Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Censorship Your Rights Online

Wayback Machine Purged of Scientology Criticism 443

muldrake writes "The Wayback Machine, an archive of websites as they appeared in their past incarnations, is reported by CNET in this story as having censored the Scientology-critical Xenu.net, in a repeat of the heavy-handed tactics used against Google as reported in this previous Slashdot thread."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wayback Machine Purged of Scientology Criticism

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @06:33PM (#4323134)
    Operation Clambake [xenu.net]. It's doubtful that they'll give in to any CoS overtures.
  • by Drunken Coward ( 574991 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @06:34PM (#4323146)
    What is Scientology?
    by Xenu.net

    L. Ron Hubbard quote:
    "Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion"
    Reader's Digest reprint, May 1980, p.1
    Hubbard later created the Church of Scientology...

    Based on a text by ex-Scientologist Roland Rashleigh-Berry. Roland wrote: "This is my personal opinion. I grant permission to anyone to reproduce this material. This description has been tailored to people who have never been Scientologists and seek a simple and short explanation as to what it is and why it is surrounded by controversy."

    In a Nutshell
    The Church of Scientology is a vicious and dangerous cult that masquerades as a religion. Its purpose is to make money. It practices a variety of mind-control techniques on people lured into its midst to gain control over their money and their lives. Its aim is to take from them every penny that they have and can ever borrow and to also enslave them to further its wicked ends.
    It was started in the 1950s by a science fiction writer named L. Ron Hubbard in fulfilment to his declared aim to start a religion to make money. It is an offshoot to a method of psychotherapy he concocted from various sources which he named "Dianetics". Dianetics is a form of regression therapy. It was then further expanded to appear more like a religion in order to enjoy tax benefits. He called it "Scientology".

    Scientology is a confused concoction of crackpot, dangerously applied psychotherapy, oversimplified, idiotic and inapplicable rules and ideas and science-fiction drivel that is presented to its members (at the "advanced" levels) as profound spiritual truth.

    The Harm it Does to a Person
    The results of applying their crackpot psychotherapy (called "auditing") is to weaken the mind. The mind goes from a rational state to an irrational one as the delusional contents of the subconscious mind are brought to the surface and are assumed to be valid. It also makes a person more susceptible to suggestion since it submerges the critical thinking faculties of the mind into a partial subconscious state. It results in a permanent light hypnotic trance and so from thenceforth that person can be more easily controlled. The person will, to a much greater extent, believe and do whatever they are told. And of course this is used to the full in persuading them to hand over further money and dedicating themselves further to the cult.
    The results of applying their oversimplified and inapplicable rules in life is to lose the ability to think rationally and logically. A person loses the ability to think for themselves and so they lose the ability to challenge incorrect ideas. This makes them easier to control. It also isolates and alienates the person from society so that they withdraw from normal society and into their "Scientology" society. This further increases their susceptibility to the influence of their group. They end up being afraid of society, believing all society to be controlled by a group of drug companies, psychiatrists and financiers all of whom report to more remote masters. In other words they are in a state of mass paranoia. They therefore avoid reading newspapers and the like since they fear it will disturb their safe Scientology world. It is a downward spiral into madness.

    The science fiction content of Scientology is revealed to them after they have reached the state they call "Clear", meaning freed from the aberrations of the mind. However, perhaps "brainwashed" would be a more applicable word to describe the mental state of someone who has survived the near entire delusional contents of their subconscious mind brought to the surface and presented to them as "truth". On the "advanced" levels (called OT levels) above the state of "Clear" they encounter the story of Xenu. Xenu was supposed to have gathered up all the overpopulation in this sector of the galaxy, brought them to Earth and then exterminated them using hydrogen bombs. The souls of these murdered people are then supposed to infest the body of everyone. They are called "body thetans". On the advanced levels of Scientology a person "audits out" these body thetans telepathically by getting them to re-experience their being exterminated by hydrogen bombs. So people on these levels assume all their bad thoughts and faulty memories are due to these body thetans infesting every part of their body and influencing them mentally. Many Scientologists go raving mad at this point if they have not done so already.

    The "Ethics" Trap
    On the surface the Church of Scientology seems reasonable. The insane content of it is only revealed to a person when the early stuff has done its work and made them more susceptible. After a short while a person "believes" that Scientology is doing them good. They are then persuaded to help their new-found group further by donating money and/or working for the organisation for almost no money. Many people do exactly that.
    "Ethics" is used to good effect to trap a person. A person's natural tendency to do good is worked upon. Yes - they want to be more ethical, but what is ethical? This is where a clever trick is pulled! "Ethics" is redefined by Scientology in such a way that to be ethical is to be a better Scientologist and obey the "church". Young people, not yet made cynical through the machinations of life and politics, are very keen to contribute to the world and to be ethical. So the "ethics" trick works easily into persuading them to join the "church". Many of them join an elite group called the "Sea Org" where they become brainwashed slaves. There they work a hundred hour week for almost no pay. There they are subject to every cruel whim of their masters. It is a living hell that they endure because of the conditioning they have received and this now perverted sense of ethics that they have accepted. The "Sea Org" is the ultimate in brainwashed slavery. They are expected to work harder and harder to achieve ever higher targets of production. If they fail to meet their targets there are various penalties. One of them is to be put onto a diet of beans and rice and to miss sleep. Another is to be sentenced to a period on the RPF (Rehabilitation Project Force). This is the equivalent to "hard labour". Such is the extent of their brainwashing that they actually write "success stories" when they complete their sentences.

    Brainwashing Bites Back
    There is no doubt at all that L. Ron Hubbard incorporated brainwashing techniques into Scientology to put people under his control. He even wrote a "brainwashing manual" which is still in existence today. However there was a cruel twist in his scheme. He fell victim of it himself. In creating his devoted slaves, the Sea Org, he created an audience that believed every word he said. Now L. Ron Hubbard had an over-active imagination plus delusions of grandeur. The negative feedback he would obtain by being part of normal society was replaced by the positive feedback from his devoted followers. Through this his imagination got the better of him and combined with his delusions of grandeur, his thinking became increasingly bizarre which, on acceptance, led on to more bizarre thinking and the idea that he and Scientology had the job of saving the entire universe He wanted to take over the world in order to further Scientology's aims to save the universe and so branches of Scientology were set up to try to influence governments and gain positions where they could influence to world to a high degree. So what started out as a mass confidence trick backed up with brainwashing became a monstrous and insane organisation with fantastic, fanatical ideals. Because of this change, the Church of Scientology survived the death of their founder. It is like a runaway monster machine that tramples on society and peoples lives that is very difficult to stop.
    Stop the Monster
    The whole machinery called the "Church of Scientology" needs to be jammed somehow so that more people do not get sucked in and the people already in it have a chance to get out. We must not forget the people already in this "church". Although they are the ones perpetrating this crime they are also the victims. They need our help as well.
    And here we come to the "War on the Internet".

    The War on the Internet
    The "War on the Internet" is the war between the Church of Scientology and Internet users who copy their documents and post them on the Internet.
    The people who are copying their material and webbing it are using the huge accessibility of the world-wide web to get information out to people to warn them of the insanity and danger of this cult. They are doing it for the public good. The hope is that if they can get this information out to the public and make it broadly known then people will be forewarned and will not join the cult. If they can starve the cult of new members in this way then the whole organisation may collapse and then the existing members can be helped to return to society. But of course the people within the cult believe only their own founders interpretation of things so they use every means they can to stop this. Usually the method they use is harassment through lengthy and expensive legal processes. Sometimes it is physical harassment. Sometimes worse!

    The people who post and host the copyrighted and confidential works of Scientology are risking themselves to help warn the public about the dangers of Scientology. They have a strong sense of public duty and care for their fellow men. They are breaking copyright laws it is true but they are acting out of conscience and out of high human ideals. As they get broken down by legal or physical harassment more rise to take their place.

    I hope this short piece of mine is a befitting and deserving introduction to these people, the "Warriors of the Internet".

    In an article to alt.religion.scientology 6. September 1998, parkerbp@webtv.net wrote:
    Here's a short summary of my experience with $cientology.
    Staff was very friendly with me as a student and pc, as long as I kept forking over the dough for services and "fund raisers."
    I joined staff at an org and the attitude of other staff toward me got a little less than friendly.
    I joined the Sea Org and put up with alot of crap from staff and LRH's policy because I thought I was helping myself and my fellow man.
    I found out I was helping no one and hurting myself. I got out I began surfing the net and found many of my doubts and suspicions about the CO$ were very well founded.
    I had been lied to and deceived by the CO$ in order to gain my trust, my money, my loyalty, and dedication to a lost and evil cause.
    Now I am dedicated to voice my experiences and opinions of the cult of $cientology.
  • Some people... (Score:0, Informative)

    by 403Forbidden ( 610018 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @06:36PM (#4323155)
    Don't they know that they can stop the crawling of pages on google at least can be stopped using a simple robots.txt [robotstxt.org] file? Looking now it seems that the same is true for the Wayback Machine robots.txt [archive.org]
  • by geek ( 5680 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @06:37PM (#4323170)

    Operation Clam Bake. Wanna know an interestin fact? Scientologists believe we evolved from clams. Hence the name of the site "Clam Bake".

    This guy has balls taking on this cult. I'm surprised they have put a hit on him. I mean Travolta was a bad mofo in Pulp Fiction.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @06:44PM (#4323213)
    LawMeme not only has a detailed report with lots of links, they have suggestions on what archivel.org should do. See, Sherman, Set the Wayback Machine for Scientology [yale.edu] .
  • by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @06:46PM (#4323228)
    The government makes the copyright laws which are used by Scientology to suppress views critical of the church. So the government is involved in the censorship rather directly. That's why copyright law includes fair use provisions, to make it consistent with the first amendment.
  • by touretzky ( 215593 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @06:50PM (#4323253) Homepage
    As the owners of SlatkinFraud.com [slatkinfraud.com], one of the websites that has been blocked completely from the Internet Archive, we were left puzzled and disturbed by the recent explanation provided by archive.org for our site's omission.

