Hackers - An Evil Scourge..or...

[sp1814]

Anonymous are attacking the Westboro Baptist Church because of their threat to picket a vigil held for those killed in Newton.

Now...do you feel this is an outrageous attack on freedom of speech...or like me, do you kinda think "About bl**dy time"?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/westboro-baptist-church-hacked-anonymous-protest-newtown-shooting-victims-funerals_n_2315070.html

[Duncer]

They are indeed all related.

To the tune of the Adams Family........


Your sister is your mother,
Your father is your brother,
You're shagg1ng one another,
The Westboro family

[China Doll]

I actually think Lady Ga-Ga had it about right when she said to not acknowledge them at all, they thrive on the attention.

They are vile people, and I would agree that the children should be removed but I doubt that would happen. However, some of the teenagers shown on the Louis Theroux documentary are not part of the church anymore, (at least one), so here's hoping that more of them do the same.

[naomi24]

Duncer, That's them.

SP, //It seems like madness. //

It's often said that things are not as they seem, but in this case they are.

[Gromit]

Duncer, aptly named.

Sorry you took my call for their kids to be murdered seriously. It wasn't.

[ChillDoubt]

If thye do turn up I've a feeling their reception will make this look like a picnic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVb0ifzw4d4

[Bluestone]

http://pastebin.com/pCTSgLTJ

[jno]

they seem like an unpleasant lot, but the US constitution does protect freedom of speech - for everyone, not just for nice people. It does not protect computer hacking, and that's okay by me because my computer is at much at risk as anyone's.

[Kromovaracun]

Anonymous is a far more interesting entity than the WBC. I say 'entity' because it's important not to think of them as an organisation as such - it's essentially just a label adopted by disparate groups of hackers and flashmob protesters. Personally, I think the people using the symbol have actually achieved some pretty impressive things.

Not least of which was their hacking of the Syrian Ministry of Defence's website - and replacing it with a message of support for the Syrian uprising: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/08/syria-ministry-of-defense-hacked-anonymous_n_920733.html

(additionally, they've promised a new campaign against the Syrian govt just recently, I think).

I hugely admire the attack on the WBC. More power to them.

[jake-the-peg]

I have to disagree with you kromovaracun

Would you support them if they were vandalising their homes and church by say spraying them with paint?

How about if they were burgled would you say more power to them then?

breaking the law cannot be condoned just because it's cybercrime against someone you dislike - that's a very slippery slope indeed

[ludwig]

// do you kinda think "About bl**dy time"? //

Yes. It's good to know hacking can be used for benevolent as well as malevolent purposes.

The obsessive hatred of that group seems to stem from the one old twisted nutjob who heads it. The rest of them are basically his offspring who've had his hatred brainwashed into them from birth. It's more of a family than a church organisation as such.

[Goonermatt]

Naomi,

I tried to check out the WBC website and got this message...


"Page Blocked.

This page has been blocked by the [my company name here] Web Proxy because it is categorized as: "Violence/Hate/Racism""


Say no more.

[naomi24]

Goonermatt, yes indeed.

[youngmafbog]

My head has to agree with Jake.

Both lots are as bad as one another but you can't go breaking the law just because you disagree.

Democracy and freedom of speech means from time to time we have to accept the abhorrent

[sp1814]

Point of order - is hacking actually illegal if the act doesn't result in financial loss?

[Bluestone]

"Computer hacking is illegal and carries a possible sanction of imprisonment"

[LazyGun]

@SP Its the process, not the proceeds, that constitute the crime, surely?

Release into the public domain of information about an individual - that would be hacking. Distributed Denial of Service- what anonymous are doing to the WBC site at the moment - thats illegal,since it prevents the WBC from receiving the service from the ISP that they have paid for. Others have hacked systems and released information on passwords, for instance, or bank account details. All these represent a breach of privacy and are therefore illegal, I would have thought.

You might occasionally see a hack where the hackers are claiming a public interest defence - highlighting security flaws in Operating Systems, for instance, or the release of classified intelligence data, as in wikileaks - but those actions would still technically be illegal.

[Bluestone]

It appears that the WBC's websites are once again up and running, which is unfortunate.

It's a tricky one, and something I feel a bit different about this morning.
It appears that, having published the name of the hotel the WBC group were staying at, the manager of the hotel has been receiving death threats in a bid to get him to throw them out. A step too far? Yes.

[divegirl]

As to why do they picket such events, there is a theory that says wait for people to react, generally with violence and then sue them. This is how they make their living. I believe the patriarch and other 'family' members are lawyers.

[Bluestone]

On a separate note, having read more about the WBC group, I have to say they are the biggest trolls to ever exist!

[Bluestone]

They spend $200,000 on flights *Every* year to attend funerals, so they can spread "Gods hate".

Mental!