Wikileaks Airs Scientology Black Ops

An anonymous reader alerts us to new material up on Wikileaks: 208 scanned pages (in one PDF) relating to the Church of Scientology and its former "Office of Special Affairs" employee (and subsequent apostate) Frank Oliver. "The documents are dated between 1986 and 1992 inclusive, when, according to the file, Frank Oliver was declared a 'suppressive person' and excommunicated. Frank Oliver should be able to verify the material and has appeared in the media before on subjects relating to the church. Starting on page 107, the document shows that at the time of writing the Church of Scientology was still actively engaged in black propaganda (especially concerning psychiatry), 'fair game' and infiltration."

Comments

Get 'em while they're hot

[Carnildo]

Make sure you get your copy before the Scientologists take the site down.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Jugalator]

By now it'll always* be online regardless what CoS do... I wonder if this organization will realize that this time, or if they'll once again do a Streisand.

* as in until it falls out of interest

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

Starting on page 107, the document shows that at the time of writing the Church of Scientology was still actively engaged in black propaganda (especially concerning psychiatry), 'fair game' and infiltration." Yes, I wonder if Wikileaks will get a taste of the 'Fair Game' policy the papers mention if they don't take the papers down.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[aarggh]

The official course of action for COS in cases like these is set down by elron himself, basically sue, sue, harass, and then sue some more regardless of winning or losing. And unfortunately they have so much sway that sending multiple C&D's to sites/ISP's will cause most sites to drop any links or references anyway as they are too intimidated by the COS. Note that by "COS" I am of course referring to the "Cult of Scientology", as no-one could ever confuse this group with any modern day religion!

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[junglee_iitk]

Some one summaries the controversial lines please, so that we can continue hot Sceintology bashing...

Ugh... I hate PDF... it makes me look like someone interested in actually reading TFA...

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if they'll care if they do. They're set up in many different countries with mirrors across the world for a reason - because they *expect* every organization they mention to try to shut them down. Won't work. The cult might bring down a server or two, but they'll just pop back up as quickly as they can and in the mean time alternate servers will take the burden.

I know the cult is sue-happy and has successes under its belt, but wikileaks is set up *specifically* for this. The documents are out, they're on servers worldwide already, and a dozen bit torrents as well. There is no way to suppress this even if they were to somehow take down all of wikileaks.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

Get your copy fully anonymized via i2p bittorrent (www.i2p2.de):

http://tracker.postman.i2p/details.php?id=2410
(non i2p preview at tracker.postman.i2p.to)

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[dwater]

> as no-one could ever confuse this group with any modern day religion!

I'm curious; why wouldn't you confuse it with a religion? What is a 'modern day' religion?

I ask these questions as a Christian myself, and a regular old boring protestant one at that.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[dwater]

...so that we can continue hot Sceintology bashing... I was thinking something along those lines. There seems to be a lot of 'bashing' happening on /. lately. I wonder if such articles get more posts and therefore more advertising revenue, or something.

All we need is for there to be a Chinese-Scientology link and we'll have the most commented-on story ever.

Hrm. I wonder if there are any stats on /. stories - ie which story received the most comments, the most highly rated comments, the most 'funny', the most 'flame bate'/etc/etc. That'd be interesting, don't you think? So, interesting, there's probably already a page somewhere on it that I haven't seen yet (I'm rarely the first to think of these things).

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The One and Only]

Note that by "COS" I am of course referring to the "Cult of Scientology", as no-one could ever confuse this group with any modern day religion!

Indeed: whatever other tactics they use, Scientology doesn't use hangings or suicide bombings to silence their critics and apostates.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

I agree, it should be confused with modern day religions, since all are groups of adults believing in fictional stories and allowing them to control their lives.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[complete loony]

If I asked you what you believe, you would point me to materials I can read, tell me yourself, or point me to someone else who can explain it better.

Scientology forces you to pay lots of money and undergo questionable interrogations before they will trust you to with their secrets. By which point you have made a huge emotional and financial investment. So it's unlikely you would question what you are being told anyway.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Marful]

Probably because it is classed as a "Cult" and not a "Religion" due to the secretive nature of the core teachings, ceremonies, inner workings, etc, etc.

Oh and the fact that the "founder" pretty much straight up acknowledges that he made up the fictitious "religion" *cough*Cult*cough* to sell books and make money.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[bertramwooster]

The official course of action for COS in cases like these is set down by elron himself

Who is this elron? Is he some sort of a cross between L Ron and Elrond? or what? :-)

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[dwater]

Probably because it is classed as a "Cult" and not a "Religion" due to the secretive nature of the core teachings, ceremonies, inner workings, etc, etc. Those sound like valid reasons, I guess.

Oh and the fact that the "founder" pretty much straight up acknowledges that he made up the fictitious "religion" *cough*Cult*cough* to sell books and make money. Well, if someone admits to lying about something ('making something up' could be considered lying), you basically have to consider that anything they say might be a lie; how do you know if they were lying then as they claim, or are lying now.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[aarggh]

Without starting a flame war on who has the best imaginary friend, and while there are many valid points raised as to the validity of reilgion with regards to suicide bombings, hangings, etc, I should have generalized more along the lines of "modern day, somewhat civilized" religions. In other words religions that over the millennium have evolved from the original (somewhat fairly hideous and violent) sect beginnings to what most western based religions are now, which for all their faults generally try to be a positive source of strength and support in todays society. Unlike specifically the money making machine that is the COS built on a Sci-Fi story as part of a bet, that routinely victimises and harasses any form of opposition, sometimes to their deaths. Thanks to living in democracies, people can voice their opinion that the COS is being picked on, or question how is it different to any modern day religion, and so on, but I would not expect that the vast majority of people in the western world would even remotely consider suicide bombings, hangings, persecution, etc, to be the norm in religion. And for that same reason, I don't think it unreasonable to consider the "documented and recorded" behaviour and practices of the COS falls most certainly more into the organised cult area than a western based church. Especially given that people have no excuse to not know more about COS with the release of large amounts of information legally and illegaly. Sometimes people confuse playing Devil's Advocate with being pedantic.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

There seems to be a lot of 'bashing' happening on /. lately. You must be new here.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[ArcherB]

Scientology doesn't use hangings or suicide bombings to silence their critics and apostates. Are you sure?

Follow this link (http://youtube.com/watch?v=LYnu5Q6ONbo#) to see ex-members speak about their experiences with Scientology. Included among the commentors are the author who was framed for bomb threats and attempted to have put in a mental institution, and a former Scientologist Internal Security officer who spent 4 years spying on, intimidating, threatening, and attempting to ruin the lives of those who would criticize the "Church". In this video, ex-members accuse the organization of mind control techniques, totalitarianism, manipulation, and various forms of terrorism

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[aarggh]

If they've been proven to be lairs, wouldn't that then fall into the realm of common sense?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[ArcherB]

All we need is for there to be a Chinese-Scientology link and we'll have the most commented-on story ever. Actually, it would have to be Evolution denying Chinese illegally tapping the phone lines of Scientologists causes Global Warming.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[dwater]

No, I agree.

However, there are extremists in many religions - though the extremism in COS seems to be somewhat more in-built.

My question was more to do with the core beliefs, rather than the church (group of people-wise) itself.

I guess I should just read up on it myself, if I'm that interested (not sure I am, actually).

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want to get involved in a Scientology lawsuit, but someone needs to go to UCLA special collections library and check out the Scientology files. There's lots of neat stuff in there that the Scientologists would like to hide. The librarians won't allow people to look at the actual files so you only get photocopies. I really hope someone will go in there and scan these files. They should be made public.

It's basic "hey, look we're even kookier than Mormons" type of stuff, but it's interesting.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[calebt3]

I wonder if there are any stats on /. stories /. Hall of Fame

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[jonaskoelker]

All we need is for there to be a Chinese-Scientology link and we'll have the most commented-on story ever. I for one (captcha: wisely) welcome our new Chinese DRM-loving Scientologist lawyer-wielding terrorism-inclined Vista-running meme-loving robot overlords. Netcraft says they're not eligible for being confirmed dead, as no robot was ever alive.

Now that's what I call a good story.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[aarggh]

Seriously, read up on it, www.xenu.net is a great start to get the facts on this group. I am really horrified at the amount of power and wealth this group wields, mostly through intimidation. Probably from a US specific view, the worst realisation would be members of COS running for government, a COS staffer being given the health or mental heath port-folio would be a worst case scenario. The more people become informed with the intent and activities of COS, the better for humanity. And if you think this sounds extreme, remember that this is an organisation that would make criminal any form of Phsycology and Psychiatry. Along with ALL the pharmaceutical companies. Simply because any form of heath or mental health treatment directly competes with their money making scheme.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[inviolet]

Probably because it is classed as a "Cult" and not a "Religion" due to the secretive nature of the core teachings, ceremonies, inner workings, etc, etc.

As far as I can see of how people actually use the terms 'cult' and 'religion'...

• It's a cult if its founder is still alive, or is recently dead.
• It's a religion if the founder has been dead so long that his adherents have had time to rewrite his character.
• (In no case is any of it rational, practical, or efficient. Religion is for those who are insufficiently honest to build their own philosophy.)

A cult, in other words, has elements of personality-worship in it. Religions are old enough to claim that the founder's personality could not have unduly influenced their membership.

This is why Mormonism, whose founder Joseph Smith is now dead ~140 years, is finally shedding its cult status.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly if somebody can't see the difference between valid religions and scientology, they are terrible critical thinkers and probably have an irrational hatred of religions that no amount of discussion will ever change.

Then you don't know as much about religions as you think you do, or your critical thinking skills are poorly developed. BTW, what does "valid" mean here anyway?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Captain Sarcastic]

To paraphrase Senator Leia Organa, "The more they tighten their grip, the more servers will slip through their fingers."

One of the things I have seen about the Church of Scientology, from postings on alt.religion.scientology and other areas, is that, no matter how things turn out, they cannot believe that their "tech" won't work. (Part of that is because changing any of the "tech" is considered a crime against the church, called "squirreling".) Therefore, members will be assigned to keep either churning out "cease-and-desist" letters to any ISP that might be hosting a Wikileaks server, or will be posting information to try to drown out the information there.

But even if it doesn't work, they keep doing the same old things, in the same old way - because their religion tells them that it must work.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[SanityInAnarchy]

I'm not entirely sure the bashing is new...

But I can't think of anyone more deserving of bashing than Scientologists.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[dwater]

I'm not entirely sure the bashing is new... Well, it's just an impression - I've no statistical evidence to back it up. Perhaps living in China has given me a perspective such that I notice that particular avenue of attack more than I did when I lived in the US.

But I can't think of anyone more deserving of bashing than Scientologists. Well, quite.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Frosty Piss]

There is no way to suppress this even if they were to somehow take down all of wikileaks.

They can't take it down completely, Wikileaks will always be availuble by IP address, but like the bank people, they will go after the domain. Wikileaks really needs to transfer the domain to a "safe" registrar.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Colonel Blimp]

Its not bashing. Its exposing a cult. A cult that revels in destroying anyone that speaks out against it. A mind control cult that robs its members of all their dough. What kind of church hides its scriptures, and makes them viewable only if you donate money. This freaking cult is going down, and its high time people learn about it. Because the more you know about $cientology, the more outraged you become.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[paintswithcolour]

This is certainly a plausible explanation; although I'm not convinced Mormonism is shaking its cult association because Joseph Smith has been dead for long enough. I'd rather put it down to a more concerted effort by the group to deliberately shift public perception away from this label.

I confess to not having put much thought into this, and it is difficult to create a concrete comparison; maybe when we compare Jonestown cult and contemporary Christianity the differences are obvious, but things are less clear cut (deliberately so, I believe) when observing Scientology or Mormonism.

I guess at the end of the day it comes down to public perception and the labels society wants to brand things with. We don't traditionally associate everyday religion with cultish behavior like social exclusion, mystery texts and finical extortion (note: not arguing that these things don't happen to religion, merely the conception of them in a cult context is different).

There may be a fine line between defining cult and religion, but public perception of one is significantly more damaging than the other - Scientology so desperately want to escape the word 'cult'.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[budgenator]

Modern day religions typically have a single benevolent deity the is normally credited with creation that extols it's followers to behave in a moral and kindly manner. Scientologist on the other hand behave as others are either prey (even their own) or minions, and they have no deity.
Modern religions have a theology or a philosophy and they actively share that with their peers and others, while a particular translation of a religions holy book may be copyrighted, the original is not, a person can typically obtain the holy book of any modern religion simply by asking; scientology text are copyrighted and the copyrights, trademarks and servicemarks are vigorously defended, the only way to legally obtain scientology texts are to purchase them and not even the CoS members in good standing have access to the totality of the "religion" Scientology is secretive rather than open like modern religions. Scientology just doesn't fit any definition of religion that applies to modern religions, it's a form of shammanism or which doctor-ism where only the annoited have the secret knowledge reveled to them who then shake their beads and rattles for the unwashed masses.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[FooAtWFU]

• It's a cult if its founder is still alive, or is recently dead.
• It's a religion if the founder has been dead so long that his adherents have had time to rewrite his character.
• (In no case is any of it rational, practical, or efficient. Religion is for those who are insufficiently honest to build their own philosophy.)

A cult, in other words, has elements of personality-worship in it. Religions are old enough to claim that the founder's personality could not have unduly influenced their membership.

The Cult Information Centre describes it as such:

• It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members
• It forms an elitist totalitarian society.
• Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma.
• It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit funds recruit people.
• Its wealth does not benefit its members or society.

(Project Clambake, likewise, quotes this list.)

In my opinion, a lot of it is a matter of a qualitative differences in what they do. There's a number of things. Some people in certain religions will try to bring you back if you leave. Cults, on the other hand, may blackmail, harass or threaten people who try to depart. Many religions ask for money; Scientology asks for money, and spends it on lawsuits against its critics. Many religions have people who approach you on the street and tell you that you need to convert or $badstuff (with varying degrees of pushiness). Scientology sets up a table with a "Free Stress Test" (presumably designed to be rather Scientific-looking) first to attract passerbys, then when you test positive for stress they try to sell you various courses, then ease into the dogma later.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Detritus]

L. Ron Hoover, founder of the First Church of Appliantology.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Count Fenring]

Religion is for those who are insufficiently honest to build their own philosophy.

Really? I think it's a bit of a stretch to declare anyone following an established religion (or philosophy, by extension) dishonest. Besides, in "building a philosophy," you have to use preexisting ideas, many of which come, directly or indirectly, from established religions.

Nothing comes from nothing. Any philosophy or religion someone has is developed based on known predicates. While all known predicates are not equal (Oppressive beliefs, while still genuine, can be less valid by overall consensus standards {A.K.A. If you practice female circumcision, stop. It's not ok, regardless of cultural imperatives.}), all known ideas have predicates. And I, personally, am not arrogant enough to say that all religious ideas are stupid or invalid, just because I don't share them.

Also, philosophy and religion are, in fact, different things. They are often closely linked, but a religion by definition deals with metaphysical concepts that a philosophy doesn't have to. And, emotionally, the need for God/god/gods/~ to worship is a different need than that for a philosophy to follow.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The One and Only]

Yes. I forgot the incident where someone in Denmark drew some insulting cartoons of L. Ron Hubbard and Scientologists around the world rioted and burned down embassies.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[dwater]

You says it's not bashing, then go on to describe bashing.

It sounds like you have a definition of bashing that includes an element of unreasonableness, or unjustifiedness. (Sorry for the 'ness'es - I'm having trouble with my words at the moment)

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod this dead agenting!

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Opportunist]

Well, a religion is something someone came up with that enables people to cooperate with their peers and give them a moral code to abide by. That's what the original religions had in mind.

Take any religion that has some more or less major impact, be it monotheistic or polytheistic, from Christianity to Hinduism, it creates a moral code that enables people to cooperate as a collective without jumping at each other's throats. Whether you agree with the morals is another matter, but generally religions served what we try to solve technically through surveillance, now that people aren't afraid of some sort of divine boogeyman anymore: That people "behave". The religious approach is that some all seeing big brother in the guise of some god or gods notice all your crimes and will punish you in some sort of afterlife.

I can't think of a religion now that requires you to be very efficient in making money for the church. I also don't know a single "normal" religion that requires you to disclose every single weakness or shortcoming you have so it has blackmail material against you. I also can't think of any religion that promises you anything for this life, they usually put a lot of emphasis on your afterlife, your next life or some other divine/enlightened/elevated state you will attain if you "behave" right.

So, I'd say yes, there are a few differences between religion and a cult 'round some (rather bad) SciFi writer. In another way, I'd rather be a Jedi than a Thetan. It's also just SciFi, but at least the story is better.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[modecx]

I'm curious; why wouldn't you confuse it with a religion?

1) All real religions will gladly tell you what they're about before hand. 2) No real religion will brainwash you into mortgaging your house. 3) No real religion protects their materials by copyright, so they can do #2, and use the law to squelch leaks and critics. 4) No real religion will make you disconnect from your friends and family, so you will have nobody to instill some sense into you--and stop you from doing #2. 5) All real religions on this planet are inclusive, instead of exclusive.

I could go on and on (and on and on), but I really don't want fingertip blisters pointing out stuff that's obvious to the un-brainwashed masses after they've completed about 10 minutes of research (2 of which might be clicking on google links).

What is a 'modern day' religion?

I'm guessing he means any religion that is widely practiced, and has evolved enough to be generally accepted as (at least) "mostly not evil" by most people (especially by most who don't practice that particular religion). For instance, there's plenty of passages from the old testament, and all of the Abrahamic traditions, which are not generally acknowledged as being things which apply to the modern world; and extremists who believe these things are generally shunned from the mainstream of their own religion. Islam is probably the one exception to the last part, because Islamic extremists are often heroes within their communities. So, whatever.

That scientology eventually teaches the idea that some Xenu character planted frosty dead people and hydrogen bombs in the Worlds' volcanoes, and that they have these ghosts stuck to them doesn't particularly enrage most of the scientology critics I know; it's their abuses and covertly hostile nature that disturbs them, and me. Fact is, that part isn't all that much different from other equally silly stories religions teach.

Still, the fact that it was dreamed up by some twice divorced sea-faring, drugged up satanic NAMBLA perv, is a lot less noble than the supposed origins of the other religions... And scientology makes it out that LRH was a 7' tall descendant of European nobility, who shot rainbows and unicorns out of his ass. So, because of that, add this to my list: 6) It's easily demonstrable that a) the people who run scientology are either purely malevolent because of the lies and contradictions in their teachings, or b) they're incredibly incompetent nincompoops who couldn't find their asses with both hands.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Colonel Blimp]

You are obviously enturbulated and rather glib. Go yell at an ashtray for a while. Oh, and that will be $500 please. L Ron L Ron rah rah rah

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[dwater]

I'm curious; why wouldn't you confuse it with a religion?
That scientology eventually teaches the idea that some Xenu character planted frosty dead people and hydrogen bombs in the Worlds' volcanoes, and that they have these ghosts stuck to them doesn't particularly enrage most of the scientology critics I know; it's their abuses and covertly hostile nature that disturbs them, and me. Fact is, that part isn't all that much different from other equally silly stories religions teach. I guess this was what I was really trying to discuss, rather than the actions of the people who have the religion itself - I guess it might be that it's impossible to separate the two, but I don't know.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Zaphod-AVA]

Evolution denying Chinese illegally tapping the phone lines of Scientologists causes Global Warming... and it's effect on the iPhone.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Nefarious Wheel]

What is a 'modern day' religion?

Well, according to Aus. Bureau of Statistics, "Jedi" is one. That is, it's resurgence is modern; it's origins were long ago, in a galaxy far far away...

Oh and I'm a strict constructionist Pastafarian myself, I guess that one's fairly new. Arrrr.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[renoX]

>The Cult Information Centre describes it as such:
>It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members

Religions don't need to do that: they teach to children: it's much more easy to influence children than adults, but I don't think that it is better..

>It forms an elitist totalitarian society.

Well the vatican looks to me as fitting this description.

>Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma.

A good definition of the pope job, he's not the founder but he has the same role.

