Update on: Anonymous vs. Scientology

As you know if you have any sort of attention to what's going on in the outside world, the conflict goes on. And as things escalate, more and more people finds out about it. The Church of Scientology has of course tried to stop the protester by exposing them on YouTube, making a video about the dangerous cyber-terrorist organization known as Anonymous (which contains at best half-truths, and at worst pure lies), and having their lawyers send threatening letters to protesters. But since they don't really have anything to pin on anyone, they can only threaten the unfortunate Anons. And I can call it threats, since they're accusing the protesters of illegal activities whiteout any proof, and saying that they will will contact legal services. The strange this is that they at first say that they've undertaken legal action, but at the end, they say that they will undertake legal action if the person in question doesn't stop what they're doing (alright, not in those words, but that's the message behind the words, so to speak). Then we of course have the protests that's been going on. The monthly ones have been successful each time, but there has also been smaller protest as well. Small groups of Anons have gone out and done "Hug-raids" as they call them. They essentially go out with signs saying "Free Hugs", dance around to the great Rick Astley, shout a little, sing a lot, these kinda things. At first I was skeptical to this approach, I didn't think it was consistent with the image of Anonymous, or something along those lines. But if you actually think about, who decides their image? I don't think anyone can, so saying that this or that isn't "right" would just mean that you haven't got the concept of Anonymous right. There are no real rules or guidelines. Sure, there is the raid-rules of course. "Ebaums did it" is another classic. But that's essentially it. Sure, I understand if someone thinks "Hug-raids" are fucked up, since Anon is supposed to be the dark sides of humanity. But who the fuck decided all of that? And what right did they have to do so? Sure, maybe they've lurked for years, but does that mean they're right? I welcome the chaos that is Anonymous. And it's quite clear if you compare the recent attack at forums for epileptics. Sure, it was a minor raid, and it kinda failed as well, since the attackers hadn't done their research. Either way, it gained some attention from major sites, and everyone complained about how awful it was. In the meantime these "Hug-raids" wear being carried out. Same "group", completely different methods and motives. Either way, I'm getting a bit carried away here. So I'll just provide with a little reading that was massive win. First of, the indisputable best article about Anonymous and Scientology so far. Then we have a famous academics take on this whole thing. And thirdly a study of digital media based on the conflict. This third one isn't full of tech-terms and such, so don't worry about that. And I've recently gotten hold of an Israeli show that apparently kicked Scientology in the metaphorical nuts. It's a good show on a big national channel so at least in Israel Scientology seems to be in trouble. This in combination with the Anonymous protests. The leaders niece dropping out of the cult and starting an organization to help victims escape Scientology whiteout harassment. Germany branding them unconstitutional, as well as a list of other countries being critical towards them could very well be the final piss in a ocean of piss that breaks the floodgates and drowns the organization once and for all. At least one can hope.

Blog Archive