DB, I just thought Chuck was being sarcastic.
A visual of John Connolly, in case he runs into you....
http://www.thedailybeast.com/author/john-connolly/
I'm at a loss on John Connolly. He's obviously a professional information barterer. He's less of an actual reporter and editor, and more of a person who snoops out stories, and he now turns out to be a person who has been in the business of derailing stories and derailing actual material being put out that would reflect badly on Scientology.
He once urged me not to put out the letter I got from Eliot Abelson, but he didn't know, because I didn't explain it to him, that I had already posted Eliot's slightly threatening letter to me, in 2005, right after I received the letter from Abelson.
John's a very smooth talking person, and I suppose that if one is in that type of business, bartering information, one can make one's living getting paid by groups like Scientology which have their own intelligence branch that subcontracts info snooping tactics.
The longrange solution is just eliminate OSA, cancel the OSA Network Orders, and get Scientology out of the intelligence business, no matter what LRH said in policy (like Simon Boliver PL, which is the basis for MSH's role in the Guardian's Office).
I've left three messages on John's answering machine, and normally he calls me back within 24 hours whenever I leave him a message.
He's actually been very helpful in advice and briefing me on things I had questions on.
I think he might just turn this into a story himself, as a way out of this predicament.
Or else, as I suspect, this is above my paygrade, meaning I have no idea about the job security of people like John who are information barterers. They might be secure in their positions, and they might not get in trouble for selling groups like Scientology, information and low level blocking tactics, like when John urged me not to post the letter from Eliot Abelson (when I just hadn't told John I had already posted it).
LRH in one of the PR series says use reporters to write stuff for "us" in certain circumstances.
Hopefully this will break as a news story, on John's activities, and he's NOT answering his phone still though.
But he's in a different league, this I feel is above my paygrade to even speculate if he's gonna get in trouble at Vanity Fair for this, maybe it's allowed, maybe it's part of the culture of news media, that people like John barter news on the side, maybe this is moonlighting and he's within their code of conduct.
I just haven't read about this type of news and information gathering and getting paid for it, like John apparantly has been doing for Scientology for years.
It'd be interesting if any of the others who were "taken" like I was, by John, if any of them are like me NOT getting answers to calls or our emails to John.
In any case, OSA's having to experience some downstats this week.
And likely, if there are other "moles" or whatever John is considered, that all the other info spies that OSA's using are being put on hold for a moment, for fear of being exposed ALSO.
Div 6, interesting. But how do you know "Sylvia and Sue" (from FCDC?) are the ones who "sent him 'in' ...."? Couldn't anyone have been communicating to him via his bluetooth?
I'm confused about these OSA operatives. As and example,the fellow ID'ed as an operative, Dr. Stuart, is Chair of the Anthropolgy Dept. at Univ. of Maryland and has been since 1988, among other things. Why would a guy like this opt to go "undercover" for a lousy church and risk(?) his career?
Nothing that I saw in his CV indicates, at least to me, that he would be up for this.
Please note that I am NOT defending anyone nor am I denouncing anyone's opinion. I just want to get an idea of how this would occur.
. . . The smarter the guy and the more removed from daily life (as most academics are) . . .
I'm confused about these OSA operatives. As and example,the fellow ID'ed as an operative, Dr. Stuart, is Chair of the Anthropolgy Dept. at Univ. of Maryland and has been since 1988, among other things. Why would a guy like this opt to go "undercover" for a lousy church and risk(?) his career?
Nothing that I saw in his CV indicates, at least to me, that he would be up for this.
Please note that I am NOT defending anyone nor am I denouncing anyone's opinion. I just want to get an idea of how this would occur.
He wasn't so much "undercover" as he was just a hired stooge offering a "plausible pretext" to pump potential info out of anons......this was early on in the Anon evolution (mid-2008) and they were still trying to find the "leaders"....
I've been re-reading this post by Chuck a couple of times.. Something about it nags me.. The way that this character, John Connolly, apparently had ingratiated himself to Chuck and becoming a confidante and someone to ask advice on anything re. the media fight with The Sinister Scam Cult of Scientology.I'm at a loss on John Connolly. He's obviously a professional information barterer. He's less of an actual reporter and editor, and more of a person who snoops out stories, and he now turns out to be a person who has been in the business of derailing stories and derailing actual material being put out that would reflect badly on Scientology. ··<snip>
. . . <snip> . . . I think Chuck got suspicious when John Connolly adviced not to publish the letter from Eliot Abelson. I don't know how John Connolly justified it. Maybe he said that there could be legal risks? - Maybe he 'explained' that it was of no public interest and would turn public off.. I'm certain he had a nice plausible 'story' about why it was a bad idea to publish. Using his media expertise to impress Chuck . . . <snip> . . .
Here is John Connally
POSING as a "Vanity Fair Contributing Editor"
Does "Vanity Fair" know he is Church of Scientology
Office of Special Affairs Intelligence agent ?
Vanity Fair is a highbrow New York Literary magazine.
Not a tabloid.
It is owned by Conde Naste.
I think it would be fun to let their Legal department know
how John Connally is bandying around the name of Vanity Fair while he works for the CULT
I wonder if he has exposed Conde Naste to legal problems as he boldly and flagrantly represented himself as a legitimate Journalist of Vanity Fair when he was spying for Office of Special AFFAIRS, the intelligence arm of DM's cult
Condé Naste
4 Times Square
NY 10036
(212) 286-2860
So per that article, John Connolly says that Marty and Mike want to take over the Church. Interesting indeed.