Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Scientology Critic Arrested After 6 Years

Posted by Hemos on Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:32 AM
from the running-to-standstill dept.
destinyland writes "Friday police arrested 64-year-old Keith Henson. In 2000 after picketing a Scientology complex, he was arrested as a threat because of a joke Usenet post about "Tom Cruise Missiles." He fled to Canada after being found guilty of "interfering" with a religion, and spent the next 6 years living as a fugitive. Besides being a digital encryption and free speech advocate, he's one of the original Burr-Brown/Texas Instruments researchers and a co-founder of the Space Colony movement."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Funny)

    by lecithin (745575) on Monday February 05 2007, @11:34AM (#17890704)

    "Other posters joined in the internet discussion, asking whether Tom Cruise missiles are affected by wind. "No way," Keith joked. "Modern weapons are accurate to a matter of a few tens of yards."

    So, does that make Tom Cruise a 'straight shooter'?
    • Tom Cruise? Straight? I think not.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 05 2007, @11:45AM (#17890864)
      I didn't know that interfering with a religion was a crime. Could any lawyers provide some details about this law and what constitutes breaking it?

      Thanks.
      [ Parent ]
      • Arrest this man! by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @12:01PM
      • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Informative)

        by Intron (870560) on Monday February 05 2007, @12:03PM (#17891164)
        California hate crime [la.ca.us] law from the DA's office. ... threatening to use force to injure, intimidate, or interfere with another person who is exercising his or her constitutional rights.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by bladesjester (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @12:18PM
          • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Belial6 (794905) on Monday February 05 2007, @12:46PM (#17891964)
            (http://www.glasshead.net/)
            I would think that threatening a person with unimaginable torture for all of eternity if they did not deny the existence of their gods would be considered a threat. Shouldn't the police start arresting the door to door Christian recruiters?
            [ Parent ]
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Funny)

              by uncqual (836337) on Monday February 05 2007, @01:08PM (#17892370)
              Amen
              [ Parent ]
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Insightful)

              by freakmn (712872) on Monday February 05 2007, @01:12PM (#17892474)
              (Last Journal: Tuesday October 02, @10:03PM)
              I see the point you are trying to make, but Christians don't have the power to damn someone to Hell. Usually it is said that God will damn you, or something like that. It is more of a warning, as it is not within their control. It is similar to someone telling you that if you lie in the middle of the freeway, you are likely to get hit by a car. They aren't threatening you with a car, but warning you of the car's coming. Whether you believe in what the Christians are saying or not isn't relevant, just that the message they are bringing isn't a threat.
              [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Funny)

                by Lars T. (470328) <Lars DOT Traeger AT googlemail DOT com> on Monday February 05 2007, @01:51PM (#17893134)
                (Last Journal: Tuesday May 15, @04:19PM)

                I see the point you are trying to make, but Christians don't have the power to damn someone to Hell. Usually it is said that God will damn you, or something like that. It is more of a warning, as it is not within their control. It is similar to someone telling you that if you lie in the middle of the freeway, you are likely to get hit by a car. They aren't threatening you with a car, but warning you of the car's coming. Whether you believe in what the Christians are saying or not isn't relevant, just that the message they are bringing isn't a threat.
                Oh so it's more something like: "If you don't stop posting here, somebody (who I have no control over) is going to kill you and your family!"
                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Insightful)

                by Durandal64 (658649) on Monday February 05 2007, @02:27PM (#17893678)

                I see the point you are trying to make, but Christians don't have the power to damn someone to Hell.
                Some do, depending on how you read the Bible. Jesus, after all, told Peter that whatever he said on Earth goes in Heaven. So if the Pope excommunicates someone, he's basically damned the person to Hell. If you believe that the Pope really is the successor to the apostle of the son of God and not just some delusional lunatic in a funny hat, that is.

                As for their message not being a threat, it's not a threat in the sense that the law requires. But it's still a threat. They basically come to your door and say, "Gee, that's a nice eternal soul you've got there. It'd be a real shame if something were to happen to it" and imply that unless you pay them protection money (i.e. tithing) and worship their thug of a deity, said thug will send you to Hell for all eternity.
                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Weedlekin (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @02:49PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Belial6 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @03:05PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by David_Shultz (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @04:05PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by complete loony (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:45PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by foolAloof (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @07:44PM
              • Being told I'm going to hell SCARES me... by AmazingRuss (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @08:10PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Dread_ed (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @08:35PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Tim99 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @10:29PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by someone1234 (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @05:34AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:4, Insightful)

                by jotok (728554) on Monday February 05 2007, @02:31PM (#17893732)
                When it comes to issues of intimidation, don't you think there is a difference between "If you don't adhere to my beliefs, I think you're gonna be running through hell with gasoline drawers on" and "If you don't adhere to my beliefs, I'm going to do my best to disenfranchise you politically, interfere with your job, and quite possibly burn your house down?"

                These are all things that religious and "non" religious people have done to each other, and it is usually frowned upon whereas anyone making pronouncements about the hereafter is generally accepted.
                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Phyvo (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @02:42PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @04:01PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @04:11PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @04:24PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by svyyn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @04:33PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:20PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Durandal64 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:26PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Belial6 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:36PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:4, Insightful)

                by freakmn (712872) on Monday February 05 2007, @06:02PM (#17897072)
                (Last Journal: Tuesday October 02, @10:03PM)

                It's the equivalent. In other words, if you get excommunicated, you might as well be damned to Hell.
                I would say that the cause flows the other way. If you are excommunicated, you are likely on the path to Hell, not because of the excommunication, but it's a sign of what's on the way.

                Any religion whose leaders preach about how terrible materialism is from gigantic churches filled with priceless art doesn't get to claim they're not in it for the money. Some Christians actually take those teachings seriously, but the larger churches obviously do not, especially the Catholic Church. I don't buy this "We build giant churches to glorify God" nonsense for one second. They do it to glorify themselves and skim a little off the top of the donations.
                Like I said, not all people who take those vows follow them completely. In my opinion, having things isn't bad, it's the reason for having them that can be malicious. If your goal is to accumulate as many material goods as possible, then that's materialism to the extreme. If your goal is to reach out to others, and you happen to use material goods, then that's totally different. Also, the Church building is there for the people, not the clergy. If it saves souls, then it's worth it.

                Evangelism by its very nature is intrusive. It requires that the target make a conscious effort to ignore you.
                My wording in the previous comment was bad, I apologize for that. What I mean is that evangelization should be done in a way that does not excessively intrude. It should be aimed at helping, not annoying. There's a lot of it going on that isn't that way, and it burns people so much that they refuse to participate in rational dialog. I've been pleasantly surprised with how rational people are being in not flaming me for my beliefs, and I'd like to thank not only you, but the others who are responding rationally.
                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:15PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Darby (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @06:21PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by JonathanBoyd (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:26PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:36PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:40PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:42PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Darby (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:49PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:4, Insightful)

                by freakmn (712872) on Monday February 05 2007, @06:56PM (#17897852)
                (Last Journal: Tuesday October 02, @10:03PM)
                The truth is that nobody truly knows without a doubt if God exists until death. That's why it's called faith. Belief without the ability to find absolutely solid proof. On the same token, can you prove that there is no God?
                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Belial6 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @07:12PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Pikoro (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @07:28PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @07:28PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:3) Monday February 05 2007, @07:43PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:3) Monday February 05 2007, @07:51PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by budgenator (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @08:13PM
              • Re:Being told I'm going to hell SCARES me... by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @08:23PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Pikoro (Score:3) Monday February 05 2007, @08:28PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @08:29PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @08:39PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @08:42PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @08:46PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Pikoro (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @09:04PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by jrobertray (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @09:33PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @09:51PM
              • However, it is a misguided policy, at best. by the_REAL_sam (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @10:15PM
              • Re: Anonymous Coward by the_REAL_sam (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @10:48PM
                • Re: Anonymous Coward by the_REAL_sam (Score:3) Tuesday February 06 2007, @06:59AM
                  • Re: Faith by the_REAL_sam (Score:2) Wednesday February 07 2007, @01:23AM
                    • Re: Faith by the_REAL_sam (Score:2) Friday February 09 2007, @02:05AM
                    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
                  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
                • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Durandal64 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @11:38PM
              • Re:However, it is a misguided policy, at best. by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @12:08AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @12:12AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @12:30AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Darby (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @01:28AM
              • What if you thinking I'm a terrorist... by AmazingRuss (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @01:33AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by inKubus (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @01:38AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Cederic (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @02:52AM
              • Re: Tom Cruise Missile by Black Parrot (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @03:37AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Weedlekin (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @04:12AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by David_Shultz (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @05:00AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by albyrne5 (Score:1) Tuesday February 06 2007, @05:57AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by nietsch (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @05:59AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Dabido (Score:1) Tuesday February 06 2007, @08:46AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Dread_ed (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @12:32PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by GuyverDH (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @01:55PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @02:35PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @02:53PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @02:59PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @03:04PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @03:12PM
              • Re: Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @03:22PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @03:30PM
              • Re:What if you thinking I'm a terrorist... by freakmn (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @03:39PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Some_Llama (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @05:25PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Darby (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @06:03PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Jonny Ringo (Score:1) Wednesday February 07 2007, @12:24AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Wednesday February 07 2007, @02:17AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by albyrne5 (Score:1) Wednesday February 07 2007, @06:10AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Weedlekin (Score:2) Wednesday February 07 2007, @06:19AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by gfreeman (Score:1) Wednesday February 07 2007, @12:29PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Wednesday February 07 2007, @01:10PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by freakmn (Score:2) Wednesday February 07 2007, @02:06PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Darby (Score:2) Wednesday February 07 2007, @06:51PM
              • Re:What if you thinking I'm a terrorist... by AmazingRuss (Score:2) Thursday February 08 2007, @02:07PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by nietsch (Score:2) Friday February 09 2007, @07:28AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by nietsch (Score:2) Friday February 09 2007, @07:44AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by blippy (Score:1) Saturday February 10 2007, @07:25AM
              • 8 replies beneath your current threshold.
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Funny)

              by frank_adrian314159 (469671) on Monday February 05 2007, @01:29PM (#17892752)
              (http://www.ancar.org/)
              I would think that threatening a person with unimaginable torture for all of eternity if they did not deny the existence of their gods would be considered a threat.

              No, John Travolta's and Tom Cruise's movies just seem like they last for eternity and, as far as I know, denying isn't enough; you aren't forced to watch them unless you actively spread the information that L. Ron wasn't actually God.

              [ Parent ]
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by siufish (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @01:50PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @02:38PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by smaddox (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @02:58PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by r_jensen11 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:27PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:4, Funny)

              by Saxerman (253676) * on Monday February 05 2007, @07:42PM (#17898416)
              (http://slashdot.org/)
              Eskimo: "If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?"
              Priest: "No, not if you did not know."
              Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?"
              --Annie Dillard, 'Pilgrim at Tinker Creek'
              [ Parent ]
            • 5 replies beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Informative)

          by morgan_greywolf (835522) on Monday February 05 2007, @12:23PM (#17891508)
          (http://stylus-toolbox.sf.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday May 15, @11:50AM)
          What I would like to know is how this discussion [google.com] violates that law. I don't see anything remotely threatening, just a few people having fun talking about a non-existant 'Agent 99' and their fictitious (and humorous!) exploits.

          If you can arrested for this, it makes me wonder how many /.ers have been arrested?
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Informative)

            by jrumney (197329) on Monday February 05 2007, @12:32PM (#17891680)
            (http://jasonrumney.net/)
            If you look at the original Slashdot article from the time of his conviction (linked in one of the comments here), reportedly he was not allowed to use the context of his quotes in his defense. So all the jury saw were a couple of snippets the Scientologists picked out. He probably ruined his case by going on the run, as I can't believe that a higher court would not have overturned the decision on appeal.
            [ Parent ]
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:02PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by LifeWithJustin (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @01:26PM
            • Sitting Out Appeals... In Jail by cmholm (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:38PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:4, Insightful)

              by AnalogDiehard (199128) on Monday February 05 2007, @02:18PM (#17893542)
              Co$ are master deceivers and masters of half truths, as well as exploiters of the legal system in the most unprecendented damnable manner. They have been rebuked by courts and judges all over the world. Unfortunately the California law enforcement and judicial branches have been infiltrated by Co$ members so it would be no surprise that Hensen faced a partial judge who was symphatetic to Co$. The only reason the IRS recognizes them as a "church" is that the Co$ infiltrated IRS offices and bullied them into submission with thousands of lawsuits.
              [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:4, Interesting)

                by fyngyrz (762201) * on Monday February 05 2007, @03:00PM (#17894192)
                (http://www.ideaspike.com/ | Last Journal: Monday October 22, @04:43AM)
                Unfortunately the California law enforcement and judicial branches have been infiltrated by Co$ members

                Has the infiltration of scientologists risen to the level of the infiltration of Christians, in your estimation?

                Or is there some reason you would present to support the idea that the infiltration of one religion is of more concern than of another?

                As far as I can see, the problems for society and its citizens are similar in nature, if not in scope, with regard to any religious person who, in your words, "infiltrates" the justice system. But I am curious as to your take on the matter.

                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by budgenator (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @08:29PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Insightful)

                by Shakrai (717556) on Monday February 05 2007, @03:14PM (#17894352)
                (Last Journal: Friday November 09, @08:13AM)

                Or is there some reason you would present to support the idea that the infiltration of one religion is of more concern than of another?

                I wasn't aware that Scientology was a religion.

                There, I said it. Kinda shocked that nobody else had the guts to do so in the first 100 posts.

                Tom Cruise won't come out of the closet.....

                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Insightful)

                by inviolet (797804) <(moc.oohay) (ta) (rednimenip)> on Monday February 05 2007, @03:42PM (#17894772)
                (Last Journal: Tuesday February 20 2007, @11:21AM)

                I wasn't aware that Scientology was a religion.

                After landing here on Rhene 01-3 (called 'Earth' by the local dominant species), my investigation into this issue led me to the following conclusions:

                If the founder of an ideology is still alive, then it's a cult.
                If the founder is dead, then it's a religion.

                Since the founder L. Ron Hubbard is dead, Scientology is therefore a religion.

                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by vakuona (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @03:46PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @03:46PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @03:51PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:4, Insightful)

                by dbIII (701233) on Monday February 05 2007, @04:04PM (#17895158)
                I really don't think so - truly bad SF with the good bits plagerised from the ramblings of someone writing during psychotic episodes in Chicago in the 1930s is still distinguishable from religion. I do however think they must have really good lawyers since they can get a ponzi scam labelled as a religeon.

                The way they treat women in childbirth and the mentally ill is truly evil - the most fanatical of religions at least look after their own when they are in trouble.

                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Rakarra (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:46PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:18PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by jamesmrankinjr (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:36PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:39PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:47PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:58PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Darby (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @07:09PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Darby (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @07:12PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by dbIII (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @07:37PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @07:53PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by dbIII (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @09:41PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:4, Insightful)

                by dbIII (701233) on Monday February 05 2007, @09:54PM (#17899622)

                Unless you are arguing that age alone somehow imparts validity, a presumption I cannot go along with.

                Bullshit crafted during our lifetime with plenty of living witnesses to say so in my opinion makes it invalid.

                As for naturopaths and others doing weird and harmful voodoo - just becuase one group does stupid stuff doesn't justify another. Interesting that you threw all of Islam in there with the African practice of mutilating women and the post-revolution Iranian practice of stoning people to death. I don't understand their religeon but I'm not going to throw them all in one boat - not all Christians and agnostics are followers of Jim Jones either.

                The arguement that Bobby can punch Sally because Jimmy punched Jane is something that should be left in the playground soon after you learn to talk - but it's amazing how many people try it. Also things that look similar may not be.

                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Thomas Henden (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @10:52PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Rakarra (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @11:09PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by inviolet (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @11:27PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by adrianmonk (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @11:39PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by ckedge (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @12:05AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @02:18AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @02:21AM
                • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by shutdown -p now (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @03:14AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Carewolf (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @04:31AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by kiddygrinder (Score:1) Tuesday February 06 2007, @07:23AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Shakrai (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @08:15AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by dbIII (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @08:22AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Shakrai (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @08:23AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Dread_ed (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @10:42AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Wednesday February 07 2007, @02:13AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Shakrai (Score:2) Wednesday February 07 2007, @09:37AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by gfreeman (Score:1) Wednesday February 07 2007, @12:32PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Wednesday February 07 2007, @05:43PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Shakrai (Score:3) Wednesday February 07 2007, @06:54PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Wednesday February 07 2007, @09:19PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Shakrai (Score:2) Thursday February 08 2007, @08:45AM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by fyngyrz (Score:2) Thursday February 08 2007, @12:27PM
              • 6 replies beneath your current threshold.
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:4, Insightful)

              by dr_dank (472072) on Monday February 05 2007, @02:28PM (#17893688)
              (http://www.chemicalwonderland.net/ | Last Journal: Monday September 03, @10:34PM)
              He probably ruined his case by going on the run, as I can't believe that a higher court would not have overturned the decision on appeal.

              If the context of his words that could have exhonerated him was thrown out, whos to say that an appeal would be granted? Hell, even a "accident" involving a shiv in the prison shower room while awaiting an appeal is reason enough to get the hell out of dodge. I don't blame him for fleeing. When the game you're playing is rigged against you, theres no use to sticking around to play.
              [ Parent ]
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by nanoakron (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @02:37PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by AndroidCat (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @03:09PM
            • Freedom of speech, China style. by MacDork (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @03:38PM
          • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Jackie_Chan_Fan (Score:3) Monday February 05 2007, @01:30PM
          • Not the usenet posting (Score:5, Informative)

            by KenSeymour (81018) on Monday February 05 2007, @01:39PM (#17892902)
            I read in TFM that he was tried and convicted based on his picketing activities outside a Scientology film studio. Since then, I have not been able to get to TFM.

            You can read about it here [wikipedia.org].

            So he was not arrested for that usenet discussion. He has been sued in civil court
            for publishing Scientology documents. He defended himself and lost, to the tune
            of $75,000. He then declared bankruptcy. At that time, he started repeatedly picketing
            a Scientology film studio.

            When he was convicted and sentenced to six months in jail (for the picketing),
            he chose to flee to Canada because he believed that Scientologists would have him
            killed in prison.

            He applied for political asylum in Canada. After three years, Canada asked him
            to appear in person to hear what the decision was. Fearing deportation, he packed up
            and left Canada the night before.

            So no, usenet posting, in this case, did not get him arrested.
            [ Parent ]
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by haggie (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @01:13PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by jcr (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:28PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by aled (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:36PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Kelbear (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:45PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by DavidHumus (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @02:00PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by rograndom (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @02:21PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by bigpat (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:14PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by McFadden (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @07:59PM
        • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
      • by HTH NE1 (675604) on Monday February 05 2007, @12:15PM (#17891366)
        If I were to start a religion based on the preservation of copyrighted works for when they may eventually enter the public domain, employing any methods necessary to make the copies (similar to the preservation of ancient works through the Dark Ages, sort of like Digital Monks of the Internet Monastery), can I gain similar protection against the likes of the RIAA and MPAA, provided I can afford Scientology's lawyers?
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Teun (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @12:32PM
      • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by pdp1144 (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @01:34PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Maxo-Texas (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:51PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Durandal64 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @02:34PM
          • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Insightful)

            by dosquatch (924618) on Monday February 05 2007, @04:07PM (#17895198)
            (Last Journal: Monday March 26 2007, @07:57AM)

            You can marry a person of the same sex all you want in a religious ceremony. The state will just not recognize it as a real marriage, and you won't get tax breaks or spousal benefits.

