Jeebus H. Tapdancing Xenus! Just when you thought Fox’s No Spin Zone’s very own Bill O’Reilly couldn’t be a bigger assmonkey, you see this video of him during his time on “Inside Edition.”

Sadly, the crybabies at YouTube have already had it pulled because they are controlled by anyone with a bigger schlong than they have (which is EVERYONE including eunuchs), but Gawker has it preserved for journalistic integrity.

So, go on over and watch Bill make an ass out of himself, for the billionth time.

And just for fun, below is a nice clip of Bill getting his sh*t thrown back at him by Andrew Morton, who is as handsome as he is tall. Bill on one hand says he has a friend who is a Scientologist and tries to defend the “religion, but then proudly proclaims it’s a cult to Morton, ‘cuz you know, Andrew might not have caught on to that fact. This interview is so full of fail for O’Reilly they should call the “No Win Zone”.

From the beefcake Ron B. at TheFrameProblem, a much better written perspective on the abuses of Scientology than I can offer. The above video shows Canadian CoS Org President Yvette Shank tell an Anonymous protester that the Church of Scientology could find her if they wanted to…for more read Ron’s account here.

In fact, check out The Frame Problem for additional reports on the CoS and the protests from yesterday, there’s TONS of stuff I didn’t get to because I SUCK. Keep up the good work TFP!

So here it is sweeties. Your play by play of Friday’s Oprah Interview with Tom Cruise. I should state for the record that in general, I tend to be sympathetic of Oprah. She’s not perfect and she has, I think, lousy taste in reading material, but I’ve always liked her and she reminds me of my stepmother, so I tend to cut her slack. However, she managed to break the bonds of my patience this time, although she had the help of Mr. Cruise.

From the start of the interview it was like some nightmarish Robin Leach “When Wealthy Folk Visit Each Other”. Both Katie and Tom were on hand to welcome The Oprah and guide her in to “the mudroom”, where Chez Cruise had provided Oprah with her own brass plated cubby with her own monogrammed slippers to wear around the house. “Let me know if these aren’t comfortable,” says Tom. “I can always get you something else,” which somehow brings to mind a sweatshop in back full of pre-clears busily sewing Oprah labels on the back of an infinite number of slippers. Katie gives her totally authentic sounding contractually obligated “I love you” before leaving to “take the kids into town”.

Others have commented on Oprah’s somewhat tacky obsession, possibly even mania, with money and expensive things. Girlfriend is always bringing up the Benjamins, and not necessarily to her credit. Anyone remember the time she interviewed Anderson Cooper, whose old money mom Gloria Vanderbilt was in the audience, and she started going on about how she’s always impressed by people who don’t have to work who do make something of themselves? You could just see that Cooper was so appalled and mortified. It was a car crash of old money and the nouveau riche.

I’m afraid this unseemly aspect of her personality was in full force. First, she walks in to the huge spotless multi-jillion dollar kitchen which is possibly bigger than the average person’s home and says “It’s just SO NORMAL and kitchen like!” and then proceeds to compliment the wood paneled refrigerator. Show of hands of everyone out there with their fridge paneled to match the rest of their solid oak kitchen. Later, when Tom is showing her all his scripts, which he’s had leather bound, she becomes almost apoplectic over how much he could get for these on eBay, which she insists on repeating multiple times. It was not attractive.

Possibly my favorite moment of “When Wealthy Folk Visit Each Other” comes after visiting the gym, the toy wing, the spotless kitchen and then the dining room, Oprah tells Tom why she loves his home, and this is a direct quote: “[it’s] so earthy and so simple…Oh! There’s the photo that Annie Liebowitz did [of TomKat & Suri for Vanity Fair]”. Uh, yeah. I’m not going to ask for a show of hands for how many of you have an Annie Liebowitz portrait of yourselves on your earthy, simple dining room wall.

Lots of other sites offer a play by play of “the Interview” that follows. Oprah does bring up the “tough” questions, though you get the sense that Tom had received a list of them weeks before hand. As I watched the interview, I realized something about the way Cruise handles interviews which I’ve never witnessed so clearly before. Cruise has two ways of answering questions. Well, technically three.

