Talk:Church of Scientology denied injunction against Anonymous

Active discussions

Anonymous interivewEdit

WN: The last protest was peaceful, do you expect the 15th to be the same?
Anonymous: Absolutely. There's no reason to believe the success of the 10 February protest won't carry over to this weekend's.
WN: Do you believe the threats the Church mentioned in the injunction filing came from members of Anonymous?
Anonymous: No. They have a history of fabricating these things, and I have no reason to believe this is any different a situation.
WN: How have Anonymous defended themselves in court?
Anonymous: Well, there's been no need for any kind of defense. The restraining order has been rejected by every judge the church has brought it before and furthermore, there's no reason to believe any of the names on their court filing even consider themselves Anonymous. They appear to be completely made-up by the Church of Scientology.
WN: Do you view this as an attempt by the Church to stop peaceful protest against them?
Anonymous: Absolutely. They've used the courts to stop free speech before, they're doing it again. Public protest draws attention to the Church's human rights abuses, so they'll do anything to stop them.

See alsoEdit

See also a prep page that was used, at Wikinews:Story preparation/Church of Scientology files for a injunction to stop Anonymous protests on the 15th. Cirt - (talk) 21:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Curious ...Edit

How did you interview an anonymous online group such as Anonymous. How can you be certain that you are speaking to a person that actually represents the group? (maybe these have been answered already in the ever-expanding number of articles on this) --SVTCobra 23:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous, while anonymous, is quite easy to find. The section title might be misleading and better titled "Member of Anonymous' response" Bjweeks - (talk) 01:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

See alsoEdit

Return to "Church of Scientology denied injunction against Anonymous" page.