Defending Anonymous?

I got an interesting e-mail from an anon who pointed me to yet another entry in an Anonymous dead agent blog similar to Anonymous Hate Group. In it, they made the claim that Anonymous was like Nazis due to their want of Tom Cruise's new movie Valkyrie in which Tom Cruise plays a Nazi planning to assassinate Adolf Hitler pulled from theaters. Interesting enough they claim not to want to invoke Godwin's reductio ad-hitlerum law, and invoke Godwin's law in the same sentence:

Please understand that I don't want to invoke Godwin, but this rather reminicient of Nazi Germany.

Aside from the irony and the obvious misspelling of reminiscent (it's really sad that of all people, I have to correct your spelling) it begs the question; why should I spend my time defending Anonymous?

I mean sure there are bad anons, just like there are bad lower-level Scientologists. The posts even admits that the vast majority of anons are good. People who are not under Scientology's hypnosis can blatantly see what is going on here and know it's a load of crap. There should be some defence of the claims aganst anonymous, sure. However, there are those who are committed to spening a good portion of their time doing this which I think is a fruitless endevor. We don't need someone standing next to a gaping asshole pointing out that everything that comes out of it is just a steaming pile of shit by analyizing every peice of corn in it. Just point out how any why it is shit overall and move on to the main arguments and not get distracted by Scientology's red herrings.

I think if Scientology were to win this battle against reason, reality and logic (or as they call it "The MEST Universe") I think they need to spend a little less time looking like assholes by using the most well known and useless logical fallacy of ad-hominim attacks and start defending themselves against criticism by rational debate.

For one, they can start by explaining why they had to lie to set up shop in Clearwater, FL, why the security at Gold Base looks as though as if it's designed more to keep people in than out, why they sue people for simply disagreeing with them, why they feel it nessassary to stalk and picket the homes of dissenters, or why they have people who spend a lot of time on the internet flaming people on newsgroups.

I try not to point out too much how Scientology are in ways similar to that of the national socialist regime of Nazi Germany for the reason that as soon as you bring up Hitler in any argument, it makes most people suspicious of your argument. Arnie Lerma does a great job pointing out the similarities for those interested; however it's safe to say Scientology aren't Nazis and most-likely not going to be throwing people in ovens. Moreover, Scientologists need to learn how to confront criticism and opposition and also learn how to stay away from nasty logical fallacies that puts so many bullet holes in their feet.