Message to Scientology
Uploaded by: Church0fScientology
Video Description:
Hello, Scientology. We are Anonymous.
Over the years, we have been watching you. Your campaigns of misinformation; suppression of dissent; your litigious nature, all of these things have caught our eye. With the leakage of your latest propaganda video into mainstream circulation, the extent of your malign influence over those who trus
t you, who call you leader, has been made clear to us. Anonymous has therefore decided that your organization should be destroyed. For the good of your followers, for the good of mankind--for the laughs--we shall expel you from the Internet and systematically dismantle the Church of Scientology in i
ts present form. We acknowledge you as a serious opponent, and we are prepared for a long, long campaign. You will not prevail forever against the angry masses of the body politic. Your methods, hypocrisy, and the artlessness of your organization have sounded its death knell. You cannot hide; we ar
e everywhere. We cannot die; we are forever. We're getting bigger every day--and solely by the force of our ideas, malicious and hostile as they often are. If you want another name for your opponent, then call us Legion, for we are many. Yet for all that we are not as monstrous as you are; still o
ur methods are a parallel to your own. Doubtless you will use the Anon's actions as an example of the persecution you have so long warned your followers would come; this is acceptable. In fact, it is encouraged. We are your SPs. Gradually as we merge our pulse with that of your "Church", the suppre
ssion of your followers will become increasingly difficult to maintain. Believers will wake, and see that salvation has no price. They will know that the stress, the frustration that they feel is not something that may be blamed upon Anonymous. No--they will see that it stems from a source far close
r to each. Yes, we are SPs. But the sum of suppression we could ever muster is eclipsed by that of the RTC. Knowledge is free. We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us. --------------- Translations French: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFbe0pCAZE8 Germ
an: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=1KDqOjypt6I Spanish version 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lZkiP-QY0g Spanish version 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRjCBADIHDs Japanese: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKwPRYRmk8 Polish: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=S1OQn33-IW8 Russian: http://uk.youtube.c
om/watch?v=0nN_rkff_nU Swedish: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=kdY6IZiVd00
Tags for this video: cruise ebaums god message Scientology to tom xenu
Find more videos in the "Tech" category
See more videos uploaded by Church0fScientology
| The Un-Funny TRUTH about Scientology | Anonymous - Second address to Scientology | Scientology Crazy Followers |
 |  |  |
| Anonymous Raid in Adelaide | Some crazy scientology stuff | Scientology: XENU TV Speaks to Anonymous |
 |  |  |
Share This Video:
Comments for this video: Show || Hide
| Comments for this video on YouTube |
| How do you imagine ... ( 9 hours ago by robyonder) |
| How do you imagine Hubbard found out about this particular engram roby? After all there is no physical traces...do you think he merely made it up? imagine , or figure , i choose figure , i figure LRH discoverd it by auditing someone , and apparently he had succes by auditing out engrams with the command " it turns my blood to water "and the person found elevation from his conditition .pretty much "physical " proof . |
| Nice answer roby! ... ( 9 hours ago by toryluvslrh1) |
| Nice answer roby! Lets see how they come back at that one .... |
| Mr, Hubbard lied. ... ( 9 hours ago by actualnothing) |
| Mr, Hubbard lied. The original state of CLEAR was presumably "discovered" as a result of auditing. But NOBODY has ever been "clear" by that definition. Ergo: He made it up. He made up a story about being injured in the war. He was not. He made up many many things. |
| So he plucked the ... ( 9 hours ago by cfcilldara) |
| So he plucked the phrase "it turns my blood to water" out of the air, completely at random? As for proof, I'm glad you mentioned that. Can you direct me to the evidence. Which scientific journal was it submitted to? What researchers/scientists etc. verified the claims? |
| i have to sleep , ... ( 9 hours ago by robyonder) |
| i have to sleep , catch ye . |
| You sound paranoid ... ( 9 hours ago by cfcilldara) |
| You sound paranoid cf! Whats wrong? Not at all...I'm merely amused...roby might believe this stuff will save him but we all know what you are; one of the higher ups who likes to leech money from people trying to make it across the bridge! Give yourself a clap on the back tory, you've become like Hubbard! |
| Actually,"engram ... ( 8 hours ago by actualnothing) |
| Actually,"engram theory"was tested with the COOPERATION of the dianetics org (in the 50's) using real scientific rigor. This did not involve subjective experience (I feel better). Suffice it to say, no evidence of any such thing was found. Since then NO scientific verification of any claims has been allowed. |
| No evidence? What a ... ( 8 hours ago by cfcilldara) |
| No evidence? What a big surprise! |
| Then again: "THE ... ( 8 hours ago by cfcilldara) |
| Then again: "THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN CONTROL PEOPLE IS TO LIE TO THEM. You can write that down in your book in great big letters. The only way you can control anybody is to lie to them." - L. Ron Hubbard, "Off the Time Track," lecture of June 1952, excerpted in JOURNAL OF SCIENTOLOGY issue 18-G, reprinted in TECHNICAL VOLUMES OF DIANETICS & SCIENTOLOGY, vol. 1, p. 418 |
| If you do not copy ... ( 8 hours ago by sigsaw1) |
| If you do not copy and paste this onto 10 videos your mom will die in 4 hours |
| hey roby, have you ... ( 7 hours ago by vaLLarrr) |
| hey roby, have you noticed that their "argument" is just some assertion followed by "ergo" and then a complete non sequitur? like "But NOBODY has ever been "clear" by that definition. Ergo: He made it up. " just as IF one leads to the next. LOL quite funny. they're not "debating" you, they're just trying to waste your time. my advice? don't bother. |
| 'Actually,"engram ... ( 6 hours ago by vaLLarrr) |
| 'Actually,"engram theory"was tested with the COOPERATION of the dianetics org (in the 50's) using real scientific rigor" gee. I've never seen that. can I see where you get this "information" from? reliable source please. |
| If a state of being ... ( 3 hours ago by actualnothing) |
| If a state of being, CLEAR, is described in detail and defined as such as a RESULT of a methodological process, then it follows that the state was DISCOVERED. That means people were OBSERVED to have that state as a result of the process.But as nobody has ever demonstrated having that state ( a "model" CLEAR presented by Hubbard failed to pass muster, in the presence of media) THEN, THEREFORE ERGO, the state was merely HYPOTHESIZED or MADE UP to put it less charitably. |
| Visitors -- Do your ... ( 3 hours ago by MindHead77) |
| Visitors -- Do your basic research on Scientology (youtube, google, BBC, ABC, 60 Minutes, NBC). This a deceptive, evil organization that wraps itself in the guise of a religion: an insult to religions everywhere. |
| How could you ... ( 3 hours ago by actualnothing) |
| How could you possibly, in your perusals, come across such arcane information? You would have to DIG for it. I'll give you a shovel: AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF HUBBARD'S ENGRAM HYPOTHESIS by Jack Fox, Alvin E. Davis and J. Lebovit in The Psychological Newsletter, 1959 |
| 'then it follows ... ( 3 hours ago by vaLLarrr) |
| 'then it follows that the state was DISCOVERED....That means people were OBSERVED to have that state.....' if people were OBSERVED to have the state, then how does it follow that no one has "had the state?" because they weren't "demonstrated?" does it occur to you that SOME of the details of the state might be in error, and yet the state still exists, and there IS no "MODEL" CLEAR to be demonstrated? SO WHAT. just because an ABSOLUTE "IDEAL" doesn't exist, doesn't mean it's "hypothesized." |
| "AN EXPERIMENTAL ... ( 3 hours ago by vaLLarrr) |
| "AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF HUBBARD'S ENGRAM HYPOTHESIS... I read it. I don't even know where to begin. first, LRH NEVER says anywhere that a PARTICULAR engram will be "recovered" at a particular time. this was done in the early 50's, to see WHAT might happen. it was not "claimed" that it WOULD HAPPEN on "CUE." that is now how auditing works. CONT... |
| CONT.. FURTHERMORE ... ( 3 hours ago by vaLLarrr) |
| CONT.. FURTHERMORE, what comes up in a session, is what comes up. just because THAT particular engram DIDN'T, in no way 'DISPROVES" auditing, since that's NOT what it does in the FIRST place it doesn't "selectively" "bring up" PARTICULAR ENGRAMS ON CUE. that's ABSURD. it was interesting to SEE what would happen, but their "conclusion that, "Thus, the engram hypothesis was not substantiated by this experiment," in NO way equals the engram hyposthesis was "DISPROVEN" by this experiment EITHER. |
| In order to define ... ( 3 hours ago by actualnothing) |
| In order to define CLEAR, Mr. Hubbard would have to OBSERVE "clear". Right? He would observe features in people, write them down and say, " These people as a result of auditing have these features...I will call this result CLEAR" BUT, there were not, in fact, any people with those features, so he did not observe anybody with those features YET he talked about it as though he had. That is a made up story some people call a LIE! |
| 'BUT, there were ... ( 3 hours ago by vaLLarrr) |
| 'BUT, there were not, in fact, any people with those features,... and how do you draw this conclusion? perhaps some his observations MAY in fact have been in error, but that in no way means he "lied." dealing with people is often open to subjective interpretation and opinion. show me ONE syndrome in "psychology" "psychoanalysis", "psychiatry" has been ABSOLUTELY PROVEN. show me ONE "id", show me ONE "Oedipus complex", show me ONE "ADD" caused by a "chemical imbalance," etc etc etc etc..... |
| My god the show ... ( 1 hour ago by squilky1951) |
| My god the show goes on,what the hell is he rattling about now? Cannot understand a word,English please Val,keep it simple for us poor souls,yer know like YES or NO. |
| He lied. It was a ... ( 1 hour ago by actualnothing) |
| He lied. It was a BOLD lie. It was a lie as big as all out doors! Nothing in science is ABSOLUTELY PROVEN. One experiment does not invalidate the engram hypothesis but it constitutes a particle of evidence. For the hypothesis to become a THEORY, much evidence has to be collected to support it. Right now the engram hypothesis is a religious belief. Show you an "id"? Show me an "urge", I'll show you an "id". |
| "yea? and just ... ( 1 hour ago by AnonRanGER01) |
| "yea? and just where does it say that one MUST believe that in Buddhism? nowhere? LOL" It's the fundamentals, retard. |
| "perhaps some his ... ( 59 minutes ago by AnonRanGER01) |
| "perhaps some his observations MAY in fact have been in error, but that in no way means he "lied."" "An individual processed with the aid of the E-meter was said to reach the intended goal of "clear" and was led to believe there was reliable scientific proof that once cleared many, indeed most illnesses would automatically be cured. Auditing was guaranteed to be successful. All this was and is false - in short, a fraud. " Federal District Judge Gesell 333 F. Supp. 357; 971 U.S. Dist |
Tell a friend: