PDA

View Full Version : Scientology on trial in France!



elipson
27th May 09, 01:24 PM
It's been a while since we talked about the Co$


http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2009/05/27/bittermann.fr.scientology.trial.cnn

It's about time France did something right.

HappyOldGuy
27th May 09, 01:29 PM
Putting people on trial for their ideas=bullshit.

Period, end of discussion.

Even if they are dumbfuck clams.

Fearless Ukemi
27th May 09, 01:34 PM
Taking away people's basic freedoms never equals right. Fuck France in its French ass.

Spade: The Real Snake
27th May 09, 01:42 PM
LOL.
Inquisition, mark V

elipson
27th May 09, 01:45 PM
You guys didn't watch the video did you?

Odacon
27th May 09, 02:14 PM
This is a fraud case, it has nothing to do with their beliefs.

HappyOldGuy
27th May 09, 02:15 PM
This is a fraud case, it has nothing to do with their beliefs.
Err, the alleged fraud is their religious beliefs. This is exactly equivalent to a mormon suing for their tithe money back because there is no god.

Odacon
27th May 09, 02:26 PM
Err, the alleged fraud is their religious beliefs. This is exactly equivalent to a mormon suing for their tithe money back because there is no god.

No, it's more like vulnerable people being bullied into donating large sums of money by a dangerous greed driven cult.

Robot Jesus
27th May 09, 02:27 PM
don't think it's quite that black and white, it says they pressured into giving them money.

what does that mean, shamed into it, or something worse.

I reserve judgement until i meet with console in my chambers.

HappyOldGuy
27th May 09, 02:32 PM
No, it's more like vulnerable people being bullied into donating large sums of money by a dangerous greed driven cult.

What is the difference, please be specific.

Ajamil
27th May 09, 02:38 PM
What were the claims made about the pills' effects? That's the main fraud aspect.

Artful Dentures
27th May 09, 02:39 PM
No, it's more like vulnerable people being bullied into donating large sums of money by a dangerous greed driven cult.


Which religion does this not apply to?

HappyOldGuy
27th May 09, 02:50 PM
What were the claims made about the pills' effects? That's the main fraud aspect.

In the states, they are banned by court order from making falsifiable medical claims for auditing or the E meter. It's possible that they don't follow those rules overseas, but given the relative sizes of the groups and the legal climate in europe, I'm dubious. And the arguments presented by the state and plaintiffs in France haven't included any claims of that kind. Usually they stick to the nebulous "clearing your past life garbage makes you healthier in this one" kind of stuff.

Fearless Ukemi
27th May 09, 04:08 PM
No, it's more like vulnerable people being bullied into donating large sums of money by a dangerous greed driven cult.

Who is making them join/ stay? Everyone knows or should know that scientology is all about buying your salvation.

elipson
27th May 09, 04:44 PM
So if I start a cult that states the faithful must mug others to provide money for my faith, does that fall under the umbrella of religious freedom?

Of course not! There are some things that should not be condoned under religious freedom.


Who is making them join/ stay? Everyone knows or should know that scientology is all about buying your salvation.

Did you miss this episode of "how the sociocide turns"?

I can't tell if you seriously are asking this or are just asking the question to entice the answer.

Fearless Ukemi
27th May 09, 05:03 PM
If your religion asks you to do something illegal, then expect to have fun practicing that religion.

I'd like to get some details as to the bullying that is being claimed and why scientology should be held responsible rather than the individuals carrying out said bullying.

elipson
27th May 09, 05:24 PM
Holy crap he seriously doesn't know.

Scientology has a long history of institutionalized thuggery and intimidation.

I don't even know where to start.....

HappyOldGuy
27th May 09, 05:30 PM
Holy crap he seriously doesn't know.

Scientology has a long history of institutionalized thuggery and intimidation.

I don't even know where to start.....
Start at the beginning, go through the middle, get to the end. It's not that long a list. There is quite alot of evidence that Scientology is run by assholes, some evidence of honest to goodness thuggery, especially to those they percieve as threats, and none whatsoever that people are kept in the church by any force other than social pressure from their peers.

Most of the thuggery is old.

Fearless Ukemi
27th May 09, 05:34 PM
Holy crap he seriously doesn't know.

Scientology has a long history of institutionalized thuggery and intimidation.

I don't even know where to start.....


Replace scientology with most any mainstream religion of your choice.

You make no valid point as to how this justifies the French government.

Fearless Ukemi
27th May 09, 05:38 PM
So, thuggery is ok when the government does it?

Dark Helmet
27th May 09, 05:38 PM
Hold on

Dark Helmet
27th May 09, 05:40 PM
http://www.zipperfish.com/zf-toons/yaafm-11-scientology/

I can't embed this. But watch it everyone and enjoy.

HappyOldGuy
27th May 09, 05:43 PM
Replace scientology with most any mainstream religion of your choice.

You make no valid point as to how this justifies the French government.

Scientology had a "secret police" of sorts who got themselves in shitloads of trouble. Bugging government offices. Breaking into opponents homes and offices, etc. Beyond anything any mainstream religion has been guilty of for quite a long time.

But your second sentence is still valid.

Spade: The Real Snake
27th May 09, 05:55 PM
Scientology had a "secret police" of sorts who got themselves in shitloads of trouble. Bugging government offices. Breaking into opponents homes and offices, etc. Beyond anything any mainstream religion has been guilty of for quite a long time.

