Fan Mail From Some Flounder

I always am willing to speak with people who have opposing views.  However, I like them to be at least halfway reasonable in what they have to say.  This rather lengthy e-mail exchange happened over the last 24 hours.

Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:10:42 -0700
Subject: Re: Anonymous
Dear Mr. Bunker,
John Bowen Brown III would like to know if you are the man who let those dogs named Anonymous out of there cages? I beleive the answer to be ‘Yes.  I am not a Scientologist, and Anonymous tried to burn me because I would not give up some sources I had. Even though their protests against Scientology has been non-violent with a few exceptions, everything else they do has been illegal. Anyone who disagrees with them gets ddos attacked. You helped organize  a bunch of cyber gangbangers, who are hurting people. Do not worry about Scientology or allegation that they still use fair game. Worry about me. Unfortunately for you, Anonymous has unknowingly made your their leader, Wise Beard Man. You, from this day forward, will be held liable for whatever Anonymous does.

John Bowen Brown II 
Check out my web site at:
This email is the intellectual property of the author. Please do not transmit or reproduce without first obtaining Permission of John Bowen Brown II.

Well, you are a bit mistaken in the chronology.  Anonymous started attacking Scientology with illegal methods and I urged them to not do that and instead use peaceful, legal means to speak out against Scientology’s fraud and abuse.  They considered my advice and largely have followed it.
That doesn’t make me their leader.   I’m closer to an Obi Wan Kenobi.  Offering sage advice to take on an evil empire.
But blame me if you must.
All my best,
Mark Bunker

Hi Mark,

I actually want to correct something I said. Originally I said, ‘Unfortunately for you, Anonymous has unknowingly made your their leader, Wise Beard Man.’ I actually don’t feel you are the Leader, but they have put you in some sort of leadership status. If you want to call it being a sage, that’s fine; but you are still a leader in the Anonymous movement.

Whatever floats your boat, John.  I’ve met hundreds of members of Anonymous and they all seem like decent people who are taking to the streets in peaceful protests.  I’ve denounced any and all illegal activities and tried to lead them to doing good.  Most have responded.
There are still some dopes who do destructive things.  There are dopes in every group.  The vast majority of Scientologists are terrific people.  There are dopes at the top doing things that are ethically and morally wrong.
All I can do is set an example and encourage doing things the right way.  I’m sorry if this disappoints you.

Did not say I was disappointed. I am a human rights activist, and I actually understand human rights principles. The term ‘human rights activist’ seems to be a term that is abused. Some local cells are terribly inept and disorganized. The protest Housh is one example. You do not ever walk into the building of the group you are protesting.

Another thing is some outed Anonymous member  referring to the earlier illegal methods as civil disobedience, an misuse of that term. What is being done on the internet is vastly different from the openly non-violent protests.

I don’t give myself a lofty term like human rights activist.  I’m a guy who is speaking about some things that are wrong in Scientology that people should be made aware of.  These are things that journalists have been documenting now since the group began in the 50’s.  The net is allowing all that information to be gathered and shared.
I find that valuable.
People may speak out about Anonymous’ abuses as well.  I have done so in many of my early interviews about the group.  I denounced the abuses and support the legal activities.  I hope you continue to speak out about the abuses which I also condemn.
The net is an unruly place.  My latest video deals with that subject.  Anywhere people can post anonymously on the net, there are dopes who say stupid things that they would never say to a person’s face.
I get emails at my job in TV news from viewers venting about various issues.  They can curse like a sailor at some perceived faceless corporation and then when I answer them they say, ‘Oh – I didn’t think anyone would actually read that.’
While the net is wild and unruly, I keep my corner of it civil.


I am aware of some of the things Scientology has done in the past (IRS break in and  Paulette Cooper, ect.). Perhaps you and I ought to talk about this in person or on the phone.  Anonymous is creating a persona that I see as beginning to resemble the same paranoia Sci   seems to display when confronted with dissent. I am glad you are not so polarized as some are, and can admit the possibility of some abuses in Anonymous can occur. They are occurring!
Lastly, I never considered my use of the term human rights activist as lofty. That is how I originally became involved in activism by studying human rights principles. In this stage in my activism I need to consult with an attorney because the human rights issues I become aware of contain some complicated legal issues

I’m on record condemning the bad and praising the good.  Meet with Anonymous at the pickets and you’ll find decent people from all walks of life.  That would probably do you more good than meeting or calling me.