One is to recite a very carefully rehearsed anecdote which has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Hence we get him telling the (highly suspicious) sounding story of how he himself carefully waxed the floor so his socks would slide for that shot in Risky Business, and later the oh so cute story about how he dressed up like Santa but his genius daughter Suri saw through his sham immediately.

The second similar way he has of answering questions is to repeat a carefully rehearsed sound bite. Thus he repeatedly said in answer to the Oprah Q&A about Brooke Shields “It came out wrong” and “It should be up to the parents”. Since we’re talking about Tom accusing Brooke of ruining her career by taking anti-depressants, and no one said a darn thing about giving drugs to kids, it sounded really weird.

The third way he had of answering questions is to simply repeat the question he’s just been asked in the form of a statement. “Were you surprised?” “Oh…yeah…I was totally…you know…surprised….absolutely surprised.” “Were you prepared [for the crazy fame that followed Risky Business]? I mean, how could you be?” “Oh, no, no, of course not….how could anyone be…prepared” God, I wanted to slap him myself through the TV, and though I haven’t been giving Oprah credit for much in this dog and pony show, I do give her credit for not smacking him.

He declined to say anything substantive about Scientology except “I think it’s best for people to read about it for themselves,” and then quickly reassured the world that respect for other religions is an absolute tenant of faith for Scientology, and OF COURSE he believes in God. I was particularly interested in how he handled Oprah’s questions about whether he was preventing Nicole from having access to the children. He described their relationship as “good, easy”, and “we share custody, that’s what we do.” Then, in case we didn’t get that, he said again that they “share custody, whenever”. So, whenever what? Whenever Nicole makes up her mind to move back to LA and stops behaving like a Suppressive Person?

Honestly, it’s hard to tell sometimes if Cruise is a lousy liar or just a lousy interview. Perhaps it’s the same difference. I have no doubt that he’ll be totally controlled and perfect for Monday’s chapter in front of a live audience, especially since the whole point of the show is to laud him for a movie which most people barely remember from twenty five years ago. Yay! Let’s pretend we all care! Yay!

I don’t think I can bear to watch it. Best of luck to you if you manage!!

[Above is a guest post from KT at Populucious, please visit often, and thx KT]

You know what, I have grown to HATE Disney’s influence on children. First it was Vanessa Hudgens with her full-on nude photo showing ALL her naughty bits — and never mind how Britney, Christina and Justin have grown up to be sexually explicit artists — but now we have Miley Cyrus aka “Hannah Montana” in nude photo shoots.

Well, I should say “artistically” nude. See, we don’t *actually* see anything other than the implied threat of her nudity as she is covered up with a sheet. Famed photographer Annie Leibowitz did the shoot for Vogue Magazine of Miley Cyrus and really should have known better, as should have Miley, her parents, her agent, her manager and anyone who really cares about the “Hannah Montana” franchise, which is estimated to be close to $1 billion dollars.

As could be predicted, Disney has responded to the photos being leaked out on the internet for the impending June Vogue issue, which comes on the heels of leaked photos showing Miley tarting it up in other picture (you can see those here), from the NYTimes:

But wait, there’s more…

Tory Christman, more commonly known as “Magoo” on the internets, has had her YouTube account suspended without cause. Tory is a former Scientologist who worked on super-secret projects for OSA (Office of Special Affairs) for the Church of Scientology and has been targeted by Scientology using their “fair game” policy to silence their critics.

Tory posts videos on YouTube detailing her experiences in the CoS, frequently negative and often damaging to their already pock-marked reputation. Tory is also a favorite among the internet-based group Anonymous and has become affectionately referred to as “Wise Glasses Lady” as a nod to her male counterpart Mark Bunker, aka “Wise Beard Man.” For a group as diverse as Anonymous, singling out central figures as voices of reason and sources of wisdom has become part of their agenda and some of these figures serve as “guide” in this leaderless operation. Because of her profile in this movement, it seems Tory has now become a target by what may be the work of her former CoS bosses, OSA.

