Anonymous hacks the KKK

[Brainplay]

Anon has always said that they don't have to like what you say, but they will fight for your right to say it. They've left the KKK alone this long because of it, but now that the KKK is trying to infringe on others' free speech (or right to protest), they are taking action.

This is pretty untrue by lengths and miles. Anonymous isn't a coherent body. It's whoever decides to use the title. Anonymous does things in the name of things for reasons of whatever. Anything they declare today may change tomorrow when someone decides to use the same moniker for a different reason. There's a big fat chance this is just a script kiddie who will do some vandalism against a group that hasn't held any power in decades nor is any credible threat because it gets attention.

 

[Denamic]

Anonymous is just an angry (or at least annoyed) mob on the net. Sure, there are some people you wouldn't mind see face an angry mob, but for the most part it's not something you want running around.

Anonymous isn't an angry mob in of itself. It's a chaotic mass of people to be sure, but not inherently angry. It's when they GET angry that people notice them. That's when they pseudo-organise and cause damage.

 

[Signa]

Anon has always said that they don't have to like what you say, but they will fight for your right to say it. They've left the KKK alone this long because of it, but now that the KKK is trying to infringe on others' free speech (or right to protest), they are taking action.

This is pretty untrue by lengths and miles.

Now, I'm not really a Channer, (only go there when my friends link me something) but I've heard what I've said spoken about 4Chan as a group many times. Yes, they aren't a cohesive group, but I know they if they aren't doing it for the lulz, their activism is usually spurred by someone else calling them out or stomping on someone else' freedom. Hell, they let the Westboros go on for years before they went toe-to-toe due to a misstep the church took.

 

[Fox12]

Can't say i can really applaud this. While sometimes, such as this time, Anonymous does go after deserving targets, i find them and their entire operation very unnerving.
The idea of a tyrannical totalitarian government is very unnerving to me, but the idea of self appointed moral crusaders who will attack anyone who offends them isn't much of an alternative.
The way that they attack (rather dubious) religious institutions, corporations and political targets under the banner of justice really does make me question why people view them as some kind of heroes rather than the militant political faction they are.

This really is a case of supporting the lesser of two evils, but i feel they have gained enough support by picking off the low hanging fruits no one likes in order to drown out the more questionable aspects of their operation.

It's rather funny that they model themselves after Alan Moores V, since the entire point of the novel was that V was morally wrong. It was about a bad rebel fighting against a bad government. Talk about missing the irony.

I didnt even know the KKK had a website. I wonder what Flem and Earl are going to do when they check their website and see gay porn everywhere.

 

[Denamic]

It's rather funny that they model themselves after Alan Moores V, since the entire point of the novel was that V was morally wrong. It was about a bad rebel fighting against a bad government. Talk about missing the irony.

They're aware of it. They don't consider themselves the good guys. Well, some of them probably do, but as a whole, they don't consider themselves shining knights of goodness. In fact, they actively dislikes people who act like they are. They just adhere to a few core principles that boil down to two main things: "Freedom" and "for the lulz."

 

[Brainplay]

Anon has always said that they don't have to like what you say, but they will fight for your right to say it. They've left the KKK alone this long because of it, but now that the KKK is trying to infringe on others' free speech (or right to protest), they are taking action.

This is pretty untrue by lengths and miles.

Now, I'm not really a Channer, (only go there when my friends link me something) but I've heard what I've said spoken about 4Chan as a group many times. Yes, they aren't a cohesive group, but I know they if they aren't doing it for the lulz, their activism is usually spurred by someone else calling them out or stomping on someone else' freedom. Hell, they let the Westboros go on for years before they went toe-to-toe due to a misstep the church took.

Again, it's not a "they". It's whoever feels like using the title. We've seen two groups claiming to be Anonymous clash or act independent of each other. We've also seen them do some pretty stupid things. Hell for the longest time it was nothing more than random people logging into the LOIC to run ddos (some of which got busted).

 

[Signa]

Anon has always said that they don't have to like what you say, but they will fight for your right to say it. They've left the KKK alone this long because of it, but now that the KKK is trying to infringe on others' free speech (or right to protest), they are taking action.

This is pretty untrue by lengths and miles.

Now, I'm not really a Channer, (only go there when my friends link me something) but I've heard what I've said spoken about 4Chan as a group many times. Yes, they aren't a cohesive group, but I know they if they aren't doing it for the lulz, their activism is usually spurred by someone else calling them out or stomping on someone else' freedom. Hell, they let the Westboros go on for years before they went toe-to-toe due to a misstep the church took.

Again, it's not a "they". It's whoever feels like using the title. We've seen two groups claiming to be Anonymous clash or act independent of each other. We've also seen them do some pretty stupid things. Hell for the longest time it was nothing more than random people logging into the LOIC to run ddos (some of which got busted).

Once again, group or not, either they are doing for lulz or because someone crossed their ideals.

 

[Shadow flame master]

I'm more surprised that it took Anonymous this long to do something. Aren't they one of those groups that go around being the moral champions of this generation or something?

 

[Darks63]

Wait, last I heard the KKK had fractured into a ton of largely non related chapters some time ago, and were losing white nationalist/supremacist followers to other groups like the Aryan Nation. Did some big Klan merger taking place when I wasn't looking (given, I don't often look at the Klan, so it wouldn't be a surprise).

Since the op didn't provide a link i cant say for certain, but this is likely just one particular chapter of the KKK vowing to do this. You are right that they haven't had a national organization since the 1920's.

 

[Kopikatsu]

I'm more surprised that it took Anonymous this long to do something. Aren't they one of those groups that go around being the moral champions of this generation or something?

No, it's only the Missouri chapter.

Although this isn't entirely relevant to the OP, gun sales in Ferguson and the surrounding area have recently risen by 700% [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/18/ferguson-gun-sales_n_6179254.html], and the National Guard has been deployed. [http://www.nytimes.com/news/ferguson/2014/11/17/governor-activates-missouri-national-guard/?_r=0] KKK or no, I feel like a lot of people are going to die following the Grand Jury's decision, no matter what it is.

All it takes is one shot to set off a powder keg.

 

[Something Amyss]

Anonymous is just an angry (or at least annoyed) mob on the net. Sure, there are some people you wouldn't mind see face an angry mob, but for the most part it's not something you want running around.

I agree, though it's hard not to have a visceral reaction to this.

 

[Fox12]

It's rather funny that they model themselves after Alan Moores V, since the entire point of the novel was that V was morally wrong. It was about a bad rebel fighting against a bad government. Talk about missing the irony.

Got a source for that?

I'm not much of a fan of the comic or film however I've never stumbled across anything by author Alan Moore stating V must be interpreted this way; at best seeing he himself is an anarchist this leads credence to the idea that we are at the very least meant to be sympathetic.

There's also the fact that he certainly does not mind the use of the mask [http://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/nov/27/alan-moore-v-vendetta-mask-protest].

Sounds like you're projecting pretty hard.

No, he's an anarchist, but he's on record as saying that V's methods were too violent, and that he couldn't support his methods. The character was supposed to be morally gray and divisive.

Anarchist =/= violent revolutionary.

 

[Eddie the head]

If it wouldn't get me a low content warning my entire post would consist of a picture of Nelson Muntz pointing and saying "HA! HA!"

I'm pretty sure it's frowned upon to to explicitly say you're writing something to avoid a low content warning. I'm not saying you'll get a warning for this, it's just I've seen similar things happen.

More on topic I can't say I really like ether side of this. On one hand I don't think the KKK should have said that. On the other I don't think Anonymous should have reacted in such a way.

 

[Ftaghn To You Too]

No, they didn't. Anonymous does not do things. Anonymous has never done a single thing. What happend was that people identifying themselves as anonymous did something. Stop treating them as anything approaching an organization, with any sort of agenda. Such a thing does not exist.