Slashdot Mirror

Because the church of scientology is enormously wealthy, and has a lot of rich and powerful members, they successfully censor and defame Scientology critics over and over. The Church of Scientology has been subject of credible accusation of human trafficking, and has harassed critics of the church (see "Operation Freakout"). It has infiltrated government agencies (see operation snow white) for which several scientologists, including hubbards wife were conficted. Scientologists consider enemies of the church to be "fair game", by which they mean that attacks on opponents of the church fall outside Scientology ethics. For example, in "Penalties for Lower Conditions", Hubbard states that opponents who are "fair game" may be "deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.". Some months later Hubbard recinded this policy saying: "The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations. This [policy letter] does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP.". Read the language carefully...

The church actively, aggressively, and very successfully courts celebrities, which gives the church a veneer of legitimacy, and successfully spreads their word. A non-violent, extra-legal attack like that by Anonymous can be seen as an act of civil disobedience, in which a large group of relatively poor and powerless (compared to the COS) individuals break laws in order to strike back at a more powerful institution which is enormously harmful. Presumably the main purpose of the attack is generating interest in the evils of Scientology, i.e. using extralegal means to combat their giant, well funded propaganda machine. Considering the well-document, harmful nature of the COS, I would assume that this is the reasoning of Dr. Evil.

You are mistaken on several counts. One is that they do imprison people, as described by numerous former members at http://www.scientology-lies.com/imprisonment.html. Some members are kept confined at "Flag Base" without correspondence, telephone contact, or any information from the outside world.

The other is that the "consent" of many victims of Scientology is not "informed consent". The auditing sessions, well-documented as hypnotic conditioning with a lie detector, are used to condition new members to acceptance of the group's beliefs and claims, and acceptance of the group's treatment, without informing the victim of the genuine costs or the actual potential benefits of the treatment, or the risks of loss of income, loss of family, and in some cases such as http://www.lisamcpherson.org/ loss of life.

Worse, this cult _preys_ on the mentally ill, at Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, at prisons, and other venues, by offering physical and mental health and fraudulently lying about psycho-active medication and treatments from professionals from behind its front, the "Citizen's Commission on Human Rights". They're nasty: removing their non-profit status would be a good step towards forcing them to open up their books, pay off various court judgments against them, and tracing where the money and the people went. In particular, it would make the "auditing folders" part of business records that could be easily subpoenaed.

Ex-Scientology kids is designed, owned, and operated by three young women who grew up in Scientology, and later left the Church.
A forum for Anonymous Protests against Scientology Signed appropriately, Anonymous We do not forgive, We do not forget, Expect Us.

A cult is a small, unpopular religion.

A religion is a large, popular cult.

By the strict sociological/anthropological definition, yes, that is true. (Well, sort of: if the small religion broke off a larger religion it's a sect and the correct term for a large religion is church).

But out side of academia, the word cult has a very different meaning. It implies, lieing, brainwashing, abuse, and other illegal activities. Scientology certainly falls in this category. It has violated the majority of the fundamental rights outlined by the UN Declaration of Human Rights. They have killed (eg) and invaded governments (eg). They use what essentially amounts to slavery.

Yes, other major religions have done this in the past. In fact, one notes a pattern to these sort of things: one sees religion participate in these sort of things when it becomes entangled with political or economic interests. The often forgot half of the separation of Church and State is that it protects religion from politics.

Yes, nuts have used other religions as a justification to do ${immoral act} but this is fundamentally different from a church sanctioned and led activity. And these nuts would've found some other justification...

How much faith did Lisa MacPherson have in Scientology when they murdered her?

Have you always worshipped murderers?

Regardless of whether all cults are nuts, Scientology are clearly organized criminals masquerading as a religion (cult, by popular definition), and it is pathetic that the US allows their ridiculous charade to persist.

If real entheogenic religions that use naturally occurring substances are denied First Amendment protection, why is such an obvious front for murder and extortion provided an undeserved safe haven under the same right?

Dare I say: "F*** Scientology and F*** the UK (who forfeited their right to be considered a free society many years ago)?

No. I dare not say it in this politically correct police state, now, do I?

for more info, check these out http://www.lisamcpherson.org/ - she was murdered by scientologists in 1995 http://www.scientology.org/ - they try to look so innocent http://www.churchofmyconology.com/ - hilarious parody or scientology.org (posted anonymously so they don't try to sue me)

Something you have to understand is that Scientologists _know_ they have the answers to everything (because L. Ron Hubbard said so). If a member has any doubts, then they're "out of ethics" and have to report for additional training (at their expense). The CoS does not use the same meaning of the word ethics that you or I would. To them, ethics is doing and believing exactly what you're told. If you don't understand something, or have questions, then you are assumed to simply not understand the material; because if you did understand the material, you wouldn't have any questions.

The organization is set up so that it slowly isolates members from normal society, both physically but also mentally. Everything the CoS teaches becomes the truth and any conflicting information is actively ignored. The group as a whole forms a sort of feedback loop whereby members receive positive affirmation from the group when they do, experience or feel something the CoS wants them to feel regardless of whether or not it's true. This is why some people claim that Scientology has helped them, it's not because of the "tech", it's because they feel acceptance and safety within that group.

The church has several ways of dealing with dissent and criticism. The first is by declaring someone a suppressive person, or SP. SPs are considered to be very, very evil people as they're trying to suppress or prevent the CoS from saving mankind (yes, that's their stated mission). People who leave the church, or people outside of the church that are trying to talk someone into leaving are "declared" SP which means that Scientologists are forbidden from speaking to them about anything meaningful. If you're a Scientologist and someone is an SP it doesn't matter whether or not they're your father, mother, brother or daughter, they're dead to you. The second way is through their "fair game" doctrine which basically states that the CoS will not punish a member for anything they do towards an SP, be it harassment, extortion, assault or murder.

David Touretzky (yes, _that_ Touretzky) has some great information about Scientology available on his homepage. There's a fantastic article available that describes exactly how someone gets sucked into the cult, little by little. Note I say cult and not religion because the CoS _is_ a cult. They simply call themselves a religion in order to attempt to shield themselves from "interference" from government and to take advantage of IRS tax breaks (so they can keep more money). In addition, they have members sign contracts that absolve the church of any responsibility should something like you dying from their Introspection Rundown happen. Check out this contract they have you sign. Pay particular attention to this sentence,

I understand, acknowledge and agree that the Introspection Rundown addresses only the individual's spiritual needs and I freely consent, without reservation, and without condition or limitation, to Church members conducting the Introspection Rundown, and that I accept and assume all known and unknown risks of injury, loss, or damage resulting from my decision to participate in the Introspection Rundown and specifically absolve all persons and entities from all liabilities of any kind, without limitation, associated with my participation or their participation in my Introspection Rundown.

Notice it says "only the individual's spiritual needs", which means that it doesn't meet your physical needs and you can die from their "ritual" like Lisa McPherson did.

I could go on and on about things like church members being locked into compounds with patrolling armed guards, related organizations like Narconon treating drug abuse problems with long saunas and megadoses of niacin or actual proved conspiracies like Operation Snow White and Operation Freakout, but I'd prefer the reader follow some of the links I provided and educate themselves.

Re the "tax-free status." Do a little home work on HOW Scientology got its tax exempt status. (This article doesn't mention if the then President and John Travolta spent time together.)

You are in for a surprise.

http://www.lisamcpherson.org/irs/jeff-irs.htm

And while you're at it, acquaint yourself with Lisa McPherson.

If that so-called "mosque" was allegedly responsible for the deaths of several of their members, then yes, I would say you were justified in picketing.

He was picketing because of the death of Lisa McPherson. But you know that and now so do those who choose to read the links.

Right, and person X didn't die because of being shot, but because his heart stopped beating. One can always draw meaningless distinctions of causality.

If Lisa McPherson (to pick one example) had not joined Scientology, she would probably be alive today. The people culpable for her death would not have treated her as they did were it not for their "religion". Therefore we can reasonably say that it killed her.

BTW, a new photo of what CoS seems to have done to the Lisa McPherson memorial brick. scroll down a little

What about a large number of privately owned cameras in a downtown area, among other things positioned to read the licence plates of people stopping at intersections? Yes, I guess surrendering that downtown area to this group could be done.

Don't worry! Now that Scientology is trying to increase their presense in Tampa, I'm sure that they'll add cameras like their 100+ in Clearwater.

Clearwater Florida has had a system for years. Since it's owned by Scientology, you'd have to ask them how many criminals it's spotted and what laws they broke.

They have several vault sites where they keep the works of Elron Hubbard preserved. Quite elaborate and expensive. Seems redundant, you can find all the used copies of Dianetics and Battlefield Earth you could ever want at 2nd hand books stores.

The Catholic Church has never been comparable to Scientology.

Well, Scientologists don't burn people alive.

True, they don't. They much prefer to do this kind of thing to people instead.

The law is available to everyone, for whatever purpose.

You need to talk to your crack dealer. Whatever he's cutting your supply with is making you hallucinate something fierce.

Reality check. This shit DOES happen.
http://www.lisamcpherson.org/

I guess that from the perspective of the Church of Scientology the good thing about BE would have been that it was going to be this highly succesful film that would make Hubbard a household name as a "bestselling" science fiction author rather than being known a the wacko that started that UFO cult Travolta and a few other celebrities are in. This is, of course, the same reason the church had put such a great effort years ago into publishing the BE book and the gigantic Mission Earth 10 volume series that followed (the Mission Earth series was also known as a doorstop --you should be able to find it in the shelves of most libraries). And this is why the church engaged in their book buying campaigns (as was previously also the case with Dianetics) to artificially push these books into the bestseller lists (so it is actually true that LRH did produce bessellers with these books). It is all a matter of bringing prestige and exalting the name of the founder.

Anyway, the good thing about BE is that it failed to exalt L. Ron Hubbard's name as hoped by the church. If anything, he is known more than ever before as that guy that started the UFO cult; plus he is known as the author of that book that was turned into that awful science fiction movie with John Travolta. Not the great P.R. they were hoping for (which would have been very welcome to undo some of the bad P.R. stemming from the church's killing of Lisa McPherson).

One of the longest running free-speech issues on the Net has been between the Church of Scientology and the numerous CoS debunking sites such as Xenu.net. The CoS has vigorously pursued anyone who publishes their secret processes on the internet - they are ruthless, fearless, and most importantly to anyone meaning to host something offshore, they have a NAVY (and Tom Cruise to boot!) If you are truly sovereign, then along with the rights of a sovereign nation come the responsiblities - such as defending yourself from intruders. One of the first groups to seek refuge on your haven will be the Scientology resistance, and you will soon be pitted against Ron's Navy.

Which brings me to my question: Do you have any plans on implementing true physical countermeasures, such as phased-array radar, anti-aircraft weaponry, and hardened gun emplacements?

You state your opinion as fact - that Scientology is not a religion. [...] You are far more frightening in the narrowness of your vision than Scientology is.

Hmmm, I think I'm feeding a troll, but I'll bite just in case.

Scientology is a "fake religion" in the sense that the guy who set it up and the people running it now almost certainly didn't and don't believe what they tell people. A lot of what the CoS says about him is a pack of lies.

Convictions total about seven and they are for "stealing xerox paper" or some other crap.

Lisa McPherson was covered in bruises and left dehydrated for days - in a Scientology "Hotel"! See photos of the autopsy on the Web if you like.

When it screws up, religion should be bashed for it. There's nothing wrong with bashing religion, some of it is ridiculous to me, but that's alright; the problem is religions which are blatantly pathological... take scientology. This cult has caused more trouble than comes to enough, and there are many clam fronts around whining about the lack of religious tolerance for their ridiculous beliefs... I would consider ridiculous any argument which says I should respect the quackery of a dangerous psycho-group such as Scn'gy. Sure, respect the people based on their own actions, not by their beliefs; but religions, like political beliefs are Fair Game. People are not, but unfortunately Scientology hasn't grasped this fact. (Scientology's Fair Game Policy)

However, before I piss everybody off totally, where religion does work, it should be congratulated for it. Yes, religion, and Christianity has done a lot of damage to a lot of people; but they have changed over time, and have come to do a lot of good -- look at liberation theology, widespread social programs, etc. I'm still going to bash churches and religions for bigoted behavior, they deserve it because their position is rationally indefensible; I'm still going to bash the RC chuch for its position on contraception because it causes great suffering through increasing poverty and aiding spread of disease; but I will also acknowledge the good that they do as well. Not to do so would be a very sorry form of hypocrisy.

www.xenu.net
Lisa McPherson