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'."

8 of 546 comments (clear)

  1. 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.

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

    and active law enforcement officials too.

  4. 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?

  5. Re:The Klan Is Always Getting Bigger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The NAACP should be targeted next.

  6. 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.
  7. 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
  8. 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.