Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

Discussion in 'Think Tank' started by WMAnon, Mar 18, 2008.

  1. WMAnon Member

    Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    No, this is not another "let's target this other thing!" post.

    The Church of Scientology is our target, but it is comprised of several different groups. Sea Org, ABLE, WISE, Narcanon, RFW... they're all part of the same destructive group. Are we targeting these Orgs, or keeping things as general as possible?

    On a similar but slightly more controversial note, what about the splinter groups? EST and Landmark both employ many of CoS's abusive practices and are rooted in Scientology, although no longer officially affiliated.

    We all know that going after every cult ever does not constitute staying on target and will lead to fail, but are these splinter groups close enough to be included in the blast radius?
  2. Mussy Member

    I, personally, don't think that's a bad idea.

    Like pulling weeds; make sure you get the entire root.
  3. anonymous3347 Member

    I think that the front groups are already being outed for what they are, in a lot of places. Right now, I think that the best idea would be to step-up letter writing. It's preparing the public, planting the seeds, so that when Anonymous is ready to fully commit to that front, it won't be "Oh, those bad Anons, picking on someone else now."

    For right now, I think the main force of Anonymous is in the right place, doing the right things. Outing the CoS-connected front groups is an auxiliary concern. More exposure can only help, but the CoS-proper is where we need to spend our main strength.
  4. jesse Member

  5. Dubber Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    If you target a Narconon center, bring leaflets that have names & phone numbers for other drug dependency programs in the area, in case you need them.
  6. Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    Honestly, the CoS has outed themselves on a lot of the more commonly known ones. Check out the homepage.
  7. Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    Most dangerous ones in my opinion are Applied Scholastics and Volunteer Ministries. (besides the CO$ itself obviously).

    I've been reaching out to psychiatrists and therapists in my area talking to some of them about COS views on them etc... almost none of them knew the details about it but were VERY interested. I would encourage others to do the same. I think they are a community of people who are of course... obviously anti-COS once they know the details and they talk to each-other, have own organizations etc... pressure on COS from any front/angle is good at this time.
  8. mojo Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    Youth for Human Rights International

    ...the wiki says

    .....In Brussels last year, Julie Barreau, a reporter for Le Soir magazine, recorded the speaker of a Scientology meeting as saying: "We must take control of Belgium. Their intentions are the same as the Nazis. We have to educate the forces of the fourth Reich about human rights." The reporter then explains that Scientologists consider any government that does not recognize Scientology as a religion to be the same as the Nazis, and thus the usage of the term fourth Reich.
  9. kimask2 Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    We shouldn't go after splinters for we are religiously tolerant, unless they hide what they are preaching. [Not my idea, previous consensus.]

    CoS fronts should be exposed as to what they are trying to infiltrate. This will generate more public support, from my own experience.

    YHRI is a definite front even used in counter protests. I can't dig anything up about America's Schools Program at They have YHRI AND ML Soccer as affiliates. The YHRI is using this as propaganda on their website.

    Potentially this can bring a lot of parents and soccer moms to write angry letters.
  10. xenubarb Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    Keep in mind that NarCONon, (it's the one with the 'con' in the middle) is a huge PR and moneymaker for Scientology. It *is* Scientology, from its position on the corporate chart, to the courses "students" are subjected to.

    Narconon is huge. By huge, I mean that up to $30,000 must be paid up front, ten percent of which whooshes straight up through the ABLE umbrella front to RTC. Right to the top!
    And then there are the licensing fees to CST for the rights to use Hubbard's material. Also, some of the real properties used by Narconon are leased...from a Scientologist-staffed front group.

    If you really wanted to help a whole lot of people worldwide, you'd definitely target Narconon exposure. I get emails every week from parents whose kids got kicked out of the program, but were denied a refund.

    A Narconon theme refuting all the bogus claims of an unrealistic success rate, and how Narconon's program is dangerous junk science by a crappy science fiction writer/college dropout, and how their denial of any connection to Scientology Inc. would almost certainly make some parents change their minds about sending a kid to Narconon.

    So far, only Richard Beha has received a full refund for his son's treatment at Narconon Stone Hawk. He ponied up $26,000 or so, and his kid got kicked out; driven to a sleazy motel hours from anywhere, and dumped out with $10 in his pocket. Beha spoke his mind before settling with Narconon SH, as I warned him he'd probably have to sign a gag order to get his money. So he spilled his guts beforehand. It's all out there. He went on Riverside's Vince Daniels show on KCAA. It was devastation. One of the owners of Narconon SH was on the show. He weaseled, squirmed, tried to promote the program, and did everything he possibly could to avoid addressing the refund question. You can hear it at
    They're available as podcasts.

    Vince needs to get a new show! He could well be Unanimous Radio's front man to the wog world. He srsly does not approve of Scientology or Narconon. Teh cult tried to fair game him, and they think they are the reason he dropped the show. People are perfectly happy to let them take credit.

    Somewhere in the country today, someone is searching for drug rehab clinics online.
    Try it. Pretend you're just someone who wants to put your evil twin into rehab. See what turns up. See how slick it is. And someone is looking at it right now, and it looks like a great program, because they have so many websites, and they are going to PICK UP THE PHONE because they don't know that Narconon is a front for Scientology. Later, they'll wind up over on to tell their story of how they got ripped off and can't get their twenty some grand back.
  11. Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    IMO we should set the stage, making the nature of splinter groups known so that when CoS goes down it'll be more natural for us to turn the spotlight in that direction- or at least enable others to do so. I think it should be regularly mentioned in passing. It doesn't merit its own flier yet because it would distract from our current goal.
  12. Edges Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    Landmark is some freaky shit, but not nearly as insidious as CoS. Let's just not worry about it, last thing we need is for all the cults to unite against the common enemy. If we win, we'll reinvingorate the anti-cult movement in our wake, and they can deal with this stuff.
  13. anon23stl Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    NarCONan is a major one for pulling people into Co$. These people are vulnerable and have addictive personalities. Co$ uses that to replace a drug addiction with an audit addiction.
    One of our locals lost his father due to them bringing him into Co$. Definitely in our best interest to consider it the same as its host.
  14. anonyrat Member

    Front groups in NZ

    I think we should definitely go after the front groups. In NZ a lot of our work has been focused on digging into the front groups, especially Narconon, because they keep popping up and they're a great way to cut off funding avenues to CoS itself. There aren't really any 'Old Guard' critics here, and it's only been very recently that NZ ex-scientologists have come forward and started talking to us :flowers:.

    It's a strategy that has paid off pretty well so far; we've alerted several government agencies that have given funding to front groups in the past, and when we found out the other day thanks to Ent that Narconon was planning to build a 'rehab' centre in Wanganui, there were very knowledgeable anons on the ground who stepped forward and are busy informing the locals about the real deal with Narconon and Scientology.

    For a small country like NZ, with only one CoS org in Auckland and a mission somewhere in Christchurch, going after the front orgs gives the NZ anons overseas or not near an org something to do that makes a real difference. We still get out there every month to protest and inform the public (and eat cake), but this gives us something to work on during the rest of the month. Moar info here: Scientology in New Zealand discussion thread - Activism Forums

    I'd love to go after Landmark when CoS is dealt with, and it could be useful to draw parallels with them if you're talking to someone who knows about Landmark but is largely unaware of Scientology.
  15. narCONon Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    I think, after operation pyscout (or game over or watever its gonna be), ie in June, we shuld shift our focus a little. It doesn't even hav to be physical. We could stay outside Co$ orgs, but change our banners/flyers. we culd focus on Narconon and Criminon, but most people can already link these with $cientology. I think we need to raise awairness of the Child-Brainwashing groups like Youth For Human Rights and Applied Scholastics. We could have somthing like Operation Peace for the Kids or somthing like that...

    Then again this is only a suggestion... Feel free to rip me apart for it...

  16. UpStatSP Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    Theory One is that you take down the "Church" and like a card pyramid the whole thing falls down around it.

    Theory Two is that you focus exclusively on the CoS and the front groups are spared (to a degree) and continue to be utilised for recruitment and scam profiteering.

    Theort Three is that you have no theories, Anon has no theories, and it naturally evolves to envelope everything and anything that it wishes to target. Nothing goes unseen.
  17. googoomuck Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    If you have a specific front group you want to target, try using the Search feature.

    I searched for "narconon" and got a jumble of stuff; then I tried searching with the drop-down menu right below the keyword field set to "Search titles only".