    While we understand that the organization behind the Wayback Machine does not want to unwittingly contribute to copyright infringement, we are distressed by the way in which the removal of our site was conducted, and the lack of feedback that we received from archive.org when we questioned this decision earlier this year.

    When a Wayback Machine user attempts to access the archived version of SlatkinFraud.com, they are instead provided with a misleading message claiming that the 'site owners' requested that it not be included in the archive. This is wholly untrue, and entirely in contradiction to the actual views of the website owners in question, who would very much like to see our site become part of the Internet Archive. The material contained within SlatkinFraud.com is wholly owned and maintained by its site owners.

    Unfortunately, as has become clear in recent days, SlatkinFraud.com is not the only site that has been summarily removed from the Archive based on complaints from the Church of Scientology. In the explanation recently provided by archive.org, the writer notes that the Church "asserted ownership" of an unknown quantity of material that was, at the time, available through the Wayback Machine archives. The maintainers of archive.org, however, have apparently made no effort whatsoever to inform site owners of these complaints lodged against their material, and in fact, until now, had not even replied to direct questions regarding the removal of certain sites when asked by the site owners in question.

    This is clearly not an acceptable system for determining what sites or material should be archived by the Wayback Machine, since it does not adhere to one of the main provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act: the counter-notification process.

    Under the DMCA, the owner of a site that has been alleged to contain infringing material has the right to challenge that claim via a counternotification letter to the hosting ISP if he or she believes that the material in question does not infringe on the copyright in question. After receiving this counter-notification from the user, the ISP is obliged to replace any files that were temporarily removed pending the complaint, at which point the original complainant must either initiate formal legal action against the owner of the site, or drop the matter entirely.

    This system provides an important check to the sometimes perilous balance between the rights of copyright owners, and those of users. By formalizing the process, and allowing a response from the individual responsible for the alleged infringement, it frees the hosting company from the annoyance of dealing with frivolous claims.

    A similar situation that arose resulted from similar complaints made by Church of Scientology lawyers about certain listings on the popular search engine Google. These complaints initially resulted in the wholesale removal of several Scientology-related sites from the Google database. Once this omission was discovered, the decision taken by Google to remove the sites without notice led to an outcry from its users. In fact, on closer examination of the complaints from Scientology, it became immediately obvious that the Church's lawyers were acting in bad faith by deliberately mixing trademark and copyright complaints, even though trademark complaints are not covered under the DMCA at all.

    The ensuing barrage of criticism and media coverage both national and international forced Google to reconsider its decision. After several days, the company replaced the links in question, and agreed to make public any further DMCA complaints in cooperation with Chilling Effects, a non-profit website dedicated to preventing abuse of existing copyright law. This solution was welcomed by Google users, who had felt betrayed not only by the removal itself, but by the lack of disclosure on the part of Google regarding the initial complaints.

    The explanation offered by the Internet Archive does not mention whether the original complaints received from the Church of Scientology were made under the provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Such information would be helpful to site owners such as ourselves, as it would assist us in determining whether a complaint is justified, and remove any infringing material on our own volition.

    Assuming that it was, in fact, a DMCA request, it would serve archive.org well to follow the same procedure as that eventually and successfully - - adopted by Google, and make every effort to inform site owners of such complaints in a timely manner. This could be done through a simple email alert system that would inform the site owner that a complaint had been made, or through a similar policy to that of Google, and publicizing the letters, either on the archive.org website itself or through an interested third party such as Chilling Effects.

    This would allow the site owners to decide whether or not to issue a counter-notification, and relieve the Internet Archive of any concerns over contributory liability that may have played a role in its decision to remove the material without warning. It would also discourage copyright owners from making frivolous complaints about material that is obviously protected by fair use, since the process requires that formal legal action be taken within thirty days of receiving the counter notification letter.

    Should archive.org decide not to re-list a site within the Wayback Machine at this point, which is, of course, its right, it should also refrain from suggesting that this was at the request of the site owner, and instead, explain its own concerns over potential infringement.

    Finally, given the enormity of the Internet Archive project, and the benefits that it has provided, and, we hope, will continue to provide to the online community, it is essential for the Library maintainers to be open and transparent about the methodology used in selecting sites to be archived. Removing sites from the archive in a clandestine fashion, as dictated by the current policy, will only lead to increased concern that the Archive itself is rewriting the Internet history that it seeks to chronicle.

    The Internet Archive's stated commitment is to provide a useful, wide-ranging resource for researchers, historians and scholars. It is surely in part due to such an admirable mandate that the Internet Archive has benefited from contributions from sponsors such as Alexa Internet, AT&T, Compaq and Xerox PARC, not to mention many individual supporters who believe in the idea of an Internet history that is freely accessible to all. It is doubtful that these supporters would want to see this ambitious initiative tainted by the suggestion that the integrity of the archive itself has been corrupted by those who would misuse copyright and trademark laws to censor views with which they disagree. The risk of such silent, selective discrimination against protected speech is great; the power to prevent such abuses by making all information related to such attempts to discriminate will always be greater.

    Clearly, the best course of action is for the Internet Archive to adopt policy that is not only transparent, but dedicated to protecting not only its own interests, but those of copyright owners, site creators and, of course, the thousands of individuals who use the Wayback Machine and other Internet Archive services on a daily basis. On balance, the approach taken by Google, modified appropriately for the particular situation faced by the Internet Archive, would seem to be an excellent roadmap for the Internet Archive to follow.

    Kady O'Malley [wwwaif.net], Dave Touretzky [cmu.edu], and Scott Pilutik

    Owners of Slatkinfraud.com [slatkinfraud.com]

  • by __aawsxp7741 ( 78632 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @06:50PM (#4323255)
    Find information about scientology at

    freenet:SSK@Zl388MATYv0Ah8GY6I2GuuNJapYPAgM/borg /2 //
    freenet:SSK@WRhGF3h0ijFh1eVJnFu~H9OyIpAPAgM/an tisc ient/5//
    freenet:SSK@jbf~W~x49RjZfyJwplqwurpNmg0P AgM/xenu2/ /

    on freenet [freenetproject.org].
  • Re:Scientology (Score:5, Informative)

    by DerekTheRed ( 579180 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @06:51PM (#4323258)
    You can't, genius. That's the whole point. Their "religious technology" is copyrighted, so anyone who posts it, or even refers to it, gets sued by the "church."

    Apparently the deal is that A. they feel they have the right to copyright whatever they want (as I religious institution, I have my doubts about that) but also B. their beliefs are that if you hear the "higher level" teachings before you are ready, you will become sick and die. That's why it's always important to let a low-level Scientology "preclear" know that your consciousness is made up of many spirits called "thetans" from outer space who were banished to this planet billions of years ago by the evil galactic overlord Xenu. Then ask them if they are feeling well.

  • by fobbman ( 131816 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @06:52PM (#4323263) Homepage
    Let's keep the chain going by sending your emails of disapproval here [mailto].
  • Copyright statement (Score:2, Informative)

    by Student_Tech ( 66719 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @07:07PM (#4323354) Journal
    Has anybody read the copyright statement @ http://www.scientology.org/csi.htm .
    " Users are not authorized to download or transmit any of these materials electronically "

    So by viewing it on a computer you are commiting an illegal act according to the words of the document. It also says that you may not print it.

    Skiming their trademarks page, http://www.scientology.org/tmnotice.htm , that ones a killer. But skimming it in their trade marks they claim (among other things): flag, freedom, Source. After some items they have Symbol or Logo, but not after these.
  • more anti-CoS sites (Score:4, Informative)

    by edgarde ( 22267 ) <slashdot@surlygeek.com> on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @07:10PM (#4323374) Homepage Journal
  • Fighting back. (Score:3, Informative)

    by BoneFlower ( 107640 ) <george@worroll.gmail@com> on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @07:17PM (#4323407) Journal
    Heres a few ideas on fighting back.

    1) Sign up for all the free websites you can. Throw as much scientology material as will fit in the space provided. Get as many people as possible to link to you. As each gets knocked down, keep putting more up. The internet can be faster than Scientology. Don't do this on paid webspace or a website you make money from unless you can afford the financial loss of the site getting pulled.

    2) Throw megs and megs of anti scientology materials and "copyrighted" Scientology texts in your Kazaa, Direct Connect, Gnutella, etc. share directories. In Direct Connect, you can have a line that users will see a brief description of what you are offering. MAke sure to put Anti-Scientology there.

    3) Get on pro Scientology mailing lists(there have to be a few with open membership) and spam it with anti scientology information. Even if they make it an invite only list in response, you still have won as fewer impressionable minds will randomly join.

    Of course, you have to be a little careful especially with the last tactic, don't use your ISP email address.
  • by fobbman ( 131816 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @07:17PM (#4323408) Homepage
    Read all about it over in their forums in this thread [archive.org].

  • Re:Consequences. (Score:3, Informative)

    by Spruitje ( 15331 ) <ansonr&spruitje,org> on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @07:19PM (#4323417) Homepage

    You know, one day they're gonna fuck with the wrong person--say, a Tim McVeigh type--bankrupt the hell out of them, ruin their life, the usual. And at that point, when said person has nothing much to live for anymore and certainly nothing to lose, Scientology HQ will go up in a big orange-red ball of ammonium nitrate and diesel oil.

    Well, they've tried it with Karin Spaink and XS4ALL here in the Netherlands.
    And they lost.
  • Re:Consequences. (Score:2, Informative)

    by theLOUDroom ( 556455 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @07:20PM (#4323431)
    I doubt that. Ever hear of the USS Cole?
    Now if THEY we in a submarine, it might be a different story.
  • Re:What the hay? (Score:2, Informative)

    by REDNOROCK ( 597025 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @07:23PM (#4323446)
    The scientologist have some weird fucking veiws. If i'm not mistaken, they have all this crap about how it's ok to kill/assault/lie/cheat/defam and destroy people if they are against the religion. Anything you can do to silence the 'blasphemeres' is OK! In other words, they think it'd be ok to, say they see you driving along, 'accidently' swerve into you and make your car go head long into a light pole, or use any kind of leverage they have to spread lies that you molest children, have sex with your sister, and kill puppies. All of a sudden, you can't get a job anywhere, and you start getting ticekts for no reason. Of course, it depends who wants your ass. Not ever scientologist really knows what they're about. But, you get what i'm saying.
  • Re:What the hay? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @07:40PM (#4323571)

    You can make fun of them all you want. But if you publish copywrited materials they will nail your ass to the wall. If you slander them, they will nail your ass to the wall. And the court will decide whether or not you have slandered them. That means you will pay a lawyer. Can you afford that?

  • Re:What the hay? (Score:5, Informative)

    by gentlewizard ( 300741 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @07:41PM (#4323581)
    Slashdot HAS been targeted. One of the very few times that content has been deleted from Slashdot instead of just being modded into oblivion was in response to a Scientology lawsuit.
  • Re:Consequences. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Platinum Dragon ( 34829 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @07:57PM (#4323687) Journal
    And at that point, when said person has nothing much to live for anymore and certainly nothing to lose, Scientology HQ will go up in a big orange-red ball of ammonium nitrate and diesel oil.

    Frankly, I'm surprised that it hasn't happened already. But with their present behavior, it's only a matter of time.

    Don't even joke about this kind of stuff - Keith Henson was convicted in California of religious intolerance for someone else cracking a joke on alt.religion.scientology about passing by the headquarters of Golden Era Productions (a Scientology front company) with a "Tom Cruise Missile", and published the coordinates for the complex, along with the occasional protest of Scientology orgs. He was convicted, and bolted to Canada. Last I heard, he applied for refugee status.
  • by llywrch ( 9023 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @08:00PM (#4323708) Homepage Journal
    Take a look at

    http://www.rdrop.com/users/llywrch/essays/mhunt. sc ientology.faq


    http://www.rdrop.com/users/llywrch/essays/mhunt. bo oks.html

    (Take care -- in previewing these URLS I notice that the http interface has put a space in them.)

    Martin Hunt was, 5 years ago, the most prolific poster to alt.religion.scientology. He tired of the fight on a.r.s., & deleted many of his posts & for a while took down his own website. These two items came from there.

    BTW, he returned to a.r.s., & I believe updated these two items. I still have them on my website because I'm too lazy to remove them. Feel free to download & preserve them on your own machines. (And if I get slashdotted, my ISP may remove the links, but you should be able to find them on the way-back machine.)


  • by Derleth ( 197102 ) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {strabhc}> on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @08:01PM (#4323712) Homepage
    Conclusion: What was the Church of Scientology thinking? This move will only increase the number of people hitting xenu.net.
    It's an old Scientology dogma to "attack, never defend." The Scienos cannot bear to have sites critical of them to exist where they can do something about it. The only reason xenu.net has existed this long is because it's hosted by XS4ALL [xs4all.nl], a hosting concern in The Netherlands, and is therefore out of range of the vicious Scieno lawyers. Anything Scientology can hit, it will hit as a matter of dogma.

    In a very real way, the Church of Scientology is waging a Crusade on the Internet. Its knights are lawyers, its swords are copyright law, and its Holy Land is an Internet the Church can control.

    Well, the Raging Clueless Cult will never silence this heathen. Muahahaha!
  • Re:What the hay?-MS (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @08:06PM (#4323749)
    Kind of like Microsoft.

    Actually Microsoft and Scientology have deeper ties than most people would expect. Microsoft usually never licenses any software, but in case of Diskeeper the made an exception:

    "Diskeeper", the defragmentation program integrated in Windows 2000 and Windows XP is written by "Executive Software", which was founded by Craig Jensen, an "operating Thetan at level VIII".

    Jensen is not only a Scientologist himself, he also only hires Scientologists - He requested: "Fully trained scientologists, computer skills desirable but not a prerequisite"

    The German government requested Microsoft to release the source-code of Diskeeper for review. Microsoft agreed, but later said they can't disclose the source-code.

    Later on, Microsoft released instructions (which included some registry-hacking) to remove Diskeeper from Windows 2000, which obviously was enough for the German government. That Diskeeper was reactivated after every Servicepack did not disturb anybody, obviously. I have not heard anything about Windows XP - only that Diskeeper is still in there, probably everybody has just lost interest.

    My personal opinion is that Microsoft probably does not have the source of Diskeeper themselves which would mean that not a single non-Scientologist has ever seen a line of code from Diskeeper.

    As a defragmentation program, Diskeeper has of course full access to all files on any Windows 2000 and Windows XP computer.

    Scientologie's stated goal is "clear world" which means the elimination of all non-Scientologists (either by conversion or by other means) on this planet.

    More information here:


    Posted anonymously for obvious reasons.

  • by Hanno ( 11981 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @08:11PM (#4323781) Homepage
    What was the Church of Scientology thinking?

    Allow me to point to two earlier postings to explain why Scientology does this:

    They make enemies because they need enemies [slashdot.org]

    Scientology is a pyramid scheme. The product? paranoia. [slashdot.org]
  • Re:I don't get it... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Sylver Dragon ( 445237 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @08:39PM (#4323927) Journal
    Whether or not it's censorship, lack of free-speech, whatever. THEY HAVE THE WORK COPYRIGHTED.

    Mod me down, but this has to be said.

    Copyright laws exist to protect the authors -- they might be using the law pretty heavy-handedly, but it's the law, they can use it.

    You are right, the law applies to everyone, including the fair-use doctrine. I have every right to quote parts of a copyrighted, written, work for editorial purposes. As long as I properly cite the source, this is allowed by copyright law. As such, if I put up a web site and slam scientology, using exceprts from thier books, this is allowed, and legal. Just because my site is negitive about thier cult, doesn't mean that they can deny me fair-use.
    No, these crack-pots are simply using the threat of lawsuits to silence critics. Almost makes me wish I was German, they recognized the Cult of Scientology for what it was, a huge pyramid scheme that brainwashes people, and banned it. Hell, they even went so far as to force Microsoft to give them a way to strip Diskeeper out of Win2k [wired.com] because the company that made it has strong ties to the Cult of Scientology.

  • Re:What the hay? (Score:2, Informative)

    by The Qube ( 749 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @08:53PM (#4323978)
    A great book to read on the subject of CoS, their philosophy and tacticts is "A Piece of Blue Sky [cmu.edu]" by Jon Atack.

    The author was a member of the church and he recounts his experieneces from the time he joined the church and the events that followed.

  • Re:What the hay? (Score:5, Informative)

    by nelsonal ( 549144 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @08:58PM (#4323994) Journal
    I should really make this a text file so I don't have to type it each time...

    The McDonald's case, although popular belief would hold otherwise, was actually a reasonably good decision. The story brought to the jury, which is all that is allowed to be decided upon, goes as such. The lady recieved second and third degree burns all around her lower torso and legs, to the extent that quite a bit of plastic surgery was required. However even including reimbursment for medical bills and pain and suffering the compensatory damage was very small (160,000 USD). I think almost everyone can agree that was probably fair, since it compensates her for her lost time, and expenses. The rest of the judgement was punative, and was intended to punish the McDonalds corporation for their behavior. Keep in mind that the verdict was probably calculated as a result of McDonald's finances. It was later reduced to 3 times compensatory damages.
    What sort of behavior would incite a jury to want to punish the company like that? Well, first of all realize that coffee is usually served around 160 F (~71 C), which will not produce the burns she suffered. The coffee was estimated to be about 190 F (~87 C), by medical experts, from the nature and severity of the burns. McDonald's was not errant in keeping their coffee this hot, it was corporate policy. The policy was designed to save money, because hotter coffee lasted longer before dispoal was required. The jury deemed this action so negligent that they decided to punish the company, hense the judgement.

    You can read much more than I wish to type here, at a consumer's attorney page here. [lectlaw.com]
  • by xeeno ( 313431 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @09:28PM (#4324129) Homepage
    Warning! Top Secret Clam facts are about to be exposed.
    This may cause jaw pain and extreme cases of uncontrolled

    All over the internet, the latest question due to well known
    controversies originating from alt.religion.scientology seems to
    be, "What is this bit about clams?" "Why do people on ARS think
    this is funny?", and the ever popular, "Can I be in on the joke?"

    Well, here are some answers to all of this and more.
    L. Ron Hubbard late in 1952 wrote a book called "What To Audit",
    later renamed "The History Of Man". It is still sold by the
    Church Of Scientology and this book contains many of the basic
    beliefs of the Church Of Scientology. It is considered by many
    connosieurs of kook literature as a true classic of kook nonsense
    and it is well worth looking for this book in used books stores
    if you are indeed interested in a book that proves that there isn't
    anything so stupid that people won't believe in it if it's in a book.

    L. Ron Hubbard in the introduction claimed it was "a cold blooded
    look at your last 60 trillion years." How could this be wrong?
    He also claimed his book finally proved the theory of evolution.

    (Patience, we will get to them clams soon enough.)

    This following excert of History Of Man is taken from the book
    Bare Faced Messiah by Russell Miller, a fine book for the neophyte
    Scientologist watcher and clam afficionado.
    Thanks also to Diane Richardson who originally typed this excerpt
    up and posted it to ARS.

    In a narrative style that wobbled uncertainly between
    schoolboy fiction and a pseudo-scientific medical paper,
    Hubbard sought to explain the the human body was occupied by
    both a thetan and a 'genetic entity', or GE, a sort of low-
    grade soul located more or less in the centre of the body.
    To underpin his new science, Hubbard created an entire
    cosmology, the essence of which was that the true self of
    an individual was an immortal, omniscient and ominpotent
    entity called a 'thetan'. In existence before the beginning
    of time, thetans picked up and discarded millions of bodies
    over trillions of years.

