A post from the SF Raid Report thread that blew me away

Wieber · **Joined:** Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm **Posts:** 8449

Smurf wrote:

skeptic2girl wrote:

I do believe ET, though maybe I'm just a hopeful person. ET could be putting in some red herrings, but I don't think ET is a troll.

It's fine to be hopeful, but not so much that you let your guard down. Alot of people fell for my BS and supported me as an ex-People Temple member, while I was perpetrating an OSA black op. There have been others.

Laura Terepin was a young woman who talked her way into the good graces of Graham Berry & CAN, volunteering many hours doing filing and making contacts in their offices. I spoke to Bob Minton & Stacy on frequent occasions about Laura being as OSA operative, and no one listened until something happened that led Bob to pay a PI to investigate her. Even Cythia Kisser, the National Director of CAN, believed in Laura.

"In January 1999, Bob Minton, posted a message to the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology accusing a woman called Laura Terepin of being a spy for Scientology. Laura Terepin had been working as a volunteer for CAN (Cult Awareness Network) for quite some time. Cynthia Kisser, who was the president of CAN before they were sued out of existence, publicly expressed serious doubts about Bob Minton's allegations."

Long story short... the beloved volunteer was proven to be a close friend of a Scilon in Wisconsin named Jolie Steckart, who had stolen a classmate's identity, and posed as Laura, with the aid of the Chicago-OSA staff. The PI located the real Laura who had no knowledge that her identity had been stolen. After she was exposed as a fraud, critics wanted to talk with Jolie to her to get her side. Her response was to quietly disappear.

http://www.solitarytrees.net/racism/lauras.htm

Black ops have been a favorite tool of the cult. ET may be the real thing, but the fact that the comm lines are one-way, and ET has the distinction of being able to contact the SF Weekly, but won't provide the means to contact ET and confirm his/her identity & establish his/her legitimacy, remains very fishy. Approach with caution...

I agree. $cientology just loves to infiltrate groups, organizations, businesses, government, and so on. I didn't pick up on it at the time but after I got out and thought about it I concluded that the place where I was working had been infiltrated by three individuals that I know were spies/operatives for $cientology and another individual that I suspect but have not confirmed.

They start out all friendly, helpful and supportive. Then they start to snoop, gather information, find out what they've been sent to find out. After that they'll do things to disrupt.

Has ET provided anything that was real information of a specific nature or actually useful? I'm hopeful they're for real as much as you are, skeptic2girl, but keep your guard up.

There is a confidence trick where the con-person gives something of little, no or false value in order to get something back that has real value. In other words, "I gave you inside information, now you give me your information." That could be ET's game. Stay vigilant.

Sponge · **Posted:** Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:07 am

Wieber, IMO if you had to choose a skeptical side then the very worst you could say about this is that it could be a spectacularly clever mindfuck against the cult.

As for it being an infiltration of the "information swap" variety then it would have to rank as one of most stupidly executed variants that I have ever heard of. Why? Because ultimately it attracted great newsmedia and a relentless series of hard protesting which has caused the cult a lot of bad PR (viewtopic.php?f=11&t=38282 ) with zero disadvantage to protesters and critics. If somone ever turns up with proof that it was an attempted operation to infiltrate and discredit critics for taking something on its face then I would also celebrate with a belief confirmed that the cult has been honed down to the last and most desperate, self-destructive bunch of cronically stupid pudknockers ever.

edit: typo

Wieber · **Joined:** Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm **Posts:** 8449

I think you may be right, Sponge.

However $cientology and its office of special affairs (OSA) promote their infallibility along with their ruthlessness. They are far from infallible. From time to time they do things that are head scratching weird.

dirty hippie · **Joined:** Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:23 pm **Posts:** 180

ET is at the bottom of believability gradient imho, but the effect is harmless to the good guys, and it could cause some of the bad guys to question stuff.

> ethicstrouble > santa clause > tooth fairy > OT powers.

Smurf · **Joined:** Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:10 am **Posts:** 2681

Wieber wrote:

However $cientology and its office of special affairs (OSA) promote their infallibility along with their ruthlessness. They are far from infallible. From time to time they do things that are head scratching weird.

You got that right. I engaged in an op where we broke the window of a psychologist's home (who was speaking at a CAN conference) and we poured boxes of live rats into her home. After I blew, I met with Margaret Singer and admitted my role in the op, and she told me of the major expense it took to rid her home of the rats and clean up the damage.

I was engaged in another op spreading dog & cat poop around the Glendale home of a CAN board member who was attending the same CAN conference. Pushing dog poo into the locks of car & house doors and smearing it on windows seemed very juvenile to me, but Rick Moxon & Tim Bowles were pleased as punch of the antics.

Smurf · **Joined:** Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:10 am **Posts:** 2681

dirty hippie wrote:

ET is at the bottom of believability gradient imho, but the effect is harmless to the good guys, and it could cause some of the bad guys to question stuff.

I have a difficult time accepting it as harmless, and it could come back to bite critics in the ass, if it was revealed later in the media, that the wool was pulled over the eyes of gullible critics.

Anons & critics want to be seen as credible sources of dox and their cause is a legitimate one. Feeding false propaganda to make people feel good is not productive in the end. And, if it's later show that ET is a troll, it could cause the ones we look to for support (media & the community) to distrust us even further.

Sorry.. I've been down that road before.. don't fight evil with lies and deception, even if it makes anons "feel good". It's not causing "the bad guys to question stuff". It only makes them more convinced that the cult is right and the critics are kooks.

Don Carlo · **Joined:** Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:20 am **Posts:** 8167

Smurf, please write all your special ops stories. That rat story alone should be in a movie.

Smurf · **Joined:** Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:10 am **Posts:** 2681

Don Carlo wrote:

Smurf, please write all your special ops stories. That rat story alone should be in a movie.

No, thanks. I've testified to them in past court cases & I was asked about it recently by an individual writing a book on the cult. The info is out there, the cult denies it, they say I'm a psychotic liar, and Scientology is everything good & proper in the world.. same old BS.

dirty hippie · **Joined:** Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:23 pm **Posts:** 180

Quote:

I have a difficult time accepting it as harmless, and it could come back to bite critics in the ass, if it was revealed later in the media, that the wool was pulled over the eyes of gullible critics.

Anons & critics want to be seen as credible sources of dox and their cause is a legitimate one. Feeding false propaganda to make people feel good is not productive in the end. And, if it's later show that ET is a troll, it could cause the ones we look to for support (media & the community) to distrust us even further.

Sorry.. I've been down that road before.. don't fight evil with lies and deception, even if it makes anons "feel good". It's not causing "the bad guys to question stuff". It only makes them more convinced that the cult is right and the critics are kooks.

I see your point, Smurf, however I think the silly drama and mystery and lack of dox surrounding ethicstrouble is lulzy and in keeping with the spirit of anonymous. I'm all for "truth," but in this case until somebody finds it, let the chupacabras run free.

Axiom142 · **Joined:** Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:27 pm **Posts:** 21

Don Carlo wrote:

Smurf, please write all your special ops stories. That rat story alone should be in a movie.

What he said.

It would be very useful to have your exploits as an OSA operative fully documented, especially if it could be cross-referenced with actual verifiable events as in the case with Margaret Singer and her rodent infestation.

Imagine the scene where anytime a cult spokeshole appears in the media and complains about what was done to them, the interviewer responds with “Well, the CoS doesn’t exactly have clean hands it self, for example…”

And if nothing else, it reinforces the case for the CoS to be regarded as a sinister cult that has no respect for the law or the rights of individuals to disagree with them. Yes, I know we all know this is the case, but proving it to everyone else is also important.

I’ve just been speaking to a person who is officially still ‘in’ but is actually ‘out’ and currently in the process of disentangling themselves. It just this sort of abusive behaviour that got them to wake up. The more evidence we can produce, the better our case.

Axiom142

Jeff Jacobsen · **Posted:** Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:17 pm

Axiom142 wrote:

Don Carlo wrote:

Smurf, please write all your special ops stories. That rat story alone should be in a movie.

What he said.

It would be very useful to have your exploits as an OSA operative fully documented, especially if it could be cross-referenced with actual verifiable events as in the case with Margaret Singer and her rodent infestation.

Imagine the scene where anytime a cult spokeshole appears in the media and complains about what was done to them, the interviewer responds with “Well, the CoS doesn’t exactly have clean hands it self, for example…”

And if nothing else, it reinforces the case for the CoS to be regarded as a sinister cult that has no respect for the law or the rights of individuals to disagree with them. Yes, I know we all know this is the case, but proving it to everyone else is also important.

I’ve just been speaking to a person who is officially still ‘in’ but is actually ‘out’ and currently in the process of disentangling themselves. It just this sort of abusive behaviour that got them to wake up. The more evidence we can produce, the better our case.

Axiom142

Can I help? http://www.jeffjacobsen.org/smurf.htm

Don Carlo · **Joined:** Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:20 am **Posts:** 8167

Margaret Singer has died, but she might have relatives who remember the rat infestation.

Smurf · **Joined:** Tue Oct 19, 2010 4:10 am **Posts:** 2681

Jeff Jacobsen wrote:

Can I help? http://www.jeffjacobsen.org/smurf.htm

You should contact Joel at Religious Freedom Watch. He needs a good writer for his hate pages, too. It probably wouldn't matter you're not a Scilon, because you act like one.

A mod posted this link on another thread. It's about coordinated smear campaigns. You should read it.

http://www.salon.com/2012/01/27/the_pre ... singleton/

A post from the SF Raid Report thread that blew me away

Who is online