The day GaySec let the internet down

The internet was abuzz not only with GaySec’s accusation, but also our takedown of their baseless case.

It has been a few days since we reported the despicable libel by vigilante group GaySec against Arlene Tan, and we have received many feedback from blogs which caught our alternative side to the story.

Since the “exposé”, Arlene had lodged police reports against the defamation and the many death threats she had received. She had also met with Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) officers to assist them in their investigations on this issue. Despite the continuing threats and no apology from the jihadist wannabes online, Arlene plans to move on with her life .

Milo Suam (@milosuam) has a feature on the first police report made in Kelana Jaya:

Meanwhile, in her blog, Lovesucks (@L0ve5uck5) writes how disgusted she is by the reaction of some Malay Muslims over the issue:

You see, what you just said puts Arlene Tan into jeopardy. Meleis guys continued to harass the accused Arlene Tan. You can read their reactions under the comment sections on all of the blogs which have posted about the news.

“Jom kita rogol Arlene!”

Hello dickheads… itu je ke yang ko pikir celake? Ini bulan puasa kot! Kalau tak bulan puasa pun, mana KEISLAMAN ko yang ko agung2kan tu? So this is the so-called ISLAM? LOL! No wonder there are so many atheists nowadays! With this kind of attitude, it is not a surprise anymore if someone declared himself/herself as an atheist. Thanks to you people! Hahahah!

♥Sya♥ also writes in her blog, and agreed that Muslims shouldn’t have reacted with vulgarity and obscenity:

Ramai yang mengutuk beliau(Arlene Tan). Tapi kita sebagai hamba Allah tak sepatutnya bertindak melulu tanpa usul periksa. Nasib aku tak terlibat sama mengutuk beliau. Bagi aku kalu pun dia bersalah dalam entri2 dia yang kurang sopan tu, kita x sepatutnya menghukum individu itu sedemikian rupa. Islam itu kan indah. Patutnya kita membimbing beliau ke jalan yang benar. Memang da jelas sekali yang dia mempunyai fahaman yang serong dan negatif (Makcik Hajjah Sitt Al-Wuzara). Kenapa dia berfikiran demikian? Itu yang sepatutnya kita siasat. Di mana salahnya didikan Makcik Hajjah Sitt Al-Wuzara itu, sedangkan dia seorang yang beragama Islam.

However, a trend that we’ve discovered is that a number of bloggers wish for Malaysian atheists to keep quiet online, as Lovesucks writes [emphasis ours]:

Okay, I dont care whether Arlene is a muslim or not… I don’t care if she is not really you! But I care if you are an atheist but you talk bad about other religions. Why don’t you just mind your own business? I dont care if you are the founder of the FB group named Apostates in Malaysia. You can create as many groups as you want in FB but still, you shouldn’t talk bad about Islam and encourage others to follow your footsteps. If you are trying to promote freedom of religion, if it is going to apply to everyone, why must you talk bad about other religions?

Right?

You are not the only atheist in this country. You know that better. But what you are doing now in your blog and twitter, will put ALL of other atheists in this country in danger. I know you are not stupid. So please think twice before you act. I’m not going to tell you what you should do or shouldn’t do. You know better. I wish you good luck.

The Towel Ninja also echoes this opinion, and thinks that Arlene is still in the wrong for criticising a religion [again, emphasis ours]:

I say ,
In my opinion , it doesnt matter Arlene Tan was the Makcik or not
she has still to deal with her suspicious atheism issues on herself.yes ,i have been looking into several of her posts and there are some comments show she’s totally supporting atheism .
i am a lil bit confused with this Arlene Tan . there’s someone in the comment ,who admitted ,he is Arlene’s brother said their mother is an Ustazah ….
It doesnt mean , your mother is an Ustazah ,then your faith will be strong as her .

p.s: its not impossible if the site just want to back up Arlene Tan ,because the site itself is supporting
FREEDOM OF SPEECH .and i usually doubted with people who support FREEDOM OF SPEECH .
for me , you cannot really depend on FREEDOM OF SPEECH ,because everyone will be RIGHT and TRUE..you can use FREEDOM OF SPEECH but in limited way and logically used.
people who practice FREEDOM OF SPEECH yang selalu love to twist /puzzle themselves about religions and the belief.because once you’re religious , you have limited thing to do ,you cant choose not to solah ,you cant choose not to believe in God ,you cant said i hate Allah , you cant say i hate Muhammad .and there , FREED dOM OF SPEECH comes and save them and will turn something that CANNOT in religion become something CAN for themselves .FREEDOM OF SPEECH will allow the LIBERALISM IN RELIGIONS.

there’s some silent atheists ,and there’s some loud atheists .i will respect more the silent one coz they never bother to insult other’s religions and they learn how to respect other’s sensitivity though they were different in belief .plus , i have some friends like that ,but non muslim lah .

On the other hand, we also have delusional bloggers like MENJ a.k.a @IbnJuferi who refuses to budge despite the overwhelming lack of evidence presented by GaySec. Ironically, one of his blogs is called Critical Thoughts.

In his post titled “I still believe that Arlene Tan is MHSAW“:

Call it gut feeling or a hunch. Having dealt with these apostate jokers/pathological Islamophobes online for so long, I can say for sure that there is definitely a connection between the two. It’s not really just the evidence brought forth by GaySec, it’s also how their line of thought and the portrayal of their ideologies are displayed on both Arlene Tan’s blog and MHSAW’s own crappy site. The flurry of denials from different people in the MHSAW camp makes me suspicious as well. One thing I do know about apostates is how they will band together to reinforce a lie or a false viewpoint (argumentum ad numerum), no matter how many times evidence is provided against it, in order to save their own scaly skins and ensure that their true beliefs are not exposed to the world.

It’s funny how MENJ had (mis)appropriated argumentum ad numerum (also known as argumentatum ad populum or appeal to the majority) against the “apostate camp”. Wasn’t it the many zealots in GaySec Facebook page who employed the same logical fallacy and came to the “certain” conclusion that Arlene Tan is Sitt Al-Wuzara?

Hey, if thousands of people like GaySec’s page, and all of them were quoting Quranic verses or hadith, surely GaySec was right, and by extension, everyone who supported them were right too? Breaking news, mate: NO.

He also claimed that the MHSAW camp is “shaking in their boots”:

The other side of the divide are shaking in their boots and are vehemently defending an individual whom they claim has no direct connection to or knew MHSAW personally. This makes me very suspicious. Would a criminal go to all lengths defending a stranger who has no connection to him / her for a crime committed by the criminal himself / herself? To what purpose does it serve? Also, considering how MHSAW and Arlene Tan had been commenting on the same thread (and in a different thread, Arlene Tan clearly admits feeling “trapped” by Islam, which puts paid to the claim that she is a practicing Muslim) casts doubt on any of the claims of these jokers.

At this juncture, and with the impeding body of evidence promised by GaySec in Part 3 of their OpsRamadhan agenda, I can only say two things:

1. That Arlene Tan and MHSAW are one and the same person, or;
2. Arlene Tan knows the identity of MHSAW and can lead the police to the “real” MHSAW.

I am leaning more towards Point 1, but hey, I can change my mind anytime. But I won’t accept any “evidence” (read: meaningless press releases) from these atheist jokers as “proof”.

Here’s a very well good reason for people to deny that Arlene is Sitt: there is a murderous mob out there who is out for her blood.

To many others who share MENJ’s view that

1. GaySec is automatically right, despite having NO evidence, and
2. Refuse to accept the confirmation that GaySec has NO case

We say this: the burden of proving (or disproving) Arlene as Sitt does not belong to Arlene’s supporters, but with GaySec. You made the accusation, now bring some reputable evidence to the table. Otherwise, take back your accusations, because someone’s life is on the line just because of your fanciful bullshit.

To end this update, last night we received a tweet from @AntiGaySec, with this accompanying image:

It’s disturbing how even someone who is against GaySec comes down with a religious angle. That quip about atheists being “ignorant smartass”? We’re still not sure whether it’s a compliment or an insult. What say you?

We will be waiting for GaySec’s part 3 of their accusations. But with such an unreliable case in part 2, what are the chances that part 3 will finally be convincing?

[Update (August 13, 2011)]: There will probably no part 3 of the accusation. GaySec had said on their Facebook page that their “findings” for part 3 are “with the authorities” and the information is “under investigation”. We call bullshit on this. If GaySec had wanted to assist the authorities in the first place, they would not need to release Arlene’s info and went straight with their “findings” back then.

[Update (August 13, 2011)]: GaySec has finally conceded that they’ve made a mistake and released an official apology to Arlene Tan.

Tagged as: Gaysec, harassment, hoax, Islam, libel, Malaysia