“Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

Liz — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 13:26:00 GMT

Hi everyone. He who will not reason is a bigot; he who cannot is a fool; and he who dares not is a slave.

I am from Kiribati and learning to read in English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Use it or lose it - surprising secrets in airline tickets."

Best regards :-D, Liz.

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

chewyannbert-Luana1980-Lighfield-curioser-steve-churilov — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 04:55:24 GMT

I'm not a big fan of Scientology, and I'm glad it's members don't patrol the Internet, that'd be creepy, but maybe people are just attacking Scientology to hide there own crimes.

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

Just Bill — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 17:56:45 GMT

@Judy

"The church of Scientology has the same rights as every other church to protect itself from other religious zealots who wish to deprive its members of their right to worship however they please."

Provide ANY evidence that ANYONE has deprived Scientologists of their "right to worship". No one has done this. Why do you claim it happened?

All Anonymous, and other Scientology critics want is for the Church of Scientology to STOP COMMITTING CRIMES. That's all! Worship as you wish but stop your criminal activities!

Oh, wait. Are you saying that committing crimes is essential to Scientology's religious worship?!

Wow! What a church!

Scientology members have to defend themselves against Anonymous harassment « Scientology & Wikipedia

Mon, 03 Nov 2008 02:22:03 GMT

Pingback from Scientology members have to defend themselves against Anonymous harassment « Scientology & Wikipedia

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

The Laughing Man — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:01:19 GMT

Oh dear, the legendary Terryeo makes an appearance.

So signing permits makes people guilty?

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

Terryeo — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:25:48 GMT

Oh Dear. Oh, poor, dear, sweet, Gregg Housh, whose name just accidently appears on the protest permit because Gregg's hand just accidently happened to have a pen in it while he was standing near to the permit applications and, in a strange act-of-God twitch, his hand accidently scrawled what almost looks like his signature on the permit request. Oh dear, oh dear. And now poor Gregg is GUILTY.

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

WolfyRik — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 14:28:53 GMT

@Judy

I find it hailarious that you keep spewing the same lie that critics are against religion. What utter rubbish. The protests have been, from the very beginning, about the abuses of the CoS. As others have rightly pointed out, why is it that not a single freezone group has been protested against by us? What's more, if this is about religion, why is it that the CoS has been the only group to attack the freezoners?

Why on earth would they be attacking people who follow Hubbards teachings, if it's about belief not about the money they lose or the crimes they commit?

Judy, you're an obvious cult shill. We can usually spot them from the moment they type, "I'm not a scientologist but....".

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

The Laughing Man — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 14:25:32 GMT

Sorry, it seems that I mistyped my response.

"If you want to protest abuse by church then there has been plenty of opportunities to do this long before Scientology became the latest target."

We're not protesting abuse by church, but a Cult. You can call it a church, but it is still the largest target on our screens.

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

General Public AYS — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:13:59 GMT

scientology is not a religion -

it's a way of strife!

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

The Laughing Man — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 00:45:16 GMT

@Judy

"The church of Scientology has the same rights as every other church to protect itself from other religious zealots who wish to deprive its members of their right to worship however they please."

Of course, except that the "Church" is really a money-making cult. There are people who aren't in the church who practise Scientology. They're called Free Zoners. We're not protesting them, just the Cult of Scientology.

"If you want to protest abuse by church then there has been plenty of opportunities to do this long before Scientology became the latest target."

If you want to protest abuse by the church (of Scientology) then there as been plenty of opportunities to do this long before Scientology became the latest target.

Your argument makes no sense. As shown in my calarification, "church" refers to Scientology, so that would make your statement illogical.

"To call Scientology a "crime syndicate" is to ignore the crimes and cover-ups of the catholic church and of too many christian fundamentalist churches, beginning with Jerry Falwell."

Well, we know they've committed crimes too, but the Cult the largest target on our radar.

"By protesting Scientology you are claiming that the mythology that you have been taught in your religion is more legitimate than the mythology taught under Scientology."

Really? So Free Zoners who join the Anonymous protests are claiming their mythology is more legitimate than the Cult's? That would make the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard more legitimate than the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard.

"You say 'religion', I say 'cult'."

Correct. You're calling it a Church, and I'm calling it a cult.

"So-called "protestors" of Scientology should be prosecuted under the federal 'hate-crimes' legislation."

So protesters of a-religion-not-to-be-named-here's child abuse should also be prosecuted under federal 'hate-crimes' legislation?

Thank you, Judy, for providing my daily dose of Internet failure. At least you got one sentence relatively correct.

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

Judy Burnette — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:49:13 GMT

The church of Scientology has the same rights as every other church to protect itself from other religious zealots who wish to deprive its members of their right to worship however they please. If you want to protest abuse by church then there has been plenty of opportunities to do this long before Scientology became the latest target. To call Scientology a "crime syndicate" is to ignore the crimes and cover-ups of the catholic church and of too many christian fundamentalist churches, beginning with Jerry Falwell. By protesting Scientology you are claiming that the mythology that you have been taught in your religion is more legitimate than the mythology taught under Scientology. You say "religion", I say "cult". So-called "protestors" of Scientology should be prosecuted under the federal "hate-crimes" legislation.

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

Sheila Gay — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:48:07 GMT

Question here is hypothetical, the outcome of a trial. If it had been taken to trial, the lone person against a litigious group might have won. However, Housh would have needed witnesses to testify on his behalf.

If he had called in other anonymous members, the opposing council would have provided the names to Scientology. Would Scientology have done nothing with that knowledge? Or is their even the slightest possibility new court cases pursued by Scientology?

Housh might have protected others by his silence?

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

L Fraud Hubbard — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 07:59:30 GMT

Scientology =

Ongoing Criminal Organization =

(RICO)Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and,

(Anti-SLAPP) Strategic Lawsuit against Public Participation] =

Camp FED.

Expect It

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

Fredric L. Rice — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 01:12:36 GMT

Once again the courts find that the Scientology crime syndicate's lies, libel, and perjury are unbelievable, without evidence, and more of the criminal enterprises' "Fair Game" racketeering against anyone who exposes or opposes the crime syndicate's crimes and abuses.

re: “Battling Scientology” Follow-Up

Anonymous — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 16:35:20 GMT

ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWAH!

gregg did good, the death of his monies will be mourned.

However, he does not lead us. We are leaderless and fluid because we have to be. If we had any kind of leadership, the Co$ would have drained every cent from his/her pockets with frivolous lawsuits like this one. We are leaderless because we don't need leadership. Unlike the Co$, which is dependent on directives given by higher-ups, Anonymous is a group of free thinking individuals acting for a common interest, and we're winning.