Comments:Anonymous muscle in on Canadian teen rape case

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

Back to article

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. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

Start a new discussion


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Excellent news service to cause and community817:04, 21 April 2013
O THATS EASY001:27, 12 April 2013

Excellent news service to cause and community

Well done Wikinews, informative, neutral and concise. Anonymous suggesting public naming and shaming of the miscreants is appropriate, and perhaps preventive.

Kdarwish1 (talk)04:36, 12 April 2013

That would be an excellent good first step tho the likelihood of effective shaming in what seems like a public infested with foulbrood is probably wishful thinking. I would not want the perpetrators running free in my community, let alone in a school environment. IF they can be identified and what exactly occurred proven to be as disgusting as it seems, it would seem that confinement to a reformatory at least until 21 would be just. However, just recalling the RCMP 'performance' at Huntsville where Canada showed her soul awhile back . . . justice seems more likely hope than happen. Oh Canada—who stands on guard for thee?

Surchyr1 (talk)05:26, 13 April 2013

This vigilante interference with the criminal justice system is morally wrong. It harms both the investigation and any subsequent prosecution. It risks misidentifying the criminals so risks defamation and other harm to innocent people. It also dilutes and jeopardizes whatever good reputation the label "Anonymous" has with the general public.

This is yet another "operation" that demonstrates that Anonymous has no defining philosophy, no defining core values and ideals, and no defining operating model. In particular, it demonstrates that those who claim the trademark "Anonymous" cannot be relied upon to obey the People's Law and to work with the institutions that the People have created. "Vigilante" is indeed a good description of Anonymous.

There are times and situations in which vigilante action is necessary and appropriate. This is not one of those situations. If the "Anonymous" activists really want to help prevent similar crimes, they should turn over their information to the investigating agency and let that agency control what information is released and when. Premature or inaccurate release of investigative information can destroy the ability to prosecute.

Wo'O Ideafarm (talk)16:15, 17 April 2013

Nonsense, Anonymous is completely within it's rights as cyber activists to "muscle in" on a case of cyber bullying that lead to a girl's suicide and a subsequent coverup

Maybe Rehtaeh knew she would get nowhere trying to fight her attackers, since these leches are so prized by their community

The authorities are more interested in protecting the accused than punishing them, and to me that makes them the villians, not the vigilantes stepping in to fill the cracks in the law

Jackie Dangerously13:05, 19 April 2013

Breaking the law is wrong. It constitutes "reckless disregard for the rights of others". Interfering with a criminal investigation or with the ability to prosecute criminals is morally wrong and often is also a crime. Vigilanteism is wrong. If the criminal justice system is broken, then the correct, moral response is to work, together and individually, to fix the system.

"Anonymous" the vision is awesome and precious. But "Anonymous" the movement is rapidly becoming a meaningless, desperate effort to attract media coverage. In truth, "Anonymous" was never more than a media event, and like all media events, will soon become "old news". This new "operation" is just another step down the spiral staircase to irrelevance.

In today's society, the only way to organize a revolution is to have a specific, articulated vision and a specific, articulated plan for achieving that vision, and that plan must embrace the paradigm of LAWFUL REVOLT.

Wo'O Ideafarm (talk)04:08, 20 April 2013

Wo'O Ideafarm, argumentum ad hominum is not sound nor convincing logic.

Kdarwish1 (talk)16:36, 21 April 2013

True enough, and I deny making that kind of argument. Ad hominem attacks are especially disruptive in a venue such as this, where space is extremely limited.

Wo'O Ideafarm (talk)16:52, 21 April 2013

Yes, Jackie Dangerously's assessment is simple and fair, both of Rehtaeh's final act and of Anonymous's "grass-roots" activism.

Kdarwish1 (talk)16:32, 21 April 2013

IMO, the criminal justice system is clogged and corrupt. So I agree with the general thrust of what you say. I only disagree with your proposed solution, because (1) it might result in preventing the prosecution of the boys, (2) it might make the system MORE clogged and corrupt and dysfunction than it already is, and (3) it recklessly disregards the rights of "the People" to establish and maintain institutions to promote justice and liberty. For example, if the local district attorney is not getting the job done, the responsible response is to either replace the DA or to help him or her identify and eliminate the obstacle to getting the job done. Bypassing the DA with a vigilante action does not fix the problem; it will likely make it worse. It is also a new crime, a new offense against the public. In this instance, Anonymous is just a criminal, no better than some murderer who claims that his victim "deserved to die".

Wo'O Ideafarm (talk)17:04, 21 April 2013