Anonymous’ vows to ‘destroy’ Fox News website on Nov. 5th

[go west young man]

Source: The Raw Story

In a video statement carried recently by several official channels maintained by members of the hacker activist group “Anonymous,” a digitally generated voice explains that the online collective has decided to take down the Fox News website on Nov. 5th of this year.

The date, Nov. 5, is significant for its dramatic placement in the film and comic book “V for Vendetta,” about a freedom-loving terrorist who destroys an authoritarian government that’s come to power in the U.K. “Remember, remember the 5th of November,” is his saying, hearkening back to the “Gunpowder plot” of 1604, in which the terrorist Guy Fawkes was captured and executed for his attempt to blow up Parliament.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/24/anonymous-vows-to-destroy-fox-news-website-on-nov-5th/

---

This sounds too good to be true. What a lovely November it would be though if it takes place.

[TheDebbieDee]

1. If it happens, I'll dance a jig on Fox's grave on Nov. 6th...........

and I'm not even Irish!

[unionworks]

16. i'm Irish

Don't worry, I'll show you how! :toast: :toast:

[BanTheGOP]

40. I heartily approve this action. This is WAR, FOLKS!! REAL war!!

I am pissed off at ANYONE who says that Fox News is NOT a destructive, anti-humanity organization. I can only applaud anyone who destroys anything with regard to Fox News and the republican Party, in ANY WAY POSSIBLE. As I said before in so many different posts, the republican party and it's propaganda arm, Fox News, is NOT an organization of legitimate political discourse and grievances, and we MUST take it out. In this case, subversive activity is our ONLY choice, but it must be done. DO IT!!

[teddy51]

2. Why do we have to wait until November 5th? Not that I really give a crap, cause

I don't watch that shit anyway!

[krispos42]

3. You mean that in November we might start getting smarter again? n/t

[virgogal]

4. If they can destroy Fox,they can destroy other networks. I get

no pleasure out of this group.

[Bladian]

5. Except they have no interest in the other networks

Do you know nothing about them?

[virgogal]

7. For now they have no interest in other networks. People change,groups change.

[MADem]

6. Didn't they say they were going to take down the NYSE? What happened with that?

I think they've totally jumped the shark.

I like the real people with real stories at the OWS sites--not the foolish masks and hijinks.

Will they wear their Warner Brothers Corporation masks while executing their misdeeds?

I dunno--I sometimes wonder if "ANONYMOUS" is a rather cleverly created HSA or NSA outfit. They're just too weird for words sometimes, and their little dramatic YOUTUBE videos are terribly childish to my eyes.

[Tunkamerica]

9. tell me more.

NSA, you say?

[MADem]

15. Well, let me begin with the Schultz caveat "I know nothing, I see nothing!"

But in my circumstance, unlike Schultz's, it's actually the case.

That's simply my idle speculation, and mainly because the organization has some clumsy and off-putting aspects to it.

I mean, I get the "No one can know who we are" schtick. After all, they do illegal things on the internet, like hack.

The silly robotic voice announcing their "demands" and the overly dramatic execution of the videos, though--frustrated filmmaker?

The masks? Why glorify a movie made by one of the major corporate film entities in the world? With a mask that earns that corporation a hefty royalty every time one is sold? (Hmmm--maybe WARNER BROS are "Anonymous?"--they've got the masks and the filmmaking skills!!). And why a UK-focused "hero?"

I just can't put my finger on it, but something seems very inauthentic...PHONY to me about those guys. I can't shake the sense that they aren't who they pretend to be. I don't think they are a "loose" organization at all. I sense that they are very TIGHT, in fact.

Again, let me reiterate the Schults caveat--I really do know nothing! I am sometimes right when I have intuitive feelings about things--but sometimes not, too. So who knows?

[octothorpe]

30. "They" are not what some within their group (and outside) want them to appear to be

Most of these people are useful idiots for a few who have some technical know how. Which in some cases, their social engineering and technical abilities do something interesting. For example, those jackasses at that security firm who had their emails compromised. That was pretty amusing and worthy of doing (in my opinion). But their stupid antics with DDoSing servers is just annoying shit that serves no real purpose. The super villain-esque messages they send out now are undoubtedly lame in my opinion too.

[Freddie Stubbs]

32. They took it down for two whole minutes:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-10-10/business/chi-anonymous-takes-down-nysecom-for-1-minute-20111010_1_massive-attack-youtube-video-ddos

[MADem]

39. I just don't quite get it--they make a big announcement, leading people to

infer that they are going to knock down the NYSE, and then .... pfffft.

They do this sort of dramatic thing a lot. Big announcement, with a small payoff. No REAL harm done.

Their braggodocio just doesn't match their deeds--and it never has. That's why they just seem odd to me. Aside from the stupid Warner Brothers' Corporation film mask, which as a symbol, is a bit lame--we're opposed to corporate excesses, so let's use, as our symbol, an item and a film whose purchase supports a corporate entity? Makes no real sense. The movie was OK, but hardly a "rallying cry." It was a clever little commercial film that went quickly to DVD (and if you buy the DVD they'll throw in a mask! Just in time for Halloween!).

I just don't get how a "disparate group of hacktivists" can be so uniform in their output, too. All of their little films look the same. That seems rather lockstep to me as opposed to "disparate."

Don't quite "get" them, but there's something there that seems like someone's playing games.

[RZM]

8. If this even happens at all

It will mean the Fox News website will be down for a couple hours or so. That's a statement I guess, but I won't even be a blip on the long-term radar screen. It will be a quick acknowledgment that Anonymous doesn't like Fox, which we all already knew.

[chollybocker]

10. Finally, a rapture I can believe in.

5/11/11.

[and-justice-for-all]

41. HAHA!! love it...nt

[Kablooie]

11. Sorry. Not really possible. They can block it for a short time, but that's all.

[kysrsoze]

12. They need to figure out a way to take down Fox's broadcasts too. What a lovely image.

[tuvor]

13. Doesn't affect their viewers much. n/t

[EC]

14. It says they are only going to take down their

web site...big deal.

[cstanleytech]

17. Meh, if they had hacked in and uncovered proof of something really illegal

that would cause the breakup of news corp I would be cheering but if its just taking or trying to take the site down for fox news I am a bit underwhelmed.

[Frank Cannon]

27. Their recent loud and proud hacking of a deep web child porn site...

resulted in getting nothing but user names, which are almost 100% worthless, unless some idiot also uses their user name as their password. And what are the chances of that on a deep-web CP site, where it takes a pretty fair amount of technical savvy to even get there?

Even so, I'm sure there are already plenty of cops who are already logged in to the site and using whatever information they can glean to bust as they can in a sneakier fashion. Anonymous' publishing of the sites' user names just sent out an alarm to these sick fucks to make sure their logins are secure.

So I have to get in line with the other skeptics here. I don't mind Anonymous' choice of targets, but something about their highly touted actions just seems sort of "off" to me.

[pennylane100]

18. "Remember, remember the fifth of November

Gunpowder, treason and plot."

However, I will settle for an attack on Fox News site, I just hope they have better luck than Guy Fawkes.

[MilesColtrane]

19. A DNS attack is the equivalent of spray painting a giant dick on a billboard.

It may make the instigator feel good, and annoy the company that owns it, but the net effect is zero.

[tcaudilllg]

20. godspeed! Let's see it happen.

[Emillereid]

21. November 5 is also the day Occupy LA wants us to close our bank accounts!

My birthday is November 9 -- sounds like an early birthday present to me.

[madokie]

22. I'm not much of a dancer but I'll dance on their grave it this does come about

fox noise needs to be stopped and the sooner the better.

[BlueMTexpat]

23. I viewed "V for Vendetta" for the first time this past weekend,

along with "The Manchurian Candidate" (Denzel Washington version). I'm not sure why I hadn't seen either film before. Interestingly, mainstream TV networks in Europe were showing both over the weekend.

Reflecting a trend ...?

[99th_Monkey]

24. While they're at it, is it too much to ask that they "destroy" the TV FoxNooz as well? nt

[PuffedMica]

25. Even if it is down for only a few hours, it will still be worth a laugh

I hope someone is ready to do a few screen captures in case Anonymous manages to hack in and modify FOX's home page.

[Frank Cannon]

28. I've seen a few home page site "modifications" by pranksters.

If they did that, instead of just taking the site down, it WOULD be amusing. Imagine Gladys Freeper surfing to her favorite news site and having a giant black cock staring her in the face.

[PuffedMica]

26. K&R

[Vinca]

29. Go anonymous, go!

[snooper2]

31. Sweet on my daughters birthday.. :)

[The Stranger]

33. Remember, remember, the Fifth of November . . .

[Supply Side Jesus]

34. why give Fox a heads up?

bogus

[Kingofalldems]

35. Looks like Fox News fanboys not liking this one

[Zorra]

36. Shut down the dishonest and malicious newspeak arm of the 1%?

No argument here.

[Blue Owl]

37. Treat yo-self, Anonymous

TREAT YO-SELF!

:kick:

[kestrel91316]

38. Fine with me.

[Darth_Kitten]

42. Let's break out the snacks!

:popcorn:

[No Elephants]

43. Pffft. I make more of a statement every day before breakfast.

Well, maybe if you count muttering to myself while I mkae coffee. Then again, I don't even do that.

But, I'm sure those who criticizes this as too paltry do make bigger statements all the time, bringing attention to problems of our time and all. Else, why would they pooh pooh this?

[Kingofalldems]

44. Kick this one to the top

[yurbud]

45. I could think of better uses of their talents: hack into offshore tax havens like Caymans and

give all the money hidden there to various charities--especially ones that would be really bad to be seen asking for your money back like orphans, AIDS, cancer, feed the children, etc.

Or since Wikileaks is having a hard time financially, get some new docs out like Cheney's Energy Task Force or American equivalents of the pre-Iraq War memos on BP lobbying Tony Blair to go to war.

They could also keep at Wall Street. Instead of taking down the exchange, start leaking the top execs emails and memos in real time, especially stuff giving orders to politicians, their views and strategery about Occupy Wall Street, and of course any new scams they are planning. It would really suck for them if insider trading became impossible because EVERYBODY knew what they were saying and planning.