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."
We are Anonymous Cowards, all your base are belong to us.
So, if you beat up somebody, you'll probably get less jail time than refreshing a website several times using a script?
Scientology Gullibility Test http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IQQE04_TCM
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.
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'
Don't forget they try to get YOUR tax dollars to pay for recruitment through Narconon and Criminon and even broke into the IRS and wiretapped the place, so as far as I'm concerned they are RICO bait and deserve to be treated no better than any other criminal organization.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I think it's a bit of a stretch to call Scientologists "terrorists" at the very least.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism
terrorism/trrzm/
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
scientology has used violence in the past and openly threatens and intimidates both members and critics into silence.
"Religious extremist terrorists" is pretty close, although the "religious" part is legally incorrect in some countries.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
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.
Fag n. 1. An extremely annoying, inconsiderate
person most commonly associated with Harley riders.
2. A person who owns or frequently rides a Harley.