Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Anonymous Posts Pornography To Hijacked ISIS Twitter Accounts (softpedia.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the we-are-legion dept.

An anonymous Slashdot reader writes: Softpedia is reporting that a member of the Anonymous collective "has been hijacking accounts for the most active ISIS supporters, the ones involved in online recruitment, and has been plastering their profiles with naked women and peaceful messages." Anonymous is also using the hijacked accounts to monitor "protected" tweets from ISIS, and they're reporting hundreds of thousands of other ISIS profiles to Twitter. But Anonymous is also defacing 161 of the hijacked accounts, saying they're "Adding our own images and basically showing them 'We are in control'... we are creating confusion and distrust..." There are a few things that the Islamic State fear. One is women and the second is Porn."

22 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. And probably twitter will ban it much faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And probably twitter will ban it much faster if it is porn than if it were "just" ISIS propaganda.

    Prude america, wake up!

    1. Re: And probably twitter will ban it much faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Twitter shouldn't be a censor for free speech. Youtube now keeps taking down a womans video "how to spot a feminist", which basically disses the ridiculous extremist feminist men haters. Sure you might not agree with her, but they swamp the account with trolls and get the account closed.
      She gets exactly the same response as these people expressing pro-ISIS views (well at least we assume they are pro-ISIS views, the accounts are all spam or closed currently, we have to take some anonymous persons claim as if it was true).
      Perhaps they simply expressed negative war views? which he chose to interpret as pro-ISIS and he was unable to combat their views with counter speech? i.e. his debating skills are so weak he hacks and trolls. But that's not the way to tackle pro-ISIS commenters, you tackle their speech with speech, not try to silence those views, which only gives them extra bragging rights.

    2. Re:And probably twitter will ban it much faster by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hey, don't you watch TV? Chopping titties off is acceptable, kissing them isn't!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. The downside of this by Z00L00K · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The downside of this is that it's obvious that the accounts have been hacked. It's better to seed confusion whenever an account has been hacked.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    1. Re:The downside of this by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As Robert S. McNamara said, "Satire, trolling and propaganda are best when they walk a fine line between being extreme enough to be effective and yet mundane enough to be believable."

      A light sprinkling - ideally gay ones or a bit of pegging - here and there.

      [captcha - repress]

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:The downside of this by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My thought also. The script kiddies of Anonymous will get one day of poking fun at ISIS out of this stunt, but a much better strategy would be for the NSA to quietly take over ISIS sites and, using all the global intelligence at its disposal, set up false feeds and chatter, funnel ISIS troops into kill zones, and issue faked calls for terrorist activity in the US and Europe which would lure the next Mateen into a police trap.

      We need to capture people like Mateen alive, so that their minds can be disassembled using the latest techniques to root out the ISIS command trees in Western countries. Every dead terrorist is a good terrorist, but it's also one we can't get information from.

    3. Re:The downside of this by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Also, this just helps ISIS recruit. Look, it's a clash of civilisations, a war against the corrupt, decadent west, the heathens who mock Muslims and draw Mohammed!

      Just report then to Twitter, get them shut down (oh noes, censorships!) and make them harder for people to find. That's the most you can do without making things worse.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:The downside of this by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      "Also, this just helps ISIS recruit."

      In what way would a secret hexing of jihadist sites 'help ISIS recruit?' And yes, it's a clash of civilizations and we need to understand that the US and Europe are active battlefronts in this war.

    5. Re:The downside of this by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We need to capture people like Mateen alive, so that their minds can be disassembled using the latest techniques to root out the ISIS command trees in Western countries. Every dead terrorist is a good terrorist, but it's also one we can't get information from.

      How much of a "command structure" do you need for a lone gunman? If he contacted IS - which is as of yet unclear, or if he just pledged to join their fight - there's no guarantee that he knew anyone or had anyone local who had turned him into a radical. He was angry and wanted to shoot up a gay club, since this is the US he already had the guns so is there any indication IS was more involved than *thumbsup*? This was not Paris or Brussels with many attackers and IEDs, there's no indication this was really organized or trained in any way.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re: The downside of this by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      And you do know ISIS has taken credit for this already right?

