Red Flag: The True Story of Flag Down

Discussion in 'Scientology and Anonymous' started by amaX, Feb 6, 2016.

  1. One round is on me!
  2. Ann O'Nymous Member

    I am not sure the analogy is correct, but I cannot help mentioning it here:

    A has a disease transmittable by contact. Knowing that, B asks A not to get close to her. A disregards the request and manages to touches B. From then on, B cannot be in touch with anybody without transmitting the disease.

    Comment from A: "What is the problem ? In order not to spread the disease, B only has to refrain from touching anyone. The big deal !"
    • Like Like x 8
  3. thesneakster Member

    This is a dissenting opinion: you shut yourself down by inviting Arnaldo Lerma whom (according to long extant reports) process servers first showed up looking for and not Mark Bunker. Perhaps, if your head were not so far up Arnie's *ss, you might come to realize that he deceived you when he persuaded you it was safe for him to speak at your event when he knew otherwise. You got burned. Sorry.

    Michael A. Hobson
    Independent Scientologist
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  4. DeathHamster Member

    Arnie isn't on the permanent injunction, and the process servers wouldn't have to serve Mark.
    • Like Like x 3
  5. amaX Member

    Oh. My. God. Another one who doesn't have a clue. I have to fucking understand this injunction so let me school YOU on why you're WRONG.


    So the process server was looking for Arnie to SERVE HIM AGAIN WITH THE INJUNCTION. They wanted to serve Arnie with the very same thing they served me: the LMT injunction. They weren't looking for Arnie to serve him with CONTEMPT OF COURT FOR VIOLATING THE INJUNCTION. And the reason they could serve him again was because Mark Bunker donated to Flag Down.

    ONCE AGAIN: Arnie Lerma DID NOT cause me or anyone else to be served with the LMT injunction. The process server was looking for Arnie so he could serve him AGAIN. Mark Bunker made it possible for the cult to serve us both. Bunker---NOT Arnie.

    Bunker wasn't going to get served with a damned thing because he was not putting himself in danger when he donated to Flag Down and also decided to show up at Flag Down and then spoke at Flag Down. He put other people into the cult's legal snare.

    Got it now?

    Oh, look! Someone else who understands the LMT injunction! WoooHOOOOOOOOOOO!
    • Like Like x 3
  6. amaX Member

    You are correct. The police have zero to do with lifting the injunction. None.

    Bunker's own antics during Flag Down might even be used by the cult as proof that lifting an injunction against him might not be a good idea, but what does he care? Being under the injunction doesn't affect his life at all.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. amaX Member

    Bob Minton spent millions of dollars fighting the cult for the LMT. Millions and he lost. Does any critic or group of critics have enough money to fight the cult in this matter?

    I don't care if you believe me or not, but this is the truth: Gabe Cazares' godson was the Clearwater Police Department District II Commanding Officer (downtown area) when Clearwater Chanology started in 2008. I was the liaison between our Cell and the cops. I was told by Lt. James Steffens (Cazares' godson) that Scientology was desperate to find out who all the protesters were and that he had told his officers in the downtown area to NOT make a protest unmask if they were not doing anything illegal because Scientology would try to get us in trouble legally. He then went on to explain to me in excruciating detail everything our Cell needed to know about the LMT injunction because Patricia Greenway had shown up at the first protest so he felt we needed to be aware of how to avoid being served. He said Scientology would use that injunction any way they could and that they would use as much money as they needed to keep that injunction in place.

    And he was right. And our Cell was right in choosing to not be ensnared in that injunction. And I still don't want to be under the fucking thing. And the only two people on the face of the earth who have knowingly caused innocent people to be served with that injunction are Patricia Greenway and Mark Bunker. Greenway is vilified and Bunker is a hero.
  8. DeathHamster Member

    Obviously, from the way they applied it to Mark recently, the Clearwater Police still don't understand the injunction, or they are taking CoS's word for what's on it, or are using it any way in hell that they feel like.

    They're applying Clause 2 and 3 on page 7:


    But totally ignoring Clauses 4 and 5 on the next page:


    So long as he didn't have a picket sign, and wasn't making excessive noise, there's no way that he should have been restricted from walking down the sidewalk after the Scientologist left. ("Without interruption" seems sloppy language. Does it mean without pausing, or without being interfered with?)
    • Like Like x 2
  9. JohnnyRUClear Member

    (Don't mind me; just stopping by to warm my hands by the Everlasting Flame here.)
    • Like Like x 11
  10. amaX Member

    Part of the problem is those maps. There are new cult buildings (including the Mecca/Super Power Building) that are not on those old maps.

    Another big problem is that the cops in the downtown area do have a lot of things they need to do for the citizens of Clearwater that don't involve handling disputes between anti-Sci activists and the cult and they cannot be completely faulted for not wanting to understand or try to learn every stinking bit of information about this injunction. People here in this forum don't understand it and the Clearwater Cell has been trying to make them understand it for 8 years now. I'm willing to cut the cops some slack as long as they don't completely run someone out of the downtown area.

    It was Lt. James Steffens (Gabe Cazares' godson) who also asked us to be compliant with any legal request by a police officer because the cops hadn't had it easy with previous protest groups and of course Scientology runs the police department ragged when protesters come out. It was Steffens who was the first to ask us to let them know when we were going to protest so he could co-ordinate with his off-duty officers and insure that we'd have extra police on the streets.

    *Sorry for the derail, but writing about this brings up some funny old protest memories.

    There were a couple of pretty funny things that happened when Steffens was still the CO of Dist. II. One time when DARRRRRR tried to take-over the Clearwater Cell...we were scheduled to end up in the Old Royalty (now the Capitol) Theater for the bulk of the day and there was an event hosted by the city that was also scheduled for that day. We worked very hard co-ordinating with the police so there would be no disruptions to pedestrian or vehicular traffic for the day. I don't remember how many days it was before our protest was supposed to happen, but there was this big brouhaha over NOT being in the theater and just taking to the streets and then there was talk of even moving the whole thing to another day! It was crazy. I called Steffens to tell him that we might have some changes and he got really quiet. Then he explained that he was in very hot water with his wife because there was a family wedding scheduled the day of our event and he had told his wife he could NOT go because he always worked the days we protested. She was not happy. The schedule was already made up and could not be changed. He said he couldn't tell us not to change the date, but he was asking us very nicely to not change the date. lol We did not change the date. That the CO of District II would make sure he was on duty when we protested left all of us in Clearwater feeling very safe. Steffens is also who told us all about the LMT injunction.

    We also had a three-person protest one time...I think it was maybe 4 years ago? Anyway, we were at the Ft. Harrison and the Mecca Building and the cult was pissed. I guess they blew up the 9-1-1 lines with complaints about us. A cop car pulled right up in between the two buildings and just stopped. The cop got out and we protesters just smiled. It was cop we knew. He'd been in one of our more popular videos. He got out and came up to us and introduced himself saying something like, I'm Officer Blankety Blank. You may know me from my infamous youtube video? We lol'd. He then said that if we'd stay on the Super Power side of the street that NO Clearwater cops would come back no matter how many times Scientology called to complain. We asked if we could chant a little louder since we were across the street and he said it was fine as long as we didn't curse. He went across the street and told Barney the Doorman (not his real name) that the cops were not going to come back up there as long as we stayed across the street and not to bother to call unless they had proof we were on the Ft. Harrison side of the street. lulz. Barney did not like that. We stood for hours yelling across the street. We yelled until our throats were sore. The Clearwater Police cars didn't even DRIVE in front of us the whole time we were there. Patrol cars were going AROUND buildings so they didn't drive directly between us and the Ft. Harrison! It was hilarious. :D

    You see there is a big difference between protesters who are full-time residents of Clearwater and those who don't consider Clearwater their home. Those of us in the Clearwater Cell who are or were residents of Clearwater understand that there is more than Scientology in the city. The Clearwater Chanology Cell was perfectly fine with being compliant with the Clearwater Police Department to make their lives a little easier. Our Cell didn't want to add to the batshit craziness that is Scientology. We were never asked to please do something that caused us to not be effective against Scientology or we would not have complied. We never looked at being compliant to a logical request as losing to the cult. We were still out there on the sidewalks in full view of OSA and all the security cams so we were still a thorn in their side.
    • Like Like x 3
  11. Ah such fond memories. When was the last time you protested in Clearwater anyway?
  12. amaX Member

    You tell me.
  13. RightOn Member

    since this argument has gotten beyond old and has ran on for 20 pages.....
    I thought I would post a classic which says it all.

    • Like Like x 4
  14. Does that means you can't remember? I can only guess--maybe 2011? 2012?
  15. amaX Member

    Do you think I can't remember?
  16. Why can't you just say? Is it a secret? Something you don't want people to know?
  17. amaX Member

    Why can't you just say? You already know and you're trying desperately to get to your point. Just post it. Do it. You have woefully underestimated me if you think I'm going to make this easy for you.
    • Like Like x 2
  18. Lol, I honestly have no idea and don't follow every detail of YOUR life like an obsessed fan. It is truly bizarre that you are so cagey about it--which makes it seem like it was so long ago that it's obvious that Mark Bunker had nothing to do with your not protesting anymore, and that your professing that he took away your rights and your free speech is BS because you weren't doing it anyway.

    Just a guess, though. Certainly seems like a sore spot or you would just say.
    • Dislike Dislike x 2
  19. White Tara Global Moderator

    amaX has had more than a few people attempting to play games with her here, given that, can you imagine for a second why she might appear cagey?
    The act of organising and attending Flagdown was very much an act of protest, in and of itself. It would be hard to argue otherwise.
    • Like Like x 6
  20. Certainly such an effort should be applauded.

    But if someone claims they can't protest at a certain place anymore, and for 20 pages they blame someone else, and yet they haven't protested at that place for YEARS, then it is certainly fair to ask when was the last time.

    I can't believe it hasn't been asked before because it's actually an essential question. Is everyone too afraid to ask? Does organizing an event (something that has been done by dozens of others, with no recognition) give a person a free pass? What happened to anonymous?
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  21. The Internet Member

    Asking when AMA protested last is kinda missing the point about Bunker showing up even though he was asked not to, due maybe spreading AIDS. And then AIDS being spread.

    There is a lot of derp in chanology and related. Personally, I am willing to cut slack way beyond the norm. Because people seem to get something like PTSD over time dealing with cult weirdness. But they are not going to get much in the way of thanks.
    • Like Like x 1
  22. White Tara Global Moderator

    Um I dont think it matters when she last protested (prior to Flagdown) nor which LOCATION she protested at. By my observations she had remained active to a greater or lesser extent up until that period.

    What is more important is she now no longer feels shes can. She for very obvious reasons, would not wish to go through the trauma and financial stress that she has been put through once before by being dragged to court. No matter which way you cut it, if thats the net effect of being served then that's a pretty damn bad outcome.
    • Like Like x 1
  23. It does matter WHERE she protested last because she MADE it matter.

    She claims it's FLAG where she can no longer protest and it's a such a huge deal she is suffering terribly. No one has suffered such a tragedy as this..

    But she hasn't protested there in years, apparently. Starting way before Bunker moved to town.

    So she is claiming something has been taken from her which she has no intention of doing whether Mark Bunker is there or not. Makes no sense. If anyone wants to cut her slack because she's soooo important and has done soooo much, why doesn't Bunker get any slack for what he's done?
    • Dislike Dislike x 2
  24. White Tara Global Moderator

    We are in a thread discussing the forthcoming/not forthcoming results of Mr bunkers documentary work, I take no particular position on that other than if and when his work comes out I will be both delighted and grateful for it.

    I would suggest that the proper place for this discussion is actually in this thread:

    Irrespective of when amaX last protested there, she now may not, ever again, lest she expose herself to the cost, and attendant stress of court proceedings.

    amaX had that option curtailed, through no fault of her own. I might be pissed too were I in the same position. After all from time to time the church puts on various productions at that location that truly warrant mockery and scorn. She had a right to address that grievance here or wherever she sees fit.The discussion has actually been perpetuated into a shitfight by you guys arguing the toss. Fact is fact, she can no longer protest there through no fault of her own. Are you suggesting she has no right to be pissed at all?
  25. The Internet Member

    Well I am cutting everybody slack, including you.
  26. anon8109 Member

    I don't think that is correct.
  27. White Tara Global Moderator

    I have sat back quietly and watched this NoUfest go back and forth and back and forth again and again. I have seen it infect other unrelated threads as derail which i have duly moved where spotted.

    amaX was pissed, she posted this thread to get the shit off her liver.
    When this topic goes silent, so to does this thread.
    There are two distinct camps in this shitfight. Granted there may be others who seek to keep it going for their vested interest or sheer boredom.

    As I said having sat back and watched this fight continued, i have observed at times with relief that it seems to have come to its own natural end, Then, on more occasions than not, someone (wanting to make trouble for troubles sake? dunno) comes along and picks the scab off by provoking amaX into rebuttal.

    Everyone has a right to put their case forward, and it seems everybody has. However when it becomes a rehash upon rehash. It becomes a cacophony of noise.

    Maybe that is the point.
  28. anon8109 Member

    I also have been watching this thread and the related Bunker thread, and I don't think that is accurate either.

    Pretty much any mention of WBM in any thread on any topic is met with a backwash of the same unsubstantiated accusations and insults.

    One decision on WBM's part to show up at Flag Down, arguably a justified decision, has turned into a "black PR" campaign against him that rivals anything OSA has ever done on WWP.

    WBM's showing up at a major anti-scientology conference, where many people wanted to hear him speak, has been framed as him intentionally deciding to prevent AMAX from protesting, as him now working for OSA, as him stealing the donations for his film and never intending to make it. All outlandish, unsubstantiated, and scientological accusations. Anyone disputing these accusations is then attacked and hounded into silence.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  29. White Tara Global Moderator

    Here you and I may have to beg to differ.
    While I make no judgement on WBM's decision to attend or not,It was certainly between him and his conscience if there was any attendant risk to others.
    On the facts it seems his choice had a certain downward impact on individuals. So what. you may say, but a fully informed person such as himself likely may have well measured and weighed those impacts before acting.

    On the point you have referenced where any mention of WBM in any thread draws reference to this sorry tale, I agree. I would implore people to stop introducing this topic as a derail in any other thread referencing WBM. Its painful to the reader, confusing to newcomers, and creates work for modstaff to rearrange.

    If we are counting numbers, the WBM coalition has the edge on the amaX coalition when it comes to kicking this dead dog topic back to to life.

    You use the word unsubstantiated accusations, I would like to counter this with this question, all extraneous details aside of course, amaX may no longer protest without fear at Flag, why is this so, who is responsible? .

    In the end I think the facts carry the point of this thread. irrespective of intention, an act, by an individual A, has caused, disruption to individual B, ergo individual B is Pissed. You may have to accept that individual B has a point of grievance, no matter which side of the divide you stand upon. JS
    • Like Like x 2
  30. failboat Member

    The point of grievance is exacerbated by the fact that WBM was publicly told not to commit this act which caused disruption. The possibility of this act was addressed in the planning stages, well ahead of time, and it was made clear by the organizers of the event that the potential for this disruptive act was a bad thing that they didn't want to occur - because of the LMT injunction and its possible extension to attendees/organizers of Flag Down.

    The organizers of the event took steps to make it clear to WBM that he or anyone else named by the LMT injunction was not welcome at the event. He came anyway.

    I think that point of grievance is even further exacerbated by the fact that exactly the consequence that amaX feared - the curtailment of her protest at Flag - has occurred as a result of WBM's uninvited appearance at Flag Down. And WBM spits into and salts the wound by refusing to acknowledge this simple chain of events and his responsibility for the results.
    • Like Like x 2
  31. Still this pish?
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  32. anon8109 Member

    i do accept it, and have previously acknowledged that AMAX has been adversely affected, and I don't dispute the facts. What gets my goat is the way this has been blown out of proportion and turned into a campaign to smear WBM and to divide WWP into camps for and against when we all (including WBM and AMAX) have the same goal.
    • Like Like x 1
  33. White Tara Global Moderator

    Are you actually adding to anything?
  34. White Tara Global Moderator

    You are not far from my sentiments, the facts have well and truly been covered. Anything beyond that has been self serving to say the least.

  35. You're not.
    Instead of shutting your fucking mouth about the whole thing you're adding to the argument when you could be saying it's time to let it rest.

    White Tara shit stirrer of WWP.
    Rt. Et.
    This message by Rt. Et. has been hidden due to negative ratings. (Show message)
    • Dislike Dislike x 5
  36. White Tara Global Moderator

    Dude, you should learn to read I have pretty much said as much. All the facts have been presented, from both sides. Its really up to the viewer to make judgments where they see fit. Anything beyond has or should tend to be viewed as a NO-U. end of
    • Like Like x 1
  37. BigBeard Member

    Flag Down is long over and Xander's activities have brought things to a pass where the CWPD has been told flat out the injunction will not be enforced against anyone not specifically named in it. So will a mod please put a lock on this waste of bandwidth thread and bury it in a deep hole?? Please.

    • Like Like x 5
  38. ArnieLerma Member

    FWIW, I had already been "served' with the LMT injunction over a decade ago.
    That injunction was so badly written and intentionally complicated on purpose, in order to give $cientology the color of law to generate litigation costs to discourage protests. Every protest demonstrates to current members who witness it (this is why they hide) that THERE ARE NO OTs IN SCIENTOLOGY, JUST AN ASTHMATIC DWARF.

    If you believe the PI's were looking for me, It would be good to remind you that an enemy of scientology may be lied to and/or tricked or deceived.

    I walked by their PIs a couple of times, no one 'served' me, and there was no motive to 'serve' me as I'd already been served a decade previously, and then charged for violating it, and then found not guilty...

    READ and SAVE for future need: Previous AMICUS Briefs filed by this writer and his pals in opposition to attempts to cause trouble for "Anonymous" over that LMT injunction.

    The Betrayal of Mr Robert Minton by Arnie Lerma, moved to members only area by Mods at ESMB, but then webbed by an ex-CMO, who had also been banned and was the child who was locked in the chain locker of the Apollo. A tl:dr version of same file with moar details for those interested on Lermanet

    Arnie Lerma
    my wordpress blog (new stuff)
    One person standing there with a picket sign beats 100 keyboard warriors every time...

    • Like Like x 7
  39. Arnie what brings you to wwp now and leads you to respond to all of this now?

    Who sent you?

    Are we to disregard all the past likes on the posts supporting you were one of the people they were looking for?
  40. amaX Member

    A process server was looking for you to serve you.

    It wasn't a private investigator. Just one guy. Not multiple PI's.

    The process server is in good standing with the Pinellas Sheriff's Department. I know for a fact that I was served and Pete Griffiths was served. So when the Sheriff's Department officer who oversees all the process servers in Pinellas Co. told me personally that he had called this process server into his office and asked him what was going on AND this process server told him he had served both Griffiths and myself AND that he was also looking to serve Arnie Lerma? I believe him.

    Why do I believe the process server was looking for you, too? Multiple reasons.

    The off-duty police officers I hired for Flag Down were hand-picked by the lady who oversees off-duty officers' schedules. They were great cops. (The first night we ran over. I had only paid for the officer to stay a certain amount of time. This officer stayed over for free. I even tried to pay him the overtime the next day and it was refused. The second night the officer was so enthralled with the speakers that he sat inside to listen to them. I had a great talk with that officer, too.)

    The process server lives in Pinellas Co. He makes his living as a process server. He might be willing to take cult money to do their dirty work, but he's not going to jeopardize his livelihood for the cult of Scientology. He's in good standing with the county and he's not going to LIE to the officer who can stop him from making money.

    And there would be no reason for this process server or this cop to lie and say you were to be served, too.

    What does make more sense to me is that they WERE trying to serve you again because you are a goddamned thorn in their side and they would love nothing better than to ensnare you in any way they can.

    Everyone knows the cult doesn't like you, Arnie.

    And remember how it went down, Arnie.

    Griffiths, you, and I were all listed on the Flag Down funding page where Bunker donated.

    So all three of us were on the first hit list. We were evidently the only ones the cult wanted initially.

    Then Bunker was allowed to attend.

    Hageli was served.

    There were a lot of other speakers and attendees at Flag Down that could have been served, but the cult condensed it to four people.

    What I don't understand is how you could think the cult wouldn't want to snatch you up again. Do you really think Scientology has forgiven and forgotten all you've done?
    • Like Like x 4

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


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

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins