Customize

ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

Discussion in 'St Petersburg Times expose' started by Anonynamefag, Jun 23, 2009.

  1. Anonynamefag Member

    ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    The iron is hot, /b/rothers. Interest in the cult's criminal activities is at an all-time high. I think it's time we pound in the last nail in the cult's coffin.

    This time, we're going to hit the cult where it hurts the most - their celebrity donors. Indirectly, anyway.

    See, their celebrities rely on their fans. If their fans hate them, they aren't popular. If they aren't popular, they don't get in movies. If they don't get in movies, they don't make money. If they don't make money, they can't donate to the cult. If they can't donate to the cult... see where I'm going with this?

    The cult's numbers are at an all time low, but this doesn't mean shit if they still have mega-rich celebrities backing them. It's time we took away the cult's last line of defense.

    My Plan: The Average Joe gets their celebrity gossip from tabloid magazines and programs like Entertainment Tonight. With Scientology being such a hot topic among celebrities, Slappy Miscavige's latest shenanigans will be a real eye opener, especially with his close ties to Tom Cruise.

    Starting tomorrow, the day before Staturday, we are going to launch a barrage of harpoons to every tabloid magazine and every piece of two-bit gossip media in range. We'll hit everything from Entertainment News to Yahoo! Entertainment, from Perez Hilton to that herd of cows on the View. I'm talking epic harpoonage, blot-out-the-sun shit.

    If this is successful, the SP Times article will seem like a Nobel prize. No Scientologist in the country will be able to go to the checkout aisle at Wal-Mart and not see "TOM CRUISE'S RELIGIOUS LEADER ASSAULTS STAFF" in big bold letters on the cover of every magazine there.

    The cult is down to their last numbers. Take away the celebrities, and they'll have nothing left to fall back on.

    Contact Us | Inside EW | Entertainment Weekly
    Info Contact Us : People.com
    Contact US - National Enquirer Magazine
    OK! Magazine - Contact
    Contact Us | Usmagazine.com
    Billboard Magazine
    Hollywood.com
    Radar Online
    Variety Magazine
  2. Anonymous Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    harping poons tomorrow as soon as i wake up
  3. Anonymous Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    oprah.com might be an interesting one to poon, as well...
  4. Anonynamefag Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Oprah's a cult sympathizer.
  5. lokimotion Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    I'd be very interested to know which celebrity Scilon, referred in the recent Graham Berry thread, is coughing up the ten million dollars to combat SP's and Anonymous. This person should be a high priority for negative publicity.
  6. Anonymous Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Her listeners/web site users are entertainment gossip junkies is why I mentioned it
  7. Anonymous Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    I wondered that too. There are only a few with that kind of cash. I'd bet it is Cruise.
  8. Ann O'Nymous Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Bart did that last year.
  9. Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    I thought there'd be penises in the maximum exposure thread. :( I am disappoint.
  10. lokimotion Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Be it Nancy Cartwright, Tom Cruise or John Travolta, anyone who pledges that kind of cash to combat/crush/stop criticism of Co$ needs to receive massive negative publicity until they withdraw that pledge.
  11. kitfisto Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    I'll hook you up at the next global:eek:
  12. 3rdMan Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Pretty much. She canceled her show when Chi-Anons announced they'd be protesting at her show-HQ. Besides, all she knows about Scientology is what comes from Cruise.

    What about E!?
    E! Online - Entertainment News, Celebrity Gossip, Celebrity News
    Here is their fax for sending press releases to them: 323.883.1779
  13. Anonymous Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Oprah is interested in making money. <period
    The microsecond her support of culties and cult operations causes her popularity one single muon of reduction, she'll be gone with the wind.
  14. mrfyde Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Oprah has reached critical mass (in more ways than one) and can do anything she wants.

    take for instance Anon boards that claim tens of thousands of members or more, they can make a dent in Oprah's popularity, by getting her to say 9,000 penises but they can't stop it. Cruise is toast w/ Oprah but Travolta (Oprah's #1 cultie) is still as popular than he was in Jan. '08.

    These people have literally millions of fans that don't care if they are culties or not.

    People like Beck, and Kristi Ali and that chick that was on Darma and greg would actually think it was great they are back in the press. So even if you go after the has-been scilons its a win for them and you can be sure they will be asked about it and there will be one more positive spin article about scientology as soon as they do.

    Entertainment news is not like other news they scratch each others backs and both sides make money. Real news has to sell advertising entertainment news IS advertising.
  15. Anonymous Member

  16. Relyt Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    So, your plan is to get into the heads of fans to make them hate scilebrities just because they're scilons? Sounds absolutely brilliant!
  17. Anonymous Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Sorry if still are disappoint :'( the goods are barely covered is close enough I hoep.
    Otherwise 4chn needs to haf a anonymous dicks thread wif wwp names.
  18. IHasABadge Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    BEEP BEEP BEEP LOGIC ALERT REPEAT LOGIC ALERT BEEP BEEP BEEP
    If there is sarcasm here it is sadly wasted. As far as i can tell, yeh, that'd work.
    BEEP BEEP BEEP LOGIC MISSING REALITY FOUND END ALERT REPEAT END ALERT

    Otherwise, as you were.
  19. Relyt Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    lern2coherency.
  20. YAHRLY Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    ah man, I had totally misconstruded this thread

    /clothes back on
  21. Anonymous Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    I doubt it. But then again, we did get her to say "over nine thousand penises" on TV.
  22. cubby Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    nude protesting, sounds good

    thx OP
  23. none given Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Anonynamefag you doing all the leg work?
    Adding a long list of tabloid links to your OP?
    Line up targets for us. I, for one, will knock them down.
  24. Anonynamefag Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    EDIT: Added moar. I couldn't find the contact link for TV Guide, if anyone else can, that'd work better.
  25. Anonymous Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Hey has anyone mentioned that this title sounds like it references nudity yet because if I'm the first wowowowowowowowow comedy gold
  26. ultrapoet Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    I don't think turning the public against the celebrities who have been duped into Scientology is going to work.

    However, I still think this should be done. My thinking is this--first off, with such a long list of People What That Are Famous to slap on the cover to go with this story, the tabloids would cream themselves. Plus, they don't even have to do that much work, all they have to do is start with "According to the St. Petersburg Times . . . " and rephrase the whole thing in breathlessly dramatic language. They don't even have to go into anything about the celebrities other than the fact that they're in the "Church". (A tabloid using a bait-and-switch headline on the cover? Say it ain't so, Joe!)

    So the tabloid junkies get the word. It doesn't matter if they think any better or worse of the celebrities (indeed, if they see the celebrities as 'victims', so much the better!) just as long as they are aware that Scientology is not the shiny, happy thing it portrays itself to be. And thus more people are inoculated against the cult.

    Go for it.
  27. ESG Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    I LIKE THIS IDEA VERY MUCH
  28. ultrapoet Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Well, crap. Three celebrity deaths in a row are bound to drown out anything about the SPTimes article. Should we hold off and wait for shit to die down, or harpoon now and hope they'll get around to it?
  29. mefree Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    ^^^THIS
  30. Anonymous Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    There is another angle to this you know because there are a lot of showbizzy discussion forums out there and talk about any of the scilebrities would be a good in for an Anon to mention the Church of Scientology and what it gets up to.

    Your average celeb follower won't read papers like the the SP Times and most of them will only know about the CoS in passing.
  31. FUCK Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    ^^^ This.
  32. Snake Member

    Re: ITT: We go for MAXIMUM EXPOSURE

    Can this raid be an optional nude raid? I've seen plenty of anons and I don't wanna see flappy moobs going everywhere.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

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

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins