Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Government The Courts News Your Rights Online

Surprise Arrest For Online Scientology Critic 954

Posted by kdawson
from the don't-make-fun-of-the-FSM dept.
destinyland writes "An online critic of Scientology was confronted at a routine hearing Tuesday with surprise arrest warrants and thrown into jail. Six years as a fugitive ended in February. (After picketing a Scientology complex in 2000 over the unexplained death of a woman there, he'd been arrested for 'threatening a religion' over a Usenet joke about 'Tom Cruise Missiles.') But 64-year-old Keith Henson had been out on bail, and was even scheduled to address the European Space Agency conference on Space Elevators. He's a co-founder of the Space Colony movement, and one of the original researchers at Texas Instruments. In this interview he discusses both space-based solar energy and his war with the Scientologists — just a few days before he was arrested."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Surprise Arrest For Online Scientology Critic

Comments Filter:
  • by 42Penguins (861511) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:40AM (#19067359)
    when you mess with dark lord Xenu!
    Hail xenu!
    • by ubuwalker31 (1009137) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:28AM (#19068207)
      Look, I am sorry, but if you are charged with a crime, you show up in court, and plead your case. Any judge with half his brain tied behind his back would have recognized this guys actions as free speech, and tossed his arrest. Then, he would have had a great civil rights suit against the police officers and the city for violation of his rights. But no...what this guy does is he flees the USA, because he thinks the scientologists are out to get him: "I couldn't be employed while I was trying to hide out from them. They have agents inside the IRS, so when you use your social security number, they just pull it and come and get you." I mean, come on, this guy is a complete nut job...give me a break. IHMO, he should be punished for not subjecting himself to the lawful authority of the court...but not punished for telling it like it is about the cult of Xenu.
      • by taniwha (70410) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:41AM (#19068467) Homepage Journal
        and the judge didn't allow him to introduce the bulk of his evidence ... he fled and claimed political asylum in Canada before sentencing ....I suspect you're wrong about the amount of the judge's brain tied behind his back. Keith may be a bid odd, but he's not crazy - he realized he'd been railroaded by political pressure on the local DA - it's a small town in the desert dominated by a Scientology compound - the locals hate them and if Keith had been allowed to put the fact that it was Scientology he was picketing (rather than making it sound like a real church) the jury would have acquitted him
        • if Keith had been allowed to put the fact that it was Scientology he was picketing (rather than making it sound like a real church) the jury would have acquitted him

          This implies that its acceptable to picket Scientogoly(a fake church) while it is wrong to picket a "real" church, ie real as in christian? Just what kind of bigoted ridiculousness is this, no matter what church it is, it is acceptable(ie constitutionaly protected) to picket and protest its presence.

          • by Buran (150348) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @12:29PM (#19070541)
            I don't get it either. We are Constitutionally guaranteed the right to peaceably assemble, and the right to protest has long been protected. No individual or organization has the right to not be offended. Shouldn't his action have been protected under the First Amendment? I would personally have looked into having my accuser prosecuted for violation of my civil rights.
          • by jsebrech (525647) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @01:36PM (#19071903)
            This implies that its acceptable to picket Scientogoly(a fake church) while it is wrong to picket a "real" church, ie real as in christian? Just what kind of bigoted ridiculousness is this, no matter what church it is, it is acceptable(ie constitutionaly protected) to picket and protest its presence.

            Just because you call something a religion doesn't mean it is. Scientology is a money-making scam, nothing more. That is not to say that there aren't any believers, but every scam has its believers.

            But, yes, fake religions, real religions, real presidents, it doesn't matter, you should be allowed to protest it unless you are being a danger to the public safety (which this guy wasn't). For a nation that protects freedom of faith to such a degree the US is pretty poor at protecting freedom of protesting/speech.
            • by radish (98371) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @02:15PM (#19072533) Homepage
              Just because you call something a religion doesn't mean it is

              OK, so what does make something a religon? What's the definition? I'm not disagreeing with you that Scientology is at best rather absurd, but I don't see any clear way of distinguishing it from other more conventional religions other than by number of belivers or age - neither of which seem fair ways to judge legitimacy to me.
              • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 10, 2007 @06:51PM (#19076819)

                Let's just be clear about one thing: Scientology (the "applied religious philosophy") is indeed a 100% valid religion. The question is whether or not the Church of Scientology (the transnational corporation) is a religious organisation or not.

                The main thing that distinguishes CoS from just about every other religious organisation that I can think of is that you have to pay them money to find out what they actually believe.

                The overwhelming majority of mainstream religions will be happy to tell you. You ask a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindu or a Buddhist what they believe, and (assuming they're not busy right at that moment) they'll be happy to fill you in or tell you who can. Or you can go to any bookstore and buy books describing their beliefs and practises in some detail.

                There also still exist, in the world, "mystery religions". Mystery religions have an arcanum, some body of secret wisdom that is only revealed to initiates. I'm a bit dubious about these, personally, but still, the main differentiating factor between traditional mystery religions and the CoS is that in the CoS, the revealing of the arcanum is directly tied to the handing over of money.

                The other thing that distinguishes the CoS is its aggressive behaviour in attacking critics and splinter groups. It clearly doesn't act as if it believes in freedom of religion. Therefore it's not a religious organisation.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:59AM (#19068821)
        Except that they DO have 'agents' in the IRS.

        Members of the Cult Of Scientology have been prosecuted for badly using their position in the IRS in USA, Canada and France.
        They are also known to "infiltrate" (get hired into) prosecutors offices. Again cases exists in the USA and France (a big scandal there in the 90's).
        Since you cannot discriminate future employees based on "personal believes" it is easy for them as long as they are competent in their domain.

        When a prosecutor and a sheriff showing up with a search warrant are all members of the cult. When the warrant is signed by a judge member of the cult. When the warrant specifies "documents" but the sheriff leaves with computers including screens, printers and even phones.
        When you lived thru these you tend to get paranoid.
        Yes you have recourses, but it takes months or years. The COS has billions of $$$. Even the Washinton Post backed off following a law-suit threat.
      • by Kierthos (225954) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @11:20AM (#19069209) Homepage
        I take it you have never read about Operation Snow White [wikipedia.org]?

        Basically, the Church of Scientology has a history of behavior that is questionable, but when you infiltrate government agencies like the IRS, well.... is it still a religion at that point? Or is it a cult? Or, hey, perhaps more like organized crime?
        • by Red Flayer (890720) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @12:27PM (#19070487) Journal

          is it still a religion at that point? Or is it a cult? Or, hey, perhaps more like organized crime?
          Or perhaps all three? The Catholic Church, during certain periods of history, could easily have fallen under the modern definition of organized crime. The same is true for many religions, such as certain sects of Mormonism.

          The question is where (and how!) do you separate an organized crime syndicate from a religion? Is the crime syndicate equivalent to religious organization, or is it comprised of individuals within, but separate from, the organization?

          The only way to answer that is to have knowledge of the organization, which is why I suspect Scientology clamps down so hard on public availability of their written materials.
      • by russotto (537200) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @11:48AM (#19069763) Journal
        RTFA. He was arrested and _convicted_ for "interfering with a church", a law which likely violates the Establishment clause on its face and freedom of speech as applied. THEN he ran, seeing that there ain't no justice and believing his life would be in danger in prison.
      • by Synchis (191050) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @01:08PM (#19071379) Homepage Journal
        I'll supress the largest bulk of the rage that I feel about your comments, and give you the facts, as you obviously have not researched this.

        When Keith fled the US to apply as a political refugee in Canada, I worked with him. I spent a good 3 years with the man or more and got to know him as a good friend.

        Keith *did* try to defend himself in the original trials. And in fact, there were more than just the original charges of "Interfering with a religion". The cult made motions in limine to exclude much of Keiths evidence and testimony based on copyrights and religios "secrets" that they didn't want put in the public eye. The court allowed this, and there went Keiths case. The assertions that he was a "terrorist" and threatening to bomb them were thrown out as ridiculous, even an idiot could see that the comments made were made in jest. *BUT* they did make the charges of "Interfering with a religion" stick, based on some far-fetched theory that his organised picketing was interfering with their right to practice their religion. *Thats* what he's supposed to go to jail for.

        The reason Keith fled the country, or at least the biggest reason was because he feared that if he went into prison for this so called crime, he would never come out alive. And after my involvement in an incident here in Canada, I would believe it. Even when Keith came to Canada, the $cilos never left him alone. They dropped false tips to law enforcement agencies here in Canada that resulted in a high-profile swat style take down of Keith in a local shopping center. It not only put Keith at risk (who was unarmed and very much not a dangerous man) but all civilians that were in the shopping center at the time. The take down was executed based an tips that Keith was a terrorist that was "Armed and Extremely Dangerous".

        Keith is a kind and generous man who wanted nothing more than to see justice served on this horrible cult.
  • How the hell... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:41AM (#19067377)
    ...can you be arrested for 'threatening a religion' ?!

    Threatening a person, yeah, but a religion? If I express a wish that Christianity or Islam die out can I be arrested? What happened to America's much touted freedom of speech?
    • Re:How the hell... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Rob T Firefly (844560) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:44AM (#19067431) Homepage Journal
      Especially when most of the mainstream religions seem to have explicit "all the other religions are crap" clauses somewhere in their bylaws.
      • I wonder if the IRS requires strict book-keeping from faith-based non-profits. I sure hope they do.
        • Not a problem (Score:4, Informative)

          by Concern (819622) * on Thursday May 10, 2007 @01:33PM (#19071837) Journal
          It doesn't really matter - it turns out that if you don't like what the IRS decides, you can get your way. All you have to do is mount a campaign of terror against the IRS until they give in.

          They just kept at it, year after year. 26 years, actually. They identified and targeted individual civil servants. They sued and blackmailed and swarmed them with PIs. They harassed their friends, families and associates. They spent uncounted millions. They ruined countless lives. Eventually, in '93, it worked. Read more here. [cmu.edu]

          I'm no fan of tax free religion period, but nothing should make you sicker about it than watching these wackadoos sponging off of hard working Americans.
    • Re:How the hell... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Applekid (993327) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:45AM (#19067439)
      It's a California law.

      Seems to me, though, that it's one of those laws that aren't really enforced except when local authorities are pressured. The linked interview also suggests there's some collusion between the local government and Scientology... claims of a falsified "Failure to Appear" warrant dated from 2000, illegally storing documents not entered in the dockets.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by AccUser (191555)
        Richard Dawkins is fscked if he ever goes to California then.
      • Re:How the hell... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Jarjarthejedi (996957) <christianpinch@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:00AM (#19067737) Journal
        As a religious person, it's a REALLY dumb law...

        I mean seriously, we're getting to the point now where even doing something that could possibly be maybe related to a threat against a person/place/idea is a criminal offense. If you can be thrown in jail for picketing a group, especially if you have a good reason, then you have lost way too much freedom. I mean, if someone came and picketed my church I'd probably be more curious to hear their side of the story than wanting them thrown in jail.

        Ugh...whatever happened to the place where you could jokingly punch your friend in the shoulder in school and say "I'm gonna kill you for that" then go off and demonstrate peacefully about something you care about and the police wouldn't care a bit?
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward
          "I'm gonna kill you for that"

          I feel threatened by you and I'm calling the police. The governement needs to do more to keep me safe. Maybe if it knew everybody's photograph, fingerprints and RFID chip, I would feel safer. Except for me of course, since I wouldn't hurt anybody.
      • Re:How the hell... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Mordaximus (566304) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:04AM (#19067813)
        Strange that a state law can trump a Constitutional right, no?
    • Re:How the hell... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Wakko Warner (324) * on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:55AM (#19067651) Homepage Journal
      Doesn't the thing you're threatening have to be an actual religion, not just some made-up bullshit about space aliens who fly around in 747s, too?
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Hatta (162192)
        And the whole thing about zombie jesus and his invisible sky daddy isn't just some made-up bullshit? Seriously, what's the difference?
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Rycross (836649)
          Well, most religions don't require you to pay to learn the religious texts. Donations and the like are "heavily encouraged" but not required.
        • Re:How the hell... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:31AM (#19068267)
          Well, one MAJOR difference (and I'm not of either of these religions) is that Christianity gladly and freely makes its gospels and religious texts available for you to read, such as Gideons in hotel rooms, plethoras of organizations willing to mail you free bibles, etc. Of course these organizations have their own reasons for doing this beyond pure altruism, such as hoping you'll convert, and either donate money or services back to them.

          Scientology, however, keeps its religious texts secret and hidden, and you are not allowed to view them until they deem you worthy. So if you decide to set off on the path of becoming a scientologist, you have no idea what beliefs you're ultimately going to be expected to hold until you've already spent considerable time and money to make it to high-enough level to be justified to view those texts. And at that point you've invested enough time and money that you won't want to back out, etc.

          I also think that in Scientology if you decide to leave the 'Church' then other Scientologists are required to shun you. And considering that one needs to invest years to advance to the higher levels and that a significant fraction of their friends will be Scientologists, this makes it even difficult to leave the Church.

        • by Opportunist (166417) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:32AM (#19068293)
          The difference is that it's old. Like, stepping into a pile of dogshit makes you curse, but stepping into a pile of dinosaur shit makes you famous.

          Despite both being crap.
        • Re:How the hell... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by mrpeebles (853978) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:46AM (#19068553)
          Comparing Chistianity to Scientology is like comparing Aristotle (who's science was wrong) to that voice that uses genetic technobabble to narrate the beginning of Heroes (its science is wrong too.) Christianity has had the great geniuses of the Western world contributing to it over last 2000 years, and it based on the Hebrew Bible, a great work as literature. It may or may not be wrong, but it has important, or at least sophisticated, things to say. Scientology has Tom Cruise and John Travolta, and is based on Dianetics [salon.com]. (I haven't read Dianetics, but I have seen the film version of Battlefield Earth, and that is enough for me.)
      • by arivanov (12034) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:03AM (#19067795) Homepage
        Lazarus Long as usually has the answer: One Man's Religion as Another Man's Belly Laugh
  • I blame the voters (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bert the Turtle (1073828) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:42AM (#19067393)
    If you all insist on voting for people because of their religious affiliations (and indeed, expressly WOULDN'T vote for atheists) then what did you expect? Vote for religious people, and they protect religious ideas. No matter how perverse they are. To allow you to deride Scientology would risk allowing you to deride born again christians or catholics.
  • by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:43AM (#19067415) Homepage Journal

    Why is it okay for a religion to threaten me with hell, but not okay for me to openly state that I'm trying to bring down a religion? Isn't it my state-given right to work to destroy unfavorable institutions so long as I work within the confines of the law?

    A law against "threatening" a religion is a violation of my right to freedom of speech.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by rnelsonee (98732)
      I think criticizing a religion is protected by free speech, but threats against a person, or group of people, no matter how large, are not not necessarily so. Among the several things the First Amendment doesn't protect (fire in a crowded theater, sedition...), out-and-out threats are in there.

      Now, that being said, I think the statements he made should be considered criticisms, not threats. It's not like he said he was going to kill every Scientologist.

    • by morgan_greywolf (835522) * on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:57AM (#19067697) Homepage Journal
      Mod parent up!

      How very insightful of you. Why should there be a problem with it? If I say I'm working to defeat the Neo-Nazi movement, it would seem no one would care but the Neo-Nazis and most folks would cheer me on. It wouldn't seem likely a judge would have me arrested, either. But as soon as I say I'm working to bring down Scientology, I'm 'threatening a religion'? As long as I work within the confines of the law, I should have the right to say what I want against any institution. That's why the Framers wrote the 1st Amendment -- because bad institutions should be openly criticized.
    • by Red Flayer (890720) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:04AM (#19067807) Journal

      Isn't it my state-given right to work to destroy unfavorable institutions
      The state cannot grant rights; it can only restrict them. To say that any right is granted at the pleasure of the state is a recipe for disaster.

      As to whether that law restricts your free speech, the claim is that "hate speech" is not protected by the Constitution, particularly when it interferes with the right of others to worship freely. The logic is that allowing people to threaten religions is implicit State approval of those threats.

      I believe Scientology abuses the law; but I also believe the law is necessary to protect people's right to worship freely.
      • by xENoLocO (773565) * on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:12AM (#19067935) Homepage
        I'd mod you up if I could.

        Along the same lines... (speaking generally, not to you in specific) As a human, you have rights. The constitution was created to guarantee your rights are not trampled on. The constitution does not grant anything, it protects right you alredy had from being violated by a government.

        Believe it or not, this country was founded upon the experience of people who were ruled by fundamentally corrupt governments. Over the years they've found ways to constrict how the constitution defends your rights... and that's why we have the sad state we're in today.
  • Total BS! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ArcherB (796902) * on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:45AM (#19067435) Journal
    As a Christian, I don't like seeing people criticize my religion, but I certainly don't want them arrested for it! WTF makes scientology so damn important? The same could be said for Islam. Why is throwing a koran in the toilet a hate crime, but dumping a cross in a jar of urine not?

    I don't want to see people arrested for criticizing Christianity and I sure as hell don't want to see people jailed for criticizing other religions either! Why is the free speech of non-Christians important than that of Christians??
    • Re:Total BS! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by starX (306011) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:56AM (#19067673) Homepage
      Because the crucifix in the jar of urine was art, and the Koran in the toilet was torture. If you put a Koran in a toilet in the middle of a museum, it would be art, and therefore okay.

      I want to start an off topic discussion with you (seriously, I'm not trolling). Have you played Bible Fight at adultswim.com, and if so, what do you think? Grievous insult to the Christian faith? Over the top satire? Humorous satire? Not especially playable? I'm just curious.
  • Remember (Score:5, Funny)

    by Grashnak (1003791) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:45AM (#19067443)
    No one expects the Scientology Inquisition!
  • by u-bend (1095729) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:45AM (#19067445) Homepage Journal
    Not knowing all the particulars of the supposed threat he was posing to the religion, it strikes me as odd that this can cause him so much trouble with the law. If he had been criticizing Catholicism as vocally for instance, would the same have happened? So remind me which elements of free speech we're not supposed to exercise anymore? We're not allowed to criticize Scientology, certain liberal agendas, certain conservative agendas, what else?
    • by DrXym (126579) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:09AM (#19067891)
      Not knowing all the particulars of the supposed threat he was posing to the religion,

      The threat he posed was to expose their idiotic (and expensive) teachings, their lies and to illustrate what a malignant mind control cult they really are. This made him their enemy and they have been hounding him with nuisance lawsuits ever since. Unfortunately for him he made some throwaway remark on a usenet forum about aiming a missile at their HQ and they somehow managed to get him prosecuted for making terrorist threats as well as interfering with a religion.

      His unrelating persecution by scientologists to silence and even jail the guy show who the terrorists really are.

  • Brave people (Score:3, Insightful)

    by clickclickdrone (964164) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:47AM (#19067475)
    After reading that I'm surprised anyone dared to post anything in case they ended up in jail. Crazy, just crazy. Land of the free. Umm yeah.
  • by smooth wombat (796938) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:49AM (#19067517) Homepage Journal
    Is Henson the only person to ever have this happen to them? Has anyone had the same treatment for speaking out against christianity, islam, judaism, buddhism, etc?

    If so, who was it and what happened to them? If not, why?

    How long until people wake up and realize that scientology is not a religion but a dangerous, money-grubbing, control-freak cult/business?

    Name one other religion that refuses to open its documents so someone can look at them WITHOUT you having to pay to see them.
  • by ReadbackMonkey (92198) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:51AM (#19067553)
    The more and more I read about how they push people around, the more and more I think I should join up with the winning team. These guys seem to be acquiring the kind of power the Catholic church had before the Reformation.

    The only thing stopping me is I always thought L. Ron Hubbard was a terrible writer, and I can't imagine having to read all that crap as part of my 'religion'.

  • by yamamushi (903955) <yamamushi@nOSpAM.gmail.com> on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:51AM (#19067561) Homepage
    What was the joke about Tom Cruise Missiles?
  • by hkgroove (791170) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:52AM (#19067591) Homepage
    Thankfully, they're a bit more tame in Pittsburgh. I don't even think the people working the store are in a high enough level to understand my "Xenu Built My Hotrod" tshirt. Or on Halloween when I went as Tom Cruise covered in thetans (condoms). I just got some weird looks that day.
  • by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohn AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday May 10, 2007 @09:55AM (#19067649) Journal
    I think this guy went about this in a very offensive way which lead to trouble. His posts were (in court of law [operatingthetan.com]) to have said things like

    Scientology is a business, and an unethical business at that. It is run by dishonorable men and women, and I will see it in ruins. Ahh, I love the smell of gun powder drifting on the morning breeze.
    Now, I don't think they ever proved he said that and what concerns me is that, though I'm not a lawyer, postings on the internet are very hard to authenticate. I don't think that this could be submitted as evidence in a court of law unless there was a hard link between the post, the time of the post and the defendent.

    If you want to "ruin Scientology," don't approach it like that. Don't align yourself with anyone that might make you an easier target for their lawyers. Ask questions. Investigate yourself. Don't do anything mildly against the law. Present your findings to newspapers or publish them online, but do not turn to violent attitudes. If you expect to be taken seriously about it, don't joke about it and don't joke about things that people might take the wrong way.

    These people have a lot of money and a lot of lawyers, you have to be smart and careful and cautious if you want to expose them for what you believe they are.
    • by vrimj (750402) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @11:04AM (#19068905)
      Flag Burning, "Fuck the Draft", First admendment law is not based off of inoffensive actions.

      Speech that is not "thretening" generally needs no protection.

      This is an idenfifyable group, but it not a small one so I doubt the exception for threating speech would apply.

      The thing is, unconstitional laws happen, that is what courts are for, to make them go away.

      This is not how I would choose to do battle with an orgnization I opposed, but it is not illegamitate.

      Saying "be nice" undermines the key issue, that sometimes it will be nessacry to not be nice. That is why we protect people who aren't. It is hard to tell, contempriously, who is right.
  • you beat enemies of free speech: religious fundamentalists, retarded ip laws, oppressive governments, etc. with more free speech

    the only reason anyone would oppose free speech is if what they have to say would suffer if it had more scrutiny

    scientologists have legions of zombie lawyers attacking anyone who infringes on their "intellectual property" and "religious principles" simply because if that crap got out in more general circulation, they would be revealed as the fascist ufo wackjobs they are

    same with oppressive governments, same with ip lawyer whores

    and so, in the spirit of the recent dmca take down notice on digg for a stupid numer [com.com], i would like to serve and support keith and attack the immoral, yet somehow, incredibly, legal basis for arresting him by serving his cause: posting stuff the church of scientology does not want posted

    the digg number fiasco prompted wordwide press coverage. this should to:

    it is the exact same issue [kuro5hin.org]

    expand the digg number revolution folks. use everything that was used in the digg number fiasco and make it used again. weidl it as a weapon agains tthose who wish to censor in the name of fascist religious fundamentalism and corporate greed. let this revolution continue! let them fear us, not us fear them!

    i will respond to this comment with another comment with text the church of scientology does not want known

    slashdot may get attacked by me doing this, slashdot has been forced to remove comments before [slashdot.org]. i may be attacked too. i don't care, because i know i am in the right, and i know this is important, and i know i have support

    the proper response to my post of the sensitive scientology information? post it some more yourself. post it and post it some more.

    post it more, post it more, post it more. post it everywhere. post it a million times

    scientology has legions of aggressive fanatical laywers, but we, who love free speech are yet legion more

    i support free speech, do you? did the recent imbroglio over that stupid number on digg stoke your righteous indignation at censorship in the name of corporate idiocy? well this man was just arrested in the name of religious fundamentalism. you should be stoked at this too. it is the exact same thing. let's make the revolution over the digg number a permanent fixture on the internet. let's band together and in the same of social justice fight these censoring fascist assholes

    the proper response to keith being arrested is bomb post every and all sensitive church of scientology material any of us can find. the more the material makes those fascist assholes squeal, the more it should be disseminated. digg, slashdot, fark, every and all sites you can find. bomb post away, bomb away, bomb away

    this is important folks. if a man can be arrested for making a dumb joke on a newsgroup, any of us can. so all of us should band together and prove the futility of what scientology thinks they are doing: when someone is arrested for simply criticizing their stupid church then us on the internet will respond by hurting them where they hurt the most: the mass public airing of that which they deem so personal and sensitive

    dear church of scientology and your legal whores: fuck you you fascist censoring pricks

    this is war

    fire away
    • PART 1 (Score:5, Informative)

      OT III
      [Operating Thetan Level 3]
      BODY THETANS

      by L. Ron Hubbard

      The head of the Galactic Federation (76 planets around larger stars visible from here) (founded 95,000,000 years ago, very space opera) solved overpopulation (250 billion or so per planet - 178 billion on average) by mass implanting..

      He caused people to be brought to Teegeeack (Earth) and put an H-Bomb on the principal volcanos (incident II) and then the Pacific area ones were taken - in boxes to Hawaii and the Atlantic area ones to Las Palmas and there "packaged".

      His name was Xenu. He used renegades. Various misleading data by means of circuits etc was placed in the unplants. When through with his crime loyal officers (to the people) captured him after six years of battle and put him in an electronic mountain trap where he still is. "They" are gone. The place (Confederation) has since been a desert.

      The length and brutality of it all was such that this Confederation never recovered. The implant is calculated to kill (by pneumonia etc) anyone who attempts to solve it. This liability has been dispensed with by my tech development. One can freewheel through the implant and die unless it is approached as precisely outlined. The "freewheel" (auto-running on and on) lasts too long, denies sleep etc and one dies. So be careful to do only Incidents I and II as given and not plow around and fail to complete one thetan at a time.

      In December 1967 1 know someone had to take the plunge. I did and emerged very knocked out, but alive. Probably the only one ever to do so in 75,000,000 years. I have all the data now, but only that given here is needful.

      One's body is a mass of individual thetans stuck to oneself or to the body.

      One has to clean them off by running incident II and Incident I. It is a long job, requiring care, patience and good auditing.

      You are running beings. They respond like any preclear. Some large, some small.

      Thetans believed they were one. This is the primary error.

      Good luck.

      * * *

      For the purpose of clarity, by BODY THETAN is meant a thetan who is stuck to another thetan or body but is not in control.

      A THETAN is, of course, a Scientology word using the Greek theta which was the Greek symbol for thought or life. An individual being such as a man is a thetan, he is not a body and he does not think because he has a brain.

      A CLUSTER is a group of body thetans crushed or hold together by some mutual bad experience.

      ----------

      Character of Body Thetans

      Body Thetans are just Thetans. When you get rid of one he goes off and possibly squares around, picks up a body or admires daisies. He is in fact a sort of cleared Being. He cannot fail to eventually, if not at once, regain many abilities. Many have been asleep for the last 75,000,000 years. A body Thetan responds to any process any Thetan responds to.

      Some body Thetans are suppressive. A suppressive is out of valence in R6. He is in valence in Incident I almost always.

      One can't run a human being on these two incidents since human beings are composites and would not be able to run the lot. Aside from that, non-clears are way below awareness required to even find these Incidents.

      Huge amounts of charge have already been removed from the case and the body thetans by Clearing and OT I and OT II to say nothing of engrams and lower grades.

      Awareness is proportional to the charge removed from the case.

      Although a human is a composite being there is only one I (that is you) who runs things.

      Body thetans just hold one back.

      You will continue to be you. You, inside, can of course separate out body thetans and so solo auditing is the answer. How good do you have to be to run body thetans off? Well, if you didn't skip your grades, Clearing and OT II particularly, you. should be able to'command body thetans easily.

      * * *

      Incident II is over 36 days long. Capture on other planets was weeks or months before the implant. Tho
    • PART 2 (Score:5, Informative)

      OT III Errors

      Amongst OT III errors are "a BT run on Incident I fails to blow". There are three reasons:

      1. Auditor is trying to run a cluster with an Incident I. The right thing to do is date and get the character of the incident that made it a cluster and then run Incident Its on those left when it breaks up. Or get Dianetic auditing.
      2. There is an earlier Incident I on the same BT. Find it and run it. The BT has a chain of them all by himself.
      3. Another BT is copying the Incident I just run so it looks like it didn't blow. Failure to ever run Incident I can also cause a bog. Routine Dianetic auditing by a Dianetic HDC who is also on or above OT III using triple flows and LDN OT III also handles bogged OT III pre- OT's.

      ----------

      Cluster Formation - Cumulative

      In doing a cluster one is likely to find it is made up of other earlier clusters. This looks like this. 1898 impact horse accident. When engram 1898 run on R3R, that part blows. No F/N occurs, TA remains up. Remainder will grind after the blow. Earlier portion dates as 93,000,000 years ago, electric shock. When run on R3R, that part blows, no FIN. TA remains up, will grind if run further. Earliest portion dares as 72 trillion implant. When run on R3R, all blow, FIN.

      A cluster or engram which is a cluster can repeatedly FIN as BT's blow. Dates as 778 million explosion. After run once or twice an FIN occurs as one BT blows. Run again to second FIN as two more BT's blow. Remainder blow with a wider FIN. The cluster has gone. This happens (repeating FIN) when picture persists and noter check reveals it is not a copy. It will be more BT's in same cluster. So above repeating FIN occurs when pre-OT is moved through it. Clusters are found by meter dating, listing for type of incident and run as an engram. Clusters can occur at Incident .II and Incident I. They can also occur at 1 quadrillion, which is the Clearing course materials. They also occur at random dates for different reasons.

      * * *

      I have lately been C/Sing a number of failed OT cases and have found them all running well on solo now. The errors are made as follows:

      1. The solo auditor cannot audit, needs more training.
      2. Cases are not well prepared with Dianetics.

      The remedy for all of these is to:

      1. Run the PC for at least a score or two of Dianetic items by R3R, done of course by a good HDC,
      2. then do a GF 40.

      And then repeat it until necessary auditing is complete. These two actions take care of the majority of difficult cases on OT

      The real End Phenomena of OT III and OT IV is exterior with full perception. You can and should accomplish full stable exteriorization on doing the materials of III.

      ----------

      Further III remedies:

      3. High TA. This comes from not completing the Incidents I and II on body thetans.
      4. The solo auditor puts too wide an intention on the BT and runs two or three when he is intending to run only one.
      5. A cluster just won't break up. The remedy is a Dianetic session listing for impacts or incidents that would cause a cluster and doing R3R. The principle of earlier similar holds good. When this is completed, the solo auditor is sent back to solo to clean up the BT's shaken loose and to continue with OT III.
      6. Rudiments go out on BT's. The remedy of course is to locate BT's who have out-ruds, put in the ruds and run Incident 1, at which the ST should leave.
      7. A theta-bopping meter sometimes puzzles a solo auditor -on OT Ill. This means a BT is trying to exteriorize and can't. The remedy is to complete the partially run Incident 11 or Incident I or in extreme cages put the ruds in on the hung up BT.
      8. One-hand electrode giving wrong TA read baffling the solo auditor with floating needles with a high TA. The remedy is to have two-hand electrodes handy and trim the trim knob so the one-hand electrode reads the same as two-hand electrodes.
      9. A suppressive body thetan sometimes isn't auditable. The remedy is to run Grades IV
  • by Iloinen Lohikrme (880747) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:15AM (#19067975)
    Only in United States you would get arrested for criticizing church of Scientology. In Europe at least many governments have understood that Scientology is not a religion but a business: i.e. Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] about them states that "Germany classes Scientology as a business, rather than a religious organization, and Belgium, France, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Mexico, Spain and the United Kingdom, remain unconvinced that Scientology is a religion"

    I also remember an incident from the beginning of 90's where a Finnish anonymous email re-mailer service was accused in US, actually in California if I remember correctly, on being a nest of pedophiles and Johan Helsingius the maintainer of service being a pedophile too. Actually if my member serves me good some California states legislator in public speach demanded that US uses to it's power to pressure Finnish government to crack down on service. Later it was found at that the church of Scientology was behind this campaign as a pressuring way and as a retribution Johan for not cooperating with them and disclosing information about on the users of service. Wikipedia has a small article about this in their section about Johan Helsingius [wikipedia.org].

    Just have to wonder how on earth US government hasn't cracked on Scientology and hard.
  • by unity100 (970058) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:38AM (#19068405) Homepage Journal
    RIAA, MPAA, NSA, CIA, FBI, IRS, Lawyers, Rich Scientologist perverts, corrupt, sold out congressmen/senators, AT&T, Verizon and countless more.

    just reading slashdot is enough to chill one from head to toe.
  • by phrostie (121428) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @11:00AM (#19068835)
    we believe when you die your soul gets thrown up on the roof and can't get down.

    it's the space aliens that do it.
  • by MrHill (1100413) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @11:05AM (#19068921)
    The Church of Scientology and its followers want you to believe that Keith Henson stated he would "have them bombed and the buildings exploded": This is utter fabrication, Keith Henson never expressed such threat, jokingly or not. He merely corrected someone who answered to a post in which someone else was joking about a "Tom Cruise Missile."

    Here is his post in Google archives: http://tinyurl.com/3dgn4y [tinyurl.com]

    Keith Henson was picketing and trying to bring awareness to what he calls "depraved indifference" in the death of two young women in and around the Scientology compound. He was trying to bring awareness because he cared. This is directly from the doctrine of the Church of Scientology: "[People critical of Scientology] may be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed," from L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology. This is the precise doctrine they followed to try and silence Keith Henson.

    Meanwhile, the leaders of the Church of Scientology, David Miscavige included, have been promoting the murdering of other human beings. This is beyond irony that it is now Keith Henson in jail, just because he cared enough, while David Miscavige is free to go despite his graphical depictions of deadly violence against psychiatrists -- with thundering applauses from followers... (ref.: Evening Standard (London, Oct. 2006): "Tom's aliens target City's 'planetary rulers'" by David Cohen, Michael Leonard Tilse: "False Purpose Rundown") (http://tinyurl.com/24xfta [tinyurl.com])
  • by kwandar (733439) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @11:07AM (#19068949)
    Yes, I still remember Scientologists being convicted in Canada

    From an article by Glen McGregor, The Ottawa Citizen Published: Wednesday, October 26, 2005

    "Scientology is also the only religious group ever to be criminally convicted in Canada. It was found guilty on two counts of breach of the public trust related to a 1982 conspiracy to break into government offices. The criminal charges lead to a precedent-setting defamation case, known as Hill vs. Church of Scientology of Toronto, brought by a Crown prosecutor whom the church's lawyer had accused of criminal contempt. The Supreme Court in 1995 upheld the finding against the church, which became the largest libel award in Canadian history."

  • by MythMoth (73648) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @11:37AM (#19069567) Homepage
    (For non-UK readers, Panorama is the BBC's flagship investigative journalism programme)

    Panorama
    Monday 14 May
    8:30pm - 9:00pm
    BBC1
    Scientology and Me
  • L. Ron Hubbard (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kaenneth (82978) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @12:57PM (#19071155) Homepage Journal
    L. Ron Hubbard was mostly likely insane, I'm not a psychologist, but I have spent much time helping mentally ill people recover, I think he was Schitzophrenic. Paranoid delusions, delusions of power, fear of psych meds... Why would he hate Psychatry so very much, unless he had contact with them? One disturbing thing I've seen is that Scientology activly recruits from mental hospitals!

      Schitzophrenia has two sides, sometimes you feel terrible, like the entire world hates you; sometimes you feel like a god, immortal and wonderful. and when you are in each state, you can't even conceive the other one. I've seen people off their meds go from laughing giddy, to believing that they have never been happy in the space of 15 seconds.

      If you take your meds, you lose the Highs, but also the Lows. because you lose the Highs, and are having paranoid delusions, it's common to think that the medications are bad, and the doctors are trying to poison you. (a belief of L. Ron's) Because of the auditory hallucinations, you may think your body is occupied by multiple entities (a belief of L. Ron's), and come up with a bizzarre world-view that attempts to explain the world that you are perceiving (Scientology or TimeCube)

      One possible trait of Schitzophrenia is a difficulty producing 'normal' emotional responses, aka 'Flat Affect'. people with this symptom may appear emotionless, and disinterested (like the VT shooter, as he was decribed before the shootings). My personal thought is that someone with this symptom, if they are very smart, may be forced to 'fake' emotions in order to interact with others. this self-training from a young age could make someone a VERY good actor, as they have essentially acted their entire life. I suspect that Tom Cruise and possibly John Travola may be in this situation. Unfortunetly as they aged they may have started showing other signs of Schizophreneia, were urged to take medication, rebelled, and then joined a cult that supported their decision... Think about Tom on Oprah and a 'giddy high'. I think Tom Cruise is intelligent, and a great actor, but without meds he may get progressivly less sane.

      No matter how smart you are, with a mental disorder warping your perceptions and emotions, eventually something bad may occur by doing something that seems entirely appropriate at the time. If your 'Angel' is telling you that someone is trying to kill you, and your angel is never wrong, shouldn't you attack them in self defense first? If your uncle has lung cancer, and you can 'see' where it is, shouldn't you take a kitchen knife and cut it out? A good friend of mine came to these conclusions, fortunetly nothing seriously wrong happened, and he's now on medications instead of prison for attempted murder, or worse. (like the VT shootings, where my conclusion is the guy went insane, and detached from society... without support of others he rereated into paranoid delusions that ended in a pre-emptive attack, which in his mind was fully justified)

      Unfortunetly, it's difficult to seperate 'Mental Illness', from 'Religion'. So some mentally ill states have gained some protections under the law; I've read that in the Soviet Union, when they were being critisized for imprisioning to many people for disagreeing with the Party, they redefined mental illness so that disagreeing with the Party could result in your being declared mentally ill, and being locked up in a hospital; because any 'sane' person agrees with the Party. As much as the idea amuses me, I don't think voting republican should be grounds for be declared legally insane.

      Scientology, However, is not just using the law as a Shield, they are using it as a Weapon, and abusing the process. This is entirely wrong, and needs to be stopped. Like false rape accusations damage the chances of real justice for real victims; if Scientology keeps abusing their position as a 'religion' it will harm other genuine religions.
  • by PPH (736903) on Thursday May 10, 2007 @01:06PM (#19071323)
    Personally, I welcome our Thetan overlords.

    And their various legal minions and lackeys.

panic: can't find /

Working...