Scientology strikes back!

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2008-07-23 03:46am

Ok, a while back we had a thread about how Anonymous was taking on Scientology, and giving it a fair go. Given the past use of the legal system as a blunt instrument against it s critics rather then a set of rules for society to go by, Anonymous made sure to keep their actions legal, if annoying. As always, Scientology feels the law is for lesser beings, and has decided to fight back in an illegal manner. Anonymous was based out of 4chan and its associated message boards. Currently, 4chan is down.

The site is still down due to an ongoing DDoS attack.

Remember kids: DDoS is cruise control for cool.

Now the exact culprit has not been named, but Scientology is the safe bet (and if not then the thread title ensures I have egg on my face). So a web board known for having a lot of computer savy people who enjoy aiding script kiddies and engaging in other mischief is under attack via computer.

I'm pretty sure The Art Of War had something to say about the wisdom of engaging your enemy on a battleground of his choosing, but what the hell did Sun Tzu know? I'm sure L.Ron Hubbard had something to say on the topic, and clearly he is the better source.

Ayrix · Post by **Ayrix** » 2008-07-23 03:55am

eh, raidchan.org has been going after 7chan for a while now, so to think they also hit 4chan isnt that big of a stretch. Not that I give a rats ass.

loomer · Post by **loomer** » 2008-07-23 09:28am

I'm pissed. I can't get my daily meal of /x/ creepypasta.

Also, I bet this is all part of Hubbard's book 'The Invader's Plan'.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2008-07-23 09:30am

I'm seriously annoyed, too - I generally kill quite a bit of time on /co/ and /tg/. Hope that they find the source of this shit soon.

Archaic` · Post by **Archaic`** » 2008-07-23 09:40am

To actually be able to take down a site like 4chan is rather impressive. The servers, and datacenters servicing them, would have to be some of the most robust in the west, given the sheer amount of traffic the site has. This attack would have to be on a scale dozens, if not hundreds, of times larger than the initial DDoS attacks on the Scientology website back at the beginning of all this.

Ayrix · Post by **Ayrix** » 2008-07-23 09:46am

Uh yeah guys I checked around, its raidchain. So this whole DDoS thing is completely Scientology free. Apparently the attacks are done for now, and 4chan should be back up eventually.

Morilore · Post by **Morilore** » 2008-07-23 12:56pm

Why would one assume Scientology had anything to do with this? 4chan is a breeding place for idiots who like to make others' lives more difficult for no reason whatsoever, and I'm suprised their own population doesn't do things like this more often.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2008-07-23 01:07pm

Scientology has better things to do then worry about a minor iritant group on the internet that no one outside of it takes seriously.

That's what Anonymous proved itself to be by the utter lack of numbers they produced during there global protests.

Metatwaddle · Post by **Metatwaddle** » 2008-07-23 01:11pm

Solauren wrote:Scientology has better things to do then worry about a minor iritant group on the internet that no one outside of it takes seriously.

That's what Anonymous proved itself to be by the utter lack of numbers they produced during there global protests.

Actually, Scientology has responded to Anonymous. Some of the members have gotten Cease and Desist letters, and they seem to go to great lengths to identify some of the people at protests. And there are always cameras whenever Anonymous protests outside one of their churches.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2008-07-23 01:18pm

That's the one thing those little shits would probably fear more than anything: actually being identified. It's not as if they're making violent enemies, but they know they routinely do things that are illegal.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2008-07-23 01:21pm

Morilore wrote:Why would one assume Scientology had anything to do with this? 4chan is a breeding place for idiots who like to make others' lives more difficult for no reason whatsoever, and I'm suprised their own population doesn't do things like this more often.

*channers are more likely to attack other boards than their own, so I'd be willing to bet that it's someone from another board than anything else.

Metatwaddle · Post by **Metatwaddle** » 2008-07-23 02:35pm

That's the one thing those little shits would probably fear more than anything: actually being identified. It's not as if they're making violent enemies, but they know they routinely do things that are illegal.

Well, yeah, that's why they wear Guy Fawkes masks: because they don't want to be identified. To be fair, not all of them do illegal things; Scientology sometimes gets a bug up its ass and tells people to C&D from libel/slander/whatever when all they're doing is criticizing and protesting in legal fashion. And there's a culture of paranoia in Anonymous that's taken on a life of its own: because a few people have been identified and sent C&D letters, lots of people are sure that if they go unmasked, they'll get indicted on pedophilia charges or something. Finally, there are people who cover their faces at the protests just because everyone else does.

A lot of the protests do get way out of control, though. There are usually racial and homophobic slurs thrown around (especially homophobic ones; the word 'fag' often just means 'person' in the context of Anonymous).

Ayrix · Post by **Ayrix** » 2008-07-23 04:11pm

Well, yeah, that's why they wear Guy Fawkes masks: because they don't want to be identified. To be fair, not all of them do illegal things; Scientology sometimes gets a bug up its ass and tells people to C&D from libel/slander/whatever when all they're doing is criticizing and protesting in legal fashion. And there's a culture of paranoia in Anonymous that's taken on a life of its own: because a few people have been identified and sent C&D letters, lots of people are sure that if they go unmasked, they'll get indicted on pedophilia charges or something. Finally, there are people who cover their faces at the protests just because everyone else does.

A lot of the protests do get way out of control, though. There are usually racial and homophobic slurs thrown around (especially homophobic ones; the word 'fag' often just means 'person' in the context of Anonymous).

Pretty much what he said, and to elaborate on Anonymous's illegal activities, mostly the people who do that stick to the one Random board/shithole while the other boards can vary from generally mature to Shithole 2, and most of the other boards tend to hate all the other ones, so grouping them all in one category is kinda pointless.

This isn't to defend the shitheads of /b/, I'm just saying there are a few redeeming qualities outside of the ANON IS LEGION crowd.

Tanasinn · Post by **Tanasinn** » 2008-07-23 08:25pm

The current DDoS attack on 4chan (and earlier 7chan, ED, others...) is being done by a small group of people from raidchan, whom have apparently been identified and, in at least one case, pinned down to a real-life person. Due to unrelating spamming on a site named anontalk's part, 4chan invaded them, which has doubtless dragged anontalk in on attacking 4chan. The current attack has jack and shit to do with Scientology.

Anonymous as seen at the Scientology protests represents a microcosm of Anonymous as a whole, and protestors come from a wide range of sites besides 4chan. Actually, prevailing opinion on 4chan recently has been that the continuing protests are lame attempts by new members and drama queens trying to be cool. I'm inclined to agree.

The use of Fawkes masks is at least 50% a /b/ in-joke: one common character on /b/ is the stick figure "Epic Fail Guy," who has on repeated occasions been shown donning a Fawkes mask. The other 50%, not wanting to be identified, which I can't blame the protestors for. Scientologists play dirty, fuck them.

Tanasinn · Post by **Tanasinn** » 2008-07-23 08:33pm

Embarassingly, I misused 'microcosm' there, I'd meant to indicate that protestors represent only a small portion of the userbase, but typed without thinking.

(Similarly, the last sentence should probably say "The other 50% don't want to be identified, which I can't blame the protestors for."

That shows me to hit 'submit' without double-checking what I've written. :S