Anon Vs. Anon: "Chanology is Over, Go Home."

At around 1:30 am GMT time on Nov. 3, two anti-scientology websites went down (near?) simultaneously. Perhaps not exactly simultaneous, nothing is clear on that, but close enough. These sites, http://whyweprotest.net and http://www.scientology-exposed.com were both part of "Project Chanology", an Anti-Scientology campaign undertaken some months ago by the controversial group called by the media and some of its members(?), "Anonymous".

Shortly after the websites began reporting 404 errors to visitors attempting to access them, related "Chanology" IRC chat channels saw administrators kicked and banned. Soon other internet forums began to verify the sites had gone down, as well as the IRC channels. Order was restored on the chatchannels, but as of 6pm GMT, neither page was opening. Operation Clambake, a purely Scientology protest forum has traffic buzzing about the news, both sites are down, with one member posting this quote from www.endthecult.com

"-irc.whyweprotest.net compromised; all the admins were banned. As of this update, they're unbanned and working on restoring everything. The site and the irc -server got rooted.

-8:37pm

-WWP irc back under control. m00ncup globals the following:

-I'll explain later what is going on, I'd apreicaite it if you didn't pm me for now

-So relax and let the jaerb get done."

AnonNewswire holds a post by one of of the administrators of the affected sites, "WhyWeProtest is Down... We are working on issues at hand." Underneath, two posts bearing the "noms" associated with taking credit for the attack state...

"You can't fix it this time"

and

"Chanology is Over, go home."

"you are not the "Associated Press of Anonymous"

"Half of you faggots have been facefagged. As much as you want it to be, "Anonymous" is not a "Cultural Phenomenon". You are not Anonymous"

Despite the slur, "fag" likely has as much to do with sexual preference as it does with firewood...almost. anonymous, or "Anonymous", has it's own lingo which is not easily understood by those on the outside. The impression these comments leaves is clear, however. Anonymous was attacked by dissenting members(?) from within its own ranks. While this may seem like infighting or even betrayal, the terms "members" and "ranks" have little do to, and are antithetical to anonymous in the first place. The upset at the attack is is undeniable:

"Chanology is far from over. And dont tell me what to do, buddy"

and

"OMG UR NOT ANONYMOUS WE ARE WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA GO HOME *hax hax hax*"

and then this, which causes one to wonder if even normal seeming language isn't saying something more...

"go home, you heard what he said, go home.

enturbulation is gone. go HOME."

(enturbulation was an original Chanology site, which, according to rumor, fell to a DDOS attack. When Enturbulation when down, WhyWeProtest came up to replace it.)

and later...

"go home.. go to where your home is.

there you will find shelter.

there you will find friends.

there we will find win."

Sprinkled all through the texts accounting the event, in nearly every forum is the link to claims it is the second edition of "Cntrldata". The page is an ascii style document filled with comments and logs providing convincing looking evidence that the take down of these sites were caused by members(?) within anonymous(?). Only lightly sprinkled with actual narrative, the issue of Cntrldata has conversation logs as well as system logs, file transfers and command lines. Most of it I can't and won't comment on out of lack of knowledge. While the documents and logs could be easily faked, it's clear(?) that the document is made more for those it attacked, as evidence. Only the victims(?) of the attack and those who took down the sites could verify the claim, and I'm left with the impression that this is exactly the point.

So, what is Anonymous? "Anonymous" being a proper noun indicates a name, despite the meaning of the word. Did anonymous become "Anonymous" with Chanology? Is this just another face of the group(?) in another perspective? Anonymous surprised the world when Mark Bunker asked them to take a different, law abiding approach, and they did, seemingly as one group.

Which is paradoxical in a group this chaotic. One would expect less than consensus in nearly everything they did. And they would be correct. To assume anonymous has a truly unified front against Scientology would be a mistake. What the media refers to as "Anonymous" is actually a single project, taken on voluntarily by like(ish) minded anons, called "Project Chanology". The media attention, the websites, the very name "Anonymous", forums and IRC structures used to support Project Chanology all became "materiel". "Anonymous" became resources and assets targetable, and detestable by its own standards.

Along with the loss of the sites, some sources report that important and private data was also stolen from Chanology during the raid, which means that "anon's" who joined along with Project Chanology for the protest against Scientology have also been compromised, as well as some sightseers and lurkers. Anons and Scientology protesters both are suggesting changing passwords if you were involved in these groups, especially if you used the same password as you do in other accounts.

While in my mind, there is still a little doubt that anonymous targeted itself, this is mainly because of the nature of the information gathered. Nothing can be certain except to those involved. I suspect little is certain for them as well. Questions are asked. Some wonder if Scientology didn't hire a rogue hacker to take down the sites, making it look like an inside job. Others feel that this is the true nature of anonymous, to tear down the ego, to constantly destroy all around it, including itself. Many who claim participation agree, this is the strength of Anonymous, and why it's impervious, because it doesn't remain an identifiable target long enough to make any attack or classification relevant.

Ketchup.