Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: ANONYMOUS IN THE NEWS  (Read 30607 times)
Ididntcomeback
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +14/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 14442


« on: February 13, 2009, 05:00:34 PM »

                         The ONTARION
University of Guelph`s independent student newspaper

"We are an organization and we need to pay our rent, our hydro. We need to exist. None of the money asked for is in excess of what we need [to cover] operating costs." ?Priscilla, auditor from the Church of Scientology

 

Scientology seems to possess all the components of a religion. It is a community with its own system of beliefs, practices, rituals and behaviours, seeking a connection with the divine life.

Despite this, the church has many enemies and has even inspired the formation of an activist group called Anonymous, whose members have concealed their identities. For these reasons, the Ontarion went to someone on the inside; an auditor from the Church of Scientology in Kitchener who coincidentally chose to remain anonymous herself, referring to herself as just Priscilla.

When asked what she would say to the group Anonymous, Priscilla replied,"If they're protesting something we actually believe then I'll have a discussion with them. But most of what they say is pretty outrageous and kind of ridiculous."

Her response seems more directed at accusations of alien stories such as the infamous tale of Xenu, evil intergalactic overlord.

When asked about aliens, Priscilla said, "usually people walk in here and its kind of funny they do want a religion that believes in aliens. They come in and they go 'Oh! You believe in aliens, right?' and I go 'Aww, no' and they're really disappointed."

However, Anonymous' website and videos make it clear that they are not out to persecute the beliefs of others. They protest activities that they believe to constitute brainwashing, misinformation, fraud, extortion and harassment.

Priscilla said that scientology's aims are innocent.

"It's basic [and] pretty simple. It's learning more about how the mind works, how the spirit works and how it relates to the body, the mind, and life. And then using that information to improve aspects of your life that you're having trouble with," she said.

As for the accusations of brainwashing, "Quite the opposite. The whole point of Scientology is to make you more individual, more yourself, and get rid of all of these other influences that try to control you and not let you achieve your goals. So it's actually the opposite. I'm not really trained in brainwashing, I'm not sure how it actually works...in the world of whoever came up with it... the CIA or whatever.

[In] everything you do in Scientology, you're completely aware of what's being done. Seeing for yourself that it works. You're not obligated to do anything you don't want to do. Anybody that came in, we could show them the course room, we could show them how the counseling works. There's no mystery to it at all," said Pricilla.

The process of becoming a member involvescourses about the mind, the spirit and life, proceeded by one-on-one spiritual counseling, called auditing. This past summer, I observed auditors conducting "personality tests" at the Toronto Exhibition, and had one done on myself. Tinkering with the dial on the back of his E-meter, my auditor said the same things the others around me had said: "You have a lot of stress. What's bothering you?" This was proceeded by a string of general personal questions about the sources of my stress and a pitch for Hubbard's first book on Dianetics.

Scientology remains voluntary throughout it various stages according to Priscilla.

"Nothing in Scientology is true unless it's true for you. There's no dogma, there's nothing that you're supposed to take on faith. So if somebody's doing it and they say, 'Whoa, that's not for me,' they can leave; we have no interest in making someone believe what they don't want to believe," she said.

In his CNN documentary 'Scientology and Me', John Sweeney has footage of public relations Spokesperson Tommy Davis literally stalking and harassing him for speaking to non-believers.

As for where the tenets of scientology originated, Priscilla assured that Hubbard's concepts weren't taken out of thin air.

"The way it was developed was very much through research into every field that could address the spirit or the mind, so psychology, ancient religions [and] current religions. Everything was investigated and looked into when L. Ron Hubbard was discovering what he was discovering because he wanted to see if there were parts of these religions and parts of psychology that could help people. He doesn't claim to have invented everything. He just looked into what man already knew and drew from that," she said.

Russell Miller's famous book Bare Faced Messiah: The True Story of L. Ron Hubbard exposes many of Hubbard's credentials and studies as fictitious. Miller was consequently harassed and attacked in court by the church. A visit to the Hollywood Museum, 'Psychiatry: An Industry of Death' may have you questioning whether Hubbard was likely to form any objective criticism of psychiatry.

Anonymous' major criticism is that unlike say, the Catholic Church, new members are not given source texts to study before signing up. Instead, they have to work their way up the ladder, spending more money for more 'training' and information.

"Yes, we sell our books and we sell our services," said Priscilla. "We are an organization and we need to pay our rent, our hydro. We need to exist. None of the money asked for is in excess of what we need [to cover] operating costs."

Eventually, the financial pressure to get results is immense. In a CNN interview with John Sweeney, actor Jason Beghe stated that he had spent close to $1 million before realizing it was a "scam."

Scientology is the only religion with its very own Celebrity Centre, begging the questions as to why these millions might be needed.

With files from Daniela Muller-Shapiro

http://theontarion.ca/viewarticle.php?id_pag=2244
Logged
Ididntcomeback
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +14/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 14442


« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2009, 05:15:06 PM »

Anti-Scientology Group Anonymous Wants You to Wear a Funny Mask this Valentine's Day

By Caleb Hannan in Hannan
Friday, Feb. 13 2009 @ 1:05PM

This year, forget the flowers and box of chocolates. Since nothing's tackier than a cliched Valentine's Day gift--and because your beloved is a unique little snowflake and wants to be treated as such--why not spend the day dressed up as Natalie Portman's sidekick in "V for Vendetta" and yelling at Operating Thetans (Bonus points if you spot a Level VIII)?

You know, quality time.

Nashville's version of Anonymous, the one-year-old Rick Rollin' Scientology haters, are planning an 11 AM VDay protest and (of course) they'd like you to join them. L. Ron's Plucky Gang of Misfits have had a relatively low-key* presence in Nashvegas for years now, but they'll soon be movin' on up, and out, of their Music Row digs.

Last June, the Church of Scientology Religious Trust bought the Falls School Business Center, that really impressive old elementary school on the corner of 8th and Edgehill, a block away from Greer Stadium. Dusting prints off the bones of this skeletal website, it seems the NashThetans intent is to create an Ideal Org in Nashville. Roughly translated, that seems to mean a really kick-ass building that will impress passer-by sufficiently that they may open up their wallets and spend money on bogus "Stress Tests". But again, that's a rough translation.

*Here's the question/reason behind this post...has anyone ever actually been approached by one of the Nashville Scientologists? There's an apocryphal story that says as soon as a local reaches a certain level of fame they get an unsolicited questionnaire from the group. But have any of you presumably normal people had any contact with the Hubbard Heavies?

http://blogs.nashvillescene.com/pitw/2009/02/anti-scientology_group_anonymo.php
Logged
Ididntcomeback
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +14/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 14442


« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2009, 07:36:57 AM »

  Church of Scientology falsely accuses internet group 'Anonymous' of 2007 school shooting

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Church_of_Scientology_falsely_accuses_internet_group_%27Anonymous%27_of_2007_school_shooting
Logged
Ididntcomeback
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +14/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 14442


« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2009, 07:44:14 AM »


Anonymous is interviewed on G. Gordon Liddy`s radio show.

Liddy`s claim to notoriety is that he was one of the
Watergate conspirators.
Since then he`s been a political commentator and
radio show host.
Here is the podcast. It downloads and can be played
at your leisure.

Worth a listen

http://feeds.radioamerica.org/podcas...6-03-09_H3.mp3
Logged
Ididntcomeback
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +14/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 14442


« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2009, 04:20:17 PM »

 Scientology protest group 'Anonymous' targeted in internet blacklist crackdown
20/03/2009 6:56:00 AM.  |

 

Scientology protest group Anonymous targeted in internet blacklist crackdown


A list of 2,395 websites which are considered unsuitable for Australian internet audiences has included a home base of 'Anonymous', the web-based activist group that made headlines by declaring war on the Church Of Scientology.

The list was purportedly leaked from the Australian Communications and Media Authority, and tables a group of websites supposedly facing a ban - although ACMA is denying the content is accurate.     

It features the URL details of an image board on which thousands of the protest group?s members discuss matters relating to their cause.

However, along with details of protests and the group?s concerns with Scientology practice, the image board contains a vast collection of gruesome and questionable material.

Images of pornography; including bondage and fetish material, graphic pictures of accidents, and questionable user-generated content is generally uploaded by members on a daily basis.

It is believed this material is the primary reason why the website was targeted for blacklisting by ACMA, the Australian Communications and Media Authority.

In its manifesto, Anonymous justifies its posting of the questionable material with a Darwinistic ?natural selection? approach to its process, and with an attitude promoting the freedom of information and ideas - irrespective of the gratuity of the content.

Despite this, illegal material, including child pornography, is not permitted by moderators.

Interestingly, the Anonymous image board in question is the birthplace of many popular, and now mainstream, internet cultural artifacts, including ?LOLCATS?, ?Fail/Epic fail/Epic Win?, ?Motivational Posters? and ?FTW (for the win)?.

If ACMA succeed in having the website blacklisted, Australian distribution of the image board?s URL could lead to criminal prosecution, fines of up to $11,000 per day, and prison sentences of up to 10 years.

http://www.livenews.com.au/Articles/2009/03/19/Scientology_protest_group_Anonymous_targeted_in_internet_blacklist_crackdown
Logged
anonyrat
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +6/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 484


« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2009, 02:42:56 PM »

A list of 2,395 websites which are considered unsuitable for Australian internet audiences has included a home base of 'Anonymous', the web-based activist group that made headlines by declaring war on the Church Of Scientology.
[..]
However, along with details of protests and the group’s concerns with Scientology practice, the image board contains a vast collection of gruesome and questionable material.

I presume they're taking about 4chan. But afaik (don't visit the site myself) chanology stuff hasn't been welcome there for many a moon...
Logged
OnceBitten
Editors
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +28/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 349

Seize the moment


« Reply #6 on: March 23, 2009, 02:51:18 PM »

Um, what's 4chan?  Never heard of it.
Logged
useful_anon
Editors
Full Member
***

Karma: +5/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 56

I have nothing else to do.


« Reply #7 on: March 23, 2009, 10:36:30 PM »

4chan is a website. Theres a whole bunch. 8chan etc. id advise keeping away, its quite renown for viruses, malware, spyware and what not. as i understand it anonymous is more or less 2 groups. the 4chan anons (where it started) and protest anons who 4chan anons hate. its all very confusing. haha. scientology tries to link protest anons with 4chan anons all the time.
Logged

WOG 4 LIFE
Ididntcomeback
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +14/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 14442


« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2009, 04:45:03 PM »

Nashville anons in the news.

See article and photos here...

http://media.www.vanderbiltorbis.com/media/storage/paper983/news/2009/03/23/Newsfeatures/Nashville.Anonymous.Protests.Scientology.Center-3679432.shtml
Logged
OnceBitten
Editors
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +28/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 349

Seize the moment


« Reply #9 on: March 24, 2009, 07:37:33 PM »

4chan is a website. Theres a whole bunch. 8chan etc. id advise keeping away, its quite renown for viruses, malware, spyware and what not. as i understand it anonymous is more or less 2 groups. the 4chan anons (where it started) and protest anons who 4chan anons hate. its all very confusing. haha. scientology tries to link protest anons with 4chan anons all the time.

Thanks Useful.  I was kinda being funny.  lol.
Logged
useful_anon
Editors
Full Member
***

Karma: +5/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 56

I have nothing else to do.


« Reply #10 on: April 02, 2009, 11:35:30 PM »

lol oh, soz, damn internets so hard to tell when people are being sarcastic or not. my bad XD
Logged

WOG 4 LIFE
Ididntcomeback
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +14/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 14442


« Reply #11 on: May 01, 2009, 12:20:08 AM »

From "the Irish Times."


For God's sake, why have blasphemous libel?


ANALYSIS: The proposal to make blasphemous libel an offence would likely criminalise many writers and publishers, writes CAROL COULTER

EVERY SATURDAY a group of young people, their faces hidden by masks or scarves, gathers outside the office of the Church of Scientology in Abbey Street in Dublin with leaflets and placards making serious allegations about the sect.

If the new law prohibiting publishing or uttering blasphemous matter becomes law, as proposed yesterday by Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern, they could face fines of up to €100,000 and have their homes raided by members of the Garda Síochána in order to seize the offending material.

For that to happen, a court will have to be satisfied the matter published is “grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion”, and that the outrage was intentional. These provisions came unannounced in a proposed amendment to the Defamation Bill, which was before the Oireachtas Committee on Justice yesterday (but was not discussed). The proposal from Ahern does not define “religion”, so there is no reason to imagine the Church of Scientology would not be protected by it from the publication of “abusive or insulting matter”.

What about other religious groupings and faiths? The proposed amendment makes the degree of outrage among adherents of any religion, in response to things said or written about them, a defining factor in determining whether an offence has been committed. We have seen elsewhere in Europe large-scale expressions of outrage by members of the Muslim community in response to films, books and cartoons. Books such as Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses and films and cartoons, such as those published by a Danish newspaper and which offended some Muslims, would almost certainly be criminalised in Ireland by the present proposal.

This is in marked contrast to the state of the law at present. The Constitution qualifies the right to freedom of speech, making it subject to “public order or morality or the authority of the State”, and says the publication of “blasphemous, seditious or indecent material” is punishable. The 1961 Defamation Act prescribed penalties but did not define the offence or any prosecutions.

In 1991, the Law Reform Commission concluded there was no place for an offence of blasphemous libel “in a society which respects freedom of speech”. “The argument in its favour that the publication of blasphemy causes injury to feelings appeared to us to be a tenuous basis on which to restrict freedom of speech,” it said. “The argument that freedom to insult religion would threaten the stability of society by impairing the harmony between groups seemed highly questionable in the absence of any prosecutions.”



In 1999 came the only case taken under this law, Corway -v- Independent Newspapers, where a man complained about a cartoon depicting a plump and comic caricature of a priest, who was holding a host in his right hand and a chalice in his left. He appeared to be offering it to John Bruton, Ruairí Quinn and Proinsias De Rossa, members of the government of the day which had sponsored the divorce referendum. They appeared to be turning away. Corway complained that it was an insult to the Catholic faith.

The Supreme Court, upholding a High Court ruling, pointed out that there was no legislation defining blasphemy and describing the offence of blasphemous libel. “In this state of the law and in the absence of any legislative definition of the constitutional offence of blasphemy, it is impossible to say of what the offence of blasphemy consists,” the Supreme Court concluded.

There the matter rested until the Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution, under the chairmanship of Seán Ardagh, reported last year, recommending the deletion of references to sedition and blasphemy in the Constitution. While there appears to be no appetite for an amendment to do so, there equally has been no conspicuous clamour to legislate to fill the void identified by the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, in the UK, where our blasphemy law has its origins, the law prohibiting blasphemy was repealed in July last year. The present proposal comes in an international context where a campaign seeking to outlaw the “defamation of religion” has been waged for some years, spearheaded by a number of Muslim countries in the United Nations and supported by the Vatican.

Last December, there was a vote on a resolution on “combating defamation of religion” at the UN, which was adopted by 86 votes to 53, with 42 abstentions. The resolution was tabled by Egypt on behalf of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference. Ireland, in common with all other EU countries, voted against.

However, at the Durban Review conference in Geneva last week (reviewing a 2001 UN conference on racism) references to “defamation of religion” were removed from the final document. At the same meeting, the human rights organisation Article 19 launched the Camden Principles, defending freedom of expression combined with the right to equality. They were drawn up with a high-level group of UN officials, representatives from other intergovernmental organisations, NGOs and academic experts.

Explaining Ireland’s vote at the December UN meeting, in response to a question from Green TD Ciarán Cuffe in the Dáil last month, Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheál Martin said: “We believe that the concept of defamation of religion is not consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights. It can be used to justify arbitrary limitations on, or the denial of, freedom of expression. Indeed, Ireland considers that freedom of expression is a key and inherent element in the manifestation of freedom of thought and conscience and as such is complementary to freedom of religion or belief.”

He went on to distinguish between this and discrimination based on religious belief and incitement to hatred, pointing out that Ireland supported a UN resolution on “Elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief.” Has our policy on the defamation of religion changed since last December and, if so, why?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0430/1224245681506.html
Logged
Ididntcomeback
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +14/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 14442


« Reply #12 on: May 07, 2009, 04:44:17 PM »

                           Scientology Protest Leads To Arrest

                                 The Nashville News.

Protestor Says Guard Shoved Him
Reported By Dennis Ferrier

POSTED: 3:56 pm CDT May 6, 2009

See article and video here

http://www.wsmv.com/news/19387488/detail.html
Logged
Ididntcomeback
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +14/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 14442


« Reply #13 on: May 09, 2009, 08:28:31 AM »

               Scientology Security Permits Not Valid


Permits Valid Day Before Event Occurred; Officers Not Clearly Identified
Reported By Dennis Ferrier

POSTED: 3:42 pm CDT May 7, 2009
UPDATED: 12:26 am CDT May 8, 2009

In a home video, a group of protesters walk toward the Church of Scientology on the day of the church's grand opening and are stopped by security guards, who knock one protester to the ground and have him arrested for criminal trespass.

The altercation happened 400 yards from the church, on the other side of the street.

Public Works pulled all of the permits taken out for the Scientology event. The permits -- all of them for sidewalk closing and lane blocking -- are for the wrong day. They're for the day before the event and expire before the scuffle occurred.

In addition, three of the five security guards were off-duty Spring Hill police officers working in Nashville, which can only be done if local police are notified and officers are wearing uniforms clearly identifying them as off-duty police officers.

"The armed people from the other county are not identified police officers," said John M. L. Brown. "You're looking for a problem."

Brown, a Fraternal Order of Police attorney, has been defending police officers for 32 years. He said he finds the officers' actions hard to defend.

"Nashville's a capital city, and there are protests in Nashville with some frequency," he said. "I don't think that mentioning a bologna sandwich is a recognized law enforcement tactic."

The security firm hired by the Church of Scientology was Hayes Security on Gallatin Road. A representative of the firm said that the matter is being turned over to its attorneys.

http://www.wsmv.com/news/19398540/detail.html

Logged
Ididntcomeback
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +14/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 14442


« Reply #14 on: May 12, 2009, 04:06:58 PM »

                       Teenager Pleads Guilty to Scientology Web Attack


A 19-year-old New Jersey man has pleaded guilty to knocking the Church of Scientology's Web site offline in a series of January 2008 online attacks.

By Robert McMillan

Mon, May 11, 2009 — IDG News Service — A 19-year-old New Jersey man has pleaded guilty to knocking the Church of Scientology's Web site offline in a series of January 2008 online attacks.

Dmitriy Guzner, of Verona, New Jersey, was part of an underground hacking group called Anonymous that has made the church a target of several attacks. He had been expected to enter a guilty plea when he was charged last October, but it was not formally entered until Monday, the U.S. Department of Justice said in a statement.

He faces 10 years in prison on computer hacking charges and is set to be sentenced on Aug. 24 in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

The attacks began Jan. 19 and managed to knock the Scientology.org Web site offline by hitting it with several bursts of unwanted Internet traffic. Called a distributed denial of service (DDOS) attack, it flooded the site with as much as 220Mb per second of traffic.

Anonymous promoted the incident with several YouTube videos. "For the good of your followers, for the good of mankind and for our own enjoyment, we shall proceed to expel you from the Internet and systematically dismantle the Church of Scientology in its present form," a creepy computerized voice says in one Anonymous video.

http://www.cio.com/article/492318/Teenager_Pleads_Guilty_to_Scientology_Web_Attack

Let this be a reminder to all Anons that only legal means should be used to bring down this criminal cult. 
If Dimitry had done his homework he`d have realized that the only people who`d have noticed that Scientology`s web sites were crashed were the scilons themselves.



Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9   Go Up
Print
Jump to: