Slashdot Mirror
Scientology Critic Flees U.S. Over Usenet Posts, Pickets
"Religious bigotry will not be tolerated in Riverside County," was a Scientology spokesperson's reaction to the verdict.
That's basically the problem right there. The First Amendment gives me the right to be a bigot as long as I don't hurt or threaten anyone. You don't have to like my opinions, but you do have to tolerate them.
If you've ever hung out in an online forum, you'll probably get deja vu reading this Usenet thread. The first message posted is a description of cruising past some Scientology related buildings, complete with GPS coordinates for whatever reason. It's written as a self-mocking, satirical sendup of spy movies. The remainder of the thread is jokes in the same vein.
The question is whether this running gag about "Tom Cruise Missile Coordinates" (get it?) could be taken seriously enough to qualify as a threat under Section 11415 of the California Penal Code.
As I read the recently-passed law, if you go along with the jokes about the "handheld laser guidance system," you might be a terrorist:
Any person who knowingly threatens to use a weapon of mass destruction [including] by means of an electronic communication device, is to be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out ...
The fact that the person who allegedly violated this section did not actually possess a biological agent, toxin, or chemical weapon does not constitute a defense to the crime specified in this section.
The victim of said terrorism must have been in "sustained fear" of the threat being carried out. And how does the law know your victim was in sustained fear? Because he or she evacuated the building -- or took "any other action."
Here's what Henson says. In this case, the Scientology organization's legal team managed to bar any evidence from being presented about why Henson was picketing the Scientology location (because of two unusual deaths within a month).
Nor was the context of the above thread, or context of Henson's other Usenet posts, allowed to be introduced. For example, the jury could not see the context of the above thread; they only saw Henson's contribution to the running gag:
Modern weapons are accurate to a matter of a few tens of yards. The terminal guidence ones are good to single digits.
Of the next quote, the jury was only allowed to see the first sentence, not the second:
The only way I can get clear of this scientology mess is to "destroy them utterly." So: This week I will be back picketing gold base.
And you can decide what you think his third quote means, but again you have the advantage of its context being just a click away:
PPS Killing the organization off entirely is the best way to change the future of Scientology.
Worse still, according to Henson's at-the-time lawyer, whether these statements caused fear in some Scientologists was decided not by the statements he actually made, but by hearsay versions they got from others. He points out that Scientology's censorware package ("Scienositter") would have blocked the original Usenet posts anyway:
...cult members, who are not allowed access to the Internet and are actively prevented (by the Church of Scientology "net nanny") from reading the newsgroups on which Henson posts, may have an unreasonable and irrational fear based on unreasonable and out of context statements of which they were informed selectively, but which they did not read.
So picture Keith Henson's situation. He feels strongly about his particular cause. He peacefully carries a picket sign. He exercises his First Amendment right to post on Usenet about what he's doing and why -- and in so doing he uses sentences and phrases which, in context, clearly are not threats, but out of context could be construed that way.
Dragged into court, all context is stripped away and -- while he narrowly escapes conviction as a domestic terrorist -- he is convicted of using the threat of force against people who may never have actually read what he wrote.
If you're smart, you'll take Henson's case as a warning. You'll think about what your own statements would look like, with their context totally removed, and in the harsh spotlight of a courtroom. Do you really need to post that joke, or wouldn't the judge find it funny?
You'll soften up your opinions just a little, trying not to change what you mean while trying to change what you could be twisted to mean.
Maybe it's not such a great loss for you or me; we're not great writers anyway, and if we censor ourselves before hitting Save, maybe that's not the end of the world. We weren't really going to use that First Amendment right anyway, you know?
But somewhere out there is a Mark Twain who's had it up to here and is poised to pen a caustic attack on a religion which will become an important classic. As of yesterday, Mark's a bit more likely to live in Canada.
I think you probably don't know, because otherwise you'd understand! The Scientologists sue absolutely anybody they can, for whatever reason, often without any grounds at all. Yet they throw enough money and effort at it, that they win a disproportionate amount of times.
I can only say, go to http://www.xenu.net. Read. Marvel at it.
posted as a/c because I have the fear.
Even the good slashdotters ? C'mon .. cant you just target first posters and trolls ?
Then again, they're probably sitting in some server room, overworked and overpaid, making sure an NT box isn't crashing.
(Hitchhiker's Guide Voice) This is, of course, impossible.
The jury got even less of the story. The word Scientology was not even allowed to be used in the case, let alone any evidence of their history of legal abuses or the well known Fair Game policy.
Yep. The black robes have so far removed juries from their duties. Join and support the Fully Informed Jury Association and try and help reverse this trend!
There's a mirror of nearly all the pages extracted from the google cache and stitched together at http://www.geocities.com/hensonmirror/. Including a zip of all the files at http://www.geocities.com/hensonmirror/henson.zip
then he just committed a crime. One that he cannot blame on the Church, the United States or anyone else.
Silencing himself by being pigeonholed in the California prisons doesn't serve his cause, and neither does allowing an organization of questionable intent to manipulate his life with the help of tactical litigation and accusation.
Look, if you believe in your rights, stand up for them.
I believe he just did.
Of course, white juries also let white murderers of black people get off scott free because they judged that it was no "real crime" to kill a n*****. It cuts both ways, you know.
Er, ACs aren't "members," right?
You're confusing things. The Catholic Church and the Christian Coalition have nothing to do with each other. Some Catholics may be members of the Coalition, but it is not even remotely connected with the Catholic Church.
In fact, the Catholic heirarchy discourages those with positions of authority (priests, etc.) from running for political office. This is not to say that political advocacy is not encouraged. Priests and other such ministers have so many other obligations that holding a political office is simply impossible.
They have these things because they're needed, not because they're scams. If no one was accoutable for the money, how would it get doled out to the right people? Not to mention that churches are made up of fallible people, so embezzlement would almost certainly be more prevalent than it is. Also, the government requires record-keeping for tax purposes, even for tax-exempt organizations.
Good. :)
If you honestly believe that, I think you are dangerously uninformed about Scientology. Have a look at Operation Clambake and spread the word!
Why? A legitimate religious organization should not have to pay taxes. If they did, the government would have control over religious activities. Think about taxes applied to religious actions we don't like -- a "religious sin tax," if you will :). Such an ammendment alteration would be dangerous.
If a particular "church" sells items to fund vacations, it is acting fradulently and should be prosecuted.
It's not an either/or situation. Scientology is not a religion and should not be a tax-exempt religious organization. What's lacking is information in the right hands.
--
The article harps on and on about how these quotes were taken out of context, yet isn't it the job of the defendant's lawyer to give context to those quotes (and to explain his clients actions and why these threats were not real?)
I'm by no means a fan of $cientology, but I have the strange feeling I'm only getting 1/2 the story here. Certainly his lawyer should have explained that the usenet posts were a joke and the jury shouldn't have given it a second thought (the post in the google archive isn't terribly threatning IMHO, you'd need see-through thin skin to be affected by it). All in all, something just isn't adding up here.
Down that path lies madness. On the other hand, the road to hell is paved with melting snowballs.
I read the internet for the articles.
"Be full of faith", and "seek truth" are incompatible goals.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Having faith in something and being right totally by accident is not how one seeks the truth. One seeks the truth by NOT engaging in faith. Columbus' trip was not based on faith. It had already been proven mathematically that the world was a sphere. In fact, if anything Columbus's faith was a faith that the world was small enough to make his trip short, a faith that was proven to be incorrect later. The fact that the world was a sphere was already known. In fact, the greeks had even made an experiment to measure how big the earth was, by extrapolating from the curve of the sea surface. (Put a stick of known hieght a great distance away (or use a ship's mast), than see how far away you get before the top of the stick is lost behind the horizon. Using this, it can be determined how tightly the surface is curved, and if you assume the world is spherical, you can figure out how big around it is from just that fragment. Using this primative technique, the Greeks got a figure that was only about 5% off from what we know today. Very smart people. Columbus's faith COUNTERED this fact, with his assumption that the world was much smaller. In fact, the notion that his exploration was opposed because people thought the world was flat is a myth. His expedition found opposition because learned scholars were telling him the world was MUCH bigger than he had guessed, and they (not he) were right. Columbus is damn lucky there was a continent out there in the way or he'd have died.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Now, as to your second point, even if Canadian colonists were participating, it still wouldn't be the same sort of thing. They declared themselves to be fighting for the Brits, under their army, under their command. The official start of the US as a country was the signing of the declaration of independance, in 1776, which occurred a few years after the fighting began, but well before it was over. Before that declaration, the war was a *set* of splinter groups fighting, that hadn't even declared themselves to be a single entity yet, and the thirteen colonies had no connection to each other at all. New Jersey and New York were just as "foreign" to each other as Maine and Nova Scotia. The signing of that document is what declared the 13 colonies to be one federated nation, and that's why it's the start of the US as a country. The fact that the war wasn't over yet is not relevant. Britain *declared* that the US was still just a set of colonies, but Britain wasn't really in charge phyiscally. They just held a few cities. (And held them well, and won most battles, but in the end it didn't matter because at the time the US was largely agricultural and could function on the large amount of land the Brits were ignoring.)
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
If you ignore the rest of the world and look at just the US and Canada, then it might look like the US started the war of 1812. But if you look at the world, the war of 1812 was merely an expansion of US/British hostilities that actually began at sea, over British trade blockades.
(And if you look at the whole Western Hemisphere, and not just the US/Canada border, the war of 1812 was a draw. No land changed hands, even though both sides tried taking over land. (The US tried invading into some British land (called Canada), and the British tried invading into the south of the US, near New Orleans. Both of these failed. The US capitol buildings were burned (but the city was not held by the British. They just burned some buildings and left.), but at the same time the US Did get what it wanted in the end, which was open trade in the Western Hemisphere. (The war was started over the British Colonial practice of forbidding trade between British colonies and anyone other than Britain herself. It was illegal to sell US goods to British colonies (both Canadian and Carribiean) and visa versa, and THAT was the issue that sparked the war.)
If you seriously think that the skirmishes along the US/Canadian border were the ONLY part of the war of 1812, then I see how you might have gotten your skewed view.
You can't ignore the fact that Canada was British in 1812. That's the only reason why any fighting occurred at all across the US/Canada border.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Fact: The war of 1812 was fought between the US and the British.
Fact: The British made use of their vast colony known as "Canada" as a place to fight the US from (instead of trying to do it from across the sea).
Conclusion: The Canadians didn't burn the white house down. The British did. Despite Canadian patriotic claims to the contrary, the US has NEVER been to war with the nation known as Canada. In 1812, there was NO such thing as a nation called "Canada" yet. The name "Canada" referred to a vast array of British colonies in the north.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Get out! Scientologists abusing people through the legal system?! How dare you make such accusations?! I can't believe any of this garbage. People should stop being religious bigots and accept Scientology for the well meaning organization that it is.
just what I needed today, bombardment with cruddy televisions and uncomfortable japanese bedding . . .
P>
hawk
If you can't beat em. Join em. Right?
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
I'm curious to know why you believe Discordianism is a made up religion. Although I am not a Discordian, I do know enough about the Principia Discordia and the beliefs of the religion to know that you should _not_ base your opinion on the perversions of it that you see in the news media. Seeing rebel stoners claiming holy war on others is not what Discordianism is about. Indeed, Malaclypse the Younger was all for peace and love. Read a little before you just lump it in with every religion.
Your point is valid in a lot of other ways though, a belief system is a belief system is a belief system. You'll still kill for it, you'll still put down others in it's defense.
Please do not lick this post.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
FACT: There are make-believe religions. (Scientology, Moonies, Islam, etc.)
:-)
FACT: There is true religion. (Christianity)
You're kidding, right? Right? I have friends who think Catholics are a cult... seems to me a "real" religion is in the eye of the practitioner. Or the IRS.
I've learned more than I'd like to know about Scientologists due to losing a girlfriend over their weirdness (I think they're total lunatics) but that doesn't make it a "fake" religion.
I mean really, next you'll be dissing Rastafarianism.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
> They have killed billions
Obviously not. Plenty have been killed, tortured, or "re-educated", but let's attempt to be realistic, eh?
> The philisophy of jesus was "Convert or Kill."
Hey, I'm the last guy around to defend the Christian Right, but that's simply not anywhere near true. It's not the philosophy of Jesus that's the problem, it's people who believe that God (tm) is somehow both all-powerful but and at the same time unable to take care of things without their help.
They've done plenty of evil to point out without having to overstate it.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
- Scientology is the only "religion" (at least in the US) that engages in these kinds of litigious tactics. Please don't blame "religion" in general for the actions of Scientology.
- There is considerable reason to believe that scientology was started as a joke and/or a business. Many countries (e.g. Germany) do not regard Scientology as a religion but as a business.
- By most accounts, one advances in Scientology by spending a lot of money. A Supreme Court case found that this money was not donations, but fee for service.
- Most of all, scientology is in no way affiliated with any world religion. Please don't hold us accountable for their errors.
Disclaimer: I am not an expert on Scientology, and the above statements are based on things I have heard said in other forums over the years.--
-- Slashdot sucks.
You right. Me wrong.
:(
Sory
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Asylum in Canada is an embarrassment to the US if it is granted. Canada is America's closest Neighbor and closest ali (Except for burning that building which had to be repainted and is now called "The White House").
Ordinary American citizens if asked to pick a justice system other than the US they would trust their fates to would likely select Britain or Canada.
Running away to Canada just splatters egg all over the face of the US system.
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
to kill all slashdot members with Phasers and Photon torpedos.
Vermifax
Vermifax
Logout
If you want the real truth about Scamatology, I strongly urg you to pick up the book Angry Candy by Harlan Ellison. Harlan Ellison was known to be a friend to L.Ron Hubbard early on in their lives and in this book of short stories, he writes a rather extensive forward, where he talks about the origins of the "church", and L.Ron Hubbard's actually opinions about what happened before he died. It was Ellison's effort to make amends/set the record straight for his friend and in some way, apologize for what happened.
If religious freedom allows for special exceptions under the law, why don't those who are critical of Scientology simply start their own religion? They would get the same protections and would be able to express their Jihad like statements under protection of religious freedom.
The BC NDP won seats?! Okay, what parallel universe have I wandered into this time?
I always thought the NBC style of warfare involved destruction of enemy morale by broadcasting horribly written sitcoms with worse acting.
If the recognized court of the government determines that he can not express his views on Scientology, then why wouldn't that be prosecution by the government? The court is merely the legal branch of the government in the United States.
This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U
You can condemn him to your heart's content. You can post to these newsgroups that he will burn in hell for being so bigoted and intolerant and offensive.
I would defend your right to do so, too. It's your opinion, you have the right to express that opinion, no matter how offinsive or misplaces it may be.
But it's not the place of the courts of California or any government to determine what speech in particular should or should not be condemned. That brings us right up the the looming cliff of Censorship, and once we go that way, there will be no going back.
If this case stands, Scientology will have legal grounds to have every non-apprived reference removed from the public eye. If that happens, any group can have anything removed that is offensive to them. ALl these Neo-nazi groups can have information on all the experiments that Himler oversaw removed, because they have nothing to do witht he Nazi political movement and detract from their message. Or orders from the Religious Right because I have pictures fo Diablo on my web page, and we all know that Diablo comes from the Latin for Satan.
Regardless of what you think about what he said, you can not claim that he should be subjected to this without me condemning you as a hypocrite.
This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U
Better yet, ROT26 (i.e.,ROT 13 twice), or even ROT 42.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
I'm pretty sure that you're a few wars off and that it was actually World War I (one).
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
We've had our problems with Scientology too: if memory serves: they were convicted of launching covert operations against the Toronto police, and had to pay ~4 million for attacking the prosecutor in that case.
davecb@spamcop.net
Is why was not all the usegroup posting allowed to be used in a court of law. That is like picking apart a man's speech and taking out only the sentences that you feel are threting instead of understanding the context they are stating in. To a much lesser degree My twin brother once told be something out of context he pick out the part that stuck out the must to him, but without hearing why it was said I was pissed.
This entire thing frightens me because it allows people to be wrongfuly convicted if they like to use metaphors.
I wonder if the reaction here to his supposed "hate crimes" and "threats" would be any different.
I strongly suspect that the majority of the posts here regarding Mr. Henson's innocence, or the "harmless threats" he made would be on the other side of the fence...
It's all a matter of "us" and "them".
--
Your Servant, B. Baggins
The "'Fire' in a crowded theatre" analogy was penned in a decision to imprison a peaceful protester whose only crime was to condemn the draft.
Anyone who talks about limiting your write to yell 'FIRE' is talking about limiting your right to peaceable protest. Remember that. The historical context should always remind us that so long as the pwerful and control-oriented can craft "reasonable limits," they will use them to stifle criticism.
--G
For example, the constitution as written addresses "intellictual property rights", and says congress has the power to guarantee them to authors and inventors "for limited times" (where "limited" has a legally significant meaning). The separation between that limit upon the power of Congress and current statutory law is an issue well worth addressing; if you believe the status quo to be preferable, then perhaps you have a consistent argument, but if not, it suggests that current statute and juris prudence are errant, not that the Constitution per se has a weakness.
One significant point on which I think the framers got it wrong was their mistrust of standing armies (see the 2-year appropriation limit), but even in that I see why they did it, and recognize that it was in many ways tied with the logistics of war in the day which are no longer applicable.
I'm curious which of the "first principles" enshrined in the constituion and its amendments you think are out of date and need replacement?
Speaking of the last point, Hubbard is quote as saying:
L. Ron Hubbard, Science of Survival
Now, Keith said the following in the USENET post:
You see, Keith was just quoting Scientology scripture. Any critic would have immediately "got" the joke. However, Scientology was able to act like their own scripture was coming out of Keith's mouth and try him on that. Furthermore, KEITH WAS NOT ALLOWED TO SAY WHERE THAT QUOTE CAME FROM!!!! The defense was under strict rules that none of Scientology's internal practices or even the name of the church he was picketing could be entered into evidence.
Scientology's abuse of the court system is scary. Remember people, these are the people who scared Slashdot with litigation. Not even Microsoft could do that!!!!!
---------------------------
That's not what I meant.
--
You can't ban them in the US anyway now that they have infiltrated your government at both local and federal levels.
Hopefully they'll be kicked out of France in a few months though. We'll throw a party.
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
Quotations from Ambrose Bierce's ``The Devil's Dictionary'' could be hazardous to your freedom as well.
Canada may not be a safe haven. Are we sure there aren't any obscure clauses in the NAFTA agreement that might apply here? And for the truly paranoid, there's this story on The Village Voice's web site.
--
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
There's something funny going on with this DA.
Why are they wasting time with this case, are they really afraid of some guy posting jokes on an newsgroup ? Obviously, he wasn't discussing plans to bomb anybody. This law is so unconstitutional it's not even funny.
- sigs are for wimps.
You are a bigot against geeks. Somebody put this guy into jail, he's threatening us, quick, quick !
- sigs are for wimps.
Well, I agree, but then again it wasn't you or me facing 200 days in jail and 5 years probation.
Also, this guy is bankrupt, guess why ?
- sigs are for wimps.
Did jurors didn't even know the "Church" in question here was Scientology.
They didn't even get to hear, why this guy was picketing against them. For all they know, he was picketing the local Synagoge or burning crosses in front of a black Church.
Hopefully, with him being in Canada, this case can get more national press and expose the DA & the Judge in this case. What the heck are they doing ?!?!?!?
- sigs are for wimps.
If you want to maintain a strong sense of Hyperbole, might I recommend instead using non-existent science-fiction weapons? Threaten to use a Death Star or anti-matter weapons. Perhaps you should add a further touch of the comedic by threatening somebody with a 747 full of rabid weasels.
Uh, last time I checked, "Tom Cruise Missiles" was a non-existent weapon.
- sigs are for wimps.
The ACLU will not go up against Scientology. We've tried plenty to get them to. But the Co$ are the ones who sued the I.R.S. into submission.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
Also, I'd be awfully surprised if Christians aren't a large majority on slashdot. Of course strict Biblical interpretation fundamentalist Christians aren't the majority, but if you use an inclusive definition, Christians are in the majority.
...
--
I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations
And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners.
Berke Breathed
--
I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations
And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners.
Berke Breathed
Remember when the federal omnibus anti-terrorism bill was in congress and many people said that anti-terrorism legilation could be used to persecute non violent political dissidents?
In this case it's a state law, but the point is still the same. Whenever you put a restriction on free speech, someone will be able to twist it to persecute their enemies.
Since the precedent has been set that the rights of the first amendment are not absolute, why not make membership in a "dangerous religious cult" illegal. We could fight scientology that way.
I am joking, I believe that the rights granted by the first amendment are absolute. If you want to join a cult. That is your business.
http://vagina.rotten.com/elron/
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
It's a good idea, but if the judge won't allow your context into court in the first place, they might as well just not allow your disclaimer too.
Caution: contents may be quarrelsome and meticulous!
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
So, just because he was joking, doesn't matter at all. The main question is whether or not the other people were truly afraid of what was said, or if they laughed the first time they read it too.
So uhm... to the person who said they were going to kill everyone on /. with phasers and photon torpedos; I'm assuming you're from a distant planet, and therefore I am fearing for my life. But since you aren't from the US, and probably are not in the US, we can't do much about it...
What?
Note to Scientology Research Centre:
See if we can get a brain-sitter(tm) installed in this one. Humor can be terribly threatening.
"...they may harpoon us, but they ain't gonna pick us up on no radar screen!"
So my thinking is that the judge saw the context as irrelevant in the case because this law doesn't really make clearance for the "just kidding" defense. Effectively this is being treated similarly to the laws about bomb jokes at the airport. So he forbid entry of that evidence into the record because it would have tainted the jury's perspective.
It seems quite realistic that if you sent an e-mail to somebody and jokingly said, "If you don't come out with us tonight, I'm gonna blow up your house with a cruise missile," you can be prosecuted as a terrorist (assuming they feel compelled to do so). This is a VERY bad law written in the heat of the moment and in desperate need of overturning. So whatever you do in the mean time, if you describe conducting violent acts on anybody in any forum, don't do it in California, and don't use weapons of mass destruction. And ESPECIALLY don't do it to scientologists
If you want to maintain a strong sense of Hyperbole, might I recommend instead using non-existent science-fiction weapons? Threaten to use a Death Star or anti-matter weapons. Perhaps you should add a further touch of the comedic by threatening somebody with a 747 full of rabid weasels.
Disclaimer: If you choose to use advice in this posting, you need to put down the crack pipe. Just say no!
---
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Swinging your fists is not illegal until you hit someone. It isn't illegal to swing your fist "before another man's nose", unless it can be proven you were actively threatening him. Even then, compensation wouldn't be awarded, but you wouldn't have much of a case if your sparring partner struck you.
...Oh, I almost forgot:
I am the first private citizen to be part of the exclusive nuclear club. Today I deploy a missle from my back-yard, aimed at San Francisco. Death to the beach-dwellers!
Come and get me, California.
aÍÍ©ÍÌÍ£Ì'̽ͩÌÍzÍYÌÍÌY
"A person commits the crime of menacing if, by any threat or physical action, he or she knowingly places or attempts to place another person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury."
Let's first look at menacing:
menace n.
So to menace is to threaten. Read my quote again:
"It isn't illegal to swing your fist [...] unless it can be proven you were actively threatening him."
Now, to be prosecuted under CO Rev. Statute 18-3-206, you have to "place another person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury."
Well, what does serious (adj.) mean, exactly?
The very definition of the word "serious" includes intent. Without intent to harm, the fist swinger's actions couldn't be refered to as serious. There's no proof that the actions were not in jest, and in a criminal court case, the burden of proof would be on the prosecuter. You could claim that the fist swinger meant to harm, but you could never prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt without some other evidence. [This wouldn't be true in a civil case.]
So out the window goes the criminal "menacing" charge, because of no earnestness of action. If some chap is just swinging his fists, Colorado law says you can't claim that you were in fear of danger unless there was a seriousness to his actions, which could be rapidly approaching, attempting to strike, or verbal threats.
So, there was no menacing, thus there wasn't any "attempted misdemeanor assault".
"Swing your fist in my face in my state, and you will definitely be charged with either menacing or attempted misdemeanor assault."
YOU ARE INCORRECT. (See Above)
aÍÍ©ÍÌÍ£Ì'̽ͩÌÍzÍYÌÍÌY
And why do the good ones don't?
I mean, Hubbard always read to me like Heinlein with a transorbital lobotomy.
Why don't good sci-fi authors get semi-mystical followings? Like Clarke or Pohl. At least, that would be really amusing.
At most this is a misscarage not becouse the laws themselfs but becouse a trial was done.
Let's say I accuse the RIAA of criminal harrasment on Napster... now we have a trial and the RIAA isn't allowed to defend itself or take any part in the trial.
Well I'll be able to prove that the RIAA is a conspericy to distory Napster...
Lets forget that the RIAA predate Napster... and all easly accessable data proving the RIAA was consistent when it went after Napster. (They were suing just about everyone using MP3s and distributing digital audio over the net before Napster ever existed)
But we command the details and RIAA can not defend. So RIAA is found guilty of harresy, cultism, and wearing ugly ties...
and hay.. I don't like the RIAA so....
Same deal here.. The guy ran off... The trial held in his absence is a travisty of the legal system.
Now all he has to do is come back.. The ruling can be thrown out and he can not be tried a second time... even thow he wasn't present the first time...
I don't actually exist.
The judge alowed impossable threats with fictional wepons of mass distruction.
If I were to fear for my life from a Usenet post threatonning me with a "Tom Cruse" missle or a photon torpedo the best corse is to find a padded cell for me.. not the threatoner..
I don't actually exist.
> Throughout history, cults have been branded as nefarious, predatory > and corrupt. If one sits down and looks at the facts surrounding the > critisims of Scientology and compares them to any of the major > religions and the histories of those religions, the differences are > obscured. Compare scientology to the preachers on BibleTV, and one > finds little difference. Is it a scam, of course. However, freedom
I don't know BibleTV (I'm not from the US).
But Christians, once considered cult members (Christianity was a Jewish sect), didn't kill dissenters, nor prosecuted their opposers at their origins. This only began when the Primitive Church became the official religion of the Roman Empire, the decane pastors became bishops, and the bishop of Rome became the Pope, thus making the Church, originally an organic, non-organized body, into the Middle Ages' Roman Church. Even so, that was the European Middle Ages. You can't compare that with US century XXI.
Your comparision lacks fundamenting facts, it is essentially an expression of your own prejudices and lack of information.
> synical note, I'm in favor of things like Scientology in that they > weed out (Darwin-effect) societies idiots. Its like the Judas-Priest > albumn, or that MTV show that caused those kids to run themselves > over. These things should be encouraged to rid our society of the Tom > Cruises of the world.
Tell that to Nicole Kidman, who once obviously loved her husband. Better yet, imagine a person you love gets in the hands of Scientology. Would you love this person less because now you classifies her as an idiot?
--
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra
DBA, SysAdmin
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
Competition isn't prosecution... Simon never claimed godhood, and anyway the problem wasn't competition itself, but that Simon tried to buy the apostles' power to perform miracles.
--
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra
DBA, SysAdmin
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
Jamie, I know you've read my critisms before, but please take this constructively. By being so one-sided in your reporting, you're encouraging the people you're trying to persuade to distrust you. Your style might generate a lot of posts, but a mis-guided /. effect launched against an innocent school district, judge or whoever will dramatically damage your cause. (This says nothing of the guilt/innocence of the judge in this case.)
Why would you damage you cause? Remember when fax machines were becoming popular and there were tons of junk faxes. It was spam that cost you a lot due to the high cost of fax paper back then. Legislators started considering legislation to restrict spam faxing. How did the spammers react?
They flooded legislative offices with faxes trying to persuade them to not pass the legislation. Hrm...I wonder how legislators reacted to having to go through rolls of thermal paper a day? A huge response might be a grassroots movement, or it's more likely a bunch of idiots who don't have their facts straight motivated by some muckraker who either doesn't have all the facts or is motivated by one side or the other to mis-represent those facts.
Jamie, I'm saying this as constructive criticism. Whether you like it or not, you're a journalist. People rely on you and take action based on what you say, without realizing that you are only giving one side of the story. Those actions may negatively impact the very people you want to help with your article. As more and more people realize that you let your biases color your reporting, they'll start to distrust you and your stories. Since there will still be a force who'll follow you dispite you bias, you'll lose both ways. Your followers will hurt those you want to help, and you'll lose your reputation with those who see through your bias.
-sk
OK, thats a good point. I think I probably slightly misread Jamie, maybe he needs to work on making his intent clear in writing. I'd bet if he were delivering this as a speech his position would be instantly clear.
So, Jamie, to be perfectly clear, are you advocating that we give in and just abandon our right to speak as we see fit?
Actually, all of your posts are already copyrighted by you. I'll direct your attention to the bottom of the page: "All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2001 OSDN." (Emphasis mine). Plus, when something is created, it is automatically copyrighted by the creator, unless the copyright is explicitly granted to another. Now, if you want to make that copyright explicit, that's of course perfectly acceptable, too.
49 20 68 61 76 65 20 74 6F 6F 20 6D 75 63 68 20 66 72 65 65 20 74 69 6D 65 2E
Two things worry me here.
Firstly, this means the best and the brightest are pretty much eliminated as possible jurors. That's not good.
Secondly, I find it difficult to concieve of how to draw the line here on what evaluation of the credibility of evidence is permitted. One divorce case springs to mind where a defendent said that him and the woman he was alone in the unlit room with were playing snooker. That's clearly ridiculous testimony...
However, note my location. What's the situation like over here, then?
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
- Any person who knowingly threatens to use a weapon of mass destruction, with the specific intent that the statement
... is to be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of
actually carrying it out
What jamie and a little creative paraphrasing produced:- Any person who knowingly threatens to use a weapon of mass destruction [including] by means of an electronic communication device, is to be taken as a threat, even if there is no intent of actually carrying it out
...
Key phrase, missing from Jamie's post:- with the specific intent that the statement
... is to be taken as a threat
That being said, those prosecuting this case are misrepresenting the law as well. The defense should be quite simple, the fictional narrative is just that and as such should pass rational tests against the law. The problem? Earth has always experienced a shortage of rational persons.Seems to me that Keith had a horrible defense. I took the time to read the penal code, specifically the section which would apply here, and I would think any competent legal defense would have been able to show both that the code itself would not apply to this case and that the code is poorly worded.
Paraphrasing:
11418.5.(a): the threat must be "on its face and under the circumstances" be so unequivocal, immediate, and specific enough to make the person threatened feel that the threatener really means what they say and that the threat is likely to be carried out immediately.
11418.5.(b): "sustained fear" can be identified by any action taken in direct response to the threat, but is not limited to such.
So, for part a, I would think any decent defense would have made clear to the jury the circumstances under which these "supposed" threats were made. This would include making available the context of the Usenet postings. Failure to do so would be a good grounds for appeal.
For part b, I would hope that a defense lawyer would argue that this portion of the penal code is too vague and ill-constructed that it should not be used as a basis for enforcing this code.
Why drive them? Make 'em walk. Less emissions that way.
-----------------------
To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.
The best i've ever heard it described is: "You are free to swing your fist until it comes before another mans nose."
"Why, arent YOU the ladykiller?" "Aquitted!"
Doesn't anyone have anything substantive aside from that poorly updated xenu.net site?
--
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
--
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
I hate to do it, but whatever. When I read the thread, the comment was marked as funny. Moderation takes time, and now I've spent 5 times as much time reading your post and telling you how useless it is, than anyone needed to. Don't bitch about moderation, run your own site if it bothers you, it works (although probably not the way you want), just relax.
--
+&x
I'm curious to know why you believe Islam is a made up religion. Although I am not Muslim, I do know enough about the Koran and the beliefs of the religion to know that you should _not_ base your opinion on the perversions of it that you see in the news media. Seeing rebel fighters claiming holy war on others is not what islam is about. Indeed, Mohammed was all for peace and love. Read a little before you jsut lump it in with every religion.
Your point is valid in a lot of other ways though. A belief system is a belief system is a belief system. You'll still kill for it, you'll still put down others in it's defense.
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
defendant: "well, your honour, we had a long object and some small round objects and we were trying to put one of the objects into a cushioned orifice."
Judge: "Sounds like you were just playing snooker then, case dismissed!"
dave
It's not the far left and the far right that think this way. Both sides are opposed to almost all government interference and help in daily lives of the citizen. The side that is most for this is the center, which is why this sort of thing plays so well. If the center was against it, then the whole thing would be mute.
Dear Mr. Vermifax,
We are sorry to inform you, that the post above is a threat to our client, a slashdot member, and an evidence of teroristic intentions.
Not only you threatened to use armed force against our client, you also threatened to disturb our client from practicing peacefully in his slashdot religion.
We contacted some military representatives to inquire how you required an access to top-secret military equipment. Those representative took our inquiry quite seriously but refused to press charge against you. The representative said he contacted the CIA regarding this matter, and they will take care of it using their own methods.
We decided to press charges on you. We filled a class action in the name of all slashdot members. Please stay where you are, and wait for the police representatives to make contact with you and read your rights.
Regards,
Sela & Sela, IANLs attorneys LTD.
PS: We will be more than happy to represent you in court. We advise you to claim for insanity. Such claim is very likely to be accepted, since, as a slashdot member you have threatened to kill yourself as well.
Although it seems clear that Mr. Henson statements where intended as a joke, they also where bigoted, intolerant, and highly offensive.
;) )
Bullshit.
If you want to find offensive posts about scientology, look back in the a.r.s archives to about 1995. The flames were on full back then. I still remember one in particular that began with, "I am going to impale you on my clue stick. Maybe once my clue-bearing sperm chew their way through your clammy insides to your brain, you'll understand why you're such a fuckwit." Now *that's* bigoted and offensive. It was also highly entertaining.
(Go for -1 -- Flamebait, folks; I've got karma to burn.
Mr. Henson's remarks were very reasonable WHEN TAKEN IN CONTEXT, for a man who is spending his life in opposition to a criminal organization. Read the posts; the missle 'threat' was an obvious joke, and the 'utterly destroy' quote was not only in the context of pickets and legal battles, but was originally lifted from the scienos' own scriptures. Every statement Mr. Henson made should have been protected by free speech, and his flight to Canada is a sad, sad reflection on America.
Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
The Canadian government already says that - they are very reluctant to extradite U.S. criminals who are facing the death penalty. I think most countries take that stance, in fact.
itachi
HE IS THE REINCARNATION OF HITLER!!
/me can't stand pseudo-science such as the stuff practiced by populists and dictators like mussolini, hitler, stalin, various churches, cosmetics and food industries and so on.
Are there any higher user numbers???
It is so obvious that you are a complete newbie... I'm really surprised that a moderator felt your post was underrated. I don't even find it remotely funny and I have a broad sense of humor.
nosig today
Well, they would first have to get my ass to court in the "oh so free"-USA. Since I don't live there I don't have to do things like disclaimers.
nosig today
Uh-oh. Looks like /. has attracted the attention of a Scientologist. Will the nefarious Scientology legal team follow? Let's hope so. I'd be DAMN interested in watching that combat play itself out.
Look man, this guy has no history of violent behavior, he didn't have any weapons in his possession, and the only thing he is guilty of is speaking out of his ass. But if you've spent any time at all in Usenet you know that this stuff happens ALL THE TIME. If he had been saying these things directly to you then I might sympathize with you a bit. But he didn't. He said it in a newsgroup. Newsgroupies are exactly as threatening as you let them become.
The last statement proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Slashdot.org is dominated by people who want to help destroy Scn.
Wrong again, m'friend. /. is dominated by skeptics who virulently detest any quelshing of speech under damn-near ANY circumstances. There is more rancor directed towards the CoS because of their past (and current!) actions against netizens. But they're (we're) equananimous in our loathing of such behavior, whether it comes from the CoS or the Mormons or the government of Paraguay. Doesn't matter. What DOES matter is that Scientology goes way over the top, moreso than almost all other groups, when it comes to trying to silence criticism.
BTW: You might want to go check out the Freepers for some really crazy stuff that is much worse than this.
- Rev.I don't think that the man should be running to Canada. If he is going to commit such inflammatory actions then I think he should take up the responsibility and face the injustice that he has provoked in order to showcase his cause, otherwise, he will just cause the erosion of more of our freedoms.
Yeah what the fuck ever man. You ain't the one facing time in the big house. If I have a choice between being somebodies bitch and bounding over to Bampf, that ain't even a choice. Besides, he'll have a much louder voice outside of jail than inside it. I'm all for martyrdom and sacrificing yourself for principles when it's appropriate, but that only works whenever people give a shit. 99% of America doesn't care about this, so he'd be hard pressed to accomplish anything positive from jail.
- Rev.--
I hate that analogy. It IS a crime once the other, reasonable, person believes that you really do intend to harm him. "Menacing," IIRC. This can occur long before the fist is anywhere near the nose.
A similar restriction applies to free speech issues. Your right to speak *does not* include the right to block me from the private enjoyment of life. This is why there are all sorts of "time, manner and place" restrictions - a speaker on a soapbox in a public park during a Sunday afternoon is a very different thing than, e.g., someone using a bullhorn to screech at your residence at 2 AM.
However, these restrictions should be based on "presentation" alone, not "content."
(Not a lawyer, but a serious student of civil liberties.)
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Keith is an extraordinarily nice and articulate fellow -- I have met and spoken with him extensively at the Hackers conference from time to time, and very much enjoyed those communications. His efforts to defend himself pro se in a criminal matter, aided from time to time by a few ad hoc lawyers, were highly misguided and probably led, more than anything else, to the difficulties in which he now finds himself. The fact of the matter is this -- when you find yourself defending a criminal case, do not try to use the forum to make any other point.
Sure, there were reasonable reasons to drag aspects of his scientology criticism into the case -- and it would appear from the commentary to date that his attorneys at trial were unable to do a decent job getting that in at the time. But in the United States of America, you can get a fair trial, particularly in the face of idiocy -- and this can happen in criminal cases even without a pot to piss in.
This is where my sympathy ended for Keith. If the following is true:
He was not present at his sentencing hearing yesterday and is a fugitive from justice, apparently planning to claim asylum in Canada.
then he just committed a crime. One that he cannot blame on the Church, the United States or anyone else. Look, if you believe in your rights, stand up for them. Defend yourself sensibly, and hope for success at the end of the day. By going to Canada, he has forsworn any opportunity for an argument on the merits.
The call for justice here is improper. Had he submitted to the courts and been unfairly and improperly incarcerated, yes, by all means. Hell, he'd have guys like me helping with the appeals. By leaving for another nation and relying upon a claim of asylum, however, Keith went over the top. That is a felony, a most serious crime, with penalties that he'll never be able to overcome by making legal arguments on the merits. He's hoping to override the legal system by a political appeal. This is a poor choice of strategy, IMHO.
I am a long-standing and outspoken critic of CoS' legal tactics, particularly with respect to IP issues. I stand by those remarks, because I felt CoS was acting outside the bounds of the law, offending my sense of fairness and justice. Count me now as a critic of this action, if true, for precisely the same reasons.
Keith should have gone to sentencing. Running to Canada was a grave error, both legally and morally. Now, unfortunately, the merits of the case against him simply don't matter anymore. He's a fugitive not because he was wrongly accused, he is a fugitive because he chose to skirt the system.
The U.S. Justice system just sucks. Until you compare it to anything else in the world.
So far as I can tell, he is not a political prisoner by any stretch of the imagination. He was accused of a crime, and after a full trial, a jury unanimously found him guilty. If his problem is with the form of the trial, he has remedies in the United States, far more powerful than would any convict in any other nation in the World. He instead decided to abuse the freedoms he had and left the nation.
Time will tell if Canada will offer him any meaningful refuge.
I was under the impression that the charges were federal (1984 deprival of civil rights). Why would he ever end up being held in a county lock-up?
I believe he just did.
If you say so. By fleeing the country as a fugitive, being never able to return absent a grant of amnesty for both the underlying crime AND the crime of running, he simply becomes the poster child that the CoS can muscle you out of anywhere -- even the United States. By doing so, Keith loses credibility with U.S. politicians, lends credibility to the CoS for its claims, and ultimately moves nobody previously on the fence to the side of right and reason.
If that's the kind of thing you think makes for a favorable result, so be it. For my part, I think the cause of CoS critics took a major step backwards if these reports are true.
Belief in one's convictions means standing up for one's rights, not running scared.
The next person who considers cocking a snoot at the Church, I believe, will find herself deterred, not inspired, by this result.
Either that or Co$ "Employs" it members to lurk slashdot and get mod points to use on Co$ threads.
I don't use eleetism in my Email
Scientology is a made up philosophy that acts like a religion, which is why it's false as a religion and a philosophy. If it were called "scientism" but had the exact same belief system, it would a religion. I can say this without reproach because I am clear*, so if you are angry with me for criticising Scientology, you need more auditing; you see the part of your brain that can't understand what I am saying is exactly the same part that keeps you from being a better Scientologist.
Now, as to why the poster you are answering can't distinguish context or irony correctly, who knows.
Fnord.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Is degrading to fruits or vegetables.
War is necrophilia.
And they call it a free country.
War is necrophilia.
He is not even a nazi skinhead.
War is necrophilia.
No. What he wrote was satire, if you know what the word means.
Besides that, have you ever fucking read the scientology documents? These things come from scientologists themselves, so their validity is not suspect, because we aren't supposed to see them.
Most of their major founders were arrested for spying on the government and tax fraud for Pete's sake. They became a religion for tax purposes! This is not a valid religion! How can you fucking defend a pseudo-religion that has a mantra that unbelievers can be tricked, lied to or destroyed?
Germany and France have it right. Take a fucking psychology course and see just why the Scientology courses work as they do.
Read Time if you don't believe me. Nobody makes this shit up, it's stranger than fiction!
This guy's being railroaded. Fuck off.
--
Shaun Thomas: INN Programmer
Read: Rabbit Rue - Free serial nove
I don't know if Keith had a lawyer in this case. I sat in on one of his cases some years ago (he was being sued for copyright infringment) and he was defending himself. This is not necessarily a bad thing. But Keith, in his full glory, telling the judge that he was prejudiced and mean, is not a pretty sight. Keith has a tendency (no, I think it's more accurate to say he has a need) to be a rabble rouser. He doesn't do very well at it. But he does have a tendency to not listen to the judge, refuse to answer questions, and call the judge dumb/prejudiced. Now, as a normal human, the judge is not going to react favorably to this. Keith usually causes half the trouble he's in by not knowing what not to say.
Independent side note: A recent (this week) Supreme Court case found that if there is a misdemeanor charge that may result in jail time, the defendant has a right to an attorney. Public Defenders love this stuff. (Except maybe in Riverside, which is definitely conservative...)
I wish he hadn't fled. There are attorneys out there who would help him. (not that he'd listen to them).
Thalia
Seems to me that he has strong grounds for appeal. Fleeing the country seems extreme. Why do he, and presumably his lawyer, think he would lose on appeal? There's something missing here.
Best Slashdot Co
What in the hell was this judge doing disallowing every defense that was going to be presented? Is he in the pocket of $cientology or what?
+++ ATH0 +++
B'Elanna, get those Hubbardian phase inductors online NOW!
----------------------------------
"We're sorry, but the website you're trying to reach has been disconnected."
Yeah, the moderators are sucking on this whole thread. They don't understand that humor can be "topical". Then again, they're probably sitting in some server room, overworked and overpaid, making sure an NT box isn't crashing.
./ Karma's like dryer lint. You can live without it.
Moderators: go ahead, rate me down.
----------------------------------
"We're sorry, but the website you're trying to reach has been disconnected."
If you'll spend another 5 minutes rereading the thread, you'll notice I was commenting on the moderators and not the moderation system itself.
/.'s a public forum the last time I checked, so I can say whatever the fawk I want.
BTW,
----------------------------------
"We're sorry, but the website you're trying to reach has been disconnected."
That grand defender of civil liberties? Where was it, when your precious 1st amendment rights are being abused by Scientology?
Or do you just fight the fights you know will get you the best publicity or a sure win?
Alas gallinaceas de urbe bovis volo
It just occurred to me - if I'm reading that CA law correctly, someone in a role playing game (say, post- or just pre- Apoloclytic) might tell the GM "I'll nuke Sacremento, just to be safe" -
and get arrested for it. Wow.
On one hand, I detest the lunatic laws that CA passes without a second thought. On the other hand, I appreciate the fact that California gets the just results of these lunatic laws and provides an example of How To Fuck Up for the rest of the states.
The fact that they can't keep the lights on speaks volumes.
Man, do I those damn Scientologists. They just people and their money. What a total . If I ever get my hands on a Scientologist I swear I will until they are red with .
*----- This message has been sanitized for your protection by Scienositter -----*
um, yeah, this was a joke...
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
What about now? The trial is over, is the jury allowed to read the last few days newspapers, jump on Slashdot, do their own investigation? And discovering that they made the wrong decision and performed a gross miscarriage of justice, do they have any recourse? After all, the end goal here is Justice!
How we know is more important than what we know.
heh, in Australia the lawyers get a stat sheet for each person and they get a look at them as they go up to take the oath, but dont get to ask questions. I wrote on my form 'computer programmer' as occupation, I didn't even get out of my chair when they called my name.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Is someone legally liable if they do the same thing, but immediately after their "threatening" sentance, clearly state that they're joking? Or can the statement of non-intent be removed like the rest of the context was?
--
its a pasttime of slashdot. If someone disagrees with you, and happens to have moderator access, they would rather moderate you down than try to actually mod up the good comments.
I've actually been modded a "troll" for posting something criticizing slashdot. For no other reason THAN that, actually.
I'm not aware of canada's position on Scientology, but perhaps he should seek asylum in Germany? If i remember correctly, Germany isn't too big on the whole scientology thing.
but I have the strange feeling I'm only getting 1/2 the story here.
I feel that way with almost anything Jamie posts. His writing is so completely one-sided that my natural inclination is to assume he's wrong. Even though I've thought for years that Scientology was sinister and repugnant, my first guess was that this guy must have been a kook. It wasn't until I read some of Keith Henson's postings that I thought Jamie might actually be right.
Really, I'm happy for people to post opinion pieces, but these jumbled mixes of news story and opinion piece just read like propaganda.
... is at:
http://www.operatingthetan.com/
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Keith isn't just a member of the L5 society, he's the guy who FOUNDED the L5 society.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Keith is already picketing the clams again in Toronto.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Budgie - In the U.S., the bird known as parakeet.
Buttie - In the U.K., a sandwich.
A google search returns no occurances of the term "budgie buttie". Just in case you were going to ask.
These miscarriages of justice have a habit of happening to people the Church of Scientology views as enemies (and not just in the US).
Isn't there something else in the constitution saying that just because a right isn't specifically enumerated therein, that doesn't mean it isn't a right? Just playing the logician, but it says 'speech', not 'speech except hate speech'. Not to say that hate speech is good, though.
"PPS Killing the organization off entirely is the best way to change the future of Scientology."
I see no violent reference in the above quote. The annihilation of an organization does not involve the death of any humans. If you were to proclaim 'I'd love to kill off the KKK' that does not mean the same thing as 'I'd love to kill off all of the members of the KKK'. And you can not be arrested and incarcerated in a sane world for wishing for the downfall of an organization and even working towards that end. If someone believes christianity is wrong and pickets against it that is their right.
This guy did not make any threats, he was in a forum and within a thread which was making fun of scientology. Last time I checked it wasn't illegal to make fun of a religion.
As for the fact that slashdot is populated by people who wish to see Scientology eradicated, well we have good reason.
Scientologists are well known for their abusive tactics, brainwashing, and even murder of ex-members.
No good has come out of scientology, and much evil has been perpetrated by the cult. There are no redeeming features of scientology, and nothing which makes it valuable to humanity in the least.
Why would we wish to see it continue to blight our cultural landscape?
And guess what, it's perfectly legal for me to wish with every fiber of my being that the Cult of Scientology would vanish from the face of the earth. It's perfectly legal for me to exhort others to speak out against the CoS and it's perfectly legal for me to picket against the CoS.
It's ALSO perfectly legal for me to "threaten" to slay all members of the CoS with my +4 Spork of Mystic Annihilation. So there.
Kintanon
PS. I'm coming after you with my Mystic Spork! Better call a lawyer...
Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
...was it that this country stopped being "the land of the Free and the home of the Brave?"
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.
This goes way far beyond the Orwellian (1984) concept of Big Brother.
My personality is mine as I see fit. Your shouldn't need any personality test to tell yourself otherwise.
I'm OK, you're OK.
he's already spent ALL his money fighting scientology - beleive it or not Keith Henson and his wife have litterally been bankrupted by scientolofy
He sure gets around - here's a completely unrelated bunch of pics from a recent anti-scientology picket by net-people in Amsterdam: pics 1 pics 2 pics 3 pics 4
a long time protestor against Scientology's on-line spamming
of course - he also said that eagles would come down and take away the cult's leader .... but they didn't try and convict him on that rather more obviously sillyness
If Keith were blocking access to a Scientology place of worship, or discriminating against members by refusing to hire them I think that would be bigotry - but he was posting in a public forum and walking on a public highway carrying a picket sign - I think that that sort of exercise of free speech is what the US is all about - the alternative starts to look more like the Spanish Inquisition and other sorts of state organized anti-religious organizations that caused people to move to the US in the first place.
Everyone has a right to beleive in any religion they like - even the loony haunted-by-space-aliens Scientology stuff - but equally everyone has a right to question religion too
Why was all context stripped away? Yes, the prosecuting attorney could show only the parts that supported their argument, but wouldn't the defense attorney then insist that the jury be given the entire thread if they felt that it helped their case (and it should have.)
Am I missing something here?
Ah. But it is plausible that a private citizen might have the means to build a small explosive device capable of damaging an building or depressurizing an aircraft cabin, or at least maiming nearby people. Pipe bombs, for instance, are generally quite low-tech, but rather dangerous to anybody nearby -- and McVeigh's ammonium nitrate bomb was based on fertilizer.
It is far less plausible that GPS coordinates would actually be indicative of a true threat, since far fewer people have access to the fire control systems of precision-guided munitions, and those generally don't act unilaterally in attacking domestic religious groups.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
They also tend to use the viewpoint of the alleged victim as a standard, rather than the "reasonable person" viewpoint, for determining what's harrassing or threatening. Which is a bit absurd, and leads to such bizarre results as a woman (or, more accurately, her lawyer) receiving disability and worker's comp for suffering stress when working around large, black males.
The laws need to realize that some lines are simply so unreasonable to be threats. Were I to suggest that I'd use mental powers chanelled through a modified TI-82 to crash Ceres into the Chesapeake Bay and start a massive tidal wave, drowning people in the area, no *reasonable* person would believe that.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
No law abridging the freedom of speech. Period.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
Remember the Jon Katz book brouhaha? ISTR that /.'s editorial staff was of the opinion that they *could* in fact republish en masse without bothering to ask for consent.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
Actually, her real 'crime' was mouthing off to the cop. Cops in that jurisdiction have a great deal of leeway in traffic stops to the point of being able to haul somebody off to jail for violations. She wasn't nice to the cop so away she went. A neighbor was nearby and took the kids otherwise the kids would have gone off to the social workers.
There's a real important lesson here, boys and girls. Pay attention when they are passing laws. If you don't you're going to wake up in a society with no rights, no liberties, and no justice.
Scary
DB
Make the world a better place...
...Kill a Zealot.
Could that be considered a threat?
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
The fact is that the defense was forbidden from revealing anything to the jury that would show that the "religion" in question was Scientology since this would have (rightly so) prejudiced them.
I do understand why the judge wanted to keep the name of the religion from the jury. But, and IANAL, I find it hard to believe that the complete elimination of the quotes' context didn't violate some derivation of his 8th amendment rights. I strongly suspect that either (a) he had a lawyer who wasn't competent to defend his constitutional rights, or (b) the judge was an idiot who would be easily reversed on appeal.
The guy needs to engage the ACLU and the EFF, not to move to Canada.
Throughout history, cults have been branded as nefarious, predatory and corrupt. If one sits down and looks at the facts surrounding the critisims of Scientology and compares them to any of the major religions and the histories of those religions, the differences are obscured. Compare scientology to the preachers on BibleTV, and one finds little difference. Is it a scam, of course. However, freedom of religion carries with it the same burdens of freedom of speech in that you take the good with the bad. If you start to shit on the first ammendment you are shitting on the constitution. On a much more synical note, I'm in favor of things like Scientology in that they weed out (Darwin-effect) societies idiots. Its like the Judas-Priest albumn, or that MTV show that caused those kids to run themselves over. These things should be encouraged to rid our society of the Tom Cruises of the world.
Someone you trust is one of us.
. . . if I had a bunch of aliens stuck to me.
-Peter
Anyone on the far Right or far Left tends to think this way. The far Right (I'm a conservative, but I'm not a religious zealot.) thinks that all "bad" language is evil, and everyone should be sheilded from it. The far Left thinks that it's the government's job to control what you see, hear, & say.
... and that's the scary part, its coming at us from both sides. With each side's remedies eroding our freedom. It's past time to get some Libertarians in Washington.
Excellent analysis!
How to Download YouTube Videos
Too many midichlorians! Too many midichlorians! Oh damn, wrong religion. What was I thinking?
By the way, for a good time, perform this Google search.
How to Download YouTube Videos
Thanks for posting.
there is no thing
what else could you want?
Two words: Salman Rushdie.
--
Lord Nimon
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
Scientologists go after everyone, even the least dangerous of people, with a force that can only come from a cult like theirs. This isn't just about our rights online and the First Amendment; we're seeing here just how terrifying Scientologists can be. I truly wonder if this is what L. Ron Hubbard intended.
"...today consumers have been conditioned to think of beer when they see a bullfrog..."
If you can't find a way to laugh at death, you're going to have a hard time find a way to laugh at life.
And just when I'm out of moderation points too... Your prosecuted had me laughing out loud once I managed to read it correctly.
LibBT: BitTorrent for C - small - fast - clean (Now Versio
IIRC Scientology's illegal there.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
If the legislature and executive branch both ignore the Constitution for the sake of their "principles" and social policies, what in the world makes anyone think that the Supreme Court is any different? The Constitution is simply a piece of paper, not a force of its own. If the justices want to ignore the letter, spirit, and history of the Constitution, what's to stop them?
"Prejudice is wrong; you should hate everyone the same."
Nope, last time Andover caved. They're caving again. Tripod has caved. Netcom caved. The court in Riverside County (and the judge) caved...
Wake up and smell the clam chowder!
If you decide to go on record as being against these folks, you've GOT to start letting them know you won't go down without a fight. You've got to cite all of this, as you will find out if you ever go up against them.
Do you work for or have stock in Cisco? How about Farmers' Insurance or Allstate(hold a policy)? How about if you use Panda or Executive Software? Any of your packets traverse EarthLink? How about Netcom? Checked lately to see if your kids are reading Dianetics, or learning from companies fronting for the clams?
If you're not afraid, you're blind and unthinking, especially if you live here in the US where the President of the United States has said that he believes that freedom needs to 'be controlled.' I am a man of good will, are you? Or are you just a True Coward, as well as being anonymous? Posts and comments on this site have disappeared today. We've watched them being purged. An entire Website and FTP archive disappeared within minutes after this story was posted No word from Tripod as to why. No word from Andover as to why.
Remember guys, this is Amerika. Just because you have the most votes, doesn't mean you get to win.--Fox Mulder
Rob, did Tripod tell you what happened? I was looking at the traffic meter and it was NOWHERE NEAR a slashdotting for Tripod servers. The 'da.ru' site was blocked, too, this morning (seemed to have a 'kicker' and redirect), and I had to post twice here on /. to get it to take.
Remember guys, this is Amerika. Just because you have the most votes, doesn't mean you get to win.--Fox Mulder
They caved.
Why did they not do the same thing when MicroSoft threatened them?
Go do a quick analysis of the times of posting here. See the gaps?
Remember guys, this is Amerika. Just because you have the most votes, doesn't mean you get to win.--Fox Mulder
Yep. As does the rest of this community.