The people who thinks that modern religions aren't very dangerous should try to think as if they were gay, what would you think about religions?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

Note that by "COS" I am of course referring to the "Cult of Scientology", as no-one could ever confuse this group with any modern day religion! I don't know, if you look at the history of the Catholic Church, Islam, Mormonism, or most religions, the lack of distinction between them and a cult could be quite "confusing". I'm just using the Catholic Church as an example, because it's a familiar one, and nobody would argue that they're not a religion except groups that are arguably cults themselves. They seem to behave themselves somewhat more lately, but that makes the example more credible of course, and one should reflect that the last examples of seriously bad behavior on their part are only as far back as the 19th century. (Again, an example, they're probably one of the better cults, er, religions, now!)

The apostles appeared to have required that everyone give their worldly goods to the church, and there appears to have been a miraculous death (i.e. murder or if not a true story, intimidatistic propaganda) of someone who refused to give their all. (This is in the NT somewhere, sorry, I don't own a copy.)

The Inquisition of course is another example of cult-like behavior by this particular religion.

I'm sure examples from other major religions could be given by people more familiar with them. Incidentally, I'm not an atheist, but am well aware that often the difference between "cult" and "religion" historically has been popularity, rather than qualitative. Except mine of course. ;-)

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[CRCulver]

Also, philosophy and religion are, in fact, different things. They are often closely linked, but a religion by definition deals with metaphysical concepts that a philosophy doesn't have to

You've never heard of the field known as philosophy of religion?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[geekboy642]

Anybody that shoots up a school is a person who has severe mental issues.

People with severe mental issues are frequently prescribed drugs to try to alleviate those issues.

Correlation DOES NOT EQUAL causation. In fact the most recent school shooting I can remember occurred when the shooter stopped taking his drugs and regressed to a much worse state. Clearly the drugs were at least holding his psychosis in check while he was taking them. To put your statement in a clearer light, "the 9-11 hijackers took aspirin when they had head-aches! Ban aspirin, it causes hijackers!"

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[iNaya]

...modern day religions, since all are groups of adults believing in fictional stories and allowing them to control their lives This is different from ancient religions, how?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[mav[LAG]]

If you want fiction, there's quite a wide range to choose from on the subject of the New Testament documents. Apparently people don't like what they have to say and so prefer to jump through all sorts of hoops to show they're anything other than sober cross-referenced eyewitness accounts.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

It's pretty clear that it's a cult, rather than religion. It started out as a "science of the mind", which was determined by the FDA to be fraudulent, and switched to calliing itself a "religion" to protect itself from lawsuits andn gain tax-free status. This is testified to by numerous members from the time of the switchover.

The definition of it as a "cult" comes from Steve Hassan's careful analysis of what a cult is. A charismatic central leader, who draws their membres away from family or friends outside the cult, isolates them from criticsim, pronounces a set of set of increasingly secret and misleading beliefs only revealed in levels as members rise in rank and are increasingly isolated from anyone else, and often with corrupt set of sycophantic inner members willing to devmonize or even engage in criminal acts against outsiders who expose the leaderships secret trainings or fraudulent claims.

And yes, Scientology does all of those. Hop over to www.xenu.net for a good history of their abuses on the Internet, and links to cases of murder such as Lisa McPherson, fraud, violence, and even the famous planting of bomb threats by Mary Sue Hubbard and her elite of the Guardian's Office to discredit the author Paulette Cooper from writing about the cult. The Guardian's Office didn't go away with Mary Sue's convictioin, while L. Ron Hubbard hid on a boat in international waters to avoid arrest and extradition. It had a few public faces withdrawn, and its officers transferred to a new group called the "Office of Special Affairs".

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

And you've never heard of the phrase: "doesn't have to"? ;)

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Antique Geekmeister]

Please do. I'll recommmend the South Park episode on Scientology as both funny and educational on the issue. Sadly, that's the one over which Isaac Hays, thee voice of "Chef", resigned from the show, because of his membership in Scinetology.

If you build a Radio Shack lie-detector kit, you can also experiment with the results of their "e-meter", which is nothing but a very expensive and not very sophisticated resistance-meter based lie-detector.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Antique Geekmeister]

Oh. L. Ron didn't write a lot of the inner materials. Much of it was written by David Mayo. Figuring out what was written by L. Ron, and what got written by David Mayo (and is owned by Scientology as a "work for hire") is fascinating, complex detective work.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Antique Geekmeister]

Oh, I can. Genocidal dictators worldwide, the Russian "dog of war" who just got arrested, the idiots who sent an invasion to Iraq, etc.

But Scientology has gotten itself a proud place as a leader in Internet harassment. Remember when NNTP servers didn't used ot post the IP address of the host that sent the original message? I do. I didn't understand why it was necessary, and was distrustful of the privacy implications. But I looked into it, and was surprised to discover that it occurred because Scientology was forging cancellations of other people's messages over on alt.religion.scientology, behind a set of throwawayy accounts on one of the major ISP's of the time. The change apparently helped reduce this and other, less provocative abuses by other people on Usenet, quite a lot.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[iapetus]

Given your description of the methodology, I think you may have got the 'S' at the wrong end of that abbreviation.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[richlv]

Well, a religion is something someone came up with that enables people to cooperate with their peers and give them a moral code to abide by. That's what the original religions had in mind.

i'd say control over people was the primary goal.
financial gains and other benefits just resulted from that, and were gladly accepted.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

So far we've only had Christian American Presidents, to claim otherwise will lose the election, "The Chrstian Right" has enough sway that politicians & media will sway to their will at times... and if you aren't a Christian, YOU END UP IN HELL TO SUFFER FOR ETERNITY.

You don't get more elite than that.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Mathinker]

> Besides, in "building a philosophy," you have to use preexisting ideas, many of which
> come, directly or indirectly, from established religions.

After reviewing the available data on Scientology, it seems to me that Scientology's ideas seem to be intentionally remote from those of established religions. This optimizes its ability to socially isolate its members from the rest of society. Additionally, it gives it a more distinctive "brand identity" versus its competition.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[rtb61]

One minor correction, it is now 'apparently' (have to keep the the CO$ lawyers at bay) more uniformly recognised as CO$, the Con of $cientology, trading sanity for profits. That of course doesn't even really touch the scientology truly faithful, what is 'appearing' (ditto) to be nothing more than modern day 'coercive persuasion' slave labour force, from the FSSO (Flag Ship Service Organization) Free'sic'Winds to the Celebrity 'sic' Centres where these victims misguidedly service the depravations of their controllers and of course their fiscal supporters the 'Celebrity Artists'.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[MoriaOrc]

Consider this difference:

When Bin Laden calls for a Jihad against the US, we can say that it isn't Islam that's at fault, because the religion of Islam itself grants no inherent authority to Bin Laden, he simply twists some of its teachings.

However, if the Pope were to call for a Crusade and start up a new Inquisition, and Catholics (or at least enough of them) were to go along with him, we would be more justified holding Catholicism at fault. It teaches obedience to the Pope and its core leadership would have initiated the action.

You can certainly separate the religion from its followers. However, with Scientology you have a situation where the leadership of the church practices abusive actions against individuals, the majority of its followers go along with the abusive practices of the leadership (or are unaware of them), and the teachings of the church often call for those abusive practices. It's because of this that many people lay the blame on the church as a whole.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The One and Only]

I'm sure it is, but Shawn Lonsdale wasn't running for president of Pakistan, either. I'm fully supportive of exposing Scientology, but when it comes to violent religious fanatics there are bigger fish to fry.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Imsdal]

Common sense? We're talking religion and/or cults here. Surely "common sense" can't be involved, by definition.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[dwater]

Well, yes, sure.

I wasn't trying to justify or even ignore their actions, so much as just not ask about them. I was asking about the actual religion, not the behaviour.

Some have answered this satisfactorily, I think, in that there isn't that much of a difference. I mean, for someone who doesn't believe it, Christianity should probably also be considered fiction - I wouldn't say it's 'science'-fiction exactly, but a lot of it is certainly beyond indisputable proof.

If it were just a bunch of people who believe that core stuff (and I don't claim to know much about it), without all the anti-social behaviour, then I don't think anyone would have much of a problem with it, beyond ridicule, which we Christians get on a fairly regular basis too.

Of course, like you say, if there are parts of the belief that instill authority in human beings, and others must obey without question, then has to lead to bad things, if not sooner, then later.

We don't have a whole lot of that in the protestant church. If one of the leaders of a church started spouting stuff like that, he'd not have much of a church left. Having said that, if there were a big gap in intellect (or whatever it is that makes one person able to easily convince another), then that might be more of a problem...that thing at Waco rings a bell - I wonder what sort of religion is behind that.

Anyway, I have other things to think about :|

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[roguetrick]

Right on the money! What we should do is screen all people who have headaches from boarding a plane!

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[aarggh]

As I stated in my previous post, all thoughts of COS simply being a harmless bunch of nutters doesn't go anywhere near describing the way the world would change if they had their way. In a COS world the doctor and psychiatrist who prescribed the medication keeping the persons psychotic behaviour under control, along with the company manufacturing the drugs, WOULD ALL BE THROWN IN JAIL! This is the scary reality of the view that COS is the only organisation in the UNIVERSE that can save and run this planet, these are their own words by the way.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[something_wicked_thi]

• It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members

Sounds like any other religion to me, except most religions do this from childhood, so you don't see it being done to adults.

• It forms an elitist totalitarian society.

Pick any theocracy. Any at all.

• Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma.

Jesus, Muhammad, etc.

• It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit funds recruit people.

Tithing, anyone? That covers the funds bit. Recruiting people, well, I covered that. Child abuse (not the Catholic sexual kind) is definitely up there with lying and harrassment.

• Its wealth does not benefit its members or society.

Nope. The money goes to further indoctrination and defending itself from sexual abuse scandals. Though, occasionally, a school does get built. Maybe that's the difference. Religions do occasionally spend money on humanitarian things, though usually with strings attached. You're gay? No school for you. AIDS problems? We'll help, but we won't touch those dirty condoms.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[X3J11]

I agree, it should be confused with modern day religions, since all are groups of adults believing in fictional stories and allowing them to control their lives.

As my wonderful Grandmother (she'd beat me for calling her that, she's my Nan) has always said when questioned about her unwavering belief in the Christ God, she would rather believe and be wrong, than not believe and be wrong.

Or, to quote some lyrics from a Strapping Young Lad song, "Believe what you want to believe... just believe.".

You must be young though. It seems most people of my generation and younger go through a phase where they think they're so clever believing (any) God does not exist, and that anyone who believes in such a higher power is an idiot. I went through it. Then I look at my children and think there's no way they came about without some touch of divinity.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[VorpalRodent]

Offensive and non-PC comment:
I'd think that if they perhaps add some color to those robes they would be more fabulous!

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The Only Druid]

Your grandmother referred to what is known as "Pascal's Wager": if you believe in God and are wrong, you pay no price, whereas if you do not believe in God and are wrong, you pay the price of Eternal Damnation.

The wager is uniformly understood by anyone with a passing understanding of logic to be facially invalid and incorrect.

The reason is simple: the wager makes the blatantly false assumption that believing in God while alive has no cost. Moreover, it fails to account for the fact that the 'value' of a cost paid over time is intrinsically linked to the duration of your existence (i.e. your 'life' plus any 'afterlife' you may have). If God doesn't exist, and you believe in God while alive, you pay the maximal price of wasting all that time and energy (along with all the missed opportunities this entails) during the entirety of your existence. It is difficult, if not impossible, to believe that this cost is not greater than living an actual life of happiness without a deity followed by an afterlife of 'hell'.

Moreover, belief out of fear of the results of being wrong is no belief at all: it is a shallow, deceitful pretense of belief. It is an insult to the very God you would claim to believe in, by virtue of saying that the only reason you believe is that you think it would be too costly not to believe. This is like a person who abstains from murder not out of respect for life, but rather out of avoidance of the prison-sentence. That person is a monstrous imitation of morality, not a moral man.

Belief, if you value it at all, must spring from an honest embrace of some purported truth. It cannot spring from a callow desire to avoid consequences.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Atzanteol]

You must be young though. It seems most people of my generation and younger go through a phase where they think they're so clever believing (any) God does not exist, and that anyone who believes in such a higher power is an idiot. I went through it. Then I look at my children and think there's no way they came about without some touch of divinity.

You misunderstand what 'belief' means... Not believing in a god != believing there is no god.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

If you are a good person, and you do good things, but you don't believe in the "right" God, what kind of God would punish you? Not the kind of God I'd want to spend eternity with, that's for sure. So I'm going to continue to help people and do the right thing and believing in no God.

And if your God is real, do you think he won't know that all the good YOU did was because you were afraid of burning in hell for all eternity?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The Only Druid]

As a disclaimer: I have no affiliation with the Mormon church.

I would definitely say that if we call LDS a cult, we must continue to call the Catholic Church a cult. The principle is the same: a religious group built around a cult of personality, where the original leader is subsequently replaced by a series of leaders chosen according to the originator's alleged principles.

The only difference - and I mean this honestly and without irony or sarcasm - between the cult/religion status of the Mormon and Catholic churches is time. That doesn't mean they aren't perceived differently, but it does mean that many people aren't being fair to LDS.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The Only Druid]

The question of wealth going to benefit members or society is an odd one, if we consider indirect benefits: if you're a believer in X religion, don't you intrinsically benefit (and believe society to benefit) when X's reach expands?

In concrete terms, doesn't every Christian believe that the growth of their particular church benefits both that Christian individually and society as a whole?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The Only Druid]

Hi, I think you might want to have a word with all the Hindu out there who would challenge your "typically" comment. There are around a billion of them, if I remember correctly.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[bob.appleyard]

Modern day religions typically have a single benevolent deity the is normally credited with creation that extols it's followers to behave in a moral and kindly manner.

And what of the 2 billion or so people for whom that is not the case?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[geminidomino]

Well, if someone admits to lying about something ('making something up' could be considered lying), you basically have to consider that anything they say might be a lie; how do you know if they were lying then as they claim, or are lying now. Oh oh oh !!! I know this one!

You ask "Would THE OTHER ONE tell me to go This way?" right?

Mine's the one changing its outfit every scene...

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Atzanteol]

we won't touch those dirty condoms.

I can't say I blame them...

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[something_wicked_thi]

I'm not sure how a religion expanding is supposed to benefit the people in that religion. Some people might prefer it being smaller so they believe they are part of a more exclusive, less diluted group. But they might be taken more seriously and avoid persecution in a larger group. But does a Christian in Brazil benefit when someone in Chile converts to Christianity? Probably not.

However, your second point makes sense to me. It seems logical that most believiers of a religion think that the religion has some inherent benefits and therefore society as a whole would benefit by having more parishioners. However, I don't think this differs from a cult in any way, nor does it justify the various injustices performed even by ordinary people in the name of spreading religion.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[AdamTheBastard]

Hoover's church sucks.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Threni]

Some sites, like www.cryptome.org, have backbone and don't take anything down unless they get a valid court order in their jurisdiction, which I'm not sure has ever happened. I think it takes the site owner a while to find an ISP which understands the concept of freedom of expression and due process, though.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Cro Magnon]

3. As for "I see god in my children": hey, nice for you. That doesn't even rise to the level of an argument (which one would have hoped you could recognize, since you're all old and mature and wise and stuff). There's no difference between this magical thinking and the "I don't understand it so it must be magic" that children engage in when they observe magicians. (Apologies, of course, if you merely meant that the sex was so good that you "saw god"--you know, like Cheech and Chong did when they got high and played Sabbath on 78.)

I don't know about about the OP's children, but my GF's nieces made me a believer. After all, if God exists, so does Satan.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[jstott]

Modern day religions typically have a single benevolent deity ...

There are 920 million Hindus would disagree with that statement, as would the 300 million Buddhists (give or take). Monotheism is unique to the Abrahamic religions; it is not an essential feature of "modern" religions.

-JS

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

I went through it. Then I look at my children and think there's no way they came about without some touch of divinity.

A warm fuzzy feeling isn't exactly evidence.

So having detected a mystical proof of the existence of God by looking into the eyes of a child, did you look a bit closer and find out which God to thank?

You might be on the wrong forum

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[vvaduva]

You can add more to that. Page 101 under "Punishment" "There are men dead because they attacked us" - Hubbard This is no religion or cult...it's criminal.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[DaveV1.0]

that anyone who believes in such a higher power is an idiot.

I am not young, and you are an idiot.

You are an idiot for believing in stories that have no proof other than a heavily edited book of stories, some of which are inconsistent, put together by a committee who kept out stories that did not fit in with their personal beliefs.

And, if you believe in the bible and that it is the true word of god, then I take it you also do not eat pork or shellfish and do no work on the Sabbath. Oh, and you and your church better not have a crucifix or you are all going to hell for be idolaters.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Foolicious]

The people who thinks that modern religions aren't very dangerous should try to think as if they were gay, what would you think about religions?

Your scenario doesn't account for the thousands of different presuppositions about being gay (homosexuality) that people, regardless of involvement in religion actually, bring to the table. This would make such an exercise impossible. A different way to say this may be that it seems like you're assuming that your perspective on being gay is the standard upon which everyone else should base their standard, and if people would only reach the same conclusions that you have, things would be better. To further clarify, your hypothetical gay self-image is almost certainly completely and vastly different than mine, or someone else's. You're assuming that being gay means the same things to everyone.

For example, many people involved in modern religions would consider homosexuality to be a negative trait/behavior/whatever. By using whatever, I mean that even the very definition of 'gay' varies across groups, especially religious groups, again depending on presuppositions. Those people immediately start from a completely different perspective than you (I'm assuming), so it wouldn't be particularly shocking for them to reach a completely different conclusion than yours based on your original question.

Futhermore, others involved in modern religion may indeed see things almost exactly as you do, for example the Unitarian church in the US, which is most definitely a modern religion and which most definitely supports someone's gender and sexual choices (please don't flame me for using the word "choices", that's a worthwhile, but completely different debate). I only bring this up in an attempt to show you the broad assumptions and generalizations on which your question depends.

In closing, your comment/question seems like you're basing your entire viewpoint on modern religion only on your assumptions about that religion's viewpoints (some people would say "doctrine" which other people view as a dirty word) regarding sexuality. To me, this is making a decision or accepting an assumption with a sort of self-imposed keyhole view of the big picture. Of course, I recognize that comments are made within contexts, otherwise each of our posts would be too long to be practical.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[steveo777]

Belief, if you value it at all, must spring from an honest embrace of some purported truth. It cannot spring from a callow desire to avoid consequences.

Don't know what you believe, but being a Christian myself, I've felt the same way for a long time. So Amen.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Opportunist]

I want to give the founders of various religions the benefit of doubt that they really had "good" intentions, that they tried to formulate a moral codex rather than an instrument of control. Where in the 10 commandments does it say "Do as your priest tells you"?. When you look at this rather simple moral code, it consists of a two core things:

Worship the deity (a given, since if you don't, you won't adhere to the rest of the code).
Respect your peers life, property and dignity.

That pretty much every religion was abused by those that control it (i.e. some priest caste or class) isn't too surprising. Some humans have the drive to control and command people around them, and it's easy to control and command people with promises and threats from beyond the grave. But I doubt this was the idea of people like Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus or Muhammed.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[WilyCoder]

"Belief, if you value it at all, must spring from an honest embrace of some purported truth. It cannot spring from a callow desire to avoid consequences."

Exactly why I feel that proselytization is wrong.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Captain Sarcastic]

...causing hot grits to be poured down the pants of Natalie Portman.

(Or am I about seven years too late to post that?)

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[BlackSnake112]

If I know am going to burn for eternity, may as well have fun now.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[elrous0]

Every one of those criteria could be used to describe virtually any religion. Almost all modern relgions, after all, started out as cults themselves.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[nicolastheadept]

Of course there's also the dilemma of if you worship the wrong god, and the real one is vengeful.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Z34107]

a religious group built around a cult of personality, where the original leader is subsequently replaced by a series of leaders chosen according to the originator's alleged principles.

Take out the word "religious", and you have the United States government. George Washington cult, anyone?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Maxo-Texas]

Today's cult... tomorrow's mainstream religion.

Oft repeated story-- but don't see it here yet.

Bob Heinlein and Elron Hubbard were discussing how to make money at the 195(3?) World SF con and decided religion was much more effective. They made a bar bet as to who could found a religion. Heinlein's book was "Stranger in a Strange Land"... Hubbard's book was "Dienetics".

The rest... is history.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[nicolastheadept]

Joseph Smith was a convicted con-artist and impostor before he published the book of mormon, and people still believe his words.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[sadwings]

From the LRH documents in TFA, it's a pretty good read. I read "Battlefield Earth" and his big-ol decalogy when I was 16 and I liked them. As an approach to handling criticism, defamation, "subversive activity," government investigation, etc... I can't find much fault with his directives.

If you were him, what would you have suggested? It's all pretty brilliant.

They need to keep a low profile so that the general public (their recruiting pool) doesn't know much about them. They have to protect themselves against all the people who know the scam and want to "out" them. At the time (apparently), the government was after them, so they had to fight that battle as well.

The end result is that your detractors are silenced (I think that, at the time, this was easier to accomplish by insinuating that a link to Communism existed... I don't know how well it works today), the government forgets about you and your organization continues.

As a set of marching orders, it apparently succeeded since we are still talking about them.

The rest of it is pretty creepy and it's nice to see this sort of information available.

The only thing that will destroy the CoS is this sort of open, public knowledge of the nature of the organization. My money is on them though. They'll be around for a long time and that's a good thing because, if you are ever in a car wreck and one drives by, they are the only ones who can help you.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The Only Druid]

That's nonsense: the word "religious" is an intrinsic part of the point being made, and so it cannot be removed.

If I said "Murder is the malicious act of killing someone else" and you said "take out the word 'malicious' and that means manslaughter is always murder" it would obviously be nonsense.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Dr Caleb]

"The reason is simple: the wager makes the blatantly false assumption that believing in God while alive has no cost. Moreover, it fails to account for the fact that the 'value' of a cost paid over time is intrinsically linked to the duration of your existence (i.e. your 'life' plus any 'afterlife' you may have). If God doesn't exist, and you believe in God while alive, you pay the maximal price of wasting all that time and energy (along with all the missed opportunities this entails) during the entirety of your existence. It is difficult, if not impossible, to believe that this cost is not greater than living an actual life of happiness without a deity followed by an afterlife of 'hell'."

Perhaps you think we are all bible-thumping uber Christians. Not all Christians are the fire-and-brimstone type, and not all of us believe the Bible is some tome written by the hand of God. Or the Torah. Or the Qu'ran.

Take a deeper look at all religion, and what they have in common. Jew, Hindu, Buddist - the thing that binds them all together in all religion is 'Do no intentional harm to others'. A pretty simple moral code.

Now, if God does not exist, what the worst that can happen? People are nicer to each other? And that is a waste of time? Think of the benefits if everyone adopted this simple moral code - 'Do not intentional harm to others.' Beyond that, it just differences in rituals, rites and traditions. No one would waste their corporeal existence on earth by being nicer to each other.

Believing in God has no 'cost', believing the church is infallible and that religious texts are infallible is what 'Pascals Wager' exposes. There is no downside and no cost to 'believing'. This is also the mistake the CoS has made. They don't believe in doing no harm, and they don't see their religious texts as flawed creations of man.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[budgenator]

Your right, Hinduism is a perfectly valid example of a mainstream religion in modern times that isn't monotheistic or bitheistic. I was specifically thinking of Hinduism when I chose the word typically. If you really wanted to blow me out of the water you should have mentioned Confucianism

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[etherlad]

Maybe, but I lol'ed anyway.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[gstoddart]

The wager is uniformly understood by anyone with a passing understanding of logic to be facially invalid and incorrect.

The reason is simple: the wager makes the blatantly false assumption that believing in God while alive has no cost.

Well, your mileage may vary, of course, but to some people, there's a cost in not believing there is at least some point and consequences for your actions.

As a semi-practicing Buddhist, prior to deciding that I really did prefer to have some degree of spirituality instead of just a rejected childhood upbringing as a protestant, I found myself sliding towards some rather nihilistic tendencies, and generally being a bit of an ass due to lack of perceived "ultimate consequences" (among other things).

For me, as much as I'd hardly say I'm a religious person or anything like that, at one point I found it important to re-establish a basis to underpin my beliefs and my morality. If you truly don't have at least something to tie a rope to, then you might find that there's nothing to reinforce your sense of right and wrong, and how to treat people properly. That, and to try to have a better perspective on life.

For me, I've sort of taken a modified version of Pascal's wager: live life as if there were some meaning and consequence, if nothing else than to remind you to not become a dickhead in the here and now since you don't think there are any consequences.

Do I literally believe in Karma and rebirth? Deep down, probably not. Do I use it to give me a bigger perspective than just my own damned wants and needs? Yes, I do. I think there's a lot of room to include Pascal's wager for your own personal life than you attribute to it.

However, my experiences don't necessarily reflect yours, and you're free to believe as you wish. =)

Belief, if you value it at all, must spring from an honest embrace of some purported truth. It cannot spring from a callow desire to avoid consequences.

I absolutely agree with this statement. Lip service do a belief is just that.

Cheers

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[dch24]

1) All real religions will gladly tell you what they're about before hand. -- No, they still keep secret teachings, though you have to infer what you can from reading the autobiography. 2) No real religion will brainwash you into mortgaging your house. -- They might get you to do this in order to make enough time to complete the trials and meditation, but again, don't get any money from it. 3) No real religion protects their materials by copyright, so they can do #2, and use the law to squelch leaks and critics. -- Again, no printed materials, but you're "strongly encouraged" to read the autobiography, which can only legally be had for money (the founder ceded the rights to the publisher and can't afford to buy the rights back); by deriving revenues from its copyright, they're participants in anything the publisher does in defense of the book: sue people who claim it's a lie (thus hurting sales), copy it without permission, etc. The secrecy of the teachings are protected by simply not confirming or denying anything anyone says about the religion, thus making any ex-convert who leaks unable to substantiate his claims. 4) No real religion will make you disconnect from your friends and family, so you will have nobody to instill some sense into you--and stop you from doing #2. -- Again, in practice, living an ascetic life will mean this. 5) All real religions on this planet are inclusive, instead of exclusive. -- Don't know what this means. They'll take anyone, but have the rigid rank system, and you must pass tests to move up. They profit from none of them, of course.

Sorry to hear you're being mod-stalked. I've friended you so I can always find you.

1) No, they still keep secret teachings, though you have to infer what you can from reading the autobiography.
Well, the publicly known facts could be considered part of their religious teachings. No one would join the sect who had problems with isolation or asceticism.

2) They might get you to do this in order to make enough time to complete the trials and meditation, but again, don't get any money from it.
Ok, just spending the years and years to get to the higher levels could be considered harmful. But don't you think this is at least less bad than a religion that would take all the money you have, thus leaving you basically enslaved to them? At least with this hypothetical monastic asceticism you could walk away, any time you wanted.

3) Again, no printed materials, but you're "strongly encouraged" to read the autobiography, which can only legally be had for money (the founder ceded the rights to the publisher and can't afford to buy the rights back); by deriving revenues from its copyright, they're participants in anything the publisher does in defense of the book: sue people who claim it's a lie (thus hurting sales), copy it without permission, etc. The secrecy of the teachings are protected by simply not confirming or denying anything anyone says about the religion, thus making any ex-convert who leaks unable to substantiate his claims.
This one I agree with. Most religions, however, have been around long enough that any published works they have are out of copyright, and thus can be obtained at least a few places for free. (Maybe the public library has a copy of the autobiography?)

4) Again, in practice, living an ascetic life will mean this.
Your friends and family can visit you. You can walk away. I suppose if you've made the choice, you've sort of voluntarily cut yourself off from them. But you did it before being brainwashed, before spending all your time and money, so you must have done it freely? I'm not sure I can find a coherent way of saying it, but I think an ascetic life is harmless. Though I certainly don't live one! ;-)

5) Don't know what this means. They'll take anyone, but have the rigid rank system, and you must pass tests to move up. They profit from none of them, of course.
Asceticism is usu

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[nasor]

If I asked you what you believe, you would point me to materials I can read, tell me yourself, or point me to someone else who can explain it better... That's the common argument that people bring out when trying to justify why scientology "isn't a religion", but in fact there are many non-evangelical indigenous tribal religions in Australia, North America, and Africa that try to keep their theologies secret from the "uninitiated". You just don't usually hear about them much because they don't make any particular effort to recruit new members. Scientology isn't really unique in that it tries to keep its teachings secret, it's unique in that it tries to keep its teachings secret and it actively tries to recruit.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Count Fenring]

Also questionable, but we're talking vastly different levels of damage here. Female "circumcision" is equivalent to removing the entire glans, not just the foreskin.

Also, I didn't make any judgments about male circumcision, just like I didn't make any judgments about spanking, doping, or human sacrifice. Just pulling out first example that hits. ;-)

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[zenslug]

Now, if God does not exist, what the worst that can happen? People are nicer to each other?

No, that is one of the positive consequences of religion (aberrant people and groups aside). My personal problem with a major aspect of religion, belief in God, is that it rests on blind faith. If it weren't faith then we would call it reason. So religion encourages acceptance of beliefs based not on reason and logic (which can tell you that being nice to others is a great way to live), but rather on faith. Reason is discounted. Our society needs more reason, not less.

So the worst that could happen is that people hold, encourage, and propogate ideas that are irrational and not based on fact, ideas that logic and reason cannot easily dent.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[DragonWriter]

Modern day religions typically have a single benevolent deity the is normally credited with creation that extols it's followers to behave in a moral and kindly manner.

True -- at least ignoring any disputes over the definitions of "benevelonet", "kindly" and "moral" -- of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, but not so true of Hinduism, Buddhism, or Wicca and other neo-pagan religions. I don't really see any sane definition of "modern day religions" where the former qualify but the latter don't.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Bryansix]

All have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God. You can live your life doing good things and trying to be a good person and all of that is good. However we all fall short and that is the point. Not every person who beleives in God does so out of fear of eternal damnation. Maybe they do it because they know their place in the Universe. Namely that they aren't the center of it and the Creator of all things should be worshiped and that they should accept the free gift of forgiveness.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[modecx]

I don't disagree with you, about the ascetic sects, and I was thinking of the same thing while I was writing the post; but I don't think these ways of life are exceptions or fail my qualifications. Take the Shaolin monks and Zen Buddhism, for example. Thing is, Shaolin Zen Buddhism is, ostensibly, very closely related to the other Buddhism practices in that it's a body of philosophy with roots in the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama. They're not going to shun you if you ask their key beliefs... Riddle you, perhaps, shun no. And I won't dismiss them because they won't give select esoteric knowledge over to one who is not a follower.

And in a couple particular ways, scientology is very similar to the teachings of Buddhist enlightenment which monks receive: 1) there are many stages to enlightenment 2) if you experience enlightenment before you're ready, it could be damaging to the spirit. Scientology says that if you read some text or hear about certain things before you rid yourself of space ghosts, you'll die of pneumonia in a few days. People with scientology's "knowledge" who believe this will not tell a soul, because they genuinely care for people's health. However, Buddhism (particularly ascetic Buddhism) says enlightenment is something that cannot be conveyed, it can only be experienced--and AFAIK, there are only a select few whom are said to have achieved this state. Scientology's version of enlightenment (the bridge to total freedom) is a particular thing which cannot be experienced, until it's conveyed in a very particular and precise manner, and promises things which are apparently not delivered. I have no doubt that LRH looked to Buddhism when he was dreaming up scientology, because of these parallels.

But where ascetic Buddhism teaches that one must release themselves from worldly possessions, scientology gets you to fork the money over to them, specifically.

As for the inclusive v.s. exclusive bit: You're a lot more likely to go through the scientology ranks if you've got millions of dollars for them to leach, or are more publicly visible, than if you are an invisible ascetic. Hell, they use celebrities as recruitment tools. It doesn't get more exclusive. They won't let poor people onto the "bridge" before they're damned sure they're indoctrinated for life--they're not beyond effectively using the less affluent as indentured servants of a sort. See the Sea Org.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The Only Druid]

There is an important, albeit subtle, distinction between living as if there were "some meaning and consequence", and living as if there were some deity. This is, actually, a logical result of my argument: if there is no afterlife, then the consequences and meaning of our actions are 100% found in the material world. Our impact on the world around us - including the people, is our "meaning and consequence". Thus, we all should live life as if it has meaning and consequence because it does have meaning and consequence as an empirical, demonstrable reality.

You appear to be mistaking "living as if there were a particular deity, with a particular set of rules" with "living as if there is some meaning or purpose in life". The former is what is contemplated by Pascal's Wager, while the latter is just an aspect of moral philosophy.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Dr Caleb]

See! There you go! Because something is based on faith, does not mean it is irrational. If 'God' exists, he could have created the universe from the big bang to heat death/big crunch ether knowing what would happen in it's entirety or interested in seeing what happened in between.

Belief in a higher power does not preclude what we see with our own eyes.

"My personal problem with a major aspect of religion, belief in God, is that it rests on blind faith."

So does quantum physics. So? God still believes in quantum physicists, and many QP's believe in God. The double slit experiment may mean there is no difference between the two, other than 'why' the universe was created.

"Our society needs more reason, not less."

Agreed, but our society also needs kindness, and the two are not exclusive.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Murrquan]

You are aware that psychotropic medication has really bad withdrawal, right?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The Only Druid]

I don't believe you are acknowledging the distinction between "faith" and "blind faith".

"Faith" is saying "I have some evidence to believe X, but not sufficient evidence to demonstrate X to be 100% true." "Blind faith" is saying "I have no evidence to believe X, but I choose to believe X, nonetheless."

For some religious people, they willfully and proudly ascribe to pure blind faith. For other religious people, they ascribe to faith in the sense that they see 'signs' or evidence of a deity's hand in things like the absurdly improbable existence of life, the complexity of the universe, etc.

There is a clear difference, though, between having faith in a belief based on an iota of evidence, and having faith in a belief based on 99.9% of the evidence required to demonstrate it as an incontrovertible reality.

You may look at the complexity of the genome and say "that's a little evidence for a god, so I choose to have faith in a god", but that is orders of magnitude away from looking at the enormous quantity of undeniable data that supports faith in quantum mechanics, relativity, etc.

Among other things, items of belief which are testable (e.g. the testable predictions of GR and QM) carry much, much more weight than items of belief which are intrinsically untestable (e.g. the existence of an afterlife). This should be obvious on its face: testable hypothesis are more powerful evidence.

Now, let's be honest: all faith, period, is quasi-irrational by definition. After all, you're making a conclusion based on what you know to be insufficient data to make the conclusion with 100% certainty. That said, as discussed above, we cannot confuse the degree of uncertainty of faith in GR or QM with the degree present in any religion. Moreover, faith in an item of belief which includes the claim "this item of belief cannot be disproven" is of a different sort than faith in an item of belief which includes the claim "you must abandon this item of belief if the evidence shows that an alternative is better". I think you know which faiths involve which claims.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Atlantic Wall]

Check out page 160. It deals with Blackmail and payouts on the previous page. Quote from page 160 "Truth cannot live in an atmosphere of deceit"

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Harry Coin]

FZ > ALL

And thus, having rationalized his expedition to L. Ron's modernistic office / cathedral / warehouse / condominium complex, JOE seeks The Answer to his problem...

JOE: Oh oh oh Mystical Advisor What is my problem, tell me Can you see?

L. RON HOOVER: Well, you have nothing to fear, my son! You are a Latent Appliance Fetishist, It appears to me!

JOE: That all seems very, very strange I never craved a toaster Or a color T. V.

L. RON HOOVER: A Latent Appliance Fetishist Is a person who refuses to admit to his or herself That sexual gratification can only be achieved Through the use of MACHINES... Get the picture?

JOE: Are you telling me I should come out of the closet now Mr. Ron?

L. RON HOOVER: No, my son! You must go into THE CLOSET And you will have A lot of fun! That's where they all live So if you want an Appliance to love you You'll have to go in there N' get you one

JOE: Well...that seems simple enough...

L. RON HOOVER: Yes, but if you want a really GOOD one, You'll have to learn a foreign language...

JOE: German, for instance?

L. RON HOOVER: That's right... A lot of really cute ones come from over there! (Fifty bucks, please)

And a cheerful group of Appliantologists dance into the room wearing aluminum foil lab smocks, lock arms in a circle around JOE, making sure he pays in full, all the while singing with L. RON as he delivers nis final instructions...

http://www.oldielyrics.com/lyrics/frank_zappa/a_token_of_my_extreme.html

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[yoden]

And you misunderstand Pascal's wager.

Pascal understood the real-life costs of being an adherent; he just thinks that the possibility times the infinite reward of belief is greater than the FINITE costs expended while alive. Of course, since you obviously believe the possibility to be infinitesimal, the wager doesn't make sense mathematically.

At least the paragraphs on true belief give some value to your +5 interesting.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[gstoddart]

Thus, we all should live life as if it has meaning and consequence because it does have meaning and consequence as an empirical, demonstrable reality.

Not really provably so (inasmuch as any such discussion can be definitvely "proven"), some people would definitely NOT agree with you that this it is a demonstratable fact.

You appear to be mistaking "living as if there were a particular deity, with a particular set of rules" with "living as if there is some meaning or purpose in life". The former is what is contemplated by Pascal's Wager, while the latter is just an aspect of moral philosophy.

Not quite. I understand the difference, and I'm acutely aware of the distinction having spent so many years rejecting the concept of a deity.

I just choose to attribute some of the latter you suggest as being more to do with something outside of myself, not merely something I choose to follow because I want to. Externalizing it (for me, I don't claim it to be a logically consistent stance) allows me to give it greater weight than an arbitrary belief. (Moral philosophy doesn't happen in a vacuum -- it's supported by either the belief in the divine, or that somehow it is intrinsic to the universe. Without either of those, what's the foundation of belief in it? It's just an arbitrary set of rules you try to convince yourself are correct.)

Anyway, we tread into metaphysics, and there be dragons. =)

Cheers

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[nacturation]

I have my own wager. Sure, you can believe in the Christian God and follow the matrix to see that the supposed logical course is to believe. But I have the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Here's his matrix:

Believe and it's true: Eternal reward for you and your family.
Believe and it's not true: You get to enjoy pasta.
Disbelieve and it's true: Eternal punishment for you, your friends, and your family.
Disbelieve and it's not true: No consequence.

So, you see, with my matrix you get a much higher reward for believing and a much higher punishment for disbelieving. So anyone considering Christianity using Pascal's wager must consider my wager as well, given that the matrix is far more extreme and is the only supposed logical choice.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[mrroot]

I'll second that. And I would like to add a couple of my own thoughts, again from a Christian perspective...

1. Its not whether you believe in God or not, even Satan believes God is real.
2. God is not a punisher, but a redeemer through His son Jesus, who He sent to pay the price of our sin that it would be forgiven.

It is good that you try to do good deeds and be kind to people, but doing good deeds really has nothing to do with whether God loves you or not, because He already does.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[nuzak]

> that's the one over which Isaac Hays, thee voice of "Chef", resigned from the show, because of his membership in Scinetology.

He quit over pay actually. The statement about Scientology was issued in Hayes' name by a CoS publicicist (not even his own) after he had had a stroke.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[tomthegeek]

For some religions the moral code is actually 'Do no intentional harm to others that have the same beliefs'. That's when things start to get sticky.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

"So I'm going to continue to help people and do the right thing and believing in no God."

God, I'm a good person... I don't think you exist, and the idea of you is balony, but if you do exist I hope you'll see I help others (not you) and think hey he's a swell guy, let's let him inside.

"Mommy I'm a good person but I wish you weren't here, so can I have some cookies?"

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[randyest]

what the worst that can happen? People are nicer to each other? Believing in God has no 'cost', believing the church is infallible and that religious texts are infallible is what 'Pascals Wager' exposes

Can you really have one without the other? I mean, unless you're just making up your own god (not that there's anything wrong with that) you're basing it off of some religious text, and with that comes a lot worse things than "people are nicer to each other.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[misleb]

No real religion protects their materials by copyright, so they can do #2, and use the law to squelch leaks and critics. 4) No real religion will make you disconnect from your friends and family, so you will have nobody to instill some sense into you--and stop you from doing #2.

If your friends and family don't want you to do #2, perhaps you should be disconnected from them. Not doing #2 will kill you.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[The One and Only]

Sure: my point is that this makes them more like a major religion, not less.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Count Fenring]

Yes, I have heard of philosophy of religion. I don't see how religions having philosophical aspects and vice versa has any impact on whether the concepts are different. Christianity and Secular Humanism share many moral ideas, but that doesn't mean Christians are Secular Humanists.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[rock_climbing_guy]

COS? How could I confuse them with another religious group?

How about this one.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[immcintosh]

As my wonderful Grandmother (she'd beat me for calling her that, she's my Nan) has always said when questioned about her unwavering belief in the Christ God, she would rather believe and be wrong, than not believe and be wrong.

That can be a dangerous attitude. It's pretty widely agreed that the people who believed in the Crusades and the Inquisition were wrong. At least they had a belief and stuck to it though, eh? As for me, either give me proof or I will simply reserve my judgment. If God can't deal with that kind of attitude, then maybe he's not the kinda bloke I want to spending eternity with anyway. Especially when you consider the frequent consequences of unfounded dogmatic belief.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

No, he's saying that bashing is bashing even if the bashing is justified. Which it is. I'm actually incredibly impressed with the Anonymous movement - what are the odds that you can collect a bunch of strangers from the internet for worldwide protests... without any fights breaking out?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[steveo777]

By your logic, you could fit just about any corporation, career path, martial art, committee, political structure, boy scout troops, or literally any group of people where hard work, training, experience and mutual respect can grant higher rank into a 'cult' status.

I'm not a fan of catholicism as a whole, either. And the idea of the Pope isn't appealing either. The Bible really doesn't do a lot of talking about anything 'higher' than elders of a church body. And if you've read Judges and Kings you'd notice that God was pretty opposed to having one ruler over His people. Just real people, being real with Him and His people.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[modecx]

If your friends and family don't want you to do #2, perhaps you should be disconnected from them. Not doing #2 will kill you.

Hey, you should have told that to The Duke.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[budgenator]

Monotheism is unique to the Abrahamic religions;
How about

Many Kemetic Reconstructionists, including members of the large House of Netjer, define their form of polytheism as monolatry, a term coined by Egyptologists. This means that the many individual deities are regarded as parts of an ultimately unknowable self-created Oneness, known in ancient texts as Netjer, "being of divine power," or as Atum, "the complete one/the one who is not."
Kemetic Reconstructionism

or

The Zoroastrian concept of God incorporates both monotheism and dualism. In his visions, Zarathustra was taken up to heaven, where Ahura Mazda revealed that he had an opponent, Aura Mainyu, the spirit and promoter of evil. Ahura Mazda charged Zarathustra with the task of inviting all human beings to choose between him (good) and Aura Mainyu (evil). Zoroastrianism

or

Mithraism was a Roman mystery religion that flourished in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD. Much is still unknown about this secretive sect, but it involved the worship of the ancient Persian god Mithras in caves, a communal meal, and initiation through seven stages of an astrologically-themed hierarchy. Mithraism

or even

There is significant variation within the Rastafari movement and no formal organization. Some Rastafarians see Rasta more as a way of life than a religion. But uniting the diverse movement is belief in the divinity and/or messiahship of Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie I, the influence of Jamaican culture, resistance of oppression, and pride in African heritage.Rastafari

another point is with the emphasis on Trinitarianism some may argue that Abrahamic religions, especialy Christianity isn't monotheistic

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Adambomb]

The jokes from couples alone would cause hours (more) of delay at security.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[ampathee]

Now, if God does not exist, what the worst that can happen? People are nicer to each other? And that is a waste of time? Think of the benefits if everyone adopted this simple moral code - 'Do not intentional harm to others.' Beyond that, it just differences in rituals, rites and traditions. No one would waste their corporeal existence on earth by being nicer to each other. Speaking as a nice atheist, I take issue with that assertion. Some of us are nice to other people out of empathy, not because we read in some book that we should be.

Anyway, 'believing' in something because the numbers work out to give you a higher expected return is, as someone further down pointed out more eloquently than I can, not really believing.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Kalak]

Wikipedia Link, touching on the controversy surrounding his departure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chef_(South_Park)#Hayes_quits_South_Park

short version: "I didn't say that. I was too busy having a stroke"

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[jafac]

I guess my question (about the definition between Cult and Religion:) is Ayn Rand dead long enough?

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Antique Geekmeister]

Are we reading the same article? The show's creators claim he left over the Scientology episode, and he claims otherwise after the fact. This looks like a pretty fundamental disagreement over the facts.

I like Isaac Hayes work, and am glad he wsa Chef and that he had fun doing it.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[jafac]

Having witnessed SSRI withdraw firsthand, there is a period of about 2 weeks (varies per individual and dosage) where there is extreme irritability (along with dizziness, nausea, "buzzing" sensations, sleeplessness, profuse sweating - leading to dehydration in some cases, etc), which is completely unrelated to the original symptoms that prompted medication in the first place.

So yeah - psychotic goes on meds, is stable, goes off meds, is unstable. Mildly anxious person goes on meds, is "happy" - goes off meds, and CAN become unstable for a short period of time. I've seen it happen. Went on "SSRI withdraw" discussion boards, and talked with other people who were going through or have gone through the same exact thing my significant other went through.

And yes - some of them became suicidal, and violent during withdraw.

The medical establishment needs to much more closely monitor SSRI usage.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Antique Geekmeister]

LDS was a cult duriing its early years. They've matured, and matured surprisingly well (despite the behavior of some of its more outlandish and outlying members).

Saying that the difference was only time is like saying the only difference between a seed and a tree is time. It has some philosophical validity, but in practice, you can't eat the wood from trees and you can't make boards out of seeds.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[frank_adrian314159]

I'd rather be a Jedi than a Thetan. It's also just SciFi, but at least the story is better.

Yeah, but only by a Jar-Jar or two.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[FooAtWFU]

I will select a few points here.

>The Cult Information Centre describes it as such:
>It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and retain its members

Religions don't need to do that: they teach to children: it's much more easy to influence children than adults, but I don't think that it is better..

>It forms an elitist totalitarian society.

Well the vatican looks to me as fitting this description.

>Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not accountable and has charisma.

A good definition of the pope job, he's not the founder but he has the same role.

The people who thinks that modern religions aren't very dangerous should try to think as if they were gay, what would you think about religions?
Children learn from their parents (/teachers/peers/day care). It's fairly common. One of those things parents+etc teach children are cultural, moral and ethical considerations, whether overtly religious in nature or otherwise. And I don't think that you can express that it's somehow 'better' to teach them not-religion or not-teach-them-anything without falling back on some system of values which is itself para-religious in nature.

Totalatarian. The Vatican does not come down on my head if I use the Internet. It does not attempt to tell me what jobs I can take and where I can buy a house, and who I may and may not associate with. If I violated some proscription - something like, oh, cheat on my wife with the secretary from work (not that I have a wife) and the Vatican or a local priest found out, I'd be told "that is wrong; stop, repent, go to confession, don't do things like that," sure, but by and large I would not face any significant consequences at all. In a cult, violating a proscription is another matter altogether.

The Pope. Is elected internally by a college of Cardinals, and not self-appointed. This is not so much a big deal for Scientology anymore; their founder is dead. Messianic? Not old Ratzinger, I don't think so, nuh-uh. Accountability is suspect to outsiders, sure.

In conclusion, while the questions of whether Religion in general or specific cases is justified or justifiable or safe or dangerous ... and all that.... cannot be addressed at this juncture, there are still real, qualitative differences between the Catholic Church (or other churches) and a cult. If you can't see them, I would also request that you please take a few moments to consider whether your view has been affected by prejudice in these matters.

Also, as this article is about cults, not generally about "religion is bad", the comparison of the Catholic church to a cult, and expression of concerns regarding its danger, are not in and of itself relevant to the article. As such, I would contend that you have a personal agenda and that you are opportunistically dragging into this conversation to push it. (Zis ees eensy bit offputting. juzt a beet.) Finally, also take a moment to consider whether your particular selection of exemplary church (the Catholic one) is more or less "dangerous" than various other churches, religions, or denominations of Christianity. (Phrases like 'Westboro Baptist Church' and 'fundamentalist Islamic law' come to mind).

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Anonymous Coward]

I just collected hundreds of documents off the web. Thank goodness for google. The Internet is a wonderful backup and storage mechanism. Once you publish something, it might as well be impossible to suppress it, unless it is child porn or something actually actionable. I am goin g to make a DVD and put it into my safety deposit box so when my daughter grows up she will have it and can release it on the web again. :-)

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[jwo7777777]

Unfortunately, critics of "religion" are correct. We mostly practice a form of organization with exclusionary traditions, rather than "[aiding] widows and orphans in their distress." Thus they are unable to see any advantage or power in the "good news."

The truth is a sword and takes a lot of skill (love) to wield as a scalpel.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[mav[LAG]]

Couldn't agree with you more. But many critics think they're being insightful by calling the NT documents fiction or fairy tales or unreliable, entirely without credentials or evidence.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[zenslug]

Because something is based on faith, does not mean it is irrational.

Agreed. It doesn't mean it is rational, either. Blind faith exists absent of reason, but that doesn't mean that the belief itself is wrong. My problem is with the process.

... quantum physics [rests on blind faith].

As another responder has pointed out, there is a difference between blind faith and faith based on a level of certainty through observation and testable claims. The theories of quantum physics have been arrived at over time. There have been some wild ideas tossed in there, too, but they are actively being tested to determine if they are accurate or how accurate they are.

... our society also needs kindness, and the two are not exclusive.

Agreed, faith in religion and kindness are not exclusive.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Kalak]

It was eventually reported, however, that Hayes did not quit the show, but that the original press release announcing his departure was put out by someone who was not authorized to represent him. As recently as January 4, 2006, Hayes defended South Park's style of controversial humor to The Onion's AV Club and XM's Opie and Anthony Show, going so far as to note that although he was not pleased with the show's depiction of Scientology, he "understand[s] what [Matt and Trey] are doing."

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Antique Geekmeister]

Nice selective reading. You're claiming as certainty the part earlier where it says:

> Parker and Stone assert that he quit due to the controversial episode "Trapped in the Closet"' and its treatment of Scientology, as Hayes is a member of the religion. Series co-creator and writer Matt Stone commented in a manner that suggested that Hayes practiced a double standard regarding the treatment of religion on South Park: "[We] never heard a peep out of Isaac in any way until we did Scientology. He wants a different standard for religions other than his own, and to me, that is where intolerance and bigotry begin." And Hayes public defense of the South Park humor was _before_ the Scientology episode.

Nowhere does it say "I was too busy having a sroke", as you described the situation, although the stroke does raise some interesting possibilities. Nowhere does it say his departure was over money. I don't know where you're getting this.

Re:Get 'em while they're hot

[Kalak]

I'm not sure where money entered into this conversation, as I never mentioned it.

Timeline:
November 16, 2005 - original airing of Trapped in the Closet Episode.
January 4, 2006 - Onion AV Club interview: "But I understand what they're doing."
Janurary 17, 2006 - stroke date referenced in note 3, month confirmed in later article referenced
March 13, 2006 - Reports of Isaac Quitting
March 20, 2006 - Interview published post stroke: "Isaac's been concentrating on his recuperation for the last two and a half, three months," a close friend told me.

One word

[Anonymous Coward]

PWNED.

PDF Link Broke

[LaskoVortex]

The PDF file was broke or the link went to nowhere.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[mythosaz]

Current link (from wikileaks.cx) working just fine... A lowly 60k/sec, but that's just a minute or two download.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[kiwi_jackal]

get it by torrent - http://thepiratebay.org/tor/4059049/New_scientology_dox__The_Computer_Frank_Oliver_Dox

Re:PDF Link Broke

[ecavalli]

Fasten the tinfoil hats boys and girls. This one is gonna get messy.

Would anyone like to wager how long it will be before we see a headline announcing the mysterious disappearance of Wikileaks' founders, their families and pets and anyone they've ever spoken to?

Re:PDF Link Broke

[Ron_Fitzgerald]

It is sad to say that your statement may not be far from being serious, if it was intended to be a joke.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[Ron_Fitzgerald]

dl'd @ 400k in 30 secs from a torrent. Who said BitTorrent was for nothing but bad.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[ecavalli]

Xenu, I believe.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[flyingsquid]

Would anyone like to wager how long it will be before we see a headline announcing the mysterious disappearance of Wikileaks' founders, their families and pets and anyone they've ever spoken to?

Who are these "Wikileaks" people exactly, anyhow? I googled the name, but oddly, I didn't come up with any hits...

Re:PDF Link Broke

[cdrdude]

People like you are why need an additional rating (Score:5, Awesome)
Thank you for your quick thinking good sir; I am seeding it now.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[Anonymous Coward]

In addition to this Chuck Beatty, who was a member of the Sea Org for 27 years has a toll free number, 866-XSEAORG for any current Scientology staff members to call if you need someone to talk to . He can also be reached at 412-260-1170 and by email at chuckbeatty77@aol.com You know, i hate living in a world where i see something like this and the first thing i think is "i wonder if the scientologists are actually creating anti-scientology fronts to discover who is leaking information or considering defecting with proofs."

Re:PDF Link Broke

[r_jensen11]

Xenu, I believe. Wouldn't he actually approve of it? I haven't read the book, let alone TFA, but I would've guessed that he created the whole bittorrent protocol by means of having Thetans carry packets from computer to computer via his ginormous spaceship.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[Kandenshi]

Feel like you want more information on a *wiki?
Why not just go to wikipedia?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikileaks

Basically, it's a website dedicated to posting stuff anonymously that businesses/governments/etc... would not approve of. Airing all their dirty laundry/skeletons in their closet, etc...

Re:PDF Link Broke

[zakeria]

Document is a fake because I own the chuckbeatty77@aol.com addy!

Re:PDF Link Broke

[Anonymous Coward]

It looks like you're trying to use the technique of Dead Agenting (see page 135)
Now it's my job to produce the marriage certificate, apparently.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[jonaskoelker]

This is a sign that emacs is evil: xenu is an acronym of the precursor to emacs, the POSIX-compatible enux.

(Interestingly, enux was a microkernel OS. That didn't fit will with RMS's idealistic agenda of monolithic kernels, hence emacs.)

Re:PDF Link Broke

[RealGrouchy]

i wonder if the scientologists are actually creating anti-scientology fronts I read that as "anti-scientology fonts," and thought "Wow, that is some damn subtle manipulation!"

- RG>

Re:PDF Link Broke

[budgenator]

the link I followed was slashdotted and the squid proxy substituted an info page telling the requester the sever was overloaded.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[budgenator]

dude get rid of the tinfoil hat, tinfoil grows metal whiskers that can penetrate the skull and make a direct connection to the brain for the mind-control rays beamed from outer-space by Xenu; for goodness sake use aluminum or tin-lead alloy foil for your hat!

Re:PDF Link Broke

[RareButSeriousSideEf]

Way to go, sir. Had I mod points, they would be yours.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[Opportunist]

DAMN that soul-pirate!

Re:PDF Link Broke

[ClickOnThis]

(Interestingly, enux was a microkernel OS. That didn't fit will with RMS's idealistic agenda of monolithic kernels, hence emacs.) Okay, maybe a joke just flew over my head, but for the record, Gnu HURD is based on a microkernel, and surely has the support of Richard Stallman. Whereas the [Gnu/]Linux kernel is monolithic.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[Anonymous Coward]

I firmly believe this supposed anti-CoS piece, HOW TO TALK TO A SCIENTOLOGIST, is written by a practicing Scientologist.

The essence of it is: "F- off, don't talk to me."

Re:PDF Link Broke

[Antique Geekmeister]

You didn't know about Cult Awareness Network? Hop over to Wikipedia, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_Awareness_Network.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[Catbeller]

Disappearance? No. Another tragic suicide by carbon monoxide. You'd think the SP's would find a new way to commit suicide after they realize their crimes, but for some reason they always use the exhaust-pipe-via-garden-hose-to-the-entire-home trick.

Re:PDF Link Broke

[jonaskoelker]

Yes, whoosh. Or maybe I should learn to make my irony more explicit.

Remember what happened last time

[sgtron]

Do a google search for slashdot deleted posts scientology, and see what comes up.

Re:Remember what happened last time

[pete-classic]

Would it kill you to provide a link?

-Peter

Re:Remember what happened last time

[Abeydoun]

Maybe...

My condolences to your family, good sir.

Re:Remember what happened last time

[Merusdraconis]

I see this: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/03/16/1256226

Which appears to be an apology from Slashdot for being strongarmed, and how to find the comment, plus lots of other 'Scientology are evil pricks' links. On the balance, I don't see the problem.

Re:Remember what happened last time

[Anonymous Coward]

Er? No, it's a story about how they deleted the comment, and a few places to find the text that was in the comment. You know, sites that aren't slashdot. Which deleted the comment.

Re:Remember what happened last time

[Arancaytar]

Slashdot took the path of least resistance by backing down, and I don't blame them for it. Slashdot's job is to aggregate, summarize and discuss technology news, and they didn't have the resources to stand up against a powerful censorship organization.

Wikileaks, on the other hand, has made it its business to do exactly that. This is their test of fire.

Re:Remember what happened last time

[Anonymous Coward]

those were posts containing entire NOTS packs, which is like CP for scientologists.

slashdotted

[EmbeddedJanitor]

I bet this is a Scientology plot to overload wikileaks.

Re:slashdotted

[Jugalator]

Over here the page still loads swiftly. *shrug*

Re:slashdotted

[Brian Gordon]

Wikileaks is wayy beyond scientology's grasp. I mean, the CoS would easily bomb a data center if they could find one, but wikileaks is worldwide and hidden.

Re:slashdotted

[renegadesx]

It worked! Damn that Xenu! sneaky little bigger.

Re:slashdotted

[Foobar of Borg]

I mean, the CoS would easily bomb a data center if they could find one

You mean, with a Tom Cruise Missile?

Re:slashdotted

[IconBasedIdea]

as are these fellows: http://thepiratebay.org/tor/4059049/New_scientology_dox__The_Computer_Frank_Oliver_Dox

Re:slashdotted

[mOdQuArK!]

It jumps up and down on the server until the server crashes from embarrassment.

Re:slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

Those are easily picked up on gaydar.

Re:slashdotted

[luna69]

Oh shit! Here comes an s!

Re:slashdotted

[CodeBuster]

Yes, but it is also simultaneously calibrated with pure thetan energy to overload the brains of all the psychiatrists reading it causing their heads to explode like volcanos. Indeed, even Xenu himself could not have conceived of such a brilliant and masterful subterfuge.

Re:slashdotted

[fishbowl]

>I mean, the CoS would easily bomb a data center

Being linked to a literal act of terrorism would be the end of Scientology in the US.

Re:slashdotted

[Shadow of Eternity]

It hasn't yet, what's one more?

Re:slashdotted

[Detritus]

They survived the aftermath of Operation "Snow White" with no long-term consequences.

Re:slashdotted

[paganizer]

anyone have the Freenet 0.5 key? My ISP doesn't like torrents.

Re:slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, the CoS would easily bomb a data center if they could find one

You mean, with a Tom Cruise Missile?

It's reassuring that enough mods got that reference to mod it up to +5, and doubly so considering the fate that memeticist Keith Henson ended up suffering as a result of first inventing that wisecrack. Google around for "Tom Cruise Missile" and "Keith Henson".

/anon
//legion
///etc

Re:slashdotted

[feuerfalke]

There'd likely be a lot more public outrage over it. I mean, just think about it: Bombs, explosions, violence! The media would have a field day with it, and the public would know about it, and politicians and law enforcement would be pressured to do something about it.

Re:slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe he did not invent that wisecrack, he was simply arrested at the request of the Church of Scientology for being in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and REPLYING to the Alt.Religion.Scientology post that contained that joke.

It's a joke I remember making once myself 20 years ago when I was 8!

Re:slashdotted

[fishbowl]

>They survived the aftermath of Operation "Snow White" with no long-term consequences.

Several people were tried, convicted, and served lengthy prison sentences, putting the church in
the public eye and simultaneously making it a laughingstock. One long-term consequence was that
the media exposure about the church reached the attention of one Ivan Stang, inspiring him to start
a competing scam religious cult company.

Re:slashdotted

[Adambomb]

If so, it backfired into a massive near telethon style donation campaign.

Whoops.

Re:slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

Wooooo! Love the balloons and confetti ...

Also, I'm always getting Amway confused with Scientology ...

Re:slashdotted

[mpe]

Being linked to a literal act of terrorism would be the end of Scientology in the US.

Given that US authorities only appear to be concerned with terrorists connected with "the toilet" what would be the chances of that happening?

Re:slashdotted

[mpe]

There'd likely be a lot more public outrage over it. I mean, just think about it: Bombs, explosions, violence! The media would have a field day with it, and the public would know about it, and politicians and law enforcement would be pressured to do something about it.

Media (at least outside of "web only") together with politicians and law enforcement would have to deal with the fact that they have been treating terrorism as exclusivly something to do with Islam for most of this decade. Even to the point of downplaying ignoring Jewish and Christian terrorists, who are likely to have a lot more in common with Islamic ones than anyone connected with Scientology. By choosing to misrepresent terrorist these people have painted themselves into a corner.

Re:slashdotted

[Detritus]

Considering what they were doing, I think they got off very lightly. 5 years is not a lengthy sentence for espionage and subversion, not to mention the huge conspiracy.

Re:slashdotted

[dkleinsc]

For those like me who didn't know off the top of their head Ivan Stang created, he founded the Church of the SubGenius.

Re:slashdotted

[dgm3574]

Eternal salvation, or triple your money back!

Re:slashdotted

[Oktober Sunset]

Espionage and subversion against your own government used to be called treason, if a islamic or a socialist organisation had done the same thing they probably would still be in jail now and their organisation banned.

Re:slashdotted

[msheekhah]

actually, according to http://www.enturbulation.org/, it is submitted by Anonymous. If you ever want a peek inside their head (without using mind probes), it seems to be one of several distributed hubs for their plotting and communication. the others are, from what I can gather, less savory. but spicier.

Re:slashdotted

[Captain Sarcastic]

Also, I'm always getting Amway confused with Scientology ...

Can't say I blame you. Until November of 2005, Amway was outlawed as a cult group in the People's Republic of China.

Re:slashdotted

[networkBoy]

It looks like that's what they did...
Anyone with a copy of the PDF? I'll even host a mirror of it over on networkboy.net which *should* be able to take the bandwidth (crosses fingers).
-nB

Re:slashdotted

[networkBoy]

Fourteen hours after the story posts and the server is still hammered:
http://networkboy.net/scientology-frank-oliver-osa.pdf
And in case some wing nut wants to sue me:
Piss off.

Re:slashdotted

[beoba]

The Oklahoma City Federal Building bombing already did that for us.

Unless, of course, everyone's already forgotten about that.

Re:slashdotted

[bondjamesbond]

Jail, as in Gitmo, which is a good place for scientologists.

Re:slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

no no *boing* no no no *boing* no no *boing* *boing* no no *boing* no *boing* no no no *boing* no *boing* no no no!

Re:slashdotted

[rahvin112]

You can't ban an organization in the US. The government can take all their assests and arrest the leaders and even the members but the government can't stop the free association of people.

Are people this ignorant of the constitution?

Re:slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

> Espionage and subversion against your own government used to be called treason

No it has not, and I suggest you read up on the definition of treason. Part of it is defined in the constitution.

I agree, 5 years is pretty light, but you frothing at the mouth doesn't change facts.

Re:slashdotted

[Jojie_T]

Constitution only protects legal activities. Make it illegal (patriot act, internment camps, etc) and it doesn't apply to you. Or did I miss something?

Re:slashdotted

[Dracophile]

I mean, the CoS would easily bomb a data center

Being linked to a literal act of terrorism would be the end of Scientology in the US.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Re:slashdotted

[Steve Franklin]

Um, the constitution defines WHAT you can make illegal. You CANNOT outlaw things--like free speech--that are protected by the constitution.

What you missed, apparently, was a large part of your secondary education.

Re:slashdotted

[Jojie_T]

I'm sure you can practice free speech all you want when you're rotting in jail because due process was not afforded to you in the name of national security. I'm also sure you can practice free speech all you want but just know that someone (your government) is listening in on your conversation. Illegally. Silly me.

Re:slashdotted

[dpastern]

Tell that to the NAZI party...

Dave

Re:slashdotted

[Shakrai]

Espionage and subversion against your own government used to be called treason

With respect and the disclaimer that I have no lost love for the CoS, what possesses you to make the leap to 'treason' with regards to Scientology?

Treason as defined in the US Constitution consists solely of "levying war against the United States, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort". What has the CoS done that would fit into this definition?

This guy arguably committed treason. But where is the foreign power assisted by the CoS?

Re:slashdotted

[Anonymous Coward]

I think whats really scary about the above comment is that you believe this, and probably many others do too.

Re:slashdotted

[Steve Franklin]

The point I was trying to make which you seem to have missed AGAIN is that there are two levels of law in this country, the purely legal and the constitutional. Law is trumped by the constitution. If multiple laws are being passed, and enforced, that are in contravention to the constitution, it is because we have crossed the line between poor legislation and tyranny, and we all know what T. Jefferson's solution to tyranny was. So stop crying and wetting your pants and DO something about that tyranny or STFU.

Re:slashdotted

[Jojie_T]

It's cute how you explain your fantasy that the constitution is protecting you. Cute sig.

Here come da judge!

[Black Parrot]

Bet that won't result in any legal harassment.

So,

[Warll]

First they had troubles with some foreign bank now there posting Scientology documents. Next step the MAFIAA?

Re:So,

[Cctoide]

And then the Illuminati!

Hold on, there's someone at my do--

Re:So,

[Assassin bug]

I'm sorry but whenever someone says, "Illuminati", I think of pizza. You see, when I was first dating my wife their family ordered a pizza from Lou Malnati's and I thought they said, "Illuminati's pizza". I thought, how does that work for a business philosophy for pizza? It was all very funny (and it is very good pizza).

Re:So,

[Barbobot]

That's the Neptunati, followed by the Death Star of David!

Re:So,

[jberryman]

Oh shit, was it candlejack? Wait... but you didn't even sa

Re:So,

[aTMsA]

No, no, no. The canonical way to make that joke is finishing with NO CARRIER, with optional line noise before that. Here, I corrected it for you.

And then the Illuminati!

Hold on, there's someone at my do&%"$%NO CARRIER

Anonymous marches March 15.

[Anonymous Coward]

Anonymous marches on March 15, the "March of Ides".

Are you going to be there? Find the closest church and be there!

It is your civic duty. I hope to march alongside you.

Re:Anonymous marches March 15.

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope to march alongside you. But how would you know it was me? And how would I know it was you?

Re:Anonymous marches March 15.

[TehDuffman]

Well you do know that March 15th is St. Patty's day this year right? They might have wanted to pick a different day because i know i am going to be to drunk to protest. I guess there are better people in the world than me( see as not alcoholic :).

Re:Anonymous marches March 15.

[meringuoid]

Well you do know that March 15th is St. Patty's day this year right?

Debatable. St Patrick's is not normally a movable feast; it's March 17th every year. However, since this year that happens to be during Holy Week, I gather some dioceses are celebrating the feast of St Patrick early. As far as I know this isn't the case in Ireland, where St Patrick's Day is being celebrated on the 17th as usual.

The more important consideration of course is that a Monday is not convenient for getting properly drunk; I mean you can't leave it till after work to start drinking if it's to be a proper St Patrick's pissup now can you? Consequently the best day for Guinness sales will likely be the Saturday before.

Re:Anonymous marches March 15.

[TehDuffman]

I saw that it was moved... But i will compromise by celebrating twice.

organizations that prohibit criticism

[Anonymous Coward]

...are bankrupt at their core. We're talking Scientology, Islam and like religions, and extremist governments as well.

Extremists are at THEIR cores essentially frightened little people, afraid of change, afraid of difference, afraid of criticism.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[icegreentea]

Why are you specifically stating Islam, and then forgetting all about those wonderful little people at the Discovery Institute. I understand that 'like religions' really does encompass all possible religions, singling out Islam by name is a bit unfair. They are no better, and no worse than any other major religion with extremist/fundamentalist groups.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[MrNaz]

I am a Muslim and I will not tolerate you criticising me for not tolerating criticism!

Wait...

Dammit!

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[Anonymous Coward]

A preist violated my core once, does that count?

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[ArcherB]

Why are you specifically stating Islam, and then forgetting all about those wonderful little people at the Discovery Institute. I understand that 'like religions' really does encompass all possible religions, singling out Islam by name is a bit unfair. They are no better, and no worse than any other major religion with extremist/fundamentalist groups. Actually, Islam is the only major religion who has flown planes into buildings, posted videos of beheadings, preaches that the penalty for leaving the religion is death and is responsible for really REALLY close to 100% of terrorist attacks around the world (Not just the US, but all over the world). So, yeah. I think they deserve an honorary mention on this one.

So, when you say, They are no better, and no worse than any other major religion with extremist/fundamentalist groups., I'm afraid I have to say that you are extraordinarily naive and just plain wrong And to compare Islam to the Discovery Institute... I'm sorry, how many people have been killed by people from the Discovery Institute? How many civilian markets and embassies have been bombed? How many children and mentally retarded people have they used to blow up innocent civilians? Did you say Zero? If you did, then you are correct. Any other answer is just plain ignorant.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[stony3k]

Islam is a much more decentralized religion that most of us are used to. This means that any two-bit priest can issue a Fatwa or invoke. This also means that just because a few Muslims blew up innocents, the whole religion is flawed.

Islam does have many issues to work out with how they fit into the modern society and the sooner they do this the better for all of us.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[sir fer]

yeah true, christians just invade sovereign nations based on lies and kill and displace many innocents based on more lies that's much better than islamics who kill a few thousand in one event every 100 years, yes, I see your logic...you think 1 + 1 = 10^24

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[Anonymous Coward]

Jihad has been fairly frequent since the 7th century. Although other religions such as christianity have had "holy wars", islam is the only major religion whose founder and his immediate followers practiced and endorsed holy war.

Other religions can credibly claim that holy war is a perversion of their religion, islam can not.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[Version6]

Islam is the only major religion...[which]...preaches that the penalty for leaving the religion is death

Islam is about six hundred years younger than christianism. Much more recently than six hundred years ago Roman Catholics were killing "heretics" who tried to practice a related form of christianism. In England, the reverse was happening, though on a smaller scale. And of course all the christianists were happily killing Jews, followers of a closely related religion. I think it's easy to imagine what would have happened to anyone trying to become a muslim in that environment. Let's just hope it doesn't take several hundred years for muslims to become as relatively civilized as the christianists seem to be today.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[mabhatter654]

you missed the Middle Ages when the Catholic Church wielded nearly the same power over Europe and launched 3 Holy Wars (Crusades) to free Jerusalem (even though they killed as many jews as arabs in the process). Joan of Arc may have been an inspirational leader, but she was still a Woman in a mans job claiming visions (not from the church) so they LEGALLY burned her at the stake, it wasn't a lynch mob at all. Or how the pope would condemn whole cities or states to burn in hell by shutting down churches when a political leader didn't toe the Church line. The Ayatollahs got nothing on the Pope and Bishops for despicable acts.

Comparing to Scientology, the Catholic Church had that little thing called the Spanish Inquisition... which was really just one peak out of several hundred years of church-state sponsored religious terror for anybody non-noble or non-priest that didn't toe the Church line. Scientology is amateurs compared to them.

Note: many of the early American immigrants were from those heavily corrupt countries which is why the Catholic Church was treated like a cult until the mid 1900's it was even an issue whether the Pope would pull rank on the president in the 1960's!

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[SanguineV]

To claim that terrorism is "really REALLY close to 100%" of terrorism is rediculous. A start might be to note known terrorist organisations, or perhaps terrorist incidents in recent history or track down some suspected/actual terrorist activitie here.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[TapeCutter]

You do realise that Christians, Jews, and Muslims all belive in the SAME God, don't you? Hindus won't argue with any of them, they just add Abraham's God to their vast collection of gods.

Islam does not have a monopoly on evil shit anymore or less than Christianity does. To belive otherwise is to fall for the religious propoganda that encourages said evil shit.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[SanguineV]

Correction: To claim that islam is responsible for "really REALLY close to 100%" of terrorism is rediculous.

... maybe I really do need coffee.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[Anonymous Coward]

The more interesting point to consider is why Islam completely missed the boat on the Enlightenment.

Whereas Christians looked around and said, you know, maybe killing all these people isn't right, Islam has carried on with its Jihads.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[LaskoVortex]

Actually, Islam is the only major religion who has flown planes into buildings, posted videos of beheadings, preaches that the penalty for leaving the religion is death and is responsible for really REALLY close to 100% of terrorist attacks around the world (Not just the US, but all over the world). So, yeah. I think they deserve an honorary mention on this one.

You really should stop making these kinds of post-hoc generalizations. Yes, the people who flew the planes into the buildings are thought to be Muslim, but the religion of Islam did not officially sanction the attack. This is like saying that Tim McVeigh's religion sanctioned the Oklahoma bombing. A lot of bombing and mayhem goes on in this world. For instance, USA continues violent attacks all over the world. We do not call it terrorism and the attacks by the USA are organized by the US government and not by Christianity, which is the USA's most practiced religion.

More important and dangerous than the logical flaws in your rant is the fact that your comments perpetuate an unnecessary bigotry against a peaceful and established religious practice. Though you may be intelligent enough to understand that most Muslims are non-violent practitioners of their chosen religion, most non-Muslims do not possess this sort of intelligence. Consequently, the US government and other belligerent governments around the world (e.g. UK) use the hatred and fear-mongering you have demonstrated above to persuade the ignorant masses into spending fortunes on war and commit grave crimes against humanity.

Please be more careful and do not spread religious hatred.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[Malevolent Tester]

No.. no other religion beheads, uses fear, kills indiscriminately, or uses other reprehensible methods and calls themselves just and pure. True. You see, what you've used there is called the present tense. If you want to compare modern event to ones happening 300+ years ago in a desperate attempt to prove moral equivalence you need something called the past tense.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[KenRH]

The old testament clearly states in multiple places that worship of other gods is punisble by death.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[Guido von Guido]

How did this get modded -1? AC, yes, but it's a pretty reasonable point. I guess it's just unpopular.

Don't forget about the Tamil Tigers. They're credited with "inventing" the suicide bomber, meaning that they're the ones who came up with the idea of the suicide bomber vest. Oh, and they're a secular organization. They've been known to force Muslims out of the areas they control. They haven't made the headlines Al Qaeda has because they're not attacking American interests and because of the 2001 cease fire (which seems to have lapsed, though).

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[d3ac0n]

...are bankrupt at their core. We're talking Scientology, Islam and like religions, and extremist governments as well.

And this is why I scoff at people who claim that Christianity (in general, not any specific denomination) is a corrupt religion. Christianity not only tolerates criticism, it actually ENCOURAGES it, both from within and without.

While you may be able to lump in some denominations of Christianity with COS and Islam and their ilk, and absolutely some individuals, the religion as a whole, like Judaism, is largely unimpeachable on the "intolerant of criticism" count.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[d3ac0n]

I was going to write a long and involved response to your troll, but I shall simply allow Robert Spencer to respond for me, as he is far more erudite than I:

What about the violent passages in the Bible?

First, violent Biblical passages are irrelevant to the question of whether Islam is violent.

Second, the violent passages in the Bible certainly do not amount to a standing order to commit violence against the rest of the world. Unlike the Quran, the Bible is a huge collection of documents written by different people at different times in different contexts, which allows for much greater interpretative freedom. The Quran, on the other hand, comes exclusively from one source: Muhammad. It is through the life of Muhammad that the Quran must be understood, as the Quran itself says. His wars and killings both reflect and inform the meaning of the Quran. Furthermore, the strict literalism of the Quran means that there is no room for interpretation when it comes to its violent injunctions. As it is through the example of Christ, the "Prince of Peace," that Christianity interprets its scriptures, so it is through the example of the warlord and despot Muhammad that Muslims understand the Quran.

You can learn more at http://jihadwatch.org/islam101/ Feel free to educate yourself.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[d3ac0n]

Just to back you up, I'll quote the excellent Robert Spencer on the very subject of the Crusades:

What about the Crusades?

The obvious response to this question is, "Well, what about them?" Violence committed in the name of other religions is logically unconnected to the question of whether Islam is violent. But, by mentioning the Crusades, the hope of the Islamic apologist is to draw attention away from Islamic violence and paint religions in general as morally equivalent.

In both the Western academia and media as well as in the Islamic world, the Crusades are viewed as wars of aggression fought by bloody-minded Christians against peaceful Muslims. While the Crusades were certainly bloody, they are more accurately understood as a belated Western response to centuries of jihad than as an unprovoked, unilateral attack. Muslim rule in the Holy Land began in the second half of the 7th century during the Arab wave of jihad with the conquests of Damascus and Jerusalem by the second "rightly-guided Caliph," Umar. After the initial bloody jihad, Christian and Jewish life there was tolerated within the strictures of the dhimma and the Muslim Arabs generally permitted Christians abroad to continue to make pilgrimage to their holy sites, a practice which proved lucrative for the Muslim state. In the 11th century, the relatively benign Arab administration of the Holy Land was replaced with that of Seljuk Turks, due to civil war in the Islamic Empire. Throughout the latter half of the 11th century, the Turks waged war against the Christian Byzantine Empire and pushed it back from its strongholds in Antioch and Anatolia (now Turkey). In 1071, Byzantine forces suffered a crushing defeat at the Battle of Manzikert in what is now Eastern Turkey. The Turks resumed the jihad in the Holy Land, abusing, robbing, enslaving, and killing Christians there and throughout Asia Minor. They threatened to cut off Christendom from its holiest site, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, rebuilt under Byzantine stewardship after it was destroyed by Caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah in 1009.

It was in this context of a renewed jihad in the Middle East that the Roman Pope, Urban II, issued a call in 1095 for Western Christians to come to the aid of their Eastern cousins (and seems to have harbored the hope of claiming Jerusalem for the Papacy after the Great Schism with Eastern Christianity in 1054). This "armed pilgrimage," in which numerous civilians as well as soldiers took part, would eventually become known years later as the First Crusade. The idea of a "crusade" as we now understand that term, i.e., a Christian "holy war," developed years later with the rise of such organizations as the Knights Templar that made "crusading" a way of life. It worth noting that the most ardent Crusaders, the Franks, were exactly those who had faced jihad and razzias for centuries along the Franco-Spanish border and knew better than most the horrors to which Muslims subjected Christians. At the time of the First Crusade, the populations of Asia Minor, Syria, and Palestine, though ruled by Muslims, were still overwhelmingly Christian. The "Crusading" campaigns of the Western Christian armies were justified at the time as a war liberating the Eastern Christians, whose population, lands, and culture had been devastated by centuries of jihad and dhimmitude. Conquering territory for God in the mode of jihad was an alien idea to Christianity and it should not be surprising that it eventually died out in the West and never gained ascendancy in the East.

Following the very bloody capture of Jerusalem in 1099 by the Latin armies and the establishment of the Crusader States in Edessa, Antioch, and Jerusalem, the Muslim and Christian forces fought a see-saw series of wars, in which both parties were guilty of the usual gamut of wartime immorality. Over time, even with reinforcing Crusades waged from Europe, the Crusader States, strung out on precarious lines of communication, slowly succumbed to superior Muslim power. I

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[KenRH]

I guess facts are good bait for trolling :-)

There is not much room for interpretation in the versers in the genesis that states that the punshiment for worship of other gods is death, preferably by stoning and for some reason at the city gates.

One might argue that this is only about jewish people (this is the old testament so christianity did not exists yet) converting to other religions, but Islam is (as they should be) often critisised when killing converters to other religions.

Luckily most modern cristians ignore most of the bible :-)

The fact that there are violent parts of the bible might be irrelevant when discussing wheter Islam is violent, but not when stating that Islam is more violent than other religions.

The cristian churches has commitet uspeakable amounts of violence up the ages, Islam will have to work hard to catch up. Not to mention that if you attribute violence from people that happen to be muslims to Islam when the violence itself is more related to politics, then the amount of violence that needs to be attributet to christiany is enormous.

But now I sound like I defend or endorse Islam, wich I dont. I just get annoyed when other religons pretend to be all on the moral highground.

As far as I am conserned all religion is bad, for one reason: They ask you to but aside critical thought and blindly follow a dogma and the religus leaders.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[Anonymous Coward]

... maybe I really do need coffee. Don't be r i diculous.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[Confuzzled]

Actually, Islam is the only major religion who has flown planes into buildings

Actually islam has done no such thing, islam is a system of beliefs, certain members of a fundamentalist extremest islamic group flew some buildings into planes, etc. etc.

As much as I don't agree with islam, condemning the whole religion is like saying "All americans are imperialistic murderers" because we invaded iraq without any reason to do so.

Just because a christian runs over your dog (even if his local preacher told him to), does not mean christianity ran over your dog.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[PhxBlue]

And this is why I scoff at people who claim that Christianity (in general, not any specific denomination) is a corrupt religion.

Agreed -- and I'm saying that as a Pagan. No religion is inherently corrupt -- that requires people whose true intentions are not in line with their stated goals.

Re:organizations that prohibit criticism

[rock_climbing_guy]

Check out this interesting post for the appropriate references to the Quran.

Should make a torrent

[von_rick]

The file would be downloaded like crazy over the next few days, and if its not taken down by S-logy lawyers, it will surely surpass the bandwidth quota of the person hosting it. If its made into a .torrent, it will live happily ever after, or before it becomes stale.

Re:Should make a torrent

[psychodelicacy]

I think this is it. (Originally mentioned in another comment above.)

Re:Should make a torrent

[Gutboy]

surely surpass the bandwidth quota of the person hosting it.

There are hosts that actually don't have bandwidth limits. Hostgator.com comes to mind, and only $15/month (and no, I don't work for them or get anything for talking about them).

Re:Should make a torrent

[Threni]

> If its made into a .torrent, it will live happily ever after, or before it becomes stale.

Well, that or anyone trading it will have their IP address trivially captured.

Re:Should make a torrent

[von_rick]

Thats what I get for not having my mind wired to the Internets :)

Re:Should make a torrent

[cesium132]

idiot, it's not unlimited. if you look at their terms of service, you'll see that they'll cut you off when you 'abuse' it.

Re:Should make a torrent

[psychodelicacy]

You don't? Get with the times, man!

208 scanned pages (in one PDF)

[FudRucker]

yowza! they should have made it as html like a GNU/HowTo page even with a decent computer that is a lot for any pdf reader...

Re:208 scanned pages (in one PDF)

[Antique Geekmeister]

Scanning to PDF is just foolish, unless you've got excellent on-line character recognition built in. If it's an image, publish it as an image file, not a complexly formatted layout structure like a PDF.

Re:208 scanned pages (in one PDF)

[Martin Blank]

I routinely open manuals of 300-800 pages in the various PDF readers on P3 and P4 systems, and have no troubles with them. It's really not a big deal.

Re:208 scanned pages (in one PDF)

[ruinevil]

Scanning to PDF is just foolish, unless you've got excellent on-line character recognition built in. If it's an image, publish it as an image file, not a complexly formatted layout structure like a PDF.
 
Obviously I'm too lazy to actually download it and read it, but it would be 208 8.5"x11" images, all attached end-to-end, and being rendered at the same time. Sounds like fail to me.
 
PDF is an open format, so what are the problems using it to link all the images together sequentially in book form, with each page being rendered individually. Seriously, other than console users, who can't see images anyways, who doesn't have a PDF reader?

Re:208 scanned pages (in one PDF)

[narf]

Preview.app handles it with grace and aplomb.

Re:208 scanned pages (in one PDF)

[Antique Geekmeister]

Because scanned PDF is horribly inefficient. PDF is designed to store a lot of informaiton about layout that just isn't relevant to a simple image, and winds up being very inefficiently stored. Mind you, this is from my old attempts to scan directly to PDF and GIF and TIFF.

For an image format, if you want multi-page grey-scale, TIFF works well. It's the format faxes are normally stored in.

Prepare for the migration...

[tubapro12]

...as thousands of CoS members migrate to Sweden to physically destroy the server...

Re:Prepare for the migration...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, they're already unhappy with Sweden. It seems that someone submitted a bunch of $cientology documents to the Swedish government. Even with the (apparently fraudulent, due to forged copyright registrations) existing copyrights on such documents, getting them yanked back from public access through the Swedish government would take a constitutional amendment for them. But the $cientologists have repeatedly tried stealing the documents while keeping them "checked out" of the office that has them.

It happened with the Steve Fishman court documents, it happened again in Sweden. I hope Wikileaks, and the original poster, have been very careful to preserve and authenticate their original documents to avoid just such theft.

On a completely unrelated note...

[Anonymous Coward]

My friends and I walked into the London scientology building while drunk and demanded a stress test. We were turned away. Truly the lowpoint in my life when not even Scientology wants me :

Passed the test, going for the brass ring

[JavaRob]

Maybe they figure that now they've cut their teeth on a big player (and they came out on top, eventually) they can tackle the big guys. I won't be fun, though... Scientology doesn't play by the same rules as normal corporations with rational customers. They fight as dirty as possible; tactics that would easily sink a normal business if they got out are business as usual, and they don't pretend otherwise to their members; they just made it part of their belief system that it's morally okay to use any means necessary to stop their detractors.

This is probably the best time to do it, though, while WikiLeaks still has quite a lot of active attention because of the Julius Baer legal business.

I just hope they didn't waste some of that capital calling for the eNom boycott. Not exactly the same level of "evil"....

But I guess we'll see, either way. Stay tuned -- same bat-time, same bat-channel!

Re:Passed the test, going for the brass ring

[batmanuel]

I wish them luck. It's not like they're going after TicketMaster's evil monopoly where they would soon be crushed from existence.

Re:Passed the test, going for the brass ring

[Anonymous Coward]

Proof of parent: page 27 of this pdf; stalking 101 class
paraphrase: "Call all these airlines, ask for frequent flier info with name and address -> get last few plane flights"

page 23:

[Department 20's] valuable final product is:
[following is in all caps in original]
handled situations which result in the total accept-
ance of scientology and it founder throught the
area.

Re:Passed the test, going for the brass ring

[CodeBuster]

Maybe they figure that now they've cut their teeth on a big player (and they came out on top, eventually) they can tackle the big guys Perhaps, but even the scientologists would be wise to pick and choose their battles carefully. There are various governments, organizations, and even individuals around the world who do not take kindly to attempts at infiltration and should they be caught by these people there might be, well let us just say that there could be terminal consequences. If the CIA cannot always protect their agents from harm then how much less will the scientologists be able to do so? Anyone who dares to act outside the law should be prepared for the consequences, even governments are not immune to blowback.

This is hilarious

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out how the contract begins:

I FRANK OLIVER DO HEREBY AGREE to enter into employment with the SEA ORGANIZATION and, being of sound mind, do fully realize and agree to abide by its purpose which is to get ETHICS IN on this PLANET AND THE UNIVERSE and, fully and without reservation, subscribe to the discipline, mores and conditions of this group and pledge to abide by them.

THEREFORE, I CONTRACT MYSELF TO THE SEA ORGANIZATION FOR THE NEXT BILLION YEARS.

being of sound mind...CONTRACT MYSELF FOR THE NEXT NEXT BILLION YEARS... :)

Re:This is hilarious

[von_rick]

Unless "Instant Karma" gets you first.

Re:This is hilarious

[Centurix]

If they have their own reincarnation thing going for them, how do I know that I haven't signed this contract in a past life? Maybe I'm already a member of the COS without knowing it. Surely I don't have to sign it again? Wait, what's signing this contract? My physical body, or this other crap they're talking about?

I guess there's no sunset on this one either. A billion years at sea. The intergalactic equivalent of a press-gang. I'm no fool, I'm not signing that, or may Xenu strike me down with a lightning bolt...

Re:This is hilarious

[switcha]

I know. Can you imagine how cool the retirement gift would be once that was up? Make a gold watch look like pocket change.

Re:This is hilarious

[bky1701]

Except most of those religions now just say "go to hell!". Scientology actually helps you get there if you decide you want to leave...

Re:This is hilarious

[Opportunist]

By the time you reach the level of signing a contract with Sea Org, you're already so brainwashed and indoctrinated that you either readily swallow this load of BS or you want to believe it, since you don't want to admit to yourself that you sunk your life savings (and probably all you ever inherited) into a rather dull SciFi story. SeaOrg definitly ain't entry level, we're talking upper echelon here.

That's why you don't get to hear the whole story of Xenu (not to mention that you definitly don't get to see the "original drawings" of the space ships at all anymore, since they look SO terribly stupid) before you're in deep. If you told that kind of BS to an "unclear" (read: still autonomously thinking) person, he'd laugh in your face and tell you to stick your alien god where it belongs.

Re:This is hilarious

[mux2000]

#define DO_HEREBY_AGREE "am forced by psychological and financial means"
#define SEA_ORGANIZATION "world-domination R US"
#define ETHICS_IN "medieval on"
#define PLANET "miserable human refuse"
#define AND_THE_UNIVERSE "including imaginary human refuse"
#define CONTRACT "grovel and prostrate"
#define NEXT_BILLION_YEARS "until you decide to terminate me"

Re:Can't my people get a break?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude.

Black Sabbath. Black Sambuca. Black Lights.

Don't ignore the good!

Be careful...

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't put it past them to try and track anyone downloading that over something like a torrent; I'd stick to Wikileaks itself if possible. I've researched some of the abuses they did in the past, and I really don't like Scientology :/

Didn't they have ties to a major ISP (Earthlink?) at one time, too? That said, I remember reading that their internal sites are (were?) entirely self-made because they don't trust us "wogs". And by self-made I mean they're supposed to be utter crap.

Re:Be careful...

[Wog]

I take offense to that!

Re:Can't my people get a break?

[Anonymous Coward]

Clever!! Yep, drive da brotha into a suicidal depression!!

Oh wow

[TurinPT]

Take a look at page 75: A list of what they consider hostility towards scientology.

Thats some scary shit.

Re:Oh wow

[wanderingknight]

Page 99:

JUDGE AND PUNISHMENT

None of us like to judge or to punish. Yet we may be the only people on Earth with a right to punish, since we can undo the damage we do in most cases. Therefore never punish beyond our easy ability to remedy by auditing and restoration. That's outright insane. That's L. Ron Hubbard himself telling his followers that they have the absolute moral right to damage anyone basically because they can "undo the damage". It's completely insane, but I believe I see what people see in this. I suppose it gives them a degree of "superiority" feeling over their non-Scion peers... but it's still pretty hard to believe that people actually read this shit and think it's actually right.

Oh, people have believed in the Bible for centuries. Nevermind.

As the original submitter...

[Anonymous Coward]

As the original submitter of the article, I'd like to mention that it is the now the second Wikileaks held set of documents for Scientology. Though I must apologize for the badly written rushed body of the firehose article, it's the linked content that is important :

Citizens Commission on Human Rights" (CCHR) exposed as an illegal Scientology front. exposes their LEAF (Letter to the Editor ATTACK Force) campaign, and illegal govt lobbying.

Many apologize to the Wikileaks admins for the /. effect, but this news HAD to be made public.

To the $clilos - Disclaimer - I did not personally leak these documents, nor did Slashdot, I'm merely posting legal links.

The peaceful protests of Anonymous against the CoS are also legal. Anonymous is ONLY protesting the CoS organization, no other religion and not religious beliefs themselves. There is a campaign of fabricating/doctoring Anonymous protest images and footage to try to frame Anonymous for anti-religious protests (they started by attempting to attack the Vatican): take a guess at who might want to be doing that!

Rather worrying, a similar anti Anonymous "ad hominem" attack force is trying to re-define the cake meme from the game Portal into one about underage pornography.

PS. Everything I post is posted via strings of proxies and most importantly Tor !
(wish it was faster, and didn't have so many problems with slashdot, lol)

Re:As the original submitter...

[DMalic]

Why was this modded down? It looks like a highly informative and relevant comment.. That worries me, especially in light of the article. I don't have mod points ATM, so I can't bring it back up.

Re:As the original submitter...

[bdjacobson]

Why was this modded down? It looks like a highly informative and relevant comment..

That worries me, especially in light of the article. I don't have mod points ATM, so I can't bring it back up. I think all anonymous coward posts now start at -1.

Re:As the original submitter...

[AndroidCat]

They get caught doing it now and then, but people rarely connect the dots that this is their policy.
Secret Scientology letter war exposed July 12, 2007, Joe Hildebrand, Daily Telegraph

Re:As the original submitter...

[AndroidCat]

Rather worrying, a similar anti Anonymous "ad hominem" attack force is trying to re-define the cake meme from the game Portal into one about underage pornography.

Phhhfft! Re-define memes right back at them!

Whenever they say "Reverend so-and-so of the Church of Scientology", make sure that you insert "One Week Course" into the conversation. Actually it varies between a couple days to a week if you're slow, but one week is probably tops. And some people, they just dress up and call reverends without any course.

Shoring Up Its Religious Profile June 25, 1990, Joel Sappell, Robert W. Welkos, Los Angeles Times
According to police documents disclosed in 1984, an undercover officer who infiltrated Scientology's Toronto outpost during an investigation of its activities was asked by a church official to don a "white collar so that someone in the (organization) looked like a minister."

Re:As the original submitter...

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe Anonymous is a Scientology black-operation to collect "intelligence" on those who protest the CoS.

Prove me wrong!

Re:As the original submitter...

[meringuoid]

Rather worrying, a similar anti Anonymous "ad hominem" attack force is trying to re-define the cake meme from the game Portal into one about underage pornography.

IIRC, on some chans, /cake/ is for lolicon. Don't know why; delicious and moist, maybe? At any rate it's not really much of a stretch for the cult to portray Anonymous as perverted. Take ten minutes to browse /d/, and then tell me if you reckon Anonymous cares what the cult thinks...

Re:As the original submitter...

[darkfire5252]

The peaceful protests of Anonymous against the CoS are also legal. Anonymous is ONLY protesting the CoS organization, no other religion and not religious beliefs themselves. There is a campaign of fabricating/doctoring Anonymous protest images and footage to try to frame Anonymous for anti-religious protests (they started by attempting to attack the Vatican): take a guess at who might want to be doing that! OK, doing good so far...

Rather worrying, a similar anti Anonymous "ad hominem" attack force is trying to re-define the cake meme from the game Portal into one about underage pornography. OK, stop. The first time Slashdot covered the "anonymous" group protesting/declaring war on CoS, I saw a comment that claimed that 'Anonymous' was nothing more than the name that people who go to the 'random' (referred to as /b) section on various *chan sites. So, I lurked at those sites (listed at the bottom of post) for a while, and it was a very fascinating look into an internet subculture, albeit a somewhat disturbed subculture. The *chan sites are image boards that allow anyone to post any image, comment on them, and reply to comments. Indeed, if one is to lurk on *chan for a while one would see many references to the CoS and the war against them. Interestingly enough, there are also many references to how the CoS war is raising the profile of the *chan sites and attracting all sorts of new people (newfags) who then annoy the regulars (oldfags). The people who frequent the /b section call themselves 'Anonymous', /btards, and other things.

That is relevant to the cake thing, because many of these image boards have pornography sections. There is a wide range of porn, some of it pretty disturbing, and there are sections for (very) underage girls. There's not usually actual child porn there, and it gets removed quickly if someone posts it, but there are many non-nude pictures of 'lolis' and many animate nude pictures. What is the section called? On one site, it is '/loli/ - Delicious Cake', on another it is '/cake/ - Lolicon'. So, say what you want, but the cake = pedophilia connection isn't made up.

The *chan sites that you can peruse (take that, oldfags!):

• 4chan.org
• 7chan.org
• 711chan.org
• 420chan.org
• I'm sure there are many others, as new chans tend to pop up when the chan gets overrun by newfags.

Take a look there some time, it's fascinating really.

Re:As the original submitter...

[bdjacobson]

I've seen that with even with 50% Insightful and 50% informative.

Maybe the mod system is acting up.

Send them to Venus

[SlashWombat]

Easily fixed. First we modify all the old DC3's we can get our hands on by adding shuttle solid fuel boosters. Then we dress up as Aliens ...
We then encourage all the COS members to migrate to Venus to separate them from the unclean non-believers.
IMHO, COS members are all "B Ark" material anyway!

Re:Send them to Venus

[zakezuke]

IIRC there is a soul repackaging center of Venus which the enlightened avoid as it just dumps you off the coast of California.

Re:Send them to Venus

[antibryce]

Just wait for a passing comet and then poison them.

Mod parent plus a million

[Anonymous Coward]

Show them we know what they're up to and won't stand for it. Keep the pressure up.

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[Anonymous Coward]

When they stop murdering people and destroying lives. Deal.

Re:Page 117

[TurinPT]

I'm just speed reading, but this file is filled with little gems.

LRH on Data Mining - pg 117:

By all standards modern governments are not sane.

Thus, somewhere at the bottom of the pile is some hidden intention.

In collecting government files and the various false reports in them, through the use of Freedom of Information Act, it is not enough to simply see they are false and DA them. This of course is a necessary action but is NOT _the_ basic action.

One needs to construct a data bank of all documents and cross-index to get _all_ documents in their possession - using one file to find things that will detect the existence of unrevealed additional documents.

Interesting read...

Screw civic duty

[__aailob1448]

the real reason to go is for the lulz. Any good that comes out of it is just a bonus!

Re:Screw civic duty

[AndroidCat]

And cake! There will be moist delicious cake!

Re:Screw civic duty

[RLiegh]

The cake is a lie.

And that's terrible.

Re:Screw civic duty

[DMUTPeregrine]

Pie doesn't lie. Choose pie. There are pies for everything. Meat pies. Fruit pies. Vegetable pies. Ice-cream pies. PIE!

try...

[Anonymous Coward]

this

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[dbIII]

I'm wondering why it is that Slashdot continues to post so many negative stories about Scientology

Because Scientology took legal action against Slashdot on what appeared to be a trivial matter. I do not think any other group has taken legal action against Slashdot in it's ten years of operation.

I wonder why...

[deesine]

your very first comment on /. is to ask why /. hates CoS?

-

Re:I wonder why...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is an idiotic question. The posting had no bias that I could detect. If publishing of the documents bother you, you might reconsider how you feel about the cult. I'm guessing you don't like to read the paranoia laden documents as it spoils your pristine view of the cult. The documents reveal a psychologically damaged organization and you know that.

But, if you are hurting, it's ok. We can help. We can give you a test and figure out what's wrong. Then we can retrain you. Come to our organization and we will forgive you and fix you. You will need to pledge your life and eternal soul to us so that we can own and control you, but it is for your own good. After you do that, don't turn our back on us or we will destroy you. Its our policy.

Black propaganda passage

[cpricejones]

For those of you who didn't make it this far into the 208 pages ...

"Our propaganda is dirty but it is not black because it is true. Black propaganda is essentially false. ... We just run propaganda campaigns."

Pretty goofy but it gets far goofier.

"Vicious and lying gossip by old women was the earlier form of this tactic and was so bad that some areas put them in public stocks (neck yokes) to drive them out of town. ... The world is full of madmen."

Hmm.

PAGE 101

[zakeria]

Scary stuff!!! these twisted bastards need fucked up!!

3.. 2.. 1..

[apodyopsis]

thats the cue for the CoS to DDOS the wikileaks server and the Striesand Effect to kick in ten seconds later, oh wait - there we go...

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[Anonymous Coward]

(Hello, Article submitter here again)

users first post , check (not always the case but very common)
'witch hunt' comment, check
'bigotry' comment, check

*CoS countermeasures 101 detected.*

'cyber terrorists' comment expected soon
'ad hominem' attacks, coming 'real soon now'.

Slashdot posts what people submit, it gets front paged if enough people care about the story and vote it up.

With Scientology stories it takes a hell of a lot more people voting it up than normal as OSA and the LEAF campaign try to force such things down.

So the story only makes it if people REALLY care, are interested, and strongly think the story has merit.

Don't you wonder MAYBE such stories might at least have SOME truth in them if THAT many people are so interested in them even OSA can't keep them down?

Now you've pondered that for a pico-second enjoy your invasive security 'sec check'.

Re:Page 117

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this really new? alot of stuff I recognize from http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/CoS/ , a website last updated 2002.
For example, the aforementioned Page 117 and Page 75 (AKA Count Your Points vs. OSA)

After reading this PDF...

[Patchw0rk F0g]

I'm asking: Has anyone else realized that these people are FUCKING NUTS?!

I was around for the Toronto trials, but this shit...? Holy cripes.

I may not be the most stable person, when discussing evolution vs. whatever-the-hell-the-trolls-from-the-evangelical-campuses-are-calling-it-this-week, but this takes the cake, in a SPECTRE/Mission Impossible/I Can't Believe This Is Under The Radar type of way.

Does this mean I need to watch for people on street corners, watching me covertly from behind newspapers? So be it! Bring it on, Tom! I'll kick your ass, Johnny boy!

Re:After reading this PDF...

[zakeria]

Start by boycotting Tom's films! support him in anyway supports the Church.

Re:After reading this PDF...

[Opportunist]

You say that like it's hard in any way. Did he make a movie worth watching in the last, say, decade?

Re:After reading this PDF...

[Sciros]

If you think about it, he's a fantastic actor, managing to hide that utter insanity and all. It's like Lucy Lawless, who IRL was way more hot and feminine than Xena but didn't get any credit for it.

Anyway, The Last Samurai was a great film, Cruise's insanity notwithstanding.

Ides of March

[Speare]

I didn't see anything on the first page linked that mentioned "March of Ides" but the traditional phrase is "the Ides of March." As in, "Beware the Ides of March," the infamous and probably apocryphal advice to Julius Caesar before his assassination. The Ides is the midpoint of a month, so the 15th of March is the Ides of March.

Re:Ides of March

[dosius]

Ain't it because it's the Ides of March March, thus, the March of the Ides of March, or simply the March of Ides?

Makes sense to me </DAX>

-uso.

Re:Ides of March

[Anonymous Coward]

Its because /b/tard are morons and you can't count them getting anything right, not even a simple historical reference. Lets hope for more "long cat is loooooooooonnnnnnnnngggggg" picket signs and "do a barrel roll" chants at this protest.

This is quite scary

[Monsuco]

In the case of a bad article which is signed, use the following procedures

1. Tell them by letter to restract the statement at once.

2. Hire a private investigator of the national type to investigate the writer not the magazine and get any criminal or communist background the man has. ...

3. Have your lawyers or solicitors write the magazines threatening suit. (Hardly ever permit a real suit - there more of a nuisance than their worth.)

4. Use the data you got off the detective at long last to write the author a very tantalizing letter. Don't give him your data on him. Just tell him we know something very interesting about him and wouldn't he like to come in and talk about it. (If he comes ask him to sign a confession of collusion and slander - people at that level often will just to commit suicide - and publish it as a paid ad in the paper if you get it.) Chances are he won't arrive but he's sure to shudder in silence.

5. Give the data you got from your detective to your lawyers to use against the magazine.

6. Don't let the matter upset you, take much time, or disrupt the central organization.

This is on page 100. Page 101 talks about "punishment". Pg. 116 explains a conspiracy theory about why government attacks religion.It appears there is a long list of conspiracies that Scientology has about the government. They talk about the constant need to deal with enemies, they seem more paranoid than Nixon, and with a longer enemies list. Pg. 148 has information about the need to attack. Pg. 149 rants about how Scientology is victimized by a conspiracy of public opinion, government, and media. I mentioned an enemy list, pg 165-206 is just that. Pg. 208 discusses Oliver's "crimes".

This is scarier than any horror film ever could be. Thank god Wikileaks. Kudos to Frank Oliver.

Re:This is quite scary

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm wondering how Scientology gets away with all this garbage and hasn't been declared a subversive organization. Five bucks says that it's because no one really believes just how bat-shit crazy they are.

Re:This is quite scary

[mabhatter654]

because the Government is too scared of the right wing to go against any "reasonable" religion. Many right wing groups like Amish or others seem just as crazy to regular people. But if the Feds went after Amish, for example, many religous people would get very upset as a breech of freedom of religion. Scientology has the size and a few key people they're not a cult like say Branch Davidians, and they tend to be in "liberal" places like Hollywood where "normal" religion is dramatized and fake anyway.

Re:This is quite scary

[kestasjk]

Page 99:

None of us like to judge or punish. Yet we may be the only people on Earth with a right to punish

Guilt is established by a person's actions and statements, by witnesses and written evidence and by an expertly run E-meter Page 100:

If he comes, ask him to sign a confession of collusion and slander - people at that level often will, just to commit suicide - and publish it in a paid ad in a paper if you get it

Tell the detective "We don't care if they know you're investigating them for us. In fact, the louder the better."

When to Sue
Never if you can help it. It consumes time, means little but trouble for you. Suits are basically best as threats. Page 101:

At this instance there are men hiding in terror on Earth because they found out what they were attacking. There are men dead because they attacked us - for instance Dr. Joe Winter. He simply realized what he did and died. There are men bankrupt because they attacked us

But if you do put the wrong head on a pike, be sure to put it back on the body again as soon as the need for its being on a pike is over Page 102:

It is mercy to put the padlock on such a person's activities. Every word he says or writes against us, every plot he enters into, alike punish him further and further down
How bad can it get? We have evidence in a book Dr. Winder wrote. He knew it consisted of stolen ideas and enthete lies. Every code it sold killed him a little more. And one day he died Page 103:

It's a relief for a bad case to be punished. Sometimes they choose us for their executioners - worse luck Page 107:

2. By having high-toned investigators who have no possibility of being blackmailed, we can make up in effectiveness what we at this time lack in numbers.

L. Ron Hubbard Wow.. I started out by cherry picking the juicy parts, but once Hubbard's memos start appearing it's pretty much all juicy.. Black propaganda--Hubbard, The genus of insane governments--Hubbard, Why governments attack religion--Hubbard

Look at the situation. Every time the enemy offers an attack, you defend against it and that is all you do. Any castle, to hold out, has got to sortie. The proper strategy for any battle is to find a weak point in the enemy lines and attack it.

The reason the United States is losing against communism is simply on these same mathematics. That they are losing is patent. All they are doing is defending the points attacked. We are lucky Hubbard was a sci-fi writer and didn't go on to become a politician.. I would have like to see his handling of the Cuba missile crisis going by the above logic..

I can see the parallels of religion to CoS, but I have to say this goes way beyond any religion. Nothing other than a cult would write such aggressive, practical advice on silencing critics as this. With Immams declaring fatwahs at least that's not actually an officially sanctioned part of Islam, with Scientology it is.

I think all the media attention will eventually kill scientology. Hearing about "Xenu" has been worse for Scientology than hearing about even the worst silencing of critics, blackmail, and manslaughter.

Re:This is quite scary

[HairyNevus]

2. Hire a private investigator of the national type to investigate the writer not the magazine and get any criminal or communist background the man has. ... Haha, how backassward is Scientology that they think finding a Communist background in someone is on equal bearing to a criminal background?

"Hey, look! We found a commie!" Hey, look! The Red Scare has been dead for over 20 years.

Re:This is quite scary

[Darby]

Many right wing groups like Amish or others seem just as crazy to regular people.

Did you just call the Amish, one of the most left wing religious groups in the country, "right wing"?

You don't actually have the foggiest idea what left and right are, do you?

I mean it's frightening to hear political discussions in America anyhow given the disgusting level of ignorance of most people here, but you have gone way beyond blatant ignorance into a whole new realm with that insane babbling.

Re:This is quite scary

[mabhatter654]

you don't understand, the meaning has changed...

Right wing means "right" or righteous. Left wing means "lefty" or wrong. Both sides want strong government control to make people do what they want. By the 1920's definition both democrats and republicans are very Liberal. Example: The social "left" passed prohibition, the religious "right" keeps it there.

By that definition, Amish may be mildly "socialist" but to the normal right wingers they are seen as "super right wing", maybe kooks, but more RIGHTeous than you. Remember, reality is that the whole right-left thing is a circle not a line. The religious "right" holds strongly to freedom of "right" (correct) religions. Scientiolgy is more "mainstream" than Amish are, so if nobody would mess with Amish, nobody would mess with Scientologists unless you could find them committing an actual crime (hence the reason Mormons always got hassle over the polygamy thing, because THAT was illegal and you could punish them for it, even though the reason was that you just didn't like them)

Re:Page 117

[Anonymous Coward]

No it's not really new, but it being on wikileaks endorses it for a lot of people, and it getting on slashdot brings it's attention to a lot of people who wouldn't notice as otherwise it's relegated to 'conspiracy theorists' sites, and ignored much like many other caches of evidence on such sites including many legal documents.

what IS new (dated some time ago, but all new leak never seen before) is the wikileaks email content linked in this comment : http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=484166&cid=22724096

Best parts start on page 100

[Scareduck]

I got a copy of the PDF from the Bittorrent posted upthread, and the best part is on page 100 (so far), talking about dealing with lawsuits ("Never if you can help it"), what to do when being investigated ("don't co-operate"), and how to deal with "entheta press":

1. Tell them by letter to retract at once in the next issue.
2. Hire a private detective to investigate the writer ...
3. Have your lawyers or solicitors write the magazine threatening suit ...
4. Use the data you got from the detective (!!) at long last to write the author of the article a very tantalizing letter. Don't give him your data on him. Just tell him we know something very interesting about him and wouldn't he like to come in and talk about it. (If he comes, ask him to sign a confession of collusion and slander -- people at that level often will, just to commit suicide -- and publish it in a paid ad in a paper if you get it.) Chances are he won't arrive. But he'll sure shudder into silence.

Analysis threads & more leaked docs

[Anonymous Coward]

Analysis of the released docs is occurring on this thread:
http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=6291

Also there are two threads on released e-mail dumps on CCHR ("Citizen's Commission on Human Rights" - a Scientology front group) being discussed here:
http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=6059
and here:
http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=6159

The website also reports that protests are being held at all CO$ center's world wide on March 15th 11am local time. Visit http://forums.enturbulation.org for details.

Re:About Tor...

[Anonymous Coward]

The excellent Slashdot community would be the first to tell me if I'm wrong, but I believe that :

• ALL Tor Nodes are Relay Nodes, and Exit nodes, you cannot choose to be one but not the other. (without recoding your own Tor)
• Your Tor connection randomly chooses a bunch of nodes, they all become Relay nodes for you and the final one before the server you wish to connect to becomes the Exit Node.
• All nodes acting as a Relay Node for Client A have all the traffic through it encrypted, so no listening.
• Every time you select 'new Identity' in Vidalia your connection will be transferred to a whole new range of Relay Nodes and a new Exit Node.
• The first node you connect to is never your Exit Node. So ...
• they cannot locate your REAL IP though as it's been passed encrypted through Relays (this is the one I'm most unsure about)
• Exit Nodes snooping Tor for personal information is already a known issue
• but unless you transmit personal info you are safe.
• The chances of a CoS hacked Tor node being selected as Client A's EXIT Node is very slim considering all the nodes out there, and regularly requesting a new identity makes it even less possible to be attacked.
• Malicious Java,Flash or plugins can be tricked into giving away your real IP, but NoScript stops that being a problem, and slashdots pretty safe anyway!

Lots of Slashdot going 'you can't post to this page' etc on many Tor nodes makes for many identity changes weather you want them or not :(

I fapped

[Anonymous Coward]

I fapped to this document and blew my load all the way up to OT Level VIII!

Daughters of Scientology's top brass speaking out

[Anonymous Coward]

Three girls who are ex-scientology kids have come forward and started a website about the issues with Scientology. (Not bad looking either). One is Jenna Miscavige Hill (niece of David Miscavige, the current head of Scientology). Another is Kendra Wiseman, who is the daughter of the current head of CCHR (Scilon front group).

http://www.exscientologykids.com/admins.html

The stories of all three are quite fascinating in terms of getting a look on the inside.

This just in...

[etherlad]

All we need is for there to be a Chinese-Scientology link and we'll have the most commented-on story ever. ... thousands of Chinese eMeters have been recalled due to high lead content! Film at eleven!

Re:This just in...

[StarReaver]

Don't you mean Microsoft-brand Chinese eMeters?

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[HairyNevus]

Who's the Cult of Scientology moderator who has modded this guy down twice now?

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[arete]

In just the last few days there was an article about someone who previously sued a group of defendants including /., and later dropped /. from the suit. It was in the /. summary; I didn't read TFA.

"Eight Dynimics [sic] Course" ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, look at page 9 ... Frank Oliver has been awarded the certificate of

[handwritten]
Eight Dynimics [sic] Course

It's signed by three people and none of them presumably recognised that the word is spelled "Dynamics".

Maybe they all have to start climbing the bridge again from the bottom.

Anonymous: "Project Blockbuster" - DVD download

[Anonymous Coward]

Anonymous a full 4+ hour DVD with vids of the protests & information on Scientology.

Torrent is here: http://www.mininova.org/tor/1234202

Details on what's on it here: http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=6172

Contents include:
1. Road to February 10th 2. An Anonymous Message to The World -- Human Rites in the RPF
3. Message To Scientology
4. Call To Action
5. Code of Conduct
6. Anonymous Lobby Against Scientology
7. Anonymous vs. Church of Scientology - The Ides of March
8. Ides of March - Why We Fight
9. ExSciKids: Kendra, Jenna & Astra Speak
10. Sou7h Park - Traped 1n The Closet
11. Missing In Happy Valley
12. The Bridge
13. OT 2007 Summit Testimonials 14. Un-Cut Tom Cruise Testimonial
15. XENUTV: Comparing Myths

are you serious?

[sir fer]

all religions use intimidation to get their way whether it is by law suits or by threats of hell and eternal damnation.

Re:are you serious?

[mfrank]

If someone tells me I'm going to hell, I can chuckle a bit and go on with my life. Try doing that with a subpeona.

The story from the beginning

[symbolset]

At the dining room table, two couples playing bridge:

LRH: My books aren't selling. Who makes the most popular books?

RAH: The Boy Scouts. After that the Q'uran and the Bible.

LRH: Religion sure sells a lot of books.

RAH: Yeah, I thought about writing out some book for that a while back. I turned it into a short story "Gulf".

LRH: I don't think you could do it with a short story. All the big religions have high word counts. I would think a trilogy at least.

RAH: I could do it in one book.

LRH: I bet a dollar I could do it better than you.

RAH: Done and done. Now shuffle the cards.

... Three years later ...

LRH: Can you believe it? I've got groupies! They worship me!

RAH: You can have mine too if you want them. They're camped on the lawn. They're scaring Ginny. Here's your buck. The bet's over.

LRH: Win!

RAH: Whatever. Shuffle the cards.

Re:The story from the beginning

[Opportunist]

Reminds me of the old joke: "Hey Jesus, get this: The fishing club you started when you went down there? Guess what, it still exists!".

Re:The story from the beginning

[DoctorFrog]

I liked the bit in 'Soap' where Bert got kidnapped by aliens and met a 6000-year-old Jewish author...

Bert: "You mean to tell me you wrote Genesis?"

Sol: "You mean to tell me you've read it?"

Re:The story from the beginning

[R2.0]

Best.Imaginary.Conversation.EVAR!

Re:The story from the beginning

[elrous0]

Ah, the all-too-rare "Soap" reference. Nice to know there are still some people who remember how funny that show was in its heyday.

Why is this AC modded down? I don't understand

[frostband]

Why is this AC modded down? I don't understand.

It didn't seem like it was a troll. Am I missing something?

Re:Why is this AC modded down? I don't understand

[Anonymous Coward]

I haven't noticed that.
I *have* noticed that as of a couple of weeks ago, when I get mod points, nowadays I get TEN instead of five.

No announcements, though I suppose there's no great need.

Let's see how this post shows up -- logged in, but choosing "Post Anonymously".
HUH -- a bug, also. In preview mode, it ignores the "post anonymously" and shows the post preview with my account credited.

dotted?

[AutoTheme]

Our servers are overloaded by extreme popularity. Try again in a minute by pressing "return" on the website address in your browser address bar (do not press reload -- this will take longer). In the mean time, please consider throwing your support behind us, so Wikileaks can upgrade its servers, fight censorship, expose injustice and with your help, continue to change the world for the better.

Re:Can't my people get a break?

[mcmonkey]

Black cat is bad luck. Bad guys wear black. Must have been a white guy who started all that.

You've given me an idea for a wicked prank

[Weaselmancer]

An eMeter is really just a wheatstone bridge, right? All they're really doing is just measuring your resistance by inducing a tiny current through you.

Go into one of these centers and have them hook you up. Lick your other palm and every so often jam a 9v battery against it. Screw with the guy's mind. Keep twitching the needle at just the right time and see if you can convince them you're L. Ron reincarnated or something like that.

If you're really good, make some sort of a Van de Graff generator and use it to build up a gigantic static charge on you before you get hooked up. See if you can actually bust the thing.

Re:You've given me an idea for a wicked prank

[sa1lnr]

"If you're really good, make some sort of a Van de Graff generator"

Won't they get a bit suss if you turn up looking like this? ;)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Marvin_(HHGG).jpg

Re:You've given me an idea for a wicked prank

[smellsofbikes]

You're joking, but this is perfectly easy to do. You just barely listen to what the questioner is saying, while simultaneously thinking hard -- the way actors do, method acting, trying to *live* your thoughts -- about calming or embarrassing things from your past. You can teach yourself to drive e-meters. They're a little more complicated than just a Wheatstone, but that's basically what they are. When I was a kid I made one as a science project and taught myself to push the needle from the bottom to the top and back again while talking to people (I grew up without a TV and had a lot of time on my hands, okay?) and later ended up dating a Scientologist (she was hot and I *still* didn't have a TV, okay?) and she and her family did *not* appreciate my ability to push an e-meter around.
I don't think carrying a charge could break one: the ones I've gotten to look at didn't have much vulnerable electronics. They used a transistor to drive the meter itself, based on the differential voltage across the bridge.

Re:You've given me an idea for a wicked prank

[Schnapple]

Go into one of these centers and have them hook you up. Lick your other palm and every so often jam a 9v battery against it.

A funny idea, but I'm afraid you use both hands on the cans of the e-meter, and the auditor is watching you the entire time. As John Travolta demonstrates.

Re:You've given me an idea for a wicked prank

[nuzak]

> Lick your other palm and every so often jam a 9v battery against it.

I fail to see how that would make it to the other side of your body. You'd probably have better luck touching only one of the terminals.

Besides, you can screw with their minds without even touching the e-meter. Just make eye contact. And never break it. Stare. Intensely. Use a flat affect, except for one or two questions, where you suddenly become sing-song, then switch back.

Re:You've given me an idea for a wicked prank

[Darinbob]

All they're really doing is just measuring your resistance by inducing a tiny current through you. Can you feel the power?

This shows Germany was 100% right to ban them

[golodh]

I have heard a lot of (fairly uninformed) criticism of Germany's decision to outlaw the Scientology sect.

However, with the Fishman affidavit, the whole case concerning Karin Spaink (see http://www.xs4all.nl/~kspaink/fishman/home.html), and now this I feel strengthened in my support for the decision of the German government to outlaw this sect.

Regrettably it doesn't work like that in the US. We gave them the tax-exempt status of "church" instead.

Re:This shows Germany was 100% right to ban them

[Kierthos]

Actually, they have the status of "tax exempt non-profit organization", not church, according to the IRS. The CoS proclaims that this means the U.S. Government considers them a church, but that doesn't make it so.

What's amazing is that they got this status AFTER their acts of infiltrating the IRS and other government agencies (Operation Snow White), although they didn't get the tax exempt non-profit bit until years after the sentencing of LRH's wife and several others for that little bit of espionage.

Re:This shows Germany was 100% right to ban them

[neuromanc3r]

They are not outlawed in Germany, they are just not considered a religion.

CoS The Greatest American Terrorist

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, what other organization has had the populace, the media, the government and even the I.R.S TERRIFIED to speak out about them for DECADES.

It doesn't matter that it's not bomb threats but legal threats, or implied other action, or even just the 'rumors' of stalking, hounding, privacy invasion, you all know about it.

There is no better way to describe it, America has been TERRIFIED to speak out against the Church of Scientology.

lest we forget :
terrorist /trrst/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ter-er-ist] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-noun
1. a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.
2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others.

The 'War Against Terror' should have started with this!

keep em in the dark, and feed em shittake

[Anonymous Coward]

lodge your complaints here http://www.churchofmyconology.org/

Re:funny..

[FishWithAHammer]

sure they are a shit cult not worth anything, can't we just let the fucktards be fucktards? it is your own fault if you get tricked into their fairytale with no factual historic background or events tied to it.

why don't people focus their 'civic duty' elsewhere, like maybe our corrupt legal system, corrupt politicians, and corrupt companies?

Because Scientology has infected our politicians as well. Operation Snow White says hi.

An experience with aggressive recruiting...

[Anonymous Coward]

I had three of these guys show up at my apartment looking for my friend... God damn it was a freaky experience. Two stood on lookout at the front door while the third fast-talked his way past me upstairs. Apparently my friend had only made acquaintances so they were just "following up" on a possible new member, and they left quietly after he rebuffed them.

I felt bad for a while for not having turned them away immediately, but you don't always know what you're friends are up to... and it's hard to be ready for something like that. When you are a naive college kid confronted by three overbearing, slick guys inviting themselves hurriedly through your front door, it really throws you for a loop.

Scientology is basically ritualized emotional abuse. It separates its victims from everything they know -- in fact it aligns them against their parents, family and friends, and everything that might come to their rescue -- and it turns them into abusers themselves. Elron was a sick, abusive, evil freak.

Thanks, Guys

[Anonymous Coward]

I tracked down the relevant sites. Real bunch of pricks, aren't they! Germany was right to ban Scientology, and I think we'd be insane not to revoke their "church" status and all the protection it provides.

I wonder how long it will be until somebody uses the "Scientology Defense" to apply copyright to all the embarrassing photos of some drunk frat boy and the sheep his buddies caught him with?

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[Anonymous Coward]

More fool them, many read at -1.

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[SgtChaireBourne]

... I do not think any other group has taken legal action against Slashdot in it's ten years of operation. Yeah and the tobacco executives do not think smoking is harmful or addictive. Microsofters have gone a few rounds against Slashdot now and again. Though it claims to be a business and is full of more tax dodges and creative bookkeeping than Enron, MS operates like a cult. See the analysis and summary to save time or just search for the string 'jihad'.

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[The Grassy Knoll]

"in it's ten years of operation."

Grud-dammit, the Grammar Liberation Front is preparing a case right now.

.

But!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's my public WiFi, you insensitive clod!

Re:Daughters of Scientology's top brass speaking o

[Anonymous Coward]

ANY of those girls could make a perfect agent for the CoS. Maybe just one....... or two....... or all three of them!

Interestingly, they claim that Freezone Survivors Association may be a CoS operation.

It's a "This Statement Is False" kind of problem. You don't know who to trust.

Scientology is...

[Kaenneth]

Scientology is what happens when the mentally ill don't take their medicine.

The human psyche is made up of a collection of personalities?
Against taking psych mediciations?
Thinking that psychiatrists are evil?

Hubbard probably developed schizophrenia, with paranoia, delusions, voices in his head, etc.

So he developed a way other think to justify his decisions after the fact, calling it Scientology. That is, the "Science of Science", or like one fellow I met in a psych ward said "You have to read between the lines between the lines"; layers upon layers of conspiracy seem to be common in delusional thinking.

So his organization is a draw to others who don't want to take their meds, including the large 'anti-drug' campaign they claim to have. Cruise on Oprah?, looked pretty 'Manic' to me.

Unfortunetly, the only consistant way to tell the differences between Religion, Cults and Insanity is how many people share the same set of delusions, kinda democratic really.

Simple Solution

[CaptainZapp]

Scientology sets up a table with a "Free Stress Test" (presumably designed to be rather Scientific-looking) first to attract passerbys

When they pester you with their stupid personality test (which only points out what a screwed up person you really are, no matter what) I found a simple and reliable method:

Explain to the friendly Scientologist[TM] that he probably is not allowed to talk to you, since you get Ritalin prescribed by your psych (Scieno-talk for psychiatrist / psychologists) then watch and wonder.

Works like a charm.

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[ArsenneLupin]

Scientology is also the only organization known to have been able to successfully coerce Slashdot to censor comments. That is until trolls started Scientology-bashing as a pasttime, and there were just too many comments to censor...

Get popcorn and watch the fight for freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

When WikiLeaks got popular, I knew it would be a matter of time before they ran up against the most prolific extra-national censorship institution on Earth. I'm eager to see if in WikiLeaks the CoS finally meet their match - the BJB case was nothing against this.

There's a chance, depending on how extensive these documents are, that CoS will merely try to "distance" themselves from "rogue members" - but if the fight turns dirty, WikiLeaks will have their hands full. Besides lawsuits, they can expect stalkers, death threats, sabotage, major network "failures" (see Blue Security Inc. vs the spammers) and other things that not even the shadiest bank would consider. I hope that free information will win the day.

Brilliant

[giorgist]

To sue, $cientology will have to claim copywrite and claim it as their own. Well go ahead, just like claiming suing for copywrite about that the fruity Xenu story made them claim it as their own. come on punk ... do you feel lucky ? G

In Church of Scientology, God is You!

[Cheesey]

(Sorry.) But that's part of the teaching. You've got all these godlike powers, telekinesis for example, and your thetans are the only thing stopping you from using them. You can get rid of your thetans by giving the CoS all of your money for the rest of your life, and if you are sufficiently committed to the church, maybe one day you will be as magical as LRH. And then you'll never really die. Your entire life is a small price to pay for the chance of being a God.

This is pretty similar to other religious claims, I think. It covers all the basic tickboxes: "you are more important than non-believers", "you get everlasting life" and "you get to be like God". I think it is specifically tuned for extremely arrogant people, though, because there is no notion of God as something better than you, that you can at best only aspire to be like. I think this is a deliberate choice by LRH, who liked hanging around with film stars and seems to have figured out what they wanted to hear:

LRH: You're the most important guy in the Universe!

Tom Cruise: I already knew that, L. Ron. Have some more of my money!

Re:In Church of Scientology, God is You!

[aadvancedGIR]

Yes, but the VIP stance is only one side of the CoS coin. For 99.9% of the follower, it's not "you're a god", it's "you could be a god someday if you give your life and soul to the cult". People like Tom Cruise already have far enouth people ready to tell them they're the best in exchange of some of their money, but only the CoS can give them real slaves without any real legal risk, moreover, I wouldn't bet that those people have to pay the CoS for anything, their public support of the cult is already valuable enough.

Re:In Church of Scientology, God is You!

[apt142]

I would argue with this:

This is pretty similar to other religious claims, I think. It covers all the basic tickboxes: "you are more important than non-believers", "you get everlasting life" and "you get to be like God".

Many churches screw this up, but Christianity is supposed be like the following:
> "you are more important than non-believers"
Change that to "You have different rules you have to follow than non-believers." Some churches go on to get this to mean that they are coming from a position of superiority. But this is, according to The Bible, incorrect.

> "you get everlasting life"
This I can't argue with. Though, various denominations interpret the conditions of getting this differently. Many say you get this free of charge. That is, you're exempt from hour zero. Other say you just have to admit that you're a screw up some times and just make an attempt to follow the rules of the faith. Others go a bit farther and say you have to be good at following the rules. This latter one is usually a hallmark of a bad church.

> "you get to be like God"
I don't think any where in the Bible it says you get to be like God in the sense that you get to have his powers and omniscience. "You get to be with God" is in there. "You should be strive to be Godly (in actions)" is certainly there. "God will be with you," is certainly there as well.

Actually thinking about, most religions don't go so far as to say the last one. In most religions the reward for faith is the everlasting life bit. Very few say that in this life you will get Godlike powers. Now, various religions have perks in the afterlife that are considered quite nice. Unaging, the company of virgins, being in the company of God, living in a paradise, relief from fear and worry, or even a trip back to the land of the living in a better body all exist in the list. But, "you get to be like God?" No, I don't see that.

Re:Scientologists deserve a medal

[Grimbleton]

Scientologist spotted.

It is called a "church"

[walterbyrd]

> I'm curious; why wouldn't you confuse it with a religion? What is a 'modern day' religion?

It is called the "Church of Scientology" and they have applied for official government status as a religion.

The line between a religion, and a cult, can be a thin one, but there are differences:

http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/checklis.htm

Re:It is called a "church"

[dwater]

Eh. You give reasons why you *would* confuse it with a church. I asked the opposite.

Imagination

[einnar2000]

Religion boils down to "My Imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend." It's mass brainwashing/hypnotism/therapy/counseling for people, depending on the intentions of whoever is preaching it.

Make a donation/tithe/whatever, and listen to a speech, then feel better about yourself. Sounds like a psychiatrist to me. Oh wait.. they don't exist, according to CoS....

Church???????

[advocate_one]

They're still a church when this is their list of targets T1 to T7:

T1: Depopularizing the enemy to a point of total obliteration
T2: Taking over the control or allegiance of the heads or proprietors of all news media
T3: Taking over the control or allegiance of key political figures
T4: Taking over the control or allegiance of those who monitor international finance and shifting them to a less precarious finance standard
T5: Generally revitalizing the societies in which we are operating
T6: Winning overwhelming public support
T7: Use all other similar groups as allies

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[EveryNickIsTaken]

Tom Cruise, is that you? You had me at "Xenu."

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Ouch ... you are right.

[golodh]

... and I was wrong.

The scientology cult isn't outlawed in Germany but just not tax exeampt and not recognised as a religion, just as you say. I found this link: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/krasel/germany/government.html

I know it was rhetorical but...

[mwigmani]

Magnolia in 1999 (albeit in a supporting role).

Re:I know it was rhetorical but...

[nuzak]

Collateral was also quite good (and a rare entirely-evil-bad-guy role for him too, not just a "bad boy")

Christianity is different because ...

[Cathbard]

Scientology is a cult unlike christianity because it's based around a person that claimed special knowledge and was capable of unbelievable super human abilities ...... oh wait, so does christianity

It's a cult because it is harmful and uses threats to intimidate people .... oh wait, christianity threatens people with eternal damnation and has killed millions

It's a cult because it scams people out of millions of dollars and flaunt it with ..... oh wait, christians have enormous cathedrals and huge bank accounts

Sorry I can't find any substantial difference except the scale of it all.....basically you're both nuts!!!

Furthermore...

[Anonymous Coward]

Furthermore, consider this:

A deity does the following things:

- Will hurt/kill your friends and family to punish you
- Will let you suffer for eternity for doing a finite number of bad things, or not believing in him even if you have never heard of him
- Tells you that things which come naturally to you are wrong, and will punish you for them
- Tells you to, at least, shun people who ignore what he says, and says that he will punish them (for all eternity again)
- Says that even mentally questioning what he says is wrong
- Says that if you follow all his commands, everything should be hunky-dory, but he can't guarantee anything so don't get your hopes up, and don't be discouraged if everything goes horribly wrong. Also if he punishes you, it's for your own good.

Now does that sound like a fair, benevolent God or some sort of sci-fi/fantasy supervillain?

Can this file be safely seeded?

[nowhere.elysium]

I'm just wondering, because if anyone's going to try and take it down, it'll be the scientologists: torrents obviously provide a far safer distribution method. I just don't want the UK government to tell me that I'm in the wrong and subject to prosecution. Scientology has little sway over here, so its only the government that I'm worried about...

An important and informative website on the matter

[blind biker]

I wonder how come I have not seen this site mentioned in the higher modded posts. It's the most informative website about scientology.

Re:This is hilarious - odd mention of "BLOGS" p77

[Malevolent Tester]

Joe Bloggs/Blogs is Joe Sixpack's British cousin.

The true tenets of Scientology

[SoundGuyNoise]

Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women.

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[DaveV1.0]

Apparently you are either ignorant of Scientology or are a low level Scientologist, which implies the same, or a high level Scientologist trolling.

Any group that encourages it's members to harass, threaten, and kill said groups detractors and ex-members is a danger to the rest of the community.

Check out the Scientology doctrine of "Fair Game" and "2R45" (Hint: 2R45 = 2 rounds from a .45 caliber pistol)

Personally, I think ever single one of them should be rounded up and executed.

Ah! Finally!

[Pig Hogger]

Ah! We finally get to know what happens when an infinite force encounters an immovable object...

Re:Daughters of Scientology's top brass speaking o

[sherriw]

Oh my god, it sounds like something out of Orwell's 1984. Complete with made up words for things, invasion of privacy and 'big brother' constantly watching. This site was an eye-opener for sure!

Re:About Tor...

[AshenFalls]

Actually, you have to explicitly opt in to be an exit node. All nodes, however, do function as relays.

Re:Scientologists deserve a medal

[Anonymous Coward]

Another scientologist spotted.

Happy happy joy joy, we can keep doing this all day. Now it's your turn.

Dahmer VS.Gandhi

[Belial6]

I've always like the cannibal quandary. Would your rather go to hell with Gandhi, or heaven with Dahmar?

Mod Parent Up

[Count Fenring]

That's really interesting. It's still influenced by previous things (After all, we're defined by what we deliberately aren't as much as by what we are, sometimes), but I do think that it's purposely designed to separate the victim's ideas from those of the mainstream, to better control the victim.

Re:Scientologists deserve a medal

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you misunderstood, GP was correcting GGP. Moron = scientologist. It's the new form of gramar nazi . . . semantics nazi.

I'm glad to be a Subgenius

[NeuroManson]

We won't shut up about anything we do, and are damned proud of it!
Praise 'Bob'!

Re:Slashdot vs. Scientology?

[TheMadTopher]

CoS killed Chef. You bastards!

What's funny about this?

[symbolset]

I was going for informative here. They did play bridge at the time in question (ca. 1963) at RAH's house. They were the authors in question. They did discuss the subject. They were both the competetive sort. This was the result.

RAH got disgusted with the dirty hippies camped on his lawn or showing up at all hours scaring his wife with their offer to share water. He quit the theme after one book. We got the 60's anyway before it died down.

LRH on the other hand fell in love with being an Idol, continuing to crank out book after book until it his cult consumed his personality. The result is we still have TFA today when people should have laughed it off and got over it.

Sure, I wrote the dialog to recreate the event but I believed it happened much this way.

Re:What's funny about this?

[R2.0]

Interesting...sources? Though I won't consider myself a Heinlein scholar, I read a lot of his autobiographical stuff and can't remember any reference to LRH at all.

Re:What's funny about this?

[symbolset]

I believe this was covered in Grumbles From The Grave. I'll check it out. It could take a while. Send to the obvious gmail, hotmail or any address at the obvious domain for a persistent contact.

Um...wow. They really are posting.

[Calledor]

I mean, I hate to refer to the above post in the third person plural but damn. How is that organization still going? I'm all for competant evil empires with scary bad ass powers and personel, but forum trolling? I...wow. Really I'm just left with one bothering question; Why couldn't you give me your money instead of to Scientology? I've got various-meters that I can strap to you, make them beep, and write things about to give you an interpretation that makes you think your getting spiritually better. If the classic crazy lady with a crystal ball purging spirits is more your style I can cross dress (extra-charge). Hell I even have a cool sci-fi fantasy world in my head that can describe an origin for EVERYTHING and I can tell you not to take any medication that would cause you to become aware of your diminished capacity, as it would probably hurt my income from you. Seriously, all that bullshit they're telling you about how to do well in the world that sound like terribly bad ideas on their face and really only have the depth of a child philosophizing about life, I can tell you the same things for cheaper. I also can tell you to kick the ass of anyone who defies me because it's in my best interests, later when you're caught I'll lie (as you should too) because that's A-OK. Are you a yuppy that has a lot of cash and thinks that the high times of human civilization lie somewhere between blood letting and taking massive doses of vitamins ignoring the actual advances that have raised life expectancies to their highest since Noah, then boy howdy I've got a bank account you can start filling right away.

Oh, come on now?

[patio11]

Evolution-denying Chinese employees of Microsoft illegally tapping the iPhones of Scientologists causes Global Warming

(Oh, best flamebait ever: "Linux-using Scientologist: Friend or Foe?" Its like strapping buttered toast to the back of a kitten and pushing him off a table.)

If you are a schizo

[Calledor]

I really wouldn't recommend not taking medication. Not only is there nothing that can cure it, but such people have a long history of murdering that predates psychotropic medication.

Who threatens Heber Jentz?

[Anonymous Coward]

Message to the FBI & All Scientologists & All Supporters of the Anonymous Peaceful Campaign against the Church of Scientology Organization

The Church of Scientology has alleged in an injunction for protection from harrassment filed with Clearwater county officials today, March 12th, that they suspect a group of peaceful protestors calling themselves "Anonymous" will try to murder a prominent leader of the Church named Heber Jentzsch, on or around Thursday, March 13th, 2008. They have used this allegation as the basis for their request for a restraining order against peaceful protestors, which is in violation of every american's "right to peaceful assembly."

Anonymous has no intention of harming this man, or any other member of the Church, in any way, shape or form. However, Anonymous fears for Heber Jentzsch's physical safety. We believe he is being detained against his will by the Church, possibly at the Hemet, California Gold base Scientology location, which is a secure armed compound. He has not been seen publicly for nearly five years, that we are aware of currently.

The Church of Scientology has demonstrated before that they will not hesitate to cause harm to critics or even church members, if it furthers their agenda. They have been legally implicated in the deaths of dozens of people, both critics and church members alike. Anonymous believes Mr. Jentzsch is in danger of being injured, imprisoned or even killed by the Church of Scientology, so that they may place the blame on Anonymous and thus shift attention away from illegal activities within the Church that Anonymous is presently working to expose.

Anonymous is very concerned for Mr. Jentzsch's safety. We strongly urge the FBI to investigate and, if at possible, locate and place Mr. Jentzsch in protective custody as soon as can be arranged. Thank you for your consideration.

-Anonymous

Emphasis mine.

The only people who would EVER gain from Heber Jentz being harmed are those he holds evidence against in his memory, being those from the Church of Scientology.

Protect Heber Jentz!

The legal filing the Church of Scientology made : http://www.sptimes.com/2008/03/12/images/Scientologyinjunction.pdf
Article : http://www.sptimes.com/2008/03/12/Northpinellas/Scientology_fights_ba.shtml

One of the main centres for discussion of Anonymous : http://forums.enturbulation.org/

snapshot review of Scientology : http://www.youfoundthecard.com/

Re:Who threatens Heber Jentz?

[Anonymous Coward]

*VERY IMPORTANT NOTE TO ALL PEACEFUL PROTESTERS!! *

OK... taps microphone, I need everyone's attention, especially LA Anons and Clearwater...

This is from my telephone notes regarding what the OT Committe members were told
during the super duper secret OSA briefing. Dont ask me questions cause Im telling you all I know.

This will be no surprise, my source is certain that Scientology is planning to choreograph an incident of violence, using their children. this was implied, I don't have the exact words just the summation, that Scientology wants and desires a confrontation.. they would LIKE to create a riot..

OT committee member and their families, public scientologists And their families are invited for a pancake breakfast at 9 AM... the children will be doing fun things like "Face painting"

If you did not know about the facepainting you might THINK they were demonstrators, right?

The "breakfast will start at 9:30, bring the kids "face painting and clowns"

Nota Bene: Scientology NEVER says bring the kids....cause the kids don't have wallets.

Buses will take you at 11 AM to the respective locations of the event, Ruth Eckart Hall in CW and in LA the Shrine..
The LRH event WILL BE this saturday.

(methinks so that if one of them gets knocked down by one of THEIR operatives, it will be plain to see its a scientologist kid)

They will be putting their nastiest pieces of work on the front lines to get the protestors spun up and angry, using fighting words. They hope to crate enough confusion so that their perpetrators of a choreographed incident will escape and protestors will get blamed.

And this rubbish is has the gall to call themselves church?, Im sorry I dont have 'clearer' notes.. I will read replies and try to ask my sources questions as posed but I need to write another brief..

CW protestors should watch out for a nasty clam named Ian Shillington

source : http://forums.enturbulation.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=6667&p=115691&sid=39f876cc4fe650164c092508efecfb75#p115691

WHY would Scientology, that traditionally HIDES ALL 'parishioners' from all protesters, suddenly CALL IN THE CHILDREN on a known major protest day?
If this plot is canceled because we got the news, or is just made up, to discredit our information,frankly, GOOD. Anonymous just doesn't want ANY violence., doesn't want ANYONE harmed especially children.
  The source is credible however (Arnie Lerma ), be forewarned!

Re:Scientologists deserve a medal

[ASM65816]

So you think its ok for these people to ruin peoples lives and get away with it?

Liberal Loon: I don't care if I've lost my job and my whole life has been ruined because of a bad psych report based on a stupid multiple choice test and a bunch of lies from workmates who hate me. I'll just smile and take these pills the nice psychiatrist gave me to stop me being angry at how they've ruined my life and walk the street looking for work while the nice psychiatrist drives by in his famcy car on the way to a $500/hour appointment with his next victim.