Slashdot Mirror


Scientology Critic Arrested After 6 Years

destinyland writes "Friday police arrested 64-year-old Keith Henson. In 2000 after picketing a Scientology complex, he was arrested as a threat because of a joke Usenet post about "Tom Cruise Missiles." He fled to Canada after being found guilty of "interfering" with a religion, and spent the next 6 years living as a fugitive. Besides being a digital encryption and free speech advocate, he's one of the original Burr-Brown/Texas Instruments researchers and a co-founder of the Space Colony movement."

39 of 1,046 comments (clear)

  1. Tom Cruise Missile by lecithin · · Score: 5, Funny


    "Other posters joined in the internet discussion, asking whether Tom Cruise missiles are affected by wind. "No way," Keith joked. "Modern weapons are accurate to a matter of a few tens of yards."

    So, does that make Tom Cruise a 'straight shooter'?

    --
    It could be worse, it could be Monday.
    1. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by DJCacophony · · Score: 5, Funny

      Tom Cruise? Straight? I think not.

      --
      Slow Down, Cowboy! It's been 60 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment.
    2. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I didn't know that interfering with a religion was a crime. Could any lawyers provide some details about this law and what constitutes breaking it?

      Thanks.

    3. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Intron · · Score: 5, Informative

      California hate crime law from the DA's office. ... threatening to use force to injure, intimidate, or interfere with another person who is exercising his or her constitutional rights.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    4. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Informative

      What I would like to know is how this discussion violates that law. I don't see anything remotely threatening, just a few people having fun talking about a non-existant 'Agent 99' and their fictitious (and humorous!) exploits.

      If you can arrested for this, it makes me wonder how many /.ers have been arrested?

    5. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by jrumney · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you look at the original Slashdot article from the time of his conviction (linked in one of the comments here), reportedly he was not allowed to use the context of his quotes in his defense. So all the jury saw were a couple of snippets the Scientologists picked out. He probably ruined his case by going on the run, as I can't believe that a higher court would not have overturned the decision on appeal.

    6. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Belial6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would think that threatening a person with unimaginable torture for all of eternity if they did not deny the existence of their gods would be considered a threat. Shouldn't the police start arresting the door to door Christian recruiters?

    7. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by uncqual · · Score: 5, Funny

      Amen

      --
      Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
    8. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I see the point you are trying to make, but Christians don't have the power to damn someone to Hell. Usually it is said that God will damn you, or something like that. It is more of a warning, as it is not within their control. It is similar to someone telling you that if you lie in the middle of the freeway, you are likely to get hit by a car. They aren't threatening you with a car, but warning you of the car's coming. Whether you believe in what the Christians are saying or not isn't relevant, just that the message they are bringing isn't a threat.

      --
      warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
    9. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Lars+T. · · Score: 5, Funny

      I see the point you are trying to make, but Christians don't have the power to damn someone to Hell. Usually it is said that God will damn you, or something like that. It is more of a warning, as it is not within their control. It is similar to someone telling you that if you lie in the middle of the freeway, you are likely to get hit by a car. They aren't threatening you with a car, but warning you of the car's coming. Whether you believe in what the Christians are saying or not isn't relevant, just that the message they are bringing isn't a threat. Oh so it's more something like: "If you don't stop posting here, somebody (who I have no control over) is going to kill you and your family!"
      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    10. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or is there some reason you would present to support the idea that the infiltration of one religion is of more concern than of another?

      I wasn't aware that Scientology was a religion.

      There, I said it. Kinda shocked that nobody else had the guts to do so in the first 100 posts.

      Tom Cruise won't come out of the closet.....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    11. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by dosquatch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You can marry a person of the same sex all you want in a religious ceremony. The state will just not recognize it as a real marriage, and you won't get tax breaks or spousal benefits.

      True, but it should be exactly the opposite. The state should take no particular position on the issue as long as all parties are consenting adults. One man, one woman. Two men. Three of one and two of the other. Whatever. You don't have to like it, I don't have to like it, but as long as they are all happy with it, it ain't none of my business. Or yours. Or the state's. And I don't expect any particular church to condone it.

      Quite simply, the conjoining of incomes for tax purposes and the assignment of benefits should be an automatic, simple, and painless event. It is not the state's place to say "Ewww", or "But God says...". It is the state's place to serve its citizens.

      --
      "Hey, the third matrix movie would have been good except for the plot,story, and acting." --AC
    12. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by killjoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The trial was in a scientology town, the judge was a scientologist.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    13. Re:Tom Cruise Missile by grasshoppa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You won't get any real arguments from me; Organized religion is in the business of selling the afterlife to gullible people.

      And they've made a mint.

      However, consider this when weighing scientology; They believe that millions of years ago, the evil lord Xenu packaged up all the useless cruft of society into giant space planes ( which, coincidentally looked like DC10s ), and flew them to Earth. There, he crashed these jets into volanos. But that wasn't good enough! No, then he built huge soul capturing centers to attract the wandering "thetans" and confuse them. Once released from these spirit reeducation camps, the thetans floated around confused until they found a prehistoric us. In which they found a host, and have been living in us ever since.

      Now, the virgin mary, jesus on a stick and moses are pretty spectacular, but this is just plain bonkers. No less for the fact that their prophet was a Sci Fi writer. A very very bad sci fi writer.

      So while jesus-centric religions are pretty nutty, you have to account for 2000+ years of history rewriting and folk tale telling to account for the weird shit. This crap is weird right out the gate.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  2. Re:Scary by garcia · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have we in the Western world become so enamored by political correctness that we cannot even take a joke for what it is?

    We've become so enamored with religion and terrorism that we can't make jokes about anything having to do with either.

  3. Scientology isn't a Religion by Cornflake917 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, it's just a pyramid scheme that takes advantage of people's unhappiness. The leaders of scientology make bank by brainwashing their followers.

    Even if Scientology was a legitimate religion, why is it illegal for someone to interfere with a religion, but it's completely acceptable for religions to interfere with everyone elses lifes.

    1. Re:Scientology isn't a Religion by Tweekster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The vast majority of religions that do not require payment. Most religions will teach the beliefs regardless of whether you cough up money. Some ask for donations but that is hardly on the same level as Scientology.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    2. Re:Scientology isn't a Religion by jspectre · · Score: 5, Funny

      maybe it's about time someone starts an open-source religion? license it with the gpl so it can be distributed freely and not require payment to participate in. everyone can modify it as they see fit and all gods/goddesses must be open for all to see.

      i just wonder how long will it take for microsoft to embrace the new religion, add their own pantheon, patent it and try to squash the rest of us? i can hear the chant now... "developers.. developers.. developers.." as we do a monkey dance around a bonfire of burning penguins.

      --

      abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

    3. Re:Scientology isn't a Religion by Bastian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At this point it's no secret that L. Ron Hubbard started the Church of Scientology as a sort of get rich quick scheme. There's plenty of documentation of this, and there is plenty of information on the CoS's internal workings that has made it into the public record thanks to a number of court cases. Red flags should start flying immediately once one realizes that you have to pay the CoS thousands and thousands of dollars before they will start telling you the religion's actual theology (the stuff in Dianetics is really only the tip of the iceberg, it isn't even enough that I would be willing to say that Dianetics alone could possibly qualify as the basis for a religion).

      It's true that you've struck on an interesting semantic conundrum, though. The fact of the matter is that, as part of his scheme, LRH and his compatriots did have to construct a religion, and the fact of the matter is that anything can be a religion as long as people actually believe it. And there is a group of people, the Freezone Scientologists who have turned the official Church of Scientology and the incredible number of crimes it has committed. This group is obviously a legitimate religion as much as any religion can be according to any objective definition that I can come up with*.

      *Since I can't personally determine the details of the beginnings of any religion, I don't feel it's reasonable to say one religion is legitimate and another isn't based on which ones I am guessing came from the imagination of one man and which ones are truly divinely inspired. Especially given that, as an atheist, I believe that all religions fall into the former group. So I won't call Scientology-the-religion illegitimate despite the fact that it was created as part of Scientology-the-pyramid-scheme.

    4. Re:Scientology isn't a Religion by raju1kabir · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's true that you've struck on an interesting semantic conundrum, though. The fact of the matter is that, as part of his scheme, LRH and his compatriots did have to construct a religion, and the fact of the matter is that anything can be a religion as long as people actually believe it.

      But that's what's great about Scientology, and why I hope to see it flourish.

      The fact that something which was started in our lifetimes as a get-rick-quick scheme, could become considered a "legitimate religion" on legal par with Christianity and Islam and all the rest, is the most striking demonstration to date of why religion is a crock and in fact deserves no special legal recognition whatsoever.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
  4. Space colony, eh? by PhxBlue · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can we set up a solar colony for the Scientologists?

    --
    !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
  5. Re:hm by Applekid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the things that makes Scientology dangerous is not that they believe in odd things, it's that they are very well organized and equipped to muzzle detractors. South Park attacked the fundamentals of belief in a way that's obvious. Nobody except Keith and that church branch really know what happened during his protest. The original trial where he wasn't able to even counter Scientology's accusations is a travesty of justice. Beleving in Xenu, thetans, and paying gobs of money for the privilage of memorizing word lists aren't in themselves dangerous, illegal, or even wrong. What IS dangerous is how much legal protection they are granted by being recognized as a religion and their willingness to exploit the law in their favor. Other religious organizations (Roman Catholic for the best example) dumped influencing governments centuries ago. Like a badly behaved child, this new religion is trying to do exactly what a lot of the old world religions did at one time and no longer consider fashionable.

    --
    More Twoson than Cupertino
  6. Friday police by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Friday police arrested 64-year-old Keith Henson.

    I don't know who these Friday police are, but they should be stopped. Friday police don't have the right to stop free speech anymore than normal police do!

  7. Re:Hazy Case & Donation Fund by thelexx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "I personally hate Scientology but they are a religion and must be respected as one."

    Not necessarily. From http://home.snafu.de/tilman/krasel/germany/:

    "The German Federal Government maintains that Scientology is an organization which has primarily economical interests. This idea has been reinforced by a ruling of the Federal Labour court (which is not connected to the government in any way). After having reviewed several Scientology books, the judges concluded that Scientology is not a religion, but a commercial enterprise.

      Furthermore, the German government maintains that Scientology tries to distribute its ideas as widely as possible, ideally leading to a society where humans life together according to Scientology rules. A closer look at Hubbard's writings shows that this is not desirable since Scientology is structured in a totalitarian, anti-democratic fashion."

    There is an entire faq on the Germany v Scientology thing: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/faq-you/germany.txt

    --
    "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
  8. scientology is just an evil cult by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    sometimes, i think it is wrong for countries like germany to prosecute them

    other times, i think it is wrong for the usa not too

    the issue is one of persecution: one should not be persecuted for their beliefs

    but if you are persecuting a group BECAUSE they believe they have a right to persecute people like this poor guy who is also just expressing his beliefs, the argument about freedom kind of collapses in on itself

    you are free

    we all are

    but you are not free to restrict the freedoms of others

    and across that simple philosophical divide, so much misery in this world is created, this scientology case beign but one small example

    personally, i think there is intolerance, which is evil

    and then there is intolerance of intolerance, which is a virtue

    you don't gain anything in this world by tolerating the intolerant, except more misery and intolerance

    and i think this argument applies just as much to fundamentalist christianity and fundamentalist islam

    how or why is tolerance served by tolerating the intolerant?

    being intolerant of the intolerance is actually extending tolerance in this world

    scientology should be punished, not this poor guy

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  9. Re:Hazy Case & Donation Fund by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I personally hate Scientology but they are a religion and must be respected as one. If they can convince chumps to give them money, there's nothing I can do to stop that.

    I was going to say something of my own here, then I thought of this Menckenism:

    "We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart." -- H. L. Mencken

    --
    I am not a crackpot.
  10. Religion ? by Alain+Williams · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Surely calling scientology a religion is an oxymoron ?

    They have lots of followers but that is only because they have been brainwashed. Scientology is a way of making money for the high ups. Another source of information about the crap that the scientologists peddle is the fishman affidavit .

    If there was any sense in what they were on about they would argue it out in the open, rather than using underhand legalities to silence those who show them to be the charlatans that they are.

  11. There have to be limits to freedom of religion by MikeRT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Freedom of religion should not be extended to religions that are clearly made up. There is ample evidence to show that Hubbard pulled Scientology's belief system out his ass, the same cannot be said of any other religion from Christianity to Taoism to neo-paganism. The "Church" of Scientology is nothing more than a roving scam that exploits the first amendment to avoid taxation. It has also been shown to be a haven for systematic criminal behavior and should be considered a threat to American society.

    Bottom line is religions don't have "trade secrets," but Scientology does. I could buy that if it claimed to be a mystery religion or a form of gnosticism, but it doesn't. Rather, those secrets are exposed as the result of a financial transaction.

    Some religion. Despite my being a libertarian, I think the Germans are right on this one. It's not a religion. It's a subversive organization that needs to be monitored by the state because it has been known to use force and criminal behavior to advance its agenda, which is not even remotely religious.

    1. Re:There have to be limits to freedom of religion by drxenos · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Freedom of religion should not be extended to religions that are clearly made up.

      Um, wouldn't that be all religions?

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
  12. Re:Scary by Firethorn · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've read about his case, and from that I'd say the 'stalking' material would be his picketing their compound. Complete with big-ass sign.

    Going by the standards that it takes to get abortion protestors arrested, there's something fishy about the case.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  13. Re:I don't get it? by jrumney · · Score: 5, Funny

    While not outright illegal, everyone here would give me the eyeball if I went out picketing a Jewish mosque.

    If you can find yourself a Jewish mosque to picket, then I say go for it. You'd probably get a lot of support from Jews and mosques around the world (not to mention the evangelical Christians) for picketing such an abomination.

  14. What, no linkage to Operation Clambake? :) by bad_fx · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's all the info you need on Scientology

  15. Re:Scary by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Odd thing about that jury, since the case, no one has been able to verify that these people actually exist.

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  16. Re:Scary by edwardpickman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comforting to see it's not just the US. Here what is percieved as the majority have to watch every word but minority groups are largely allowed to say what they want so long as it's about the majority. There is some condemnation if they insult other minorities. Intolerance and hatred is pretty color blind and virtually all groups have issues. Offhand the only major religion that doesn't condemn anyone or anything is Buddism. Most factions have some issue with some one or some thing. Even most racial conflicts tend to be more ethnic or social than racial. In the US we even have a north south division that is a hold over from the civil war. It isn't spoken of very often but there's still tension. Intolerance should never be tolerated by any group and people need to take intent into account. I remember a fuss made about a town called Fish Kil. An animal rights group was demanding they change the name of the town to something fish friendly. When locals pointed out it meant Fish River in Gaelic the group wasn't impressed and still wanted it changed. Intent is everything and sometimes the insult is in the eye of the beholder.

  17. It's only a matter of time... by naChoZ · · Score: 5, Funny

    "interfering" with a religion

    So now it's just a matter of time before creationists start having archeologists arrested for digging up dinosaurs and interfering with their religion...

    --
    "I can be self-referential if I want to," said Tom, swiftly.
  18. Ecumenical Councils: the Christian Party Line by spun · · Score: 5, Informative

    You do not know or understand the history of Christianity. There were a series of meetings, known as the Ecumenical Councils, that defined what Christianity is, what it believs and professes, and what it considers heretical. The important ones occuring between 325AD and 1123AD and resolved such questions as whether Jesus was entirely Divine, entirely human, human and divine parts seperated, or human and divine parts united.

    Allmost all Western Christian denominations, as well as Eastern Orthodox accept the decisions of councils 1-7. Catholics, protestants, all of them. That is the Christian party line. Oriental Orthodox churches only accept 1-3; Assyrian Christianity accepts 1-2; Mormonism, Jehova's Witnesses, Unitarians and a few other fringe groups don't accept any of the council's decisions.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  19. Re:Scary by jcr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The 12 people on the jury never got to hear Keith's defense. Basically, he was prohibited from even telling them why he was picketing. That so-called "trial" was an absolute farce.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  20. Unfortunate... by Synchis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Its unfortunate that Keith has finally been arrested. While he was in Canada, I worked closely with him on a few R&D projects. He was a good guy who always had an interesting story to tell. He fought very hard to get political refugee status from the Canadian Gov't while he was here, and was eventually denied after about a 3 year struggle. He left on his own terms, returning to the US in his own time, claiming that if he was escorted properly across the border, he would be a dead man.

    In all the time that Keith spent in Canada, he was never once left alone by the cult of Scientology. I was involved with one incident with a P.I. that was following him, and there were numerous other occasions that I had heard about from him.

    He was a good friend, always willing to stick his head out for ya. I sure do miss him now, and sincerely hope that nothing terrible happens to him now that he's been arrested.

    --
    Thomas A. Knight
    Author of The Time Weaver
  21. Re:Scary by Valdrax · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm not in the least contesting the idea that Scientologists aren't loony to their very core; I'm just curious why you seem to think that Scientologists are worse than Christians somehow. Most of the differences I can think of leave the Christians as the worse offenders.

    Two points.

    1) You're probably unaware of the offenses of Scientologists. They're relatively obscure.
    2) There are a LOT more Christians and the religion has had a LOT longer time to have offenses committed in its name.

    Combining these two means that you don't really have a good concept of the relative densities of craziness in the two religions. The larger a population is, the greater the violent fringe that can exist. Every major religion in existence has had its share of bloodshed, but that's not the fault of religion per se so much as the natural human tendency to form groups and to think less of people not in your group. Since Christianity is larger and more established, it has a greater capacity to harbor a lunatic fringe. That does not reflect necessarily on the relative merits of the core beliefs of the two faiths.

    Don't recall any Scientologists blowing up any abortion clinics, for instance, nor can I think of them trying to tell me, a non-believer - or worse, getting a law put in place that coerces me - such that I can't marry two willing people.

    While there isn't any solid evidence of murders committed in the name of Scientology, there is a long history of intimidation, harassment, and property damage in defense of the religion. (There is evidence for negligent death, but no first-degree murder.) The religion is relatively young, so it's hard to say whether that's a matter of time or not.

    However, there is a marked difference in the canonical stance on violence towards outsiders between mainstream Christianity and mainstream Scientology. Scientology views those who interfere with Scientology to be fair game. That is to say that there's no moral laws protecting the enemies of Scientology and no sanction of any activities taken to harm them. Christianity, at its core, states that you should love your enemy. Few Christians are capable of holding themselves to that standard, but the difference in what you're supposed to do is marked.

    As for attempting to force their morality on others, Scientology simply hasn't had the power to enforce its views on outsiders due to a lack of critical mass. What makes you think they'd be different from any other segment of society bound by a common code of behavior?

    They have, however, lobbied for broad government powers to enforce copyright because they protect their inner secrets with copyright law and have been responsible for a number of DMCA takedown notices. They were notable advocates for the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act and the DMCA itself.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").