Here’s what Tory said in a forum on Enturbulation.org about the suspension:

In the 1990’s the “Church of Scientology” asked me to do them a favor, so they said. Basically it evolved into my opening up Phony accounts that my auditor, Bill YAUDE, told me were being used, “To Handle the Critics”. This was ALL “TOTALLY TOP SECRET Tory. You cannot tell ANY Executives, Auditors, DM, Heber, RTC, Ethics officers or ANY Public, including my own husband”. When Yaude showed me this deal I had to sign, I remember well looking at him and saying, “This sounds like Guardian’s Office Crap” (Where 11 Scientologists went to jail).

He looked at me and said, “Tory, LOOK at me! It’s me, your friend and auditor—would *I* do anything wrong?” Honestly, then, I couldn’t imagine him doing anything bad—so I said, “ok” I will.

They were always to be opened with money orders, so there could be NO trace to C of S. I had to ALWAYS use a phone card—so no one could trace this. They wouldn’t tell me what they were used for, but he promised me it was “All legal-trust me”. I did. At first Scientology was flying me to different cities, to open up phony accounts.

Then they realized we could use the phone, so they’d give us (this girl and I) phone books from different areas. The plan was to take *a* name from the area (or make one up)—mainly get an address that was local, and adifferent phone number. Then call an ISP and insist “We need to open up an account TODAY as our father is moving there, he’s very sick and we must beable to communicate with him” or whatever we had to say, so they’d say, “OK”. We’d get the e-mail set up and a password, and send them the money order—and pass it onto OSA___Part of Scientology. They’d then use it to spam ARS–a newsgroup many X-Scientologists and critics were talking on. (That part I didn’t know–as Yaude told me, “I won’t tell you what we’re doing with them, so then IF you have to get
deposed, you can honestly say, “I don’t know”).

Also, Scientology terrorizes their members into NOT looking on the Net, especially back then, when it was rather new. 2 people went “insane” and Yaude told me, “They were reading the Net, Tory”. Ok, years later I spoke to both. One was drugged and reverse audited —driving her insane. She had
also worked for OSA< and then woke up---so they tried to shut her up. Didn't work, her story is on Operation Clambake - The Inner Secrets Of Scientology "Catherine's story".

(Yaude had also removed the Net Nanny from my computer, explaining how it was there to "help keep the bad stuff off your lines")

Ok, I think it was when I was ordered to "Not use your own name on the phone, and never call us by our names". Bill was I think "Jack" and Gavino (The Sea Org criminal actually running to deal, no doubt via Davey boy out of Gold) was something else.

I finally went on the net and LOOKED on ARS and sure enough, there were thousands of food recepies. In between that, were people saying, "Those aren't my words! Scientology is changing what I said!"

I'll never forget sitting there stunned. OH MY GAWD. SCIENTOLOGY IS USING ME TO STOP FREE SPEECH.

And I CAN NO LONGER TRUST MY AUDITOR--the person I trusted the most.

I'd signed something that I'd "Never ever tell ANYONE" about this Top Secret project---so I knew I was on my own.

So I called up Bill and just said, "Bill---I have to get back to working". He said, 'Ok, fine---just come on over, and fill us in on everything at this apt in Glendale". It sounded fine, so I headed over that night.

I walked into a dark----odd feeling room. It was ALL Men, all 'OT's" I knew. I sat down, and suddenly the door smashed open, and in flew Gavino, this skinny, Nazi like guy, yelling:

I TOLD YOU ABOUT HER!! I TOLD YOU!!!

Shocked, I looked at Bill (my then best friend and auditor) and said, "Told you WHAT???) At the time I was still truly a "True believer" and although MANY things had proven to be BULLSHIT_----including this, *I* still didn't fully get how bad Scientology was.

After about an hour of they grilling me, yelling at me---I finally ran out, with Bill running after me. Something snapped that night. My own personal Truman Show really cracked in half, right then.
Only there was no light----for me to see---and that took about 6 more months for me to FULLY SEE AND FACE who these mobsters really are. I Left Scientology, forever, and the main reason I left was over Free speech and they trying to stop it.

Sure, there were many other things wrong with Scientology---many I've written about. However this issue was THE Thing that pushed me over the edge. Ironic that now, today, they get my youtube site suspended.

But Know this: *I* TORY CHRISTMAN Was sent out BY the organization known as the church of Scientology---to OPEN UP THE PHONY ACCOUNTS THAT WERE USED TO STOP FREE SPEECH.

So for me, there's no: "Oh that wasn't OSA!" FUCK THAT____I KNOW DAMNED WELL IT'S OSA!

And I write this to you all for this reason: Granted, They've managed to get my ToryMagoo44 Youtube site suspended. But you have to know THEY (OSA) have a program to SHUT DOWN ****EVERY***
Single Critic of Scientology. (Just so you get how covert they are.........when I finally saw those food recopies, I called up Bill. I said, "Isn't it going to be obvious that these are made by C of S/OSA? He
said to me: "No, we've covered that! We're spamming tons of OTHER newsgroups, too, so they won't know it's us"). That's deep---------very deep, and scary too, when you get just how far they will go to "Get the job done".

So don't call Youtube because of me. I'm fine, and I'll be fine, one way or the other. But CALL YOUTUBE because ***IF** Scientology can get away with this, they shall copy it over and over with
person after person.

This isn't a Tory issue. This IS A FREE SPEECH issue! And it's an issue...............for every single person who cares about Free Speech, and doesn't want to live under the rulings/"Ethics Codes" BULLSHIT LIES of Scientology.

Tory, I will happily host your videos, as would thousands of people. YouTube will have to shut down A LOT of accounts to silence the vast number of critics against the Church of Scientology. So we have YouTube, Amazon, Digg, Ebay all going down like cheap hookers for the Church of Scientology. Only Google remains neutral against this vast conspiracy to silence the internet of all religious critics. These HUGE technology companies will use “religious bigotry” as their excuse for shutting people up.

No one *wants* to be seen as a religious bigot right?

Except they fail to see what those inside, outside and all around the globe are starting to see: the Church of Scientology is NOT a religion. They are a money-making scheme designed to take advantage of people using poorly researched science which has been proven to damage the psyche of those who use their “tech.” You can’t control the INTERNETS anymore CoS.

tick, tick, tick, tick….hear that? That’s time running out for you Church of Bad Science and Dupery. Feel free to bombard YouYube with well-crafted letters concerning free speech.

UPDATE: TORY’S ACCOUNT IS BACK. YAY!

When I began writing about Anonymous’ protests against the Church of Scientology I had NO idea what to think, expect or envision. As far as I was concerned, they were two sinister organizations battling it out, and it was good idea to stay removed.

During my coverage, I was rickrolled, memed, exposed to weird variations of intentionally misspelled words and utterly lost in this seemingly surreal world. At some point, I visited Encyclopedia Dramatica and the Something Awful forums to do some research on “Anonymous” and I genuinely thought to myself, “how is it possible I could be blogging for over six years and be so clueless about an entire subculture of people.”

In all fairness, Anonymous does have a fairly sordid past, with a strange sense of humor. Both sites listed above have a tendency to make fun of the kinds of people and things that society politely protects due to an abundance of political correctness. The SA and ED sites are not for the PC or easily offended. You’ve been warned.

This however, does not mean that all individuals who call themselves Anonymous, are in fact “Anonymous.” Even those people who are Anonymous aren’t even Anonymous. Does that make sense? It shouldn’t. For months now I have read various parties try to define who Anonymous are and who they aren’t. Most Anonymous feel there is no proper way to define the group, and many are repulsed at the idea of even trying to do so. From my perspective, this stems from the very nature of the word “anonymous.” From Merriam-Websters definition:

anonymous

1 : not named or identified 2 : of unknown authorship or origin 3 : lacking individuality, distinction, or recognizability

Still confused? That’s natural. While I am not an authority by any means, I feel as informed as anyone else in the media to make distinctions. Yes, even in a group calling itself “Anonymous” there are distinctions. And in this case, quite marked.

Glosslip has actively chosen to interact with all sorts of people calling themselves “anonymous” and from what I have observed, there are three distinct groupings of Anonymous. I will attempt to define as best I understand.

