Anon. Op to destroy Norwegian killer Anders Behring Breivik's manifesto

[ResonanceSD]

Source: http://www.news.com.au/technology/anonymous-bid-to-destroy-norwegian-killer-anders-behring-breiviks-manifesto/story-e6frfro0-1226102267855

Seriously, one of the better things they've done. Actually I'd say it's the best so far.

 

[mad825]

And what would be the point of this? Oh wait, censorship.

 

[F4LL3N]

Yet they're on 4chan praising him as a hero.

 

[ResonanceSD]

And what would be the point of this? Oh wait, censorship.

...I don't know where you got that from. It's actually to destroy his message. How's that censorship? Do you want his message to be spread or something?

 

[DEAD34345]

And what would be the point of this? Oh wait, censorship.

I was thinking the same, but now that I've seen the article I have to say I think it's a great idea. They're don't want to remove his manifesto as such, instead they're going to create tons of parody versions and claim that they are the real ones, so that no-one even knows which the real one is.

They've got a thumbs up from me. Clearly the manifesto means a lot to the psychopath, since he (apparently) committed his murders to promote it. What better way to hurt him than make that plan completely backfire?

 

[kebab4you]

Yet they're on 4chan praising him as a hero.

Keep in mind that the fuck tards over at /b/ are not connected with anonymous.

Good luck I say to those that plan on editing this 1500 pages long beast. Maybe if you edit the first 100~200 pages will be enough.

 

[Stein Inge]

Just leave the copy-pasted piece of "Eurabia" inspired bile to die in piece. Destroying it will only imply that we care about whatever delusions he constructed to justify his actions.

 

[Esotera]

And what would be the point of this? Oh wait, censorship.

It's not censorship - they are creating their own manifestos to disguise which is the original. The original still exists online, nothing ethically wrong here.

 

[KrabbiPatty]

And what would be the point of this? Oh wait, censorship.

...I don't know where you got that from. It's actually to destroy his message. How's that censorship? Do you want his message to be spread or something?

What, you serious?

Dude, destroying a message IS censorship. That is literally the dictionary definition of censorship. Like, no I'm serious, that's what it means. To destroy or suppress what someone says or does for some reason, usually political.

What did you THINK censorship meant? Do you think it only applies to things you like? And what's with the 'tude man? "Do you want his message to spread?" Who fucking cares...that's not even a relevant question, and even if it were, if you REALLY don't believe in censorship (as Anon claims...key word, "claim") then the answer would be YES!

But we all know that Anon is not about freedom of speech or information or whatever buzzword they use this week. They're effectively an anarchist cult that worship's memes. They're not even entirely aware, I believe, of who or what Guy Fawkes was--they literally chose him at random from a movie. Is it any wonder then that they claim to be against censorship and yet are practicing the LITERAL DEFINITION of censorship? They probably don't even know what that means...this is what happens when your revolution is organized by thirteen year olds on 4chan Lol.

 

[mad825]

And what would be the point of this? Oh wait, censorship.

I was thinking the same, but now that I've seen the article I have to say I think it's a great idea. They're don't want to remove his manifesto as such, instead they're going to create tons of parody versions and claim that they are the real ones, so that no-one even knows which the real one is.

It's censorship nonetheless, maybe a less of an authoritarian way to do it.

And what would be the point of this? Oh wait, censorship.

...I don't know where you got that from. It's actually to destroy his message. How's that censorship? Do you want his message to be spread or something?

censorship does destroy an message/idea/belief by removing important key facts about the doctrine.

What do I want? The truth.

 

[KrabbiPatty]

And what would be the point of this? Oh wait, censorship.

It's not censorship - they are creating their own manifestos to disguise which is the original. The original still exists online, nothing ethically wrong here.

Bull.

That's still trying to suppress something, it's just a pussy passive aggressive way of doing it.

Just admit it: Anon is full of crap.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

I'm conflicted over whether I want the shooter to suffer through watching his life's work (*shudder) mass raped and mutilated on the internet.....or just to have it disappear.

mad825 is right in the sense that Anon would be hypocrites if they just deleted it (please read Edit).....but I don't give a toss about that: It SHOULD just disappear. Forever.

But then again....Anders Behring Breivik SHOULD suffer. And if he values his work like any.....author(for lack of a better word), would...... This should destroy him.

Quite the conundrum. Atleast it's a win-win.

EDIT:

censorship does destroy an message/idea/belief by removing important key facts about the doctrine.

What do I want? The truth.

Truth?

His manifesto doesn't have "truth". It has bigoted, disturbing opinions. Opinions that agree with the slaughtering of ~90 innocent children.

A line must be drawn at some point. Even by Anon. I certainly wouldn't fault them. For they are, at the end of the day, Human.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Hmmm...Ok, yeah, they can argue they aren't censoring him, just silencing him by drowning him out with other crap, but it's still fairly close to exactly what they are supposed to be against.

On the other hand, does anyone take the stated morality of anyone supposedly representing Anonymous at all seriously?

I like the idea, but freely admit it's one of those "except _____"s stuck onto claims to support free speech.

 

[KrabbiPatty]

God forbid that something people disagree with should exist on the internet: a device that has effectively become a delivery system for porn and YouTube poops. Hey should we go burn every copy of Mien Kampf. Maybe some other offending literature. That's not censorship right, it's just destroying or suppressing something we find offensive for completely arbitrary reasons and...OH WAIT!

*rolls eyes so hard they bleed*

Ouch.

 

[Grimrider6]

http://pastebin.com/DktSNbme

There we go. Really, news.com.au... referencing sources is taught on day one of Journalism school. I am disappoint

 

[intheweeds]

And what would be the point of this? Oh wait, censorship.

...I don't know where you got that from. It's actually to destroy his message. How's that censorship? Do you want his message to be spread or something?

What, you serious?

Dude, destroying a message IS censorship. That is literally the dictionary definition of censorship. Like, no I'm serious, that's what it means. To destroy or suppress what someone says or does for some reason, usually political.

-snip-

It is definitely censorship. No question about it. I disagree with it and believe it is wrong.

But - seriously who cares? When is the last time anyone ever read a known psychotic's 1500 page 'manifesto' and took it seriously? Crazy people write crazy manifestos. Its been going on forever and no one has ever taken them seriously as a threat before...

Where is the threat here that we need to pull out censorship for? This seems like a misguided attempt by Anon to garner some public support now that the FBI is arresting people. People are already only reading it to laugh at him. What more do you want?

Edit: Wait... so everyone who helps shut down Wikileaks is against freedom of information and should be attacked, right? So now Anon is trying to obfuscate information, right?
So that means Anon stands for - um...
Ok, then, Anon is against - umm...

***BRAIN EXPLODES FROM HYPOCRISY OVERLOAD***

Can't believe this only hit me now. What a cruel massacre of logic has occurred here today. Someone should tamper with and redistribute Anon's publications quickly.

 

[Cazza]

This isn't censorship the real one will still be out there somewhere. Anon just want to destory the ego of this monster.

 

[Staskala]

1. Find the Manifest of Anders Behring Breivik : 2083 ? A European Declaration of Independence
2. Change it, add stupid stuff, remove parts, shoop his picture, do what you like to.....
3. Republish it everywhere and up vote releases from other peoples, declare that the faked ones are original

My, my, aren't we mature today.
And here I was thinking that it couldn't get any lower than Operation Green Rights.

 

[Giest4life]

And what would be the point of this? Oh wait, censorship.

...I don't know where you got that from. It's actually to destroy his message. How's that censorship? Do you want his message to be spread or something?

What, you serious?

Dude, destroying a message IS censorship. That is literally the dictionary definition of censorship. Like, no I'm serious, that's what it means. To destroy or suppress what someone says or does for some reason, usually political.

What did you THINK censorship meant? Do you think it only applies to things you like? And what's with the 'tude man? "Do you want his message to spread?" Who fucking cares...that's not even a relevant question, and even if it were, if you REALLY don't believe in censorship (as Anon claims...key word, "claim") then the answer would be YES!

But we all know that Anon is not about freedom of speech or information or whatever buzzword they use this week. They're effectively an anarchist cult that worship's memes. They're not even entirely aware, I believe, of who or what Guy Fawkes was--they literally chose him at random from a movie. Is it any wonder then that they claim to be against censorship and yet are practicing the LITERAL DEFINITION of censorship? They probably don't even know what that means...this is what happens when your revolution is organized by thirteen year olds on 4chan Lol.

Pretty much this. Freedom of speech should apply equally and not just to things Anon finds worthy.