Not signed in (Sign In)
This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.
  1.  (702.21)
    I think in the best of all possible worlds, this could turn into one big happy wave of "I am Spartacus!" oneupsmanship - which, now that I think of it, makes a particular level of sense - for what is stronger than a decentralized movement, with no particular leader for opposition to attack? If everyone decides to be Anonymous, or at least make their own similar banner to carry, then all that will be seen is the force, not the individuals involved, and all the lawyers, guns, and money in the world can't hit a target that isn't there....
    •  
      CommentAuthorEgon
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2008
     (702.22)
  2.  (702.23)
    @Unsub:
    If you do something evil it does not matter what your reason was because to someone with a different opinion it will just be an excuse.


    I'm sorry, that just is not valid. First, you're calling what Anonymous is doing evil and that's an overstatement. The genocide in Darfur, sex trafficking and female genital mutilation, there's three examples of actual evil. Anonymous is people using information in new, and arguably prickish, ways. Is it questionable ethically? Yes, but evil is a very simple way of tilting the language of the argument. After all, who wants to say that you support the "axis of evil"? Sounds like you're on the side of supervillains.

    Doing bad in the name of good is extremely common. In fact, it was part and parcel of the Global Frequency series. You had Miranda Zero and the 1000 operatives going around the military, the police, the legal structure to get something done, usually on a tight timeline. They stepped on toes, did godawful things to some people but they also saved gobs of lives. Seeing the one issue where the GF guy shoots out the guys kneecap to get a confession was unsettling, it should be.

    Scientology, as a business not a belief, has spent millions and millions of dollars quashing free speech via legal bullying. The media is so cowed by this tactic they won't report on their nonsense, except when Tom Cruise goes babbling on in some youtube video and then it's just "isn't tom crazy?" and not an examination of what this business is really up to. The Catholic Church has been the subject of god knows how many investigations in recent years because of the clergy abuse scandals. Unlike Scientology, the Catholic Church isn't a centralized corporation.

    I could care less if people believe in OT and Xenu and space planes. When a corporation uses the legal system to suppress dissent and set dangerous legal precedents perhaps it is time for someone to do some bad to accomplish some good.
    • CommentAuthorDracko
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2008
     (702.24)
    I'm having a time out until I can learn some manners.
    It would help if concepts like Good and Evil were clearly defined in the first place. What Anonymous intends in a form of change in the social spectrum.
    •  
      CommentAuthorzoem
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2008
     (702.25)
    To all the reasonable people on this thread: word.

    To the others: What? This seems like one of those "Everything is equally good" conversations. It's not. Some things are in fact less good than others. Cope.

    A lot of the arguments in this thread seem to assume that Scientology is a valid religion operating legally as others do in the United States, and that the conflict has something do with wanting to deny them the ability to practice their religious beliefs.

    That's just not true. It's not a matter of their "views" being evil, it's a matter of their actions being illegal under United States law, but shielded by their cover of being a "religion". The Catholic church has discovered that doesn't fly, when it comes to protecting their priests, and they were exposed through much personal humiliation and work on the parts of the victimized.

    There are actual, documented crimes committed by this organization (it's hard for me not to use the charged word "cult" - though it does describe their indoctrination and retention methods best) and they have used manipulation of the law to suppress the truth of their operations from coming to light.

    Think Mafia, not temple.
    • CommentAuthorDracko
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2008
     (702.26)
    I'm having a time out until I can learn some manners.
    Yeah, it seems to me that while Anonymous are mostly in it for the lulz and harassment, it's undeniable that also relies on spreading information and making it as accessible a spossible in spite of Scientology's response.

    Moral relativism is a really tired game, but I'm hardly surprised it's brought up when we're raised to think that way.

    "It's a criminal organisation sure, but I also believe in free speech!" really doesn't fly, guys.
  3.  (702.27)
    While I'm inclined to side with anonymous on this issue (based on the general principle of "fuck Scientology") you can't deny that in the past (and infact in the course of recent events) anonymous (or at least a group of people claiming the anonymous identity) have carried out thier raids against relativly ordinary people. Making thier private details public and generally harrassing them in a manner that can only be discribed as criminal.

    I don't mind the current spate of actions against scientology because I think it's a legitimate target and I don't even have a problem with blatant illegalities like denial of service attacks on scientology websites. Because frankly, the law offers no protection to people FROM scientology so why should it offer protection TO scientology?

    On the other hand,I find it pretty hard to defend the people who're hasseling the poor guy in the video that Orwellseyes posted further up. Ok, you don't have to like the guy but it's hard to justify the posting of his personal information in the comments thread.

    So how can I reconcile the good stuff done under the Anonymous banner (and I do think that a popular activity against scientology is a good thing) with the bad things done by supposed anonymous members?
    •  
      CommentAuthorEgon
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2008
     (702.28)
    The Brotherhood of Evil Mutants considered themselves freedom fighters too, y'know. ;)
  4.  (702.29)
    The difference is the Brotherhood were fighting the X-men, not Scientology.
    •  
      CommentAuthorEgon
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2008 edited
     (702.30)
    Tom Cruise would make a good Cyclops.

    aww shit, I'm derailing this conversation. Back to Global Frequency/Anonymous, people
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2008
     (702.31)
    "A lot of the arguments in this thread seem to assume that Scientology is a valid religion operating legally as others do in the United States, and that the conflict has something do with wanting to deny them the ability to practice their religious beliefs.

    That's just not true. It's not a matter of their "views" being evil, it's a matter of their actions being illegal under United States law,"

    Is that your opinion or the opinion of a valid US court?

    I fucking loathe the pricks who run Scientology - just as I loathe the pricks who run the LDS and the Catholic Church, amongst others.

    But I express that loathing by writing and talking to people and attempting to reason with the people I know who've been sucked in.

    I don;t engage in DNS attacks on their websites and I don't publicly out gay Scientologists.
  5.  (702.32)
    What's wrong with DNS attacks on thier websites? I genuinely don't see the problem.

    Edit. Also, totally off topic.

    Is that your opinion or the opinion of a valid US court?


    Does it matter? You don't have to have a degree in law to understand the legal system. Or if you do then jury trials are a seriously bad idea.
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeJan 29th 2008
     (702.33)
    "Does it matter? You don't have to have a degree in law to understand the legal system. Or if you do then jury trials are a seriously bad idea."

    Look at it this way, a lot of people think Michael Jackson is a pedophile and that OJ Simpson is a murderer (including me). That opinion doesn't justify physically attacking them.

    Anonymous probably sincerely believe Scientology is guilty of all sorts of crimes. Guess what, Stormfront and Al Qaida are equally sincere in their belief in the Jewish conspiracy.

    A DNS attack is no different in essence to firebombing a Scientology centre (except obviously the chances of collateral damage are a lot lower.)

    I have no problem with the admittedly technically illegal theft and retransmission of parts of their recruitment video. But that's adding to the discourse. Hacking their websites is reducing the discourse.

    These people believe Xemu came to Earth in a spaceship shaped like a DC3. We should be encoutaging them to tell as many people as possible about their idiocy.
  6.  (702.34)
    These people believe Xemu came to Earth in a spaceship shaped like a DC3.

    Hey, Christians think a virgin gave birth.

    A DNS attack is no different in essence to firebombing a Scientology centre (except obviously the chances of collateral damage are a lot lower.)

    Don't be fucking stupid.

    Done now.

This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.