Slashdot Mirror

Behind The Facade Of The “ANONYMOUS” Hate Group Part 1
Behind The Facade Of The “ANONYMOUS” Hate Group Part 2

In early 2008, Anonymous launched 141 million malicious hits against Church of Scientology websites, in an attempt to bring down those sites. During the same period, there were 41 death threats, 56 bomb and arson threats, 103 other threats of violence and 40 incidents of vandalism against the Church. One Anonymous member now faces criminal charges for those DDoS attacks.

Attack on Scientology Website Sends New Jersey Man to Jail on Felony Charges

Behind The Facade Of The “ANONYMOUS” Hate Group Part 1
Behind The Facade Of The “ANONYMOUS” Hate Group Part 2

In early 2008, Anonymous launched 141 million malicious hits against Church of Scientology websites, in an attempt to bring down those sites. During the same period, there were 41 death threats, 56 bomb and arson threats, 103 other threats of violence and 40 incidents of vandalism against the Church. One Anonymous member now faces criminal charges for those DDoS attacks.

Attack on Scientology Website Sends New Jersey Man to Jail on Felony Charges

Rick Ross: Continuing Pattern and Practice of Criminal Activity

Rick Ross has a long-term criminal record. The following is by no means a complete picture, and investigation of his criminal activities continues.

On December 22, 1974, Rick Ross and Jeffrey Ward Nuzum attempted to commit a burglary by kicking in the door to a building in Phoenix. They were caught in the act by the Phoenix police and were arrested. Ross was 22 years old at the time and was employed as a bill collector for the American Credit Bureau. He plead guilty to a charge of Conspiracy and was sentenced to 10 days in jail and placed on probation for a period of one year.

On July 23, 1975, at 11:00 p.m., Rick Ross robbed Kay-Bee Enterprises, a jewelry store located in the Broadway department store at Biltmore Fashion Park in Phoenix, Arizona. Ross made off with approximately $50,000 worth of diamonds and “precious paraphernalia” by presenting the clerk at the store with a note demanding the diamonds be placed in a box or Ross would detonate a bomb that he had brought into the store with him. The clerk, Daniel Schroeder, told police that he had followed the robber’s instructions and that while the jewelry was valued at $50,000, its retail value was approximately $100,000.

It was later discovered that Ross and Schroeder together had in fact set up the robbery and that they had later split the stolen property. Ross and Schroeder both confessed to the crime after police overheard their conversations in which they bragged about having pulled off the heist.

Ross eventually confessed to the police that he had been discussing this crime with Schroeder for three months prior to the robbery and that during this time, he had associated with many criminals. Ross admitted that previous to the jewelry store robbery, he had bought and used stolen credit cards and had also stolen furniture and appliances from model homes.

Ross and Schroeder were arrested and charged with the crime of Grand Theft by Embezzlement for the jewelry store heist.

Ross’ probation from his previous arrest was revoked on July 29, 1975, for failing to conduct himself as a law-abiding citizen. Ross admitted to this violation of his probation in open court on November 17, 1975. His probation was then extended to four years.

Reports attached to court documents relating to the incident show that Ross was described as an individual who has sociopathic inclinations and cannot see that what he does is socially unacceptable and dangerous.

In a plea agreement, on April 2, 1976, Ross was found guilty of Conspiracy, 2nd Degree, to Commit Grand Theft, a felony, and was sentenced to four years probation and a fine of $1,100.

In a civil matter, on May 23, 1979 a suit was filed by Jack Grodzinsky accusing Rick Ross of having ripped him off based on an agreement that Ross would repair two cars that Grodzinsky paid for. The Court ruled against Ross and ordered him to pay Grodzinsky $8,464.65, including his legal fees. Ross presumably paid this off from his earnings in the deprogramming business.

Also in 1979, another lawsuit was filed against Ross, this one for failure to repay a loan to his own aunt for $4,000. Ross had borrowed the money from his relatives, David and Emma Katz, on November 10, 1977, and when their attempts to collect on the loan failed, they filed suit.

In the 1980s, Ross became involved in a new scheme to make money. He became involved with a network of criminal deprogrammers called the Cult Awareness Network. In a letter from Rick Ross to the Cult Awareness Network executive director, Priscilla Coates, dated July 30, 1987, Ross complained about not getting deprogramming referrals from CAN and that

“some parents are so cheap they prefer to let their kids ‘bang the bible’ than pay.”

(really - look at StopPhoulPlay.com. It's really special.)

Beleaguered Internet advertising phirm Phorm is hitting back at critics with StopPhoulPlay.com, in an attempt to lure Internet activists into herniating from laughter.

"It is clear that the campaign against Phorm originates in the sinister manipulations of Alex Hanff and Marcus Williamson," said Kent Ertegun, CEO of Phorm, "who have used mind control lasers and the killer robot armies of the Open Rights Group and FIPR to deceive millions of Britons into a Communistic fervor of hatred against the engines of the free market and customer demand, the salesmen and marketers, the true creators and enablers of objective value."

The website, designed in Microsoft Word, uses the public relations format so successfully put into play by the ReligiousFreedomWatch.org site of the Church of Scientology, a community institution of flawless repute. StopPhoulPlay.org reveals how:

* At the age of five, Hanff REFUSED to share his crayons with the little girl next to him, saying she was "poopy" and would only draw a picture to be used against him.
* At age twelve, Williamson accepted MONEY from his mother to buy sweets, but not to tell schoolmates in case they wanted some.
* Hanff and Williamson may have attempted to access POTENTIALLY ILLEGAL images blocked by the Internet Watch Foundation.
* Hanff and Williamson have used WIKIPEDIA at least once in their lives.
* Hanff and Williamson INVADED POLAND in 1939.

"Given the persistence with which they propagate incorrect information, we cannot rule out the possibility that a competitor is involved," he said. "The competitor goes under the name 'reality.' Needless to say, we have no tolerance for an entity of such limited possibilities.

"These people are privacy pirates -- people who steal privacy online, off the coast of Somalia. With Internet guns! And drugs! And child pornography!"

Mr Hanff and Mr Williamson said they were unsure whether to sue Phorm into atomic dust for gross defamation or to just let them continue with their infallible public relations work. Phorm shares have dropped from 405p to being declared a serious infection risk by the World Health Organization.

Keep bigoted ideas OUT of public discourse!

I am not a Scientologist, and am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Duck and cover;-).
I am of the belief that my religion is the "Most Correct". I fully expect that the members of other religions/beliefs (agnostic, athiest, buddist Cathloic, Hindu, Musilum, OSSist, Prostents, Scientologist, etc.) consider themselves to be the "Most correct". I think that much good can come from our well intended efforts to convince one another other of our "Most Correct" virtues. We will in the end disagree on many things, but we will also find much common ground.
    IMHO what should define a religion (as far as governments are concerned) is it's course/goals of improving the lives of it's practioners and more importantly improving the lives of all people. Although not a limitus test, we should be wary of groups claming to be religious which define themselves by who they oppose. There will of coures be instances where groups will be in opposition. The oppisition should be not to a people, or person ("all Tohm Juckers must die") but toactions and philopsies which we believe to be detrimental to mankind ("All two timing, lieing jerks need to straighten up their acts. Trust is and love are too valuable to society to be carelessly ignored.") In fact all good men sould consider it a bashing of another group, a warning flag to reconsider the tenats of their religion. (OSSers "We must destroy MS" Bad "We must have alternatives to MS or we will miss many of the intelectual fruits software diversity and freedom offers" Good).

So...
Is scientology a (good) religion? Maybe. I would encourage any brave Scientologist our there reading /. to put forth the redeaming aspect of their religion which makes Scientology a belief valuable enough to society to earn that respect of a religion.

If sites like http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/anti-religiou s-extremists/ are official Scientology websites then I would kindly point out that you consider the warning flag waved.

Wikipedia is a geek's best friend: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Henson One ironic note about that Wikipedia article is that it was created by a Scientology sock puppet, especially to tarnish Henson's reputation with their ongoing smear campaign to make it seem as though he is a dangerous bomb-making terrorist (and a "child molester" -- they even dug up one little snippet from his divorce papers of 25+ years ago to blow it up and try to label him as that, too. His ex-wife laughed that one off and has denied the accusation as fervently as he has.) To get an idea of what Scientology has been trying to do to Keith Henson, you should go to their own hate site on the Internet: http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/anti-religiou s-extremists/keith-henson/ -- but be sure to check the whole site out and see the outlandish, unbelievable BS they pile up on there. It all falls just a whisker short of libel, of course. (My own commentary on "Religious Freedom Watch:" http://www.modemac.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl/Religious_F reedom_Watch ) It should also be noted that Wikipedia's entry on Scientology is probably the most informative, comprehensive, and UNBIASED look at Scientology in the entire world today: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology

Scientology edges the line of lies and libel because they'd really love to have a critic try to fight them in court where they've been quite happy to spend millions to crush single critics. They'd abuse the hell out depositions during discovery (as usual), and then drag the case out for years of expense. If they lost, they could just collapse their sock-puppet, and pop up another one. (This in the 3rd generation of such sites.)

Take a look and think about what kind of cthurch puts up a site like that.

They run a sock-puppet site where they have all sorts of out-of-context IRC quotes to prove that critics are eeevil beings sent by Xenu.

They run a sock-puppet site where they have all sorts of out-of-context IRC quotes to prove that critics are eeevil beings sent by Xenu.