By xaosseed
This whole ‘Anonymous takes on the Scientologists’ thing is giving me the creeps. Who sits on the invisible pigeon-holing committee that says this is grand and the intarwub chimes in that Anon is just in it for the ‘lulz’ and the ‘hates’ so that makes it alright?
No related posts.
28th of January, 2008
I don’t see the problem. You speak of them as though they have any actual authority. Anyway, I can think of few better targets than the CoS, who use copyright and legal threats as well as having members who perpetrated one of the largest subversive attacks on the US Gov. in history.
29th of January, 2008
I can see where you are coming from in one sense bill. No-one is really taking this seriously because CoS is the target. But would people really take it more seriously if it was, say, The Red Cross. After all a all out attack took place between Estonia and Russia online, and while there have been some arrests and media coverage - people had the same opinion of “its just for the hates”. Never mind that a countless amount of damage was done on both sides, the kind of damage that people lose livelyhoods over.
Oh, and Uber - care to send me a link on the whole “largest subversive attacks” thing? Sounds interesting and i must have missed that story.
29th of January, 2008
Small correction, Bob. It turns out the attack on the Estonian internet was perpetrated by one Estonian hacker, and had nothing to do with Russia.[1]
The attack is Operation Snow White.[2][3]
29th of January, 2008
Interesting reading. You really have to wonder as to the true nature of the relationship between the IRS and Scientology. Why did the IRS grant a tax exemption to an organization (Scientology) which had been exposed for committing crimes against the government of the U.S.?
One theory has it that the IRS gutted the Church organization and installed it’s own people, with an eye to making some serious cheddar. Whatever the truth it certainly makes you wonder how deep the rabbit hole goes.
29th of January, 2008
As someone who’s had a great deal of fun wreaking havoc as an anonymous commenter, and who has been blissfully unaware of this particular Internet drama, I have little to say on the post but will address this:
Why did the IRS grant a tax exemption to an organization (Scientology) which had been exposed for committing crimes against the government of the U.S.?
Having read nothing on this, my guess is that the IRS, being a largely autonomous and fairly stupid organization, doesn’t care about the criminal record of a taxpayer. I assume if the organization was actually convicted of something, they would lost more than their tax exempt status.
Barring that, religions do not pay tax (as organizations). It’s one piece of the fallout from the separation of church and state thing — if churches pay taxes, then they have a right to say how those taxes are spent, which makes churches involved in policy, then the world ends in theocracy.
Non-profits also do not pay tax; the Church of Scientology may fall under either of those categories.
31st of January, 2008
Thanks for the links Uber, interesting reading.
Also on the Estonian / Russian case, so far only one person has been convicted (Dmitri Galushkevich), but considering the attacks are ongoing, and that first D in DDOS, he is not the only one involved, just a script kiddie who if not as good at hiding his activities as the professionals are.
Also I might have seen this first on the gamers forum (can’t remember), but do a Google search for Dangerous Cult . I would not be surprised if Anonymous were behind that one too.