Firstly, according to Anon SA the theme for the next raid will be known as Operation Reconnect. I'm quite sure that Scientology already knows this considering their rather pervasive presence on the internet in regards to this.
Secondly, take a look at this from thunderf00t:
I hope that you enjoyed watching it. I know I did.
Thirdly, I found that Ex-Scientology Kids has a wall of shame.
By the way, if you haven't already, please check out some of the stories from ex-Scientologists but preferably after you have read this post, I still have more to say.
Anyway, the wall of shame links to a site called Scientology Myths (which is apparently a front site, and I can see why, and you will too without losing most of your IQ).
But to be fair the homepage does say the following:
"ScientologyMyths.info wants to find answers to the questions that are being asked all over the internet about Scientology, Scientologists, the Church and L. Ron Hubbard. Our goal is to find answers from independent sources, not only from Church of Scientology owned sites or anti-Scientology sites either. We pull our information mainly from court documents and other neutral sources and lay out the information for you to come to your own conclusions."So they want you to think of them as another Operation Clambake but they fail. Unless they want you to find answers without any impartiality at all, then they succeed quite well.
This is the Scientology Myths page on Anonymous.
The very first thing they mention on their "Anonymous" page is a link to the Wikipedia article on hate crimes. If you can be bothered to read the article at all, you will find the "seedy origins" of Anonymous, mentions of bomb and death threats, and take this little gem:
"One could say that Anonymous fails to clean its ranks from psychos and criminals but - without morals to protect it and cowardice as “party line” - is actually actively supporting terrorist activities."
So in other words, a decentralised organisation with no membership requirements, no member lists, and limited knowledge of who is a member of the organisation is supposed to have strong centralised leadership, membership requirements, member lists and the ability to check criminal and medical records?
And then they provide the Scientology Propaganda Video that "details" "death threats" against Scientology members by "Anonymous".
I've mentioned it many times before, but Anonymous provides the same protection as you would get with login names/forum names/avatars etc. on the internet.
And the other thing is that all the links provided support CoS. There is no evidence provided that supports Anonymous or even details what Anonymous is and does. Not even a Wikipedia link.
The Clambake section provides more evidence of the inherent bias in this site, and also shows a poor grasp of biology.
The Lisa McPherson page.
Ultimately can be summed up by:
"Some corrupt individuals tried to profit from the death of this girl and make a lot of noise about it. That's why you know about it."
The entire page supports Scientology, but they don't seem to mention some of the other things, like say Lisa being bitten by cockroaches.
But as evidence they supply the death certificate. I'll raise them some autopsy photos (WARNING: NOT SAFE FOR WORK, PEOPLE OF CERTAIN FAITHS, OR MINORS). As a side note, the blemishes on her back and the underside of her legs/arms is caused by livor mortis, where the blood has settled to the lowest parts of her body.
Now based on the pictures and the rather large number of wounds on her body, it seems rather odd to ignore this evidence and make it look like she was in a livid mental state.
On internet censorship. All you get is a quote from Scientology (this I would suggest you read, note the blatant hypocrisy) a mention of Operation Clambake (at least I think it is) with a pro-Scientology spin on it.
Operation Foot Bullet from Operation Clambake has a mention of it as well.
And you get a lovely link to the DCMA from the Scientology Myths site as well.
To close I will leave you with one last page. The page on Freezone.
Especially this snippet:
"Freezones are not religious in nature, they are money making ventures, originally started by Captain Bill Robertson."
So when the Freezoners were talking about keeping the tech free, they actually meant that you should charge people for it?
Or how about this (same page):
"I understand the largest Freezone group is in Germany, which makes sense, since Germany is well behind the curve in supporting religious freedom."
Because it doesn't count when it isn't your religion that is being practised right?
Oh wait, I forgot this.
"The "Cult of Greed" statement very much false. The Internal Revenue Service agrees that the Church of Scientology is not a for-profit organization."
I'm quite sure you can claim to be a non-profit organisation while actually being a for-profit organisation. It all comes down to what you show them, and who you blackmail.
It's good that someone, somewhere has mentioned to ESK, and probably other websites about this one, although it was quite clear anyway when you read certain pages that there is an inherent, and clear bias, on this site.
At least Operation Clambake provides links to Scientology sources.