      According to the Lt. Governor of Texas, so has God.

      http://www.chron.com/news/arti...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re: The downside of this by robi5 · · Score: 2

      Haha Putin props up anything that may destabilize the less barbaric part of Europe, from financing extreme right wing parties to maintaining East European countries on the short leash via energy exports, shooting Syrian rebels instead of ISIS and when they have some free time, invade and annex some parts of real European (rather than Eurasian) countries, shoot down passenger planes and then act surpised when Nato plants some more defenses on its own territory. The only nice thing so far is the freeing of Palmyra, too bad they (and the Western World) let it fall in the first place.

  3. Re:Slashdot won't acknowledge gay murder by ArchieBunker · · Score: 2, Informative

    While tragic, it is hardly "news for nerds".

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  4. Don't think so by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 2

    There are a few things that the Islamic State fear. One is women

    Well they've certainly conquered *that* phobia, because they seem to be able to get close enough to commit rape on an industrial scale.

    --
    It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    1. Re:Don't think so by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      Easily solved: Switch to gay porn.

  5. Re:Slashdot won't acknowledge gay murder by TheReaperD · · Score: 2

    It's currently loaded in the firehose. This is a news aggregation site, it takes time. If you want to know what is happening right now you want sources such as twitter though I wouldn't count on the reliability.

    --
    "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
  6. Re: How about you support HR 4269, ban massacre to by johnsmithperson123 · · Score: 2

    And what good did that do in Paris?

  7. Need to see the pictures by tie_guy_matt · · Score: 2

    How can we tell if the pictures are really offensive if we can't see them? We need to see non-blurred images for purely scientific reasons. Yeah just for scientific reasons. That's it, that's the ticket.

  8. Re: How about you support HR 4269, ban massacre to by sumdumass · · Score: 2

    It was the type of venue that mattered. It's a gun free zone. Gays do typically lean left politically and the left is generally anti gun. It doesn't take complex equations to figure 2+2 in this case.

    But as I mentioned, it is a gun free zone by law (without any regard to the owner's desire) because it serves alcohol. I do agree that consumption of alcohol and firearms to not mix well. But designated drivers and police - on or off duty likely could have made a difference. The thing is, the amount of time involved and the direction of shooting, there would have been plenty of opportunity for someone to attempt to do something. That attempt doesn't mean they would be successful but it also means that they wouldn't have been completely defenseless and at the shooter's mercy.

    The truth is, the only thing that stopped this bad guy with a gun was a good guy with a gun. All I'm saying is that there should be a lot more good guys around when a bad guy shows up.

  9. Re: Slashdot won't acknowledge gay murder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's your fault for not participating in the firehose. Slashdot does not report the news. Users submit articles and vote to bring them to discussion.

  10. you DO prefer your violence after football by raymorris · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's true, is Europe you like to have your random violence at football matches, don't you.

  11. Honeypot by phorm · · Score: 2

    Yeah, I don't know how good it will do in the field, but it would be great to setup a honeypot of some sort. I kinda wonder why they don't do that already, like "to catch a predator" except for f***'ed up would-be terrorists (or perhaps they do and don't mention it much)

  12. Re:How about you support HR 4269, ban massacre too by vux984 · · Score: 2

    You are a complete moron.

    I'm not the poster you are replying to. But actually no. You are mis-reading his post.

    His point was that the gun legislation that passed was only toothless and pointless because of the gun lobby.

    The assault weapons ban only banned what the weapons look like and little more

    Because of the gun lobby.

    but all the existing high capacity mags were grandfathered in.

    Because of the gun lobby.

    The exact same gun claimed to be an assault weapon in this case ( AR15) could have the stock changed and flash suppressor removed and not be considered an assault weapon even though the functioning mechanics would be identical.

    Because of the gun lobby.

    Bottom line, the gun lobby is MORE responsible for that piece of shit legislation than the anti-gun lobby. They lobbied until it was pointless, and then laughed all the way home when it passed.

    As for places with no guns, your own home as long as all legal residents agree

    Back in the 1880s entire towns were gun free zones.

      "You could wear your gun into town, but you had to check it at the sheriff's office or the Grand Hotel, and you couldn't pick it up again until you were leaving town," -- regarding Tombstone, AZ

    And drinking establishments have traditionally had rules about turning in your weapons also going back to the "wild west".