    ('The genetic entity apparently enters the protoplasm line
    some two days or a week prior to conception. There is some
    evidence that the GE is actually double, one entering on the
    sperm side...') The GE carried on through the evolutionary
    line, 'usually on the same planet', whereas the thetan only
    came to earth about 35,000 years ago to supervise the
    development of caveman into homo sapiens. Thus the GE was
    once 'an anthropoid in the deep forests of forgetten
    continents or a mollusc seeking to survive on the shore of
    some lost sea'. The discovery of the GE (Hubbard hailed
    every fanciful new idea as a 'discovery') 'makes it possible
    at last to vindicate the theory of evolution proposed by Darwin'.

    Much of the book was devoted to a re-working of evolution,
    starting with 'an atom, complete with electronic rings'
    after which came cosmic impact producing a 'photon
    converter', the first single-cell creature, then seaweed,
    jellyfish and the clam.
    ^^^^^^ Look! Clams!

    Many engrams, for example, could be traced back to clams.
    The clam's big problem was that there was a conflict
    between the hinge that wanted to open and the hinge that
    wanted to close. It was easy to restimulate the engram
    caused by the defeat of the weaker hinge, Hubbard pronounced,
    by asking a pre-clear to imagine a clam on a beach opening
    and closing its shell very rapidly and at the same time
    making an opening and closing motion with thumb and
    forefinger. This gesture, he said, would upset large
    numbers of people.

    'By the way,' he warned, 'your discussion of these incidents
    with the uninitiated in Scientology can cause havoc.
    Should you describe the "clam" to some one [sic], you may
    restimulate it in him to the extent of causing severe jaw
    pain. Once such victim, after hearing about a clam death,
    could not use his jaws for three days.'

    Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
    Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
    Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!

    Does your jaw ache, dear reader?
    Clams! And people pay to be taught stuff like this from silly lads
    who believe stuff like this. And they claim it is science!
    And a religion! Low level Scientologists are discouraged from
    reading this book and are told it will all be explained later
    when they are ready to understand the higher secrets of Scientology.

    'Clam' is a word used on alt.religion.scientology to describe
    scientologists who believe stuff like this and explains the rash of
    clam jokes of alt.religion.scientology.

    More secrets of Scientology:

    After the clam became the 'Weeper' or the 'Boohoo', a
    mollusc that rolled in the surf for half a million years,
    pumping sea water out of its shell as it breathed, hence
    its name. Weepers had 'trillions of misadventures',
    prominent among them the anxiety caused by trying to gulp
    air before being swamped by the next wave. 'The inability
    of a pre-clear to cry,' Hubbard explained, 'is partly a
    hang-up in the Weeper. He is about to be hit by a wave,
    has his eyes full of sand or is frightened about opening
    his shell because he may be hit.'

    Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
    Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!

    Progressing along the genetic time-track, evolution arrived
    at the sloth, which 'had bad times falling out of trees',
    the ape and the famous Piltdown Man, which was the cause
    of a multitude of engrams, ranging from obsessions about
    biting to family problems. These could be traced back to
    the fact that 'the Piltdown teeth were enormous and he was
    quite careless as to whom and what he bit.' Indeed, so
    careless was the Piltdown Man, Hubbard recorded, that he
    was sometimes guilty of 'eating one's wife and other
    somewhat illogical activities.' (Unfortunately
    for Hubbard, just twelve months after The History of Man
    was published, the supposed fossil remains of primitive
    man found in gravel on Piltdown Common in the south of
    England were exposed as a hoax. The Piltdown Man had
    never existed.

    The History of Man drifted into pure science fiction when
    Hubbard came to the point of explaining how thetans
    moved from body to body. Thetans abandoned bodies earlier
    than GEs, it appeared. While the GE stayed around to see
    the body through to death, thetans were obliged to report
    to a between-lives 'implant station' where they were
    implanted with a variety of control phases while waiting
    to pick up another body, sometimes in competition with
    other disembodied thetans. Hubbard revealed that most
    implant stations were on Mars, although women occasionally
    had to report elsewhere in the solar system and there
    was a 'Martian implant station somewhere in the Pyrenees'.

    Well, there you have it. How can we deny the genius of
    L.Ron Hubbard? The thoughtful and useful ideas he taught
    the world? He obvious deep learning and careful judgement?
    The certain correctness and amazing insights of the basic beliefs
    of Scientology?

    More tartar sauce with your clams?

    Poor Little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
    Poor Little Clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
    Pope Charles
    SubGenius Pope Of Houston
  • by emkman ( 467368 ) on Tuesday September 24, 2002 @10:34PM (#4324558)
    Besides all the general information related to Scientology found at Operation Clambake [xenu.net], there are two categories of information that I feel are most important in understanding the premises under which the Church of Scientology, or Co$ for short, operate:

    This page [xenu.net] explains Scientology's misuse of copyrights and explains why their documents should not be subject to copyright laws. Basically, copyrights were intended to encourage publication of works, the exact opposite of what Scientology is trying to do. Furthermore, copyright law allows fair use for the purpose of critical review. How can you review something that isnt published? A significant portion, if not the whole document would need to be reproduced in order to evaluate it fairly.

