Comments:'The Regime' hacks in response to 'Anonymous' attack on Scientology; takes web site off line

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Begin comments merged from old comments page

"a site popular with hacker group "Anonymous.""

Anonymous is not a hacker group, stfu. The Regime are idiots for thinking they where going after a hacker group. At best its a skript kiddie group, most cases a small portion of annonymous is actualy hackers, that small portion distributes the tools for ddossing from everyone else.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)


Anonymous never claimed to be hackers, Fox News gave them the label "hackers on steroids" because they stole a couple thousand myspace passwords. Why did these regime guys waste their time going after possibly the most insignificant *chan? Why didn't they target 4chan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous will be victorious! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:22, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

lulz —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

End comments merged from old comments page

Elaborate scheme by the group Anonymous to bring up ratings and try to get attention of REAL news teams at a very pathetic pace. Both so called groups are filled with script kiddies being controlled by a group of "Dorks" with nothing better to do with their time.

Enjoy the Soap Opera they are putting out for you.

Information recieved from "An0nYm0us" found on—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)

Each person should investigate to their own satisfaction. Jesus said it best, "the truth will set you free." For any group to attack the 711chan and then claim not to be scientologists defies all logic. My IQ is over 60 and i didn't fall for that excuse. Just how dumb do you have to be to join Lower Revolving Hanibals followers?--- —Preceding comment was added at 09:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

It's pointless to go after Anonymous. They're... anonymous. We're only linked by the Chans and it would honestly be a pain in the ass to hunt down each and every one of us. Their actions are fruitless and will yield nothing more than retaliation and the wrath of Anon breathing down their neck.

--Anon 3177 —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:33, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

The Regime has been backraided by g00ns and their site pwnt. </story>-- 21:58, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


I know digg isn't WP:RS/WP:V. Ima stay on it and hit you up with links etc. as and when found. Also, since wikinews did the original story on The Regime h4x, isn't a follow-up in order? I can break you off with g00ns info if you want an interview.

--Piepie (talk) 22:41, 27 January 2008 (UTC)-- 22:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

They got them good -- 03:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

At the moment instead of going after all these shadowy little groups that can crowdsource a DDoS we're trying to get official comment from the Church of Scientology. I have several shrinks and someone doing their doctoral thesis on Scientology lined up to help analyse their response and offer professional opinions on CoS. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

yeah they got hacked back[edit]

Goons hack the "regime" and posted all there personal information —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Epic fail on Regime's part, eh? That didn't last long. -Kiz —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

This was g00ns, not Something Awful "goons". g00ns and goons are not affiliated in any way with each other. -- —Preceding comment was added at 02:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Can we protect this page there appears to be a member of the loony organisation deleting it.[edit]

Can we protect this page there appears to be a member of the loony organisation deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

lulz to the regime[edit]

Listen Regime, which seems to be Church of Scientology. The War won't stop untill The Cult is dead. So C'mon make us lul some more.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)

Feb 10 Anyone who seriously believes that The Regime is not associated with CoS is retarded. They may not be Scientologist but they are in their employ.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs)


Giving so much attention on the news pages (complete with "interviews" & "srs journalism") to this affair is ridiculous. It's one group of narcissists vs another, hardly groundbreaking & hardly interesting. It's embarrassing that these wikinews items are treating this affair like it's something epic.

Far better off letting the script kiddies have their fun *without* giving them press & instead return the news to something that less resembles a circle jerk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:28, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Regime got their personal details all over the intarbutts anyway, s'all good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


Anon was NOT impressed. Kindly take this free internet protocol address. Enjoy, and good day.

The more we acknowledge these folks the more credibility they gain....[edit]

the pulp writer isn't worth the time to respond to this extent ... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 2600:1700:e7f0:c8a0:b533:3be7:7221:4e46 (talkcontribs) 02:55, 23 August 2019 (UTC)