Slashdot Mirror
Scientology Attacker Will Be Sentenced To Jail
OBG writes "A Nebraska native charged with taking part in a massive cyber-attack against the Scientology website will be spending the next year behind bars. 20-year-old Brian Thomas Mettenbrink will plead guilty to the charge of unauthorized access of a protected computer for his involvement in the denial of service attack, which was orchestrated by the online group 'Anonymous.' Mettenbrink's is the second successful prosecution connected to the 'Anonymous' attacks. Last year, Dmitriy Guzner of Verona, New Jersey, was sentenced to a year and a day in federal prison for attacks on Scientology sites."
Not so Anonymous now by the looks of things...
Scientologists aren't popular because their beliefs are corny or stupid, or because the "church" engages in fraudulent practices and is known to abuse members; that doesn't mean that individual Scientologists are religious extremists or bad people. Scientologists are just a popular group to hate right now.
The fact that they do it under the guise of religion and get tax breaks and perks because of being a religion is what is offensive. I'd have no problem if they called themselves the L. Ron Hubbard science fiction fan club, but to do it while not paying taxes and while enjoying protected status as a religion makes no sense.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
But if you're affecting millions of people, then yes.
Stop Scientology lies. There aren't a million in the cult world-wide.
That is because strong anonymity works best when keeping a low profile. Disruptive actions tend to leave a wide trail.
Wise Beard Man was right: The consequences of using illegal means in this conflict will eventually outweigh the benefit.
(Still, jail seems kind of disproportionate. Scientology has engaged in worse online censorship-fraud without even being fined.)
I think it should be wise to separate Scientologists in two kinds. The first are the "officers" of the "church", akin to the priest in catholic religion.
IMHO, those are the ones who are engaging in fraudulent and misleading activities. The second type are the "followers"; my belief is that this is desperate and naïve people whose despair has gotten to the point that they choose to approach to this scamming community.
The problem is that the CultoS are so good at what they do that people really follow their orders of "not seeing your family forever!!" and other stupid orders.
Is like the "Flagellants" Christian groups who think hurting yourself is going to help you improve your image against God. Officers who promote this are assholes, followers who put their trust in the officers are naïve, weak and need help.
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
Just like you would get a "little bit" longer sentence if you beat up millions of people.
You'd get some badass bragging rights, though.
Keeping in mind that Scientology's attack is based on instilling fear in their victims, why do you consider calling them "terrorists" a stretch? Scientology isn't just unpopular, they're criminals. Their "religion" is a tax evasion scheme for rich members and Scientology preys on the weak and gullible with a classic scare tactic where the cure is always just one more (costly) step away.
... ethical people have the RIGHT to use force to oppose such religions
Ah, well, that is where it gets problematic, isn't it? There is no universal, objective standard for "good ethics", and in extreme cases we have people such as the terrorists of all denominations, who feel they have the ethical right to kill innocent bystanders "for a higher truth". Evil is evil, even if you use the excuse of a good cause.
Of course I understand the sentiment - it is galling to see a large organization like Scientology, that is considered a criminal organization in many countries, get any sort of victory, however small. But we are only as good as our deeds; and a crime is still crime, even if it is committed against criminals. This is the price you pay for being good.
And anyway - criminals like Scientology are always going to win if you play by their rules and fight them with their own dirty methods; they have much more experience in that game.
Everyone here on /. knows Scientology is evil. But why did Anonymous do something stupid with a denial of service attack? Now the Scientologists can say Anonymous is a terrorist organization, get rid of all its critics using the PATRIOT act and get some good PR too. The only way Scientology will be defeated is if there is some major internal schism or everyone realizes they're not the nicest religion out there.
(Still, jail seems kind of disproportionate. Scientology has engaged in worse online censorship-fraud without even being fined.)
Scientology has enormous amounts of money to ensure this remains the case.
You're missing the idea behind Anonymous.
We are not Anonymous because we hide our names.
We are Anonymous because our names mean nothing.
We are disillusioned mundane people who are nothing and mean nothing.
We are something only as a Legion.
We are fans of Fight Club, but without illusions, a leader or a purpose. And with more malice.
We are tired with the system, and break it when and where we can.
Our only powers are numbers, variety and unpredictability.
Losing one or two of us means nothing.
They try to give a name to the threat, by providing the name of one of the people behind the Anonymous. That's like trying to fight avalanche by removing two rocks from it and giving them names.
After all, the catholic church is probably responsible for more misery in africa due to its attitude to contraception than any other single institution.
All religions fuck with gullible and/or insecure peoples heads. How is scientology different?
Yet again, in the USA the more money buys the "better justice".
And the Co$ has gobs of money.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
I don't agree with Scientology at all, but if you('re stupid enough to) get caught DoS'ing their site you deserve to go to jail.
Wow, that's very poetic and all deep and shit. Tell me, oh nameless one, those two rocks who got stuck in jail...how do they feel about being nameless and being referred to as nothing? I think they'd disagree. You are only anonymous until you really piss someone off enough to come after you, then you are an individual hung out to dry.
Could you please not refer to those nuts as fags? The majority of gay people are not very found of religious fanaticism and we'd rather not be lumped together with the Scientology bullshit.
Because the church of scientology is enormously wealthy, and has a lot of rich and powerful members, they successfully censor and defame Scientology critics over and over. The Church of Scientology has been subject of credible accusation of human trafficking, and has harassed critics of the church (see "Operation Freakout"). It has infiltrated government agencies (see operation snow white) for which several scientologists, including hubbards wife were conficted. Scientologists consider enemies of the church to be "fair game", by which they mean that attacks on opponents of the church fall outside Scientology ethics. For example, in "Penalties for Lower Conditions", Hubbard states that opponents who are "fair game" may be "deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.". Some months later Hubbard recinded this policy saying: "The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations. This [policy letter] does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP.". Read the language carefully...
The church actively, aggressively, and very successfully courts celebrities, which gives the church a veneer of legitimacy, and successfully spreads their word. A non-violent, extra-legal attack like that by Anonymous can be seen as an act of civil disobedience, in which a large group of relatively poor and powerless (compared to the COS) individuals break laws in order to strike back at a more powerful institution which is enormously harmful. Presumably the main purpose of the attack is generating interest in the evils of Scientology, i.e. using extralegal means to combat their giant, well funded propaganda machine. Considering the well-document, harmful nature of the COS, I would assume that this is the reasoning of Dr. Evil.