Anonymous sends letter to Westboro Church

[The Franchise]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/anonymous-sends-an-open-letter-to-the-westboro-chu



Anonymous Sends An Open Letter To The Westboro Baptist Church

AN OPEN LETTER FROM ANONYMOUS

February 16, 2011

TO THE CONGREGANTS OF WESTBORO BAPTIST CHURCH:

We, the collective super-consciousness known as ANONYMOUS - the Voice of Free Speech & the Advocate of the People - have long heard you issue your venomous statements of hatred, and we have witnessed your flagrant and absurd displays of inimitable bigotry and intolerant fanaticism. We have always regarded you and your ilk as an assembly of graceless sociopaths and maniacal chauvinists & religious zealots, however benign, who act out for the sake of attention & in the name of religion.
Being such aggressive proponents for the Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Information as we are, we have hitherto allowed you to continue preaching your benighted gospel of hatred and your theatrical exhibitions of, not only your fascist views, but your utter lack of Christ-like attributes. You have condemned the men and women who serve, fight, and perish in the armed forces of your nation; you have prayed for and celebrated the deaths of young children, who are without fault; you have stood outside the United States National Holocaust Museum, condemning the men, women, and children who, despite their innocence, were annihilated by a tyrannical embodiment of fascism and unsubstantiated repugnance. Rather than allowing the deceased some degree of peace and respect, you instead choose to torment, harass, and assault those who grieve.
Your demonstrations and your unrelenting cascade of disparaging slurs, unfounded judgments, and prejudicial innuendos, which apparently apply to every individual numbered amongst the race of Man - except for yourselves - has frequently crossed the line which separates Freedom of Speech from deliberately utilizing the same tactics and methods of intimidation and mental & emotional abuse that have been previously exploited and employed by tyrants and dictators, fascists and terrorist organizations throughout history.

ANONYMOUS cannot abide this behavior any longer. The time for us to be idle spectators in your inhumane treatment of fellow Man has reached its apex, and we shall now be moved to action. Thus, we give you a warning: Cease & desist your protest campaign in the year 2011, return to your homes in Kansas, & close your public Web sites.
Should you ignore this warning, you will meet with the vicious retaliatory arm of ANONYMOUS: We will target your public Websites, and the propaganda & detestable doctrine that you promote will be eradicated; the damage incurred will be irreversible, and neither your institution nor your congregation will ever be able to fully recover. It is in your best interest to comply now, while the option to do so is still being offered, because we will not relent until you cease the conduction & promotion of all your bigoted operations & doctrines.

The warning has been given. What happens from here shall be determined by you.

WE ARE ANONYMOUS.
WE ARE LEGION.
WE DO NOT FORGIVE.
WE DO NOT FORGET.
EXPECT US. .

[ArrowheadHawk]

Some crazy fuck should just blow up the Phelps church.

[Stanley Nickels]

You can't hack into cardboard signs. Nothing will come of this.

[Frazod]

That is full of WIN. :rockon:

[Ebolapox]

fuck yes, go all ch4n on that ass!

[CrazyPhuD]

LOL let's be defenders of free speech...yet rail on any group because of what they say.

I'm no fan of the Phelps, but I will defend their right to say what they do, even while I pray some mysterious illness solves the problem for us all.

[Hammock Parties]

This is awesome.

In fact, while I was reading this, this music came on, and I just about died:

<object width="480" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q1bBBNC30MU?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0&amp;hd=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q1bBBNC30MU?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0&amp;hd=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="390"></embed></object>

[Bugeater]

You can't hack into cardboard signs. Nothing will come of this.
Don't they use their website to publicize where they're going to be? I have to think that's where the media gets their information, and therefore giving them the attention they crave.

[Ebolapox]

LOL let's be defenders of free speech...yet rail on any group because of what they say.

I'm no fan of the Phelps, but I will defend their right to say what they do, even while I pray some mysterious illness solves the problem for us all.

ANONYMOUS *IS* the mysterious illness to solve the problem, fwiw.

[Hammock Parties]

You can't hack into cardboard signs. Nothing will come of this.

You do realize Anonymous has a physical presence?

http://www.t52.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/27.jpg

[CrazyPhuD]

ANONYMOUS *IS* the mysterious illness to solve the problem, fwiw.

Earth. Hitler. 1938.

[Jenson71]

LOL let's be defenders of free speech...yet rail on any group because of what they say.

I'm no fan of the Phelps, but I will defend their right to say what they do, even while I pray some mysterious illness solves the problem for us all.

If a relative of a dead soldier actually shot them at a funeral they were protesting, would you be on the jury and vote for them to be guilty?

I wouldn't. I'd hang that jury all day if I had to. There's no way in hell I would find a family member guilty in that situation. I'd consider it a provocation and I'd find for a counterclaim of intentional extreme emotional distress.

[The Franchise]

If a relative of a dead soldier actually shot them at a funeral they were protesting, would you be on the jury and vote for them to be guilty?

I wouldn't. I'd hang that jury all day if I had to. There's no way in hell I would find a family member guilty in that situation. I'd consider it a provocation and I'd find for a counterclaim of intentional extreme emotional distress.

If that actually happened.....do you know how hard it would be for them to find enough people to fill that jury? Anyone who has heard of the WBBC or has a family member or friend in the military wouldn't be allowed to serve.

[Jenson71]

If that actually happened.....do you know how hard it would be for them to find enough people to fill that jury? Anyone who has heard of the WBBC or has a family member or friend in the military wouldn't be allowed to serve.

"Have I heard of WBBC? No sir, not til this morning here at the court."

[CrazyPhuD]

If a relative of a dead soldier actually shot them at a funeral they were protesting, would you be on the jury and vote for them to be guilty?

I wouldn't. I'd hang that jury all day if I had to. There's no way in hell I would find a family member guilty in that situation. I'd consider it a provocation and I'd find for a counterclaim of intentional extreme emotional distress.

Honestly I wouldn't find them guilty for a world of other reasons, but I could make that claim for probably most criminals.

Look if anonymous wants to do this fine, just don't claim to be patrons of free speech while you do it.

The issue with free speech is that once it's ok to shut one group up it becomes all that much easier to shut up the next one. It's the camel's nose/slippery slope argument.

One way to phrase it as such, if by killing one ex-criminal you could save a million lives would you do it? What if it's not a criminal, but a normal person, could you still do it? What if it's a child? What if it's not one but 1000, or 100,000.

At what point does it become wrong or too much? The only way to be fair is to say it's always wrong. We hold a very high standard for free speech for the same reason. The damage of that speech has to be so overwhelming that the chilling effect of reducing free speech is minimized.

I hate pretty much everything the phelps stand for, but if we shut them up because we don't like what they say, that does far more damage to the rest of us than anything they could ever do.

[Fat Elvis]

Honestly I wouldn't find them guilty for a world of other reasons, but I could make that claim for probably most criminals.

Look if anonymous wants to do this fine, just don't claim to be patrons of free speech while you do it.

The issue with free speech is that once it's ok to shut one group up it becomes all that much easier to shut up the next one. It's the camel's nose/slippery slope argument.

One way to phrase it as such, if by killing one ex-criminal you could save a million lives would you do it? What if it's not a criminal, but a normal person, could you still do it? What if it's a child? What if it's not one but 1000, or 100,000.

At what point does it become wrong or too much? The only way to be fair is to say it's always wrong. We hold a very high standard for free speech for the same reason. The damage of that speech has to be so overwhelming that the chilling effect of reducing free speech is minimized.

I hate pretty much everything the phelps stand for, but if we shut them up because we don't like what they say, that does far more damage to the rest of us than anything they could ever do.

Pretty much sums up my view of things.

I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
Voltaire

[alnorth]

This ought to be fun to watch. What they did to Scientology was hilarious.

http://turbo.inquisitr.com/wp-content/2011/02/Anonymous-e1298145145810.jpg

[Ebolapox]

Pretty much sums up my view of things.

I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
Voltaire

thought that was patrick henry? hmmm... maybe voltaire said it first.

hell, neither technically.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_said_I_may_not_agree_with_what_you_say_but_I_will_defend_to_the_death_your_right_to_say_it

[pr_capone]

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/IUH3JQjcweM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Frazod]

If a relative of a dead soldier actually shot them at a funeral they were protesting, would you be on the jury and vote for them to be guilty?

I wouldn't. I'd hang that jury all day if I had to. There's no way in hell I would find a family member guilty in that situation. I'd consider it a provocation and I'd find for a counterclaim of intentional extreme emotional distress.

Absolutely.

[Jenson71]

The issue with free speech is that once it's ok to shut one group up it becomes all that much easier to shut up the next one. It's the camel's nose/slippery slope argument.

One way to phrase it as such, if by killing one ex-criminal you could save a million lives would you do it? What if it's not a criminal, but a normal person, could you still do it? What if it's a child? What if it's not one but 1000, or 100,000.

At what point does it become wrong or too much? The only way to be fair is to say it's always wrong. We hold a very high standard for free speech for the same reason. The damage of that speech has to be so overwhelming that the chilling effect of reducing free speech is minimized.

I hate pretty much everything the phelps stand for, but if we shut them up because we don't like what they say, that does far more damage to the rest of us than anything they could ever do.

Nah, I don't see any damage to the rest of us if a family member shoots and kills a Phelps member who is shouting out at him with insults about the fallen soldier during his funeral.

["Bob" Dobbs]

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jN2pfbMqKeo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Check out starting at about 2:00

[Ebolapox]

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jN2pfbMqKeo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Check out starting at about 2:00

ROFL

[DaFace]

Huh. This could be fun. It's tough to imagine that Anon could really do anything that substantial, but I wouldn't put anything past them.

[pr_capone]

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jN2pfbMqKeo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Check out starting at about 2:00

Ouch... Anon FAIL.

http://i54.tinypic.com/2s0oig9.jpg

[kaplin42]

If a relative of a dead soldier actually shot them at a funeral they were protesting, would you be on the jury and vote for them to be guilty?

I wouldn't. I'd hang that jury all day if I had to. There's no way in hell I would find a family member guilty in that situation. I'd consider it a provocation and I'd find for a counterclaim of intentional extreme emotional distress.

I think this is the first post of yours that I actually fully agree with.

[Jenson71]

I think this is the first post of yours that I actually fully agree with.

You have reached a wise turning point, kaplin. Embrace this. It is progression.

[Hammock Parties]

You think Tyriam Roshak is a real name?

[CrazyPhuD]

You think Tyriam Roshak is a real name?

He should have used Ivana Tinkle

[jAZ]

Honestly I wouldn't find them guilty for a world of other reasons, but I could make that claim for probably most criminals.

Look if anonymous wants to do this fine, just don't claim to be patrons of free speech while you do it.

The issue with free speech is that once it's ok to shut one group up it becomes all that much easier to shut up the next one. It's the camel's nose/slippery slope argument.

One way to phrase it as such, if by killing one ex-criminal you could save a million lives would you do it? What if it's not a criminal, but a normal person, could you still do it? What if it's a child? What if it's not one but 1000, or 100,000.

At what point does it become wrong or too much? The only way to be fair is to say it's always wrong. We hold a very high standard for free speech for the same reason. The damage of that speech has to be so overwhelming that the chilling effect of reducing free speech is minimized.

I hate pretty much everything the phelps stand for, but if we shut them up because we don't like what they say, that does far more damage to the rest of us than anything they could ever do.

I don't buy the slippery slope model for this or a lot of things. But I do agree with you about their right to free speech. I will defend the person I respect the least's right to say the things I respect the least.... as much as anyone saying something I like.

It's a responsibility of everyone to do the same, IMO.

Burn the flag. Shout at soldiers.

Anonymous is the one proposing committing a crime here. Generally, Phelps is just being a (wildly psychotic) American.

[KcMizzou]

You think Tyriam Roshak is a real name?LMAO Seriously...

[The Franchise]

Ouch... Anon FAIL.

http://i54.tinypic.com/2s0oig9.jpg

This :facepalm: is for you.

[Shogun]

In b4 Westboro Baptist gets 100 pizzas delivered to them

[tinfoil]

If you Google Tyriam Roshak, the #2 listing is this thread. hahah

[HighChief]

If a relative of a dead soldier actually shot them at a funeral they were protesting, would you be on the jury and vote for them to be guilty?

I wouldn't. I'd hang that jury all day if I had to. There's no way in hell I would find a family member guilty in that situation. I'd consider it a provocation and I'd find for a counterclaim of intentional extreme emotional distress.

:bravo::thumb:

[Slainte]

This ought to be fun to watch. What they did to Scientology was hilarious.

Yes. They completely destroyed Scientology and that organization doesn't exist today.

In other words, nothing substantial will come of this. ANON declares war on WBC. Pffft...big deal.

[Hammock Parties]

IT'S ON.

http://i53.tinypic.com/28h27v8.jpg

[teedubya]

Wow... how long until shit goes crazy? lol

["Bob" Dobbs]

Shit just got real.

[Pushead2]

ahhhhhhhhhh yeahhhh

[Dave Lane]

Some crazy **** should just blow up the Phelps church.

With them in it.

[LaDairis]

Good thing religion and politics are not tolerate in The Lounge...

[Fire Me Boy!]

Don't they use their website to publicize where they're going to be? I have to think that's where the media gets their information, and therefore giving them the attention they crave.

Coverage is a problem for the media. It's a double-edged sword. Yes, WBC is using the media; but their presence in a town, along with the protests and counter-protests, is newsworthy. The news teams aren't there to pass judgment on WBC; they are there to cover the news without bias.

[R8RFAN]

LOL let's be defenders of free speech...yet rail on any group because of what they say.

I'm no fan of the Phelps, but I will defend their right to say what they do, even while I pray some mysterious illness solves the problem for us all.

I believe in a mans right to free speech but I also believe in a mans right to be punched in the face for saying it too...

A man has the right to call your wife and or daughter or mom a whore on the street .... But that does not guarantee him that you won't kick his ass for doing it.

[Saul Good]

I believe in a mans right to free speech but I also believe in a mans right to be punched in the face for saying it too...

A man has the right to call your wife and or daughter or mom a whore on the street .... But that does not guarantee him that you won't kick his ass for doing it.

That's kind of where I stand on this. Just as charities serve a social purpose in assisting those whose needs are unserved by traditional means, vigilantism, too has a place in maintaining a polite society.

Its a last resort, but its a useful tool. See Chris Rock's bit about hitting women for another example.

[Royal Fanatic]

At what point does it become wrong or too much? The only way to be fair is to say it's always wrong. We hold a very high standard for free speech for the same reason. The damage of that speech has to be so overwhelming that the chilling effect of reducing free speech is minimized.

I hate pretty much everything the phelps stand for, but if we shut them up because we don't like what they say, that does far more damage to the rest of us than anything they could ever do.
Completely agree with you if it's the government that shuts them up.

If private citizens decide to shut them up, I think I'm good with that.

[chiefsnorth]

There have been numerous stories lately about some kind of private security investigator who was about to identify numerous of these anonymous people and was going to turn this information over to law enforcement. Predictably, although there are a lot of casual people associated with it the leadership per se is a small number of mostly teenagers.

Recently they tried to attack amazon's web hosting service for dropping wikileaks and failed. It's not a sophisticated group and it doesn't take much knowhow to launch DDoS attacks.

It would be nice if they could take these idiots off the web permanently but I don't see it happening. The "church" would probably sue then for civil rights violations and just get richer

[RNR]

I believe in a mans right to free speech but I also believe in a mans right to be punched in the face for saying it too...

A man has the right to call your wife and or daughter or mom a whore on the street .... But that does not guarantee him that you won't kick his ass for doing it.

That is very well said~

[R8RFAN]

That is very well said~

Thanks,

Also Kudos to the Patriot Guard that blocks alot of that garbage from the families.

http://www.patriotguard.org/Portals/0/National/LDF%20Patch%20X-%20lrg.jpg
http://www.patriotguard.org/

[Old Dog]

I believe in a mans right to free speech but I also believe in a mans right to be punched in the face for saying it too...

A man has the right to call your wife and or daughter or mom a whore on the street .... But that does not guarantee him that you won't kick his ass for doing it.

Aw hell, I'm agreeing with R8ers AGAIN. That's already two or three times this year. Is it 2012 already?

[RNR]

Thanks,

Also Kudos to the Patriot Guard that blocks alot of that garbage from the families.

http://www.patriotguard.org/Portals/0/National/LDF%20Patch%20X-%20lrg.jpg
http://www.patriotguard.org/

I have some buddies back home that ride with them~

[Bugeater]

Coverage is a problem for the media. It's a double-edged sword. Yes, WBC is using the media; but their presence in a town, along with the protests and counter-protests, is newsworthy. The news teams aren't there to pass judgment on WBC; they are there to cover the news without bias.
Why is it newsworthy?

[R8RFAN]

I have some buddies back home that ride with them~

I had a craving for waffle house food one morning and me and the wife stopped in, as we were leaving, about 30 of them pulled into the parking lot en route to a fallen soldiers funeral , I thanked them for the service they provide.

[salame]

uh-oh they are fucked now

[Dave Lane]

Ohoh don't look now but their site just went down.

[dtebbe]

What we need is 3 or 4 vans loaded with woofers and about 4k watts each. These vans would then follow WBC to every location (including any worship on their grounds) and play "Paul Revere" by the Beastie Boys at merciless levels.

I think this would put an end to their protests in short order :D

DT

[jAZ]

Wouldn't "BRING IT!" be an invitation that invites Anon's stated actions... thus making any hacking they were getting ready to do and invited action... and perfectly legal?

That' line seems pretty stupid. But I guess they aren't at all worried about stopping Anon, or sending them to jail. Just getting attention.

So I stand corrected.

[Rausch]

http://i53.tinypic.com/28h27v8.jpg

Yeah.

You fuq'tards have fun with that...

[Phobia]

Why is it newsworthy?

It's not in my paper but we're a mom & pop so who cares? I understand why the big guys cover it. But I won't spend my time and energy giving them a forum. They can buy some advertising though.

[Gonzo]

Everyone sit on the edge of your seats with baited breath and await this groups action!

Well, it's going to take a while. There's a Highlander marathon on the SciFi channel this weekend.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Sannyasi]

If a relative of a dead soldier actually shot them at a funeral they were protesting, would you be on the jury and vote for them to be guilty?

I wouldn't. I'd hang that jury all day if I had to. There's no way in hell I would find a family member guilty in that situation. I'd consider it a provocation and I'd find for a counterclaim of intentional extreme emotional distress.

There is nothing in the world someone could say to you that would give you the right to kill them.

[Rausch]

It's not in my paper but we're a mom & pop so who cares?

Link?....:evil:

[Fire Me Boy!]

Why is it newsworthy?

Because when you have a single, small group of people whose sheer presence has the ability to cause traffic jams, bring out counter-protesters, create the need for increased law enforcement presence, cause schools to cancel class and generally disrupt the everyday lives of others, it's newsworthy.

Believe me, every single time they go to a town, the news organizations have a lengthy discussion about whether or not it's something they're going to cover. Having worked as a journalist in and around Kansas City, as well as several other markets, I've been a part of several of these discussions.

[gblowfish]

This whole thing is a bad idea by the hackers. All WBC wants is attention. This gives them exactly what they crave. Best policy with Fred's Klan is to ignore them. That's the one thing they can't abide.

[chiefsnorth]

This whole thing is a bad idea by the hackers. All WBC wants is attention. This gives them exactly what they crave. Best policy with Fred's Klan is to ignore them. That's the one thing they can't abide.

Exactly. And yet there is a new thread here every week celebrating their latest protest, giving them more of the attention they crave.

[Bugeater]

Because when you have a single, small group of people whose sheer presence has the ability to cause traffic jams, bring out counter-protesters, create the need for increased law enforcement presence, cause schools to cancel class and generally disrupt the everyday lives of others, it's newsworthy.

Believe me, every single time they go to a town, the news organizations have a lengthy discussion about whether or not it's something they're going to cover. Having worked as a journalist in and around Kansas City, as well as several other markets, I've been a part of several of these discussions.
Fair enough, I suppose the majority of the blame lies at the feet of the ignorant general public that seems to have an insatiable thirst for things to be outraged towards.

[Marcellus]

Honestly I wouldn't find them guilty for a world of other reasons, but I could make that claim for probably most criminals.

Look if anonymous wants to do this fine, just don't claim to be patrons of free speech while you do it.

The issue with free speech is that once it's ok to shut one group up it becomes all that much easier to shut up the next one. It's the camel's nose/slippery slope argument.

One way to phrase it as such, if by killing one ex-criminal you could save a million lives would you do it? What if it's not a criminal, but a normal person, could you still do it? What if it's a child? What if it's not one but 1000, or 100,000.

At what point does it become wrong or too much? The only way to be fair is to say it's always wrong. We hold a very high standard for free speech for the same reason. The damage of that speech has to be so overwhelming that the chilling effect of reducing free speech is minimized.

I hate pretty much everything the phelps stand for, but if we shut them up because we don't like what they say, that does far more damage to the rest of us than anything they could ever do.

Antiquated thinking. It's simple.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a duck. Fuck that duck.

Use common sense. Is shutting these assholes up going to do any harm to anyone? No, will it do good? Yes. SHut them up. Permanently.

That doesn't mean we are spinning down a blackhole of censorship. I hate this argument because it allows what should be intolerable to exist in the name of freedom.

Sorry it was never meant to be that way. Never.

[Dave Lane]

There is nothing in the world someone could say to you that would give you the right to kill them.

Im not saying I would shoot them, but Jenson expresses my view well. I'd never find anyone guilty of killing all of them despite any and all evidence presented.

[Dave Lane]

This whole thing is a bad idea by the hackers. All WBC wants is attention. This gives them exactly what they crave. Best policy with Fred's Klan is to ignore them. That's the one thing they can't abide.

I'd love to see them hack the site and put up a bunch of gay porn. Maybe photoshop Fred's head onto some gay sexcapades.

[gblowfish]

Im not saying I would shoot them, but Jenson expresses my view well. I'd never find anyone guilty of killing all of them despite any and all evidence presented.

Why become the thing that you oppose? Killing them would make you as bad as they are. Worse even.

I don't get this line of thinking. At all.

As Ron White said, "You Can't Fix Stupid."

[Dave Lane]

Why become the thing that you oppose? Killing them would make you as bad as they are. Worse even.

I don't get this line of thinking. At all.

As Ron White said, "You Can't Fix Stupid."

Don't care. I'm basically anti death penalty in other than the most extreme and documented examples but in their case I will suspend logic.

[Talisman]

You think Tyriam Roshak is a real name

It appears to be an anagram of Karma History.

Could be this guy thinks these groups they go after are getting what they deserve and in doing so they are making history? :shrug:

[milkman]

I think that a family should have the right to grieve the loss of a family member in peace.

When one takes advantage of their right to freedom of speech to infringe on another's rights, they should lose that right.

[Marcellus]

I think that a family should have the right to grieve the loss of a family member in peace.

When one takes advantage of their right to freedom of speech to infringe on another's rights, they should lose that right.

It's common sense.

[DJ's left nut]

This whole thing is a bad idea by the hackers. All WBC wants is attention. This gives them exactly what they crave. Best policy with Fred's Klan is to ignore them. That's the one thing they can't abide.

I actually disagree with this.

The WBC is a bunch of true believers. Even if the general public ignores them, they're still going to show up to the funerals of dead soldiers, etc... and create hell for the family members of the fallen.

Ignoring the problem will not make it go away in this instance. It will make it irrelevant for you, but not for the family members they harass.

[RNR]

There is nothing in the world someone could say to you that would give you the right to kill them.

When they disrespected those willing to die to give them their rights I ran fresh out of give a shit. If I read that some or all of them are killed I would smile and think the world is a better place for it~

[allen_kcCard]

I think WBC does want and thrive on the attention, but....even moreso I think they want to say "We are allowed to do this and there is nothing you can do to stop us." If anon can do things to them that stop them from doing some of the things that they want to do, their websites for example, then that very well could trump them getting attention in a very big way, so long as they put their throat on their virtual necks and WBC can't find anything to do to make them stop.

[chiefsnorth]

I think it is a pretty scary day in America when people will say about someone else, "I don't like their politcal or religious beliefs. If it were up to me it would be OK to kill these people."

I think people who would say that are worse than WBC. The WBC nuts are trying to inflict emotional distress on people to spread their nutty beliefs. They aren't killing anyone. As far as I know they aren't saying anyone should kill anyone else.

Saying people should be killed because you don't like their political beliefs puts you in the company of the worlds worst and most destructive people ever. Hell the Nazis had to warm up to this idea. You just espouse it openly without any coercion.

So for those of you saying that, congrats for being more like them than unlike.

[milkman]

I think it is a pretty scary day in America when people will say about someone else, "I don't like their politcal or religious beliefs. If it were up to me it would be OK to kill these people."

I think people who would say that are worse than WBC. The WBC nuts are trying to inflict emotional distress on people to spread their nutty beliefs. They aren't killing anyone. As far as I know they aren't saying anyone should kill anyone else.

Saying people should be killed because you don't like their political beliefs puts you in the company of the worlds worst and most destructive people ever. Hell the Nazis had to warm up to this idea. You just espouse it openly without any coercion.

So for those of you saying that, congrats for being more like them than unlike.

I wouldn't condone any killing, but I would certainly understand if the emotianal distress these people are inflicting sent someone over the edge.

[Sannyasi]

Don't get me wrong, I would certainly be in favor of any legislation that would make it illegal to protest funerals like this. I don't see any reason why freedom of speech should necessarily extend that far. But that is a lot different than condoning murder, which is what is really being done here, when you strip away all of the euphemism.

I'm also a little surprised that Anonymous is picking this fight. I know for a fact that many members of Anonymous sort of admire the Westboro Baptist Church, in that they have a similar mission of basically trolling, muck-raking, and attention whoring. I guess their fight against Scientology wasn't getting enough press anymore or something.

[Jenson71]

I think it is a pretty scary day in America when people will say about someone else, "I don't like their politcal or religious beliefs. If it were up to me it would be OK to kill these people."

I think people who would say that are worse than WBC. The WBC nuts are trying to inflict emotional distress on people to spread their nutty beliefs. They aren't killing anyone. As far as I know they aren't saying anyone should kill anyone else.

Saying people should be killed because you don't like their political beliefs puts you in the company of the worlds worst and most destructive people ever. Hell the Nazis had to warm up to this idea. You just espouse it openly without any coercion.

So for those of you saying that, congrats for being more like them than unlike.

I'm not in favor of killing them because of their political or religious opinions. I'm in favor of killing them because of their actions. Disgraceful, inhumane actions whose continuance degrades humanity.

There's some sacred about a funeral that deserves to be respected. It is the recognized moment of the living's final time with the dead, who is often their brother, sister, mother, father, son, daughter, friend.

These protests are specifically aimed at dead American soldiers, a group that is generally in their 20s, often with young families, who have given their lives in order for this country interests to be protected.

That the moment is tarnished because some pathetic human has the "religious belief" or "political belief" that God is damning America because of homosexuality, and uses the funeral as their grounds is beyond comprehension. Their beliefs are so divorced from their actions (how are they even fucking related?) goes to show that this is not about their beliefs. It is about them.

They deserve death. If that, in your mind, makes you think I'm like a Nazi, I can live with that, I suppose. I think 98% of the country would agree with me, and I have a pretty good feeling about the general wisdom of public opinion.

[Frazod]

Good thing religion and politics are not tolerate in The Lounge...

Are you a Phelps? It would explain a great deal.

[Mr. Plow]

Fuck 'em. The world would be a better place without them.

[Easy 6]

He should have used Ivana Tinkle

Or Ishat Madrawers.

[Gonzo]

Anyone that elects to "off" Phelps and his clan have to know that there's some attention-starved cock smokers just waiting to take the place of these particular cock smokers.
An unfortunate fact of life. There's always someone who craves attention no matter how disgusting and hate-filled the means might be.
See the following for examples:
KKK
Skinheads
Nazi's
Skip Bayless
Posted via Mobile Device

[Okie_Apparition]

Phelps and his minions DO chant DEATH TO FAGS! It is none of his business if I want to cuddle with Ramsfan WITH OUR CLOTHES ON. It just between me, Ramsfan and his guardians.

[LiveSteam]

I have laid to rest. Two friends from that shitty war. Both times them FUCKING SCUMBAGS showed up. I hope I dnt /but if I loose another friend over there. & those Fucker's show up? This is what they will get from me?
A SUPER SOAK-ER WATER GUN.Filled full of my piss. Setting it out in the sun to ferment.Then a drive by. & soaking them fuck nuts with it. Including their lil children that hold the signs. & if I go to jail??? So be it.

[kcfanXIII]

I had a chance to ride with the patriot guard, and Im still pondering doing it. I have a bit of a temper, and Im worried i might do something stupid. (Legally speaking,) I could think of nothing more satisfying then tying their hands and dragging them down a gravel road. I have to show restraint.

I agree its a slippery slope and freedom of speech is the most valuable of freedoms. That is why it falls on citizens to take care of them.

[RealSNR]

Should you ignore this warning, you will meet with the vicious retaliatory arm of ANONYMOUS: We will target your public Websites, and the propaganda & detestable doctrine that you promote will be eradicated; the damage incurred will be irreversible, and neither your institution nor your congregation will ever be able to fully recover. It is in your best interest to comply now, while the option to do so is still being offered, because we will not relent until you cease the conduction & promotion of all your bigoted operations & doctrines.

I'm pretty sure they're going to send them pictures of goatse

[crazycoffey]

Phelps clan has crossed a line of free speech, similar to yelling "fire" in a crowded public place IMO. Freedom of speech has always been high on my moral radar, but when that free speech isn't about sharing opinions and becomes a venue to purposely infringe on the rights of others with different opinions, then it's no longer a fight I can agree with.

[LiveSteam]

They can go scream all they want in Madison Wisc. At events like that.
Stay the Fuck away from funerals.

[vailpass]

There is nothing in the world someone could say to you that would give you the right to kill them.


However there are definetely things they could say at certain times that would give you a reason.

[BigRichard]

I think it is a pretty scary day in America when people will say about someone else, "I don't like their politcal or religious beliefs. If it were up to me it would be OK to kill these people."

I think people who would say that are worse than WBC. The WBC nuts are trying to inflict emotional distress on people to spread their nutty beliefs. They aren't killing anyone. As far as I know they aren't saying anyone should kill anyone else.

Saying people should be killed because you don't like their political beliefs puts you in the company of the worlds worst and most destructive people ever. Hell the Nazis had to warm up to this idea. You just espouse it openly without any coercion.

So for those of you saying that, congrats for being more like them than unlike.

If you don't see the reason people are thinking this way then I think something is wrong with you.

[RNR]

I'm not in favor of killing them because of their political or religious opinions. I'm in favor of killing them because of their actions. Disgraceful, inhumane actions whose continuance degrades humanity.

There's some sacred about a funeral that deserves to be respected. It is the recognized moment of the living's final time with the dead, who is often their brother, sister, mother, father, son, daughter, friend.

These protests are specifically aimed at dead American soldiers, a group that is generally in their 20s, often with young families, who have given their lives in order for this country interests to be protected.

That the moment is tarnished because some pathetic human has the "religious belief" or "political belief" that God is damning America because of homosexuality, and uses the funeral as their grounds is beyond comprehension. Their beliefs are so divorced from their actions (how are they even ****ing related?) goes to show that this is not about their beliefs. It is about them.

They deserve death. If that, in your mind, makes you think I'm like a Nazi, I can live with that, I suppose. I think 98% of the country would agree with me, and I have a pretty good feeling about the general wisdom of public opinion.

We agree on damn near nothing but we agree on this. The high horses in this thread can think what the want of me and they can kiss my ass while they are at it~

[BigMeatballDave]

I'm not in favor of killing them because of their political or religious opinions. I'm in favor of killing them because of their actions. Disgraceful, inhumane actions whose continuance degrades humanity.

There's some sacred about a funeral that deserves to be respected. It is the recognized moment of the living's final time with the dead, who is often their brother, sister, mother, father, son, daughter, friend.

These protests are specifically aimed at dead American soldiers, a group that is generally in their 20s, often with young families, who have given their lives in order for this country interests to be protected.

That the moment is tarnished because some pathetic human has the "religious belief" or "political belief" that God is damning America because of homosexuality, and uses the funeral as their grounds is beyond comprehension. Their beliefs are so divorced from their actions (how are they even fucking related?) goes to show that this is not about their beliefs. It is about them.

They deserve death. If that, in your mind, makes you think I'm like a Nazi, I can live with that, I suppose. I think 98% of the country would agree with me, and I have a pretty good feeling about the general wisdom of public opinion.Death is a bit extreme. Hate begets hate. They are vile scum, no doubt. But, they do not deserve death.


That said, if someone bombed their church and many of them were killed(save the children)I wouldnt lose a wink of sleep.

[R8RFAN]

at first, everytime the WBC went to a funeral we would see it on tv in NC....
People have grown tired of them and they basically get no airtime now.

If they were treated like a streaker on the field and they turned the cameras away, they would lose interest.

[kysirsoze]

Wouldn't condone violence, but Anon attackiing their media outlets is completely acceptable to me. There is a limit to what I think Free speech encompasses. Sure, it's a gray area, but that's OK. People are constantly having to figure out what's acceptable. Saying it's a slippery slope is a gross oversimplification.

As for me, I wouldn't attack them at a funeral because, if nothing else, I know Fred Phelps faps nightly to the idea of one of his followers becoming some kind of media martyr.

[chiefsnorth]

I'm not in favor of killing them because of their political or religious opinions. I'm in favor of killing them because of their actions. Disgraceful, inhumane actions whose continuance degrades humanity.

There's some sacred about a funeral that deserves to be respected. It is the recognized moment of the living's final time with the dead, who is often their brother, sister, mother, father, son, daughter, friend.

These protests are specifically aimed at dead American soldiers, a group that is generally in their 20s, often with young families, who have given their lives in order for this country interests to be protected.

That the moment is tarnished because some pathetic human has the "religious belief" or "political belief" that God is damning America because of homosexuality, and uses the funeral as their grounds is beyond comprehension. Their beliefs are so divorced from their actions (how are they even ****ing related?) goes to show that this is not about their beliefs. It is about them.

They deserve death. If that, in your mind, makes you think I'm like a Nazi, I can live with that, I suppose. I think 98% of the country would agree with me, and I have a pretty good feeling about the general wisdom of public opinion.

I guess I am just in favor of free speech even if I don't like what is being said. You wish death on people who say things you don't like and would help them get away with it if you could. None of this requires and excuse making or emotionalisation or explaination. Those are the facts.

I will line up with free speech. Enjoy the lynchings.

[listopencil]

I guess I am just in favor of free speech even if I don't like what is being said. You wish death on people who say things you don't like and would help them get away with it if you could. None of this requires and excuse making or emotionalisation or explaination. Those are the facts.

I will line up with free speech. Enjoy the lynchings.

I will.

[RNR]

I guess I am just in favor of free speech even if I don't like what is being said. You wish death on people who say things you don't like and would help them get away with it if you could. None of this requires and excuse making or emotionalisation or explaination. Those are the facts.

I will line up with free speech. Enjoy the lynchings.

Screw you and the high horse you are trying to ride. Nobody is trying to take away their rights. Like what has been mentioned several times in this thread. Nobody is saying they don't have the right to say it or do it, it just comes down to the fact some people may responed by harming them. I and many others would not be upset by that~

[ArrowheadHawk]

I guess it was all a hoax? http://anonnews.org/?p=press&a=item&i=494

Dear Phred Phelps and WBC Phriends,
So we've been hearing a lot about some letter that we supposedly sent you this morning. Problem is,
we're a bit groggy and don't remember sending it. Our best guess is that you heard about us on that
newfangled TV of yours and thought we might be some good money for your little church.
You thought you could play with Anonymous. You observed our rising notoriety and thought you
would exploit our paradigm for your own gain. And then, you thought you could lure some idiots into a
honeypot for more IPs to sue.
This is not so foreign to us; as you may have heard, we trade in Lulz. You just do not have enough to
offer right now.
While Anonymous thanks you for your interest, and would certainly like to take a break and have some
fun with you guys, we have more pressing matters to deal with at the moment.
But, we will keep this application on file, and will certainly contact you if any openings become
available in future.
Next time, don't call us. We'll call you.
Additionally, as your "Press Release" failed to understand: When Anonymous says we support free
speech, we mean it. We count Beatrice Hall among our Anonymous forebears: "I disapprove of what
you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Do some among our number hate you and your cynical exploitation of your human rights for monetary
gain? Of course. But the MoralFags are also the first to admit that they are, in fact, your rights to
exploit.
In closing, let us assure you: We are not BAWWWING sissies, nor are we afraid of your false god;
we're just really busy. Stay tuned, and we'll come back to play another day.
We promise.
To the Media: Just because it was posted on AnonNews doesn't mean every single Anon is in
agreement, in fact in this case it doesn't even mean a single Anon is in agreement. Next time, if you
could give us a few minutes to put all our paperwork in order, we'll be sure to let you know what we're
up to. (LOL)
To Anonymous: It's a trap. They've got their ports wide open to harvest IPs to sue. Don't DDoS, and
boycott Operation Westboro. If you really want to continue messing with them, just send them a few
male prostitutes and faxes of goatse. Nothing more.
(Note: This letter was written by more than 20 Anons, at the same time, and none of them were inbred
family members. Unlike that other, shitty "Press Release".)
We are Anonymous.
We are legion.
We do not forgive.
We do not forget.
Expect us.

[kstater]

I guess it was all a hoax? http://anonnews.org/?p=press&a=item&i=494

Looks to me like Anonymous is backing down like pussies.

[Hammock Parties]

Wow, it's even more awesome.

Westboro is a bunch of phags who tried to piggyback on the security company breach news.

LOL


Looks to me like Anonymous is backing down like pussies.

LOL, give me a break. Westboro say Anonymous in the news and tried to ride their coattails to some free pub. Pretty good try.

[Marcellus]

Death is a bit extreme. Hate begets hate. They are vile scum, no doubt. But, they do not deserve death.


That said, if someone bombed their church and many of them were killed(save the children)I wouldnt lose a wink of sleep.

Some people don't deserve to live. End of story.

They preach hatred. Bin Laden has never personally killed a single American I know of. What he preaches has killed thousands.

Hitler never actually pulled the trigger on a single Jew.

[Brock]

Doesn't sound like Anon.

[Bugeater]

Doesn't sound like Anon.
Which one doesn't?

[Gonzo]

Well, I think most of us are in agreement that we wouldn't mind something horrible happening to these people. Personally, I would love some sort of public embarrassment against Phelps himself over anything else. If he were to be killed, the group would live on in martyrdom.
I would absolutely love a giant scandal in the group. Something like a gay sex ring or bestiality caught on film would make my day.
Somebody get on that, would you?
Posted via Mobile Device

[Phobia]

I don't think Phelps should be killed but I don't think rape is too much to ask. Maybe a little beastiality mixed in and caught on film... Perhaps it would even leave Fred with a new hobby.

[stevieray]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/anonymous-sends-an-open-letter-to-the-westboro-chu

WE ARE LEGION?

[KcMizzou]

How organized is this "Anonymous"? It seems pretty random. Can you really define it?

Whatever they are, they're interesting.

[Brock]

Which one doesn't?

The first one, for sure.

[Dave Lane]

Screw you and the high horse you are trying to ride. Nobody is trying to take away their rights. Like what has been mentioned several times in this thread. Nobody is saying they don't have the right to say it or do it, it just comes down to the fact some people may responed by harming them. I and many others would not be upset by that~

Hell I would applaud it.

[pr_capone]

WE ARE LEGION?

Legion–adjective

very great in number: The holy man's faithful followers were legion.

They are simply saying that they are great in number.

How organized is this "Anonymous"? It seems pretty random. Can you really define it?

Whatever they are, they're interesting.

There is no set roster and there is no real "leadership" to the group. There are multiple places on the net where anon gather and if the cause is just, action soon follows.

They aren't gonna pipe bomb buildings or cause people any physical harm... they simply make their presence known using the tools available to them on the net.

If you really are interested in Anon...

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Anon

[KcMizzou]

Legion–adjective

very great in number: The holy man's faithful followers were legion.

They are simply saying that they are great in number.



There is no set roster and there is no real "leadership" to the group. There are multiple places on the net where anon gather and if the cause is just, action soon follows.

They aren't gonna pipe bomb buildings or cause people any physical harm... they simply make their presence known using the tools available to them on the net.

If you really are interested in Anon...

http://encyclopediadramatica.com/AnonCrazy stuff... and really, kind of cool. This nebulous internet entity, that can't really be defined... yet comes together at certain times for a common goal.

That's some trippy shit.

[Hammock Parties]

Where does Anon gather?

[Phobia]

Where does Anon gather?

In your mom.

[jAZ]

Doesn't sound like Anon.
Yep....

http://cdn1.knowyourmeme.com/i/26374/original/its_a_trap.jpg?1258089072

http://www.networkworld.com/community/files/imce/img_blogs/its-a-trapAnon-part1.gif

[Prodigal Son]

If a relative of a dead soldier actually shot them at a funeral they were protesting, would you be on the jury and vote for them to be guilty?

I wouldn't. I'd hang that jury all day if I had to. There's no way in hell I would find a family member guilty in that situation. I'd consider it a provocation and I'd find for a counterclaim of intentional extreme emotional distress.

You wouldn't have a jury finding a counterclaim for a civil action in a criminal trial.

[Hammock Parties]

lol

RULE #1: DO NOT CONDUCT DDoSes.

Yeah, you may be thinking, WTF? Don't think I'm going full moralpillowbiter and telling Anonymous to stop. Read on.

Listen to me first. The Westboro Baptist Church are professional trolls. Not only are they the same level as /b/, they make all their money from suing people who fight back, so they're just waiting for IPs to sue. I have a bad feeling that it's all a trap, made by them so they can get some money and attention.

And it's not just that DDoSes pose a safety risk. A DDoS is useless, it's just a symbolic act. It doesn't do any damage, and it gives them undeserved media attention.

I ask you, anons, to stop and put this tactic back in the bookshelf. The costs are too high for a gain that is too low.

But just in case...

RULE #2: Be careful.

I have every reason to believe this was a trap. They want more people to sue, so they posted an operation to attack their site.So please, Don't DDoS. Use anon's good ol' life-ruining methods.

Stay safe, anon. And rape their asses in the most unpredicable ways possible.

[niblet]

They are extreme to the point of absurdity. I've never felt offended or taken aback at anything they've done because they are just a caricature of intolerance. No need to retaliate, they're humiliating themselves as it is.

[Pioli Zombie]

Sick Fat Bastard on Phelps.

[Lono]

I think that a family should have the right to grieve the loss of a family member in peace.

When one takes advantage of their right to freedom of speech to infringe on another's rights, they should lose that right.

Agree 100%

[BigMeatballDave]

In your mom.ROFL

[R8RFAN]

These people are some of the most vile putrid people in America that should be slapped silly,But this is America, and even though I despise everything these people represent, they have the right as Americans to say it....

Once people start trying to determine what is and what is not hate speech etc it turns into a very slippery slope that will keep snowballing...

Keep their speech free, even if they are pukes.

187 bucks + hospital bills is what it costs in NC to punch someone in the face with no weapons involved and it is a misdemeanor. Small price to pay to prove a point.

[J Diddy]

These people are some of the most vile putrid people in America that should be slapped silly,But this is America, and even though I despise everything these people represent, they have the right as Americans to say it....

Once people start trying to determine what is and what is not hate speech etc it turns into a very slippery slope that will keep snowballing...

Keep their speech free, even if they are pukes.

187 bucks + hospital bills is what it costs in NC to punch someone in the face with no weapons involved and it is a misdemeanor. Small price to pay to prove a point.

I'm sure it'd cost much more in civil court. Seems that's their whole thing. Be so appalling that it reels people in so that they can collect cash in court.

[Otter]

What is ANONYMOUS an acronym for?

[alnorth]

The WBC's charming website (godhatesf a g s.com) is down, probably taken down by WBC. I've read (not confirmed) that before it was taken down, their web site was redirecting to http://www.globalseeker.com/frednbarnie/

[alnorth]

What is ANONYMOUS an acronym for?

It is not an acronym. Most of anonymous originates from 4 chan.org's /b/ forum. (without the space) (Extremely NSFW) The key feature of that forum is anonymity, the vast majority of posters to that forum are identified as "Anonymous".

Anonymous is not really very organized. They consist mostly of bored kids, but some highly skilled hackers do happen to visit the site as well. Every once in a while they identify a target they think is worthy, either an individual or an organization, and they anonymously come together with varying degrees of skill to give them hell.

[ReynardMuldrake]

Looks like they got hacked:
http://i.imgur.com/1UjAt.png

[Ming the Merciless]

You think Tyriam Roshak is a real name?

Its RustShack

[Hammock Parties]

So Westboro tries to pull a fast one...and gets nailed for it.

LMAO

Dumbshits.

[BigMeatballDave]

Looks like they got hacked:
http://i.imgur.com/1UjAt.pngWTF? I can't read that.

[vailpass]

WTF? I can't read that.

clicky clicky for biggy biggy.

[Otter]

It is not an acronym. Most of anonymous originates from 4 chan.org's /b/ forum. (without the space) (Extremely NSFW) The key feature of that forum is anonymity, the vast majority of posters to that forum are identified as "Anonymous".

Anonymous is not really very organized. They consist mostly of bored kids, but some highly skilled hackers do happen to visit the site as well. Every once in a while they identify a target they think is worthy, either an individual or an organization, and they anonymously come together with varying degrees of skill to give them hell.

Pretty interesting, I'll have to check out the web page after work. Thanks

[tiptap]

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OZJwSjor4hM&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OZJwSjor4hM&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>


here is input

[BigMeatballDave]

clicky clicky for biggy biggy.I was on my Droid earlier. That doesnt help on a small screen.

[vailpass]

I was on my Droid earlier. That doesnt help on a small screen.

Too bad you don't have an Iphone. Apple fanboy says it has an app that would project that picture into a 4D holograph for your viewing pleasure for a minimal fee.

[BigMeatballDave]

Too bad you don't have an Iphone. Apple fanboy says it has an app that would project that picture into a 4D holograph for your viewing pleasure for a minimal fee.:LOL:

[Calcountry]

From the bible: First John Chapter 2.

Bearing in mind that no one is righteous, no not one, I offer the following as a clear condemnation of the hateful actions of a "Church" that is doing great harm.

Dear friends, I am not writing you a new command but an old one, which you have had since the beginning. This old command is the message you have heard. <sup class="versenum" id="en-NIV-30559">8</sup> Yet I am writing you a new command; its truth is seen in him and in you, because the darkness is passing and the true light is already shining. <sup class="versenum" id="en-NIV-30560">9</sup> Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates a brother or sister<sup class="footnote" value="[<a href=&quot;#fen-NIV-30560b&quot; title=&quot;See footnote b&quot;>b</a>]">[b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20John%202&version=NIV#fen-NIV-30560b)]</sup> is still in the darkness. <sup class="versenum" id="en-NIV-30561">10</sup> Anyone who loves their brother and sister<sup class="footnote" value="[<a href=&quot;#fen-NIV-30561c&quot; title=&quot;See footnote c&quot;>c</a>]">[c (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20John%202&version=NIV#fen-NIV-30561c)]</sup> lives in the light, and there is nothing in them to make them stumble. <sup class="versenum" id="en-NIV-30562">11</sup> But anyone who hates a brother or sister is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness. They do not know where they are going, because the darkness has blinded them.