Blogtown, PDX

Friday, February 8, 2008

News Scientology Protest Planned For Sunday

Posted by Matt Davis on Fri, Feb 8 at 2:55 PM

The “anonymous” group is still planning to protest Scientology—that’s right, the whole entire religion-type-thing—on Sunday. Their invite says: “709 SW Salmon St Portland, OR 97205 2-10-08 12:00pm (bring a mask)”.

What’s the betting this isn’t just something thought up by the Church of Scientology to make you sympathetic to its cause? Either way, here’s another email from the protesters:

Ladies and gentlemen of the public and the press,

On February 10th, working in concert with concerned citizens around the world, Anonymous will stage a large number of public demonstrations at Church of Scientology centers around the world. Now that we have made evident the sincerity of our intentions, we would like to take this opportunity to clarify our objectives to the press and to the public. There have been a number of myths and misconceptions surrounding the nature of our means and intentions. Among these is the idea that our declaration of war is intended a threat of physical harm against individuals affiliated with the Church of Scientology.

Allegations that Anonymous wishes to physically harm any human being as part of our campaign against the cult of Scientology are patently untrue. As stated in one of our productions, the intention of Anonymous is to ‘systematically dismantle the Church of Scientology in its present form’. Our struggle is directed against the toxic ideals and behavior of the corrupt, violent, and abusive leadership of the Church of Scientology, not against the lives of those who have become entangled with it. Know this: though we oppose all that they stand for, even the highest officers of this cult will not be harmed physically by Anonymous. Our battle is one of ideas. As we speak, it is being fought and won in the hearts and minds of the world’s honest citizenry and their leaders. The ideological nature of our struggle brings us to another common misconception regarding the objectives of Anonymous in this campaign.

Spooky. There’s (much) more, after the jump.

Although many of us are put off by L. Ron Hubbard's religious doctrine, we do not oppose the right of individuals to follow beliefs of their choice. As set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion". Anonymous, as a whole, honors the spirit of this declaration. We fight against the atrocities - not the beliefs - of the brainwashing cult known as the Church of Scientology. The acts of defamation, intimidation and murder perpetrated by this criminal organization galvanize our resolve to fight against it. Our righteous indignation is directed against the hypocrisy of this institution, not against the faith of its members. As an illustrative example of our stance, we would like to draw your attention toward a group of individuals who practice L. Ron Hubbard's teachings, but have disaffiliated themselves from the Church of Scientology. They are known as the Freezone. Anonymous bears no animosity toward these individuals.
Many of you may wonder how Anonymous plans on launching into the task of dissolving the Church of Scientology. Our first major objective in this endeavor is the revocation of this cult's tax-exempt status. Indeed, the privileges accorded to the Church of Scientology under the law are significantly more generous than those enjoyed by major religions. As set out by the appellants in Sklar v. Commissioner, training offered through the Church of Scientology is tax deductible, while that obtained through legitimate religious institutions is not. The status of the Church of Scientology as a tax exempt religion is an affront to honest religious organizations. However, its special status with the IRS above and beyond that of other religions is not merely an affront, but a slap in the face.

On several occasions, figures within the media have casually dismissed Anonymous as nothing more than a gaggle of restless youth. We remain entirely undeterred by their remarks. Virtually all age groups, creeds and professions are represented within our ranks. Many who are not affiliated with Anonymous have expressed support for our campaign. Their words serve to further underscore the broad demographic base of our initiative. If you remain doubtful of our strength and resolve, we invite you to observe them for yourselves.

Actions speak louder than words. In the name of those who have been silenced by the false church of Scientology, Anonymous will be heard.

Permalink

Comments

"What’s the betting this isn’t just something thought up by the Church of Scientology to make you sympathetic to its cause?"

Matt, are you fucking serious? Aren't you supposed to be the Merc's investigative journo? Do you want to back up this idle conjecture with any sort of evidence at all, or are you simply content with being an irresponsible douchebag with a podium?

Posted by f | February 8, 2008 3:06 PM

christ, do you read reddit or digg, like, fucking ever? STEP IT UP, MERC-TARDS.

Posted by roguespierre's insurmountable southwestern wrap | February 8, 2008 3:32 PM

f: Are you going to back up your self-serious-taking with a sense of humor? Or shall I take your comment as a "no?"

Posted by Matt Davis | February 8, 2008 3:37 PM

Damn Matt, I hope you don't end up having to investigate some Anonymous people about Scien-fucking-tology. They sound almost as annoying as the cult they're out to get.

You might want to drink a few Klaaktu cocktails first to lighten up...ha!

Posted by schting | February 8, 2008 3:41 PM

sorry matt. your post was neither insightful (yay news!) or entertaining (yay funny!). maybe i missed something.

Posted by f | February 8, 2008 3:46 PM

...your medication?

Posted by Matt Davis | February 8, 2008 3:55 PM

Ok, Matt. Here's what you said:

"What’s the betting this isn’t just something thought up by the Church of Scientology to make you sympathetic to its cause?"

That's what they call idle conjecture, AKA pulling shit out of your ass. If you want to make this newsworthy, maybe you should try to back up your suspicion with something resembling coherent thought. This, in turn, might provoke thought in you readers. I know this might be a new idea for you, but I think it might be beneficial to your career. Just trying to help...

Posted by f | February 8, 2008 4:10 PM

Matt,

Four comments:

1) The plan as most of the "Anonymous" participants have agreed to is a meeting at 11 AM (Portland time). This is similar to other cities internationally.
For further reference: http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?t=15

2) The "Anonymous organization", in the end, has no formal leader. What catalyzed us, however, was a desire to communicate in a clear and peaceful manner one of many important concepts: that people have the right to spiritual beliefs--but do not have the right to act in a harassing or aggressive manner toward others that disagree peaceably.

3) Please note that this is _not_ some sort of strange attempt to promote the Scientology organization. Many flyers will be handed out that mention many troublesome events, including the death of Lisa McPherson, the divisive practice of "disconnection," and concerns that they promote specious mental health treatments. In aggregate, this would be an extraordinarily horrible way of promoting Scientology.

4)Time Magazine wrote an article on Scientology called "The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power." The journalist for this article won three awards for his work, one of which was won previously by Bob Woodward for his work on the Watergate scandal.

Thanks, Matt, for the opportunity to provide the public with the ability to discuss and dialogue about our concerns.

Respectfully,
-Some Concerned Citizens of Portland

Posted by Concerned Citzen of Portland | February 8, 2008 4:19 PM

I read somewhere that those guys got kicked out of Germany. Germany, where that guy ate that slightly crazier guy for dinner. Germany!

Posted by schting | February 8, 2008 4:23 PM

How's it going over at the Church of Scientology, "F"? Seriously, you need to chill the fuck out.

Posted by What the??? | February 8, 2008 4:56 PM

sorry, "what the???". I guess i expect that when newpapers have blogs, they're going to uphold some sort of journalistic integrity. Perhaps I'm in the minority in thinking that "oh, what if?" conjectures are more befitting to weed-clouded dorm rooms than news rooms (no matter how 'alternative')?

Posted by f | February 8, 2008 5:08 PM

To f: While your rants are sort of entertaining (I almost have to wipe the saliva off my screen), perhaps you might consider working out your personal problems with Matt in therapy?

Posted by Leo | February 8, 2008 5:24 PM

or take your meds...

Posted by schting | February 8, 2008 5:35 PM

ok, folks. i said that matt's post is crap journalism, and gave my reason why. similarly, in the vegan stripclub post, i replied that i found Matt's attitude towards women troublesome (to which he responded "blow me"). sorry if this isn't a space where it's unacceptable to question others opinions, but Matt really is a shit journalist that won't respond to any criticism.

Posted by f | February 8, 2008 5:46 PM

Does the "F" stand for Fair Game?

Posted by OJ Simpson | February 9, 2008 2:01 AM

f, didn't you just comment in on of these boxes that Hillary is less conservative than Obama? you know, the same one that voted to give Bush the power to invade Iraq. The only reason I'm saying this, is because, well.... you should really consider moving to Eugene. you can spell women, womyn, and one further, we-moon down there, and your arguments don't have to be coherent. that, and you can take yourself soooo seriously.I really think you'd fit right in.

Posted by Jason | February 9, 2008 1:09 PM

If he wants to move, I've got $5 on it...

Posted by schting | February 9, 2008 2:52 PM

quit ganging up on 'f' for being harsh... he may have been a little too personal, but he's RIGHT. A little investigation would have made it obvious that you're way off base here.

Posted by Jeff | February 10, 2008 12:13 PM

Scientology as a concept is a complete joke, thus it is reasonable that one not be overly serious when discussing the topic. However, there are a lot of gullible people in the world that have gotten shafted by this organization and other more intelligent critics who have been unduly harassed, so for Matt to make a trying-to-be-cheeky remark at the expense of this awareness campaign’s credibility is pretty weak in my opinion. You can’t just dismiss Scientologists as quacks or else you end in the same dilemma that real scientists faced when they didn’t rebuke Intelligent Design propaganda--its allowed to fester in inbreeder communities until it becomes a real problem for everyone.

Posted by Jack | February 11, 2008 12:45 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).