Fan Mail From Some Flounder

I always am willing to speak with people who have opposing views.  However, I like them to be at least halfway reasonable in what they have to say.  This rather lengthy e-mail exchange happened over the last 24 hours.

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:10:42 -0700
From: johnb.brown2@gmail.com
To: xenutv@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Anonymous

Dear Mr. Bunker,

I would like to know if you are the man who let those dogs named Anonymous out of there cages? I beleive the answer to be ‘Yes.  I am not a Scientologist, and Anonymous tried to burn me because I would not give up some sources I had. Even though their protests against Scientology has been non-violent with a few exceptions, everything else they do has been illegal. Anyone who disagrees with them gets ddos attacked. You helped organize  a bunch of cyber gangbangers, who are hurting people. Do not worry about Scientology or allegation that they still use fair game. Worry about me. Unfortunately for you, Anonymous has unknowingly made your their leader, Wise Beard Man. You, from this day forward, will be held liable for whatever Anonymous does.

John Bowen Brown II

Check out my web site at: http://www.intwknews.com

This email is the intellectual property of the author. Please do not transmit or reproduce without first obtaining Permission of John Bowen Brown II.

Well, you are a bit mistaken in the chronology.  Anonymous started attacking Scientology with illegal methods and I urged them to not do that and instead use peaceful, legal means to speak out against Scientology’s fraud and abuse.  They considered my advice and largely have followed it.

That doesn’t make me their leader.   I’m closer to an Obi Wan Kenobi.  Offering sage advice to take on an evil empire.

But blame me if you must.

All my best,

Mark Bunker

Hi Mark,

I actually want to correct something I said. Originally I said, ‘Unfortunately for you, Anonymous has unknowingly made your their leader, Wise Beard Man.’ I actually don’t feel you are the Leader, but they have put you in some sort of leadership status. If you want to call it being a sage, that’s fine; but you are still a leader in the Anonymous movement.

Whatever floats your boat, John.  I’ve met hundreds of members of Anonymous and they all seem like decent people who are taking to the streets in peaceful protests.  I’ve denounced any and all illegal activities and tried to lead them to doing good.  Most have responded.

There are still some dopes who do destructive things.  There are dopes in every group.  The vast majority of Scientologists are terrific people.  There are dopes at the top doing things that are ethically and morally wrong.

All I can do is set an example and encourage doing things the right way.  I’m sorry if this disappoints you.

Mark

Did not say I was disappointed. I am a human rights activist, and I actually understand human rights principles. The term ‘human rights activist’ seems to be a term that is abused. Some local cells are terribly inept and disorganized. The protest Housh is one example. You do not ever walk into the building of the group you are protesting.

Another thing is some outed Anonymous member  referring to the earlier illegal methods as civil disobedience, an misuse of that term. What is being done on the internet is vastly different from the openly non-violent protests.

I don’t give myself a lofty term like human rights activist.  I’m a guy who is speaking anonymously about some things that are wrong in Scientology that people should be made aware of.  These are things that journalists have been documenting now since the group began in the 50’s.  The net is allowing all that information to be gathered and shared.

I find that valuable.

People may speak out about Anonymous’ abuses as well.  I have done so in many of my early interviews about the group.  I denounced the abuses and support the legal activities.  I hope you continue to speak out about the abuses which I also condemn.

The net is an unruly place.  My latest video deals with that subject.  Anywhere people can post anonymously on the net, there are dopes who say stupid things that they would never say to a person’s face.

I get emails at my job in TV news from viewers venting about various issues.  They can curse like a sailor at some perceived faceless corporation and then when I answer them they say, ‘Oh – I didn’t think anyone would actually read that.’

While the net is wild and unruly, I keep my corner of it civil.

Mark

Mark,

I am aware of some of the things Scientology has done in the past (IRS break in and  Paulette Cooper, ect.). Perhaps you and I ought to talk about this in person or on the phone.  Anonymous is creating a persona that I see as beginning to resemble the same paranoia Sci   seems to display when confronted with dissent. I am glad you are not so polarized as some are, and can admit the possibility of some abuses in Anonymous can occur. They are occurring!

Lastly, I never considered my use of the term human rights activist as lofty. That is how I originally became involved in activism by studying human rights principles. In this stage in my activism I need to consult with an attorney because the human rights issues I become aware of contain some complicated legal issues

I’m on record condemning the bad and praising the good.  Meet with Anonymous at the pickets and you’ll find decent people from all walks of life.  That would probably do you more good than meeting or calling me.

I have gone out of my way to meet and talk with current and former Scientologists over the past ten years so I can better understand Hubbard’s creation.

If you’re upset with Anonymous, take it up with them.

I know the “bad” Anonymous have turned on me a couple times.  I got copious phone calls from what sounded like two 14 year old kids.  They got bored when I didn’t react to to their taunts and went away.   The good Anonymous continues to take to the streets and talk to the media.

I’m not going to pin the actions of the few dopes on the good people I’ve met.  However, the bad actions do tar their reputation.  That’s something the bulk of the group needs to face.  Perhaps they will spin off and start a new name.  Their actions are up to them.

The local Anons in my area are part of the problem. They are with the bad. Unfortunately they taunted me and I responded quite nastily. They have also gotten nasty once with a local Sci member who  apparently was a Sci newbie who wanted to give them some Lit.

Also I recommend you go on the record as stating you have no leadership status with Anonymous. The picture they are painting of you is that you fill some kind of leadership status.

What happened to me is I approached Sci and Anonymous and started asking them both questions about Sci. I started researching fair game. I had some research sources. Anonymous wanted the sources. I did not give them my sources. I also questioned some things that were said. They considered me a Sci at first. Then a BSer. The Mods  accessed my own member ID and vandalized my posts. They said it will stop if I give up my research sources. I did not want to give them up under those circumstances. I never did. Then I got nasty with them. Then they said they knew my phone number and ask how Kris, my wife was doing. My business line is posted, but I do not remember putting my wife’s name out there. I live in Tuscon. The local Tucson Anon are of the bad breed. They seem to be looking for confrontation from what I observed. They seem to be left over from the image boards.

So what did you say about Fair Game?
The policy itself was canceled years ago, but the Sci org seems to currently have an attack the attacker policy. Anon don’t seem to understand the fair game targeted members only. There might be another “attack the attacker” policy within Scientology, but only former and current members ever need to worried about Fair Game.
Well, I can see why Anonymous reacted poorly to your statements.  They are factual false.  Having read the Fair Game and the cancellation order, you have it wrong.  The cancellation orders expressly says the use of the term Fair game is canceled because it creates bad PR.  But Hubbard also writes in the same very same order that this does not at all change the way we treat an SP.

Fair game was L. Ron Hubbard written policy to handle what he calls Suppressive Persons, those who he perceived to be “enemies of the church.  No where in the policy does it state (nor is it true) that only members or former members could be SPs.

By the way, what a wonderful religious sentiment it is that Hubbard wrote “an SP can be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any disclipline of the Scientologist.  May be tricked, sued, lied to or destroyed.”  No religion should have such a policy.  No religious leader should have such thoughts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology)

Paulette Cooper is but one example of a non-Scientologist who was targeted as Fair Game.  Gabe Cazares was another.  My friend Bob Minton yet another more recent example.  The abuse was well documented.  I have met all three and know their stories well.

So if Anonymous is calling your information bogus, they are the correct ones and it would do you well to do more research on the subject.  The documents have been entered into court cases and verified as true.

http://www.xenu.net/fairgame-e.html

I am aware of all this. In interviewing the head of the Scientology church in Tucson, I was shown a book not available to the public. So far I have been allowed to view this book, but not buy it. I know about SPs and Squirrels, and other terms. I have  read things you would not be allowed to read. The local group has allowed me access. I am aware of what the fair game documents say. I have read them. They specifically apply only to members. I am aware of the Paulette Cooper incident. It was an something called Operation Freakout. Paulette Cooper was taking classes to research Scientology. Since she was involved in Scientology she might be declared fair game. I do not believe the policy of fair game is still in effect, but that does not preclude other aggressive policies. As concerning these alleged court cases, I need copies of original documents. Many of the court cases on the internet about Sci are uncertified transcripts. Can you provide me with certified transcripts or copies of original court documents?
If Scientology has evidence to refute the documents that have been entered into court cases it would be wise of them to release it publicly rather than hold it secret only for those people it lures off the street.  How can anyone refute what is in their secret “truth” book if no one can have a copy of the “truth?”

Yes, I have had copies of the written orders.  We had an extensive collection of Hubbard material at the LMT but no I don’t have a copy to send you right now nor the time to search for items which have been well documented for decades.  However, the Fair Game documents have been used by many major news organizations from 60 Minutes to the L.A. Times, Time Magazine, the BBC and beyond.  NO WHERE has Scientology refuted the content of the documents, only arguing the ridiculous notions that you gave to Anonymous.

Paulette Cooper NEVER took classes to research her book “The Scandal of Scientology.”  Another lie told to you by Scientology.  But if she had, that would not excuse their attempts to have her jailed, locked in a mental institution or driven to suicide.

http://tinyurl.com/6zatg7

Frankly, I’m shocked that you would represent yourself as some type of expert, presenting papers, creating a website touting yourself as a reliable source, when you so ill-informed on the topic of Scientology.

So how did your conversion come about?  In a google search, I see you describe yourself as a former deprogrammer.  There are pictures of you protesting JW with Silent Lambs, and as late as 2007, you are still against child abuse in JW:

http://tinyurl.com/5vxa4k

Now your empty site suggests a turnaround.

What do you mean by ’empty site?’
Click on most of your links and see a placeholder ‘This is where you would put your content’ message.
Hi Mark,
I check my current site at http://intwknews.com/. The links work. I have no idea which site you are referring to, probably some old site I had
Here’s what viewers see for the Neopagans, Scientology and Human Rights links.
What I said was that Anonymous has put you in some sort of leadership position. I also corrected my self and reworded it. Remember, I said, “I actually want to correct something I said?  My web site has actually been inactive for quite some time. I have not been actively promoting it. As you may see it is not done.   Neopagans, Scientology and Human Rights links do not comprise  “virtually every link.”  There has been no one on it for quite some time. Look at its stats. I am not trying to overwhelm you. Lets stick the Scientology. Please stop using ad hominems to discredit me.
I’m sorry but so far I am not impressed by your arguments nor have you provided me any of the documentation you yourself demand.

After your second email to me, I wondered who you were so I did a quick google and found your site, your photos showing your and your wife at a Silent Lambs protest, notices about you presenting a lecture on religious minorities in the UK at some sort of conference and more.

I would have expected you who wanted to chastise me for being the leader of Anonymous to at least have done a quick google and found out some basic facts about me.  It’s not hard.

BTW, you mentioned Anonymous knew your wife’s name and found that spooky.  Her name was on your photo collection from the Silent Lambs protest.  There is nothing spooky about a google search.

Please try to support whatever you choose to say or I see little reason to continue.  It is not an ad hominem attack to ask you to at least do as much as you demand of me.  For a purported scholar and a person whose site chooses to defend Scientology as a minority religion, you are falling short and I can see why Anonymous gave you little credence.

I have asked you to provide me with documentation for just the claim that you made about Fair Game and you have failed so far to do so.  I on the other hand gave you documented evidence that your site has dead links to major sections when you claimed otherwise.  It’s not my fault your site is inactive.  Your email said:

“Check out my web site at: http://www.intwknews.com

It did not say, “And look at the lousy stats and by the way, many links show the site has not even been constructed yet.”

Please, you can do better than this.

Hi Mark,
I hope you understand my position on finding documents. I am trying to get into graduate school, and have already written level academic papers. I am trying to to academic level research. I need authenticated and/or primary documentation. Uncertified transcripts or simply saying what the document allegedly says, as some sci critical sites have done, is not acceptable
So far you have charged me with being the leader of Anonymous, were unaware that the LMT closed six years ago and not even aware of what is on or not on your site.  Your research thus far has not overwhelmed me.
And one more thing:

I need to re-emphasize that I have only researched Fair Game thus far so to judge me base on whether I know about some Sci critic org like the LMT I consider unfair assessment. Anyway, give me a couple of days. I will provide my documentation. I would appreciate any primary documentation that adds to and sheds like on what I have

At this point, I have to admit I was tiring of the exchange.  I understand not everything on the net is verfied truth but when decades of reporting has all pointed to something like Fair Game being an actual document that has been verified as true and entered into court cases, that is good enough for me.  I’ve seen the originals.  I know what they say and what Scientology says about them.
John,

Do your own research.  I have a full time job in TV news.  I can’t waste any more time on you.  I haven’t seen you provide me with one authenticated and/or primary documentation from Scientology to refute information that has been in the record for decades yet you seem to believe whatever nonsense they tell you.

So from now on, only argue points on which you provide me with authenticated and/or primary documentation and not ‘you were taken into an Org and shown a magic truth book.’

I think we were lied to about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.  “What’s that President Bush?  We weren’t lied to?”  Okay.  I got it from the source.  It must be true.

Good luck to you.

And one more thing:

I need to re-emphasize that I have only researched Fair Game thus far so to judge me base on whether I know about some Sci critic org like the LMT I consider unfair assessment. Anyway, give me a couple of days. I will provide my documentation. I would appreciate any primary documentation that adds to and sheds like on what I have

Let’s go back to the very first message your sent me:

“Dear Mr. Bunker,

“I would like to know if you are the man who let those dogs named Anonymous out of there cages? I beleive the answer t be ‘Yes.'”

If you had done even the slightest, tiniest bit of research you would have discovered that I am the one who said, “Don’t do Illegal things” and helped reform at least a large faction of the group:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW466xcM0Yk

So you ask me not to judge you?  You have yet to back up ONE of your statements.

I am aware of what i said. I am aware of what you said  about illegal things. I have a copy of the vid.  I also said later in a email I said the following: “I actually want to correct something I said. Originally I said, “Unfortunately for you, Anonymous has unknowingly made your their leader, Wise Beard Man.” I actually don’t feel you are the Leader, but they have put you in some sort of leadership status. If you want to call it being a sage, that’s fine; but you are still a leader in the Anonymous movement.”

Yes I have backed up some of my statements. I keep referring earlier emails correcting what you said. And again I refer back to what I said. You have so far accused me of this and that, and I keep referring back to things i said in earlier email to correct what you said. So don’t lecture me about research.

If you have to resort to attacking character rather than content, it is plain character assassination. As you notice, I have responded to every accusation you label against by attacking the content of what you said rather than your character.

I’m commenting on your lack of research, not your lack of character.  And calling me a leader in the Anonymous movement is an incorrect statement.  I do not control their actions, nor their activities.  I am someone that many of them seem to think has had some interesting things to say for the past ten years about Scientology and that my suggestions of non-violence, legal actions have merit.

You should be thanking me for tempering the group and so should Scientology.

Now, until you produce documents that support your arguments, this seems like a silly waste of time.

I will stand side by side with Paulette Cooper, Gabe Cazares and Bob Minton and show them my support.  You feel free to stand with the people who viciously assaulted these people’s characters and ran covert operations to destroy them.  There’s some real examples of character assassination, not the harmless comments I have made to you in these e-mails.

I am not standing with Scientology. I am aware of the character assassination that goes on in Scientology (e.g. Religious Freedom Watch). That fact that you have some kind of leadership status in Anonymous is not incorrect. You sure seem to be some kind of leader or spokesperson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrVttHNvZVI&feature=related) You say that you do not control their actions, and yet say I should be thanking you for tempering the group. You automatically labeled me as being with “them.” Also stop mirroring what I am saying. I ask you for documents. You tell me that  you do not have the time. Then you try to mirror what i said and ask me for my documents.

I am not going to debate with you about character assassination. If you refer to the researcher rather than the research, its an ad hominem attack.

I might actually have added documentation in the future that might change my current opinion of some of Scientology’s tactics, but my opinion of you is pretty much set. You, sir, are a pompous asshole! You are right. This is a waste. This started out as a pleasant discussion, but it seems you have labeled me as being with “them.”

You have accused me of defending Scientology by considering them a minority religion. Good or bad, they are still a religious group. I am not defending Scientology. I am interpreting the information I currently have. I might acquire more information in the future. I might actually find a document that states specifically what you claim about Fair Game. My research is far from over. You are obviously not going to help me with that. Even if i come to some realization that Scientology is an evil, dangerous group, you will still be that pompous little asshat that tried to play games with me
Did I say you were with “them?”  You are putting words in my mouth.  I said you were willing to stand with them and support the notion of Fair Game.  You are twisting my words.

You demand documents yet offer none of your own.  I expect you to make a good faith effort to live up to what you demand of others.

You show me a videotape in which I speak about Scientology’s phony baloney fear of Scientology and say that somehow that makes me a leader or spokesman.  If I had made a video about the Bush administration’s shredding of the constitution would that have made me the head of the Democratic Party?

You call me a pompous asshole yet call yourself a lofty human rights advocate by the name of John Bowen Brown II?  I knew a Joseph W. Blow IV and you know what, he called himself Joe Blow.  Name changed to protect the Joe.

Scientology is a minority religion.  I have never said otherwise.  People are welcome to believe any wacky thing they want.  All I ask is that Scientology stop lying about what it believes.  For example, they say it has nothing to do with Xenu and space aliens and such and now you can hear in Hubbard’s own voice the truth:

Fresh on the internet thanks to Anonymous.  Understand this, I support people’s right to believe Xenu blew them up in a volcano.  It is after all why Hubbard put an exploding volcano on the cover of Dianetics from the mid-60’s on.  I only ask that Scientology not lie about it.  Not too big a thing to request.

We did start our pleasantly.  If you hadn’t behaved in such a rude manner, chastising me from the gitgo, demanding court stamped originals of documents that every major news organization has already verified for decades, we could have continued in that manner.

It might be very constructive for people to see our entire exchange on my blog.  Do I have your permission as a public human rights advocate who specializes in minority religions to post our exchanges unedited?

Thanks,

Mark

O blah blah blah blah, pompous asshole. Sure you can use our correspondences, provided that you use them in their entirety with out commentary. People can make up their own minds. I actually feel privileged that you are going to try to go public with our correspondences. Yes my real name is John Bowen Brown II.  I use my full name because of how many Johan Browns there are in Tucson alone, let alone the country (my dad’s name included). Come to Tucson. I am here. What point is there to insulting my name? If you want to think that calling me a human rights activist is lofty that is your opinion. Like I said earlier with the title academic, human rights activists are people too. There’s not anything lofty about it

That video is only one example that suggests you are have leadership status
You said, “For a purported scholar and a person whose site chooses to defend Scientology as a minority religion…”

I was not rude to you in asking for documentation. Do I need to refer back to that email too. My initial email might have been a little rude,  but i corrected myself in a later email. You, sir, are an ass hole. You can quote me on that.
New Email
Also lying about the Xenu belief is a rather small thing compared to fair game. I could care less whether they lie about the Xenu. I am more concerned if they are lying about fair game. We were never talking about Xenu. Thanks for the vid. Its interesting—LULZ
New email
I mentioned our correspondences on my blog.
New Email
Sorry forgot the link

http://anonymous-watch.blogspot.com/

So in the end is Mr. John Bowen Brown II even who he says he is?  Or was the whole charade a Scientology-style suitable guise?    Pretending to not know my history with Anonymous and then having Anonymous Watch be his blog.  Nice.
UPDATE:
Mark,

How can you say that I pretended like I did not know about your history with Anonymous when that I was why I approached you the first place?

It would have been better to just make the emails available in a document like I did rather than posting 40 + email that are God knows how many pages that is.

Gees your dumb.

Most people are not going to want to read that much on the internet.

Explore posts in the same categories: Anonymous

77 Comments on “Fan Mail From Some Flounder”


  1. […] Read more: Fan Mail From Some Flounder […]

  2. Noxat Says:

    Flounder indeed; seems pretty fishy to me.

    I don’t even understand why this guy is contacting you in the first place. The first email reads like some sort of accusation of guilt. Then he wants documents to prove… what exactly? Why is it your responsibility to provide “authenticated and/or primary documentation?”

    The blog is also suspicious. I’ve noticed that the poster’s name has already changed from “Captain Cheesit” to “LULZ Killer” while I was reading it. Under “View complete profile” lists a Tucson satanic cult blog with a single entry made yesterday (Aug 14th). Let me guess. We’re supposed to believe Anonymous has hacked his page and profile! Not to mention, he seems more concerned about his correspondence with you than anything Anonymous has done.

    Well, whatever. Nothing he says degrades the work you’ve done over the years, or the good Anonymous has done despite their roots. Its pretty obvious Scientology has a “divide and conquer” mission set against Anonymous (or all critics, really). But no matter what some flounder says, Scientology needs to be reformed, even if they are a “minority religion.”

  3. John Says:

    Noxat,

    Thanks for reading my blog. I changed the name to LULZ Killer. I am also a student of LaVeyan Satanism.

  4. RMN Says:

    I’m calling fruitcake.

    This is the kind of troll who think’s he’s an intellectual. This variety merely looks for some sort of recognition or e-fame by attaching themselves to existing controversies or known individuals . If he was a true intellectual scholar, as he seems to think he is, he would allow for the possibility of himself being wrong, as true scholars value fact over ego. As a further attempt to garner more attention, he’s even started responding in these comments.

    Move along folks, nothing to see here

  5. John Says:

    RMN,

    Your description sounds a lot like Anonymous’ garnering attention. If you actually read my emails, I did

  6. Leannekera Says:

    Either way you seem very suspicious.

    Mark I wouldn’t entertain replying to this person anymore. He just seems to be snooping for you to say your the leader of anonymous so co$ have something above you in order to try and prosecute.

    We all know co$ is looking for an Anon leader, someone to point to and try to prosecute in order to make anonymous look like a terrorist group… If they can do that to you Mark it would be a bonus for them.

    By reading these emails it looks as though first they tried to get a sarcastic answer from you to use, and then tried to be your friend. How surprising.

  7. Eric Says:

    Geez your dumb? LOL, one thing I find so damned funny is when an idiot preaches to others who are obviously of a higher intelligence level. This guy cannot spell to save his life, cannot differentiate your from you’re, there from their from they’re, etc. The points he attempts make are scattered and utterly ridiculous at times. Hey John, Geez you’re dumb. (You’re = you are)

  8. AnonLover Says:

    Ohh this was so delicously funny!!! Scilon trolls have so much to learn about using the interwebz as an effective tool that we’ll have this war won long before they get a clue!

    “My research is far from over. You are obviously not going to help me with that.”

    If there is any legitimacy to his claims, then it’s readily apparent he’s got a very long way to go before his research even starts. However, with all the pompous contradictions and misinformed accusations he spewed at you there’s no doubt his ‘research’ is just another poorly scripted lie.

    As always Mark, your patience and class are only outshined by your big heart. And in lieu of the recent internal anon drama regarding the role of OG in our midst, this poor sot has obviously been given a directive to stir a pot thats been left out in the cold for a quite awhile. Nonetheless, props to you WBM for the way in which you handled this nitwit – yet another example of why the beard is so wise!


  9. Do they not teach grammar in Scientology school?

  10. John Says:

    Wouldn’t know Eric

  11. SP Batman Says:

    I dont know what John is talking about. I read the whole thing…

    I guess bull-baiting can work in email form… but Mark, good job on keeping your cool.

  12. Me Says:

    prat-parade? git-exhibit?

    Someone who praises himself as “human rights activist”, who’s doing (serious?) “research” and “studied” (?!?) human rights principles up to a level that requires legal consultancy … Someone who claims to have written academic papers and yet says in the same sentence to be “trying” (sic!) to get into graduate (!) school and “trying” (sic!) to do academic level research …

    Someone who is not only swanking with his pompous name (and poses(?) as Reverent somewhere else on the net) and also claims intellectual propperty on his (absolutely unimportant) email correspondence right from the beginning … but yet runs several really pathetic websites and blogs and goes with nicknames like “LULZ killer” and “Captain Cheesit” and quite quickly resorts to habbits like calling ohters “pompous asshole” and “dumb” while still bragging about his “research projects”.

    Well that pretty much tells everything, doesn’t it?

    A pompous bragging prat who poses with standards that he cannot fullfill at all and who shows neither intellect nor manners beyond his big mouthed words.

    Mark, as you put it so precisely: there are always dopes in the net – and your email-account just got flooded by one! Thanks for posting this “conversation” here and letting people know what you are up against sometimes.

    Please keep up your good work, but be carefull not to waste your time with such pitiable distracters! And most of all: keep us entertained with such foot bullet snipers!

    I’m truely amazed with the patients and politness you display towards blithering idiots. To my personal list of examples worth emulating only Richard Dawkins has dispayed more inspiring manners against ignorance yet – and that should constitute quite a praise.

    And to Brownie Boy: Don’t judge others by your own inaptitudes: There are actually people out there, who are interested and do read – (all of it! – AND actually understand what they are reading!)

  13. Me Says:

    prat-parade? git-exhibit?

    Someone who praises himself as “human rights activist”, who’s doing (serious?) “research” and “studied” (?!?) human rights principles up to a level that requires legal consultancy … Someone who claims to have written academic papers and yet says in the same sentence to be “trying” (sic!) to get into graduate (!) school and “trying” (sic!) to do academic level research …

    Someone who is not only swanking with his pompous name (and poses(?) as Reverent somewhere else on the net) and also claims intellectual propperty on his (absolutely unimportant) email correspondence right from the beginning … but yet runs several really pathetic websites and blogs and goes with nicknames like “LULZ killer” and “Captain Cheesit” and quite quickly resorts to habbits like calling ohters “pompous asshole” and “dumb” while still bragging about his “research projects”.

    Well that pretty much tells everything, doesn’t it?

    A pompous bragging prat who poses with standards that he cannot fullfill at all and who shows neither intellect nor manners beyond his big mouthed words.

    Mark, as you put it so precisely: there are always dopes in the net – and your email-account just got flooded by one! Thanks for posting this “conversation” here and letting people know what you are up against sometimes.

    Please keep up your good work, but be carefull not to waste your time with such pitiable distracters! And most of all: keep us entertained with such foot bullet snipers!

    I’m truely amazed with the patients and politness you display towards blithering idiots. To my personal list of examples worth emulating only Richard Dawkins has dispayed more inspiring manners against ignorance yet – and that should constitute quite a praise.

    And to Brownie Boy: Don’t judge others by your own inaptitudes: There are actually people out there, who are interested and do read – (all of it! … AND actually understand what they are reading!)

  14. WolfyRik Says:

    From my experiences on the forums (ARS, Topix etc.) over the last year or so (wow I think it’s actually closer to two years now!) people who write

    “I’m not a scientologist, but”

    usually turn out to be scientologists. This guy started out not only with an accusation, followed by “I’m not a scientologist” then went on to follow company li(n)es:

    “Even though their protests against Scientology has been non-violent with a few exceptions, everything else they do has been illegal.”

    Scientology claim the first “non-violent with a few exceptions”. What exceptions. So far the only exception I have seen was commited by scientologists for example the man who was flashing a firearm who went back into the org or the fellow in London who was shouting abuse and was immediately turned in to the police by the REAL anons.

    Scientology claim the second ” everything else they do has been illegal”. Such as?

    Maybe the Philadelphia Anons who wrote the Authorities regarding scientology’s abuse of protest permits?

    If this person isn’t a scientologist, why does he copypasta their claims as fact whilst flinging baseless accusations which also match their’s, seemingly without question?

    One thing I picked up from Barbera Graham “if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck”.

    He also follows their bizarre response style. When asked why he made such claims, he then rants on about how he also addressed these things. Never giving an answer, simply repeating

    “I already answered that in previous communications” or words to that effect. Another common sign.

    If it walks like a duck….

  15. settlesdown Says:

    What a DIPSHIT. For someone who writes: “I am trying to get into graduate school, and have already written level academic papers. I am trying to to academic level research.” It makes one think that he should stick to hooked on phonics. And you are right Mark, his page is completely bogus and devoid of any info. Even the video is disjointed and incomplete. It’s almost as if someone edited it for him. I hope for his sake he IS a stooge for Scientology, otherwise he is a serious mo-ron.

  16. CrazyDelaney Says:

    I think John is definitely a troll. He is either a channer upset about the “hijacking” of Anonymous and so called moral faggotry or he actually is an agent of Scientology trying to handle Anonymous. It may be wrong but I find myself extremely skeptical of those who say. “I’m not a Scientologist but.” In my limited experience.. most people who bother to defend Scientology in any way are Scientologists. There are exceptions.. Alexander Cockburn for example but for the most part… non-Scientologists who know anything at all about Scientology don’t bother to defend it.

  17. Narconon Says:

    Don’t feed the troll/insane guy/both, Mark.

  18. Rabidtreeweasel Says:

    “Most people are not going to want to read that much on the internet.”

    I went back and read the whole thing again just for that statement, “John”. OSA volunteers are adorable.

  19. Anonykota Says:

    WHOIS lookup on his “website”.
    http://private.dnsstuff.com/tools/whois.ch?domain=http://www.intwknews.com/
    This was created back in October of last year, which gives the guy plenty of time to create a page for Scientology and other such things. The guy sounds like a scientologist to me. The “argument” are too fragmented and scattered and really it does sound like he’s just bullshitting most of his information. Good job keeping a cool head Mark.

  20. Sandwich Says:

    <meta name=”keywords” content=”Jehovah’s Witnesses, cults, Jehovah, Witnesses, Watchtower, cults, Watchtower, Jehovah’s Witnesses, cults, Watchtower, Jehovah’s Witnesses, cus Witnesses, cults, Watchtower, Jehovah’s Witnesses”>

    This NORM website http://www.intwknews.com/ is apparently involved in some other far less harmful ‘religious movement’

  21. Dr Dozzy Says:

    “Gees your dumb.”

    Best possible ending.
    Period.

  22. Dim Says:

    If it means anything to you, Mark, I read it all. Twice, in fact, and straight-through.

    PS, have you looked at his blog? He seems convinced that you’re on the same level as the rest of Anonymous. He thinks you posted the e-mails in the blog to discredit him (despite him giving you permission to do so). Heck, in a comment to one of his posts, he accuses one of the Anonymous commenters of actually BEING you. Because you have every reason to comment anonymously, right? 😉

  23. Not-really-anymous-but-dont-want-my-name-out Says:

    “Most people are not going to want to read that much on the internet”.

    On the contrary, checking in on what Mark Bunker is subjected to and is has to respond to is scary, educational and comic all at the same time. You would fit this latter category.

    Cheers mate, here, this is for you:

  24. XENU TV Says:

    I am amused that this human rights activist would call himself Captain Cheesit. I’m sure that will help him with his next scholarly report.

    BTW, I missed a few emails last night and they got added to the thread this morning. The stuff about “What did you say to Anonymous?” and Fair Game answers are new additions and add better context to some of the stuff that followed.

  25. Scholar Says:

    For a scholar, he has incredibly primitive grammar. There was a site known as “Wikipedia watch”, but at least the proprietor of that site was somewhat eloquent in his content, so it’s unlikely there is any correlation.

    With regards to Mark – he’s well known enough by anonymous protesters and scientologists alike, so why would him posting anonymously provide any suitable advantage?

    Regardless, this seems to be quite silly.

  26. English bloke Says:

    I rewatched ‘The King of Comedy’ the other night and there are some striking similar patterns happening here. Just hope it is a scientologist and not a psyco. Goodluck with that.

  27. Irish chappy Says:

    He seems completely bonkers,or he is just baiting you.You gave him time than he deserved.


  28. ” Perhaps you and I ought to talk about this in person or on the phone.”

    Who can say whether this fellow wants to bait you or date you? Either way, he’s trying to slip through the wire. It all reeks of someone trying to pilfer your thunder, somehow. On one hand, it reminds me of that charity bout with that man off the street who was sure he could knock-out Sugar Ray Leonard. (Man-off-the-street’s manager threw in the towel in the first round, if I remember right. ) He sure wanted to be known as the average Joe that knocked out Sugar Ray Leonard. However, if this is the case with John Bowen Brown II, he needn’t meet you in person to hold a debate, right? And to write an article about you or to learn from you, email is certainly as good a forum as any.

    English Bloke has great intuition with the “King of Comedy” vignette. Only I smell a tinge of bed-wetting-child-of-divorce vitriol from Mr. Bowen-Brown. Instead of Sandra Bernhard (“You’re gonna love meeee”) I hear Eva Peron (” You must love meeeeeee”).

    Of course, none of us are worried. You’re beard is far too bright and your thunder is an intangible aura of good karma. Such gold doth unstolen go.

  29. David Says:

    “You should be thanking me for tempering the group and so should Scientology.”

    That comment strikes me as ill advised and maybe a little arrogant, people often don’t react well to being told what they should or shouldn’t think and/or do not that this guy sounds like he couldn’t use a little guidance.

    Then again set against the various asshole, hat, barn, etc retorts you might liken the difference to that between spitting on someones grass and crapping on their newspaper.

  30. XENU TV Says:

    By that time I was just seeing how he would react. It had been clear to me for several exchanges he was a phony baloney.

    There was a woman in Washington D.C. at the last Anon event who was very similar in that she wouldn’t even touch the internet since everything on it was disreputable. When I would advise her to go to the Washington Post website, for example, she would refuse because it was on the net.

    At some point, you just have to say, “Lady, you are nuts.” There’s a difference between a random blogger and a source of verifiable information.

  31. David Says:

    Ah well thats some thing else then. I tend to avoid prodding people for a reaction, then again thats not usually the point of interviews and documentaries and the like.

    Still it seems almost like arming them given their fixation on twisting words and deeds of good people into attacks against Scientology, at least when they aren’t fabricating things outright. With your suspicions in mind and the possibility that this guy was Scientology, it would seem to me a better approach to simply do as you do; defeat/defuse them with logic. Not that logic and rationale have much to do with any religion.🙂 They all boil down to “Because I say so” in response to the question of why and how. Logic in answering that question in most religions is circular, but in Scientology it’s more like a mobius strip.

  32. ohbuddy Says:

    ERIC they don’t go to school they work and are interigated

  33. Anonymouscorrespondence Says:

    Eh. Real or no, the internet is filled with people of varying opinions, reactions, temperaments, and expressions. Sometimes you get many who don’t know the first thing to forming a proper argument or get too lost in their own opinion that they neglect how to make it coherent.

    Indeed, this fella (John) seemed very adamant about proving a point and if so, really needs to work on forming a proper argument and remembering exactly what he has been saying in his past emails. He also seemed overly competitive. It became more about retorting to your statements (Mark) and less about having an actual debate.

    I’d say if John intends to be a human rights activist, this recent experience of his should present him an opportunity to work on being a better debater. If indeed he intends to address the importance of the basic rights of life to all people, I hope he improves his perspective; else, this would work against him in the future. A man with his determined personality would be valuable for fighting for human rights. It would be a pity if he wasted his skills on displays like this. (assuming he is who he says he is)

  34. XENU TV Says:

    John does not strike me as a very competent researcher or expert in the field of minority religions.

    The fact that he has been allowed to present papers twice at CESNUR says worlds about both him and the cult apologist organization.

    http://www.apologeticsindex.org/c10.html

  35. Sleepless in Las Vegas Says:

    TLDR… Just kidding. An interesting exchange to say the least. I did want to read this much on the internet, and more! I found John’s lack of researching skills to be sad as I was shown better in high school. It would be nice to have the links on hand to the court cases and the like just so expedite things the next time this comes round, and also to have on fliers to hand out at protests. Keep up the good work WBM! We are all rooting for you… though we do not hold you in any leadership capacity, nor take your words as orders!

  36. monarch24 Says:

    It seems to me that if Mr. Brown is trying to gain acceptance into graduate school, and he has written “level academic papers”, he should work on his 1)Research skills, 2) Grammar, and 3) Spelling. I have written academic level papers also on politics and the way he writes is atrocious. I may not be learned enough to write a book, and I don’t claim to be a grammar whiz, but based on his writing in the e-mails, if I was his professor, he would barely pass.

  37. kybo Says:

    I read the emails last night, and I’m still laughing. Even if this is a poor clueless non-Scientologist, he’s not a very bright debater and has failed in establishing himself as an academic. Being a university undergrad, I know not to rely on one source of information to develop conclusions, but to consult many experts, texts and sources to validate information and develop my own conclusions from my findings.
    Also, most of us are rather proud of our research skills, and any worth his or her salt would not ask another person to do research for them. They might ask as to the location of certain information and documents, but does all the leg-work and eye-straining reading themselves. It comes with the territory.

    So yeah, John, if you’re withholding sources of your information, how exactly are we suppose to trust you as a reliable source? Unless, of course, you aren’t really.

    And on the original question of whether Mark is “the man who let those dogs named Anonymous out of there cages” (and it’s “their”, not “there”), if you were following the beginning events of the Anonymous protests, you would know better than to ask that. Mark, while we certain respect him for his experiences and knowledge, is no way responsible for anything that the protesters do, and never will be. We’re very much a democracy, thank you very much, and quite capable of making our own decisions.
    Have a lonely day, sir.

  38. Xeero Says:

    Wow that one came close to degrading into a chat-room argument. Hats off to you Mark for generally keeping your head amidst it all. I got a real giggle out of the “oh blah blah blah! Pompous Asshole” bit in one of John’s later responses. Not to mention having him hover around here afterwards.

    It says a /lot/ about a person when they act like that then follow up by wading into an area that they apparently already know is biased against them, Strikes me as intentionally trying to stir up trouble.

    I have to agree with the sentiment of being dubious about someone saying “I have sources!” and then refusing to share said sources. I can also see why John was freaked out by Anon, but honestly? At this point the man’s practically a big red bull-eye for identity theft. He posts his full name, pictures of his personal life, etc. There’s more than enough that someone could track down his info (as you demonstrated with a google search, Mark).

  39. eitherwise Says:

    Oh my,

    Yes I actually read through all that, followed the argument, the conversation and the nuance. Is it really a matter that these freaks are willing to take a percentage of the bewildered herd because they know that Barnum was right. We can fight and scream and write but… good grief give me some hope folks. Yes we take a stand but where do we take a stand against stupidity?

    YOU! OUT OF THE GENE POOL!

  40. Artoo45 Says:

    He must be a clam-troll. The shoddy grammar. The poor spelling. The repetitive drivel. The slow burn into name-calling when faced with a calm, rational opponent. He must be a graduate of a Delphi school. Asshat indeed.

  41. Artoo45 Says:

    Whoa. I didn’t read all the comments above, so perhaps somebody already clicked through his blog at:

    http://anonymous-watch.blogspot.com/

    but if you go to his profile and look at his other “sites” he’s a freekin’ Satanist! Now I have nothing against the dark lord (or the light lord for that matter), but evidently our JB is a devil worshipper like ol Elron! No wonder he’s defending the cult. LULZ killer? Well, he’s slaying me . . . with laughter.

  42. someoneelse Says:

    I think Paulette Cooper did in fact take a course at Scientology, that’s when she found a list of people declared “enemies of mankind”. She went there after a friend of hers had gone to Scientology and became very strange. But I think she only started further research into the subject, when she couldn’t reach those people by phone, because most of them had unlisted phone numbers.

    It’s wrong for this person to state “fair game” only applied to members. There’s been at least lots of activities directed against non-members which very very well fit the description of what may be done to an SP. I think Keith Hanson for example never was a member.

    You certainly aren’t a leader of anonymous. Wouldn’t work. There are no leaders.

  43. Artoo45 Says:

    About the witty closing swipe he takes at Mark in that update: “gees your dumb” . . . kinda says it all, doesn’t it? Silly Satanist, writing is not your strongest skill, honey.

  44. Troll-Slayer Says:

    It is just a troll. You can only defeat the trolls by not feeding them.
    Don’t reply to them. Don’t comment on their blogs.
    Just ignore them.
    Saves you a lot of otherwise wasted time.

  45. Xeero Says:

    @Artoo45

    He can’t be a very /good/ Satanist then. Satanists believe in respect and that you do not mess with someone unless they mess with you first. If someone treats you in a polite and respectful manner you are expected to do so in kind,

  46. anonymous Says:

    read & approved

  47. Shii Says:

    Attention: John Bowen Brown II

    I read ALLLLLL of your e-mails. ON THE INTERNET. You are being dishonest in your dealings with Scientology.

  48. Stacey Says:

    Well, that was all rather strange. I just looked at that “john” guy’s blog, seems like he’s more interested in trying to insult you than anything else. Perhaps he dislikes how you are widely respected on the internet?

    Regardless I’d personally leave him to it, seems like he’s just trying to get attention. And it all seems rather shifty from where I’m standing.

    Was a very interesting read though.

  49. R. Hill Says:

    Heh… “Then I got nasty with them”… Right… A “human rights activist” that is capable of “[getting] nasty” with people, I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have bothered discussing further with that person. Mark, you sure are a patient person🙂

  50. Suzanne Says:

    Geez Mark, I think you’re great!!!!

  51. Anon Says:

    ‘Most people are not going to want to read that much on the internet.’

    I read every word… that guy is a tool. Anonymous has NO leader,

  52. DefineYourTerms Says:

    This is an amateur troll, period. Wants attention. Not smart enough to pull it off (double ent. intended). Time to grow up, sweetheart.


  53. […] This rather lengthy e-mail exchange happened over the last 24 hours. Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:10:42https://xenutv.wordpress.com/2008/08/14/fan-mail-from-some-flounder/Google Scholar – Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaBarbara Quint : Changes at google Scholar: A […]

  54. Caliwog Says:

    “I was shown a book not available to the public. So far I have been allowed to view this book, but not buy it.”

    Ooooh, the secrets! The intrigue! Mr, Brown II clearly has been given a look behind the veil! My guess is that this was the red technical dictionary. If that’s the case, you can get it at Amazon.com (http://tinyurl.com/5oeb4s). Contains definitions of squrrel, SP, and all sorts of wacky stuff that just might give people taking the Free Personality Test reason to pause. (You can also find plenty of copies if you go to work for a WISE-affiliated company.) Sounds like a classic case of a Scientologist trying to defuse a situation by “clearing misunderstood words.” Of course, if you happen to use new definitions that make the Hubbardian way of doing things seem more sensible, all the better… but surely as an experienced researcher Mr. Brown II would have spotted such tactics right away.

    In any case, given the choice between two researchers, the one who uses the phrase “pompous asshat” is definitely the more credible one, to my way of thinking.

  55. Dave O'Maley Says:

    This guy is silly. He is actually not a Scilon. He used to be Jehova’s Witness, and now is a Wicca (read his CESNUR article). Maybe he is going for striiiiike three by dabbling with Scientology?

  56. Klapton Says:

    Mark did your mother ever tell you not to feed the trolls? Gees your dumb😛

    Thanks for the post, it was frigging hilarious


  57. […] This rather lengthy e-mail exchange happened over the last 24 hours. Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:10:42https://xenutv.wordpress.com/2008/08/14/fan-mail-from-some-flounder/Bowen ready for life&39s next big splash – VillageSoup BelfastAt the state meet he won the 200 IM […]

  58. ManAna Says:

    I’m not a Scilon but….

    I was very amused, would read again.

  59. AmberWavesofWtf Says:

    John Bowen Brown II = Assclown. Pretentious name and equally pretentious, conspicuous, and highly dubious academic cred. He starts off by accusing you of being the leader of Anon and throughout most of his exchanges with you, Mark, he just comes off as very defensive and hopped up about something.

    I think he was hoping for some kind of written confirmation that you were ‘a leader’ so Co$ could be ‘justified’ in stepping up tactics on you, because of all the stuff that he said in his exchange with you, that specific request for documentation or some kind of statement about that just stuck out like a sore thumb.

    Sloppy OSA assclown is sloppy.

    Anonymous doesn’t have any leaders, but I know you’re my favorite fuzzy-cheeked SP.😀

  60. celegar Says:

    lol, does he realize that human attention focuses on the beginning and the end of documents first. “Most people are not going to want to read that much on the internet.”. if anything thats going to cause people to read it.

  61. caveat emptor Says:

    A good read Mark! And John Brown is an asshat.

    “John Brown
    Bring him down
    Pull his body
    To the ground
    Left him up
    For long enough
    Let me be
    The baby gruff
    John Brown
    Bring him down
    Pull his body
    To the ground”

    Masters Of Reality.


  62. Facts and Myths About Fair Game. See Link

    http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/09/04/18532902.php

    HTML and PDF versions of article available

  63. Anoncarpenter Says:

    “and have already written level academic papers”

    Did he use a precision bubble level to determine this? maybe a laser level?

    or does he mean they were “fair and balanced” just like Fox News is?

  64. Tensil Says:

    OH HAI GUYS.

    I’m one of those BAD NAUGHTY tucson anon’s JohnB thinks so fondly of. If you’re curious about what actually happened in our exchanges, here are some delicious links to the threads where John B acts like a douchdoodle. There’s a lot of TL;DR, but what happened here was this guy comes in mildly interested about what we’re doing and claims to eb doing research. He seems a bit skeptical, but we love intelligent discussion so we engage him. He makes a lot of outlandish claims and refuses to debate productively, so we ask him to cite the sources where he gets his information, so we can confirm what he argues is true. We didn’t demand he surrender his resources so we can use them for our evil purposes lol, we were just trying to get him to see that unless he can back his bullshit up with facts, he’s just full of shit. So when he kept refusing to cite or give any sources, of course we started trolling him.

    I like how in this entire email exchange John leaves out the part where he threatens to come to our protests and beat us up… literally.
    So without further or ado, go witness the lulz for yourselves😀

    http://yiitucson.com/node/474 Where he threatens physical violence
    http://yiitucson.com/node/362 His first, mostly civil, thread
    http://yiitucson.com/node/381 The madness continues (TL;DR)

  65. Tensil Says:

    Evil Tucson Anon here again. Wanted to elaborate more on John B, since it looks like WBM had EXACTLY the same problem we did with him.

    After TWO MONTHS (and you thought wbm, was gracious lol) of being painfully patient and polite with Flounder, we finally give up on civilized debate and just went for lulz. After he claimed we LOL VIOLATED HIS HUMAN RIGHTS because we started tacking on hilarious additions at the end of posts, we just couldnt take it anymore😀 He will claim we hacked his computer and did all this illegal cyber terrorism, but ultimately his staggering ignorance of the interwebs proves to be his downfall.

    From this comment: http://yiitucson.com/node/381?page=1#comment-2443 and below is where it gets juicy. What we did (using our own website administration) was change his account so that everywhere he goes on our website, the image of a well endowed, nude, African American gentlemen appears prominently. He notices that when he’s not logged in the image doesn’t appear, and assumes we used l337 hax to ruin his shit. So he, and I quote, says “I have a program called SBW Capture that takes pictures of Screen. I have photographed both ID screens.”

    So he planned on getting us V& with this special program that takes screen caps lmao. I would like to point out, after an extensive search, we could not find evidence that this program exists. So not only does he not know that his keyboard can do screen caps, but he lies and makes up a program so he can threaten us with “evidence” of hacking… which we weren’t doing in the first place. After we pointed this out to him is when he started threatening violence, which I linked to in my prior post here.

    After all this we did a simple google search and turned up a bit more info on him, which led to this post: http://yiitucson.com/node/476

    He shut up pretty quick after that hahahaha. So I’d just like to apologize to Mr. Bunker, for having to put up with this moron. We tried to contain his stupidity, but alas, the sheer levels of fail were beyond even our powers of pwnge.

  66. XENU TV Says:

    He started up with me again early this week. He called the L.A. police department to clarify if I could really be allowed to walk on L. Ron Hubbard Way during the 4th of July event back in ’99. He somehow expected the officer at the desk to be aware of me and the videos, I guess.

    He also was crowing about the wonderful research he put on his blog about “Fair Game” and how it was only used against members not the general public. I wrote him back this:

    Okay, John. Since it’s the weekend I can waste a little time on you but no more. I’m done.

    It’s amazing what you dwell on. So far over 1.2 million people have watched the July 2nd video on YouTube. Someone put it up without my knowledge or permission (not that I mind) and called it “Scientology Crazy Followers.” He didn’t call it, “Some Nut Pestering Scientologists” because that’s not what the video shows.

    Of the over 1.2 million people who have seen the video, the VAST majority are amazed at seeing Scientology’s tactic of bullbaiting in practice. So far, there have been over 26,000 comments left. 99% are people amazed by the “What are your crimes” nonsense spouted in the video.

    You, on the other hand, seem to see only my conversation with a cop. That’s kind of wierd.

    Further, you write some sloppy entry on Fair Game and focus on “who does this policy apply to” and seem to ignore the section that says, “ENEMY — SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.”

    Even if this order was written up for just one person — let’s call him John Bowen Brown II — this would be a vile, obscene document not worthy of any organization, let alone a church. If it was leaked that the White House wrote: “ENEMY — SP Order. Fair game. Democrats be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Republican without any discipline of the Republican. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.” There would be hell to pay.

    You quibble over who it applies to. That’s insane. The story is L. Ron Hubbard wrote it. And applied it. And he is revered by his blindfolded followers still.

    It’s as though you join the world in watching The Godfather and only want to talk about the carpet in the lobby.

    But, hey, that’s okay. The internet is the home for goofballs to put their crackpot lunacy on the net. Think the government took down the twin towers? Get yourself a website and rant.

    I always wondered who presented papers at these cult apologists conventions. You have shown me what little brain power is needed to be invited to speak. All you have to do is be willing to support vile actions in the name of “religion.”

    BTW, I don’t recall ever saying that my July 2nd video was a news story. It is a video I shot and thought people would find interesting. People have. But if you need to see it in a newcast to show that people find the actions of the Scientologists in my video newsworthy, go to 10:45 in this broadcast from New Zealand’s version of 60 Minutes:

    A large percentage of the report comes from videos I uploaded to YouTube. They didn’t ask permission or give credit but I don’t care. i put the videos out for people to see and use and make their own minds up. I was flattered that 60 Minutes used my videos as a source.

    Funny though how they didn’t report on what you are obsessing over.

  67. CaptainJack Says:

    Hey, WBM. Hello, fellow anons.

    This is Captain Jack of Tucson Anon. I felt the need to pop in for just a second to add that not only did John B. Brown manage to piss off the Tucson Anon to a very LULZy degree, but he even managed to make the local $cientology center here in town nervous.

    While he was huffing and puffing about the possible methods he could use to ram my fist into my own anus, Tucson $cilons were pleading with him on the forums to stop talking to us, refrain from dealing us, and (in some more extreme cases) telling him to stay away from them altogether.

    John B. Brown is a man that is truly an island. Or, a sandbar. Or something.

    Thanks for posting his e-mails. Funny stuff!

    ~Jack

  68. juno Says:

    O hay guise. I herd u had a troll.

    Mark, I also had an email exchange with the illustrious JBBII in which he attempted to extract from me the police reports we had made when we were follwed in March, as well as the names and positions of police contacts I have (which would put my anonymity in jeopardy, and I politely declined on more than one reply to him). He eventually gave up with me when he realized he would not be meeting with me face to face or having a phone conversation with me. And really, obvious troll is obvious…how many other people would ask to meet someone named Anonymous in person? >.<

    But to everyone here, I want to make it clear that JBBII apparently DID show at a previous raid and DID make contact with us personally before he took to our website. At first I really just thought he was a stupid person with good intentions. Now I think he’s a stupid person who’s got his head screwed on wrong. It’s obvious he’s not a graduate student, or even pursuing a graduate degree…one needs basic English skills for that in the good ol’ U S of A. I mean, last time I checked anyway.

    Anyhoo, I’ll post emails too if anyone wants to see them, but it’s basically the same drivel as Mark posted. A little added “I need more information so I can report to the proper human rights organizations” but otherwise, rinse repeat.

    Thanks for posting this, Mark. We’ve been dealing with this psycho for far too long, time to get him out in the open rather than leaving him to us.

    Soldier on, fellow Anon.

    -Juno

    p.s. Still waiting on JBBII’s sources. Anyone else?

  69. XENU TV Says:

    What? He still hasn’t proved his sources? Shocking.

  70. Tensil Says:

    Oh! Another hilarious little tidbit. That magical secret book the Scientologists showed him? It was a children’s book. John B himself said so in one of his first threads on our forum.

  71. XENU TV Says:

    You know guys, you are going to make him feel bad. He only has a couple feedbacks on his posts (many from himself) and here you are with 70 comments on this thread already.

  72. Tensil Says:

    Lol, funny you should mention that, Oh Wisest of Bearded Men.

    I just finished handing him his ass in the comments section of his blog. I don’t know why I bother, he really is compeltely off his rocker. But I linked to sources and indulged him for awhile. Now he has like 20 comments on one of his entries. Hopefully that will cheer him up.

  73. Dim Says:

    Well, turning off anonymous commenting will tend to keep people folks posting. He says it was to further kill lulz. That’s, like, synonymous with “escape butthurt,” right?

  74. CaptainJack Says:

    Short update:

    John Bowen Brown the II has his little “Lulzkiller” blog, which has some of the worst grammatical errors I’ve ever seen. Not new news with John; however, since the conversational value of said blog has degraded into yelling at Tucson Anonymous, John is using the site mostly to collect IPs that visit it, in hopes that he’ll be able to use said IPs to find out the identities of at least Tucson Anons. The funniest part of this is that he no longer cares about making sense and has instead settled on trolling, possibly in hopes of getting “picked on” by Anons. That way, he can play the victim: “oh, Scientology isn’t bad, but Anonymous ruined my blah blah blah.”

    It’s like he’s a professional parasite. He latches on to some new “cause of the week”, annoys the piss out of you, and moves on only when he feels superior.

  75. juno Says:

    **UPDATE**

    JBBII has taken down all of his blog posts and re-dedicated his blog to posting his “research”. At last count there was exactly one post. Telling how he tore down the old posts to post his “research”. I was enthralled, I was enraged, and I was educated. It’s the most informative blog to date. With its one post with no actual research data.

    Lulzkiller indeed, JBBII. You sure got us this time.


  76. […] spent the last hour reading about this guy, including and exchange he had with WBM on the Wog Blog. Fan Mail From Some Flounder THE WOG BLOG from XENU TV I have come to two conclusions. 1. The guy is a fruit loop 2. He is TB After reading his stuff I […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: