The Battle of Gold Land Base
UPDATE:
The Village Voice has linked to this great series of videos about Anonymous vs. Scientology from Palm Springs station KESQ.
The full series is now online along with the complete unedited interview with Scientology’s PR guy, Tommy Davis.
Part one involves the arrest of AnonOrange at Gold.
Part two looks at Scientology and Hubbard’s handwritten account of Xenu and Body Thetans.
Part three covers Scientology’s propoganda attack against Anonymous and Jeff Stone’s connection in forwarding those attacks.
Part four is the first half of the Tommy Davis interview and, boy, does he squirm. I loved the surprise at the end of the segment. It made me roar with laughter!
KESQ-TV ends the week with their second half of the interview with Scientology leader Tommy Davis. At the end, the segment states there’s more to come in the coming weeks.
Here’s the full Tommy Davis interview:
Explore posts in the same categories: Anonymous, TV Broadcasts
THE WOG BLOG from XENU TV 
March 9, 2009 at 1:01 pm
I wonder what they will report the next day…
March 9, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Say Bob, those protesters sure can protest. Now to Alicia Vega in Sylmar and that transsexual tiger cub found at a children’s birthday party! Local news. Ugh.
March 9, 2009 at 9:31 pm
The audio on that vidya is harrible. View the fixed copy @
March 10, 2009 at 10:06 am
Second parts up,
March 10, 2009 at 10:10 am
Okay, I saw part two and they had the cojones to read (and show in Hubbard’s own drug-addled chicken scratch) OTIII. It’s still dumbed-down in that local newsdrone kind of way, but they may actually take a stand before the series is over . . . it is sweeps week after all. But beware KESQ management, Palm Springs is just a stone’s throw from Hemet. Right this very minute, OSA is digging through your collective trash, looking for any “ruin” in your garbage to “shudder you into silence”.
March 10, 2009 at 11:19 am
Yeah, Anonymous has been sending KESQ a much info as possible to help them be prepared for fair-game. There was some criticism on the part of the article that alleged Anonymous responsible for threats of violence. You all remember the Anonymous is a Hate Group DVD? Yeah, that video. They didn’t do their research on it. But that is pseudo-journalism for you. The new age news-source of the U.S. (sighs)
March 10, 2009 at 10:28 pm
aww, no tom? i would have thought ol’ tommy would have jumped on this controversial issue.
come back tommy, I miss you.
March 11, 2009 at 2:41 am
The reporter starts to ‘answer’ the question ‘why is Scientology so controversial’, but makes no mention of the history: operations Freakout and Snow White, Hubbard being banned from the UK, the establishment of the Flag Land Base on false pretenses, the sheer number of lawsuits etc. etc.
Looking forward to ‘top leader of the Church’ (ha!) Tommy Davis. I’m sure he’ll explain everything and make everyone understand that Scientology is a beautiful thing.
March 11, 2009 at 8:42 am
To Mike:
The reporter is walking a very thin line with Scientology. He has been informed about their fair game policy and has no doubt did his research. The second the reporter says something Scientology doesn’t like, the cult is going to attack him and the news station he works for to shut them up. And given that being sued is the worst fear of American organizations. Well, you get the idea.
March 11, 2009 at 9:33 am
Fixed audio for part 3 is available here:
March 11, 2009 at 9:45 am
the church is really it’s own worst enemy. i cant wait to see the lies TD will cook up for this journalist.
March 11, 2009 at 11:56 am
I’m anxiously awaiting the next installment. I never watch local news, but finding this on the internet means that I *do* watch local news (even if it’s not my local). I predict full blown shenanigans!
March 11, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Oh joy! We’ll be treated to an interview with the utterly humorless Tommy Davis. Now, KESQ has announced that they are going to confront Mr. Davis with the OTIII story and the perils of hearing it before you’re ready. I think I’ve seen him dodge the whole subject before with the usual “I’ve been in for X years and I’ve never heard a word about aliens”. Someone should ask Tommy what Hubbard meant in his lecture “The Role of Earth” sometime. That would be interesting . . .
March 11, 2009 at 7:30 pm
I’m glad that KESQ is doing a report and for more than one day! It’s great to see someone report the activism for freeom of speech that Anonymous supports. Too bad though the clip with the lies from the likes of Jeff Stone was shown. Like, I’m Anonymous and I’ve never seen any of those pics showing kids how to commit suicide. WTF? And the supervisor’s comments about masks & capes….making jokes. Well. This 50 year old doesn’t think its funny. Fuck those corrupt politicians. Fuck Jeff Stone. They have no idea who Anonymous is and are treading in deep shark-infested waters when they piss of the likes of this old fart.
March 12, 2009 at 1:38 am
I want to buy Nathan a beer and thank him for having the fortitude to do these investigative reports.
Tommy Davis should quit his day job. I hope he gets RPF’d for being such a dismal failure during his interview.
March 12, 2009 at 5:46 am
If you didn’t know you would think this was a spoof.
March 12, 2009 at 5:57 am
This is getting better an better with part IV.
Tommy admits SLANDER against members of Anonymous in that Document…can you say group action law suit?
And yes, I wouldn’t want to mar a desolate hill side with a survallence camera, so I covered it with army camo netting…smiliar to what the Viet Cong and Al Qaeda did with their surveillance outposts.
Tommy, your out2d!
See you at the volcano!
March 12, 2009 at 7:04 am
The journalist did a good job.
March 12, 2009 at 7:20 am
If Anonymous are religious bigots towards Scientology, why is it that they don’t protest the Free Zone? No one ever seems to mention that.
March 12, 2009 at 7:29 am
The over/under odds of Tommy blowing in the next year are 1 in 3. Place your bets.
March 12, 2009 at 7:47 am
Pure gold, i love his comment on the fence spikes facing inward “they were just installed that way”… Ummm, yeah sure thing.
March 12, 2009 at 10:54 am
Tommy Davis has an answer for everything. That is what they pay him for. Srsly, could he sound any less than like a used car salesman?
March 12, 2009 at 11:04 am
I am extremely surprised Scientology has not been able to put a stop to this broadcast!!
I don’t know about Tommy leaving the cult but I definately see him spending some time in the RPF for his inability to ‘handle’ this reporter.
March 12, 2009 at 11:11 am
“Just how they were installed”. Yeah. Sure. And who had them do the installation? Companies don’t just come in and do whatever they wanna do. They do as instructed or they get sued.
This reporter’s got balls of steel. He should ask to see Miscavige.
March 12, 2009 at 11:59 am
this guy is the balls!!! cant wait to check out the full 45 minutes of TD agony.
March 12, 2009 at 3:54 pm
I’m actually impressed. They’re more skeptical towards the cult than most of the big networks have been.
March 12, 2009 at 3:56 pm
I’ve been following this since day one and I have to say, when I saw the reporter who was taking this story… I was worried for a bit it was going to be lies and slander.
But, after seeing the past several days go by I must say… This guy is awesome. He’s hitting a lot of the main issues that Scientology always dodges and also does it without putting his personal opinion in it. Sure, he questions Scientology and not Anonymous, but that’s mainly because Anon has no real spokesman.
This guy is doing a great job and I hope nothing comes back to hurt him or his career later because of it.
Spread this around! Its a local broadcast but this is the stuff that should be shown to whoever you can to make them more aware.
March 12, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Where’s Tom Newton? ^_^
Notice how he’s only “debating” on here when he’s able to slander Anonymous or Bunker/Tory/Randomcritic and spin Scilon BS.
March 12, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Part 5 in text form 😀
http://www.kesq.com/Global/story.asp?S=9996728
March 12, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Look for Scientology to dead agent that news station and or that reporter. Almost any PR is bad PR for them…
March 12, 2009 at 8:22 pm
I actually gave Tom a time-out because of the spam he kept posting. I warned him repeatedly that he could post but not spam.
Do you think I should lift the ban yet or are you enjoying the peace?
March 12, 2009 at 9:38 pm
The reporter has definitely done his homework. I’ve already emailed him my congrats on this expose’.
Also, Tom Newton is the cancer killing Xenutv. Perma-ban is my vote.
March 12, 2009 at 11:12 pm
Regarding Tom Newton: He’s never gonna change his mind or what he does. Heck, I’m still not sure if he is for real and just a random troll doing it for the lulz.
I don’t mind the oppositional content of his posts. But if he has gone from “lulz killer” to “spamminator,” he can enjoy his ban.
I would only approve him being unbanned if he writes a 1-page long apology for spamming. ^_^
March 12, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Hmm.
Spam is bad, but squelching dissent (even when done in good conscience) is also bad. If we have only Sci guys on Sci sites, and only anti-sci guys on anti-sci sites, that isn’t too conducive to critical debate.