I have gone out of my way to meet and talk with current and former Scientologists over the past ten years so I can better understand Hubbard’s creation.
If you’re upset with Anonymous, take it up with them.
I know the “bad” Anonymous have turned on me a couple times.  I got copious phone calls from what sounded like two 14 year old kids.  They got bored when I didn’t react to to their taunts and went away.   The good Anonymous continues to take to the streets and talk to the media.
I’m not going to pin the actions of the few dopes on the good people I’ve met.  However, the bad actions do tar their reputation.  That’s something the bulk of the group needs to face.  Perhaps they will spin off and start a new name.  Their actions are up to them.

The local Anons in my area are part of the problem. They are with the bad. Unfortunately they taunted me and I responded quite nastily. They have also gotten nasty once with a local Sci member who  apparently was a Sci newbie who wanted to give them some Lit.

Also I recommend you go on the record as stating you have no leadership status with Anonymous. The picture they are painting of you is that you fill some kind of leadership status.
What happened to me is I approached Sci and Anonymous and started asking them both questions about Sci. I started researching fair game. I had some research sources. Anonymous wanted the sources. I did not give them my sources. I also questioned some things that were said. They considered me a Sci at first. Then a BSer. The Mods  accessed my own member ID and vandalized my posts. They said it will stop if I give up my research sources. I did not want to give them up under those circumstances. I never did. Then I got nasty with them. Then they said they knew my phone number and ask how Kris, my wife was doing. My business line is posted, but I do not remember putting my wife’s name out there. I live in Tuscon. The local Tucson Anon are of the bad breed. They seem to be looking for confrontation from what I observed. They seem to be left over from the image boards.

So what did you say about Fair Game?
The policy itself was canceled years ago, but the Sci org seems to currently have an attack the attacker policy. Anon don’t seem to understand the fair game targeted members only. There might be another “attack the attacker” policy within Scientology, but only former and current members ever need to worried about Fair Game.
Well, I can see why Anonymous reacted poorly to your statements.  They are factual false.  Having read the Fair Game and the cancellation order, you have it wrong.  The cancellation orders expressly says the use of the term Fair game is canceled because it creates bad PR.  But Hubbard also writes in the same very same order that this does not at all change the way we treat an SP.

Fair game was L. Ron Hubbard written policy to handle what he calls Suppressive Persons, those who he perceived to be “enemies of the church.  No where in the policy does it state (nor is it true) that only members or former members could be SPs.
By the way, what a wonderful religious sentiment it is that Hubbard wrote “an SP can be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any disclipline of the Scientologist.  May be tricked, sued, lied to or destroyed.”  No religion should have such a policy.  No religious leader should have such thoughts.
Paulette Cooper is but one example of a non-Scientologist who was targeted as Fair Game.  Gabe Cazares was another.  My friend Bob Minton yet another more recent example.  The abuse was well documented.  I have met all three and know their stories well.
So if Anonymous is calling your information bogus, they are the correct ones and it would do you well to do more research on the subject.  The documents have been entered into court cases and verified as true.

I am aware of all this. In interviewing the head of the Scientology church in Tucson, I was shown a book not available to the public. So far I have been allowed to view this book, but not buy it. I know about SPs and Squirrels, and other terms. I have  read things you would not be allowed to read. The local group has allowed me access. I am aware of what the fair game documents say. I have read them. They specifically apply only to members. I am aware of the Paulette Cooper incident. It was an something called Operation Freakout. Paulette Cooper was taking classes to research Scientology. Since she was involved in Scientology she might be declared fair game. I do not believe the policy of fair game is still in effect, but that does not preclude other aggressive policies. As concerning these alleged court cases, I need copies of original documents. Many of the court cases on the internet about Sci are uncertified transcripts. Can you provide me with certified transcripts or copies of original court documents?
If Scientology has evidence to refute the documents that have been entered into court cases it would be wise of them to release it publicly rather than hold it secret only for those people it lures off the street.  How can anyone refute what is in their secret “truth” book if no one can have a copy of the “truth?”

Yes, I have had copies of the written orders.  We had an extensive collection of Hubbard material at the LMT but no I don’t have a copy to send you right now nor the time to search for items which have been well documented for decades.  However, the Fair Game documents have been used by many major news organizations from 60 Minutes to the L.A. Times, Time Magazine, the BBC and beyond.  NO WHERE has Scientology refuted the content of the documents, only arguing the ridiculous notions that you gave to Anonymous.
Paulette Cooper NEVER took classes to research her book “The Scandal of Scientology.”  Another lie told to you by Scientology.  But if she had, that would not excuse their attempts to have her jailed, locked in a mental institution or driven to suicide.

Frankly, I’m shocked that you would represent yourself as some type of expert, presenting papers, creating a website touting yourself as a reliable source, when you so ill-informed on the topic of Scientology.

So how did your conversion come about?  In a google search, I see you describe yourself as a former deprogrammer.  There are pictures of you protesting JW with Silent Lambs, and as late as 2007, you are still against child abuse in JW:
Now your empty site suggests a turnaround.

What do you mean by ‘empty site?’
Click on most of your links and see a placeholder ‘This is where you would put your content’ message.
Hi Mark,
I check my current site at The links work. I have no idea which site you are referring to, probably some old site I had
Here’s what viewers see for the NeopagansScientology and Human Rights links.
What I said was that Anonymous has put you in some sort of leadership position. I also corrected my self and reworded it. Remember, I said, “I actually want to correct something I said?  My web site has actually been inactive for quite some time. I have not been actively promoting it. As you may see it is not done.   Neopagans, Scientology and Human Rights links do not comprise  “virtually every link.”  There has been no one on it for quite some time. Look at its stats. I am not trying to overwhelm you. Lets stick the Scientology. Please stop using ad hominems to discredit me.
I’m sorry but so far I am not impressed by your arguments nor have you provided me any of the documentation you yourself demand.

After your second email to me, I wondered who you were so I did a quick google and found your site, your photos showing your and your wife at a Silent Lambs protest, notices about you presenting a lecture on religious minorities in the UK at some sort of conference and more.
I would have expected you who wanted to chastise me for being the leader of Anonymous to at least have done a quick google and found out some basic facts about me.  It’s not hard.
BTW, you mentioned Anonymous knew your wife’s name and found that spooky.  Her name was on your photo collection from the Silent Lambs protest.  There is nothing spooky about a google search.
Please try to support whatever you choose to say or I see little reason to continue.  It is not an ad hominem attack to ask you to at least do as much as you demand of me.  For a purported scholar and a person whose site chooses to defend Scientology as a minority religion, you are falling short and I can see why Anonymous gave you little credence.
I have asked you to provide me with documentation for just the claim that you made about Fair Game and you have failed so far to do so.  I on the other hand gave you documented evidence that your site has dead links to major sections when you claimed otherwise.  It’s not my fault your site is inactive.  Your email said:
“Check out my web site at:
It did not say, “And look at the lousy stats and by the way, many links show the site has not even been constructed yet.”
Please, you can do better than this.

Hi Mark,
I hope you understand my position on finding documents. I am trying to get into graduate school, and have already written level academic papers. I am trying to to academic level research. I need authenticated and/or primary documentation. Uncertified transcripts or simply saying what the document allegedly says, as some sci critical sites have done, is not acceptable
So far you have charged me with being the leader of Anonymous, were unaware that the LMT closed six years ago and not even aware of what is on or not on your site.  Your research thus far has not overwhelmed me.
And one more thing:

I need to re-emphasize that I have only researched Fair Game thus far so to judge me base on whether I know about some Sci critic org like the LMT I consider unfair assessment. Anyway, give me a couple of days. I will provide my documentation. I would appreciate any primary documentation that adds to and sheds like on what I have

At this point, I have to admit I was tiring of the exchange.  I understand not everything on the net is verfied truth but when decades of reporting has all pointed to something like Fair Game being an actual document that has been verified as true and entered into court cases, that is good enough for me.  I’ve seen the originals.  I know what they say and what Scientology says about them.

Do your own research.  I have a full time job in TV news.  I can’t waste any more time on you.  I haven’t seen you provide me with one authenticated and/or primary documentation from Scientology to refute information that has been in the record for decades yet you seem to believe whatever nonsense they tell you.
So from now on, only argue points on which you provide me with authenticated and/or primary documentation and not ‘you were taken into an Org and shown a magic truth book.’
I think we were lied to about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.  “What’s that President Bush?  We weren’t lied to?”  Okay.  I got it from the source.  It must be true.
Good luck to you.

And one more thing:

I need to re-emphasize that I have only researched Fair Game thus far so to judge me base on whether I know about some Sci critic org like the LMT I consider unfair assessment. Anyway, give me a couple of days. I will provide my documentation. I would appreciate any primary documentation that adds to and sheds like on what I have

Let’s go back to the very first message your sent me:
“Dear Mr. Bunker,
“I would like to know if you are the man who let those dogs named Anonymous out of there cages? I beleive the answer t be ‘Yes.’”
If you had done even the slightest, tiniest bit of research you would have discovered that I am the one who said, “Don’t do Illegal things” and helped reform at least a large faction of the group:
So you ask me not to judge you?  You have yet to back up ONE of your statements.

I am aware of what i said. I am aware of what you said  about illegal things. I have a copy of the vid.  I also said later in a email I said the following: “I actually want to correct something I said. Originally I said, “Unfortunately for you, Anonymous has unknowingly made your their leader, Wise Beard Man.” I actually don’t feel you are the Leader, but they have put you in some sort of leadership status. If you want to call it being a sage, that’s fine; but you are still a leader in the Anonymous movement.”

Yes I have backed up some of my statements. I keep referring earlier emails correcting what you said. And again I refer back to what I said. You have so far accused me of this and that, and I keep referring back to things i said in earlier email to correct what you said. So don’t lecture me about research.
If you have to resort to attacking character rather than content, it is plain character assassination. As you notice, I have responded to every accusation you label against by attacking the content of what you said rather than your character.

I’m commenting on your lack of research, not your lack of character.  And calling me a leader in the Anonymous movement is an incorrect statement.  I do not control their actions, nor their activities.  I am someone that many of them seem to think has had some interesting things to say for the past ten years about Scientology and that my suggestions of non-violence, legal actions have merit.
You should be thanking me for tempering the group and so should Scientology.
Now, until you produce documents that support your arguments, this seems like a silly waste of time.
I will stand side by side with Paulette Cooper, Gabe Cazares and Bob Minton and show them my support.  You feel free to stand with the people who viciously assaulted these people’s characters and ran covert operations to destroy them.  There’s some real examples of character assassination, not the harmless comments I have made to you in these e-mails.

I am not standing with Scientology. I am aware of the character assassination that goes on in Scientology (e.g. Religious Freedom Watch). That fact that you have some kind of leadership status in Anonymous is not incorrect. You sure seem to be some kind of leader or spokesperson ( You say that you do not control their actions, and yet say I should be thanking you for tempering the group. You automatically labeled me as being with “them.” Also stop mirroring what I am saying. I ask you for documents. You tell me that  you do not have the time. Then you try to mirror what i said and ask me for my documents.

I am not going to debate with you about character assassination. If you refer to the researcher rather than the research, its an ad hominem attack.
I might actually have added documentation in the future that might change my current opinion of some of Scientology’s tactics, but my opinion of you is pretty much set. You, sir, are a pompous asshole! You are right. This is a waste. This started out as a pleasant discussion, but it seems you have labeled me as being with “them.”

You have accused me of defending Scientology by considering them a minority religion. Good or bad, they are still a religious group. I am not defending Scientology. I am interpreting the information I currently have. I might acquire more information in the future. I might actually find a document that states specifically what you claim about Fair Game. My research is far from over. You are obviously not going to help me with that. Even if i come to some realization that Scientology is an evil, dangerous group, you will still be that pompous little asshat that tried to play games with me
Did I say you were with “them?”  You are putting words in my mouth.  I said you were willing to stand with them and support the notion of Fair Game.  You are twisting my words.
You demand documents yet offer none of your own.  I expect you to make a good faith effort to live up to what you demand of others.
You show me a videotape in which I speak about Scientology’s phony baloney fear of Scientology and say that somehow that makes me a leader or spokesman.  If I had made a video about the Bush administration’s shredding of the constitution would that have made me the head of the Democratic Party?
You call me a pompous asshole yet call yourself a lofty human rights advocate by the name of John Bowen Brown II?  I knew a Joseph W. Blow IV and you know what, he called himself Joe Blow.  Name changed to protect the Joe.
Scientology is a minority religion.  I have never said otherwise.  People are welcome to believe any wacky thing they want.  All I ask is that Scientology stop lying about what it believes.  For example, they say it has nothing to do with Xenu and space aliens and such and now you can hear in Hubbard’s own voice the truth:
Fresh on the internet thanks to Anonymous.  Understand this, I support people’s right to believe Xenu blew them up in a volcano.  It is after all why Hubbard put an exploding volcano on the cover of Dianetics from the mid-60’s on.  I only ask that Scientology not lie about it.  Not too big a thing to request.
We did start our pleasantly.  If you hadn’t behaved in such a rude manner, chastising me from the gitgo, demanding court stamped originals of documents that every major news organization has already verified for decades, we could have continued in that manner.
It might be very constructive for people to see our entire exchange on my blog.  Do I have your permission as a public human rights advocate who specializes in minority religions to post our exchanges unedited?

O blah blah blah blah, pompous asshole. Sure you can use our correspondences, provided that you use them in their entirety with out commentary. People can make up their own minds. I actually feel privileged that you are going to try to go public with our correspondences. Yes my real name is John Bowen Brown II.  I use my full name because of how many Johan Browns there are in Tucson alone, let alone the country (my dad’s name included). Come to Tucson. I am here. What point is there to insulting my name? If you want to think that calling me a human rights activist is lofty that is your opinion. Like I said earlier with the title academic, human rights activists are people too. There’s not anything lofty about it

That video is only one example that suggests you are have leadership status
You said, “For a purported scholar and a person whose site chooses to defend Scientology as a minority religion…”

I was not rude to you in asking for documentation. Do I need to refer back to that email too. My initial email might have been a little rude,  but i corrected myself in a later email. You, sir, are an ass hole. You can quote me on that.
New Email
Also lying about the Xenu belief is a rather small thing compared to fair game. I could care less whether they lie about the Xenu. I am more concerned if they are lying about fair game. We were never talking about Xenu. Thanks for the vid. Its interesting—LULZ
New email
I mentioned our correspondences on my blog.
New Email
Sorry forgot the link

So in the end is Mr. John Bowen Brown II even who he says he is?  Or was the whole charade a Scientology-style suitable guise?    Pretending to not know my history with Anonymous and then having Anonymous Watch be his blog.  Nice.

How can you say that I pretended like I did not know about your history with Anonymous when that I was why I approached you the first place?
It would have been better to just make the emails available in a document like I did rather than posting 40 + email that are God knows how many pages that is.
Gees your dumb.
Most people are not going to want to read that much on the internet.

19 Replies to “Fan Mail From Some Flounder”

  1. I read it all. Every line. And I absolutely made my opinion on who the Asshole is. Bad reputation for a guy that wants to watch anonymous “crimes”. But as Anonymous is called a lofty human rights group by some, I (as part of this group) hope he will not be replaced, degraded and RPFd for that.

  2. Haha laughed my ass off.
    Poor boy trying to fuck with WBM.
    Epic fail guy that Brown is and his blog is like Scientology driven by statistics. I dont consider this as important enough to research whether his stated stats are true or not.
    If he would be a Scientologist he would be the best proof that the Tech fails.

  3. “I am trying to get into graduate school, and have already written level academic papers”
    I have to sort through a stack of these pretentious idiots who apply every year. At least I keep the correspondence PhD programs in business…

  4. Me thinks his train of thought has derailed…many times.
    Yes, if you’re not doing anything Mark, I’d like some certified copies of those alleged court cases too and a large coffee with cream and sugar. I’m too busy interviewing Xenu and reading “Scientology for Dummies”.

  5. I read the whole thing, (for the record). And, the guy comes off as a total loser. Just the sort of self-important, overly gullible and aggressive lout that is PERFECT for Scientology’s Sea Org ranks. Good luck on that C&D letter. Might be worth having your attorney draft one of his own, since he seems to be the one initiating the conversation.

  6. By asking WBM to provide Joe Blow with these certified copies would that not make it appear that WBM does indeed have a role or responsibility to speak for Anonymous??? A Grad student cannot obtain these documents with his own resources?? Ummmm ya…

  7. Mmmmm – I think John Brown will end up in Scientology. They will keep working on him & as he already has sympathy for them & not much for those they’ve crucified, he seem like perfect pickings to me. By the way, you don’t have to be an aggressive lout to be perfect for the sea org – it’s more….mostly youngish & very idealistic people whose ideals get co-opted, that are prime candidates. So inherently very good people (but the abused can become the abusers in some cases, mores the pity!).

  8. John Bowen Brown IS deluded has a history of homelessness and major psych issues severe enough that he cannot hold a drivers lic.
    He actually fantasies he is some kind of crusader of John Brown University where he is a “professor” He should be considered dangerous and may own firearms has a history of stalking harassment.
    Police please take notice.

  9. I think every comment about John B. Brown is correct I unfortunetly know him quite well and also have recieved a letter from his so called attorneys to stop talking about him……duh! Never gave him another thought until he started to contact me after years of not hearing from him. I blocked him from my e-mail account and he used a fack name to get to me. Hoping this guy is gone for good in my life.

  10. Mark,
    Stop engaging this nutjob. Seriously. It’s a waste of your time. As one unknown sage once said:
    “Don’t argue with a fool. They’ll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *