Same old, same old….

Still boring, still in search to get a life: Anonymous.

Gene Simmons Hacker Arrested

kevinpoemugKevin George Poe- member of hacker collective Anonymous- was arrested for shutting down Simmons website

Notorious hacking collective, Anonymous, has been linked to major attacks on websites including Playstation, Mastercard, Visa, and the Church of Scientology. On Tuesday, one of the group’s members, Kevin George Poe, was arrested in Connecticut for hacking into, the KISS frontman’s website.

According to Reuters, a court date has not yet been scheduled, but Poe has been accused of using a computer program that bombarded Simmons’ website for five straight days in October 2010. The site was attacked with tens of thousands of requests in a denial of service attack.

Poe has been charged with conspiracy and unauthorized impairment of a protected computer. If convicted, he could serve up to 15 years in jail.

For those of you unfamiliar with a “denial of service” attack, essentially the software is designed to send a large number of requests to the sites network. The server becomes overwhelmed with the requests and shuts down. This method is apparently a favourite of the Anonymous collective.

It is unknown why Simmons website was chosen to attack by Poe.

Source: Shalom Life (


  1. Here’s a repost word for word of my reference for why I don’t deal with those who post critical comments:

    INSANITY AND “SOURCES OF TROUBLE” page 216 Introduction to Scientology Ethics

    Type H

    “h. Persons who “have an open mind” but no personal hopes
    or desires for auditing or knowingness should be ignored,
    as they really don’t have an open mind at all, but a lack of
    ability to decide about things, and are seldom found to be very
    responsible and waste anyone’s efforts to convince them.”

    Pat (lol, not Rasmussen)

    • [snip. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. If you want to discuss the post, go ahead, by any means. But this blog allows anonymity, also for yourself. So heed it or GTFO. – Louanne]

      • [snip. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. If you want to discuss the post, go ahead, by any means. But this blog allows anonymity, also for yourself. So heed it or GTFO. – Louanne]

      • [snip. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. If you want to discuss the post, go ahead, by any means. But this blog allows anonymity, also for yourself. So heed it or GTFO. – Louanne]

      • Yeah, but, c’mon seriously. If she would outright lie about that, what else is she lying about? Is she lying about Scientology too?

      • [snip. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. If you want to discuss the post, go ahead, by any means. But this blog allows anonymity, also for yourself. So heed it or GTFO. – Louanne]

      • No, louanne- it proves the point. She is a liar, and her word is no good here. She revealed herself. I won’t talk about her name any more, but I know that her claims are equally suspect. It’s nice of you to protect your friend, but it’s hypocritical to try to expose others while allowing her to hide behind a mask. You and her are just as anonymous as the “cowards” that you mock.

      • Anyways, it was a fun conversation. My only advice is that, if she wants to remain anonymous, she ask her own son (not saying which, or if it’s both, for her own privacy) to stop complaining about her online. Just friendly advice.

      • Just realize, Louanne, that when she expects someone that visits your job to get facts to merely accept her word on her own integrity (as in the examples that you edited out), that doesn’t hold much water. It seems that she’d really benefit your site more by presenting facts and logical discussion, rather than her usual “it’s true, trust me” approach.

      • “@Comment by Callfourreform on December 24, 2011 6:09 pm
        No, louanne- it proves the point.”

        Bullshit again. You can call yourself what you want here and claim to be who you want. But you have just proven that you are not interested in any discussion or in posting questions to be answered. Your intent is to attack individual posters for their assumed identity. And that’s not ok as it violates the purpose of this blog. Get it?

        – L

      • I don’t care who she wants to pretend to be or not be- I don’t care who you want to pretend to be or not to be. But here’s the deal; she won’t attach her real name to her claims. That’s fine, but she’s just another anonymous poster on the internet. So all that matters is the facts and validation that she’s able to attach to what she says to be true. But she doesn’t do that very often, and a few examples of that has been posted here. Heck, I can pretend that I don’t know who she is, I don’t mind doing that. But my point is that unless she starts bringing some facts to the table, there’s not much else to draw from.

      • Lol, I think that we’re all respecting your rule, louanne, and no one is posting any of the massive amounts of validation of her identity. We don’t care who she is and who she claims to be. I don’t like that she lies about it, but that’s my own opinion.
        But, like call said, if she won’t attach her name to something (as you won’t do, yourself), then she can only be believed by presenting facts and verifiable information. She’s not very good about that. You try, to a degree, and it’s appreciated. You have to realize that most of the world deals in facts; facts that are universally constant, keeping those separate from belief or opinion. If you can’t talk in that language, you can’t communicate effectively.

    • That’s really irrational. Why would I post as Thetaworks when I always post with my name? That’s not my post.

      • [snip. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. If you want to discuss the post, go ahead, by any means. But this blog allows anonymity, also for yourself. So heed it or GTFO. – Louanne]

      • [snip. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. If you want to discuss the post, go ahead, by any means. But this blog allows anonymity, also for yourself. So heed it or GTFO. – Louanne]

      • For all I know, you did that. Why are you stalking anyway?

      • [snip. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. If you want to discuss the post, go ahead, by any means. But this blog allows anonymity, also for yourself. So heed it or GTFO. – Louanne]

      • [snip. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. If you want to discuss the post, go ahead, by any means. But this blog allows anonymity, also for yourself. So heed it or GTFO. – Louanne]

    • [snip. I am sick and tired of this bullshit. If you want to discuss the post, go ahead, by any means. But this blog allows anonymity, also for yourself. So heed it or GTFO. – Louanne]

    • Just ask them to keep on topic… it doesnt take long for them to talk about things that have nothing to do with what is posted….

      • How would you know it wasn’t on topic? I’m assuming you didn’t actually read what was snipped?
        I’m not going to repeat it here, out of respect for “pat’s” wishes for anonymity, but it was a direct answer to a question that was asked. Louanne asked that we refrain from talking about Pat’s real name, which we have all respected here. She deleted the comments in order to re-conceal pat’s name.
        There, now you’re informed.

  2. “It is unknown why Simmons website was chosen to attack by Poe.”

    Me thinks you’re just being coy, Louanne; or you’re just quoting someone else who’s ignorant of facts while neglecting to add an editorial to answer the question that was raised.

    Simmons gained the internet collective’s attention when he said “The music industry was asleep at the wheel, It didn’t have the balls to go and sue every fresh-faced, freckle-faced college kid who downloaded material” and suggested that the music industry “sue everybody” and “Take their homes, their cars.”

    Simmons is all about money- he’ll lend his name to anything that will make him money. He even marketed KISS brand condoms in order to make a few bucks. He’ll do anything, including take away someone’s home, to protect his bottom line. For him, it’s not about right, it’s about making more money. He said it best: “I love cash. It will get me everything I want in life.”

    So, that should answer your question- he was targeted because of his own statements.

    Do you really think that anonymous is a group?

  3. Wow, up to 15 years in federal prison…. For buying the “Anonymous hive mind” bullshit. When it comes down to real life it’s prison bars and creepy cell mates.

    • Is the person that did the crime to blame, or the group they identify with? Or is it shared?

      • Without the group they wouldn’t have done it. “Anonymous” as a concept and as a group encourages such actions and I have no mercy for those that get caught.

        – L

      • Really? How do you know that to be true? and, if that’s the case, why aren’t all that subscribe to the anonymous meme doing these crimes?
        You say “without the group they wouldn’t have done it”. Do you excuse scientology for Tom Ciancio’s murder? Do you excuse scientology for the Perkins family?

      • Perhaps to put things in perspective; how many scientology critics (bear in mind, that goes way beyond anonymous- the critics are from all walks of life) are getting arrested for murder, fraud and other felonies?

      • well, let’s see:
        Fowler took money from the company in order to give it to scientology. He would not have done that if he were not a scientologist. Ciancio left the business primarily over that. When he went in for his severance pay, fowler murdered him. If it weren’t for scientology, Fowler would not have killed ciancio. If that scientology MINISTER was able to handle his life, he wouldn’t have killed the US army veteran who was on his way to his son’s birthday party.
        Eli Perkin’s mother took him off of his medication because of her scientology beliefs- unmedicated, he killed her in a psychotic episode. Since being back on treatment, he has never had another such episode. She died because of her scientology beliefs.
        You can’t have a double standard, Louanne. If “anonymous” is to blame for the crimes of individuals, so is scientology if they’re doing actions according to their understanding of the group.
        Besides, “anonymous” hardly cares about scientology any more, they had their fun. It’s the tens of thousands of critics and former members that stay focused on scientology. Anonymous has moved on- but you still look to blame them. It’s almost like you WANT to keep them interested or something.
        If scientology is so much better than anonymous, why does scientology still have the lead in serious crimes, like your murders, fraud convictions, espionage, plus all the suicides, bankruptcies and all that? If “anonymous” is guilty, as a group, then why is 4chan still up and running? Is it, perhaps, because we live in a Nation where people are allowed to enjoy free speech and free association, as long as they’re not committing crimes? You’re the only one that seems to condemn people without evidence of crimes..

      • proof of the above- poe wasn’t attacking scientology, now was he? He moved on- anonymous, the meme and the 4chan-born collective has moved on. you seem to want them back, I suspect because it was an easier target to discuss, rather than the wide variety of critics that are actually opposing scientology. It’s no anonymous that you need to be looking at, as they’re not after you. It’s starting with the growing list of THOUSANDS of former members that are speaking out- apostates, you call them I think. That list is growing, and doesn’t include those that are leaving quietly. It’s the growing independent movement, which is becoming relevant in an upcoming discrimination lawsuit. And it’s the increasingly negative public perception. It’s true, look at google news and search for scientology; how many people are saying anything positive about the group? Really, all you’ll find are press releases by some absent public affairs director. And Tommy Davis’ acknowledgement that there’s a condition under which dianetics (and, thus, scientology) is false has only seemed to make things worse, especially since people can look up the information and decide for themselves. Non-scientologists aren’t going to look to scientology websites to make a decision- they’re looking at court records, news stories and personal experiences. Those are generally not positive to scientology. Consider this- when someone hears what tommy davis said (“Of course, if it’s true that Mr. Hubbard was never injured during the war, then he never did heal himself using Dianetics principles, then Dianetics is based on a lie, and then Scientology is based on a lie.”) what do you think they’ll believe when they look at Hubbard’s own war records, provided by the navy, which show that he not only was never injured in combat, but never had the injuries that he claimed? And that no doctor, nurse or soldier ever has come forward to support otherwise?
        But, scientology seems to spend more time condemning former members than wondering why they are leaving…

  4. Mainly a time issue. Will be back some time.

    – L

    • I mean this story… Is gene Simmons a scientologist?

      • Dunno. maybe, maybe not. I have been covering Anonymous too. Especially their criminal and inhuman actions.

        – L

      • I see- so this site is about both Scientology AND anonymous? I’m just trying to understand.

      • The point for me anyway, is that Anonymous (who had done the same thing to the Church websites), is still perceived to be criminal and the fact that these guys are being prosecuted is justice for what they did to the Church. This site is just what it says in the FAQ at

      • Ah, Pat! I knew that you were still checking up. The site was kind of dead for a while, wasn’t it?
        Anywho, The only two people that seem to still tie anonymous to scientology is Louanne Lee and Pat Rasmussen- that’s pretty much it. That’s because most of the world can see that anonymous- they’ve lost interest in scientology. They had their fun several years ago, but that’s about it. Sure, some self-proclaimed members still are concerned; but as you can see, anonymous as a whole has bigger fish to fry. They had their fun with scientology, so I don’t understand why you keep wanting to pull them back in. Are you TRYING to get their attention? It seems to me that by continually trying to cheese them off, you’re doing little more than attempting to get scientology back in their crosshairs- why would you do that to scientology?
        I think that you realize that anonymous isn’t a threat to scientology any longer. I think that you can see that it’s project chanology, the thousands of former members, the news media and the countless critics. And yet, you don’t focus on the actual threat… why?
        Because you can’t.
        Because anonymous is an easy target, and you can try to dead agent them with crimes committed by some of their members. But you can’t do that as easily with the growing number of critics and former members, most of which have a clean police record. So you have built up a strawman in anonymous, a group which doesn’t exist as you can understand it. You say, “look, they’re bad because some of them are in jail!” whilst ignoring the murders, fraud and other violent crimes that pepper scientology’s ranks. Why do you blame anonymous for the actions of a few, while excusing scientology for the likes of rex fowler? I don’t get that- I don’t think you do, either.
        Anonymous doesn’t exist. There’s no membership, no rules, no standards. It’s a sub culture, a lifestyle for some who chose to call themselves by that name. Why do you keep trying to fit them into scientology?
        Oh, thanks for the link to the FAQ! It says, “Here you can ask questions about Scientology, no matter what type of questions or how stupid they may sound. I’ll answer them and have done so since February 2008!”- where does that mention anonymous?

      • Out of curiosity (to louanne), why doesn’t this site cover the serious crime of murder when committed by a scientologist, but covers the same story over and over and over again when it’s committed by someone that may have or may not have at one time committed an act of petty vandalism against scientology’s website?

      • Huh.
        So was Kevin poe one of the people that hacked scientology?

      • The one that posts here as “Pat”. If you look back, she said that she had to engage in the scientology practice of “disconnection” because I was a “potential trouble source” on account of my open mind.
        She’s actually pretty nice to talk to. I’ve actually talked quite a bit to her in the past, and also her son (online only), who’s openly critical and open-minded.

  5. I would assume it’s because news isn’t a myth, just data of events.

    You can get that here:

    and here:


  6. Why did you stop covering Scientology news?

    • Because all of the news about scientology is either self-generated or negative :)
      Seriously, try it- go to google news and search for news related to scientology. You can see how non-scientologists actually see the group.That’s why, as you can see, louanne tends to focus on news about CRITICS of scientology, and try to break them down. Seriously- look at the posts on this blog: they’re either about people that oppose scientology OR about scientology spending money.

      • Holy shit! That’s some jacked up crap. I had no idea.

      • “You can see how non-scientologists actually see the group” – actually, I think “You can see how ANTI-scientologists actually see the group” would be more accurate.
        Seems most of what Google News finds is the Village Voice, which I would say is not in the slightest impartial.

      • non-scientologists and anti-scientologists are increasingly one and the same. yes, the village voice is very prevalent, but it’s not the only one. If you look, the only people praising scientology is scientology itself in paid press releases.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

  • What is this blog?

    I am running a website, which deals with critical questions about Scientology.
    So naturally I am into finding answers to the questions that are constantly being asked all over the internet about Scientology, Scientologists, the Church, L. Ron Hubbard and the Church's leader, David Miscavige. I want to find answers from independent sources, not only Church of Scientology owned sites or anti-Scientology hate sites. So what's left? Court documents, photos and other reliable sources. Help me find stuff and ask whatever you want. Thanks!

    The easiest way to shoot a question over to me is to click here.

    Or search below.
  • Archives

  • Religion Photo Feed