WHAT JENNA MISCAVIGE REALLY HAD TO SAY
anonymous...@gmail.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L5RgJfef6w&feature=related
http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?p=289965&highlight=#289965
I hope this is real.
Sincerely,
Anon
anothers...@hotmail.com
>
> I hope this is real.
>
> Sincerely,
> Anon
It IS for real and I was disappointed in the Inside Edition (whatever
it is called) that, while covering some important things, completely
missed the point of Jenna's letter.
David Miscavige and his blood relatives ARE estranged. If scientology
practices the OPPOSITE of disconnection as Karen Pouw's statement on
behalf of scientology states -- then why is it that their very
leader's family is fractured and broken?
The practice of "Disconnection" is alive and well in scientology.
Make no mistake.
:(
Another Surfer
Quaoar
Her presentation was short and very sweet. I suspect that she will
return in a broader, more detailed presentation in a week or two.
This will give Davie time to make diplomatic (sic) representations to
Bulgravia. He will have boarded the Freewinds with enough gold,
platinum, and The Way to Happiness books, to buy his way into wherever
he needs to go.
Q
barb
I think she made the situation pretty clear when she was asked why she
stayed in Scientology when her parents left.
"Why would I leave to go with people I don't know?"
Scientology. Keeping families "together" for over 50 years.
--
barb
Chaplain, ARSCCwdne
buy my book!
http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=1198812
read my page! (thanks, R. Hill!)
http://www.xenu-directory.net/critics/graham1.html
visit my store!
http://www.cafepress.com/birdville
barb
Let's hope all that heavy cargo doesn't shift...
Vandar
> Bump this thread so that it stays above $ci-fag sp4m
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L5RgJfef6w&feature=related
"anonymous" really needs to find an actual human to narrate. That
electronic, emotionless voice is annoying as hell and detracts from the
message they are trying to convey.
As soon as I heard it, I immediately stopped watching the video and just
went to read the actual post.
Narrate it yourself, guys. They aren't going to track you down through
the sound of a voice. Is there no one with decent elocution among you?
banchukita
I donno...I think it gives it a nice sci-fi kind of flavor that
resonates well with the issue, and is symbolic of the point that
(unlike Scn, Inc.) it's not all being run by one voice.
-maggie, human being
Vandar
I don't think it adds a sci-fi feel to it. It's like listening to Ned
from South Park. Using a narrator doesn't imply that it's being run by
one voice. It implies that "anonymous" is speaking with one voice. They
could even ask one of the known critics to do the narration for them,
thereby maintaining their veil of anonymity.
A consistent human narrator would also help confirm the authenticity of
the message.
As it is now, anyone could post any message they want using that exact
same electronic voice and claim it's from "anonymous". If someone did
that and the message was "the pickets on the 10th are called off", that
would throw a serious wrench into the works, as some people planning to
picket would believe it's an authentic message for and from "anonymous".
JAFAW
"Vandar" <vand...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aEhqj.3535$7d1....@news01.roc.ny...
*sigh*
Ya just don't geddit, do ya.
Hartley Patterson
> As it is now, anyone could post any message they want using that exact
> same electronic voice and claim it's from "anonymous".
Anyone who comes up with a better mousetrap gets imitated and ripped off.
That's how we chattering monkeys do things! It was an excellent publicity
stunt that attracted lots of attention by combining several memes.
I assume Anonymous is sensible enough to drop the format when it has
outlived its usefulness.
--
Hartley Patterson
http://www.newsfrombree.co.uk
http://news-from-bree.blogspot.com
Alexia Death
wrote:
> I assume Anonymous is sensible enough to drop the format when it has
> outlived its usefulness.
the voice of one man. But the machine... Anybody can speak with the
voice of anonymous, but it will be a message from anonymous if it
resonates with the people that form this movement in a way that they
will desire to pass it on. Otherwise it will be forgotten and becomes
fake because it has NO support... Simple... Elegant... Unbeatable :)
Vandar
Oh, I get it. If that's the best reply you could come up with, then it's
obvious you don't get it.
banchukita
> JAFAW wrote:
> > "Vandar" <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't think you do.... Perhaps you still think there are actual
leaders within the anonymous collective? Simply, there is no one who
has the authority to "call off" the pickets. It's not linear or
heirarchic. And they all know it.
-maggie, human being
Vandar
> On Feb 6, 3:19 pm, Hartley Patterson <hptt...@daisy.freeserve.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>I assume Anonymous is sensible enough to drop the format when it has
>>outlived its usefulness.
>
> It is needed as long as anonymous exists. If a human voice speaks its
> the voice of one man. But the machine... Anybody can speak with the
> voice of anonymous,
Including the cult they are trying to combat. That's the problem. When
openly communicating with allies in an attempt to coordinate an
"attack", you do not want to use a method that the target of the attack
can easily imitate.
> but it will be a message from anonymous if it
> resonates with the people that form this movement in a way that they
> will desire to pass it on. Otherwise it will be forgotten and becomes
> fake because it has NO support... Simple... Elegant... Unbeatable :)
"anonymous" seems to have a very high opinion of itself.
Vandar
I never thought that.
> Simply, there is no one who has the authority to "call off" the pickets. It's not linear or
> heirarchic. And they all know it.
As do I. The point is that the method of communication is inherently
flawed. The cult hasn't picked up on that, which is a good thing. If
they did pick up on it and throw a similar message out there calling off
the pickets, some people would believe it authentic and "anonymous"
would have to scramble to undo the damage.
barb
eerie, ominous feeling.
Reading or watching, at least you got the message. :)
barb
No. We're not that credulous. There has already been disruptive
misinformation put out, the date of the event, for example. Anonymous
isn't a bunch of naive sheep. Nor are the critics. These people have
come up to speed incredibly fast. No Scientology shenanigans is going to
fool them. They know what to expect.
So does Scientology. Expect us.
John Dorsay
> No. We're not that credulous. There has already been disruptive
> misinformation put out, the date of the event, for example. Anonymous
> isn't a bunch of naive sheep. Nor are the critics. These people have
> come up to speed incredibly fast. No Scientology shenanigans is going to
> fool them. They know what to expect.
>
> So does Scientology. Expect us.
One of the real cool effects of the Anonymous action is the spanning
of generations.
I asked my 16 year old daughter if she was familiar with Anonymous
Yes. Did she know about the planned picketing of the nut cult? Yes.
Was she interested in participating? Yes.
I told her I was thinking about picketing one of the local cult
franchises with Anonymous and she could come with me if her mother
agreed. Well, my daughter was so keen on that suggestion, there was
no way my wife would have *dared* disagree.
Guess who's going to the picket?
John
barb
Whatever. Drop it. Anonymous isn't going to change its format because
you don't like it. So let's talk about Jenna Miscavige, shall we?
Remember, that was the subject before you dragged it off in a
nonsensical direction.
Alexia Death
On Feb 6, 3:45 pm, Vandar <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Alexia Death wrote:
> > It is needed as long as anonymous exists. If a human voice speaks its
> > the voice of one man. But the machine... Anybody can speak with the
> > voice of anonymous,
>
> Including the cult they are trying to combat. That's the problem. When
> openly communicating with allies in an attempt to coordinate an
> "attack", you do not want to use a method that the target of the attack
> can easily imitate.
The can imitate the voice but they cannot imitate the message because
the message is against them. And the message is the only thing that
matters, the message is what makes Anonymous. The voice is just a
tool.
> "anonymous" seems to have a very high opinion of itself.
Anonymous has no opinion of it self. It just is. It is just the way it
works.
And I am not anonymous. Anybody with half a clue about IT can trace
me. I have simply watched and and tried to understand this movement
since it was still young... And I believe I DO understand it.
Vandar
> Vandar wrote:
>
>> Alexia Death wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 6, 3:19 pm, Hartley Patterson <hptt...@daisy.freeserve.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I assume Anonymous is sensible enough to drop the format when it has
>>>> outlived its usefulness.
>>>
>>>
>>> It is needed as long as anonymous exists. If a human voice speaks its
>>> the voice of one man. But the machine... Anybody can speak with the
>>> voice of anonymous,
>>
>>
>> Including the cult they are trying to combat. That's the problem. When
>> openly communicating with allies in an attempt to coordinate an
>> "attack", you do not want to use a method that the target of the
>> attack can easily imitate.
>>
>>> but it will be a message from anonymous if it
>>> resonates with the people that form this movement in a way that they
>>> will desire to pass it on. Otherwise it will be forgotten and becomes
>>> fake because it has NO support... Simple... Elegant... Unbeatable :)
>>
>>
>> "anonymous" seems to have a very high opinion of itself.
>>
> This was the best explanation I've read. You still don't "get it."
Uh huh
> Whatever. Drop it. Anonymous isn't going to change its format because
> you don't like it.
And I'm not going to "drop it" just because you don't like it.
> So let's talk about Jenna Miscavige, shall we?
>
> Remember, that was the subject before you dragged it off in a
> nonsensical direction.
I'm offering constructive criticism. If you don't like it, then feel
free to exercise your right to not reply.
Vandar
You claim not to be that credulous, while in the same breath claiming
you aren't a bunch of naive sheep, came up to speed incredibly fast, and
can't be fooled by the cult's shenanigans, and end with "expect us".
That's haughtiness, not humility.
Vandar
> Vandar wrote:
>
>> anonymous...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Bump this thread so that it stays above $ci-fag sp4m
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L5RgJfef6w&feature=related
>>
>>
>> "anonymous" really needs to find an actual human to narrate. That
>> electronic, emotionless voice is annoying as hell and detracts from
>> the message they are trying to convey.
>> As soon as I heard it, I immediately stopped watching the video and
>> just went to read the actual post.
>>
>> Narrate it yourself, guys. They aren't going to track you down through
>> the sound of a voice. Is there no one with decent elocution among you?
>>
> They're using it for effect and I think it works quite nicely for that
> eerie, ominous feeling.
>
> Reading or watching, at least you got the message. :)
I got the message a long time ago - before the cult ever popped up on
anonymous' radar. I'm familiar with the chans and ebaum. I watched the
games they played with Hal Turner, but his site remains and his ignorant
followers remain. The net effect was zero.
While the true critics are certainly benefitting from anonymous'
participation. In the long run, I don't believe it's anonymous is going
to have a positive impact on their cause. They'll attack the websites,
coordinate protests, post various criticisms throughout the web, get
their "lulz", and move on to something else. Meanwhile, the people who
are personally invested in disarming the cult will still be fighting the
good fight. They aren't in it for the lulz.
anonymous...@gmail.com
There are no leaders. There is no centralization. No one is making
decisions.
The collective responds when each of us decides that it is in our best
interest.
To put it simply:
Anyone speaking for anonymous..... ISNT.
anonymous...@gmail.com
> barb wrote:
> > Vandar wrote:
Exactly. What do you think we are, a standing army?
In lulz we trust.
R. Hill
<snip>
> There are no leaders. There is no centralization. No one is making
> decisions.
> The collective responds when each of us decides that it is in our best
> interest.
>
> To put it simply:
> Anyone speaking for anonymous..... ISNT.
No leader? Argh... the final part of that documentary got me thinking
there was a leader:
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/scientolulz
Ray
Friendly Xenu
>anonymous...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Bump this thread so that it stays above $ci-fag sp4m
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L5RgJfef6w&feature=related
>"anonymous" really needs to find an actual human to narrate. That
>electronic, emotionless voice is annoying as hell and detracts from the
>message they are trying to convey.
No it doesn't. The computer generated speech is part of the success
of Anonymous. It's sinister but non threatening.
---
Starbucks: drink the coffee and then break the windows
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,972865,00.html?imw=Y
Friendly Xenu
>Alexia Death wrote:
>> It is needed as long as anonymous exists. If a human voice speaks its
>> the voice of one man. But the machine... Anybody can speak with the
>> voice of anonymous,
>Including the cult they are trying to combat. That's the problem. When
>openly communicating with allies in an attempt to coordinate an
>"attack", you do not want to use a method that the target of the attack
>can easily imitate.
It's not a war. Nobody cares if the Scientology crime syndicate
produces videos with computer generated speech. Scientology forges
bomb threats against its own business offices, commits arson against
their own buildings, and no end of criminal activities to try to
play pretend they're some how a "persecuted religion." Everyone
gets that. If they produce videos claiming to be from Anonymous,
big whoop -- they've done it before only with a different medium.
Friendly Xenu
>Guess who's going to the picket?
I really hope that you -- and everyone -- get lots of photographs
and video and make them available as close to real time as possible.
Alexia Death
critics will get a nice boost from it. And young people who never
thought of activism or standing up for anything will get an
unforgettable experience. They are the next generation politicians,
mayors and human rights activists. I cant forget that anonymous young
man in a suit from Orlando protest video reading out a speech of
grievances against the dusk sky... I may be a hopeless romantic but
that must have given him SERIOUS kicks. Maybe enough to stand up again
for a worthy cause but then no longer anonymously...
> In lulz we trust.
To LULZ! :)
Vandar, The Anonymous is expression of the public opinion that Co$ is
a problem and a threat, a force empowering critics like WBM, Dave and
Tory to be heard by making the common person passing protests on 10th
to ask themselves "Why are they protesting?". Anonymous cannot be
questioned, but WBM can and he has the answers! WBM is wise. It was
not planned this way... It was not planned at all. It just happened.
Suddenly a Legion people became aware of the lurking evil and that
awareness spread all over the world at the speed of light in
Internet's complex social network. Aren't you glad it did? If you are
then just enjoy it. :)
anonymous...@gmail.com
Wise beard man is wise. This will probably die down a lot after the
10th, but it will create enough media blitz to inform the general
public about the crimes of Co$ against the populace, and create a
voice for dissent. Anonymous has a very short attention span. It's
impossible to guess how we will evolve after the 10th, but I'm hoping
that this is just the first in a spree of justice and activism brought
to you by Anonymous. Hopefully, the script kiddies will learn how bad
DDos is for our rep, and stop doing illegal activities..... but like
I've said over and over again: it's not for us to decide what
Anonymous does or doesn't do... and anyone speaking for Anonymous....
ISNT
Vandar
> Vandar <vand...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Alexia Death wrote:
>>
>>>It is needed as long as anonymous exists. If a human voice speaks its
>>>the voice of one man. But the machine... Anybody can speak with the
>>>voice of anonymous,
>>
>>Including the cult they are trying to combat. That's the problem. When
>>openly communicating with allies in an attempt to coordinate an
>>"attack", you do not want to use a method that the target of the attack
>>can easily imitate.
>
>
> It's not a war.
*sigh*
I didn't say it was.
> Nobody cares if the Scientology crime syndicate
> produces videos with computer generated speech. Scientology forges
> bomb threats against its own business offices, commits arson against
> their own buildings, and no end of criminal activities to try to
> play pretend they're some how a "persecuted religion." Everyone
> gets that. If they produce videos claiming to be from Anonymous,
> big whoop -- they've done it before only with a different medium.
Oh really? Show me a video they have produced claiming to be from anonymous.
Vandar
No, I think you're a bunch of sitting keyboard jockeys.
> In lulz we trust.
Come Monday, what do you think will be different?
Vandar
With a little help from Tom Cruise's insanity, MB is how I became aware
of it a long time ago. A little googling, links to a few videos on
YouTube, links to xenu.net, etc.
I'm glad the information about the cult spread like wildfire. I am not
glad that the people who recived that information aren't going to do
anything effective with it. They just want the "lulz". They are in it
for themselves.
anonymous...@gmail.com
Alexia Death
> Come Monday, what do you think will be different?
Scientology is just another safe fringe religion. And if somebody
clueless talks to them about Scientology all the red flags that need
to go up when you are dealing with a Cult will go up. And when they
google it http://www.xenu.net comes up right under Co$ website... And
that is what really HURTS Scientology and its income machine.
Awareness. Getting tax exemption to go away is a further goal but with
greater awareness doable.
> Oh really? Show me a video they have produced claiming to be from anonymous.
There may be one, or may not... Nobody cares. Nobody would know about
some stupid irrelevant fake...
Why do you insist this wont make a difference? It already has and more
is to come.
Vandar
> Vandar <vand...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>anonymous...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>Bump this thread so that it stays above $ci-fag sp4m
>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L5RgJfef6w&feature=related
>>
>>"anonymous" really needs to find an actual human to narrate. That
>>electronic, emotionless voice is annoying as hell and detracts from the
>>message they are trying to convey.
>
>
> No it doesn't. The computer generated speech is part of the success
> of Anonymous. It's sinister but non threatening.
Is it a success when people say that the message is delivered in an
annoying and distracting manner? The voice isn't sinister at all. It's
emotionless and monotone. It conveys nothing on a human level. It's just
digital noise that attempts to form coherent speech. My former high
school had a science teacher who spoke like that. His students didn't do
very well.
Vandar
And thus the insults start.
Enjoy your "lulz", kids. One of these days when you grow up, you'll
understand... maybe.
Vandar
> On Feb 6, 10:47 pm, Vandar <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Come Monday, what do you think will be different?
>
> A whole bunch more people will know better than to assume that
> Scientology is just another safe fringe religion. And if somebody
> clueless talks to them about Scientology all the red flags that need
> to go up when you are dealing with a Cult will go up. And when they
> google it http://www.xenu.net comes up right under Co$ website... And
> that is what really HURTS Scientology and its income machine.
> Awareness. Getting tax exemption to go away is a further goal but with
> greater awareness doable.
Eliminating their tax exempt status would be a very good thing. A picket
isn't going to accomplish that.
>>Oh really? Show me a video they have produced claiming to be from anonymous.
>
> There may be one, or may not... Nobody cares. Nobody would know about
> some stupid irrelevant fake...
>
> Why do you insist this wont make a difference? It already has and more
> is to come.
I haven't insisted it won't make a difference. I ask what difference you
think it will make.
Friendly Xenu
They are all leaders.
Alexia Death
> Eliminating their tax exempt status would be a very good thing. A picket
> isn't going to accomplish that.
Rome wasn't built in a day. Think about it. It has wisdom in it.
Oh about insults, Id say the only person insulting anybody is you.
They understand better now than you ever will...
anonymous...@gmail.com
Don't feed the troll.
Alexia Death
JAFAW
"Vandar" <vand...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9gpqj.3460$Sa1....@news02.roc.ny...
Ya *still* don't geddit do ya
Friendly Xenu
>Friendly Xenu wrote:
>> Vandar <vand...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>Alexia Death wrote:
>>>>It is needed as long as anonymous exists. If a human voice speaks its
>>>>the voice of one man. But the machine... Anybody can speak with the
>>>>voice of anonymous,
>>>Including the cult they are trying to combat. That's the problem. When
>>>openly communicating with allies in an attempt to coordinate an
>>>"attack", you do not want to use a method that the target of the attack
>>>can easily imitate.
>> It's not a war.
>*sigh* I didn't say it was.
You stated that there was some kind of combat.
combat 1. To oppose in battle; fight against. 2. To oppose
vigorously; struggle against. --intr. 1. To engage in fighting;
contend or struggle. --com·bat (k¼m“b²t”) n. 1. Fighting,
especially armed battle; strife. --com·bat adj. 1. Of or
relating to combat. 2. Intended for use or deployment in
combat.
I state again, your rhetoric is misguided. If anything, Scientology
is at war against its own customers. The Anonymous and the ARSCC
have never been at war with the Scientology crime syndicate. We've
never declared war against the criminal enterprise and we've never
accepted their assaults against our vicil rights as being a war.
Friendly Xenu
>Friendly Xenu wrote:
>> Nobody cares if the Scientology crime syndicate
>> produces videos with computer generated speech. Scientology forges
>> bomb threats against its own business offices, commits arson against
>> their own buildings, and no end of criminal activities to try to
>> play pretend they're some how a "persecuted religion." Everyone
>> gets that. If they produce videos claiming to be from Anonymous,
>> big whoop -- they've done it before only with a different medium.
>Oh really? Show me a video they have produced claiming to be from anonymous.
You idiot.
Friendly Xenu
>No, I think you're a bunch of sitting keyboard jockeys.
<smile> Ergo you express your own inability to do homework or
utilize google. Fact is that the Anonymous has done more for the
cause of human rights and civil rights in two weeks than the ARSCC
usually does in two months. The Anonymous (some of them) engaged
in criminal activities, something that the ARSCC never did and
will never do, and that's not acceptable to most of us yet the
fact remains that the Anonymous are successful.
barb
> barb wrote:
>
>> No. We're not that credulous. There has already been disruptive
>> misinformation put out, the date of the event, for example. Anonymous
>> isn't a bunch of naive sheep. Nor are the critics. These people have
>> come up to speed incredibly fast. No Scientology shenanigans is going
>> to fool them. They know what to expect.
>>
>> So does Scientology. Expect us.
>
> One of the real cool effects of the Anonymous action is the spanning of
> generations.
>
> I asked my 16 year old daughter if she was familiar with Anonymous Yes.
> Did she know about the planned picketing of the nut cult? Yes. Was she
> interested in participating? Yes.
>
> I told her I was thinking about picketing one of the local cult
> franchises with Anonymous and she could come with me if her mother
> agreed. Well, my daughter was so keen on that suggestion, there was no
> way my wife would have *dared* disagree.
>
> Guess who's going to the picket?
>
>
>
Me?
--
barb
Chaplain, ARSCCwdne
buy my book!
http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=1198812
read my page! (thanks, R. Hill!)
http://www.xenu-directory.net/critics/graham1.html
visit my store!
http://www.cafepress.com/birdville
barb
> barb wrote:
>
>> Vandar wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> On Feb 6, 3:19 pm, Hartley Patterson <hptt...@daisy.freeserve.co.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I assume Anonymous is sensible enough to drop the format when it has
>>>>> outlived its usefulness.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is needed as long as anonymous exists. If a human voice speaks its
>>>> the voice of one man. But the machine... Anybody can speak with the
>>>> voice of anonymous,
>>>
>>>
>>> Including the cult they are trying to combat. That's the problem.
>>> When openly communicating with allies in an attempt to coordinate an
>>> "attack", you do not want to use a method that the target of the
>>> attack can easily imitate.
>>>
>>>> resonates with the people that form this movement in a way that they
>>>> will desire to pass it on. Otherwise it will be forgotten and becomes
>>>> fake because it has NO support... Simple... Elegant... Unbeatable :)
>>>
>>>
>>> "anonymous" seems to have a very high opinion of itself.
>>>
>> This was the best explanation I've read. You still don't "get it."
>
> Uh huh
>
>> Whatever. Drop it. Anonymous isn't going to change its format because
>> you don't like it.
>
> And I'm not going to "drop it" just because you don't like it.
>
>> So let's talk about Jenna Miscavige, shall we?
>>
>> Remember, that was the subject before you dragged it off in a
>> nonsensical direction.
>
> I'm offering constructive criticism. If you don't like it, then feel
> free to exercise your right to not reply.
>
Feel free to quit flogging the deceased equine.
barb
> barb wrote:
>
>> Vandar wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> On Feb 6, 6:17 am, Vandar <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> anonymouspraetor...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bump this thread so that it stays above $ci-fag sp4m
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L5RgJfef6w&feature=related
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "anonymous" really needs to find an actual human to narrate. That
>>>>> electronic, emotionless voice is annoying as hell and detracts from
>>>>> the
>>>>> message they are trying to convey.
>>>>> just
>>>>> went to read the actual post.
>>>>>
>>>>> Narrate it yourself, guys. They aren't going to track you down through
>>>>> the sound of a voice. Is there no one with decent elocution among you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> resonates well with the issue, and is symbolic of the point that
>>>> (unlike Scn, Inc.) it's not all being run by one voice.
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think it adds a sci-fi feel to it. It's like listening to Ned
>>> from South Park. Using a narrator doesn't imply that it's being run
>>> by one voice. It implies that "anonymous" is speaking with one voice.
>>> They could even ask one of the known critics to do the narration for
>>> them, thereby maintaining their veil of anonymity.
>>> A consistent human narrator would also help confirm the authenticity
>>> of the message.
>>>
>>> As it is now, anyone could post any message they want using that
>>> exact same electronic voice and claim it's from "anonymous". If
>>> someone did that and the message was "the pickets on the 10th are
>>> called off", that would throw a serious wrench into the works, as
>>> some people planning to picket would believe it's an authentic
>>> message for and from "anonymous".
>>>
>>
>> No. We're not that credulous. There has already been disruptive
>> misinformation put out, the date of the event, for example. Anonymous
>> isn't a bunch of naive sheep. Nor are the critics. These people have
>> come up to speed incredibly fast. No Scientology shenanigans is going
>> to fool them. They know what to expect.
>>
>> So does Scientology. Expect us.
>
> you aren't a bunch of naive sheep, came up to speed incredibly fast, and
> can't be fooled by the cult's shenanigans, and end with "expect us".
>
> That's haughtiness, not humility.
>
I never claimed humility, you dumb fuck. And I will get arrogant as hell
with people who hijack posts, who refuse to accept that people don't
agree with them, and who persist on wasting bandwidth on a losing
argument. I've met people like you irl. You are the people who make
meetings go on much longer than necessary, because the only agreement
you will accept is the one you promote, and meanwhile the potato salad
at the potluck is growing bacteria exponentially.
You put it out there. Nobody liked it. FAIL, fool, and embrace it!~
barb
> barb wrote:
>
>> Vandar wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> Bump this thread so that it stays above $ci-fag sp4m
>>>>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L5RgJfef6w&feature=related
>>>
>>>
>>> "anonymous" really needs to find an actual human to narrate. That
>>> electronic, emotionless voice is annoying as hell and detracts from
>>> the message they are trying to convey.
>>> As soon as I heard it, I immediately stopped watching the video and
>>> just went to read the actual post.
>>>
>>> Narrate it yourself, guys. They aren't going to track you down
>>> through the sound of a voice. Is there no one with decent elocution
>>> among you?
>>>
>> eerie, ominous feeling.
>>
>> Reading or watching, at least you got the message. :)
>
> I got the message a long time ago - before the cult ever popped up on
> anonymous' radar. I'm familiar with the chans and ebaum. I watched the
> games they played with Hal Turner, but his site remains and his ignorant
> followers remain. The net effect was zero.
>
> While the true critics are certainly benefitting from anonymous'
> participation. In the long run, I don't believe it's anonymous is going
> to have a positive impact on their cause. They'll attack the websites,
> coordinate protests, post various criticisms throughout the web, get
> their "lulz", and move on to something else. Meanwhile, the people who
> are personally invested in disarming the cult will still be fighting the
> good fight. They aren't in it for the lulz.
>
If there were no lulz, I wouldn't be here now. There are lulz. They are
tasty and delicious lulz. And one of them is the fact that Scientology
is right in people's faces now because of Anonymous.
Why are you even here? Do you imagine yourself to be some two bit video
critic or what? You gave your input. Nobody agreed. Gedd over it.
banchukita
> Alexia Death wrote:
> > On Feb 6, 10:47 pm, Vandar <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>Come Monday, what do you think will be different?
>
> > A whole bunch more people will know better than to assume that
> > Scientology is just another safe fringe religion. And if somebody
> > clueless talks to them about Scientology all the red flags that need
> > to go up when you are dealing with a Cult will go up. And when they
> > that is what really HURTS Scientology and its income machine.
> > Awareness. Getting tax exemption to go away is a further goal but with
> > greater awareness doable.
>
> Eliminating their tax exempt status would be a very good thing. A picket
> isn't going to accomplish that.
>
> >>Oh really? Show me a video they have produced claiming to be from anonymous.
>
> > There may be one, or may not... Nobody cares. Nobody would know about
> > some stupid irrelevant fake...
>
> > Why do you insist this wont make a difference? It already has and more
> > is to come.
>
> I haven't insisted it won't make a difference. I ask what difference you
> think it will make.
Picketing and public demonstration is a way to bring attention to a
problem. More people are beginning to learn more about Scientology
and perceive it as a problem. Eventually there will be enough pressure
on our elected officials to act on the tax exempt issue, if enough
people keep talking about it.
Nobody expects this to happen overnight, but we just evolved one of
Robert Anton Wilson's "Jesuses" in exposure and cultural response.
Not everyone is going to picket. Some people will stay home and
celebrate their freedom of speech by writing letters to elected
officials, editors, etc.
What would be your plan?
-maggie, human being
zeeorger
Ruthie - lying piece of shit - Co$/O$A whore ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ijr2ReT8VpQ
Pet adoption ad: couch jumping bitch, not potty trained.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9Pc-nvYl10
Z
Hartley Patterson
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ijr2ReT8VpQ
>
> Pet adoption ad: couch jumping bitch, not potty trained.
You believe what you see on teh Internets? Researched her. She did 3 'self
improvement' courses and the sauna thing at the LA Celebrity Centre 2002-
4, has lots of MySpace style Internet presence with no mention of
Scientology, has done a pile of Youtube videos before none about
scientology, has lots of hobbies, reads inspirational books by Latter Day
Saints, gives her religion as Mormon, doesn't appear to work for a WISE
company...
If she's a clam, she's a very dumb sleeper agent with an amazingly dumb
handler who has just pointlessly blown her cover.
Anonymous response? Assume she's OSA, badmouth her, publish her address,
Email, telephone number, car registration, employer. Repeatedly. This is
not OK.
--
Hartley Patterson
http://www.newsfrombree.co.uk
http://news-from-bree.blogspot.com
antimidas
@news01.roc.ny:
> anonymous...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Bump this thread so that it stays above $ci-fag sp4m
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L5RgJfef6w&feature=related
>
> "anonymous" really needs to find an actual human to narrate. That
> electronic, emotionless voice is annoying as hell and detracts from the
> message they are trying to convey.
> As soon as I heard it, I immediately stopped watching the video and just
> went to read the actual post.
>
> Narrate it yourself, guys. They aren't going to track you down through
> the sound of a voice. Is there no one with decent elocution among you?
>
Not to mention the music in the background that drowns out the voice. I
have to strain to hear it. It sounds like Stephen Hawking while on a bad
acid trip.
antimidas
news:13qk04p...@corp.supernews.com:
> John Dorsay <restim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Guess who's going to the picket?
>
> I really hope that you -- and everyone -- get lots of photographs
> and video and make them available as close to real time as possible.
>
> ---
> Starbucks: drink the coffee and then break the windows
> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,972865,00.html?imw=Y
>
>
I am scheduled to attend the local event. I will be taking a still camera
and will post the photos to my site and a link here once faces have been
obscured whcih should not take too long after I return from the event. It
all depends on which battle plan I implement to prevent being followed
and/or identified as to when they get put up.
How paranoid is too paranoid?
antimidas
news:8fdc5d8b-7af7-40a2...@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com:
Some of us will do both and more if possible. What notariety do people
think Anonymous is going to get if we are anonymous and masking our
identities as much as possible? There is no glory in it. Only justice.
antimidas
@corp.supernews.com:
And I might clarify that I do not feel one can blame anonymous for the
illegal activities of the few who chose to pursue those activities on
their own. I am anonymous, but I have not and will not violate any laws.
I am merely utilizing my constitutional rights to protest atrocities that
have caused me to become passionate about the topic.
The more I learn, the more willing to fight I am. This is not a passing
interest for me. I tend to see things through to the best of my ability.
To assume that we will stop fighting on Sunday is childinsh fantasy. We
are each responsible for the society in which we live. If we don't agree
with it, it is our mandate to set things right and restore human decency.
Leader...@gmail.com
wrote:
> zeeor...@yahoo.com:
Actually, there's quite a bit more to it than the fact she did a few
course. In a couple other videos, the camera moves, in other words,
it's being filmed by someone else. Also, the lighting is done by
someone who knows their way around a studio. No unflattering shadows
on her face. The way the light is behind her to make her appear to
have a halo. The way when she mentions critics she either shrugs them
off by rolling her eyes or shifting her gaze down, when she mentions Co
$, she looks at the screen, face upwards, as if receiving the message
from above. She uses classic OSA handling phrases, i.e. "How can you
protest the most ethical people on the planet?" Notice the over use of
the word 'ethics' in her video. "How can you judge something you
haven't even tried? You've never been in Scientology!" These
statements are repeated themes. You can see some editing that's been
done to the video, nothing blatant, but if you watch for it, you can
see skips.
It's also been shown that's she's an actress. She also works in a
chiropractors office, and if anyone would note, there are a lot of
dentists and chiropractors that are clams. Would it make since that Co
$ paid her? Propaganda war on Anon's own turf. Also says she's a
Mormon, now, I know a few and they do not like $cifags.
Now, none of this is concrete evidence, she could be an actress who
took some courses a few years back, dabbled so to speak, and has the
opinion that they are just a harmless religion and shot off her mouth
before she knew any better. All of this is anecdotal or circumstantial
evidence, but after hearing of the stories of Paulette Cooper and
'fair game' wouldn't you be better off erring on the side of caution,
and assume that she is, rather than blow her off?
realpch
>
> barb wrote:
>
> > misinformation put out, the date of the event, for example. Anonymous
> > isn't a bunch of naive sheep. Nor are the critics. These people have
> > come up to speed incredibly fast. No Scientology shenanigans is going to
> > fool them. They know what to expect.
> >
> > So does Scientology. Expect us.
>
> of generations.
>
> I asked my 16 year old daughter if she was familiar with Anonymous
> Yes. Did she know about the planned picketing of the nut cult? Yes.
> Was she interested in participating? Yes.
>
> I told her I was thinking about picketing one of the local cult
> franchises with Anonymous and she could come with me if her mother
> agreed. Well, my daughter was so keen on that suggestion, there was
> no way my wife would have *dared* disagree.
>
>
The whole family?
: )
Peach
--
Extra! Extra! Read All About It!
Save some dough, save some grief:
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.scientology-lies.com
barb
> Friendly Xenu wrote:
>
>>
>>> Alexia Death wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is needed as long as anonymous exists. If a human voice speaks its
>>>> the voice of one man. But the machine... Anybody can speak with the
>>>> voice of anonymous,
>>>
>>> Including the cult they are trying to combat. That's the problem.
>>> When openly communicating with allies in an attempt to coordinate an
>>> "attack", you do not want to use a method that the target of the
>>> attack can easily imitate.
>>
>>
>> It's not a war.
>
> *sigh*
> I didn't say it was.
>
>> Nobody cares if the Scientology crime syndicate
>> produces videos with computer generated speech. Scientology forges
>> bomb threats against its own business offices, commits arson against
>> their own buildings, and no end of criminal activities to try to
>> play pretend they're some how a "persecuted religion." Everyone gets
>> that. If they produce videos claiming to be from Anonymous,
>> big whoop -- they've done it before only with a different medium.
>
> anonymous.
>
Now you're demanding proof that they do? Let's see...YOU want a "real
voice" behind Anonymous' videos. An identifiable voice.
You wouldn't be a scifag, by any chance?
barb
> anonymous...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Bump this thread so that it stays above $ci-fag sp4m
>>>
>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L5RgJfef6w&feature=related
>>>
>>>>> "anonymous" really needs to find an actual human to narrate. That
>>>>> electronic, emotionless voice is annoying as hell and detracts from
>>>>> the message they are trying to convey.
>>>>> As soon as I heard it, I immediately stopped watching the video and
>>>>> just went to read the actual post.
>>>
>>>>> Narrate it yourself, guys. They aren't going to track you down through
>>>>> the sound of a voice. Is there no one with decent elocution among you?
>>>
>>>> eerie, ominous feeling.
>>>
>>>> Reading or watching, at least you got the message. :)
>>>
>>> I got the message a long time ago - before the cult ever popped up on
>>> anonymous' radar. I'm familiar with the chans and ebaum. I watched the
>>> games they played with Hal Turner, but his site remains and his ignorant
>>> followers remain. The net effect was zero.
>>>
>>> While the true critics are certainly benefitting from anonymous'
>>> participation. In the long run, I don't believe it's anonymous is going
>>> to have a positive impact on their cause. They'll attack the websites,
>>> coordinate protests, post various criticisms throughout the web, get
>>> their "lulz", and move on to something else. Meanwhile, the people who
>>> are personally invested in disarming the cult will still be fighting the
>>> good fight. They aren't in it for the lulz.
>>
>>
>
> No, I think you're a bunch of sitting keyboard jockeys.
>
>
> Come Monday, what do you think will be different?
>
A host of new people will know all about the abuses and crimes of
Scientology. They might agree that Scientology doesn't deserve tax
exemption. And if they are given the opportunity to affect that
exemption down the road, they'll make an informed, correct decision.
You're a real wet blanket, arncha?
barb
Nobody but a clam talks like a clam. Unless they're a wog pretending to
be a clam, in which case, we've got the patter down pat, as Michael
Reuss once learned when he responded to a troll of mine.
But, I don't think this little muffin is trolling, and what's churning
from her cake hole is pure, unadulterated cult bullshit.
If it quacks like a duck...
barb
> John Dorsay wrote:
>> barb wrote:
>>
>>> No. We're not that credulous. There has already been disruptive
>>> misinformation put out, the date of the event, for example. Anonymous
>>> isn't a bunch of naive sheep. Nor are the critics. These people have
>>> come up to speed incredibly fast. No Scientology shenanigans is going to
>>> fool them. They know what to expect.
>>>
>>> So does Scientology. Expect us.
>> One of the real cool effects of the Anonymous action is the spanning
>> of generations.
>>
>> I asked my 16 year old daughter if she was familiar with Anonymous
>> Yes. Did she know about the planned picketing of the nut cult? Yes.
>> Was she interested in participating? Yes.
>>
>> I told her I was thinking about picketing one of the local cult
>> franchises with Anonymous and she could come with me if her mother
>> agreed. Well, my daughter was so keen on that suggestion, there was
>> no way my wife would have *dared* disagree.
>>
>> Guess who's going to the picket?
>>
>> John
>
> The whole family?
>
> : )
>
> Peach
ARSCCwdne: Keeping Families Together!
Hartley Patterson
> You can see some editing that's been
> done to the video, nothing blatant, but if you watch for it, you can
> see skips.
Yes I noticed, and her buzzwords. I've never been a Scientologist, and
they slip into my everyday conversation too! Are her other videos the
same, or are they normal Youtube babble and press Upload?
> It's also been shown that's she's an actress. She also works in a
> chiropractors office, and if anyone would note, there are a lot of
> dentists and chiropractors that are clams.
There was no sign that her claimed by Anon employers are clams on their
website. It's normally there somewhere.
> Now, none of this is concrete evidence, she could be an actress who
> took some courses a few years back, dabbled so to speak, and has the
> opinion that they are just a harmless religion and shot off her mouth
> before she knew any better.
That's my hypothesis. Her supposed handler would have to have not known
about Kristi's course completion database, despite it being one of the
most hated by the cult of our websites.
> wouldn't you be better off erring on the side of caution,
> and assume that she is, rather than blow her off?
I'd rather err on the side of caution and assume she is not. Innocent
until proven guilty? And to repeat, publishing home phone numbers and
addresses on the Internet is NOT OK.
Alexia Death
organization is. Keep that in mind when deciding actions....
beech...@gmail.com
>
> You wouldn't be a scifag, by any chance?
Yeah, that occurred to me as well.
Given the cults penchant for retaliation, Anonymous would be a
collective idiot to use any single person's voice.
A real voice is traceable.
Leader_of_Anonymous
wrote:
> LeaderOfA...@gmail.com:
I don't do that, publish her personal information, that is. To me, by
harassing critics of Anon we become what we are most against. The
same things we claim to fight for are the same things we do to
dissenters. Now, not all of us, there are some voices of reason, but
the newfags are trigger happy, they want to go in and find everything,
become "The Internet Hate Machine", it's us oldfags that have been
around for awhile that try to remain calm and wait it out. It can be a
little confusing. Just look at the IRC channel. Loaded down with
newfags, you can see the oldfags, they're the ones that don't spout
memes everywhere. Especially in a chat room with all Anon's in it.
/rant
anonymous...@gmail.com
Leader? You best be joking nigger. No one leads.
If you presented yourself as a leader on any of the boards you would
be drawn and quartered.
I suggest you take a look at this: http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?t=740
Also, ITT: ACTUAL $CI-FAGS!!!! Y HELLO THAR!!! :D
Hartley Patterson
> I don't do that, publish her personal information, that is. To me, by
> harassing critics of Anon we become what we are most against. The
> same things we claim to fight for are the same things we do to
> dissenters. Now, not all of us, there are some voices of reason, but
> the newfags are trigger happy, they want to go in and find everything,
> become "The Internet Hate Machine
Heh. Tell us about it! ARS has had a constant trickle of newbies for a
decade, puzzled over how we don't put SCIENTOLOGY SUCKS in every post and
seem sometimes to want to talk about the subject instead of constantly
slagging it off.
This is a common historical theme replaying itself.
--
FREEDOM is a trademark owned by
Religious Technology Center
http://www.daisy.freeserve.co.uk/stolgy_0.htm
Leader_of_Anonymous
Dumbass, I've made this to troll that dumbass barbara shwartz. read
fucking posts.
Jommy Cross
<hpt...@daisy.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in msg
<MPG.221525eb7...@news.thundernews.com>:
<snip>
>Yes I noticed, and her buzzwords. I've never been a Scientologist, and
>they slip into my everyday conversation too!
Sweet Elvis you're paying a high price for this, d00d. I'd rather gnaw my
own leg off than start dropping Hubbardisms into my normal speech.
Ever yours in fandom,
Jommy Cross
---------------------------------------------------
This message brought to you by Radio Free Albemuth:
before you hallucinate
--------------------------------------------------
Friendly Xenu
>fr...@skeptictank.org (Friendly Xenu) wrote in
>news:13qk04p...@corp.supernews.com:
>> John Dorsay <restim...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>Guess who's going to the picket?
>> I really hope that you -- and everyone -- get lots of photographs
>> and video and make them available as close to real time as possible.
>and will post the photos to my site and a link here once faces have been
>obscured whcih should not take too long after I return from the event. It
>all depends on which battle plan I implement to prevent being followed
>and/or identified as to when they get put up.
>How paranoid is too paranoid?
--smile-- Thank you! I am so looking forward to Sunday. I'll be
in a.r.s and on YouTube being really obsessive about it. }:-}
Friendly Xenu
>The more I learn, the more willing to fight I am. This is not a passing
>interest for me. I tend to see things through to the best of my ability.
>To assume that we will stop fighting on Sunday is childinsh fantasy. We
>are each responsible for the society in which we live. If we don't agree
>with it, it is our mandate to set things right and restore human decency.
I am SO glad to hear you -- and so many others -- express such sentiment.
I have posted a video to YouTube this evening (claiming to be from the
ARSCC which certainly does exist) saluting the Anonymous and your courage!
antimidas
> I have posted a video to YouTube this evening (claiming to be from the
> ARSCC which certainly does exist) saluting the Anonymous and your
> courage!
>
> ---
> Starbucks: drink the coffee and then break the windows
> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,972865,00.html?imw=Y
>
>
Do you have a link to the video?
Anonymous
> > Oh really? Show me a video they have produced claiming to be from anonymous.
>
> Ruthie - lying piece of shit - Co$/O$A whore ...
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ijr2ReT8VpQ
I'm sure she had no idea what she was getting into when they asked her
to make those videos. I think OSA had a pretty good idea what would
happen though. They threw her to the wolves.
macqu...@earthlink.net
> On Feb 6, 9:27 pm, zeeorger <zeeor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Oh really? Show me a video they have produced claiming to be from anonymous.
>
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ijr2ReT8VpQ
>
> I'm sure she had no idea what she was getting into when they asked her
> to make those videos. I think OSA had a pretty good idea what would
> happen though. They threw her to the wolves.
She threw herself to the wolves. She made this video all on her own.
It was pretty foolish of her to step in front of a train the way she
did, but she did it herself. She's not currently part of CoS and
hasn't been for about 4 years.