Slashdot Mirror
CoS Bigwig Likens Wikipedia Ban to Nazis' Yellow Star Decree
We mentioned on Thursday that Wikipedia has banned edits originating from certain IP addresses belonging to the Church of Scientology; reader newtley writes now that Scientology leader (CEO and Chairman of the Board of the linked, but legally separate, Religious Technology Center) David Miscavige calls the ban "a 'despicable hate crime,' and asks, 'What's next, will Scientologists have to wear yellow, six-pointed stars on our clothing?' During World War II, Hitler forced Jewish men, women and children to wear a a yellow cloth star bearing the word Jude to brand them in the streets of Europe, and in the Nazi death camps."
I remember saying very close to the same thing quite a number of times to various people when I was... 10?
He loses the argument. End of story.
For a real argument, editing Wikipedia is not akin to, say, being able to buy food. IPs can and do get banned for all sorts of reasons.
I am officially gone from
So when does he think that the Wikipedia stormtroopers will march up to the scientology homes and round them all up to labour camps that have a Work is Freedom banner at the front gate? Honestly, it's the first time I've ever seen a conversation Godwin itself from the original argument. Reduction Nazium indeed.
i suppose when they actually have to wear yellow stars he'll have a point.
The CO$ got banned because they systematically abused the PRIVILEGE (not a right) to do edits on Wikipedia because they were doing so to silence criticism.
If they'd made edits to correct factual errors instead of their own (since they have already violated Godwin's Law) NAZI like internet tactics this never would have happened.
Now I wish Wikipedia would start banning other corporate abusers, such as Sony, who also notoriously edits out any criticism of them and their ethics. Go look at all the edits on the Star Wars Galaxies article and SOE liar in chief John "Smed" Smedley.
Corporatism != Free Market
So the Jews had to wear the stars due to the fact that they were pushing its own agenda on the 'free encyclopedia anyone can edit?
Being a Jew, I feel strongly that the Jews were treated this way due to the anti-semitism of the times, which is NOTHING to do with the current Church of Scientology situation.
Just because you hate what happened doesn't make it a hate crime.
Written by Church of Scientology, Clearwater, FL
Hahahaha
If they didn't like what Wiki did, they're going to hate being Slashdotted!
They aren't being forced to wear something or being branded. Their HQ IP block was banned because they were violating the Wikipedia terms by editing their own pages and planting false information.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." --Mark Twain
will Scientologists have to wear yellow, six-pointed stars on our clothing?
Actually I was thinking they should be marked with something like a scarlet letter on their foreheads.
Perhaps a big "I" for Idiot.
It would certainly make them easier to spot.
Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
I'm all for Scientologists wearing something we can easily identify them by, so we can avoid their ignorance.
Comparing your 'religion' to Judaism is ridiculous. I won't go into detail as to why I think so, because I think all religions are absurd, but it's like comparing pop tarts to a t-bone steak. One company, running a website, decided to block all IPs linked to Scientology. You are not being 'persecuted'. No death marches, no concentration camps, no shootings in the street. But we can all hope for that! Just kidding.
And did he just godwin himself?
Make no mistake: WE are the ones making huge progress in the Global Obliteration of Psychiatry. Wikipedia is acting at Big Psychiatry's beck and call.
This guy needs to see a psychiatrist ASAP.
The Reg article really oversimplified the Wikipedia ArbCom ruling, making it sound more one-sided than it was. If you actually read it, you'll see that it recognizes both pro- and anti-Scientologists as troublemakers, and includes sanctions for some hardcore Scientology critics as well.
This is actually a relief to me, as anti-Scientologists can get as wacked out as the Scientologists themselves. Wikipedia ArbCom has made some bone-headed decisions in the past; it's good that they were level-headed in this case.
Next thing you know Jimbo will be rounding up Scientologists,forcing them into camps near active volcanos, and then blowing them all up with H-bombs.
Don't forget that part of their goal is expelling the souls of dead aliens from our bodies. Which is, of course, the true definition of sanity, not having dead alien souls in you.
No portion of this post may be rebroadcast without the express, written consent of Major League Baseball.
Wikipedia also regularly bans Congressmans' offices from editing because they try to use the site to create fictional accounts of either their own candidates or the opposition. This is actually a show of integrity by Wikipedia (equal treatment of all). They are preventing a certain behavior from occurring -- not certain group of people from behaving.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
ummmm.... another planet I guess, but let me go ask xenu just so there is no confusion.
Deja Moo: The feeling you've heard this bullsh*t before.
Persecuted?
From Webster's dictionary:
" to cause to suffer because of belief"
I'm not sure how lack of Wikipedia access is comparable to being thrown in a death camp, but perhaps someone with more perspective can tell me.
The analogy is horribly flawed: The stars identified Jews so they would be discriminated against by other people as well as by the state (e.g. employers, benches, certain events, buildings etc.)
Filtering IPs from the CoS prevents them from contributing or skewing an already established work: it doesn't attach an indelible mark with which others can identify them with (and use against them) and it doesn't promote wide-spread "We hate you" feelings - it's just saying "We don't want your 'contributions'"
Is that like the chewbacca defense with a Jewish twist?
1) It's clear you are a COS member
2) I can go back 15 generations in my family tree because the Nazi's had a habit of being thorough and making sure people were in now way "jewish", even if they were christian for 10 generations, they had to be christian for at least 15. I have a hard time believing they would hire anyone jewish as a soldier or a member of the police.
Jews are from this planet!
I argue because it's the internet....and I can.
Do you know which Jews made it through the Holocaust unscathed?
The ones with money who fled early.
Frankly, you can take your bad analogies & shove them up your... no, scratch that - you'd almost certainly enjoy that.
"There is nothing wrong with his analogy" says a user with the name BadAnalogyGuy.
Too perfect.
Your argument is hilarious. What does the existence of Jews willing to slaughter other Jews have to do with anything--or even defend the analogy!
Your deflection of the errant analogy with some sort of pointless note of some Jews working for Nazis during the Holocaust is borderline antisemitic in my book.
Grow up. They can't edit an online encyclopedia! How do you compare that with stripping an innocent of their right to live?
My work here is dung.
Several comments note that Wikipedia is a private company and it can ban whoever it wants to. Dangerous. Wikipedia is becoming bigger then itself, it is no longer just a website. Many see it is a realiable and impartial source of information. I often use wikipedia before google as I am more likely to get the result I want. For that matter, the first page in a google result is often wikipedia.
Wikipedia claims to have no agenda, to be impartial. Yet it has for CoS now decided that THIS is the truth, not what CoS says. Fair enough, but where does it end? What truths are going to be determined next. The holocaust? Certainly denial of it is lying so ban the deniers. But others are less clear. Other exterminations by other countries. The turks, the chinese, the dutch, the americans, the japanese. All of which have shown less then favourable reaction to being pointed out that they are equally guilty of mass extermination against others. What is the official version of american, australian, canadian history relating to the natives at the moment?
CoS is being banned for two reasons. First, it is claimed they use underhanded tactics like scaremongering, lawsuits to silence opposition. But that is true for any religious group, should all religious groups be banned? They also violated the terms of the site. But that as I said is dangerous because it is effectively one individual/company saying how they think so called impartial information should be gathered.
I don't have an answer. You can't constantly have highly biased information being inserted and neither can you have someone else decide that their truth is the truth even if it is about someone else.
Sadly, the truth is often hard to get at and depends entirely on your point of view. You can easily point at the antics of CoS and call it wrong, but then I would look at the antics of your school of faith and wonder what the difference is.
All you can wonder now, who is going to be banned next for pushing their view on articles relating to them.
Remember, wikipedia was NOT supposed to be a regular encyclopedia with a choosen set of editors who get to decide what the view of the institution is. It was supposed to be open to all. Now it isn't.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I'm torn between giving someone "equal time" to respond to something done to them by a company, and saying that Slashdot did nothing more than feed a troll by allowing this particular posting.
I talk about stuff.
or six.
*rimshot*
The Church of Scientology can access Wikipedia just fine, they just can't edit it. So this is basically analogous to having your story submits summarily rejected by a newspaper because you've submitted so much crap in the past.
And no, that's not really equivalent to being sent to a death camp, but then again, scientologists aren't exactly known for their sanity or truthfulness, that being one of the reasons why they're being banned.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
...that I see a Scientology ad here.
Circumcision is child abuse.
I'll skip commenting on the "Wikipedia Ban = Nazism" claim. Many, many other people, I'm sure, will point out just how ridiculous it is. After you place that ridiculousness to the side, however, I found something odd. The person making the comparison is "Scientology religion's chief executive officer Mr. David Miscavige". A religion's "chief executive officer"? Since when does a religion have a CEO? Am I just ignorant of the structure of religions other than Judaism (which has a very loose-knit make up - the joke is that if you ask two Jews a question, you'll get three opinions)? Are there other religions with CEO's?
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
It's not even that bad is it? They still have access, they just can't edit... from IP addresses belonging to CoS... from home IPs is fine.
So yes, obviously Mr Miscavige is being repellantly disingenuous here.
If any block of IPs - regardless of who owns it - is routinely responsible for sabotaging the encyclopedia then it seems appropriate that the admins should ban that block of IPs.
OMG!!! Ponies!!!
Hell, if this analogy works then we should all disable our Spam filters and cower in shame for our prejudice, after all, these guys believe in us seeing the best Pr0n on the internet as well as giving us the opportunity to enhance our manhoods.
www.meneguzzi.eu/felipe
What hoops do I have to jump through to see subject lines on Slashdot again?
<sarcasm mode="dripping">Whoa! Watch out for the Global Psychiatric-Pharmaceutical Anti-Religion Conspiracy! They won't stop at nothing less than global domination!</sarcasm>
Talk about extreme paranoia! This guy's talking about pushing for a sane world and blaming the insane for stopping Scientology, when, obviously, this guy is the insane one.
Mr. Miscaivge: My wife, as a psychologist and therapist, works in the "Psychiatric-Pharmaceutical industry" and I can tell you with absolute certainty that these guys can't even agree on whether "Post-Traumatic Embitterment Disorder" is a real disease or not, let alone organize a global anti-religion conspiracy, seeking to destroy any religion (or anything really), let alone the Church of Scientology. You should seek professional help for that, it sounds like you're paranoid-delusional.
My blog
These people are being persecuted because of their beliefs and their willingness to stand up for their beliefs.
Do you know which Jews made it through the Holocaust unscathed? It was the ones that joined up with the Nazis as soldiers and police. Through their complicity, these Jews were responsible for the millions that were slaughtered in the camps.
"BadAnalogyGuy". Yeah...no kidding.
Nobody at Wikipedia is forcing CoS members to go against their principles and fellow members and kill them, or even speak poorly of them. They aren't being persecuted for their beliefs. They're being told to leave Wikipedia's private property alone, not even because of their beliefs, but because of their track record of propaganda edits. Which is both completely different, and also legal.
Considering the CoS's history of making promotional propaganda edits to Wikipedia articles about them, I'd say it's also a very good idea.
The only way your analogy would work is if certain CoS members were forced to make derogatory edits to Wikipedia, rather than do nothing at all. And they're not even being forced to do nothing; only to do nothing from their own offices. Members can still make edits from home, libraries, Internet cafes, Starbucks' hotspots, and dozens if not hundreds of other places.
I suppose another way to make your analogy work is if the Jews in Germany/Austria were banned from having loudspeakers in the public square making public service announcements about how Judaism is the salvation to all people and things, and how they're much better than all other religions, and won't sue you for leaving the church, and don't force you to buy ridiculous electronics to practise the religion, and don't keep their most holy books locked up under copyright where nobody can even read them, and loads of other crap. (None of which is true about Judaism, BTW....this is just an example)
But the Jews didn't try to do this stuff, and they didn't get banned from it. So your analogy doesn't work.
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
If I were Jewish I'd be really insulted by this. I wouldn't want the genocide of my people compared to getting kicked out of McDonalds for repeatedly setting the restroom on fire.
Wrong. The Jews were persecuted because they were being used as a scapegoat. It wasn't legitimate and entirely made up.
CoS is being "persecuted" here because of a pattern of repeatedly submitting shitting articles. I'd hope Wikipedia does more of this. It's a good step towards establishing legitimacy and reliability.
Thanks,
Bruce
Through their complicity, these Jews were responsible for the millions that were slaughtered in the camps.
Oh dear, it was the fault of the Jews all along, was it...who'd have guessed it!
So there you are, surrounded by all your technology and information - and still...
Maybe you should try our free personality test...?
So, I actually clicked through to RTFA, and was stunned by the article. I'm pretty sure it's a fake. Just to quote it - "There is so much nonsense on the internet about Scientology, all of which was written by anti-religion extremists in the employ of the Psychiatric-Pharmaceutical industry. Many are also being paid by certain depraved, degenerate factions within the German government. You can't believe any of it. If these scumbags had their way, all children would be psych-drugged into oblivion, most eventually becoming high school gunmen; vicious de-programmers would constantly be leaping out from shadowy corners; there would be all-night electroshock parlors on the high street of every village, town and city; and anyone who tried to live an ethical life would quickly receive an icepick lobotomy."
That scans more like Burroughs than anything else. Kind of a satirical send-up of the scientologists, you know? If it *is* real, I think this guy should write more press releases.
This guy needs to see a psychiatrist ASAP.
It's nothing an R2-45 won't cure.
It's also saddening to see how quickly otherwise liberal minded people revert to the old, dictatorial, oppressive and ultimately ineffective ways of trying to silence people they don't like.
It's not about silencing anyone, Scientologists still have the means to express their views through their own websites (and countless others). They have just lost the privilege to edit Wikipedia, since it apparently has been found that they have been misusing that privilege. It's like telling someone who is shouting in your ear to shut up: technically, it is limiting their freedom of speech, but don't you think it's justified?
I think you misunderstand censorship:
"the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts.
In this case, it's the CoS that are trying to censor Wikipedia by editing articles to remove the parts they don't want the public to read.
As you said censorship on the Internet doesn't work, and Wikipedia just proved that by banning the censors - in this case the CoS.
One of the universal rules of happiness is always be wary of any helpful item that weighs less than its operating manual
If losing editing rights (on Wikipedia) from CoS IPs is akin to Nazi prosecution of Jews then I wonder what they say about "The Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services is considering prosecuting and banning some Scientology practices, in particular the use of the Scientology personality test to sell courses. State Secretary Rigmor Aasrud said that the activities in question might be prosecuted as fraud or as violations of existing healthcare regulations." Or for that matter the trials against them in France.
If just losing editing rights is as bad as Nazi prosecution then by comparison other forms of prosecution must be like killing kittens with sledgehammers.
The Long Now Foundation
Filtering IPs from the CoS prevents them from contributing or skewing an already established work: it doesn't attach an indelible mark with which others can identify them with (and use against them) and it doesn't promote wide-spread "We hate you" feelings - it's just saying "We don't want your 'contributions'"
Then again the CoS is probably worse than the Nazis since their attitude is closer to pinning the yellow star on everyone else.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
So the church of Scientology actually recognises the Holocaust now? Ah well :)
So this is basically analogous to having your story submits summarily rejected by a newspaper because you've submitted so much crap in the past.
Well.... they should come on down to Slashdot, let Kdawson show em' how it's done!
"When you see a unixer brainwashed beyond saving, kick him out of the door." - Xah Lee
I hate seeing this argument pop up again and again. Wikipedia has a lot of de facto power. We gave them this power by using the service and promoting it among our acquaintances. We didn't give Jimmy Wales this power so that he could use it to advance a personal agenda of changing social perceptions or silencing arbitrary voices. There's a certain amount of accountability here.
But the decision to ban Scientology's IP's was perfectly in line with a reasonable prior policy. That's what makes this is OK, not the fact that Wikipedia is private property.
Is that they did a lot of bad things. Are you only allowed to say "this person is doing this bad thing" if:
(pick one)
- Nazis didn't do it
- Some person more well-known than the Nazis, who was not themselves a Nazi, did it
- The person you're talking about has ALSO killed six-million jews
Just because the Nazi's killed a bunch of people doesn't suddenly excuse everything they did leading up to killing a bunch of people, or make it okay.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
I think the idea of identifying CoS members has some merit, although a dunce cap might be more appropriate than a yellow star.
Or maybe the Puritans had something: we could dunk them in water, and if their body thetans don't weigh them down, they're truly "clear" and then we can put the dunce cap on them.
I don't know about you all, but I want to be able to identify people with goofy beliefs. At least on Sunday the religious nuts go to church so for a few hours a week we know where they're all at.
Anyway, everybody knows the only true belief system is Thelema.
You are welcome on my lawn.
And their members can, in fact, edit Wikipedia from other locations. But this wasn't "members" editing. This was the cult's own staff doing a planned campaign to distort and eliminate the postings of others.
Remember, few "members" are permitted to deal with skeptical outsiders. That's a task reserved for the "Office of Special Affairs", their group that took on dealing with reporters and former members, after the "Guardian's Office" had its leadership convicted of planting bomb threats to discredit the author Susan Meister and convicted of a large array of other crimes. Look it up: this is _precisely_ the material that these astro-turfing censors wanted to eliminate from Wikipedia. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Special_Affairs, it's fascinating what this cult has done historically to harass writers and former members.
There is no obligation to religion/superstition by private groups. It is time anti-religionists went on the offensive to assert ourselves (legally) against superstition.
We don't have to give religionists anything we are not obliged to in law, and we do NOT owe respect to superstition. Scientology in my opinion is a blatant con game, and hence worthy of (legal) denial of support. Supporters should be exposed so those of us who oppose Scientology can (legally) choose the manner of our interaction with them.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
So you believe that it's censorship for a privately owned website to try to prevent systematic, repeated vandalism of Scientology related articles (said vandalism including removal of (i.e. attempted censorship of) anything negative).
You are either
a) a troll
b) an idiot or
c) a Scientologist (and by implication also an idiot)
And here I thought it was just acid reflux.
... it's obviously a Miscavige of justice. I'll get me coat.
Wait, did you just impy that killing kittens is worse than killing people?!?
Scientology is an elective class of people, on the whole. It is not an ethnic grouping of some historical standing, with traditional relations - good and bad - with the broader community.
CoS shared some characteristics with Israeli intelligence and guerilla information warfare outfits. Beyond this, the analogy that refers to this effort by the "Church" to control its public perception to the Nazi program to decimate European Jewry is disgusting.
"Calling 4Chan!"
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
cross the CoS, you get reamed. amongst their successful takedown targets: the IRS. yes, the IRS. read all about it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_snow_white
see the part where they break into IRS offices? i wonder how many times this section has been deleted by CoS griefers
this is a good article:
http://www.villagevoice.com/content/printVersion/487758
if these assholes have no bringing the god damn IRS to heal, what the hell do you think they are going to do about wikipedia? we all should worry, these CoS trolls are committed, and the splash damage could seriously bring wikipedia's integrity into question if the CoS wins any sort of battle with wikipedia
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Well, are the kittens Scientologists? Or at least L Ron Hubbard's kittens? What about the people? I think that answers that.
The problem with most scams is the people that do them usually aren't that smart and get caught. Scientology is an extremely well thought out scam operated and organized by the same people who run Amway and other scams. (Yes... I called AmWay a scam because it is). They keep control close to them and only let people *think* they have power. Only the super rich can make it to the top and by then those people are so greedy the truth doesn't bother them at all.
I truly believe in everyone's right to believe in what they want to. However... when your organization is blatant in it's manipulation of desperate people... then i have a problem. Hiding behind the wall of religion to promote an incredible pyramid scam is beyond cowardice. The only reason they haven't been busted is the lack of evidence... but that is because they are so secretive and protective of their "secrets".
Sigh... it's so sad that there are so many people in the world like this.
Nothing wrong with his analogy at all - for people who can't tell horse shit from roses. IF the Jews were only being prevented from trespassing on other people's (intellectual) property, THEN the analogy might fit. CoS has been abusive and arrogant in their dealings with the Wiki. The Wiki isn't exactly "public" property - that is, it is not owned by the government, it wasn't built by the government, and taxpayers don't have a monetary interest in it, in any way. The Wiki, like any private individual, can ban any person or group of persons for almost any reason, and they don't even have to justify it in a court of law. In this case, however, it could be easily justified in any impartial court, without ever once mentioning relious beliefs. CoS needs to change their conduct, plain and simple. Wiki doesn't care that they are a bunch of nutcases, they only care that the nutcases are abusive.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
LARSON (voice of): The old management was discharged, the new management was put in its place. And its motto was, "We make no deals with anybody. We're tough, we're ruthless, no deals".
LARSON (on camera): It was about 15 of us. We went out and rented three limos, drove up to an organization in San Francisco and did a practice (snaps fingers) beat-'em-up kind of meeting, you know. We took the CDB Org--the commanding officer of that org, organization. He got thrown into the filing cabinets, he was sec-checked on the meter and, um, you--that's where you, what, you have to tell the truth. And there's a whole row of people around the guy, right? And he's sitting there hanging onto the cans and--this is nothing to do with religion any more, right? This is, "Where's the money, Jack? I want the money! Where did you put the money?" And he said, "I, you--I don't know! I don't have the money." David Miscavige comes up, grabs him by the tie (makes punching motion with his right arm) and starts bashing him into the filing cabinet. And he's thrown out in the street; his tie is ripped off. Um, this is just a warm-up kind of bash.
It's from a BBC documentary made in 1987 called Scientology - The Road to Total Freedom. The part of the documentary containing the quote above can be seen here, if you don't want to watch the whole thing (which you should, if this interests you, as it's incredibly eye-opening).
These people are being persecuted because of their beliefs and their willingness to stand up for their beliefs.
Hogwash. They're being excluded from using someone else's property because they behaved badly when they had access to that property.
Want to talk about persecution? Google for Keith Henson.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
The IP addresses were banned because they continually broke the terms of service for the site. If you constantly break the rules, expect to be punished. I don't understand how you find this somehow to be prejudice? Its prejudice against people who break the rules constantly, I suppose...
They're not being persecuted for their beliefs at all. It has absolutely nothing to do with that. In fact, I'm guessing you're comprehension is on par with Miscavige. His comparison is absolutely flawed so much that I have to wonder if he's either that stupid or if he knows its bad but just hopes that dropping the term Nazis will make people overlook the enormous gaping logical flaw in his argument.
Religous beliefs do NOT give you the right to blatantly break the rules of a website. If you somehow think thats the case, then I don't know what that makes you.
I supposed it depends on the people in question.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I believe L.Ron Huber's views of a, "Church of Scientology", are a form of Passive Intolerance. Much of today's news is filled with the antics of those who do not Tolerate. Proud Ignorance, to me, is not a badge of honor, but a cancer of the inner self. Also, in a some-what permissive culture such as what I live in, I find it troubling that the "Scientology Show-off's" find it easier to to sue their detractors, than live by a way where strength in conviction has always proven to be the best offense.
I hope you are not implying that killing kittens is worse than killing people.
Let's try a thought experiment, just for kicks:
Which one feels worse?
Now, of course it's not an even comparison: the kittens are defenseless from the start.
True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
Not only does the story Godwin itself, but it's pure troll.
Lots of sites are carrying this story, and experience has made us all quick to believe the most ridiculous things about Scientology, but this looks incredibly fake, and I can't find any reliable sources.
Does anyone have any evidence that this is real?
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
From TFA:
The Scientology religion is the only major religion to have emerged in the 20th century.
You're forgetting Jedi - which scored higher than you multiple national censuses. Whats that you say? Its made-up science fiction? Yes, and so is Jedi.
It is the world's fastest growing religion, found in over 264 countries
And this is why they don't let you edit Wikipedia. You only get to 264 countries if you include Narnia, Mordor, Ankh-Morpork, Azkhaban, Ruritania, Elbonia, Grand Fenwick, and about 55 other places that are as real as Xenu.
(sorry if this is a dupe, but my link to /. went down a few hours ago when I was posting this)
That's a weak semantic point, raised in an effort to justify a rigid, easy-answer ideology. :(
It's harder to commit extensive abuses of power without the force of law, I'll grant you. But when someone with an agenda can, in a targeted fashion, change how millions of students do research, that's the kind of "power" that doesn't require double quotes. You can say that's not censorship, but then I can call you a naïve ideologue, so that's fair.
If just losing editing rights is as bad as Nazi prosecution then by comparison other forms of prosecution must be like killing kittens with sledgehammers.
Didn't you know? Scientologists perform a semi-annual rite in which they kill kittens with sledgehammers and then inject their blood with the contents of the kittens' brain stems. I read it on Wikipedia before the Scientologists edited the article to hide these facts.
CoS and Miscavige are FAIL. Over and over again.
(Mod points yesterday, none today..!)
State Secretary Rigmor Aasrud said that the activities in question might be prosecuted as fraud or as violations of existing healthcare regulations.
Whoa, wait a second. That's actually an excellent point. Are personality tests the domain of psychologists, particularly when used to render a diagnosis (even as simple as "you're depressed") unless clearly being used to entertainment value? If so, then it would seem that Scientology is either:
I can't see how they could avoid being subject to HIPAA if they're presenting their tests as legitimate, informative procedures. If HIPAA does govern them, then I can imagine about 1,000 ways they've violated it based on headlines over the years.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
If anything, the CoS is being punishemed for censoring others. This isnt a case of censorship against The Church of Scientology.
Censorship suggests that a person or group is not allowed to say what they wish. The Church of Scientology had that ability. They could have outlined factual information about their church in the appropriate places on Wiki. But they abused the system and used it has a propoganda tool, editing the contributions of others to further their own agenda.
Another thing to note is that Wiki is specifically meant and designed to be an apolitical, unbiased, and nuetral publication. Everyone agrees to those terms when they post there. Everyone can openly edit so long as they dont hamper the ability for the facts to be presented. CoS chose to disregard those terms and edit out any facts that shed them in an unfavorable light (of which there are plenty of choices).
Wiki isnt an advertising service, no matter how much these people seem to think it is. It is for the passage of information, ALL information, whether favorable to them or not.
"But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
I felt like it was April's fool when I read this /.. Isn't ironic to read an article about Scientology being bashed when the Google Ads displayed at the top of the page is one about the Scientology Church? This made my day!
The analogy is horribly flawed
by BadAnalogyGuy (945258)
yathink?
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
The Church, which is located only meters from Ballo's dormitory, states that the results had shown Ballo was "depressed, irresponsible, hyper-critical and lacking in harmony."
Family blames Scientology for daughter's death
Apparently she suffered from periods of depressions; the critical and negative response she received from CoS pushed her a bit too far. She was twenty years old.
This particular case combined with other reports have caused the Norwegian Government to take a stern look at the practices of CoS; and try to evaluate if their practices comply with the law.
The Long Now Foundation
They had loads of fun in Canada, too. You see, Health Canada investigated their "auditing" and found them to be, in fact, pedaling "Alternative Healing" but doing so in a fraudulent manner, and they published this report. There was also a Canadian couple that quit Scientology and was telling their story. Now, fast forward a bit, and the Church of Scientology has infiltrated the US government almost to the top. There is a huge raid on their offices, which uncovers a lot of interesting information. First, it had information all about their undercover ops in the US and Canada. It also had information about how they bound and held prisoner Michael Miesner. For whatever reason, those charges in the USA got themselves vanished, but not before the FBI forwarded this information to Canada! Now Canada finds here in their cabinets, confidential government of Ontario and RCMP memos! They find they have agents infiltrating the hospital where the doctor who wrote that scathing report on their psychic healing works! They find they have guys in Canada Revenue looking for dirt on the couple I mentioned before, anything to bring them down! Not willing to bring charges on that alone, the RCMP sent two undercover agents into the Toronto branch. Using information they gathered, warrants were issued and all kinds of files and audiotapes were seized. They had all the evidence they needed for these break ins and thefts and assorted other crimes. They had also broken into many Toronto office buildings to steal corporate information, too, anything to potentially in the future be used against their enemies (who are legion). In the end, 14 people plus the Church itself were all summonsed. The Church tried to get the warrants invalidated. They failed. They tried to blackmail the judge, they failed. They tried to plea bargain, "we'll donate millions to any charity you want if you drop the charges against the church, you can have our members, fine, but not the church." It was declined. They tried to get all of their files detailing their undercover ops and breakins and criminal harassment ruled as confessional material, and inadmissible in court due to priest-parishioner confidentiality. That failed too. Then they tried a massive smear campaign against the Crown prosecutor. THAT stunt got the church itself a $1.6 million dollar judgment. And since their lawyer was spewing it too in press releases, he himself got a $400,000 judgment. (never libel nor slander a LAWYER). In the end, all of the criminals working for the Church were convicted (some cases are still ongoing I believe, 20 years later). The church is still trying to appeal its own convictions and judgments. Their fine for libel though, and their lawyer's, those have been upheld all the way to the Supreme Court, so that's done, no more appeals, only took 10 years! They repeated their slander every step of the way, too, in press releases and in court, and in every appeal they maintained its truth even though most of it was provably false. I would have thought that continuing to repeat the same lies after a judgment for doing so would be contempt of court, and get their lawyer hauled before the judge in irons, but I guess the Canadian legal system doesn't work like the American versions do on TV? ;)
And yes, the Church called the Ontario government Nazis. The church has its own fake "tolerance" watchdog organization. According to their brochures, they stand up against all intolerance, though in practice only if it is against the CoS. It condemned the government for persecuting a poor religion, when all the religion did was slander, libel, and order criminal acts against Canadians and their government. I believe the argument went, "Members of the church give all their worldly possessions to us, and we support them. So fining the church directly punishes all of our members! You have a slippery slope that says a church is responsible for the actions of its members, and you can punish all members of the church for the actions of one
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
Repressive systems have no use for facts they can't alter to fit into their world view. Read your 1984 for reference.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Epic troll is epic :). It pleases me to see that some still practice the ancient art; however you failed to get modded up :(. But I'll play along:
When your beliefs include killing all who oppose you, it's only fair that you get the same in return, no? Not that Wikipedia banning you from editing is the same, but still.
Actually, it was the ones who escaped early. Nazis weren't interested in having Jews as soldiers or police, or in any other position for that matter. Jews were already being soldiers, police and all other imaginable things prior to Nazis taking power; it was the Nazis who removed them from these positions.
What the heck does this have to do with Scientology, thought?
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Please us smaller paragraphs. I honestly couldn't get past the first few lines as it all started to blur together. You wrote a lot so I hope I'm correct in assuming you'd like people to read it. Please, in the future, make such posts easier to read.
For the n-th time, they didn't just say "we don't like your opinion, go away". There is an approved and tried way to deal with controversal topics on Wikipedia, there is the well known discussion page, there's moderators, there's a solution for almost any kind of argument. What is NOT a solution is to simply go and put your view of something on the front page without even considering someone else's opinion. The CoS isn't the first person or group to be banned for repeatedly and deliberately putting "their" view of events and positions ahead of everyone else's while ignoring the mediation and moderation efforts.
CoS decided to break the rules, so they're being banned. What's hard to understand about it?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
'What's next, will Scientologists have to wear yellow, six-pointed stars on our clothing?' During World War II, Hitler forced Jewish men, women and children to wear a a yellow cloth star bearing the word Jude to brand them in the streets of Europe, and in the Nazi death camps."
Well, if that's a problem, we could force them to wear a colored arm-band around their right arm. This shouldn't be a big deal, since many of their members already do. And if they are extra-good, they get the gold-colored band and they can even spend one night per week with their spouse! /Heebie-Jeebies/
Seriously, name a single other "religion" that charges members "donations" individually for services, complete with a price sheet?
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Actually if the author had looked it up in Wikipedia he would have found that Scientologists would not wear the Star of David.
More accurately;
If they were a religion they would wear a purple triangle
-or-
If they were mentally ill or an "asocial element" they would wear a black triangle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_concentration_camp_badges
Tisha Hayes
There are three meaningful differences:
1) Nobody is being identified as CoS. The comparison is ridiculous and specious on its face. However, I can understand how Scientologists wouldn't want people to know who they were.
2) CoS is being removed from a private site with limited reach (admittedly an important one), but this in no way affects them outside that site. This is no more "censorship" than would be being removed from the golf course that senators play at.
3) CoS is being removed for a pattern of poor behavior of editing things in their interest, without providing appropriate sources, removing well sourced material, in the hopes of changing their public image. Each of these is against Wikipedia's stated policy, and the group was warned more than a dozen times over the course of several years.
They are merely Godwinning so that they don't have to accept that what happened to them is the result of their organized campaign of unethical behavior (as were it any surprise, given their other activities.)
Routing around in 3, 2...
StoneCypher is Full of BS
Please don't compare all religions with scientology. Scientology is an insult to christians, muslims, buddhists, hindus -- everyone whose religion is more than measly 50 years old, and whose religion has already went through the "H0ly kruz4des!!1" period. Scientology looks like a bad, but dangerous, brainwashing joke. Thank you.
In some respects, I would say yes, as kittens are unable to fight back. But maybe I'm odd... I've never cried for anyone I've known who's died, but I've cried for every pet I had to put down.
Now killing babies vs. killing kittens - there you've got me.
If that wall of text was too much for you to read, you should perhaps take a remedial English course. Most books written for adults are written with lengthy paragraphs and very few pictures.
Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Though a Calvanist might argue otherwise, all religions with some doctrine of "free will" or the like would claim that, yes, you do choose your faith.
Changed how millions of students do research? How do you figure? Wikipedia is not an acceptable reference in any school I'm aware of. You're saying that because it happens to be the first result on Google that it changed the way students do research? I hope not, cause thats just stupid.
Research patterns changed because of the search engine and the web itself itself. Wikipedia provides data for the search engine, but its the search engine that actually changed things. Put wikipedia online with no searchability (internal or from external search engines like google/live/yahoo) and no links and you'd get no visitors. Take wikipedia away, and students will still use search engines to find their data.
The way students changed before Wikipedia existed, its a great priliminary resource for information, but lets not get stupid and elevate it to some level of Holy Grail. Its full of false information, bias by companies pawning their wares there, and ignorance from any random contributor that thinks he knows that an article is wrong when in fact it his he/she that is wrong. Its a good starting point to get some ideas and seek out more information. Thats fine and it does a great job at that, but thats where it ends. I'm happy to get use out of Wikipedia on a daily basis, but its pretty stupid for anyone to consider anything on Wikipedia a fact without outside unrelated references.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
No, it isn't. Europe isn't yet a state and my local law says otherwise.
Ezekiel 23:20
You have a slippery slope that says a church is responsible for the actions of its members, and you can punish all members of the church for the actions of one.
See Scientology v. Cult Awareness Network in the US.
Essentially, Cult Awareness Network works to spread information gathered about cults. One woman at a CAN meeting wants help to get her son out of a cult. Another person volunteering for the group (but not acting on behalf of the group) recommends a cult deprogrammer.
They pick up the son and try to deprogram him. Sadly, the son is over the age of 18, which makes what the deprogrammer did tantamount to kidnapping and illegal imprisonment.
$cientology funds the sons resulting lawsuit against CAN, alleging that CAN was responsible for the actions of its volunteer, even though the action was not taken by the group, but an individual outside the actions of the group.
CAN is bankrupted by the legal bills. In the bankruptcy auction, a $cientologist buys up CANs assets, including name, logo, trademarks, and phone number.
Now, when you call the Cult Awareness Network (New CAN), you're calling a scientologist. If you think you're going to get help, you're not.
Well, duh. Kittens are waaaaaaay cuter. Besides, while there are undeniably far too many people, cats aren't really such significant spike on the Shelden spectrum. Also, while killing humans has palpable benefits to most of the people left alive, killing kittens really doesn't.
</bwahahaha>
"The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
That wall of text would have filled up at least a page or two in a book. The problem is not that it's "Too much to read. " It's just that poorly organized structure of the comment is a strain on the eyes, and requires extra, unnecessary concentration. Just like run-on sentences can make perfect sense, but sometimes you are forced to read it multiple times before the idea the writer is trying to convey forms in your head, and then you can continue reading the next sentence without the uncertainty of possibility of losing track of your position in the text, or trying to think too much about what the fuck the author is trying to say because the sentence is so god damned long you forgot how it began, and you start to wonder why the asshole couldn't just separate his thoughts into a few sentences just to make things a little bit easier on you.
Abaddon: An Xbox 360 Indie game
So what you're saying is that if Scientology lasts a while longer, it will gain legitimacy? Sorry, not just no, but hell no. If anything, Scientology demonstrates that all these little cults are just crocks of excrement. Old excrement, but excrement nonetheless.
I supposed it depends on the people in question.
that reminds me of the joke about the guy who wanted to kill every single jew and a clown
I would think that a CoS Personality test would fall under the same criteria as a psychic's character reading; except the psychic's read is usually much more accurate.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Maybe there's an L. Ron Hubbard cockroach... that's a fitting tribute.
Actually, it should be clams.
"Wouldn't being "depressed" probably be a legitimate diagnosis of someone who does *anything* and goes and kills themselves two hours later?"
Yes, and she had that diagnosis already. What the CoS told her was far more than "you're depressed". They use so-called "hard-sell" techniques, which they practice extensively. "I look at these stats, and I see death. Only death." Imagine how it feels to hear that if you're depressed, and think the person telling you is a legitimate scientific authority. They are pretty good at presenting that image, you know. In all likelihood, Kaja was told that she was a human wreck, a truly hopeless case, and the only thing that could have a slight chance of saving her was [the scientology intro course they were selling that week].
"If you leave this room after seeing this film and walk out and never mention scientology again you are perfectly free to do so. It would be stupid, but you can do it. You could also dive off a bridge or blow your brains out. That is your choice." If that's what they tell healthy people (and they do, it's the final punchline for a common intro video), what do you think they say to someone who is plainly having real troubles?
xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
Smithers, use the amnesia ray.