Can't Say Nothing

Lucky you, I'm still on regular hours and just awoke. The real overtime starts this Friday so I'm still on normal hours. And because of this I find it impossible to not make a mention of some of the latest goings-on with Anonymous. Lucky you, like I said.

It's Anonymous, whatever that is, that informs most of my outlook these days and - if pushed - I suppose if I had to declare a "party affiliation" these would be the guys I'd probably slide in next to. Democrats, Republicans, Independents, to me it's all the same mush. Relics of the past, to be perfectly frank. So I happily take on new symbols and metaphors - mostly in response to the stasis of modern politics and all the petty nonsense that defines it these days. Or perhaps has always defined it.

The fact of the matter is that, no, I'm not part of Anonymous. This is true mostly because you know who I am. Plus I don't have the mad internet skilz needed to do raids and the kind of civil actions Anonymous is known for. In fact the only direct dealing I've ever had with it is directed at the Church of Scientology's fraud and abuse. And, because the "church" knows me and I never signed onto anything without using my real name, what I'm actually a part of is a subtext known as "Project Chanology." What developed after, or along with, that project went on to Wikileaks, skirting around the Iranian internet blocks, the Arab Spring and, finally, the Occupy movement. Anonymous, or at least people who have some sort of nebulous connection to Anonymous, had a hand in all of that. The DNA can be traced back to the "leaderless group." They've also helped me track down a long lost classmate, but that's neither here nor there.

Anonymous has also battled neo-Nazis, child molesters, and evil neighbors of dying little girls. You should really read this short history to get an idea about the group. And, in that article, you will also see negative stuff. And that right there is the point.

The single most important thing people need to remember is something that runs counter-intuitive to standard analysis. The fact is that anybody can claim to be "Anonymous," and anybody basically has.

I've no doubt that the recent arrests of "hackers" that operated under the Anonymous banner are, in fact, targeted actual regulars within the group. But, like Islam, if you want to view the whole thing as a monument or a monolith you'd be way off track.

When my involvement with Chanology started to taper off, the demands of real life and the pursuit of long neglected dreams taking over, the only thing for sure I could say about the group was that there was - and so far as I can tell still is - a lively debate about internet activity. Denial of Service attacks, website content altered to say embarrassing or opposite views than those intended, are believed by some to be a legitimate tactic in the culture wars. Others think them counter-productive. That's not something that will be resolved soon, because there is no leader. There is the "hive-mind" (Read "on the internet" definition) and there is individual action.

So the recent arrests of people alleged to be part of Anonymous (which, laughably, could be anyone who claimed it whether they did anything or not) did get my attention.

There's a pretty well-informed article here at the Chicago Tribune today, which I strongly recommend you take five minutes to read - if nothing else than because it is one of the more cogent explanations from the "outside" as I've seen in a while. But the thing you have to remember is that what constitutes a "member" of Anonymous ("member of Anonymous" being a term which in and of itself is virtually meaningless) is wide open. You'd be surprised to learn who is part of it or supports it. If you think it's hackers on steroids operating from Mommy's basement you'd be believing exactly what "Anonymous" wants you to believe. The actual participants come from every walk of life. From professionals to people with well-known names. Don't laugh at that.

Laugh at this instead.

Anyway is this the end of Anonymous? Everybody scared off now?

lol...

A Short Aside

I will resume the reflection pool thing in a day or so, but in the meantime I saw this picture and just had to post.

Here is the Libyan dictator's daughter whats-her-name being "defiant."

And I can just hear her reasoning...

So, I'm going to go out and stand behind this podium festooned with cheap-ass electric Christmas lights that look like they're from 1954. I'm going to stand next to this thing that looks like a bombed-out toilet wall combined with some kind of Tim Burton iron sculpture representing something I don't know what.

I'm going to go out there with this face that will have people searching the web for better pictures of me and put this look on it like I've been completely sheltered from reality and have had any kind of harsh truth hidden from me all my life. I have a pretty dress and a pretty thingee that goes around my head and my hand is raised.

You can tell by the look on my face, and the fact that I'm very very happy to see a camera taking a picture of meeeee, that this is my defiant stance. We're the Kadaffies, or however the hell you spell it from one year to the next, and we run this.

Did you get my good side? I'm going to be Queen someday. Queen of busted mud huts and cracked toilet walls and bad light decorations that make no sense at all. Exposed electric cords and all. But this is Libyan expertise in action.

Aren't we great?

Did you get my good side/

lol Xenu

Screen writer and producer Paul Haggis (Million Dollar Baby, Quantum of Solace, The Next Three Days) is sitting on a book that, when published, promises to blow yet another lid off the corporate religiosity fraud known as Scientology.

Joining a long list of ex-members who have disavowed the cult as well as a slowly growing list of "celebrities" who have discovered they have better things to do, Haggis' initial dust-up with the social invention of science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard began with the issue of Proposition 8 because the "Church" of Scientology joined with the Latter Day Saints in saying that gay people are weird and ought to be illegal or something.

It has always been strange to me why the cult's backing of Prop H8 was such a surprise. One only has to read Scientology "scripture" to see where homosexuality is officially considered an aberration the "church" can actually help you get out of if you shell out enough money. But, oh wait, you would have had to shell out some money to actually READ that "scripture" or else you wouldn't know that - sorry. I wasn't thinking.

Here's a part of the story published in the LA Times this week...

Director Paul Haggis has already been the worst kind of publicity for the Church of Scientology, penning this letter in August 2009 in which he resigned from the group over its support of Proposition 8.

Now he could become more than just a thorn in the church's side. According to this Gawker report, the Oscar winner is shopping a book with New Yorker writer Lawrence Wright about his experience with Scientology –- an experience that he says included, among other things, his wife cutting off contact with her parents at the order of church officials.

Or you can get the whole thing here.

I think because the people just looking for the lulz may have been taking an extended break from working against the cult of Scientology folks have a tendency to think the storm has subsided for our money-grubbing Hubbard space cadets. But they'd be wrong.

We STILL run this.

Learn more about Scientology here at Why We Protest. It ain't over til it's over.

Needs Be Said

Those of you who are keeping an eye on the news have probably, by now, read where it has been stated that Anonymous has been staging dos attacks against Visa and Mastercard and a small number of websites that are actively opposed to Wikileaks' diplomatic cable dumps.

You should know that, first of all, Anonymous is not an entity with any semblance of cohesive or clearly defined leadership. Actually, anyone can claim to be "Anonymous." As is explained in the link above it is more an ongoing internet meme than anything else.

As a former member of the Church of Scientology, I've been very happy to see that Anonymous has taken on those purveyors or fraud full-on and have created what is now a campaign of cultural inoculation against the "Church" that is going on close to three years.

However because I am listed publicly as an "ex who has spoken out against," - a listing I am happy to be a part of - there is nothing about me that can claim to be "Anonymous," because I'm not. Technically I'd actually more associate myself with Project Chanology, which is a portion of / splinter from / aspect of / sub set to / different than / what is known as "Anonymous."

After the unrest in Iran where that oppressive regime began to control internet and other electronic media access and thus hampered the activities of the anti-government protest movement, Anonymous showed the dissidents how to get around it. But the part of Anonymous that did that was not always completely the same part of Anonymous which was dealing with Scientology.

Early on Project Chanology/Anonymous used dos attacks against Scientology websites but reversed themselves and, in fact, are opposed to the tactic; if only because a person doesn't have to do anything "illegal" to expose the cult - all you have to do is just talk about it and people will be all "wtf??"

It should be explained that the dos attacks against MasterCard and Visa et al were done because those entities disallowed contributions made online going to Wikileaks. It was not done to get anybody's info or anything like that, as far as I can tell.

And although I am in favor, so far, of Julian Assange's general outlook and utility, I am against dos attacks. I'm not sure how people do that, but if it isn't illegal it probably ought to be.

I can't answer for whatever part of Anonymous is responsible for the "cyberwar" and, though sympathetic to the cause, I'm not for the tactic.

Just to be clear, that "part" of Anonymous concerned directly with the cult of Scientology published a very informative explanation of the situation and you can read it here.

These kind of things have happened and will happen again, if only to demonstrate the fact that there simply is no centralized leadership in this shape-changing, amoebalike entity known as Anonymous. People have even done mischief in its name with the express purpose of blackwashing Anonymous.

We'll get back to my usual bloggy blather after this. I just thought it needed be said.

aka Robert S

/b/ you make me happy

THIS IS WHY

Referencing the first story in the post immediately under, allow me to say that as of late this week 4chan has hereby delivered the requisite number of pizzas to the Petkov's humble cottage.



Rock on... <---- CLICK IT!