It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anonymous hacks and exposes Westboro charlatans Baptist Church internal infrastructure during live c

page: 9
96
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:01 PM
link   
Seriously who the heck cares about a Church calling Anonymous out. I only engaged in discussing "Anon" because I thought they were warriors against corruption. Anything Anonymous wise that does not deal with corruption is a HOAX. And or this "Anonymous" group it's self is a HOAX.




posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by BobbyTarass
reply to post by undo
 


It's like that jester guy, claiming that he's part of anonymous (he did,multiple times) while he's working alone, writing his name all around the internet, like those guys so proud to say that they've taken part in some operation, spouting memes, yelling the so-called rules of internet, trying to act tough or mysterious, you're not, everybody see through that kind of roleplay.
You're a fraud.


just to be clear, are you saying i'm being a fraud or jester or just
anon or just hackers other than anon?



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Look I'm not wrong at all. What they did is illegal. It wasn't freedom of speech and for your information, the right's protected by the Constitution apply ONLY to American citizen's. Hypocrisy is not flattering and anyone that breaks the law are wrong. We are NOT a democracy and never have been. We ARE a Constitutional Republic! Democracy & Socialism go hand in hand. We are a land of law and if people don't like it, they make their bed and lay in it.
edit on 25-2-2011 by soaringhawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Its late. I'm tired. I'm also a Christian. It is the duty of all Christians to rebuke fellow Christians when necessary. Here is a good link one can follow, Christian or not, to see clear scriptural citation rebuking the methods of WBC:

Does Westboro Represent Christianity?

There are 1162 chapters in the Holy Bible plus the 27 chapters in Leviticus, so often cited by this organization. To this day I still personally seek a relationship with God and to understand Him through the Bible and other sound resources. When Phelps mentioned God "knowing" our hearts in this interview, I could almost smell the ionized ozone. These followers appear to be zealots, allowing their hearts to be corrupted by the reality of the very sins of all people. The same sins Jesus died to free the world from. Seeking forgiveness for our sins and pursing a Christian lifestyle does not mean that Christians have a free pass to point fingers, especially knowing that there are consequences when doing it improperly. This is especially true when one is among people who do not know or understand God.

Real Christians have a responsibility to follow Christ in His holy way, continue the work He started, await His return, and spread the Good News. Hanging out with publicans and sinners is what Christ did because these are the folks who need to know that God does love them. In Mark 5:25-34, Jesus shows us what faith is supposed to be about and how powerful the love of God is. This "unclean woman" had to break one of those Levitical laws in order to touch the clothes of Christ. If those from WBC were out there preaching among the crowd, the fact that their signs and shirts with the words "GOD HATES" would be all anyone would need to see. (I have omitted the derogatory term for homosexuals because it is merely incidental, not to mention convenient for the WBC agenda.) You could just as easily have a shirt saying "GOD HATES VIOLATERS OF ANY ONE OF THE 613 RABBINICAL LAWS". Now the unclean woman who thought, "If I just touch his clothes, I will be healed" would be very reluctant to approach anyone in the WBC. That's all the truth one needs to know about these folks.

Let them preach. In America, at least now, they have the right. The more everyone hears their message, the more everyone will see the WBC for what it really is. Their preaching bears little fruit. I fail to see a genuine pursuit of the WBC followers to understand what kind of heart it will take to drink from the cup that John and James wanted to drink from.

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye." ~Matthew 7:3-5

Dear God. I pray I am always aware of the plank I am constantly trying to pull out of my eye so that I may see what You would want me to see. Amen.

Peace to all of my ATS brothers and sisters and may God bless you all and good night!



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnD
 


erm this could get bad. ya know, i'm a christian. i gave up more addictions than most people have in their lifetimes. but i still have a bugger hanging around. i get judged for it quite frequently in fact. i'm trying to imagine how this one irritating sin of mine could lead to people publishing my personal information on the internet, as a form of rebuke. i'm thinking that's carrying it a little too far. i'm also thinking, it's dangerous precedent to set.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by manuellabors
reply to post by undo
 

Look up what happened to hb gary federal.


Early on in the Wikileaks battle, HBGary threw its gauntlet into the fight, going after Wikileaks donors. Furthermore, the COO of HBGary Federal, Aaron Barr, thought it would be interesting to infiltrate the Anonymous group and try to find who its leaders were (there aren't any). He attempted this by lurking on forums and IRC. Eventually, Barr started sharing his findings with the press, and intended to present them at a security conference. This, of course, set Anonymous off. A new target and cause… take out HBGary.

Anonymous pretty much decimated HBGary’s defenses one brick at a time. By leveraging some very basic security issues in a number of systems, Anonymous was able to deface HBGary’s web site, delete 1 TB of backups, and steal tens of thousands of critical and sensitive emails (including some very embarrassing ones). In fact, HBGary was so affected by this attack that they even pulled out of the RSA conference.

HBGary surprisingly fell victim to some of the most basic security mistakes one could make. To accomplish all of the mayhem I mentioned earlier, Anonymous’ attack included the following components:

• A SQL injection on a badly coded custom CMS
• A cracking attack (using rainbow tables) on badly encrypted passwords
• The discovery of some embarrassingly weak passwords used by high value targets
• The discovery of rampant password reuse (again, by high value targets)
• An elevation of privilege attack due to an very unpatched system
• …and some basic social engineering

None of those attacks are new, nor particularly extraordinary or complex. In fact, some are as old as hacking itself.

Every security practitioner knows you should not reuse the same password at multiple sites. If you do reuse your password and an attacker gains access to it via one insecure site, then the attacker has the keys to your entire kingdom. Obviously, you should use different passwords everywhere, which is the industry best practice. However, following this best practice isn’t easy. At the very least, it takes extra time and thought. Most normal users don’t know about the password vault or keychain software that might help them manage multiple passwords, Even when they do, users don’t always use them because they adds extra steps, or roadblocks to their daily processes. As a result, many people reuse passwords.

The best security mechanism in the world won’t do a thing if your users turn it off.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 05:13 AM
link   
This is fab, thanks for posting.

I have never come accross a group of people I hate more than the wbc. It is just this sort of intollerance and trumped up self importance that makes me puke. And I can so understand how anon would want to slap them down for trying to get publicity off of their reputation. Nicely done guys - a live hack! Brilliant!



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Shamatt
 


Oh that makes perfect sense. Hate someone who merely protests instead of someone actually responsible for the death and enslavement of millions. Such as Marx, Lenin, Mao, Hitler. You know, NONE of them were Christian. Don't dare say Hitler was a Christian because all anyone has to do is crack open that new Testament, read the words of Christ and bam!



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 06:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by soaringhawk
reply to post by Shamatt
 


Oh that makes perfect sense. Hate someone who merely protests instead of someone actually responsible for the death and enslavement of millions. Such as Marx, Lenin, Mao, Hitler. You know, NONE of them were Christian. Don't dare say Hitler was a Christian because all anyone has to do is crack open that new Testament, read the words of Christ and bam!


If you expect me to list everyone I hate each time I slag down a hatefull group of biggots and bullies then you are as stupid as they are. Just because the WBC call themselves Christain does not mean that they are - they are a group that preaches hate. You assume that I don't hate those who are responsible for mass murder? Why? Please explain?

And whilst we are talking about mass murder - look at what the Christain church did in South America. Look at how many inocent people were killed during the crusades. Look at how many people were burnt at the stake for being witches. The Christian church is responsible for more deaths than any other political or religioous group that ever existed on this earth.

Stick your new testiment up your arse! BAM! You and it have both got what you deserve. Idiot.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by JohnD
 

i'm trying to imagine how this one irritating sin of mine could lead to people publishing my personal information on the internet, as a form of rebuke. i'm thinking that's carrying it a little too far. i'm also thinking, it's dangerous precedent to set.


Sowing discord is most definitely a sin. Using technology of this world makes it even more of sin. That is what WBC does. We are all sinners. When an organization or an individual claims to be as "Christian" as the WBC and then shows their own doctrine to be false, then it is the duty of a Christian to call those organizations out. What WBC does is not correct from a Biblical standpoint. Unfortunately, many organizations do just the opposite by pulling out the sunshine and rainbows of scripture and that is also not sound doctrine. God does love us, but He does not love unconditionally as we so often hear on pulpits all over the world. If God loved unconditionally, Adam and Eve would not have been thrown out of the garden of Eden, Noah would not have had to build an ark, Job would not have been made to suffer, and last but certainly not least, it would not have been necessary for God to send Jesus to show us how evil this world is, even though "He so loved the world." That's right folks. Good and evil do exist. Evil rules this world, therefore we must not love the things that are of this world.

All individual Christians should be kept in check on a more personal level. I am not afraid for what I believe. I cannot force anyone else to believe what I believe. You say you are a Christian and I think that it is awesome. I also know that it is much easier to walk one day at a time to face my own addictions and demons with Jesus than it is to do it alone. As Christians, one should seek God daily and it can only be done through the Word. Accountability groups are a good way that many Christians can keep themselves on the path of righteousness. AA functions in a similar way. The only difference is that members strive to be free from alcohol addiction on a daily basis and are usually successful. It is hard to do that with sin because it is nearly impossible for any of us to go one day, much less one week, without sin.

Otherwise, AA would have to be AAA, and I think that acronym is taken. Sorry... had to lighten up the message a little bit... but only a little :-)



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Expunged
 

Horray, a new christmas list for my special friends...muahahahahaha!



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Shamatt
 


WBC aren't Christian but you hating them more than any other group is what I'm talking about.
"I have never come accross a group of people I hate more than the wbc. "

Those are your exact words. Now think about what you said. How about the secular humanists that wish this world ill? Why don't you read the Humanist Manifesto II ( 1973). Go read up on the limits of growth by The Club of Rome. Or the countless other evil done by certain groups. Whether it's political or not. You said group and that covers a broad range.

Christianity isn't responsible for a single injustice, a single murder. People using religion are responsible for that. Jesus Christ clearly says love your enemies. That if we don't forgive those that wrong us, we will not be forgiven. How about you crack it open and read it or just be quiet because you've already given up. The Crusades were an answer to the Muslim invasion of Jerusalem.
Sure wrong was done but plenty has been done in the name of God of religion's. Your words are typical of a person ignorant of scripture and the truth as a whole. You talk before thinking and what you talk about you don't know enough about to discuss. You come across as an uneducated, bitter, atheist with a hot head that treats people like they're idiots when the real idiot stares you in the face because you refuse to learn.

You can either attack people for no reason and be bitter or you can get with it, act civilized and desire to be on the same page with anyone else that cares for truth. If you don't, why are you here?
edit on 26-2-2011 by soaringhawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Wow.

Her 'debating skill' reminds me of several trolls on this website.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by soaringhawk
reply to post by Shamatt
 

You can either attack people for no reason and be bitter or you can get with it, act civilized and desire to be on the same page with anyone else that cares for truth. If you don't, why are you here?
edit on 26-2-2011 by soaringhawk because: (no reason given)


And God's people said... Amen.
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34

And Sloth said, "I love you, Chunk!"



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by soaringhawk
Those are your exact words. Now think about what you said. How about the secular humanists that wish this world ill?


We all have our ignorance and prejudice - - don't we.

Secular Humanism: Secular Humanism, alternatively known as Humanism (with an emphasis on the capital H to distinguish it from other forms of humanism), is a secular philosophy that espouses human reason, ethics, and justice, and the search for human fulfillment. It specifically rejects religious dogma, supernaturalism, pseudoscience or superstition as the basis of morality and decision-making.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Humanism and secular humanism are totally different. Secular humanism is in fact a religion. It's the worship of self. Conquering nature, man and becoming 'god'. It allows such things as murder. There are no absolute right or wrong in secular humanism. Whatever they believe is justified to accomplish a goal. I know what I'm talking about. Do some real research. Read the Humanist Manifesto II ( 1973)
edit on 26-2-2011 by soaringhawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by soaringhawk
reply to post by Annee
 


Humanism and secular humanism are totally different. Secular humanism is in fact a religion. It's the worship of self. Conquering nature, man and becoming 'god'. It allows such things as murder.


NO. That was written 78 years ago. You seriously want to hang on to some 78 year old Manifesto of a concept you don't even understand?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This was written in 1973 - - - man - concepts evolve

Humanist Manifesto II
Preface

It is forty years since Humanist Manifesto I (1933) appeared. Events since then make that earlier statement seem far too optimistic. Nazism has shown the depths of brutality of which humanity is capable. Other totalitarian regimes have suppressed human rights without ending poverty. Science has sometimes brought evil as well as good. Recent decades have shown that inhuman wars can be made in the name of peace. The beginnings of police states, even in democratic societies, widespread government espionage, and other abuses of power by military, political, and industrial elites, and the continuance of unyielding racism, all present a different and difficult social outlook. In various societies, the demands of women and minority groups for equal rights effectively challenge our generation.

www.americanhumanist.org...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back on Topic - - sorry - just had to address above.

I fully support Freedom of Speech - - - but SOME TIMES - - - some people - - - really do deserve to get knocked down a peg or two.

No people were physically hurt in this cyber attack. That would have been unacceptable.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Big Raging Loner
Star and Flag!

Have these Anonymous folks got any better targets than West Boro or Scientology?

If they are talented hackers IMO there are people who deserve to be attacked much more than these two lame organisations. I have only recently heard of them so I am not fully aware of their antics.


The message posted on WBC states that Anonymous has more plans more around Lybia, Iran, and another. They got big # probably in the works... especially with stuxnet lingering around



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnD
 


not sure what your position is on the "punishment"
that's where i have a problem with this entire thing. it's one thing to say, "we disagree with you" or "you are behaving poorly and inconsiderately".. it's quite another thing to take the person's personal data and spread it around the internet, without their consent, as a form of punishment.

some guy threatened to do that to my husband because the guy didn't like the fact i disagreed with him about some conspiracy theory he had. now my hubby has nothing to do with my personal opinion, i'm an individual..

so add to the problem that anon also included the data of people in wbc that were being represented by shirley but who did not personally egg on anon, it was all shirley. anon wasn't going to do the hack at all, except for shirley's taunts. so what's the end result? the entire church has their personal info released onto the internet. they all had to pay because shirley was egging on anon.

there's some significant warning signs in that.

i was under the impression, back in their protests of scientology, that they were not trying to do personal harm to the scientologists, but rather help to warn people about the dangers of scientology and maybe convince individual scientologists to get out of the religion. anon ended up having to defend itself because it was seen as attacking freedom of religion. how is this any different? (other than the fact, they also released private information about the members of wbc and they apparently didnt do the same to scientologists. which means they are escalating the severity of their attacks on religious groups, not lessening).

and here's the rub: there are several religious groups on the planet, that disagree with each other. and they would be more than willing to attack other groups because the concept of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," hasn't sunk in yet (and maybe never will). if these people are also members of anon, they will be more than willing to go along with any atheists in anon who feel religion needs to be done away with as long as it isn't THEIR religion being attacked,. and you know how that ends up for any body who has a different opinion?

that really should give EVERYBODY, even anon members, reason to think past their own little corner of the world, before acting.
edit on 26-2-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


contrary to public opinion, emotional and mental abuse is bad for everybody, including the person perpetrating it. just cause you don't smack a person upside the head in reality, does not mean that emotional or mental harrassment doesn't do physical damage. that's the same reason why most think it's wrong to attack gay people in such a heartless manner, because abusing people emotionally or mentally, is the problem in the first place. how does one abuse resolve the problems of the other? it doesn't. the only resolution for situations like this is to diffuse it not accelerate it by encouraging others to take part in the vicious circle.




top topics



 
96
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join