Freedom Mag DA videos/articles on Paul Haggis, New Yorker

Discussion in 'Media' started by tikk, Aug 29, 2011.

  1. AnonLover Member

    ^^This. DO WANT! I would expect it to be in Celebrity Magazine from 2005-06, but I havent had a chance yet to see if its floating around somewhere.
    • Like Like x 3
  2. hushpuppy Member

    August 31, 2011, 3:30 PM
    Scientology Strikes Back at The New Yorker


    The Church of Scientology is certainly no withering violet when it comes to defending itself.
    “The New Yorker: What A Load of Balderdash,” reads the cover headline on the church’s in-house magazine Freedom, which was being handed out for free on Wednesday outside The New Yorker’s corporate headquarters.
    Scientology officials have produced a 51-page glossy special issue and 3-part DVD series attacking The New Yorker over response to a 25,000-word story that painted the church as corrupt and cultish. The church goes to surprising lengths in attempting to discredit The New Yorker and its staff, naming editors, fact-checkers and others who worked on the Scientology article by name.
    It calls the story a “24,000-word Odyssey to Nowhere,” accuses the profile’s subject, a former Scientologist named Paul Haggis, of being a nobody and attempts to cast doubt on the author’s credibility by showing video of him speaking to a group of student journalists in which he says he is paid by the word.
    The church mocks The New Yorker as no better than a supermarket tabloid and even created a fake New Yorker cover with the headline “Remnick Denies Alien Baby Claim,” a dig at the magazine’s editor, David Remnick.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Anonymous Member

    cool, and the NY Times ^^
  4. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 7
  5. Anonymous Member

    The staff of The New Yorker is probably have a lot of fun today looking at the DVD and Freedumb magazine.
    • Like Like x 2
  6. AnonLover Member

    Imma hoping tomorrow or the next day, we see an interview/comments from Lawrence Wright on his thoughts on it (in some other media outlet).
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Anonymous Member

    we love you, Paul.
  8. Anonymous Member

  9. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 2
  10. Anonymous Member


    Tick Tock Tick Tock - Hey Miscavige - how much more will the public take of this bullshit??

    How much more can your one-staff-per-org take of the humiliation??

  11. Sponge Member

    ^that Yahoo link has a response from the New Yorker...
    New Yorker dismisses attack from Church of Scientology –
    • Like Like x 8
  12. Miranda Member

    Wow, that must hurt. Nothing worse than an alien baby claim. Also, "balderdash." They said "balderdash" lol.
    • Like Like x 3
  13. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 2
  14. Anonymous Member

    I feel their pain but it is a good pain, all the free advertising for The New Yorker must also hurt a lot.
    • Like Like x 3
  15. Anonymous Member

    Yeah, lets face it - New Yorker will make money out of Scientology, we get to laugh at the clams baaawwwwing about it. Win-win.
  16. AnonLover Member

    Things that make you go hmmmm.....

    Will the original New Yorker article on Haggis get more web traffic than the freedom mag smearfest?

    Is that something we can find out via Alexis?
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Tofuman666 Member

    • Like Like x 1
  18. Anonymous Member

    Here is a link to Alexa with the freedom mag link set up and is showing traffic stats graphs,just add the original new yorker article at your convenience.
    • Like Like x 3
  19. subgenius Member

    Oh geez, I haven't been keeping up with this thread. Its full of shit fucking Win.
    Too much fun.
    • Like Like x 2
  20. Anonymous Member

    Hey Scientology, while you are on a roll with all the good publicity, pointing out how the New Yorker is such a terrible publication, why don't you build on it by dressing as Nazis and parrading around Clearwater?
    • Like Like x 1
  21. Anonymous Member

    Does the "Freedom" rag article credit an author? I don't think so. It reads like a Miscavige speech, i.e. convoluted shit.
    • Like Like x 1
  22. Anonymous Member

    They just love using the term "Church officials". It reads so much better than "Cult stooges".
    • Like Like x 2
  23. Anonymous Member

    Smear campaign we agree with: Rah! Rah! Rah!

    Smear campaign we disagree with: Boo, Hiss!
  24. Anonymous Member

    David Miscavige, though I have no doubt you were burning the midnight oil, ironing out the kinks, and setting the record straight with aplomb in the pressure-cooker environment of cult-leadership and expansion, it seems that a few trifles escaped your notice in the "Freedom Mag" epistle.

    That is to say, without further ado, some of the sentences in your "Freedom Magazine" article failed to incorporate a de rigueur tired cliche. Time to pull up your socks and move on to the straight and narrow.
    • Like Like x 3
  25. Sponge Member

    • Like Like x 26
  26. Anonymous Member

  27. Anonymous Member

    Someone post that pic again, please. Good point, sir.
  28. Anonymous Member

    This kind of shit fucking win is my personal favorite. Mama always said "go after the fact checkers after you fail at disproving the facts". WINNING.
  29. Anonymous Member

  30. Anonymous Member

  31. Anonymous Member

    More funny patterns
    1. "Ok, lets pose as Nazis to criticize the free press. We can use our Sea Org uniforms. Anyone's irony meter going off? Mine neither"
    2. "Ok, lets accuse the New Yorker of being a smear and propaganda rag. We can use "Freedom Magazine". Anyone's irony meter going off? Mine neither."
  32. Anonymous Member

    my coppery meter went off as soon as I logged in, and then I was like, "well should I really post such an awesome joke". And then I was like, "hell, yea".
  33. the anti Member

    more of them dressed as nazis, this from the 70's


    and two more from the 90's

    [IMG] [IMG]
  34. Anonymous Member

    Wait, I forgot that part, from the 90's? Please to give me clarification on that?
  35. jensting Member

    • Like Like x 1
  36. Anonymous Member

    I don't suppose there is a way we can renew interest in the old Haggis scientology expose in the New Yorker and make scientology look bad twice over? Oh, wait. . .
    • Like Like x 1
  37. DeathHamster Member

    Needs dong copter.
    • Like Like x 3
  38. Anonymous Member

    well...maybe just a little now that you mention it.
  39. TinyDancer Member

    Actual quotation from Mark Warren:
    • Like Like x 5
  40. TinyDancer Member

    David Miscavige, ... most people had forgotten about the article, man! Now, you've given it a whole new lease of life!!

    The dumb - it hurts!
    • Like Like x 6

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins