Scientology video channel's credibility in question

Muddy waters of fact and fiction meet as mysterious “dignitaries” and out-of-context quoting bring video channel’s legitimacy into question.

The Church of Scientology has refuted claims by an independent French news Web site, the Anonymous Group and the Enturbulation that a video posted to the church's new Video Channel includes bogus or misleading footage of non-existent dignitaries singing the praises of the controversial religion's youth humanitarian efforts.

The video in question – Human Rights, In Support of Human Rights – featured on the Scientology Video Channel includes more than 20 unnamed dignitaries from various political, cultural and educational occupations promoting the Youth for Human Rights campaign; a movement in which the Church of Scientology is only one of over 30 sponsors. Only the speakers distinguished job titles are offered to the viewers as a means for judging the credibility of the speaker's statements.

The satirical French news site Bakchich – a similar publication to Australia's Crikey news site – claimed that a so-called representative from the mayor's office in Marseille did not exist. "The fellow in the video was perfectly unknown to the municipal team," said the article's author after contacting the mayor's office in Marseille.

The Church of Scientology told PC World it was unfathomable that he would not be recognised, as he was at the time of the interview the deputy mayor of the seventh arrondissement of the city of Marseille.

The Bakchich article also brought into question the comments made by a so-called representative from the 'Council of European Communities'.

The Church of Scientology said the speaker is the retired president of the civil servant's trade union of the Council of the European Union, the current name of the Council of European Communities.

Bakchich showed the video to the media service for the council of ministers of the European Union, who replied that the name 'Council of European Communities' did not correspond with any institute of the European Union, and that the video, which does not indicate the names of any of the speakers, did not strike them as convincing.

The director of media for the European Parliament, Jaume Duch, told Bakchich that no one in the video worked or belonged to the European Parliament.

Two Australians are also featured in the video praising the Youth for Human Rights campaign. PC World discovered that one was correctly identified in the video as a member of the Legislative Council, Parliament of NSW.

The other, described in the Scientology video as a Commissioner for Community Relations, Sydney, Australia, could not be identified. The media manager for the NSW government Community Relations Commission said that the person in the video is not a commissioner of the CRC, and no one from the CRC has been authorised to speak on behalf of the CRC on that video.

PC World was told by one of the persons featured in the video – who did not wish to be named – that they were upset that their comments relating to Youth for Human Rights was included in a video promoting Scientology, and that they felt their comments had been taken out of context. They said they had contacted the Church asking for their appearance in the video to be removed.

Enturbulation, a source for information on activism against the Church of Scientology, features a thread posted by users that claims to have identified more speakers in the Scientology video whose identities or job titles are either false, fabricated or embellished.

The Church of Scientology did not respond to questions as to why they did not include the names of such apparently distinguished interviewees in its videos, but said the Church stands by its Video Channel.

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Andrew Hendry

PC World

Comments

Anonymous

1

Computer magazines and religious scholars

I'm a bit surprised to see a computer industry magazine delving into the realm of religion. It seems to me that criticism of the religions of others might be best left to the bigots.

Apparently there are some on the staff of PC World, however, and they feel it's their duty to inform others of their anti-religious stance.

The "Anonymous" group is composed of white supremacists and young men who support child porn. While the opinions of these people might be valued highly at PC World, the religious community as a whole might be a bit concerned about what these people are really doing.

http://www.anonymous-exposed.org

Death threats. Bomb threats. Anthrax scares. Vandalism of churches. The FBI having to evacuate buildings and even an entire street in the downtown area of one city.

PC World finds these guys a credible source of information. When they're not calling in bomb threats or death threats, they're advising PC World now.

Um... great.

If you're curious about what Scientology really is all about, why not go to RELIGIOUS SCHOLARS - professors of religion who have actually studied Scientology?

Or better yet, pick up a Scientology book by Hubbard, and actually read it?

Going to a hate site to get the "truth" about Scientology is like asking Hitler to share the "truth" about Jews. Or asking someone who is busy burning a "witch" to please explain what Wicca is.

It might be interesting, but it's not going to give you true information.

What Scientologists REALLY believe:
http://www.bonafidescientology.org/Creed/index.htm

Anonymous

2

Truth be told...

First and formost, it seems very fitting that you attack an article about the lies of scientology with more lies. In my opinion it only goes to verify exactly what the article stated. To state that Anonymous is made up of any one type of person is ignorance in itself and just goes to show the type of slander that your organization has built itself upon. Secondly to claim that one can gain any truthful knowledge from reading Hubbards writing is suggesting that one learn from the biggest fabricator of lies himself. There is nothing legitimate about scientology. It is a con based on lies. Period.

Anonymous

3

Go to the Source

The relevant thread is:

http://forums.enturbulation.org/showthread.php?t=5387

summary of debunked so far :

spkr 1 ('President' Family Justice Centre)
1. Speaker is NOT the President of the organization.
2. Speaker was addressing the use of The Way To Happiness in the workplace, and not the "Youth for Human Rights Program". She's apparently very upset about this.

spkr 2 (NSW Councilor) . The speaker recorded the clip for use in supporting human rights, not the Church of Scientology. He has objected to the use of the clip in the context it is in and told the YHR to remove it.

Other investigations still ongoing.

