Anonymous vs Westboro baptist Church

[yvid]

reply to post by dbledged


Indeed.

Screen shot of pdf released by Westboro baptist church


Edit - I thought anon were all for freedom of speech?
I guess that only counts if they agree with what your saying. I'm guessing the site is under ddos.

We, the collective super-consciousness known as ANONYMOUS - the Voice of Free Speech & the Advocate of the People

Seeing anon members say that is hilarious.

Edit - back up

Edit - And down and up and down and up

reply to post by aivlas


Thanks, much appreciated. I do wonder where and how the law separates what is a legally recognized religion and what is not. Like for instance can any cult, hate group, etc. simply add baptist or nazarene to its name or is there a certain criteria that must be met? The reason I ask is because it seems to me that its not only because of free speech that the law is hesitant to touch them but also because of their claim to be members of a legally recognized religion.

reply to post by mr-lizard



LOL, the letter from Anon looks like:

"Westboro Baptist Church, the consequences will never be the same!!!"

And the WBC response looks like their typical, crazy, Son of Sam ramblings.

All the people here going on about Free Speech and how WBC should be left alone are pretty worrying.

Since 9/11 Americans have been going on and on about Freedom and especially freedom of speech, without, apparently, completely understanding the philosophy of that freedom.

WBC have a lot coming to them, they have hurt and affected many lives and the sooner they get closed down (and punished, if possible) the better. They are scum!

reply to post by triplesod


No doubt but anon apparently stand for freedom of speech they go on about defending freedom of speech then they go and stop people having freedom of speech.

dbledged no idea hopefully someone could shed some light on the matter. They have press releases going back to 1980 so they aren't new.

Originally posted by mr-lizard
Listen here right.

Your so called freedom of speech is sometimes grossly retarded. You will quite happily pipe on about how we should never disrupt the right to open speech. And yet you'll quite happily stand back and allow a group or groups destroy people's lives because you appease yourselves to a conformity of Americanism. In this case, some of you would rather moralistically defend the rights of a fundamentalist group, more akin to the fundamentalists you'd quite happy bomb to the stone age in other countries.

Is it more American to disrupt and humiliate a funeral and destroy the last memory of a person's time on a planet, in the name of free speech?

Is it Un-American to decide enough is enough, and try and do something about this hatred?

Or are you more concerned about the methods employed? If it was the government cracking down on Westboro, would you be happier? But because it's 'anonymous' you automatically don't like it?

I normally hate people who do this but... well, I've never been much a fan of myself, anyway.

Great post, Mr Liz!

Originally posted by mr-lizard
Is it more American to disrupt and humiliate a funeral and destroy the last memory of a person's time on a planet, in the name of free speech?

Sounds exactly like what anon have done in the past. So they are allowed to do this but others aren't? or because of the bandwagons anon have jumped on latley they get what they have done in the past forgotten?

Originally posted by trailertrash
reply to post by mr-lizard

 

"You may say innocents are harmed in the way of the revolt. But your arguement becomes null and void, when you fail to realise that exploitation started a long time ago."


"Argument" does not have an "e" in it and "realize" has a "z", not an "s". Your placement of a comma is also inappropriate. Other than that your response was boring.

My apologies. I was on the receiving end of many a fine beverage when i began typing. Next time I'll gauge my boredom levels by referring to you first.

Although 'realise' is the standard, original English spelling of the word. So your argument (correct spelling this time) is only 50% correct.

I apologise for being boring. We can't all attain levels of excitement all the time.

Either way, I wonder what anon's response to their reply will be?

Interesting times.

reply to post by mr-lizard


It looks like they start the ddos, unless Westboro baptist church has the lamest provider (some how I don't see that being the case)

Well I say good luck to them....

The WBC are a vile group and deserve all the abuse and harassment they get.


I also agree with Mr Lizard about the whole free speech thing and just allowing groups like this to go around insulting the dead and any and every group they choose.

That for me isn't free speech.... it's about humanity and believe me.... a group like this would not last long in the UK.

People power would prevail.

reply to post by blupblup


You do realize anon have done the exact same thing in the past?

Originally posted by aivlas
reply to post by blupblup

 

You do realize anon have done the exact same thing in the past?

The exact same thing being.....?

reply to post by blupblup


Harassing the family of dead kids

Edit - I would put the epilepsy stunt at the same level tbh.

Originally posted by aivlas
reply to post by blupblup

 

Harassing the family of dead kids

Any links to this at all?


Also the WBC is founded on hate.... their mission is to be as offensive and abusive as they can while supposedly doing god's work.


And for me this isn't about anonymous.... this could be the KKK attacking WBC and I'd still say good on them.... I don't give a crap who's doing the threatening to the WBC..... they need bringing down a peg or five.

reply to post by blupblup


Sounds like anons mission statement as well just change god to the peoples.

I can't be bothered, go do some reading

To start
partyvan.info...

To follow up
www.google.com...

Edit - One more link will be posted when I can find it.
anonymousdown.files.wordpress.com...
view.samurajdata.se... - online pdf viewer

Anyone that can explain to me how any ONE can be both the defender and arbiter of free speech, please do.
I am not fan of the WBC but I am not really a fant of anyone standing behind their love of free speech in order to shut the speech down of others. It just smells far too hypocritical.

After that response I think WBC can say bye byes to their websites.

why do the good die young? and for people not familiar with that phrase, it is ironic.




these people need culling, best be done from a helicopter but i still defend their right to free speech!