digg

Join DiggAbout

superb video about Anonymous vs Scientology...from Fox News! watch!

myfoxkc.com — Yes, it's the end of times. Fox News has made an excellent video about the protest that will occur on March 15th. Includes an interview with a man who lost his daughter to Scientology.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • marcomc2, on 03/15/2008, -1/+347Crazy Crazy. Scientology gets more ***** every time I read anything about it...Go Anonymous.
    • unicronband, on 03/15/2008, -1/+27Don't you worry about Scientology. Let me worry about [blank].
    • iChainsaw, on 03/15/2008, -1/+3its a trap!
    • sotopheavy, on 03/15/2008, -5/+7This is consistent with Right wing born-again Christian fox. If it claims to be a religion and it's not Christian it deserves an attack in their view. Luckily this actually deserved an attack anyway.
    • electricdragon, on 03/15/2008, -0/+1Go Medium.
    • Dsly, on 03/15/2008, -19/+3Why stop there? Bring down the Catholic/Protestant and Mormon Church as well. Stop the Synagogues, put an end to the mosques and while you're at it let's all get together and put a final kibosh on Devil Worshippers, Cult leaders and Political Parties!

      END STUPID, BRAINLESS, UNQUESTIONING, SHEEP-LIKE FOLLOWING OF ANYTHING, ANYONE OR ANY BOOK OR THEORY!

      and watch JFC. http://www.jfcshow.com
      • Scaryclouds, on 03/15/2008, -0/+11Anyone else see the irony in this?
    • smek2, on 03/16/2008, -11/+2***** Anonymous. I never seen such a pointless, illusional balloon of hot air. What exactly is it that Anonymous does, besides one or two peacful demonstrations? DoS ttacks on scientology servers? Please.... After an initial hype, accompanied by digg frontapge stories about Anonymous made into the "news" (read: local stations nobody heard beforer) it went a bit quiet and i started to wonder what'll be the next big internet craze. Never before did i wittness and deillusional idiocity like this before. One commenter even wrote "Scientology at its last days. Smiles :O)". Oh really? You really think a organisation as powerful and rich as Scientology will simply vanish because of some self proclaimed "hackers", who release inane and childish videos on YouTube?
    • rebotfc, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3Sorry to cross post this here but it has to be seen, Scientology has been proved to of falsified the bomb threats by using a higher res than the 'original' threat...

      http://digg.com/world_news/Anonymous_Vs_CoS_Youtub ...
      • MrPeach, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Did you really think that was a properly formed English sentence?
    • frigid04, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1"Trojan Horse" Party Van - Operation Party Hard Philadelphia = Huge Success
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gO5j8bkdEw
    • amrom, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1http://tinyurl.com/33m8te Scientology gulag video documentary. Please digg before it is dugg down. This is why Scientology is evil. This is why they need to be stopped.
  • Icouldbe, on 03/15/2008, -3/+234Anonymous is giving strength to those who can speak out from their experience and to the major news organizations who are now free to report on Scientology. Wow. Wow.
  • FlippinJack, on 03/15/2008, -5/+146Scientology at its last days. Smiles :O)
    • Quakee, on 03/15/2008, -62/+10Does anyone really think anon or anyone else is going to bring scientology down with protests? REALLY? The only thing you might do is slow the tide of their recruits a bit, but thats gonna be about it. This is just the new internet fad, and its already showing obvious signs of slowing.
      • Aeron, on 03/15/2008, -7/+36do you really think your comments mean anything? Scifag comments are powerless to the internets.
        • Quakee, on 03/16/2008, -6/+3They mean about as much as your comments, anyone elses comments, or digg articles. yet here you are.
      • IHaveCrayons, on 03/16/2008, -2/+3I have to agree, realistically, the protests won't "destroy" the Church of Scientology. Anyone who thinks that protests will, come back to me months from now and eat crow for me.
      • jwoelmer2, on 03/16/2008, -0/+5I would definitely have to agree, but only because Scientology is just a big corporation with money and the courts on its side. Honestly, it's gonna take a lot more than just Anon to bring it down. We have to go further- write to Congressmen to get the actual laws regarding tax exemption for Scientology overturned.
        • nobodyUwannakno, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1scientology has courts on their side?
          Tell us how that "battered wife protection" temporary restraining order in Clearwater worked out
    • SpookyPig, on 03/15/2008, -0/+12I know a good surgeon, tell him you know George and he'll take half off a nose job.
    • Shananra, on 03/15/2008, -1/+10Quakee, Actually I think it's going to pick up. Have you noticed how many ex-scientologists have come out of the woodwork, who may have been too fearful to do so otherwise? Believe me, they are the ones most passionate about this, especially those who have friends or family that they want to help.

      Plus you have the original protestors, who will almost certainly come back out for round two, plus those who couldn't make it to the first protest but will now after seeing how successful the last one was. This protest should be a great deal bigger than the last one was.
    • smek2, on 03/16/2008, -6/+4100+ diggs for a idiotic comment as this? You really think a organisation as powerful and rich as Scientology will simply vanish because of some self proclaimed "hackers", who release inane and childish videos on YouTube?
  • Stevenator, on 03/15/2008, -45/+188Who knew that Fox in Canada was made of 100% pure win?
    • hbeierg, on 03/15/2008, -1/+111local Fox news groups tend to be a lot better than their national counter part, and Kansas City is in Kansas and Missouri not Canada but I'm sure its good up there to.
      • harpwn, on 03/15/2008, -10/+4KC is in Missouri
        • blazes816, on 03/15/2008, -2/+32And Kansas.
        • supersheep7, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4The Fox News station in Kansas City is actually located on the Missouri side (I've from KC), but it broadcasts to both Kansas and Missouri, obviously.
        • Murphy52589, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3Woot something positive about kansas for once!(I live here). And yes, Fox is actually a good new station here, very accurate and not like the fox you see nationally
    • Neoanarchist, on 03/15/2008, -0/+143Lmfao, someone failed geography.
    • toolsdrummer, on 03/15/2008, -1/+14I'll be nice and give you the benefit of the doubt that you were for some reason implying Canada, KS
      http://preview.tinyurl.com/2qovdf
    • Eldorian, on 03/15/2008, -4/+34Sweet! I live in Canada?
    • MrSlumberjack, on 03/15/2008, -22/+8Your a goddamned retard.
    • Icyfenix, on 03/15/2008, -0/+5You guys, we have to protect the people whos names appeared in this video- the reporter who gave a fair story, the man who lost his daughter, and his family, and if we can find her, his daughter!
    • alittleroy101, on 03/15/2008, -0/+17How did you get 40 diggs for that, eh?
      • naju, on 03/16/2008, -0/+4canadians are everywhere, like anonymous
    • shundi10, on 03/15/2008, -10/+1Fail
    • Shady77, on 03/15/2008, -2/+17I'm proudly Canadian, and especially proud (and thankful) that we don't have Fox affiliates in Canada. But you're right about the pure win!
    • Scaryclouds, on 03/15/2008, -1/+6Oh my god why are people digging this person up?!? Kansas City is located in Missouri (smack in the center of the U.S.) not Canada!
    • zplot, on 03/15/2008, -0/+3As much as Diggers can't stand Fox, we should be glad for this. Fox has a huge viewer base, so in those few cases of an honest report such as this, anonymous has succeeded in generating a lot of attention against the CoS. Go Anonymous!
    • themastersb, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1I don't think that Fox in Canada can be all good.
    • sampanc, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2There is no Fox News in Canada. It was about to come in 2004-2005 but thankfully it didn't. We only have Fox Sports.
  • PURPLEDRINK, on 03/15/2008, -98/+9gais: ***** fox news. don't forget that, we don't need their help.
    • boombye, on 03/15/2008, -1/+25The local myFox news stations are different than the national news or propaganda of Fox News Channel
      • Soulbow2, on 03/15/2008, -0/+6True. Local news stations are great when reporting on local news.
      • PURPLEDRINK, on 03/15/2008, -7/+1No. They're not. they dropped montel's show after he spoke out against them.
        • boombye, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2That was Foxs News Channel, which is on Cable. Montell's old talk show was shown in syndication, and his show was on Foxs News Channel, which I just frakking told you is not the same as myFox local affiliates

          can't you read the damn language? you got dugg down how much and still disagree?
    • Ron247, on 03/15/2008, -3/+13ignorance is sad =(
      • PURPLEDRINK, on 03/15/2008, -8/+1ignorance? if you don't understand fox news = enemy of anon then go climb a wall dicks.
    • insanebrain, on 03/15/2008, -8/+4true. . .you need to be buried.
    • Wugie, on 03/15/2008, -0/+12It was an incredibly well done and balanced report. Plus, its local...
      • ronoxQ, on 03/15/2008, -4/+1Fair and Balanced? Holy *****.
        • boombye, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1Maybe because this wasn't the cable channel "Fox News Channel" which is run by different people.
    • obxjdt, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2Hey "PURPLEDRINK", keep drinking the koolaid, and join the cult..... It's jackass's like you that make the left look like extremest!
      One day you'll learn that there are 3 sides to every story. Mine, yours, and the truth. If you keep those blinders on, you'll stay angry at the world... If an eagle wants to fly, it need a left wing and a right wing. Please let us know is you see one fly with only a left wing.....
      People like you make it obvious why the Democrats use a jackass for their symbol....
      • boombye, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1What does his political affiliation have to do with him being a moron and getting this wrong? He didn't even state that he was a Democrat.
  • bctrainers, on 03/15/2008, -1/+72This is why I love Kansas City news.
    Keep it up Anon's, today will be a huge day!
    • boombye, on 03/15/2008, -0/+9That was a pretty informative clip, objective on both sides. Scientology comes off as crazy with her last statement, "people have a right not to talk to anyone who disagrees with their religion" or whatever, it's like they won't even deny that SP thing.
    • Scaryclouds, on 03/15/2008, -0/+2Kansas City news FTW!
    • graffikiller, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1KC ***** YEA
  • joebonk, on 03/15/2008, -83/+12christianity brainwashes more people in a day than scientology ever will in its hopefully short existence
    • everslim101, on 03/15/2008, -2/+51An Atheist disagrees.
    • sys9five, on 03/15/2008, -3/+32Do they charge hundreds of thousands of dollars? No. If you want to be brainwashed by a religion, go ahead...but don't be forced to pay.
      • LilJimmyNordin, on 03/15/2008, -5/+3They don't "charge" hundreds of thousands of dollars, but they definitely aren't shy about asking for money. Overall, the Christian church raises far more money just by asking nicely than the Scifags ever will, no matter what they decide to charge.
        • PueSi, on 03/15/2008, -1/+7But at the end of the day, It's voluntarily (at least Catholics).
          Also, they won't sue you if you say something they don't like.
        • AussieFox, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3Thats the thing
          They "ASK" for money.
          I'm athiest and hate all religion, but one thing they don't do, if force money to stay.
        • LilJimmyNordin, on 03/16/2008, -1/+1I don't disagree with that- I know it's voluntary. But, really, the brainwashing is the part to be concerned with. Without the brainwashing, there isn't ANY transfer of money, voluntary or otherwise. The fact that one "asks" and the other "requires" is academic in light of the fact that both rely heavily on peer pressure and coersion. In this sense, the concept of being "forced" to pay is dependent on what you consider force, and where along the line it happens.
    • sq2shooter, on 03/15/2008, -3/+10Except one brainwashes them and the other brainwashes them, steals their money and isolates them from friends and family. Yea, they are just alike.
    • Audacitor, on 03/15/2008, -0/+9Ya, but at Christianity really seeks to help peoples lives. I'm an atheist, and I think the world would be a better place without any religion whatsoever, but for all the bad things Christiantiy has going for it (extremists, for example), the average Christian means well.
      I just wish they'd quit sending me spam and trying to convert me. It's more annoying than enlightening.
    • celkin, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1youfail.org
  • no12u, on 03/15/2008, -2/+31Good report. Today is gonna be great!
  • FallenWings, on 03/15/2008, -1/+199My cousin received a cease and desist letter from CoS this morning, with an accompanying DVD of the YouTube video mentioned in the Fox piece. Now I'm really riled up. Two hours until we mobilize, go anon go!
    • smacksaw, on 03/15/2008, -0/+32I would hope the ACLU or EFF would step up, but I think he should consider himself a test case and go forward and let Co$ try to sue him. We need to figure out where we stand as Americans who protest - no matter how controversial or distasteful the protest is.

      It's interesting because the RIAA and MPAA are copying Co$ is foregoing criminal complaints to civil litigation. I frankly think it's an abuse of process. But we're not going to make a decision on that as voters, legislators, judges, etc until someone like Co$ pushes that envelope and actually follows up on their threats.

      There was an article on Digg the other day about the woman in Oregon being sued by the RIAA, and now she's counter-suing the RIAA. The gist of the article is that through pre-trial discovery, she has an awful lot of access to RIAA documents and procedures as to how they went after her and others. The same goes for your cousin. However they got this information on him would provide evidence as to how they go after others.

      I frankly don't think Co$ is going to follow through with their threats. #1 it just proves Anonymous' point about them, which is that they are nuts. But #2, it leaves them open to court action, or even worse, notice by legislators. They're really screwed. It's almost like being in quicksand. The more you struggle the faster you sink.

      After all of the time they spent on Usenet, it's almost fitting that they still don't get the golden rule: Don't feed the trolls.

      Don't feed Anonymous. Anonymous feeds upon desperation.

      What are your cousin's crimes? I suggest letting Co$ accuse him and then he can ask Co$ what their crimes are.
      • houstonrally, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2Awesome reply, very insightful and true.
    • IAmTomCruise, on 03/15/2008, -0/+7***** Scientology.
    • ThreeDee912, on 03/15/2008, -5/+1I hate to say it, but...

      Pics or it didn't happen.
  • fcrow, on 03/15/2008, -1/+33Definitely frontpage news!
  • DeltaWolf, on 03/15/2008, -2/+37Homygod! Tom! Ya gotta come out the closet!
    • IAmTomCruise, on 03/15/2008, -0/+15No! I won't come out of the closet.
      • georgiom, on 03/16/2008, -0/+8Tom! Hey Tom, this is John Travolta. Tom, you've gotta come out of the closet. Oh my Gahd.
        • robdiggity, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3If you two don't come out dat closet... IMA PULL OUT MY GUN!!
        • chris1012, on 03/16/2008, -1/+2In mother Russia, man don't come out of closet, other men come in closet.
  • pleiroma, on 03/15/2008, -0/+63It's a Pyramid Scheme!
    • Metal_Hurlant, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2I'm always confused about that statement.
      Pyramid Schemes exploit greed, and the false belief that a lot of money can be made if you just find 10 marks, and they each find 10 marks.

      Scientology seems very different. There's a tiny kernel of insiders that are making a killing, and a vast majority of victims that are giving them all their money, all their time, or both, in exchange for becoming perfect, immortal, and whatever other non-sense will convince them to keep doing it.

      Am I missing something here?
      • etherreal, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2Instead of using money as the lure, they are using faith. This way the guys at the top of the pyramid dont even have to share.
  • paintpro, on 03/15/2008, -1/+17This is great. We need to keep up the pressure and hopefully make it to national news sources.
  • cgbspender, on 03/15/2008, -6/+77Well, it is a local Fox affiliate. They are not as bad as the News Corp Fox.
    • Pillage, on 03/15/2008, -0/+11for those of you who are mathematically inclined:
      MyFox ≠ Fox News.
    • Jedravent, on 03/15/2008, -0/+3It doesn't really matter. Remember the last time a local Fox affiliate did a story about Anonymous? Exploding yellow vans.
      • Metal_Hurlant, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2One would wonder if this is even the same "Anonymous".

        The typical Anon on 4chan's behaves very very differently from what Anonymous has been doing in the past couple of months wrt Scientology.
        Initially Xenu.net was posting videos full of "UR DOING IT WRONG", yet now they appear to have embraced Anonymous' activities on their front page.
        Those kind of signs might hint that the composition of "Anonymous" has evolved. 4chaners might have gone back to their favorite past-time, and a slightly more mature crowd might be surfing the boost of interest initially generated.

        Or I might be totally off here.
  • djdavey, on 03/15/2008, -3/+4Ban them!
    http://www.floort.com/?fid=240&ftitle=Scientology+ ...
  • masahlko, on 03/15/2008, -4/+45I feel bad for that old man, Losing his daughter to this cult...

    if only anonymous could help find her for him..
  • nVious, on 03/15/2008, -5/+33Thats just ***** sick what happened to that family. CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY YOU WILL BE DESTROYED!
  • fruscianteisgod, on 03/15/2008, -2/+12epic win
  • theanswer0611, on 03/15/2008, -10/+2superb and fox news in the same sentence?
    • ultraluxe, on 03/16/2008, -0/+0Apparently it's moar likely than you think.
    • Vet4Peace, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1It's a local affiliate and local news usually does a good job. But yeah, the big Faux News is the suxxorz...
  • stackered, on 03/15/2008, -14/+22Wow... Fox news actually made something unbiased and informative.... nice.
    • D3koy, on 03/15/2008, -5/+42It's only unbiased and informative because you agree with them...
    • bobthegreat1224, on 03/15/2008, -2/+8Selection and diction biases. No news organization is without them.
    • TotalHalibut, on 03/15/2008, -0/+7Relatively speaking yes, it is about as unbiased as you are going to get. They did present both sides of the discussion, they did not slap manditory labels on either group, but at the end of the day, how difficult is it to be truly unbiased about an organization that are little more than proven fraudsters, liars and even murderers. You might as well be asking for an unbiased opinion on terrorism, you will never get it.
      • n00854180t, on 03/15/2008, -0/+4Don't forget traitors. They stole possibly classified material from the US gov.
    • harpwn, on 03/15/2008, -3/+17This isn't "Fox News" this is a local news station affiliated with Fox. I live in KC, and this station is a lot better than Fox News, although it's the worst of the local channels. Mostly it's ***** caught on tape.
  • logego, on 03/15/2008, -0/+172Every single person who has left Scientology and who has been denied access to family members within this so-called church should sue. How many laws are these people breaking? I noticed the following:

    1. Child labor Laws (80 hours week)
    2. Minimum Wage Laws
    3. Threats against employees (will die either by sickness or accident)
    4. Hostage (hiding the whereabouts of family and friends)
    5. Unfit Mother/Father (when teens are working so many hours)
    6. Abuse (verbal, emotional, mental anguish, etc)

    There's also a bunch of other documented stuff not reported in the video that's already common knowledge. What's taking our Government and Law Enforcement so long to react to this? This is *****' sick.
    • dondara, on 03/15/2008, -0/+26And honestly, lawsuits are how Co$ will be brought down. The child labor thing is a big one. A big class action suit for unpaid wages and bad labor practices would probably win and at worst, expose the inner workings of the slave camps ...I mean orgs. I think lawmakers are slow to react due to corruption and not enough public outcry about the cult's activities. The wheels of justice turn slow but crush when they turn.
    • smacksaw, on 03/15/2008, -0/+10Perhaps Anonymous should come out of the shadows and petition Congress to appoint special counsel/an independent prosecutor to investigate.

      And for the people who are former $cientologists, they have a remedy as well - a class-action lawsuit. They just need to find a sympathetic judge.
      • noloveIII, on 03/16/2008, -0/+3No kidding, If congress can investigate ***** baseball than they can certainly look into a widespread cult
    • almk, on 03/15/2008, -2/+4You can't sue the church, even after you leave. In order to join Scientology they make you sign a release form saying you can't sue them. You're family can't even sue "the church" if you die because of their negligence (b/c of Lisa).
      http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Scientology/ReleaseForm ...
      • smacksaw, on 03/15/2008, -0/+18You've already been Dugg down - I didn't do it, but people who know better will do it rather than refute you as you are wrong. Let me give you an example. I have a goat and you want to marry it. So I take you to a priest who will actually marry you to a goat. You get a contract from the priest that you and the goat are married.

        Is it legal because you have a contract? No.

        Let's look at it the other way. You join the Co$. You have a 6-year old kid, and the kid works an 18 hour day. Because you signed a contract, it's perfectly legal for the kid to do that? No! You cannot sign private "binding" legal agreements that contravene state or federal law.

        If your car gets broken into in a parking garage, do you look at the part of your parking pass that says "the owner shall not be held responsible" and you just go "ok" and take care of it? Do you get it? Someone cannot indemnify themselves by making you sign away your rights illegally.

        I don't care what ANY contract says - that's why we have a legal system. To interpret them. Contracts are not ironclad. I feel sad for people like you in your daily lives because you incorrectly believe that because you have a binding, legal agreement to do something that you have no recourse within the framework of the law to defend yourself against illegalities perpetrated upon you. Co$' contract is meant to intimidate. But if a litigant can find an attorney to represent him without being intimidated and a judge to listen to them, they can challenge the contract since as we've come to understand it, it does contain some illegal provisions, mainly in regards to labour law.
      • combatchuck, on 03/15/2008, -0/+9A true believer signing a contract under threat of eternal damnation (or whatever the Scientology equivalent is) could be considered coercion or duress, both of which invalidate the contract. Also, child labor is a criminal issue before it's a civil issue. No matter how many things are signed, breaking child labor laws will land you in prison.
    • Metis2be, on 03/15/2008, -0/+6They probably list staff members as volunteers. They choose to work 90 hour weeks without pay, sleep, or sometimes food.
      /sarcasm
    • evilbunnys2, on 03/15/2008, -0/+4Scientology was also behind the single largest US government infiltration ever.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Snow_White

      And a lot more:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controver ...
    • JesseJ, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Theres this thing called bribing. You give politicians money, whores and booze and they help you. It goes way back, some 7000 years or more. Look it up, it's both in books and this thing called the internet.
      • linuxpenguin, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1This will only work until the word is spread around about the truth (as is currently being done). Then this is a big stain on the politicians' reputation, and they have to work at cleaning their reputation if they want to be voted in again. Otherwise, the people won't support them, and any businesses won't support them because they know this might also give them a bad reputation. (Well Scientology might support them, but likely most others will stop supporting them.)
  • Po0py, on 03/15/2008, -12/+2Surprised to see a piece from Fox that seems to be fair and balanced. A rare occation.
  • keatonkeaton998, on 03/15/2008, -18/+32This isn't fox news dumbasses, it's a local fox station
    • boombye, on 03/15/2008, -3/+7I don't know why you got dugg down because you're right, this is myFox, a local Fox affiliate run by people who actually live in that city and probably went to school in that same city to learn how to broadcast...News Corps' Fox News Channel on cable is a different breed.
      • StGhurka, on 03/15/2008, -4/+2I for one dugg him down because I'm tired of the anti-fox idiocy. If a local fox affiliate had made a laughable mistake, people here would have been all over it with "LOL FOX NEWS SAYS.....!!". But if they say something they like, they have to find some way to reconcile their cognitive dissonance.

        News agencies have a bias. If you don't see it, then it just means you have the same bias.

        Even right now, Yahoo is labeling Eliot Spitzer a Republican. Is that bias? It certainly would be if it were anybody remotely related to Fox labeling a disgraced (R) as a (D).

        http://uk.news.yahoo.com/afp/20080312/img/ppl-us-p ...
        • boombye, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1If a local affiliate did that, and people started saying that stuff, they'd be morons and I wouldn't have to spend my time pointing that out, it'd be apparent and someone would point it out to them that local affiliates aren't the same as the cable run news.. anti-fox idiocy is alright with me since Fox as a whole deserves it, they cancelled firefly, family guy, and I can go on and on.. Fox sucks as a whole.
    • JointheArmy, on 03/15/2008, -0/+5Even more hilarious the comment right below yours said the exact same thing and got 17 diggs while you have -3. Digg makes no ***** sense sometimes.
      • xsquirrel378x, on 03/15/2008, -1/+4i usually go down one by one and flip a coin to see who gets what
      • keatonkeaton998, on 03/16/2008, -0/+0I'm glad some people noticed that I made the exact same comment as the person below me
    • yohnstoppable, on 03/15/2008, -1/+5he probably got dugg down for being a douchebag and calling everyone dumbasses
  • Signa91, on 03/15/2008, -10/+82its NOT Fox News, its Fox "news," reporting local stories. its no where near the same.
    • AnarchoManiac, on 03/15/2008, -0/+2THIS
    • BlaenkDenum, on 03/15/2008, -0/+1Fox news in Los Angeles also made a report on Anonymous a while back if you guys remember, I would say this one favors Anonymous more than the previous report by a long shot. Of course, it could always be just because they think "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

      http://www.myfoxla.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?con ...
    • Pillage, on 03/15/2008, -0/+2It is sad that people don't know the difference. Though my local Fox affiliate seems to follow Fox News in having hot anchor-women.
  • claughery, on 03/15/2008, -11/+5this was quite fair and balanced. thats something new from fox!
    anyways... this was a good little clip!
  • Rikushix, on 03/15/2008, -2/+20What I'm impressed by is that it isn't just some minute long scan by of the protests, talking about Scientology's grievances with anonymous; it makes it just seem like Anonymous is persecuting a religion. This was informative and covered all sides of the issue, including making it clear why Anonymous is protesting: not because of religion, but because of the illegal activities CoS is involved in under the guise of religion.
  • KLWinters, on 03/15/2008, -1/+1Anyone have it from another source online? The video isn't working from their site for me.
  • FLAESHAL, on 03/15/2008, -2/+27I live in Kansas City and can honestly say that the local fox network is really not bad at all.
    • lilwagon, on 03/15/2008, -0/+3KTVU -S.F./ OAK - Fox Affiliate = win
    • Scaryclouds, on 03/15/2008, -0/+1We even have a Tom Bergeron look a like!
  • TonyKay, on 03/15/2008, -10/+2It's far too easy to knock a Fox News report, because it's Fox News. This is a good video, so props to Canadian Fox News.
    • TonyKay, on 03/15/2008, -0/+9*Local Kansas Fox News
      • kcmedic, on 03/15/2008, -0/+3Kansas City not Kansas news. Where is everyone getting Canada from this?
    • Chaoticfist, on 03/15/2008, -1/+5Where are people getting this Canadian bit? I admit the Canadian fox is not as bad as the American Fox, but it says this is happening in Kansas.....
      • patrflav, on 03/15/2008, -0/+3Actually there are no Canadian Fox stations, nor NBC and ABC.
      • kcmedic, on 03/15/2008, -1/+2No, not Kansas. It is in Missouri. Kansas City, MO. We have a lot of geographically challenged here.
        • robdiggity, on 03/16/2008, -2/+1Count yourself among them. The city spans the MOKAN state line. Guess where: State Line Road.
          • kcmedic, on 03/16/2008, -1/+1RTFA. It starts with: Kansas City, MO.-- Guess where the reporter says it is. 39th and Main. That's midtown KCMO. Kansas City does not span the state line. There are TWO DIFFERENT cities. Kansas City Missouri and Kansas City Kansas. State Line Rd mostly runs between KCMO and Overland Park/Leawood/Mission Hills, Kansas. It only divides KCMO and KCK for about a mile or two. As AJRiddle pointed out below, when people say Kansas City, they are usually referring to KCMO. If they are talking about Kansas they say KCK or Kansas City Kansas. But, I guess you're right. I don't know what the hell I'm talking about.
      • AJRiddle, on 03/15/2008, -0/+2Just fyi, there is a Kansas City in Missouri and Kansas, but all the locals call the KC in Kansas "Kansas City, Kansas" or "KCK". The scientology church in Kansas City is in Missouri, as is the city people mean when they say just Kansas City.
  • LewisBreaker, on 03/15/2008, -61/+2why wear masks, are you cowards?
    • xenubuster, on 03/15/2008, -1/+26Because the Church, as you well know, seeks to sue, defame, slander and pursue those who criticise it. Cease asking stupid questions.
      • bobthegreat1224, on 03/15/2008, -14/+1While I completely understand that perspective and take no exception to it, if I were a protester I would wish to make my identity completely known. There's more gravity to the claims of a man taking risks to make his point.
        • feacesface, on 03/15/2008, -0/+10That is exactly the opposite of "anonymous", then, isn't it?
          • oxphantomxo, on 03/15/2008, -0/+1Not all of us wear masks.
          • bobthegreat1224, on 03/15/2008, -6/+0I greatly appreciate what the people in Anonymous are doing, both in the fact that they're opposing Scientology and that they are actively exercising their rights. But wearing a mask takes no guts. Protesters in the civil rights movement came out with their faces bared, prepared to endure public humiliation, physical and verbal abuse, and social and occupational ruin. They understood that the most in the most effective protest, an innocent party is harmed by the group they oppose.

            It's a simple rule: you risk more, you gain more.
          • DarkShroud, on 03/15/2008, -0/+4bob, not everyone can afford to have every aspect of their lives asulted by Scientology.
          • bobthegreat1224, on 03/16/2008, -3/+0I don't mean to say I want everyone to suffer or anything like that. My point is, how many people do you really think have had their eyes opened by Anonymous' efforts? If I see some dude in a Guy Fawkes mask spouting off about the evils of a cult, I'm not exactly going to be inclined to take his word over the cult's. The whole thing comes of as sophomoric.
    • elnerdo, on 03/15/2008, -1/+13Because the group is called "Anonymous". Duh.
    • atomicpoet, on 03/15/2008, -0/+16We get it. You're a scilon. Hopefully, you're making more money at this than $70 a week.
      • LewisBreaker, on 03/15/2008, -10/+1So anyone that questions you is attacked and called childish internet names, wow you guys are sure to bring the walls the of scientology crashing down around Tom Cruise.

        I am just a bystander calling how I see it.

        A bunch of cowards with nothing better to di with their lives then make lame and very low quality you tube videos. The last group of people of masked protestors I can think of are the KKK and they liked to harass people who were different and believed different things to them.

        I see no difference between the KKK and Anon. If this is something you truely believe at least be man enough to show your face, dont hide behind a mask!
        • Aeron, on 03/15/2008, -0/+5you stand out like a sore thumb
        • dunk71, on 03/15/2008, -0/+2Nah, you ain't no bystander: "Bystander, a person who is present at an event or incident but does not take part." You can't keep out of this. That's not bystanding.
          Your posts here and on other Scientology/Anonymous threads show that you're either pro-Scientology or a moron that's got a bug up his ass about something he is too dumb to understand and too lazy to research. Which is it?
        • lotsa1s, on 03/15/2008, -0/+2Your actively defending a corporation that is very obviously guilty of a plethora of crimes against its constituents and the American public at large.
          You are no more a bystander then those who supported Hitler's Holocaust. You're support enables these horrible, horrible people to continue their illegal, abusive, and repressive practices. ***** you.
          • lotsa1s, on 03/15/2008, -0/+1Did I really just say "You're support"? Damnit.
          • bobthegreat1224, on 03/15/2008, -0/+1Don't forget "Your actively", too.
    • kwirk, on 03/15/2008, -0/+5Lewis: Kill yourself.
      • LewisBreaker, on 03/15/2008, -10/+1yet more prove to how immature you guys are! What a constructive comment to make, how old are?
        • Aeron, on 03/15/2008, -1/+5none of your own comments have been constructive, including this one
        • lotsa1s, on 03/15/2008, -0/+3Your suicide would improve the collective human gene pool. I'd say that's rather constructive.
        • KillaJazzBass, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2scilon, nice.

          old enough to get 80s scifi references!
        • robdiggity, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2DUCK LEW!! IT'S XENU!!
    • smacksaw, on 03/15/2008, -0/+4If a bus full of kids with Halloween masks going to a Halloween party crashed, would you help them? And when you started doing that sexy little massage, would your crime be "child molestation"? Because that little $cientology massage is pretty damned creepy if you ask me.
      • LewisBreaker, on 03/15/2008, -7/+1What are you talking about?
        • smacksaw, on 03/15/2008, -0/+2Well, whatever marginally funny joke I might have made will be ruined by explaining it, but it comes down to two things. In the Tom Cruise video, he talked about seeing an accident and being the only one that could help. The other is that Co$ gives out these creepy massages. After 9/11 they showed up and did this thing where they run their fingertips all over your body, except it's free and you don't get a happy ending.

          The OP is an obvious $cientologist and he's talking about masks. Because his logic is that people who wear masks are cowards and have something wrong with them, my joke is that they would refuse their fruity little massage to the kids, which is probably a good thing since it would be considered abuse to watch an adult do that to a child.
    • schroeder, on 03/15/2008, -0/+2Anon is just spreading awareness and showing their disapproval of Scientology's practices. They are non violent and are not making personal attacks. Scientology and their millions of dollars go after individuals and try to destroy their lives. There would not be an issue if Scientology was just something to believe in. Instead they force members to hand over all their money and make it almost impossible to leave without consequence threatening " illness or accident" will cause their death if they leave along with spreading secrets learned while under their sessions where members are told to relate everything "bad" they have ever done to be cleansed (things that would be under doctor/patient confidentiality laws if done in a psychiatric setting). These things are twisted to appear worse than they really are and posted in their neighborhoods. And your comparison with the KKK in another reply is *****. The KKK does more than protest. They use their hidden identity to provide protection from the law while they commit outrageous illegal acts against people they don't like.
    • LewisBreaker, on 03/15/2008, -3/+1reading all these comments just proves my point, you all seem to be very small minded people who cannot handle the fact that other people disagree with you. By disagreeing with Anon views on Scientology and the methods it goes about expressing those views I am not supporting Scientology in anyway. I am pointing out that you are acting acting very immature. And lack the skills to talk about these issues like adults (which I guess most of you arn't).

      Its kinda like pro-life protesters, I say let them do what ever it is they want to. Its not hurting you so let it be. I respect you points of view, I just dont agree with them. The feeling I get is a lot of people involved in this think they are in some hackers type film or something. This time next year it will be totally forgotten.

      • darkfish, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2You are either very naive or obtuse in failing to understand the tactics that CoS uses against former members and other critics (SPs). Do a little research before you get on your high horse and accuse others of being cowards. It's cheap and easy to sit back and be critical of those who are out there protesting and putting their necks on the line.

        Lets get to the facts: do you think CoS is a religion or a cult that sucks money from ordinary people, cultivates celeb whore members to shine up their image and uses intimidation, illegal detention, illegal surveillance, infiltration of government agencies, child labor, abuses DMCA & copyright laws. I could go on, but you do your own research if you dare. Or come up with proof that all their critics are liars. Otherwise you will look like a Scilon and smell like a Scilon.
      • LewisBreaker, on 03/16/2008, -2/+1See here is the POINT you are all missing. CoS may be really bad and do all those things you say they do. I think there are more effective ways to show that you do not agree with how their organisation works. Because thats who Anon is attacking right, the organisation. By having these protests and acting like you do on the internet you arn't really helping to show the people that are being hurt by scientology the error in their ways. What you are doing is alienating them and pushing them deeper into the thing you want stopped.

        I cant take any of this seriously when people start calling me immature internet names.

        Damn I cant make a constructive argument, I know ill cave in to my frustration and start calling people names. I know lets all stand outside a scientology church and shout and call their members names. Its not going to work all you are doing is intimidating th epeople you are meant to be helping!

        Also reading all this crap that is on digg, the average age of Anon seems to be 15. Most of the responses to my comments claim I am defending scientology (I have never said anything positive about them). However I do believe that if someone wants to be a scientologist that is up to them.
        • bennyboy371, on 03/16/2008, -0/+2Nobody is debating that they have the right to believe what they'd like, but you're the idiot on the internet who has spent all day defending Scientology (don't bother saying you haven't, you have. We can look at your page, it lists all of your comments, all you've done is defend it.) Also, you're the guy ON THE INTERNET saying that peaceful protests are not the answer!

          I'm sorry, but when there has been violent wars in our culture, peaceful protests have been the reaction to such violent acts. What would you say is better action than peaceful protest? Doing nothing? You're telling people to ignore their beliefs so that others can continue their atrocities? I'm sorry, but your logic simply doesn't match up.

          Why don't you actually LOOK at the evidence people have amassed? Because these people have the right to believe what they'd like? Sure, but they sure as hell shouldn't be so violent and angry towards everyone else, they shouldn't contribute to the deaths of others.

          Let's take this particularly nasty example, it may be a bit more blatant but it gets the point across: Let's say I have organized a religion based on the peace and freedom of its members. Its clergymen, particularly the ones at the top, have instructed its members to burn down your house, along with the homes of others nearby. This is because you don't agree with their beliefs, you find them quite silly, so you are deemed a threat. We'll just assume what they've done to you has taken a great emotional toll, whether lives were lost or not, this religion has essentially declared war on your own personal beliefs. This religion has rooted itself in the government, and given itself more freedoms and money to work as it would like. Given religious tolerance, the burning of your home will be legally tolerated, and although people may think it is wrong, nobody will speak up publicly for fear of being called intolerant or being sued. What should be public outrage becomes private outrage, and slowly builds. You wonder what you can do, what can be done. What they are doing may slowly be turning into the Crusades of the modern era. Someone organizes a peaceful protest.

          Then someone on the internet devotes their time to calling these people idiots, and speaking about how this religion should be free to do as they wish.

          You can see the confusion you have built. I have reached the conclusion that you are either a very devoted internet troll or a member of the Church of Scientology. It's unrealistic to see otherwise, you've given no reason to. So I extend to you something a bit more realistic... you respect our right to peacefully assemble, our right to free speech, and our right to believe whatever the hell we'd like to believe, and you can do the same. However, as deaths build, as members of the CoS slander and sue the ranks of nonbelievers and root themselves deeper into the core of our society (albeit less publicly than you'd anticipate), the necessity of Anonymous will become more clear, and the fact that they do not respect these rights will become clear as well.
    • Vet4Peace, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Because the CoS will sue and harass them by any means possible.
      So, you gotten all those nasty Thetans out yet?
  • aythrea, on 03/15/2008, -3/+5Beautiful.
  • RogueMountie, on 03/15/2008, -33/+3You people are almost as annoying as the macbook air crowd.
    • dunk71, on 03/15/2008, -0/+7Let's do a deal: You ignore us, we'll ignore you.
      • AnarchoManiac, on 03/15/2008, -0/+3Wow that's pretty easy to do D:
  • willskillz, on 03/15/2008, -25/+3This ***** is getting dumb. Why don't these people rally together to get rid of street gangs or hate groups instead? I think their more likely to get shot, stabbed, robbed, beaten or all of the above by those kinds of thugs then they are to get sucked into the nasty world of Scientology. But I know that's actually a stupid question for me to ask because "it's cool" to be against the CoS these days.
    • smacksaw, on 03/15/2008, -1/+17Why did the patriots dump the tea into Boston Harbor? Why didn't they just go and start killing the British straight away? Hell, why didn't they sail back to England and burn the whole ***** place to the ground?

      It is a stupid question. It's your logic that says "people sell drugs because they are evil/don't accept Jesus/are lazy"...typical black-and-white analysis with no wisdom or real-life experience applied. If you have to ask that question, it's highly likely you won't understand the answer, but here it goes anyway.

      "Thugs" as you put it are a product of an ill society. There are a myriad of contributing factors, but it only takes a small combination of any of these factors to corrupt any specific person. It could be abuse, absent parents, learning difficulties, drugs, poverty, dangerous neighbourhoods, you name it. The problem you are talking about cannot be solved with simple protests. While we can raise awareness on these issues, many of the problems are so deeply entrenched in our society that it takes something larger and more drastic than protest to solve. It takes direct action by everyone.

      Scientology is totally different. It is not multi-faceted. It is one simple entity, and a small one. A small group of people can deal with it. The issues are few and simple, and luckily for Anonymous they deal with very clear rights, namely those granted by the 1st Amendment. There is no right or Constitutional law about poverty or gangs. It's not that simple. Scientology is trying to suppress free speech. It's a simple equation with a simple variables.

      It's like dumping tea. It's a simple statement about taxation and lack of direct democracy. But what did it lead to? The American Revolution. It has to start somewhere. Guys like you don't even have foreplay with a woman before you do her. You probably just do your two-pump chump, leave your $20 on the nightstand and go home and fall asleep.
      • willskillz, on 03/15/2008, -6/+1Ok ok, thanks for the psychoanalyzing me. lol, It seems like you know me soooo well. This Scientology crap is just diverting people like you from real problems in the world. I just find it hard to believe that pathetic, internet tough guys like yourself can do anything about this CoS problem. Short of writing long winded replies to Willskillz's comments, what else have you done to rid the world of the evil Scientology?
        • smacksaw, on 03/15/2008, -1/+3What they have done is a real problem. They've harmed people. Period. If they stop doing so, more power to them to do their thing.

          Think about what you're saying. There is a problem with what they do. If we ignore it, we are being diverted from a real problem for some other problem? How does that even make sense?

          And I don't know what I have done to get rid of $cientology. I've posted in forums being critical of what they do wrong. But unlike Anonymous, I do not want to see $cientology destroyed. I want the exact opposite. I want it fixed and healed. Which is why you don't care about $cientology and be filled with apathy and I can not care that much and be filled with objectivity.

          If you want to say that stating reality is getting rid of $cientology, that's an incorrect opinion. $cientology is not evil, but there are evil people influencing it. People can believe whatever they want, but they shouldn't do harm. There is room in this world and there's room in $cientology for it to exist, but only as something positive. As a good citizen that respects laws, human rights and free speech. As an entity that is not litigious, bullying, threatening and disruptive. If it did what I am saying...
          • willskillz, on 03/15/2008, -3/+1I'm very ignorant when it comes to Scientology so I apologize for it being the least of my worries. It seems that the people who would join into it are big boys and girls that can make their own decisions. All of the anti-CoS comments on here sounds like a bunch of mindless group-think and that always deters me. So, I'll stay away from this one. Good Luck with your "Boston Tea Party".
        • robdiggity, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Uhh will? I think your thetans are showing...
        • nobodyUwannakno, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1what have YOU done to solve the "real" problems of the world?
          The same thing very very few of your fellow scientologist zombies do? pass out booklets and ask for credit cards?
    • atomicpoet, on 03/15/2008, -2/+9Tell that to the father who lost his daughter to the CoS.
      • willskillz, on 03/15/2008, -8/+1I'll tell him to pay more attention to his children. Or I'd be a father and go in there with guns blazing. Not sit around and cry like a baby as you would do.
    • Beatmiser, on 03/15/2008, -2/+12http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCGP-0545EU

      I'm sure Lisa McPhereson agrees with you...Idiot.
      • willskillz, on 03/15/2008, -10/+1You're right You're right. Let me get my bullhorn and go stand out in the street to whine and complain. That'll teach them. ***** loser
    • boombye, on 03/15/2008, -1/+5why you crying for?
    • schroeder, on 03/15/2008, -1/+4There are a lot of problems in the world. People choose their battles. Anon has chosen this. You can't fight everything at once, but everyone can choose their battles and support others who have chosen theirs. And I personally think the CoS is more dangerous than other things you mentioned, they are very resourceful and have a lot of resources.
    • dunk71, on 03/15/2008, -0/+5willskillz: Because the police, and the populace at large, are largely ignorant of the crimes of the Church of Scientology whereas everybody knows about the crimes of street gangs and and hate groups and action is being taken against them. Anonymous seeks that same action against the CoS. This is not hard to understand, is it?
      And, while we here, how does the picking of a group, more readily identifiable as a problem, justify ignoring the crimes of another group? Because their crimes are hidden they should go unchecked?
      • willskillz, on 03/15/2008, -6/+1who's crimes? CoS? Okay it's "alleged" that they break up families, practice forced labor and threaten death to members if they want to leave. That sounds a lot like the military. Where is the proof dunk71? I am almost certain they've been infiltrated by the FBI by now and so has you little Anonymous group. Anonymous are the ones that sent over 8k phone death threats, 3.6 million threatening emails and over 22 bomb threats (if you watched that fox clip). Anonymous sounds on par to being labeled as a terrorist group within the coming months. I'd stay far far away from that org. And for the record I don't feel bad for that guy who "lost" his daughter. He knew what he and his wife were involved with and brought their children into that world. That's on him.
        • dunk71, on 03/15/2008, -1/+4OK... You're throwing all sorts of ***** so lets address it a point at a time:
          The crimes are more than alleged. They're recorded, witnessed, testified... It happens. The info is readily available out there if you care to look. You have the internet at your fingertips, why not use it? Digg is actually a very good starting point for finding links to other sites where information is readily available. A favorite of mine is http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/
          Again you say the CoS's actions are similar to another group (the military) but this does not justify their actions. If you commit a crime it does not make it OK for me to commit the same crime.
          The FBI may have infiltrated the CoS, they may have infiltrated Anonymous, they may may not have. Should we citizens sit back and entrust that someone else is taking care of everything in our absence? I think not.
          The threats the CoS alleges Anonymous have made will be investigated if they have been reported to law enforcement agencies. The common belief among Anonymous is that the vast majority of the threats are either inventions of the CoS or faked by them in order to attempt to discredit Anonymous. Anonymous does not endorse violent or threatening behavior as part of the action against the CoS. Time will tell.
          Anonymous have been labeled many things in the past, and will be labeled many things in the future. I watch with interest, but am not Anonymous.
          You can feel however you wish for the man who lost his daughter but I find your comment laking of compassion. Have you never lost anyone? Has someone left your life and you know they can't return? What if you knew they could return but that they won't because their peers won't allow them or have convinced them not to? It hurts, surely? The father did not know that this would be the outcome of his relationship with the CoS... They're hardly going to advertise that policy are they? "Join Scientology! Bring your family! But make sure they all believe and don't have doubts because if they do leave then you'll never be able to talk to them again as long as you stay in the church". Oh I'll sign up for that! I've got ***** for brains!
  • heartsblood, on 03/15/2008, -9/+1I just dug a story from fox...I feel dirty.
    • pencilneck, on 03/15/2008, -0/+1Don't worry, you didn't cause any global warming.... ***** hippies.
  • ltkerr0r, on 03/15/2008, -5/+22That's not THE fox news. Local stations are different.
    • TecK415, on 03/15/2008, -1/+5This has been said about 2807138 times now.
  • Hoogs, on 03/15/2008, -16/+1Why do you all care about Scientology so much? How does it affect your lives enough to get this riled up about it?
    • D14BL0, on 03/15/2008, -0/+17To acknowledge an injustice and not do anything about it is just as bad as committing an injustice in the first place.
    • lotsa1s, on 03/15/2008, -0/+4They tried to censor the internet in their favor. We, the internet, do not appreciate that.
  • D14BL0, on 03/15/2008, -1/+8At least FOX didn't say "a secret internet website" again.
  • LordRahl72, on 03/15/2008, -19/+2From someone who could care less about any religion it looks like many of you people could make use of some intense therapy.
    There is a life out there and far more important things in this world to get all roused up about than something as useless as this.
    Now when someone from this Scientology thing goes and kills your son or rapes your daughter then by all means get all worked up.
    • atomicpoet, on 03/15/2008, -0/+8Hey scilon, are you suggesting we get some therapy from a psychologogist? Oh, and if you watched the video, you'd discover something *did* happen to someone's daughter.
    • schroeder, on 03/15/2008, -0/+3Why wait?
  • Mahoney07, on 03/15/2008, -12/+3How is it surprising this is being reported by Fox News? Contrary to digg belief, Fox News is a normal news reporting agency that is not different from news sources like CNN. I hate it when people say Fox News is biased and give examples like Sean Hannity said blah blah blah. The show is called Hannity and COLMES. Colmes is a Democrat that also tells his opinion.
    • tempspastic1, on 03/15/2008, -3/+0Don't feed the trolls (Even when you might be correct)
    • boombye, on 03/15/2008, -0/+4ok stfu. News Corps Fox News Channel is not the same as local affilates dubbed myFox news..

      seriously, colmes? it's a news commentary program, not the news
      their bias is in their actual news reports, that is what differs them from local news on the myFox affiliates which is objective

      it's no surprise that their news commentary programs are biased, because that's what news commentary programs are...commentary or opinions from a host and his guests that appeal to a certain demograph, but not only that, there actually daily news is biased.
  • Argy, on 03/15/2008, -2/+9Fox affiliate stations like this one aren't controlled by the national network as much as one might think, so it being Fox really doesn't matter.
    In any case, great report.
  • DaLukeMan, on 03/15/2008, -1/+9Lol I'm going to burn you!
  • diggitny, on 03/15/2008, -2/+30Anonymous wear masks because of the tactics the Co$ uses to silence its critics. Ever heard of "fair game"? Google it and I think you'll understand.

    Watch Scientologist goons attack an SP (suppressive person) who shows up to a Scientology party. "What are your crimes? Murder, perhaps? . . . Did you stop beating your wife to come here? . . . I'm pretty sure you're a child molester." They don't want the truth--they just want to intimidate: http://youtube.com/watch?v=pPol_m8wm8Y
    • Tayls, on 03/15/2008, -0/+1I get such a kick out of that video. The one guy is going off on "absolute freedom." As in, join this organization for absolute freedom. Seems a little counter-productive to me.
  • koopertrooper, on 03/15/2008, -1/+35dugg for the Burger King mask
  • CarStan, on 03/15/2008, -7/+1cant we shut of Scientology's IP like pakistan shut of youtubes'IP one week ago?
    • XMike14x, on 03/15/2008, -0/+4The last thing we want is to encourage censorship - even though it would be good.
      • combatchuck, on 03/15/2008, -1/+4Censorship is never good. If we censored everything people didn't agree with, we'd end up with nothing. Scientologists are free to believe whatever they want. You can't change their beliefs, and you can't shut them up. The protest is against the laws they break, the people they abuse, and the threats they make.
        • Bing11, on 04/14/2008, -0/+1Yeah! Those laws they break! Like breaking copyrights and DOS attacks! Oh no, wait...
    • GastonFTW, on 03/15/2008, -1/+1I don't see how that would be helpful at all.
  • krakkinem, on 03/15/2008, -1/+7They're a Fox affiliate, they're not wholly evil. My local Fox affiliate down here is the news I always end up watching. It all comes down to the journalistic integrity of the people producing, writing, shooting, and editing the piece.

    However, I suppose big brother News Corp. could always drop the hammer at any time...
  • paker, on 03/15/2008, -0/+21Scientology loses in court on a restraining order for a 500 foot buffer between the main Scientology Clearwater HQ and Anonymous protesters.

    http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/myfox/pages/Home/Deta ...
    • jaydoj, on 03/15/2008, -0/+8the judge ruled in favor of anon, with the added note that a restraining order cannot be applied to a group of people by a CORPORATION. hee hee
  • bradcrc, on 03/15/2008, -3/+7The video appears to be from a fox affiliate station, not "fox news".
    • rjwisniewski, on 03/15/2008, -2/+5Capt. Obvious reporting for duty.
      • thisisegn, on 03/15/2008, -1/+1You say that bradcrc is, but based on other comments people clearly don't know that
        • rjwisniewski, on 03/15/2008, -0/+1You are correct. I guess I should have stated that comment "in general"
    • scarz99, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1It is FOX News, just the local branch for Kansas City dubbed "My FoxKC"
  • maxlightz, on 03/15/2008, -1/+8keep your eyes out for stories about legal threats and mysterious other occurences relating to that newswoman - Tess Koppelman
  • petethepanda, on 03/15/2008, -10/+2.
  • nsanidy, on 03/15/2008, -2/+4[This comment has been removed due to a copyright claim by the Church of Scientology]
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 110 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.