Slashdot Mirror


Anonymous Begins Publishing Ku Klux Klan Member Details Online

An anonymous reader writes: Anonymous has begun releasing the personal details of members of the Ku Klux Klan, escalating its cyberwar against the white supremacist group. Last week the hacktivist group promised to reveal the identity of 1,000 members of the KKK after getting possession of the private information through a compromised Twitter account. A press release from Anonymous reads in part: "After closely observing so many of you for so very long, we feel confident that applying transparency to your organizational cells is the right, just, appropriate and only course of action. You are abhorrent. Criminal. You are more than extremists. You are more than a hate group. You operate much more like terrorists and you should be recognized as such. You are terrorists that hide your identities beneath sheets and infiltrate society on every level. The privacy of the Ku Klux Klan no longer exists in cyberspace. You’ve had blood on your hands for nearly 200 years. You continue to inflict civil rights violations, commit violent crimes and solicit others to commit violent criminal acts. You seek to intimidate and/or eliminate those that are different from you and those that you dislike by any means possible. You seek to terrorize anyone and anything that you feel is a threat to your narrow view of the 'American way of life'."

546 comments

  1. Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The names of a thousand hateful red necks. Sounds like the best reading list for the winter. The real fun will be to see who gets wrongly targeted. I hope no one has the same name as me or signed me up. Vigilantes for the win!

    1. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Funny

      The real fun will be to see how many of these people are active politicians.

    2. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      and active law enforcement officials too.

    3. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sure there's no possibility that there will be any names released who aren't actually KKK members.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    4. Re: Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, I'd stick a few names in there I wanted to drag through the mud.

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

      Not all Rednecks are racist and not all racists are Rednecks.
      Believe it or not, not all racists are white some are black, asian or Hispanic etc.
      Racialism can be found in any and all ethnic groups.

    6. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by nwf · · Score: 2

      The real fun will be to see how many of these people are active politicians.

      Or match with Ashley Maddison accounts who were looking for a non-white girl to hook up with. That would be seriously funny.

      --
      I don't know, but it works for me.
    7. Re: Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After the blowback from the last screw-up, I'd say that there is no possibility whatsoever. Anonymous will have been quite careful to vet the information thoroughly.

      However, your comment wasn't really designed to get a reality-based response, now was it? It was designed to evoke the response I've given you. Now that you've been obliged, you can go on your pre-planned cathartic rant about Anonymous knowing fuck-all about what they're doing.

      Have a nice day, program.

    8. Re: Rednecks Anonymous by hesiod · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Anonymous isn't a set group of people who will learn from mistakes, because it's most likely not the same people. Also, since the list was disseminated to others, any individual can add names, claim it's the unedited original, and spread it under the umbrella of "Anonymous."

    9. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      And only rednecks do high-fives...

      Fight for your bitcoins!

    10. Re: Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how being a redneck, is construed to be kkk. There. Are many liberal rednecks. Many, just because of where they live are being reiterated. Shuclks, even Bluenoses live south of the Mason Dixon line. I would bet if the listing were verified, by someone, it wouldn't be rednecks but greenbacks/carpetbaggers mostly.

    11. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do we get to make fun of the ultraliberal Democrats on the list like the mayor of Knoxville or do we just get to hate the Republicans?

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

      A popular joke, but really, these guys want nothing at all to do with brown sugar, unless they're setting it on fire. Knew a guy in HS whose dad was almost certainly in the Klan, and his attitude toward those of African descent was sort of like Hitler-meets-Stalin-on-the-question-of-Ukrainian-Jews, i.e., what's the best way to keep their corpses from fouling the water supply?

    13. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2

      Well they did try to prove each members' membership to the clan by gathering DNA evidence, but they found it was all the same.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    14. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      And only rednecks do high-fives...

      Oh, nerds do high-fives though. However, they are frequently uncoordinated and miss, and the nerds afterwards pause to push their glasses back up the ridge of the nose.

    15. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some advice for Anonymous:

      Take care when you set out to hunt monsters, lest you become a monster.

        -- Some white German guy

    16. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by BradMajors · · Score: 1

      Nope. The new KKK accepts blacks and all people of colour as members of its organization.

    17. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by BradMajors · · Score: 1

      And how many of the members are black.

      Black Chicago Men Start KKK Chapter, Cite Declining Culture:

      http://www.thenewsnerd.com/loc...

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

      Or match with Ashley Maddison accounts who were looking for a non-white girl to hook up with. That would be seriously funny.

      Don't worry, most of them probably aren't coming after "your" women.

    19. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I'm pretty sure it's all fair game, as long as we recognize the concerns of the ACs above. I'm ever the Batman fan, but that's because Batman does his homework. Vigilantes in general are notorious for not doing their homework even to the point of roflstomping evidence to the contrary because they've found someone to lynch and they're gonna lynch somebody! Hmm... sounds like a certain group....

    20. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by sjames · · Score: 2
    21. Re: Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous is everyone with a grudge or an ex-girlfriend. But if they post something on the internets it must be true.

      Captcha: Superego!

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

      Yeah, and what happens when "some of those names" happen to be the same as your friends but are completely different people? What's to prevent the Doxxing of one KKK member and the subsequent "accident" happening to several people with the same name over a few days?

      Anonymous can be a slightly helpful when it chooses to, but let's not pretend it's something honorable on a justice crusade. It's little more than bullies/trolls that want to see people die for realsies. That makes them no better than the KKK members they have picked as enemies. Only now it's targets are specific.

    23. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Well the list so far has included several prominent senators and congressmen. Want to guess which party they belong to ?

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    24. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by Mike+Frett · · Score: 1

      I don't know if it's the same old KKK, but if it is, Anonymous just dug it's grave for at least a few members. The KKK has/had links to various questionable and legal organizations that could "Take care" of people. And it's well known that some Politicians and Law Enforcement are members. Anonymous is feeling like the masters of the virtual universe it seems and now real life threatens to literally, burn down their Tree House.

      You know what they say about playing with fire and I know I am inviting a joke here =p

    25. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I turned on the TV to see the mayor of Ocala, FL, trying to defend himself. So there's at least one active politician on the list.

    26. Re: Rednecks Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say that there is no possibility whatsoever

      19 hours later:

      Anonymous Says US Senators Were 'Incorrectly Outed' As KKK Members

      Your faith is badly misplaced. While you ponder why this is it would be great if you would keep it in mind when sharing your views in the future.

    27. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by left00coaster · · Score: 1

      All members of the KKK are racist. Hopefully the list will be accurate.

    28. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by rhazz · · Score: 1

      This article is related to the bogus release, not at all tied to Anonymous' data.

    29. Re:Rednecks Anonymous by megaronic · · Score: 1

      This ain't your lucky day.
      Even on /. there's several people with the same name as you.

  2. Ob by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    The crux of the matter comes down to this: is it a burning issue?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Ob by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 4, Funny

      Kkknock it off!

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  3. What's with the .ru accounts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Looking at the Pastebin data, seems almost all the E-mail addresses in the pre-release come from a Russian site. It would be interesting to have some confirmation before people listed in the data get the dogs of war sicced on them.

    1. Re: What's with the .ru accounts? by TheMeuge · · Score: 1

      You mean an anonymous hacker site if not the gold standard of reliability to be used in developing a list of people to persecute?

    2. Re: What's with the .ru accounts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Apparently not.

      They listed a fax number used by the Disability Department or a testing service, which helps students with disabilities arrange for accommodations for their testing.

      http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2015/11/nj_testing_company_fax_line_in_anonymous_kkk_revea.html

    3. Re: What's with the .ru accounts? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the Ku Klux Klan?

    4. Re: What's with the .ru accounts? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Of course that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't listed in the KKK database. Either because the KKK got the number wrong or one of their members used a work number for something.

      No doubt all will become clear in the days ahead.

    5. Re: What's with the .ru accounts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My father was a member of Southern Christian Identity.

      I disagreed with him to the point I was evicted with an 8 hour notice.

      Yet, what if my name is listed there? Does it list my specific disagreements with my ex-father and my efforts to help women and minorities make progress? Or does it just list that the son of a bigot must be a bigot as well?

      I don't care anymore. How can you know I hate women? Look at the gender I was assigned at birth. The actual gender of my body parts and medical opinions of my doctors doesn't count for shit. How can you know I'm racist? Look at my skin color.

      I guess I'll go and check. It will be interesting if I'm listed. It would not be the first time in my life I've been accused of sexism due to my assigned gender and my talents. Might be the first time I've been seriously accused of racism.

      I don't care anymore. If you really don't want me in this world, humans, come for me. I am a homeowner because of the sacrifices I've made. Getting my address would be trivial. Just kill me.

      If I can't get a viable plan together to leave the man's world by 2018, I will look forward to the next life. Avoid major cities starting around 2019. If you don't have a spare gas can, the walk to the gas station will be for your own good.

      UNLESS

    6. Re: What's with the .ru accounts? by KGIII · · Score: 4, Funny

      A buddy and I were going to go to one of their rallies. We were too drunk to drive and unable to actually figure out how to make the pointy hats with sheets - and his girlfriend, at the time, was not impressed with what we did to the linen. It is at this point that I should also share that I'm mixed, racially, and that one of those mixes is black and my friend, whom I was in the Corps with, was so black his nickname was "The Grape Ape" 'cause he was almost purple black - from the Dominican Republic by heritage. We were late to our Klan meeting.

      This is probably for the best. We were in Virginia at the time. We'd probably have been lynched or at least had a good brawl on our hands.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  4. Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One anonymous criminal organization exposing another. For transparency no less!

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

      Came to say just that. While I applaud the effort, "the ironing is delicious."

    2. Re: Irony by halivar · · Score: 4, Funny

      the ironing is delicious

      I feel this comment left me a little flat.

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

      Do you also find it ironic when an executioner pulls the switch on a convicted murderer? Or are all acts viewed with no context with you? Or only when trying to make false equivocation?

    4. Re: Irony by N1AK · · Score: 4, Funny

      I felt pressed to respond and let off some steam.

    5. Re: Irony by halivar · · Score: 2

      As long as you don't get hot under the collar...

    6. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Time for our bi-yearly reminder:

      Anonymous is a generic group-heading that refers to multiple cells of groups.
      Many of these groups hate each other, but they all fall under the same heading of Anonymous since it is where their roots began.
      Occasionally they work with each other for a common goal, but it is rare.

      There is no singular Anonymous group and hasn't been since 2006.

    7. Re: Irony by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Are you trying to claim that Anonymous is sanctioned by the government? Because if not, then there is no comparison.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    8. Re: Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what exactly is the equivocation that is supposedly being made here?

    9. Re: Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're cute when you try to participate in adult conversation.

    10. Re:Irony by Solandri · · Score: 3, Funny

      One anonymous criminal organization exposing another. For transparency no less!

      I like how you made it a trifecta by posting that as anonymous coward.

    11. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No in the case of anomalous its Hypocrisy.

      hypocrisy
      hpäkrs/
      noun
      noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies

              the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.
              synonyms: dissimulation, false virtue, cant, posturing, affectation, speciousness, empty talk, insincerity, falseness, deceit, dishonesty, mendacity, pretense, duplicity; sanctimoniousness, sanctimony, pietism, piousness;
              informalphoniness, fraud
              "must politics be the perennial benchmark of hypocrisy?"

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

      SHILL!!

    13. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Says the AC.

    14. Re: Irony by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Actually, I do. But then I'm not in favor of capital punishment.

      P.S.: I don't consider government approval to be a moral sanction.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    15. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except he wasn't exposing anonymous's members. And I am not exposing his identity.

    16. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm also not exposing your identity. 'Solandri' is just as anonymous as Anonymous Coward.

    17. Re:Irony by HiThere · · Score: 1

      You cannot accurately assert that anymore than any particular Anonymous group can claim to speak for all anonymous groups.

      You don't know the particular members of this group. They may all be following a consistent moral standard. It may even be a laudable moral standard.

      OTOH, some reports have questioned the accuracy of some of the data. If those are accurate then the posting group is at minimum criminally reckless.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    18. Re:Irony by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      But I do think there's an Anonymous Coward group on Slashdot, they keep posting crap every single day!

      Fight for your bitcoins!

    19. Re: Irony by theCzechGuy · · Score: 2

      I am board with your puns.

    20. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Question is, how many of these are from someone's personal "I hate this guy" list.

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

      Irony: It's like goldy or silvery but made of iron.

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

      Time for our bi-yearly reminder:

      Anonymous is a generic group-heading that refers to multiple cells of groups.
      Many of these groups hate each other, but they all fall under the same heading of Anonymous since it is where their roots began.
      Occasionally they work with each other for a common goal, but it is rare.

      There is no singular Anonymous group and hasn't been since 2006.

      But they all promote fear and hate... (it's just that what they fear and hate is politically correct these days).

    23. Re: Irony by Spaham · · Score: 2

      yeah, don't leave it on a back burner

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

      How are you not an anonymous coward? Look at your name. It's bogus, nobody is named that.

    25. Re: Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Jeez, people. Enough of the puns. Don't we have more pressing matters?

    26. Re: Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because you say it's bogus doesn't mean it is. Your comment is proof that Slashdot is dead.

    27. Re: Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your comment is proof that Slashdot not only isn't dead, but that you don't actually believe that it is.

    28. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One is criminal by every conceivable sane definition, and the other is a vigilante group. Not even close to the same thing. It's like Batman versus the Joker.

    29. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Calling Anonymous a criminal organization is just plain silly.

      Primarily because it implies organization. Anonymous is a lot of things... organized isn't one of those things.

      It would be like calling "Heavy Metal Fans" criminals. It's an extremely wide net full of varied individuals. Certainly there are criminals within the ranks, but the group as a whole isn't a criminal venture.

    30. Re:Irony by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

      How is Anonymous a "criminal organization"?

    31. Re:Irony by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Google Slashdot and trolltalk.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    32. Re: Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, don't leave it on a back burner

      Wow, that comment was hot off the permanent press

    33. Re:Irony by Barsteward · · Score: 1

      they can't stop, it must get tiring for them to pass the single brain cell around at such speed to get all the crap posts posted. then again, it could just be one of them stuck in a smelly basement cutting and pasting like mad.

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
    34. Re: Irony by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Yeah, we need to strike while the iron is hot.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    35. Re: Irony by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Mainly because he's pseudonymous not anonymous.

      You might not know his/her other identities, but you can draw together all posts under the name U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M and use that to draw conclusions on credibility, reliability and consistency, and engage in conversation on those grounds.

  5. Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are no journalistic controls in place. They can put whoever they want on that list.

    1. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, this concept that this is an unbiased dump of information makes me wonder. We know Anonymous has political bias. It shows in just about everything they do. Now we're going to have the whole "It said it one the internetz..." crowd beating this one to death.
       
      Just like most other controversies of this era, we'll never know the truth.
       
      I'm really just starting to wonder if Anonymous isn't just a tool for some established political entity.

    2. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by thaylin · · Score: 2

      What specific journalistic controls are you speaking about?

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    3. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by sycodon · · Score: 2

      I have documents that show you are not only a member of the KKK, but also a pedophile.

      What controls do you think should have been applied to that statement?

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    4. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by thaylin · · Score: 1

      What controls are there?

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    5. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Considering the access that Anonymous appears to have to government and corporate data, and the kind of people they go after and the agenda they appear to serve, Anonymous does indeed seem to be heavily influenced by a political entity.

      Not unlike the Occupy Wall Street people. That was a full-blown astroturf campaign.

    6. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Primate+Pete · · Score: 1

      And how do we know this is really Anonymous?

    7. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Nexus7 · · Score: 2

      > We know Anonymous has political bias...

      So does the KKK.

    8. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Reputable" journalists require two independent confirmations before publishing information.

    9. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Now now, there's no evidence he's in the KKK.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    10. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Coren22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because they wore Guy Fawkes masks and everything! They must be the very same Anonymous...

      I'm wondering when the Black Panthers leak is coming, as they are just as much a hate group.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    11. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Frankly, so does any group of people.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    12. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by shaitand · · Score: 0

      Come now. Be honest. You are a republican and are pretty sure the list of politicians is going to consist almost entirely of figures from your party.

      It's got to really suck knowing that without the Klan your party will lose on the balance of power scale.

    13. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your point being? We know the KKK lies and cheats their way through society. Anonymous has too many who blindly follow them regardless of lack of proof. That's a problem. Not many people believe what falls out of the mouths of the klan.

    14. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by WhiplashII · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are aware that almost all KKK members were democrats, right? And that the "party of Lincoln", also known as Republicans, fought a civil war to end slavery?

      Please go ahead and continue to shout the lie...

      --
      while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
    15. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I have no skin in this game and do not for a second trust anything Anonymous puts out unless it comes with a huge amount of independently verifiable sources...

      But I do just really need to say that the Republican party that Abraham Lincoln was a member of has nearly nothing in common with the GOP of today. Any decent student of American history will tell you pretty readily that the Republican Party of Lincoln's time more closely resembles the Democrats of today and that the Whig party much more closely resembled today's Republicans.

    16. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by bug1 · · Score: 1

      Victims can use defamation law to (try to) prosecute a publisher.

      Ofc the point behind anonymous is that arent accountable if they arent identifiable. Which itself is needed because whatever "controls" you can think of that are intended to protect people can also be abused and used to persecute people.

      Maybe people shouldnâ(TM)t be judged based on which lists they are on, and we should only judge people we know.

    17. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. That was true 200 years ago. But since you acknowledged that the two parties swapped ideologues, I why you even bothered posting this asinine comment? Does this make the KKK any less putrid?

    18. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

      Who needs controls... this is a public service. Right?

    19. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are aware that NONE of the members of the Republican party when Lincoln was alive, are still members of the Republican party?

    20. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are aware that almost all KKK members were democrats, right? And that the "party of Lincoln", also known as Republicans, fought a civil war to end slavery?

      Please go ahead and continue to shout the lie...

      You fail to realize that at some point, the party labels flipped. During Lincoln's time, Republicans were northerners. If you look back then, the Democrats were mostly southerners, hence the term 'Dixiecrats".

      Some point down the road, the labels were flipped. If you look closer, the political interests of today's supposed republican are more aligned to that of a dixiecrat / democrat from the civil war era.

      Enjoy!!!!

    21. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by IceAgeComing · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're misquoting and hiding behind historical details.

      The Southern establishment switched from Democrat to Republican in the 1960's in response to the Democratic President Lyndon Johnson (Texas) supporting Civil Rights. The parent post was not about party affiliation 50 years ago. It was about today's party affiliations.

    22. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Klan's ANONYMOUS members can push whatever agenda they want and not have it being tied to the Klan. This dump could remedy that.

    23. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Informative

      Robert Bird was a democrat and KKK member. One of the more famous cases of liberal bias against their own hate. He got a pass for being KKK because he was a good liberal.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    24. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Thanks for showing that you've listened to the political rhetoric from the Left labeling Republicans as racist. One more tool they use to own minority votes without actually helping them with policies.

    25. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I don't know about currently, but in the 1980's the Black Panthers were much less a hate group than a mutual protection society. This, of course, is not how they were depicted in the media, but I lived in an area where they were operating.

      Of course, it's possible that what was true about the local group was not true of other chapters, but the media lied frequently enough when I had information that I don't believe them about when I don't have information.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    26. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Well, that lets out Associated Press.

      (I'm sure they prefer to have two independent confirmations, but they've published stories and photos without that requirement.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    27. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Almost everyone has. And almost everyone has come to regret that decision at some moment. Ask Dan Rather.

    28. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      You mean the same journalistic control the other journalists use in 2015, which is "I've read about it on the Internet"?

      Fight for your bitcoins!

    29. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and some political theorists think that the "southern strategy" Nixon used in 1968 is what led to the current implosion of the Republican party

    30. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A man can change and redeems himself ...

      Byrd joined with Democratic senators to filibuster the Civil Rights Act of 1964,[30] personally filibustering the bill for 14 hours, a move he later said he regretted.[31] Despite an 83-day filibuster in the Senate, both parties in Congress voted overwhelmingly in favor of the Act, and President Johnson signed the bill into law.[32] Byrd also opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 but voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1968. In 2005, Byrd told The Washington Post that his membership in the Baptist church led to a change in his views.

    31. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there are still "reputable" journalists working?

    32. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by khasim · · Score: 0

      Robert Bird was a democrat and KKK member.

      He was. And then he later renounced his KKK membership.

      He got a pass for being KKK because he was a good liberal.

      At the time he was in the KKK, he was NOT a "good liberal".

      He may have been a Democrat but that is not the same as being a liberal.

      You can read more about him on Wikipedia:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd

    33. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      There are no journalistic controls in place.

      Yeah, it would have been so much better if they cited "sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity" or "top officials".

      Journalistic integrity today is a joke. The real journalists seem to be confined to a handful of organizations, like Vice News, or Brian Krebs (who had too much integrity for the Washington Post to keep around). Journalist ethics went out the door when everyone started re-reporting stories based on information from anonymous unverifiable sources as being factual information.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    34. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 0

      And then he later renounced his KKK membership.

      Which is all fine and dandy if the same people who forgave him, would also forgive all the "KKK" that other politicians had, that they also renounced. But that is typically only reserved for good liberals in standing.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    35. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      Which ex-KKK politicians would you like them to forgive?

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    36. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      any decent student of American history = no true scotsman

    37. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by iceaxe · · Score: 1

      You are aware that political parties change over time, right?

      Civil rights act, "Southern Strategy", etc.

      While not particularly a fan of either party, I can recognize that the current Republican party has struggled to appeal to any kind of racial or social minority due to its stated and implied "conservative" goals of maintaining the unfair privileges enjoyed by those already unfairly privileged, while the Democratic party has enjoyed strong minority support possibly due to making unlikely promises of righting past wrongs.

      Then politicians of both parties proceed to pander almost entirely to wealthy and corporate campaign donors in their actual activities in office.

      I tend to blame this mostly on a fundamentally flawed system of elections.

      In any case, your statements, while largely true, are correctly cast in the past tense.

      --
      WALSTIB!
    38. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Dahan · · Score: 1

      If you look back then, the Democrats were mostly southerners, hence the term 'Dixiecrats".

      "Mostly"? Hardly. Dixiecrats were small, short-lived splinter group off the main Democratic party. They were only around for one year: 1948.

    39. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by meglon · · Score: 1

      I am aware that, regardless of what party name they chose, the KKK was, and is, a conservative organization, and Lincoln's republican party was liberal. I'm sorry, but seriously, only a complete fucking idiot would compare today's GOP to that during Lincoln's time, or even from the civil rights era of the 60's, and suggest they're even remotely the same. You have to just be trolling us, right; no one can be this completely fucking stupid.

      --
      Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
    40. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Not unlike the Occupy Wall Street people. That was a full-blown astroturf campaign.

      Occupy Wall Street was not astroturf, as reflected by their lack of a coherent message, lack of any organization, outright hostility towards affecting any sort of political change, and lack of any sort of clue as to how people would react to them. Barney Frank's assessment of the occupy crowd was pretty enlightening. To say he was pessimistic would be an understatement.

      The Tea Party Movement, from the start, had support from Americans for Prosperity, and the first major event, the Taxpayer March on Washington, was organized by the Heartland Institute, the aforementioned Americans for Prosperity, Freedomworks, and others. They were heavily promoted by and supported by Fox News commentators, Glenn Beck in particular.

    41. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      > And how do we know this is really Anonymous?

      It doesn't matter, is literally the point. If they claim to be Anonymous and are doing something that Anonymous would do, then they are Anonymous. Would Anonymous screw with the KKK? Absolutely. So they are doing that.

      I don't think we lose much by assuming they are the same group, because they are generally acting in the same fashion. In general, after the feds tracked down the original crew, we haven't seen the same vigor as before, but they still do hacktivist stuff here and there to stay relevant and scare their potential foes.

    42. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know who they are? No? Then they are anonymous.

      It's not a name, it's a fact.

    43. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >We know Anonymous has political bias.

      No you don't. You know this group of people who are claiming to be anonymous has a political bias. Stop your thinking that everyone using that moniker is in any way connected and you'll understand why trying to pin down Anonymous is a fool's errand.

    44. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And because of that, having a name appear on the list shouldn't equal instant condemnation.

      But it might earn you a bit more scrutiny in your extra-curricular activities

    45. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could very well be considered a member of the KKK given certain distortions in logic.

      My ex-father was a Southern Christian Identity minister. I'm giving all kinds of doxxing clues in these comments, btw. I'm curious if it will happen. I've successfully mentored one woman who had mistakenly majored in English despite being a programmer in learning the ways of the programmer. My current apprentice is spiraling forward, advancing in her knowledge and talents talent day after day. I'm happy to report that she has a dark skin color. I wish to assist her in whatever way I can, and she's given me new faith in her progress recently. I will continue until she gives up, and I will try to encourage her to never give up. Always spiral forward! That is the way of the hacker. My other student is trans, and she's the best hacker I know. Given those details, doxxing me should be achievable.

      I vehemently disagree with the premise that 1.) some specific translation (KJV) of the bible is the only one applicable (I prefer MSG (The Message) myself) and 2.) the bible taken by itself is a complete guide to philosophy, and 3.) that it even contains accurate descriptions of historical events and 4.) that we can even trust that some method exists for events from the future to be communicated to prophets. Oh and #5) playing stupid etymological games.

      Despite this, it's simple to see that because of my gender on paper, I must hate women. It's simple to see that because of the color of my skin, I'm racist.

      Is the son of a bigot a bigot for no other reason than being a son of a bigot? Probably. I don't care anymore. I merely want to share my art with those who are interested. I don't care if they have boobs, and I don't care about skin color. Watch me show up on this list, however. It would not be the first time.

      CISA, TPP, TTIP, and TISA are all being rammed through. Observe the Clinton Coronation. Simply amazing. Avoid major cities beginning around 2019. There will be riots in all major cities, followed by martial law and FEMA concentration camps. I hope you have a spare gas can, otherwise the walk to the gas station will be for your own good.

      UNLESS

    46. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if the KKK is always in the '20s, then the Black Panthers will always be in the '60s, with their Minister of Propaganda, Eldridge Cleaver, eternally raping those White women as "an insurrectionary act"

    47. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the switch over took about 40 years. Republican penetration in the south did not reach the really solid levels we take for granted today until around 2000.

    48. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by jdeisenberg · · Score: 4, Informative

      a) It's Robert Byrd. b) If you look at his voting record from 1968 onwards, you'll see that he was hardly voting the Klan agenda: He voted in support of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. In 2003-2004 he had a 100% "pro" voting record from the NAACP, and in 2005 proposed additional funding for the Martin Luther King Jr Memorial.

    49. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by TimSSG · · Score: 2
      Ha Ha Ha; now that was very funny.
      Filled with lies but funny!
      Tim S.

      So I have no skin in this game and do not for a second trust anything Anonymous puts out unless it comes with a huge amount of independently verifiable sources...

      But I do just really need to say that the Republican party that Abraham Lincoln was a member of has nearly nothing in common with the GOP of today. Any decent student of American history will tell you pretty readily that the Republican Party of Lincoln's time more closely resembles the Democrats of today and that the Whig party much more closely resembled today's Republicans.

    50. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm wondering when the Black Panthers leak is coming, as they are just as much a hate group.

      As soon as you get hold of their information.

    51. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Just as much? Just as much?! And this gets modded to +5 Insightful?

      Obviously some seriously racist shitbag has modpoints today. I'm just going to point out that in terms of actual victims, even if the Panthers were the violent group they were portrayed as being, they can't stand in the shadow of decades of lynchings.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    52. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I'm wondering when the Black Panthers leak is coming, as they are just as much a hate group.

      On what planet? You're either misinformed or trolling.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan

    53. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by martin-boundary · · Score: 1
      True, but it's easy enough to test.

      1) Tell your best friend (must be black!) that you bought a used TV on ebay from some guy, and would he mind going to the guy's house to pick it up for you?

      2) Wait for your friend to return.

    54. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Would that be Barney Frankly or Benjamin Frankly ?

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    55. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Now that is a convincing argument. Saying you renounce or support something is meaningless, and doubly-so if you're a politician.

      Actually DOING something to stand by the statement -over a long period - that carries weight.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    56. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      If there's one thing you can depend on reactionary right wingers for, it's the false equivalence fallacy. Every time.

      "I once saw a black woman call a white woman a bitch, so there is an equal amount of racism from black and white people."

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    57. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Lets start with the four mentioned ... Mkay?

      http://www.mediaite.com/online...

      As the article suggested, if just having your name and email address on a "free to sign up" website database, then Barack Obama was trying to cheat on his wife at Ashley Madison.

      But it is much easier to get people to spread the lies, than it is to actually verify them. Just accuse, and disseminate the lies and as Harry Reid says about his lying "It worked".

      This is why I can't stand many progressives, they don't care about the truth, only the narrative they are promoting. "It was a YouTube Video"

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    58. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Unless he was involved in a lynching, then nothing he says fixes that. Guilty by association and all that.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    59. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      If he was, then he should be charged with conspiracy to commit murder.
      And you know what, if he was charged, convicted, sentenced and afterward spend decades genuinely atoning.... that would STILL carry a lot of weight.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    60. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      genuinely atoning.... that would STILL carry a lot of weight.

      Maybe.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    61. Re:Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Carrying weight is not the same "convincing" - it's just a step in that process. In the end, how convincing it is - and how deserving somebody is of a second chance largely comes down to how sincere their remorse it. Since we haven't yet developed mind-reading technology, gauging that is by necessity a subjective thing. Some are more easily convinced, some less easily - but there is a point where the majority of people would feel that it really does look like the efforts are sincere.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  6. its not just white people.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    90% of what i read above, the BLACK communities in the USA are doing as well...

    1. Re:its not just white people.. by shaitand · · Score: 1

      That is true. There was a time to look the other way while things corrected themselves but the time when shouting black power is political suicide just as sure as white power should be coming soon. I mean, there was a time like that before but this time it would be because people shouting black power are racist rather than because everyone else is.

  7. Hurray for suppressing dissent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We should never allow people with unpopular opinions to have any privacy at all.

    1. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by thaylin · · Score: 1

      If you want privacy dont be a politician.. seriously.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    2. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are the odds that those published will end up losing their jobs and such? You think that will end up causing more problems?

      This might be a better way to deal with things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis

    3. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by TWX · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What are the odds that those published will end up losing their jobs and such? You think that will end up causing more problems?

      This might be a better way to deal with things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Those with whom we choose to associate say a lot about our character and about our choices. Choices are one thing that an employee can be judged-on. I see no reason for any employer to be compelled to retain anyone that is affiliated with an organization like this.

      As to your point about dialogue, that only works when the group being addressed is either well enough organized or small enough to be cohesive and for its members to operate as a single voice. Look at the fragmentation of the IRA during The Troubles, there were an uncountable number of splinter groups such that establishing a dialogue with one was no sure means to deal with all, an if anything could incite violence by the others.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    4. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      These aren't politicians. But politician or not, outing somebody for stating any opinion at all definitely a chilling effect on free speech.

      I myself hold the opinion that people cannot come anywhere close to changing their biological sex at any point past conception. It's an unpopular opinion, but there's zero justification to try to get me fired over it or have people showing up my house and harass me over it.

    5. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      fair enough points

      but using that same logic, we should not be applauding obama for wanting to remove the box asking if job seekers are criminals or not correct? I mean its another way to judge character right?

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    6. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2

      We should never allow people with unpopular opinions to have any privacy at all.

      Although I agree with you that this isn't a case where the violation of privacy is warranted, handwaving it away as an "unpopular opinion" is disingenuous and, frankly, betrays your credibility. You cannot behave as though free speech is more important than the safety of lots of people, then turn around and suddenly it's just a few inconsequential mutterings and any response shows just how petty one side is.

      Either free speech is powerful or it isn't, pick one and stick with it, you don't get to have your cake and eat it, too.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    7. Re: Hurray for suppressing dissent by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Uhh that seems unrelated. These ppl are assholes who harrass/intimidate/etc others using their privacy.

    8. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      And the difference between that and the 50s with keeping anyone who didn't have a hard right wing imperialist streak from working in many fields is....what exactly?

      Remember boys and girls that your views may be mainstream NOW but that does NOT mean they will be mainstream in the future, and those same weapons you applaud being used against those you don't agree with can be easily used on you. If free speech is to be anything but an echo chamber mockery of the word we MUST protect the right of those we do not agree with to speak, otherwise your only freedom is the "freedom" to agree with the majority on everything.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    9. Re: Hurray for suppressing dissent by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Uhh that seems unrelated. These ppl are assholes who harrass/intimidate/etc others using their privacy.

      Why? It's one thing if they're a terrorist organization, but it's a whole other thing if they're just groveling among themselves about how much they hate x. Unless you can prove somebody has done something beyond simply being bigoted, then doxing them is an evil thing to do.

    10. Re: Hurray for suppressing dissent by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Using that logic, unless you can prove that it's an evil thing to do, it's just a harmless prank - as everyone knows what a socially responsible organisation the KKK are, the response towards leaning the members' names will be nothing but positive.

    11. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      > I mean its another way to judge character right?

      Except of course that the entire motivation for removing it is that it isn't, at least, not anymore.
      The vast majority of people in the US with criminal records have them for minor drug offenses - and there is a clear and massive racial bias in that (African Americans are convicted of minor drug offenses at a much higher rate despite proof that proof that Caucasians commit them no less frequently).
      So if whether you have a criminal record or not is most often merely indicative of whether your were fortunate enough to be born white or black (or if you want to be charitable: middle class or working class) then it's no indication of character at all.

      The other consideration is that a released criminal has been punished for his crime, he has paid his debt to society and ideally we WANT him to earn an honest living now - making that harder, or near impossible, is harmful to everybody (including the potential employer). On the other hand - the names revealed as KKK members have not in any way made up for it.
      If one of them were to forswear his allegiance to them in the future, and publicly and repeatedly apologize and undertake restitutionary actions of some sort or other (maybe provide police information voluntarily on the more criminal elements gleaned while an insider or something) then that would show up in the google as well - and likely help rather than hinder an application for a job.
      Hell the world basically forgave Albert Speer and he was at one point one of the most powerful NAZI leaders in the German government - but he appologized and seemed to show real remorse for the rest of his days.
      True or not ? I guess we'll never know - but people are suckers for a redemption story.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    12. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I myself hold the opinion that people cannot come anywhere close to changing their biological sex at any point past conception. It's an unpopular opinion, but there's zero justification to try to get me fired over it or have people showing up my house and harass me over it.

      I doubt that anyone would care about your reactionary opinions, unless you started calling for transgendered people to be lynched or something.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    13. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's put it another way...

      Said KKK member gets fired from their job. Legal or not, their being fired had nothing to do with job performance and everything to do with their association. Will they try to redeem themselves? Or will the bitterness of being fired over this polarize them to hate (it's Jews and African-Americans, right?) certain groups even more?

      I am not defending KKK members, but they are also human beings even if their beliefs are misfounded and/or ignorant. I'm on the side that it's better to unite people rather than segregate, and I feel that invading their privacy in the form of a "shaming" is more likely to segregate them, as opposed to what Daryl Davis does. I posted http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=8265749&cid=50851211

      To clarify, when I say unite, I mean to show that we are all humans.

      I guess I could say that two wrongs don't make a right.

    14. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I see no reason for any employer to be compelled to retain anyone that is affiliated with an organization like this.

      Employers should not be able to use aspects of a person's private life to fire them. Otherwise they might start getting rid of atheists/Christians, people who have children out of wedlock, people who join gay rights protests (but are not actually gay, since that is protected) etc. Only when their decisions make their position untenable should employers be able to act.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    15. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by TWX · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between having a 'streak' and paying dues and participating in rank-structure in an organization that has actively engaged in bloodshed against other people.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    16. Re: Hurray for suppressing dissent by Triklyn · · Score: 2

      and, it's troubling that it makes use of the "200 years" line.

      Unless you've got some highlanders under them there hoods, we generally, in the civilized world, don't hold people responsible for the sins of their fathers. Probably a vanishingly small fraction of the membership has ever taken part in a lynching. And there are laws to go after those people... you know the ones against murder.

      This is a troubling thing, going after americans for their associations.

    17. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      the KKK is at liberty to hold parades, rallies, as is any group of americans with any common opinion or belief.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      free speech is more important than the potential safety of potential victims. either you're telling your people to go kill those black people over there. or you're free to say whatever you want.

      Saying "i hate black people and think they should all get hanged" isn't actually enough to warrant restricting their first amendment rights.

      I find it troubling that a non-governmental entity is trying to do something that we won't allow our government to do to us.

    18. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      and if this were 50 years ago, and this were the nascent civil rights movement being exposed?

      would your opinion still be the same? flip the viewpoints, if your opinion remains the same then i've got nothing to say. If it changes, you should ask yourself why it changed?

      your take on the matter should be exactly the same regardless of the view of those being exposed; otherwise you're not really considering the heart of the issue.

    19. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      don't agree with amijojo much, but this will do.

    20. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Saying "i hate black people and think they should all get hanged" isn't actually enough to warrant restricting their first amendment rights.

      Are you describing that as an opinion or as a threat?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    21. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      i think it can't constitute a threat, unless there are actual black people who can be hanged in the immediate vicinity that could possibly be hanged, or in previous speech I have actually described a specific individual or specific individuals that the listener could track down and hang.

      everything else is simply opinion.

      It'd be a stretch to interpret any of it as actual intent, and a judge would laugh the prosecution out of court.

    22. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Okay, so you're saying until people have actually been killed in very specific circumstances, the speech has no real power to it. Right?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    23. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by TWX · · Score: 1

      The nacent civil rights movement was seeking to end dissimilar treatment of people based on something outside of their control (ie, race).

      This group was seeking to use both violence and systemic structure to perpetuate and even increase the dissimilar treatment of people based on something outside of the control of the targeted people.

      Judge people for their actions, their choices. How people behave and who they freely associate with are actions and choices.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    24. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by TWX · · Score: 1

      If the group in question hadn't ever used violence then I might agree with you, but this group has used violence and does not believe against the use of violence.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    25. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      yes, but now you're making a judgement call based on your own moral grounding. Who's to say that 50 years from now, you won't be in the moral minority?

      the rightness of an act is not predicated on who it happens to. Does me murdering a baby differ from me murdering someone on death row? Regardless i'm still guilty of killing someone.

      The majority of these people are most likely all talk. Judge them by their associations? judge them by who they're seen with? Let me never live in an america like that. Guilt by association.

    26. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      nah, i pretty much agree with the supreme court on this one.

      intent, imminence and likelihood.

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/we...
      The standard developed determined that speech advocating the use of force or crime could only be proscribed where two conditions were satisfied: (1) the advocacy is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action,” and (2) the advocacy is also “likely to incite or produce such action.”

      it's got power. but at a certain point, you're robbing the actual perpetrator of their responsibility too.

      If i say black people should die and 3 years later one of the listeners killed a black person? does that mean that I am guilty of inciting the listener to violence?

    27. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Before I continue I want to say that our opinions aren't that different.

      If i say black people should die and 3 years later one of the listeners killed a black person? does that mean that I am guilty of inciting the listener to violence?

      An argument could be made either way, but that's not what we're talking about. It's a question of do we allow the rights of individuals to be violated. Remember, we're talking about minimizing an expression of speech as "just an opinion". What happens when "just an opinion" means "I ain't gonna hire you.", not because the person saying that is behaving as a bigot, but because they don't want trouble from the locals who have subscribed to that nonsense?

      It's powerful enough that it isn't an issue of restricting first amendment rights, rather it becomes an issue of protecting the rights of minorities. You have to minimize the impact of it quite a bit to fit it in a box labeled 'opinion'.

         

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    28. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      That's where it gets tricky, and people a lot more qualified about it have to think deep thoughts on those fringes.

      hiring and firing. When does a employer's right to do with his money what he wants, trump vs get trumped by a employee's right to a livelihood? How do you enforce the equal opportunity employment of minorities? even bad people have rights,

      i hate the power of the twitter mob, on things like donald sterling and brendan eich. but i don't know if governmental protection is the answer to each individual user exercising his or her right of association and speech. when do the rights of the oppressed trump those of the oppressor. when does good taste and the moral majority, become oppressive with their good intent?

      donald sterling lost half a billion in the forced sale of his team, due solely to an illegally recorded private conversation.

      brendan eich lost his job due to a political opinion.

      because these fringe cases are... difficult. I tend to err on the side of more freedom. I don't like it, but those organizing a digital lynch mob against sterling and eich, were well within their rights.

      and hate speech must be protected, unless they're actively calling for someone's head.

    29. Re: Hurray for suppressing dissent by weweedmaniii · · Score: 1

      and, it's troubling that it makes use of the "200 years" line.

      Yes 200 years, since the klan was formed after the Civil War which ended 150 years ago. Either someone is really bad at math 150=200 or They were busy texting someone during History class the day they covered the end of the Civil War.

      Unless you've got some highlanders under them there hoods, we generally, in the civilized world, don't hold people responsible for the sins of their fathers. Probably a vanishingly small fraction of the membership has ever taken part in a lynching. And there are laws to go after those people... you know the ones against murder.

      This is a troubling thing, going after americans for their associations.

      --
      "If stupid things work...then they are not stupid."
    30. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Crosshair84 · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between having a 'streak' and paying dues and participating in rank-structure in an organization that has actively engaged in bloodshed against other people.

      That's an awfully loose definition you're using, you sure your own neck isn't gonna get caught in that rope?

      If someone published a database with the name, address, and photo of everyone who has ever been an abortion doctor in the US, you'd be cool with that? After all, nearly half of the country believes that a fetus is a human life and an abortion, done when the mothers life is not in danger, is murder. Therefore abortion doctors are "actively engaged in bloodshed against other people" from their point of view.

      Heck, what about people who have simply donated to or are members of a pro-choice organisation? By your loose standards, those people are "paying dues and participating in rank-structure in an organization that has actively engaged in bloodshed against other people".

      Are you gonna be OK when people get fired or passed over for promotion at work because a pro-life supervisor or owner found out that someone made regular donations to a pro-choice group? Oh the "official" reason won't be that, but if a supervisor/owner has any brains and patience, they'll get rid of them one way or another.

      Hairyfeet is right, there is a very good chance that a view you think is popular and not going anywhere today is going to be unpopular, potentially VERY unpopular, 10 or 20 years from now.

    31. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by Crosshair84 · · Score: 1

      Judge them by their associations? judge them by who they're seen with? Let me never live in an america like that. Guilt by association.

      Well said.

    32. Re:Hurray for suppressing dissent by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      What amazes me is how few here actually remember their history as this has happened before and in our VERY recent past...remember the 1980s?

      Everything the current progressive movement holds dear would have been right at home in the 70s, women's rights, gay rights, acceptance and talk of decriminalizing drugs...then came the 80s and the hard right shift. After 1980 if you held those views you were considered a fool at best and at worst a possible threat to this country as your views could be seen to be helping the USSR. I mean for fuck's sake we had actual witch hunts in the 80s with the whole "satanic cult" bullshit that ended up with people actually DYING from what was nothing but mass insanity stirred up by a couple of quack shrinks pushing their BS book.

      So these kids need to seriously wake the fuck up, as those weapons they are more than happy to hand out to be used against those they do not like can be easily used against them, and culture shifts? They can happen as fast as you can snap your fingers, just compare the popular views of 78 to 81, it doesn't even look like the same country.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  8. Backwater racist rednecks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pretty sure this list will surprise no one. "Cleatus, the town racist, is in the KKK? Well I'll be dipped!"

    1. Re:Backwater racist rednecks by shaitand · · Score: 0

      If you can't find enough republicans on the list to stymie their political power in congress I'd be amazed... only a little amazed because I'd assume that meant you didn't have the complete list.

    2. Re:Backwater racist rednecks by deKernel · · Score: 1

      As your first idiotic comment was corrected by WhiplashII above, here you go:

      You are aware that almost all KKK members were democrats, right? And that the "party of Lincoln", also known as Republicans, fought a civil war to end slavery?

      Please go ahead and continue to shout the lie... /quote.

    3. Re:Backwater racist rednecks by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      If you're talking history, yes. If you're talking the last 50 years, then no, they are almost all Republicans. Such was the turnaround in the positioning of the parties.

  9. Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh wait... we hates the KKK so it's just "publishing" informaiton.

    Information we don't even have decent proof as to the nature of the source.

    Like Dan Rather's proof that Bush got preferential treatment - Until the documents were proved as forgeries - That's ok, he said, the documents are fake but what they said is true!

    So which is it? Do Slashdot's editors now agree that doxxing is good?

    1. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Much as I loathe the KKK and all that they stand for, this action is not one I can support.

      I'm not from the US so I don't know much about the legal status of the KKK. We dinhave a similar situation here though, where there was a leak of data from the British National Party, a gang of similar right-wing racist toe-rags.

      The rub is, that much as I also despise the BNP, they are recognised as a legitimate political party, and while being a BNP member may be frowned upon, it's a legitimate although unwholesome aspect of democracy.

      By all means prosecute KKK members who commit crimes. Not having been brought up under the US constitution, I also see a case for prosecutions under incitement and hate speech laws - I appreciate many Americans will disagree on this. But anon outing them just because they're an easy and unpopular target feels a bit cheap.

  10. ADL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who is going to cross reference this with the ADL? I'm sure we'll find a lot of overlap.

  11. a real false flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The data in this one makes no sense.

    This isn't Anon, this is someone else trying to discredit Anonymous before the real data comes out.

    1. Re:a real false flag by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      http://www.politicususa.com/20...

      4 US senators named so far, yet no denials or complaints by the senators in question yet. If this was fake, why wouldn't someone whose name is on it expose it as a fake?

    2. Re:a real false flag by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      sometimes its better to ignore things like this. say something like im not wasting my time with an answer to such a bs claim

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    3. Re:a real false flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uh, whut?

      Coats has already gotten angry at the wippersnappers on the internet.

      Coats is an idiot and I am ashamed he is one of my Senators and he has done nothing for Indiana in his terms, but the connection is a little tenuous here.

    4. Re: a real false flag by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Why should anybody dignify these people by responding to them. Random trash accusations on the internet don't need to be acknowledged. Or do you think President Obama should have to respond to every crank birther?

    5. Re: a real false flag by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      He did respond to them. He answered where he was born and all that on many many occasions. That may not have been the best example.

    6. Re:a real false flag by schneidafunk · · Score: 1
      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    7. Re:a real false flag by hondo77 · · Score: 1
      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    8. Re:a real false flag by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      http://www.politicususa.com/20...

      4 US senators named so far, yet no denials or complaints by the senators in question yet. If this was fake, why wouldn't someone whose name is on it expose it as a fake?

      No doubt they feel caught between the iron and the board.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    9. Re:a real false flag by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Having had a little more time, all the mayors named have denied it, and it died there with that, but I've still not seen a senator deny it. Why wouldn't they deny it if it isn't true?

    10. Re:a real false flag by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      Having had a little more time, all the mayors named have denied it, and it died there with that, but I've still not seen a senator deny it. Why wouldn't they deny it if it isn't true?

      Because to deny the KKK would be to lose white racist votes?

      Not saying that is the case, just saying it's a possible reason for a politician.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    11. Re:a real false flag by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Lose the votes to whom? Democrats? Not the racist vote...

    12. Re:a real false flag by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      Lose the votes to whom? Democrats? Not the racist vote...

      How about a democratic candidate (or president as the case may be) that tries to refute the validity of his American birth certificate?

      The reality is that sheeple just don't do much fact checking. They start off with bias and eagerly swallow anything that reinforces it.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    13. Re:a real false flag by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I haven't looked at it, but it seems to be the consensus that Republicans are more likely to make up stories close to an election in order to sway it. It even has a name for it now, drawn by a recent time when the Republicans did it. "Swift boating" is used to describe an untrue personal attack (launched close enough to the election to not be refuted before the election - optional). When you want to hate the "other side" the facts don't matter. Fox News said it, so it must be true.

  12. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by TomR+teh+Pirate · · Score: 5, Informative

    The usefulness of your post notwithstanding, I heard in a news broadcast a few months ago (to my recollection) that the Klan's membership used to numbers in the millions at its peak and is now measured in tens of thousands. Happily, it's a club apparently on the decline.

  13. Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You expect me to believe the Klan uses Russian email addresses?

    1. Re:Seriously? by ArylAkamov · · Score: 2

      They say it be as it is, comrade.

      But is not.

  14. I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1, Informative

    Oh wait, they are not doing anything to expose actual terrorists, because that might actually be dangerous?

    I don't think much of the KKK but to call them "terrorists" seems a pretty big stretch at this point because they've not really done anything, or been relevant for some time. They probably talk a lot of shit on private mailing lists, but as we all SHOULD know that doesn't mean much.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by thaylin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What is a terrorist?

      a person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims.

      the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

      So are you saying that the KKK does not use violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims?

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    2. Re:I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by harrkev · · Score: 1

      So are you saying that the KKK does not use violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims?

      No, not as far as I know. Well, not lately.

      I find the notion of the KKK abhorrent, an I despise anybody that would join such an organization. However, if they have not broken a law, there is honestly not much that you can or should do to these people, from a legal perspective. Feel free to shun them, and call them names. But having an ideology (no matter how stupid it is) and joining a group is not, by itself illegal.

      I have not heard of any KKK violence in quite a while (things were different 40 years ago). If any members did commit any violence or break any laws, then throw them in prison.

      If this list is true, I would hope that any elected official on the list would immediately resign. Otherwise, recall efforts should be launched.

      --
      "-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
    3. Re:I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      They do, but they're not remotely the threat that they used to be. The various non-KKK white power groups are more of a problem.

      I despise the KKK and what they stand for, but as long as they're not using violence or threat of violence, they have the right to undertake their actions anonymously. The ACLU has sided with them several times on free speech and anonymity points. Publishing this list is a form of presumed guilt, and as others have mentioned, there's little way to prove that it's accurate.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    4. Re:I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by bmo · · Score: 2

      I don't think much of the KKK but to call them "terrorists" seems a pretty big stretch

      The KKK has done some pretty bad things over the past decades. On equal with what ISIS and other terrorists have done.

      Indeed the definition of terrorism is "the use of violence is the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes."

      http://withoutsanctuary.org/

      Tell me that was not violence for political purposes. Try me.

      Just because the lynchings aren't widespread anymore doesn't mean the other violence went away. And it's not just "Cletus the redneck douchebag" as a member, it's politicians and law enforcement.

      Yes, these people do need to be exposed. If this makes you uneasy, too bad.

      --
      BMO

    5. Re:I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      The KKK is by definition a terrorist organization. The intentional try to instill fear in people for their own personal agenda.

      Which ... Ironically ... Is EXACTLY WHAT ANONYMOUS DOES. They just don't have the balls to do anything other than hide in moms basement and run scripts someone else wrote while they hide. The Internet is the silly named groups white hoods, they are just too stupid to realize how idiotic they make themselves look

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    6. Re:I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      Oh wait, they are not doing anything to expose actual terrorists...

      Oh really? The only people that seems to have scared them off are the drug cartels.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    7. Re:I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is a terrorist?

      Black lives matter.
      PETA
      Black Panthers
      The Weathermen
      Occupy Wall Street

      All of which have been active far more recently than the KKK.

    8. Re:I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh wait, they are not doing anything to expose actual terrorists, because that might actually be dangerous?

      I don't think much of the KKK but to call them "terrorists" seems a pretty big stretch at this point because they've not really done anything, or been relevant for some time. They probably talk a lot of shit on private mailing lists, but as we all SHOULD know that doesn't mean much.

      I agree with the assessment of the KKK by MAD magazine in the mid-1980s:

      "The KKK is like a college fraternity,except it's members are all too dumb to get into college."

    9. Re:I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um... because ISIS people aren't trying to hide their nature while holding positions of responsibility and supposed impartiality within the United States?

    10. Re:I look forward to the ISIS publication.... by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      >the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

      Of course, Noam Chomsky would point out that the vast majority of US military operations in the past 100 years fit this definition (and indeed, fails to fit the definition of anything else).

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  15. Questionable Accuracy: Include Gay, Latina Mayors by Koreantoast · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The short post of four US Senators and five US mayors includes one openly gay mayor and a older Latina woman who started her political career organizing Mexican laborers with Cesar Chavez. That alone casts a bit of doubt on the accuracy of this list.

    An alternative theory - a lot of these individuals may have signed up for these mailing lists simply to monitor these groups, and some of them may have just been signed up by other people as a prank. Just pulling information from a mailing list hardly represents membership.

  16. Dicks v Assholes? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

    I'm with the dicks.

    1. Re:Dicks v Assholes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can survive without a dick, but not without an asshole. Dicks are optional, but assholes are essential.

  17. The Reason for the Russian by Shoten · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, a lot of people have been asking about this...asking why so many of the addresses end in ".ru"

    Fundamentally...think about it. Russia is a haven for a lot of different things, including bulletproof hosting that is beyond the reach of the FBI and other Western LEOs, either via direct raids, wiretaps or by more procedural means (subpoenas, etc.). So it entirely makes sense that people who are, in the truest sense of the word, interested in the overthrow of the US Government as it exists today should use email accounts that are hosted in Russia, far from the reach of the organizations that are out to get them.

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    1. Re:The Reason for the Russian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      When was the last time you saw a Black Russian other than the cocktail of vodka and coffee liqueur?
      Russia is the last great bastion of white supremacists.

    2. Re:The Reason for the Russian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That would also mean that KKK members are extremely computer-savvy. Much more competent than most paedophiles, terrorist groups etc.

    3. Re:The Reason for the Russian by moosehooey · · Score: 1

      I think the more likely explanation is the Russian spam-bots testing website fields for spam purposes, and thus ending up on the lists.

    4. Re:The Reason for the Russian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't it ironic that in the 21st century, Americans need to look to Russia to seek protection for their freedoms of speech and association?

    5. Re:The Reason for the Russian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > When was the last time you saw a Black Russian

      There is a well-known eastern european joke set to that theme:
      In the early 1970s the CIA is humiliated by many soviet HUMINT successes and decides to retaliate by training a super-agent and infiltrating him to Russia to assassinate the party general secretary Brezhnev.

      The agent parachutes in and sets out on foot. He soon encounters a collective farm worker. They start discussing the next 5year plan's shrinking vodka rations. The farmer suddenly asks: Comrade, aren't you an imperialist spy? He kills the farmer and buries the body in the canopy.

      Over the forest he meets a high-school girl on a bicycle. They start discussing if Visotsky or the Beatles is best. Suddenly she asks: friend, aren't you an imperialist spy? He rapes and strangles her and dumps the body into a bear cave.

      He continues the journey and eventually encounters a pensioner lady collecting mushrooms and helps her pick. Suddenly she asks: Son, aren't you an imperialist spy? Why do you think so? Well, we haven't got many negros here since Pushkin...

  18. I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But being a Klansman is not inherently illegal. Being an Anonymous hacker that deals in stolen data is. While I agree that the KKK has a horrible message, they aren't the criminals here.

    1. Re:I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm willing to bet that SJWs ruin more lives than the KKK do. They're both despicable groups of people.

    2. Re:I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by shaitand · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But unlike being a criminal, being a Klan member indicates you are a bad person.

    3. Re:I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being a Klansman is not illegal.

      Being in Anonymous is not illegal.

      The rest of your post shows your very obvious bias.

    4. Re:I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not liking black people does not necessarily make you a bad person. Perhaps just stupid and ignorant. Unless they're actually doing bad things based on race, they're not doing anything "bad". Telling bad jokes and bitching about the guy down the street with other like minded fools is not inherently bad.

    5. Re:I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but while that's not extremely bad, it's still bad. Bad comes in gradations as much as does good...and they aren't always even contradictory. But denigrating a group of people counts as bad. That's why these days villains normally have green skin...that doesn't hurt anybody. Polish jokes, however, are bad, and people who choose to tell them are being at least slightly bad. That may be involved in why they were replaced by elephant jokes (among the people that I knew), though if so I wasn't aware of it.

      Jokes and actions aimed at putting someone else "one down" are alway bad actions, even when there is no intention of causing injury. (And putting someone "one up" isn't the opposite, though it's usually not perceived as humor.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    6. Re:I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess we need to stop telling "yo' mama" jokes too? There is almost nothing anyone can say any more that is not insensitive to someone else. There is a difference between doing things to others with the intent to disparage them and saying things between two people with no intent to harass or harm another. Is someone "bad" because they call their ex-wife a bitch when talking about her with his best friend? Saying it to her face could be hateful, but it does not label that guy as "bad". He simply dislikes her and says unkind things behind her back.

    7. Re:I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by renderhead · · Score: 2

      Being a passive racist is not the same as joining a racist organization.

      --
      I wish that my inferiority complex were as good as yours.

      -RenderHead

    8. Re:I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being a klansman isn't illegal. Being an anon isn't illegal.

      Murdering someone for the color of their skin is illegal. Making illicit copies of someone else's data is also illegal

      I'll let you work out which is the greater evil.

    9. Re:I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Being a stupid and ignorant person who dislikes black people does not make you a member of a radical terrorist organization like the KKK.

      This is not a group that sits idle bitching about the guy down the street with other like minded fools.

    10. Re:I'm not defending the Klan or anything... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Since I've never heard a "yo' mama" joke that I thought even a trifle funny, I wouldn't consider that a major loss. I consider it an unfortunate weakness that I occasionally find a racially or nationality based joke to be funny. Nobody's perfect. At least I avoid telling them.

      If you want to make jokes that are less bad, tell them about your boss, or someone with equivalent power over you.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  19. You're wasting your time, the Klan is a joke by NotDrWho · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Klan as a mainstream group, even in the deep south, peaked in the 1920's. It had a brief minor resurgence in the 1960's during the civil rights movement, but for the most part it's a fringe-of-a-fringe-of-a-fringe movement and has been for most of its existence. Exposing them isn't even fighting racism, since their membership rolls today are made up of a tiny handful of disenfranchised rednecks who don't have any power to oppress or intimidate anyone. Hitting them today is like stabbing Julius Caesar several decades after his funeral. It's a pointless feel-good exercise that doesn't help anyone.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:You're wasting your time, the Klan is a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      More blacks are murdered by other blacks in one year, than have been killed by the KKK in its entire existence.

      See also "Worrying about the wrong problem"

    2. Re:You're wasting your time, the Klan is a joke by LaurenCates · · Score: 1

      While I'm pretty much in agreement with you (though I wouldn't discount the idea that politicians were part of the rank-and-file, they'd just be more clever at hiding it), if I were in law enforcement, I'd be very careful about a resurgence of the KKK if race is going to be a hot topic during the next year and for election season.

      Not that I advocate arresting people for thought crimes. I'm just saying that if there's going to be a resurgence of the Civil Rights Movement in the form of Black Lives Matter (we'll see if that hasn't calmed down within the next year), there IS going to be a counter-movement as a reaction.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    3. Re:You're wasting your time, the Klan is a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Klan as a mainstream group, even in the deep south, peaked in the 1920's. It had a brief minor resurgence in the 1960's during the civil rights movement, but for the most part it's a fringe-of-a-fringe-of-a-fringe movement and has been for most of its existence. Exposing them isn't even fighting racism, since their membership rolls today are made up of a tiny handful of disenfranchised rednecks who don't have any power to oppress or intimidate anyone. Hitting them today is like stabbing Julius Caesar several decades after his funeral. It's a pointless feel-good exercise that doesn't help anyone.

      Don't forget those Tea Party bastards.. I move that 90% of them are KKK. David Duke is a confirmed Klansman who tried to run for President and also an extreme right wing, bat shit crazy republican. You see one there are 100s more you don't see, like cockroaches!

    4. Re:You're wasting your time, the Klan is a joke by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      Unless of course the 4 Republican Senators so far listed are indeed KKK members. If so the rednecks aren't quite as disenfranchised as one might hope.

    5. Re:You're wasting your time, the Klan is a joke by swb · · Score: 2

      I'm just saying that if there's going to be a resurgence of the Civil Rights Movement in the form of Black Lives Matter (we'll see if that hasn't calmed down within the next year), there IS going to be a counter-movement as a reaction.

      I think that more or less, the general intensity of racism is less than it used to be. It's debatable what the reasons are, but because of this I think the kind of open, militant racism of the 1960s or earlier Klan or any other racist groups just won't fly, regardless of whether BLM becomes an enduring phenomenon or not.

      That being said, I think that despite increased racial acceptance, racial ill-feeling hasn't gone away completely, but become more muted and coded. But I think it would take something like open warfare in the streets to go back to the racism of the past.

      Trouble is, I don't discount open warfare in the streets..

    6. Re:You're wasting your time, the Klan is a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, you really want to remove peoples ability to vote, which is the actual definition of disenfranchise, _solely_ based on their skin color and where they were born? I mean, there are groups that are entirely for that, and you are entitled to your opinion and everything. Just saying...

    7. Re:You're wasting your time, the Klan is a joke by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Good news! Law enforcement acts to prevent black people murdering other black people too.

      What a marvellous world in which it's possible to focus on multiple concurrent problems. Who'd have thought.

  20. Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    There are dark times ahead for the KKK.

    1. Re: Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see what you did there...

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

      Too late. The KKK has already been darkened

    3. Re:Indeed by CaptnCrud · · Score: 1

      Clayton Bigsby would have none of that!
      /I miss cheppelle show. : (

    4. Re: Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should probably not exist with that attitude. It's people like you that propagate unfounded hate between races when humans are clearly just humans. What is the purpose of defining someone based on the pigment of their skin?

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

      It's fun and simple. Defining and hating people on their blood type is too much of a hassle. Now, doing a number on aspies instead could be interesting...

    6. Re:Indeed by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      There are dark times ahead for the KKK.

      Yes, things are looking black.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    7. Re: Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know. As someone of color (You People - kkk Lowercase intentional) are a joke to me. I'm probably the worst kind of "nigger" too. I'm an immigrant that came to you country where you were born and got a great education and have my own business. Meanwhile you little kkk people are busy hating and fighting a war that exist only in your little uneducated minds. Nigger is a word my friends. Words are like pillows. They only hurt if you let them. Therefore, why would I let some coward little man hurt me with a pillow? Just saying. God wants us to love everyone. God did not say everyone except uneducated morons. ðY±

    8. Re: Indeed by hachigatsu62 · · Score: 1

      (Logged in and reposted) You know. As someone of color (You People - kkk Lowercase intentional) are a joke to me. I'm probably the worst kind of "nigger" too. I'm an immigrant that came to you country where you were born and got a great education and have my own business. Meanwhile you little kkk people are busy hating and fighting a war that exist only in your little uneducated minds. Nigger is a word my friends. Words are like pillows. They only hurt if you let them. Therefore, why would I let some coward little man hurt me with a pillow? Just saying. God wants us to love everyone. God did not say everyone except uneducated morons. ðY±

    9. Re: Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hope you remember that thought the next time sjw's go on about straight white men.

      Glad to see the KKK being taken down a few more notches. Hopefully the end of them is near.

  21. First they came for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    First they came for the pedophiles. I was not a pedophile, so I did nothing.

    Then they came for the Klansmen. I was not a Klan member, so I did nothing.

    Then they came for the Anonymous Cowards who post on Slashdot.

    There was nobody left but me and my buddy CowboyNeal and we were no match for The Legion.

    What, not you too CowboyNeal. Nooooooo!!!!!!!

    1. Re:First they came for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First they came for the pedophiles. I was not a pedophile, so I did nothing.

      Then they came for the Klansmen. I was not a Klan member, so I did nothing.

      It doesn't worry me at all that pedophiles and Klansmen are being outed, just as long as they do get their facts straight (that last part is the tricky bit). Why should you worry about that?

      Then they came for the Anonymous Cowards who post on Slashdot.

      Posting on /. as AC is not a crime nor socially unacceptable. At least not where I come from. Are you sure you belong here, boy?

  22. if they are wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if these guys are wrong? In many circles KKK membership ranks right up there with convicted murderers for popularity. My kids use "rascist" as a general purpose insult.....

  23. Looks highly dubious to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    One of the supposed members is the mayor of Lexington, KY named Jim Gray who is very openly gay. While it could be true I guess, I seriously doubt this guy is a member of the KKK.

    1. Re:Looks highly dubious to me... by Nexus7 · · Score: 0

      Yes, there are false positives on the list. But maybe the thinking is that there is a benefit to scrutinizing all these individuals - the errors would be weeded out. Question is, are there real KKK on the list too?

    2. Re:Looks highly dubious to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why can't a gay guy be a klansman?

      Are you a homophobe or something?

    3. Re:Looks highly dubious to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, there are false positives on the list. But maybe the thinking is that there is a benefit to scrutinizing all these individuals - the errors would be weeded out. Question is, are there real KKK on the list too?

      Scrutiny in the form of mob violence towards potentially innocent people. SJWs should be jailed.

    4. Re:Looks highly dubious to me... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Let me know when you have figured out how to prove a negative.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    5. Re:Looks highly dubious to me... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Why would you imagine that Klansmen can't be gay?

    6. Re:Looks highly dubious to me... by starless · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, as is the case for a mayor on the list, it will be clear that they don't belong on the list..

      It won't necessarily be clear for everyone.
      For the gay democrat most people will think his inclusion was a mistake.
      But if somebody on the list is a right-wing republican white man, but not a racist and not a member of the KKK, it will
      probably be very difficult for him to convince people that his inclusion was a mistake.

    7. Re:Looks highly dubious to me... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      So, what you're saying is as long as the accusation is "KKK" it is okay to be guilty until proven innocent.

      Accusations are all you need? I think you might be a child molester and domestic terrorist.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:Looks highly dubious to me... by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      >right-wing republican white man, but not a racist

      That's a bit like saying "If somebody is employed by wallmart but doesn't work for for wallmart".

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    9. Re:Looks highly dubious to me... by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Considering they are members of a top-secret all-male society ... they may actually be MORE likely to be gay...

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  24. Not dangerous? by Elfich47 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cases of arson, lynching, beatings, killings, cross burnings and voter suppression in an organized manner against a specific segment of the population? These activities have been ongoing for over a hundred years in a systematic manner? The frequency is down but it still occurs or is overlooked. I would call that terrorism at the very least.

    --
    Architectural plans are like computer source code with a couple of differences: You only compile once.
    1. Re:Not dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You left out: murder.

    2. Re:Not dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhhh, show me one of those things in the last 20 years.

      But on the other hand, look at the rate of black on white crime.

      Guess it's ok as long as it isn't visibly organized.

    3. Re:Not dangerous? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      is it 1910 again? because it hasnt been that way in forever

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    4. Re:Not dangerous? by Elfich47 · · Score: 2

      We're had cross burnings as recent as 2006 with intimidation and violations of the fair housing act. That recent enough for you?

      --
      Architectural plans are like computer source code with a couple of differences: You only compile once.
    5. Re:Not dangerous? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      we also had black churches burned down.... but oh wait, it was done by a black man trying to set up the "white man"

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    6. Re:Not dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do the words "lynching" and "killings" mean in your language?

    7. Re:Not dangerous? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      A decade ago? No, not even close to recent enough, not enough to warrant any group going after the KKK ahead of real terrorists..

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    8. Re:Not dangerous? by truck_soccer · · Score: 1

      Dylan Storm Roof? Is that name ringing a bell? Recent enough for you?

    9. Re:Not dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, but he did leave out evidence.

      200 years ago doesn't do you much good, but I'd be interested to see statistics from, say, the last 30 or so.

    10. Re:Not dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, they are terrorists but a bunch of toothless old fools are hardly relevant these days. Their actual crimes are probably in the noise of the deaths in a week in Chicago.

    11. Re:Not dangerous? by HiThere · · Score: 0

      "real terrorists"? You mean the police? If not, who? I doubt you mean the US Army.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    12. Re:Not dangerous? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      really? he was an actual KKK member??? or was he just a sick kid who had no friends and hated everyone???

      Im serious ive never seen anywhere state he was a KKK memeber

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    13. Re:Not dangerous? by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      Haven't heard much from Al Queda in a few years. Does that mean they're back on the Xmas card list?

    14. Re:Not dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently they are because you Amerians are once again arming, training and supporting them in Syria

    15. Re:Not dangerous? by GiganticLyingMouth · · Score: 1

      Right, and al-qaeda hasn't done anything over here since 2001. Are they also unimportant?

    16. Re:Not dangerous? by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

      Yes, the KKK is a terrorist organization.

      They have learned to keep their profile low —their venom never went away.

      Wondering Out Loud: How did they continue to exist after that landmark legal case – the one in which they lost their headquarters and the giant estate on which it sat?

      Lots of $$$ donations from dedicated bigots? I can't think of any other explanation. Can you?

    17. Re:Not dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a clever indictment! My monocle popped quite out due to your rapier wit and candor! HiThere's torpid sarcasm is the talk of the town!

    18. Re:Not dangerous? by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      I believe you may be conflating the KKK with Aryan Nation, which did have to give up its compound as the result of a court case.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    19. Re:Not dangerous? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      The KKK hasn't done anything, anywhere, for about a decade.

      Al Qaeda is in fact doing things frequently, but our media is too busy pretending they do not exist to tell you anything about them.

      Do you seriously deny that ISIS is a more worthy target to attack than the KKK at this point? If so, you are a retard. And a really stupid one at that.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    20. Re:Not dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought everyone was trying to pin that on Nazis like Andrew Anglin

    21. Re:Not dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Cases of arson, lynching, beatings, killings, cross burnings and voter suppression in an organized manner against a specific segment of the population?”

      Happens in Yakima, WA all the time.

    22. Re:Not dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we also had a white guys car vandalized.... but oh wait, it was done by the white man himself trying to set up the "black man" and black lives matter awareness campaign
      Man Trashes Own Truck, Blames Black Lives Matter
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qu_edt15zCA

      21 sep. 2015

      Scott Lattin, of Whitney Texas, claimed his truck was vandalized by the Black Lives Matter Movement. He reported it to the police and spoke to local media. He even raised money on Go Fund Me to fix his truck. However, he made it all up. Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian (The Point) hosts of The Young Turks discuss.

      Should this guy go to jail for this? Why would he do this? Let us know in the comments below.

      Read more here: http://gawker.com/cops-man-raised-5-0...

      “A Texas man was arrested and charged with making a false police report on Friday after allegedly defacing his own car and blaming it on supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement, the NY Daily News reports.

      Earlier this month, Scott Lattin of Whitney, Texas told KDFW that vandals had spray-painted “Black Lives Matter” and “[Fuck] Your Flag, Your Family, Your Feelings, Your Faith” on his truck after he wrote “Police Lives Matter” on the vehicle’s back window.

      “They need support so they can feel what they do, putting their lives on the line every day,” Lattin told the station at the time. “It’s the only truck we have and because of this, it’s totaled now.”

    23. Re: Not dangerous? by hachigatsu62 · · Score: 1

      This person said a black man set a church on fire and try to blame a white person. This argument was raised because we are saying that there has not been an attack on blacks in many years. Here's a little controversy for you. What the Fuck are you talking about. (I'm a Christian so it's wrong for me to swear) Sarcasm. Recently a young white fellow in the south walked into a "black" church and shot and killed 10 or 11 "niggers" His friends, his own friends later said his hate for black people had grown to the point where he felt the need to kill as many of us as he could. That was this 2015 summer. People hate people. Period. If us "niggers" weren't here, people would hate people because of the color of their eyes or because of their hair color. Mankind is wicked evil and hateful. Anyone who cannot see that is blind. Look in the ghettos. "Niggers" are killing each other. That has nothing to do with white people. It's just ignorance and hate. In African Congos the black Africans are killing, raping and torturing other black men, women and children. A couple of post earlier I saw someone making the statement about Christians and religion. Again, we must first educate ourselves before we can speak knowlably about a subject. I believe there is a God. Jesus Christ is his son. I'm not concerned if anyone else believes that. I have no issues with people of the same sex getting married. The so called Christians who are bashing the gay and lesbian community best be careful. Love is the missing ingredient period. If we all loved each other regardless of sex or race we would not be having this conversation.

    24. Re:Not dangerous? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      You still didn't identify them.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    25. Re:Not dangerous? by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

      Yep, you're right.

  25. Unfortunately-- by LichtSpektren · · Score: 2, Funny

    --Anonymous also inadvertently published the identities of all the developers of the KDE Desktop. Presumably this was an error.

  26. Who? by crackspackle · · Score: 1

    You are abhorrent. Criminal. You are more than extremists. You are more than a hate group. You operate much more like terrorists and you should be recognized as such. You are terrorists that hide your identities beneath sheets and infiltrate society on every level

    Are they talking about themselves or the KKK ?

    1. Re:Who? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You are abhorrent. Criminal. You are more than extremists. You are more than a hate group. You operate much more like terrorists and you should be recognized as such. You are terrorists that hide your identities beneath sheets and infiltrate society on every level

      Are they talking about themselves or the KKK ?

      The end result will be to help more people understand the importance of privacy. You go, SJWs! (You crazy selfish cowards.)

  27. Re:Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by thaylin · · Score: 0

    doxxing is typically bad if it is with malicious intent, this is a public service.

    --
    When you cant win, ad hominem.
  28. The next group they don't like? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what about the next group they don't like? Have current KKK members broken any law? If so, charge them. Don't applaud their lawbreaking though.

  29. Due process? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You can accuse anyone of anything. Now probably this will expose mostly a bunch of KKK shitheads, but if I were a cowardly misanthrope looking to inflict petty malice on someone without it getting back to me, I'd add their name to a list like this.

  30. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    * You're

  31. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 5, Informative

    In Freakonomics, they delve into one man's 30 year war against the KKK, where he broadcasts things like their secret rituals and so on, on radio shows, effectively turning them from a serious organization to a laughingstock few people (relatively) wanted to join, in the early part of the century.

    The vast bulk of damage to them is already long done. The point of the article was mockery, rather than outlawing, seemed to be much more productive.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  32. Re:Questionable Accuracy: Include Gay, Latina Mayo by alvinrod · · Score: 1

    Perhaps that was intentionally done by Anonymous who are simply trolling and seeing if they can get a reactionary internet crowd to send these people all kinds of hate mail because they never verified the accuracy of the list.

    It sounds like the kind of thing they would do "for the lulz" based on previous exploits.

  33. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't you glad you're hidden behind your keyboard?

  34. When was that again? by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cases of arson, lynching, beatings, killings, cross burnings and voter suppression in an organized manner against a specific segment of the population?....The frequency is down but it still occurs or is overlooked.

    But when was the last time any of that happened? I have not seen stories about anything like that for many years - the most recent stuff being black churches set fire to, which it turned out was not don't by the KKK at all (who would seem to have been a primary suspect).

    I'm not saying the KKK has not been a horrible organization in the past, or even that they are in any way an organization that should be supported today. I'm saying that they have become essentially irrelevant, and the resources used to combat the "terrorists" of the KKK would be far better spent on real terrorists - but they aren't because the real terrorists can bite. Attacking the KKK like this is lame because it's pretending to help people while actually helping no-one.

    The KKK is dying, why even give them the publicity these attacks grant? It can only help the KKK at this point.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:When was that again? by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      Racism is alive and well. KKK is just not the most boisterous brand right now.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:When was that again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah all those white cops killing unnarmed black people (66 unnarmed black people out of 760 total killed by police), the black church shooting in north carolina, THE CONFEDERATE FLAG RALLIES SHOUTING THE WORD NIGGER AT OUR PRESIDENT. none of that happened this year right? That was all in the 1860's. Racism doesn't go away just because you deny it. Just like climate change, evolution, the round earth theory, etc.

    3. Re:When was that again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The KKK is alive and active. They have learned to moderate their public efforts and work within the system to achieve their goals. Today's release of info was a False Flag by the Boys in the Hoods.

    4. Re:When was that again? by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      But when was the last time any of that happened?

      It'll be interesting to see if any of the cops that killed blacks recently are on the list.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    5. Re:When was that again? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      But is racism worse than murdering people, or keeping thousands of Christians (and other non-muslims) for sex slaves? That is all happening right now. Why is anyone wasting time giving the KKK publicity instead of attacking targets that are actually doing real harm.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    6. Re:When was that again? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      keeping thousands of Christians (and other non-muslims) for sex slaves?

      Damn! That sounds like a bit of KKK "literature" right there... I'll have you know that those people are our allies in the Middle East/North Africa destabilization effort. To the point where we now have *boots on the ground*. They can have their Bacha bazi (Afghanistan, but same difference) as long as they keep their guns pointed in the right direction.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  35. Re:Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by oakgrove · · Score: 2

    So if your name shows up in this dump, will that be a public service too? Because it most certainly could. What possible mechanism do you think exists to unequivocally verify whether any of these names denote actual members of the KKK before their reputations are irreparable tarnished?

    --
    The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
  36. Re:Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Coren22 · · Score: 2

    How is it no malicious? They intend for these people to be mobbed, it is the whole point of releasing the names.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  37. It's always against right wing groups. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have yet to see Anonymous, Wikileaks or a similar group making public harassment, threats or disclosing the dirty secrets of left-wing groups, populistic governments, real terrorists that have killed many innocents in the last decades, etc.

    1. Re:It's always against right wing groups. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That should make you think then, yes? Perhaps the right wing groups that are causing all of the turmoil in the world are to blame? Or no? Is it just that brown skinned people are bad and should be civilized by the gracious hands of white democracy? If you're starting to see a pattern, it might be because THERE IS A PATTERN THERE.

    2. Re:It's always against right wing groups. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't Snowden and just about everyone that leaked stuff work for the Obama "left-wing"?"

    3. Re:It's always against right wing groups. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever you think of as the "Obama 'left-wing'" is an autonomous symbolic complex of your mind, imbued with many of your fears and inner demons. Say it after me... "It's not real"

    4. Re:It's always against right wing groups. by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      You must have missed when anonymous went after (and released the details of a large number of) ISIS members.

      As for going against rightwing organisations, if your goal is to attack evil, that's a pretty good way to recognize it.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  38. What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Picking a fight with people who murder people. Now somebody just needs to falsely out one of their enemies as a member of Anonymous and the KKK will go after them. How are you going to prove that you are not a member of Anonymous, assuming the KKK hit men even give you a chance to try?

  39. lol, Robert Byrd is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but Harry Reid, yep he's still alive. It doesn't surprise me that he's a klansman (remember his comment about Barack Obama's "negro dialect"), but still it's kind of surprising. He's retiring (and a democrat) so I guess the media won't mention it.

    I'm a little surprised Joe Biden isn't a member. (remember when he called Barack Obama a "clean articulate black guy")? He's too independent for that, but wow, what a fucking story if the first black President's VP was a klansman. Too funny. Only in America!

  40. They have a "point" to make by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Oh great, now their hat sewing pattern is all over Interwebs. Thanks alot.

  41. Re: Who is to say that this "list" is legit at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't be such an idiot. Really, it makes you look like a fool to vocalize stereotypes like this.

  42. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In the US the KKK is allowed to exist. You're allowed (fortunately for the time being) to still form groups and speak your mind and influence the political process by your words (so long as that's ALL you're doing and not actually trying to be a criminal organization) regardless of how stupid, insane or irrational as it may be.

    There are a few states with hate speech laws on the books but they're fortunately far and few in between because "hate speech" means whatever the political elite want it to mean at that point in time - Thaylin's comment here being a perfect demonstration of such.

    Case in point, it's an easy open and shut case to prosecute black lives matter groups for incitement and hate speech - lots of proof too - But so long as they're not committing actual crimes they shouldn't be silenced or have their ideas buried for not being approved.

    That's what being in an free society is all about.

  43. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2

    I don't like the Tea Party either, but there's plenty of legitimate stuff to complain about, we don't need to assign negative traits to them.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  44. Do you remember when.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anonymous was actually going after the power structure and wasn't an NGO front group for the FBI?

    So now we get the KKK membership list. That of course consists of 100 idiots and 900 paid federal informants. Yep, those guys are sure a real threat to everybody. Maybe next week they'll dox the Easter bunny.

    The free internet has died. Time to go home.

  45. No sheet? by Bodhammer · · Score: 1

    Really?

    --
    "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
  46. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by AnontheDestroyer · · Score: 0

    To echo the other poster, there's no need to link the Tea Party to the KKK. It will only make Tea Party types dig their heels in deeper, and they're backwards enough and so distant from the facts that it's not really necessary.

  47. Constitution Party of South Carolina by bl968 · · Score: 1

    One of the emails in the dump is the same as the registered contact for the Constitution Party of South Carolina...

    --
    "GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
  48. "Redneck" is a racial slur. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The names of a thousand hateful red necks.

    "Redneck" is a racial slur. It insinuates that the target is, not just from a rural culture (especially - a poor white southern farmer), and not just sunburned on the back of his neck due to working outdoors with a short haircut, but also that he may be part American Indian. (It originates in a time where this was considered to be extremely "poor breeding", and many so-called "sundown towns" had laws requiring people with any American Indian genetics to be out of town by undown.

    It currently has an implication that the pepole it is applied to are unintelligent and uneducated. (The space program proves the lie of this: Note the accents of the people involved. A substantial fraction of real rocket scientists are, and were, rednecks.) This slur dates at least to the Scopes Monkey Trial (which was largely a propaganda piece fomented by the mining interests to brand the miners, who were trying to unionize at the time, as igorant idiots in the urban east coast's public perception.)

    Rule of thumb: If you don't self-identify as a redneck, and wouldn't use the "N" word, don't use the "R" word.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      and not just sunburned on the back of his neck due to working outdoors with a short haircut,

      That makes no sense, rednecks have mullets.

    2. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Redneck is certainly a racial slur, but implication has shifted for everyone else in the world except you, clinging and trying to associate it with things that haven't been correlated in a long time. Redneck is now, to everyone else, what Jeff Foxworthy has made it out to be. Poor, white, unaware hicks.

      The rest of history has moved on past where is started, you should too.

      Yes, I self identify as a redneck.

    3. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such social justice. Much warrior. Wow.

      Is there any evidence for that highly atypical connotation?

    4. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by amicusNYCL · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Did you just make all of that up? I can't find a single source that connects "redneck" with Native Americans, every definition I've seen ties it specifically to white people. Many today claim it as a badge of pride. And the Scopes Monkey Trial? That had nothing to do with unionizing miners, and everything to do with a publicity stunt to draw attention to the town of Dayton, TN. Mr. Scopes was even unsure whether he had ever taught evolution but incriminated himself anyway so that the trial could have a defendant. The miners that you're referring to were trying to unionize 5 years before Scopes and they wore red bandanas around their necks and self-identified as "rednecks" to help themselves organize and have solidarity. That label was not given to them by outside interests, they chose it.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    5. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Informative

      Did you just make all of that up? I can't find a single source that connects "redneck" with Native Americans, every definition I've seen ties it specifically to white people.

      I got it from my wife - trained as a historian, a member of Phi Alpha Theta (the historical honor society), redneck, and raised as a part American Indian.

      I'm not where I can consult her for references right now. If I think of it before this is off the front page I'll see if she can come up with some.

      Yes, the term is used on rural whites. As I said above, the bit about insinuating American Indian admixture is one of the several allegedly derogatory slurs embedded in the package.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    6. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      1. Fuck off with your Political Censorship.
      2. Lighten up.

      **Every** word has a connotation. Ignoring the "bad" ones doesn't magically make them go away.

    7. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm sure someone, somewhere, is justifying the N word the same way.

    8. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I lke this alternate universe you live in. It's fascinating!

    9. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That makes no sense, rednecks have mullets.

      That would be Hill Billies...

    10. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It originates in a time where this was considered to be extremely "poor breeding", and many so-called "sundown towns" had laws requiring people with any American Indian genetics to be out of town by undown."

      No, it does not. Its use goes all the way back to Great Britain. Albion's Seed covers it.

    11. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2

      The progressives have been very clear about trying to destroy the roots and symbols of rural culture in America. Religion and Guns? Clearly must be suppressed.

      It's particularly significant when you realize that:
        - The country was formed by and for "religious nuts with guns".
        - The separation of church and state was both:
                  - Central to the beliefs of the Plymouth colony settlers (the "Separatists" - often conflated with the "Puritans" who settled a few tens of miles further north), and
                  - Written into the Bill of Rights by the leaders of several churches (who knew damn well that, if the government had an official church, it wouldn't be theirs, but WOULD lead to the same sort of religious suppression and/or religious wars that they came here to escape.)

      From the viewpoint of the current "religious nuts with guns", the current suppression of the same is the result of a cultural war on them by later arrivals (including "The Ellis Island Crowd"), mainly lower-class descendants of serfs, who brought the elitist/royalist values the revolutionaries were trying to escape, and, rather than assimilating into the American Pluralist culture, decided to impose them, with the only substantial change being appointing themselves to a new class of nobles.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    12. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The space program proves the lie of this: Note the accents of the people involved.

      German?

    13. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 4, Insightful

      WTF, really?

      Remember, it's not genocide if it's the enemy. The progressives have been very clear about trying to destroy the roots and symbols of rural culture in America. Religion and Guns? Clearly must be suppressed.

      I'm strongly opposed to gun control, but the arguments made by the other side are not without merit. A few gun owners have made their hobby/obsession a problem for the rest of us. Decent gun owners would be better served by reminding the rest of the population that they're not all a bunch of nutcases. Are you sure you're helping?

      Same for the "religion" half of your argument. Keep your guns out of my face and your religion as well, and we'll get along juuuuust fine.

      Deep family ties? Must financially punish marriage.

      Yeah, for definitions of "financially punish" that include "Stop subsidizing specific peoples' personal relationships at everyone else's expense." I'm all for that.

      Economy? The war on tobacco continues to destroy cash crops

      Of course, tens of thousands of cases of heart disease and cancer don't have any economic consequences at all, am I right?

      the war on coal decimating employment

      I'm not a global-warrming alarmist but you don't have to be one to recognize that digging up coal and burning it is a stupid, inefficient, wasteful, and generally harmful way to generate power. The sooner we get away from coal the better off we'll all be, and that includes the rural areas.

      and turning the education system into a proxy for the propaganda war has destroyed the education system there.

      Yeah, when we took Jeebus out of the classroom and started teaching evolution, I guess that's when things really started to go to hell, huh?

      This is exactly why sane people are starting to gang up against religion. Don't want a "propaganda war?" Don't start one.

    14. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Mr. Scopes was even unsure whether he had ever taught evolution but incriminated himself anyway so that the trial could have a defendant.

      [citation needed]

    15. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by rtb61 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think you have any idea what it is like to work in the sun, your neck stays pretty much untanned as getting the sun on it really heats you up, pretty much the reason why you should wear a wide brimmed hat. The red neck comes from when certain people with very pale necks lose their temper and they become flushed and as a result of having those pale necks they turn bright red. It is not red neck via race but via behaviour. Please do not include the majority of pink skins in your red neck assertions because by far the majority of pink skins are not red necks, this not because of some new assertion of further variegations of pink skin race to define more shades of pink but based upon intellect and behaviour. Red neck is a behavioural classification. Me and my lilly white butt take offence at your associating of red necks with all people of European ancestry, nope you get your red neck tag based upon the way you behave and choose to express yourself, nothing to be proud of either. They are found pretty much all over the globe, unfortunately. Bogans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... is another name for them, perhaps American red necks might prefer it, it definitely has a more descriptive ring to it.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    16. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Must financially punish marriage

      As a single person with no kids making a middle class income I think I speak on behalf of all of my brethren when I say FUCK YOU.

      You get tax cuts for being married, tax cuts for popping out kids, and hell with two incomes you can better afford a house so you get tax cuts buying property. While I get saddled with paying for your brat's schools. Go fuck yourself and your "marriage penalty."

    17. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If rednecks can get over being called rednecks why cant others throw off the shackles of history and get over it?

    18. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Panoptes · · Score: 2

      "he [a redneck] may be part American Indian"

      Can you give a citation, or is this just a pigment of your imagination?

    19. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Y'know... I'm partially black. I can't speak for everyone. I am mature enough to say this, there are certain times - like with references to the name itself, where saying "nigger" is okay. Well, at least I don't mind. I don't really mind any usage but typing "the N word" just seems a bit silly. I don't have a whole lot of black left in me (GNAA jokes notwithstanding) so maybe my opinion should only amount to that same amount. However, I thought I'd share.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    20. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      You said "connotation" and I am offended!!! Donate to my Patreon (I think that's the name) at once or report to the reeducation camp posthaste.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    21. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by grcumb · · Score: 1

      Rule of thumb: If you don't self-identify as a redneck, and wouldn't use the "N" word, don't use the "R" word.

      'Self-important fuckwit' on the other hand, has no such restriction. :-)

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    22. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by yanyan · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you were thinking of the word "redskin"?

    23. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that just as ridiculous as saying that because some black people use the N-word to refer to themselves, it's not bigoted to use it as a slur? Does bigotry really become that much more acceptable to people if they redefine all the -isms to exclude it? Why is using the color of one's skin (quite literally, in this slur) to imply that a person is poorly educated and someone who should be shunned by polite society acceptable for some melanin counts and not others?

      Why can't we judge each person by the content of their character, as individuals, rather than making assumptions about large groups based on stereotypes?

    24. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And just to clarify, lest it be lost on some, my take would be that we should NEVER use some stereotype to make horrible assumptions about people.

      Inasmuch as I'm presuming about things you seem to think, it's because I recognize your username and remember your comment history, both as far back as when the real NYCL was active and as recently as earlier this week.

    25. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " Decent gun owners would be better served by reminding the rest of the population that they're not all a bunch of nutcases."

      Yeah, and in real life there will always be some nutcases. It's human nature and its unavoidable. Knowing this, how do you defend a society handing guns to these nutcases?

    26. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > A substantial fraction of real rocket scientists are, and were ... ... germans with a penchant for precision engineering and extending their arms to the front, in a slightly upwards position and praise a certain 88. After 1945, they were imported by the thousands to the USA during Operation Paperclip. (Honestly said, a smaller but still very significant number of those germans were imported to the USSR and France for secret works, as well.)

    27. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by silentcoder · · Score: 2

      That seems unlikely considering that around the world the term is used by people of Dutch and German ancestry to refer to people of British ancestry and has been that way since the early colonial days.

      Here at the South End of Africa "rooineck" is still a common slang term for "Englishman".

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    28. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Mind you, that is the more salubrious term, those who are still angry about the Anglo Boer War 102 years later... well their preferred term for an Englishman translates as "salty dick head".

      I wonder how they know that...

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    29. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      >the war on coal decimating employment

      Not to mention that, in fact, coal is a teeny-tiny employer in the American economy and always has been. There are already more green energy jobs in America than there were coal jobs even at it's height.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    30. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... lead to the same sort of religious suppression and/or religious wars that they came here to escape.

      Actually lots of early settlers left Europe not so much to escape persecution, but because they were being prevented from persecuting others. Some of the early colonies would routinely hang people for having even slightly different religious ideas.

    31. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      - Times changed, back then guns were an effective way to keep the government in check or seek independence, now not so much.

      - The religious nuts back then were just as bad, it's simply that they had less power so were forced to agree to separation of church and state. More recently their power has grown and they are now acting against the common good and their former dedication to this separation, e.g. by introducing "under god" into the pledge that children are forced to recite at school.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    32. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Grim+Beefer · · Score: 1

      Shut up.

      NOBODY that actually lives in the south thinks "redneck" is a racial slur. Nobody. Your college definition has little relevance to the real world. Being a redneck is about your attitude towards life and your actions, not your income or intelligence level. It's more akin to words like "gangster", "intellectual", "hippie", "tomboy" and so on, not words like "white", "black", or "asian". It's not a god damn racial slur, despite whatever eggheads think it's historical origins might be, for the same fucking reason that you can't be racist against hippies. Two brothers can come from the same family, and one of them can be a redneck and one of can not be. It just depends on how you turn out. I should know, I'm one of those brothers.

      I'm not saying that you can't use the term in a bigoted way to denigrate poor folks, just don't call it a damn racial slur. The south has enough problems with race relations without jackasses wanting to muddy the waters with this kind of horseshit. Calling someone a redneck in no way carries the gravity of calling a black person ANY racial slur. Just don't even compare the two.

    33. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol

    34. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by riondluz · · Score: 1

      my understanding is that the term redneck had
      its origins in the KY/WVA scots-irish who went
      on strike in the 19th century and tied red
      scarves around their necks to distinguish
      themselves from the 'company' men

      --
      resist propaganda
    35. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1
      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    36. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      I'm not advocating for racial slurs, I'm only questioning the assertions made by the person I responded to.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    37. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, stop talking, the mountain of bullshit is going to topple over and cover everyone soon.

    38. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on the context which the "racial slur" is used.

      It's fairly certain the term "redneck" is used here to refer to your typical garden variety "moron from the deep south" be it a senator, congressman, cop, Texan, etc, etc ..

      The only race that could possibly be offended by this slur used in this context would be the Neanderthal, and they're all too stupid to know they have been insulted in the first place. No damage caused.

      Nothing to see here, move along ..

    39. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and in real life there will always be some nutcases. It's human nature and its unavoidable. Knowing this, how do you defend a society handing guns to these nutcases?

      Easy: with a history book. If you want to be safe, take the guns away from your police, government, and military first. Then take them away from the "nutcases."

    40. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 1

      Times changed, back then guns were an effective way to keep the government in check or seek independence, now not so much.

      Really? Somebody should've told the Viet Cong, the Afghan rebels, and ISIS.

    41. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

      Also, "Redneck" is a label MANY people wear with pride.

      The entire post smacks of trolling/propaganda.

    42. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but also that he may be part American Indian. ...I got it from my wife ... raised as a part American Indian.

      I've eaten soup. With saltines. I take personally offense to any use of the pejorative "cracker". Which is clearly insulting me and others for their culinary choices.

      In other words, no one believes you.

    43. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the war on coal decimating employment

      Alternative energy production already employs more people than coal.

      progressives have been very clear about trying to destroy the roots and symbols of rural culture in America.

      By maliciously supporting traditional farming by buying fresh produce from farmer's markets.

      Those bastards.

    44. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She's wrong. The meaning of the word is what people are getting at when they say it. One's 'neck' is red because it's been out in the sun while undertaking extensive physical labor/drinking.

    45. Re:"Redneck" is a racial slur. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The space program... a substatial portion of real tocket scientists...

      My wife and I were driving through Kansas (all the way through, en route from CO to TN). We saw so many towns with boards saying "Town of ..., home of astronaut ...".

      We figured that was just their way of getting as far away from Kansas as possible...

  49. Stop white genocide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So white people aren't allowed to simply live with their own kind any more? Who decided that?

    Why would white people want to have their countries flooded with millions of people from failed countries, who hate our guts?

    Any answers? Why are all these third world people flooding into white countries, unless they can't make their own shitty countries work? Why are they here?

    1. Re:Stop white genocide by behrooz0az · · Score: 1

      You really should have thought about that before You enslaved them; and that's not what KKK stands for. stop embarrassing yourself.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
    2. Re:Stop white genocide by Garfong · · Score: 1

      I hope you will shortly be returning to Europe, and leave the Americas to their indigenous peoples. The only reason white people are here is because they couldn't make their own shitty countries work.

      If you are in Europe, I hope you're not an Irish protestant, English, Normand, Breton, or from the south of Spain, or many other places in Europe, I have bad news for you too.

    3. Re:Stop white genocide by meglon · · Score: 1

      Europe went through that whole thing in the 30's and 40's dealing with asshats like that racial purist AC; they really don't want any of them coming back.

      --
      Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  50. Oh the irony! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anonymous hides behind the characterised mask of a convicted terrorist, and by today's standards a religious extremist.

    But the real kicker, the then Jesuits had the belief they belonged to the "Master Race."

    Just a bit of the pot calling the kettle black.

  51. Hope The Nerds Hid Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've heard -and this may be complete hyperbole, so take it with a grain of salt- that the KKK are known for being a bit...how shall I say this...pugnacious.

    In other words, they have a reputation for perpetuating gratuitous physical violence on people of many races and creeds; regardless of the law of the land.

    Not exactly sure how smart it is to deliberately goad folks like that; especially if you are a skinny kid that could end up in jail with a few Aryan Nation dudes.

    Captcha: "corers"

    1. Re:Hope The Nerds Hid Well by moeinvt · · Score: 1

      "they have a reputation for perpetuating gratuitous physical violence"

      Yeah, 50 years ago. Nowadays they are a pathetic joke. Anonymous stays anonymous because they don't want to admit to stealing the data, not because they're afraid of the KKK.
      Also, the prison gang you're talking about is "The Aryan Brotherhood" and it's like any other criminal gang. They don't give two shits about your political opinions. It was formed purely as a survival mechanism for white guys in prison. You don't want to be a lone white dude in a prison full of Bloods, Crips, Mexican Mafiosos, MS-13ers or whatever.

  52. Re:Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No matter how repungent the KKK is, this is not a public service. This is being done with malicious intent to damage people that a particular group does not like. A group, by the way, that also hides and does not reveal themselves. A group that believes their morals and beliefs are infallible and above the law. Not much different than the group they're trying to take out.

  53. Not sure if their data is any good by daninaustin · · Score: 1

    I looked through a sample and it seemed to be loaded with Russian email addresses. A quick check of a few phone numbers turned up a testing center, a credit agency and a loan processing company. These are the first numbers i checked so looks like it's 0 for 3 on the phone numbers.

  54. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DO you like the Democratic party? I bet...

  55. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by schneidafunk · · Score: 1
    --
    Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
  56. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup. Just like when Spike Lee tweeted George Zimmerman's address on Twitter.

  57. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The NAACP should be targeted next.

  58. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not compared to the NAACP and NOW.

  59. Anonymous : What a joke. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hacktivist. Yeah right. They are a bunch of script kiddies that couldn't hack 127.0.0.1 even if they had root. They give real hackers a bad name, even the black hat ones and that's pretty bad. I guess it wouldn't be so bad if they had a real purpose instead of "playing" like they mean well.

  60. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if his keyboard is white with white keys and white silkscreening. Otherwise he's a complete hypocrite.

  61. Re:Jew fraud kkk - by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

    May the schwartz be with you!

    Fight for your bitcoins!

  62. Re:Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by thaylin · · Score: 1

    Last I am not a politician who threw myself into the public sportlight

    --
    When you cant win, ad hominem.
  63. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by reboot246 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You don't know anything about the Tea Party except what you've been told by CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, etc. If you knew anything about them, you'd probably agree with them. Don't let your ignorance blind you.

    They are not a "hate" group and have plenty of black members. They even have a lot of members who are Democrats!

  64. Free breakfast for children. by khasim · · Score: 1

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Breakfast_for_Children

    They had problems later. But in the beginning they were doing a lot to help minorities.

    1. Re:Free breakfast for children. by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      al copone also started the first soup kitchen. Gangsers of all sorts always give back to the community (well the smart ones do)

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  65. Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you intend on posting the black pansies info too?

  66. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by thaylin · · Score: 1

    Thaylin's comment here being a perfect demonstration of such.

    Please clarify, are you saying my comment is an example of hate speech ? there was nothing in my statement that indicated hate. Politicians in a hate group should be outted. When someone places themselve, of their own free will into the public spotlight and says "hey look at me, I am virtuous" then they deserve to be looked at to determine if they are indeed virtuous.

    --
    When you cant win, ad hominem.
  67. Does anyone notice the similarities here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not defending the KKK at all so please, let's not be confused about that. I did find the issues of secrecy surrounding the KKK to be very similar to that of Anonymous.
    "hide your identities"
    "infiltrate society on every level"
    "seek to intimidate and/or eliminate those that are different from you and those that you dislike by any means possible"

    Is it me or could those things be said of Anonymous as well?

    Ah, sweet irony.

  68. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Rakarra · · Score: 4, Informative

    The usefulness of your post notwithstanding, I heard in a news broadcast a few months ago (to my recollection) that the Klan's membership used to numbers in the millions at its peak and is now measured in tens of thousands. Happily, it's a club apparently on the decline.

    The clan has had many rises and falls throughout history -- it hasn't been one continuous organization. This is the third Ku Klux Klan active. The first arose (and fell) during Southern Reconstruction after the Civil War, the second Klan was active between WWI and WWII (and was more concerned about Catholics, Jews, and immigrants moreso than black people), and the third arose post-World War II. Who knows if a fourth will ever arise. At first, I thought it would be more difficult in today's world of hyper-connectedness, but one of the side-effects is that it's now far easier for geographically-distant radicals to band together and enjoy their echo chamber.

  69. Anonymous outing the KKK is a stunt to get support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's just like the "Mormon Church" opposing gay marriage in order to be seen as legitimate by Evangelical Christians, or any number of anti-Child porn groups like "Perverted Justice" who are really against PIV sex and are using an _unpopular_ cause to get credibility.

    In this case, Anonymous wants to spread out from its core of white techo-libertarians and get some of the #BlackLivesMatter folks

  70. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

    The BNP *were* a party. I don't know if their dwindling away to nothing was entirely due to the membership leak, but presumably it had a big part to play. Hopefully the same will happen to the KKK.

    No sympathy. Racist thugs don't deserve it.

  71. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Proof the jews computer generate posts and spin thread - Less than three minutes ago I posted a comment near top which now is near bottom thread with over a hundred fake computer generated posts in between. Notice which posts are hidden. click show all comments, also slide bar over to see all posts. They dump bs spew under my posts to distract. Don't be distracted, see post above, get off the web -

  72. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So are American's allowed to join ISIS and speak their mind about it?

    No.

    It seems only foreign terrorist organisations are banned. Domestic ones are allowed. And yes, the KKK is a terrorist group. How else can you describe their activities as "night riders". Lynching, burning and dragging black people.

  73. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    Klan membership had always ebbed and flowed. According to HateWatch and the Southern Poverty Law Center, Klan membership is sadly on the rise again.

  74. Re:Questionable Accuracy: Include Gay, Latina Mayo by cdrudge · · Score: 1

    My city's mayor was also identified even though he's a democratic mayor with fairly liberal leanings. The supporting evidence isn't as strong with him as it is with the others that they are NOT members of the KKK, but it's pretty hard to believe.

  75. bogus - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'anonymous' is a jew fraud front same as the bogus 'kkk'.

  76. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    I had not heard of this, but if he did it he should be prosecuted for encouraging vigilantism. Zimmerman shot a kid in self defense, and when the courts ruled it as the truth, he should have been left alone.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  77. OMG!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just read the list -- George W. and George W. Sr.

    OMG!!!

  78. Re: jew fraud govt - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rarely has the nom de plum "AC" been so apropos...

  79. Re: Jew fraud kkk - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're not a member of the KKK by any chance are you? The nordic KKK obviously, not the Jewish KKK.

  80. Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You seek to terrorize anyone and anything that you feel is a threat to your narrow view.

    How is this different from what Anonymous is doing here?

    First Ashley Madison, now the KKK. I am not a fan of this vigilante stuff.

  81. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by kaatochacha · · Score: 2

    That's because they're so abysmally low, that two people joining today probably is a 10% bump.

    and, the Anonymous statement above "You seek to intimidate and/or eliminate those that are different from you and those that you dislike by any means possible" could equally be applied to Anonymous, just sayin....

  82. ... but still... not groking free speech by nsxdavid · · Score: 1

    It's still a bit stunning to me how few people understand the whole concept of "Freedom of Speech". Even this anon doesn't seem to understand what it is all about. There is nothing in the First Amendment about you or me impinging on anyone's freedom of speech, only on congress passing laws that would do so.

    So it would not matter what Anonymous did, unless Anonymous happened to be the law-making body of our government (i.e. congress) that would apply. So the whole free speech part of the press release speaks really poorly of their (or that person's) understanding of this particular issue. There was no need to defend themselves from the imputed accusation that they were impinging on someone's freedom of speech, since they are perfectly free to do so if they wanted too.

    --
    David Whatley
    1. Re:... but still... not groking free speech by moeinvt · · Score: 1

      I challenge your understanding of the whole concept. The idea of "freedom of speech" transcends The First Amendment. Yes, The Constitution is specific in that it denies government the power to pass laws infringing upon free speech, but it doesn't end there. It may be "legal" for private organizations and individuals to suppress speech that they don't like, but those efforts ARE infringing on "freedom of speech". You admit in your last sentence that this is exactly what's happening here. When you have to live in fear of repercussions, violent or otherwise, for expressing your opinions, you don't have "freedom of speech". It doesn't matter if the repercussions are a result of government policy or the efforts of private parties. The accusation is entirely appropriate. Our society is f***ed up for allowing the persecution of people who say unpopular things. It's also incredibly hypocritical because so many people (particularly academics) claim to support freedom of expression in principle, but do everything possible to stifle ideas that they don't like.

    2. Re:... but still... not groking free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > There is nothing in the First Amendment about you or me impinging on anyone's freedom of speech, only on congress passing laws that would do so.

      False and wrong. The SCOTUS has long ago placed the 1st amendment under the umbrella protection of the 14th amendment. As a result, e.g. if you own a shopping mall and its available for the general public patrons to visit, you cannot prevent e.g. a self-appointed preacher enter, stand in the corridor and start orating about the incoming rapture or divine condemnation of homosexuality. Any place that falls under 14th amendment jurisdiction of the federal guv'mint must tolerate freedom of speech else the FBI rolls in.

      Please note that SCOTUS has repeatedly refused to similarly 14th-ize the 2nd amendment. Therefore, your right to bear and carry arms doesn't extend to counties, towns and gated communities which oppose firearms.

    3. Re:... but still... not groking free speech by RingDev · · Score: 1

      Our society is f***ed up for allowing the persecution of people who say unpopular things.

      And those PERsecuted individuals can PROsecute the slanderers.

      That's how our government handles the enforcement of Freedom of Speech.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  83. Re: Jew fraud kkk - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never mind all that nonsense - where's the white women at?

  84. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    The usefulness of your post notwithstanding, I heard in a news broadcast a few months ago (to my recollection) that the Klan's membership used to numbers in the millions at its peak and is now measured in tens of thousands.

    I doubt they even have that many members, my unsubstantiated guess would be well under 10,000, maybe half that many.

    But I agree, it's good to see them in decline. In the next 20 years (after all the old geezer members die off) I suspect they'll be down to a couple of thousand, if that. They'll be vastly outnumbered by furries and people that enjoy My Little Pony porn, lol.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  85. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

    Here, I'll answer both ways:

    "Why yes, I'm an extreme liberal. I'd prefer not to make the same dumb mistakes that the faux-news crowd routinely does."

    Alternatively...

    "I'm a Republican and I know that's not even remotely true. I hope you lot do start spewing that garbage so it'll ruin your credibility."

    Pick whichever one you like.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  86. hiding comments- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    click load all comments, also slide bar over, see above, notice which posts they hide.

  87. This sort of activity gets dangerous by kuzb · · Score: 1

    All they have to do is publish someone's name and whether or not there's evidence to support the claim that person will be smeared. The problem with Anonymous groups doxing is that you can't be sure what their motives are, or if they're telling the truth. They also have zero accountability.

    --
    BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
  88. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by GLMDesigns · · Score: 2

    So wanting constitutionally limited government now equals being racist KKK terrorists?

    --
    If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
    Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
  89. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by GLMDesigns · · Score: 2

    Not only that but Black, Hispanic and South Asian Tea Party activists have been elected to congress (and the Senate).

    --
    If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
    Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
  90. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't say your comment was hate speech.

    I said your comment was a perfect demonstration of the political elite changing the definition or hate speech to destroy their political enemies at any point in time.

    You demonstrated it again, perfectly, here:
    "Politicians in a hate group should be outted."

    What is a "hate" group - One that you've deemed hateful? By what standard? Yours? Would you agree with the Catholic Church's definitions of hate groups? How about China's definitions of hate groups?

    No, your statement was a perfect example of how "hate speech" laws are nothing more than a cudgel to enforce thought control and it's fascinating how you tap dance on how "THEY" should be outed but "YOU" should be protected because somehow your public post on a public forum makes you still a private person...

  91. If terrorism = violence + political aims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Technically, the United States Government falls into this category as well :|

    ( For that matter, most governments do )

  92. Coren22 proven a LYING punk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

    Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

    (Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

    I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

    I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

    I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

    Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

    APK

    P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

  93. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What part of "organizations are allowed so long as they aren't actually a criminal organization" did you miss?

    There are plenty of Americans who are voicing support for Islamic regions and tried to get us out of war there. I know you haven't heard of many since Obama took office but those groups were never prosecuted or disbanded. Islam itself is a growing religion in the US and, we even take in their refugees from Syria (whom we're still bombing)

    So uh... what was your point again?

  94. Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

    "So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

    Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

    &

    How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

    ---

    "Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

    You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

    FACT:

    Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

    ---

    Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    ---

    * HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

    ---

    Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

    I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

    I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

    You told me you learn from guides?

    I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

    + WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    You did all that? No!

    (& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

    APK

    P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

  95. Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

    False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

    Is that YOUR fake site for MORE LIES Coren22?

    Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

    ---

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

    APK

    P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

    "his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

    "I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

    "APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

    "his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

  96. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    However the racists moved out of the KKK and into other groups that didn't act like clowns.

  97. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Is the KKK currently involved in terrorist activities? They used to be, but I don't know that they still do.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  98. Most KKK Members that I've Known are Out and Proud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I strongly suspect this won't really cause them much concern.

    However, I'd hate to be a member of Anonymous (even the ones that didn't participate) if the local thugs found out about it.

  99. Re:Questionable Accuracy: Include Gay, Latina Mayo by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    I was on a neo-Nazi mailing list for quite a few years. I don't know how I got on it, but it was mildly amusing every so often.

    This should not be taken to mean that I have any warm feelings for neo-Nazis, or the old National Socialists.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  100. maybe you can call me short sighted, etc,, but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    first a statement.

    I have not read the article, I am posting this in response to the title

    while various people are hacked, dox't., exposed, etc..

    they Do have some positive aspects, which unfortunately get overshadowed by the atrocious crap that has surfaced today..

    But the KkK, they are just historically messed up.. People/individuals perceived with too much time on their hands, to which are lost.

    Like the nazi party, for some they were great, for everyone else it was no so great..

    While I am not fond of the violation of peoples rights for some form of privacy, given the KkK's displayed history and extremely short shortsightedness, I must admit, perhaps they deserve it.
    a beacon to all beyond the taxes, monies collected, etc what a cancer it really is.
    Im actually glad to see that stuff like this is promoted in full force in the media and hopefuly beyond..

    kKk Your absurd behavior in a civilized society is unacceptable, hopefully this surfaces that notion to our global community, which may in turn result in more positive "hacking,Doxing, surfacing" events..

    Thanks,

  101. Someone PLEASE tell me by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    that Clayton Bigsby is on that list.

    http://www.cc.com/video-clips/...

    --
    -Styopa
  102. Tune in November 5 for the Actual List by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The announcement that came previously about this release was that the names would be outed on November 5, after a propaganda campaign beginning on the 4th. Today is only November 2. This is clearly not the presaged-leak, but in fact just something to take the steam out of it a bit. The KKK probably released this list themselves.

  103. Re:Most KKK Members that I've Known are Out and Pr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uhhh....

    " by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 02, 2015 @06:38PM (#50851725)

    I strongly suspect this won't really cause them much concern.

    However, I'd hate to be a member of Anonymous (even the ones that didn't participate) if the local thugs found out about it.
    "

    "by Anonymous . . .

      . . .

    . . . I'd hate to be a member of Anonymous"

    LOL

  104. Taking cues from Fallout 3? by Chalnoth · · Score: 1

    Fallout 3 was released in late 2008, and includes the People's Republic of America Radio. Presumably they thought it was a good idea?

  105. lol by ajzimm3rman · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I'm sure they're fighting against a Growing threat. Maybe we should be fighting against the people cutting heads off in the M.E. Just saying.

    1. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prior to 7/11, I'd bet 80% of Americans couldn't even point to it on a map. I'd bet today half would still struggle. They don't care, no matter how much violence there is to rile them up.

  106. Basic knowledge of history sadly lacking by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1
  107. Read the official opKKK twitter account by zedaroca · · Score: 1
    https://twitter.com/Operation_KKK

    They state that the release will happen on the 5th of November (of course).
    They also warn about the pastebin with fake names.

    The twitter account that released the pastebin with the government officials that are clearly not KKK is https://twitter.com/sgtbilko42...

    (...)

    For any information about #OpKKK we will refer to the official .@Operation_KKK twitter account

  108. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So are there any specific human rights violations of Israel you want to point out or are you just another moron pouring out hate bile. I bet you can't point to one single instance even though there are plenty to choose from. Why don't you get off your ass and write to your government to protest the rights violations made by your own country on behalf of them YOU FUCKING HYPOCRITE.

    Few who know what acts they have committed would condone it, so before you go pointing fingers don't tell me you actually give a shit about Palestinians because from the perspective of the sane person the KKK, Nazis, Islamic, Zion and Christian extremists are all the same as people like you - the vomit that sane people endure whist we go through the sickness.

  109. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

    the Anonymous statement above "You seek to intimidate and/or eliminate those that are different from you and those that you dislike by any means possible" could equally be applied to Anonymous

    It could be applied to SJWs in general. Let there be a pox on all their houses.

    --
    20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  110. This is relevant how? by cbhacking · · Score: 1

    That has what all to do with the comment you're replying to? The topic isn't racism in general, it's the KKK in particular and vigilante action / doxxing in general. Yes, the KKK are bad because they're racist, but this disclosure (even if 100% accurate and not leading to any false positives, which is respectively unlikely and laughably absurd) doesn't actually do anything about racism as a problem or viewpoint of the people in question.

    In fact, it makes anti-racists look like hypocrites who don't care about collateral damage, which is... not the best way to go about convincing people of the righteousness of your cause.

    --
    There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    1. Re:This is relevant how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, it makes anti-racists look like hypocrites who don't care about collateral damage, which is...

      The truth. SJWs care only about marketing. They don't think twice before walking over some poor schmuck. Which is also the reason they're so successful.

  111. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

    Black I can understand, but Green Tea Party activists too? Sounds like progress to me!

  112. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like the Republican Party... although most act like clowns jontheless...

  113. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, don't be fooled. Let Fox News show you what Republicans are really about. Climate change and evolution? That's the devil's sciene. Taxes for the people that can afford to pay? He'll no!! They are "job creators", they are saints! Btw, just look at how fanatic the party base gets when one of their presidential candidate gets all racist and hateful... they salivate and Trump heads the polls. So how is the Kkk different from Trump/Republicans???

  114. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Holi · · Score: 1

    Hard to dox a public official, there residences are usually public record.

    --
    Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
  115. amicusnycl your integrity's the joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why'd you have to run from apk amicusnycl? Answer = your mouth wrote checks your lame ass can't cash http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

  116. amicusnycl makes thing up has no source(code) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why'd you have to run from apk amicusnycl? Answer = your mouth wrote checks your lame ass can't cash http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

  117. Anonymous Jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slandering white people is a Jewish tradition. They are indiscriminate as to which goyim they demonize under neutral circumstances, but they want a Jewish Commander in Chief of the USA (Most powerful military in the history of Earth). Majority white in USA? There's why they have to ridicule whites.

    If this "anonymous group" was also was exposing Black Panthers or other racially incensed groups like Mexican gangs... it hypothetically could lend more credibility to their motivations. Even still, it's divisive and possibly adds to tensions and strife. It's not only what they are saying, it's what they aren't saying. This "story" is a tale of biased slander. Are they Jewish? Maybe only in spirit. Maybe literally a smear of white people by Jews. Maybe kids without life experience. The motivation seems more like pumping fear into non-KKK whites of being labelled and demonized as racist. The concept pops up in movies and tv shows and msm news over and over and over when it's not even related to the subject at hand.

    You are abhorrent. Criminal. You are more than extremists. You are more than a hate group. You operate much more like terrorists and you should be recognized as such. You are terrorists that hide your identities beneath sheets and infiltrate society on every level.

    This is textbook Jewish hypocrisy. Point the finger point the finger whirl a chicken point the finger... meanwhile doxing a bunch of people from "an infiltrated Twitter account".

    Vote no Jew for Commander in Chief of the most powerful military on Earth. Since USA citizens votes are jokes, you better locate and explain to the electoral college reps way prior to elections. 270 need to be knowledgeable about Israeli loyalties and what that implies. A wall doesn't stop planes or tunnels and a force field like Iron Dome isn't exactly feasible for USA. USA would need one too.

  118. I wonder if they will do the same by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    To the islam-o-nazi types that have come here to destroy the USA? Oh, I forgot, "that's racist".

  119. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fourth is already rising, the SJW again non crazy people

  120. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  121. seems unbecoming that a group eponymous with anon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is so hellbent on "unhooding" and unmasking others...

    hard to cry over the klan but still seems an unwise move.

  122. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The new clan will be the SJWs. Anon for a reason.

  123. Support the Klan, killer a Nigger for Jesus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quit your bitchin' nigger and just let things be
    You're messin' up big time take it from me
    Quit your bitchin' nigger or you'll get your due
    'Cause the Ku Klux Klan will come-a-callin' on you

    For forty-somethin' years you've been raisin' all hell
    And niggers that ain't enough
    We're all gettin' mighty fed up with you
    And all of your civil rights stuff
    Don't you love this country, either you do or you don't
    If you ain't happy, then what the hell do you want

    Hey quit your bitchin' niggers and just let things be
    You're messin' up big time take it from me
    Quit your bitchin' nigger or you'll get your due
    'Cause the Ku Klux Klan will come-a-callin' on you

    You got money and jobs and your equal rights
    Given by the government
    You got welfare, food stamps, a medical card
    And sometimes a little free rent
    You just keep begging, takin' everything we've got
    Well damn you nigger, don't you think it's time to stop

    So quit your bitchin' niggers and just let things be
    You're messin' up big time take it from me
    Quit your bitchin' nigger or you'll get your due
    'Cause the Ku Klux Klan will come-a-callin' on you

    Lately you're yelling 'bout our rebel flag
    Wantin' us to take it down
    It represents our history and southern pride
    And rebel blood on the grass
    So go to hell nigger, I'm tellin' ya loud and clear
    It ain't comin' down, the rebel flag is stayin' right here

    Hey quit your bitchin' niggers and just let things be
    You're messin' up big time take it from me
    Quit your bitchin' nigger or you'll get your due
    'Cause the Ku Klux Klan will come-a-callin' on you
    'Cause the Ku Klux Klan will come-a-callin' on you

  124. Most of whom are 4chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the rest of whom are FBI agents, trying to incite criminal acts in order to get easy prosecutions.

  125. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to say that was an absolutely amazing burn.

  126. Re:maybe you can call me short sighted, etc,, but. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Way to go Dick Head International. so wonder /. is so fucked up and up for sale again..
    buncha bitches

    Such a pertinent comment, Modded so low so tobe hidden..

    what a bunch of fucking bitches.

    the kKk is a senseless group, they bring, hate, war, and bullshit thinking..
    As for those stating "JEW, comments" your all a bunch a fuckers..
    Like nazi germany they will get theirs.. its all a matter of time.

  127. Re:Jew fraud kkk - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    your such a goober..

    and you say all of that with your mouths full..

    Its not nice to talk with your mouth full of jewish cock..

    get off your knees and stop sucking cock for coke..

  128. Coren22 proven a LYING punk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

    Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

    (Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

    I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

    I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

    I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

    Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

    APK

    P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

  129. Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

    False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

    Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

    Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

    ---

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

    APK

    P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

    "his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

    "I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

    "APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

    "his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

  130. Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

    "So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

    Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

    &

    How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

    ---

    "Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

    You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

    FACT:

    Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

    ---

    Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    ---

    * HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

    ---

    Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

    I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

    I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

    You told me you learn from guides?

    I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

    + WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    You did all that? No!

    (& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

    APK

    P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

  131. Coren22 it's no mere claim you're a liar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

    See subject: You ARE a liar - Did I say AD runs minus DNS Coren22? I've say AD = internal network DNS dependent far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

    (Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

    I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

    I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

    I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

    Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

    APK

    P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar - MORE of your utter fuckups after this too... apk

  132. Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

    False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

    Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

    Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

    ---

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

    APK

    P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

    "his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

    "I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

    "APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

    "his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

  133. Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

    "So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

    Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

    &

    How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

    ---

    "Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

    You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

    FACT:

    Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

    ---

    Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    ---

    * HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

    ---

    Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

    I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

    I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

    You told me you learn from guides?

    I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

    + WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    You did all that? No!

    (& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

    APK

    P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

  134. DoXXXed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bitches

  135. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by easyTree · · Score: 1

    Do they wear sheets so that black ppl can join-in without being discriminated against?

  136. Re:Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    John Smith.

  137. http://kukluxklan.info/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://kukluxklan.info/
    highest recommendation

  138. pedophile jews- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The scum jew has Zero to refute the facts of your scheming mass child rape mass murdering tribe so you slobber smut bs then load up with bullshit double talk distraction bs. Your tribe is the scum that used your printing press shit to 'pay' parasites to breed and destroy the planet, your mass immigration shit. Your scum chemtrails your fraud 'govt'. fck off scum pedophile jew.

    -others, the more the scum jew replies with bs and scum distraction you see for yourself the scum jews, they know the links are gight they've killed over a billion because you and your breeders and their breeders for centuries sat on your asses. Now they are spraying you. No one is coming to 'save' you. see jew posts above, copy to re read, give links to others, make tribes or die-

  139. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, so stop wanting that shit, stupid. Or accept that you're a racist terrorist. Whichever makes you sleep better at night.

  140. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You just can't stop propagating the hate can you? You just had to bring color into it...

  141. actual membership roster? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it just me, or would this particular group not be well-served to *not* actually have any sort of official membership roster...? I guess an email mailing list might be semi-close to an official list. But really, as noted by others, that could easily include people who have been pranked, or signed up as a means to be better informed of the group's activities.

  142. Re:Questionable Accuracy: Include Gay, Latina Mayo by will_die · · Score: 1

    Have you read the words of Cesar Chavez? According to current people he is a grade A racist.
    What is so bad is you now have people going around and changing this words and actions so he true beliefs are not shown.

  143. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Barsteward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    their loudest voice is Sarah Palin, what more do you need to know?

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  144. Re:Jew fraud kkk - by Barsteward · · Score: 0

    gawd, where did you cut and paste that from? did you have to get your mum to do it for you?

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  145. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "At its peak in the 1920s, Klan membership exceeded 4 million people nationwide."

  146. distraction jew- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keep slobbering distraction jew. The facts and mass of links beats the shit out of your jew tribe frauds, your mass murder mass child rape mass immigration your phony kkk shit, your scum nano chip chemtrails and more. fck off.

    -others, see how the scum jews distract, that's what surrounds you every day, they kill worldwide and you did nothing, continue to sit now and you're next. copy the first jew kkk post above, give links to others, make your own tribes -

  147. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Barsteward · · Score: 1

    UKIP has moved in to take its place with legally smarter rhetoric

    --
    "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
  148. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. But oddly enough, the two are highly correlated.

  149. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why hasn't that been tagged "Funny"?

  150. Joe McCarthy is smiling tonight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An anonymous group of international criminals has released a list it "got" (or made-up) that alleges some people they do not like are supposedly affiliated with a notorious hate group. The people on this list will never be able to prove their innocence, and unlike in the era of McCarthy, will never even be able to face ANY accuser. To top it all off, of course, the "data" (if we can call it that) has been washed through servers in (insert drum-roll) .... Russia!

    The world would be so much better if only the Democrats had never created the Klan in the first place, and had not celebrated the founders of the Klan at several of their national presidential conventions (i.e. they gave that organization real power, rather than them being just a local group of drunk bigots).

    Sadly, as a left-leaning group that's popular in many Democrat circles, the Democrat party will be politically unable to help any victims of this smear, and given that the Democrats and their friends in the press have so thoroughly propagandized the public into seeing Republicans as racists, the Republicans would be insane to help here (any help they provided to anybody slimed by this "Anonymous" act would be cited as proof of some racist tie). As a result, anybody whose reputation is unjustly destroyed by this is more victimized and less able to seek redress than anybody McCarthy went after.

  151. oops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While it's historical fact that the Democrats created the Klan, BUT I erroneously left out words I intended for the 3rd paragraph to make it clear that it's "Anonymous" and NOT the Klan that's popular in some Democrat circles these days - did NOT mean to imply that the Klan is currently popular in the Democrat party. It is a fact that all the Democrats in the senate as recently as the nineties and most who are there now voted to be led by a former Klansman (Sen Robert Byrd) but they were not voting for the Klan itself, which is an improvement and a sign of the times.

       

  152. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That only proves stupidity is not bound to race (as ought to be obvious to anyone with an ounce of intelligence - not that you would find many of those in the Tea Party).

  153. 200 years? by sgunhouse · · Score: 1

    Wasn't the Klan formed after the Civil War? That would make it 150 years.

  154. KKK is bad as long as anti-papist. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with KKK is not anti-negrism, as it is obvious that blacks are a failed race, judged such both as individuals and as a community, both in America and Africa. KKK's great sin is to have risen against The Catholic Church, even though Jesus gave the keys of the kingdom to apostle Simon Peter and proclaimed him to be the cornerstone of His church. The bishops of Rome are the heirs of apostle Peter, seated in the basilica built right over his tomb and whatever they bind or lose on Earth will be made such in Heaven.

  155. Only 1,000? by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1

    That's it? Honestly, that's pretty pitiful. Yet once this data is combed over by some more militant BLM people, I fully expect to hear about some targeted LEO assassinations. Once a person, especially one who has already been believed to be harassing minorities for awhile, is found to also be on this "list"...they will be a target. I also suspect several people in a specific area of Arizona to be outed on this list too. But really, only 1,000? Just cracking some place like Stormfront should get far more results than that.

  156. My Mayor is on the list. by alfredo · · Score: 1

    He is openly gay, has close ties to immigrant, low income, and African American communities. He's a Liberal. I think they screwed up this one entry. His dad shares the same name, so it could be his father. He has forcefully denied the charges.

    --
    photosMy Photostream
  157. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

    And it in it's turn is dwindling away to nothing. The leader resigned after the poor election results, but was brought back because they have no one to replace him.

  158. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

    Is there a statute of limitations on terrorism?

  159. Re:Questionable Accuracy: Include Gay, Latina Mayo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This. It's the kind of thing that they hope will get a lot of the more trollish elements of the SJWs up in arms, at which point anon likely hopes they'll start sending death threats and engaging in doxxing and all the things that _both_ sides of that ongoing conflict engage in, only this time it'll be against the kind of people that don't take kindly to it. It's bait, tied up with a nice bow and left on the doorstep. Now to see which side ends up with pie on their face.

  160. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

    The KKK is not a political party - if they were, that would be a different matter.

    Indeed it would be better. Rightwing crazies in small parties may be annoying, but they are also relatively harmless... at least, unless everything else go horribly wrong and they win a number of parliamentary seats, form a coalition with the mainstream conservatives which sees their leader made president in an effort to absorb them into the mainstream and defuse the situation, then the chancelor dies and the newly appointed president appoints himself to that office as well effectively removing all checks and balances and becoming the absolute ruler and then they haul off every liberal and socialist in government one night and shoot them in the head... but in fairness that's only happened once.

    --
    Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  161. Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since the general public wouldn't know an sql dump from a morning dump. This seems like it would be easy to fake this.

  162. lulz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i helped compile this list, and i put on a bunch of ppl i dont like

    prove i didnt

  163. Solution??? by wkwilley2 · · Score: 1

    I say just put all the KKK members and all the Black Panther members in the same place, say the Antarctic Tundra, and let them sort out their issues.

    --
    Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
  164. First thing I thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but the KKK has been relatively peaceful since the days of segregation. True freedom guarantees everybody the right to speak their mind, even if their message is offensive, bigoted, or asinine. True freedom also guarantees the right to laugh them down, which is clearly the appropriate response in 2015, where the KKK is taken about as seriously as an internet meme.

    Even if they hold demonstrations on the public street, as long as they remain peaceful and avoid direct harassment, the appropriate response is simply to laugh them down.

  165. Re: Space Jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember that bit in the last Dune novel (by Frank) where the space Jews were trying to create their own Kwisatz Haderach independently of the Bene Gersserit? man that was dumb and awesome.
    then again, I could be remembering it wrong, its been a while since I read it.

  166. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by twistedcubic · · Score: 1


    the second Klan was active between WWI and WWII (and was more concerned about Catholics, Jews, and immigrants moreso than black people)

    Citation? HIstory suggests the opposite for this time period.

  167. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Cederic · · Score: 1

    The leader resigned after the poor election results

    Yeah, getting over twice as many votes as a party that won 56 seats in parliament is a fucking disaster.

    The irony is that UKIP appear to be less racist too.

    Meanwhile BNP membership is discriminated against by the police service, which will almost certainly have greatly reduced the number of people signing up. If the police banned membership of Labour, Plaid Cymru, the Conservatives, the Lib Dems, the SNP and UKIP too then you'd see membership for those drop as well.

  168. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, it's the Jews that have created a message system that completely eludes you. You do realize replies to earlier comments push down new messages don't you? Apparently not, it's some kind of deep, dark conspiracy.

    You are truly a dumb fuck and deserving of whatever names you are being called. Now go have a gun "cleaning" accident or whatever.

  169. My mayor was listed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But all that did was make me doubt the authenticity of their report. She has a very long very liberal track record. If anything, she would be on the list of people the KKK hates, what with being in the local gay pride parade and living in a "mixed race" household, as well as a career based on equality political activism. I could not be prouder of her and what she stands for/has accomplished.

  170. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    I don't know about individuals, but if nobody in the KKK is a terrorist now I don't think it should be thought of as a terrorist organization. Assholes have rights in this country, and if they want to organize to talk about a stupid ideology they can.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  171. What? No black panther members hack? by brainchill · · Score: 1

    I am noticing a rather pervasive double standard here ..... Racism is racism and any group that would put itself above all others is the same so far as I'm concerned.

  172. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    the second Klan was active between WWI and WWII (and was more concerned about Catholics, Jews, and immigrants moreso than black people)

    Citation? HIstory suggests the opposite for this time period.

    The second Klan, unlike the first and third, was a more urban movement with a centralized leadership structure, and were based in the West and Midwest with a smaller base in the South (specifically Alabama). While it's true that Birth of a Nation helped galvanize the second Klan in the South and gave us much of the visual imagery that we associate today with the Klan, the organization was riding the wave of anti-immigrant sentiment at the time. Don't get me wrong, they were still a completely racist and anti-black organization, but that wasn't their core focus at the time; black people were kept "in their place" in the South, and the second Klan was more concerned with external threats. Mostly Protestants, they have great distrust towards the Catholic Church and the American Jew (the Anti-Defamation League was formed as a response to the second Klan's anti-Jewish activities). They also strongly endorsed, and this was one of their greatest popular selling points, Prohibition. They burned saloons in the South and attacked bootleggers. They didn't get much foothold in the northeast due to the stronger Catholic influence there.

    They were (late in the organization) strongly anti-Communist, but I'm guessing that the stated goals of the second Klan being so close to the stated goals of the Nazi Party helped kill off the second clan. Being a group that thrived on social tension, the Great Depression and World War II killed off that organization for good. They had more of a centralized organization, but they were also very secretive, so when membership lists were leaked and published, people left the Klan in droves. The Klan was already in great decline by the 1930s after some of the leaders were convicted for murder

    The third Klan arose in the late 40s and 1950s as a response to the Civil Rights Movement and upward mobility in Black Americans, and as such was far more concerned with the rights (or lack thereof) of black folks. That's the group we think of as the Klan today.

    Interesting reads include Kelly Baker's Gospel According to the Klan and while Wikipedia may be iffy at times, it's worthwhile to follow the references it cites.

  173. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by hachigatsu62 · · Score: 1

    LOL! Sarah Palin. Isn't that the lady who can see Russia from her house? She should move there and take the clan with her. Regardless of the fact the 2 aren't connected. Just waste of skin.

  174. Re: The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by hachigatsu62 · · Score: 1

    That's a good question. I mean as a "nigger" I could join without the help of affirmative action. Not that it matters, but I'm Jamaican. Just saying. 2 weeks ago a category 5 Hurricane Patricia which was the 3rd largest in history to touch land blew right over Mexico. Predictions were scary. Results, no loss of life and minimal damage. Who saw that as a miracle? Probably no one. Patricia now less than a tropical depression touched US soil taking 1 life and causing significant damage. High School kids either committing suicide because their peers are mean hateful ignorant little pricks. Or they take out their frustration by shooting up the schools. Cops murdering people, not just black people. Cyber Warfare, sex slavery, children being traded as sex slaves... Children people and all the other nonsense that's happening in the world and instead of combining resources and knowledge and working together to solve problems, we still tear each other down. Nigger this, nigger that. Cracker this cracker that. Ignorant, Destructive, hateful and just flat out selfish. Awwww... Welcome to the greatest country in the world. USA. However it's still better here for us "niggers" than over in Europe where in some countries actually put up billboards saying go home monkeys, you are not wanted here. Classic! I honestly wish the world would end Today!

  175. Freedom of speech, not freedom of consequences by rhyous · · Score: 1

    In the United States of America, we have the freedom of speech, yes. But nowhere are we guaranteed freedom from the consequences of speech. There may not be government-imposed consequences, but there are social, political, news/media, and/or market consequences.

    If you are a business owner and you make a statement that offends the public, your business might take a hit. The constitution isn't going to force anyone to shop at your store. The constitution guarantees you the right to make the statement without government-imposed consequences.

    Also, privacy is not a constitutional right. I am still having an internal debate on whether it should be. But even if privacy were a constitutional right, a person would lose such a right if they shared their opinion publicly on Social media. That opinion is now public and no longer private by the person's own choice. If that person tries to get around this by using an alias account, well, there is no guarantee that the alias will really hide who that person is.

  176. I do so love irony... by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

    "You are more than a hate group. You operate much more like terrorists and you should be recognized as such. You are terrorists that hide your identities beneath sheets and infiltrate society on every level."

    Golly, I thought for a moment they were talking about themselves...

  177. fk off jew- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Scum jews have nothing but bs. More links. You would not find these on your own. Copy pages to disk. Don't waste time clicking links or index. There is a site that ripped off his work, credits someone else, pushes 'jeezus' shit focus 'religion' angle and other psy ops to dumb down the fact jews are a race. Do Not waste time searching or going through all the files. You are being Sprayed. Time is short. These and the links in first posts chosedn from hundreds. Copying just these will take two full days. Between these and the other sites/links in first post you have more than enough. Copy to disk for backup. word doc, set page margins .5 half inch, right click images, copy paste text. Use notes with other links to hand out to others. Don't try to give all these links to masses of people. Masses are idiots. Keep notes short. Use hand out note in other comment. Just copy the jud inc pages to disk for backup. You cannot find these files anymore without the links, only some of the links on other bogus sites. These will be gone soon. Get them on disk, they will wipe your computer, they can do it now. Hand out short notes to meet others. Make your own tribes or die.
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/Bush_Mossad11.htm - fraud 'war two'
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/assassination_of_president_Mckinley.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/Oneill.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/1.0.19james_vincent_forrestal.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/H.uey_long.htm

    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/11.lindbergh1.htm
    over 5 mill voluteered to 'look for the lindbergh baby' but No one got off their asses made tribes and took down fraud 'government'. You, your breeders their breeders still sit on your ass as they kill those who stand up. You sit on your ass as they kill worldwide in their fraud 'wars'. Now You are being sprayed. Now it will be You. Stop looking for 'leaders'. Get off your ass. Make your own tribes.
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/wal_mart__waltons.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/81jekyll_island_was_infamous_for_r.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/84Walton_funding.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/Murdoch_Fox_news.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/87tboone_pickens.htm

    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/j.ack_the_ripper.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/harold_shipman.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/85dahmer.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/87simon_trent.htm
    The 'jeezus' fraud made up by jews, 'vatican' made up by jews, all but two 'popes' have been racial jews. current scum 'pope' is racial jew.
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/freidman_pedophiles_from_hell.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/84incestuous_dungeon_master_is_a_z.htm

    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/Waco.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/Oklahoma_City_Bomb.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/postville.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/87congress_investigation_kosher_persecution.htm

    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/h....o,locaust_fraud_on_the_school_ci.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/89bobby_de_niro_walks_off_film_set.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/89latest_tv_series_is_the.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/10_12_vanity_fair_jewish.htm
    tiny sample. millions in the tribe, millions get 'advantage' over you as racial jew in the tribe. Whites never bothered to make tribes so our race had the weapons and power, instead you hand your 'tax' labor and children's lives to the scum jews. Now they will kill you.
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/10_15.third_generation_holocaust_survi.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/88where_are_they_now.htm
    http://67.225.133.110/~gbpprorg/judici

  178. racist meme bs- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 'anti' 'racist' bs is a jew meme. The jews are the ultimate racists while making up 'anti hate speech' bogus 'law' to cover up their own racial tribe and to make it harder for nordic whites to defend from mass immigration agenda by jews to destroy us. The 'indians' bs is also jew shit. Whites were first on the continent, the indian immigrated and killed them all - 'kennewick man', the scum jews covered it up, the only person with any bones now is a fraud jew named 'owsley' who was part of the Waco cover up. They/he also put up bogus sites pretending to 'fight to keep the bones', same false opposition bs as all the fraud 'activist' bs by jews. Once white dutch came and settled again they had to fend off indian attacks to do it. No one seems to remember 'scalping'. Also it was jews that gave the indians smallpox. Don't bother searching you'll only get a few pages sniveling 'killed a million indians' bs, there never more than 300k 'indians' here. The jew psy ops inflate the number of 'indians' so idiots keep sniveling over bs name 'indians' instead of get straight that whites were here first, managed to immigrate again and fight and survive, but stupidly allowed jews to put up scum fraud 'government'. Now they own it all.
    see 'jew' posts above.

  179. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    The same description describes the Palestinian youth who, for the past 50 years have been subjected to hatred propaganda in their schools, mosques, Radio and TV.
    Imagine for Palestinians whose rulers wasted money on tunnels, while the Israelis developed Nuclear reactors, desalination plants, and provides their enemies with both electricity and water, and money.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  180. They didn't release the list is false. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "#ICYMI #OpKKK was in no way involved with today's release of information that incorrectly outed several politicians "-@Operation_KKK

    1. Re:They didn't release the list is false. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous Klan member dump obviously bogus
      http://boingboing.net/2015/11/03/anonymous-klan-member-dump-obv.html

  181. Indian immigrants by NewYork · · Score: 1

    You should be aware of creeping Caste system (a type of Pyramid scheme) due to Indian migrants;

    If you meet anybody from India, ask him "What is your caste".
    If he says Brahmin, SACK him, before he injects the Pyramid scheme in your society;
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...

  182. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck off with your zionist propaganda. Nobody wants to hear your lies.

  183. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

    Yeah, getting over twice as many votes as a party that won 56 seats in parliament is a fucking disaster.

    The clue is in the party names. The SNP only stood in Scotland, and they won virtually every steat they contested. UKIP stood throughout the UK. There is no sense in which UKIP did better than the SNP. Not MPs and not votes.

    The irony is that UKIP appear to be less racist too.

    They try harder to hide it. But rarely a week went by during the election when one candidate or another wasn't outed for racism.

    Meanwhile BNP membership is discriminated against by the police service

    Good. And the adoption service too. You can't condone having racists as policemen, or racists adopting children.

  184. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Cederic · · Score: 1

    Good. And the adoption service too. You can't condone having racists as policemen, or racists adopting children.

    I can't condone having sexists in those roles either but feminists aren't banned.
    I can't condone having fuckwits that want to overthrow the government in those roles but communists aren't banned.
    I can't condone having people that reject the law of the land in favour of their fictional book of lies but muslims aren't banned.

    How about banning people based on their behaviour, not on the political party they support? Someone in the police commits racist acts, prosecute them, sack them. That's not so hard.

    It is possible to be a member of the BNP and not be a racist. Just as it's possible to be a member of the SNP and not be a racist. Equally unlikely but one of those is banned from the police service and not the other.

  185. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

    Your clear sympathy for the BNP is noted.

  186. Re: Publishing? You mean DOXXING right? by Cederic · · Score: 1

    Your clear inability to identify objective observation and content agnostic defence of basic rights has been rather more accurately noted.

  187. Coren22 proven a LYING punk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

    Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

    (Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

    I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

    I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

    I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

    Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

    APK

    P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk

  188. Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

    "So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

    Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

    &

    How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

    ---

    "Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

    You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

    FACT:

    Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

    ---

    Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    ---

    * HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

    ---

    Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

    I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

    I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

    You told me you learn from guides?

    I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

    + WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    You did all that? No!

    (& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

    APK

    P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

  189. Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

    False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

    Is that your fake site for more lies Coren22?

    Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

    ---

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

    APK

    P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

    "his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

    "I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

    "APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

    "his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)