 | Forum Threads |  |
| Random Photo | |
| Member Poll | |
|
 Anon vs. Scientology |  A group of internet vigilantes calling themselves Anonymous have declared war on the Church of Scientology.
Several Scientology websites have been experiencing major problems and today a score of secret Scientology movies and documents have been outed.
Although their means might be questionable, does their aim justify it?
This is their declaration of war video, posted a few days ago: Message to Scientology
After the attacks on the Scientology website and it became clear the message was not just a prank, news of the story has been spreading both on the web and on major networks.
Here are links to SkyNews and NBC reports about the incident and finally here is a link to the outed documents: Secret Dox released by ANON
|
|
| |
| |
| Comments |
on January 27 2008 13:50:46
The enemy of my enemy is my friend 
- even if that group is better known for being annoying than useful in any way |
on January 27 2008 14:46:43
Heh, this is a quote from one of the Anon boards:
'Church of Scientology, Seattle Washington <srsbsns>Looking for a Computer IT Specialist (Ad in newspaper)<still srsbsns> Holy shit, someone join them? >>Sent in app today. If a fellow Anon does not get position, then we need to double the dataforce and brainwash the new IT guy.' |
on January 27 2008 14:55:10
Scientology is a religion just like any other religion, and the behavior of the church and its followers is quite like any other religion.
They give people hope, belief in an afterlife.
They learn people how to be moral, how to be good citizens.
They give meaning to people's lives.
Just like any other religion. |
on January 27 2008 15:08:27
I browsed around to see if any plans were underway in Denmark, this is all I could find: link |
on January 27 2008 16:06:07
Scientology is not "just like any other religion". It is more intrusive, more protective and more aggressive than most. Is it your sentiment that all religions are equally deserving of attacks? |
on February 04 2008 23:11:16
It is not more intrusive than just about any other cult. Their E-meter sessions are conspicuously similar to the Catholic's confession. They can hardly be said to be more protective than the Vatican, and with regards to their aggression; I (speaking only for myself) have far more often been approached by Christian proselytizers.
Are all religions equally deserving of attacks? No, the ones that condone and encourage murder (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Scientology, et al) are certainly more deserving. In fact, I would say that it is immoral not to attack any religion that encourages misogyny, bigotry, slavery, and child rape (at least the unholy trinity of the Abrahamic religions). Any questions? |
on February 04 2008 23:11:31
Here's one of my favorite quotes: "[It's a] fact that nothing but suffering has ever come from attacking religious beliefs". It's not one of my favorites because I think it's true (I most certainly do not), but because you said it.
 |
on February 04 2008 23:28:17
I think the reason people are after Scientology more than other religions is that it is blatantly made-up and obviously a money making scheme for certain people.
However, the other religions are also blatantly made-up, even if the origins of those religions are blurred by history. There are also plenty of people scamming and cheating people out of their money in the other religions. Also, mind you, in the Faroes.
But Scientology does give hope, meaning and a guide to a moral life; just like the other religions. |
on February 05 2008 12:49:37
I stand by that quote. If you have proof to the contrary please provide it.
Here's how I see Scientology differing from say, what Thomsen and other people who frequent this site believe in. Firstly, If you decide to leave scientology, you will not merely become excommunicated but you are likely to experience some form of harrassment, such as the vandalisation of your property or people following you around etc. That's just plain creepy. In addition to that, they use methods of conversion that are more similar to "brainwashing" than anything I've ever seen or heard of in any other religion - at the very least it's brainwashing of a much more bombastic kind. Then again, Scientology is more of a cult than a religion - i'm a bit fussy on the distinction right now.
In any case, comparing the methods of scientology to those seen in faroese churches is ludicrus. I have less issue with the blatant made-upness of scientology than with their methods of conversion and their treatment of ex-followers. Aside from that they also seem to have a habit of breaking the law, but I suppose you could argue that all religions could be associated with crime.
In any case, I still think you're making an unfair comparison that better fits with your idea of all religion being evil. |
on February 05 2008 17:08:14
I see the enlightenment, education and secularization of the Western societies, the rise of Humanism, and everything that can be labeled "science" as an attack on religion, and it is all good.
I don't really see how you reconcile your quote with your approval of attacks on Scientology, but that might just be because of my application of logic
-----
Excommunication and subsequent harassment has been seen with Christian sects as well, notably the Jehovah's Witnesses. In Islam, apostates get a fatwa death penalty(!).
I disagree with you on the brainwashing issue; yes, they use brainwashing techniques, but not in a degree particularly worse than e.g. the Pentecostal sects. This I say based on my own experience.
(At least Scientology doesn't have state-sponsored brainwashing of children, although they would if they could, like Christianity has here)
I don't think Scientology can be termed a cult anymore than any other religion, but that's just semantics.
Don't get me started on how criminal offenders tend to be more religious than the general population... no surprise that this holds true for Scientology as well. They are, however, probably the most scrutinized religion ever, so having seemingly more offenses should come as no surprise.
-----
You may think that my comparison is unfair. I do not. Scientology and the Faroese churches may differ in degree, but not in kind, and thus, if one should be tolerated, both should. If one should be attacked, all should. |
on February 05 2008 17:36:35
I agree that they do not differ in kind. Other than your definition of what constitutes an attack on something I think we're in agreement, although for me, the degree is what matters.
Christians that are actually murdering individuals should be treated differently than Christians who just subscribe to a somewhat blurry belief in a book that, according to you, advocates murder.
EDIT: Oh, and as for reconciling that quote, I don't see any conflict, do you? I didn't really mean that I condone these attacks, but even if I did there still wouldn't be a conflict. These attacks will accomplish nothing whatsoever, except maybe strengthening Scientology a little bit. |
on February 05 2008 20:00:16
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend" and "nothing but suffering has ever come from attacking religious beliefs" ergo, those who cause suffering are your friends!? I see the conflict.
The bible doesn't advocate murder, it commands murder. And stop saying that that's according to me; the bible has unequivocal death sentences for around 20 crimes, among them working on the sabbath, cursing, and disobeying your parents (I chose those because they're completely ridiculous, and we're both guilty of all three). The bible ALSO say a lot of other crap, and there's even some good stuff, but that absolutely does not change the fact that the bible does command murder. That's written in stone (get it? ).
I have never said that all Christians should be treated equally, regardless of crimes or not, or that persons should be attacked, don't know where you got that idea from.
It's religion itself I'm after. And I know your arguments are that Christians do a lot of good in the world, and religion gives them peace in their hearts, blah blah. No, wait, that's not what you say, you say it's never gonna work, so don't bother. Ok, but those aforementioned arguments are some of those that pro-religious people use, and they're equally applicable to Scientology. Additionally, they're wrong.
Now, I don't think these attacks will do much of anything either, but I think in the long run that it's good that there is focus on these issues. |
on February 06 2008 06:20:59
You didn't notice the smiley at the end of that first post did you? Had I known that you would jump on it immediately and compare it to something I said months ago, I might have worded it slightly differently. I think it's fun that scientology is getting some of their own medicine in the form of hacker attacks because this is the kind of aggressive methods this cult employs itself. I would probably feel the same way about someone doing something like, say, cutting the balls off a rapist, even if that rapist was an atheist or a christian. If asked more seriously if I actually condone vigilantism I would say No, not really. Get it? |
on February 15 2008 14:40:37
I don't understand why someone would judge a religion solely on something humans wrote centuries ago at a time when humanity had a very different morale code than we have today. |
on February 21 2008 23:01:08
@Grizlas: Did you see my smiley after quoting you?
@Michelsen: Because when asked, most religious people will say that what's in that book is what counts; the only thing that counts.
And even if humanity has a different moral code today, and the religious people have changed their ways (ignoring most of the content of their book, which is good), they insist on not changing their book accordingly. And since religious people keep telling us to read their book and insist that that's where their religion comes from, well, then that's what we have to judge their religion on. |
on February 27 2008 12:19:10
I am classifying environmentalism and ecologism (is that a word?) as 'modern' religions, with the same negative effects that Vuz is applying to older religious movements. Whereas the oldern day religions have a God figure that they 'must' apeace to be given their religious awards, new-time environmental religions have more druidic and tree-huggering appearances, but the religious zeal is pretty much the same in my view. And the negativity. |
on February 27 2008 21:04:40
As long as you spread your new message with the same clarity and sensemakingness as that comment, I shall welcome your new initiative... |
on October 19 2008 08:59:00
Now they've arrested some guy from anonymous in connection with their attack on scientology. Guess they fight back.
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/anonymous-membe.html |
|
|
| Post Comment | |
Please Login to Post a Comment.
|
|
|
| Login | |
Forgotten your password? Request a new one here.
|
| | 
| Last Seen Users | |
| Obituaries | |
You must login to post a message.
|
| |
|
