Slashdot Mirror


4chan Gives 90-Year-Old Vet a Great Birthday

Hugh Pickens writes "Members of 4chan aren't known for doing things that are cute and heart-warming and when they decide to go after someone, it's typically to subject them to ridicule. But not this time. Someone at 4chan decided that the Internet should get together and wish 90-year-old WWII veteran William J. Lashua a happy birthday, and soon Lashua's local branch of the American Legion was deluged by birthday calls from people as far away as Sweden. The account someone set up for Mr. Lashua's birthday on Facebook had 3,956 'likes' and over 500 comments, most of which wished him a happy birthday and thanked him for his military service. It's not clear how 4chan originally came across a photo of Lashua, but a member of the site posted a snapshot of a flyer that was on the bulletin board at a store in Ashburnham, Massachusetts asking for guests to attend the nonagenarian's birthday on at the American Legion hall and the post took off. In contrast to their usual behavior, 4chan members 'were giving him nice phone calls and sending him nice notes' and discouraging those who wanted to do something stupid or mean. 'They were all being.. well, shucks, awful nice.'"

363 comments

  1. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by gmagill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He risked his life for your right to be an asshole.

  2. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 5, Informative

    Instead of wasting mod points on you, I'll just tell you:

    It was for his BIRTHDAY. His birthday was yesterday, not on November 11.

    --
    "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  3. What part of "birthday party" do you not get? by spazmonkey · · Score: 1

    As 4Chan would say; DIAF.

  4. Thank you by Andy+Smith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Thank you William J. Lashua.

    1. Re:Thank you by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Shutting down his website a week after every other news blog has featured it? Probably, assuming he has a website.

    2. Re:Thank you by LanMan04 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Indeed. Thank you for your service in the LAST WAR that protected American freedoms. Everything post WWII.....well, it's history.

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    3. Re:Thank you by jmccay · · Score: 1

      Thank you for your service, and for helping secure the freedom of my family, friends, and myself.

      --
      At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
    4. Re:Thank you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Not only American freedom. Special thanks from Germany, which he helped to free of some silly idiots, we couldn't get rid of on our own.

    5. Re:Thank you by Herr+Brush · · Score: 1

      Ah I suppose Pearl Harbour doesn't really count as the homeland then. It is pretty far away...

    6. Re:Thank you by jaggeh · · Score: 1

      actually it doesnt, because hawaii was an occupied territory until 1959 when it was amde a state.

      --
      I would give everything i own for a little bit more.
    7. Re:Thank you by Herr+Brush · · Score: 1

      So what's your point? It was still a territory under US jurisdiction and the naval base that was attacked was a US military asset and the people killed were US citizens. Attacking an overseas embassy is an act of war even though they're not states,

    8. Re:Thank you by g1zmo · · Score: 2, Funny

      Japan attacked us in the Pacific! Let's land in France.

      --
      I have found there are just two ways to go.
      It all comes down to livin' fast or dyin' slow.
      -REK, Jr.
    9. Re:Thank you by ailnlv · · Score: 2, Funny

      Saudi Arabians attacked us! Let's invade Iraq!

    10. Re:Thank you by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      It was still a territory under US jurisdiction and the naval base that was attacked was a US military asset and the people killed were US citizens.

      When you've broken into someone's house to rob them, you don't have a lot of ethical high ground to complain when someone else who has broken into the same house starts a fight with you.

      The Pacific theater of WWII was a straight-up fight for territory between two colonial powers. Our version of colonialism might have been somewhat less brutal than that of the Japanese )though you ought to read about atrocities committed during the Philippine-American War before you decide about that); but this was not a conflict about high ideals.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    11. Re:Thank you by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Japan attacked us in the Pacific! Let's land in France.

      That's what being "Allies" is all about, both on our side and the Axis side. Japan attacked and declared war, Hitler did too, though he thought the Japanese were making a big mistake.

  5. Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Brought to you by the same people who love Caturday. Sometimes the Internet Hate Machine puts a yellow van back together.

    1. Re:Heh by macshit · · Score: 1

      Hey, who doesn't love Caturday?!

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    2. Re:Heh by DurendalMac · · Score: 1

      Zippocat?

  6. The cliche is true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In these uncertain times... you never know what the /b/tards might do.

    1. Re:The cliche is true by DurendalMac · · Score: 2, Funny

      I would have expected them to do anything but this. When 4chan gets all warm and fuzzy, then it's definitely a sign of impending armageddon. Cats and dogs living together, mass hysteria!

  7. Is it... by jDeepbeep · · Score: 1

    April 1st so soon?

    --
    Reply to That ||
    1. Re:Is it... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      Yes. Don't you watch the news? We're skipping the winter months this year. Some guy in Congress claims it will make people feel better and give the economy the boost it needs to pull out of the slump. Also, the government is going to spend a lot more tax money that they haven't collected yet. That's supposed to help too. Whee.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  8. Reddit by slime73 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Reddit did it's part as well, example

    1. Re:Reddit by lewko · · Score: 0

      And the Girl Guides do nice stuff also.

      The point is, 4Chan is not Reddit.

      --
      Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
  9. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by gmhowell · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Perhaps he was like my now deceased grandfather who didn't care for an annual reminder of having been involved in the island hopping of the US at the tender age of 17 nor the glorification and magnification of violence as the answer to world problems.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  10. Re:But tomorrow... by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

    Hey young punk, at 90 years old, I would not be surprised if he could wip the ass of most of the people in 4chan, those guys were tough, just google "senior citizen breaks the neck of mugger". That guy was only 70, but the punk he was dealing with was a lot tougher than the 4chan guys.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  11. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's his damn Birthday, let the old dude have his day.

  12. Wow by Cwix · · Score: 4, Funny

    4chan being nice?!?

    I do believe this was foretold in the bible as one of the signs of the end times.
    REPENT!! THEN END IS NIGH!!

    --
    You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    1. Re:Wow by jolyonr · · Score: 5, Funny

      4chan being nice. Duke Nukem Forever possibly being released soon. Cats and dogs living together.

      End of days, my friend. End of days.

      --


      Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
    2. Re:Wow by Eil · · Score: 1

      I would say the picture in that photo says very emphatically, "leave me the hell alone, especially on my birthday."

      Mystery solved.

    3. Re:Wow by interkin3tic · · Score: 2, Informative

      4chan being nice?!?

      Hmm... I think good PR could spin a lot of their actions as "nice." Their efforts to combat the dangerous cult calling itself "Scientology" for instance aren't exactly greedy and evil. Maybe they're motivated more by a sense of superiority than a sense of justice, but they're still attacking an evil organization.

      I haven't heard of 4chan, say, killing puppies or disrupting the flow of natural disaster relief supplies or flooding the gulf of mexico with crude oil. Whether that's because they don't do it or because I haven't heard of it, or because no one has yet realized they were behind the deepwater horizon spill, I don't know. It just seems to me (having never visited 4chan) that while they might be mostly rude, crude, and immature, they're not -evil-.

    4. Re:Wow by Zapotek · · Score: 1

      rofl, I actually have a PoC picture in my camera for the latter...and there I was thinking that my father was wasting his time while he was documenting history...

    5. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Duke Nukem Forever is real and will be coming out for the PS3 and Xbox 360.

      http://www.tgdaily.com/games-and-entertainment-brief/51395-holy-crap-duke-nukem-forever-gets-a-release-date-window

    6. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... I haven't heard of 4chan, say, killing puppies ...

      Wait? What?

      ... (having never visited 4chan) ...

      Oh. That might explain your ignorance. 4chan is everyone. 4chan does everything, no matter how horrific, no matter how kind.

    7. Re:Wow by Cwix · · Score: 1
      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    8. Re:Wow by zMaile · · Score: 0

      Anon isn't one being, it's a collective of people. Some are nice, some aren't, and some do kill puppies and post that as an animated .gif. Though recently 4chan got a bunch of 'summerfags', who i imagine are diluting the truly 'evil' anons that there are. It really has been getting more immature and the years pass by.

    9. Re:Wow by VendettaMF · · Score: 4, Funny

      >> they were behind the deepwater horizon spill

      Dude, that was Ebaums World.

      --
      kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
    10. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be too weirded out. The organization (if you can call it that) is chaotic neutral in character. Neither all out good nor all out evil, but always in it for the epic lulz. It may not be all that often, but sometimes the way it works out is that the dice roll out nice and good things can happen.

      It's epic considering the achievement, and it's lulz because people who have a certain expectation are left confused once again.

    11. Re:Wow by drolli · · Score: 2, Informative

      Let me add:

      4chan being nice.
      Duke Nukem Forever possibly being released soon.
      Microsoft supporting open source
      Cats and dogs living together.

    12. Re:Wow by bemymonkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      PS3 and XBox360? You mean there's no PC version of the iconic PC shooter?

      Run, it's a scam!

    13. Re:Wow by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      All part of teh lulz. INTERNET LOVE MACHINE is just another meme, messing with people by subverting their expectations of your behavior.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    14. Re:Wow by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

      This is so hart-warming :)

      There is still hope for humanity. It takes a _lot_ for me to get moved by something (especialy by something on the internet) and it almost always has to be realy, realy sad.

      Well, there is a first time for everything ^^,

      --
      Here be signatures
    15. Re:Wow by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      You haven't heard of them doing those things because they lack the abilities. And evil is such a subjective term. I prefer to consider 4chan to be full of amoral sociopaths whose actions are restrained only by their own fear and lack of materials. Not to mention the hardcore ones fear of other 4channers which prevents real organization. The crusade against CoS is not of 4chan, it is of moralfags who think 4chan is a place of guy fawkes masks and memes. The real 4chan is a very ugly place.

    16. Re:Wow by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Anyone knows about the current temperature in hell?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    17. Re:Wow by Golddess · · Score: 1

      Probably about 67F as of this post.

      (Weather.com wouldn't give a result for Hell, MI, but it's only 3 miles from Pinckney, MI.)

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    18. Re:Wow by HungryHobo · · Score: 1

      Most of them are probably not amoral sociopaths in real life but I think John Gabriel's "Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory" explains it neatly.

      http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/3/19/

    19. Re:Wow by Man+Eating+Duck · · Score: 1

      The weather in Hell is actuallyquite nice for the time being.
      Give it a couple of months, and it'll freeze over (again).

      --
      Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
    20. Re:Wow by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      I prefer the climate in this version of Hell. I got married near here. The running joke is that I went through Hell to get married.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    21. Re:Wow by jonadab · · Score: 1

      You forgot Rakudo Star. Until a few weeks ago, an actual complete, convenient, and usable release of Perl6 was not generally expected until several YEARS after the release of DNF.

      Now we're just waiting for Emacs to ship with reasonable key bindings (like, ctrl-x and ctrl-c and ctrl-v for clipboard operations, and ctrl-a for select all) by default out of the box. That, and the seven-year Middle-East peace treaty that allows the third temple to be built.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    22. Re:Wow by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > while they might be mostly rude, crude, and immature, they're not -evil-.

      They're typically not just rude, crude, and immature but also selfish and frequently vindictive. Perhaps that's not evil in the most extreme James Bond (or comic book) "Ve are goink to build a giant doomsday device in space to destroy the population of the entire planet, Bwa-hahaha-ha" sense, but it's not what I'd exactly call "made of pure righteousness" either.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    23. Re:Wow by jonadab · · Score: 1

      Interesting spin, but it's just that: spin.

      As for the attacks on Scientology supposedly proving goodness because anything that attacks evil must be good, meh. I certainly have no great admiration for Scientology, but attacking people isn't a good thing to do. The ancient Assyrians were basically distilled evil in human form, the most infamously cruel society ever to grace the planet, and Nebuchadnezzar attacked them, so he must be good, right? In fact, he was a pretty evil guy on the whole. He threatened to chop large segments of society into small pieces whenever somebody couldn't deliver on one of his projects as fast as he liked. He did behead people on a regular basis, without checking too closely to see whether they'd actually done anything wrong. That's not very smurfy.

      Evil is evil, even if the other guy is pretty bad too and, indeed, even if the other guy is worse. When misguided Christians (and I use the term loosely here) get together and attack an evil organization (like, say, a facility dedicated to killing children), the entire world calls them hypocrites at best, and usually rather worse -- and rightly so. Attacking and harming people is wrong. Even if what *they're* doing is wrong too, attacking them is still bad.

      (By "attack" here, I'm not talking about polemics. Telling people they're wrong is protected speech in this country, and sometimes it's absolutely what they need to hear, even if they don't think so. And yes, people are sometimes a little more frank and tactless than would be strictly necessary, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about actual attacks.)

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  13. ummm.... by Anarchduke · · Score: 1

    well, it evens out, the anonymous collective can't be dicks all the time

    --
    who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
    1. Re:ummm.... by BluBrick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What amazes me is that so many of them can manage to not be dicks at the same time! It's almost like they have a choice to act in a douche-ey manner or not - you know, kind of like free will.

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
    2. Re:ummm.... by jack2000 · · Score: 1

      Carefully now, this is crazy talk.

    3. Re:ummm.... by jaggeh · · Score: 1

      Hivemind....

      --
      I would give everything i own for a little bit more.
  14. Thanks from Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    While WWII might indeed evoke fairly bad memories in those who were actually there, Happy Birthday, and Thank You mr. Lashua.

    I live in Italy and if it wasn't for people like you I'd probably speak German or Russian now, and concepts like individuality, freedom of speech, personal rights might be alien or completely twisted in my mind/society.

    1. Re:Thanks from Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, you wouldn't have any problems with the mafia anymore.

    2. Re:Thanks from Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US/UK Won. And now you speak English.

      Does it really make a difference in the long run?

    3. Re:Thanks from Italy by RichiH · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > I live in Italy and if it wasn't for people like you I'd probably speak German or Russian now, and concepts like individuality, freedom of speech, personal rights might be alien or completely twisted in my mind/society.

      While I agree with what you say, it seems odd that someone from Berlousconi-land would _speculate_ about how "concepts like freedom of speech, personal rights might be alien or completely twisted in my society."

      Note that I removed "individuality" and "my mind" from the above. I know several Italians who are very nice people. But a country that elects the likes of Berlousconi has deeply rooted problems.

    4. Re:Thanks from Italy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > But a country that elects the likes of Berlousconi has deeply rooted problems.

      The deeply rooted problem being Berlusconi himself

    5. Re:Thanks from Italy by maxwell+demon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      > But a country that elects the likes of Berlousconi has deeply rooted problems.

      The deeply rooted problem being Berlusconi himself

      How did he get rooted? Did he listen to a Sony CD?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    6. Re:Thanks from Italy by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > But a country that elects the likes of Berlousconi has deeply rooted problems.

      Name a country that doesn't.

      (Just saying. I actually don't know much about Berlousconi in particular, perhaps because the finer points of Italian politics are not my primary area of study right now.)

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    7. Re:Thanks from Italy by RichiH · · Score: 1

      > Name a country that doesn't.

      I am not saying there is any perfect country. But voting him into power repeatedly shows a stunning lack of intelligence and insight. Similar to, if not quite as stupid, as voting for Bush.

    8. Re:Thanks from Italy by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > Similar to, if not quite as stupid, as voting for Bush.

      Oh. In other words you just disagree with his politics and like to overstate things.

      It is my considered opinion that Bush, while not great, was nonetheless a significantly better President than his successor. This is particularly true of the most recent Bush, who, although he did stubbornly insist on certain things (particularly with regard to the military undertaking in the Middle East, which was unpopular and arguably unnecessary), notably *didn't* try to out-stupid all the boneheaded economic moves of every other major world leader in history combined. Bush did not, for instance, try to restore faith in the economy by deliberately expanding the already quite large federal deficit to previously unimagined levels, with nothing whatsoever to show for it, watch the effort backfire (as every rational person predicted it would do), and conclude that somehow he just didn't do _enough_ completely insane deficit spending and even more of that was just what the doctor ordered.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    9. Re:Thanks from Italy by RichiH · · Score: 1

      > In other words you just disagree with his politics

      Obviously I disagree with his politics, otherwise I would not have made the statement above.
      I also disagree that American pancakes are better than European ones. Yet, I would not call anyone stupid for preferring American ones.

      > and like to overstate things.

      Hyperbole can be useful to make a point. In this case, I understated things.

      It is extremely unlikely that we will agree on anything, that being said, I will give it a try. I might or might not answer to whatever replies I get as I don't like dragging out arguments on the Internet. The reasons should be obvious.

      > It is my considered opinion that Bush, while not great, was nonetheless a significantly better President than his successor.

      It is my considered opinion that Bush did more to destabilize the world at large than any other single person managed to do in the last 50 years. More, but not everything, below.

      > the military undertaking in the Middle East, which was unpopular and arguably unnecessary

      The war in Afghanistan has had quite a few positive results for the people over there. A lot more worse, though.
      Partially, this is due to Afghanistan being insanely hard to fight in. But then, Bush knew that before.
      The fact that he disregarded build-up efforts and preferred more aggression is a common theme. It has failed before, failed this time, will fail again.

      Of course, the decision to pull out of Afghanistan way too early was what made things go truly downhill.

      Which brings us to Iraq. Obviously, Bush is not personally at fault for causing Iran's & Iraq's state, but Rumsfeld and Cheney were. Thankfully, Bush learned from that and did not heed their advice. Oh, wait...

      Anyway, it has been painfully obvious that the "proof" of Iraq's WoDM has been fabricated even before they ever attacked. For some value of attack. Iraq's army was so broken down that the max speed of the slowest vehicles of the US army slowed the advance. Not, like, an army or anything.

      If Bush as commander-in-chief messed up Afghanistan, he outdid himself in Iraq. No humanitarian help whatsoever, letting gangs pillage everywhere and not intervening and generally pissing in the face of a whole nation and population is the best way to make sure the insurgents and radicals get a lot of influx. I will never forget the pictures of the national museum of Iraq being raided by unarmed people while a few dozen tanks plus soldiers watch; doing nothing. The people of Iraq will not forget them, either.

      > notably *didn't* try to out-stupid all the boneheaded economic moves of every other major world leader in history combined

      Q: What is the difference between this crisis in a substantial sector of the world's society and the ones before?
      A: This time, the world did not plummet into a world-wide regression.

      I am not saying the gobs of money were the only mitigating factor. China and their stable (and debt-free!) economy helped a lot. So did other factors.

      I do agree that the personal liability Obama introduced does not go far enough, though. But then, Bush would never ever have done anything to hurt his friend in big money.

      Gee, a lot of text.

      A few more points:

      * Barring legastenics, anyone who is not intelligent/educated/non-drug-destroyed enough to read, write and generally communicate on at least an average level can not ever be fit to lead anything important.
      * Bush has had a consistent track record of failure. Everything he ever touched went downhill.
      * Guantanamo Bay, deliberate and coordinated torture, other human rights violations. People knew this shit when they elected him for the second term.

      As an aside, it's fascinating that Obama is a Muslim, not an American, Satan himself and all other kinds of things. Yet, no one really cared that the Bush family's single most largest source of income is the joint venture with a certain Bin Laden clan. Oups.

      So, to summarize: I, literally, ca

  15. Re:But tomorrow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually he choked the guy to death and broke his clavical, not his neck. Yeah I GTFA :)

    Regardless a 70 year old choking out a 20 year old is pretty impressive. Moreso when the rest of the seniors were fighting off the other 2 assailants who apparently had knives and a gun between them. Badass.

  16. Now keep doing it. by strredwolf · · Score: 1

    The power of 4chan and Anonymous is tremendous. It must be held carefully. This is one good example of how to put this power for good instead of evil.

    --

    --
    # Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
    $Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
    1. Re:Now keep doing it. by Xtifr · · Score: 1

      Actually, they frequently use their power for good. It's just that their power is mainly based on the practical application of the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory (warning, TVTropes link, may suck you in for hours), combined with semi-directed flash-mob behavior. So normally their version of good is being fuckwads to people who deserve it. This is a rare case of them not being fuckwads at all, while still being a flash-mob.

      It is cool that they managed to pull this one off.

    2. Re:Now keep doing it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is one good example of how to put this power for good instead of evil.

      Nobody shall celebrate his birthday alone, EVER AGAIN!

      Seriously, though. Alot of the 4chan crowd are "white knights" who feel misunderstood and lonely.

      This guy sortof connected with the future projection 4chan has for themselves and did something awesome and hearthwarming, but not really "using power for good instead of evil".

      I agree 4chan is a channel where once they set a collective goal, they can achieve alot. But their attentionspan and issues they take at heart are often not worldchanging.

  17. Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As an oldfag over at 4chan, let me tell you this:

    Anonymous does whatever he fucking feels like, whether it is sending an old man birthday cards or bullying a child. There is no rhyme or reason to it because Anonymous is a disorganized swarm made up of people of all ages and cultures. "Anonymous" is a constantly rotating, relatively small sample of a large, global population.

    Trying to predict Anonymous is pointless. There is no command structure, no ultimate goal. Most of the activities partaken that affect the outside world start as pet projects of individuals and gain traction through spamming and samefagging (because everyone posts anonymously, it is easy to pretend to be multiple people to take advantage of the group mentality there).

    This particular incident was started by someone close to the man in question and spammed endlessly over the course of several days leading up to the event. It was a shameless abuse of /b/ as his personal army, but it succeeded because it was relatively novel and interesting.

    1. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      And like most "oldfags", you've managed to put a negative slant on a good thing by making a "get off my lawn!" kind of statement. Congrats

    2. Re:Ugh. by dreamchaser · · Score: 1, Insightful

      How is it a 'shameless' abuse to do something nice for an old veteran? Hint: it's not.

      Comments like yours make me almost ashamed to be an 'old' geek. I would tell you to grow the fuck up but apparantly that ship already sailed.

    3. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What?

      I'm glad they made an old man happy. Really, it's sweet.

      I'm just trying to portray what happened more accurately, rather than letting the typical ignorant mainstream media bullshit stand. I have yet to see a news piece on an online community fail to misrepresent reality. Cripes, get over yourself.

    4. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      its a shameless abuse to use a website to push for your own individual agenda.

      everything the anonymous does is a shameless abuse of something.

    5. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would tell you to grow the fuck up but apparantly that ship already sailed.

      Oh yeah, real mature. Hypocrite.
       
      /b/ has an unwritten policy of not being the personal army of anybody, especially not internal activists. So-called "invasions" of other sites are against the official rules, but more than that, we generally don't like being manipulated. The guy who was spamming us with requests for cards for this man was violating that policy with blatant samefag posts. He even admitted it. Thus, "shameless abuse". That's all. Besides, as I said in another response, I'm personally all in favor of this event.

      Now kindly shut your ignorant mouth, as you've demonstrated you haven't wasted enough of your time there to know what you're talking about. Lucky bastard.

    6. Re:Ugh. by justinlee37 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Oh god shut the fuck up. He's right, Anonymous is unpredictable. What the hell part of his post made you think that he gives a fuck what Anonymous does, or that he was in the least bit annoyed? He is annoyed with YOU morons who seem to think that Anonymous is some sort of "organization." It isn't, it's just a flash mob.

      "Shameless abuse of /b/ as his personal army" is a reference to a meme on 4chan. People come to the board with requests often, like "harass this guy because I don't like him" and so on. The standard response to these requests (if they don't sound like fun) is to say "/b/ is not your personal army."

      Now kindly pull the stick out of your ass.

    7. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rules 1 and 2! *facepalm*

    8. Re:Ugh. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      There is no rhyme or reason to it because Anonymous is a disorganized swarm made up of people of all ages and cultures.

      Fail. There is a rhyme and a reason, you just don't seem to understand the Anonymous collective or what drives it :-)

    9. Re:Ugh. by LordLucless · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you were an investment banker, and used your trusted position to deposit a ton of money in his account, it would be a shameless abuse of your authority. What you are doing is less relevant than how in this case.

      That said, saying that a /b/ account comes with any level of trust or authority is laughable in itself.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    10. Re:Ugh. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      How is it a 'shameless' abuse to do something nice for an old veteran? Hint: it's not.

      It's not nice in the same way robbing a bank to buy him a really nice present isn't. Endless spamming and abuse of a forum, even of such a craptastic place as /b/ is not good behavior and it hardly seems the means justify the ends to give a 90 year old birthday greetings. It might be a fun thing to do once, but I wouldn't want to visit a board where it has caught on. Then again, I don't like hanging out at /b/ anyway so what do I know...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    11. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And get off my Goddamn lawn.

    12. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read harder. He's saying spamming and samefagging are the abuse.

    13. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Rules 1 and 2 have long since expired. 4chan has been mentioned in the mainstream media on a monthly basis for well over a year, now. Anybody curious enough to ask about 4chan or practically any of it's memes can easily learn all about it from Google.

      The battle against newfag cancer was lost before it began. Really, it has been a constant since Day 1 (/b/ was never good, etc). It is only the newfags, trying to catch up on memes, who protest. The oldfags point this out at every opportunity, which is in turn pointed out by the metafags.

    14. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      disregard that i suck cocks

    15. Re:Ugh. by DriedClexler · · Score: 1

      Jaron Lanier, is that you?

      --
      Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
    16. Re:Ugh. by linzeal · · Score: 1

      They will use all this goodwill to doing something horrible, you watch.

    17. Re:Ugh. by Ryunosuke · · Score: 1

      Wow, trolling slashdot is easier than I thought. Look at you guys rising to him.

    18. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      moralfag

    19. Re:Ugh. by religious+freak · · Score: 1

      I would just like to know out of curiosity... what fucking language are you guys speaking? Is there a translator in this house? I don't like kitty porn, headless corpses or flamewars, therefore I have zero desire to even go to 4chan... but... my curiosity at your odd language may make me break down and... eh, no it won't...

      But if someone wants to translate, I'll read it :-)

      --
      If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    20. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pissing in an ocean of piss.

    21. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right. The internet is SERIOUS business.

    22. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous is not amused

    23. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      u mad?

    24. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lurk moar newfag

    25. Re:Ugh. by kyrio · · Score: 0

      You might not like kitty porn but I have a feeling you love kiddie porn.

    26. Re:Ugh. by Nyder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As an oldfag over at 4chan, let me tell you this:

      Anonymous does whatever he fucking feels like, whether it is sending an old man birthday cards or bullying a child. There is no rhyme or reason to it because Anonymous is a disorganized swarm made up of people of all ages and cultures. "Anonymous" is a constantly rotating, relatively small sample of a large, global population.

      Trying to predict Anonymous is pointless. There is no command structure, no ultimate goal. Most of the activities partaken that affect the outside world start as pet projects of individuals and gain traction through spamming and samefagging (because everyone posts anonymously, it is easy to pretend to be multiple people to take advantage of the group mentality there).

      This particular incident was started by someone close to the man in question and spammed endlessly over the course of several days leading up to the event. It was a shameless abuse of /b/ as his personal army, but it succeeded because it was relatively novel and interesting.

      As someone who's been on the internet longer then any of you old or new fags, let me tell you this.

      Get off my lawn.

      Swear to god, you oldfags, newfags, are a bunch of little girls squabbling in a public message board. Yes, your the big fag, seeing as you can claim your old fag and preach how you, i mean, 4chan isn't this and that, and does what it wants, and no one tells it to do anything because it's not your personal army. yet, somehow, it does do things, because someone got creative on how to spam it in 4chan.

      And notice how I'm not posting anonymous? unlike you, i'm not scared to stand behind what I say, right or wrong, i said it.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    27. Re:Ugh. by DurendalMac · · Score: 1

      /b/ was never good.

      As someone who has spend a good deal of time on 4chan (and has since sworn it off), I was amazed by this. Yes, Anon does whatever the hell they feel like, but I don't ever remember them doing something truly positive with no malicious intent. This blows my mind. Even Chanology had plenty of malicious intent. Not that it wasn't warranted against Scientology, but they initially did it for the lulz and moralfags/newfags hijacked it after a while. Sometimes they rightfully go e-vigilante on someone (Dusty springs to mind), but again, they do it with the intent of getting someone fucked over.

      Summerfags or not, this is nothing short of a goddamned miracle.

    28. Re:Ugh. by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 1

      It always is slighly funny when a little bit of /b/ steps onto another site without trying to destroy it XD

    29. Re:Ugh. by wampus · · Score: 1

      I think it's probably the assburgers.

    30. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    31. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you've spent any time browsing /b/ you would've noticed that they're not so much "the assholes of the internet" as they are a bunch of teenage boys masturbating to porn, spamming gore pictures (because they think it's somehow "new" to the internet) and generally behaving like annoying teenage boys.

      Also, there's the whole thing where the average "/b/tard" seems to seriously think that this pack of teenage boys is somehow the "hacking" elite of the internet even though they routinely have problems with large scores of /b/tards willingly downloading and running scripts that DDoS 4chan.

    32. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Disregard that, I suck cocks!

      Goodbye.

    33. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous is amused

    34. Re:Ugh. by niks42 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Shouldn't that be 'pull the sharpie out of your ass?'

    35. Re:Ugh. by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      Anon is not amused at being amused at not being amused, now GTFO of my /b/.

    36. Re:Ugh. by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      rules came from gaia you fucking summerfag POS. Got nothing to do with /b/

    37. Re:Ugh. by RichiH · · Score: 1

      > It was a shameless abuse of /b/ as his personal army, but it succeeded because it was relatively novel and interesting.

      Interesting. The angle that someone trying to replicate the results would end up with _very_ different results makes sense and is somewhat unsettling, especially as that negative reaction could be abused. 4chan's equivalent of bounce spam, so to speak.

    38. Re:Ugh. by RichiH · · Score: 1

      Correct.

      The problem here is that someone might abuse exactly this mechanism to create a backlash with a fake request.

    39. Re:Ugh. by RichiH · · Score: 1

      Do they have actual accounts? I have to admit that I am not all that familiar with the various chans, but I thought it was all anonymous?

    40. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His post title of "Ugh" kind of gives away his opinion. As a fellow oldfag I reacted pretty much the same way: it's a little dismaying, but at least it was novel and interesting. These days I'll take anything interesting happening on /b/ as a positive sign, so that makes me approve, overall. It's still not really something I want mentioned on the news.

    41. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can purchase a gold account, which is required to view some of the images.

    42. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rules 1 and 2!

      newfag

    43. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous is anonymous

    44. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say this like anyone gives a damn whether or not you stand behind what you say.

    45. Re:Ugh. by Megane · · Score: 1

      This certainly gives a new dimension to the concept of "personal army". What exactly, I'm not sure, but something.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    46. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      haters gonna hate

    47. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you mean "you're" not "your".

    48. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who's been on the internet longer then any of you old or new fags, let me tell you this.

      Yeah, yeah, your e-penis is bigger than the gp's because you were sooner on the internet (how the hell do you know that ?)

      Swear to god, you oldfags, newfags, are a bunch of little girls squabbling in a public message board.

      Right, because that happens only on 4chan and nowhere else

      And notice how I'm not posting anonymous? unlike you, i'm not scared to stand behind what I say, right or wrong, i said it.

      And notice how i'm posting anonymously. Not because i'am scared, but because we just squabbling in a public message board - it's not important, you dont' have to make such a big deal out of it, also check http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Usi :)

    49. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      inb4 newfag. http://bash.org/?5775

    50. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet you're doing the exact same thing, retard. Just read your own post and explain it to yourself really because it seems you've missed it.

    51. Re:Ugh. by vertinox · · Score: 2, Funny

      And notice how I'm not posting anonymous? unlike you, i'm not scared to stand behind what I say, right or wrong, i said it.

      Unless you happen to be the same guy posting a rebuttal to his own anon comment?

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    52. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +5 troll. My compliments, /b/rother!

    53. Re:Ugh. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Why was parent upmodded? GP described 4chan /b/ quite accurately, and parent just seems to have an axe to grind with 4chan-- its not insightful to call someone a "fag" (gp is using an actual 4chan term with an actual meaning; parent just just being immature). Seriously, has parent ever been to 4chan, or do you even know how long GP has been on the internet?

      Sounds to me like youre just firing flames off for no particular reason, and have no understanding of how 4chan actually works.

    54. Re:Ugh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4chan is full of brats. I hate each and every one of you little virgin pukes.

    55. Re:Ugh. by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      Why are you generalizing? "They" didn't do anything for any specific reason. Different people had different reasons.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    56. Re:Ugh. by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      I think the point was that someone from 4chan who calls himself "old" or claims to be a veteran, is really just a newbie. 4chan is a pretty recent thing in internet time.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    57. Re:Ugh. by religious+freak · · Score: 1

      /me tips hat

      lol - you caught me!

      (Damn my shit sense of spelling words which are homonyms...)

      --
      If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    58. Re:Ugh. by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > How is it a 'shameless' abuse to do something nice for an old veteran?

      Bear in mind, the person who wrote that sentence basically admitted to hanging out on /b/ (the most infamous section of 4chan) quite a bit over a fairly protracted amount of time (relatively speaking). *Obviously* his moral compass is going deviate somewhat from traditional values.

      And technically, it is "abuse" in the literal sense -- using something for other than its intended or conventional purpose. I don't think /b/ was intended to be used, and I *know* it isn't conventionally used, to organize nice birthday parties for veterans. As for "shameless", anybody who has an ounce of shame wouldn't be hanging out on /b/ in the first place, so.

      Still, the fact that he thought to string together those two words ("shameless abuse") says a lot about how he tends to think (which is typical of 4chan users if the other things they've been known to perpetrate are any indication).

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    59. Re:Ugh. by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > As someone who's been on the internet longer then any of you old or new fags

      Is that a gopher user I sense?

      > And notice how I'm not posting anonymous? unlike you,
      > i'm not scared to stand behind what I say

      Oh, usenet. Right.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    60. Re:Ugh. by BrianKid · · Score: 1

      As a long time user of the internet, and obviously someone much less ignorant than you, might I just say this: "Shut the fuck up." Seriously. People like you ARE the newfags you idiot. You're not "cool" or "badass" because you have a log in. My grandmother has one. Keep your angry-because-I-was-violated-by-daddy-as-a-child ass off the internet.

    61. Re:Ugh. by kyrio · · Score: 1

      They are two very different sounding and spelling words and therefore not homonyms.

  18. Another WWII Vet just celebrated his 90th by pickens · · Score: 3, Interesting

    His name is Jack Vaughn.

    He was a prize fighter, a diplomat, and the second Director of the Peace Corps.

    Read a very interesting story about his life at:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Vaughn

    Happy Birthday, Jack, from RPCVs around the world.

    1. Re:Another WWII Vet just celebrated his 90th by rrossman2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My grandfather is also damn close to 90. Joined the military at age 16 (obviously lied about it), went into the air corps and passed, even with getting sick for the first year or so, because his flying was so good.. learned on bi-planes at that. Went on to fly B-17s in WWII over Europe, was involved in other conflicts, and retired as a Colonel in the Air Force working in the Pentagon. Just wanted to throw that one out there too :)

    2. Re:Another WWII Vet just celebrated his 90th by hitmark · · Score: 1

      Given the aircrew turnarounds on those B-17's, your grandfather was one lucky man.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    3. Re:Another WWII Vet just celebrated his 90th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool story bro!

  19. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Unless GP is German. Or Japanese. Or Italian. Or.... well you get the idea.

  20. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Funny

    You fucking douchebag.

    Hey, c'mon, be nice. Before saying something that might be hurtful, first ask yourself - WWFD*?

    *What Would 4chan Do?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  21. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This isn't going to be popular to point out, but citizens of each of the countries you mentioned has more freedom of speech and other rights as a direct result of people like William Lashua and the US military.

    --
    Qxe4
  22. Reddit... ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I thought this started out as a post on Reddit - not 4chan. But I could be wrong and certainly don't want to piss off 4chan.

    1. Re:Reddit... ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, you're right. His grandson left a thank-you thread.
      You can trace the threads back a few days, Reddit did a LOT more than 4chan in regards to being there IRL, and sending nice gifts. I'd bet it was quite a tiny, minuscule fraction of anon who did anything besides posting in /b/ claiming they were going to do something.

    2. Re:Reddit... ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whatever makes you feel better, bro.

    3. Re:Reddit... ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But isn't that how 4chan works? Claim everything on the Internet started with them, then make some weird posts on Slashdot about new fags and how anonymous isn't a person and whatever the fuck else?

    4. Re:Reddit... ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is. With no way to track old threads (that don't get archived) on 4chan you'll just have to take my word it was there first. Reddit hopped on the bandwagon.

    5. Re:Reddit... ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but if you put that in relative terms, a small miniscule fraction of "Anon" doing a good thing is like all religions coming together for a day to enjoy a nice picnic.

  23. Anon = god? Maybe. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    As shocking as it is it should prove something. Anon only attacks those who deserve it or when public ridicule is in order. No one could see any reason to make fun of this ederly hero who, at first, appeared to be as if he wasn't going to have many friends or family attend the party...and when many anon wanted to attack him in a negative away, anon wasn't going to have it. Anon is not a horrible entity. Anon is more like the little voice in side everyone's head that they usually silence...and as has been proven in the past...the power of many anon can be used for evil...or on the occasional case, used for good. Didn't anon help identify the girl who was throwing puppies in to the river? Anon is great, anon is good. Anon is everything and nothing at the same time. Is anon god? Sometimes it's vengeful, sometimes it's good. Who's to say? Just don't piss anon off.

    1. Re:Anon = god? Maybe. by DurendalMac · · Score: 2

      Anon only attacks those who deserve it or when public ridicule is in order.

      You've never been on 4chan, have you? They most certainly HAVE gone after people that didn't deserve it.

    2. Re:Anon = god? Maybe. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who are you to judge? hail allahu akbar hail anon!

    3. Re:Anon = god? Maybe. by DurendalMac · · Score: 1

      Saying that it's "for the lulz" does not make a person deserve it.

  24. A drop of honey in a gallon of battery acid by goodmanj · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And now, every time someone rightly says that 4chan is nothing but a batch of juvenile asshats, they'll trot out this one story as a counterexample.

    1. Re:A drop of honey in a gallon of battery acid by Abstrackt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And now, every time someone rightly says that 4chan is nothing but a batch of juvenile asshats, they'll trot out this one story as a counterexample.

      Well, this one and the ones where they tracked down animal abusers from Youtube videos. Further reading if you're interested.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    2. Re:A drop of honey in a gallon of battery acid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to point out that was after a year of featuring cats getting their heads smashed in by someone stepping on them.

    3. Re:A drop of honey in a gallon of battery acid by jack2000 · · Score: 1

      Because all of 4chan is just /b/ right? Get off my fucking lawn.

    4. Re:A drop of honey in a gallon of battery acid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can we also talk about how they were the starting point of quite a few protests against scientology?

    5. Re:A drop of honey in a gallon of battery acid by luther349 · · Score: 1

      4chan has done stuff like this in the past. they actively track down animal abusers like the chick who tossed a puppy in a river and uploaded it to you tube. its just when they flame the crap out of someone they make it to headlines and the news. so there nice acts are largely unknown other then to other 4chan members. just like any media people get. imagine if they did report all of 4chans nice acts as well as the crazy shit they do i don't think we would ever not heave a story.

    6. Re:A drop of honey in a gallon of battery acid by DurendalMac · · Score: 2, Informative

      One counterexample. Just about everything else Anon has done says otherwise. Someone mentioned animal abusers, such as Dusty. This is while people post Zippocat, a series of images of a cat getting doused in lighter fluid and torched. Chanology started out as lulz and evolved further into the bigger protests, but you can bet that their primary motivation on that one wasn't to get the bad guys.

    7. Re:A drop of honey in a gallon of battery acid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      teaching that 11yr old cunt not to be a whore on the internet was for her own good
      dontcha think?

    8. Re:A drop of honey in a gallon of battery acid by N1AK · · Score: 0, Troll

      4chan is nothing but a batch of juvenile asshats, they'll trot out this one story as a counterexample.

      Well, this one and the ones where they tracked down animal abusers from Youtube videos.

      And ruined the peoples lives because they get the same perverse pleasure out of making other beings suffer as their target. 4chan is too often just a circle-jerk of cowards using its anonymity to engage in the harassment of people for amusement.

  25. Doesnt seem odd to me. by pyster · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Think about it... Have they attacked anyone who hasnt deserved it? Scientology, a loud mouth little girl, an animal abuser... They love kittens... and obviously people who risked their lives fighting the scourges who threatened freedom. I look forward to seeing what battles they wage in the future.

    1. Re:Doesnt seem odd to me. by SpeZek · · Score: 1

      Think about it... Have they attacked anyone who hasnt deserved it?

      LOL

      In b4 habbo

    2. Re:Doesnt seem odd to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's not forget the families of suicide victims, "camwhores" who broadcast their faces on the Internet and are therefore in contrast to the anonymous mindset, anyone who speaks out against bullying or cussing, people who are dumb enough to type their social network passwords into a phishing scam, anyone who calls them out, any of their own people who accidentally break anonymity and spill too much information about themselves, and of course just anyone who looks like they may be fun to fuck with.

      Most of 4chan's battles are fought against innocent people who react badly to trolling.

    3. Re:Doesnt seem odd to me. by kyrio · · Score: 1

      If you can't take online trolling then GTFO the Internet. It's the IRL trolling against innocent people that is disgusting behavior.
      Keep the needless trolling online only.

    4. Re:Doesnt seem odd to me. by DurendalMac · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Christ, you've never been to /b/, have you? They have. Many, MANY times. They rarely do anything because they feel like it's the right thing to do. They occasionally get a sense of righteous fury (tracking down animal abusers while they post images of animal abuse to drive the newfags out), but they've done plenty to people that didn't deserve it. The emailing of fatality accident photos to family members of the deceased springs to mind. I've seen them attack Facebook memorial pages and raid people just because one post said that they should.

      Hang out on /b/ more often and you'll find that while Anonymous isn't just some big, homogenous group, they do have some pretty collective tendencies.

  26. Well Anonymous is Legion, after all... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe they just got confuse.

  27. Pictures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The event happened yesterday, there are pictures from it. You should have included a link to them: http://imgur.com/a/3Jc87/MP8VI

    1. Re:Pictures by arielCo · · Score: 1

      Does anyone recognize the tattoo?

      This guy had the distinct luxury of knowing that he was fighting the good fight to stop Crazy Adolph, even if he didn't know all the horror he was up to. He's also something of an internet hero; these guys went to bloody WAR and now we're able to troll/shock/godwin to our gallbladder's content ;)

      --
      This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
  28. uhm... by neuro88 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So like... what? Has 4chan become the Internet Love Machine now?

  29. Puppy and veterans by stimpleton · · Score: 1

    Some 4channers may have their tails between their legs, or wishing to bolster the reputation of the board as a whole.

    While references are difficult given the nature of the 4chan board structure, my understanding is that from the recent "Puppy Thrower" video(the east european girl, not the US soldier of some time ago), several innocent people were outed wrongly, including a 13 yo german girl.

    The dynamics from this sort of thing, would be similar to a political party rift. You get those that need to, in genuine good concience, act outside the party norm. I see this incident as related, I could be wrong.

    --

    In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
    1. Re:Puppy and veterans by horza · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah you're wrong. If you are looking any deeper than "because they can" then you are over-analysing.

      Phillip.

  30. Oorah for the vets by alphatel · · Score: 1

    Question is, does he understand what just happened?

    --
    When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
    1. Re:Oorah for the vets by DamienRBlack · · Score: 1

      Your age discrimination is showing. You might want to tuck it back in.

  31. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by gmhowell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Truth is rarely popular.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  32. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by pyster · · Score: 1

    Douche bag is a douche.

  33. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol why u mad tho?

  34. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by WitnessForTheOffense · · Score: 2, Funny

    The truth is uncouth when scrawled on the wall of a bathroom stall or a telephone booth.

  35. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by jamesh · · Score: 5, Funny

    He risked his life for your right to be an asshole.

    And remember, a right not exercised is a right lost!

  36. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

    *What Would 4chan Do?

    You know, those goofy fucks over at 4chan have always been pretty decent to me. Last year, they pitched in and bought me a nice box cake for my birthday.

    They made me sign up for some weird sessions, though, where I have to hold these two tin cans connected by wire to a little meter. Supposedly it's going to get rid of some bad feelings or something from my brainpan. I didn't understand the mumbo jumbo because I'd drunk half-a-box of burgundy before going to the first session.

    At least they said they were from 4chan.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  37. Waiting for Fox News... by Nrrqshrr · · Score: 0

    So How will Fox News report this? The terrorists of the internetdoing good things? Am curious.

    1. Re:Waiting for Fox News... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously? Go fuck yourself. Where do people like you come from?

      On a side note: Happy birthday Bill! Thanks for all your dedication that picks like Nrrgshrr don't understand.

  38. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What Would 4chan Do?

    Hack their computer and set the wallpaper to Goatse?

    Direct the 4chan Party Van to their driveway?

    Send them to North Korea?

    Call their employer masquerading as a young prostitute?

    Sign them up for every piece of junk mail in existence?

    There's so many answers, better question would be, WWFD...What Wouldn't 4chan Do?

  39. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by mopower70 · · Score: 0, Troll

    I don't know how old you are, but I currently have less freedom of speech and other rights than I did 30 years ago. And that's mostly on account of people born to William Lashua's generation and their misuse of the US military.

  40. No by justinlee37 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    4chan is just an Internet Amusement Machine. Anonymous does whatever amuses it.

    Sometimes that involves posting pictures of dead cats or trolling 11-year old internet girls who show their boobs on tinychat (see Jessica Slaughter), sometimes that involves wishing an old man a happy birthday or organizing anti-Scientology protests.

    I have personally seen Anonymous engage in some unusual behavior. For example, someone recently was asking Anonymous on /b/ to troll a high school kid because his Mom had just died and he was homosexual. Anonymous decided that would be a dick thing to do and decided that it would be more fun to troll the person making the request. Anonymous immediately set about trying ascertain the identity of the troll so that they could harass him.

    Anonymous is unpredictable. There is no central organization and there are no rules. Anonymous just does whatever it thinks might be fun at the moment.

    1. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have personally seen Anonymous engage in some unusual behavior. For example, someone recently was asking Anonymous on /b/ to troll a high school kid because his Mom had just died and he was homosexual. Anonymous decided that would be a dick thing to do and decided that it would be more fun to troll the person making the request. Anonymous immediately set about trying ascertain the identity of the troll so that they could harass him.

      That's actually not at all unusual behavior, it was in fact entirely predictable if you simply had a greater understanding of Anonymous' habits. NYPA: not your personal army. As much as Anonymous loves teh lulz, epic win and great justice, multiply that emotion by 100 million times to understand the amount of hate they would have for someone stupid enough to make such a request.

  41. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... NOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd say it was the subsequent generation, and/or the military's involvement that diminished our rights.
    We of course, let them too.

  42. Re:But tomorrow... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

    need a link, need an article. EPIC.

    --
    "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  43. The end of days... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    When even the high numbered slashdotters get laid - now that's when I drag the lawnchair out to a primary target and slather on the 3 million sunblock...

  44. Not as unlikely as you think. by flimflammer · · Score: 3, Informative

    I know a most of the news stories that mention 4chan are generally in the negative, but people in that community do tend to do a lot of good, and much of it is rarely publicized. People attribute Anonymous to this large collection of like-minded individuals doing whatever they please but it's really couldn't be further from the truth. "Anonymous" is a loose many-minded collection of individuals who don't agree with each other. You'll get those trying to harass others and many stepping in to stop it, and you'll get those trying to do good and many stepping in trying to stop it.

    1. Re:Not as unlikely as you think. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4chan users are definitely not a like-minded, coherent group. There's just tons of people on 4chan, some out of very many ideas spark interest, and then part of the user base is off to realize whatever, be it drawing some text on a picture or bringing down a sect. 4chan is ad-hoc and not coherent. If you want places where people do stuff in an orchestrated fashion, that's more like, something aweful and other message boards.
       

    2. Re:Not as unlikely as you think. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      White knight detected

  45. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think you'll find pretty much all of Europe appreciates the US war effort, we consider them liberators. The countries of the Axis generally consider their part in WWII a dark chapter of their history. But some people bug me when they pretend the US valiantly and selflessly threw itself into battle for freedom and justice. The US only entered WWII after Pearl Harbor, it was forced into the war and it's all speculation what would have happened otherwise but it is far from certain the US would have come to our rescue. At the end of the war the allied forced rushed to take land just as much to not give it to the Soviet Union and communism as to liberate Europe. Certainly something we should be grateful for, but hardly selfless. Likewise when they speak of US losses, the US brought lots of military might that was crucial but it was Europeans doing most of the dying. Of course those people were dying for their country while the US forces were mostly dying for someone else's country, but it's also a bit like a person who lost his toes complaining to a guy who had to amputate both legs. But that beef is with all those that commentate in retrospect, full respect to each and every one of those who picked up a gun and went to fight for us. Each man has only one life and he put his on the line for us. A very happy 90th birthday to him.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  46. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    It's his fucking birthday.

  47. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by tqk · · Score: 1

    "Brought tears to me eyes."

    Seriously. HB, man.

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
  48. Re:Fuck 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I take it this is a cover-your-ass "No, officer, I've been documenting" it?

    Ask Pete Townsend how well that went.

  49. Re:But tomorrow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Followed your advice to Google it but couldn't find anything other than forum posts & blogs referencing it. However, your post here is already showing up on google.

  50. starlet pleads kombucha to probation violation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's got to be some of the most quick witted attorneying we've seen, even though it failed.

  51. Re:Fuck 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am not a lawyer, but that is a pretty terrible affirmative defense.

  52. Re:But tomorrow... by Cwix · · Score: 4, Informative

    Maybe this one.. but its old:

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,253959,00.html (Linking to Faux news feels so odd)

    --
    You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
  53. Re:Fuck 4chan by Anonymous+Showered · · Score: 1

    You show him! I've had enough of Cold Pizza as well!

  54. Huh? by archmcd · · Score: 1

    What TF is 4chan? Is this news?

    --
    I'm not an expert, but I play one on slashdot.
    1. Re:Huh? by ductonius · · Score: 2, Informative

      To paraphrase Spider Jerusalem:

      Imagine an underground nightclub full of perverts and freaks and people with sexual organs you didn't know existed. Imagine you're standing in that nightclub and the time comes to vote for what you're all going to do that night. You vote to watch television, and everyone else, as far as the eye can see, votes to rape you with switchblades. That's 4chan. You're welcome.

    2. Re:Huh? by Joebert · · Score: 1

      Not knowing what 4chan is and fucking up an acronym. You get bonus noob points for that post.

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    3. Re:Huh? by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      I VERY highly recommend you at least google 4chan before asking that question. It's like asking what goatse is. If you don't know, the rest of the world does and it's on google.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    4. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like to think of 4chan as like a flash mob. But instead of organizing a conga line outside of an Apple store, they arrange for 400 "adult" Craigslist ads to be posted using your cell phone number.

      It's a laser powered by the same people who, when they were kids, studied chemistry books for fun to figure out how to make explosives just for the hell of it. A coherent beam of malice with no obvious source or predictable direction.

  55. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by B1oodAnge1 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Well said.

    --
    RUGBYRUGBYRUGBY
  56. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by tqk · · Score: 1

    Perhaps he was like my now deceased grandfather who didn't care for an annual reminder of having been involved in the island hopping of the US at the tender age of 17 nor the glorification and magnification of violence as the answer to world problems.

    I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have enjoyed it either. War sucks for everyone involved.

    I'd still want to hug him to thank him for suffering through it. Didja ever think he might have found it exciting?

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
  57. WWII Vet defeats Anon Oldfag (was Re:Ugh ) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not nice in the same way robbing a bank to buy him a really nice present isn't.

    No, you're wrong. Robbing a bank is not expected behavior or the acceptable, average day at the bank.
    Being a dick, spamming, etc., are the acceptable average day at 4chan. You should know.

    And get off our lawn. It's not acceptable here.
    (snip)

    ...but I wouldn't want to visit a board where it has caught on.
    Then again, I don't like hanging out at /b/ anyway so what do I know...

    Then you really have no viable leg for propping your argument, and thus, you're guilty of violating Wheaton's Law.

  58. Re:Fuck 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Best of luck to you. When "5chan" springs up and they use it to shred every last vestige of your sad little already-broken life, you'll be able to rest knowing that what you did had no significance at all. Moral: You can have a war on a country, but not a war on ideology. War on drugs doesn't work. War on terror doesn't work. War on 4chan won't work.

  59. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This isn't going to be popular to point out, but surviving citizens of each of the countries you mentioned has more freedom of speech and other rights as a direct result of people like William Lashua and the US military.

    FTFY

  60. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by arkane1234 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's not get off-track on what's being talked about. The GP was talking about Pre-war vs post-war. We won't discuss any kind of rights adjustments and such that have happened separate from that. Just to clarify though, if you are American, you have more rights now than you did in 1945 (the last year of the war). If you need them pointed out, you reallly need to re-examine that era.

    --
    -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
  61. Re:So? by tqk · · Score: 1

    They're still a bunch of basement dwelling pedophiles and people who took V for Vendetta way, way too seriously.

    Guy Fawkes should've put more research into the plan. Dammnit.

    "... basement dwelling pedophiles ..."?!? Do you have issues?

    --
    "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
  62. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Joebert · · Score: 1, Troll

    Let's be honest, it's all Moses' fault.

    --
    Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
  63. Gatecrashers by Sc4Freak · · Score: 4, Informative

    It only seems nice until you realise that William J Lashua's family specifically asked that random strangers do NOT show up. It was an event reserved for family and friends, and the internets basically gatecrashed what was supposed to be an old man's birthday party.

    1. Re:Gatecrashers by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      So did anyone actually showed up there in person? TFA only talks about sending gifts and postcards, and the post you've linked to asks for no personal visits, but doesn't say that there were any (apparently they were planning it, but then saw that post?).

    2. Re:Gatecrashers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was shown to be BS. But you didn't follow up, did you?

  64. Re:Fuck 4chan by SpeZek · · Score: 1

    Shh, nobody tell him about 12chan.

  65. They Could Do Better... by damn_registrars · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    It is nice of these people to take time to acknowledge the birthday and contributions of this veteran. However this is just one man who they took time for, they could have directed their efforts in a more wide-reaching manner. After all, we do still have many WWII (and other war) veterans who are worthy of praise, thanks, and acknowledgment.

    If they really want to help the veterans, my first suggestion would be to look into helping the Veterans Administration (VA). The various resources of the VA - especially their hospitals - are scattered around our country and often stretched thin. Regardless of your position on government-funded, government-aided, or government-provided health care, the VA is the hospital of choice for a great number of great people. If you want to thank and help our veterans, your local VA can direct you to ways that you can do that. You could volunteer to help veterans get to their appointments, you could advocate for better resources for the hospitals, or do any number of other things. I wouldn't be surprised if your local VA would even appreciate volunteers to come and visit with the hospitalized family-less vets.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:They Could Do Better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah ... no. That's not something your typical 4chan user is going to care about. This case was one where people thought this guy was going to have a lonely 90th birthday (it started with an image of a flyer saying "People Wanted for Birthday Party"), it turned out he was a Vet and it really blew up from there. Him being a Vet had a lot to do with it, but it wasn't out of a greater sense of duty to vets in general. It was just an unusual situation -- the kind of thing /b/ thrives on -- and people stepped in to make something of it. Nothing more.

  66. History lesson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, unfortunately, your understanding of history seems to be a bit skewed. I think I remember reading in texts that the US fought on the European front long before pearl harbor. But I guess you're allowed to be a buckethead, given as we helped liberate most of Europe. But it was nice you ended it with a happy birthday for someone who served his country.

    1. Re:History lesson by The+Iso · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think I remember reading in texts that the US fought on the European front long before pearl harbor.

      Yes, you're thinking of World War I.

      --
      "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." - Bob Dylan
    2. Re:History lesson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Epic "reply to this fail", lulz.

  67. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by TheDarAve · · Score: 1

    You fucking douchebag.

    Hey, c'mon, be nice. Before saying something that might be hurtful, first ask yourself - WWFD*?

    *What Would 4chan Do?

    99.99% of the time What the guy before you posted IS what 4chan would do.

  68. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by _KiTA_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't know how old you are, but I currently have less freedom of speech and other rights than I did 30 years ago. And that's mostly on account of people born to William Lashua's generation and their misuse of the US military.

    Ah, but you also forget that most of these people who have misused the military either "had other priorities" than serving their country and used their connections to get repeated deferments, claimed they had a boil on their asses that prevented them from serving, or got a cushy air force position and then went AWOL when even that was too hard.

    Mr. Lashua's a hero and deserving of respect. Save your (justified, right, correct, and intelligent) scorn for the clowns screaming "Support Our Troops" while running the military into the ground.

  69. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The ends justify the means of course!

  70. Re:Fuck 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    12chan has been down since January. And law enforcement probably wasn't the culprit, just shitty administration. Er- so I heard, it isn't as if I was a user or anything....

  71. Re:Fuck 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    do it faggot.

  72. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't see how anyone could say we wouldn't have at least come to the aid of Britain, considering Americans were already dying coming to the aid of the Brits during the German first happy time which was a full year and a half before Pearl. One could also argue that the Battle of Britain may have gone far differently if America wasn't keeping Britain supplied.

    And while I have no doubt that more Europeans died than Americans (after all they were on BOTH sides so it would be kind of hard not to) talking to my relatives who actually fought in WWII when I was a kid I can tell you what the Americans faced, especially on the western front as we pushed towards the Rhine, was a fucking horror show. Our tanks were rolling coffins compared to the Tigers, the Nazis had MG42 nests all over the damned place cutting our guys into hamburger, and according to my grandfather and great uncle, may they rest in peace, many guys didn't even get IDed because they used the FLAK-88 as an antipersonnel weapon, which turned anyone in the blast zone into a "red mist" where even their boots were blown to pieces.

    So while I got nothing but respect for anybody that fought in that hell, you have to admit that there were times the Americans got the shitty end of the stick, like the US bombers doing the daylight raids while the Brits went at night. One thing both my grandfather and great uncle could agree on though, they were damned glad to have to face the Krauts over being with Uncle Jerry fighting Japs in the Pacific. Like they said at least they weren't dealing with Malaria and leeches as well as the enemy.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  73. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    Talked to him about it 50 years after the war was over. First and last time he talked about some of that stuff. Whether I'd want to hug him for it is immaterial; he didn't want the reminder. At all.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  74. Re:Fuck 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When "5chan" springs up....

    http://5chan.org/
    I think you underestimate how many *chans there are. Shii (a founder of 4chan and the reason it is "Anonymous" rather than "No name" like on elevens) has an index at http://shii.org/2ch/ . He also has some other cool shit on his site relating to anonymity.

  75. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by tedgyz · · Score: 1

    He risked his life for your right to be an asshole.

    Wow! Well said.

    --
    "No matter where you go, there you are." -- Buckaroo Banzai
  76. It made me think of this by voss · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ferengi rule of acquisition #76 Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies.

    1. Re:It made me think of this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      damn I'm late ... I wanted to quote that :P

  77. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by LanMan04 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Heh, November 11 is my son's birthday. :)

    --
    With the first link, the chain is forged.
  78. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by religious+freak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well... it's worth pointing out that Roosevelt supported Britain as much as was politically possible through the lend / lease program with Britain. After WWI public opinion was loath to support "yet another" European war. In fact, I think it's fair to say Roosevelt was provoking an attack supporting Britain as he did.

    Of course that's not to say the action was "selfless". Roosevelt understood, more than the public the importance of keeping Britain from being conquered. It is rare that any action in international relations is "selfless" (and when selfless acts are committed they are always minor and occasionally disasters), but the support the USA gave to Europe during WWII and the cold war is probably as close as you'll get.

    --
    If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
  79. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The US only entered WWII after Pearl Harbor, it was forced into the war and it's all speculation what would have happened otherwise but it is far from certain the US would have come to our rescue.

    Those who bitch about how the U.S. operates today had damn well better remember what you said above.

    Many people in the U.S. prior to WW2 wanted the U.S. to remain neutral, keep to itself, mind its own business. Look what that led to. Now many people in other countries want the U.S. to keep to itself, mind its own business. Any guess as to what that would lead to?

    My personal guess is that it wouldn't lead to anything good for very long, certainly nothing better that what we have now, and almost certainly result in something worse over the long term.

  80. Literally... by operagost · · Score: 1

    Literally a random act of kindness.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  81. Re:Fuck 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I give the troll a 3 out of 10 for effort. Golf clap.

  82. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, where in hell do you live? I suspect you see a picture of a white guy, and hate him. I also suspect that you see a picture of an American citizen and hate him. I just finished reading the Turner Diary (the same book that Timothy McVeigh promoted), and pretty much hate the attitudes and goals promoted in the book. Then, I read nonsense such as you post, and I have to reevaluate why I find the book so distasteful.

  83. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by deniable · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If only his mother could have held on for two more months. I guess they don't make them like they used to.

  84. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Gerzel · · Score: 1

    Isn't it nice to know that his risk wasn't in vain?

  85. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by deniable · · Score: 4, Funny

    Direct the 4chan Party Van to their driveway

    That sounds like a reality TV show waiting to happen.

  86. Re:But tomorrow... by deniable · · Score: 1

    Throw in Buzz Aldrin and the moon hoax guy.

  87. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Neat (: Tell him some random stranger from /. said Happy birthday (:

    --
    "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  88. Re:But tomorrow... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

    That is epic. (:

    --
    "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  89. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 5, Informative

    You make a lot of inane and ignorant ASSumptions here. The US also had a lot of money invested in Germany - ask IBM, because they were at the head of that list. Don't "Oh please" us - the world in 1942 was NOT the world we live in today, and the United States in 1942 was most certainly NOT the world we live in today. If you've read your history at all, you would know that the administration coordinated with the pentagon to MANEUVER us into that war. The losses at Pearl Harbor were preventable, but they were deemed "acceptable" because they would force the citizenry into accepting America's participation in the war. Oh, please, right back at you. Had the US cooperated with Germany, we could have been the third point of a power triangle for decades, even if we may have been less powerful than we were. World history would have been VASTLY different - starting with Iran, Iraq, and Israel. It's possible that you are unaware that the military/industrial machine that controls so much of American policy today ony came into existence during and after the world war - much of it in response to the communist threat. Had the Axis won, that communist threat would have been nonexistent!

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  90. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sometimes, I hate your posts. Sometimes, I love 'em. This one is the latter category. My stepdad lied about his age, so that he could join the Seabees at age 15. He saw a little bit of the Pacific, until he was hit by shrapnel, and spent the last year of the war recuperating in the states. The old man turned 18 just after the war ended, and walked out of the hospital shortly after that. During those years, reality sucked, man. I also had an uncle who saw very little combat. He was a year older than my stepdad, but his Mama did everything she could to keep her son from joining the service. When he was old enough to LEGALLY enlist without Mama's approval, he signed up, went to Europe, saw a little bit of action, then participated in liberating one of the death camps. Remembering his stories, every time I hear the holocaust deniers running at the mouth, I just want to shoot them in the face. Yes, reality sucked in the 1930's and 1940's. Sometimes, I think we have things far to good these days. Few Americans have any concept just how ugly life can be.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  91. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But some people bug me when they pretend the US valiantly and selflessly threw itself into battle for freedom and justice. The US only entered WWII after Pearl Harbor, it was forced into the war and it's all speculation what would have happened otherwise but it is far from certain the US would have come to our rescue

    There's also the perspective that the US was funding the war with supplies and weapons long long before Perl Harbor, and the strong suggestion that the US knew about Perl Harbor but had to let it happen to avoid giving away the fact that we had cracked all of their codes.

    Or to get the American public behind joining a war unrelated to us on behalf of the same countries we had recently(*) been fighting against for our own freedom.

    Either way, the US was attacked at Perl Harbor because we were already participating heavily in the war on the side of the Allies. Even if you want to knock the US getting credit for joining the war with warm bodies at that point, the US was already involving itself "selflessly" in the war long before then.

    And it was Russians, far and away, who died the most. At least according to my college history professor. :)

  92. summary is wrong by crgrace · · Score: 2, Informative

    The summary is wrong. No one is a member of /b/.

    1. Re:summary is wrong by scotty.m · · Score: 1

      I agree with your argument.

      --
      Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
      [ST8Z6FR57ABE6A8RE9UF]
    2. Re:summary is wrong by jonadab · · Score: 1

      The word "member" has a couple of different meanings. It can mean "someone whose name is listed on an official membership role", but it can also just mean "one person who happens to be part of the group".

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  93. Re:But tomorrow... by Cwix · · Score: 1

    Your backwards smiley threw me for a loop there. Yes that is epic.

    --
    You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
  94. Re:But tomorrow... by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    What, exploding party vans?

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  95. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No he didn't, I never sanctioned anyone to fight for me nor did I personally piss off anyone enough that they wanted to wage war on me. In short, I can take care of myself and I would appreciate people like you not trying to guilt trip others, thanks.

  96. misled by shird · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This guy did not need the handout, the poster was more or less a joke/notice to let the many people that do know him they should come to his party. The very fact he knows so many people was the reason for the notice, it was the most practical way to notify the large number of people he knows.

    If the guy was a "lonely old man with no friends left", do you think he would book out a town hall to hold his party?

    http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/d9zmp/dear_internet_on_behalf_of_the_lashua_family_i/

    "He has 7 children, many grandchildren, and even great grandchildren. In his younger years he was a foster parent to dozens of foster children."

    I can't help but think these donations and effort could have been directed to people more in need.

    --
    I.O.U One Sig.
    1. Re:misled by pspahn · · Score: 1

      I can't help but think these donations and effort could have been directed to people more in need.

      Sometimes you have to publicly honor someone who does good things. It helps to motivate the few good people out there to do their own good things.

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    2. Re:misled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you seem to mistake anon for someone who cares.

    3. Re:misled by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      I can't help but think these donations and effort could have been directed to people more in need.

      Everything can be directed to people more in need.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  97. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by nsayer · · Score: 1

    Don't forget this, btw... The US did not declare war against Germany until Germany made such a declaration first, after the US declared war on Japan. Germany was not bound by the tri-partite pact to honor Japan's "de-facto" declaration of war (to wit, the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor), and it's quite possible that had Hitler not so declared that the US might have gone on to fight a one-front war against Japan only. I (and I don't believe I am alone in this) regard Germany's declaration of war against the US to be Hitler's first major blunder (not counting things before his rise to power, like the Beer Hall Putsch).

  98. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Grimbleton · · Score: 1

    But his birthday isn't November 11...

  99. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would make a great prank. Get a bunch of people from a bar to try to join Scientology. Just inundate their building for days with drunks and hobos.

  100. Jumped the Shark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Internets are doomed, DOOMED I say!

  101. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the one hand, I really do give credit to the US for fighting in the war. No, seriously... they very likely turned the tide and if they hadn't stepped up then history would probably read quite differently.

    However. I do get tired of a couple of things. First is the constant flag waving "we won the whole war and the rest of the world owes us everything" attitude a lot (not all, just a vocal minority I imagine) of people from the states seem to have. Fact is, the US were a major force... yes... but they didn't fight the whole thing themselves and people need to stop acting like they did. Second is this whole attitude of "we stepped in, completely selflessly, and saved you all when we really didn't need to". Seriously, I hear this pretty regularly. Fact is, the US wasn't going to commit to the war despite the obvious danger of the Allies losing. I mean seriously, if the allies fell did the US think the Axis would just give eachother high-fives, settle down, and leave the US alone? Doubtful. The US had as much to lose as any country, right from the very start... but it waited until the last possible minute before it committed hoping that the Axis would get beat down without them having to intervene.

    I'm willing to give credit to anyone who fights a good fight, but let's face it: the US did what it had to do, just like everyone else. I don't like it when they try to take credit for the entire war rather than just their part in it.

  102. Re:But tomorrow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kudos to you for recognizing the cognitive dissonance. Next time, consider hte bias not in how they report it, but in what they don't report. Then you'll realize that fox is center-left and there is no right-wing american news.

  103. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by dadioflex · · Score: 1, Funny

    The UK, as a whole, often gripes about the US coming into WWII late but there's no doubt the vast majority of us appreciate the sacrifices they made and the economic help that was extended to us and the rest of Europe afterwards. And to their credit the US does appear to be doing whatever they can do to make it into WWIII as early as possible.

  104. Meh, I find it hard to beworked up over this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So a guy had a birthday. Thousands, if not millions of other people have had birthdays, this guy is...not special. Like um..Racquel Welch just had hers.

    But maybe I just don't buy into the Greatest Generation BS. You know who was also of their generation? The same folks on the other side!

  105. Re:But tomorrow... by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

    I bet you're right handed, therefore not in your right mind. I can understand how it would have thrown you for said loop. (;

    --
    "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
  106. 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sharpie in pooper?

  107. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by hairyfish · · Score: 1

    Not sure what movies you watch, but I was taught that WW2 was joint effort. No one country won or lost it, it took the combined effort of hundreds of millions of people in most of the countries on the planet to achieve victory. There's no I in Team, and I'm pretty sure that no-one in here was a direct participant, so lets not disrespect others by trivialising this into some sort of nationalist pissing contest.

  108. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by wampus · · Score: 0, Troll

    Remembering his stories, every time I hear the holocaust deniers running at the mouth, I just want to shoot them in the face.

    You know who else liked to shoot random people in the face?

  109. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by red_pill1987 · · Score: 0

    no once forced the US to make daylight raids. the british had mounted them, but found losses too high, so switched to nighttime area bombing. the US thought the B17 could take it, and desised to try for presision daylight bombing. i belive that prisison in this case is a matter of miles, but still. the US could have switched to night time bombing. there was no over command for bombers, with the exepstion of damands made on both forces by eisenhower in the run up to overlord.

  110. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm from Eastern Europe. Screw you.

  111. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by red_pill1987 · · Score: 0

    men countrys owe there freedom of speech to the US, briton, france, poland...there where alot of countrys who, at the end of it, wern't the soviats (to whom the allies owed alot anyway, as they did alot of the fighting). pointless and slightly off topic fact: untill the libration of france, the poles had more troops then the free french, even outside of the polish underground, witch was amazingly well set up.

  112. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by extintor · · Score: 1

    This isn't going to be popular to point out, but citizens of each of the countries you mentioned has more freedom of speech and other rights as a direct result of people like William Lashua and the US military.

    Yeah, and the US has its freedom thanks to the french...

  113. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is nothing "random" about shooting holocaust deniers. Reading comprehension 101 - available at a community college near you!

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  114. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by SpeedBump0619 · · Score: 1

    He risked his life for your right to be an asshole.

    So *that's* why 4chan is celebrating!

  115. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by sulimma · · Score: 1

    And in many aspects they have more freedem of speech and other rights than people in the US....

  116. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The powers that be in the us were looking for a reason to step up efforts helping the european forces, more than just sending supplies and helping protect merchant fleets. however popular opinion and the closing of the great depression washington needed a catalyst. the attack at pearl harbor might have been what started the change in popular opinion but the wheels were already in motion. as far as most of the dying... the entire death toll was appalling. and i wouldnt single out a single group and look at the numbers it was a GROUP effort to single any out dishonors them all they all fought, bled, lived, died, grieved and those who could got up and continued the struggle. they all fought for their countries, because if europe fell do you really think that the war would stop there? no the nazi's would have at least attempted to invade the north american east cost and with the industrial capacity of most of europe the parts not bombed into the stoneage that is while the jap's would have went gunning for the west coast.

    Qupla'! Mr. Lashua your service honor us

  117. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by pookemon · · Score: 1

    So you're saying that WWII veteran's only have birthdays on November 11? Do you only honour your mother on Mothers day? Your Father on Fathers day? Your kids (if you have any) on International Childrens day? If your house burnt down and your family was saved by a firefighter that ran into the flames, risking his (or her) life, would you only thank him on May 4th - International Firefighters Day.

    Perhaps you're annoyed because there isn't an officially recognised "International Douchebag Day". (when is your birthday?)

    --
    dnuof eruc rof aixelsid
  118. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think you'll find pretty much all of Europe appreciates the US war effort, we consider them liberators. The countries of the Axis generally consider their part in WWII a dark chapter of their history. But some people bug me when they pretend the US valiantly and selflessly threw itself into battle for freedom and justice. The US only entered WWII after Pearl Harbor, it was forced into the war and it's all speculation what would have happened otherwise but it is far from certain the US would have come to our rescue.

    I think that it's very important to keep apart the U.S. (the country) motivation for its foreign policy and participation in WW2, and the effort of every individual American soldier who fought in that war. Politics may be dirty, but I very much doubt that Americans fighting on the ground and breaking open concentration camps really thought "we'd really leave these guys rot if Germans didn't attack us first, and we didn't have to hold back the Soviets". Maybe a few really did - you never know - but by default I'm going to assume that every person who served in that war, on his own, was truly a liberator.

    By the way, the same goes for Soviets - Stalin's politics is one thing, soldiers on the ground is another.

    Likewise when they speak of US losses, the US brought lots of military might that was crucial but it was Europeans doing most of the dying.

    This one's interesting. If you look at military casualties for WW2, U.S. has 415k deaths, and actually ranks above any Allied European country except for the USSR and Yugoslavia. These are totals, but if you look by theater, then Americans have only lost ~100k dead fighting in the Pacific; so the remainder is mostly in Europe. Let's take that as 300k. Now the next European Allied country on the list, UK, lost 380k dead. Everyone else actually lags behind US losses in European theater alone. So the claim that "Europeans were doing most of the dying", while, perhaps, factually correct, is making a wrong point.

    Which kinda makes sense when you remember the history of the war. The most massive losses on Allied side, by an extremely large margin, are the Soviets, because they bore the brunt of the war - the initial wearing out of German industry and manpower - and, ultimately, the victory in Europe. UK is high because it kept putting up the fight; US, because it intervened and kept going. Poland and France are also relatively high because they did put up some fight early on, and because they had significant military resistance to occupation afterwards. Yugoslavia is very high on the list mainly due to active guerrilla warfare against the occupying German forces (IIRC, the most active country in that regard of all occupied ones). Everyone else mostly just sat there waiting for the liberators after putting up some token resistance.

  119. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Many people in the U.S. prior to WW2 wanted the U.S. to remain neutral, keep to itself, mind its own business. Look what that led to. Now many people in other countries want the U.S. to keep to itself, mind its own business.

    Many people in other countries want the U.S. to keep invading countries. In WW2, it was reversed - many people wanted the US to stop one country from invading the other countries. It's a perfectly sensible position so long as you take it for granted that invading countries (except in response to another invasion) is a bad thing regardless of who does it.

  120. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    This isn't going to be popular to point out, but surviving citizens of each of the countries you mentioned has more freedom of speech and other rights as a direct result of people like William Lashua and the US military.

    Yeah, that's a very good point, considering that about 3 million people own their very survival to a direct result of people like William Lashua (which is to say, all Allied soldiers).

  121. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Neither is lies.

    For some reason the best option often is to STFU.

  122. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by marcello_dl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    he refers to nazi habits of firing to jews randomly. there are separate accounts of such scenes. If you however prefer shooting all deniers that's perfectly fine for his point.

    As for denial, one victim is enough already. That settles it. Let them talk on the details as they want, they are details.

    A society which makes you a culprit for giving your warped version of history instrad of the 99.99% likely warped official one is a fascist one. As long as you do not incite others to do crimes your speech oughta be free. In that regard your post is worse than holocaust denial.

    --
    ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
  123. outliers - minority report by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's what it is called

  124. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well - that's one more rather liberal viewpoint. How about you take a look at the deniers? What are their aims, their goals? For the most part, they want to tear down the civilization that our fathers and grandfathers built. They side with Hitler and the Aryans. Yes, I want to shoot them. As for actually picking up a weapon and killing a denier - no, I won't. Not unless, and until, they actually organize and start working to overthrow our government in the name of some supposed racial superiority. Then, I'll shoot in self defense. Given the opportunity, they would kill off all my family for having polluted blood.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  125. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by jimicus · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Holocaust deniers treat the whole thing like a religion - they've already decided what they believe to be true, and even if you invented a time machine and took them on a tour of the Nazi extermination camps, finishing off with a few months in Auschwitz in the early-mid 1940s they still wouldn't believe you.

    However tempting talk of violence is, it'll have exactly the same effect as it has on religion - it makes the belief stronger, and will be (ab)used by the victim as evidence of them being right.

  126. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Kjella · · Score: 1

    I don't see how anyone could say we wouldn't have at least come to the aid of Britain, considering Americans were already dying coming to the aid of the Brits during the German first happy time which was a full year and a half before Pearl. One could also argue that the Battle of Britain may have gone far differently if America wasn't keeping Britain supplied.

    Running supply lines is a whole different story than sending large military troops, if Britain's defenses had broken it is unlikely the US would have time to declare war and send enough troops across the Atlantic to repel them. And it's a different thing coming to the aid of someone holding their island compared to one with the back against the sea with a good chance of your troops ending up there too. Fortunately we don't need to find out...

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  127. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Tell him some other random stranger from /. said "Cut your hair and get a job, you hippie."

  128. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by VShael · · Score: 2

    "Likewise when they speak of US losses, the US brought lots of military might that was crucial but it was Europeans doing most of the dying."

    Actually, it was the Russians who did most of the dying. But other than that, fair point.

  129. For years I've been in Futaba, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Toshiakis never have done this. 2ch's VIP folks did donation to Chile as a counter-attack of Korean DDoS to 2ch servers but apart from that, we were just morphing Akasan or Mageres("Unforgivable Angles"), drawing OS-chans, and registering them to Akinator.

  130. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly, there's no sense arguing with such people - it just entrenches their view that there's some kind of global conspiracy and they're on the side of right. The best thing you can do with these people is ignore them, they're already as irrelevant to most of us as religion. Eventually they'll realise nobody is listening and go away, but if you feed their sense of self-righteousness they'll stick around because they feel they have to defend their views. The vast, vast majority of people in the world know the truth, we don't need to shout down these idiots because the only people taking them seriously are other idiots, and besides which the whole point of having freedoms is that everyone gets a voice, even idiots, if we try and silence them because we disgree with their views we're one step away from the very path we are fighting against.

  131. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    Sorry, I'm just honest and say what I feel. as for the deniers, I think the best thing we can do is slap them upside the head with the truth. My grandfather actually helped liberate one of the camps, not one of the famous ones but he said they were frankly ALL nightmares from hell, and I'll never forget those descriptions.

    Bodies piled 5 and 6 deep, unable to tell male from female because they were all just skeletons, actually being told by their commanding officer NOT TO FEED THE VICTIMS because they had been starved for so damned long that the rich GI food would throw their systems into shock, and watching a man die from just that who managed to get some food from a GI. He said the whole thing was just like something out of a fucking horror movie and if he hadn't have been there he never would have believed humans could be such sick bastards. They made the German civilians in town march through there and get a good fucking look at what they were pretending didn't exist, and made them help bury the bodies. A couple of weeks after that he and a buddy were laying line and one of the rag tag German squads set off a mortar and dropped a wall on him. He spent a year in a full body cast and was actually shipped home in a cargo plane dangling like a piece of meat in a full cast. I had to give respect to anybody who could live through such hell and not come out bitter and jaded.

    So sorry if I piss ya off, but at least you know da Hairyfeet is just being his honest Southern self, and not trolling or Karma whoring. i just call 'em as I see 'em.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  132. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    huh, aren't you people forgetting about something?

    Germany fought all those countries practically by herself, yet no one one refers German casualties... Despite what one might think about the German leadership, German soldiers were, for the most part, as honorable as any other and fought bravely even in face of total defeat. They deserve to be acknowledged.

  133. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    German soldiers fought for the wrong cause. They can still be acknowledged as fighting for their country in time of need, but that is solely up to their countrymen to do that. There is no reason why an American (for example) should acknowledge German soldiers fighting for Germany, especially when the latter was an enemy country.

  134. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about civilian losses?

  135. This is so rad! by pinkushun · · Score: 1

    That is all.

  136. Rules 1 & 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the hell are you on about?
    There is more to 4chan than that /b/oard.

  137. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    They are regrettable, but they aren't part of the "war effort" of the country which suffers them. So, when comparing the contribution various countries have made towards liberation and victory, it's a rather meaningless statistic.

  138. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 1

    He also attacked Russia while he was still fighting Britain. The only hope of success that would have had would have ben if Germany had dedicated everything to it AND persuaded the Japanese into attacking Russia from the other side.
    Operation Barbarossa had no planned knock-out blow and no way to actually win. Even if they had taken Moscow (which a bit more effort, and a bit less meddling may have enabled), history suggests that the Russians would not have surrendered - by that point they were well advanced with moving most of their production behind the Urals and would probably have waited until the Germans were well stuck in to the Russian winter in Moscow before unleashing the Siberians to do what eventually happened in Stalingrad. So, as I said, the only hope for an axis victory would have been a Japenese invasion of the eastern end of Russia tying up the Siberians, and pushing them further west until they JUST had the Urals. Even then it's doubtful, given their record, that the Japenese could have done more than tie up Russian troops - they had various border skirmishes with the Russians in the years before the war and were roundly beaten.

    In short, had Germany not had to try and keep Britain supressed (perhaps had Moussolini managed to fight in North Africa on his own - suppressing Britain by invading her may have tied up more troops in an army of occupation than the forces required to bottle her up), AND got the Japanese to invade the Rusians, AND had a four-leaf clover, rabbit's foot & lucky horseshoe, they MAY have been able to roll the Russians up, and dominate Europe, Asia and Africa. Then, they may have been able to subject the United States to war on two fronts, which would likely have got messy.

    --
    FGD 135
  139. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He risked his life for your right to be an asshole.

    Yeah, 'cause that's the *first* thing the Axis would've stamped out. The assholes.

    First they came for the Assholes,
    But I did not speak out,
    'Cause I'm an asshole!

  140. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    Yes, it does deserve to be acknowledged. Not as something praiseworthy, but as a warning. Blind obedience to the country's leaders from a well-trained military is a very dangerous thing and makes it easy for the leadership to commit atrocities. This is why officers now are taught not to follow illegal orders. Unfortunately, they are not taught this very well.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  141. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    In short, I can take care of myself

    So, you're going to move to Somalia or some other country where you can put this belief into practice? Or are you going to sit smugly in the middle of a civilisation of a few hundred million people providing you with most of the infrastructure that you need to have an easy life and proudly proclaim that it's all your own work?

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  142. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isn't going to be popular to point out, but citizens of each of the countries you mentioned has more freedom of speech and other rights as a direct result of people like William Lashua and the US military.

    i can haz?

  143. FAIL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    November 11 is the end of WW1...

  144. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by adamofgreyskull · · Score: 1

    I think you'll find pretty much all of Europe appreciates the US war effort, we consider them liberators.

    That may be true, but there is also more than a passing undercurrent of resentment in Europe toward the U.S. for the perceived delay prior to them entering the war, at least there is in the UK. I would imagine the same applies to other countries who resisted the Nazi war machine. Selfless or not, the U.S. allied with free Europe, when we needed them, for the good of ourselves, themselves and the free world.

    As you say, any and all debate is irrelevant in the context of this discussion. This man has served his country and all free men. He deserves respect and a happy birthday. 4chan or not.

  145. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by kaizokuace · · Score: 1

    or reality porn

    --
    Balderdash!
  146. Re:But tomorrow... by ooshna · · Score: 1

    I just started work as a nurses aide and this Old man named Mr. Benson used to be a pilot for ww2 He is old as dirt but strong as hell. Just today I was trying to get him to stand up so I could dress him and it took 3 of us to hold him up and this was with him half asleep never opening his eyes.

  147. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by gabebear · · Score: 1

    This isn't going to be popular to point out, but citizens of each of the countries you mentioned has more freedom of speech and other rights as a direct result of people like William Lashua and the US military.

    How so? I don't know much about Germany or Japan, but Italy ruthlessly censors media ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Italy ). Italy has to be one of the most developed countries with the lowest amount of free speech.

  148. Internet love machine by Legion303 · · Score: 1

    Ebaumsworld did real good.

  149. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by mopower70 · · Score: 1

    Fine, but troll? Off-topic, maybe, but trolling? If you honestly think your rights in American haven't been seriously degraded in the last 30 years, you're the one living under a bridge.

  150. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree with a good portion of your comment but wanted to add to it:

    But some people bug me when they pretend the US valiantly and selflessly threw itself into battle for freedom and justice. The US only entered WWII after Pearl Harbor, it was forced into the war and it's all speculation what would have happened otherwise but it is far from certain the US would have come to our rescue.

    The US may have entered the war after Pearl Harbor but they were trying to get involved in it since well before the attack took place. The US attempted to provoke German ships in order to cause an incident and have their excuse to enter the war but as the Germans never took the bait it was then decided that the US would enter the war via Japan and proceded to cut off Japan's access to aviation fuel and many raw materials (Japan's booming industry heavily relied on them) that were in high demand and provoked them into attacking. The Japanese did not maintain radio silence as the story is often told, the higher ups knew that they were coming and didn't lift a finger in order to get in on the war.

  151. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Don't post this anon. A post like this should be submitted under your name. Grow a set.

  152. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by rotorbudd · · Score: 1

    He wouldn't be a member of the American Legion if he had been an Axis soldier ....... now would he.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it, but artillery is addressed to " Whom It May concern"
  153. Collective tendencies? Like being immature idiots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject above. Between 4chan bbs' membership largely being immature as 1 of their main tendencies, their capacity for homosexual behaviour and the ability to spread HIV and AIDS around their members as they do, you have 2-3 of their main "qualities" well in hand and described perfectly.

  154. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by pizzamannetje · · Score: 1

    Actually, the numbers learn us that it's the Russians that did most of the dying

  155. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by bjourne · · Score: 1

    While true, from the German perspective, the western front was basically a vacation resort. Exhausted and demoralized platoons were used there because most of the strength was needed on the eastern front. Something like 75% of all German forces were concentrated there.

  156. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by DarenN · · Score: 1

    On a purely pedantic note, the UK did not fight WWII, the British Commonwealth did. In fact, it's not unreasonable to state that the British bankrupted the largest empire in world history on a point of principle - the invasion of Poland. Up until quite late in the war, Hitler believed that the British Commonwealth would fight with them against the communists.

    The Commonwealth was introduced formally with the Treaty of Westminister in 1931 (although the Aussies asked to be specifically excluded, and thus were technically a self-governing colony until 1973)

    So when measuring casualties, it's British Commonwealth forces that should really be measured. Newfoundland, Burma and India were directly controlled by the British Empire, so were included in the declaration of war
    UK : 326,000
    Newfoundland: 1,000
    India: 87,000
    Burma: 22,000

    Total 426,000

    The Australia, Canada and New Zealand were part of the commonwealth andreiterated the declaration of war (as they had control over their own foreign policy)
    Australia: 39,800
    New Zealand : 11,900
    Canada : 45,300

    Total 96,400

    South Africa was also part of the commonwealth, but their prime minister refused the declaration which led to the immediate collapse of his government.
    South Africa: 11,900

    Total: 11, 900

    Which means that there were 534,300 military casualties to the British Commonwealth. Which, incidentally, was fighting on at least four fronts - SouthEast Asia (where they frankly got hammered by the japanese in Burma and at Singapore), Eritrea, North Africa and Europe (both the north coast and the mediterranian coast).

    It's also easy to forget about China. Those poor feckers had WWII start earlier on them, with the invasion of Manchuria in 1931, and the 2nd Sino-Chinese war starting in 1937 and merging with WWII. Such charming incidents as the Rape of Nanking happened during these times. There were over 5 million chinese military deaths.

    --
    Rational thought is the only true freedom
  157. Whooosh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Booom....whoosh.

    Boy, did you miss the point of the story.

    You're just sorry little sour pussed fuck, aren't you. Someone does something and you go on about how it wasn't enough. Bet you're hit at parties.

  158. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fucking moral supremacist

  159. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Muros · · Score: 1

    Likewise when they speak of US losses, the US brought lots of military might that was crucial but it was Europeans doing most of the dying.

    This one's interesting. If you look at military casualties for WW2, U.S. has 415k deaths, and actually ranks above any Allied European country except for the USSR and Yugoslavia. These are totals, but if you look by theater, then Americans have only lost ~100k dead fighting in the Pacific; so the remainder is mostly in Europe. Let's take that as 300k. Now the next European Allied country on the list, UK, lost 380k dead. Everyone else actually lags behind US losses in European theater alone. So the claim that "Europeans were doing most of the dying", while, perhaps, factually correct, is making a wrong point.

    Which kinda makes sense when you remember the history of the war. The most massive losses on Allied side, by an extremely large margin, are the Soviets, because they bore the brunt of the war - the initial wearing out of German industry and manpower - and, ultimately, the victory in Europe. UK is high because it kept putting up the fight; US, because it intervened and kept going. Poland and France are also relatively high because they did put up some fight early on, and because they had significant military resistance to occupation afterwards. Yugoslavia is very high on the list mainly due to active guerrilla warfare against the occupying German forces (IIRC, the most active country in that regard of all occupied ones). Everyone else mostly just sat there waiting for the liberators after putting up some token resistance.

    The picture is nowhere near the same if you look at all casualties of the war. 0.5% of all deaths in WWII were American servicemen; 58% of all deaths in WWII were allied civilians, few of them American. I don't have a breakdown of those deaths handy, I'm sure the vast majority were likely Chinese and Russian. But a lot of them were western European civilians.

  160. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by wisdom_brewing · · Score: 1

    And how many russians please?

  161. Surely I can't be alone on this... by John+Pfeiffer · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else find the idea of 4chan doing something 'nice' to be completely TERRIFYING? I mean like, I get their usual shenanigans... But I can't even begin to wrap my head around this. I am scared shitless. Because who knows what they'll do next...

    --

    Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
  162. Check out this YouTube video to see a happy guy by yodleboy · · Score: 2, Informative

    looks like he had a great birthday! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzqNkIkj3rE

  163. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Offering praise to 4chan for this is like cheering for a 14 year old kid who just figured out how to not shit in his pants.

    1. Re:Anonymous Coward by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Maybe this as more like the 16 year old girl who just gave her daddy a kiss after sneaking out at night and wrecking his brand new Porche a couple of weeks ago.

      "Yes, that was nice, thanks"

      "No, you're still grounded."

  164. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by phantomfive · · Score: 1, Informative

    Uh......have you ever read what life was like under Mussolini? They were killing people based on nothing but their race. I didn't say it was perfect now, certainly it's not, I just said it was better after the war.

    --
    Qxe4
  165. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by SideshowBob · · Score: 1

    Not to take anything away from the military, because force was justified in fighting WW2 (unlike pretty much all of the military force we've projected since then), but the freedoms that are enjoyed in those defeated countries has a lot more to do with what came *after* the war than the actual war itself. Specifically the Marshall Plan and the Keynesian/New Deal economic programs and progressive constitutions that we gave them.

  166. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by FutureDomain · · Score: 1

    Except when it says "Trust your technolust".

    --
    Hydraulic pizza oven!! Guided missile! Herring sandwich! Styrofoam! Jayne Mansfield! Aluminum siding! Borax!
  167. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although, at this point, perhaps it would be a good idea to invade Mexico. That place needs to be cleaned up! :b

  168. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Omestes · · Score: 1

    The US only entered WWII after Pearl Harbor, it was forced into the war and it's all speculation what would have happened otherwise but it is far from certain the US would have come to our rescue.

    To our credit we were supplying weapons and such to the British before we actually hopped in as a military power. Also, a lot of Americans were fighting along side the Canadians before the US decided to actually hop in, as well.

    I agree though, presenting us as the "great white hope" is a bit much. When I was in high school I learned the the US bravely fought in WWII to defend the Jewish people from the Nazis. It was a nice thought, but sadly far far from the truth. Most Americans identified with the Nazis, and even held views similar (though maybe not as extreme) as their about racial an eugenic purity. The Japanese were an easier enemy to fight.

    (Not to mention the fact that we gallantly fought in the Civil War to free slaves)

    --
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  169. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by gabebear · · Score: 1

    The point I was (vaguely) alluding to is that you can't give people freedoms; they need to make their own freedom. Italy is a mess financially(possibly worse than Greece), human-rights wise, and racially. Italians don't seem to care or even want to fix their problems.

    It's great when the US defends people that can't defend themselves, but they don't do it to give non-Americans more freedoms ( and I don't think they should ). Trying to credit the US military for fostering freedom and rights in other countries is dangerous; in reality, they both hurt and help.

    http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5101348,00.html (race)
    http://www.businessinsider.com/european-debt-maturity-profile-2010-5 (debt)

  170. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    So when measuring casualties, it's British Commonwealth forces that should really be measured.

    It's a good point in general, but the original context was "mostly Europeans dying", remember? I don't think that it's reasonable to count Canadians, Aussies etc as Europeans.

  171. Yea, US needed war to get out of 1933 bankruptcy. by NRAdude · · Score: 0

    I remember the United States declared bankruptcy in 1933, and needed a war to get the population on a mobilizations scheme to assure the retention of viable industry that would've been exported as a result of creditors. I remember reading that US Navy threatened Japan with sanctions if they invaded Philipines and such, which the United States had no right for it's agency to say and do because *it* (the United States singular, not plural of the First Judiciary Act) had no interest as a claimant. So the United States staged Hawaii to be an immobilized weakened possibly-aggressive neutral collection of the greatest threat in the Pacific Ocean as a target for Japan to think about anhilating (and they did), just so the United States can come-around to declare war.

    Apparently in the Constitution of the United States, war is the only activity that must be done to keep the Unitd States in existance or else The 48 united States of *America* are the ones that have the original exclusive cognizance and jurisdiction. Few know the United States are not the States of America because it's a foreign nation and corporation animated from the District of Columbia. That's why we have the War against Poverty, Drugs, Education, and the one thing they'll never declare war against is Apathy because just like the American Medical Association they only want to assure their verry existance by targeting the individual symptoms rather than the original cause of the problem.

    --
    without prejudice
  172. My mother joined when she was 8 years old. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi. Durring WW2 in my country, my mother joined the army when she was 8 years old. That's where she met her future husband, Commander Muhammad. I believe his penis was as long as her forearm, but they worked it in.

  173. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Falconhell · · Score: 1

    Germany's declaration of war against the US to be Hitler's first major blunder.

    Nah I dont think so.

    I think a lot of people would say the decision to stop bombing fighter commands airflields and start bombing cities during the battle of britain was Hitlers first major mistake. Fighter command was at breaking point at that time, and could not have kept going much longer
    under sustained attacks..

  174. 4Chan is evidence of Law Enforcement posting CP. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All the CP on 4Chan is the kind that is concealed in evidence repositories in government offices held by prosecutors and such. When you see that kind of gruesome and implicit material posted on 4Chan, then that proves the government officers are funneling it around between them in their enjoyment and as-well trying to entrap others by punnishing the 1st-amendment world in polluting it onto all the Bulletin Boards.

    If someone posts CP on a Bus Station bench, do you blame the bench and remove it that everyone is required to stand-up in waiting for the bus? Do you blame spelling errors on the pen or him that wields the pen?

  175. So, you that one girl? Your number don't work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You shouldn't have thrown that puppy, bitch!

  176. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what about the people in the middle, that believed it happened but not to the same extent? its not a black and white issue. while i believe it was sickenly wrong, i won't just take the 6 million figure at face value. i believe the incomplete data sets, faulty record keeping, victors' bias, et al. provide us with not so accurate results. who funded the research to find this out?

  177. Re:So? by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, every single one of them!

    --
    I am not devoid of humor.
  178. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by chrb · · Score: 1

    I very much doubt that Americans fighting on the ground and breaking open concentration camps really thought "we'd really leave these guys rot if Germans didn't attack us first, and we didn't have to hold back the Soviets".

    I'm not so sure. Of course, liberating the concentration camps would invoke feelings of anger and pity. But the majority of soldiers did not actively take part in that. For most, the war meant being shot at, half starved, fear of being gassed, risking life and limb day after day in appalling trench warfare conditions. 10 million of those Americans were conscripts who would rather not have been there. The predominant feeling before Pearl Harbor was that Americans did not want to get involved in another European war. This is not a dig at Americans - millions of Russians, Japanese and British were also conscripted. For many conscripts, a refusal to fight would have meant public ridicule, jail time or even death.

    By the way, the same goes for Soviets - Stalin's politics is one thing, soldiers on the ground is another.

    The same goes for most Germans, Japanese and everyone else. Most people don't want to leave their families and loved ones at home in order to go abroad and fight some horrible war. Some minority, sure, but the majority would much prefer peace. Remember the football match in no man's land on Christmas day 1915? Such a thing would not be possible if either side were the bloodthirsty monsters that they were portrayed as. I once saw a WWII decorated American war hero saying that he didn't hate the Japanese, because they were just doing their job as soldiers like everyone else. If someone who actually took part in the war can acknowledge such a thing, then maybe there is hope for the rest of us.

  179. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by chrb · · Score: 1

    There is no reason why an American (for example) should acknowledge German soldiers fighting for Germany, especially when the latter was an enemy country.

    If the aim were to accurately and truthfully recognise the actions of history, then an observer would acknowledge the actions of other humans without drawing the artificial distinction that one group happened to be born in a different nation to those of another group. If all else were considered equal, and the people of both groups were acting in the same way, and with the same motivations regardless of nationality, then nationality should not be considered a significant factor by an honest observer. Of course, this is not an ideal world, and often such an observer will be biased by their own concerns, particularly if this involves feelings of nationalism.

    "He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilisation should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder." - Albert Einstein

  180. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by QuantumBeep · · Score: 1

    All men are brothers. It's a terrible tragedy that German soldiers fought and died for the wrong side. The world is worse off without them.

  181. Holocaust denial by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    As for denial, one victim is enough already. That settles it. Let them talk on the details as they want, they are details.

    Some Holocaust deniers argue that it happened at a much lower scale than commonly believed.
    While a small number of murders still sucks, it's better than a large amount of murders. So discussing scale is important.

    Yes, Holocaust denial is an interesting test of free speech.
    Do anti-Holocaust-denial laws martyr such people (at least in their minds) as "OMG my free speech is being stifled"?

    NB - I think denial's at least as nonsensical and illogical as other conspiracy theories, with higher gravitas

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  182. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    if he hadn't have been there he never would have believed humans could be such sick bastards.

    maybe that helps fuel denial - mass murder in the millions is literally incomprehensible.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  183. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

    > For the most part, they want to tear down the civilization that our fathers and grandfathers built. They side with Hitler and the Aryans

    Citation needed. I am no expert, but the denialists' stuff I came across did focus on practical things, not political. Maybe it's an indirect way to attack Jewish people, but censorship against a possible indirect attack is even more fascist.

    --
    ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
  184. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    I can go along with quibbling over numbers. No one can say for certain that there were 2 million, 4 million, or 6 million Jews killed - it MIGHT even be 8 million. If someone spends time researching, and chooses to believe the lowest credible numbers, and he decides that only 2.3 million Jews died, I'll disagree with him. No problem. I can disagree, and still respect him. It's the clowns who say that there WERE NO JEWS KILLED that I despise. There are plenty of neonazis and nazi apologists who claim that there was no holocaust. Those, I truly hate.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  185. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    Actually - Germany probably could have won the war against Russia. I don't mean to belittle or to denigrate the efforts of the Russians - but the winter defeated Hitler as much as the Russians did. Countless German soldiers were marched into Russia, wearing summer uniforms, or uniforms fit for winters far to the south. The machinery and equipment weren't designed or maintained properly for operation in the Russian winter, either. Had Hitler properly equipped and dressed his men, and sent the proper machinery and equipment, history would be quite different. He may or may not have beaten Russia in the end, but the story would still be vastly different.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  186. Re:4chan gets it wrong again... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    Good post, AC. In fact, there were some admirable people who fought for Germany. If anyone should be interested enough to read Erwin Rommel's biography, he is one such man. He was NOT a Nazi, and he refused to join the party. His sympathies were to his NATION, not to his government. Had he been politically minded, he would have been killed much sooner than he was.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br