But wait, there’s more…

Clip from “His Highness Hollywood” interview with ex-Scienologist Michael Pattinson

After an exhaustive investigation into the tech nightmare author Ian Halperin endured on the opening of his new film, “His Highness Hollywood,” a representative from the National Arts Club, Greg Singer confirmed the film’s equipment was tampered with just prior to the opening of the movie.

Singer, the tech official on duty that evening for the NAC, had this to say about the circumstances which led to the final version film being scrapped after three failed attempts:

“It [the tampering] was a professional job. Someone tampered with the screen projection system. All the settings were changed and the laptop was inspected before the screening. There was a system check for viruses, and the computer came back 100% clean. When we investigated the laptop after the screening, there was a virus infecting the laptop. Someone was definitely out to sabotage the evening.”

I asked Ian how many people he invited to the premiere and he estimated about 30, including select members of the media. Ian said he was keeping the numbers small and exclusive out of concern for any possible attempts by groups targeted in the film, namely the Church of Scientology, from preventing the screening of the film.

As stated in Glosslip’s earlier post on the event, there were 200 people at the screening, with at least 70 turned away. Ian said he didn’t know how word got out, but was initially thrilled at the turn out. I did some checking on my own and saw on the NAC’s website the event listed on their calendar of events. So really, anyone in the public could have been privy to this information.

Prior to the book’s release Ian did some publicity for his projects, plus there are several excerpts of the film available on YouTube with Ian going in undercover at the ScientologyCelebrity Center in, and the most damaging part is Ian’s interviews with ex-Scientologist Michael Pattinson. Pattinson has attempted to sue the Church for damages related to spending close to $500,000 on auditing and spiritual training to cure him of his “homosexuality.

Scientologists believe “homosexuality” to be an aberration within humans. L. Ron Hubbard spoke specifically of it within his writings, especially in his popular book Dianetics.

“The sexual pervert (and by this term Dianetics, to be brief, includes any and all forms of deviation in Dynamic II [i.e. sexuality] such as homosexuality, lesbianism, sexual sadism, etc., and all down the catalog of Ellis and Krafft-Ebing) is actually quite ill physically… he is very far from culpable for his condition, but he is also far from normal and extremely dangerous to society…

On something called the “tone scale,” homosexuality is at the top of the undesirable chart at -40 -1.1, referred to as “total failure.”,

“At 1.1 on the tone scale we enter the area of the most vicious reversal of the second dynamic. Here we have promiscuity, perversion, sadism, and irregular practices.”

I give Hubbard credit for suggesting homosexuals weren’t completely “culpable” for their condition. In some ways that’s quite generous to most other religious opinions. But most religions don’t sue people for leaving, threaten and harass their critics, have special arrangements with the IRS, or tell their members who they can or can’t have in their lives.

Between my interview, Ian’s threatening phone calls, Defamer’s and Queerty’s publicizing the details and the general air of hostility between the Church of Scientology and the public, anything is possible.

We have no way of knowing who was involved, all that remains clear is someone did not want Ian’s film watched that evening.

[Editor’s note: correction made to tone scale rating on homosexuality]

There are images circulating which show a lovely brunette naked and engaged in various sex acts from artistic angles who looks vaguely like a famous actress. Or to put it another way, some chick with brown hair, who may or may not be Kristen Davis aka Charlotte from Sex In The City (and Melrose Place before that) allowed her picture to be taken while she was taking it.

Before we get into the specifics of the aforementioned photos, the first thing that struck me is why on earth would a famous woman allow herself to be photographed in the nude, with penises near her vajayjay or her face? I mean isn’t that the sort of cardinal sin any self-respecting actress would never commit? Sure Paris Hilton would, or Lindsay Lohan, or porn stars (wait are Paris and Lindsay porn stars? nevermind), but not sweet, innocent Kristin Davis!

Well, yes, even sweet girls like to be naughty and apparently having yourself photographed while doing the nasty is like, totally hot. Or something.

Kristin has denied the photos are hers, and since the angles are such that we can’t get a straight shot of her, then really it’s her word against the totally creepy scumbag who leaked the photos to the press. Did I mention that was a really scummy and creepy thing to do? What does this say about society when you can’t pick up some random dude, have unprotected sex with him, allow him to take pictures of you while having unprotected sex, and trust said guy to not leak these pictures on the eve of your first major film debut?

I guess it says we like naked pics of celebs, that’s what. So without further ado, some naked pics after the jump. NSFW

But wait, there’s more…

Last week was the Ohio primaries and I almost didn’t vote, despite this being a very exciting time in our nations political history. The last two presidential elections I voted in, I lost. I didn’t just lose because the candidate I backed lost, I lost because my country was no longer my own. I felt completely disenfranchised by the person who became my president. Such is the way of our political system. Half the people get what the want, the other half get left swinging in the breeze.

Throw in the complete and utter contempt and overt disdain our current leadership has for its constituency by loading the Supreme Court with conservative judges thus creating a very unbalanced judicial system, the systematic snatching away of personal privacy under the guise of a “war on terror” and then ultimately the deteriorating state of our current economics, it’s no surprise people want change in their government.

Yesterday NY Governor Elliot Spitzer, a former Attorney General, called a press conference to apologize for a “personal matter” which compromised his integrity as an elected official and ultimately hurt his family. While he didn’t elaborate on what the personal matter was, it didn’t take a genius to figure out he was taking a preemptive strike against information which linked him to a “high-rolling prostitution ring.” The very types of criminal activities as Attorney General of New York he fought tooth and nail to prosecute and eliminate.

But wait, there’s more…

Yet another year has gone by and tonight we prepare for the next class of Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Inductees, and as usual, it sucks huge donkey testicles.

I blame Jann Wenner, the simpering queen and publisher at Rolling Stone for his constant need to pass up the greats so he can cater to his friends and special interests of the marginally talented. Lest you think I am being too harsh, take a look at this year’s artists, compared to who has NOT been inducted yet.

2008 Performer Inductees

* John Mellencamp
* Leonard Cohen
* Madonna
* The Dave Clark Five
* The Ventures

With the exception of Leonard Cohen, who is an amazing singer/songwriter and likely should have been in YEARS ago, this is a list of *ehhh*, who cares. Sure, Madonna is a master of marketing and mimicry, and John Cougar Mellencamp has some great songs, but the Dave Clark Five? Give me a friggin’ break.

Ok, here’s a list of groups who’ve been completely ignored for years (and mind you, this is a tad heavy on the 80’s New Wave, but STILL…)

Roxy Music - It is a crime against humanity that Bryan Ferry and Roxy Music have been ignored for years, YEARS I tell you. I mean if we aren’t going to judge on artistic integrity, creative genius, and sheer longevity, then what’s the point. Roxy Music is one of the most seminal art-rock bands who crossed over into popular music that ever existed. Period, the end. Case closed. Jann sucks.

The Cure - What the F*CK excuse does the RH committee have for not including the Cure in the Rock Hall? The Cure were as influential to rock as REM, U2 and the Clash, three bands from the same era who are in, yet somehow they keep getting overlooked. I would like to punch Wenner in the ballsack for this oversight.

Rush - I don’t even particularly even LIKE Rush, but still, come on. Progressive rock wouldn’t be the same without them. In fact, there are no prog rock bands in the Rock Hall. No Emerson, Lake and Palmer, no Yes, no Moody Blues, nothing. Why? Because Jann Wenner sucks big hairy ones, as do all the toady lickspittles who kiss his ass. BTW, Jann Wenner likes Scientologists. A lot. He might even be one.

But wait, there’s more glaring omissions: Duran Duran, Joy Division/New Order, Depeche Mode, B-52’s, Tears For Fears - the list goes on as far as the New Wave/Electronic/Punk set goes. What about Cyndi Lauper even? These bands and artists were not only immensely popular, and most still are, but they had tons of hits and sold massive amounts of records.

I will be at the Rock Hall tonight helping the publisher of Blogcritics.org, Eric Olsen, to cover the event for Cleveland.com. I will also be thinking evil thoughts about Jann Wenner, the sucktacularness of Rolling Stone, and his crappy taste in music.

Feel free to list bands who YOU think have been overlooked because the Rock Hall is run by a bunch of corrupt, scruffy-looking nerfherders.