digg

Join DiggAbout

Message to Scientology watch!

youtube.com — We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not Forgive. We do not Forget.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • blizzok, on 01/21/2008, -154/+22How silly. Dugg
    • KillerJ59J, on 01/21/2008, -27/+6No, a massage for Scientology would be silly, you silly.
      • BoneheadFarker, on 01/21/2008, -21/+3Who would want to give a massage to someone for Scientology? I doubt they'd enjoy it anyways...unless it came with a happy ending...
      • deadlyhaiku, on 01/22/2008, -1/+4[This comment has been edited due to legal action by Church of Scientology International]
    • Jlaugh, on 01/21/2008, -15/+31OMG internet tough guys. UNITE!!
      • sekhui, on 01/21/2008, -13/+10laugh now, but they'll be laughing at you when you get all hacked and butthurt.
      • CraigCarlyle, on 01/22/2008, -2/+2You don't know the power of Anonymous.
        • deadlyhaiku, on 01/22/2008, -1/+2[This comment has been edited due to legal action by Church of Scientology International ]
    • Ataxia2008, on 01/21/2008, -2/+7Sorry for being so naive, but have those comments on the vid on YouTube actually been targeted by the CoS?
      • Kakama, on 01/21/2008, -2/+6No, it's trolls... we assume. They have targeted comments before though.
        • Incomp3tnt, on 01/21/2008, -7/+17All YouTube comments are either trolls, idiots or Christians. Either way you're wasting your time paying any attention to their thoughts.
          • se1zure, on 01/21/2008, -11/+11saying it is a waste of time to pay attention to Christian's thoughts is a ridiculously idiotic comment in itself, considering quite a few of the greatest minds on earth are/were Christian. Sure, alot weren't but making a blanket statement like yours is completely outrageous.
          • 77boy84, on 01/22/2008, -2/+8Am I the only one who doesn't see the irony in an Atheist bashing bashing Christianity?
        • ParticleMan420, on 01/21/2008, -14/+8on earth, idiots are synonymous with christians
      • Zyrix, on 01/21/2008, -1/+13No I don't think so because [This comment has been edited due to legal action by Church of Scientology International]
    • ELEM, on 01/21/2008, -1/+3Yes
    • Christbait, on 01/22/2008, -0/+10But not quite as silly as Scientology.
  • DGNeo, on 01/21/2008, -17/+373Excellent.
    • sesstreets, on 01/21/2008, -3/+90This should be interesting to see what happens. A gigantic money fed "religion" vs a gigantic mass of anonymous people with nothing to lose.
      • adventchild08, on 01/21/2008, -24/+5Nice commentjack.
      • darkwing81, on 01/22/2008, -8/+4i doubt "anonymous" is a giant mass of people. probably just a few nerds on a power trip.
      • redDC143C, on 01/22/2008, -5/+2LEAVE SCIENTOLOGY ALOOOOOOOONEEE!! *sob sob sob*
    • xsuite, on 01/21/2008, -36/+17First they came for the Scientologists, but I did not stand up because I was not a Scientologist...
      • Albumen, on 01/21/2008, -4/+35Nice sentiment, but you don't understand the true nature of this beast. The beef isn't with in individual scienos. Its the leadership and its crimes against its own members that are the real problem.
        • xsuite, on 01/21/2008, -13/+8Very true but If the berating and annihilation of the Church of Scientology goes unchecked then it wont be long until such action is taken against other 'unpopular' faiths.

          Dont get me wrong, Im not a scientologist, Im a Christian, but I just dont think that the natural right to believe whatever you want should ever be compromised.
          • Urusai, on 01/21/2008, -2/+7Yes, but beliefs can be changed, otherwise we'd all still be shamanistic animists. If we know a better way, we have a moral obligation to try to spread it. Even Plato agrees.
          • Tiak, on 01/21/2008, -1/+5But the thing is, they tend to compromise that ability in their followers to begin with,.. Enticing people in with promises of perfect happiness, then putting them through repeated suggestibility-increasing exercises, followed by limiting their exposure to all other ideas, kind of steps over that line, doesn't it?...

            How else is one to respond?
          • Sidzilla, on 01/21/2008, -0/+3I'm hoping they target Lutherans next. They are heretics, I tell you....
        • Albumen, on 01/21/2008, -2/+12You missed the point yet again! It's not Scientology itself, its the "Church" of Scientology and its leaders who are the criminals. Believe whatever you want, but if your beliefs spawn illegal behavior then be prepared for the consequences.
        • Yonson, on 01/21/2008, -2/+16I have no problem with the 'beliefs' of Scientology, however crazy I may think they are, it's the freedom of Scientologists to believe them. The problem I have is with the actions of the Church - the suppression of information and "fair game" tactics.
          • williamdyer, on 01/21/2008, -1/+12Sceintology is not a legitimate religion. Sometimes even the state can make a wise judgment, as in Germany banning Scientology. The Germans are too familiar with that kind of organization.
        • OwdenBowden, on 01/21/2008, -4/+2I am Kent Brockman and I would like to be the first to say: HAIL - to our new alien leaders.
      • ingenium21, on 01/21/2008, -5/+27so you're saying that scientologists should go on slandering, killing, and destroying the lives of those who do not agree with their views? Also, your argument can be turned around against you. What about those people whom the scientologists "came for" but we did not stand up because it didn't concern ust? In fact what about if I changed your argument to "First they came for the homosexuals, but I did not stand up because I was not a homosexual"? Religion acts like its a victim all the time but in reality, it is one of the worst human rights violators on the planet.

        One of the worst displays of cruelty I have seen by religion is cloaked under a charity. Most "missionary" groups will not help out poor African villages until they are "saved". That means you cannot feed, clothe, or even give them a drop to drink, until they say they believe in God. So please don't come here with this haughty attitude because this is a matter of life and death, and people need to start being held responsible for their actions.
        • BOFH2, on 01/21/2008, -5/+5Which missionary groups? You say "most"; please tell us how many "missionary" groups there are and which ones do not allow people to eat or drink until a profession of faith.
        • Smaulz, on 01/21/2008, -4/+5Straw man much? Let's see a few names. Hell, show me a single instance of a reputable missionary group that's ever done what you mentioned. You sir, are full of *****. Thanks for playing.
          • marm0lade, on 01/21/2008, -3/+6I'm sick of people throwing around the "nice straw man argument" when they have no idea what the ***** they are talking about, such as yourself. When did it become so popular? He did not overstate xsuite's position. Nothing about this is straw man. YOU sir, are full of *****. THANK YOU, for playing.
          • ingenium21, on 01/21/2008, -3/+6I guess you have no idea what a straw man argument is, For instance, I took his argument, which is a notable quote by Martin Niemöller about how they came for the Jews,. the communists, the trade Unionists, and then for "him". Now, how is it that his is not a straw man argument since he flips the entire quote around, rather vaguely, to depict religious people as victims? What I did was I worked with his argument, in an objective sense, replaced the premise and added a conclusion. I would say mine isn't a fallacy at all.

            Also, if you claim that I'm full of *****, you are just naive or just plain dumb. The International Mission Board, Gospel for Asia, and the Christian and Missionary Alliance are prime examples of evangelical groups who try to spread the word o' christ in their mission.

            One more thing, you claiming that my argument is a straw man, when you are wrong is a logical fallacy in itself. I think....a straw man...
          • Smaulz, on 01/22/2008, -1/+1@ingenium
            "Most "missionary" groups will not help out poor African villages until they are "saved"."
            see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
            Second, you gave me two evangelical groups who "try to spread the word 'o christ" in their mission. Can you point out where in the bylaws (or even actions) of those two organizations they state that they "will not feed, clothe, or even give them a drop to drink until they say they believe in God"? Oh wait, I get it. Just because they "spread the word 'o christ", they're "one of the worst displays of cruelty". Correct?
            Umm... Do you know what the word 'missionary' means?! And you're accusing me of being "naive or just plain dumb"... uhh, yeah. Once again, thanks for playing.
            @marm0lade
            Pay attention, please.
          • Acolyte357, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1@Smaulz
            "so you're saying that scientologists should go on slandering, killing, and destroying the lives of those who do not agree with their views? Also, your argument can be turned around against you. What about those people whom the scientologists "came for" but we did not stand up because it didn't concern ust? In fact what about if I changed your argument to "First they came for the homosexuals, but I did not stand up because I was not a homosexual"? Religion acts like its a victim all the time but in reality, it is one of the worst human rights violators on the planet."
            Above is his argument. Please detail the Straw man that you see here.
            "Most "missionary" groups will not help out poor African villages until they are 'saved'."
            This however is a Red herring fallacy know as "Poisoning the well".
        • artliquide, on 03/16/2008, -0/+1Ok. I agree with most of what you said, but from my experience (a missionary kid), I would disagree that "most" missionary organizations will only help those who will further the religious cause. I'm not religious myself, but having grown up in another country due to being the daughter of missionary parents, I've had a lot of exposure to a large number of missions organizations, and can confidently say that most of them are honestly altruistic and not evil.
      • revanrules, on 01/21/2008, -0/+3xsuite is just parodying a poem by Martin Niemöller, i found it funny
        • nreynolds, on 01/22/2008, -1/+1the poem, on the other hand, is not funny at all.
    • prisoner24601, on 01/21/2008, -4/+246No "religion" should EVER be permitted to have IRS Tax-Exempt status if they refuse to release their "scriptures" into the public domain. Christians never pursue copyright violations for anyone downloading/excepting/quoting (even for rebuttal) the bible. Muslims make the Koran available for free. Atheists don't "hide" their philosophy of life and make you buy or "pay your way through classes" to learn what they believe.

      Freedom of religion is absolute. You can believe the Stay Puft Marshmallow man is god in you want to. I'll defend YOUR right to do that (no matter how stupid) with all my being. But if your "religion" won't flat-out declare it's principles and make them available for public rebuttal, then it doesn't deserve tax-exempt status. And if you actually SUE people under copyright law for publishing your beliefs then you are a scam, plain and simple. If Scientology can't "man up" and compete openly in the free market of ideas then that just proves what a scam it is.
      • xsuite, on 01/21/2008, -1/+30I have to agree with you there, prisoner. In that case, let the revolution commence.
      • Haxnn, on 01/21/2008, -19/+2I think you may be a little naive if you think Christians have never tried to suppress religious documents. I don't how you can say freedom of religion is absolute and then put a whole bunch of conditions around it. Why don't we just remove the Tax-Exempt status from all religions?
        • doctechnical, on 01/21/2008, -1/+14Because to tax a thing is to control a thing, and having the federal government control religious expression is anathema to the principles on which the nation was founded.
          • fixty, on 01/21/2008, -1/+4But there are certain conditions that governments are within their right to put forth for determining who can claim they are a religion - otherwise anyone wanting to avoid their share of taxes (pick a company - Walmart for example) would just say their business is a religion.
        • prisoner24601, on 01/21/2008, -1/+15I've been a Christian quite a long time. I know a very large number of Christians, in many different denominations. I don't know of a single one that views anything other than the Bible, and the Bible alone, as "scripture."

          I honestly don't know what you are talking about. Even the most hardcore atheist I've ever debated with here will agree that he has FULL access to all the scriptures any Christian believes, has them for free, has had them made available BY Christians in the first place, and has NEVER had it enter his mind that he might be SUED for repeating (if only for rebuttal) those scriptures. The same is true of Islam. Buddhism. Atheism. You name it. All except Scientology. You WILL be sued if you try to make available (perhaps to refute) their documents. You may hate all religions, but not all religions are the same.
        • EditorResponse, on 01/21/2008, -9/+4prisoner24601: "I honestly don't know what you are talking about. Even the most hardcore atheist I've ever debated with here will agree that he has FULL access to all the scriptures any Christian believes"

          Too bad you do not know what you are talking about. The Vatican has tens of thousands of documents that they do not make public...and the reason is because they do NOT corroborate Jesus Christ as the main man...he did not exist or was a minor player. The Vatican is not going to ever release the documents.
          • ChaosMotor, on 01/21/2008, -0/+11Sure, the Vatican's archives are a problem, but we have the Gnostic gospels, most of the Dead Sea Scrolls are available now, and huge amounts of the "Lost" books of the Bible are available. If someone were able to copy and propagate the suppressed texts in the Vatican, I doubt they would be hunted down like an animal. Maybe 500 years ago, doubtful today.
          • AmusedToDeath, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2The Vatican is a Catholic Entity. Catholicism does NOT equal Christianity.
        • prisoner24601, on 01/21/2008, -1/+8EditorResponse, I understand you have some obvious concerns with Christianity/Catholicism. I'm not trying to dismiss them, but I really think you are discussing a *different* issue. As a Christian, my religion is built on the Bible alone, a book you do have access to. The overwhelming majority of Christians (indeed, probably almost every single Christian you could ever meet) would state the same thing. What we believe is what we CAN read in the Bible, and whatever hypothetical documents might have been lost/hidden/destroyed (whatever your theory is here...) are not relevant because any hypothetical documents we *don't* have access to are not a part of our beliefs anyway.

          You are, I think, asserting something of a conspiracy theory that Christianity as I (and the overwhelming majority of those how believe in it) understand it isn't "correct" and certain documents hidden by the Vatican would prove that. That honestly has nothing to do with the issue at hand: Christians, like me, who believe the Bible alone welcome others to examine it and never hide it. Other hypothetical documents you can't examine aren't relevant because they don't form any part of my belief system anyway.
      • writeman, on 01/21/2008, -23/+3Your comment is stupid. What if one of their principles is to keep those principles secret? What if they only want people who are serious about Scientology to be privy to them, and as such require them to pay for the information?

        Don't be fooled into thinking that Christians and others don't pay for what they receive. Many Christians give a percentage of their income to the church, and every Sunday, the donation dish is passed around, giving people little choice but to contribute.

        Those who sin are threatened with eternal damnation in the fires of hell. So how, exactly, is Scientology any worse than that?

        Your comment about athiests, by the way, is equally stupid. Athiesm is not a religion and is not organized, and there is no set philosophy of life in which we believe. So throwing us in with the rest of them makes no sense whatsoever.
        • Kakama, on 01/21/2008, -1/+12Christians are not forced to put money into the plate; they are not told that if they do not, they will not reach enlightenment. They do it to support the church and the causes, and eventually people give money, but a mere 10% given to a church that asked you is not the same as having the CoS tell you that you MUST pay THOUSANDS of dollars to reach enlightenment. People have killed themselves trying to escape the financial clutches of Scientology; show me a person who is in legal debt to Christianity or Judaism.
          • writeman, on 01/22/2008, -1/+0I was raised a Christian. I went to church and Sunday school. If you didn't put money in the plate, it did NOT look good -- a sure sign that you were going to hell. So don't tell me they're not forced. And that 10% you give to the church can easily wind up in the thousands in a very short time if you make good money.
            Am I happy that Scientologists demand money? No. But to paint them as different than other, "accepted" religions is ridiculous.
        • prisoner24601, on 01/21/2008, -1/+10You can't possibly think there is anyone who isn't aware that Atheism isn't a monolithic organized religion. That's obvious to everyone. The point, however, is that no Atheist will SUE me if I wanted to excerpt and discuss some portion of The Origin of Species. If I quote a passage of Dawkins' The God Delusion I'm not going to end up in court because Atheist respect the concept of fair use and public debate. Atheists don't say "you can only buy a copy of The God Delusion" after you've completed our Origin of Species course.

          As to your concern: "What if one of their principles is to keep those principles secret?" again I say it's perfectly FINE for a "religion" to say that it one of their principles, but that should, by itself, exclude them from consideration from TAX EXEMPT status.
          • ChaosMotor, on 01/21/2008, -3/+1While I agree with you, I want to point out that Darwin would be astonished to hear that "Origin of Species" is an atheist text, seeing as how Darwin was a devout Christian and thought evolution was more evidence of God's glory.
          • cranium, on 01/21/2008, -1/+3@ChaosMotor
            That's *****. Darwin was an agnostic even before OoS was published, and the story of his deathbed return to christianity has been discredited.
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin#Religi ...
          • writeman, on 01/22/2008, -0/+0Athiesm organized? You're joking, right? I mean, that's such a ridiculous concept, I have no idea how to respond.
          • prisoner24601, on 01/23/2008, -0/+1@Writeman: Um, I specifically said: "You can't possibly think there is anyone who isn't aware that Atheism ISN'T a monolithic organized religion..."
        • acdcfanbill, on 01/21/2008, -0/+4"What if one of their principles is to keep those principles secret? "

          By telling us that, they are breaking their principals anyway, so why not just be forthcoming.
        • EditorResponse, on 01/21/2008, -4/+6All religions should lose their tax exempt status.
        • buymeachicken, on 01/22/2008, -0/+5The first rule of Scientology is you do not talk about Scientology.
        • jordanmerle, on 03/10/2008, -0/+0Just ask Edward Norton!
      • EditorResponse, on 01/21/2008, -19/+6"No "religion" should EVER be permitted to have IRS Tax-Exempt status if they refuse to release their "scriptures" into the public domain."

        Then you should be going after the ***** Catholic church dumbass! I see so much drivel on Digg.com. This is another example. Does anyone have any idea how many tens of thousands of documents the Catholic church has in storage in the Vatican: the Holy See? Lets say that the Bible, old and new testament is composed of...I'm guessing, 50 books. If they have ten thousand documents, which are scripture at the Vatican and many of them DO NOT SUPPORT the main 50 books then that is why they are not public. Doesn't anyone find it funny that Diggers are going after a religion/cult with less than 2 million followers when the catholic church has a lot more people and more to hide....daily, miracles are performed by catholics and after some time the people that do the miracle get beatified...they become saints that can be prayed too.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatification
        http://www.catholicherald.com/saunders/98ws/ws9811 ...

        If you ask me the majority of Diggers going after Scientology are Christians that have an axe to grind...and Christianity, like Islam sucks my ass too. I think all of these CULTS need to go.
        • Syphon8, on 01/21/2008, -0/+8Members of the Catholic church are not allowed to see, or are taught from those papers. The Roman Catholic church has it's public bible, and that's all the followers see. Way to compare apples and oranges.
        • prisoner24601, on 01/21/2008, -0/+9The Protestant Bible has 66 books (Genesis to Revelation) and the Catholic Bible includes 7 more. I understand your concern for "transparency" in churches, but surely you recognize that not every single document produced by the Catholic church either needs to be public or could reasonably be considered scripture? As a protestant, my theology is incredibly simple: the Bible and the Bible alone. A Catholic's might be more complex if you include the Papal declarations of those (quite rare) times when he spoke "Ex Cathedral" with the express purpose of adding doctrine. But those Ex Cathedral statements are public record.

          This issue is far more than Christians ganging up on Scientology as some matter of personal dislike. The reason you see EVERY major group here (Atheists, Christians, Muslims, Apple Fanboys, Punk Rockers, Ron Paulites, LOLcat-ers, and Aqua Teen Hunger Forcers) unified against Scientology is that it HIDES it's core fundamental beliefs from the public scrutiny and debate that EVERY other religion or philosophy or claim of higher truth willingly subjects itself to.
        • ChaosMotor, on 01/21/2008, -0/+5The battle with Catholicism was fought hundreds of years ago, they still have many suppressed documents, but many of them have become public through alternative channels, like the Gnostic gospels and the Dead Sea Scrolls, and many are collected in various "Lost" books of the Bible collections. In fact, your entire complaint goes all the way back to the Council of Nicea when they decided on the Catholic version of Christian faith, the Trinity, and the Divinity of Christ. The books were excised then because they conflicted with the doctrine adopted by the Council. Many of those texts are now available. While it would be an incredible boon to Christianity as a whole to access the entirety of the Vatican's archives, that battle is largely over. Let's concern ourselves with the conflict at hand.
      • Syphon8, on 01/21/2008, -3/+31Atheism isn't a religion.
        • ThndrShk2k, on 01/21/2008, -15/+6But it is the faith in the idea that there is no god(s). This could be considered as a belief system itself.
          • fixty, on 01/21/2008, -2/+5A belief system? If you consider the extension of rationalism into ontological matters a belief system then maybe, but I wouldn't call it a "faith".
          • ThndrShk2k, on 01/22/2008, -2/+2But rationalization without the concept of proof is just unfounded speculation. These such unfounded statements are only believed in by the people who believe it is right, without any proof backing it up.

            Prove to me that there is not a god.
            Prove to me that there is a god.
            If you can not do these things, then your ideals about a supreme being, no matter what form, function, or even status of existance, are based on your own faith in the aspect that your opinion is right.
            To believe without proof is in essence the definition of faith. And with this faith people automatically reject my rationalisation that what they say is a faith based conjecture, because they do not have doubt. To have doubt would be agnosticism.
          • Acolyte357, on 01/22/2008, -2/+2@ThndrShk2k,
            Atheism is to reject theism.
            Let me give you an example:
            Theist: There is a god and he (shouldn't you use the pronoun it, sense it's neither man nor woman) created all.
            Atheist: Really?! Cool! Where?
            Theist: He's invisible, but he all around us!
            Atheist: Ohh. So he's invisible?
            Theist: yeah
            Atheist: So what proof do you have that he exists then?
            Theist: A book (or prophet), told me so.
            Atheist: Right...I'm going over here.
          • fixty, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2@ThndrShk2k,

            Not to be picky, but it cannot be proven that there is not a god. That's a negative-proof logical fallacy...
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof
            ...so to say inability to prove there is not a god implies your non-belief is therefore a matter of faith does not follow logically.
          • ThndrShk2k, on 01/22/2008, -1/+1@Acolyte
            What makes you more correct than him?
            @ Fixty
            1) I asked you to prove that there is not a god, and prove to me that there is. This negates the Negative Proof fallacy as I am questioning the whole concept of blindly following of one set of rules. I am provoking doubt.
            Atheism is a faith, but if it was not faith in your belief of non-belief, then you would have proof. Because without any solid proof your beliefs are a matter of opinion. Believing this opinion of yours is faith in your opinion, as the route you took to reach it only resides in your /personal/ logic.
            The aspect of faith is not to have proof, but to believe. as a wonderful quote by Douglas Adams:
            "Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:

            "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

            "But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. Q.E.D."

            "Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

            "Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

            Most leading theologians claim that this argument isn't worth a pair of fetid dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid from making a fortune with his book Well That About Wraps It Up For God."
            So I say to you again. Prove to me that there is a god, or that there is not a god. Without this proof all you have to go on is faith, and to have proof, is to deny faith.
          • ApeInago, on 01/24/2008, -0/+2athiesm is a faith as much as NOT collecting stamps is a hobby.
        • MrMetal, on 01/21/2008, -1/+2Exactly, it's a way of life.
        • prisoner24601, on 01/21/2008, -1/+14I honestly wasn't trying to imply that it was. It's sometimes just a little "syntactically unwieldy" to make the distinction. My point is that all "schools of thought" or "philosophies" in the debate on truth openly expose themselves, except for Scientology.

          Meant no offense to atheists here and if any was taken I apologize.
          • jaydedragon, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Valjean, at last, We see each other plain `M'sieur le Mayor', You'll wear a different chain.
        • xptoast, on 01/22/2008, -0/+21. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. 2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion. 3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions. 4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion. 5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith. 6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice. Sounds like Atheism is a religion. Sorry to burst your bubble. Its like saying that anarchists can be pure as they feel they should not be a group but individual. Sorry but they become a common group as they are common. Atheism as well as any other set of beliefs not able to be proven beyond a shadow or a doubt for all humans is that of faith and a belief in said subject. Please note there are many definitions for the word not just one. Atheism fits into a few of these.
          • molochi, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2Yaknow, I could strawman "Christian" into some derogatory terms that, using partial definitions, would be as misrepresentative as calling atheism a religion.

            Atheism is in its purest form devoid of faith and is merely an observation. An atheist is an atheist because they do not see god(s) in the universe. Athiesm does not imply a dogmatic belief in any particular thing, and doesn't fit you definitions.
      • fixty, on 01/21/2008, -1/+4Right on. If a religion isn't free it should be taxed. If it cries out that this violates its freedom of religion it is perfectly free to do unto its members what it wants the government to do to it: release them from financial obligation.
      • BeSeeingYou, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2Exactly! You've put into just the right words my very feelings on this. Bravo!
      • torressr3, on 01/23/2008, -0/+1hell yeah
    • skrizzy, on 01/21/2008, -9/+45[This comment has been removed due to legal action by scientology.]
      • Ireland, on 01/21/2008, -2/+5Ah ***** them. [This foot is up the ass of scientology.]
    • Herostratus, on 01/21/2008, -0/+13Oh yeah! I wanna see this. I've always hated scientology but I got stuck working for some of them for a while. They are serious weird. They are all drugged up on "supplements" and they have almost ritualistic ways of doing nearly everything. They we're trying to get me to join up so I had to leave them.
      • UNL1M1T3D, on 01/22/2008, -0/+4You should have stayed and spied on them.
        • Herostratus, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2Heh, at flagship (cause this was in Clearwater)? No way, they are way too freaky. My co-workers were all imports from around the country there to do their repenting seminars. Anyhow I woulda had to stop smokin me magic herbs.
          • UNL1M1T3D, on 01/23/2008, -0/+1In that case I would have done the same thing.
    • EndersGame, on 01/21/2008, -0/+25Watch this video to get an idea of how crazy Scientologists actually are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPol_m8wm8Y&feature ...

      Skip ahead to where the camera man speaks to the 3 guys that accuse him of being a wife beater, child molester, etc. because apparently you have to be a criminal to attack Scientology.
      • gthyb, on 01/22/2008, -0/+4That is amazing.
      • Scaryclouds, on 01/22/2008, -0/+7What about your crimes?! That's why you are here! Because you are a criminal!
      • whoamarcos, on 01/22/2008, -0/+5i was worried it was a rick roll but I'm glad I clicked.

        Those people are so messed up, its like every discussion they get into they have to try and intimidate everyone else.

        I hope some serious damage comes their way soon.
      • HotWingBias, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2Thanks, Endergame, I had never seen that before. I can't believe that people this wako actually exist...
      • slaizer, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1Scientologists give techniques on how handle anyone who "challenges their faith" to keep anyone who isn't apart of their cult from breaking their mental patterns. "What are you afraid of? What are your crimes?". They create a conspiracy in their followers minds, something along the lines that they are the only enlightened ones and they must help others. "We are the way to happiness. We can bring peace and unite cultures."
    • metateck, on 01/21/2008, -1/+10I wish I could digg you up more than once.
    • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -6/+11"Tonight on Fox 11: The hackers on steroids threaten to kill all Scientologists!"
    • SuperWinner, on 01/21/2008, -11/+4Lets think of destroying scientology as a warm up for destroying the really big religions...
    • Providence, on 01/21/2008, -2/+18Aha! To be astounded. An army of assholes, an association armed with an arsenal of asinine ambiguously adult anonymii. This ambidextrous armada, no mere attack force is an astounding assembly of articulate aristocrats. assuming the collective affliction has not atrophied, another day of ardent internet argument arises. Under the ambiguous aegis of internet anonymity, all annoying assertations may be announced with reckless abandon. the armored amplifiers of info, The antithesis of approbates, aided and abetted by all things arbitrary. Apology? do not forgive, do not forget. alas I am all aflutter, after the anticipation. You may call me anonymous.
      • Tripacer9999, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1too many A's !
      • joshuabowers, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3A-haaaa! (Seriously, I feel like I'm reading the beginning of V for Vendetta.)
    • mickcn, on 01/21/2008, -0/+7Yes. How the ***** does one go about becoming apart of this? /anonymous computer voice
      • Brian47126, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2thats exactly what I want to know... I am all about the destruction of this cult
        • ApeInago, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1just do it. give credit to anoymous.
    • jdenial, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3I hope Scientology doesn't end up with having its own country after this war......
      • rebotfc, on 01/22/2008, -1/+3The only country scientology will have is the country of fail.
    • MiddleOfNowhere, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2BTW:
      If you think there is a war ahead of us; if you are fond of slightly bizarre conspiracy theories, good ol' Vintage Cyberpunk, if you like to see stories about Techno-Armageddon, out-of-control cults and Hubbard-esque Orgs (Yacht uniforms!) with a Young-Tom-Cruise kind of Messiah, media manipulation and a really nasty old witch plus a smokin hot Terri Hatcher ... you totally owe it to yourself to watch Oliver Stone's "Wild Palms".
      It is a TV show that was produced before people had fir... no, wait, Internet.
      Set in The Future.
      Which happens to be ... the year 2007.
      Go figure. :)
    • XxbladesfirexX, on 01/22/2008, -1/+2Seems there was a video response by another group of hackers:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR8_BKf-0PE
      Now this is getting interesting!
      Digg submission here:
      http://digg.com/world_news/Message_to_Scientology_ ...
    • xptoast, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1The systems of corruption shall fall to the masses in which hate them. For in the night they shall come. In the night they shall fall. In the dawn a new order shall rise.

      Back to the scroll from whence you were written. Come to eternity in the fires of hell the corruptions shall fall.
      Legions shall overtake your minds and your souls and make them revert to common sense or the True creator and sense of reality and death shall take you.
    • xptoast, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2The systems of corruption shall fall to the masses in which hate them. For in the night they shall come. In the night they shall fall. In the dawn a new order shall rise.

      Back to the scroll from whence you were written. Come to eternity in the fires of hell the corruptions shall fall.
      Legions shall overtake your minds and your souls and make them revert to common sense or the True creator and sense of reality and death shall take you.
  • Arachnology, on 01/21/2008, -16/+121Dugg !
  • thespudmall, on 01/21/2008, -32/+81FOR NEGROTITS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Antijr, on 01/21/2008, -5/+212Finally some sense in this world...
  • stewart1988, on 01/21/2008, -81/+609[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Cult of Scientology International]
    • seldon452, on 01/21/2008, -41/+223Alright, this ***** needs to stop. It was funny the first 2000 times but now its just old.
      • adventchild08, on 01/21/2008, -28/+19[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Cult of Scientology International]
        • beaudoin1977, on 01/21/2008, -22/+8[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Cult of Scientology International]
        • evilbunnys2, on 01/21/2008, -16/+9[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Cult of Scientology International]
        • Narwaffle, on 01/22/2008, -0/+6[This comment is no longer available due to C-C-COMBO BREAKER]
      • sekhui, on 01/21/2008, -2/+29you mean it was funny the first "MOAR THAN 9000" times.

        but yeah, it's old.

        p.s.*****.
      • MaddieCakes, on 01/21/2008, -2/+8Oh no... they got to you... YOU'RE ONE OF THEM! lulz
      • seventoes, on 01/21/2008, -8/+12[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Cult of Scientology International]
      • patrickbwells, on 01/21/2008, -4/+18[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by seldon452]
    • JanYpe, on 01/21/2008, -31/+15Look at it this way: As long as they're doing this, they're not talking about Ron Paul OR their favorite 9/11 theories. Silver linings and all that.
    • dkichline, on 01/21/2008, -26/+11RON PAUL '08!!! WOOOOOOOOOT!
    • XTX7X, on 01/21/2008, -15/+10Oh please. This video was clearly edited using Adobe® Photoshop ™ Photo Manipulation Software.
      • jimbobuk, on 01/21/2008, -1/+4Eh? How do you 'edit a video' using Adobe Photoshop??? "Photo Manipulation Software". hahahaha
        Whats chance that some of these comments are written in here by Scientologists?
        • SethG911, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1Photoshop CS3 Extended edits video... do your research before you post.
          • jimbobuk, on 01/24/2008, -0/+1wow. Cheers for pointing that out. I just had a little play with it....pretty cool!
      • UNL1M1T3D, on 01/22/2008, -0/+4What does it matter how it was edited?
    • localhost6881, on 01/21/2008, -2/+41[We are Anonymous, We approve this comment. Expect us.]
    • blueRAP, on 01/21/2008, -1/+14All I want to know is "WHAT ARE YOUR CRIMES?!"

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPol_m8wm8Y&feature ...
    • hansk, on 01/22/2008, -1/+3Church of Scientology, we sue you now for calling it a cult
    • ElbertF, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2If only Tom said he was 'super serial' and 'really means it this time', I just might believe him.
  • adventchild08, on 01/21/2008, -5/+211Information should be free.
    • skeen07, on 01/21/2008, -37/+7Elaborate please. You're saying that if I wrote a book, it should be free? What incentive would I have to write the book? What "information" should be free? I can't think of any information that *should* be free...people have to work to get the information - whether they make it free or not is entirely up to them. Why would anyone even digg up such a ludicrous statement?

      Author, post your phone number, and address please. Information should be free, right?
      • testcase, on 01/21/2008, -16/+9Touche!

        A lot of what passes for post-modernist philosophy (like the notion that information should be free) is really just an attempt to justify thievery as a lifestyle.
        • bdurkin, on 01/21/2008, -1/+11...and I am alright with that. ***** the RIAA and thank you NYT for getting rid of subscriptions.
        • Rhino2, on 01/21/2008, -0/+12Truth will set you free and one path to truth is knowledge and the way to obtain knowledge is though informing and education yourself.

          I for one think this world would be a lot better place if more people where educated and informed.

          In regards to the compensation of one's labor - I totally agree with that also. But just because you write a book about X and want Y money for it; that is fine by me. But at the same time, other free resources are going to compete with your book (Libraries, wiki, internet, book with expired copyright licenses, journals and even other authors – which I think is good).

          Secondly and most importantly; there is a Huge difference between SUPRESSING information and asking due compensation for ones labor. There is a difference between you charge X dollars for your work and the government and/or society (eg, churches) destroying or disallowing your work.
        • Boreras, on 01/21/2008, -0/+6information should be free. You can't actually own the information the companies try to own, aka our culture (look at Ulysses, arguably the best book of the 20th century. Overflowing with references. Shakespeare: based on other people's work. Homer's works: legends retold by one or more (long lasting debate) 'poets' (or singers, if you will). Imagine if these works were not here today, because of the current system)

          Example: replying to my comment or quoting it will cost you 5 $, for I am enslaved by SONY BMG.
          Example 2: your comment will have to cost you anyway. You made a reference to copyrighted material, post-modern philosophy is actually owned by Penguin Books.
          example 3: pharmacist companies are asking a lot of money for their medicine for AIDS, so as a result (I'll have to admit it's not the sole reason, but presumably the biggest) 3rd world countries are unable to buy and provide medicine for their citizens. Lower cost would help, despite other problems they might have.
          example 4: hey, your Diebold voting machine is easily to hack, and will be rigged in favour of G. W. Bush. But that information was removed for copyright infringement. Until there was an uproar.
          example 5: What if Einstein were not allowed to use Planck's findings, because of copyright claims? What if Einstein were not allowed to work with Lorentz transforms? No frigging relativity and Quantum Physics advancement until 70 years after deads. And than one day one releases a veeeeery small advancement first, and all will have to wait till that guy dies. No frigging progress.
          example 6: " Hello, USA? Yeah? this is the UK. We would like you to give us ALL your money because we started the industrialization." USA stole the technology, if I remember it correctly.
          example 7: "Hello, Western World? Yeah? We are the Chinese. We'd like all your money because you conquered and enslaved the world with OUR invention, gun powder"
          example 8: I'm trying (or doing, depends on your opinion), to debunk the claim (note: I did NOT say your claim) that it is fine this way. And that we should all let the big companies continue lobbying for government-granted monopolies and extra income, only to make more money at the expense of ordinary (middle- and lower-class) citizens. But my effort is, however, a thought-based process to provide information and point-of-view to the reader, and my goal is to help provide insight, at the expense of my time, NOT MONEY.

          the sole problem is that information can't be owned, even though there is quite the effort going on, and, again, the middle- and lower-class will enjoy the disadvantages.

          And on what testcase actually said: who cares if you presume the motives wrong. The goal is, imho, good. You say thievery, while it is only information and culture and thought that is stolen.

          This is quite the long post, and my native language is not English, but I consider it decent, but because I write in a kind of stream of Consciousness (tm James Joyce), I tend to be hard to understand (in my native language too :P).
          And I overdid it in the number of examples, but let me recap : we would still be some fishes in the sea if it weren't for sharing information. freely!
      • theOster, on 01/21/2008, -0/+8i think the phrase is typically "information *wants* to be free". and that's only an effect of the fact that people *want* information and will always devise ways to bypass imposed securities. information that is made readily free is generally much more advantageous to a larger population than it would otherwise be if it were locked down.
        • skeen07, on 01/21/2008, -4/+3"information that is made readily free is generally much more advantageous to a larger population than it would otherwise be if it were locked down."

          No, I think you mean information that should be paid for, made readily available...

          Actual free "information" generally sucks, in case you haven't noticed. I don't have a single favourite song, book, or movie that is free.
        • adventchild08, on 01/21/2008, -1/+4I can think of some good free infomation...like the contents of the Bill of Rights...or the Constitution...
          The Magna Carta perhaps.
          • skeen07, on 01/21/2008, -2/+2So, what you're saying is, "Free information should be free." Duh.
          • adventchild08, on 01/21/2008, -1/+2Nope....not what I am saying at all....I replied to:"Actual free "information" generally sucks, in case you haven't noticed. I don't have a single favourite song, book, or movie that is free."
            It sounds like you might be missing the point.
      • adventchild08, on 01/21/2008, -1/+5Just quoting the video... You're right, some stuff shouldn't be free.
        In context though, one of the main criticisms of scientology is that you have to pay your way to ascend into the advanced levels of the church. And when teachings are posted publically (like the xenu story in OTIII) the church will sue you for copyright infringement, usually win and still maintain their tax free status. I
    • adventchild08, on 01/21/2008, -2/+3quoting the video...
    • Richandler, on 01/21/2008, -8/+1I'm sorry but information should not be free. You can't protect some information and make the other free. We are trying that right now, and it doesn't work for either party on the deal. The truth is, a lot of useful information is available on the internet. Not a single bit of it is free. It's all paid through donation or advertising. Please learn about how socialist and communist ideas don't work out economically.
      • Scaryclouds, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3Some information is in fact free. If I setup a website, had no advertisers and refused to accept donations, that information would be free.
      • imsoclever, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1What the hell are you trying to say - No one is saying information can always be distributed or shared for free. It should be made available for everyone to digest for free. Socialism and Communism have nothing to do with this. Learn what words mean before you use them.
    • EmilyLitella, on 01/22/2008, -0/+0Oh, darn. Will I be billed for this?
  • austenw, on 01/21/2008, -15/+177Madness?.... THIS. IS. LEGION!!!
  • blaster009, on 01/21/2008, -30/+22Dugg for lulz...Looks like Scientology is in for some moar good times! :D
  • Eagle1901, on 01/21/2008, -10/+177Dugg for great justice
    • GhostyBoy, on 01/21/2008, -0/+15The Free Speech armies of the Internet have elected to spread their mighty muscles, starting with a pathetic, yet dangerous cult.

      Evil forces of the world watch and beware, this will be but a small display of our growing power.
      • HalFTW, on 01/21/2008, -0/+10So, when does the DDoSing begin?
        • oxdeltaxo, on 01/22/2008, -0/+6Wait for your assigned smoke signal or carrier pigeon.
        • UNCCEJ1010, on 01/22/2008, -0/+7Scientology.org is down
  • n0rton, on 01/21/2008, -16/+8nevar forgetz
  • xconquestx, on 01/21/2008, -13/+84***** dugg.
  • Blazers, on 01/21/2008, -4/+395What's the best part about making up a religion? Having people pay you for it! It's a scam on a global level...
    • Elwood19k20, on 01/21/2008, -35/+58Doesn't that pretty much sum up any religion? A) They are all made up. B) They all expect you to pay. C) They are all scams.
      • vawksel, on 01/21/2008, -15/+8Sure they give false hope, but they do make people feel better about themselves sometimes.

        Some are sneakier than others about collecting "donations", but they all do. A lot of churches are super wealthy.
      • kingmanic, on 01/21/2008, -2/+73Scientology is the biggest scam because the other religions you can put in a dollar or nothing and really it's not a big deal but you must pay to continue on with Scientology.
        • SillyDigger, on 01/21/2008, -13/+7I take it you've never heard of '10 percent tithe'

          http://www.ehow.com/how_2096205_tithe-10-percent-c ...
        • Smaulz, on 01/21/2008, -1/+14SillyDigger, that link is ridiculous. First, "Tithers believe this practice brings wealth, prosperity and good health into their lives." Umm, no, that's not the biblical reasoning for tithing. Secondly, tithing is, and always has been, completely voluntary, that's the whole point. You can't really calling it "giving" when it's being taken. Yeah?
      • spudnic, on 01/21/2008, -3/+110Donating a few dollars to your local church to keep it open is not the same as donating most of your income to scientology.

        -From an avid atheist.
      • fires, on 01/21/2008, -1/+18Does Buddhism expect you to pay? Don't know myself, just asking...
        • sekhui, on 01/21/2008, -2/+15no.
        • kingmanic, on 01/21/2008, -1/+20They will take donations. It's good karma to donate. Just as the lord rewards those who tithe etc.. most of them make i optional but smiled upon. Some make it frowned upon not to donate. Scientology demands payment.
        • EditorResponse, on 01/21/2008, -13/+1"Does Buddhism expect you to pay?" Remember Burma...and all of the folks with their hands out when the dictators decided to take back the streets? The tens of thousands of folks with their hands out for food and money were Buddhist monks. They certainly do expect to get paid every day when hey go begging for it. Every culture is different in how they extract the money for the religion. Scientology being an American capitalist invention is more business-like and has tiered payment system. No better no worse than any other system...it is American.
          • phauna, on 01/22/2008, -1/+2Begging is obviously not expecting to get paid. And how are various systems above being judged effective, worthy, better or worse?

            And buying and selling stuff is American now, is it? Just like English, the Bible, etc.
  • Plomma, on 01/21/2008, -2/+53Launch all 'ZIG'
  • DiggLive, on 01/21/2008, -3/+217XENU SMASH!
    • asauterChicago, on 01/21/2008, -1/+33Looks like Lord Xenu (Scientology's arch enemy) has awoken and is pissed. Let the Armageddon begin...
  • swrostmore, on 01/21/2008, -68/+114chan is getting way too good at gaming their digg submissions, thank xenu for the superusers that will delete this before it gets to the frontpage.
    • l0rdx3nu, on 01/21/2008, -0/+9gb2/scientology.org
    • KlogereEndGrim, on 01/21/2008, -1/+5Yeah, this will nevarh make it 2 teh fr0npaeg!!1 LULZ *****!!1

      /legitdiggg
    • FMKaiba, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3Its front page now, in your face!, 4chan 4eva!
  • Trevordtodd, on 01/21/2008, -14/+185Leave Xenu alone!!!
  • Loliking, on 01/21/2008, -7/+298ATTN: All Anons
    This is funny on epic proportions, don't stop.
    • thespudmall, on 01/21/2008, -3/+42your name is epic
    • Versh, on 01/22/2008, -0/+7Not to mention a great public service, or rather, overdue justice. Scientology is an insane cult that preys on the weak. Dugg.
    • TomTruelle, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3...thinkin about tommorow.
  • KoraX, on 01/21/2008, -2/+223Well then, its about time Scientology was shown that it isn't a faceless untouchable behemoth, and who better to teach it that lesson, than a faceless, untouchable, behemoth.
    • asauterChicago, on 01/21/2008, -6/+23I don't know, Scientology, as a corporation, rakes in almost a half a billion dollars in annual revenues. I think some anonymous internet group is going to have quite a bit of work if they are going to "systematically dismantle" their organization. People up top, aren't going to let that money go, they also have the capital to fire back some pretty nasty things themselves. Not to mention viciously, to the death, loyal members.
      • sekhui, on 01/21/2008, -2/+44apparently you don't know 4chan.
        • Nionignite, on 01/21/2008, -1/+21I was going to say the same thing. Anyone who doubts the sheer power of flood of anonymous...even 10% 4chan could pull this off. there are MILLIONS of us.
          • asauterChicago, on 01/21/2008, -9/+3Ok, that's great, but how do recruit millions of users without recruiting Scientology agents themselves? I mean you have to have a way to recruit people, by recruiting people you have to become a little less anonymous, thus you open yourselves up to attacks by Scientology. Someone has to run, host, build a website, recruit people and pay for it all.... and how do you do all that against a 500 million dollar corporation with blindly loyal members? But hey, if they have all this ***** figured out, more power to them. I'm sick of hearing about Scientology. IMHO, I think people should freak out more about the Cult of PETA than scientology. PETA, there's a ***** cult that scares the ***** out of me....
          • Jenadae, on 01/22/2008, -0/+6Anon doesn't need all of these things you speak of. What Anon wants Anon gets.
          • webwiz1986, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3Anon is not a solid organization. It thrives by the fact that It has no hierarchy. The closest thing to it would be the Uber L774 group of people who educate and equip the faithful. And those who do become moles will never see the internet again. Never.
        • rezonq3, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2I don't mean to ask this, but I actually don't. I have been hearing about this 4chan but have no frame of reference, so I do not know where to start researching why digg posters keep talking about it.

          Could you provide me a short background or a point to start from so I can be filled in?
          • UNL1M1T3D, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3Work the Google on your internet machine.
        • Jenadae, on 01/22/2008, -1/+4@rezong3

          4chan.org 7chan.org 420chan.org
          and for making what little sense can be made of things you dont understand check out encyclopediadramatica.com
          you have been warned
      • Ghiren, on 01/21/2008, -0/+11I'm not sure how the best way to describe this, though you're right that Scientology has a group of brainwashed, psychotically-loyal control freaks but Anonymous is... well... every faceless, anonymous individual on the internet...
        This is going to be like Big Brother versus the Borg...
        • taquitohater, on 01/22/2008, -0/+1Epic lulz are in the forecast for the foreseeable future.
    • echinda, on 01/21/2008, -0/+14Don't take their revenue numbers at face value. A friend in the publishing industry told me that the scientologists have been caught faking book sales and revenue by having cultists buy their books and then give them back to the cult so they could be resold as "new", artificially pumping their sales and revenues.

      Apparently, they were caught by suspicious publishers stamping little coloured circles on the ends of the books. When the books came back with the marks already in place ... gotcha.
  • adventchild08, on 01/21/2008, -19/+9This didn't frontpage yet?
  • AshamedAmerican, on 01/21/2008, -5/+78I doubt they can break scientology's drones from mass brainwashing, but I sincerely wish them the best of luck.
    • zephyr42, on 01/21/2008, -0/+13Group effort man! If everyone pitches in we could be rid of scientology this weekend!
    • MKautz, on 01/21/2008, -0/+5Honestly, you organize all of Anon, it's a hell of a force to be reconded with in the virtual world.

      The problem, of course, is organizing them. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's not exactly an easy task.
    • roybemename, on 01/22/2008, -1/+2thats not how it works, dont wish "them" the best of luck, everyone is a potential anonymous member
  • NJPENSO, on 01/21/2008, -4/+29*facepalm*
  • DeviantDarkWolf, on 01/21/2008, -9/+19***** YEAH!!! XENU!!!.. oh wait.. ahh ***** it.
  • rebotfc, on 01/21/2008, -2/+70And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, lo, the great internet war begins..

    • snyperr2s, on 01/21/2008, -1/+38first it was ytmnd VS ebaumsworld, now its Everyone VS Scientology. For some reason i have a feeling that Everyone VS Scientology will result in real world results.
      • tuddy666, on 01/21/2008, -0/+22agreed. it'd shock me if 99% of the *chans (heck, even fchan helped in the raids, and they're a bunch of perverts) Vs a group of lunatics didn't result in a real-world change.
    • dolby, on 01/22/2008, -0/+4It about time...I was wondering when Microsoft Sam was going to get involved, Go get em.
  • vervalsing, on 01/21/2008, -33/+20It's a small religious(or whatever you want to call them) sect/cult of about 50,000 people worldwide, they're not Big Brother. Maybe this is a joke that I'm not getting for some reason but that seemed a little overboard/creepy. Scientologists would love to get in a "war" with "SPs" because that justifies their cause to every person they've brainwashed or is just stupid of their own free will.
    • sekhui, on 01/21/2008, -2/+23hi tom cruise!
      • vervalsing, on 01/21/2008, -9/+3Did you actually read what I said, or is what went down in your mind something more like "Durr she question what masses think. Me digg down and make insightful Tom Cruise joke."
        • sekhui, on 01/21/2008, -2/+11no actually as soon as you got around to defending Co$ i knew what you were about.

          or if you weren't defending them you were trying to intimidate 4chan? or something? i don't know. but trying to scare 4chan is pretty stupid if you think about it.

          p.s. i torrent all your movies.
          • vervalsing, on 01/21/2008, -3/+4I'm not defending them, they're ***** insane. I'm saying that proclaiming war against them VALIDATES everything they tell their members about "SPs".
          • Jenadae, on 01/22/2008, -1/+3This doesn't bother anon
          • pcore, on 01/22/2008, -0/+2Why does it validate everything they tell their members?
    • Kythas, on 01/21/2008, -0/+13They actually have several million followers around the world. The stories about things they do to destroy the lives of their enemies are legendary. It's not a joke at all.
  • beaudoin1977, on 01/21/2008, -44/+7[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Cult of Scientology International]
  • PressF10toride, on 01/21/2008, -16/+30HA HA Scientology is goin down!
    • smrekar, on 01/22/2008, -0/+4www.scientology.org is currently down.
  • absinth1977, on 01/21/2008, -28/+17This one time, at band camp, [This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Cult of Scientology International]
    And this is why to this day my little brother is scared of Tom Cruise.
    • Hanker, on 01/21/2008, -6/+4enough with the "This comment is no longer availab..." already!, still a nice story though
      • Anoobis, on 01/21/2008, -1/+2well it was either you re-using a joke or you stole someone else's idea. either way you lose
        • Llyralei, on 01/21/2008, -2/+3it's called a meme, newfag

          though i guess it would be an old meme by now
      • senatorpjt, on 01/21/2008, -0/+4At least this guy put another angle on it.
  • Yareking, on 01/21/2008, -25/+10[This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Cult of Scientology International]
  • cabooglio2, on 01/21/2008, -54/+8For all of you that think this is so "great", just remember that L. Ron just wants you to succeed. He just wants to adjust your Thetan levels to allow you to be the maximum you. It's only a joke until you experience it. Have a Dianetic day!
    • buddamus, on 01/21/2008, -4/+3Have a nice day yourself Dian-Jerk
    • sekhui, on 01/21/2008, -0/+11another tom cruise troll alt...
    • linagee, on 01/21/2008, -0/+3I didn't buy the Dianetic module. That one is extra.
  • MaidenFan2358, on 01/21/2008, -4/+95/b/tards can serve a purpose.
  • mishaco, on 01/21/2008, -4/+153my new favorite internet flame war .
  • Hanker, on 01/21/2008, -3/+69well the microsoft sam voice was very intimidating...... scientology members are still retarded though
    • annnon, on 01/21/2008, -1/+14it's not microsoft sam.
      • tuddy666, on 01/21/2008, -3/+6It's the vista version of Sam. I should know, as I have the soundpack of it for my XP "speech" menu.
        • annnon, on 01/21/2008, -0/+28it's really not. the program is called cepstral and the voice is david. 'i should know,' i made that part of the video.
          • Meatwad650, on 01/22/2008, -1/+0I downloaded their David voice and it didn't sound quite the same. At least not on my Mac. Bummer - it was way creepy. The mac version is too happy. But it totally sounds like the one on their website. Is there an app I can get to make that same creepy voice?
        • Kythas, on 01/21/2008, -0/+8Pwned!
        • tuddy666, on 01/21/2008, -0/+5yes, just it sounded like a voicepack I has... back to my folders to find out which voice pack twas...

          and you're right, it's not Vista Sam. I have been well and truly owned.
    • drizzlelicious, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3Should've had Don LaFontaine do the voice
  • pilotss, on 01/21/2008, -3/+81So where do I sign up?
  • NoNamesLeft, on 01/21/2008, -19/+324[This comment has been repeated about 1000 times and is no longer funny]
    • bahamutxd, on 01/21/2008, -2/+99[09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0] Oops.. wrong story.
    • bdurkin, on 01/21/2008, -7/+2[This comment is no longer available due to an annoyance claim by NoNamesLeft]
    • Kyan, on 01/21/2008, -3/+41[In Soviet Russia the comment repeats you!]
    • ZeRux, on 01/21/2008, -11/+1[This story has reached the front page about 1000 times and we're tired of it]
    • localhost6881, on 01/21/2008, -1/+12[In Korea, only old... never mind; frickin' lasers]
    • Tetraca, on 01/21/2008, -6/+4[Insert generic reply here]
      • unitedstatians, on 01/22/2008, -1/+1[Insert mechanical voice here]
    • anononon, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3THANK YOU!
  • tkltangent, on 01/21/2008, -0/+54wow, I haven't been hanging out with anonymous in a long time. look what i missed!
    • DNABeast, on 01/21/2008, -0/+9Yeah. Last I heard of him he was writing poetry. Now he's gone all vigilante justice.
  • wirah, on 01/21/2008, -9/+49There's lulz afoot
  • T101, on 01/21/2008, -8/+7hawt
  • muzaki, on 01/21/2008, -3/+37we do not forgive. we do not forget.
  • Nionignite, on 01/21/2008, -3/+59Scientology gonna get loved tenderly by Anonymous.
  • br0ken1128, on 01/21/2008, -5/+27Dude, this is awesome.. spread the video!
  • Prototek, on 01/21/2008, -51/+5This is as stupid as the computer generated voice. Buried.
    • Forky, on 01/21/2008, -1/+13Do not underestimate the legion, the domestic terrorists. They might blow up your yellow van.
      • Prototek, on 01/21/2008, -12/+1The legion is a single ***** in his basement who has a computer speak for him.
        • evilbunnys2, on 01/21/2008, -1/+6If we used our voices we would not be anonymous
      • Cenobite, on 01/21/2008, -0/+1Not just domestic.
  • killzalot, on 01/21/2008, -25/+9ebaumsworld did it!
    oh and....
    [This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Cult of Scientology International]
    • j4200, on 01/21/2008, -3/+5Nono. ebaums is just good at stealing things. Not creating.
  • contra9, on 01/21/2008, -7/+21*gears up for war*
    • tuddy666, on 01/21/2008, -1/+10Gears? War? Hell, that reminds me, I need to complete that game, but first...

      *gets ready to join anon for the war*
  • MasterThief117, on 01/21/2008, -5/+124The most powerful force on the Internet going up against a "religious" cult.
    Anonymous will win, no matter what the price. Scientology will be stopped.
    • br0ken1128, on 01/21/2008, -1/+48Anonymous is a powerful force.. They are everywhere and nowhere, they are everyone and noone.. who does scientology retaliate against? I love it.
      • senatorpjt, on 01/21/2008, -1/+10Anonymous is at once everything and nothing, substance without form, shape without motion, time without reason… he is the Highlander.
        • Kythas, on 01/21/2008, -1/+6[Insert obligatory "There can be only one!" statement or joke here]
    • SSUK, on 01/21/2008, -12/+10Until their parents kick them out their basement?
      Face it, Anonymous are a bunch of teenagers who are tough and kick-ass online, but in real life like chess, ELO and are frightened of women. When Scientology defends themselves offline, they'll ***** run a mile and a half. But so long it stays on the internet, we're fine.
      • rpayne656, on 01/21/2008, -1/+16Nerds make people very very jealous.
      • Jarodd, on 01/21/2008, -0/+5So what ? So far only germany moved, at least someone is doing something. What is to lose ? They gonna harrass scientology ? hack their files and publish them ? What's wrong with that, any bad publicity is good.
      • dementedd, on 01/22/2008, -0/+5What's wrong with chess and ELO?
    • webwiz1986, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3Remember, there are thousands, nay millions that identify with Anon and its allys. Anon is not the only force out there. There are chans, gains, eBaumers, newgrounders and many more. It would take an H bomb to take them out.
  • chrisaug18, on 01/21/2008, -11/+36Whats with all these scientology articles and videos hitting the front page lately?
    • oneofone2007, on 01/21/2008, -2/+46Cause Anonymous is on the warpath. I'm sure there are plenty of them here on Digg.
    • ArchieAndrews, on 01/21/2008, -1/+21World's tipping point has been hit with the new Tom Cruise stuff maybe? I am hoping so.
    • Melancholiatic, on 01/21/2008, -0/+11Natural selection!
    • purzzzell, on 01/21/2008, -1/+241: recent funny tom cruise vid got leaked.
      2: a bunch of their private files got hacked

      1+2 = it's becoming trendy to hate scientology, people who neverhave before are learning about it, hating it, and digging.
      • INTERNETMASTER, on 01/22/2008, -0/+8it's also trendy to hate murder, slavery, and cancer.
    • waspbr, on 01/21/2008, -0/+5finally soome one is going to make those stuck up lunatics STFU.

      kudos to anonymous
    • Berkana, on 01/22/2008, -0/+12It's an immune reaction to Scientology's tactics of suppressing criticism.
    • GambitL, on 01/22/2008, -0/+3If there should be anything that digg be raising awareness in, I think scientology should be it.

      scientology... I have to say I'm disgusted by their activties... disgusted by what they do to those that so much as speak negatively or criticize them. Going by this rule of "Fair game", destroying peoples' lives through lies, deceit, malice, revenge, anger, harassment, murder.

      http://whyaretheydead.net/

      If nothing would move the government, the people, to go against such criminality and evil, than I really think that we're all going to be screwed further down the road.




    • CaptLulz, on 01/24/2008, -0/+0All the articles and videos are the beginnings of an Anon victory.
    • chrisaug18, on 01/30/2008, -0/+1I see...thanks for the replies guys and or girls
  • Gugel, on 01/21/2008, -36/+7wtf newfags, rules 1 and 2
    • eternal464, on 01/21/2008, -0/+5always follow the rules and no names? I'm confused
    • tuddy666, on 01/21/2008, -2/+7they only apply during raids now. Moot said so at Otakon.
      • churrodoll, on 01/21/2008, -1/+6Rules 1 and 2 were created by Gaiafags, asshat.
    • FiP0, on 01/21/2008, -0/+2I hear you :(
    • Kronos6948, on 01/21/2008, -1/+7Newfag is new.
    • mikebaldwin67, on 01/21/2008, -15/+4rules 1 and 2:

      youre all a bunch of pathetic vigin losers who like whacking off to hentai porn. get a life outside of discussion boards for 14 year old perverts.
  • absinth1977, on 01/21/2008, -9/+26Wow...looks like the no good mother Hubbards are out in force today burrying everything left and right.
    So much for freedom of speech and the ability to express an opinion.
    • jah434s, on 01/21/2008, -2/+6I agree. People who have opinions different from yours should be silenced, so that your free speech can be heard. Down with the oppressors!
    • ELEM, on 01/22/2008, -0/+0I think its kind of like war or something... you know propaganda and what not....
  • GeekyGerge, on 01/21/2008, -19/+2"This video is no longer available"
    ???
  • Devdude30, on 01/21/2008, -2/+22Its like the kiss of death. Anon has spoken.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 363 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.