Go away, poodle-boy. Tell your masters hey, for us, would you? Your attorneys just stirred up the whirlwind.
Go tell Trooze and Cravolta to get out of Poodle's bed and go make some more cash for the Legal Fund.
You're gonna need it.
The corrupt office of the District Attorney in Riverside County, California and the clams' tame judge aren't the ONLY politicians or business or public figures that's gonna start to feel the heat.
"I know that taking a stand against Scientology is likely to subject me and my family to the same abuse Mr. Ward has experienced. But there comes a point where people of good will *must* stand up to criminals-- even to those who are experts in using the courts to harass." --- Keith Henson
Remember guys, this is Amerika. Just because you have the most votes, doesn't mean you get to win.--Fox Mulder
...and so was your Founder. But then, you know that since you're OSA and have probably snuck looks at the 'forbidden' stuff, eh?
Go away, poodle-boy. Tell your masters hey, for us, would you? Your attorneys just stirred up the whirlwind. Go tell Trooze and Cravolta to get out of Poodle's bed and go make some more cash for the Legal Fund. You're gonna need it. The corrupt office of the District Attorney in Riverside County, California and the clams' tame judge aren't the ONLY politicians or business or public figures that's gonna start to feel the heat.
"I know that taking a stand against Scientology is likely to subject me and my family to the same abuse Mr. Ward has experienced. But there comes a point where people of good will *must* stand up to criminals-- even to those who are experts in using the courts to harass." --- Keith Henson
Remember guys, this is Amerika. Just because you have the most votes, doesn't mean you get to win.--Fox Mulder
Excuse me, poodle boy...are you a lawyer? If not, you wanna be charged with 'practicing law without a license,' like you were charged with 'practicing medicine without a license' in the San Jose NOTS 34 case?
Go home Poodle. Your cooties are showing.
The corrupt office of the District Attorney in Riverside County, California and the clams' tame judge aren't the ONLY politicians or business or public figures that's gonna start to feel the heat.
"I know that taking a stand against Scientology is likely to subject me and my family to the same abuse Mr. Ward has experienced. But there comes a point where people of good will *must* stand up to criminals-- even to those who are experts in using the courts to harass." --- Keith Henson
That's gonna be our war cry, assholes!
Remember guys, this is Amerika. Just because you have the most votes, doesn't mean you get to win.--Fox Mulder
Here's the 'freekeith' Google cache
NOTE TO THE CLAMBOTS, WISE, The Poodle Korps and OSA/SeaOrg: Try and cancelbot/DDOS THAT, without tipping your hands to the SEC, the Bundeswehr, INTERPOL, Treasury or the FBI as to your TRUE level of control over Earthlink (NOTE to all others: Mouseover and check the link. It's http://www.netcom.com/pub/hk/hkhenson , one of Keith's sites shut down when they took over the Web!) and what you have planned for the rest of the Net
Who IS Keith Henson? Who is he? A patriot, a thinker, an eccentric, a brave and fearless man. From Caroline P. Meinel's classic, Guide to (mostly) Harmless Hacking That's right! Keith Henson was a member (and continues to develop) of the original Hypertext Projct, Ted Nelson's Project Xanadu. Therefore, it can seriously be argued that Keith is one of the fathers of the Web! (As well as as a thinker on space travel, a Life Member of the L5 Society, an original pioneer in the concept of 'Mega-Scale Engineering', a close friend of Dr. Richard Feynman, and a pioneer in the study of nano- and micro-technology, cryonics/cryogenics and technological Life Extension.) Further proof can be seen when Nelson's Appendix to his updated Xanadu Proposal also thanks Keith, directly, along with the other US XOC visionary, Roger Gregory. Other citations mentioning Keith include a citation from Johnathon Vos Post's 'Letter to the Editor' in response to Wired's 1995 'The Curse of Xanadu' Finally, from Xanadu's (original) timeline Of course, Keith has had troubles in Riverside County before. But because of David Miscavaige (The Poodle), WISE and the other clam enterprises in Riverside County, as well as past allegations of government corruption and bribery (that started Henson on his crusade there), any thinking person can easily come to the conclusion that Riverside County is already in the control of the clams, and is now wholly compromised.
This great and brave man has fought and continues to fight these murdering fascists for us and his neighbors.
XenuBat has some of Keith's call-ins to KGO archived for all to hear. Here's some more of Keith's troubles with the clams, in his fight to get the FDA to admit that the clams were 'practicing medicine without a license.' (the famous San Jose 'NOTS' case).
Some of Keith's site other caches are these Google caches.
As for why Canada, here's a quote from the Google cache as to why: Keith and his family have been banrupted, harassed, threatened and assaulted. The clams continue to 'Fair Game' him (note the allegations of Child Molestation, a clasic of the clams against their enemies). Some other acts of clam terrorism against other individuals, all over the world. Here's Google's Scientology in the courts page.
Scary stuff, huh? That you can be sued to poverty for telling the truth and then jailed isn't the scariest thing, though. It's what they have planned for us wogs and SPs, if we don't knuckle under and begin to accept them for what they believe they are. The FBI still classifies them as a 'paramilitary' organization and, after the Aum Shinrikio incident, watches them for similar behaviors to Aum's, especially in Riverside County, California.
NOTE TO TACO and ANDOVER: Okay, you pussies knuckled under to these assholes once before. GET THE LINKS AND UPDATES OUT NOW, OR _EVERYONE_ IS GOING TO THINK YOU'RE PUSSYING OUT AGAIN!!!! Additionally, get rid of the OSA plants and the max-karma PoodleBots you were forced to accept. Kick these murdering, lying fascist slime out!!! Keep at least part of the net CLAM FREE!!!!!!!!!
Remember guys, this is Amerika. Just because you have the most votes, doesn't mean you get to win.--Fox Mulder
So quoteth Xenu, the "All your base" evil guy.
<---[singularity sig]
So the quotes were taken out of context. Can someone explain to me why Henson's lawyer wouldn't/didn't submit the context as evidence in his defense? Was there some reason that the full context of the quotes wasn't allowed as evidence?
--Ty
It just occurs to me that this could be the start of a large campaign to drive people out of California in order to solve their power problems.
Just a thought.
--Ty
Scientology is trash and its leaders deserve to be rounded up and shot.
Oops, I don't live in California. Well, fuck you clams anyhow.
-Legion
A few posts in here suggest we need a new moderation option for these Cultist ?
-2 Clam (:)
Bad move there, threatening the life of the President of the United States. I expect that any minute now, the Secret Service will be knocking on your door to take you into custody. At your trial, the one nasty sentence in your comment (the one following the phrase "into this:") will be presented as evidence against you (though without the trailing question mark), and the context will be inadmissible because context is not relevant to the crime for which you will be on trial. I hope you like anal sex; I think you'll be getting a lot of it.
This is one of the reasons that Open Source and Intellectual Property cannot get along.
I surmise Scientology lawyers were able to delete the context as a by-product of copyright infrigement.
14 years protection was enough to get Moby Dick established in the public domain, it whould be enough for Scientology, or Disney, or Metallica.
Ed Craig "Who cares what you think?" George W. Bush, 4th of July 2001
If CoS wants to play hardball with the legal system, I say that the next time CoS hauls someone into court, the defendant's testimony and evidence should bring into consideration by the jury the legal tactics used by CoS, and hopefully, the jury will rule in the favor of the defense, and perhaps it will bring some momentum to keeping the CoS goons in check.
Exactly what I've been thinking about this whole issue. It's so bloody obvious that it's the solution.
Create a church in direct opposition... Jyhad!
Why not set up the "Church of Slashdot"? CmdTaco could be promoted to PopeTaco.
Want to distribute DeCSS? Create the "Church of DeCSS".
Napster under pressure from corporate interests? Tell them to fuck off by creating the "Church of Napster".
I've reconsidered and now hold The Church of Scientology in the highest esteem. Thanks to the precedent that they are setting, we will soon be able to overthrow everything that we don't agree with by creating "church" facades to hide behind.
Scientology rules!
-- kwashiorkor --
Leaps in Logic
should not be confused with
-- kwashiorkor --
Leaps in Logic
should not be confused with
Jumping to Conclusions.
The fact that we are not hearing about these abuses by Scientology in the mass media is the surest sign that there is something horribly wrong here. This is one of the most interesting discussions here in a long time - possibly because the posters really seem quite rational and intense (even it is a topic a little out of the norm). Why can't some of these script kiddies attack things like Scientology for a change? As for me, I'll see your first ammendment rights to be a whacked-out religion and raise you my second ammendment rights to be totally armed and dangerous just in case you come to my door.
Usually, the Scientologists don't bother with trials. Generally, they just kill you.
Then you obviously don't understand what "far left" means.
Just 'cause someone is an anarchist hardly makes them a leftists. There are plenty of far-right anarchist groups. Kinda reinforces the fact that the whole concept of the "political spectrum" is bullshit, though.
And I actually post from a .com domain; my email address is a .edu one, though.
If he comes to BC he'll likely run afoul of the Human Rights Commission (more accurately known as the Human Wrongs Commission). It's run by a motorcycle-riding chinese lesbian...nuff said.
You're using her as bait, Master!
That's almost as good as Al Bundy's religion of "No Ma'am!" That is until that bitch Marcy took him down by showing his followers pictures of him being nice to his wife!
You're using her as bait, Master!
How? Simple. By starting his own "religion". One whose basic premise is to expose Scientology for what it is. That way when the Scientologists march him into court claiming religious bigotry, he can make the same claim! Then the two "bigots" will simply cancel each other out, and we will be left with what this really is...utter stupidity not worth wasting the court's time
You're using her as bait, Master!
All referenced pages seem to be pulled by lycos.
Does anybody know why ? Is there a mirror ?
f.
Just stop beeing their willing assistant.
f.
Since the law requires intent to threaten, the state of mind of the defendent is material. Jokes that are not meant to be taken seriously do not violate this law.
Two questions:
There's stuff to worry about, but it isn't as cut-and-dried as it's being portrayed in the original posting.
How did we get to rules of evidence that prevent the defense from introducing key documents and calling pro-defense witnesses? That seems to be what happened here.
..that saying 'all your base are belong to us' is illegal under the law mentioned in the article above?
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
well, Martin Luther was excomunicated from the Church. Excomunication was considered the worst thing possible then because of the Church's hold on what was thought to be the only way to God. However, that is not the belief today.
The Co$ seems to enjoy perverting US law and hiding "church" documents from prospective members untill such time as the new members brain has had a major washing and allows them to believe in space cooties and other such nonsence.
It amazes me to no end the number of "famous" actor people that have joined Co$. Is Hollywood becoming a town with a Blacklist? If your not Co$, no work for you?
I think a religion by Doug Adams would have been really kick ass! :)
It is widely known to critics of $cientology that this is exactly why Hubard created his cult.
A New York based magazine editor recalled, in 1986,
This seems to echo Hubbard's statements to a Newark, New Jersey science fiction club in 1949:
And consider this quote, from California Superior Court Judge Breckenridge, speaking of Scientology founder, L. Ron Hubbard, in a 1984 legal decision:
Finally, Hubbard himself is quoted in a communication to his followers dated 25 February 1966:
After doing a little cursory research into this (following some of the links), it seems to me that this case manages to violate fully half of all amendments in the bill of rights: I, V, VI, VIII, and IX. It seems to me that his reason for seeking asylum in Canada is to attract attention to this case in Canadian press, and to make this a matter of international concern.
... be be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor". He was barred from obtaining witnesses or evidence in his favor; he was not informed of the charges against him (until they accidentally leaked out). Amendment VIII states that "excessive bail shall not be required." According to his cached web page, he was ordered to jail despite paying $10,000 bail.
This ruling violates the first amendment, obviously, in that it infringes on his right to free speech and free assembly. Scientology argues that the first amendment favors their own case; however, this means that amendment IX would be broken, since enumeration of freedom of religion would be infringing on both free speech and free assembly. Amendment V is clearly broken; it states that "... nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". The use of quotes from the defendant, of which the context was barred from presentation, would seem to be comprise a case of him being forcibly used as a witness against himself, and seeing the circumstances of his trial, he was clearly not given due process of law.
Continuing with amendment VI, the unconstitutionality is absolutely appaling. The sixth amendment states that "the accused shall enjoy the right to
This is a case that everyone should be watching very, very closely. Even more so than the DeCSS decision, the freedom of the States depends on the outcome.
------------------
A picture is worth 500 DWORDS.
If you're smart, you'll take Henson's case as a warning. You'll think about what your own statements would look like, with their context totally removed, and in the harsh spotlight of a courtroom. Do you really need to post that joke, or wouldn't the judge find it funny?
Now that's definitely a good old-fashioned threat like the cops give 'em to the scum on TV.
It's... It's...
"We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
Why don't you do this?
Or are you just an idea rat?
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
Although it seems clear that Mr. Henson statements where intended as a joke, they also where bigoted, intolerant, and highly offensive.
Crimes are committed daily due to religious intolerance (sometimes, too often, here at home in the US). Those who commit these crimes often mock the validity of their victim's religion.
Mr. Henson's right to free speech should be defended, as our free speech rights depend on it. We should not defend what he wrote. We must condemn what he wrote.
Erosion of whose freedoms?
If you're so eager to see someone serve a jail sentence to "set a moral example" or whatever, why don't you go inside for him?
Besides, him going to Canada may be an erosion of other people's freedoms. Him going to jail is one hell of a blow to his own.
Wrong. At least in my state, anyway.
Colorado Revised Statute 18-3-206: "A person commits the crime of menacing if, by any threat or physical action, he or she knowingly places or attempts to place another person in fear of imminent serious bodily injury."
"knowingly" means only that the defendant was aware of his own conduct and of a reasonable likelihood that his conduct will bring about the prohibited result.
Swing your fist in my face in my state, and you will definitely be charged with either menacing or attempted misdemeanor assault.
Read the statute again. The word "serious" describes the level of injury which the victim feared. It does NOT have any connection to the actor's intent.
The only part of the statute where intent is relevant is in that word knowingly. "Knowingly" refers to a particular state of mind on the part of the actor. You see, under our law, a person will generally need to act in a culpable mental state in order to have committed a crime. The mental states are: "Specific Intent," where the actor has the intent to cause the prohibited result; "Knowingly" (sometimes called "willfully) where the actor knows a prohibited result is the likely result of his actions; "recklessness," where the actor disregarded a knowing risk; and "criminal negligence," where an actor failed to perceive a risk because of a lack of care.
Each individual criminal statute specifies a culpable mental state as an essential element of the crime.
In the case of Menacing/Felony Menacing, the only place where the actor's mindset matters at all is in the question: did he know his words or actions were likely to cause such fear in the victim?
"Serious Bodily Injury" is not the most-specific term in the lexicon, unfortunately. The only firm rule is that it's more than bruises and a black eye. Without intent to harm, the fist swinger's actions couldn't be refered to as serious
Read the statute again. "Serious" is not used to describe the swinger's actions, but rather the degree of injury feared.
You'd be more than welcome to come to Colorado, swing your fist in someone's face, and try this argument on the judge. But I'm not going to bring you a file baked in a cake when the judge gives you the sentence of up to 180 days permitted by statute.
Very interesting... if they intend to put non-converts in "facilities" then they've got a realistic you're going to hell threat - hell on earth - when (if ever) they manage to take over the world.
Scientology scares me pantless sometimes. Of course, they'll have to get through my legion of killer robots before they get to me.
Steve
[ approaching AI ]
Take a look at this article. Specifically:
Greta Van Susteren, the CNN legal correspondent, and her husband [...] are Scientologists.
So, what's the last time you heard a scientology story on CNN? I certainly don't remember hearing one in recent history. It is quite disturbing that they have control over people so high up in the "visibility" hierarchy...
// zyqqh
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.
--Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter of 18 October 1967
Ahem, are you stupid or something? How could this possibly be viewed as anything other than a direct threat? Do you actually mean to tell me you believe this is some pathetic attempt to describe a way to improve the functioning of the organization? Give me a fucking break. This is a direct threat to MY life.
Stick to your toys, Clams, and leave us to our work.
(P.S. Regarding jail conditions: The guy was convicted of a misdemeanor. He very likely would NOT be in with hardened criminals. One goes to prison on a felony and jail on a misdemeanor (yes, they are 2 separate classifications of penal institutions). Misdemeanor criminals are not usually dangerous, anything really serious is usually a felony.)
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
The ruling makes perfect sense. Remember, the case was heard in CALIFORNIA. :/
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Vincent Vega's back! And he's on a mission from Xenu! John "Brainwashed" Travolta stars in "Pulp Fiction 2: Battlefield Canada!"
There are two major products that come out of Berkel
Because it might not effect you, today, that does not mean that you should not protest and be aware of it.
Fight Spammers!
So Twain's essay isn't as much about slamming CS as it is slamming the attitude that causes cases such as the one above. People get sucked into a religious faith and then practice / protect that faith to the extreme.
What this has taught me about Scientology: "Do not love thy fellow man if he hath dissed our church."
hey man, i thought it was fucking hillarious. i was kinda upset too that it was marked offtopic.
:)
oh well
"I would kill everyone in this room for a drop of sweet beer."
Because it is a laughing matter.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
If the speech does not directly and immediately threaten harm, they can say it. I would not, but someone could say they hated catholics, jews, irish people, poles, blacks, homosexuals, nerds, geeks, etc. . . . .
Hell, pick a troll, they'll come up with something suitably nasty. And I will defend their right to say it (though, perhaps, for the sake of decency, someone should mod it down ;)
Seriously, you have to believe "this stuff". While I am not willing to go into it freedom of speech is actually quite an important right.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Roasted over the First Amendment :)
Hell in a hand basket? Well, at least it will give us excuses to finally use automatic weaponry.
This is a joke. This is a joke. This is a joke.
I'm probably f*cked now :).
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Now for the two statements:
1. "I AM GOING TO EAT YOUR BRAIN AND DEVOUR YOUR SOUL!!!!"
2. "Remember in that weird movie, Army of Darkness (evil dead 3), when that witch said, 'I AM GOING TO EAT YOUR BRAIN AND DEVOUR YOUR SOUL!!!'? That kind of scared me." Obviously, the first statement could be percieved as threatening. Simultaneously, the first statement exists in the second (compound) statement, yet is clearly not a threat.
Not to say this is directly relevant in his situtation, but atleast the context should have been analyzed.
Doesn't matter anyways, as you seem to have written us(whoever the monolithic slashdot community is(I can't recognize it. You must be a good degree smarter than I am to have recognized it)) off anyways.
If this is how you really live, than please leave.We are the children, the dreamers, and the immature.
This is how we do things. This is how we live. And this is how we drive the engine of our economy. Bugger off ;)
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
http://freehenson.tripod.com/keith-asylum.txt Is not available....slashdotted or removed? Anyone know?
----- Gavia Immer
Now this is libelous - open and shut. You should file suit, then submit a /. story and ask for donations to your legal fund.
