- Home
- Politics
- Entertainment
- Sports
- Health
- Religion
- Society
- Tech
- Money
- People
- Science
- Galleries
Technology
Anonymous Plans to Defend Aaron Swartz's Funeral from Westboro Baptist Church Protests
Hacker group Anonymous is planning to defend Aaron Swartz's funeral from Westboro Baptist Church's planned protest on Tuesday.
According to Salon, Anonymous announced Monday that #OpAngel will thwart the church's plans to picket his open funeral in Chicago.
In a statement, the group said: "Twenty-four hours after the death of Aaron Swartz was announced to the world, a heartless cult announced their intention to picket his funeral. In response, Anonymous has launched Operation Angel."
They also acknowledged that the church's interest in his funeral is likely related to their previous attacks on WBC.
"It is likely that our continuous condemnation and attacks against this cult is the very reason Aaron is being targeted by them. We would do anything to stop them from attending Aaron's services," they said.
The rest of the statement urges people who would like to form human shields near his funeral to "listen closely for any announcement by the family on this action and respect their wishes." They also urged people who have intel on the cults to e-mail that information to OpAngel@hushmail.com.
Once Swartz has been put to rest, they explained that #OpAngel will have a second phase:
Partnering with other organizations, Anonymous intends to pursue reform within the DoJ and other government agencies to prevent the kind of unnecessary harassment that Aaron Swartz was victim to. Some of the brightest men and women in the fields of information technology and security are being targeted by agencies that lack a basic understanding of the so-called crimes they are accusing people of. We will do this for Aaron Swartz and everyone like him.
The launch of the operation speaks volumes of how passionate Swartz was about activist and hacker networks.
Galleries
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
Comments
All the deceased's family
All the deceased's family have to do, is to ask Anon to announce publicly where and when the funeral will be taking place, then to conduct a small, private funeral service beforehand, at a secret location. That little white lie on Anon's part is certainly less blameworthy in the circumstances than copyright infringement, hacking, denial of service attacks and distributing malware. But, if Anon has suddenly developed a conscience, perhaps simply keeping the time, date and venue of the funeral secret will suffice.
If that isn't good enough, because the deceased's family want members of the public who had never met the deceased to be able to pay their last (and only) respects to somebody they merely read about in life, turning the funeral into something of a political demonstration, then they should be willing to tolerate people who disapproved of the deceased also turning up to pay their last disrespects.
It either has to be a discreet, private funeral, or a free-for-all. Blame the constitution for that.
I don't always support
I don't always support Anonymous'actions, however, under the circumstance I do support them defending the dignity of the funeral for Aaron Swartz. Whether Swartz was innocent or guilty of computer fraud, it is absolutely unconscionable for the Westboro Baptist Church, a fraudulent religious sect of racist hatemongers to be demonstrating at anyone's funeral. It is high time that the President of the United States call on Congress to pass legislation that protects individuals and groups from documented hate speech, along the lines that exist in most Western democracies. We cannot sustain a modern civil society when people are fomenting hate against individuals and groups who practice a different religion or whose sexual orientation is not the same as theirs.
They can protect the dignity
They can protect the dignity of the funeral far better, by not telling WBC where and when it is being held.
John, I lost my father a few
John,
I lost my father a few years ago. As is tradition here, an obituary was placed in the newspaper that listed when and where his funeral would have been held. Soooo many people came to pay their respects, people my mom, brothers nor I knew but who knew my dad from work, from childhood, from his activities, etc. Funerals are not simply held for blood relatives - they're not the only ones who grieve the loss of an individual. That said, when a family is grieving, trying to remember who should be told about a secret location and notifying those people is a lot of added stress during an already awful time.
I do agree with you that Anonymous' method of dealing with this is not the way to go. The Patriot Guard or members of the community forming a human wall to shut WBC out seems a much better method of handling the situation.
"an obituary was placed in
"an obituary was placed in the newspaper that listed when and where his funeral would have been held"
I dare say your father wasn't a public figure, on trial for hacking, who committed suicide, and who had antagonised a hate group notorious for attention seeking behaviour at funerals, by bringing down its websites.
Well, yes he was. You didn't
Well, yes he was. You didn't know??
No, John, my point was it's difficult to hold a "private" "secret location" funeral and communicate that information to everyone who knew an individual and who wanted to mourn their loss with others who were mourning as well.
If people "hide" from these WBC bullies, then in my opinion that feeds their agenda and their feeling of success. The more successful a bully, the more they push. A community standing together (like with the Patriot Guard Riders or other citizens) to block these handful of obnoxious troublemakers seems to be a more reasonable solution to me. (And, it's been successful in the past.)
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=8844684
That's just one example.
I have discovered the
I have discovered the following description of an earlier picketing of a funeral by WBC ("the church"):
"The church had notified the authorities in advance of its intent to picket at the time of the funeral, and the picketers complied with police instructions in staging their demonstration. The picketing took place within a 10- by 25-foot plot of public land adjacent to a public street, behind a temporary fence. ... That plot was approximately 1,000 feet from the church where the funeral was held. Several buildings separated the picket site from the church. ... The Westboro picketers displayed their signs for about 30 minutes before the funeral began and sang hymns and recited Bible verses. None of the picketers entered church property or went to the cemetery. They did not yell or use profanity, and there was no violence associated with the picketing."
"The funeral procession passed within 200 to 300 feet of the picket site. Although Snyder testified that he could see the tops of the picket signs as he drove to the funeral, he did not see what was written on the signs until later that night, while watching a news broadcast covering the event."
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-751.pdf
It is heartening to hear of a hate group of bullies (a grandfather, two of his daughters, and four of his grandchildren) having an off day like this, on which they neglected to turn out in force, or to bully anybody that day. Let's hope that WBC cause just as little inconvenience in the case of THIS planned funeral picket too. If so, Anon's intervention is unlikely to be necessary.
I have to say, I find WBC somewhat disturbing, in a mediocre way. But their parody of Bohemian Rhapsody is real *quality* disturbing. For best effects, get the parody lyrics up, and follow them whilst listening to the recording of the singing. It really is good quality material. More counter-culture than hate group. Definitely disturbing.
The persecution of Aaron
The persecution of Aaron Swartz was a travesty of justice. It saddens me that more readers are interested in the antics of the Westboro Baptist Church than the DOJ harrassment of Aaron Swartz. I wish Swartz had continued to enlighten Americans about the bureaucratic greed & misuse of public documents & information via university websites, instead of chosing to taking his life when bombarded with excessive criminal charges that overwhelmed him. But how many 26 year olds could deal with having their dreams & careers put on hold while they spent every dollar they had and they next 10+ years of their lives battle our legal systems that has not modified it's laws to deal with 21st century technology. Aaron Swartz spent his short life improving Internet access for us all. He tried to make information open & accessible to all. If his exposure of some fraudulent activities embarrassed some universities, he did so in the public interest. I hope THE PEOPLE will not forget this, or him. We need whistle-blowing laws to protect hackers whose only crime was using the net to expose an injustice. Vigilantes who expose public corruptions do this nation a service that should mitigate any legal charges against them. If we want our society to value truth, integrity & public service we must make this part of our legal system.
If our society had such values, I do not believe we would have ever had the Financial Crisis of 2008. We have seen lots of proof that many people knew of the frauds Wall Street was perpetrating in reports and on the People. Many tried to come forward but their reports were buried & they were warned to keep their opinions to themselves. What kind of a world are we living in when our justice system is harder on those who try to protect the public than the Corporate Con-Artists who fleece the public. The DOJ hounded an idealistic young programmer to his death. The public should be asking why.
gem - Jan 16 2013 -
gem - Jan 16 2013 - 6:18pm
"The persecution of Aaron Swartz was a travesty of justice. It saddens me that more readers are interested in the antics of the Westboro Baptist Church than the DOJ harrassment of Aaron Swartz..."
Because the article HERE is about Westboro, not Swarz. Want to discuss Swarz, go where opinion pieces about him are published.
So when did this "registered
So when did this "registered hate group" (he-heee...), change their target from baby killing soldiers fighting an illegal, immoral war, to someone who helped engineer the web?
When are you two going to
When are you two going to register?
When WBC starts their stuff
When WBC starts their stuff up, take their pictures and track down their home addresses - publish all that info, and get everyone to agree not to hire or sell goods to anyone in that organization. Being refused service at every supermarket, restaurant, and roadside fruit stand should deliver them the message that their assclownery won't be tolerated and the good people of the US intend to starve that type of behavior out of existence. And all without breaking any laws.
If gas stations refuse to sell them gas, airlines, buses and trains refuse to sell them tickets, etc., they also can't travel to where they aren't recognized.
That said, constant vandalism of their vehicles would put a smile on my face, too.
All you'd do is give them a
All you'd do is give them a reason to claim martyrdom - suffering bravely for their perversion of Christianity - by being so systematically persecuted. A little 3-methyl indole on their Welcome mat would give people adequate warning of their arrival - "You can tell by the smell... it's a Westboro Baptist!"
@cityboy, I understand your
@cityboy,
I understand your intent, and I REALLY appreciate that your suggestion's non-violent, contrary to some other posts, here...
...but some of what you suggest is prohibited by both federal, and many states' anti-discrimination legislation.
I've read both about, and the writings of, the WBC nutjobs. Trust me on this, NOTHING will disabuse them of their way of thinking and acting. Nothing.
The only signal WBC has ever given which tells us a little about what will or won't work is that in situations where protesters of WBC have been fairly aggressive (but not violent or even threatening) such that WBC's efforts are literally thwarted (by, for example, protesters encircling WBC's protesters so that no one may read their signs; and then talking or yelling or singing over their words so that no one may hear them... stuff like that), then WBC usually just packs-up and goes home fairly quickly.
WBC is human, too, and so maybe if that starts happening absolutely everywhere WBC goes, it'll start to make 'em maybe stay home more or something. I think that's about the best for which anyone may hope... that is, as long as those against WBC act lawfully (which is, in my opinion, the ONLY way that anyone should act).
I'm going to assume that your "constant vandalism" one-liner is in the same league with my occasional throwing-in to one of my rants that so-and-so should (not literally, of course) be dragged behind a '74 Dodge pick-up. It's the kind of thing that we don't actually literally mean, but nevertheless makes us feel better. I'm assuming that, because if I don't, then it starts to suck the air out of my earier herein non-violent congratulations.
Gregg L. DesElms
Napa, California USA
gregg at greggdeselms dot com
Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.
They are a registered hate
They are a registered hate group, makes you wonder what they have to do before the cretins in power finally do something to stop them.
Those that can't or won't defend themselves can only be slaves.
Were you asleep in Civics
Were you asleep in Civics class when they covered the First Amendment to the Constitution? The same Amendment that protects our right to call these fuckwits... well, fuckwits protects their right to BE fuckwits (as long as they refrain from violating the law in ways NOT protected by the Constitution).
What I can't understand is why slander and libel statutes aren't used to punish these people. Their comments about gays, soldiers, and probably Aaron Swartz ought to be enough to deprive the parishioners of Westboro Baptist Church of their collective property in court. The First Amendment DOESN'T protect libel, slander and some forms of defamation.
@loupgarous, Phelps and
@loupgarous,
Phelps and several of his family members are attorneys. I suspect they know just how far they can go and precisely what they cannot say without being successfully sued.
A group can register in the
A group can register in the USA as a "hate group"? That is just so cool! Is there a registration fee?
Nice catch there. I suspect
Nice catch there. I suspect what he meant is that that "organization" has been placed, by other organizations that track and deal with that sort of thing, on a list of groups that promote hatred.
This one is probably what he had in mind: http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups
I guess it's the new
I guess it's the new non-profit.
Registered hate group, indeed......
Give every attendee a can of
Give every attendee a can of pepper spray, when the wacko's turn up spray them then beat them. If it's done by individuals who remain nameless the psycho's can't sue. Spray them right in the face then follow up with a roundhouse to the jaw.
Preferably would be to give all attendees a baseball bat and end the problem permanently when the psycho's turn up.
Those that can't or won't defend themselves can only be slaves.
@RealityBites wrote: Give
@RealityBites wrote: Give every attendee a can of pepper spray, when the wacko's turn up spray them then beat them. If it's done by individuals who remain nameless the psycho's can't sue. Spray them right in the face then follow up with a roundhouse to the jaw.
Preferably would be to give all attendees a baseball bat and end the problem permanently when the psycho's turn up.
MY RESPONSE: A roundhouse to the jaw? If you've actually received ethical martial arts training (and your suggestion makes me think you haven't, but you find it nevertheless romantic), then you were trained never to think that way, or use your training for such purposes.
As for pepper spray (in additiona to the aforementioned "roundhouse," and your "[i]f it's done by individuals who remain nameless the psycho's can't sue," are you serious? I mean, you're obviously... like... 14 or something; but are you SERIOUS? Have you been watching too much TV? Playing too many video games? Do you know what kinds of felonies you're suggesting? Are you freakin' insane? Have you lost your damned mind? What's WRONG with you?
And baseball bats to "end the problem permanently?" That's MURDER, you freakin' nutjob!!! Seriously, HAVE YOU LOST YOUR DAMNED MIND?
Suddenly, your nickname, around here, is making a lot more sense, because you and the notion of reality apparently don't often collide in the same sentence... or even thought, truth be known. That you can, with a straight face, refer to anyone else as "psycho's" [sic] is the very epitome of irony.
Seriously... I'm asking you -- no, really... resist the urge to fire back and please, please allow me to impore you -- to pause, and take one giant step back, and think long and hard about what you've proffered, here, and how easily and unhesitatingly you so did...
...and then ask yourself how that makes you any less the criminal that I've read you decry around here.
FortheloveofGod, man: IMPULSE CONTROL! This isn't a video game. This isn't a TV show or movie. This is real life, where acts of violence are punished by years of imprisonment and, if released, a lifetime of being a convicted felon and all that that implies. Your monicker says that "reality bits;" well, apparently so, for you, because you're about as disconnected from it as I've ever seen. That you think it's okay to even kid around about the kind of stuff you wrote is so, so telling about you...
...and I am completely confident that you cannot even SEE it; that it's not merelly that you can't get your mind wrapped around it, but, rather, you can't literally even SEE it.
Oh. My. God. [shakes head in disbelief]
And here's the worst part, from your perspective: I, for one, will now never take seriously a single thing you write here, again. With this godawful posting of yours to which I'm responding, you've shown yourself to be pathologically anti-social; and so, then, both incapable of rational discourse, and unworthy of response.
Here's the scary part: It's often your kind that screams the loudest for the right to bear arms.
Sobering, indeed.
Shame on you, RealityBites. Seriously. What you've written goes so far beyond the pale; yet I'm completely confident that you neither see it, nor could grasp the full depth and breadth of it, even if you could...
...as what I'm sure that what at least YOU think will be your "clever" retort will reveal.
Just wait for it, everyone.
Gregg L. DesElms
Napa, California USA
gregg at greggdeselms dot com
Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.
Better yet, give all the
Better yet, give all the regular attendees spray cans of gay. When the protesters show up, spray them with it! They'll be so upset they got gay on them and that they just might now be gay, the reactions should be hilarious! We should film that and put it on the internet.
Because what @cityboy wrote
Because what @cityboy wrote was in response to what I wrote, I presumed something about his motives which may, in fact, not be true, and so I've now removed what I originally wrote here. @cityboy could, I realized, simply be advocating, albeit clumsily, that the WBC protesters be painted with that which they most hate. Of course, the problem with that is that it also paints -- hopefully inadvertently -- being gay as something negative, and worthy of weaponry.
Still, disregarding that, for a moment, if all that @cityboy meant to convey was painting WBC protesters with that which they most hate, then at least his heart was in the right place; and so, then, what I originally wrote, here, would not be deserved.
Of course, if this commenting interface simply had a "delete" feature so that once a post is made, and re-thought, it could be removed by its original author, then I wouldn't now have to fill this space with such as this.
Gregg L. DesElms
Napa, California USA
gregg at greggdeselms dot com
Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.
(deleted)
(deleted)
"Of course, the problem with
"Of course, the problem with that is that it also paints -- hopefully inadvertently -- being gay as something negative ..."
Cityboy wasn't doing that, but let us suppose, for a moment, that he had been painting gay as something negative. Why should painting "gay" as something "negative" be a "problem"? Even if it were done advertently? To whom might a negative opinion of things "gay" be a problem, and how?
For the past ten or twenty years, I have estimated, school children have used the term "gay" to refer to anything that they feel negative towards. Didn't you know this?
I have a theory as to ONE reason why children do this. It is to rebel against adults. Especially against adults who consider it to be a *problem* if anybody says anything negative about things gay. How better for independent-minded youngsters to rebel against adults like this, than by using the adjective "gay" to mean "invoking negative feelings".
Some of youngsters I first overheard using the word "gay" in this way, are parents themselves now.
John, How do you feel when
John,
How do you feel when you hear someone describe people and/or their actions as crazy, insane, or mentally ill? Those are all terms that people have used for years in a non-clinical way to describe actions that make no sense to them.
How about when someone does something without thinking it through and another refers to the actions as "retarded"?
The word "gay" is used in the way you described because "gay" is considered by some to be something bad, something negative - just as being crazy, insane, mentally ill, or retarded.
"cityboy could, I realized,
"cityboy could, I realized, simply be advocating, albeit clumsily, that the WBC protesters be painted with that which they most hate."
Of course. But how did Cityboy make that joke of his "clumsily"?
Or, you could have left it
Or, you could have left it and simply apologized for the misunderstanding.
Even better, don't invite WBC
Even better, don't invite WBC to the funeral. Don't even tell them where and when it is to be held. Then mock them. "Oh sorry. Did you miss it?"
Hire Hells Angels for
Hire Hells Angels for security, look how well it worked for the Rolling Stones.
@argon wrote: Hire Hells
@argon wrote: Hire Hells Angels for security, look how well it worked for the Rolling Stones.
MY RESPONSE: Yeah... just look:
* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_q3Oyk_4rrM
* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qTKsylrpsg
Of course, I realize that yours was just sarcasm; but it's nevertheless worthy of making it all very painfully clear for the benefit youngsters reading, here, who have no idea what you're talking about (and who might inadvertently think it's a good idea).
Gregg L. DesElms
Napa, California USA
gregg at greggdeselms dot com
Veritas nihil veretur nisi abscondi.
Veritas nimium altercando amittitur.