I'd like to join in the twitter thing using that tag, but I don't have an account and I can't be bothered making one. If you have one I suggest that you tweet using that tag.
John Dixon a councillor in Cardiff (that's in Wales in case you don't know) made the following tweet when he was in London:
“I didn’t know the Scientologists had a church on Tottenham Court Road. Just hurried past in case the stupid rubs off.”
Naturally CoS decided to complain. Ok, maybe they have the right to, but seriously. Would you really complain about that? Would you?
Now I knew that CoS was thin skinned. Clearly I didn't know how thin it was.
The article I linked to above states the CoS claimed that the comments "impinged on the right to religious freedom". I'd like to see their reasoning for that, especially considering that Scientology isn't a religion in the UK.
Reading the Google update page for #stupidscientology a few people have pointed out that an anagram for Scientology is "Yes, not logic". That probably explains the reasons for this complaint.
Anyway, they have started their second submission period of Voices in Unison. But they also have put up the stories from the first one.
If you are someone who doesn't really know too much about Scientology, but wants to hear some stories about it then you should really go here.
These people are not celebrities, so they don't get the "baby-Scientology" that Tom Cruise goes on and on about. They are the regular people in proper Scientology, the one that critics and Anonymous don't like.
The people whose videos were taken down sent a DMCA counter notice.
Long story short they failed, the Australian (WARNING: Anna Coren Alert, expect stupid segues) and German reports are back up. However the video entitled To Anonymous/Scientology isn't.
I, like many others, believe that this "American Rights Counsel" is akin to the "Citizens Commission on Human Rights". It's just another "Church" of Scientology front group that allows the "Church" to influence people without getting its hands dirty.
Before I get on to the next bit, an open message to Google:
Basically all I can say on this is that the OSA really has failed here. Considering all that they are supposed to know about their SPs and critics they didn't seem to know that the Americans there couldn't actually speak German.
I'm vain enough to see if people post comments on this blog (although there is a rather funny one where it told me that I was replying to myself, when I was actually replying to a commenter). Anyway, I learned today that I got a reply on this post
"So, so, you are doing a review of my site without giving me a chance to say something. What did you think? That I am not a real person? Some ghost in the machine or what.
Anyway, I just updated the site. Maybe you like it.
- Louanne"
Well, umm... I don't really know what to say...
I doubt that you are a ghost in the machine, because I don't think that there are bots capable of writing sentences that mean something. In my defence when I wrote that I based what I knew about reviewing things on what I would, say, read in the paper. I didn't actually know that I had to tell you, but considering that you managed to find that post about a month after I posted it I don't really see what the problem is.
Still you are more then welcome to write a proper reply, and if it makes you happy I can provide a link to anything that mentions you in the future.
Mark Bunker's Youtube channel, xenutv1, has been taken down.
Scientology decided that the Jason Beghe interview (a news story about Beghe leaving is here). Bunker would have been posting the video interview he had with Beghe on youtube soon.
Now that might not happen because Bunker, I'm guessing, has been suspended over "hate speech" because he decided to use the internet to spread his message which shows Scientology as it actually is, instead of the sanitised version that they want to show us.
If THE WOG BLOG is right, then hopefully even my email which was bounced by the spam filter for some reason is having an effect.
Hopefully we will see a repeat of the VenomfangX incident, where he was suspended for posting a bunch of anti-Islam videos, which really showed what a racist guy he was, where a concerted effort by Youtube users who believe in free speech chose to stand up for the rights of this racist person and get him back on Youtube. Except that instead of a racist guy, we are supporting an Emmy Award winning journalist.
Scientology is afraid, because the internet has become what Radio Free Europe, or even West Berlin, was for Communism. Scientology is trying to control the net so they can appear to be a "peace-loving, helpful religion" when in fact they are a power-hungry, subversive, totalitarian cult.
All I hope is that Scientology will, through their actions, get themselves another entry in their already long list in Operation Foot Bullet.
It's a post chocka block full of Scientology goodness. So watch out for engrams, and strap your thetans in for this wild ride through the world of Scientology.
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.
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.
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?
Right?
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.
"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.
"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.
For the record I'm not saying that I wasn't not there on Waymouth St. not protesting Scientology.
But CoS did film the proceedings, not very subtly either. I'm sure that if they just stood outside doing it they would have had something much funnier to watch. Anonymous, although faceless, is very photogenic.
Even though I was in the area I didn't make the photo gallery on the Advertiser Website.
But I will be on Scieno-cam.
All that I will say about that is:
Obvious Camera is Obvious
And
Smile You're on Scieno Camera
I wonder how the protests in other parts of the world are going/have been or will be?
Well it looks like I am keeping somewhat up to date with things now. Found this through the Anon SA website.
Now that you have wasted 5 mins of your life watching that I hope you at least saw some of the things that I did.
Firstly they basically open their video on a quote mine. They don't actually cite the video in question so I can't check the facts properly but I feel quite safe in saying that they have edited the video to make Anonymous look worse then they actually are.
Secondly is that all that CoS have managed to do is (at least US wise) fall into the same trap that you see from other religious groups. They cite the US 1st Amendment.
Now I am not American. I base the next bit on what I have learned from Americans about this.
Somehow, it is quite possible to hold the opinion that you can freely practice your religion but somehow that annuls the bit that says that you have a right to say whatever the hell you want.
Australia is a little different. We have in our Constitution that the Commonwealth cannot prevent any religion from being followed (which is why the overturned legislation banning CoS in Australia was passed in the State Governments).
We have no protection of speech, but if CoS was to be stupid enough to sue someone protesting them they would have a new entry in Operation Foot Bullet. In trying to suppress free speech they would see themselves looking like gits and also ensuring that everyone in Australia would have a right to free speech.
If they won and the case went to the High Court and they won again there would be such an outcry that the government(s) (Either Federal or State) would end up passing legislation overturning a HCA ruling. If they lost in the HCA they would have set a precedent granting free speech, although it would be narrowed to say only organisations, it would be better then nothing at all.
Finally all they have done is shown what the label of "Anonymous" can do. It makes people feel quite safe, especially since CoS can't really do anything but whine. In a way they are crying "foul" because someone is basically following "Do unto others", that well known phrase in the Bible. If they can go around making phone calls and putting up posters accusing people of being a paedophile basically under the guise of "The Church of Scientology" (or some front group) then why cry when someone does the same to you?
If I were a "truther" I would be calling them "disinfo agents".
I never met him, but it does not mean that I haven't heard of him.
RIP Shawn Lonsdale, your work will not go in vain.
At this point may I suggest that you stop reading here.
Now I had said something in the JREF forum about his manner of death, but I thought it was something else.
The article above says:
" They found a garden hose stretched from the exhaust pipe of Lonsdale's car into a window of his home..."
I saw "exhaust" and "hose" and thought he was found in his car.
Except that he wasn't.
There is one thing that bugs me the most about this, why kill yourself in that manner? It seems to be rather complicated instead of killing yourself in the car.
They are waiting for a toxicology report though. I hope that you could still get some fingerprints off the hose but because it is in Florida I doubt that there would be any good ones.
Until they reveal the toxicology report and do a proper investigation (Lonsdale was on the receiving end of death threats) I think that he may have been driven to suicide, and this will go down in the history books as a successful example of "Operation Freakout"-like tactics being used by CoS.
The problem that I can see in such a death is that you need to determine if there was carbon monoxide present in his lungs. He was found at 12:20 pm so if there was foul play and he was murdered then I would most likely assume that they will find CO in his lungs because he might have been asleep.
12:20 was around the time that an odour was detected. If the odour was due to putrefaction then he would have to have died sometime on Thursday at the minimum. If not then the odour would be something in the exhaust fumes.
And now we get to the more interesting bit. If he was found with no CO in his lungs at all then it means that he was already dead. Unless it was an accidental overdose on something (which, given the circumstances seems to be pretty unlikely) then there would be a wound or presence of the drugs, that killed him.
If there are any drugs in his system that induce sleep but he wasn't taking them at all, it would mean that someone killed him and staged a suicide.
Although there is plenty of evidence that supports a motive for CoS to kill him, I don't really know if they did. It would be one of the worst things for them to receive publicity for killing a critic, it would be good for the critics though, but would CoS really kill someone for criticising them?
Strangely the answer based on available evidence suggests that they would. If they would really go ahead with it, I am not so sure.
Shawn's work will not go in vain, people like Anonymous will see to that, and we may also see his name remembered in what could only be called a battle cry.
May you rest in peace, free from all the troubles that you have had to face in the world.
The JREF forum has a few Scientologists. Recently one of them has mentioned that he has been on the receiving end of abuse because of his religion.
That is one problem with Anonymous. It suffers in real life from the same thing that you find on internet forums. People can say far more insulting things when they don't know where you are or even who you are.
The problem is that there are times where you can't really separate the religion from the person. This is something of a different case. The idea of Project Chanology, like any criticism that has been dealt against Scientology, is usually not against the religion itself, but against the actions of the organisation that is Scientology.
My proof?
Go on a little journey and learn about the Freezoners.
They are basically the Scientology version of the initial Protestants.
They had a problem with certain practises of the Church of Scientology and basically broke away. They follow Scientology principles like a Scientologist but one of their tenets is that it will be free.
They allow criticism of what they do and don't really care about it. In Germany they are pretty much free to do as they will because they obey the law and don't act in a manner that is contrary to democracy.
Compare that to the Church of Scientology, an organisation known for breaking the law (Operation Snow White), being a vexatious litigant by suing people to destroy them financially, libel and slander against SPs, and even blackmail. They cry persecution when they don't get things their way, but willingly persecute people who disagree with what they say and do, cry abuse against the mental health organisation but abuse their own through the RPF (here is a good article to read about this) and you can't say that Lisa McPherson wasn't abused.
The actions of CoS are hypocritical and manipulate freedoms that the law gives us to their advantage but willingly deny people of their rights, by censoring speech when it doesn't suit them.
An organisation that tries to destroy their critics (Operation Freakout for example) deserves to be picketed. The problem is that the only way to do this effectively is to be anonymous, which opens the door to abuse from the people who don't really deserve it, low org members and Public Scientologists.
The real people who deserve to be on the end of this abuse are either safely away from any protesters in their million dollar mansions (I mean proper higher ups, not celebrities) or are there filming the protests, recording the phone calls, and writing the press releases (the OSA) and also the SO who control the organisation.
They are the ones who should suffer, but don't, and the ones who suffer, shouldn't.
I've actually been a little lazy in regards to this. Project Chanology has been going on for quite a while now, on Sunday there were protests.
I was expecting there to be something about it in the newspaper on Monday because the Scientology office thingy (they have a fancy name for it) is only a few metres away from the Advertiser building.
I would have gone but I had to go to work on that day. And I didn't have a mask.
For those that don't know Project Chanology has its roots back in early 2008, when someone decided to post some Scientology videos of Tom Cruise getting some fancy medal of valour thing.
Anonymous took offence and started bombarding Scientology with some rather childish stuff and a controversial DDoS attack on their website, which people like Andreas Heldal-Lund denounced.
After that they decided to hold protests, be more peaceful, and that is what they did.
Operation Clambake did quite well when it came to posters. I think that it is because it is pretty much the place to go to learn about CoS.
According to The Advertiser 150 people showed up, so that is 50 less then in Melbourne and the same amount as Sydney, but as a percentage of population represents 0.01% of Adelaideans compared to 0.0036%, 0.0056%, 0.0020% 0.0027% of Sydneysiders, Melbournians, Brisbournians and Perthites (Perth based on the higher number).
Apart from allowing me to say that Adelaide did better as a percentage of population then the other Australian cities, there is another reason for me to say this.
CoS called Anonymous "cyber-terrorists" and they also said (from The Advertiser, the story has already been linked to):
"Anonymous is perpetrating religious hate crimes against Churches of Scientology and individual Scientologists for no other reason than religious bigotry"
This is the hypocritical statement of the _____.
A little interactive fun. Choose what you think fits the blank best:
Month
Year
Decade
Century
Millennia
Since Time Began
Since Xenu Convinced the Galactic Council That Forceful Movement of a Certain Percentage of the Population for the Purposes of Reducing Overpopulation by Killing them on Earth Was A Good Idea.
(Also I don't think hypocritical fits there, what should that word be?)
But then again Scientology considers any negative criticism to be an attack, and the people who do it to be criminals and religious bigots. Picketing CoS buildings is not a religious hate crime. I would ask them how it is but I am certain that they wouldn't give a straight answer or any answer at all.
What they want is to be able to do all this, on top of scamming people out of hundreds of thousands of dollars, and not want us to stand up and do anything about it. Well you know what Church of Scientology? You can't attack people who disagree with you and then cry foul when people do something that is far less violent or damaging then what you do. Google may have removed the googlebomb on dangerous cult but you know what, you basically are even with your religious status in Australia.
Besides, have you guys ever thought that maybe we like our engrams?
Before I start, I must stress that in Australia the organisation known as the Church of Scientology is considered under the law as a legal religion. So I think that it might be best that I say a little about it's legal history in Australia.
In South Australia, Western Australia and Victoria have at one point or another banned the CoS from operating.
Victoria passed the Psychological Practices Act, 1965 after the findings of the Anderson Report (or in it's formal name Report of the Board of Enquiry into Scientology).
"The Inquiry has revealed the real nature of scientology and its serious threat to the mental health of the community, and it is evident that its continued practice should not be permitted."
In 1968 the government of Western Australia passed the Scientology Act (1968), and South Australia followed suit with the Scientology (Prohibition) Act, 1968.
For those that don't know the Church of the New Faith was an organisation created by Scientology to counter the acts brought against them, but by that time Western Australia and South Australia had repealed their acts in 1972 and 1973 respectively.
And now with that very brief history of Scientology and the Law we move on to the present day.
This was reported yesterday in The Advertiser: Parent anger at religious 'advice' (In case something happens to the online version the printed versions details are: Kleinig X. 2007. "Parent anger at religious 'advice'" The Advertiser 29 October 29 p.23).
The briefest description would be that uniformed police officers have been found distributing Scientology related material at a Government school.
The version that I will give you is as follows.
Uniformed police officers went to Whyalla High School and distributed a pamphlet entitled "Whyalla High School presents the way to happiness, a common-sense guide for better living" after showing them a DVD on living a moral life.
There were two things that showed that it was a Scientologist production. The first was that the website it linked to was a Scientologist one. The second was that if you looked very carefully at the copyright information you would find out that it was written by L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology.
The book apparently did not contain any religious material. All well and good you think? Well no actually, this is what the police had to say:
"Police Assistant Commissioner Graeme Barton confirmed that two officers had visited the school to give lectures on bullying and that the claims of religious instruction would be investigated."
They were supposed to be giving a lecture on bullying. I fail to see where a pamphlet called "Whyalla High School presents the way to happiness, a common-sense guide for better living" has anything to do with bullying.
What makes it even more annoying is the blatant deception that the CoS has used to spread their "message". They used two uniformed officers to distribute a pamphlet that directed children to a site about Scientology, the pamphlet itself managed to convince parents that it was something from the Education Department, something that the department denies. What makes it worse is that this occurred in a Government school. They are places were proselytising is a big no no.
There is one other thing that makes it somewhat hypocritical.
They showed a DVD on morality, but they were acting in an immoral way, just like Scientology itself claims to be the most ethical group in the world, this was an unethical way of doing things.
If they don't seem to be able to gain more followers in a regular way, then maybe they should be looking at themselves and fixing what they need to fix?
I think that the name of the song that I am listening to fits well with this post...
