Site search

Blogroll

3000 Votes
Andrew Bartlett
Antony Loewenstein
Audrey of Adelaide
Australians All
Austrolabe
Balneus
Bitch Ph.D.
BoltWatch
Brian Flemming
Bush Telegraph
Catallaxy
Club Troppo
Counteract Now
Crazy Brave
David Jeffery
David Tiley
Deb Foskey
Denialism
Feminism 101
GrodsCorp
Human Rights Act
Irfan Yusuf
Jane Clark
Jeremy Sear
John Quiggin
Josh Wolf
Kalkadoon.org
Language Log
Larvatus Prodeo
LeftWrites
Legal Soap Box
Machine Gun Keyboard
Miss Politics Australia
New Int. Blogs
Nexus Six
Paradigm Oz
Peter Black
Peter Campbell
Peter Martin
Planet Irf
Polemica
Possums Pollytics
Reasons You Will Hate Me
Rodney Croome
Sauer-Thompson
South Sea Republic
Spinopsys
StinkyJournalism.org
Suki Has An Opinion
Talk it Out
Talk It Out
Tama Leaver
The Dogs Bollocks
The Indian Mutiny
The Partisan
The Poll Bludger
The Road to Surfdom
Thinkers Podium
Tim Dunlop
Tim Lambert
Tug Boat Potemkin
Typing is NOT Activism
Watermelon Rant
Webdiary
Woolly Days


Featured Content

Profile: Mick Towke
Profile: Greg Smith
Profile: Paul Gibson

Make “God Hates Fags” Pay

God Hates Fags” is a website run by the so-called Westboro Baptist Church in the US. This group is well known for picketing the funerals of aid’s victems. A post on digg has suggested some minor net activism, try to make their rubbish too expensive to host by chewing bandwidth.

This is a link to the largest file on their website, the suggestion on the digg thread is to download it a few times, which is replicated across the net could infinitely increase Westboro Baptist Church’s hosting costs.

There is a counter argument, that this form of net activism simply serves to promote their ideas, others claim that “censorship is bad”. I’m of the opinion that there is no way on earth that people going to the God Hates Fags website could possibily do anything other than make a laughing stock of the Westboro Baptist Church. The censorship argument sounds awfully like the crud that right wingers dig up whenever anyone to the left dares express their contempt for utterly disgusting ideas.

Freedom of speach does not equate to a right to be heard, nor a right to immunity from vocal protest action!

Update: Their entire server is now down.


Stories the server thinks are related:
>>Windschuttle: The Left Hates The Working Class
>>DeadRoo gets a BIG CASH DONATION!
>>Exam Period Open Discussion Thread
>>A blog with guaranteed readership??


Comments

resta suma Comment from Iain Hall
Time: December 28, 2006, 4:35 pm

Sure you should be free to say what you please but if you say some thing that people object to you must be prepared to argue your case. However crashing their server will probably be counterproductive in the long run as it will just reinforce their feelings of suffering for their holy cause. Isn’t if funny how all of the God bothers are afraid of sex?

resta suma Comment from Dana
Time: December 28, 2006, 4:41 pm

Whatever you do, be mindful that many internet accounts actually cost *you* money or bandwidth when you download large files.

resta suma Comment from rjs
Time: December 28, 2006, 5:53 pm

Yes freedom of speech doesn’t equal right to be heard, but by DDOSing someone you are not targeting their right to be heard, you are targeting their freedom of speech.

God hates fags are fuckjobs, but DDOSing is not the answer. For a start bandwidth is cheap these days and there are lots of services out there that are willing to host sites under DDOS attacks for pittance, so it isn’t really very effective. It also reinforces their opinion that ‘family values’ are under attack from the leftist hordes and that they are a victim.

resta suma Comment from Rebecca
Time: December 28, 2006, 6:15 pm

I think rjs is right on this one. These crazy bastards are best left ignored; anyone to the left of Fred Nile is going to see their nonsense for what it is.

resta suma Comment from Kieran
Time: December 28, 2006, 8:43 pm

Odd, I’m in the Fuck Skip minority on this one. I’ve always seen a politically motivated non-script based DOS attack the net equivilant to shouting “shame” during a particuarlly apalling speech.

Or perhaps a non-violent blockade of a Liberal party conference.

“It also reinforces their opinion that ‘family values’ are under attack from the leftist hordes and that they are a victim.”

That at least I have no problem with, I want the Westboro Baptist Church to feel under attack as a consequence of what I consider their totally unacceptable “views”. I suppose I don’t believe it is possible to embrace or convert the likes of these fanatics.

I would probably consider it an unacceptable attack on freedom of speech to criminalize the act of making these comments, but I believe it’s wholley apropriate for society to shout such speech down.

resta suma Comment from Dale
Time: December 28, 2006, 8:44 pm

the site is back up and slow as all hell especially considering that its mainly text based.

resta suma Comment from rjs
Time: December 31, 2006, 2:54 pm

I wasn’t saying that we oughtn’t let them feel like victims because I think there is some chance of changing their minds, but because such homophobic hate-filled bastards don’t deserve to feel as if they are victims. Also everytime that they are “shouted down” and overcome it then they will feel renewed and reinvigorated as if they have achieved something.

resta suma Comment from Kieran
Time: December 31, 2006, 3:14 pm

Surely every time they are publically and forcefully rejected, society feels a little more welcoming for their victems?

Write a comment





Close
E-mail It