"I'm Anonymous, please donate!"

Or: Some thoughts on the current Anonymous donation practices

It is a tricky thing to address the problems with many of the Anonymous donation drives. It is often impossible to know if the need is real, but it is also very difficult to prove that the need is not real. Most of the reasons to distrust Anonymous donation drives are tiring lists of "s/he tweeted this, but then said this. And that tweet/paste/post was a lie. This person told me some things that make me wonder" which nobody really has the nerve to read or even write in the first place. That's why I won't write all things down that could be relevant, only those that are easy to "prove" (differently colored text passages are links, in some cases every colored word is a single link. Hover your cursor over them to see the single link underlined). Feel free to question my points or to take them into consideration.

1. Trip to Chi

Some months before the NATO event in Chicago Jackal and Emmi of @YourAnonNews started a WePay donation drive to gather money for a trip to Chicago. https://www.wepay.com/donations/55858

Fishy list

• They never asked for a specific amount in their description or their tweets, but suggested they'd also need the money for potential bail money right away, without even being sure if they'd get arrested. Also they failed to explain what would happen to this money in case of them not getting arrested. 

  "This Wepay was set up to help Jackal and Emmi of the YourAnonNews team get to the NATO Summit in Chicago! We would epically appreciate any help you can give us to cover the Summit, the inevitable protests, and the potential costs that we may incur, such as travel, food, and bail. " 

• The original donation goal was set to 250.000,00$. Some might remember this (it is changed now). When confronted with the ridiculous number, JackalAnon answered that this was a typing error and WePay wouldn't allow them to correct the number. Lie #1. Because, as you can see, the donation site now "only" asks for 5000,00$. As far as I know this was changed after I complained to Jackal. And, as other WePay users assured me, changing the amount you ask for is always possible.
• Knowing that they successfully changed the amount they asked for, Emmi dared me to show "proof" that they originally asked for 250.000,00$. Since they advertised for their WePay with their influential account, many will remember that they indeed asked for 250k. Even if WePay doesn't require you at all to enter a specific amount, they asked for the highest possible amount. This could be called a joke, because the amount is ridiculously high, but that they later changed it to 5k (which is still ridiculously high but not high enough to be considered a joke) sort of ruins this explanation. 
• If that is not enough lies, here is the newest, blatant lie: In fact there is no 5000$ minimum. Proof for that is for example the WePay of a young man who also asked for money for a trip to Chicago: https://www.wepay.com/donations/paul-weiskel-photo The interesting point is that he just asks for 700$. So it IS possible to ask for less than 5k. And way more realistic. Even if we take into consideration that Emmi and Jackal are two people, that still would be just 1400$. Not 5000$ and surely not 250.000$.
•  But yes, they only got about 300$, because people are not dumb, not because they didn't ask for more. Jackal assured me that without this money the trip wouldn't have happened. Interesting that the first thing they bought [edited to please Emmi, even without asking her to show her proof] was a giant stock of pot for their trip. They even proudly displayed it on photos they posted on Twitter. The point is not that people were too smart to fall for their shit and they "only" got 300$, but that this couple tried to transform their Anon fame in the biggest pile of money possible. They just held their bags open and hoped for people to be blinded enough by the Anonymous hype to fill them. Else they would have set a sane limit.

 

•  Now the highly speculative part: Did they need the money, or did they rake in money from big-hearted people who maybe even have less than those two Anon celebrities? That is hard to tell. The only hints we have here is what they themselves tell us. And what they outspokenly tell us is that they are in dire need of money. But what we read between the lines (and in the pictures they post) leaves some things to question. For example the regular (according to Jackal about weekly) purchase of drugs seems to be in their budget. Just like tattoos that cover the whole arm and shoulder. And according to Jackal they also have enough money to eat in a restaurant once a week. (When he told me this it seemed that to him this was already a sign for unacceptable poorness. I might add that I'm not poor, but that dining out once a week would be way too expensive and I rather save the money). I'm not saying they are rich. But I say that they delivered enough evidence to question their claims of "dire need".
• Before people ask others for money, they should try to raise the money on their own. Maybe by not buying their weekly pile of pot for the months in which they ran the donation drive. Maybe by not eating weekly in a restaurant in that time. Maybe also by not buying weird S/M sex-toys  or weird electrical novelties for smoking pot (only $179.99 instead of $199.99! Because a whole bong collection is not enough!) or whatever they spend their money on for some time. This is how people usually raise money and save a sane amount on their bank account that will allow them to cover "unexpected" expenses like protest-trips on their own. Usually people deny themselves unnecessary luxury products instead of asking others to pay for their stuff.
 

 

 RESERVED SPACE

Since Emmi was very upset about this post, I offered her to write a rebuttal that I will add to the end of this chapter. I also promised her to amend my post, if necessary. I will also apologize, if her rebuttal shows that I got all the things I wrote here wrong.


After being angry about my blog and then threatening me with libel lawsuits, Emmi now is angry that I obeyed her wish and changed the wording of the one sentence she was able to come up with real complaints for. Before blocking me she made this interesting statement:

 So weed is her medicine? Not my position to judge. But what about JACKALS weed? Jackal was, as we all know, straight edge for quite some time. Then emotional stress and maybe peer-pressure caused him to resume smoking weed. So I ask: Is the amount of weed that Jackal smoked also in your "budget for medicine"? If you bought all of that weed from your budget money? Or did jackal smoke nothing of it? His tweets suggested something different.

2. Kahuna

Kahuna faces hacking charges. And an unusually aggressive donation drive ensued. But only after the first attempt of an donation drive with some weird goals fizzled like a Harry Potter spell gone wrong. The fishy list here is not short. I will add it as soon as I find time.

How to... fight pedos without actually helping them

This sounds like a very simple thing, yet Anonymous failed at it every single time they attempted it. Since I acknowledge their good intentions (of course e-fame plays a major role, too) and am also aware of the importance of this matter, I decided to write a how-to to help them direct their energy to useful paths.

Table of Contents

1. WHAT!? WHY DO YOU SAY WE FAILED?
2. Preparations
3. Things to avoid at all costs
4. Things to keep in mind

1. WHAT?! WHY DO YOU SAY WE FAILED? 

Because you did. All Anon actions against pedos I’m aware of totally backfired or were highly questionable. Some simply framed people as pedos, just to rake in some e-fame or to silence enemies. Others post IP’s and demanded their “Anonfamily” to attack this alleged pedos without ANY proof, details or whatever.

A short list of Anon’s operations

• Fake Lulzsec hack, framing 7,5k people and spam-bots as pedos in order to get e-fame. They uploaded child porn in order to make their lies a bit less obvious.
• A “Pedo cop” was attacked and harassed by some Anons who either wanted to frame a cop or were too preoccupied with looking at the scantily clad underaged girls to actually read the mails. Those explained that the picture was part of an investigation against the ex-boy-friend of one of the girls.
• #OpDarknet. Epic fail op that not only tipped off the criminals, but also destroyed evidence, rendered the collected data useless and tried to frame unrelated people as members of a pedo site. Even the involved Anons acknowledge this. One wrote an apology to one of the framed people.
• PedoCop reloaded. Cabincr3w found a joke mail and screamed “pedo!”. They wrote an apology. After being scolded long enough. Good cabincr3w. *pat pat*.
• Anon @VizFoSho and others spread dox of an enemy that tried to frame said enemy as a pedo. His crime: Being an operator in a teen chat. While being a teen.
• #TwitterPedoRing. Had good intentions but couldn’t resist the attempt to rake in e-fame. Tipped off the people they reported with several bragging pastebin files and twitter posts. Most likely lead to destruction of evidence and maybe even hindered existing investigations.

 You get the picture. That’s why this How-To is so terribly necessary. Not only for people who want to actively target online-pedos, but also for those who avidly spread the informations others give them. Mostly without ever checking the facts and even attacking those, that point out blatant lies or errors.

2. Preparations

 “Be prepared, be prepared, this lesson must be shared, this lesson must be shared to be prepared…”

                                                      - TheGoat from Hoodwinked!

A good preparation is the base for success. Here a short list of what to consider for your planned Op:

- Read laws. Especially if you are from the USA you should keep in mind that not all countries have the same age of consent. In many European countries the age of consent is 16. Not debating that people who look for such teenagers are creeps (they are!), but they do nothing illegal. Targeting them based on USA laws doesn’t make that much sense. Instead of collecting incriminating evidence, like for example Hawkeye tried, you just waste your time flirting with a pedophile. Also there are other legal things that should be considered.

- Get to know your team. This stuff is sensitive matter, you don’t want a person in your team that, for example, thinks it funny to slip in the name of his least favorite teacher. #OpDarknet had someone in the team who did exactly that sort of thing. This also means: No “everyone who wants to post stuff can send it to us!” calls in Twitter or IRC. This means to delay the e-fame raking. If that’s a problem for you, you shouldn’t do an op.

- Organize your team and get everyone to acknowledge the rules. Make sure everyone knows the right procedure and doesn’t ruin the op out of silly, selfish reasons. Assign everyone a task for which they are responsible. Appoint, as a group, at least one person who isn’t involved in the actual work, but serves your group as a quality control agent. This position requires the person to verify information, proof read texts and to remind the others if they stray from the group's codex. This person actually has to look HARD for possible problems. Simple cheering isn't enough.

- Set a procedure for dealing with found pedophiles. Look up which police addresses to contact and how to preserve evidence without incriminating yourself OR compromising the evidence. Since you are Anons, you might want to find a way for this which allows you to stay anonymous. Maybe assign one person as contact person. Set a procedure for documenting all your research results. Not only those that are interesting for sensationalists.

3. Things to avoid at all costs

Don’t brag.

Seriously, don’t brag.

And never brag.

At least not until you HAVE something to brag about, which would be an arrested pedo.

Also all other ways of tipping pedophiles off are a bad idea. This includes threats, open pillorying and trolling. 
 

Don’t think that it’s a funny game. It’s about peoples life and you should act sensible and sane. Don’t endanger victims by carelessly enraging the abusers. Don’t publish ANYTHING before you are 100% sure. Take what you do seriously, it’s not about you and your e-fame.

Don’t ruin investigations. Even if #Seabitches were sensible enough to not mention the name or handle of the person in question, posting such a thing too early could have ruined the efforts of the police. Also, if a policemen supplies you with information about the criminal, check first if it’s OK to share them. In some countries such details (like court record or previous investigations) are confidential and usually not to be shared with outsiders. Revealing that such information was given to you can, under circumstances, give the criminal “ammunition” for his legal case. Or he could even press charges against the police. 

Avoid sensationalism. Treat this problematic topic with decency and respect for the victim's privacy.

4. Things to keep in mind

You are not the police.

You have literally no executive power over other people. This is not “unfair”, but a necessary restriction in society to prevent angry mobs that don’t question even such ridiculous accusations like the one VizFoSho spread.

Evidence is a tricky thing. If you access the E-Mail-account of those people or their data, the evidence you gather is most likely completely useless. Even worse: It is compromised and can’t be used in court. This may sound unfair, but keep in mind that Anonymous falsely accused over 7500 people of being pedo, while the list of the rightfully accused people is rather short. Random people from the internet that carry said Anonymous banner are usually not considered a reliable source. Evidence is only evidence if police and court can be sure that no one tampered with it.

Evidence also can be destroyed. The evidence you gathered is most likely just a small piece of what really is there. Also, like I said above, the evidence you gathered will, most likely, not be very helpful. Tipping off pedophiles can cause them to wipe their hard drives or even change their computers. If there is no computer matching the data, the criminal could claim someone else used his unprotected w-LAN, for example.

That’s why it is vital that the criminal doesn’t know that you reported him and the original evidence can be gathered by the police. #Seabitches claimed that Twitter logs stuff and that this stuff would be accepted as evidence. Even if this works, you don’t want the criminal to erase the rest of his crimes. Just like you don’t want a heroine dealer to flush away 90% of his drugs. The amount of found evidence can be important for the verdict the criminal faces.

Never rush releases. Talk them through, check facts, criticize each other if necessary. And always wait until your actions lead to the desired effect. In this case an arrest. Be patient, it may take a while for the police to verify your data and to maybe monitor the criminal or even set up a trap for him. Again, this is not necessarily a sign for a broken system, but for a system that tries to respect the in dubio pro reo principle. 

Learn from the mistakes other people made, don't reproduce them.

You also may disrupt an existing undercover police investigation if you carelessly attack. That's why you should inform the police first.

If you hinder police investigations, you risk that kids will suffer for longer or won't be rescued at all. And you will be responsible for that.

Thanks for reading, 
Justice Duck 

WE ARE ALL INDIVIDUALS

With great influence comes great responsibility

This post will be updated several times. Its purpose is to show evidence of how irresponsibly (and sometimes knowingly) @Anonopssweden spreads lie amongst its followers. No chronological order.
Seeing how much influence this account gained in a relatively short time bothers me. Especially its role in spreading slander and blatant propaganda lies makes me feel very uneasy. Since his followers don't seem to notice, I will help them by gathering some examples of very questionable behavior.

[Edit 16.04.12]
1. Forwarding Disinfo
"hacked Emails leaked"
A plain lie by @poisonkillr:

Retweeted by many idiots. Including @Anonopssweden, who habitually doesn't care to verify the info he forwards. Why is it a lie? Easy:

Actually the emails weren't leaked or hacked. Nor does Pastebin has the Power to release Trick, by the way. As far as topsy tells us, the person who posted those mails first was the person who received them. Big deal.

2. Forwarding disinfo and slander (without even checking it)
Again related to @enigmazrr aka @ihazcandy.

No matter what one thinks about this person in question, it disgusts me that this bunch of Anons mocks all victims of real pedophiles by using "pedo" as a fun insult. For, again, the "evidence" is pure bullshit. David Heine operated the "teentalk" from 1990 to 1996. That 22-16 years ago.
Our genius Anon doxers alongside @vizfosho seem to forget that people AGE. And according to the doxes David Heine is now 37. Do the math. He operated the channels age 15-20/21.
Espacially such accusations SHOULDN'T BE SPREAT WITHOUT CAREFULLY CHECKING THE FACTS.

3. Spreading Disinfo

It shouldn't surprise us that he also spreat the pedocop lie without checking the facts. Telling him about this results in "troll"-calling [see "the anon that cried "pedo"" post for background]. Also it didn't made him check his facts. Neither did he learn from the incident and, see item 2., he still spreads such extremely hazardous slander without checking the (very obvious) facts.

4. Spreading Disinfo
Sadly the tweets of our first encounter are no longer accessible, because too many new tweets were made by both accs. But him calling me troll is the direct result of me telling him about #opmegaupload and the dirty tricks that were used and which endangered unknowing Twitter users, who served as meat-shield for technically inapt Anons who took part in the DDoS. Eventhough this incident was fully proven and even ADMITTED by Anonymous members, I was called a "troll" and bullied by him and his supporters for pointing it out.
Reminded me very much of the "Ministry of Truth" from Orwell's 1984.


more to come.