Monday, November 7, 2011

Don't tell Robert Farago. He'll go into mourning at the blow to his Sinaloa Cartel Theory of the Gunwalker Scandal.

Member of Anonymous released by violent Mexican drug cartel after viral video threat. Group says it has 25,000 emails that proved government collusion with the Zetas.

The hacktavist collective Anonymous has canceled Operation Cartel after a member that was allegedly abducted by a Mexican drug cartel was released Thursday, the group's longtime public face announced in an online post.

Barrett Brown claimed the organization had 25,000 emails stolen from the Mexican government that proved collusion with the Zetas cartel, blamed for dozens of deaths in the drug war gripping the Veracruz region of Mexico, Gawker reported Thursday. From those e-mails, the group says it compiled a list of 75 Zetas accomplices, which Anonymous threatened to expose.

However, after the unidentified member reportedly had been freed, Brown claimed that the e-mails would be handed over to him instead and the hackers would back down.

"Anything that proceeds from now on is my own work, and not that of Anonymous," he wrote.

Brown later added that the names of the alleged accomplices would not be released.

"As the Zetas left a note with the person threatening to kill ten civilians for every name published, none of us will be proceeding with those particular names."


So, the Kalashnikov is mightier than the keyboard?

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Two words : Kiki Camarena (and his pilot)

The criminal apples may not fall far from this poisonous orchard. I wonder. Did any of them roll under the non-existent fence to grow? Or perhaps a box fell off a truck in DC, by accident?

The Marxists will save us, I'm sure.

Anonymous said...

All this in an age where we can photograph your DNA from overhead assets...

Wonder what that means....

I know what it means to give in to bad guys. You get more bad guys and more bad acts.

If they are willing to kill somebody's family, and they are, doesn't that pretty much give you a hint what you should be doing with them?

Why yes it does, and we aren't doing it, for some reason. I wonder why that it?

pdxr13 said...

Promise to kill 10 cartel members and collaborators for every civilian harmed. Mexico is capable of this.

Tit-for-tat ("proportional force") never ends anything: massively escalate force (they shoot at us, we bomb their houses and cars and depots, accept surrender if they come to us) and end it fast.

Cheers.

Anonymous said...

Proving once again, if you want respect and deference, the easiest way to get it is to CREDIBLY PROMISE to kill people, and watch the lily-livers back away slowly.

Jihadists (and terrorists of any other stripe) understand this.

As now does the group Anonymous, who clearly bit off more than they can chew.

Merovign said...

Killing American allies in Afghanistan by releasing their names - they don't care. Harming narco-terrorists in Mexico is apparently not worth the risk.

Yeah, we know whose side they're *actually* on.

Anonymous said...

Then, too, remember who "Anonymous" is. They're not "activists" in any sense of the word. They're a bunch of rich white teenagers, merry pranksters with Mommy's computer. Their previous "targets" were the Scientologists, about whom no one can be moved to give a damn, and whose resources and IT skills are lacking; "Anonymous" defaced their Web page for a while and declared victory, then wandered off into the distance distracted by something shinier. Someone purportedly speaking for the rather amorphous and ill-defined group then tried to start a pissing match with the Zetas, which could not possibly have ended well for a bunch of sixteen-year-old kids from the 'burbs who have no guns and no organization to speak of.

It is not so different, when you think about it, from "Wikileaks." We have noted that Julian Assange has bent over backwards to avoid revealing anything that could possibly be embarrassing for the governments of Iran, China, Russia, etc. Why? That'd actually be dangerous, that's why.