Scientologist overlord declares victory over Anonymous Scientology head David Miscavige has declared victory over Anonymous in an internal church magazine. Miscavige described Anonymous as a group of "mask-wearing subversive and anarchistic internet denizens". He continues: "Having run into the Church of Scientology, they are no longer laughing out loud or otherwise. Nor are they …
Shades of Andrew Crossley of ACS:Law in that statement from the alien infested ones.
Time to get the popcorn and sit back and wait for the action.
Perhaps the aliens have a fire (breathing lizard) wall to protect there sites from an anonymous LOIC drive by.
Doubly wrong.
Sarah declared snacks other than popcorn are to be used in such scenarios. Besides which, it isn't time to sit back and watch, it's time to get out your Guy Fawkes mask and go stand outside in the cold.
http://www.whyweprotest.net/
I dunno, but this cult* is certainly trying to be more stealth. I have recently started hearing about "Citizens Commission on Human Rights" from ads in certain podcasts. Turns out that this is just a front-group for the cult, and not something which is immediately ovious . Which is a real shame.
It either means the makers of the podcasts are members of this cult, or not as intelligent and sceptical as I thought they were. Not sure whether or not to carry on listening to them as I do not want to give any support to this cult in any shape or form.
As for Anonymous...I don't really support what they are doing, but I understand why they are doing it. When the government fails to act in the defence of the people, it falls to the people to defend themselves. While I don't like what Anonymous are doing, at the moment I don't have a better answer than their direct action against this cult, and other anti-freedom organisations.
*Scientology is not a recognised religion here, so I feel safe in calling it a "cult".
The CCHR is the front group which focuses on the church of scientology "Global Obliteration of Psychiatry" agenda. Their propaganda states that psychiatrists were behind 9/11 and orchestrated the Holocaust during World War II among many other evil things.
While I am all for over sight of "big pharma" and against excessive use of prescriptions to treat depression, especially in kids, if I were Islamic then the CCHR would be Al-Qaeda (way to extreme for me and an embarrassment which only serves to damage the reputation of my beliefs). Incidentally I also happen to believe much of the over prescription problem is down to demand generated by the people for a quick fix. I digress.
Anonymous activities as far as the church of scientology is concerned have centred on world wide peaceful campaigns, lobbying and education which has proved quite effective; although they have bought a lot of buildings they're all pretty much empty. The early cyber "terrorist" attacks stopped after a couple of days and the first global protest started Feb 10th 2008, they have been running monthly ever since but have purposely become less organised so the cult don't have fixed dates when they can be ready for them.
Anonymous activities regarding Wikileaks have followed the cyber "terrorist" route so far although as far as I can tell they were not aimed at causing financial harm, more just a broadside shot to draw attention. If anything I liken these activities to the civil disobedience of protesters like Gandhi.
There have already been Anonymous turning up at protests in support of Wikileaks and Assanger. And I expect this will continue as the protests activities spill out in to the real world.
Not all Anonymous who support the campaigns regarding the church of scientology support Assanger. Not all Assanger and Wikileaks supporters care about the cult of scientology.
Anonymous is like a city, the citizens who frequent Anonymous are like citizens occupying a City. There are many groups and sub-groups which form and disband spontaneously to do certain things. In a way rather than saying Anonymous did this you might as well say "The Internet" but Anonymous is way cooler.
I really don't feel that you can equate the actions of the people who subscribe to being part of this 'Anonymous' group with the actions of Ghandi and his followers. Especially those actions as part of the campaign against opposers to wikileaks.
I must say, I support the anti Scientology feelings which the 'Anonymous' group have and were they promoting anti Scientology denial of service attacks I would probably not bat an eyelid. It is only since they have begun attacking reputable companies who have made a viable business decision to not support or allow their services to be used by wikileaks that I have realised that I was being a hypocrite.
Direct action, whether via the Internet or in person up in someone’s face through violence, which in a way a DDOS attack is despite it happening in a totally nonphysical world, can NEVER be the way we treat people of different opinions to us. This is not the way to a society in which we can exercise free speech.
In this world there are many viewpoints which I find frankly distasteful (e.g. the BNP political party in the UK) but I’m supposed to live in a country in which I can say anything as long as it does not violate the rights of others, either directly or indirectly (e.g. by inciting violence). So BNP you have a right to be here and say many things I find distasteful, Scientology do too, and I find that equally distasteful, I mean really who follows a religion whose founder said that "The way to make a million dollars is to start a religion." But their right to speak things I dislike is directly related to my right to speak out if I see injustice in the world around me, my right to speak about my own religion (Christianity) and my right not to be oppressed because of my views.
Wikileaks I do not support, and businesses which do not wish to be associated with it have a right to not do business with it. That is one of many ways society can show that it does not approve of something a person/organisation is doing. Attempting to affect the way businesses which refuse to do business with wikileaks do business with others via DDOS is a crime and should not be taken part in no matter how righteous the actors feel their cause is.
As a general rule, any semi-official sounding organisation which says anything remotely positive about scientology is a front group.
I recall walking past an anti-drugs event that Dublin City council foolishly permitted at the top of Grafton Street a few years back. A jazz band was playing in front an impressive wall of "sponsors". Virtually every single "sponsor" was just a scientology front organisation. CCHR, Narconon etc.
The alien is for Xenu, possibly the most laughably awful cult "secret" ever.
I dont believe that was the intended message of the previous anon poster... I believe they meant that the Anonymous vs. CoS battle was done online, in person and politically... whereas this thing with wikileaks seems to analog to a "Cyber vigilante" where they are not neccessarrily covering all of their bases, and in essence are creating a bad name for themselves...
No point.
This calls for passing out literature to newly recruited Scilons, doxing extant ones and other such lulzy stuff. LOIC isn't going to make the Scilons afraid. Showing thier cult members exactly how bad a cult they've gotten into it, on the other hand, a good way to strike back.
Deplete thier base of new recruits and you deplete the number of fresh "cumps" who can be connec into giving everything they own to the cult. The best way to hurt these people is in the wallet: after all, it's all they care about.
All Dave has managed to achieve with this is to admit that anonymous were a serious enough problem to celebrate the attacks ending. He then paints a giant bulls-eye on his face, and shouts 'bring it on'.
I think Anonymous was right to switch targets to bring attention to the more current and pressing issue of international freedoms in light of recent events. I can only assume Dave wants more publicity for his cult now that Anonymous is more in the public eye.
I reckon you've got it spot on. The pyramid-selling scam known as Scientology relies/thrives on publicity. If no-one pays attention they feel 'ronerey, so ronerey'.
He wants them to come back and have a go so he can feel like he's wanted, like he is 'important' as being 'important' seems to be one of the things that keeps a bunch of cults together.
When no-one worships a god it simply dies off.
Anonymous has not switched targets rather there are those who frequent Anonymous who decided they supported Wikileaks and Assanger and there are those who have just started frequenting Anonymous thanks to the publicity for the same reason; drawn to Anonymous by the promise of some serious Net hacktavist activities, plus LULZ and CAEK.
Anonymous forums still cover the cult of scientology and as far as I can tell the campaigns will still continue until everyone is the world is educated regarding the dangers of the church of scientology. Not all Anonymous care about Wikileaks and Assanger, not all those who care about Wikileaks and Assanger care about the church of scientology - but at least both sides are aware and generally stay out if each others way.
That's the thing with Anonymous it can do it all.
To be honest, Miscavige and the CoS are jumping on the news of the arrests so hard because they tried to prosecute Anons so much when the protests were really big news (not that they ever stopped since, but the police are used to Anonymous protests now and rarely believe CoS orgs anymore when ridiculous claims are made of misbehavior from Chanology protesters.) They always craved arrests and prosecutions of Anonymous (and wanted to find a leader and swore that Anonymous was part of the great conspiracy against the CoS) because the CoS's other main tactic is using their coffers to fund outrageous litigation against all who oppose them. It's the big reason Chanology was so successful, really - the CoS doesn't have enough money to fund THAT MANY LAWSUITS.
So now they just stand back and claim a victory that isn't theirs and has nothing to do with their cause at all, which is par for the course with them.
Icon because hail Xenu!
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Cowen/warhero/
If you believed the Scientology blurb he would be one of the most highly decorated officers in the Navy, with aircraft carriers named after him. As it was he was absolute failure as a naval officer, completely unfit for command with a dismal record that included almost starting a war with Mexico.
When it first came out in paperback. Mediocre at best (but it sure was big, kind of like puffed rice).
Not long after that I got tossed out of a scientology office for not taking it seriously (and quoting Mary Poppins) . Went in for the free I.Q. / Personality / Stress test, and when it came to the part where they want you to self diagnose your problems (they have a course for that, and another, and another) I said I was practically perfect in every way. They didn't seem to like that :)
The comment by AC @13:33 was a well worded explanation one which I do to a certain extent agree with. The governments involved here should be appalled. There are only a handful of organizations in the credit card processing space and only two with the market share which Visa and Mastercard have (To my knowledge). If anything these organizations need to be regulated so they cannot just stop providing their services unless certain conditions are met. I would say that one of those conditions would be that the organization which is being funded by their processing is deemed a criminal organization in a court of law.
do these idiots know not to tease the sleeping dangerous small animals?
just by stating it they just painted a big target and restarted new ways of slapping them.
now i am gonna grab a beer some popcorn some music and watch the fireworks when anonymous or some other groups get to work on these nut jobs.
it's as though every side of this story is aggressively, annoyingly boring. after two years, this whole conflict feels so tired i'm getting exhausted looking at the headlines. maybe we move onto something other than 4chan twats pouring out latent spite on whatever target they think they can take. *yawn* wake me when there's something worth the effort.
Bah, is this what you call "news"? I really don't understand the whole sensationalism of everything. All this is an undercover group with an agenda against a religious organization. I mean don't you guys seriously have something better to do? Why are we validating senseless hatred with articles like this, no matter which organization it's directed to? Go do something productive - like maybe, find a real job?
Well, for starters, this is El Reg.
Then, we are talking about a cult, not a religious organisation. And a dangerous one. There are plenty of information regarding this aspect of the Cult of Scientology. There is a documentary from the BBC if you prefer a mainstream production instead of the information on the Internet.
Go do something productive - like maybe, open your eyes?
Do you get paid to post these comments, or is it part of some "volunteer work" you perform for Scientology? I don't actually know how it works, but i suspect that if you are actually paid for the astroturfing, (as opposed to performing it "voluntairily" under the auspicies of Central Command) there might be legal issues.
Find an OT 3+ and ask them!
Scientologist cult in shock lie-telling shock? Who'd have thought...?
Anyway that ought to take some of the heat off Visa, Mastercard etc. while Anon. divert attention from Wikileaks matters to give that obnoxious cult a LOIC-powered reminder.
Extra points if they can get Gnosis involved too :)
Too many comments, and even articles, assume that "Anonymous" is a group in some traditional sense, with leaders, plans, intentions, members.
Hence comments and articles link the pro-WikiLeaks people with the anti-Scientology people and any other protest anywhere on the Internet.
There is no "Anonymous" in that sense.
It's silly to keep pretending there is.
Originally, there was a group of people associated with 4chan that called itself "Anonymous", and it was loosely organized in that forum. But they have mostly disavowed "Chanology". Since the "Chanology" schism, the "group" Anonymous has fractured much farther. Now, ANY protest on the Internet is immediately associated with "Anonymous" as if there were a group there planning all this stuff.
Stop making the stupid assumption that there IS such a group that "is behind" ALL protests. Each protest is composed of folks who, at that moment, feel strongly about that subject. Each protest is different, potentially involving completely different people.
There is an underlying reason why the powers that be want to see
Anonymous==Al Queada
i.e. some form of terrorist organisation.
It means they can secure funding to do what they like with (usually curtailing our freedoms if history is anything to go by).
Remember, any terrorist action is now the fault of Al Quaeda, and any internet related actions is now Anonymous.
The general public are just too willfully ignorant to recognise simple phsychological levers. Those that do are in a very real minority and pretty much powerless. If they aren't, then they are dealt with using the usual state tactics against dissidents.
If I, as a white Anglo Saxon male, can start to feel radicalised against our own forms of government, then I can only imagine what it is doing to those groups who are oppressed directly.
I feel so ashamed that I don't even really think of myself as a human being anymore, not if that means being one of the masses that are so ignorant they think whoever wins the X factor is actually important news.
So that means you can relate to them really well then, Miscavige ?
Don't worry, I'm sure they haven't forgotten you - it's just that you've been so quite lately they found another mole to whack.
They'll be coming back now and you'll be able to play again. I promise.
Hiding under the cover of Anonymous is like hiding behind the shield of religion. It is so much easier to fight and hate your enemy when you don't see them face to face. Once we see and face each other as humans, it makes it much more difficult to see differences instead of similarities. We all seek justice, we all seek understanding. We should all realize we are on the same team - regardless of political stance or religious doctrine.
Kind of like a mouse declaring victory when the cat stops sticking his paw in the mouse hole because he's gone to chase something else. Anonymous doesn't really need to go after Scientology, anyhow. Most people already see it as a questionable organization. Anonymous already got its message out. Some victory.
described Anonymous as a group of "mask-wearing subversive and anarchistic internet denizens"
Meanwhile
Anonymous described Anonymous as a group of "mask-wearing subversive and anarchistic internet denizens and totally not a bunch script kiddies with no social skills and delusions of importance yeah that dude".
....as if topologically speaking - and by "here," I mean, the comments section, by in large.
Frankly, I can appreciate some of Miscavige's statements, though I'm afraid that he (way) too easily verges on a melodramatic view of the situation, by the sound of it - and yet, I understand that such a manner may not be uncommon, in the context of which the original article occurred - about which, the El Reg article was a comment, itself, of course.
It's great to see that so many people are entertained by the events, however. No really, it's wonderful. Have fun!.....
Anonymous, 'cos ... why not? Some people will probably think as if I was writing in Greek script, here, anyway - funny how that works out, insofar as it may.
As did purplecrosses, a couple of hours later, to post that fatuous "we'd be friends if only we understood each other's viewpoints" guff.
History, of course, shows the exact opposite: the closer our understanding, the more trivial and yet more bitter the disputes get, which might be why Co$ has schismed (c.f. Panorama). So I for one welcome Anonymous' contribution to a greater understanding of the Scientologists...
(L. Reg: can we have a V-for-Vendetta mask icon please? Or at least a Guy Fawkes one?)
"History, of course, shows the exact opposite: the closer our understanding, the more trivial and yet more bitter the disputes get."
Absolutely true. Do anyone remember what was the original division between Catholics and Prostestants? Wikipedia isn't too clear on matter.
If I racell right, it was formally something totally trivial. In reality of course it was totally the power struggle: Pope vs. the others.
Civil wars also tend to be much more brutal than any other war type.
"Miscavige described Anonymous as a group of "mask-wearing subversive and anarchistic internet denizens"."
Maybe, but that's not a crime. Stealing money and property from people is.
And that's the major function of scientology, everything else is an excuse for primary function.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
