Scientology on the news again, Anonymous owned them again

[Sqrl]

starcraft said:

Sqrl said:

starcraft said:

Once again you redirect the issue away from the CoS, not surprising, actually I expected it.

And yes I think its perfectly fine for them to maintain anonymity under the circumstances. Documented above by the FBI is a case where they did exactly what these people fear they might do to them and they have every right to fear for their safety as any reasonable person would see, you haven't even made an argument to the contrary which makes me believe you agree but wish not to address any part of it.

I love how you paint Anonymous as if there is zero accountability despite the fact that they have not broken the law, and to my knowledge continue to file permits for their protests. As soon as any protestor breaks the law he will lose his anonymity and be held accountable for his actions, beyond that CoS has no right to hold any of them accountable for anything or even know who any of these people are and they have good reason and right to fear a situation in which CoS does learn their identity.

Now, are you going to continue to sidestep the heart of the issue as outlined in hubbards "attack the attacker" policies or are you going to acknowledge the wrongdoing of CoS and by virtue of that repeated and widespread wrongdoing the necessity for Anonymity?

Actually let me rephrase that, are you a reasonable person who admits when he was wrong after being shown evidence? Are you capable of recognizing when circumstances dictate that anonymity is the prudent action? Or are you obstinate and unwilling to admit error, stuck in the first thought pattern you fall into on any subject?

 

I'm not entirely sure what your doing? Are you agreeing with Ssj12 when he says that I am without doubt a murderer or at the very least a perpetrator of assault, simply because I don't believe Anonymous protestors should remain anonymous? I'm going to post a few quotes from myself right here. These are the many examples of times in this thread when I have adamantly asserted that I do not in any way agree with the CoS as a religion or as an organazation, whilst you continue to directly imply that I do.

"Yes, I agree that the religion is complete crap, but people are perfectly permitted to believe it free from persecution. If people wish to be seperated from non-believers, that is their choice."

"Whilst I would still take issue with many of the groups methods, my primary problem with Anonymous is their total lack of accountability." (This was one of my earlier posts, highlighting the fact that my problem with Anonymous is not their point or beliefs, but their methods and lack of accountability)

"Do you not realize that in declaring anyone who disagrees with him guilty of the same crimes he is accusing the CoS of, ssj12 adopted the very same tactics he is accusing the Church of. "

"I'll say again. Anonymous' reasons for wearing masks may have started out due to concerns for physical safety when it was a tiny number of people, but now there is no remotely credible physical risk to member's safety (even if everything you say about CoS is true) it is abundently clear that it's all about protecting yourselves from litigation. "

"I fully realize and accept that there is substantial circumstantial evidence that the CoS is dodgy. I said in my post above that their should be a Senate or Judicial enquiry into the organisation."

"At the end of the day it is wrong for people to throw around accusations without being willing to back them up, and it subverts the free world's entire judicial process. "

"I simply happen to believe that human beings have a few inalienable rights and should never be tried and sentenced by the media. If you don't agree with that belief, feel free to state that, but stop acting like I'm supporting the CoS when I have said and done nothing of the sort."

"You people need to calm down for a moment and think before you post. Everything your saying about the CoS could be absolutely true. But that doesn't make it their official policy."

" I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, LOOK THE CoS IN THE EYE AND MAKE AN ACCUSATION!!!!"

 

There are more but lets leave it there with the quotes.

Here is what I am NOT saying. "CoS is justified in everything they do." "CoS hasn't done anything wrong."

Here is what I AM saying. "There is substantial evidence CoS has committed numerous crimes, but that should be determined by a legal entity, not by a mob that has no accountability." "The Anonymous claim that they need to hide their faces for protection has been well and truly debunked."

The clambake link provided earlier claims to have definitive proof that the CoS is a murderous organization. If that is so, lobby police and politicians to do something about it in a calm and open manner. You drastically increase the credibility of your argument if you don't hide behind a mask.

 

 

Seriously? I made a small comment and you've latched onto it and are now trying to put words in my mouth(see first paragraph of your responce). Apparently a suspicion is now an accusation of murder....when did that happen? Thats pretty weak man, not much else I can say about it.

ON TOPIC:

 

I challenge you to a point by point rebuttal of Sqrl's post where he spent 20 minutes of non-effort finding CoS wrongdoing. Then I believe Final-Fan has other posts he would like an answer to. Once you've done that we can move on normally, until then I encourage everyone to stop engaging starcraft in conversation in this thread. It only affords him the opportunity to dodge the issue.

 

 

PS - If he makes another dodge post feel free to paste this section above as the only responce. If he wants to ignore the points made by others our only recourse is to do the same in kind.