"Research is what I am doing when I don't know what I am doing." -- Wernher von Braun
And Slashdot Has The Freedom Of The Press and Freedom Of Speah On It's Side. It Reports What It hears, And Aside from The Copyrighted Texts They Have, We Are Allowed To Say Anything We Want For The Same Reason they Are Allowed To believe Whatever They Want: The First Amendment.
I Also Think That If they Do Sue Us, We Would Win. Right Now, They Have No Context In Which To sue Us, So To Do So Would Be Very Foolish On Their Part. I Don't Think They're Going to Try To Attack Slashdot for Nothing, but It Does Seem Like both The Community And The Admins Are A Bit Sore At Having To Delete A Comment. I Think They Would Be Willing To Go A Few Rounds If It Meant Denting The Egoes Of The Scientologists.
And There Is Nothing Wrong With Trouble, As Long As It's Trouble With A Good Reason.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
`Lex - Find Me Here: Text Appeal
Slashdot Itself Has Been Targetted For Being Set Against Scientology. I Wonder If The Scientologists Are Going To Start Seeing Slashdot As An Actuall opponent And Start Doing More Against Them, Things Akin To What They've Done To Poor Keith. All I Can Say Is I Hope So. I Think It's Horrible That The Justice System Can Be Perverted So Easily, Like With These Sort Of Events, And The DMCA, And Many Other Places Where It Becomes An Issue Of Power As To Who Wins The Court Case, Not Who Was Right. The Courts Were Put There To Protect The Little Guy, The Opinion No One Likes, And The Outcasts. If The Scientologists Do End Up Trying To Take On Slashdot, I'm Sure Slashdot, With It's Users And Andover Backing, Help Can To Win A Court Case, And Maybe Start To Put These Cultists In Their Place.
Yes, I Know I Type Funny.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|
`Lex - Find Me Here: Text Appeal
(*anonymous clam)
They're very good at making enemies, that's for sure.
In all this silliness, one thing is missing: a definition of the concept of "dead-agenting". A dead agent, according to Sun-Tzu in The Art of War, is one of either a double agent (hence winds up dead when caught) or a source of misinformation ("dead" information?). This is part of the whole Fair Game thing -- make the target look as unpleasant as possible with innuendo and dirt-digging so nobody will take them seriously.
/Brian
In a country that has such a ridiculous phenomenon as "Food Libel" can you really be so surprisec?
When the heat gets sub-tropical... And the talk gets so topical, Riot act - you can read me the riot act ... You can make me a matter of fact or a villain in a million... A slip of the tongue is gonna keep me civilian... (Elvis Costello)
In other news today, user_xyz was sued today after police raided andover HQ to obtain ip information after a spork threatened to utterly destroy commander taco with nothing other than hot grits, all your xyz are belong to ijk, petrified natalie portman statuettes, and other assorted obselete objects such as phallic beowulf clusters.
Seriously though, this shit scares me? Is there anyway to protect/imdemnify yourselft against such things when you want to desperately desire to abuse some twat that needs it? Can an american sue me even though i am an australian for implying / saying that they are a [insult here][bodypart here if needed]?
How every version of MICROS~1 Windows(TM) comes to exist.
Do the following really mean anything? SCSA MCP CCSA CCNA
--I'm not actually after an answer!
Like a we-do-not-tolerate-clearly-dangerous-cults- precedent?
For Christs sake, you've got prisons crammed full of minor drug offenders and some states execute children and you say that banning something as abhorrent as $cientology sets a dangerous precedent!
All your posts are belong to you...
Give me your tired, your poor, Your religiously prosecuted...
---
Copyright © 2002 me
I am OT VIII, the ONLY way a thetan ever gets in trouble, the ONLY way he can get trapped or become part of a cluster is by mocking-up and inaking pictures of bad experiences. All power comes from the ability to occupy a point. The base that separates two terminals must be firm or there will be no exchange of energy.
::walks around like a zombie with hands held in front of me::
Uber Alles
--
Friends don't let friends use multiple inheritance.
A lone obsessive nut threatened a gang of obsessive nuts and somehow the government got involved. We hate the Scientologists, but we're a bit scared to say so.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
I'm sorry; I'll try to speak slower next time.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
If you don't have anything nice to say, say it often.
- Ed the Sock
The whole site should be mirrored there soon, and currently redirects to http://www.operatingthetan.com.
Thanks to jcr, Don NOTS and others. As of 1742 EST the current best mirror is at the google cache in the Topic, but within 20-30 minutes it should be the original URL, http://freehenson.da.ru.
Thank you to the kind folks at dis.org, Don NOTS, and others.
The site is accessible from its original location at http://freehenson.da.ru as well as its new location at http://www.operatingthetan.com.
This site will withstand all traffic.
Freehenson website BACK UP after a savage slashdotting
FREE HENSON
I can't speak for Keith's situation or his personal feelings or financial situation, but, in general, he's done pretty much exactly what the Scientologists wanted him to do: Go away and shut up.
He hasn't shut up, and in the day of the Internet, he hasn't even gone "away" since there is no "away."
In fact, this one action has created more publicity for his case than the months of relatively quiet and local human rights activism which prompted the original charges.
While I can't say what I think of the likelihood of success in this action, and in fact it could end him up in an even worse situation than where he started, going away and shutting up are two things that Keith Henson are not about. He is not about sitting still and having a gag shoved in his mouth, or getting beaten up or killed in a prison with a strong presence of Scientologists in the form of recruitees into the front group Scientology operates in prisons, Criminon.
For months before this verdict, the Scientologists were boasting about how they had total control of the situation and how they were getting Keith "just where they wanted him."
Canada is not where they want him.
Whether or not it's worth the ultimate fallout that it will cause, Henson has managed to turn his local and limited publicity activism, and his prosecution by an obscure and corrupt District Attorney's office (Riverside DA Grover Trask is disreputable) into an international incident and involve more government bodies.
What has happened here will now receive at least some of the scrutiny it deserves. Henson has not fled in a cowardly fashion, otherwise he would not be so noisy about it. How many fugitives post their address and phone number to the Internet and invite press and government scrutiny of their actions? That's not the action of a guilty man fleeing.
What has happened here stinks on ice, and can not withstand broad scrutiny. Even if Henson later gets transported back to the United States and ends up being sentenced, the court which ends up with the case will be under tremendous scrutiny to handle the proceedings fairly, and further kangaroo court tactics will not be tolerated or ignored.
What has happened here was only allowed because it was a backwater court in a corrupt district, with a corrupt District Attorney, who was allowed to get away with murder. Let's see if Deputy District Attorney Robert K. Schwarz is so willing to be visibly the pawn of Scientology with the world watching.
What has happened here was only able to occur because the obscure Deputy District Attorney Robert K. Schwarz was backed up by Scientology lawyers Elliott Abelson and Samuel D. Rosen, who openly coached the DA's every action, standing behind him in court and whispering into his ear, and apparently pumping hundreds of thousands of dollars worth into free legal aid to the DA's office. What the hell kind of situation is it where a criminally convicted organization like Scientology can essentially act as its own private District Attorney's office and use a state actor like a DA's office as a proxy to make its own law?
What has happened here needs this continued publicity lest it continue to happen.
Henson has brought that scrutiny to bear, but it will be allowed to pass without action.
Free Keith Henson!
The hell they caved. They just obeyed the law. The DMCA basically forced their action and I suggest you read it to understand why they did what they did. Incidentally their action, and their full report in the thread caused more bad publicity for the cult of Scientology than leaving the article up would have, and was completely legally protected, so if Scientology sued, they'd lose and get slapped with costs and fees. Slashdot used effective tactics and won.
As for Tripod, what can I say. They're fucking morons. Apparently they either got a bandwidth spike and croaked the site, or a bogus complaint and yanked it without notice. That's fine. Now the site is sitting on top of two T3s at http://www.operatingthetan.com thanks to the nice people at http://www.dis.org. Thanks Don NOTS. http://freehenson.da.ru is the *permanent* URL for the site wherever it goes. That is what I have always used when referring it to people, so that if they linked, the links would not be broken when some dip-idiot temporary free host yanked it. However, people insisted on pointing to Tripod instead. http://freehenson.da.ru will *always* work even if the site gets croaked at one or another location.
Apologies for rant and thanks to the mirrors and dis.org
Protester is subject to arrest1 701/hhens.shtml
THE PRESS-ENTERPRISE
Thursday, May 17, 2001
BY ERIN D. RANDOLPH
http://www.inlandempireonline.com/news/stories/05
A man convicted in April of oppressing Scientologists because of their religion has fled to Canada to apply for political refugee status, the man said Wednesday.
Keith Henson, 58, of Palo Alto, was scheduled to be sentenced Wednesday morning in court but didn't show up. A judge immediately issued a warrant for his arrest.
Henson's conviction on a charge of interfering with a religion stemmed from his picketing at the Church of Scientology's Golden Era Productions in Gilman Hot Springs.
Henson said in a phone interview Wednesday night from Canada that he went there to protest a Scientology event. He then decided he would stay after talking to an immigration lawyer.
Henson said his human rights have been violated because of a recommended sentence that could put him in jail for 200 days and subject him to five years' probation for a misdemeanor crime. He said the sentence would be too harsh.
Probation officer Garry Davis recommended that sentence to the court.
Henson had said he did not want probation because he believed it would give Scientologists a chance to keep an eye on him through the government.
Despite his conviction, Henson doesn't believe he was a threat to the Scientologists. He said Wednesday that he just wants them investigated for one death in the compound and one near it last year.
Court records include handwritten and typewritten letters from some of the Scientologists who work at Golden Era expressing their fear that Henson might harm them. They requested sentencing terms similar to Davis' recommendation.
Friends of Henson don't believe that he deserves the treatment he has received, because they say he would never hurt anyone.
"He is a kind and gentle man," Ida Camburn said. "He is a decent human being."
Riverside County Superior Court Judge Robert Wallerstein issued a no-bail arrest warrant for Henson. The judge postponed the sentencing until Henson is arrested and can explain where he has been and why he didn't come to court.
Deputy District Attorney Robert Schwarz said Henson took pictures of him and posted the names of district attorney support staff on the Internet. Schwarz said in court Wednesday that he believes the moves were an attempt to intimidate him from prosecuting the case.
"He needs to come back here and face up to his charges," said Muriel Dufresne, public relations director for Golden Era. "He can't flee from justice."
Erin D. Randolph can be reached by e-mail at erandolph@pe.com or by phone at (909) 487-5229
No his X is not a Scientologist.
[Libellous smears from an anonymous cultist or troll deleted.]
His ex has denied these charges since then, and the only occurrence of them in a court record is hearsay from a third party entirely. Whatever claims were made, his ex was asked about them after the Scientology smears started, and recanted the claim.
His ex incidentally is Caroline Meinel of Happy Hacker fame. Why not ask her yourself?
For Immediate Release:
May 17, 2001
Toronto Ontario Canada.
Keith Henson today retained the services of Canadian Immigration Lawyer and Specialist:
Mr. Guidy Mamann gman@migrationlaw.com
of Mamann & Associates. http://www.migrationlaw.com
(416) 862-0000
74 Victoria Street, Suite 303
Toronto, Canada M5C 2A5
From http://www.lsuc.on.ca/cgi-data/legal_members_en.sh tml
Law Society of Upper Canada
"Mamann & Associates provides a full range of services for temporary and permanent immigration to Canada and the United states. Guidy Mamann is a former immigration officer and is certified by the Law Society of Upper Canada as a Specialist in Immigration Law. Mamann & Associates is conveniently located in the same building as the Immigration and Refugee Board at 74 Victoria Street in Toronto."
Keith Henson is seeking Refugee Status after having been made a Political Prisoner of Conscience. His "crime" was to peacefully picket and criticize the internationally infamous Cult of Scientology. Unfortunately for Mr. Henson and the reputation of the United States, these protests occurred near Hemet California. Scientology has an extraordinary level of political influence upon the local government. This extralegal influence was clearly demonstrated by the open collusion between the Scientology Corporate lawyers and the District Attorneys Office of Riverside California.
Mr. Henson chose to seek refuge in Canada as that nation has previously criminally convicted corporate Scientology for Breaches of the Public Trust. Mr. Henson also has extensive personal contacts amongst consumer and religious activists opposed to Scientology abuses in Canada.
Wm. Gregg Hagglund
Press Secretary
Refugee Committee,
Temple of At'L'An (TM)
Free Keith Henson http://freehenson.da.ru
What if the FBI/BATF got an annonymous tip that your cult, the CoS had automatic weapons, wouldn't that be interesting?
There's already an on-the-record non-anonymous declaration sworn under penalty of perjury to that effect. The Declaration of Andre Tabayoyon, a Vietnam veteran and their former security chief at Gold Base, attests to the literal armory they have there, including guns and explosives. The Feds aren't interested. This is the same base that claims to be "terrorized" by a 57 year old engineer with a picket sign 300 yards away, across a barbed-wire fence with motion detectors and armed guards. They also run and scurry whenever anyone else shows up with a picket sign, even little old ladies, other computer nerds, and his wife Arel.
Incidentally any BATF involvement in a raid on Scientology would be disastrous. Not because the Scientologists would be likely to display armed resistance (though it's possible as they're getting crazier lately), but because the BATF are poorly-trained idiot goons who would screw up the raid so badly that Scientology's army of lawyers would eat them for breakfast.
They caved.
Why did they not do the same thing when MicroSoft threatened them?
Microsoft, as evil as it is, when presented with a threat of extreme public humiliation and embarrassment, and while in the middle of extremely ugly antitrust litigation, can be beaten into submission when it is made clear to them that they are being completely unreasonable and that future activities of that sort might damage shareholder value and even harm them in ongoing litigation.
Scientology has no such ability to make a sane and rational decision and will gladly throw millions of dollars into the toilet for no other reason than to show that they can. Furthermore, they were actually right on the issue of law. Furthermore, see RTC v. Netcom. They sue over that, they win, Slashdot loses, and a few hundred thousand dollars of Andover's money disappears into thin air with no positive effect whatsoever.
I don't like that situation, but they made the right choice from a legal perspective. If the post they removed had been even remotely defensible as fair use, the argument for yanking it would be weaker; however, the article in question was blatant copyright infringement, the exact same material has been found in numerous courts to be a copyright infringement, and the case would be completely unwinnable. Any lawyer who did not advise their client to remove the material in question would be guilty of malpractice, and anyone who ignored their lawyer giving such advice would be a fool.
Retaining the article would just have been a typical rebellious Slashdot action, no different from saying no to Microsoft, and would have generated relatively little interest. Removing the article was a total bombshell and created one of the busiest threads in Slashdot history, linked to a damning article filled with virtually every major link to Scientology-critical material, including essentially the same material hosted by Karin Spaink, who has won a court case in the Netherlands allowing her to retain a fair use of the materials without quoting them in their entirety.
This created a huge amount of public awareness of Scientology that had only sporadically been aired on Slashdot prior to that. This damaged Scientology's credibility even further and represented a very successful blow against this fascistic cult, and made very clear that they were behaving unreasonably and in a silly fashion, and not only not defending any important interests of theirs, but actually acting against their own interests. This is called "Operation Footbullet," when Scientology graciously agrees to do outrageously malicious and stupid things to damage its own reputation.
There is a principle known in hierarchical structures as "malicious compliance." The Slashdot guys gave a brilliant demonstration of the concept. Did they back down? Sure. Did they cave in? I don't think so. They used their own "reasonable compliance" as a weapon with which to strike back at the enemy, while availing themselves of the invulnerable protection against civil liability given by the DMCA.
Attacking and damaging the enemy while yourself remaining unexposed to attack is the height of strategy. They did good. Anyone who criticizes good strategy as cowardice misses the point. There's no such thing as "bravery" or "cowardice" against a malicious entity like Scientology that wants to destroy freedom of speech in toto. There is winning, and there is losing, and that is all. Slashdot won that round, by ducking and letting the opponent punch himself out.
Karin Spaink's website is at this URL. http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink
But the US did get booted off the human rights board and then decided to withold membership fees to protest.
The slashdot 2 minute between postings limit: /.'ers since Spring 2001.
Pissing off hyper caffineated
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
Henson was arrested at gunpoint today, according to The Register
The info pages at http://freehenson.tripod.com/ have either been removed, or they're slashdotted. Are there any mirrors out there?
Burntsand, who lives in Canada and is free to tell the Church of Scientology to kiss my ass
If the courts are enforcing Scientology, think of how it'll be when Shrub's judicial appointees have their say about the just powers of Christian scams, now in line for massive federal funding.
Corporations, religious organizations, governments - only when they are well-divided do individuals have any chance of breathing free. We were alright under Clinton because the Congress - dominated by the strange religio-corporate hybrids that have become the GOP - was Clinton's throat and vice versa.
How can we divide them now? We almost need a Man From Mars to show up their shoddy scams, a true religion to shatter the unholy alliance.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
I should have made it clear that this is a true story rather than a play.
Tim.
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
But what would happen if I dialed a number, got the engaged tone and then said,
"You're on that *** phone again. I'm going to have to cut your tongue out."
I can see how someone who overheard the comment could complain about the language (Substitute suitable words for ***) but I can't really see how a court could consider this to be a threat unless you repeat it to the person it was intended for.
On the radio (BBCR4) on saturday there was a couple who had returned home to discover that the cat was walking round with the budgie in its mouth.
The woman screamed and then the husband shouted "You bloody cat. I'm going to kill you."
The neighbour rushed around expecting (hoping?) to stop a murder but all was well in the end.
Tim.
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
Have I got this right. Can you really be prosecuted for threatening someone even if they couldn't have been threatened by it. It will be thought police next.
In 2001, when the thought police come Knocking at your door. Think? "I'm Out".
Tim.
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
News of Mark Twain's resurrection have been greatly exaggerated.
Before you go frothing about those evil, greedy Scientologists(like myself, I guess), think about what would have happened to the guy had he been saying this in relation to a Jewish Mosque.
/.'s membership list, I think I could have YOU prosecuted under this law. And NO, you don't get a chance to explain the context of that remark. It's clear to all, as is your guilt. Turn yourself in now, you terrorist.
If he said anything about a Jewish mosque, it'd be ignored as incomprehensible babble, as Jews worship in synagogues, and Muslims worship in mosques. Talking about a Jewish mosque makes about as much sense as talking about a "Church" that operates like a con game.
intending to obtain Slashdot's membership list, firebombing the building the servers are in and hunting down the staff and members one by one and killing them painfully
Hmm. Taken out of context, this sounds pretty frightening. If I'm on
--
Freeper Logic
You're scaring me pal, I'm going to sue you!
"Present them!"
"Touche teacher!"
disclaimer: This comment is invalid when taken out of context from the entire conversation or discussion thread. In order to be considered valid, all posts in this thread, from all respondents, must be taken and considered as a whole.
One suggestion would be to appeal to the Supreme Court and make it a constitutional issue. I'm sure some of the heavy-weight laywers would get involved in it to solve this problem once-and-for-all.
Seriously, it now boils down to hitting a Canadian judge who is pissed off enough about the US to risk embarassing the Canadian government by granting asylum to a US citizen, and thus implying that it is possible to be persecuted in the US. Oh, the Horror, the Horror! What next, a crimes against humanity case against Henri Kissinger at the Hague?
On the other hand, the odds are against him.
-- look, cheese ahoy!
Well - how about speaking ill of Ford Motor Company?
Did anyone know that our friends @ 2600 mag are being sued by Ford now? Please see fordreallysucks.com
If you are in Windsor/Detroit you can come to the Courthouse and support them tomorrow.
I read the article on midiclorians.. Interesting...
What really amazes me is the birth of $cientology. $cientology is a 'new religion' invented by Hubbard. Over the next 200 years - if we permit it to grow by giving it tax breaks etc etc and not identifying it as the sham cult it is - what stops it from becoming Christianity for the new age? They have a cool-new-hip techno hook (that emeter thingy), they have aliens, they have copyrights, they have celebrities - Fuck man, they have it down. Will $cientology will grow into a 'respectable religion'. $cientologists know how to play the 'fair game' with lawyers and whatnot to drum up 'popular' support by claiming refuge behind 'religious freedom'. "Middle America" who are Christians, Muslims, Jews and Hindus know how important it is to defend their 'religious freedoms'... they are going to get hoodwinked into supporting these crazies.
How long until the 'jedi movies', stories of 'midiclorians', claims by the Aussies of "jedi" as their religion are all tied together in a grand unified story of their acceptance (and righteousness). 300 years from now, will the fog of history cloud all the real stories behind the origins of these 'things'. Will they be mis-represented by the $cientologists as history (proof) of the birth of their religion. Hubbard's popular faux-pas will be lost - the quotes of him saying 'if you want to be rich start a religion', histories of his family of him being out of control with his drug use, the 'fair game' letters all hidden by copyright...
We are all truly lucky to live in these days - we may be witnessing the birth of a religion that will explode over the next 1000 years. We may sit back and think - smugly - at what a joke it is that this cult is taken seriously, how bizarre their 'tactics' are. Anyone who recounts these stories will be marginalized as a 'religious bigot' and put in jail (article shows its already happening). The 'Operation Clambake' event will be shown as a moral victory - a testament to the conviction of the founders of the religion to overcome religious persecution. But make no mistake; this is a very fucking big deal.
What do you do when humanity grows out of our old religions.. the old emotional crutches and fairy tales -- you create new ones with stories based on the times, one appealing to modern people - with technology, stories of aliens, religious-technology devices..
is anyone else as amazed at the whole event as I am? It tells as much about Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism and their origins.
"It is true that liberty is precious -- So precious that it must be rationed." -- Lenin
Nice troll.
He is leaving the country because he would be put in jail in Riverside County by a (most likely) Scientologist judge. There is very little chance of an appeal in Riverside County with a case involving Scientology. I would have left the country too. I know Keith, and I'm glad he's safe and not in jail.
Not Bart!
Nancy Cartwright, voice of Bart Simpson, is a Scientologist! I found her name on a list of Scientologist celebrities at this page Sob, sob...
Steven
-- I have marked myself unwilling to moderate-- I don't have other accounts to artificially inflate the karma of
In his novel, The Joke, Milan Kundera traces the treatment of a joke by the communist government of Czechoslovakia. I recommend it to readers interested in the Scientology affair.
Mike O'Donnell http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~odonnell/
I am glad Martin Luther King did not think like you.
I'm glad the Dali Lama did think like him and fled Nepal. Otherwise, instead of alerting others to the illegality of the events that befell the Nepalese, he'd be assembling Nikes and burning counterfeit copies of Office2000.
Every major world religion - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc, and all of the major divisions within those religions have one glaring difference with Scientology. They are all open and direct about their beliefs and positions. Even television preachers freely share what they see as the truth. Sure, there are fringe movements within all major religions that like the idea of the "mystery cult" and like feeling like they understand some truth that others don't, but they are generally dismissed as cults (in, of course, the negative sense of the word) by their own parent religions.
Even when Christianity was controling Europe or Islam was conquering North Africa, they preached their doctrines in the open for all to see and here, and acted by the light of day. Scientology, on the other hand, is a religion of sewer rats hiding in the cracks and the shadows, ready to swarm out on anyone who happens to get uncomfortably close to them. In a bitter irony to their professed interest in liberating the human mind, their behaviour is as programed and predictable as a caged animal that strikes at anything it sees.
The Establishment clause of the first amendment was to protect the states from the federal governement. None of the states (and it was the states, not the people, who ratified the Constitution) wanted a federal government that could establish a national religion. Maryland was still Catholic and Pennsylvania was still Quaker.Yes, scientology is protected (despite insisting in its early years that it was a science, not a religion). But protection as a religion does not entail protection from criticism. Scientology has always been of the position that it does. Indeed, its very declaration of itself as a religion was in order to be free from the peer review of legitimate psychology that continuing to claim to be a science would entail.
"It's past time to get some Libertarians in Washington."
Man, you are so right it isn't even funny....
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
Tom Cruise is like 5'4" & couldn't beat his way out of a wet paper bag with a chainsaw and a hole in the side.
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
Here is all he needs to show the Canucks...
The purpose of [a lawsuit] is to harass and discourage rather than to win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly.
"A Manual on the Dissemination of Material" (first published in Ability, the Magazine of DIANETICS and SCIENTOLOGY, 1955) Note: this paragraph has apparently been purged from later editions of the "Manual".
I think they are going for the ruin him entirely bit....
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
It's a vary interesting read, and it gives insight into why it's in the vested interest of the organization, not to tolerate descenters.
I think you meant dissenters. The descenters are the ones that are still Scientologists.include $sig;
1;
I wish he had not fleed to Canada. Was he fearing for his life? This case needs to be appealed and overturned, but can it be done with him in Canada? It does not look good with him in Canada. I guess the word is to be careful when flaming powerful organizations who are sensitive.
I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but I do take your point. Everything I know tells me that the CoS is wrong, yet that goes against everything I belive about living without sticking my nose in other peoples' bussines. Blurry lines are always the most intersting ones. My logical deduction is that if these guys are around for no reason save power and money, then fuck them, burry them. If they're here for religous puropses, to give a glimmer of hope in this often grey world, more power to them. And you really can't compare the evils done be them to the evils done by the Chrisianity, Islam, or even Judaism. Im not familiar with enough other religions to put them in there to.
"Cornflakes are not the innocent critters they seem"- Sterling Morrison
Your commenting on the constitution made me thing about it, and I know this is offtopic. I really think that the Constitution is out of date. It's writers did a damn good job, but I think it has to many loopholes, or so it seems. They could never have immagined the issues that would be brought up by the Constitution, so I think it's out of date. The only problem now is figuring out how to get new one writen that isn't corrupt...
"Cornflakes are not the innocent critters they seem"- Sterling Morrison
Sorry, that's 234 characters. You only get 120... Why not just copyright all of your posts? Like the copyrighted laws discussed a few days ago. Then you can limit who is able to reproduce them and who can (and cannot) bring them into court.
Well, if you can copyright the law, why can't you copyright the evidence?
Keith's sentencing hearing was yesterday and his motion to postpone sentencing pending appeal apparently didn't go anywhere. So he'd have been thrown in jail and by the time his appeals were complete, his 200-day recommended sentence would have been over. However, since he wouldn't have had any income in jail, he'd have likely lost his house (he's permitted to keep it in bankruptcy under the homestead exemption). As it is, he's applying for permission to work in Canada, so he'll be able to keep making payments. There's some more info on this on the currently-slashdotted Free Henson site, which will hopefully be back in operation soon.
http://www.gwbush.com/gwtv/
"There Ought to be Limits to Freedom!" --George W Bush (at a Press conference at the Texas State House, May 21, 1999. Speaking about this website)
...and while we're on the subject of "silly political views", your courage is commendable. I know that I always post as "AC".
- - - If the sun is a star, why can't I see it at night?
Be very afraid. Our right to free speech is almost gone. Even (y)our president thinks that "there ought to be limits to freedom." We can barely express an opinion without the fear that we will offend someone. How long before Bill Gates himself sues everyone here for speaking ill of Microsoft?
- - - If the sun is a star, why can't I see it at night?
Can you say "chilling effect" boys and girls. I knew you could.
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
I don't think that the man should be running to Canada. If he is going to commit such inflammatory actions then I think he should take up the responsibility and face the injustice that he has provoked in order to showcase his cause, otherwise, he will just cause the erosion of more of our freedoms.
If you look at the details of it he is claming asylum on a "Human Rights Violation Refugee Claim" in Canada. If a Canadian court upholds that (and I don't think they have traditionally been favourable to scientology) then that would certainly make for an interesting standoff, and quite possibly more adverse Scientology publicity than if he appeals to court which might rule no more fairly than the orriginal. A refugee claim based on human rights violations is probably also more likely to bring the freedom aspect out in the media than what you suggest.
The constitution says nothing about individuals interfering with religion. It only says the government may not. But since most people don't have the first clue as to what the constitution actually says it is not suprising that this verdict came down the way it did. Today, free speech covers everything except what is deemed "politically incorrect", and this guys speech was apperently deemed "hateful". I say keep saying what you want. They can't throw everyone in jail.
I'd also like to point out the correct citation for Henson's "destroy them utterly" quote. It comes from L. Ron Hubbard's 1955 article "The Scientologist, A Manual on the Dissemination of Material". Hubbard wrote: The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly.
This is one of the most famous of all Hubbard quotes, having been cited in dozens of legal cases against the Scientology cult. It is a reflection of Scientology's "fair game" policy, which is still in full effect today. Keith Henson is just the latest in a long string of victims. But he may yet have the last laugh.
no.
fisfhcuerk.
First, it's got to be a religion, rather than a ponzi-scheme-like business.
-- .sig are belong to us!
All your
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Your work, of course, being to convince people that they need "help" removing the alien spirits that inhabit their bodies. This "help", of course, comes at a price, which remarkably enough is directly proportional to the amount of money the person has. And sometimes, the price is death.
It never ceases to amaze me that the "church" of scientology is based on what was clearly a manuscript for L-Ron's newest sci-fi novel. Too bad he died before he could let anyone in on the joke...
Perhaps a disclaimer is necessary in the signature block if you are posting any where publicly that could cause you problems. Something to the effect of:
disclaimer: This comment is invalid when taken out of context from the entire conversation or discussion thread. In order to be considered valid, all posts in this thread, from all respondents, must be taken and considered as a whole.
FACT: There are make-believe religions. (Scientology, Moonies, Islam, etc.)
FACT: There is true religion. (Christianity)
If you think that there's a difference between 'make-believe' religion and 'true' religion, I have a bridge in London you might want to buy.
By the way, I've informed the Taliban regime about your feelings on Islam. They're coming over to kick your ass right now. Run while you still have legs.
Does my bum look big in this?
2 fucking people in Hollywood belong to Scientology and that automatically makes it a dominant religion? HA!!!
Let's see, Ben Stiller & Adam Sandler (among others), are Jewish, all of Hollywood must be Jewish right?
The anti-freedom, "secret torah" nature of it would seem to preclude the individualist
Oh, you mean Christianity?
I don't see how any one in their right mind could belong to scientology, or how anyone in their right mind can make the conclusion that because 2 people of a group belong to a religion, it must be the favored religion of the rest of the group. I'm not following your logic.
Besides, the right wing likes to force their ideas on to others, like prayer in schools, anti-choice, etc., much like the scientology church tries to convert everyone.
That Tom Cruise doesn't come on up to Canada and kick his ass John Woo-style!
--
--hongpong.com
Scientology has had critics online for a long long time. They routinely pursue them more vigorously than any other organization in modern times. The msot notable of online criticisms of Scientology is called Operation Clambake and has been around for many years. The proprietor of this collection of information has helped several people high in the Scientology organization 'escape' the clutches of that organization. It's a vary interesting read, and it gives insight into why it's in the vested interest of the organization, not to tolerate descenters.
--CTH
--
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
Let's found The Church of Free Knowledge, which asserts that scientific and creative knowledge can not be owned and must be disseminated freely as much as possible.
It is a sin to withold such information, and therefore we are required to spread DeCSS, One-Click, and everything else far and wide. Failing to do so will result in our condemnation to the Hell of Flaming Ignorance.
Who, except those hell-bound atheists in the RIAA and MPAA, could blame us for spreading DeCSS?
-- I have monkeys in my pants.
If we have secrets,
If we ask for money,
If we fear,
If we ban,
We emulate Scientology's methods.
We can stand for the truth as we find it, shine light on it, and those of us who have found the way out, can point toward Jesus. Prayer is much more useful than any of the other methods I just listed. True prayer requires you to be humble, admitting that you can't solve the problem with your own abilities...
information is immaterial
FACT: There are make-believe Christians.
FACT: There are true Christians.
Discerning the difference between the two is easier made by non-Christians. They all know that we are told to love our neighbors.
Islam is not a make-believe religion. It's as real as Christianity. See what the Koran says about Jesus Christ and John the Baptist: Jesus is who he said he is, and he's coming back like he said he would. And John the Baptist, whom the Koran called "Yahya", is described as fulfilling the prophecy at the end of Malachi, just like Christians believe.
You may want to consider refining your definition of the word 'make-believe'. It doesn't quite hold up to the strength of the rest of your sentence.
information is immaterial
See, we recognized a few generations ago that SOMEtimes the intolerable is actually the better way. In this case, Scientology hides behind so many secrets that it is pretty clear they have little new to offer the world.
Yet we must tolerate them, or else we become intolerable, just like them.
If we do it any other way, we regress, not progress. It's logic which is fuzzy to non-Americans. Why? Something peculiar has come over the waters to America: nearly every single person living in America is a descendent of someone who wanted a better life. And is a descendent of someone who was oppressed by racism as soon as he arrived, but overcame it with hard work and faith in a better future...
information is immaterial
Your version is mostly hearsay. Give me some facts, please. I'm from Missouri.
information is immaterial
Be full of faith, seek truth, and stand for it when you find it.
People who fear God are in on the secret that fear of God is love of one's neighbor. That would be the only fear worth advocating...
information is immaterial
We must be careful not to INVITE Scientologists to take us on. Why? Because they will, whether we invite them or not. We must not have the hubris to think that we might succeed in a court case because we have many people on our side. No, Scientologists keep secrets, which means they accept the premise that it is permissible to lie. We Open Source folks cannot tolerate lies as easily, and are thus handicapped in the arena populated by attorneys, where lies are fabricated willfully. Scientologists also have nearly inexhaustible financial resources, because they demand money from their followers. They also can be protected in many legal systems as a RELIGION, while Slashdot cannot be so protected. Thus, it may be said that Slashdot _might not_ win any arbitrary court case against them. Thus we should not specifically invite them to sue.
The reality that they will sue us someday is quite tenable. What we must realize is that when Scientologists sue or attack something like Slashdot, they make a LOT of people aware of their faults. This realm of philosophy is where we win; an actual court case may or may not be ours for the taking. The beauty of Open Source is that anyone who criticizes it soon finds that Open Source is a better way than criticism...
Who can criticise one who publicizes all criticism?
I believe this is why Jesus kept no secrets; he knew that he would die because of his teachings, but that his teachings would live forever, because he never taught in secret.
We are into Open Source for the nobility of idea alone, not for the supremecy of the mortal courtroom. Thus, we, like all martyrs, must be willing to die for our ideas, that our ideas might live forever. They live longer depending on how purely we held to the idea of "No Secrets." For when the carrier of No Secrets dies, the idea is reborn in a thousand new forms, made durable by yet another death of innocence and purity, that one single thing which causes all men to weep.
information is immaterial
Don't read /. much, eh? OF COURSE WE'RE SMARTER!
--
--
I cannot remember where I found them, if you have ever read their OT texts(for example if you pay 300,000 dollars, they will teach you how Jesus was a pedophile). A million dollars and you get to hear about when they are in control of the world, non-converts will be put in facilities to be re-educated. It is pretty scary stuff, and cannot see intelligent people getting involved in it. Even alot of bib time hollywood scientologists (many of whom owe their jobs to scientology) are finally speaking out against it(Tom Cruise for example.) I just found this site: http://www.scientology-kills.org
Well, there is only one solution then, isn't it?
Mart"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Ahem! You have not heard of anarchism? And you post from a .edu domain??!
Mart"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Hate to break it to you, but a right wing group calling itself anarchist is about the same as the cracker/hacker situation. Bakunin's ideology is definitely left-wing, ISTR he even called Lenin a reactionary
If you want to continue this discussion, we can move it to e-mail (yes it's valid), as we're moving off-topic, and I don't particularly want to incur the wrath of the moderators <g>.
Mart"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Most Americans are willing to give up certain rights and privileges in order to lessen crime. This is at least part of the gun control debate (those for gun control are willing to give up their right--or privilege, depending on how you read the law--in exchange for less killing). I am not opposed to all of this forfeiture of our rights--certainly the violent crime rate in America demands action, but there has to be a line that we NEVER cross. That, no matter how bad it gets, we do not give up certain rights. A right to free speech is one of those. Granted, no one has the right to make violent threats against another, but, unless the full context of the threat is known, a lot of innocent language could be construed as threatening. This takes away far more of our freedoms that I am personally comfortable (it is also suspicously close to a lot of the action taken against teenagers who may or may not have threatened violence)
My question is, where is the line drawn? Do we truly have a right to free speech at all? Or is the right more of a privilege--we can say certain things, but the scope of what we can say is very narrow. Lately, it seems like the latter is the case. If you are a high-school student, don't talk about violence in any way. If you are against a church, make sure your wording is nice. Is that free speech? I am not sure....
"That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others"
Resistance Isn't Futile!
... imagine the lawsuits ..
"I'm gonna nuke your base"
"My artillery are gonna pound your factories into the ground"
Surely if this escalates, we'll be back to telly-tubby style games and not quake unreal duke nukem type fun ? Does this mean numeric key auto-taunts are now illegal (if taken out of context). What with 7 years of my gaming activity subject to EU scrutiny if certain bills get passed (I guess ISP's will have to "log" my quake movements, just in case I spray paint a subversive message now in some frag-fest) , what countries are safe now ?
Wow internet + lawyers + obsessives = interesting worktime reading, dontchathink ? Sure beats real work....
Two wrongs may not make a right, but three
If this guy is going to jail for discusing missile tracking and guidance systems, I'm definetly in trouble for some of my Quake 3 conversations.
;P
---
Man I hate Campers, all Campers. They are the scum of the earth as far as I'm concerned. Every time I see one, I pull out my rocket launcher and turn them in to a red misty memory.
---
see what I mean.
RA7
---
"Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds" - RWE
Unless:
[SNIP]
Am I forgetting something?
That there is no God...
Dave
is a God-given right that Americans enjoy.
Unless:
It causes harm to someone.
It is a direct threat to personal well-being.
It violates someone's intellectual property.
It could possibly be used to violate someone's intellectual property.
It is construed by someone to be offensive in some way.
It is degrading to some group of people to which you do not belong, unless it is derogatory to a group that is the majority. Then it's ok.
It is, in some way, derogatory towards a corporate entity.
It somehow inhibits someone else from possibly making some money, in some way, at some time, at some place, that will be disclosed at your trial.
Am I forgetting something?
You can tell a college man, but you can't tell him much.
A number of people have asked why the defense was not allowed to reveal the full content of the usenet posts.
The fact is that the defense was forbidden from revealing anything to the jury that would show that the "religion" in question was Scientology since this would have (rightly so) prejudiced them. In fact, there was one post where Keith quoted L. Ron's babbling. Because the jury could not discover that it was Hubbard's quote, they could only assume that the quote was actually Keith's!
The Co$ lawyers also put into evidence pictures of Keith picketing, but with the words on his sign removed from the picture.
"Scientology is both immoral and socially obnoxious. It is corrupt sinister and dangerous...."
Justice Latey, ruling in the High Court of London
Why did he run?
Scientology runs numerous front groups that serve to indoctrinate people into their cult. They have over fifty years experience in mind control.
One of their front groups is called Criminon and pretends to rehabilitate prisoners. The Co$ has mentioned that their Criminon program is operating in the county jail where Keith may be incarcerated.
L.Ron said that the thing to do with critics was to "dispose of them quietly and without sorrow".
Would you want to end up in jail under these circumstances?
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
I hope Mr. Henson finds the asylum he seeks (I'm Canadian). The Free Speech issues seem self-evident here. However, he should be aware that we have some Hate Crime laws in the Great White North that (sometimes) are heavy-handed - although not likely to the extent to which Mr. Henson is currently experiencing.
As well, the Scientology folks have no right to claim any injury here. I had a personal experience with these twits when I was in my teens. While walking down the street with a friend one day, some clean-cut guy (looked exactly like a mid-level manager-drone from M$ - complete with Dockers) jumped out from around the corner and offered us a free "personality test". Upon learning that we were minors, he offered to give us the tests and then discuss the results and "possible remedies" with our parents - just to be above board. Very spooky.
CrazyLegs
"Pork!!" said the Fish, and we all laughed.
"A perfect defence in this case would be to take quotes out of context out of the bible (or, barring that, various world leaders, the procecuting DA, the Judge himself, fairy tales, whatever) and ask if they sound like "terrorist words" then reveal the souce is "Mother Goose" or whatever... "
ROFLMAO! Yep. But apparently his attorney wasn't Clarence Darrow... However, they'd likely not have gotten away with it. Judges are very egotistical these days, most of them seem to suffer delusions of "Napoleonic Complex" and likely BOTH he and his attorney would have been jailed for contempt.
Judges have a practially unlimited power to jail for contempt anyone in their courtroom (and this is a MUCH abused power that should be taken away).
The judge in the Scopes Monkey Trial, though heavily biased towards Williams Jennings Bryan who was arguing the state's case against Scopes, had enough honor and decency to give the lightest possible punishment to the teacher after Darrow's stunt.
I don't think many judges of today are as principled. For one thing, judges are FAR more powerful today than 50 years ago. 50 years ago, judges INTERPRETED law, and didn't make law.
Today they make law all the time. Such as "Kaplan's Law" extending the DMCA to outlaw links.
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
"Nice troll, you don't supply any proof that scientology is the favorite religion of the far left, in fact, that's bullshit."
Really? John Travolta, Tom Cruise, the poster children for $cientology are of WHICH side of the aisle?
They are confirmed left wingers. I've yet to hear of any conservatives or libertarians mentioned as $cientologists. The anti-freedom, "secret torah" nature of it would seem to preclude the individualists, whom mostly are from the ranks of libertarians (which is what I am) and conservatives from being interested.
$cientology is the dominant religion (such as it is) of Hollyood, and Hollywood is also dominated by leftists.
=== The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
http://www.xenu.net
I can't stand these people. Copyrighted trade secrets? What a bunch of assholes. Let's just nuke Clearwater. Oh, shit! That just made me a terrorist!
I spent a year in Iraq looking for WMD and all I found was this lousy sig.
Or, if you're actually brave, you'll refuse to cow under the perceived threat of rare circumstances like this. This is a horrible miscarriage of justice, but I find it hard to believe it to be a common occurrence. On the other hand, if I were to watch everything I say in a public forum from this day onwards because of this incident...well, that would be a common occurrence, and greatly magnify the damage caused by this. Furthermore, I have enough faith in this country and our Bill of Rights to think that the better choice is to accept the risk, and aim to set a precedent against such abuse of the law in the future.
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
So, I went to the links to check the context myself. It looks like freehenson.tripod.com is gone. Looks like someone has found a great way to muzzle the discussion. How long until slashdot cuts this discussion.... It would be nice to get the original source materials up somewhere.
I too want to blow up their silly 'chruch'. Can I go to jail now?
---
___
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
God bless Google
-Henry
"Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
Anyone on the far Right or far Left tends to think this way. The far Right (I'm a conservative, but I'm not a religious zealot.) thinks that all "bad" language is evil, and everyone should be shielded from it. The far Left thinks that it's the government's job to control what you see, hear, & say. As long as someone's not physically attacking, or disrupting the place, (or someone personally) I don't get my feathers ruffled. Well, as long as apathy reigns, things will get worse.
-- Liberalism is a mental disorder.
...unless it has a nuclear warhead on it.
There are only 3 non-scifi weapons of mass destruction:
1. Nuclear
2. Biological
3. Chemical
The famed "NBC" style of warfare.
How could he be prosecuted for that?
I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
How did the prosecution prove that Hensen sent the messages in question? I didn't notice any messages signed by Hensen in that thread. If he was dumb enough to testify in court that he wrote 'em, even if he considered the entire case against him to be a sham... well, hope he enjoys his new life in Canada.
Scientology is a dangerous cult? Maybe someone should call the Cult Awareness Network and let them know...oh wait CAN was annihilated by Scientology for expressing their concerns about the cult of Scientology.
And, who do we think we're fooling anyway? Oh sure, you can point to the very few cases where someone was going to do something terrible (say, shoot up a school) and announced thier intentions and no one paid attention... but compare and contrast that to the 100's of thousands of times that nothing happened at all. That's why it's such a shock. And how exactly does making voicing that sort of idea a crime solve the problem? Do you think that if language and communication is sanitized people will continue to announce that they are planning to commit violence? I doubt it. The reason they do it now is becaue it's reasonably 'safe'; no one takes them seriously.
But I digress. The whole purpose of free speech is that (within some very broad boundaries) you shouldn't have to fear prosecution for expressing your opinion. Those bondaries are getting awfully narrow.
From the outside looking in, it appears that Hubbard intended to set up a pyramid scheme and masquerade it as an organized religion. When you read the stuff on operation clambake, it appears that Hubbard intended to set up a pyramid scheme and masquerade it as an organized religion. Go figure...
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
It wouldn't be hard to get rid of the Co$; all you would have to do is attack it as an organization for its criminal acts under laws like RICO (the "fair game" practices are hard evidence of criminal conspiracy), throw any of the officials involved in these practices in jail and sell off the assets of the organization to compensate the victims. If the Co$ had no $, it would be toothless.
I see no reason why the same legal doctrine which destroyed the Klan in the south wouldn't suffice to eliminate the Co$ organization. Without the organization providing cover for the unlawful activities and sucking the money out of people's pockets, the practice itself would be pretty harmless.
--
Having 50 karma is an itchy feeling; I know I'll get
Scientists restrict study to entire physical universe; creationist
Strangely, for such a loyal slashdotter, these 2 posts seem to be your only ones.
He wasn't prosecuted for 'hanging around the org', it was for picketing the 'sekrit' Hemet base of the 'Billion Year Contract' paramilitary Sea Org.(They of the phony sailor suits)
Your lies and distortions would be amazing if they were'nt a recognized Scientology® sacrament.
Where did Henson ever 'threaten' to kill anyone, much less you or your family?
The only desire Scientology® has demonstrated since their original attempt to stifle discussion of Scientology at alt.religion.scientology dragged free-speech advocate Henson (and others) into the fray has been to stifle *all* discussion or criticism of Scientology®.
By *any* means necessary, legal or not. That the Cult has enough scammed money to succeed in the courts is no measure of their morality or ethics, unless you use Hubbard's definition of 'ethics' which is 'whatever's good for Scientology'.
Zinj
Funny... isn't his wife still picketing in his name?
Didn't your cult try to extort his silence by deposing his daughter after stealing her money?
Wasn't the deposition supposed to be at the Cult Headquarters, Center of Billion Year Contract slave labor and home of Cult Fuehrer David Miscavige, Hemet... in Riverside County...
Exactly the compound that you claimed was full of Scientologists 'terrified of Henson shooting Cruise Missles or abducting our diminuative leader with eagles'? How many cultists are there?
How many guns?
How many lawyers?
How many children of Sea Org members?
Isn't that where Cult Attorney Kendrick Moxon sent his daughter to look for squirrels?
Hmm?
Zinj
It's hard to say what's the most outrageous and insane part of the persecution of Keith Henson.
The core of this conviction is that the 'fear' expressed by a 'religion' requires no basis in reality whatsoever. Only the subjective claim of fear of cruise missles and notoriously diminutive Cult fuehrer David Miscavige's abduction by eagles was necessary.
That and a paraphrase from Cult 'Source', Hubbard himself, to 'destroy them utterly'.
"The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than to win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly."
- L. Ron Hubbard, A Manual on the Dissemination of Material, 1955
If the law were applied evenly, the Riverside DA would have to criminally prosecute his own City Planning Commission if an obsessive-compulsive claimed to be in fear of sidewalk cracks.
Certainly, all non-scientologists have a more reasonable fear of the intentions of the Scientology Cult, based on their own dogma, after all, even the FBI Threat Assessment Designation for the Cult of Scientology ranges from 'Organized Crime' to 'Paramilitary'.
"You want to know what happens when you clear everybody in that neighbourhood, the only thing that [Scientology] center can become used for is a political center. Because by the time you've done all this, you are the government..."
-- L. Ron Hubbard, lecture 9 January 1962, "Future Org Trends"
"Once the world is Clear - a nation, a state, a city or a village - the Scientology-organization in the area becomes its government! And once this has taken place the only policy accepted as valid is Scientology policy."
-- L. Ron Hubbard, taped lecture 9 January 1962, "Future Org Trends"
"There are men dead because they attacked us." - L. Ron Hubbard
"Somebody some day will say 'this is illegal'. By then be sure the orgs say what is legal or not."
- L. Ron Hubbard, HCOPL 4 January 1966
"This is the correct procedure:
1.Spot who is attacking us.
2.Start investigating them promptly for felonies or worse using our own professionals, not outside agencies.
3.Double curve our reply by saying we welcome an investigation of them.
4.Start feeding lurid, blood sex crime actual evidence on the attackers to the press.
Don't ever tamely submit to an investigation of us. Make it rough, rough on attackers all the way."
- L. Ron Hubbard, HCOPL 25 February 1966
In the few years I've known Keith Henson personally, he's been:
Physically assaulted by members of Scientology's OSA (Office of Special Affairs - the secret police)
Sued into bankruptcy for revealing 'secret' Cult doctrine that proposes removing space cooties to treat medical
problems, and trying to send that same information to the FDA.
Been himself, his wife and children, harasssed, stalked and threatened by officers of the cult.
Certainly Keith should have more fear of a multi-billion dollar UFO Cult than they of him.
Fortunately for society in general, and the freedom of speech we enjoy and want to continue to enjoy, Keith has been consistently brave enough to exercise his own constitutionally protected right to speak and protest the outrages of Scientology.
My level of respect for him is only matched by my level of disgust for the Cult of Scientology, its megalomanic leader, David Miscavige, and his henchmen, not to mention the Riverside district attorney who so cravenly allowed himself to be used as a stooge by an organization that despises everything democracy and justice stand for.
Zinjifar
Keith Henson's defense wasn't allowed to introduce any evidence of:
Who he was protesting against
Why he was protesting
The context of the usenet replies he made
The history of Scientology legal manipulation
The history of Scientology crimes and abuses
The 'Church' dogma requiring such abuses
Certainly, the fact that even the mention of Scientology® was forbidden, says much about what any reasonable juror, with all the facts, would have decided.
Zinj
Keith has over years done more 'sticking it out' in the courts than almost anyone else.
That has less to do with him being litagous, than being courageous enough to trust in a legal system that finally let him, and us, down entirely.
Of course Scientology® wants him to 'shut up'.
What makes you think they're any closer to that now than 5 years ago?
Last time I looked Canada had internet access. (More so than the Riverside County Jail anyway)
For some reason the ACLU has no interest in supporting civil liberties when the $10 billion 'church' of Scientology is involved.
Attorneys willing to invest their own effort and fortune in defending targets of the 'Church' such as Graham Berry, become targets themselves.
When a cult is willing to spend millions to force a $75k 'judgment' there is little to no financial motive for contingency attorneys. Criticizing Scientology is something someone does for the same reasons people object to genocide - because it's right.
Zinj
... that I am not a member of that cult and I do not practice or adhere to the teachings of one L. Ron Hubbard otherwise they could fire me at will, any time without severance pay.
Since I do not care so much for Freedom of Religion, as for Freedom FROM Religion I signed that one with a smile on my face!
BTW.. Any Scientologists reading this: Heil!
Hey guys, even though the whole potential "police state" issue is a really big problem you shouldn't take your eyes off the real game here. It is pretty obvious from reading all the associated articles which came with this posting that the problem here is the organisation that this guy is protesting against. This organisation is very large, very powerful and not frightened to use tactics which we would usually associate with guys like Stalin or Hitler to get people to follow their way. This organisation also has very strong links with this part of the world - so does it really surprise us that a "fair trial" wasn't seen here. Religious freedom is one thing but this isn't a religion - it's a mind controlling cult with some pretty frightening plans - we need to be awake to this and fight it as this is the real threat to our freedom and liberty.
Wow. Hope Slashdot keeps us up to date on what happens with this. I just *can't* believe there's legislation or case law which would allow his words to be used totally out of context in a court of law for charges as serious as this. WTF were the people drafting the law thinking of?
And why did he choose Canada? We might be good if you're facing the death penalty, but unless you can see some good Canadian law that would impede your extradition back to the US, I'm not so sure Canada is the best choice. (I'm Canadian, don't get me wrong, given my current information I support him fully.)
Finally, it might have been best if he had stayed in the US and fought it out in the higher appeals courts, where he could get the actual statute revoked. A law that's written in such a way as to totally ignore the context just can't be legal wrt other more basic and fundamental laws.
Just imagine Tom Green (MTV) visiting known $cientology sites -- I'd start watching MTV again!
I would hope that, sooner or later, somebody that the Scientologists try to be heavy-handed with will be able to stick it out in the court system (perhaps with help from the ACLU or other such groups) and/or inform the local media of their plight and cause exactly what the Scientologists DON'T want: Publicity. I doubt they'd be all that happy about this story appearing on, say, CNN.
Speaking of ACLU-like organizations, are there any specificly anti-Scientologist lawyer groups?
Maybe some people don't find humour in death threats. When did life become so black that murder is supposed to be funny and death threats a joke? You watch too much TV and play too many violent video games. And what is most funny is you railing aganist taking things out of context and how the jury came up with bad conclusions on snippets of conversation when that is exactly what you're basing your judgement on. Snippets taken out of context of the courtcase. Guess you think you're smarter than the judge, the defendant's lawyer, the defendant, and the jury put together.
While I think the motive behind the victim is reprehensible (to silence bigotry, i.e. free speech)
and while I think the law is unbelievably reactionary in what is considered a "terrorist threat"
I don't think that the man should be running to Canada. If he is going to commit such inflammatory actions then I think he should take up the responsibility and face the injustice that he has provoked in order to showcase his cause, otherwise, he will just cause the erosion of more of our freedoms.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Just another victim of the Co$ "fair game" doctrine (is the FBI taking notice?). Why are the Europeans smarter about this cult than Americans? http://www.clambake.org
His leaving the country makes a much bigger statement than going into appeals courts for the next 5-7 years and loosing all your money...
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
A perfect defence in this case would be to take quotes out of context out of the bible (or, barring that, various world leaders, the procecuting DA, the Judge himself, fairy tales, whatever) and ask if they sound like "terrorist words" then reveal the souce is "Mother Goose" or whatever...
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
One thing we could do is write the DA in the case and tell him what we think. Anyone have their name and address?
I believe this person could be shown the error of their ways by our community.
CLAM alert.
You gotta love a cult that uses FUD. Hmmmm, parallels between M$ and $cientology. Hmmmmmm.
WTF?
So, if I'm reading this right, under today's legal rules, Martin Luther could have been charged with "interfering with a religion" and "domestic terrorism" for posting his 95 theses.
I mean, come on! This is ridiculous. Is this the state of free speech in this country? Say whatever you want as long as you don't piss off someone with money? Like a powerful religious group ($cientology), corporation (Micro$oft), or even government?
So, what's next? Are they going to turn this:
I will take out the garbage.
This thing is going to kill me.
George W. Bush made a bad decision.
into this:
I will kill George W. Bush?
Give me a break.
For those of you who aren't sure, I won't.
Packing my bags and heading for Canada just in case,
-- If any of the above made sense, I assure it was purely by accident.
Scientologists - cultists? Blithering idiots? Suckers so deftly fooled by a failed science fiction writer in a scam that even P.T. Barnum would envy? Scientology is a fraud and scam perpetrated by scum that make our own American politicians look saintly by comparison. Those that follow the church and actually believe it's incomprehensible double-speak are morons of the worst sort and shouldn't be allowed to breed. It's about time that someone gave Scientology, the rat's-ass vermin of cult 'religions', a swift kick in the nuts. They need to be trounced, legally, and called out as the insane hucksters they really are. Seriously, what irks me the most is the way that so many people dance around the topic for fear of getting sued. To those quaking, quivering cowards I say "get a backbone, you pathetic geeks. Say what you think or get off the pot." Like this: Scientology is nothing more than a way to sucker people from their money under the shield of religion. Scientology is no better than any drug cartel, offering an incomprehensible salvation in return for your soul instead of the immediate gratification of cocaine or heroine - but just as invasive, just as mind-destroying, and just as bad. I believe that high-ranking scientologists perpetrate this fraud in full knowledge of exactly what it is, using the legal system to silence critics in their quest for money, power, and (most likely) the sexual favors of their converts. I've no doubt whatsoever that they'd commit any crime - *any* crime, including murder - to further their goals. I also have no doubt they have no respect whatsoever for the law, except where they can use it to further their own interests. Scientology isn't a religion or a church, but a criminal organization without morals or ethical principles. This is my judgement and I'll be damned if they think they can silence me from saying it wherever, whenever, and to whomever I please. If any scientologists out there think otherwise, I invite you to 'bite me'. Or sue. Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
Scientologists - cultists? Blithering idiots? Suckers so deftly fooled by a failed science fiction writer in a scam that even P.T. Barnum would envy?
Scientology is a fraud and scam perpetrated by scum that make our own American politicians look saintly by comparison. Those that follow the church and actually believe it's incomprehensible double-speak are morons of the worst sort and shouldn't be allowed to breed.
It's about time that someone gave Scientology, the rat's-ass vermin of cult 'religions', a swift kick in the nuts. They need to be trounced, legally, and called out as the insane hucksters they really are.
Seriously, what irks me the most is the way that so many people dance around the topic for fear of getting sued. To those quaking, quivering cowards I say "get a backbone, you pathetic geeks. Say what you think or get off the pot."
Like this: Scientology is nothing more than a way to sucker people from their money under the shield of religion. Scientology is no better than any drug cartel, offering an incomprehensible salvation in return for your soul instead of the immediate gratification of cocaine or heroine - but just as invasive, just as mind-destroying, and just as bad.
I believe that high-ranking scientologists perpetrate this fraud in full knowledge of exactly what it is, using the legal system to silence critics in their quest for money, power, and (most likely) the sexual favors of their converts. I've no doubt whatsoever that they'd commit any crime - *any* crime, including murder - to further their goals. I also have no doubt they have no respect whatsoever for the law, except where they can use it to further their own interests.
Scientology isn't a religion or a church, but a criminal organization without morals or ethical principles. This is my judgement and I'll be damned if they think they can silence me from saying it wherever, whenever, and to whomever I please.
If any scientologists out there think otherwise, I invite you to 'bite me'. Or sue.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
By being a religion DeCSS would be almost immune to law, and Church of DeCSS could even use the twisted copyright laws to it's advantage, same way as those whacko scientologists used to do it.
Anybody ready to join the congregation? ( I don't really have such a plan, but it's a sweet idea, that would be really fun to see played out in court.)
-- Another senseless waste of fine bytes.
So, all those people that died in wars in the past for the freedom that we all have today died for nothing? The right to free speech is one of our most basic rights...it's a shame to see a "religion" do this to a person....but that just goes to show what a group of motivated (right or wrong) people with lots of money can do....a government of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations....
Sent from your iPad.
I come to Slashdot to read about technology and it's implications. Not to read about crap like this. Why is Slashdot continuing to participate in these debates? The CoS has proven in the past that the law is on our side in these conflicts, so why continue this?
Personally? I do view what he said as threatening. Couple that with him hanging around the org, and you could have a situation where people felt their lives were threatened. Do I agree with the punishment that was meted out? No, not really. I feel that this was an overreaction, and they should have just ignored this idiot, unless he was able to bring real hard evidence forward to support his claims. At that point, the issues would have been addressed. Believe it or not, there is a justice system in place in the CoS which interacts with governmental law enforcement agencies as warranted. If someone commits a crime, they have to face the civil and criminal penalties they deserve. But no, he resorted to thinly veiled threats and inflammatory rhetoric in a public forum. That tells me he was full of shit.
If he had a real beef with the Church, he should have pursued legal channels to bring the "truth" out. Picketing was a good start. The criminal justice system does still work, kind of. Talking about killing my friends and family is NOT the way to go about it. Those are the actions of a disturbed person. If he showed up on my doorstep, I'd get my gun.
With what has happened to Scientologists in the past, and with what is happening in many countries in the world today, you never know what some whacko is going to do. If someone is talking about using weapons of mass destruction to destroy an entire religion, who knows when their frustration will turn from mere rhetoric to action? I have a sad certainty that there will be a first time. There will be some McVeigh type who believes that calm(or inflamed) speech is no longer effective, and thinks that a bomb will work better. From the looks of it, (s)he'll probably be a slashdotter..
If you have an actual problem with our organization and/or beliefs, let's talk about it in calm, respectful tones. We ARE listening. Just be aware that if you start threatening myself, my family or associates, I WILL respond accordingly, using every legal resource available.
We in Scientology use legal channels to correct grievances because that is the correct way to go about it. Members of a lot of other religions believe in simply killing you if you disagree with them.
His minor daughter. (You know what LRH says about omitted data, Zinj!) I think harassing a teenager is pretty low.
Maybe not as low as having Bob Minton's grade-school-age daughters followed. Maybe not as low as sending a PI to stalk the mayor's 12-year-old son in the public library. Certainly not as low as locking a little deaf-mute girl or a 4-year-old boy in the chain locker of a ship.
Pretty damn low, though.
Kristi
Scientology Lies
> Nancy Cartwright, voice of Bart Simpson, is a Scientologist! I found her name on a list of Scientologist celebrities at this page Sob, sob...
Tis true.
She recently came to San Francisco on her book tour, giving us an opportunity to picket the Borders where she was speaking. It was great - instead of the run-down Tenderloin area where the Scientology org is, we got to picket in crowded Union Square, destination for loads of shoppers and tourists (including lots of Europeans, who often have a better understanding of Scientology's totalitarian tendencies than my countryfolk).
I wouldn't picket her just for being a Scientologist, but she promotes Scientology on her website, as I mention in the flier I gave out at Borders.
Kristi
Scientology Lies
Keith was offered something like five years' probation for pleading guilty to one of the lesser charges. One of the conditions would have been unannounced home visitation and searches with Scientology representatives present.
Everybody who'd cop that plea (even assuming you could stomach pleading guilty if you knew yourself to be innocent) raise your hands.
Shades of the Scientology agents' presence during the 1995 raids.
Does anybody know how often anyone other than the parole officer is permitted to be present at a parole home visit like this? It seems mighty weird to me.
Just a rumor, mind you - but maybe the Riverside DA, Grover Trask, would care to comment? (909) 766-2370 .
Kristi
Scientology Lies
In my initial post, I said that my home address has never been on the web.
A few nice folks have e-mailed me to point out that they could see my Fillmore St. address on my web site and in the whois database.
Thing is, that is NOT my home address. That's a mail drop. (I run an indie record label that had an open demo submission policy for ten years. I didn't want enthusiastic band members showing up on my doorstep.)
My HOME address is on a different street, several blocks away.
Nevertheless, Scientology managed to find my home address with no problem. That's where they picket me.
I might also point out that, when I started picketing, I used a nym, since I was aware of their tendency to harass their critics. It only took them 2 1/2 months for them to let me know they knew who I was (by dropping my name on a.r.s.); 2 months after that, they began picketing my home and handing out the libellous fliers with my name on them. Interestingly, the first revenge picket occurred at my San Francisco home in retaliation for my picketing them in Los Angeles that day. They knew I wasn't home, but the picketing effort was coordinated enough that they responded to a picket in LA with one in San Francisco. After their first revenge picket, I posted to a.r.s. to acknowledge their outing and reclaim my name.
(Why do they picket me when I'm not home? I'm not sure, but I think they're attempting to turn my neighbors against me. Since I have long-term, good relationships with my neighbors, that strategy backfired.)
Anyway, to clarify - my HOME address, where I've been repeatedly picketed by Scientology representatives, has never been in the phone book or on the web. The one you can find on the web is a mail drop.
Thanks to those who mentioned this to me.
Kristi
Scientology Lies
> Now this is libelous - open and shut. You should file suit, then submit a /. story and ask for donations to your legal fund.
Heh. Don't think it hasn't occurred to me.
Of course, the courts are Scientology's favorite playground, so a person who's been libelled has to think twice (at least) before pursuing matters there.
But it's certainly an option I continue to consider, and of course every month, at every picket, they hand out more libellous fliers, resetting the clock on the statute of limitations.
I've had a very interesting chat with the Small Claims Court advisor on just that very thing. And my handlers' regular presence at my pickets would certainly make serving papers easy.
Kristi
Scientology Lies
I currently picket Scientology once a month (first Saturday of every month); I picketed a little more often when I started out.
I make every effort to be courteous, cheery, and non-confrontational when I picket. I greet the Scientologists I know, especially the handlers who come out to try to distract or provoke me, with a friendly "Hi! Nice to see you!" but I don't try to discuss confidential Scientology doctrine - or indeed, anything - with Scientologists who don't want to talk to me. I'm there to educate the public and to encourage people to contact public officials about Scientology's continuing pattern of illegal acts.
Although I have never had any legal hassles over my web site - no claims of copyright infringement, despite my tiny bits of fair-use quoting, and no trademark or libel threats - I have been followed after pickets (both by car and on foot), been verbally provoked (including being slandered with accusations of hate crimes and statutory rape and of being on "psych drugs", and being called a bitch and told "you can suck my dick") (... and frankly, the obscenities don't bother me - I just think it's strange behavior for representatives of a church to display to the public), and had regular revenge pickets at my home, with Scientology reps videotaping anyone who came and went from my apartment building. (My home address has never been publicly available, not in the phone book, not on the web.) Scientology reps have distributed libellous fliers to my neighbors. As part of the biggest denial-of-service attack in net history, they forged disgusting racist a.r.s. posts in my name (which, of course, they did to dozens of other critics as well). Those posts have been resurrected at google.
Recently, three different Scientologists have implied that I'm next to be charged the way Keith was. The first was in e-mail.
The second was at a picket; as I was leaving, I playfully called out to my handler, Craig, "Will I see you later?" (asking if he was planning to come revenge-picket me, as is his wont). He asked, "Is that a threat?" I said, "How could asking if I'll see you later possibly be a threat?" He said "It sounded like a threat to me."
(After what Scientology did to Gerry Armstrong, I carry a visible tape recorder with me at all pickets. Some day I might get a helmet cam, but for now at least I have audio of these types of exchanges.)
The third was in a recent post to a.r.s., which you can find by searching "kristi slatkin thetans outfit" on Google. In part, it says,
"We all know that Kristi is one of your criminal gang and very active in
committing hate crimes like you. Her postings and her website are loaded with
hatred against the Scientologists. Now that you are passing out her hate
propaganda, look likes she'll be the next one to face 422.6."
I have a page at my web site explaining that I don't hate anyone; Scientology disagrees.
I believe that informing people about Scientology's dark side - and criminal acts - is education, not bigotry; Scientology disagrees.
I think people should have access to all the information, so they can come to their own understanding of an issue (which is why I link to Scientology's own site from Scientology Lies); Scientology disagrees.
I consider peaceful public protest to be constitutionally protected free speech; Scientology disagrees.
I believe everyone has the right to express their opinion.
Scientology disagrees.
Kristi Wachter
Scientology Lies
I'm friends with the web master, and i've put up a mirror of the site at http://www.geocities.com/goonetics
....this is very, very typical of how members are instructed to react to ex-members. --- Path: typhoon2.ba-dsg.net!cyclone1.ba-dsg.net!newsfeed2. skycache.com!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!cpk-news -hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!npeer.kpnqwest.n et!nmaster.kpnqwest.net!newsfeed.Austria.EU.net!ne wsfeed.kpnqwest.at!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net! mail2news
Date: 18 May 2001 06:31:30 -0000
Message-ID:
From: Clark_Bor@juno.com
Subject: Tory please post the evidence
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Lines: 37
Xref: cyclone1.ba-dsg.net alt.religion.scientology:601910
You claim that your family loves you, or something to that effect. Do
you have anything from your husband stating that he still loves you
despite the fact that you deserted him?-- for that is what you did.
Are you still living together? What does your son have to say about
you? -- and please post evidence of your assertions. Do they know you
hang out with kooks and criminals all day long? Do they read your
Magoo postings? What do they have to say about that?
Come on, fill us in, Tory. ARSCC is just one big family and no one has
secrets here. You've shared so many other heartrending "secrets" (or
so you claim) it shouldn't faze you at all to open up about what's
going on behind the scenes with the Bezazians.
Now don't just give in to the usual compulsion to lie. I think it's
important that you 'fess up to this, Tory. Try hard to avoid the usual
cop-outs... "OSA agent," "clam shill," blah-blah-blah...
Fact is, I was on usenet long before you learned to negotiate a
keyboard. I was around when the first alt. group was formed way back
when. (Do you even know what alt. originally stood for?) I would also
advise you to avoid flame wars - you're clearly not used to them.
There are days when we can barely recognize you for the soot on your
face. Even your staunchest "defenders" know it, but they'll allow you
to think otherwise for the moment. Poor little Tory, so pathetically
gullible. They'll continue to squeeze you like a lemon and then cast
you aside when you have no further worth. No one thinks you are a
particularly clever person, Tory. No one. Without at least the skill
to hold your own on ars, they'll have no use for you. You'll just be
this hanger-on who trips over her tongue and embarrasses them. Bob
will distance himself from you. The money will stop. You have no
career skills and, aging the way you are, you'll soon end up wandering
the streets of California begging for a quarter to buy yourself a donut.
And there will go Tory, broke and abandoned, but "free at last."
Clark
That Mr. Henson's QUOTES from scientology's own "scripture" should be found to be terrorism only shows that the intent of scientology itself is exactly that, terrorism against any who disagree with the cult's actions.
I quote the founder, L. Ron Hubbard, in an article in Ability Magazine written in March, 1955, entitled 'THE SCIENTOLOGIST A Manual on the Dissemination of Material.'I may be judged a terrorist also, for daring to do so, or perhaps the "Church of Scientology" or one of it's myriad corporate alter-egos will sue me for copyright infringement for daring to quote this:
"The purpose of the suit is to harass rather than to win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway...will generally be suficient to cause his ... decease. If possible, ruin him utterly."
This is scripture? Henson, and many others who have dared to speak openly against this "church," have been subjected to this destructively litigious "religious" organization's ability to afford extensive legal actions. Henson, and others such as Grady Ward, Arnaldo Lerma, and the (old) Cult Awareness Network (note; the "new" CAN is owned and run by scientology operatives) have been driven to financial ruin, bankruptcy, and the mental anguish that comes from protracted legalized abuse.
This "church" has been proclaimed as a frivolous litigant more times than I care to count. How they managed to put a District Attorney in their pocket, I don't know...but it really doesn't surprise me. That this "church" paid for and provided that same District Attorney with a bevy of high priced lawyers (all of whom just happened to be scientologists) to "advise" him throughout the trial is not a surprise either.
This "church" is the very same one that illegally infiltrated the US Government in it's pursuit of tax exempt status as a religious organization. Eleven scientologists went to jail for the theft of government documents, for breaking & entering government offices, and for participating in the conspiracy, including the wife of it's founder, Mary Sue Hubbard. The IRS finally caved in, under the burden of over 100 lawsuits file by this "church, giving it long-sought standing as a non-profit un section 501(c)(3) of the tax code in 1995. Using donations from scientology adherents in paying for frivolous legal action(s), like lawsuits against critics, is now a federally tax exempt use of those tax-deductible donations!
Enjoy your stay in Canada, Mr. Henson. I may have to join you there, fleeing the "justice" of the cult known as the "church of scientology."
For shame, State of California, for allowing your legal system's officers to become patsies for a dangerous, criminally convicted cult.I don't doubt the CA lawmakers meant well when passing the statute used to persecute, uh, er, um, prosecute Henson...but they also meant well when they deregulated the electric power industry. California is in the dark, in more than one way, and the road to hell is paved with good intentions!
I'm just another netizen whose writings are censored from scientologists' eyes by the "church's" net-nanny software!
http://www.xenu.net for a solid site of info on this "church"
http://www.operatingthetan.com/ for more background on the plight of Keith Henson
http://www.lermanet.com for the story of another scientology critic wrung dry in the court system for daring to speak his mind
http://www.scientology.org for a look at how this insidious "church" protrays itself in cyberspace -- WARNING: if you are easy prey or easily duped, then scientology's web materials are not recommended reading!
Usenet newsgroup Alt.Religion.Scientology - home of the world wide web's unoganization of scientology critics
Ignorant about scientology or perhaps just wondering how destructive it is? Stick any or all of these keywords in your favorite search engine: Xenu, OT 3, OT III, Gerry Armstrong, Arnie Lerma, fair game, RPF
If you search on "scientology" you'll need to page past line after line of scientologists' "spam pages" promulgated by the cult before you reach any site listings for critical pages (just another game the "church" plays to prevent the whole picture from being seen in cyberspace). Need a giggle, go on, read a few of these cookie-cutter pages written by sceintologists
Let me add to the fire with this, the FAIR GAME policy of scientology...
"[An enemy of scientology]...may be tricked, cheated, lied to, sued or destroyed." See footnoe [1]
After realizing what a PR disaster this policy was (it was used as ammunition by Britain when they declared Hubbard and his followers undesirable aliens in the 1960's), L. Ron Hubbard "revoked" the FAIR GAME--that is what scientology's party line is, anyhow.
In actual fact, Hubbard only revoked the practice of ~labeling~ scientology's perceived enemies as FAIR GAME. The issue that scientology uses today to assert FAIR GAME's revocation reads:
"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." See Footnote [1]
Note: SP = Suppressive Person - i.e.- any actual or perceived enemy of scientology, or the mom next door who wants her kid out of the cult, or the spouse who wants to know why his/her mate is spending their life savings on scientology "religion."
California courts have taken legal notice of the FAIR GAME policy in the cases of Gerry Armstrong (who eventually fled to Canada as Henson has done) and Larry Wollersheim. In Wollershiem's case, the California Court of Appeal (July, 1986) upheld a ruling in his favor that he had been subjected to the Fair Game policy by the church of scientology. Fair Game was mentioned multiple times by Judge Breckinridge in his opinion from the 1982 case filed by the church of scientology against the former scientologist (whose scientology job title was "L.Ron Hubbard Personal Public Relations Office Reasearcher."
H. Keith Henson, and indeed his whole family, have been under Fair Game attack by scientology for years.
Fair Game is one of those scientology policies that the jury should have been permitted to review.
Fair Game is alive as well, and being practiced by scientology everywhere it has even the slightest opposition.
Nukewaster at aol.com
Footnote:
[1] Ref: Organization Executive Course, Volume 1 (A compilation of articles written and copyrighted by Hubbard, comprising the "administration technology" of scientology, and claimed as "scripture by the cult.)
A reference for those who are curious about FAIR GAME:
The excellent book, "A Piece of Blue Sky, Scientology, Dianetics and L.Ron Hubbard Exposed" by Jon Atack, (c) 1990, Carol Publishing Group. It's out of print now, but can be read online at http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/atack/ind ex.html
What the Heck, check out the whole scientology library at this Carnegie-Mellon University professor's site - all the classic works on scientology are there.
For Judge Breckinridge's opinion in Church of Scientology of California versus Gerry Armstrong, try http://www.lermanet.com