A message claiming responsibility for the assassination of UnitedHealth CEO Brian Thompson has surfaced, allegedly authored by individuals operating under the banner of “Anonymous.”

The statement outlines a justification for the attack, citing grievances against UnitedHealth and its policies, which the group claims prioritize profits over essential health services, allegedly resulting in significant loss of life.

According to the message, the act was carried out by self-described operatives affiliated with “#AnonOps,” who reportedly planned the assassination in retaliation for UnitedHealth’s perceived failings. The statement declared, “Eye for an eye, and blood for blood,” framing the attack as a form of retribution.

The individuals behind the statement also claimed to be veterans of the controversial internet forum 8chan. They alleged to collectively hold substantial investments in UnitedHealth stock and have since fled to China. The message suggests they plan to continue participating in corporate shareholder meetings remotely, though this claim remains unverified.

The message further describes a meticulous effort to track Brian Thompson’s movements and gather personal information about him, a process referred to as “absolute doxxing.” The group claims this preparation enabled them to act decisively, likening their actions to those of soldiers carrying out a mission.

A philosophical rationale accompanies the statement, framing the act as part of a broader struggle. It contends that while there may be moments in conflict for compassion, there are also moments requiring “ruthless clarity”—a term used to describe their perceived necessity of the attack.

The message concludes ominously with the declaration, “The shareholders have spoken,” suggesting the act was intended to send a message to UnitedHealth and its leadership.

Ongoing Investigation

Authorities are actively investigating the incident and the veracity of this statement. It remains unclear whether the individuals responsible for the attack are affiliated with Anonymous, as the group operates as a loosely organized collective with no central authority.

Law enforcement agencies have not confirmed the claims made in the message and are urging caution in interpreting its contents.

This incident has sent shockwaves through corporate and public sectors alike, raising questions about the intersection of cybersecurity, personal safety, and the responsibilities of large corporations in addressing public grievances.