Print

[News Thetan]

'Anonymous' movement views Web hijinx as public good, but legality is opaque - Washington Post
25 January 2011, 11:55 am

By Ian Shapira
Washington Post Staff Writer

He goes by the code name AnonSnapple to keep secret the fact that he's part of the Internet collective of cyberpranksters and activists called Anonymous. Few at his D.C. private school know that the 17-year-old senior attends Anonymous's public protests, where he wears the movement's signature face mask of a grinning, mustachioed Guy Fawkes - the rebel who tried to blow up the English Parliament in the early 17th century.

In Prince George's County, another member of Anonymous, a 22-year-old community college student, keeps his affiliation quiet because he worries the group's missions - attacking the Church of Scientology and opponents of WikiLeaks - could hurt his chances of landing a corporate job one day.

In the Washington area, the Anonymous movement, which has attracted attention in recent months for attacks against the Web sites of major U.S. corporations, includes an emergency management technician in Fairfax County, an aspiring computer programmer in southern Maryland and a Montgomery County woman who is training to be a teacher.

They plan and attend protests around the world. They share news stories and videos about their targets, which are generally organizations or governments that they believe suppress free speech or expose the identities of political activists.

much more at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/25/AR2011012502918.html

[RedShieldwolf]

This article touches on perhaps the most surreal aspect of Anonymous activism: Most of us are leading double lives. With respect to old guard and exes, this is probably more unique to younger activists like myself. No other activism I have done before joining Project Chanology has required me to act like some sort of secret agent.

No regrets though. I get a rush from doing the protests and I'll have some great stories to tell when I get older. Hopefully the future will look like we want it to.

 

Also, I'd like to point out that Sylvia Stanard compares Anonymous to the Tucson shooting puts Anonymous and Tucson shooting in the same sentence and says we're all pretending to be secret agents. 

Worth the read.

[mefree]

This article touches on perhaps the most surreal aspect of Anonymous activism: Most of us are leading double lives. With respect to old guard and exes, this is probably more unique to younger activists like myself. No other activism I have done before joining Project Chanology has required me to act like some sort of secret agent.

No regrets though. I get a rush from doing the protests and I'll have some great stories to tell when I get older. Hopefully the future will look like we want it to.

 

Also, I'd like to point out that Sylvia Stanard compares Anonymous to the Tucson shooting puts Anonymous and Tucson shooting in the same sentence and says we're all pretending to be secret agents. 

Worth the read.

Yes. In the middle of this paragraph, Sylvia drops the bolded sentence:

"It's really frustrating," she said. "You get this intractable mind-set with them - you're wrong, they're right, no matter what you say. The danger from these Anonymous guys is the Tucson shooting. It makes sense that they're into this game of being anonymous. Somehow it's like being a secret agent in their mind. They're usually single, in their 20s or 30s, never been married, no kids, don't have a regular job. A lot of them are bored; this gives them a social outlet."

Sylvia knows exactly what she is doing here and has the attention of a nationally recognized publication. I find it interesting that she paints Anonymous as having the intractable mind-set. I would love to read about Sylvia having an objective discussion with anyone about differing viewpoints from either side of the equation.

Just Bill wrote a piece on his Ask the Scientolgist blog about Scientology's logical fallacies. It might be instructive about the CoS mindset:

http://askthescientologist.blogspot.com/2010/06/scientologys-logical-fallacies.html

[ethercat]

This article touches on perhaps the most surreal aspect of Anonymous activism: Most of us are leading double lives. With respect to old guard and exes, this is probably more unique to younger activists like myself. No other activism I have done before joining Project Chanology has required me to act like some sort of secret agent.

With all respect to the younger crowd, I don't think you really have to act like a secret agent.  By that, I mean the general public is more knowledgeable about scientology and more receptive to negative info about it than ever before. 

As an example, I had pretty much left my activities untold to the various people who inhabit my life, until a few years ago (with the exception of personal friends, who I told all about it).  A couple of years ago, I had to have the serpentine belt replaced on my car, and since he had given me no indication prior to that of it being in bad condition, I asked my mechanic if it looked like it might have been cut.  He told me that unless I had an enemy, it was really unlikely, that it looked more like an animal, maybe a squirrel, chewed through it.  (I think he thought I was being too paranoid, and he had known me to be pretty rational up till then.)  Reluctantly, I told him about my activities against scientology, concerned that it might further his view of me as a bit unbalanced.  To my surprise, he high-fived me, and said, "You go, girl!"  We chatted a bit about scientology, and he became more informed than just "it's some nut cult Tom Cruise belongs to."

At work, when one of my closer associated co-workers asked on February 11, 2008 (a Monday) what I had done over the weekend, I quietly told him I had been to a worldwide picket against scientology, with about 250 other people.  He then told me some information about Narconon trying to make their way into his local community that I never would have known if I hadn't told him.  He is very supportive.

Months later, the company Chaplain (yes, we have a company Chaplain, something I had never heard of before) was talking to this co-worker about a presentation he would be giving elsewhere about "discernment" and how this presentation would contain a segment on recognizing cults.  Co-worker told him I was somewhat of an expert on scientology, which I fessed up to, and was able to give Chaplain some info, and point him to some websites to help with his presentation.

Since then, I haven't kept it a secret.  Now, mind you, I don't bring it up unless it fits into the conversation or needs to be told because of some danger to someone becoming involved, but I find the people I mention it to are very willing to listen and think highly of me for my opposition to it.  I also think, of more value, it works to get information that you wouldn't get otherwise.

However, I am not suggesting anyone take any risks they feel uncomfortable with.  I'm don't want people outed when they don't want to be, but I think some exes and people with family in scientology have much more to fear than any of us run-of-the-mill, never-been-members, critics.  I think people are less likely than ever to accidentally encounter a scientologist in their day-to-day life than ever (except maybe in Clearwater and Los Angeles).

Also, I'd like to point out that Sylvia Stanard compares Anonymous to the Tucson shooting puts Anonymous and Tucson shooting in the same sentence and says we're all pretending to be secret agents. 

Worth the read.

Sylvia is doing what is known as "dead agenting":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversies#.22Dead_agenting.22
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=10139

It doesn't actually mean killing one's opponent in the scientology usage, despite Hubbard's melodramatic words.