Anonymous Denies Targeting Westboro Baptist Church

lenwood writes "Last week we discussed news that the hacking group Anonymous was staging an attack against Fred Phelps' Westboro Baptist Church. It turns out that this was a publicity stunt staged by WBC themselves. Anonymous issued a press release disassociating themselves from this."

Makes sense

[rsilvergun]

I was a bit perplexed when I heard they were bothering with the WBC, and figured it was somebody's publicity stunt. There are much better targets in the world than a bunch of loons and their opportunist leader...

Written by WBC?

[exomondo]

It was probably written by Westboro themselves to get some publicity.

Re:Makes sense

[exomondo]

But that's the thing Westboro members could be Anonymous too, it's interesting how this "non-group" can denounce a release as not representative of Anonymous.

How?

[Anonymous Coward]

How can a group that by it's very nature has no central control or even consistent make-up release such a statement. How does one member or group of members of Anonymous know whether or not any other part of Anonymous is/was doing something?

Re:They should have chosen a more distinctive name

[Kiaser Zohsay]

... then anyone could do something on behalf of Anonymous, and you couldn't deny it was done by them.

Or maybe that's just what they want you to think ...

why waste time on this?

[swschrad]

this is the nutcase church of the inbred Phelpses, after all. if we all ignore these coocoos, they will go away to whatever fire and brimstone meets them for not loving their enemy, and their neighbor, as thyself.

hopefully, that would also apply to the MRs in the domain registry routers, as well ;)

Wait a minute

[OverlordQ]

Every time an article comes on here about Anon everybody bashes the news organizations for saying Anonymous has a hierarchy with 'senior' members, leaders, and so forth.

So why are you so quick to accept this? How can this press release saying 'Its not really us' carry any more weight then one saying "It's us".

Re:Written by WBC?

[Call Me Black Cloud]

But since anyone can act as Anonymous then the WBC claim was legit. I can put up a server, make myself a part of Anonymous, attempt to hack my server, leave Anonymous, then claim Anonymous tried to hack my server.

In fact, how do we know who issued the Anonymous press release? On the anonnews website it says, "Anyone can post to the site, and moderators will approve relevant posts. No censorship takes place!"

Maybe Anonymous should look into LifeLock...

Re:Not a defined group

[Mysteray]

You've got two groups of trolls trying to figure out who's attempting to troll whom, and if said trolling is a threat to their own trolling efforts. Why exactly this is considered news is beyond me.

I think it's delightfully surreal. A postmodern civil war in cyberspace. Now being disclaimed by one side!

These groups were simply made for each other, for our entertainment. Certainly a better use of packets than streaming sitcom television anyway.

Re:Way to...

[interkin3tic]

With religiously inappropriate content

That describes their signs, what they're saying, and pretty much what they're all about, so I think anonymous have to dig -really- deep to find something offensive to them. Like as in "that which offends anonymous won't phase WBC."

Honestly I think faxing them bible quotes would annoy them more. That whole "Love thy neighbor" thing is either crossed out in their bibles, or is pretty narrowly defined. "Do unto others etc" must annoy the shit out of them.

Re:Not exactly how it works

[man_of_mr_e]

Anonymous claims they're not an organization. They're just a bunch of random people that get together to do something. Each time they get together, they're a different group of people. Anyone and Everyone is Anonymous because all you need is two or more people to get together and say you're doing something as Anonymous.

Anonymous may also be a community, and since there is no membership requirement, anyone that shows up is, by default, part of the community. Part of the community can claim that other part isn't really part of their part, but then the other part can say the same about the other part.

Either Anonymous *IS* an organized group, with a command and control structure, and someone pulling the strings. Or it's not. You can't have it both ways.