    Legal Standings:
    Read the decision of WOLLERSHEIM vs CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY OF CALIFORNIA [xenu.net]. To sum up the case, a man who was mentally unstable was psychologically tortured and further had his business and life ruined by Scientology. He sued and won millions after 20+ years. The judgement is important because it shows that Scientology is a religion, however its actions were not protected by the First Ammendment because its actions were performed in a coercive manner, and further that the Co$ deliberately tried to ruin his life socially, financially, and psychologically, by means not neccesarily legal. This covers the practices of Fair Game and Freeloaders Debt used and condoned by the Co$.
  • by tikk ( 199159 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @01:03AM (#4325332) Homepage
    The Catholic Church does not have a policy of "Always attack, never defend.", it does not have an "Office of Special Affairs" that hires P.I.'s. It does not break into government buildings.

    Actually.. you'd be surprised at what lengths the Catholic church is willing to go to. This Article [bostonphoenix.com] will scare the crap out of anyone not paying close attention to the priest-molestation saga. The first lines of this story sound like they're describing Scientology..

    Blaming rape victims for their own recklessness.

    Hiring private investigators to track down incriminating evidence.

    Suing victims for slander.

    Suing minor victims' parents for failing to watch over them.

    Intimidating witnesses.

    Concealing evidence.

    Stonewalling court proceedings.

    Denying knowledge of abuse -- unless the victims can prove otherwise.

    In the high-stakes arena of personal-injury lawsuits, bare-knuckle tactics like these are commonplace. But it's the last thing you might expect from the world's largest and most powerful spiritual institution. For nearly two decades, however, the Roman Catholic Church has used these very methods in its defense in lawsuits alleging sexual abuse by members of the clergy.

  • by troc ( 3606 ) <troc.mac@com> on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:08AM (#4325565) Homepage Journal
    Dunno about Germany, but Scientology is regarded as a cult in France and is well and truly illegal there :)

    It's possibly one of the few reasons to live in France (I have to say that, I'm British)

  • Finally lost one... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Misch ( 158807 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @02:34AM (#4325642) Homepage
    Actually, $cientology lost one recently. A court case, started back in the 80's, which cult head David Miscavaige promised "Not one thin dime for Wollersheim", was finally resolved this year when $cientology paid 86,748,430 thin dimes ($8,674,848) to Lawrence Wollersheim after the long battle [xenu.net]. He originally won $30 million in a lawsuit, but was later reduced to $2.5 million on appeal. $cientology drained the assets out of the "Church of $cientology of California", then claimed bankruptcy, forcing long drawn out proceedings to extend the judgement to the receivers of C$C of California's assets.

    As Wollersheim prepared to expose $cientology's true corporate structure, $cientology paid the $2.5 million, plus stautatory interest of 10% since judgement (hence the $8.6 million award).
  • by praedor ( 218403 ) on Wednesday September 25, 2002 @10:09AM (#4327012) Homepage

    I have experienced a small piece of Scientology's perfidy. Posting an obvious joke about Tom Cruise missiles for sale to be used to attack Scientology centers throughout the world in a newsgroup spied upon by scientologists got a PI sent after me. He misrepresented himself to a university cop where I was working (and from where I posted mentioned joke) as an FBI agent. The university cop, in conjunction with university computer security personnel hunted me down by manually searching for a computer with a certain IP address (that assigned to me). They found it and investigated me and almost pulled my internet privaleges.

    The university cop told me that this "FBI Agent" indicated that I would probably be visited by FBI agents and questioned (as a potential terrorist with Tom Cruise Missiles, whatever those are). I decided not to wait on the FBI to come to me and went to the local FBI office and presented myself so I could clear up the ridiculous situation. They had NO clue who I was, had no interest in me, had never heard of this (mis)represented FBI agent that started the whole mess. With the aid of some anti-scientology people and a little internet detective work, I identified the likely "FBI Agent" as a particular PI working out of the DC area and, lo and behold, known to certain scientology critics as an occassional tool of the Scientologist criminal organization. I identified the individual to the FBI and the university cop. The university cop was dreadfully sorry for having taken any action against me and became my ally (too late for certain things...a good deal of irreversable personal information was provided to the fake "FBI Agent".

    The REAL feds contacted this PI to see about his criminal act of misrepresenting himself as a Federal Officer - he denied it of course, inspite of the clear statement to the contrary by the university cop (this is a real cop, not a fake student cop or some such...they are a branch of the city cops where the university resided).

    The Scientologist criminal organization tried to cause me trouble but I won in the end. If any real harm comes out of this, I still have the very real option to sue the crap out of certain people for this entire episode (there were some agregious privacy violations involved). I have kept ALL my correspondence with the FBI, the university cop, and those who aided in my personal investigation of who the "FBI Agent" really was. It took only a few days of relatively simple internet-based investigating to ID this clown.

    The Scientologists are a criminal terrorist group and needs to be eliminated just as surely as they were eliminated from Turkey recently.

Can anyone remember when the times were not hard, and money not scarce?