Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP That is what he is being charged with so far. I am not a fan of Assange, or what he has been doing over the last few months. I don't support him. I do believe in due process. I don't know if he broke any laws or not but I am not going to break laws to "defend" him. I think private companies are within their rights to distance themselves from him if it was in their original agreement and I imagine it was. If the US vans him I will reserve my judgement for after all of the facts come in. I don't know what has been said between him and Bradly Manning (or what ever the fuckers name is) and that could possibly have a lot to do with this, but it may not I don't know. But I ain't gonna join or help start and internet war because somebody had a knee jerk reaction. gregg, feel free to do what you like, but if you are looking for something to add in your next interview, feel free to work what I said above in about at least some of us here. I don't disrespect you in any way, but I am not on board with operation payback. The press might also like to know where (as in how) the "ap" that is being downloaded and used illegally was originated, I have not seen that in any of the interviews I have read or watched. But I wouldn't be surprised if the distribution of that is also illegal, but I have no idea if it is. I do support more transparent government, I feel this is the wrong way to get it. I also support you having a right to your own opinion while believing having an opinion, and acting on it are two different things.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP um, have you been blind? this isn't operation payback hq. i'm an activist, not a hacktivist. i'm trying to drum up support for wl, get the leaks out there any way I can, and maybe contribute to the overall effort of peaceful activism for wikileaks.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Part of that was directed at the person saying what Assange was charged with and I weighed in. The other part was for gregg who was requesting input for his future articles. The rest was my 2 cents. I am not convinced that wiki leaks acted entirely legally in this situation and can't support the recent leaks yet and probably wont morally I don't think it was responsible journalism or that all information should be free, if I need to surrender my anon card for my opinion let me know.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP dude. they leaked info on us contractors providing "boy toy" service to afghani police, and I mean catholic style... and you don't know if you can support them? what was critical thinking not required in your school? just spewing out what they told you to memorize?
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Being against child abuse is not necessarily pro wiki leaks. And you are spewing out what you have been told if you believe otherwise. Please let me know of one child who has been saved from abuse because of that leak and I will applaud the savior of that child, but I will still not applaud the leak. The ends do not justify the means.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP No-one would know the issue if not for the leak. Give whoever takes it upon themselves a chance to 'do' something in a realistic time-frame first, before you start saying this wasn't a catalyst for positive action regarding this issue. I applaud the leak, and finish with a slow hand-clap for your douchebaggery
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP My interest in WWP has been in protesting Scn. As I am neither a hacker nor even any sort of programmer, this stuff is over my head to even begin to evaluate from any higher truth sort of viewpoint. I will not participate in anything illegal - period. None of the people I know on WWP would ever participate in DDOSing but the NY TImes rumor is that there may be some who signed onto the forum. Rumors are still just rumors. A number of my friends who are strictly interested in protesting the horrendous abuses of the Church of Scientology are quite nervous of the other interests of other Chanologists and where these may lead. Some have already quit WWP because they don't want to even be considered to be associated with illegal activities. I don't like it myself. Until this all settles down and I can see more clearly what direction WWP is going in, I will not be participating on the WWP forum. Anonymous has been fantastic in exposing the abuses of the Cult of Scientology and I am grateful to those here who have helped and continue to help. I will continue to protest with local Anons. Our groups is not involved in DDOSing or anything illegal. We have our own battles to fight. So Long for now, and Thanks for All the Fish.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Neither am I, and neither of these is a pre-requisite for forming a viewpoint on WL (I assume that's what you're talking about). I can only speak for myself, and certainly not for the site, but as far as I see there is nothing to suggest that the Scientology-geared direction of this site is going to change. I think your worries are unfounded, but I also realise you may have reasons I can't understand, therefore I respect your decision, but regret that you feel this is necessary. Don't know you, but best of luck in the future, and I'm sure anyone who does know you will be pleased to see you back real soon.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Gregg, it is great to have you post and speaking out. It would be helpful to have a list of your appearances.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Gottabrain the clue is in the domain name whyweprotest As mentioned before this spam will die down the media will get bored, as before. 6 months+ later some "kids" may well be arrested and go to jail, as before. While the media is interested folks should be highlighting the real reason why this site is still here. p.s. I don't see any postgame reports or pix lately highlight those for us gottabrain. hugs
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP If we are famous can we get some of that internet money now?
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP LOL, best post in thread. I LOL'd. I understand the confusion going, most people do not understand the internet. How many of you learned about it the hard way here on E/O or WWP? As Da5id said "It's not a big deal" as far it relates to Chanology, however it will bring calls for more regulation of internet.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP My incoherent views on DDOS. Staff members of the "Church of Scientology" probably post here for all I know. That's quite a disreputable group, in my view, but I don't think it "taints" WWP. There's no "character test" in order to post here. Scientology = undesireable. DDOS = undesireable. Moral significance of the fact that undesireable dingleberries post here = not much. My views on Wikileaks. Bless Wikileaks for hosting secret cult scam documents, so that people may inform themselves. Loss for Wikileaks = Win for CoS. My views of one of the processes of crooked thinking used by people of good will to condemn Wikileaks. Hiding state crimes = preventing anger = terrorists get de-motivated = saving lives = win/win = justice. More crimes hidden = more justice + more freedom + more democracy = defeat of anti-Americanism wherever it rears its head.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP There is no such group as Changeology. There is no such thing as a reactive mind. I could go on...but I won't.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP If there that were true, you wouldn't have been able to use it in your sentence.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Heard you on WNYC yesterday, well done. Having an articulate voice out there is invaluable, and gj for keeping your poise and also handling plenty of ill-informed / misguided questions and just plain trolling. Hope you are getting some well-deserved rest and glad to see you are continuing to make yourself available.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Thanks for that. As for a list, I have no idea what i've been in. I have done over a hundred interviews at this point, more than 30 yesterday alone. So I dont have any sort of list. I got some ok sleep, but its right back into the fire today. Most of the day is already filled up with more interviews. I completely understand. I will see if anyone will actually print a statement about that. The idea being that a lot of the users on WWP are not a part of Payback, and do not want to be, as they disagree with the methods. Even if they agree with the idea of defending Wikileaks. I will also try a bit better to make the difference between defending Julian and Wikileaks more clear.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Wikileaks provided support for Anonymous when it published Scientology materials but I understand that there will always be people more interested in take than give. Maybe you need to try looking at the bigger picture if that's your view. If Wikileaks goes now then what's next? If you wait until it's a site you want to use then it's going to be too late. I'm not encouraging anyone to participate in illegal activity and more importantly this site does not encourage anyone to participate in illegal activity. I'm really disappointed that you feel the need to flounce over this issue. You have a personal grievance against Scientology for what it did to you but many of us here don't. That hasn't stopped us giving up our spare time and cash to help stop the cult's abuses. If most people had displayed your attitude there would be no WWP for you to flounce from in the first place.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP As I understand, Wikileaks is consulting with the New York Times and a couple of other major media outlets to screen the leaked material. That's an important point I don't hear often enough. Gregg, maybe you could work in a sentence about that in some of your interviews. Or even a clause, like "Wikileaks and leading journalists, some from the NYT..."
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Gottabrain, the fact is WWP does not, and will not, in my experience allow or support any illegal activities through their forum. Some noobies try to see how much their crap will get tolerated and find out fast that it won't be. Fear is a bad master. Strength comes from being honest, legal and constructive, and never letting your voice be silenced.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Oh, let Gottabrain flounce. Either they'll come back eventually, in which case this is a waste of energy, or they won't, in which case Nothing Of Value Was Lost.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP While some flouncage is bound to occur over all the new attention this brings to WWP, it ultimately results in greater exposure to the public of the abuses of the Cult and therefore a net gain in people interested in protesting-FOR GREAT JUSTICE!
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Indeed. I bet there are a lot of potential Chanologists who will be delighted to join the public outcry against Scientology's scam mob.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP The problem is most of the top threads here now relate to wikileaks sadly. So when you get a TV/radio spot make sure they aware of why wwp is still here and that protests go on monthly still.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Before you know it, the front page will be saying welco to the New Why We Protest.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Just maybe... people would appreciate you not to push your view onto them. Let things roll and don't force it.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Other people would appreciate it if you didn't push your broader, diverging agendas having little to do with why this site was formed, and what has continued to be its central theme, on them. There's going to be some give and take, but if you insist on OG and Chanologists rolling over and playing dead, gtfo off our lawn. Unless you're just here for the dev-t.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP OH, yes, I saw that too. Dev-T is an LRH admin term for "Developed Traffic", or useless staff actions that do not result in a product or service but make extra work for other staff members. it denotes a dorky staff member being unproductive but "busy".
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP I think you missed the part about how Chanology began, and what composed the earliest legions of our shock troops. You obviously never understood the manner in which Anonymous rationalizes away illegalities and unethical behavior (as they have since day 0). You're not the first to up and ragequit because of evolving focus. "Operation Reconnect" decimated the community, and it was exactly that gaping pussy hole that gave 2nd-gen moralfag Chanologists the space to climb in and rebuild in the directions you've seen. If you're afraid of being tarred with nigra cooties, getting out would probably be a good idea about now. But complaining about the Tar Baby aint gonna fix it.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP You clearly know better why this site was formed than me.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP It's a big internet, guys. There is room for everybody.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Pththththththhh! Come for the leaks, stay for the chowder!
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP I know, this happens every fucking week. No i am skipping this one.
Re: NY Times Links Cyberattacks Directly to WWP Please stop using scispeak like it consists of real words. D:
