Let's not forget, that it's not likely that KKK - which consists of a number of small local groups, with no unified leadership - has a centralized data-base containing all of the personal details of its members. I don't know how exactly Anonymous obtained those names, but it seems many of the people named have social media accounts, promoting white supremacy, or neo-Nazism. And it appears that at least a few of those names are fake.

I always thought it rather shameful that Denver's airport was named after former Denver mayor and open Klansman, Benjamin F. Stapleton. Of course, we're still stuck with the name since the development they built on the site of the old airport still bears it.

(November 5, 2015 at 11:03 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(November 5, 2015 at 7:46 pm)dyresand Wrote: 20  minutes ago they just released a long list of kkk members on pastebin and oh boy will the news pick this up 

here is the list http://pastebin.com/wbvP95wg

I notice that it says the earlier list (presumably the one that contained the politicians' names) was not genuinely from Anonymous.

Begs the question of who acted as the agent provocateur on that one.

I noticed also that they listed David Duke (a well-known White Supremacist politician from Louisiana) but not the fact that he was/is a politician. To me, that was just a list of random people in the Klan... I mean, it's bad, but it's hardly a big deal except to the individual lowlifes.

The first list wasn't  official and it was stated by people who released this official version.

(November 5, 2015 at 11:14 pm)Tiberius Wrote: The problem with releasing lists like this is twofold:

1) As much as we may not like racist shitheads, they still have a right to privacy, and releasing their names is a violation of that right. We may not like it, but if this were a list of closeted homosexuals, we'd be outraged.

2) This is a list that anonymous published, and its accuracy is questionable at best purely because anonymous is an activist group with no real face. There is very little stopping them from putting names of people they don't like on that list, in the hope that these people get dragged through the mud.

I checked the names on every account with facebook and they do exist..

(November 5, 2015 at 11:49 pm)dyresand Wrote: I checked the names on every account with facebook and they do exist..

That's irrelevant to both my points. I don't care if these people exist, they still don't deserve to have their membership of the KKK leaked unless they decide to. We have a right to privacy, and that right extends to participating in organizations that you might not want people to know you are a part of.

In addition, having a Facebook account doesn't mean the list is accurate, it just means the people on the list exist. I have a Facebook account, and I'm (presumably) not on the list. If I were on the list, the fact that I have a Facebook account is irrelevant because I'm not an actual member of the KKK. Put it this way: I can go on Facebook, search for names of people, and put them on a list claiming they are members of the KKK. It doesn't make it true.

(November 5, 2015 at 11:54 pm)Tiberius Wrote:

(November 5, 2015 at 11:49 pm)dyresand Wrote: I checked the names on every account with facebook and they do exist..

That's irrelevant to both my points. I don't care if these people exist, they still don't deserve to have their membership of the KKK leaked unless they decide to. We have a right to privacy, and that right extends to participating in organizations that you might not want people to know you are a part of.

In addition, having a Facebook account doesn't mean the list is accurate, it just means the people on the list exist. I have a Facebook account, and I'm (presumably) not on the list. If I were on the list, the fact that I have a Facebook account is irrelevant because I'm not an actual member of the KKK. Put it this way: I can go on Facebook, search for names of people, and put them on a list claiming they are members of the KKK. It doesn't make it true.

I do heavily agree with you on the privacy parts and what they are doing ethically wrong yes i agree. 
I mean also with the government as well they are kinda violating the constitution with said certain programs.
Over all i mean anonymous can do good but the way the go about is really questionable.

The whole idea of Anonymous is questionable. It's an organization with practically no accountability, or responsibilities, operating using largely illegal means. Sure - their anti-establishmentarian vigilantism it's kind of romantic and I happen to agree with a lot of their messages, but the question is: what will happen, when more groups like that - some of them possibly with less agreeable political and social views - decide to follow suit and start enforcing their idea of justice, on a global scale?

I mean - sooner or later even christians will figure out how to use the internet and perhaps their hackers will be publishing names of abortion patients, drug users, or homosexuals.

On the plus side we of anonymous the TTP gotten leaked and it's bad news all around for us.

(November 5, 2015 at 7:56 pm)dyresand Wrote:

(November 5, 2015 at 7:53 pm)Minimalist Wrote: More persecution for xtian shitheads to whine about.

They shouldn't have been racist cunt waffles.

I'm offended >:c

Quote:The whole idea of Anonymous is questionable. It's an organization with practically no accountability, or responsibilities, operating using largely illegal means.

Sounds like the Department of Homeland Security.

If Edward Snowden taught us anything it is that any idea of internet "privacy" went out the window with the Patriot Act.