Bill O’Reilly hacked after verbal attacks on Sarah Palin hackers

September 21, 2008

Bill O\'Reilly hacked after verbal attacks on Sarah Palin hackersWhat happens when someone in the media openly criticises hackers? Why, they then get hacked themselves to prove a point and get revenge. This is exactly what has happened to Bill O’Reilly after he launched a verbal attack on the people who hacked in to Sarah Palin’s Yahoo email address and then published the details of her inbox online.

On September 18th, it was revealed that Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, and Vice-Presidential running mate to Republican John McCain, had fallen victim to a hacker. Her Yahoo email account was broken in to, in the most simplest of fashions, and some of the emails from her inbox were published on WikiLeaks.

While this is a crime, it was done not to cause harm or embarrassment, but merely to prove whether or not Palin was using a private email account to conduct government business. But rather than look at the facts surrounding the hack, ultra-conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly just went for the jugular and verbally attacked not only the hackers themselves, but even the sites publishing the material on the Internet.

O’Reilly’s attack on the hackers can be seen in the clip below, which includes him calling for the owner of WikiLeaks to be arrested and charged for the offence.

O’Reilly has now got his comeuppance as unnamed hackers have reacted by hacking in to his official website,, and obtained the names of premium subscribers. They not only managed to discover the names of these O’Reilly fans but also their addresses and passwords to the site.

All affected members of the site have been notified, and it has since been locked down to avoid any further incidents. But, as with the Palin hack, this virtual break-in wasn’t done for malicious reasons. No credit card details were stolen, and no harm was done to the website itself. The hackers seem to have hit O’Reilly just to prove the point. And I can’t say I blame them.

Be Sociable, Share!

15 Responses to “Bill O’Reilly hacked after verbal attacks on Sarah Palin hackers”

  1. Sue Deaunym:


    Great piece! But. . .

    Ya say “No credit card details were stolen, and no harm was done to the website itself.” Yes, but it should be pointed out that email addresses and O’Reilly site passwords were shown. Most online dumbasses use the same password for all their site accounts – email, banking, toxic blogs – and so it would be incredibly easy for someone to log into an O’Reilly account-holder’s email, find something associated with a credit card or bank account, and “break in” there. We don’t know if that happened, yet, and may never be told if it did.

    Then ya say “And I can’t say I blame them.” While I was amused that O’Reilly and his online henchmen were violated in this way, I DO blame the hackers: what they did was wrong and certainly illegal. It will only encourage O’Reilly to be even more of a reckless blowhard. I deplore them all: shame on Palin, shame on her hackers, shame on O’Reilly and his rabid lemmings, shame on his hackers.

  2. DaveP:

    I suppose, in hindsight, I have to agree with you Sue. Certainly all parties are guilty of something in this whole sorry debacle.

    That’s very true about the passwords used in other places, and I doubt we’ll ever discover if this hack directly resulted in someone losing money or not.. Good point though.

  3. DavidB:

    Saying O’Reilly is “ultra-conservative” shows you to be as blowhard as he often can be. Perhaps you should avoid making commentary about someone (or some thing) about which you know so little and instead keep your posts more backed up by FACT than conjecture.

  4. The Doktor:

    Why, as always, is it now the victim’s fault? And – ”And I can’t say I blame them.”??? Dave, I can’t wait until your house, car, or website gets ransacked so you can have the feeling of being violated in some way, shape, or form. It will give you perspective.

  5. Ken:

    You have no real proof that accessing Palin’s account wasn’t malicious and they wouldn’t have used other information if it had been there.

    Having the noble protestations of the asshole who did it doesn’t make the end justify the means or any other elastic situational ethics you want to use to excuse it. There has been real damage done as a direct result of an illegal action.

    You have now lost any right to moral outrage of wiretaps and sampling packets for trigger words because it’s not mean to be harmful or malicious, it’s to keep you safe. Feel better?

  6. john:

    It would seem that college or university educated young americans have not been taught any concept of ethics. “It is OK [to do this] because I dislike you” is the general excuse.

    Then once called upon such an egregious statement the pundit further digs a hole by intimating that “no harm was done.”

    Who lacks the most moral clarity – the criminal or the person who defends them?

  7. ouy:

    Right,So what your saying is that it’s ok becuase someone didn’t like what he was saying.Would it be ok if someone hacked this siite or one that you liked.Or your own personal stuff.
    Geuss the person who commited the crime is good in your eyes and the victim is bad.
    Hope to god your never in a position of power.
    You really need a basis for ethics or you end up having none.

  8. dick laurent:

    “in to?” “most simplest?” Geesh!

  9. deport_the_libs:

    what is wrong with you people and the author in particular ?

    you think it’s ok to hack an email account ? you think O’Reilly (who I dont care for) deserved this ?

    this has got to be the stupiest peice I have read in years. Because someone does something you dont like, you allowed to break the law ?

    really ? really ?

  10. Ken:

    “It would seem that college or university educated young americans have not been taught any concept of ethics.”

    It would seem people who post blog comments need to be taught the concept of generalizations and how stupid they make you look.

  11. Rick:

    These depicable criminal actions taken against Palin (and whoever condemns the hackings) expose the low class of the people following the Obama campaign: Terrorists, and hackers… with those followers, who needs adversaries?

  12. Zona:

    Dont start nothin, wont be nothin.

    Bill O, read and heed. Blowhard.

  13. Zona:

    Dont start nothin, wont be nothin.

    Bill O, read and heed. Blowhard.

  14. undecided voter:

    Since when is it OK to violate somebody like this just because you THINK you disagree with them? I was one of those 205 with all my private info exposed just because I forked over $4.95 for 30 days. I had just joined so I could listen to an uninterrupted archive of broadcasts, not because I am some huge O’Reilly lover. I am not even a Republican; I have always voted Democrat and am currently undecided. I am trying to give thoughtful consideration to both sides and like the other Bill – Maher – I flip between Fox and CNN to hear both sides. What is so wrong with that?

  15. JustAGuy:

    Just like the Sarah palin hacker is getting his due, so with the Bill O’Reilly hacker get his. This article is pretty dumb. You may explain away the motivations of the hackers (as if you can get into their minds), none of that matters. Crimes were committed, period, end of story. May the hackers share a cell with Bubba and make sure their mommy send them lots of vasoline.

Leave a Reply:

Recent stories

Featured stories

RSS Windows news

RSS Mac news

RSS iPad news

RSS iPhone & Touch

RSS Mobile technology news

RSS Tablet computer news

RSS Buying guides

RSS PS3/Wii/Xbox 360

RSS Green technology

RSS Photography

Featured Content


Copyright © 2014 NS