Dear viewer, these subtitles were generated by a machine via the service Trint and therefore are (very) buggy. If you are capable, please help us to create good quality subtitles: https://c3subtitles.de/talk/435 Thanks!
All right, you're ready?
Yeah, I guess.
All right, let's start off.
But we've never given a
talk to a crowd this big before,
so we're both kind of really nervous.
So and.
Yeah, we've had to basically stay
quiet for four years while going
through our court case and legal issues,
so this is the first time we can talk
about as much as we want.
So here's hoping we don't get arrested
when we go back to the state.
So basically, the
story starts with Operation Payback
and the anonymous movement
that sort of came
with it
there at the time
Operation Payback happened, it was
focused more on piracy, NPA
or RIAA, things like
that, and
the copyright.
At the same time the Operation Payback
was happening, WikiLeaks
was also forming itself
into a major journalistic entity.
What was it like two or three weeks into
Operation Payback?
A little bit more than that.
Well, it started with the
government decided to hire an Indian
company to DOS
operation to DOS the Pirate
Bay.
And so there were a series of like
revenge dances to get back at them.
And then that was sort of the forming of
Operation Payback.
And then things are sort of gone to
a level where the big Lohmeyer
lawsuit came out that September.
Yeah. And so I kind of came
in like early November is
when I showed up and The Avengers
and stuff started to come on
Decembers.
Yeah. So it was sort of like a series
of just little stuff and
it's happened so.
Oh, and quick disclaimer.
Important disclaimer.
So as most of you know,
anonymous is everything
and nothing encompassed in one.
It it shouldn't be identifiable,
it should be movement and fluid and
everything. So when we talk about
anonymous or when we relate to Anonymous,
we don't stand to
define it.
We stand to show you what
happened in relation to it
or our case in relation to it.
So there's always
in the report a on and on ops
a few weeks ago, and this reporter
as well, Anonymous, doesn't really seem
to have like a goal.
And he was missing the point totally,
because anonymous is a method
of activism.
And so the people that take part in it
have lots and lots of different goals and
needs. And so to define anonymous
as this thing that has one goal and what
need would be to destroy
it, because it's meant to help the people
that have different needs and different
goals.
And so it doesn't have just one.
So that's why there isn't one.
All right.
As I mentioned,
these are our mug shots
from the FBI,
the marshals, mine,
all mine from the FBI because it's got
the tiles. So that's the marshals.
We had two mug shots, but only one
was leaked to the public.
I guess
here you can see our indictment
or at least the front page of it.
Yeah.
Oh, and we want to point out that Denis
Collins, the guy at the very top,
he really, really wanted to be here
today, but the government
decided to indict him again
for another charge in Virginia for
essentially the same
thing.
So there's some question of like double
jeopardy. And they got around it by just
extending the dates out.
So he couldn't be here because he could
he's not allowed to have a passport
because they decided to indict him again.
Yeah. And then others on the list,
although they were involved, they
liked their anonymous status and
they just don't want to be public figures
involved in it. Not that they don't stand
with their beliefs or what they did.
They just don't want to be in the public
eye.
And then some of our co-defendants are
here right now.
So you can set up, if you like.
And those are some of my best friends in
the world, and I'm really glad you guys
aren't going to jail.
So this is sort of an explanation
around our talk around our
court case, so
December 4th, right?
Oh.
I like it better up here, but
so on or around December 4th
is when the blockade against WikiLeaks
started to kick in.
So we know that about a week before
this, the government had the government
and various governments, our government,
the French government, Britain
started to send our request to various
service providers that they start
denying service
to. Well, Hollande and
WikiLeaks now.
Well, Hollande has a lot of, you know,
represents a lot of different projects.
So WikiLeaks, while we support them,
there are a lot of other projects that
just kind of got shut down because they
were in the way of
coming through blocking while.
And so in retaliation,
a lot of members of the anonymous
movement decided that it was time
to do something about this.
And there were a series of retaliations
against PayPal
primarily, I think, because they were
like the biggest problem.
And then there was MasterCard, Visa,
Bank of America, Western Union,
pretty much any way other than just
putting cash in an envelope and mailing
it.
You could not donate to
Holland or WikiLeaks.
And so there were a series of denial
services and black faxes.
So I don't know the word in German for
black fax, but it's when you take a black
piece of paper and you tape it in the fax
machine and send it on loop, so.
Yeah, it was pretty great
because, like
there was some guy who
leaked one of the service admins
emails from the PayPal that was like
so one of the fax machines just got on
fire because the heat sensor wasn't
working.
Go us fire
is good.
So I think makes life
so out of these attacks.
I'm not sure if you can read, but we'll
go through it. This is the
damages total in dollar
amounts that PayPal put towards
the government.
So you
can see that from our from the DOS
attack. They said they spent almost a
half a million dollars in work effort,
four point five million dollars, new
hardware and software.
Basically, they re got a brand
new infrastructure on our done
and a new fax machine.
It's a very expensive fax machine,
part of this four million, five
hundred lots of dollars
was a software update.
So they tried to claim to
the government that
there that we were responsible for
the fact that they needed a software
update.
So what was
their plan? If we hadn't did
ask them was to just not update.
So the judge said, well, because you
paid for it and received it, that is
like you. That's a purchase.
That's a loss.
So like, if we break your window,
we are responsible for replacing the
window, but we're not responsible for,
like, digging you a moat also.
Like, that's not our problem.
So that was pretty cool.
We didn't have to pay them for a million
dollars.
So that was pretty awesome.
I don't have a million dollars, I don't
know anyone who does know.
All right, so on
January twenty seven, the following
month, that's got
a typo, but that's OK,
we have typos, we're human.
So,
um, January twenty seventh,
about a month.
The next month, we
40 people are thirty
five people in the United States, five
around Europe were
raided.
I believe the Europeans
were arrested at the time
for the details
attacks against PayPal.
And my personal experience
was waking up at six o'clock
in the morning after I had logged off my
computer at three a.m.
I woke up to banging on the door.
I walked into my small apartment, living
room area to lights
and people screaming outside my door
with God with guns.
I hadn't seen the gun yet because my
blinds were closed, but so
they were screaming, open up the door.
I tried to go wake my girlfriend up to
let her know what was going on.
And then.
I went back and opened the door and
immediately had a gun shoved in my face.
Ten people like Bum rushed
the door to try to get in.
I immediately turned around, fell down to
the ground, was trying not to fight,
not to put up any sort of struggle,
because I.
Who am I?
I'm not the Terminator or anything.
So so the slide says for the indictments
is actually, say, 40 search warrants.
So there were 35 or 40
served in the United States and then five
actual arrests in the U.K.
And some of those people
actually were here at the conference
today. Right.
So, yeah, that was them.
And so,
like minocycline, if you want to know
what a Fed knock sounds like,
that's what it sounds like at 6:00 in the
morning. And it's a really scary sound
when you're just waking up.
So Mydans hours.
Living with my dad at the time and I got
pulled out into the cold with, like the
flashlight in your face and guns,
and there's all these stupid questions
they asked to verify that it is indeed
you.
And then during the search warrants,
they ask you all these questions.
And one of the questions which are
so anonymous by this point in
an oral history had kind of
we were still doing fliers and things
on 4chan, but we weren't organizing
that. We were organizing on Iasi.
So they were one of
the questions they ask was
tell us about 4chan, which is a really
vague and strange question to ask.
And so after
like I mean, they asked that
I was like, look, you don't want to know
about 4chan.
He was about 14
and so
so I
was like, well, if you really want to
know, I'll tell you. But you can hear it
like this is permanent.
You're doing this to yourself forever,
and they're
like, yeah, tell us about 4chan.
And so I told
them I have a pretty good memory for
things that I've read.
So I told them almost like Line-by-line
line, one of the worst 4chan threads I'd
ever read.
And I'm not going to subject you guys
to it now, but
it's essentially about this guy that's
like in love with his dog and
in a number of ways, maybe
some of you have seen it
anyway anyway.
But the FBI agent, one of them
had to go up outside and throw up
afterwards.
In the moment,
it's the little things in life like
getting an FBI agent throw outside your
house.
They didn't put that in an evidence bag.
I'm really disappointed.
So
after the January twenty seventh
time when the search warrants
were put out, when they were going after
all their evidence and whatnot, it took
them six months to
go through all that, go
through testimonies by people who decided
to work with the government.
And on July 19th,
they finally arrested 14
of us, so so that means
that for six months
there were 40 people in America
sitting there like, oh, fuck, I'm going
to go I'm going to get indicted, I'm
going to go to jail.
And then, like, so we've
been indicted and our stuff is over.
And then the same for more or less
the 13 people in jail while they're still
waiting for their sentencing.
Some of them.
So but those other 40 people that have
been served search warrants, who some of
them had just liked things on Facebook
or had
signed a petition like things that are
suspicious,
they're still sitting there like, am I
going to go to jail?
Like they have not they've maybe gotten
their stuff back, maybe not like they are
just sitting there in limbo going.
I've been searched. What happens now?
So it's really scary place to be,
you know.
All right, so we were arrested of the
stuff and these are the charges we were
given.
Yeah.
You want to try it?
Now you can go ahead, explain that.
All right, so there's
two counts in the United States.
If you are guilty of
guilty of telling someone
how to do something and they use that
information to commit a crime.
And you could have possibly known that
they would do this then you are
a conspiracist and you are guilty
of almost exactly the same charges.
And so we have a statute of limitations.
I think you have something like that here
where for a federal crime of this nature,
it's usually seven years after the crime
is committed. If they haven't charged you
in those seven years, it's over.
It doesn't matter. They can't.
But if it's a conspiracy charge,
the statute is seven years after
the dissolution of the conspiracy.
So that would be anonymous.
So we could possibly be charged
for other things for
up to seven years after the
dissolution of Anonymous, which hopefully
will be maybe never.
For the rest of our lives.
And it kind of came down to
it could be two 15 year sentences
served, like at the same time, and then
two hundred and fifty thousand dollars in
fines.
That's just fines.
That's not even restitution
for victims.
The five point four million dollars
or whatever figure they decided to come
up with, that's not added on to this.
Fine. Yeah, so.
We'll get done with the boring legal
stuff in a minute.
So do a little bit
about the CFA
and this is the general umbrella
law they use for everybody.
They consider a hacker.
Basically, if you know how to get
on Facebook, they consider you a hacker.
I don't get it.
But, hey, I'm not the FBI, so.
Oh, so
the law was originally intended for
banking fraud, right, so
you paid a certain combination
of buttons on ATMs and got money out
or you broke into the bank's phone line
and stole some information.
It was originally intended for that.
And they have stretched the law so far
that it even covers violating the
terms of service of Facebook.
OK, so we've gone from banking fraud
to everything,
and so those
it was originally intended,
the way it was written, to actually limit
what the federal government could
prosecute.
It wasn't intended to cover like petty
squabbles, like if I put something on
your laptop covered under the CFA,
you know, but that's not what was
originally intended, so.
Included all these things added malicious
code dos.
You got this. So this is an interesting
point. Mercedes has been talking about
a lot recently.
Is that under the CFA,
when you saw charges, one was
for attempt to damage a secured computer
or protected computers.
And so the thing about the computer or
the way that the federal government
in the United States works is that
if you take something or you do something
illegal over a state line,
any of the 50 states, if you go over the
state line with that, that jumps into
federal jurisdiction and they take
control of it.
What they've been able to do is that
they're saying that the devices that we
use to connect to the Internet, to go
globally, all over the world are
interstate devices.
That means if you do anything on them
illegal, it automatically falls under
federal jurisdiction no matter
where you are, which makes it a felony
instead of a misdemeanor.
It's automatically 15 years
as opposed to. So if even if it never
touches the Internet, if it's over a
router, if I send something
to him over the same router, if we're in
the same state, which is really abnormal
or used to be abnormal for American law,
then it's automatically a felony because
it's interstate on an interstate device.
All right, so now and tomorrow, like
the political
side, you have the fun stuff, we promise.
Um, so we have
you noticed it in America a lot,
you may notice it in your own separate
countries where governments
and corporations
work hand in hand to make sure they're
protected.
The common people, the people who try
to stand up for what they believe is
right or what services they believe they
were promised,
they're not given.
They seem to fall back to nobody,
especially in America.
I know our corporations are almost given
the same rights as individuals
that have more rights than individuals.
So so you're
looking at
this tradition that has been going on for
ever.
And No. One, it just seems to get
put to the wayside because the
governments and the corporations have all
the money.
So what it is, is the system of
so, for instance, people for
our case, if they wanted to be paid
for the damages, they could have just
sued us.
Right. It didn't have to be a possible
criminal case.
But instead, they went to the government
and said government, will you
get restitution out of these people?
So it didn't have to be a federal case.
It didn't have to be jail time.
It could have just been
like, I don't know what it is, but
it is like someone's hurt.
But a corporation isn't a person.
Oh, yeah,
but and so then you see the United States
using PayPal to silence its opponents
like WikiLeaks and the other
well-known causes that got in the way.
So you see this back and forth where the
government's helping the banks and the
banks are helping the government.
So at this point, is there really any
difference between
the two?
This guy here is good old General
Alexander had or
was beautiful.
Oh, he was never really
stopped. Well, yeah, well, he's got his
own private security thing now,
supposedly not built on NSA technology,
but, you know.
So this is when
he went before Congress and said
that we could possibly cause power
outages.
It's kind of ridiculous because why would
we knock out our own power grid that we
used to get on the Internet, download
porn?
We're pretty selfish like that, but
during but during the time that the
attacks and things like that were going
on, many you would see many officials
in Congress
lobbying with
the argument that Anonymous was this big,
scary thing that was going to hurt
everybody.
So they would use that to get more money,
more power.
All those sorts of things.
So another major issue
just surrounding the whole transparency
movement and WikiLeaks, and you should
all be familiar with this, is that
the government's lack of transparency
really impacts your ability to decide
who your government officials should be
because you can't impeach
what you don't know.
And then, like, if you don't know
what they're doing, then how do you know
if they're doing a good job?
So and everything is classified,
they they just something came out
that was declassified that was classified
in the 60s and it was something
they're not.
There's a specific law that they're not
supposed to classify anything just
because it's embarrassment, embarrassing
for a public official.
And this document came out that was the
guy like had sex with prostitutes or
something, and it was classified for
50 years or so.
And then also so
in the United States, if you destroy
something that's part of the process of
a federal investigation, then
you're tampering with within your
tampering with evidence or impeding the
investigation despite your Fifth
Amendment right to not incriminate.
But if they destroy it,
it's national security and it's very
important. And we can't question that.
So.
Right, right. And this is and this
transparency is the
biggest part of what Snowden
and Manning did, I think is to
tell us what is actually going on
so we know who to put in charge.
I mean, if we need leaders, we need to be
able to trust those people.
Why are we not actually finding out what
they're doing?
And Jeremy Hunt and Jeremy.
OK, so
shortly after our search warrants, so
they've done the 40 search warrants
going, we've caught the saboteurs
and they're really bad in the power grid.
The head of the FBI went in front
of Congress and said they're cyber
terrorists and we need more money and we
need more tools and we need more power.
And they were even talking about
reallocating money from keeping Mexicans
out of the United States to looking for
us, which if they're willing to give up
their hatred of Mexicans in the United
States, that is a big deal.
So, yeah, some really nice quotes as
well, we always need more money
and we're a big FBI
family and this
is the guy that gave it.
We made a nice little gif of him going
every time he made money.
Every time he mentions the budget, his
hands go further and further out.
Yeah, we made
our Norwegian friends watch it.
He'd never seen a government video
before.
Oh, you want to go?
Um, Subu,
and the
time when lasic
was around,
basically we see Subu
as an agent provocateur,
he was placed there by the government
and was meant to control
the anonymous narrative through
bullying and threatening
harassment, Chatto being a douchebag,
generally being a douche.
So those he's that guy
that shows up to the peaceful protest and
throws a brick through a window and tries
to start a riot.
And what would have otherwise been a
totally OK, totally
like peaceful, non harmful just
demonstration.
And so we feel that it happened
at a very particular time when a lot of
people were being arrested and going
underground.
But Anonymous was still becoming really
famous and a lot of new people coming in.
So Subbu,
we don't know if it was on purpose.
I think it was on purpose.
He maybe kind of disagrees, but
we think that's who was placed at a very
particular time in the movement's
growth that kind of gave
him the opportunity to be that guy with
the rock in the window.
And he's completely opposite from what he
talks now when he talks now,
like the anonymous was way too
publicized for him.
And he did all of this and is the guy
that had like two million Twitter
followers. Yeah, the guy was anonymous
Sârbu on Twitter.
Like, how much more that what you want to
be.
And then the way he
would funnel people into law six,
Channel four, everything, make
sure that everything was logged there
like it was just the whole thing was set
up completely dirty.
Well, he had a conversation with
Gabriella Coleman, who's an
anthropologist who studies these things.
They were talking on Jabor and he refused
to use Otar like refused flat
out, refused to use off the record plug
in.
So I think backslides
and like the the big thing on Subu
is that we're not able to
talk to him. We are not able to talk to
anybody affiliated.
No one affiliated with Anonymous.
We can't be in back channels discussing
things that are happening. We're just
kind of watching things unfold.
So everything that's unfolding regarding
Anonymous is now coming onto us.
Yeah. So we're getting blamed for things
that we can't even stand in the way of
is essentially what had happened.
So we're watching all this
stuff happen and then we're currently
indited and people are saying, well, you
guys are stealing credit card numbers.
It's like, no, I just maybe
send some packets.
PayPal.
I didn't steal anyone's anything.
So for this, it's the first
month of our indictment.
We were completely prohibited
from touching any sort of computer.
And we were for almost
a year specifically barred
from using Twitter for almost
no reason that they could justify other
than, well, maybe they'll talk to people.
How could it be terrible?
From what I heard, though, it had to do
with some protests,
which I can't remember off the top of
my head, but they were using Twitter
to circumvent
the police blocks.
So some command
center of this protest would say, hey,
the cops are here, don't go this way.
And they'd make sure the movement would
move somewhere else.
How dare we avoid cops, right?
And then for the entire length of
the indictment, we were prohibited from
speaking or speaking on Iasi,
but other protocols like Javor
and things like that were totally fine.
So.
It's a government.
This basically goes off of the movie
that we just watched, I mean, the
amount of things in ways they
have to track us is mind
boggling at times, and most people don't
even want to try to wrap their head
around it.
If you want a fun game, just try
to keep track of how many times you hit
that button on the side of your phone to
turn the screen on to see what time it
is, like just where would you be
without your phone? I don't own an alarm
clock. I don't own a cell phone.
Every day we're completely dependent on
these devices, we send so
much communication over them, we don't
even realize how much and then
they can monitor all of it because
the way it works, I know in Germany
it's very different. You guys actually
cannot surrender the right to your own
your own communications.
But in the United States, it's not this
way in the United States.
So every message I send on Facebook is
not actually my message.
It's Facebook's data on me.
So if the government comes to Facebook
and says Facebook, we really need all
this data, Facebook can
legally say yes, because
it's not my data that they're
surrendering, it's their data on me.
So there is a big conflict
because we have
the constitutional right to privacy in
the United States supposedly.
And
what it is, is they're getting around the
Fourth Amendment or this, but this
human right that we've been granted by
saying that it's not your data, it's
somebody else's data.
And that's all we're requesting.
Super shady.
And then Facebook doesn't have to tell us
that they've made this request, and in
fact, in some ways they are prevented
from telling us legally they are not
legally allowed to tell us that this
request is made.
And of course, this doesn't just stick
with Facebook. It's every service you
use anywhere.
Google, Twitter
and most email providers,
all, all, all email providers
that are not privately created
by yourself, which we recommend
as many services as you can seriously
learn how it works.
Like so
like my codefendant, Josh is really
brought up in Ohio right now, and
he made a job or server,
we have our own pad for
our codependency.
We have Mirrorball.
Yeah, we have our own mumble and
like it's ours.
And if somebody comes in, we know they
have come in, it's ours and it's just
running on an old laptop that I had
left over and cable connection
my parents house. And he taught himself
how to do it. So if Josh can do it,
anybody else can do it, too.
There's no excuse.
Look at this guy.
And then it's your data and not
Facebook's data.
Yeah, so, yeah, basically
it goes on the same thing.
So if the government
is allowed to say that or
these corporations and the government are
allowed to say that, it's not our data,
it's the services data.
And if they're allowed to prosecute
us and arrest us
and charge us like they have been,
then what rights do we have online?
We come online to be free, to do what we
want, to be what we want and say what we
want. Why?
What jurisdiction do they have there?
They shouldn't have any.
And so essentially our argument is, is
that so much of your life is
online that if you're a human rights
and your civil rights do not extend to
online, then they do not exist.
They're gone then.
And and we feel that this particular
time in history is the time that this is
going to be decided, if it's not decided
now, that it puts us in a really
hazardous position for the for the
future, because this is what it's being
decided and we need to really push for
them now or we won't have them ever.
They'll be gone.
So we came up with some ethical
questions.
Yeah, so
do you feel like the banks should be able
to tell you where you can spend your
money? And obviously
that's a really big problem, because
especially in the United States, there's
only like maybe five or six major
banks now, especially since the collapse
and they consolidated.
So if all the banks decide that you
can only buy your tires from this one
place, then that is where you have to buy
your tires.
And so it's a serious problem
that could potentially control people's
spending. Right.
Which we feel especially you have
a more socialist society here.
But in the United States, capitalism runs
everything.
And if you don't have your capital
spending rights, then what rights do you
have?
None. Zero, none.
You are your wallet.
So that's why the poor and the homeless
see no no
rights whatsoever.
They're treated like trash.
And it's disgraceful.
It's it's pretty.
Oh, things
you can donate to or through PayPal
other than WikiLeaks.
Yeah, so we're also, if you have
any others that, you know, are on this
list that we forgot or left
off that are really funny, we would love
to hear those.
Yes. We're going to put a list on the
website, which we built ourselves also.
But most of these organizations are known
to be very
violent, dangerous or have
known.
Very extremist views, or they're
actually registered
as a hate group or like the KKK
is registered as a terrorist group, and
yet you can still donate just fine
to pay for or through PayPal.
Yeah, the Westboro Baptist Church.
I don't know if you guys would be
familiar with them in the United States
or in Germany, but they are
the guys that go to like the military
funerals and have the signs and say,
God hates fags.
Everyone see in these pictures, that's
those guys. You can still donate to them,
but you can't. But you couldn't at that
time donate to.
Well, Holland, there's the
truth about homosexuality.
Guys who are the ones who do
like the pray the gay away camps
where you pray and you pray and maybe God
will make you straight.
There are there are registered hate group
and you can donate to them so that you
can help people pray the gay away
doesn't work at.
Oh, yeah, so
money is speech, so that's basically
the same thing.
Yeah, well, but it's got anyway,
go ahead.
So we had the Supreme Court
decision that corporations are people
and they can donate as much money as they
want to political
candidates, which is not
very good. And so
but they've decided that corporations can
donate as much money to anybody that they
want anytime that they want.
They don't even have to tell us how they
did it or how much
they can anyway.
But by blockading
WikiLeaks, they have taken that same
right away from you.
So it's essentially the government,
under their own rules, has colluded with
the banks to take away the same.
Right, that at the very same time they
had just given to corporations.
So that
super should be super illegal.
But we're talking about the government.
And yes, so this was
a major question posed by people
throughout the past four
years is how can you
defend the freedom of speech while
oppressing somebody else's freedom
of speech?
And that's a very hard question
because, yeah, that guy,
even though you hate him, deserves to say
whatever he feels like saying.
But at the same time, if
that man is spouting
derogatory hate and
inciting riots and
starting.
General problem is, where
is the line?
And
this is our line.
You're, of course, free to choose your
own line as you like that.
Of course, this is just our opinion and
things, but, um.
We feel that
in our context, there is a major
difference between what
an individual.
Or an individual being attacked or
and a corporation being attacked,
so, yeah.
And so when cases like these
or when issues like
this come up, we look at the size
and the general nature of why
this person or I
mean this entity was targeted.
What did they do, what happened?
What made people so angry at them?
There's got to be a reason.
Like I can't imagine the
board members of people sitting in their
boardroom going, we did nothing wrong.
They might have just loved us.
They loved us a whole lot.
They wanted to send us all our packets so
they would love packets for love.
But like, didn't didn't one guy
question, like, maybe they're pissed off
at us.
Maybe we doing something wrong.
Like, I don't know if they have the
moral capability to
think that way, but that's that's exactly
how I would think if I ran a company, I
would wonder why everybody hated me.
What decision did I make to
to ruin our customer
relationship like what happened and
then work to fix it.
But PayPal obviously decided not to
do that.
We also feel there is a very, very big
difference between a human with
human rights and the rights of
a piece of paper that is designed to make
money with.
So if I make a blog
and I put this blog up and it's got
an opinion that is my opinion
formed by me as an individual,
as a human with rights.
But if PayPal has a blog, which
they did until we dusted it to the
ground,
that is an opinion formed
on behalf of making money on behalf
of that piece of paper designed to make
money. And it is not a human and it does
not have rights. And so that is where our
ethical line is as far as
what is impeding freedom of speech.
We do not feel we impeded people's
freedom of speech because we do not feel
that PayPal is a person.
And then this is sort of an
open question, because
I've given one talk before and I get this
question all the time and maybe you have
to, but people ask,
well, also for
the whole of the entity
claim that they were not
the same as Anonymous, that they were not
anonymous, that they were a separate
thing.
But there is still the question
of they were doing some things on
a nonrelated servers and they were
interacting with Norns a lot.
And so the question comes up all
the time is, did Walzak
violate ethics when they stole people's
credit cards and use them to donate to
foundations?
And were they
violating ethics when they posted
when they dumped people's addresses
and things?
And then how responsible is anonymous
as a movement for
creating the environment that allowed
Lussac to exist?
And so we've left this open because
there's some debate between us and we're
not really sure how to answer it.
And so if you guys have any input on
that, we'd certainly love to hear it
because debates are fun.
Yes. So we'll leave that open for the
Q&A, which we will have in a moment.
So here's a nice little thing
they told us to put in, we were like, but
they're like, yeah, you need money.
And so we're not
this money.
So if you would like to donate, there's
a couple different options.
There is the go fund me, which is
not obvious.
We don't have a PayPal for a couple of
reasons.
So you can donate through the go fund me,
it goes directly to the co-defendants
and then gets divided equally among the
co-defendants until the restitution is
paid and once the restitution is
paid, then the go fund me will be closed
and we will not be accepting any more
money.
We don't want money.
We just would like to not be under the
thumb of PayPal anymore.
You can also donate through the well,
Holland, which is tax deductible in
Europe, unfortunately not in America,
because nonprofits are
only for people that are actually making
profit.
And if you would like to donate
to more add ons,
like not us, because we have
our own thing, but for the broader
and all community who has been indicted,
served search warrants, has to pay for
hotels, for court, things like that.
We had a problem with that.
You can donate you free Anon's,
which is a
they're an organization that helps pay
for like food and transportation and
court fees
for Anons who are also being prosecuted
other than just ourselves.
So, yeah, thank you.
Thank you for listening to our talk.
So so at this time,
we'd like co-defendants and if there
are any other, like currently indicted
or prosecuted Anon's and or
computer activists in the auditorium,
if you'd like to come up and join us for
the Q&A, because this is not me and
Josh, this movement. This is everybody's
movement. And we all deserve a chance to
answer anybody's questions,
if you would like.
So here's our co-defendants.
Oh, this is the Q&A
and we'd like to give an opportunity to
any, like currently prosecuted
access computer activists and audience
that would also like to join the Q&A,
because it's not just our movement, it's
everybody's movement.
So.
Just Keith, hello, and this
is Vincent Kershaw, Charvet,
hello,
help if it was on hey,
so shall we begin.
Well, number one, please.
Hello and thank you for all you've done
so far, and I hope it
turns out for us. My question is with
regards to the Computer Fraud
and Abuse Act statutes that say
that protected
computers that have been
accessed across the Internet,
that's a crime, isn't it?
Criminal negligence on the part of the
parties that need to administer
this, these computers to
have them available for easy access
to the Internet? Has someone tried to
defend it in a way,
in such a way that it's criminal
negligence on their part to not be
administering their machines
appropriately, for them to be
considered protected?
You know, it just has to be you've
accessed it without consent, whether
they left it or if they left it
completely open and you went
into it. It is still a violation of the
law. It's not it's not like in
like in Australia.
If you didn't take adequate precautions
then in Australia, then it's not a crime
for someone to walk into your computer.
So but the United States is not like
that. It's just access without consent,
which is really, really dangerous because
what if you do it by accident?
Right.
Sorry to interrupt.
I see people coming in, going out
if you want to leave now, this room,
please, over the site's
not through the metal gates here because
people are coming in.
Doors are closed now in the metal and
just leave to the sides
for safety reasons.
So please continue.
OK, someone else.
Number four, please.
Um, I take it that you have
been prosecuted for being part
of the anonymous movement, and
I find it really hard to sympathize with
it because of the huge
sexist backlash against women
and female activists on the
Internet.
So would
you comment on that?
So Anonymous
has caused about Anonymous has done
anti feminism thing, I think
people in the name of anonymous
people in the name.
So this is the other
thing that we try to point out at the
beginning is that Anonymous makes
up of whoever whenever however,
I was a part of it at the time
in 2010.
I don't say I'm anonymous
now.
So what they do
I don't think is right.
But I can't they're
anonymous. I, I'm
sorry.
And I don't believe that they should be
doing that, but I can't stop
them and there's no way so
but from what I
understand your point and I understand
how that's kind of maybe not enough as
a woman, but from a
woman's perspective, who I've I've been
there and on the other side,
sometimes everyone is default
male, which as men, that's totally fine
for you because you are male.
But if you make
what some people consider to be a mistake
and let people know that, hey, you
have female pronouns or, hey, maybe you
have a vagina, it's that instead, like,
Teto, get the fuck out.
And you're like, no, show me your tits.
So you get the fuck out.
Prove you're a man.
Yeah.
And so I can say that from
personal experience, like that's just
like an Internet culture
thing that has leaked into Anonymous
and as.
OK, so if I ever had a problem
on in on Ops, which is one of the largest
anonymous viruses that's
been going on since 2010,
you were there.
If someone says this to me and I get
mad, there are people, and particularly
one of them's here in the audience
who like instant bad like
you are. Fuck you go away because how
dare you make another line feel
uncomfortable, like they can't do
activism here.
And if it gets to that point, if someone
makes it clear that they have hit that
point, then
like that person has to be dealt with,
period.
So I understand like
the feelings of the culture and saying,
like, hey, that guy's a fagot, but.
That's another panel completely, but
it is not quite what it's been made out
to be, and I really recommend that if
there is a problem, then say something
to your sysadmins.
And if there is a problem with your
sysadmins, get new sysadmins
because sysadmins are replaceable just
like anybody else.
Right.
This is the question from the Web.
Well, thanks for asking.
There's not actually a question from the
Web, but there was a lot of discussion
around why you have
chosen people
and not on other approach.
Maybe you can collaborate on this.
So you guys want to talk about
Loike in the hive and all that good
stuff.
Oh, my God.
Yeah, I'm.
So the question was basically, why did we
choose to this rather than
hack, really,
I guess I see it as a sit in rather than,
you know, breaking
and entering.
Yeah, there's no need to break and enter
when you can just, you know,
by that, I had an online sit in.
So, you know, to me, I saw
it as, you know, a legitimate way
to protest PayPal and let our opinions be
known.
And it's as simple as that.
And and in Germany, like with a live
timescale, it is legitimate, yes,
protected speech here, political speech.
So I mean, what we
went the path for, what we went
through in the past four years, if you're
a German citizen, you
pay for nothing for a weekend.
Question answered.
I think so.
Number five, please.
Yes, yes, hello.
Um, how much trouble
would it get you if someone
who went to the same legal hoops during
the same time came up to you to say
hi?
Oh, it's all good now where
we've been sentenced so we can talk
to people now, like people can come to
talk to us. It was for a long time if
somebody messaged me on Facebook and
said, hey, I'm from Anonymous and I
want to hang out, I really saw you.
I would have to, like, delete their
message and never talk to them again
because our conditions were worded very
specifically that if
you if we knew
someone to be anonymous, then we couldn't
talk to them.
But if there was that layer of doubt
where, like, we don't know, they haven't
told us directly, then it's OK.
So it goes from like the second they tell
us, then we have to stop speaking to
them.
So now we've been sentenced and
it's totally cool, which is how we get to
be here right now because the government
finally decided to let us go.
But so now, if you wanted to hang out,
it's totally cool.
We're pretty available.
You can call us actually.
You have your phone on time.
Oh, it's down there.
OK, well, our GSM number
is sweet as W, E, D
or F, you know, if you
and I register that
one.
OK, so I think that's
cushman's it.
Right. Right.
And number four, please.
Right. So if you would be willing to
talk about this, what are the amounts of
money that you now and
you have received?
And second question, would it be useful
for you right now and here to
receive cash or not?
We were going to have a bucket.
McFly forgot to get us a bucket.
We were supposed to have a bucket and
Miklós misplaced it.
So my bucket.
OK, OK.
So so far we have raised
about what was it on the go for me.
Like I'd have to look.
I know.
Yeah.
We raised one
to say seventeen.
I think it was on me.
It was close to eighteen thousand
on the go on me and then something
like four thousand on
the well Holland which our
group like the PayPal codependency,
almost every single decision is
decided by our group.
So even though I sometimes
end up being the one that everyone wants
to talk to because I'm like the token
girl, if someone comes to me
with a question I like, screenshot
the question and I send it to these guys
and I'm like, Hey, guys, how do you want
me to answer this question?
Like, everything that's done on behalf of
PayPal is done on PayPal, 14
is done on behalf of PayPal 14 and
decided by PayPal 14.
So we decided then that the four
thousand that was raised for, well,
Holland should go for this
trip to
let people know what's going on and how
things are in the United States and how
we would really like them to be, which
would be freedom.
That would be nice.
Yeah.
So we've raised about
twenty one thousand, but four thousand
went towards being here today, so
we still technically need fifty.
It's OK, so it's fifty six
hundred each defendant times
thirteen, so it's about
six altogether.
Minus twenty one down.
Yeah, it's complicated, it's a
lot of money, like fifty thousand is
left and you can go find me and go find
me right now is listed at eighty six
thousand.
But that's because they take like the
Exxon.
Yeah. The five percent figure.
Yeah, it's a fee.
So if you look at the go find me it
includes the fee for Go Fund Me
because we thought that would be a good
idea at the beginning.
So it's closer to 70 to 100, but
we have about fifty thousand
left to go which will not
fit in a bucket.
Right. And yes, we take cash.
Yeah.
This guy should come up to the stage and
give them all your money.
You want to invite more this guy,
your money, he's trustworthy.
Is there something else from the web?
Apparently not.
Sorry, I was reading this one
question for the panel.
Could you perhaps comment on
how you or the other
people that berated Bear founded
or pound of identified,
if you have any idea how they identified
us?
Yes.
Have you been identified all the stories
about the survivors in Texas?
Yeah, actually, they found,
I'm pretty sure,
Mercedes and like the people
who were like channel operators and stuff
like that, who actually didn't who
weren't involved in the protest,
they saw they seized a server
from Hostile and Hurricaine
Electric. And one of them apparently have
logs on it, somebody that know how
to use Devondale, apparently.
So do it yourself.
Yeah.
So, yeah, they got caught that way.
Some of us were caught by sending
packets.
I was one of the unlucky one
thousand people that were caught in
people's logs and
they decided to indict
five of us.
Well, I think we all said packet's.
It's just some of us used a VPN
that to use a
VPN.
I think personally for me,
I think I was set up
by an individual within
the movement and
that guys and I don't have
I don't have all of the documentation
I need to prove it.
So I'm not going to put out any
allegations at this time.
But we were working on that.
There's a website registered already,
so we have about two minutes left, I
think. And so I think we have time for
one more question.
Yeah, last question.
Number one, please hurry up.
You know, so anybody
else somewhere else know something
else from from the net?
The Revenant, yeah, there's one question
coming in.
So did you do anything more than
sending more packets to to people
and this really illegal?
So what was the current charge?
We we can't answer that question
now legally if we don't want to be
arrested when we go up again.
Again. I see.
Great, great, great, great.
I think this was an awesome talk.
Thank you very much.
Give him very well.
Thank you. Applause.