"War on Scientology" [NEW Articles and vids]

[Baby Eating Darth Vader]

WatcherPrime

Anonymous takes all kinds. Because you speak of it, you are it. By prolonging this debate, you are helping the cause.

In fact, I would like to invite you to research "Free Zone" Scientology. This is Scientology, as the CoS teaches, but without the serial abuses.

Not all are hackers, most are thinkers. The larger question to the critics is simple: What have you done aside from decry the theorical methods of Anonymous? In fact, has it not crossed your mind that the DDoS attacks might just be a large influx of unique hits, their wonderlust peaked by what Cruise is saying?

Regardless, the 'enlightened', as them tout themseleves couldn't keep a simple website up regardless of what truly went on.

Honestly, believing that they are all unique hits is rather retarded though razz

@Shaviv: If no one ever stood up to stupidity, Europe would be referred to as Das Drittes Reich now. Even if Anonymous cannot remove stupidity from existance, Anonymous will remove as much of it as Anonymous can.

[Snakitoni]

Scientology is the biggest religous hoax since Mormonism

[Raven Eraendal]

Scientologists

- I haven't seen them publicly preach any good morals apart from the right of free speech. The right which incidentally allows them to gain more followers without too much public criticism. Hell, free speech means giving the 'internet hate machine' the right to rant on.

- Not to mention the celebrities and the money. Seriously, I thought Top Gun was a good movie. It still is but I get a bad feeling each time I see one of those poor Soviet pilots being gunned down by that b*****d Scientologist. That and the b*****d had the nerve to indirectly call me a spectator. We'll see how much of a spectator I am when I gun you down... muahahaha. Crossed out to avoid a lawsuit.

- What is it with simply eradicating and annihilating everything the Scientologists perceive to be a threat ? I know about the Inquisition, the AK-47 toting Muslims etc.. but we've taken steps to stop the two. Inquisition and their methods were I think deemed to be unacceptable or something. It was dropped after humans rights came in a few centuries ago. And Muslims ? We've taken a lot of EXPLOSIVE steps to end them. So why not take the fight to the Scientologists ? The next evil cult ?

- Pseudo-science, E-Meters, thetans, the whole alleged history of the world according to them and bullshit that honestly makes me want to do some ethnic cleansing. Crude remark I know but the stupidity really hurts. If it were up to me, I'd recreate the Holocaust except that I'd probably replace concentration camps with those re-education camps that ol' China seems to be scarily fond of. Then the newly reformed SS would go out on 'hunts' involving bad a** lawyers of my own.

- Feel free to rant back at my rant but the hate machine will find you..

WE ARE SPARTA LEGION !!!

[Henry Dorsett Case]

~Toni-Sama~

Case: Amazing. You people still think the FBI investigates cyber crime? Not even close. If you're gonna try to bullshit me, at least make it believeable. Tell me the NSA investigates cyber crime, and I'll bite. Heck, even the Secret Service (who used to investigate it). But the FBI?

Yes, the FBI you petulant twit. The FBI Cybercrime division. Ever heard of it? Or do you just run your mouth all the time without thought to what comes out of it? You don't even know that the FBI Cybercrime division exists? Or have you just decided in your own little ignorant world that the FBI Cybercrime division doesn't actually do anything?

Let me guess. Your tinfoil hat is on too tight to contain your huge Anonymous ego. Go look up Kevin Mitnick. You're going to tell me he wasn't caught by the FBI now?

So far you've switched between claiming that the Feds don't care, to that the section of the Feds that investigates cybercrime isn't the section of the Feds that investigates cybercrime, to that there are "Feds" involved in the raids. All while claiming that you somehow know that the Feds aren't investigating this at all. Your Codeword Classification documentation, please?

Quote:

Which brings me to my next point: Group Participation. Why not join Anonymous in bringing down the church?

Because what little they do that is legal is the same stuff I've been doing for longer than 4chan has existed.

Quote:

You b***h about our methods even though we're clearly getting results.

And those results are what that is different than what every other anti-Scientology group has been doing for decades, child? Specifically, those results that don't have a chance of criminal prosecution?

Quote:

When that's over, Gaia won't be too far down the list. Lulz will be had; you can be pissy about us then.

That was just a threat of a raid against Gaia. Impressive, kid. Impressive.

[TeaDidikai]

Henry Dorsett Case

@Tea: When was the last time a Christian church had a known policy that people who were not Christian could be lied to, robbed, sued out of existence, libeled, slandered, or killed?

That completely depends on which part of the world we live in. That said, can you please provide a link that states Scientology believes this to be a valid practice as a matter of doctrine?

Quote:

Fair Game still exists, though they're not supposed to call it that anymore.

Citation? I am simply not well researched on the subject.

Quote:

They're not analogous to your garden variety Christian - they're the Phelps-level "evangelical" types.

What I am not seeing however- is support for why individuals amongst the organization are being counted as nutters when they do not condone such behavior. When I think about Tom Cruse, I see him being singled out because of his celebrity status. Is it possible that such treatment of individual Scientologists is simply guilt by association?

[Raven Eraendal]

Henry Dorsett Case

~Toni-Sama~

Case: Amazing. You people still think the FBI investigates cyber crime? Not even close. If you're gonna try to bullshit me, at least make it believeable. Tell me the NSA investigates cyber crime, and I'll bite. Heck, even the Secret Service (who used to investigate it). But the FBI?

Yes, the FBI you petulant twit. The FBI Cybercrime division. Ever heard of it? Or do you just run your mouth all the time without thought to what comes out of it? You don't even know that the FBI Cybercrime division exists? Or have you just decided in your own little ignorant world that the FBI Cybercrime division doesn't actually do anything?

It exists but it's main purpose in life is to track down *****. They do other things but hackers are a small problem. Besides, tracking a ***** down and charging him is going to get WAY MORE funding and positive PR than a hacker. This combined with the fact that the FBI is always competing for funds with other agencies means that hackers are given a small amount of attention.

[Henry Dorsett Case]

Raven Eraendal

It exists but it's main purpose in life is to track down *****. They do other things but hackers are a small problem. Besides, tracking a ***** down and charging him is going to get WAY MORE funding and positive PR than a hacker. This combined with the fact that the FBI is always competing for funds with other agencies means that hackers are given a small amount of attention.

I'll need sources for all of these statements. Verifiable ones, mind you.

At least I'll give you the credit Toni doesn't deserve - you at least know the FBI Cybercrime division exists, and that they give hackers any amount of attention. However, this goes against FBI claims that they have and utilize the following:

FBI

• A Cyber Division at FBI Headquarters “to address cyber crime in a coordinated and cohesive manner”;
• Specially trained cyber squads at FBI headquarters and in each of our 56 field offices, staffed with “agents and analysts who protect against investigate computer intrusions, theft of intellectual property and personal information, child pornography and exploitation, and online fraud”;
• New Cyber Action Teams that “travel around the world on a moment’s notice to assist in computer intrusion cases” and that “gather vital intelligence that helps us identify the cyber crimes that are most dangerous to our national security and to our economy;”
• Our 93 Computer Crimes Task Forces nationwide that “combine state-of-the-art technology and the resources of our federal, state, and local counterparts”;
• A growing partnership with other federal agencies, including the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, and others—which share similar concerns and resolve in combating cyber crime.

This is from this page, which is only about the FBI's Cybercrime Computer Intrusions department. Not the "Innocent Images" push, not the Anti-Piracy group, and not the Private Sector partnership. Just the section that deals with hackers, creators of malware, viruses, and those who perpetuate fraud. Ooh, there's even a story of how the FBI caught the guys who wrote Zotob in 2006.

@Tea: Go read up on Fair Game - the Wikipedia article has a very good set of source citations that I'd just be parroting. There's also this set of HCOPL texts that explain it in similar detail. It's a set of direct orders from Hubbard, not the words of some small powerless group. Besides, your claim that "individuals amongst the organization are being counted as nutters when they do not condone such behavior" is shaky; the top level of the organization is the problem, and the organization that is being singled out. In other words, the people like David Miscavige and Helena Kobrin who still use tactics legal and otherwise to harass any "enemy" of Scientology. Also note that in the 18 Oct 1967 HCOPL that the "Enemy" status, which leads to "Fair Game", begins with the terminology "SP Order". SP (Suppressive Person) is a term given to those outside the religion, more or less a step up from PTS (Potential Trouble Source). We're the people who have too much "entheta" to ever get our "Ethics in", hence we cannot be "processed" or "Cleared". We will never be "Operating Thetans", and are probably "below 1.1 on the tone scale", so we should be "disposed of quietly and without sorrow".

[TeaDidikai]

Henry Dorsett Case

It's a set of direct orders from Hubbard, not the words of some small powerless group.

From the citations provided it applies to people who are actively trying to enfringe upon the rights of Scientologists- and it would appear that Hubbard addressed that there is potential for abuse of this towards otherwise civil human beings in a lecture from July of 66. So it would appear that these aren't direct orders for Scientology to treat the general populous in such a way as by following the sources, he also stated in Scientology Ethics and Judicial Matters: The Antisocial Personality that perhaps only 2.5% of the population counts as Suppressive Persons.

Quote:

Besides, your claim that "individuals amongst the organization are being counted as nutters when they do not condone such behavior" is shaky; the top level of the organization is the problem, and the organization that is being singled out. In other words, the people like David Miscavige and Helena Kobrin who still use tactics legal and otherwise to harass any "enemy" of Scientology.

I don't see this as shaky. If we apply the same standard to the world political climate, as a citizen of the US you should be held accountable for the actions of Bush. After all, "the top level of the organization is the problem, and the organization that is being singled out".

And let's face it, if they use legal tactics to address issues raised by those who are seeking to harass them- where is the wrong? Does our judicial system not allow for such?

And the "otherwise", well, illegal action is illegal action- and the slandering of individuals within a group for the action of others isn't any more just than condemning any other whole population for the action of a few members.

Quote:

SP (Suppressive Person) is a term given to those outside the religion, more or less a step up from PTS (Potential Trouble Source).

This isn't accurate according to the doctrines of the Church of Scientology.[cite]

[Shaviv]

Military force is a good answer to military force. It's a bit ridiculous to compare the second world war / great patriotic war against the fascist nation-states of Germany and Italy to this Project Chanology. You can fight states, armies, industrial machines. You cannot really fight ideas with force.

Among other things, force legitimates the oppressed ideology.

[A Liberal Media]

Henry Dorsett Case

Right. Because the Feds never take more than a few days to catch someone..

b***h, please. the FBI has known all about /b/ since /b/ was /b/. they know all about the CP, the cyberterrorism, the raids and all the felonies. they've had ample evidence to have moot against a wall and every ounce of information he knows about /b/tards forcibly removed by the court for years.

They don't bother us. they're not going to bother us now.

[Henry Dorsett Case]

Tea, you've again missed my point and reasserted a claim that I'm showing to be false. We're not against Scientologists. We're against the religious organization itself. Unfortunately, a number of people in such organization contribute to the problems, including low-level managers of the Narconon facilities and small Org leaders. You're claiming we're singling out individuals; I'm saying we're not. Your argument is shaky. You just keep reasserting whatever you want to believe, though; have fun with that.

You're also, in claiming the "infringe[ment] of rights of Scientologists", kind of ignoring the fact that a family who doesn't want to comply with a Disconnect Order (oh, right - PTSes are reconciled so swiftly by the CoS that children are told to disconnect from their parents if their parents speak against Scientology!) is labeled Suppressive. People who expose the fraudulent doings of the Church are labeled Suppressive. And if the government doesn't let Scientology do its thing, they'll be labeled Suppressive as well. That includes if the FDA had sued Scientology in 1965 for their use of an e-meter as an unapproved medical device. Do I need to show you the Dead Agent pages so you see how the Church libels people who are labeled Suppressive? Those "rights" apparently include the "right" to libel people, to deny them medical care when they choose it, to put them in makeshift prisons, to abuse children, to split up families for ideological differences, to pressure people into signing over their property to pay for auditing, to create front groups that lie about their tie-ins to the religion, to create rehabilitation facilities that employ practices that are ineffective at best and dangerous at worst, to practice medicine and call it religion (do remember that Dianetics wasn't originally started as a religion, but a scientific process counter to psychiatry), to conduct raids on Federal facilities and steal classified documents with the intent of creating Dead Agent packs, to attempt to influence the government and courts of foreign countries, to declare people as under the condition "Treason" when in a country that believes in execution for such...shall I continue?

And you're going to take a PR page from a group that has been shown to lie about itself as counter proof to the internal memos thereof? Tea, I know you love playing Devil's Advocate, but at least try to do it with a source that's better than internal documents. Oh, by the way, that 2.5% of the population amounts to (assuming a world population of 7 billion)175,000,000 people that are Suppressive. That's ignoring other sources that claim that Hubbard stated that 20% of mankind (1.4 billion people) is Suppressive, but that 2.5 percent of that number is "Truly Dangerous". The 20 percent antisocial (that'd equate to that magic less than 1.1 on the tone scale) number comes from this page (inaccessible at time of writing), a site that is also owned by the CoS.

@A Liberal Media: And no one on /b/ has ever been v&? You're absolutely certain there's no classified investigation? I'll assume you're FBI with Codeword clearance and can back this up by illegally disseminating classified documents, then?

[LeafyJim]

Scientology is evil.They took Will Smith!!!

[Zeo Proctor]

Raven Eraendal

Henry Dorsett Case

~Toni-Sama~

Case: Amazing. You people still think the FBI investigates cyber crime? Not even close. If you're gonna try to bullshit me, at least make it believeable. Tell me the NSA investigates cyber crime, and I'll bite. Heck, even the Secret Service (who used to investigate it). But the FBI?

Yes, the FBI you petulant twit. The FBI Cybercrime division. Ever heard of it? Or do you just run your mouth all the time without thought to what comes out of it? You don't even know that the FBI Cybercrime division exists? Or have you just decided in your own little ignorant world that the FBI Cybercrime division doesn't actually do anything?

It exists but it's main purpose in life is to track down *****. They do other things but hackers are a small problem. Besides, tracking a ***** down and charging him is going to get WAY MORE funding and positive PR than a hacker. This combined with the fact that the FBI is always competing for funds with other agencies means that hackers are given a small amount of attention.

Well... just a piece of info, taken from the first press release (at bottom):

Press Release

Anonymous played a major role in the capture of Canadian ***** Chris Forcand.

[Vryko Lakas]

WatcherPrime

Anonymous takes all kinds. Because you speak of it, you are it. By prolonging this debate, you are helping the cause.

It's helping the cause of Anonymous to question their motivations and find only self-aggrandizement and complete, out-of-hand dismissals of any ethical considerations coupled with blatant disregard for the issue of a person's civil rights while simultaneously claiming to do this for the right reasons? And here I thought Scientologists were deluded.

The mentality shown so far by the apologists of Anonymous is simply to say "Ooooh, look! Scientology is evil, therefore we can do no wrong in how we treat them!" It's the same rationalization used in every instance of lynch mobbing or institutionalized persecution depriving the civil rights of people some group or other has deemed unworthy of said rights. You may not be stealing anybody's land or ethnically cleansing a population, but the rationalization is basically the same.
I keep probing for comprehension and substantial rebuttal, but all I'm met with is s**t I already know: "LOL SCIENTOLOGY IS BAD K?" Sorry, that's not good enough. It takes more than a slew of accusations to justify depriving somebody of their rights.
Hell, nobody has even demonstrated how this is supposed to send the message that the CoS is evil rather than come off as another juvenile internet prank.

Here's what I don't want in response to this post:
-A laundry list of Scientology crimes and horrors, I probably already know more of them off the top of my head than you do.
-Another wankfest for the latest raid or video or whatever.
-Another flamebaiting non-reply from Toni-Sama that equates to a shitting dicknipple of a response.

So, with that in mind would anybody care to try again?

[Zeo Proctor]

Also, I feel as if some people are siding with Scientology just to oppose Anonymous. I'd like to say something about that. Anonymous is everyone who wishes to be so. We are intelligent, we are ignorant. We are young, and we are old. We are the little voice in the back of your head that wants to stand out and sink into the anonymity all at once. How many of us are there? A lot. As with all groups of a diverse population, there will be a certain hassle in uniting all of them. Not all of Anonymous are mega hackers, nor are we all script kiddies. Not all of us are ***** or transvestites... Everyone is someone, we are all Anonymous, but no one is everyone.

There will be Anons who 'do it for the lulz' and end up doing something illegal and giving us all a bad name. It happens all the time. But we are not all like that. The majority of us are banding together to get something accomplished, the right way. Think of it this way.

Was every German a Nazi?

Is every Muslim a terrorist?

Is every Southern white guy a Ku Klux Klan member?

Think about that. Don't judge who you don't know by the statistics.