            True, but it should be exactly the opposite. The state should take no particular position on the issue as long as all parties are consenting adults. One man, one woman. Two men. Three of one and two of the other. Whatever. You don't have to like it, I don't have to like it, but as long as they are all happy with it, it ain't none of my business. Or yours. Or the state's. And I don't expect any particular church to condone it.

            Quite simply, the conjoining of incomes for tax purposes and the assignment of benefits should be an automatic, simple, and painless event. It is not the state's place to say "Ewww", or "But God says...". It is the state's place to serve its citizens.

            [ Parent ]
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Durandal64 (Score:3) Monday February 05 2007, @05:33PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by jez9999 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:40PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Insightful)

              by monkeydo (173558) on Monday February 05 2007, @06:03PM (#17897088)
              (http://slashdot.org/)
              Quite simply, the conjoining of incomes for tax purposes and the assignment of benefits should be an automatic, simple, and painless event. It is not the state's place to say "Ewww"

              "Single me out for a benefit, but don't ask what I did to deserve it!"

              Either the state derives a benefit from marriage, and in return should allow certain benefits to married couples, or it doesn't. We seem to have made a decision a long time ago that marriage does benefit the state. Does the type of marriage that you want recognized (and you must admit that gay marriage is fundamentally different than traditional marriage) bestow the same benefits on the state?

              Personally, I don't give a shit who you want to marry, and if you can get a Priest, a Rabbi, or a homeless guy to marry you, more power to you. The tax code, rules of testate, etc., should be simple and the state should just get out of the marriage business altogether. It' absolutely hipocritical to say that you want the state to butt out of your personal choices, but at the same time to want the state to honor those choices with official recognition.
              [ Parent ]
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Dutch Gun (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @07:12PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by porcupine8 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @07:34PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Jasin Natael (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @08:49PM
      • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by ConceptJunkie (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:44PM
      • Yeah! by freeze128 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @02:38PM
      • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by nurb432 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:15PM
      • Re:Mo free will by totallyarb (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @01:37PM
      • Re:Mo free will by EsbenMoseHansen (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @02:49PM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by oliverthered (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @11:54AM
    • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Insightful)

      by IdleTime (561841) on Monday February 05 2007, @12:02PM (#17891136)
      Well, the real joke is "The land of the free" bullshit.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Canthros (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @12:42PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by SnowZero (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:11PM
          • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Canthros (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:18PM
          • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by jcr (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:32PM
          • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by grasshoppa (Score:3) Monday February 05 2007, @02:00PM
            • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by David_Shultz (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @04:21PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile (Score:5, Insightful)

                by grasshoppa (657393) <skennedy AT tpno-co DOT org> on Monday February 05 2007, @04:30PM (#17895508)
                (http://tpno-co.org/)
                You won't get any real arguments from me; Organized religion is in the business of selling the afterlife to gullible people.

                And they've made a mint.

                However, consider this when weighing scientology; They believe that millions of years ago, the evil lord Xenu packaged up all the useless cruft of society into giant space planes ( which, coincidentally looked like DC10s ), and flew them to Earth. There, he crashed these jets into volanos. But that wasn't good enough! No, then he built huge soul capturing centers to attract the wandering "thetans" and confuse them. Once released from these spirit reeducation camps, the thetans floated around confused until they found a prehistoric us. In which they found a host, and have been living in us ever since.

                Now, the virgin mary, jesus on a stick and moses are pretty spectacular, but this is just plain bonkers. No less for the fact that their prophet was a Sci Fi writer. A very very bad sci fi writer.

                So while jesus-centric religions are pretty nutty, you have to account for 2000+ years of history rewriting and folk tale telling to account for the weird shit. This crap is weird right out the gate.
                [ Parent ]
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Schemat1c (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:21PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by muffel (Score:3) Monday February 05 2007, @04:58PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by David_Shultz (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:45PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Schemat1c (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:34PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by David_Shultz (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @07:08PM
              • Religion? by Hoi Polloi (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @12:51PM
              • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Hoi Polloi (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @01:00PM
              • Re:Great post by David_Shultz (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @03:44PM
              • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
          • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Lars T. (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @02:14PM
          • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by heroofhyr (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @03:57PM
          • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Fulcrum of Evil (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @05:16PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by dgatwood (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:43PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by soft_guy (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @02:05PM
        • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by Brad Mace (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @02:26PM
      • Re: "The land of the free" bullshit by Paracelcus (Score:3) Monday February 05 2007, @01:02PM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Tom Cruise Missile by pilgrim23 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @12:36PM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Scary (Score:5, Insightful)

    by salimma (115327) on Monday February 05 2007, @11:35AM (#17890712)
    (http://hircus.wordpress.com/ | Last Journal: Monday October 30 2006, @09:12AM)
    Have we in the Western world become so enamored by political correctness that we cannot even take a joke for what it is? A similar double standard is happening in Britain right now: racism by the majority is rightfully condemned, but some minorities seem to be able to get away with inciting hatred [guardian.co.uk] (The Observer)
    • Re:Scary (Score:5, Insightful)

      by garcia (6573) on Monday February 05 2007, @11:38AM (#17890766)
      (http://www.lazylightning.org/)
      Have we in the Western world become so enamored by political correctness that we cannot even take a joke for what it is?

      We've become so enamored with religion and terrorism that we can't make jokes about anything having to do with either.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Scary by Captain Splendid (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @11:49AM
      • Re:Scary by IcyNeko (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @11:53AM
        • Re:Scary by jez9999 (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @06:04PM
      • Re:Scary by green menace (Score:3) Monday February 05 2007, @12:05PM
        • Re:Scary (Score:5, Funny)

          by DrKyle (818035) on Monday February 05 2007, @12:28PM (#17891622)

          A terrorist, A scientologist, and a donkey walk into a bar....

          The terrorist says to the scientologist,"Stay away from the donkey, I've packed him full of explosives."
          The scientologist says to the terrorist,"You can't blow up the donkey, I've packed him full of thetans!"
          Finally the donkey says,"Actually, I'm fine. You filled each other up, you Asses."
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Scary by Zabu (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @01:02PM
        • by hullabalucination (886901) on Monday February 05 2007, @01:51PM (#17893144)
          (Last Journal: Friday August 18 2006, @01:49PM)

          Note: the following joke is subject to final script approval by Mr. Tom Cruise, in accordance with his production company's contract with United Artists.

          OK, see, this Scientologist walks into a bar with a frog on his head. And the bartender says, "HEY...what the hell is THAT?!" And the frog says, "Well, I'm not sure exactly, but it started out as a wart on my ass."

          * * * * *

          The best ideas come as jokes. Make your thinking as funny as possible.
          --David Ogilvy

          [ Parent ]
      • Re:Scary by daeg (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @12:33PM
      • Re:Scary by adrianmonk (Score:2) Tuesday February 06 2007, @12:07AM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Scary by nickos (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @11:56AM
      • Re:Scary by MightyMartian (Score:2) Monday February 05 2007, @03:07PM
      • Re:Scary by corbettw (Score:1) Monday February 05 2007, @03:47PM
        • Re:Scary by corbettw (Score:1) Tuesday February 06 2007, @07:14PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Scary by Reality Master 101 (Score:3) Monday February 05 2007, @12:02PM