Anonymous Hacks The Westboro Baptist Church: Posts All Their Personal Info


Recommended Posts

No, Breivik had legal means to get his message out. You are allowed to say what you want other than you are NOT allowed to incite others to harm people or society.

So, you can say "I think group X are a danger/inferior/whatever.", but you cannot add "We must get rid of/attack/hurt them".

No, Breivik had legal means to get his message out. You are allowed to say what you want other than you are NOT allowed to incite others to harm people or society.

So, you can say "I think group X are a danger/inferior/whatever.", but you cannot add "We must get rid of/attack/hurt them".

but his message was "Get rid of the muslims"

but his message was "Get rid of the muslims"

Which you're allowed to say. People would call you a racist for doing so, but it's perfectly legal to say you want x group kicked out. You just can't say they should be attacked or killed or otherwise harmed.

I've actually argued in the past that Anderw Breivik's massacre happened because he had no legitimate way to get his message out in Norway so he got it out in the loudest, most illegitimate way possible... by killing children and blowing up government buildings. I believe that if he had the legal right to say his hate speech without threat of being arrested that he wouldn't have felt it necessary to do what he did.

I suggest you stop calling other people ignorant if you're going to spout that kind of ignorant crap yourself. As you obviously don't know anything about Norway, or ABB.

but his message was "Get rid of the muslims"

We have plenty of people here saying that, heck we have an organized group fashioned after the British defense league, and we have our own old group fashioned after older Viking principles who wants to kick anyone not white and of Norwegian descent out called Vigrid.

  • Like 2

as I said up thread.. who decides what is hate speech and what if anything should we be allowed to hate at all? It's far easier just to allow the speech so we all know who the haters are.

I've actually argued in the past that Anderw Breivik's massacre happened because he had no legitimate way to get his message out in Norway so he got it out in the loudest, most illegitimate way possible... by killing children and blowing up government buildings. I believe that if he had the legal right to say his hate speech without threat of being arrested that he wouldn't have felt it necessary to do what he did.

Just to clarify things for my own personal perspective, are you saying Breivik was justified in killing those innocent people.You know, as a sign of protest ?

My own personal opinion is that anyone can say what they want about anything. Just as long as they are willing to be held accountable for it

Wouldn't it be ironic if some lunatic went on a killing spree at the WBC. Killing at will for enjoyment an only one person survived the attack ~ Shirley Phelps-Roper. I wonder how she would hold up burying her children with a bunch of people trolling her for some media attention ?

How about you Seta San , have you got any family ? Imagine them being butchered for no good reason and the whole of Neowin turning up and laughing at you in your grief. Now be honest ( not to me, but to yourself) Would you be offended by that. Would your views be the same as you lower your dead children into the ground ?

what the hell. when do these guys gona grow a brain and stop inbreeding. this is just stupid. they have no right to picket the funerals. or mess with the families. now is the time to grieve for those who lost their loved ones. don't they have anything else to do? if anonymous trashed the site they've done some good.

Just to clarify things for my own personal perspective, are you saying Breivik was justified in killing those innocent people.You know, as a sign of protest ?

My own personal opinion is that anyone can say what they want about anything. Just as long as they are willing to be held accountable for it

no. it's just a theory

Wouldn't it be ironic if some lunatic went on a killing spree at the WBC. Killing at will for enjoyment an only one person survived the attack ~ Shirley Phelps-Roper. I wonder how she would hold up burying her children with a bunch of people trolling her for some media attention ?

people have shot at and bombed their church. and honestly I don't care either way if some would be killer gets lucky

How about you Seta San , have you got any family ? Imagine them being butchered for no good reason and the whole of Neowin turning up and laughing at you in your grief. Now be honest ( not to me, but to yourself) Would you be offended by that. Would your views be the same as you lower your dead children into the ground ?

of course i'd be offended. offense isn't a good reason for speech to be banned.

Good these Right Wing Terrorists need to be disrupted in any way possible.

Good. I'm glad they did that, now maybe someone will **** those disrespecting *******s up!

Yeah, what the **** are these people doing? Do they have no hearts whatsoever?

I know US laws allows these scum bags to do what they do, but there are some things that PEOPLE just shouldn't tolerate.

The Hell's Angels have a habit of preventing the WBC's pickets, so I -really- hope that they or someone else steps up to make sure these lowlifes don't make a mockery of these funerals.

Not the Hell's Angels, but the Patriot Guard, they are a group of mainly Veterans that got fed up with the WBBC's antics and decided to do to them what they are trying to do to the families, harass them, which is also legal, and I'd prefer the sounds of a few hundred Harleys revving than the hateful drivel WBBC spews.

On a related note I'm surprised theyarecomingforyou doesn't support them, they hate America as much as he does, hell the WBBC might also be anti Semitic too for all I care

no. hate speech is covered under freedom of speech. I hate what they say but I defend their right to say it.

edit.

more over; who gets to decide what is hate speech or what is actually worthy of hate?

so i can be racist and shout what ever the hell i like in public about what ever race and events i want and everyone should accept it as its my right? but yet one person says one tiny racist thing on facebook and people get arrested left and right

......

Care to elaborate on the theory please as I am genuinely interested in it.

Do you believe that people in general should be held accountable for what they say or do ? Lets say I insult your mother in a nasty way. I'm exercising my right for speech am i not ? Are you just going to accept it or are you going to drop me instantly ? I know what I would do (No internet tough guy , I'm sure you would beat me up ) ,My point is that you would stop me from having my say, Well I hope you would , same as anyone else with a back bone would.

WBC are attention wh*res and they play the game well. They sue anyone that offends them ( Crazy logic eh ?) Idiots like this need to be held accountable for the poisonous bile they spew out.I fully support people having the right to protest and say as they wish. I take it you're a American ? I couldn't care less what happens in your messed up country to be honest.I do care about decency ,such an out dated word I know.Maybe I'm just old fashioned ?

Thankfully in my country (England ) we are now doing something about bigots that preach hatred , Its called deportation.If they hate my country so much , well we just send them back to the **** pit they come from or if they are wanted by another country we send them there. Obviously, If they are a British citizen we deal with them internally via the legal system.

This process in no way takes away any of my rights.These laws are in place to protect the decent people that live in my country.If i want to protest in a peaceful way ,I'm allowed to do so. The moment I step over the line I will be held accountable for my actions , and rightly so.

By the way , nothing in life is FREE , not even speech. "You always have to pay the piper for the tune".

IMHO - the WBC is there to make a bad name for the faith as a whole. Honestly, I highly doubt many true Christians would go out and picket the funerals, or any Athiest, Agnostic, Jew, Islamist or anyone else as it is just plain disrespectful and wrong. They (WBC) were wrong in claiming God protects their site, and were proven wrong.

Anonymous took the probably little bit of time out of their day to do the hack and prove that the church was wrong in that assumption. Now, I don't really know what the site looked like after the hack, but in all honesty, a simple restore of a backup would take care of a hack which I am guessing they did.

IMHO - the WBC is there to make a bad name for the faith as a whole. Honestly, I highly doubt many true Christians would go out and picket the funerals, or any Athiest, Agnostic, Jew, Islamist or anyone else as it is just plain disrespectful and wrong. They (WBC) were wrong in claiming God protects their site, and were proven wrong.

Anonymous took the probably little bit of time out of their day to do the hack and prove that the church was wrong in that assumption. Now, I don't really know what the site looked like after the hack, but in all honesty, a simple restore of a backup would take care of a hack which I am guessing they did.

Watch the video ! All they did was insert a "typical" Anonymous statement in the downloads section of the site. Live on air , The Anon guy was rather amusing when he admitted to having "over 9.000 sins" lol.

It was in response of WBC making up lies about Anonymous,IMO the attack was very tame and off the cuff.In all honesty I think WBO called it on ,on purpose, Anonymous giving credit to Th3 J35t3r as well ? WOW that's a first haha. They also dropped dox on WBO members as well. Links are in main story ( If you was into that kind of thing )

Care to elaborate on the theory please as I am genuinely interested in it.

Do you believe that people in general should be held accountable for what they say or do ? Lets say I insult your mother in a nasty way. I'm exercising my right for speech am i not ? Are you just going to accept it or are you going to drop me instantly ? I know what I would do (No internet tough guy , I'm sure you would beat me up ) ,My point is that you would stop me from having my say, Well I hope you would , same as anyone else with a back bone would.

WBC are attention wh*res and they play the game well. They sue anyone that offends them ( Crazy logic eh ?) Idiots like this need to be held accountable for the poisonous bile they spew out.I fully support people having the right to protest and say as they wish. I take it you're a American ? I couldn't care less what happens in your messed up country to be honest.I do care about decency ,such an out dated word I know.Maybe I'm just old fashioned ?

Thankfully in my country (England ) we are now doing something about bigots that preach hatred , Its called deportation.If they hate my country so much , well we just send them back to the **** pit they come from or if they are wanted by another country we send them there. Obviously, If they are a British citizen we deal with them internally via the legal system.

This process in no way takes away any of my rights.These laws are in place to protect the decent people that live in my country.If i want to protest in a peaceful way ,I'm allowed to do so. The moment I step over the line I will be held accountable for my actions , and rightly so.

By the way , nothing in life is FREE , not even speech. "You always have to pay the piper for the tune".

unless that speech encourages or leads to direct violence or harm i'd say that no speech should have legal consequences. Social consequences absolutely; not legal. Also, from what I understand, the U.K. has been whole heartedly importing some of the world's most vile bigots from the middle east and north Africa.

Care to elaborate on the theory please as I am genuinely interested in it.

Do you believe that people in general should be held accountable for what they say or do ? Lets say I insult your mother in a nasty way. I'm exercising my right for speech am i not ? Are you just going to accept it or are you going to drop me instantly ? I know what I would do (No internet tough guy , I'm sure you would beat me up ) ,My point is that you would stop me from having my say, Well I hope you would , same as anyone else with a back bone would.

WBC are attention wh*res and they play the game well. They sue anyone that offends them ( Crazy logic eh ?) Idiots like this need to be held accountable for the poisonous bile they spew out.I fully support people having the right to protest and say as they wish. I take it you're a American ? I couldn't care less what happens in your messed up country to be honest.I do care about decency ,such an out dated word I know.Maybe I'm just old fashioned ?

Thankfully in my country (England ) we are now doing something about bigots that preach hatred , Its called deportation.If they hate my country so much , well we just send them back to the **** pit they come from or if they are wanted by another country we send them there. Obviously, If they are a British citizen we deal with them internally via the legal system.

This process in no way takes away any of my rights.These laws are in place to protect the decent people that live in my country.If i want to protest in a peaceful way ,I'm allowed to do so. The moment I step over the line I will be held accountable for my actions , and rightly so.

By the way , nothing in life is FREE , not even speech. "You always have to pay the piper for the tune".

Its interesting to hear from people in other countries regarding the idea of free speech. It certainly sounds like the US treats speech differently then many other countries.

I think one of the big issues regarding how you 'regulate' it is that most of us in the US feel very apprehensive about trying to censor speech. You can have all the best intentions in the world, but ultimately if you go as far as making laws restricting what you can say, your putting alot of power in the hands of the government you have. You have to really trust in that government to not abuse that kind of power and try to micro manage 'free speech'. While it may be easy for someone to point to something specific like say the WBC people or lets say some speech by Hitler, but how do you define that in a law that avoids it being abused? You can't just say that if anyone is offended by speech that it makes it hate. I suppose you could define it as anything that directly incites violence (i.e. saying that someone or some group specifically should be killed), but trying to define hate in a universally accepted way is tough.

Ultimately, the answer is not more laws (at least for the US), the answer is developing the culture and community that rejects the ideas that are unacceptable. There are always those that get out of line, but with a strong community, the consequences can keep them in check. I'm not going to comment on how it is in the UK, but in the US, most feel that decency is better defined by a community than its federal government. Just becuase we dont make strict laws does not mean there aren't advocates for decency. Of course you are right about something else, we seem to be in an era where 'decency' is not anywhere near what it use to be. You can trace it right back to how cultures and communities around the world have changed. So different countries are going to deal with that change differently.

Of course, we live in a 'pc' era that does tend to take things way too far trying to silence some topics while letting other speech go forward unchecked, making it all seem very arbitrary in application.

Regarding what Anon did, I really dont care either way.

Personally, I feel like both groups have serious issues. While the Anon group sometimes attacks something we can all rally around, they also go after things that we shake our heads over. If your looking for a group with a clear set of standards, Anon is not it. WBC, on the other hand, is clearly a radical group that goes way too far. The worst part is that their insane actions make all religious groups look bad even if the vast majority would never agree with the stuff they spew. If Anon wants to mess with them, especially if WBC attacked in some way first, then have at it.

Besides, all we are talking about is internet related actions. This is all meaningless stuff in the long run. Its not like the two groups are actaully fighting, as in real people in the real world. If one attacks the other, I doubt it would lead to one dissappearing.

Does the US not have laws against hate speech? Westboro members are clearly infringing on the rights and freedoms of others, which shouldn't be tolerated under the guise of free speech.

You'd think that but somehow hate laws only relate to certain groups and not everyone.

Absolutely Seta , we made a big mistake by letting them in to preach the hatred in the first place. But now we are getting rid of them one by one.

Abu Hamza for instance.

Abu Qatada is on his way out, soon as we convince Jordan to treat him nice in jail.

These two examples have tried to cause divide in the British people by preaching hatred.They are entitled to chastise us ( lets not forget the UK and the US are allies) because in the eyes of the organisations they represent we have wronged them.Everyone is entitled to an opinion. peaceful protest is welcomed in my home city of London.Ever hear of Speakers Corner?

if Anonymous wants to troll Scientology globally again as they did in the past. They should be allowed to.do so , so long as its peaceful and in no way vulgar or offensive to the general public/public opinion. WBC should be allowed to protest as they wish but when it becomes obscene and offensive to the general public it becomes an issue. They do it for the shock value and to generate publicity and they manipulate the media very well.

How do we/should we define whats acceptable ? common sense should play a major part in it for a start. Society should dictate whats acceptable and the government should enforce it. Governments should be scared of the people it represents and not the other way around.Unfortunately some countries are becoming police states,Blame the voters for putting them in power !

Rights are a privilege,and they can be taken away if society deems you unfit to hold them.In the UK our personal actions are judged by our peers.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!