The Internet vs Scientology

[Arthur_Parker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrkchXCzY70

The call to arms for the 10th of Feb may well backfire, if there's a weak turnout.

[schild]

Those videos are great.

Also, already mapped the location of the Phoenix scientology center. And my guy fawkes masks lay waiting.

[schild]

oh hay look what picture i found

[Signe]

Big deal.  Everyone has one.



I even have one.  Well, it's only a couple inches tall and came with the DvD, but I still have one!

[sidereal]

I use mine for a cup

[schild]

http://www.warrenellis.com/?p=5523

[Kitsune]

We'll see how impressed Warren Ellis is with anonymous when like six people show up to actually carry out the menacing threat posted by one guy on youtube.  Having a mobile mob mind roaming around on the Internet is fine and dandy, but when it comes time to actually act, the inherent laziness of mankind surfaces and makes their efforts fail spectacularly.

Plus, your target has to give a fuck.  That was the achilles heel in their cunning 'picket the fur con' plan.  The furries didn't even begin to give a fuck; fursuiters swarmed out to have their pictures taken with the picketers.  Anyone who looks forward to putting on a poorly-made theme park mascot outfit and running around in public in it is probably past being fazed by other peoples' opinions.

The scientologists do give a fuck, which is a big step up over the furry thing.  But I suspect that the whole lazy issue is going to come back up and sink this boat like it did the last.

[sidereal]

Maybe the furries and CoS could join forces.  I bet Tom Cruise yiffs.

[Simond]

Maybe the furries and CoS could join forces.  I bet Tom Cruise yiffs.

[Dtrain]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHseRSX42v8&feature=related

I LOL'ed.

[Tebonas]

So did I, until I realized they would have to kill me to not be a SP anymore - and they would be perfectly happy to do so.

[Dtrain]

Either that or lock you in a closet with Tom Cruise. YOU WONT do it infront of HIM!

[sidereal]

I'll do it in front of him.  I'll do it on his face.  Pampered bitch.

[Dtrain]

I'll do it in front of him.  I'll do it on his face.  Pampered bitch.

Be careful, he's an OT7. He can make your balls fall off with a single thought. Try to be an SP around him and I bet he gets that "I'm crazy" look on his crazy face.

Plus:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=I4jo6KkFfIc&feature=related

[sidereal]

Yeah, maybe he'll jump on my couch and screw up the springs so I have to buy a new one.

[WayAbvPar]

[schild]

http://harbl.wetfish.net/cosplay/ <- Map of locations

http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewforum.php?f=2 <- Forum for organization

[schild]

Guys. This scientology shit is fucking crazy.

Just crazy. I've read through a handful of the dox, I'm almost tempted to just post the entire thing on f13's frontpage.

From Child Dianetics (the fucking Intro for fuck's sake!)

There are two courses you can take. Give the child leeway in an environment he can't
hurt, which can't badly hurt him and which doesn't greatly restrict his space and time.
And you can clean up your own aberrations to a point where your tolerance equals or
surpasses his lack of education in how to please you.

When you give a child something, it's his. It's not still yours. Clothes, toys, quarters,
what he has been given, MUST REMAIN UNDER HIS EXCLUSIVE CONTROL. So
he tears up his shirt, wrecks his bed, breaks his fire engine. It's NONE OF YOUR
BUSINESS. How would you like to have somebody give you a Christmas present and
then tell you, day after day thereafter, what you are to do with it and even punish you
if you failed to care for it the way the donor thinks. You'd wreck that donor and ruin
that present. You know you would. The child wrecks your nerves when you do it to
him. That's revenge. He cries. He pesters you. He breaks your things. He
"accidentally" spills his milk. And he wrecks on purpose the possession about which
he is so often cautioned. Why? Because he is fighting for his own self determinism,
his own right to own and make his weight felt on his environment. This "possession"
is another channel by which he can be controlled. So he has to fight the possession
and the controller.

If you want to control your child, simply break him into complete apathy and he'll be
as obedient as any hypnotized half-wit. If you want to know how to control him, get a
book on dog training, name the child Rex and teach him first to "fetch" and then to
"sit up" and then to bark for his food. You can train a child that way. Sure you can.
But it's your hard luck if he turns out to be a blood-letter. Only don't be half-hearted
about it. Simply TRAIN him. "Speak, Roger!" "Lie down!" "Roll over!"

I'm pretty sure these documents are enough to get every scientologist dog child taken away from their owner parents.

[Paelos]

To be fair, isn't the intro sarcastically saying that training your child as a dog is a bad idea. I think they are saying you can do it, but at that point you've crossed a line into preferring control instead of raising your child. I could be wrong on that, but I read it that way. Then again, the first part seems to say, don't do shit when your child breaks his stuff in your face, which sounds like some sort of California weird-ass no consequences parenting.

[schild]

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10609174

Economist link.

Also, lawyers, as a "reporter" and someone who didn't steal the dox, would I be in the wrong in ANY WAY putting them on the f13 frontpage?

Or should I just post a series of links?

[Paelos]

My gut reaction as a non-law-talking-guy says links are probably safer than specifically hosting stolen private intellectual property.

[Roac]

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10609174

Economist link.

Also, lawyers, as a "reporter" and someone who didn't steal the dox, would I be in the wrong in ANY WAY putting them on the f13 frontpage?

Or should I just post a series of links?

Doesn't matter what your rights really are - if they find out about you, and care about the number of eyeballs you get, they may well contact you via lawyers.  Up to you whether you want to roll those dice.

However, it would be awesome if you do.

[schild]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyZD8zBesqs

Awesome. Just awesome.

[Dtrain]

Paelos is right about the dog metaphor, I think. The message is still batshit crazy and irresponsible.

L. Ron Hubbard did talk more seriously about dogs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSv7tz1Ygks

This is real actual part of what high ranking scientologists believe happened when the universe was created: we were all crapped out of a dog.

Of course now that I've told you this, your R6 implant should be firing off aaaaaany second now and you will die of pneumonia.

[Phildo]

Don't play politics with the front page.  Please.

[schild]

This isn't politics. It's good vs. evil. Or at least anti-hero vs evil.

The best comic book writers couldn't have come up with a situation this fantastic.

Try following it more. And you'll see why.

[Phildo]

This isn't politics. It's good vs. evil. Or at least anti-hero vs evil.

Should we add them to the Axis of Evil?  It's absolutely political, it's legal, and it's very possibly going to get dangerous when Scientology decides to fight back.  They probably have more money than the Mormons do.

[schild]

Scientology can have all the money in the world for this.

What makes it so fantastic, is they really have nobody to sue.

They have an enemy worse than the RIAA did with MP3 downloaders.

Basically, biggest threat to a cult. Ever.

[Paelos]

This isn't politics. It's good vs. evil. Or at least anti-hero vs evil.

Should we add them to the Axis of Evil?  It's absolutely political, it's legal, and it's very possibly going to get dangerous when Scientology decides to fight back.  They probably have more money than the Mormons do.

You have to admit, what they believe in and subscribe to does kind of cross the thresholds of normal fantasy into SUPER-FANTASY! I can even argue for other major religious beliefs having political angles, but Scientology is just silly and dangerous at the same time. I'd love to see a similar torch lit under all Christian Televangalists who are stealing money from their believers in a similar manner.

[schild]

That's because they attack something you believe in, Paelos.

Non-christians use those televangelists as a key point as to why christians are fucking crazy.

On that same note, they are nowhere near as dangerous or threatening as the CoS.

Televangelists are merely money-grubbing whores. Scienos are... a clear and present danger.

[Paelos]

That's because they attack something you believe in, Paelos.

Non-christians use those televangelists as a key point as to why christians are fucking crazy.

On that same note, they are nowhere near as dangerous or threatening as the CoS.

Televangelists are merely money-grubbing whores. Scienos are... a clear and present danger.

You're getting all goofy again. I just want to warn you in advance before the crash.

[WindupAtheist]

You mean when he's standing outside some scientology building by himself with a Guy Fawkes mask in his backpack that he won't put on once he realizes nobody else is there?

[Yegolev]

You have to admit, what they believe in and subscribe to does kind of cross the thresholds of normal fantasy into SUPER-FANTASY!

Oh, come on.  Paelos, I am not attacking you, let me say this up front.  You still have a standing offer of a free lunch anytime at any Atlanta eatery within range of my office.  That said, you can't really argue about which religion is more or less ridiculous.  By comparison, my religion is the least ridiculous of (most of) them.  I'd accept arguments which call Hubbard and/or his motives into question, but structure of a religion is not something one can factually debate.  In my opinion.

[schild]

There's a few 20 signed up for the phoenix protest. I'm not sure what the repercussions would be if I was recognized, whatwith working at GoDaddy, my details being posted uhmmm all over the internet, and easily recognized features.

If I said the CoS didn't scare me, I'd be lying.

Edit: Also, didn't we already decide in another thread that CoS isn't a religion? Let's not do that again. It gives too much credence to a terrorist group.

[Paelos]

You have to admit, what they believe in and subscribe to does kind of cross the thresholds of normal fantasy into SUPER-FANTASY!

Oh, come on.  Paelos, I am not attacking you, let me say this up front.  You still have a standing offer of a free lunch anytime at any Atlanta eatery within range of my office.  That said, you can't really argue about which religion is more or less ridiculous.  By comparison, my religion is the least ridiculous of (most of) them.  I'd accept arguments which call Hubbard and/or his motives into question, but structure of a religion is not something one can factually debate.  In my opinion.

Like Schild said, Scientology isn't a religion. He's right there's no need to walk that line. I'm just saying in terms of whacky things I've heard in my life, Scientology pretty much stands out as something I'd have to wonder why people even entertain as a reality. There are a few things that make that list, but honestly the shit they put out reads like it was written for a comic book. I figured the Jedi cult would have taken off better.