Anonymous Hacks Westboro Baptist Website During Interview

A source from Anonymous confronts Shirley Phelps-Roper from the Westboro Baptist Church, calling the supposed letter sent to Westboro by Anonymous a hoax, and then proceeds to hack the Westboro Baptist Church website during the interview.

Website screenshot before being removed by Westboro: http://img19.imageshack.us/i/anonymouswestborotakedo.jpg/

The David Pakman Show is an internationally syndicated talk radio and television program hosted by David Pakman
shuacsays...

While I do not agree with Ms. Phelps' views (check out my comment history, you'll see I'm a big supporter of gay rights), I do support her right to speak out about them. Restricting her freedom of speech should be disgusting to everyone, I don't care what she's saying.

I await the myriad downvotes (for this comment) with great sadness.

Faye2441says...

She has her freedom of speech, but she doesn't get to say what she wants without fear of retaliation. This group thinks that they have divine authority to do and say what they want, so I at least like to see their feathers get ruffled a bit.
>> ^shuac:

While I do not agree with Ms. Phelps' views (check out my comment history, you'll see I'm a big supporter of gay rights), I do support her right to speak out about them. Restricting her freedom of speech should be disgusting to everyone, I don't care what she's saying.
I await the myriad downvotes (for this comment) with great sadness.

shuacsays...

>> ^Faye2441:

She has her freedom of speech, but she doesn't get to say what she wants without fear of retaliation. This group thinks that they have divine authority to do and say what they want, so I at least like to see their feathers get ruffled a bit.
>> ^shuac:
While I do not agree with Ms. Phelps' views (check out my comment history, you'll see I'm a big supporter of gay rights), I do support her right to speak out about them. Restricting her freedom of speech should be disgusting to everyone, I don't care what she's saying.
I await the myriad downvotes (for this comment) with great sadness.



Yeah, that's perfectly fine. You should expect a little retaliation if you spout offensive stuff like that. So long as it's verbal/legal retaliation.

Faye2441says...

Perhaps thats where we differ in opinion. I wholeheartedly support harmless albeit illegal responses to perfectly legal but extremely harmful rhetoric.
>> ^shuac:

>> ^Faye2441:
She has her freedom of speech, but she doesn't get to say what she wants without fear of retaliation. This group thinks that they have divine authority to do and say what they want, so I at least like to see their feathers get ruffled a bit.
>> ^shuac:
While I do not agree with Ms. Phelps' views (check out my comment history, you'll see I'm a big supporter of gay rights), I do support her right to speak out about them. Restricting her freedom of speech should be disgusting to everyone, I don't care what she's saying.
I await the myriad downvotes (for this comment) with great sadness.


Yeah, that's perfectly fine. You should expect a little retaliation if you spout offensive stuff like that. So long as it's verbal/legal retaliation.

GeeSussFreeKsays...

Isn't illegal action implying harm? What exactly are you suggesting?

>> ^Faye2441:

Perhaps thats where we differ in opinion. I wholeheartedly support harmless albeit illegal responses to perfectly legal but extremely harmful rhetoric.
>> ^shuac:
>> ^Faye2441:
She has her freedom of speech, but she doesn't get to say what she wants without fear of retaliation. This group thinks that they have divine authority to do and say what they want, so I at least like to see their feathers get ruffled a bit.
>> ^shuac:
While I do not agree with Ms. Phelps' views (check out my comment history, you'll see I'm a big supporter of gay rights), I do support her right to speak out about them. Restricting her freedom of speech should be disgusting to everyone, I don't care what she's saying.
I await the myriad downvotes (for this comment) with great sadness.


Yeah, that's perfectly fine. You should expect a little retaliation if you spout offensive stuff like that. So long as it's verbal/legal retaliation.


Faye2441says...

Is J-walking with no cars in sight harmful? is drawing a smiley face on a dollar bill harmful? Was oral sex any more harmful prior to 2003 than it is now? If you think that legality is a perfect measure of harm, I wonder what exactly you are suggesting?

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

Isn't illegal action implying harm? What exactly are you suggesting?

GeeSussFreeKsays...

>> ^Faye2441:

Is J-walking with no cars in sight harmful? is drawing a smiley face on a dollar bill harmful? Was oral sex any more harmful prior to 2003 than it is now? If you think that legality is a perfect measure of harm, I wonder what exactly you are suggesting?
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Isn't illegal action implying harm? What exactly are you suggesting?



So you are saying you want to draw smiley faces on her then, or are you just creating a straw man to not answer the question?

Faye2441says...

I'm implying that legality is not a perfect measure of harm. My point here is that the thing which is illegal in this situation is minimally harmful, and that the perfectly legal action taken in this situation (that is, the Westboro Baptist Church expressing their views) is quite harmful.
In response to your statement that illegal action implied harm, I stated other examples of instances in which the legality of an action did not reflect the harm it created. Sorry if that was not obvious to you.
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^Faye2441:
Is J-walking with no cars in sight harmful? is drawing a smiley face on a dollar bill harmful? Was oral sex any more harmful prior to 2003 than it is now? If you think that legality is a perfect measure of harm, I wonder what exactly you are suggesting?
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Isn't illegal action implying harm? What exactly are you suggesting?


So you are saying you want to draw smiley faces on her then, or are you just creating a straw man to not answer the question?

mxxconsays...

that bitch is batshit insane.
they have no 1st amendment rights when they spread hate.

somebody should play a really good prank on that cult so they would already drink their coolaid and die out.

Matthusays...

"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil—that takes religion."

She seems like a nice lady. Damn shame.

entr0pysays...

I don't know, I think Anonymous is giving the WBC entirely too much credit by calling them trolls. Yes, they do want to make other people rage, but their motives are not the same. They don't do it for the lulz, and they're not insincere. I think they enjoy living their lives in a perpetual rage spiral which can only be sustained by sucking other people in. It also makes them a poor target for trolling because they ALWAYS MAD.

See anonymous' counter press release press release: http://anonnews.org/?p=press&a=item&i=494

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More