The county jail were Keith would have been residing is heavily infiltrated by the Church of Scientology's Criminon program, i.e., there's an extremely good chance that he'd be sharing quarters with a bunch of newly zealous Scientologists.
Coupled with the organization's stated and written policy to destroy and "dispose of quietly and without sorrow" all who criticize them, I hope it's not too hard to see why it's not as simple as you're saying it is.
Being a political prisoner is only valuable if you live long enough to publicize your cause, particularly if it's not a well-known or sensational one.
And I fail to see how seeking asylum in another country is ipso facto a "grave error... legally and morally." We encourage others to come to the US under similar circumstances (i.e., the accused believes they are dealing with a kangaroo court and have been prosecuted for political reasons). Isn't it hypocritical to brand asylum seekers as morally wrong when they happen to be coming from the US?
Let's suppose that, instead of venting his anger against a religious organization, Mr. Henson had made similar statements against some other minority group.... let's say homosexuals or abortion rights activists. I wonder if the reaction here to his supposed "hate crimes" and "threats" would be any different. I strongly suspect that the majority of the posts here regarding Mr. Henson's innocence, or the "harmless threats" he made would be on the other side of the fence...
Bullshit. (Especially on slashdot.)
In context, it was very clearly a joke. Even out of context, it was very clearly not feasible for the threat to be carried out. There are absolutely no grounds for this conviction in a world where the trial is fair. Unfortunately, this one wasn't.
It doesn't have a god damned thing to do with the target of the joke, other than to say that the involvement of the Church of Scientology goes a long way toward explaining why the trial wasn't fair.
Slashdot Mirror
Coupled with the organization's stated and written policy to destroy and "dispose of quietly and without sorrow" all who criticize them, I hope it's not too hard to see why it's not as simple as you're saying it is.
Being a political prisoner is only valuable if you live long enough to publicize your cause, particularly if it's not a well-known or sensational one.
And I fail to see how seeking asylum in another country is ipso facto a "grave error... legally and morally." We encourage others to come to the US under similar circumstances (i.e., the accused believes they are dealing with a kangaroo court and have been prosecuted for political reasons). Isn't it hypocritical to brand asylum seekers as morally wrong when they happen to be coming from the US?
Bullshit. (Especially on slashdot.)
In context, it was very clearly a joke. Even out of context, it was very clearly not feasible for the threat to be carried out. There are absolutely no grounds for this conviction in a world where the trial is fair. Unfortunately, this one wasn't.
It doesn't have a god damned thing to do with the target of the joke, other than to say that the involvement of the Church of Scientology goes a long way toward explaining why the trial wasn't fair.
Google "RPF" or "Rehabilitation Project Force".
Do the Methodists train their members in how to give false testimony as a sacrament?
Google "TR-L"
Do the Lutherans have a scripture stating that the purpose of lawsuits is not to win, but to harrass into submission?
You can read this scripture at http://www.xenu.net/.