Slashdot Mirror
Vatican Attack Provides Insight Into Anonymous
Hugh Pickens writes "John Markoff writes that an unsuccessful campaign against the Vatican by Anonymous, which did not receive wide attention at the time, provides a rare glimpse into the recruiting, reconnaissance, and warfare tactics used by the shadowy hacking collective and may be the first end-to-end record of a full Anonymous attack. The attack, called Operation Pharisee in a reference to the sect that Jesus called hypocrites, was initially organized by hackers in South America and Mexico and was designed to disrupt Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Madrid in August 2011 for World Youth Day and draw attention to child sexual abuse by priests. First the hackers spent weeks spreading their message through their own website and social sites like Twitter and Flickr calling on volunteers to download free attack software and imploring them to 'stop child abuse' by joining the cause. It took the hackers 18 days to recruit enough people, then a core group of roughly a dozen skilled hackers spent three days poking around the church's World Youth Day site looking for common security holes that could let them inside. In this case, the scanning software failed to turn up any gaps so the hackers turned to a brute-force approach of a distributed denial-of-service, On the first day, the denial-of-service attack resulted in 28 times the normal traffic to the church site, rising to 34 times the next day but did not crash the site. 'Anonymous is a handful of geniuses surrounded by a legion of idiots,' says Cole Stryker, an author who has researched the movement. 'You have four or five guys who really know what they're doing and are able to pull off some of the more serious hacks, and then thousands of people spreading the word, or turning their computers over to participate in a DDoS attack.'"
A new inquisition to capture and torture these basement dwelling monsters
I think he's giving them too much credit by far.
The organization they were attacking.
Cue as well a number of people deriding the "a handful of geniuses surrounded by a legion of idiots" idea.
A protest is a protest. You're not an "idiot" just because you're not an organizer.
I originally read it as "Vulcan Attack" which perked me up for a moment. Those guys wouldn't just go after anybody.
Then my eyes focused better. Damned presbyopia.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I think they are trying to debunk the idea that Anonymous is a legion of hackers. Instead Anonymous is a handful of hackers surrounded by a bunch of people with computers.
In Spain? I wasn't expecting that.
Speaking of digital Kool-Aid, that kind of balderdash is probably why they're a handful of genii surrounded by a legion of idiots. That's the demographic it appeals to.
That being said, it's charming the way they always say, "Expect us." In this day and age, it's very civilized to find anyone who RSVPs anymore, let alone a hacking group.
The Wolfpack Project: BitCoin + Crowdfunding = Political Accountability
Perhaps I'm just a bit more in tune (yeah right...), but, didn't we know this is pretty much how they operated? A bunch of LOICers combined with a couple of guys scattered across the globe who actually know wtf they are doing? The most interesting thing about this is that you have all these intelligence think tanks, the CIA, the FBI, etc. that Anon has managed to infiltrate or get through their security, yet the Vatican remains untouchable? Exactly what kind of stuff are they hiding that they need or implement better security measures than our intelligence services?
Calling the core trolls geniuses is an overstatement. Most of them are just scriptkiddies whose most sophisticated attacks are correctly guessing when the password is 12345. The strategy of Anonymous is to try hacking against easy targets and DDoS against well-secured ones. And while DDoS is relatively easy to implement, the LOIC those "geniuses" came up with is a crappy tool.
Sounds about right, "idiots" is a bit harsh. But then the skilled hackers are transient also, so the intelligence agencies who can't grasp the concept of a leaderless collective are going to be disappointed that there aren't just a few heads to cut off...
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
No one was.
Obviously, Anonymous is NOT the Spanish Inquisition, since according to them, EVERYONE should expect the Anonymous Inquisition!!!
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
"Anonymous is a handful of geniuses surrounded by a legion of idiots,"
You can probably say this about most organizations in the world.
The Zeitgeist Movement
Victims? They don't get tricked into installing a botnet client. They install, configure and run a DDoS tool, voluntarily. Although botnet herders might participate sometimes, I don't think any infected computers count as Anonymous members...
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I didn't realize anyone thought that Anonymous was a legion of hackers. It's been previously reported that being part of Anonymous meant downloading DOS tools, so it should've already been clear that Anonymous wasn't a bunch of hackers. It seems to me that "legion of idiots" was just a gratuitous insult.
Nothing more need be said.....
B-b-b-ut fox news told me they are hackers! On steroids!
Steroids! You can't even stuff these nerds in a locker!
We're doomed!
No, no that's not what the article said at all.
Cole Stryker has - HAS - to be a pen name, right?? Totally sounds made up.
On the first day, the denial-of-service attack resulted in 28 times the normal traffic to the church site, rising to 34 times the next day but did not crash the site.
The only way that evil can win is if good people fail to act. If the Catholic Church is the Body of Christ started by a divine Jesus Christ, then obviously wicked men practicing their pedophaelia or hackers targeting it's website cannot destroy the Church. Metaphorically speaking, they can load the pistol and pull the trigger but the weapon will misfire, their aim will be off, the shot will be deflected, or something else will happen that prevents the shot from reaching the target. Just sayin...
The attack, called Operation Pharisee in a reference to the sect that Jesus called hypocrites, was initially organized by hackers in South America and Mexico and was designed to disrupt Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Madrid in August 2011 for World Youth Day and draw attention to child sexual abuse by priests.
How exactly was crashing the website going to have any effect on the event in meatspace? I can see anon causing some damage to a dotcom company, but this isn't The Matrix. I'm sure the church doesn't have any critical infrastructure tied to their website, and last I checked most still used books. You know, that old information storage system that operates just fine without electricity.
I bet next anon will be protesting Black Friday by attacking Walmart's site, and they'll be shocked when no on even notices the increased traffic.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
the LOIC those "geniuses" came up with is a crappy tool.
dude, if you think you can do better you can do better. Unless your kvetching about underlying design or strategy flaws.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
...because God knows who they are; therefore, they aren't anonymous.
Mod me down, I shall become more off-topic than you could possibly imagine.
Attacking the Catholic Church in 2012 over the priest abuse scandal is like attacking Britain over John Major's policies.
The abuse scandal was a pattern of abuse and cover-up that exploded into the media spotlight in the late 80s/early 90s. The Church did wrong, but since then, they've done a lot of right - there's a zero-tolerance policies, lots of priests have been defrocked, billions in settlements have been paid, hundreds were jailed, etc. There will always be sexual abuse in any large organization with access to children - schools, Boy/Girl scouts, the YMCA, the Mendocino Physics Club, Gencon, whatever. So yes, there may be some that goes on today on a small scale...but what has changed is the organizational response. In 1970, a Bishop might have shuffled a pedophile priest to a different parish. Today, there's zero tolerance, formal processes, and a much greater awareness.
So...why attack in 2012? What is the point? If this was 1990, it'd be more understandable.
I think "anonymous" (aka a half-dozen bored kids) is just desperate to remain in the spotlight. The attention-getting is more important than any "cause". In fact, attention-getting is the cause.
Advice: on VPS providers
If it's age-related you can get glasses for ten bucks. Or a CrystaLens implant for $15,000.
back on topic... from TFS -- designed to disrupt Pope Benedict XVI's visit to Madrid in August 2011 for World Youth Day and draw attention to child sexual abuse by priests.
As if everybody and his dog didn't already know about the pedophlia. I never could understand the Catholic's refusal to let priests marry, considering that one of the Apostles (Peter maybe? I'd have to look it up) said that men should marry to avoid being tempted into sinful sex, and there's surely not much that's more sinful than raping children.
Free Martian Whores!
grammar: the difference between knowing your shit and knowing you're shit.
(blatantly ripped from a picture I saw on a social network)
If I had the points...
I believe I heard that churches are statisically safer than schools or sports programs. Or this is used as an excuse to allow priests to marry (most of the issues was male on male action so marriage wouldn't help). Unfortunately, many people blindly drink the Kool-Aid.
In any field of endeavor that the speaker is not masterful in, "genius" is anybody that knows more than you do.
That's most slashdotter's parents call them "computer geniuses" because they can reboot the modem when the ISP hiccups.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I am pseudonymous!
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Excuse me, but the plural of genius is geniusaurses.
[Text goes here]
This isn't hacking, there's no skill, it is just having more bandwidth available than your target and being a dick. Of course that only works if you actually can have more bandwidth. As they found out Amazon didn't even blink, Amazon has WAY more resources than some dumbass script kiddies.
People with computers and the patience and drive to download command line software and follow its instructions. That qualifies them as "hackers" in the eyes of the general public at least.
May the Maths Be with you!
"I am Anonymous."
I am oblivious.
I'm not even a squad, let alone a Legion.
It may look like I forgive.
But really I just forget.
Don't expect me because I'll probably oversleep.
Someone correct me on this if I'm wrong, but wasn't Paul (or one of the anonymous authors writing under the Paul psuedonym) responsible for the decree that priests of the Catholic Church be celibate in order to focus their energies on God?
Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
It would be easier and more effective to maintain silence and truncate their index.html.
I never could understand the Catholic's refusal to let priests marry, considering that one of the Apostles (Peter maybe? I'd have to look it up) said that men should marry to avoid being tempted into sinful sex, and there's surely not much that's more sinful than raping children.
I get a lot of history across my plate sideways as it were, since my wife is a history and English teacher. It's kinda fun actually -- she's already mostly vetted the books by the time they make it to the house, so I don't have to slog through lots of BS to find the good reads. :)
On-topic here, the reason the Church (big-C Catholic Church) explicitly outlawed the clergy marrying was because of clergy folks setting themselves up as little hereditary fiefdoms, complete with lines of succession and all the fun politicking and internecine warfare that usually accompanies such an arrangement. Disallowing marriage meant breaking that line of power, and is not too dissimilar from policies at the State Department that forcibly rotate diplomats -- this prevents anyone from getting too cozy (at least in theory).
In more detail, celibacy was general Church policy possibly as far back as AD 300 and is certainly mentioned in the mid-400s. This policy was often overlooked though in the hurly burly of northern European politics, and it wasn't explicitly decreed against until the mid-1000s with the Gregorian reforms. Suffice it to say that it's complicated, but the crux of the issue was inheritance and power struggles related to it.
There's plenty more online via Google, or starting from this Wikipedia article.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Actually being "part of Anonymous" is nothing and everything. Being an active member on any chan and posting as Anonymous (like everybody else) and actively spreading and fostering ideas is also Anonymous, no tools required...
P.S. It needs more DESU!
"Idiots" is a gratuitous insult, although it probably seems fair to anyone who's glanced at /b/.
"Geniuses" doesn't refer to organizers, really. Some of Anonymous's actions are simply DDoS, which just takes an organizer and some idiots. It doesn't even take a particular organizer, since the legion of idiots isn't really an organized group. Their more interesting actions, though, involve some substantial hackery.
So what they're talking about is the density of actual, competent hackers vs. people who participate in DDoSes and how the organization of the former is different from the organization of the latter.
I never could understand the Catholic's refusal to let priests marry
Because Catholocism pretty much made a whole bunch of shit up, that's why. It's "tradition" - tradition that isn't backed by scripture anywhere.
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
Damn, and I thought he was pissed at the fig tree! What did Peter do to piss off the Jay Cee?
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
I am palendromanagramaous!
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
You may have a thousand people that can port scan, but out of the thousand maybe 2 would know what to do to get into a system.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
Anonymous is, in effect, practicing an eclectic combination of bits of espionage, sabotage and warfare. (For that matter, so is WikiLeaks.) Eventually, they will run up against people who don't think that should be confined to the online world when it has real world consequences. I really wonder if they've considered what happens then.
-- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
Because Catholocism pretty much made a whole bunch of shit up, that's why.
Because religions pretty much make a whole bunch of shit up, that's why
Fixed that for you.
This is correct, except more and more it seems that the "core of geniuses" part is becoming optional.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Hmm. Based on your sig, I'd have thought you were "Sudomodymous". Or something like that...
"...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
It was a typo. The decree originally said "celebrate", but the scribe was having an off day.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Hey, somebody had to make dinner.
You save only 59 seconds over 8 miles by going 75 instead of 65. Do you really have to pass that guy? Do the Math!
Yes, considering over 20% of what is given is eaten up by Administration and Fund Raising costs.
I never could understand the Catholic's refusal to let priests marry, considering that one of the Apostles (Peter maybe? I'd have to look it up) said that men should marry to avoid being tempted into sinful sex, and there's surely not much that's more sinful than raping children.
Pedophile priests are not raping children because they can't marry. They're raping children because they are sick men who should never have been allowed to wear a collar in the first place.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
If I choose to post a comment and not have my name attached to it (Anonymous) does that make me a member of Anonymous or just another willing pawn?
Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
but wasn't Paul (or one of the anonymous authors writing under the Paul psuedonym) responsible for the decree that priests of the Catholic Church be celibate in order to focus their energies on God?
In the context of the rest of the epistle (i.e. letter), the advice is being given to missionaries, basically. I.e. when you are out travelling and spreading the word, don't also be running around trying to hook up with the locals -- it kind of messes with the message you are trying to teach. Do that before or after, not during.
It's generally thought that Paul himself was a widower when he left on his travels, as marriage was a prerequisite for his pre-conversion status as a Pharisee.
>> Standing on head makes smile of frown, but rest of face also upside down.
Centuries of burning people to death for attempting to translate the Bible into English should be enough of a clue by itself.
Wikipedia describes the many English translations of scripture, starting long, long before the Reformation (the first translator they mention is St. Bede), with the Douay-Rheims version (from around 1600, preceding the KJV by a few years) as the "first complete English Catholic Bible."
Not to say there weren't people burned to death. I'd add that exaggeration doesn't help your case, but then I look at Fox News.
You save only 59 seconds over 8 miles by going 75 instead of 65. Do you really have to pass that guy? Do the Math!
This, exactly this.
The article (that I didn't read) exposes how it's just a group that works the exact same way as usual social dissidents. The authors don't realize that the idiots could very well be leaders in another action, and how stupidly fast and easy it is to become a leader. Anonymous is a brand name for dissidence, not an organized criminal network.
That's what it means, "we are legion". It means everyone can be replaced as long as anyone has the motivation to rally enough people to Get Shit Done.
Making laws based on opinions that stem up from false informations leads to witch hunts.
Seems to be a gap in education of Anonymous there. If they had gone through a Catholic school they would have known:
Don't mess with the Sister in charge. She knows what you are up to.
They have set up webpages before that starts to DDOS servers. All you have to do is trick people to click on the link. Honestly, I think that was one of their more creative ideas.
Sounds like little more than a language exercise. If you're volunteering yourself to be unobscured fodder, I guess you might be both a volunteer and a victim.
Same could be said of belonging to the Catholic church then.
seems to me that "legion of idiots" was just a gratuitous insult
It probably was just that...a sound bite for the mass media to be able to report on Anonymous as a bunch of idiots, rather than the slowly growing collective of like-minded individuals hell bent on keeping the power & freedom of the Internet/world in the hands of the people, not those in power. This way, the sheeple think of them as criminals, but revere the government as their protector (from what, only those idiots can tell you).
It's all spin, baby!
Will draft for food...
With the tiny difference that that doesn't involve attacking people.
Vigilantes are cool, sexy, nearly always total morons, and they hurt people. They do what they do specifically to hurt people who they think deserve it. It baffles me how people can on one hand "hate" the us (or whatever, I'm sure there's an oil company in there somewhere) for not always doing 100% due process properly (and screwing up at times) ... and support things like anonymous.
I now declare this thread 100% off-topic.
Consistency and doing the popular thing (hating the church in this case) don't mix very well.
Why is it if something like this were done against the Jews or Muslims it would be considered a hate crime but against the Catholics people feel it is okay? Why don't all of the politically correct types denounce this? Unless it is secretly condone by them.
(a) It's an attack on the organization, not the people. That's not generally considered a hate crime. (b) I don't see more people than usual condone this.
and may be the first end-to-end record of a full Anonymous attack.
They act as if tracking Anonymous is any difficultly at all. The group is highly transparent. Finding them and following them on specific issues or OPS is not difficult at all. All you need is an strong interest in the subject matter, plenty of time on your hands, and a huge bucket of popcorn.
I thought "genius" was the gratuitous part. I would go more with "A handful of moderately competent hackers surrounded by a legion of fucking morons".
Moderately competent hackers perhaps, but they seem to be very good with PR and group psychology. Channeling all the petty acts of vandalism and bending them to your purposes ... #include "godwin.h".
The Church has always lived within the rush of humanity. That it is affiliated with child rape says much more about western culture than it does about the church, if one looks at teachers, coaches, youth leaders and of course priests you will see that they all fall percentage wise into similar numbers of child predators.
In other words it's a lot like saying Democrats are criminals, because more blacks vote Democrat, and blacks have the highest incarceration rate. There's a HELL of a lot of "ism", assumption and ignorance in that statement - similar to your own comments.
I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
They're all idiots. I for one can't wait until the Internet becomes more regulated than Obama's bathroom. For teh tshyldren. Kinderheil!
Those who live by idiocy will die by idiocy.
Hitler hates pedophiles.
Five hundred years ago all you needed to stir up trouble was a handful of people to organise and infuriate the masses - and a bunch of people with pitchforks. Today, all you need to stir up trouble is a handful of people to organise and infuriate the masses - and a bunch of people with computers. The blokes with the pitchforks didn't need to be experts in martial arts and neither do the blokes with computers need to be expert hackers. I haven't been following the media all that closely, but it looks like a handful of people are now trying to organise and infuriate the masses against Anonymous. If they are successful they might get a bunch of people with computers (or pitchforks) to show Anonymous the error of his ways.
It's generally thought that Paul himself was a widower when he left on his travels, as marriage was a prerequisite for his pre-conversion status as a Pharisee.
Ah, Paul was one a Pharisee. This explains the sour grapes. If you want a somewhat biased opinion of a company, ask an employee. If you want a completely distorted opinion of a company, ask an ex-employee. The latter are even less capable of objectivity than the former...
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Anon backed off on the Zetas once people started getting strung up
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Lets start off with a real world correction, "Anonymous" has a whole history of legal public protest prior https://whyweprotest.net/anonymous-scientology/ , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chanology prior to any yarns about 4chan, global conspiracies, organised crime RICO distortions, handful of geniuses and legion of idiots or any other ludicrous mass media distortions.
Where it has gone since those days has never been challenged by those that worked to initiate the idea, as it is and always will be the individuals own choice and responsibility for what they choose to do in the name of "Anonymous",up to and including false flag events, (stupid enough to do it to yourself why would anyone protest).
Just another lame arsed "please buy my book" sensationalist. Whether it's a dead tree work by a short run minor publisher and a desperate author or a web site eventually you just start to ignore them as pointless.
The only thing that should ever be challenged is, government investigative agents seeking to gain promotion by destroying the lives of unskilled teenagers with claims of terrorism and threats to vital infrastructure with the hoodoo of "Anonymous". When government agencies started testing recruits with lie detectors completely forgetting psychopaths are born capable of passing any lie detector test, what other result could be expected.
Lazy sensationalist journalism of course does it's bit to promote readership over the truth and the harm it's lies of omission and distortion will cause it's victims.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
The report says that attacking browsers (yes, browsers, not PCs) were all targeted at the same URL with a few randomized URL values thrown in to force the server to treat them as separate requests. The key to defeating a DDOS, as I understand it, is to be able to separate legal requests from illegal, and route them to different places. If every attacker attacks with almost the exact same URL signature, doesn't that make it trivially easy to defeat? Am I missing something?
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
Our chief weapon is LOIC... LOIC and HOIC...HOIC and LOIC.... Our two weapons are HOIC and LOIC...and ruthless legion of idiots.... Our *three* weapons are HOIC, LOIC, and ruthless legion of idiots... and an almost fanatical devotion to the Anonymous... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as HOIC, LOIC.... I'll come in again.
Because Catholocism pretty much made a whole bunch of shit up, that's why. It's "tradition" - tradition that isn't backed by scripture anywhere.
In other words, it's exactly as backed up as the rest of scripture. But for some reason the stuff they made up and wrote down before the Council of Nicaea is considered canonical by some but the stuff afterwards not. Forgive me if I'm not clear on why the double-standard exists here...
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Eh, I don't know. If somebody downloads and installs tools suggested by this core group of "hacker geniuses" under the auspices of "this will hurt the bad guys, not you -- we promise" I think calling them idiots might not be gratuitous at all. "But it's open source!" Yeah. I'm just certain the people running it combed through the source and verified the hashes before they blindly did what they were told.
That nobody has fleeced the sheep yet is a small miracle, but it will happen. In fact it might be a good way to hurt Anonymous as a whole. If you take away their firepower, their ability to do anything much more significant than guess at passwords or sweep a website for known security vulnerabilities is basically eliminated.
The Idea of Anonymous: If there is something that you don't like, take down their web page... That will show them.
Lets bring awareness of stuff that everyone already knows about. If you are not part of the problem and you are not part of the solution... Lets make a brand new problem, that way you are involved. That is the Idea of Anonymous.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Sometimes religion leads to attacking people. And not only to attacking computers.
"we are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further."
Yes, giving more money to Warner Bros by wearing your meaningless mask - that's such a protest!
What part of "social-engineered victims of the core group" don't you understand?
Hitler hates pedophiles.
You're right about that, but you imply that there is no causal link between the pedophilia in Catholic priests and celibacy, and I'll argue that there is a causal link.
I'd argue that the causation is in the selection bias that the celibacy requirement creates. By saying that priests must be celibate, the Catholic church eliminates a huge chunk of good, non-pedophile men who might consider the priesthood if they could have sex.
The pedophiles are going to try to become priests no matter what - the celibacy requirement doesn't deter them. The celibacy requirement does deter non-pedophiles. And so with many fewer non-pedophile applicants, that skews the percentages towards pedophiles.
If only I had mod points...
Hitler hates pedophiles.
If my government is currently attacking Iran. That means my nation is at war with Iran and everything that entails. You're damn straight I want to know about that.
If you think these are the first info management steps to WW3, what the hell is an IN PROGRESS attack on Iran going to lead to?
Members of the Catholic church doesn't involve attacking people? Thats a good one. Haven't heard a joke that good in a while. They've toned down on the physical attacks on non-believers the last few centuries, but I assure you they attack people with the power of their words and influence on politics. At least as effective as any attacks Anonymous does.
They don't have any history prior to 4chan. Their hacking activities predate their meatspace protests.
I don't really get your rambling about false flag RICO conspiracies, since I didn't mention any of that, but sure, whatever.
But that IS what the article is saying. The skilled hacker activity of anonymous is very limited, and if those heads were cut off, then there would really just be a network of voluntary DDOS bots, which isn't really anything all that unique since traditional botnets can do the same thing.
AJ Henderson
It's all spin, baby!
Sure is, and you're better than Pravda.
Hitler hates pedophiles.
Well, there is a great way to check that for sure. Someone with the tools should do an statistical analysis of how much paedophiles we have among priests, parents, teacher\school directors and other positions of power over children. If celibacy does not play a role, the distribution should be the same.
--- "When you gotta do something wrong. You gotta do it right. (Fighter)"
"With the tiny difference that that doesn't involve attacking people."
History differs in your assessment, the only reason they are not waging all out religious war is because the world is interconnected and the majority of people will not tolerate it.
I can guarantee that if the world society crumbles, this harmless religion will organize large scale attacks to convert; there is nothing about them that has changed since middle ages, same book, same structure, same belief, same ignorance, and same power hungry ideologues running it. The only thing that stops them is the world around them.
Plus another 40% which gets spent on "Education", which is used pretty liberally, since money spent on advertising themselves is considered "Education".
The priest class abducted the psychedelic sacraments that constituted man's ritual diet, taking knowledge of god from us, and claimed to have it hidden in reserve somewhere. The priests claimed to be able to barter with us for knowledge of god, the most precious thing we ever knew, so we started giving them everything we had, hoping for scraps of it. Knowledge of god was the most precious thing we ever knew. Priests are the ultimate muggers and cheats, the first capitalists. And what they claim to be trading with, their currency, is knowledge of god they in reality no longer have, but we miss it so badly, we'll give them anything in supplication to the lie
So they made the sacrament a placebo, the Eucharist, and told us the closest we'll come to god on our own is reading the Bible
You can still take mushrooms or acid and know god in your home, initiate yourself into adulthood the way man always has done, and have religion back, a living religion, not a 2000-years-dead one. That's all I need to say about this
Peace
What would be our chief weapon?
"Legion" is not a name out of the bible; it is simply a word meaning "many" that happened to be used in the bible. It could just have well been "multitude" or "horde", the meaning would have been the same.
To be clearer: "We are legion" is NOT a biblical reference. It is simply a sentence meaning "we are many". It does not refer to demons.
So anyone who is recruited into or joins a protest is a socially-engineered victim?
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
How does one do such a statistical analysis, assuming the pedophiles are unwilling to declare themselves?
Well, there is a great way to check that for sure. Someone with the tools should do an statistical analysis of how much paedophiles we have among priests, parents, teacher\school directors and other positions of power over children. If celibacy does not play a role, the distribution should be the same.
Even if you performed such a study and discovered a skewed distribution in the priesthood, it would not mean that celibacy causes priests to become pedophiles, which was the point that I disputed in the first place. Correlation is not causation.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
You mean like what it has always been since the beginning?
No it's very clever. As anti-virus software is getting better it's harder to get a Botnet up and running quickly any other way!
That's because you're doing it wrong.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
While I agree with your point 100%, I also think that:
a) the Catholic church could have acted quite differently in finding, reporting, and bringing justice to the offending priests, and:
b) there are some vocations (priest, teacher, coach, and youth leader, as you mention, and others) where the expected child predator rate should be ZERO, or as close to it as possible. I know this seems an unrealistic expectation on the surface, but consider, for a moment, how many professions require extensive and thorough background checks or psych evaluations to access resources far less critical than our kids*, and the hefty consequences that are handed down if protocols are broken. If these same techniques were used for the vocations you listed, I can only surmise the percentage of child predators would be significantly lower in those vocations than that of the greater population (not to mention the salaries and quality would likely improve, too, though I cannot guess what would happen to the candidate pool).
*I don't normally do the "think of the children" thing, but I have two daughters, and this hits pretty close to home for me.
Just because someone drank coke that someone peed in doesn't mean that everyone who ever drank or drinks coke drank or drinks coke that someone peed in. Just because a lot of people drink coke that no one has peed in doesn't mean that no one has ever drank coke that someone has peed in.
Hitler hates pedophiles.
Sure. It's just regular American English, like "The sky is blue" and "I like pie."
Oh, and the fact that it's a verbatim quote from the Gospels. Pure coincidence.
Hitler hates pedophiles.
Why? Does hatred feel good? Does silencing other people's free speech give you a boner?
Hitler hates pedophiles.
Yes. Once you marry, your SO becomes your god, or something to that effect.
Still, it seems rather unclear: why do people continue to worship JC / YHWH after they marry if their SO is their god? Sh*t does not make sense.
I am John Hurt.
I would hope not. The dude died over 2000 years ago!
How does walking fight breast cancer? I've never understood this.
A lot of them just type 'ping' into command prompt then brag about being hackers in IRC.
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
The somebody should also look into how many pedophiles are heterosexual, bisexual, or homosexual.
testing out my trending skills
"Oh, and the fact that it's a verbatim quote from the Gospels. Pure coincidence."
Yep. Take just about ANY three words that make sense together, and they have been used millions of times over the years. And because the phrases "we are legion" and even "I am legion" have been used in many places and many contexts that are NOT even remotely related to the bible, I would say that indeed, it is much more likely than not that they had no intention of referring to scriptures when they made it part of their motto. It isn't even a direct quote. They did not say "I am Legion", they say "we are legion".
If that passage had said instead, "I am Many" (which is all it means) or "I am Multitude" would you call out anybody who says "we are many" too? Ridiculous.
Repeat: "legion" is not a name, even as used in the bible. It is simply a noun ("a legion of soldiers") meaning "many", or an adjective ("the rocks on the hillside were legion"), again meaning "many".
You sound to me like the kind of person who sees images of Jesus on burnt toast.
The teachers unions wouldn't allow the teachers to be fired.
Welp, some people believe that it shouldn't be part of the religion if it's not in the holy book. You know, like DMing a D&D campaign and pulling new rules out of your ass. ("GRAPPLING IS NOW DECIDED BY COIN TOSSES!")
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
"Anonymous" has a whole history of legal public protest prior https://whyweprotest.net/anonymous-scientology/ , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chanology prior to any yarns about 4chan,
Before the whole scientology thing there was plenty of people on 4chan busy with hacking, they just didn't style themselves as "Anonymous". It's the scientology protests which started the whole "Anonymous is legion" thing. Their offline activities before that were mostly benign flashmobs dressed up in various types of topical (for 4chan at least) getup and in far smaller numbers simply "for the lulz".
You can argue about "Anonymous predating 4chan" as much as you like, but the culture of the collective is drenched in the memes and culture of that site and was so since it's inception. This however doesn't mean that they are exclusive to 4chan, just that if you go back in time you'll find the roots of the collective there. Note that I'm not saying that all of 4chan is the collective "Anonymous", as the opinions on the group there are divided.
handful of geniuses and legion of idiots or any other ludicrous mass media distortions.
The word "geniuses" is clearly oversensational, but I would say that the analogy is mostly apt. What better a way to describe a few kids smart enough not to get caught (YMMV, see lulzsec) while egging on other kids voluntarily running DoS tools on their computers? It's mob mentality on the internet, nothing more and nothing less. Hell, if you gather enough of the "legion of idiots" in a room you'll get the same mentality, which is why 4chan is no longer welcome at conventions.
Whether it's a dead tree work by a short run minor publisher and a desperate author or a web site eventually you just start to ignore them as pointless.
I find it amusing that in this day and age people (especially journalists) still don't "get" how online communities work. Take real world behavior, add a layer of "anonymity", et voila instant greater internet fuckwad theory to a certain extent. Sure, not every online community is like this, but if it is convinced it can act without impunity you will get the exact same phenomenon as "Anonymous" eventually.
No need to show footage of a van exploding, no terrorist cells, just people being dicks.
The only thing that should ever be challenged is, government investigative agents seeking to gain promotion by destroying the lives of unskilled teenagers with claims of terrorism and threats to vital infrastructure with the hoodoo of "Anonymous".
I agree that the reaction to this whole thing is drawn out of proportion, but the reaction to most things seems drawn out of proportion these days. While I don't think that just being a dick warrants punishment, there's obvious cases where the law can step in: harassment phonecalls (often including death threats), participating in DDoS attacks, actually hacking servers, etc... I think that the justice system should use common sense in their approach to the lesser things (eg. community service), and for the more egregious offenses a more severe punishment. But letting it slide just because they are "unskilled teenagers" is simply silly, because the last thing these unskilled kids need is confirmation that they can actually do these things without impunity.
I refuse to believe that the average 15 year old downloading LOIC doesn't stop to think about what they're doing and make a moral choice. But I also refuse to believe that we should punish them beyond a (albeit serious) slap on the wrist.
"A handful of geniuses surrounded by a legion of idiots" describes the whole human race, not just anonimous. Any human organization - be it a corporation, a country, or a classroom - with a big enough number of members will look like that.
I'd say the term is better applied to organised religion.
My working response was similar, but you said it first.
pedophile will target predominately work where they have contact with children. It isn't new. But the government is TRYING at least to put obstacle and certainly DO NOT shuffle pedophile professor or teacher in anotehr district.
Furthermore I would argue it is much more important to compare the number of pedophile in church not agaisnt somewhere where you would expect pedophile to sneak in, but agaisnt the average pedophile rate. And yes pedo rate are higher in church. School are not pretending to be moral bastion. Church are pretending to be moral bastion and example. This is where the fucking significant difference is.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
I'm guessing the John Markoff who wrote the first article is the guy who wrote to the world about the dangers of Kevin Mitnick. It's a good thing Kevin was stopped before launching those nukes. Thank god for responsible journalism and best selling books.
A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.
Please - I'm far from a Christian fanatic, but it's a pretty common literary allusion. That phrase my have leeched into the common culture (who knows, maybe they're big Richard Matheson or Will Smith fans), but the use of the term "legion" to mean "many" is a Biblical allusion. Try to remember that up until probably the 1950s, most literary allusions in the States were Biblical - it was by far the most widely owned and read book in the country. Without a fairly detailed understanding of the Bible, it becomes quite difficult to really understand a lot of 19th century oratory - phrases that just seem odd to our ears were shorthand call outs to scripture.
While a lot of that Bible reading culture has now faded away, bits and pieces like "We are Legion" survive. (I laugh when people think that today's GOP is somehow the most "Christianist" in history - they'd be considered Godless libertines in the 1880s or 1930s.)
And the actual quote is "My name is Legion: for we are many." So "we" and "legion" is part of the real quote.
Your point might stand if Paul had actually criticized the Pharisees much, which he doesn't(at least not in any of the epistles I've read). Most(all?) of the attacks on the Pharisees I've read were from non-other than Jesus himself.
We're so close. We just need a couple hundred thousand more participants:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/6000-runners-fail-to-discover-cure-for-breast-canc,176/
In the UK, but here ya go... eat a british keyboard.
Teachers union official says teachers who have consensual sex with pupils should not face prosecution
http://www.pctattletale.com/blog/133/teachers-union-official-supports-sex-offenders/
Here's some state schools that had abused children for decades...
In Seattle, state school for the deaf had decades of abuse:
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Decades-of-sex-abuse-plague-deaf-school-1053009.php#page-2
Canadian state school, 40 years of reported abuse:
http://www.survivingthepast.ca/gillsterinc/schools/4-1_History.htm
New York state school, another 40 years of abuse:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willowbrook_State_School#More_scandals_and_abuses
Recent scandal in LA, confirmed 175 kids abused for years, more expected
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/09/l-a-s-school-sex-abuse-scandal-widens.html
Check google for teacher abuse and you'll find about hundreds of active cases being reported in the news. According to the best statistics we have, about 10% of children are sexually abused at schools.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/02/is_sexual_abuse_in_schools_very_common_.html
I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
Crickey, you are obtuse.
Firstly, the book in question (The Gospel according to Mark, 5:9) was written 2050 years ago, a bit longer than your 1000 years.
Secondly, even though it was written in Greek, the author of Mark used the the transliterated Roman term "Legio" (Legiwn in Greek) - the author of Mark was writing for Romans and used the Roman term. Like Anonymous, he was using an allusion that his audience knew.
Thirdly, Anonymous are using English for their motto - so the fact that we're talking about a phrase that was translated into English 500+ years ago hardly makes it likely that they came up with weirdly similar phraseology de novo. I'm not saying Anonymous is a bunch of Bible students - I'm saying they're using phraseology that came from a Biblical source whether they knew it or not simply because it's been used by speakers and authors who were purposely alluding to the Bible for hundreds of years and it has thus entered the popular culture.
Finally, the phrase "We are Legion" pairs a plural subject and a singular noun. It hardly makes sense - try using "We are Battalion" or "We are Patrol" - except as an allusion to the Biblical phrase.
I'm sorry if you are so traumatized by the Bible that the fact that certain phrases and concepts have bled into the popular culture makes you mad. I'm not a huge fan of chunks of it either, but come on - this one is a gimme...
And why couldn't anonymous break-in ?
The Vatican has better security than the DoD ?
I guess everybody just assumes God is protecting them, that must be why nobody finds it curious that their systems are so secure.
[citation really very much needed because this is complete bollocks]
Also please note that Christians don't see war as a disaster no matter the potential rewards. Aquinas explicitly endorses the concept of the just war, and Aquinas was was central enough to Catholic ethics that he was both mentioned as the most important Catholic theologist by JPII and was previously made the Catholic saint of the tuition of priests. He also believed that heretics should be put to death both inside and outside the Christian nations, lest the similarity to Islamic holy wars should not be clear. Aquinas' thinking on just wars combined with the argument that heresy was a capital offence underpinned most of the crusades and the anti-Protestant wars.
"To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
Perhaps you should go edit the Wikipedia article, then.
The Christian New Testament gospels of Mark, Luke and Matthew describe an incident in which Jesus meets a man, or men, possessed by demons who, when asked what their name is, respond:
"My name is Legion, for we are many."
(In Latin) "Legio mihi nomen est, quia multi sumus."
The quotation has been referenced and alluded to many times throughout history in popular culture.
...
On Wednesday, January 23, 2008 the Internet-based group "Anonymous" released statements on YouTube and via a press release, outlining what they call a "War on Scientology". During Their YouTube video they state "If you want another name for your opponent, then call us Legion, for we are many.".
It's obviously an intentional reference to the New Testament.
No, I am sudonymous...
"During Their YouTube video they state "If you want another name for your opponent, then call us Legion, for we are many."
Given that whole statement, I would have to agree that it is a biblical reference. However, I do not agree that simply saying "we are legion," which is what was said in this case, necessarily amounts to that. Given that they have said that before, if what you say is true, then it seems that it is a biblical reference. But this discussion was based only on the statement "we are legion", and nothing else.
Even given that, though, there is still nothing indicating that it's a reference to demons, because again "we are legion" ONLY means "we are many"... which, besides being supported by the history of the word "legion", is also stated in so many words, just as you have pointed out.
People quote Romeo and Juliet without any intention of committing suicide. Simply quoting "we are many" does not mean they associate themselves with demons.
"Crickey, you are obtuse. ... Firstly, the book in question (The Gospel according to Mark, 5:9) was written 2050 years ago, a bit longer than your 1000 years."
* I * am being obtuse? Hahahaha. Look up the word "legion", dumbass. It isn't known to have existed until approximately the year 1000 A.D.!!!! And I'm being generous, giving it a good 100 years or more leeway.
"... he was using an allusion that his audience knew."
And your point is? He substituted a Roman allusion for the Greek. I can accept that. But you missed the point: WHAT was the Greek word for which he substituted it? Do you know what the original was? MY point about that was only that the word "legion" was not in the original bible, nor is it important. It was simply a word used to mean "many". Period. Other words could have been as easily used.
"the fact that we're talking about a phrase that was translated into English 500+ years ago hardly makes it likely that they came up with weirdly similar phraseology de novo."
I never stated that they did. Where did I assert any such thing? You have gotten sidetracked, and completely missed the point I was making, which was the fact that someone TODAY saying "we are legion" hardly implies that they are attempting to associate themselves with demons... which is exactly what GP was obviously implying.
"Finally, the phrase "We are Legion" pairs a plural subject and a singular noun. It hardly makes sense - try using "We are Battalion" or "We are Patrol" - except as an allusion to the Biblical phrase."
In this you are simply wrong. Look up the word. It is not JUST used as a noun (although when it is, it is often used as a plural, not singular, noun), but in modern times it is ALSO used as an adjective. So that's not a valid argument.
As somebody else pointed out, at other times Anonymous has stated "We are legion, for we are many." Now, THAT is obviously a biblical reference. But without that foreknowledge, I deny that simply saying "we are legion", today, is an intentional reference to the Bible, much less a reference to demons. It has been used too often, in too many other contexts.
I think you got too caught up in the last couple of exchanges and didn't bother to go back and find out what my original point was.
In case my point wasn't clear, it is precisely the same as the last sentence you quoted: "... it has been referenced and alluded to many times... in popular culture."
Exactly. My point was (if we are talking about ONLY the words that were being argued about, not the earlier, more complete quote you gave) that it has been used "in popular culture" a lot, and it is arguable that most people who say it are not necessarily -- or intentionally, anyway -- referencing the bible.
The whole quote, though? Yeah, probably.
So does atheism. So does any ideology I can think of (oh it's just that one form of atheism, not this one, right ? Well, that's exactly how communists see it)
I just think that religions have the potential to be abused too easily.
They are not about facts but faith. I just don't like that concept.
I think there was never a war because of atheistic viewpoints. The dictatorship in the soviet union endorsed atheism - but atheism was not the root cause for it. In my opinion they tried to oppose religion because it is a powerful tool to control people. And they wanted to be in control.
So of course atheists see value in (some) wars, for example.
But again their opinion of wars is not rooted in being an atheist. It is not an organized movement that dictates what is good and what is wrong. It is just the simple idea that there are no supernatural powers needed to explain the world.
For me atheism is just the opposite of superstition. No other ideologies involved.
Every atheists has to get his opinions of what is good and what is bad from somewhere else.
Then again, I'm a bit of a contrarian. The more people scream something is true, the less I believe it. I mostly think that there's a reason so much screaming is required.
Sounds like me.
If there's any religion or ideology you're going to call less violent than Christianity, then please pick one of those.
Easy - The most peacefull religion is my own one. ;)
I call it "live" - because live and sentience are the only real wonders worth worshipping I found so far. And they can be experienced every day.
I have a bible too. Which probably won't ever get on the best seller lists since it's rather short and memorable.
It consists just of the words: "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you!".
Though I admit it might not be fair to compare that to other religions in term of violence or peace. Since I'm the only practioner I know of at the moment and I didn't have much time to set this world on fire so far.
"we are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further."
* I * am being obtuse? Hahahaha. Look up the word "legion", dumbass. It isn't known to have existed until approximately the year 1000 A.D.!!!! And I'm being generous, giving it a good 100 years or more leeway.
OK, even I am getting bored by this, but try to follow this.
When a word like legion has a dictionary entry that says "Origin 1175-1225", that's when the word entered the English language, not when it first popped out of the mouths of humans. Legio (Latin) and Legiwn (Greek) have both existed for well over 2000 years. Legio came to Greece and became Legiwn, came through Old French as Legion and entered English through Old French/Norman. Same word, with slight changes to pronunciation, century after century. And when it came into English, it was used in the sense of a "Roman Legion" (band of soldiers), not as a synonym for "many".
I was pretty clear in my posting that I doubted that Anonymous was purposely quoting the Bible. But you said:
The use of the word "legion" to mean "many" is approximately 1000 years old, and it originally referred to a "legion" of Roman soldiers. It did not come from the Bible at all. Remember that the Bible is a translated work.
Look up the etymology (word origin) of legion. Here's the very first hit from Google.
Which is pretty much all I said. That you continue to get your dander up over it is bizarre...
OK, even I am getting bored by this, but try to follow this.
Be bored all you like. You're the one who isn't getting it. I haven't misunderstood you, it's that your statements are irrelevant (as far as I know) to the point I was making.
When a word like legion has a dictionary entry that says "Origin 1175-1225", that's when the word entered the English language, not when it first popped out of the mouths of humans. Legio (Latin) and Legiwn (Greek) have both existed for well over 2000 years. Legio came to Greece and became Legiwn, came through Old French as Legion and entered English through Old French/Norman. Same word, with slight changes to pronunciation, century after century.
All completely irrelevant. The issue was (I asked you last time... maybe I didn't make myself clear?) WHEN was that translated into English, and what word (in whatever language) did it replace? That was the question. Was it translated to English directly from Legio or Legiwin? If so, you haven't said so. If it was, I'll concede your point.
And when it came into English, it was used in the sense of a "Roman Legion" (band of soldiers), not as a synonym for "many".
I am fully aware of this. If you bothered to read my earlier posts, I even mentioned this myself. My reference to its use as "many" was to MODERN usage. You should not have had trouble getting that part straight. I haven't even implied anything else.
Generalized sense of "a large number" is due to translations of allusive phrase in Mark v.9.
Which is pretty much all I said. That you continue to get your dander up over it is bizarre...
You think it's bizarre because you don't have the context right. Go back and look at my ORIGINAL point. It was: that young modern English-speakers who say "we are legion" (no more, no less), are probably NOT attempting to associate themselves with demons.
In that context, it is you and others who have yanked things all over the place and made irrelevant arguments. My original point was that in MODERN, contemporary usage, it is often just a synonym for "many". The dictionary says so, quite clearly. It was other people who started BSing about the meanings of words at times that were not even relevant to the conversation. And you are one of them.
English wasn't really what we'd consider English before then. Old English (or to be more precise, West Saxon) was spoken from about 800-1100 and formed the basis of what we call English now.
The Gospel of Mark in West Saxon uses "Legio", the actual Latin word, so it would seem that prior to "Anglicization" in 1175, we just used the Latin word directly. The influence of Norman French after the conquest on English caused a lot of Latin words to be merged with their Old French equivalents. So, yes, legion is a direct translation of Legio and had been used in Saxon prior to being "updated" to the French pronunciation.
And if you'd read my post carefully, I showed you that the MODERN usage of legion to also mean "many" is because of the Bible verse. The Romans didn't use the term to mean "many" - its root meaning in Latin was "conscript" from the word legere "to choose". As far as anyone can tell, it was first used as "many" in the Bible. Every etymology of the use of legion to mean "many" points to Mark 5:9 as the reason.
That's even true in French, where they use the phrase "être legion" as a synonym for many and point to scriptural use (one source uses the example "legions of demons") as the reason why.
I've read the chain. Nick brings in Jesus a little weirdly, but the basic point was that "we are legion" is a quote of the "bad guys". You were the one who brought in demons and claimed there couldn't possibly be a connection between the term legion and the Bible.
It's the equivalent of someone saying "work makes you free" and being told that "you probably should think about the origin that phrase".
"We are legion" is a bad-guy quote. If Anonymous wants to be considered good-guys, they might want a better motto.
"The Gospel of Mark in West Saxon uses "Legio", the actual Latin word, so it would seem that prior to "Anglicization" in 1175, we just used the Latin word directly. "
In that case, I concede the point that it could have meant "legion" in the Roman sense of the word.
"And if you'd read my post carefully, I showed you that the MODERN usage of legion to also mean "many" is because of the Bible verse."
And if you read MY posts carefully, you would see that this is completely irrelevant to what I originally said. My point was about MODERN usage. In fact that was the whole of my point... that someone today would not necessarily make the connection.
"I've read the chain. Nick brings in Jesus a little weirdly, but the basic point was that "we are legion" is a quote of the "bad guys". You were the one who brought in demons and claimed there couldn't possibly be a connection between the term legion and the Bible."
That is not an accurate assessment. "Nick", as you call him, was clearly implying an association with demons. Else his statement made no sense whatever... it would have been completely pointless to write what he did. Logically, he HAD TO be referring to demons. So I was not actually the one who "brought it up". I was the first to state it in plain words, but I did not introduce the subject, he did.
And I did not go so far as to say it "could not possibly". If you did indeed read my other comments, you will see that I mostly used phrases like "probably" and "not likely".
"We are legion" is a bad-guy quote. If Anonymous wants to be considered good-guys, they might want a better motto."
See? There you go again. I disagree completely about it [i.e., the words that were actually used in this case]. I do not think that a young person today who says "we are legion" is necessarily or intentionally making an association with demons. And nothing you have stated has had any bearing whatever on that assertion. The phrase has been used too often in modern times, in too many other contexts. Repeat: today's dictionary defines it as meaning "many". And my argument was about today.
Now, having said that: someone else pointed out later that on another occasion some representative of Anonymous stated "we are legion; for we are many". If you take that whole phrase, it would pretty clearly have to be a biblical reference... anything else is too much of a stretch. But even then, that does not imply that the speaker actually understands the reference. Regardless, in THIS case, that isn't what was said. So it has no bearing on my argument, which was only about the phrase "we are legion", in modern usage. That was the whole of my original point... it wasn't me who sidetracked the issue.
I agree that they could probably do with a better motto, but I do not assume that its implications are really understood by the people saying it.