This is Anonymous on Politics

Today, “dox” were dropped on the wrong John Rubenstein. In lay-speak that means the e-mail address, home address, and home phone number of John Rubenstein from Backtrace Security was published.

ANON NEWS WORLD–Today, “dox” were dropped on the wrong John Rubenstein. In lay-speak that means the e-mail address, home address, and home phone number of John Rubenstein from Backtrace Security was published. Thing is, we contacted the John Rubenstein who owned the published phone number, a retired man aged 83. He is very concerned about ever being able to contact his children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren again. His phone has been ringing into the night, but he continues to answer, eagerly hoping each young voice is one of his grandchildren. He had never heard of Backtrace Security until we mentioned it. He has since unplugged all his phones.

You see, Backtrace is just trying to imprison Anon’s most hated enemies. Leaders. These leaders have led naive adolescent Anons to make enemies of the US Military, foreign powers and dangerous legal entities like Scientology and the Westboro Baptist Church. They deserved to get “doxed” too. Backtrace is the chaos fighting back, the act of someone who was prepared for the wrath of Anonymous. Like us here at the Chronicle, the only retribution Anonymous can inflict upon Backtrace will skyrocket the right John Rubenstein into the exosphere of success.

You’re an Anon. Let’s face it, no one understands you. No one except Chronicle.SU. No one outside gets the world inside of the internet, the hivemind. It is not just one collective, but thousands of permutating spinoffs of the most active and savvy users. It is clear that some political actions have begun to manifest through what is called “Anonymous.” We here at the Chronicle mock and ridicule this so-called “hactivism” because we can. We don’t believe you’re activists, or even hackers. You are mostly glorified spammers and trolls who can rarely succeed without help from others. Now you’re too dumb to even realize it, but people like Barrett Brown try to steal the name of Anonymous and attach their individual ideas on top of it. Most of them are admins continuously correcting others in IRC. When they can’t correct someone’s ideas, they kick or ban them and call them a troll. If you hadn’t noticed, the views of the Chronicle are completely contradictory, subversive and chaotic. Our primary goal is to destroy anyone who would become a leader in Anonymous. Anonymous is not a meritocracy, it is chaos being hijacked for Politics.

We created Chronicle.SU nearly 5 years ago for teh lulz. We still stick to the lulz, but we have found a higher level of lulz based on the moral principle of destroying morals within anonymous. Morals are the symptom of leadership and not a reflection of a consensus. It’s okay that we have leaders. We’re not the same kind of beast that Anonymous is. The problem with leaders in Anonymous is that the sheep don’t even realize when they are being led. Sure you have the option not to participate, but don’t so many Anons just use LOIC out of boredom? Anons are always shopping for targets and doing it using the world’s largest honeypot IRC server. I urge all Anons under the age of 18 to refrain from participating in anonymous. Remember, your parents will bear ultimate responsibility when the Party Van comes. Yes, that is correct. Your parents will be V& with you. You are days, weeks, or months away from mass Vannings in America. The die has been cast!


13 replies on “This is Anonymous on Politics”

that sucks for John Rubenstein… and thats good advice to the younger anons. but if people werent trying to destroy the morals within anonymous then John Rubenstein could still talk to his family and anonymous members wouldnt have to be so worried about getting vanned away. old anon, we get it, you guys are dickheads with no morals, thats why youre old anon.

>lack of grammar
>Lack of reasoned argument..

I have come to the conclusion that you,sir, are the newfag.

Kilgoar’s posts are usually too abrasive for my tastes, but this one was interesting. While it’s all well and good to rage against an alternative opinion, he does make a rather eloquent argument.

Leave a comment (or don't)