Be Wary, Be Wary, the 10th of February: "A" for Anonymous Wants to Kick Scientology's "S"

Let me start off by paraphrasing a popular disclaimer: I'm not "Anonymous," nor am I affiliated with the mysterious internet group in any way.

That said, as a fan of The X Files I love a good conspiracy theory, which means that the recent antics of the shadowy entity known only as "Anonymous" have admittedly piqued my interest. In deference to those who just stepped out of a bathysphere, Anonymous is the name that's been adopted by a self-proclaimed collective of hackers and supposedly pissed-off average folks for the purpose of meting out justice via the internet -- and it's now declared war on Scientology. Two weeks ago, the group launched the first salvo in what it says will be an extended campaign to bring down the controversial "church"; it released an eerie video message attacking Scientology's tactics and promising retaliation for what it claims is a history of lies and generally sinister behavior on the part of the organization. To its credit I guess, Anonymous didn't keep anyone waiting: It launched a series of coordinated denial of service attacks on the official Scientology website almost immediately, effectively shutting it down. This was supposedly followed by prank phone calls and "black fax" transmissions to Scientology offices across the country.

At least two more videos have been released by Anonymous since its initial declaration of hostilities, one promising a global protest at Scientology centers on February 10th.

Needless to say, the normally confident Scientology big shots, who've raised damage control through vindictive litigation to an art form, suddenly find themselves in an amusing PR bind: If they dismiss Anonymous as a bunch of pathetic computer geeks -- which they already have, word for word -- they appear hopelessly arrogant; If they take the group seriously, they give it power; if they just ignore it altogether, they look stupid.

In other words, for all their supposed higher-brain functions, compliments of L. Ron Hubbard's questionable teachings, they can't win this one.

A group of internet savvy kid vigilantes has, to some extent, already beaten them.

The question some are asking though is whether Anonymous has crossed the line -- whether, in its battle to expose Scientology, it's engaging in the same kind of underhanded tactics it accuses the church of. The founder of one popular anti-Scientology website, Operation Clambake, has already criticized the group's supposed skulduggery, claiming that it'll only put Scientologists in a position to play the religious persecution card.

Maybe, but honestly -- who cares?

Almost since its inception as an organization, Scientology has been involved in one unscrupulous scheme or another -- at various points guilty of fraud, exploitation of its adherents for financial gain, and the illegal infiltration of government agencies. It's upheld the basic edict of its paranoid narcissist founder and set out to destroy its critics through intimidation, innuendo and impossibly dirty tricks. It was once called the "most lucrative cult the country has ever seen" by the Cult Awareness Network, a watchdog group which was eventually taken over by associates of the Church of Scientology. The whole thing, including the silly cosmology that serves as the basis for Scientology's belief system -- the kind of nonsense only a hack sci-fi writer could dream up -- would be laughable if it weren't so damn scary.

Anonymous claims that it was the Church of Scientology's efforts to suppress the recently leaked and utterly surreal video tribute to Tom Cruise which led to its decision to take action. Admittedly, watching Cruise -- looking not simply crazy but dangerously crazy -- spouting Hubbard's official-sounding acronymic lingo and making ex cathedra declarations of "no mercy" for psychiatrists is as mesmerizing as it is frightening. He almost seems like he's channeling his Frank T.J. Mackey character from Magnolia, demanding that we all "respect the crock."

The problem of course is that if you say any of this too loudly, the church will have no compunction about removing the choke collar from its legal pit bulls, which is what makes the mischievous guerilla attacks of Anonymous tough not to enjoy a little -- provided they never cross the line into the realm of genuine terrorism.

The bottom line: It's kind of satisfying to watch someone turn the tables on Scientology, using the same brand of furtive cloak-and-dagger absurdity to publicly shame an adversary that the church has used for decades.

If the Scientology people knew who to file a lawsuit against, you can bet it would've already happened.

That's why it's so much fun that they're left chasing shadows.

 

Follow Chez Pazienza on Twitter: www.twitter.com/chezpazienza

Comments

[londubh]

Clearly Xenu is behind these attacks.

[babar77]

Here's my take on it. If the second amendment of the constitution is there to protect citizens from the tyranny of government, and Scientology has infiltrated government (Operation Snow White, Local municipalities of Clearwater and Los Angeles), then tell me how someone couldn't make the argument that attacking an organization with DDoS isn't defending our constitutional rights from and organization that is PROVEN to be actively taking them away. Our government has done nothing about this for 40+ years. They've had decades to put them down, and they've recently given them more rights by recognition as a religion. Is the Mafia allowed to call themselves a religion? The CoS is a racket, and they use brain-washing as their tool. The CoS is sworn to put "Ethics" down on all people. Based on how the CoS defines "Ethics", I would argue it most definitely fits the legal description of an aggressor and therefore grants me the rights to protect myself, my family, and my property. People argue you can't take the law into your own hands, that's fine. But what do you do when the government has shown time and time again they won't protect you from an organization that repeatedly commits felonies? Allowing CoS to continually get away with murder (Lisa McPherson, et al.), erodes away at our rule of law and will lead us to more people becoming vigilanties. People don't realize that our government has a duty to act against CoS. It's failure to do so has lead to the attacks by Anonymous.

Educate yourself:
www.xenu.net
www.whyaretheydead.net
(Disclaimer: It is no where near my intention to go pick a fight with the CoS. If the CoS was a peaceful, law-abiding organization I would have absolutely no problem with them. I would most definitely disagree with their beliefs, but they have the constitutional right to them. But if they come knocking on my door looking to "put Ethics on me" I will defend myself.)

[Wickywoo]

You have to use worse tactics against any people like the Scientologists. The winner is the one having a nervous breakdown under their desk.

A responsible attorney general would have already raided their facility and arrested the entire heirarchy

[WoodyCPM]

Looking forward to the invasion of earth from the Xenu Galaxy with the uptake of the Scientologists with as much anticipation as I am the Rapture sucking up all the Baptists. Can't wait for these two cosmic events to finally occur so that the rest of us can be rid of these insane, American dingbats and their silly religions. Hurry up Jehovah and Lord Xenu!

[WilliePilgrim]

Well, it's a start. I hope they're successfull and that they soon begin working on snagging all the rest of the church parasites who feast on our tax exemptions.
As for Ron Paul...you know if he had his way, there'd be no tax exemptions for churches, so it wouldn't be an issue. As there's no advantage in fighting for a non-existent exemption, we can focus on the stuff that does matter, like "If you're the government, then the answer is 'none of your business'".

[LeonBNJ]

The hacking and denial of service of Scientology by this group of hackers is illegal and immoral as if they were doing it to any other faith or political group or any business. Yes, Scientology is very conterversial with good reason, but to try to supress or destroy them with methods like hacking or otherwise deny them their 1st Amendment rights of expression and faith is wrong. Instead, they should use their skills to promote information against Scientology.

[joebaggadonuts]

Anon808 and all you other anonymous folks out there....

Could we get a little help against the cult of fascists running the world now?

I appreciate the warm up practice rounds against the Scientologists but there are bigger fish to fry, eh?

Best of luck and let us know if you need any help with the larger venture. I've never crossed a Scientologist because they never bothered me, but the clowns who run the US have taken my Constitution away and I want it back. Let us know how we can help with that, dudes.

[Asbeau]

Anonymous are everywhere.
You can be 'Anonymous' too!

[runsammyrun]

Copyright laws are made to protect one's creation, a song, an idea, a book, a product
whether a mob likes it or not, whether popular or not. You know the drill. If you got a problem with that take it to court. Mr. Pazienza you wouldn't be so smug if someone waged a vicious campaign against you for trying to protect your rights. You Mr. Pazienza have the right to fight back if someone steals your stuff no matter the content. It's the rights to own one's property Mr. Pazienza, a cherished right in America. If it is deemed important to you, you copyright it, right? The mob be damned.
If some nameless faceless character character on the internet or elsewhere threatened someone near and dear to you for standing up and protecting those rights you would want to do the "ass kicking", and I am damned sure you would use every legal right at your disposal if the issue was important to you.
Am I to assume Mr. Pazienza that if your encouragement of "internet savvy kid
vigilantes" (your words) causes harm to your property, your ideas that would be alright?
or if one person, one child or any innocent person was caused hurt by the actions or consequences of these "internet savvy kid vigilantes", that be alright with you as well, as long as it wasn't someone near and dear to you but just some other nameless person you don't give a damn about?

[Anon808]

Terryeo sure gets around! I think he's a committee. Google him and see.

I am Anonymous. We are ALL Anonymous. I hope I see you on February 10 at your local Scieno office -- there IS one nearby, believe it -- to help educate more of us.

We are legion!

[Aeros]

Also, another good article to follow on. The Anonymous Crusade has caught the eye of the Journalist Gods over at The Economist

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10609174

They even linked Project Chanology's web page and mentioned the up coming 10 FEB Protest, which will happen at 11 AM Worldwide, all time zones, in front of all Scientology Centers.

[Aeros]

The best part is, Anonymous has morphed into something all together diffrent. While there is certainly a core group out there pulling a few strings, Anonymous has become the Internet itself. While it's often stated Tongue and Cheek, the fact is, The Internet has Declared War on Scientology, and has adopted the banner of Anonymous as the symbol to rally behind.

Anonymous is not just a group of Super hackers, it's everybody who uses the Internet to further the goal of free speech and free thought. Scientology has repeatedly shown it is out to rob the un suspecting of these basic human rights.

Google Lisa McPherson. Go to www.whyaretheydead.net, and www.xenu.net and see for yourself the "truth" behind Scientology.

[Quaoar]

Scientologists are downright sane compared with members of the cult of Ron Paul.

[Notapathetic]

The ironic part of all this is that noise or no noise, peace or war, publicity, no publicity, bad press, good press....t­hey become more and more prosperous. If you check the history of this organization you will see that the current fracas is very small potatoes compared to battles they've had in the past.

And they grow and grow.

There must be a reason why.

[Terryeo]

News reporting and reporters depend on our rights to free speech. Anonymous has suppressed free speech with its DDoS attack against a charitable organization. Once established, with organization and dedicated resources, what next? Anonymous could "rent out" services (from another country of course) to target any organization or business. Freedom has but one cost. Public support of those who suppress freedom of speech is a denial of responsibility.