It would be up to a turncoat to play the devil’s advocate just to break up the ‘scifags suck’ chanting in favor of some deeper discussion, and while that is normally a role I relish, defending the Church is -not- something that I particularly want to do…!
That said, I’d ask in all seriousness, what is it that you’re trying to accomplish by having a message board for each blog post, Mark?
If you want discussion/debate/multiple views, then you have to give the misbehaving kids some say. If, on the other hand, you mainly think of this as your internet home base, where you can take a step back from your real life battles to regroup with some sympathetic voices, then by all means, toss any commentators who drain your energy rather than replenish it.
By way of compromise, Is there any way to set up a posts-per-blog auto-timeout? Or if not, perhaps you should make a TOS link, with a list of some abusive behaviors and the penalties (in blackout hours or days) for particular infractions, etc.
At the end of the day, it’s your website, and we can’t tell you how you should run it. I think you should ask yourself what the message boards are for, and whatever answer you give should provide a pretty good picture of how to handle the abuses.
Keep up the great work, Mark. We appreciate all that you do.
March 13, 2009 at 12:19 am
He’s the only one I’ve ever banned from here and generally I am open to everyone having their say, even an obvious troll like Tom. And it isn’t a permanent ban. I just think a timeout wouldn’t hurt anyone.
I am curious to see how he responds to tonight’s fifth intallment of this series in which Tommy Davis admits that Xenu and OT3 are part of the tech. Tom was adamant that it was all made up by critics.
That’s just one of the dishonest arguments that Tom makes which makes me consider him a troll. OT3 has been validated for decades yet he refuses to accept the facts.
And I put stuff here that I find interesting and welcome comments good or bad. I don’t have a forum for gathering and debating because others already do that just fine.
March 13, 2009 at 2:44 am
If I may…
I think Tom’s unbanning should come soon merely because its a show of good faith.
Obviously his spamming is a problem but on the other hand him doing that only discredits himself and other Scientologists who consistently do not maintain legitimate arguments.
As it was said already, allowing this site to be an open forum for discussion would only make it better. However, if people stray off topic or start to harass, spam, etc… on these boards then banning after warning would be best again.
I like having each posting having a comment area as long as they stay on topic.
Great job, and awesome videos. I always like seeing public news outlets spreading the truth. Maybe one day soon we may see their tax exempt status go away.
March 13, 2009 at 8:01 am
Impressive – I’d LOVE to see the whole 45 mins. Tommy is a good example of the old rule of “10% WHAT you say and 90% how you say it”. It seems that his “help!” giveaway is when he starts ending every sentence with “ok”. Watch him – when he does that he’s going to get more forceful in tone and try to get out of the current line of questioning – usually by accusing the questioner of something. Sad. Just sad.
March 13, 2009 at 8:27 am
I think Tom should be unbanned and frankly I’d love to see someone who admits to being a Scientologist condemn him as not representing them…. but I’ve seen Tom all over YouTube and elsewhere and not one person who claims they are a Scientologist has ever condemned his behavior.
March 13, 2009 at 9:51 am
“TD: I…I… (laughs then pauses) Here we’re going to the basic fundamental point that I’m trying to make. OK. What you’re doing right now and what it is you’re saying to me is an intent to ridicule religious beliefs. That’s really what we’re talking about. And you’re just forwarding an agenda of hate.”
Nathan broke TD, XD. He couldn’t defend Scientology from what is out there so now he’s fallen back to basic Scientology strategy: “never defend, always attack.” And as usual, TD footbulleted himself with rhetoric and baseless slander. This time directing it to to Nathan.
March 13, 2009 at 2:30 pm
I loved how Nathan explained that major religions are just memory implants courtesy of a space alien. The anchor lady turns to the other newsie with a great WTF expression! You know that if the camera wasn’t on she would have commented aloud!
March 13, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Umm… yeah… they are going to dead agent that reporter and that station. If they don’t, something is wrong.
March 14, 2009 at 7:05 am
Tom Newton should be banned for life. Why? Because he is BORING! If he really was interested in debate, and we know he is not, there would be discussion.
The ONLY reason to allow him to bore us is to show the techniques he uses to avoid, distract, derail and corrupt the exchange and criticism of ideas.
Newton adds NOTHING to our understanding of ANYTHING. Because WE have and value freedom of expression, debate, illuminating conversations etc, it doesn’t automatically mean we have to spend our time listening to the rantings of an idiot who is instructed by his masters to annoy us.
March 14, 2009 at 9:01 am
…. just watched the full length interview of Tommy Davis. And have to say that I was disappointed that Nathan didn’t really take the chance to make Davis squirm. He even, after a longwinded and yawn inducing drone, invited Davis to finish off the last 3 to 4 minutes with further PA vomit.
The question has to be asked: were they REALLY interested in this subject or were they simply using the classic ‘struggle between extremes’ to fill up a schedule.
March 14, 2009 at 9:52 am
He may not be interested in genuine debate or discussion, but we are. By ignoring him, you give him a ‘win’, because he believes what he’s saying is so powerful that we need to shut him up and can’t stand to hear him.
We also lose any authority to point out that the Church tries to silence its critics, since we’d be saying it’s okay for us to do that, but not for them.
Not only that, but it’s obviously very easy for him to come back in another guise. In fact, if we do block him, and the Church is sending him, they’ll take that as progress, and will probably send several more to join him and do the same in order to handle us.
Truth is unassailable, and it’s easy to defeat a liar by pointing out their lies and contradictions. By trying to silence them, you empower them. I think permanently banning Tom would be an ill-considered and unwise decision.
March 14, 2009 at 11:46 pm
“I am curious to see how he responds to tonight’s fifth intallment of this series in which Tommy Davis admits that Xenu and OT3 are part of the tech. Tom was adamant that it was all made up by critics.”
Maybe its just me but I never heard Tommy admit to Xenu although he came closer to telling the truth than he ever has.
March 16, 2009 at 7:46 am
Is it “Be Nice To A Scientologist Week” or is it OSA operatives trying to be subtle ?
Dissenting Voice says: “He may not be interested in genuine debate or discussion, but we are. By ignoring him, you give him a ‘win’, because he believes what he’s saying is so powerful that we need to shut him up and can’t stand to hear him.”
We cannot and should not be concerned with what the cult takes as a ‘win’. That they consider their pathetic efforts successful is irrelevant. They throw up their hands shouting “bigotry” and “hate crimes” at every opportunity.
DV again: “We also lose any authority to point out that the Church tries to silence its critics, since we’d be saying it’s okay for us to do that, but not for them.”
…”any authority” means ALL authority I presume, and giving it over to the cult. Patent nonsense.
DV once more: “Not only that, but it’s obviously very easy for him to come back in another guise. In fact, if we do block him, and the Church is sending him, they’ll take that as progress, and will probably send several more to join him and do the same in order to handle us.”
Who’s to say he doesn’t float around in different guises anyway? If the cult send several more to join him what difference does it make? They all sound the same. They all have the same ambition. They can be spotted a mile off: writing church with a capital “C” and no inverted commas, for instance, and talking in ABSOLUTES using FALSE ASSUMPTIONS.
DV: “…by trying to silence them you empower them.”
If their words had any merit that might be the case but when has a cultie been interested in debate anyway -ever? They have no power except brute stupidity.
There are responsibilities you must abide by with free speech for it to be effective. You organise your arguments in a logical way. You may wish to express yourself emotionally and so lose the discipline of coherence, but even then you can be afforded respect by your noticeable honesty and integrity.
Scientologists on the other hand have wedded themselves to a system which is destructive.
They NEVER answer questions and seek to derail discussion of ALL questions that are important to ask and need to be answered.
This site of Mark’s is primarily a source of information. We can add or question this source intelligently. So could scientologists theoretically but they choose, or are instructed not to. They are abusing the values and virtues of free speech, here as everywhere.
Mark should block when and whenever he wants -according to his own thresholds of patience and endurance. It’s HIS site, so if they insist on bringing their muddy boots onto his carpet it is perfectly legitimate for him to throw them out.
March 16, 2009 at 9:36 am
Everytime Tommy says “Ok”, “Sure”, or “no problem,” it’s evident that a nerve has been touched.
KESQ and Nathan Baca have done a great job of researching and reporting; much better than most major news networks. This piece ranks up there with the BBC and John Sweeney.
March 16, 2009 at 4:06 pm
“General Public AYS Says:
Is it “Be Nice To A Scientologist Week” or is it OSA operatives trying to be subtle ?”
Ha. When have you ever known Scientology to be subtle, let alone OSA? I try and be nice when I can. I think any group, Scientology included, can be defeated and undone without being mocked or put down. I feel like ad hominem attacks just weaken the one making them. I call them a Church because that’s what they call themselves. I think it can be argued that all Churches are Cults. I have no positive associations with the word, as much violence and bloodshed has occurred thanks to people and their little Church-cliques. Please don’t read too deeply into my choice not to follow Anon’s preferred norms of Co$, “church,” cult, etc. I don’t think being respectful should count against my image.
All of that said, this mentality that you exhibit is similar to the Church’s in a pretty relevant way: Once the Church becomes convinced that someone is their enemy, there’s really nothing that can be said or done to convince them otherwise. So, there’s probably nothing I can say or do that will convince you that I’m not now nor ever have been a member. That’s fine, it seems it would be a waste of time to try and defend myself anyway. Instead, I ask that you consider the things I say (which you have done in other parts of your post), and don’t simply disregard my words because you question the source. The Buddha said, “Take nothing on authority, and test each thing in your mind to see if you recognize truth within it.”
G. P. AYS says, “We cannot and should not be concerned with what the cult takes as a ‘win’. That they consider their pathetic efforts successful is irrelevant. They throw up their hands shouting “bigotry” and “hate crimes” at every opportunity.” True, but we’ll still only hurt ourselves by shutting them up.
“…”any authority” means ALL authority I presume, and giving it over to the cult. Patent nonsense.” Wait, what? We’d lose all authority by virtue of being hypocritical. This isn’t some weird claim I’m making.
“Who’s to say he doesn’t float around in different guises anyway?” Good point.
“If the cult send several more to join him what difference does it make? They all sound the same. They all have the same ambition. They can be spotted a mile off: writing church with a capital “C” and no inverted commas, for instance, and talking in ABSOLUTES using FALSE ASSUMPTIONS.” That’s not a great litmus test, since it has given you a false positive, but I won’t belabor the point.
Can you please elaborate on what false assumptions I’ve made? I -do- think hypocrisy is pretty universally bad. Sure, that’s an absolute I ascribe to. I thought you’d be inclined to agree, but I hope you can show me why that’s not so.
“If their words had any merit that might be the case but when has a cultie been interested in debate anyway -ever? They have no power except brute stupidity.” Again, it’s not about their intent, but more about us taking the high road.
“There are responsibilities you must abide by with free speech for it to be effective. You organise your arguments in a logical way. You may wish to express yourself emotionally and so lose the discipline of coherence, but even then you can be afforded respect by your noticeable honesty and integrity.” Sure, that’s all true, but if someone doesn’t follow those guidelines, does that give you the right to take away their free speech?
“Scientologists on the other hand have wedded themselves to a system which is destructive.
They NEVER answer questions and seek to derail discussion of ALL questions that are important to ask and need to be answered.
This site of Mark’s is primarily a source of information. We can add or question this source intelligently. So could scientologists theoretically but they choose, or are instructed not to. They are abusing the values and virtues of free speech, here as everywhere.” So, your big defense of free speech is that it’s great when it’s done the way you think it should be, but invalid when you don’t like it? I hope you see where I’m going with this.
“Mark should block when and whenever he wants -according to his own thresholds of patience and endurance. It’s HIS site, so if they insist on bringing their muddy boots onto his carpet it is perfectly legitimate for him to throw them out.” This reflects pretty closely what I said in my first post responding to Mark’s question of how we felt about Tom’s ban. Ultimately, I agree that at the end of the day it’s Mark’s call, obviously, and I would completely support his decision either way on that principle, but, I do think that permanently banning folks, except in severe circumstances, causes more harm than good.
I don’t want to gobble up this discussion thread with our back-and-forth, so perhaps we should agree to disagree and see what we have to say in the future.
March 16, 2009 at 5:27 pm
It seems like someone higher up in the Co$ doesn’t know what’s going on with the local chapters…
A case of the right hand don’t know what the left hand is doing?
March 16, 2009 at 11:12 pm
@avideogameplayer:
What makes you say that?
March 17, 2009 at 3:43 am
From what I heard on the whyweprotest forums, the Tommy Davis interview wasn’t authorized.
But I could be wrong. I have been hearing a lot about how some of the local Co$ have been confused ever since Project Chanology was held a year ago.
It seems that the cat is out of the bag and they don’t know what to do about it.
March 17, 2009 at 10:58 pm
How can I get myself into a protest group. /b/ has become pretty lame in terms of anti Scientology, not much care from them.
March 18, 2009 at 5:18 am
Now that the press and everyone else is enjoying itself over Xenu’s confirmed existence and are laughing heartily about it, there are comments appearing from cult critics which appear to underestimate the importance of it and OT 3.
Tommy Davis’ grudging aknowledgement, though mumbled, was in effect as loud as Cruise’s notorious scientology video. It will be celebrated in years to come as a significant event and probably appear as a track on a DVD entitled “Scientology’s DOWNFALL”.
People will ask WHY it was OT 3 kept secret in the first place.
The only ‘acceptable’ answer is the deadliness of the information when it is inappropriately viewed. But this brings Hubbard, his fictions, the secrecy and the denials to the face of a dangerous curiosity and ridicule.
It was one of Hubbards most serious mistakes to make a claim which could be immediately and undeniably refuted -one to which no cult-spokesman would be able to avoid being embarrassed by -death by pneumonia for looking at scribble.
Nobody WITH ANY SENSE will pay out again for it’s ludicrous insanity. If they are forced to put this story more in the foreground as a damage-limitation exercise nobody with any sense will join the organisation. They won’t be able to get past the DC 10’s WITHOUT GIGGLING.
This acknowledgement by Davis removes a stone from the very foundation of his organisation.
March 18, 2009 at 5:21 am
Why is everone putting the boot in to Tommy Davis?
He’s one of the best friends Anonymous has ever had !
March 18, 2009 at 7:11 am
I forgot to make an open apology to Nathan from KESQ. Four days ago I complained about the full-length video of him interviewing Davis. I also questioned his and his stations motivations.
But I forced myself to watch ther video again and now I can appreciate much better what Nathan was up to.
The part where he asked for the cults ‘Genesis’ story is particularly interesting. Davis waffles on energetically -and quite well in fact because he appears to be involved in answering the question but always avoids it.
AND THEN HE GETS STUNG!….when Nathan, after giving Davis a false sense of security, opens his folder and recites Hubbards own writings about Xenu.
Davis face changes back to one of repressed aggression, and the potted plant on his left visibly wilts!!!
A masterful performance by Nathan who I will watch more carefully in future.
March 18, 2009 at 10:06 am
Oi !General Public, you’ve only watched the video TWICE? I watched it 10 TIMES ALREADY!
I am a scientologist- COMMITTED, and I’ve just escaped from a celler after being imprisoned by a bunch of your masked and robed degenerates calling themselves Anonymous.
They made me watch it continually WITHOUT BREAK with only cucumber sandwiches and a fine Italian wine to sustain me when they KNEW I only drink Californian. They were always asking questions when they pressed the pause button.
“When did you last see your family?” That was VERY painful. “Does scientology really bring families back together?” Well OF COURSE it does: against scientology. “Is scientology expanding?” It MUST be -I’ve just taken out a SECOND mortgage on my house and I’ve SOLD my car to pay for some new courses, and so have my best friends.
They were MERCILESS. “Is Narconon really effective?” I’ve told you already-I’ve JUST taken out a second morgage and sold my Chevy, I’ve no money to buy drugs.
“Have you ever met TOM CRUISE?” Yes while I was in the RPF and I had to do another 12 months for not averting my eyes when he passed. THOSE WERE THE RULES – I flunked. What do you hope to gain by asking these questions? They never answered that- is this fair? YOU HYPOCRITES.
Because it is against my religious beliefs to answer or discuss ANYTHING about ‘he who cannot be named’ they made me watch Tommy Davies JUST LIKE THE PSYCHS DID in Clockwork Orange, OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Tommy buys his mother flowers sometimes and ALWAYS LOOKS NEAT but after the relentless pressure of my captors I TOO succumbed to the ‘Stockholm Sydrome’ and began to hate him.
But now I am FREE. David said it was essential that I learn from my mistakes (I say David because we are on FIRST NAME TERMS now) The ten years I SHOULD serve on the RPF version of the RPF he has reduced to SIX which is VERY GENEROUS in my opinion considering my miserable failure in being lured into a cellar by a show of leg, and shows to me a RESPECT for my humble efforts which YOU foul mouthed SP’s do not deserve.
This is my last message before I take over Mark Headley’s job of scraping off the encrusted slime from the inside of a sewage pipe. That’s real work YOU BASTARDS! For MEN! Headley blew because he COULDN’T TAKE IT ! If anyone uses my name in the meantime give them the bum’s rush. MY NAME IS IMMORTAL, David convinced me, and anyone who uses it before 2015 is talking SHIT.
March 18, 2009 at 7:20 pm
lol
March 23, 2009 at 11:40 pm
yay, tom newton returns for another round of hillariousity. 🙂