    Results for narconon: Activism Forums - Search Results

    Results for other front groups will be similar and there's lotsa good info on the site. Some of the front groups are in our sights, but we need to do more research on them. You could help with that.

    A point of clarity: the Scientology Organization is composed of lots of subgroups for a reason: it's *meant* to be confusing. That said, Sea Org and RPF are not front groups, they're part of CoS and not officially incorporated.

    Some threads that might help:
  18. Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    Any ideas on where to find operations/protocol manuals for Narconon? I think I have seen some of their "research", and it did seem pretty weak. We need to prepare information packs debunking the operational claims of the front groups, and these manuals would be really useful.
  19. xenubarb Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    Much of their "research" is debunked over on Narconon Exposed
  20. WMAnon Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    1) If you could link me to the previous discussion on the matter, that'd be great.

    2) What about groups that are not claiming to be religions? I'm thinking specifically about Landmark Foundation, which is an equally sleazy corporate cult but without any of the religious trappings. Can we really be considered religiously intolerant for going after a group that isn't a religion as part of our ongoing protests?
  21. moose Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    We should stay on focus, but I agree that Landmark does use the same tactics and strategies as Scientology.

    The lawsuits they had against the Electronic Frontier Foundation are very similar to what CoS is doing all the time.

    They use youtube, wiki's and forums in a similar way as CoS to promote their product.
    (look at the responses to the video above...)

    A critical documentary about Landmark was made a few years ago in france, Landmark sued
    them and tried to ban the documentary (
    and sue google-video (

    But it raises an interesting question, and that is why such companies can do all this, especially in the US. It is not just about Scientology, but also Landmark, and many other companies. There's obviously something wrong with copyright and IP laws (in relationship to the freedom of speech), and the fact that such companies can sue/silence about everyone if they have enough $$$
  22. rasputin Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    my only reservation in going after Landmark and other cults - Scientology's bastard offspring and inbred cousins - is that tactically I think we are best served focusing on one organisation at a time. 10 hits on CoS could harm them, 5 each on CoS and Landmark means neither one gets damaged as badly.

    (anything involving us targetting Erhard-related enterprises would probably make the OSA's head explode due to their history)

    front groups are a different matter, and IMO any front group is a valid cause for concern - at the most basic level they may be passing money to RTC in licensing fees, and also act as easy PR for the cult. in addition to this are the specific problems with each group (Narconon's pseudoscience and medically unsound "rehab," Applied Scholastics' failure in the classroom, etc.) making them a concern even aside from the CoS connection.
  23. Peregrine Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    A little out of left field . .

    Scientology generally does not like it exposed that Narconon, Advanced Scholastics, CCHR, Food For Orphans etc etc etc are either front groups and/or scams run by scientologists right?

    Two ideas here:

    1. One month could be devoted to developing a full list of these front groups/scams and exposing them for what they are. I've seen partial lists, but never a full "connect the dots" list (if such a thing exists already, could someone link it to me?).

    2. THIS IS ILLEGAL AND I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULD DO THIS BUT MORE THROWING IT OUT THERE AS A STARTING POINT: what if say, Narconon suddenly got a lot of interest on the net and a lot of hits which were a bit more than their servers could cope with? Scientology could not say "omgz they're picking on us!" since to do so would publically expose what they desperately want to hide. Is there some legal way such a thing could be accomplished? (forcing them to expose themselves, not bringing down their servers to do so if that makes sense).
  24. UpStatSP Member

    Re: Orgs, Fronts and Splinters

    Have to say I dont agree with the targeting of Landmark.

    On the one hand, yes, they take money, alot of money, for studies that could quite easily be learnt without handing over wods of cash.

    However, the fundamental difference from what I can see, is that Landmark attempts to fix bad relationships and infact bring you closer to family, lost friends, etc.

    The fundamental tenents of the two are thus at opposite ends of the spectrum. Yes, at their centre is a desire to profit, but Landmark is nowhere near the destructive force that Scientology is, not by a longshot in my opinion.

    Please note, this is no endorsement, Ive looked into Landmark and can see why some would target them as a cult, but for the reason I have given Im not sure it would be worth sacrificing energy on LM that would be best spent aimed at Scientology.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


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

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins