Libs of TikTok Doxing Uncovers Secret Hacker-Government Mercenary Alliance Behind Regime’s War on MAGA Americans

American dissidents of all stripes are ablaze with anger after The Washington Post’s most repugnant reporter, Taylor Lorenz, published yet another piece trying to ruin someone more popular than her.

Taylor Lorenz, a Washington Post columnist, wrote a Tuesday article titled, “Meet the woman behind Libs of TikTok, secretly fueling the right’s outrage machine,” revealing the identity of the user who had intended to remain anonymous. The piece linked the user’s real estate page listing her full name and home address, which the outlet later removed.

The account, which nearly has 700,000 followers, posts TikTok videos of liberals in order to spark a reaction among conservative audiences.

Lorenz reportedly contacted Libs of TikTok early Tuesday telling the account they are “being implicated as a hate campaign against LGBTQ people,” the account said. [Daily Caller]

For those not paying attention, the blazing hot Libs of TikTok account simply finds TikTok videos wherein crazed liberals and LGBTQ-ers, many of them teachers of innocent children, unabashedly reveal their deviant grooming agenda for public consumption.

“Parents need to stay the f*** out of classrooms.” This is what the left really thinks. Listen when they tell you. They want to take your kids to groom and indoctrinate them behind your back. pic.twitter.com/vEJi71U3fH

Few people are more repugnant than Taylor Lorenz, who once falsely accused billionaire Marc Andreeson of using the “r-slur” in a Clubhouse room, and whose age is humorously difficult to pin down. Mere weeks ago, Lorenz had a meltdown over “online harassment” in an interview with MSNBC, then pressured the channel into deleting the interview.

Today she tracked down and harassed family members of the @libsoftiktok account for an article she’s working on.

Lorenz may be repulsive, to say the least. She certainly courted, assiduously, all the hatred coming her way. But there is a bigger story here. This incident is a case study in how the ruling regime uses cutout “NGOs” and “hackers” to target dissidents for annihilation. It wasn’t Taylor Lorenz who doxed Libs of TikTok. Lorenz is a used-up cocktail waitress for the regime. She’s far too talentless to achieve such a feat. Instead, it was a motley crew of regime actors.

The original doxer of the woman behind Libs of TikTok was an Antifa Twitter user named @karmaonesixone who gloated last weekend about using sleuth work to uncover the account’s original tweets and name.

"But why do I get libsoftiktok when searching for cuomomustgo? 😏 MAGA trash.https://t.co/5sUcogJF4Thttps://t.co/anvzv1XYfF pic.twitter.com/oB4MTS4U7Z

Ahhhh, there we arehttps://t.co/RkjzjKf0MEhttps://t.co/WPJVjY3AOv pic.twitter.com/Yr9UhqHDdE

Another Twitter user, Travis Brown, promoted and confirmed @karmaonesixone’s work, then went on to unearth and reveal even more information about the woman behind LibsofTikTok.

Pro-tip: if you want to run a viral moral panic account for the worst people on earth and stay anonymous, maybe start from scratch instead of doing whatever the fuck this is. https://t.co/OjzuXGQdOg pic.twitter.com/imsKPdjN4a

In the Washington Post, Taylor Lorenz herself credits Brown for confirming Libs Of TikTok’s identity.

On Saturday, software developer Travis Brown (who is working on a project with support from Prototype Fund, an organization that backs open-source projects) unearthed the account’s Twitter history and posted a thread detailing information about its profile changes.

Who is Travis Brown? In essence, a man paid by the German government to target, dox, and harass the international left’s ideological enemies.

Brown is the creator of the so-called “Hate Speech Tracker,” a program whose explicit purpose is to aid Antifa extremists in tracking and archiving statements by its enemies, and find “connections” between them to aid in doxxing.

Many right-wing extremist movements are currently developing on social media, e.g. B. GamerGate, conspiracy theory movements like QAnon and militant movements like the Proud Boys in the USA. Members of these movements often delete their content, change their username, and get banned (often temporarily) from social media platforms. This makes it harder to resist their actions. For example, prominent far-right accounts on Twitter and Facebook have developed a well-documented pattern of distributing controversial and extremist content to their followers and then deleting it before moderators have a chance to respond. This is how they radicalize their audience while minimizing the risk of their platforms losing funding or moderate supporters. Archiving is an important element in counteracting this behavior and in many cases has led to prominent victories against the extreme right.

The Hate Speech Tracker is a set of composable software tools that enable people affected by harassment and hate speech on social media to record and share information about their experiences. Blacklists for Twitter and other social media platforms can be commented on and shared privately, connections between extremist-run accounts can be identified and cases of hate speech can be archived.

The early versions of this project were mainly used by anti-fascist researchers and organizations. Although these specialists represent the primary user group of the project, the tools should also be available to a broader, less specialized user base.

For those wondering, Brown’s work egregiously violates the terms of use of the sites that he tracks “hate” on. As Brown himself noted on his website, Twitter’s own privacy policy states:

“As such, we prohibit the use of Twitter data in any way that would be inconsistent with people’s reasonable expectations of privacy. By building on the Twitter API or accessing Twitter Content, you have a special role to play in safeguarding this commitment, most importantly by respecting people’s privacy and providing them with transparency and control over how their data is used.”

“We want people to feel comfortable to create a separate and, if they choose, pseudonymous identity on Twitter. If you intend to associate any information about a Twitter user with an off-Twitter identifier, we require that you get express, opt-in consent from the user before making the association.

For example, you could get this consent if the user shares their Twitter handle directly with you as part of a signup process for your service. In situations in which you do not have a user’s express, opt-in consent to link their Twitter identity to an off-Twitter identifier, we require that any connection you draw be based only on information that a user would reasonably expect to be used for that purpose. If a user would be surprised to learn that you are using information they provided to link their Twitter account to an identity off of Twitter, don’t do it.”

Brown also openly admits to using certain tactics on Twitter that “probably” violate the ToS.

This isn’t some one-off fluke. Much like Brandy Zadrozny, whom Revolver profiled in 2020, Travis Brown exists as a small part of a much larger ecosystem.

Brown’s doxxing operation isn’t an independent venture. He is backed by the Prototype Fund, a project of the Open Knowledge Foundation Germany, an “independent not-for-profit organization.” The notion that the foundation is “independent” is, of course, a lie. OKFG receives funding directly from the the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

In other words, the German government directly financed the doxing of Libs Of TikTok and Taylor Lorenz’s calculated attempt on behalf of the Washington Post to destroy her life.

Prototype, by the way, doesn’t just fund doxing operations. It funds the mass arrival of “asylum-seekers” into Europe.

Is there something about “trans voices”? You bet there’s something about trans voices!

The same organization that paid to dox Libs Of TikTok is also paying to teach male-to-female transgenders how not to sound like Barry White.

Prototype doesn’t limit itself to online flame wars. It also takes an interest in real wars, funding an archive to gather alleged eyewitness reports of atrocities in the Syrian Civil War.

“Syrian Archive” acts vague about what position it takes on the war, but its website leaves no room for doubt: This is an organization that exists to blame Bashar Assad, and by extension Russia, for chemical attacks (chemical attacks that in at least one case turned out to be a hoax). In fact, its anti-Russia orientation is so obvious that in the last few weeks it has pivoted to warning about imminent chemical attacks in Ukraine:

The same German government-backed organization that is targeting political dissidents in the West is also funding the transgender mania and the foreign policy priorities of the Western elite. In many ways, Prototype resembles Bellingcat—an “NGO” funded by the United Kingdom that played a key role in amplifying the Russia collusion narrative, targets “far-right” domestic dissidents, and promoted the Syria gas attack hoax. In 2021, The Grayzone revealed that Bellingcat took UK intelligence money to run overseas influence operations intended to “weaken Russia.”

America unsurprisingly loves this tactic as well. In February, the hacker collective Distributed Denial of Secrets (DDoS) leaked hacked materials from GiveSendGo that doxed donors to the Canadian trucker convoy. As we previously observed, DDoS is basically a de facto government operation:

In 2020, the Trump Department of Homeland Security claimed that DDoS is a “criminal hacker group.” Despite that, it enjoys IRS non-profit status. DDoS’s high-profile hacks have, almost without exception, targeted domestic dissidents against the regime, or its international enemies, rather than the regime itself. Besides doxing every GiveSendGo donor, DDoS’s other targets include Gab, Parler, local police departments, Russia, Myanmar, and right-wing chat groups online.

So much for speaking truth to power. By all accounts, DDoS speaks power to truth.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, DDoS’s leader is the “chronically ill” “they/she” transgender freak show Emma Best. DDoS almost certainly works hand in hand with serious criminals, if it is not an outright criminal organization itself. Yet nobody is shutting down financial support for DDoS or seizing its assets. While Julian Assange awaits trial and, in all likelihood, life in prison for embarrassing the security state and the Hillary Clinton campaign, “Emma” Best (they/she) faces no serious efforts to stop his activities whatsoever. And why would he? He is among the most heroic tranissaries rendering an invaluable service to the Globalist American Empire.

The actual hacker who claims credit for hacking GiveSendGo is Aubrey Cottle, who is the co-founder of the old “Anonymous” hacking collective.

1/ Aubrey Cottle, who hacked GiveSendGo is crowing about getting thousands of people fired from their jobs for donating to the Freedom Convoy.

In late February, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Hillary Clinton called for Anonymous and other hacker groups to launch more cyberattacks on Russia. Does anybody think for even a moment that the CIA and other agencies aren’t “encouraging” such behavior behind the scenes?

Hillary Clinton says the US should launch cyberattacks against Russia. pic.twitter.com/0wlRn1YWN7

This isn’t a new idea. Back in 2013, Anonymous carried out operations against the Assad government in Syria.

So, what’s the takeaway from all this? When you see such “hacker groups” operate, they are not operating independently. They exist within an ecosystem where regime stakeholders can use cut-outs to do their dirty work. During the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the merc–, ahem, private military contractor Blackwater served a similar function for combat zones: Flexibility and plausible deniability. Now, the same goes for civil society. Nominally, the U.S. Constitution and the constitutions of its allies protect freedom of speech, and the government explicitly doxing its own citizens for dissent is unlikely to be popular. Rather than have government employees directly target dissidents (which does happen on occasion), it is much easier to quietly enable cutout “civil society organizations,” NGOs, and more — all funded by government yet insulated from any kind of accountability — to do the dirty work.

The Lorenz dox job exposes how this ecology operates. This is not simply the story of a deranged attention whore who went too far. This is a story of how the new Stasi operates: Energy flows from governments, to non-profits, to hackers, and finally to aged out journalists publishing hit pieces on dissidents in Jeff Bezos’s paper of record.

By understanding this system, it becomes possible to stop it. The most obvious fix is the most blunt: Break off the billions in government funding that enable these shadow operations of left-wing radicalism. But that isn’t the only fix. Revolver will further explore this NGO ecosystem in the weeks and months to come. Stay tuned.

Wasn’t it former President Obama who said no one, basically should have a right to online anonymity?

Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals:

Saul Alinsky’s 12 Rules for Radicals…
What is really interesting about the use of Alinsky’s simplistic tactics is that they were designed to be used by people with low intelligence – those whose lips move when they read. If they EVER read. Tools and fools. CNN’s audience.

Watch any video where the regular liberal “marchers” get interviewed and you will find that they can go no further, in a thought process, then the words they heard on CNN. They don’t have a message. They have a memorized chant which they cannot explain, or enlarge on. These people have no idea of what a concept is. They are very likely, these days, to be vaccine damaged.

When you understand this actuality, these Alinsky people become fun to watch.

Be aware that most proponents, and users, of these liberal tactics hide behind fake identities for GOOD reason.

Here is the complete list from Alinsky.
RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”

Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.”

It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.”

Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”

They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”

Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”

Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”

Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.”

Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”

Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

What is REALLY interesting is that Saul Alinsky died in 1972, almost 50 years ago…
So, these political tactics are, at a minimum, fifty years old. They were designed to deal with a political situation in existence during the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s – a world totally different from today. Yet, many activist groups laud these tactics without realizing their in-appropriateness in the 2020 world.

What Alinsky, and his followers, failed to comprehend is that they created a whole generation of people who cannot see beyond screaming criticism and offer any modern day solutions to social problems beyond a social shift to the hungry and dreary world of socialism/communism – something they definitely do not actually want to happen.

The counter reaction to this situation has been the rise of the humongous populist movement that elected Donald Trump. This group doesn’t put up with Alinsky-like nonsense. They outnumber the Alinski-ites 100,000 to 1.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.