Anonymous

4

The reason PC World found this subject worth attention is likely because the battle between Scientology and its critics is being largely fought on line.

As for the claim that "The 'Anonymous' group is composed of white supremacists and young men who support child porn." I can only assume you don't know anon, and have simply decided to contribute every anonymous comment that could be viewed negatively as one made by anonymous. While I appreciate the "anonymous exposed" link, I hardly think the Church of Scientology is an accurate source for information on Scientology critics.

"Death threats. Bomb threats. Anthrax scares. Vandalism of churches. The FBI having to evacuate buildings and even an entire street in the downtown area of one city."

I wonder if you're aware of "Operation Freakout," where the church decided it would be a good idea to steal Paulette Cooper's stationary and mail themselves bombthreats in an attempt to have her imprisoned and her criticisms of the church discredited? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Freakout)

"Or better yet, pick up a Scientology book by Hubbard, and actually read it?"

I'd like to, but the church won't state all their beliefs in a single book, and buying all of them would cost thousands of dollars. That would be like the Catholic Church copyrighting the Bible, telling Christians they have to pay $1,000 for each book, then suing anybody who tries to distribute it for free. Fortunately for the curious, anonymous has leaked all the church's books. Now even Scientologists can find out what the church teaches, up to and including OT VII.

"What Scientologists REALLY believe:
http://www.bonafidescientology.org/Creed/index.htm"

Anonymous doesn't really care what Scientologists believe, which is why anonymous is encouraging Scientologists to practice their faith free with Free Zone (http://www.freezone.org/) and is distributing the written teachings of the church for free.

What DOES concern anonymous it the ACTIONS of the church. For example, using the information gathered during "auditing" to blackmail its practitioners, destroying families with its "disconnect" policy, infiltrating the government to destroy evidence of criminal activity, letting practitioners die of neglect while in the "care" of the church, "fair-gaming" critics, "dead agenting," and forcing believers to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars just to find out what the church actually believes.

http://www.xenu.net/
http://www.exscientologykids.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversies (while the wiki is hardly a source of absolutely reliable info, the articles and sources linked on this page make for some interesting reading.)

Anonymous

5

How not to deal with criticism.

ENEMY: SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.

L Ron Hubbard
HCOPL 23 December, 1965

Anonymous

6

Very Informative Article

This was a very informative article, and I believe that the commenters below have more than adequately refuted the ignorance of the person who believes (or claims to believe) Anonymous is a white supremacist organization. Anyone who does a little research online will rapidly come to understand why so many average people of good conscience are coming forward, masks and all, to try and stop this organization. www.exscientologykids.org is an especially troubling and thought-provoking look into the lives of people who grew up inside the organization.

As for the article itself, I was a little confused by the first paragraph. I believe it would be considerably more accurate to say "Scientology failed to refute," as it couldn't actually back up any of its claims in regards to the shenanigans it pulled with this video.

roger gonnet

7

Professors paid NOT TO STUDY the cult, yes

The scientologist who pretends about bomb threats and so on is a fool. His cult has paid lots of "studies" to scholars, but NONE OF THESE has ever really known scientology from inside. They have been given false pieces, other paid scholars' pieces, attestations based on lies, and very impressive big books. But none of that is really true: That's the surface of the cult.

Only those who have tens of thousands of hours of experience in the cult and have finally left it have realized what it was all about. And the fool scientologist who says we are hatemongers should better read what Hubbard says about every non-scientologist person in his Science of Survival book: it's the very worse and negative description of humanity having been ever written by a deranged criminal mind.

True enough, the only purpose of that book was to sell the devious methods of his cult...

roger gonnet

8

Here are the "titles" also to be found on the scientology hagiog

The video of self-called human rights defender scientology contains a lot of other names.
Here they are. Please, if you can check who these people are, it would be of great interest to demonstrate onec again that the cult lies and lies and lies even about the people supposedly supporting it.
Here is the exact list of the "titles" of these people. I hope some readers will look after their existence.
>http://www.bakchich.info/article3073.html
>
> now the many titles of the people to be seen on the scam cult vid. Please,
> those of the countries should go check everyone of these. The time where
> they appear could be given.
> Those who can download the vid should do so.
>
> ==
>
> Government Board Member, Huddinge District, Sweden
>
> Cabinet Secretary, Federal Parliament, Brussels
>
> Advisor on Human Rights, ministry of Foreign Affairs, Netherlands
>
> Council of European Communities, Brussels
>
> Mayor Office, Marseille
>
> Vice-consul office of the Consulate Dominican Republic
>
> Director Center of sociology studies, College of Mexico
>
> Executive director Mexico-USA bilateral safety corridor coalition
>
> Advisor to secretary of social development, Mexico City
>
> Executive Director, Nepal television ltd
>
> Cabinet secretary national Government, Philippines
>
> Honorary member of legislative Council parliament of New South Wales,
> Australia
>
> Commissioner Community relations Sydney, australia
>
> Senior political advisor to the African Union, United Nations
>
> Nigeria High Commissioner to the UK
>
> Human Rights coordinator Dept of Education Gauteng South Africa
>
> Yganda representative to the European Union
>
> Liberia High Commissioner to the UK
>
> Board Member, United Nations Association of America
>
> Bishop Imani Temple, Washington D.C.
>
> Member House of Representatives, US Congress
>
> Honorary Chairperson, federation of of Indo-American Women Wings,
> California
>
> Commissioner Los Angeles County, California
>
> President Family Justice center, Florida
>
> Dean and Professor of Justice studies, American University
>
> President Emeritus Kiwani International Belgium

Anonymous

9

Terryeo

Heh, I love it. Critics effort to defame, to belittle and to suppress only add to your reputation when you have your act together. It is much as Ron Hubbard said it would be, although he died before the internet was fully developed. Heh, Consider for a moment that learning might be fun and go to http://www.studytechnology.org

Anonymous

10

Quick question for Terryeo

Hey Terryeo, have you seen this FDA ruling before?

http://www.scientology-lies.com/medicine.policy.html

"The device should bear a prominent, clearly visible notice warning that any person using it for auditing or counseling of any kind is forbidden by law to represent that there is any medical or scientific basis for believing or asserting that the device is useful in the diagnosis, treatment, or prevention of any disease. It should be noted in the warning that the device has been condemned by a United States District court for misrepresentation and misbranding under the Food and Drug laws, that use is permitted only as part of religious activity, and that the E-meter is not medically or scientifically capable of improving the health or bodily functions of anyone.

" Each user , purchaser, and distributee of the E-meter shall sign a written statement that he has read such a warning and understands its contents and such statements shall be preserved." (United States of America, Libelant, v. An Article or Device... "Hubbard Electrometer" or "Hubbard E-Meter" etc., Founding Church of Scientology et al., Claimants, No. D.C. 1-63, United States District Court, District of Columbia, July 30, 1971 (333 F. Supp. 357)

I'm sure you have an e-meter handy, could you do me a favor, flip it over, and check there is a suitable warning there, also, do you remember signing such a written statement as described above?

If not, your 'Church' is breaking the law, again.

Anonymous

11

Proof Positive

What is the nature of the cult of Scientology? What are their ethics about free speech, open dialogue, and honesty?

Let's see ... an article appears about claims of misquoted politicians in a video made by a church, presenting the church's claims AND factual research that shows discrepancies. Simple, objective journalism, equal time to both sides, plenty of checked facts.

Magazine staff gets called bigots.

By whom? "Terryeo" - A man working in the Internet surveillance-propaganda division of the church's secret service (yes, they actually have one). This is NOT his opinion, and the facts are irrelevant to him. To call them bigots is his job, and he is playing by the sickest, psychopathic rulebook of a subversive, fascist, criminal organization.

He touts the party line, spewing failed but almost-believable debunking of "myths" against Scientology, nearly begging people to ONLY get information from the "source" ... like a Hubbardian compulsive liar saying "If you want to know if you can trust me, you should only ask ME if I'm telling the truth."

Follow him around the net and watch him. His posts are self evident of all this. You see, according to Scientologist "scripture" there is no such thing as truth (and certainly not logic) - only "acceptable truth" of what people are TOLD to believe.

This disregard for honest scholarship in favor of information control is why he got kicked off Wikipedia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Antaeus_Feldspar/Terryeo) Seriously, no one is that illogical and clever at the same time unless they are insidiously propagandist. But then again, that's what he does for a living. If such a professional troll knew what a conscience was, he wouldn't sleep at night for the next billion years.

Anonymous

12

A few Judicial rulings on the Scientology cult

"Scientology is evil; its techniques are evil; its practice is a serious threat to the community, medically, morally, and socially; and its adherents are sadly deluded and often mentally ill... (Scientology is) the world's largest organization of unqualified persons engaged in the practice of dangerous techniques which masquerade as mental therapy."

--Justice Anderson, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia

"The government is satisfied that Scientology is socially harmful. It alienates members of families from each other and attributes squalid and disgraceful motives to all who oppose it; its authoritarian principles and practice are a potential menace to the personality and well being of those so deluded as to become followers; above all, its methods can be a serious danger to the health of those who submit to them... There is no power under existing law to prohibit the practice of Scientology; but the government has concluded that it is so objectionable that it would be right to take all steps within its power to curb its growth."

--Kenneth Robinson, British Minister of Health

"The crime committed by these defendants is of a breadth and scope previously unheard of. No building, office, desk, or file was safe from their snooping and prying. No individual or organization was free from their despicable conspiratorial minds. The tools of their trade were miniature transmitters, lock picks, secret codes, forged credentials and any other device they found necessary to carry out their conspiratorial schemes."

--Federal prosecutor's memorandum to the judge urging stiff jail sentences for 9 top leaders of Scientology who had pleaded guilty to criminal charges

"Scientology is both immoral and socially obnoxious...It is corrupt sinister and dangerous. It is corrupt because it is based on lies and deceit and has its real objective money and power for Mr. Hubbard... It is sinister because it indulges in infamous practices both to its adherents who do not toe the line unquestionly and to those who criticize it or oppose it. It is dangerous because it is out to capture people and to indoctrinate and brainwash them so they become the unquestioning captives and tools of the cult, withdrawn from ordinary thought, living, and relationships with others."

--Justice Latey, ruling in the High Court of London

"[The court record is] replete with evidence [that Scientology] is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts by pseudo scientific theories... and to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue with their sect.... The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder, L.Ron Hubbard."

--Judge Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court

"In addition to violating and abusing its own members' civil rights, the organization over the years with its 'fair game' doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the church whom it perceives as enemies."

--Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Paul Breckenridge, June 1984, in the Gerry Armstrong case

"In January 1980, fearing a raid by law enforcement agencies, Hubbard's representatives ordered the shredding of all documents showing that Hubbard controlled Scientology organizations, finances, personnel, or the property at Gilman Hot Springs. In a two week period, approximately one million pages were shredded pursuant to this order."

--California appellate court, 2nd. district, 3rd. division, July 29, 1991, B025920 & B038975, Super. Ct. No. C 42015

"When a person is subjected to coercive persuasion [as in Scientology] without his knowledge or consent ...[he may] develop serious and sometimes irreversible physical and psychiatric disorders, up to and including schizophrenia, self-mutilation, and suicide."

--California Supreme Court, United States v. Lee [455 U.S. 252,257,258 (1982)]

"Substantial evidence supports the conclusion Scientology leaders made the deliberate decision to ruin Wollersheim economically and possible psychologically....We do not mean to suggest Scientology's retributive program... represented a full scale modern day 'inquisition.' Nevertheless there are some parallels in purpose and effect. 'Fair game,' like the 'inquisition,' targeted heretics. "Other testimony established Scientology is a hierarchal organization which exhibits near paranoid attitudes toward certain institutions and individuals -- in particular the government, mental health professions, disaffected members, and others who criticize the organization or its leadership... During trial, Wollersheim's experts testified Scientology's 'auditing' and 'disconnect' practices constituted 'brainwashing' and 'thought reform' akin to what the Chinese and North Koreans practiced on American prisoners of war... "Using its position as religious leader, the church and its agents coerced Wollersheim into continuing auditing even though his sanity was repeatedly threatened by this practice... Thus there is adequate proof the religious practice in this instance caused real harm to the individual and the appellant's outrageous conduct caused that harm... Church practices conducted in a coercive environment are not qualified to be voluntary religious practices entitled to first amendment religious freedom guarantees... "We hold that the state has a compelling interest in allowing its citizens to recover for serious emotional injuries they suffer through religious practices they are coerced into accepting. Such conduct is too outrageous to be protected under the constitution and too unworthy to be privileged under the law of torts."

-California appellate court, 2nd district, 7th division, Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California, Civ. No. B023193 Cal. Super. (1986)

PlainGuy

13

Both Sides Need to Provide Documents

This is a totally valid forum for this question, just as it would be if any other prominent site were so accused.

I wouldn't characterize Hendry as a bigot without examining the body of his work on this topic - and who has the time or inclination? This article seems balanced, but it is also a work half-finished.

The church (my church, too) seems to have answered all questions directed to it. Hendry seems to have presented the church's refutations objectively. We assume, but don't know as a certainty, that Hendry published *all* proofs/verifications he received. (Not an accusation; just a point of logic.)

But if any individual Scientologist(s) got carried away and put something into a video that isn't true, they can expect the same discipline that any reputable organisation would give them.

*Long*-published church policy on public releases and commentary is - and it's written in capital letters for emphasis:

"NEVER SAY OR PUBLISH ANYTHING YOU CANNOT PROVE OR DOCUMENT."

Not a lot of wriggle-room in that!

So, another point of logic, before you can fairly accuse "The Church," best keep on investigating to get all the answers and not peremptorily accuse nor publish. For example, the headline is unfairly framed.

If I see a common fault in reporters' - and, of course, critics' - coverage of the church, it's an unfailing rush to judgment and knee-jerk agreement with any critics' accusations. And we all know if Mr. Hendry had taken the time to get all the church's responses to all the questions, and had seen all the docs, he'd never have published an article headed, "Scientology Quashes Carping Critics."

Final point: Those judicial citations one true bigot publishes below are from long past - 15 to 30 years old - before the church cleaned out some over-zealous types. And/or they're from countries where - *at that time* - there was an anti-Scientology witch hunt going on. Look at the dates, unless they've been purposely snipped out.

Check out those countries today and you'll find no untoward situations in re Scientology. Now, you have to go to still-backward countries like Germany to find such persecution. Germany has had Scientology under surveillance for a couple of decades and has found nothing more incriminating than an ice-cream social.

PlainGuy

14

Both Sides Need to Provide Documents

This is a totally valid forum for this question, just as it would be if any other prominent site were so accused.

I wouldn't characterize Hendry as a bigot without examining the body of his work on this topic, and who has the time? This article seems balanced, but it is also a work half-finished.

The church (my church, too) seems to have answered all questions directed to it. Hendry seems to have presented the church's refutations objectively. We assume, but don't know as a certainty, that Hendry published all proofs/verifications he received. (Not an accusation; just a point of logic.)

But if any individual Scientologist(s) got carried away and put something into a video that isn't true, they can expect the same discipline that any reputable organisation would give them.

The *long*-published church policy on public releases and commentary is - and it's framed in capital letters for added emphasis: "DON'T SAY OR PUBLISH ANYTHING YOU CAN'T PROVE OR DOCUMENT."

Not a lot of wriggle-room in that.

So, another point of logic, before you can fairly accuse "The Church," best keep on investigating to get all the answers and not peremptorily accuse nor publish.

If I see a common fault in reporters' - and of course, critics' - coverage of the church, it's an unfailing rush to judgment and knee-jerk agreement with any other critics' accusations.

Final point: Those judicial citations below are from long past, before the church cleaned out some over-zealous types. And/or they're from countries where - *at that time* - there was an anti-Scientology witch hunt going on. Look at the dates, unless they've been purposely snipped out.

Check out those countries today and you'll find no untoward situations in re Scientology. Now, you have to go to still-backward countries like Germany to find such persecution. Germany has had Scientology under surveillance for a couple of decades and has found nothing more incriminating than an ice-cream social.

PlainGuy

15

Both Sides Need to Provide Documents

This is a totally valid forum for this question, just as it would be if any other prominent site were so accused.

I wouldn't characterize Hendry as a bigot without examining the body of his work on this topic, and who has the time? This article seems balanced, but it is also a work half-finished.

The church (my church, too) seems to have answered all questions directed to it. Hendry seems to have presented the church's refutations objectively. We assume, but don't know as a certainty, that Hendry published all proofs/verifications he received. (Not an accusation; just a point of logic.)

But if any individual Scientologist(s) got carried away and put something into a video that isn't true, they can expect the same discipline that any reputable organisation would give them.

The *long*-published church policy on public releases and commentary is - and it's framed in capital letters for added emphasis: "DON'T SAY OR PUBLISH ANYTHING YOU CAN'T PROVE OR DOCUMENT."

Not a lot of wriggle-room in that.

So, another point of logic, before you can fairly accuse "The Church," best keep on investigating to get all the answers and not peremptorily accuse nor publish.

If I see a common fault in reporters' - and of course, critics' - coverage of the church, it's an unfailing rush to judgment and knee-jerk agreement with any other critics' accusations.

Final point: Those judicial citations below are from long past, before the church cleaned out some over-zealous types. And/or they're from countries where - *at that time* - there was an anti-Scientology witch hunt going on. Look at the dates, unless they've been purposely snipped out.

Check out those countries today and you'll find no untoward situations in re Scientology. Now, you have to go to still-backward countries like Germany to find such persecution. Germany has had Scientology under surveillance for a couple of decades and has found nothing more incriminating than an ice-cream social.

PlainGuy

16

Both Sides Need to Provide Documents

This is a totally valid forum for this question, just as it would be if any other prominent site were so accused.

I wouldn't characterize Hendry as a bigot without examining the body of his work on this topic - and who has the time or inclination? This article seems balanced, but it is also a work half-finished.

The church (my church, too) seems to have answered most questions critics directed to it, but who has the time or inclination an answer all the accusations a neurotic ex can throw at you? And Hendry seems to have presented the church's refutations objectively. We assume, but don't know as a certainty, that Hendry published *all* proofs/verifications he received. (Not an accusation; just a point of logic.)

But if any individual Scientologist(s) got carried away and put something into a video that isn't true, they can expect the same discipline that any reputable organisation would give them.

*Long*-published church policy on public releases and commentary is - and it's written in capital letters for emphasis:

"NEVER SAY OR PUBLISH ANYTHING YOU CANNOT PROVE OR DOCUMENT."

Not a lot of wriggle-room in that!

So, another point of logic, before you can fairly accuse "The Church," best keep on investigating to get all the answers and not peremptorily accuse nor publish. For example, the headline is unfairly framed.

If I see a common fault in reporters' - and, of course, critics' - coverage of the church, it's an unfailing rush to judgment and knee-jerk agreement with any critics' accusations. And we all know if Mr. Hendry had taken the time to get all the church's responses to all the questions, and had seen all the docs, he'd never have published an article headed, "Scientology Quashes Carping Critics."

Final point: Those judicial citations one true bigot publishes below are from long past - 15 to 30 years old - before the church cleaned out some over-zealous types. And/or they're from countries where - *at that time* - there was an anti-Scientology witch hunt going on. Look at the dates, unless they've been purposely snipped out.

Check out those countries today and you'll find no untoward situations in re Scientology. Now, you have to go to still-backward countries like Germany to find such persecution. Germany has had Scientology under surveillance for a couple of decades and has found nothing more incriminating than an ice-cream social.

Anonymous

17

Unanonymous

Anonymous is made up of college kids looking to party, bigots that have been tossed from the Church of Scientology for unethical behavior, a few individuals who truly think they are doing the right thing, and chans with child porn and such links on their websites. I've seen them in a protest march and talked with them and the great majority NO NOTHING about Scientology except what is regurgitated by the one anon guy on this blog. Stories 30 years old or misinformation. But they are good at propaganda. Sooner or later the lies will end and they are already losing credibility with the general public. I've talked to many people and they do not like the tactics of this hidden cadre.

Anonymous

18

This is a good article

Hey PlainGuy : one post is enough. You don't need to repeat the same thing 4 times in a row.

The reason PC World found this subject worth attention is likely because the battle between Scientology and its critics is being largely fought on line.

As for the claim that "The 'Anonymous' group is composed of white supremacists and young men who support child porn." I can only assume you don't know anon, and have simply decided to contribute every anonymous comment that could be viewed negatively as one made by anonymous. While I appreciate the "anonymous exposed" link, I hardly think the Church of Scientology is an accurate source for information on Scientology critics.

"Death threats. Bomb threats. Anthrax scares. Vandalism of churches. The FBI having to evacuate buildings and even an entire street in the downtown area of one city."

I wonder if you're aware of "Operation Freakout," where the church decided it would be a good idea to steal Paulette Cooper's stationary and mail themselves bombthreats in an attempt to have her imprisoned and her criticisms of the church discredited? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Freakout)

"Or better yet, pick up a Scientology book by Hubbard, and actually read it?"

I'd like to, but the church won't state all their beliefs in a single book, and buying all of them would cost thousands of dollars. That would be like the Catholic Church copyrighting the Bible, telling Christians they have to pay $1,000 for each book, then suing anybody who tries to distribute it for free. Fortunately for the curious, anonymous has leaked all the church's books. Now even Scientologists can find out what the church teaches, up to and including OT VII.

"What Scientologists REALLY believe:
http://www.bonafidescientology.org/Creed/index.htm"

Anonymous doesn't really care what Scientologists believe, which is why anonymous is encouraging Scientologists to practice their faith free with Free Zone (http://www.freezone.org/) and is distributing the written teachings of the church for free.

What DOES concern anonymous it the ACTIONS of the church. For example, using the information gathered during "auditing" to blackmail its practitioners, destroying families with its "disconnect" policy, infiltrating the government to destroy evidence of criminal activity, letting practitioners die of neglect while in the "care" of the church, "fair-gaming" critics, "dead agenting," and forcing believers to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars just to find out what the church actually believes.

http://www.xenu.net/
http://www.exscientologykids.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversies (while the wiki is hardly a source of absolutely reliable info, the articles and sources linked on this page make for some interesting reading.)

Anonymous

19

What do Judges have to say about Scienotlogy?

Unanonymous: please, one post at a time, especially if you're just going to past the same thing over and over.

"Scientology is evil; its techniques are evil; its practice is a serious threat to the community, medically, morally, and socially; and its adherents are sadly deluded and often mentally ill... (Scientology is) the world's largest organization of unqualified persons engaged in the practice of dangerous techniques which masquerade as mental therapy."

--Justice Anderson, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia

"The government is satisfied that Scientology is socially harmful. It alienates members of families from each other and attributes squalid and disgraceful motives to all who oppose it; its authoritarian principles and practice are a potential menace to the personality and well being of those so deluded as to become followers; above all, its methods can be a serious danger to the health of those who submit to them... There is no power under existing law to prohibit the practice of Scientology; but the government has concluded that it is so objectionable that it would be right to take all steps within its power to curb its growth."

--Kenneth Robinson, British Minister of Health

"The crime committed by these defendants is of a breadth and scope previously unheard of. No building, office, desk, or file was safe from their snooping and prying. No individual or organization was free from their despicable conspiratorial minds. The tools of their trade were miniature transmitters, lock picks, secret codes, forged credentials and any other device they found necessary to carry out their conspiratorial schemes."

--Federal prosecutor's memorandum to the judge urging stiff jail sentences for 9 top leaders of Scientology who had pleaded guilty to criminal charges

"Scientology is both immoral and socially obnoxious...It is corrupt sinister and dangerous. It is corrupt because it is based on lies and deceit and has its real objective money and power for Mr. Hubbard... It is sinister because it indulges in infamous practices both to its adherents who do not toe the line unquestionly and to those who criticize it or oppose it. It is dangerous because it is out to capture people and to indoctrinate and brainwash them so they become the unquestioning captives and tools of the cult, withdrawn from ordinary thought, living, and relationships with others."

--Justice Latey, ruling in the High Court of London

"[The court record is] replete with evidence [that Scientology] is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts by pseudo scientific theories... and to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue with their sect.... The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder, L.Ron Hubbard."

--Judge Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court

"In addition to violating and abusing its own members' civil rights, the organization over the years with its 'fair game' doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the church whom it perceives as enemies."

--Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Paul Breckenridge, June 1984, in the Gerry Armstrong case

"In January 1980, fearing a raid by law enforcement agencies, Hubbard's representatives ordered the shredding of all documents showing that Hubbard controlled Scientology organizations, finances, personnel, or the property at Gilman Hot Springs. In a two week period, approximately one million pages were shredded pursuant to this order."

--California appellate court, 2nd. district, 3rd. division, July 29, 1991, B025920 & B038975, Super. Ct. No. C 42015

"When a person is subjected to coercive persuasion [as in Scientology] without his knowledge or consent ...[he may] develop serious and sometimes irreversible physical and psychiatric disorders, up to and including schizophrenia, self-mutilation, and suicide."

--California Supreme Court, United States v. Lee [455 U.S. 252,257,258 (1982)]

"Substantial evidence supports the conclusion Scientology leaders made the deliberate decision to ruin Wollersheim economically and possible psychologically....We do not mean to suggest Scientology's retributive program... represented a full scale modern day 'inquisition.' Nevertheless there are some parallels in purpose and effect. 'Fair game,' like the 'inquisition,' targeted heretics. "Other testimony established Scientology is a hierarchal organization which exhibits near paranoid attitudes toward certain institutions and individuals -- in particular the government, mental health professions, disaffected members, and others who criticize the organization or its leadership... During trial, Wollersheim's experts testified Scientology's 'auditing' and 'disconnect' practices constituted 'brainwashing' and 'thought reform' akin to what the Chinese and North Koreans practiced on American prisoners of war... "Using its position as religious leader, the church and its agents coerced Wollersheim into continuing auditing even though his sanity was repeatedly threatened by this practice... Thus there is adequate proof the religious practice in this instance caused real harm to the individual and the appellant's outrageous conduct caused that harm... Church practices conducted in a coercive environment are not qualified to be voluntary religious practices entitled to first amendment religious freedom guarantees... "We hold that the state has a compelling interest in allowing its citizens to recover for serious emotional injuries they suffer through religious practices they are coerced into accepting. Such conduct is too outrageous to be protected under the constitution and too unworthy to be privileged under the law of torts."

-California appellate court, 2nd district, 7th division, Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California, Civ. No. B023193 Cal. Super. (1986)

Anonymous

20

What do Judges have to say about Scienotlogy?

Unanonymous: please, one post at a time, especially if you're just going to past the same thing over and over.

"Scientology is evil; its techniques are evil; its practice is a serious threat to the community, medically, morally, and socially; and its adherents are sadly deluded and often mentally ill... (Scientology is) the world's largest organization of unqualified persons engaged in the practice of dangerous techniques which masquerade as mental therapy."

--Justice Anderson, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia

"The government is satisfied that Scientology is socially harmful. It alienates members of families from each other and attributes squalid and disgraceful motives to all who oppose it; its authoritarian principles and practice are a potential menace to the personality and well being of those so deluded as to become followers; above all, its methods can be a serious danger to the health of those who submit to them... There is no power under existing law to prohibit the practice of Scientology; but the government has concluded that it is so objectionable that it would be right to take all steps within its power to curb its growth."

--Kenneth Robinson, British Minister of Health

"The crime committed by these defendants is of a breadth and scope previously unheard of. No building, office, desk, or file was safe from their snooping and prying. No individual or organization was free from their despicable conspiratorial minds. The tools of their trade were miniature transmitters, lock picks, secret codes, forged credentials and any other device they found necessary to carry out their conspiratorial schemes."

--Federal prosecutor's memorandum to the judge urging stiff jail sentences for 9 top leaders of Scientology who had pleaded guilty to criminal charges

"Scientology is both immoral and socially obnoxious...It is corrupt sinister and dangerous. It is corrupt because it is based on lies and deceit and has its real objective money and power for Mr. Hubbard... It is sinister because it indulges in infamous practices both to its adherents who do not toe the line unquestionly and to those who criticize it or oppose it. It is dangerous because it is out to capture people and to indoctrinate and brainwash them so they become the unquestioning captives and tools of the cult, withdrawn from ordinary thought, living, and relationships with others."

--Justice Latey, ruling in the High Court of London

"[The court record is] replete with evidence [that Scientology] is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts by pseudo scientific theories... and to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue with their sect.... The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder, L.Ron Hubbard."

--Judge Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court

"In addition to violating and abusing its own members' civil rights, the organization over the years with its 'fair game' doctrine has harassed and abused those persons not in the church whom it perceives as enemies."

--Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Paul Breckenridge, June 1984, in the Gerry Armstrong case

"In January 1980, fearing a raid by law enforcement agencies, Hubbard's representatives ordered the shredding of all documents showing that Hubbard controlled Scientology organizations, finances, personnel, or the property at Gilman Hot Springs. In a two week period, approximately one million pages were shredded pursuant to this order."

--California appellate court, 2nd. district, 3rd. division, July 29, 1991, B025920 & B038975, Super. Ct. No. C 42015

"When a person is subjected to coercive persuasion [as in Scientology] without his knowledge or consent ...[he may] develop serious and sometimes irreversible physical and psychiatric disorders, up to and including schizophrenia, self-mutilation, and suicide."

--California Supreme Court, United States v. Lee [455 U.S. 252,257,258 (1982)]

"Substantial evidence supports the conclusion Scientology leaders made the deliberate decision to ruin Wollersheim economically and possible psychologically....We do not mean to suggest Scientology's retributive program... represented a full scale modern day 'inquisition.' Nevertheless there are some parallels in purpose and effect. 'Fair game,' like the 'inquisition,' targeted heretics. "Other testimony established Scientology is a hierarchal organization which exhibits near paranoid attitudes toward certain institutions and individuals -- in particular the government, mental health professions, disaffected members, and others who criticize the organization or its leadership... During trial, Wollersheim's experts testified Scientology's 'auditing' and 'disconnect' practices constituted 'brainwashing' and 'thought reform' akin to what the Chinese and North Koreans practiced on American prisoners of war... "Using its position as religious leader, the church and its agents coerced Wollersheim into continuing auditing even though his sanity was repeatedly threatened by this practice... Thus there is adequate proof the religious practice in this instance caused real harm to the individual and the appellant's outrageous conduct caused that harm... Church practices conducted in a coercive environment are not qualified to be voluntary religious practices entitled to first amendment religious freedom guarantees... "We hold that the state has a compelling interest in allowing its citizens to recover for serious emotional injuries they suffer through religious practices they are coerced into accepting. Such conduct is too outrageous to be protected under the constitution and too unworthy to be privileged under the law of torts."

-California appellate court, 2nd district, 7th division, Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California, Civ. No. B023193 Cal. Super. (1986)

Anonymous

21

Selling Snake Oil

Plainguy wrote: "NEVER SAY OR PUBLISH ANYTHING YOU CANNOT PROVE OR DOCUMENT."

Sounds fair. Do you think that anyone could back up these allegations??

"Dianetics is a science; as such, it has no opinion about religion, for sciences are based on natural laws, not on opinions." - L. Ron Hubbard, "Dianetic Auditor's Bulletin", October 1950

"Arthritis vanishes, myopia gets better, heart illness decreases, asthma disappears, stomachs function properly and the whole catalogue of illnesses goes away and stays away." L. Ron Hubbard, DIANETICS: THE MODERN SCIENCE OF MENTAL HEALTH, 1987 Ed., p. 72

"Scientology is the only specific (cure) for radiation (atomic bomb) burns." - L. Ron Hubbard, ALL ABOUT RADIATION, p. 109

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

http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/quotes-by-and-about-hubbard.htm

PlainGuy

22

Critics use ancient data from religiously oppressive governments

I, as a long-time Scientologist, would be the first to scream off a scathing report to the Church's Watchdog Committee if it became clear that ANY exec were doing something illegal. No one's personality is worth endangering the Church. Tough rocks for anyone I catch.

But frankly, no one cares if you guys dislike being sued and reported for criminal acts. Bravo! Quit whining. Straighten out your illegal ethics and you won't have to hide so deep. K.I.S.S.

And don't trot out that Fair Game yawner. It was repealed decades ago AND YOU KNOW IT. One hopes that you can conclude that, if you must lie, you aren't on the side of right.

Anonymous

23

Fair Game still alive.

PlainGuy: I've seen the order to cancel Fair Game. It reads, "The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. <strong>It causes bad public relations. This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP.</strong>" Fair Game may be gone, but only technically, and only so you can make that empty claim that Fair Game has been cancelled. Ask Gareth Cales or Sean Carasov if the illegal harassment still continues today. Ask Sean in particular about his cat that he found poisoned the day of last month's protest.

Anonymous

24

Documents, New Data, Same Old Cult

Quite often in these little online chats one will read the defenders of Scientology say, repeatedly and with great predictability, that...

1. "Anonymous" is mostly composed of young people, hackers, child porn lovers and religious bigots.
2. The claims of foul play committed by the Church of Scientology are "old news".
And
3.Attacking critics through the courts and with physical intimidation is something "we don't do any more."

I would first ask why it had ever BEEN necessary for a Church to harass and intimidate critics, but we'll leave that aside for now.

In the first place this characterization of what Anonymous is composed of is not accurate, but - to be honest - it is a great advantage to Anonymous that the Church has this consideration. If it is the party line it belies the presence of law enforcement professionals, writers, artists, and concerned parents in the "ranks". If it is actually what Scientology believes, the underestimation can only be an advantage, so we can shrug at that one.

The idea that the infiltration of government offices, theft of government documents, felony charges successfully prosecuted on high ranking Church officials, bribery and unlawful imprisonment are "old news" brings us back to the question of "why was this necessary activity for a Church in the first place?" But, moreso, it is not true that this activity no longer occurs. One poster has asked for documents, and I would humbly present this rather lengthy collection of Scientology's activities TO THE PRESENT DAY...
http://forums.enturbulation.org/73-cold-hard-facts/fact-sheet-documented-history-scientology-7937/

But, finally, if the intimidation of critics "isn't done anymore" why has the law firm of Latham and Watkins sent hand-delivered letters to the parents of young people whom the Church's payrolled private investigators have identified from MySpace accounts and other means (which have no legal force and that have been turned over to both the local Bar Associations as well as the ACLU); why are protesters followed; why are private investigators parked in front of identified people's houses; and why have the two cases Scientology so far pursued in an effort to silence current critics been thrown out by the courts as having no basis whatsoever?

I would humbly request all neutral readers to take a look at the date we've collected and judge for themselves.

And, if the argument is used that I have no idea what Scientology is about in my direction, please understand that I am an ex-Scientologist the Church is still trying to win back by mail and phone.

Eyes wide open.

vcao.net

25

A few Judicial rulings on the Scientology cult

Also why do Scientologists think they're better than everyone else? What about the incident at one of the protests where some were hit by a bus? When the Church they were protesting was called, the person on the phone laughed about the incident! http://www.vcao.net They didn't show any sympathy towards those people until the person calling stated that he was one of the people hit by the bus, and only then did they say that they tried to send people to the hospitals to see how they were but "couldn't find them".

Parmigiani Fleurier

26


Thanks for the sane judgment. Me and my brother were preparing to do some research about that. We got a good book on that matter from our local library and most books are not as informatory as your blog. I am very glad to discover such information that I was searching for a long time. :)

Comments are now closed.

Latest News Articles

Most Popular Articles

Follow Us

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Resources

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Compare & Save

Deals powered by WhistleOut
WhistleOut

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?