Hacker and internet troll Weev befriends DSK: "We're all like one big Breakfast Club in there"

Discuss

36 Responses to “Hacker and internet troll Weev befriends DSK: "We're all like one big Breakfast Club in there"”

  1. Felton / Moderator says:

    We’re all like one big Breakfast Club in there

    Is Weev the Anthony Michael Hall character? If so, I can’t wait to see the paper he writes on behalf of the group.

  2. rg says:

    So why can’t Weev go live with DSK now? Lack of a million dollars bail money? Hey Weev, you’re an annoying fuck but you don’t deserve to sit in jail more than DSK does. Come back, we miss you :)

  3. Artimus Mangilord says:

    You did intend to disagree with Ugly Canuck, right? Your first example only proves their point. As in, “an accused rapist is an established rapist accused of something, which also happens to be rape.”

  4. Anonymous says:

    Maybe this is too far off-topic, but a common nickname for Dominique or Dominic is “Dom.” In French, it’s pronounced sorta like saying “doom” more quickly than you might usually.

    It isn’t particularly noteworthy unless you find the nickname ominously suitable for Msr. Strauss-Kahn.

    • Irene Delse says:

      “Maybe this is too far off-topic, but a common nickname for Dominique or Dominic is “Dom.” In French, it’s pronounced sorta like saying “doom” more quickly than you might usually.”

      Sorry to burst your fantasy bubble, but nobody in France would use “Dom” as a nickname for Dominique. (A real French nickname would be Domi, pronounced doh-mee.) So in addition to being so far off-topic you can no longer glimpse it with a telescope, your statement is as ludicrous as Weev’s own antics.

      Thanks for playing.

      • kjulig says:

        He didn’t say “France” though. I’m not confident I could say anything authoritative about the way the French language is used in all of the 29 countries where French is an official language.

      • Anonymous says:

        Actually, in Quebec Dom is a frequent short name for Domini[c|que]…
        But Dom really doesn’t sound like Doom though!

  5. Ugly Canuck says:

    One final go at this point.

    The accusation itself (ie of the crime of rape) must logically be proved prior to the subject being able to carry the denominative qualification of being such as he is accused of being (ie a rapist).

    The phrase, “the accused rapist” only makes sense if and only if the accused has already, previously been found guilty of the act which allows him to be so qualified. Until then, he is only an accused person – in this case, the accused banker. “The banker accused of rape.” That is true, that is accurate.

    BUT NOT “The rapist accused of rape.”

    See the problem now?
    Words are important!

    • failix says:

      “Innocent until proven guilty” is a good rule, but it only counts in court. In the real world; I’m not going to pretend that there’s no reason to believe this guy did what he is being accused of having done until I hear the court’s verdict. It wouldn’t be the first time rich and powerful men act as if they were above the law to take advantage of poor, virtually unknown women.

  6. robulus says:

    If there was ever a picture of a dude who looked like he was having an orgasm thinking about characters from “Blake’s 7″, this is it.

  7. Pantograph says:

    Anybody else feels dirty about kicking a man when he’s down? I don’t like the guy, but perhaps we should leave the celeb hounding to the tabloids. Have some dignity people.

  8. Shotaro says:

    You know what? Even if he is guilty, tarring and feathering people for being friends with him is right out. I firmly believe that the majority of sex crimes involve someone who isn’t quite right in the head, and the best thing for them is a supportive friend who they can talk to, and can encourage them to seek counseling, or at least ease the strain on them; stress and social isolation correlate very strongly with increased recidivism in sex offenders.

    As a paedophile(urges, not actions), I can tell you that the risk to my family and friends is at the forefront of my mind every time I jump behind seven proxies and contact someone about my condition. If I tried to comply with a perfectly reasonable request to phone in that an adviser at Stop It Now made, I’d be shitting my eyeballs worrying that my voice was going to be recorded or recognised somehow. That leaves us with the less-than-stellar option of discussing the issue over email, a process that is more than slow enough to have me fighting the tendency to rationalise and sanitise what I say.

    I don’t care if you think this guy’s a shitty person for putting in a good word about an alleged rapist, the benefits of not hounding people for associating with DSK outweigh any possible benefit of hounding them.

  9. Anonymous says:

    @rg
    What do you mean? Weev isn’t in jail, anymore, he lives in that building now, (I presume that he’s on house arrest now? or at least on probation and still being monitored to some extent?)

    And how the hell can he afford this building? isn’t it 50k a month? Wouldn’t Weev lose the money he got from credit card fraud and iPad hacking after he was convicted? Did he manage to stuff a lot of it somewhere safe where some loopholes prevented him from giving it up, like a Swiss bank account or something?

    Or maybe he just has a pot of gold from having a sweet leprechaun beard.

  10. Jack says:

    Are you there, Dominique Strauss-Kahn? It’s me, Weev…

  11. adamnvillani says:

    Well, this guy vouches for him, and so does Bernard-Henri Levy, so, that’s it, he’s in the clear, right?

    • pmhparis says:

      Yeah well do note that both BHL & weev lack that which reportedly turns DSK into an animal: a vagina.

      Like I used to tell a friend of mine 10+ years ago who lied & charmed his way through a number of women in our circle (& had a child with 3 different women): You’re a great guy, funny, charming & intelligent but when my daughter turns 12, we’re history as you just cannot be trusted around women.

    • Irene Delse says:

      Funny how people in the States seem to take BHL more seriously than his fellow French citizens, and then act outraged when he utters idiotic things. Here’s a few pointers: in his own country, the guy is kind of the intelligentsia’s counterpart of Trump: rich, famous, very controversial, hated by a lot of people, fawned over by the media but simply viewed as a buffoon by a growing number of his peers. Please don’t be fooled by the hype.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Buddy movie! The Noxious Hipster and the Elderly Rapist on a cross-country road trip! Laughs ensue! Then the car goes off a cliff and ends in a fireball that can be seem for miles! More laughs ensue! This thing writes itself!

  13. Anonymous says:

    Dude, weev was just trolling.
    I can verify that.

    Why everyone just runs with whatever he says is beyond me.

  14. Anonymous says:

    I read that the rent in the building where he’s under house arrest is $50,000/month.

    Is Weeve a trust fund baby, or does he make a ton of money as a hacker?

  15. bjacques says:

    But BHL is a reliable weathercock, emphasis on the “cock.” I knew DSK had gotten him into real trouble when BHL leapt to his defense. And he didn’t disappoint.

  16. pato pal ur says:

    DSK’s actually in detention only because he taped Weev’s buns together.

  17. Ugly Canuck says:

    An “accused rapist” is a rapist, who has been accused.
    The grammatical form you are using presumes his guilt!

    I wouldn’t…:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/26/us-strausskahn-prosecutors-idUSTRE74P70V20110526?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Top+News%29

    “Alleged rapist” is a better, and more accurate, appellation.

    He is presumed innocent…or does the word “presume” now mean whatever the Police Prosecutors and the Press says it means?

    or is mere accusation now enough to establish a person’s guilt, if the accuser is properly presented by the Media?

    I think you all really ought to wait until the accuser’s testimony has been subjected to a thorough cross-examination by competent counsel, unsympathetic to the witness, in a public courtroom, BEFORE presuming to call the accused a “rapist”.

    Or has “American justice” now become just a matter of lip service, of merely formal obeisance to rules and principles, without any regard being had of the substance of the ideals upon which American jurisprudence was once based?

    Oh well sex sells, and sexual morality plays sell even better – unlike the dry rights guaranteed the accused under the Law. Right, editors?

    IMHO , no accused’s name ought ever to be published before conviction, if they are already in custody.
    It does not serve justice, only the interests of the profit-seeking media – and other assassins of character too – to do otherwise.

    • dragonfrog says:

      An “accused rapist” is a rapist, who has been accused.

      That just doesn’t ring true. Try out these phrases “accused banker” or “accused guitarist”. The obvious reading of those is that someone has been accused of banking, or playing guitar, which is silly.

      Only after scratching your head a moment do you go, “Oh, I get it – the banker/guitarist is accused of some other thing. What awful syntax. Maybe if I keep reading I’ll find out what the accusations are.”

      On the “not publishing the names of the accused” business, I’m of two minds – I see where you’re coming from, but then I would not have withheld the names of the cops (initially at least) acquitted of beating Rodney King, for instance.

      There are also some cases where a successful defence comes down to “the morally vile thing my client did is not technically illegal”. In that case, “trial by publicity” may be appropriate…

      • Ugly Canuck says:

        No…there are unstated things providing the meaning….”accused (of being) a rapist”…”accused (of being) a banker”.

        The problem of course is that no one is accused of being a rapist, one is accused as having committed a criminal act, and NOT ‘of being” something.

        On can only be a criminal if on is found guilty of the criminal act.

        “The accused criminal”….boy that sure preserves the presumption of innocence, don’t it?

        i note your counter-examples don’t use characterizations which are prejudicial. banker, guitarist?
        Why not murderer, thief?

        To state “the accused murderer”….or “the accused thief”….oh no, such phrasing is clear, that no judgement has been made yet as to the accused person, eh? Really? It would “be silly” to claim otherwise? Such prejudicial phrases could be uttered by the Prosecutor to the Jury without on objection by the defense? That’s fair for the prosecution to use that phrasing, you think?

        A very sloppy and very loose way of speaking, which tends to be – and I suspect not by accident, either – much to the prejudice of the accused person.

        Ardent moralists do not care about legal rights, from what I’ve seen.

        • Ugly Canuck says:

          O no – typos!

          “One” for “on”, unless “on” ought to be a “no”, in the above.

          The guy’s innocent in all respects until proven guilty, in my book. I care not what the accused’s alleged crime may be.

          A trial of the evidence – and not the accused – is required.

  18. Jake0748 says:

    Um… good. I guess? Hope they have fun together.

  19. Anonymous says:

    what a glorious beard

  20. emmdeeaych says:

    I smell a sitcom!

  21. Lobster says:

    So. They’re all in one single building, right?

  22. Anonymous says:

    Wins BB award for most obscure references in one article

  23. Anonymous says:

    I’ll believe it when I see a photo of DSK wearing a GNAA t-shirt.

Leave a Reply