There's this narrative going on that Anonymous works together with the US government. All of these claims are people saying this without providing documented evidence. But who benefits from such claims?
During the George Floyd protests in America, Anonymous posted a massive hack on American law enforcement, called #BlueLeaks It's likely that this spooked the feds. Now how would you discredit a chaotic movement that's impossible to control? You try to create a narrative
In 2011, the FBI arrested some of our comrades through infiltration, there were operations going on to make everyone a suspected federal agent in order to create distrust, and it worked for core US subsets.
Yet what we've seen since then, hacks kept happening around the globe. The Equifax hack from anonymous Chile comes to mind, but it's hardly the only example. Anonymous stopped communicating out in the open on IRC channels and preferred private encrypted communications.
The current high profile hacks against Russia make the American government nervous, even though hackers can't be extradited to Russia, Anonymous is unpredictable. It's likely these same tactics will be used to expose American wrongdoings (like we've seen with #BlueLeaks in 2020)
As a recap, how do you discredit a movement that's hard to contain? You use tactics that have been proven successful in the past, you create distrust and paranoia among current hackers and as a deterrent for new activists interested to carry on the name of Anonymous.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