The most frightening thing I read was about the Scientologists following to their homes, the people who were picketing them.

Fearless Ukemi
27th May 09, 06:07 PM
Scientology had a "secret police" of sorts who got themselves in shitloads of trouble. Bugging government offices. Breaking into opponents homes and offices, etc. Beyond anything any mainstream religion has been guilty of for quite a long time.

But your second sentence is still valid.

I consider Islam to be a mainstream religion as practiced by the majority of its followers, but we still hear of modern day thuggery going down in the name of Islam in some places. Sometimes in westernized countires.

Sun Wukong
27th May 09, 09:06 PM
Personally, I don't really care what justifications they use to wage legal war with the $ci-cult, as long as those justifications can hold up in court.

The rulership of that pile of saprophytes belong buried under tons of earth and rocks.

bobyclumsyninja
27th May 09, 11:30 PM
Personally, I don't really care what justifications they use to wage legal war with the $ci-cult, as long as those justifications can hold up in court.

The rulership of that pile of saprophytes belong buried under tons of earth and rocks.

haha, I dont' think some of the posters are aware of the tactic the """""church"""" uses to 'enforce' happy think, or whatever the fuck they call it.

It's a giant ponzi scheme, with fraud, extortion, murder, intimidation, harrassment, forced hospitalization etc etc.

Whatever they're on trial for, it's probably not enough. When the founder of your religion says "if you want to make real money, start a religion" and then does....well....it's some bullshit. Especially when that same a-hole lives in international waters as some kind of retched, perverted jabba the hut, but without all the morals.

HappyOldGuy
27th May 09, 11:33 PM
It's a giant ponzi scheme, with fraud, extortion, murder, intimidation, harrassment, forced hospitalization etc etc.


I'm familiar enough to know that intimidation and harassment are the only ones that are even vaguely true. Forced hospitalization? I don't think you know much about the clams at all.

socratic
28th May 09, 06:24 AM
Remember that Emily girl they starved to death? RC-45? Operation Snow White? Operation Clam Bake? End of Cycle? Good times, good times.

There's actually records of people being harrassed into committing suicide by the cult of scientology. Ron Hubbard said it was perfectly all right to kill SPs and religiously justified shooting people with a colt 45.

People do end up destitute or dead [remember that Emily girl, whose body was dumped in front of a hospital once the COS fuckers realised they'd killed her?] in that organisation.

bobyclumsyninja
28th May 09, 09:15 AM
I'm familiar enough to know that intimidation and harassment are the only ones that are even vaguely true. Forced hospitalization? I don't think you know much about the clams at all.

So intimidation and harassment are their only faults worldwide? You might consider looking, and you'll find it's much worse than that. Assuming you're not a youtube "carlo gambino was teh ultimate" gangster apologist type.


Just go look.

Craigypooh
28th May 09, 09:50 AM
In the states, they are banned by court order from making falsifiable medical claims for auditing or the E meter. It's possible that they don't follow those rules overseas, but given the relative sizes of the groups and the legal climate in europe, I'm dubious. And the arguments presented by the state and plaintiffs in France haven't included any claims of that kind. Usually they stick to the nebulous "clearing your past life garbage makes you healthier in this one" kind of stuff.

The video seemed to suggest that the charges centre around the use of vitamins and exercise routines to cure an illness, in return for lots of cash. Sounds like there's a case to answer to me.

Fearless Ukemi
28th May 09, 10:47 AM
I'm tired of government interfering in everything on behalf of stupid people. This is really why gambling is not legal in most of the USA and why I can no longer prey on the epic fish pond that was Party Poker. The government wants to rip off all the stupid people without any of our competition.

As for the so called victims, let them get fucked if scientology appeals to them.

KO'd N DOA
28th May 09, 10:50 AM
The finger puppet guy was awesome, but I still don't get French Comedy.

Ever since I watched Battlefield Earth, I wanted to see someone punished. Good job France. Do they still have Madame Guillotine on moth balls somewhere? That movie sucked so bad.

Craigypooh
28th May 09, 11:01 AM
I'm tired of government interfering in everything on behalf of stupid people. This is really why gambling is not legal in most of the USA and why I can no longer prey on the epic fish pond that was Party Poker. The government wants to rip off all the stupid people without any of our competition.

As for the so called victims, let them get fucked if scientology appeals to them.

And the weak? Are you tired of the government locking-up muggers who legitimately take stuff from people too weak to hold on to their belongings?

HappyOldGuy
28th May 09, 11:17 AM
So intimidation and harassment are their only faults worldwide? You might consider looking, and you'll find it's much worse than that. Assuming you're not a youtube "carlo gambino was teh ultimate" gangster apologist type.


Just go look.

I've been following the scientologists since Reagan was in office. Don't fucking tell me to go look. If you think you can prove me wrong, bring the specifics.

Socratic at least tries. It's just that his try proves that he is just parroting something he read on 4 chan.


Remember that Emily girl they starved to death? RC-45? Operation Snow White? Operation Clam Bake? End of Cycle? Good times, good times.

Her name was Lisa, and they didn't starve her to death. What they did was convince a deeply disturbed girl who was not capable of taking care of herself to check herself out of a psychiatric hospital, and failed to take care of her until it was too late. This is because of scientologies attitudes towards psychiatry. It is a serious criticism of scientology but it's in line with the kid who refused to take his chemo for religious reasons. It's not an act of wanton cruelty.

It's R2-45 and it's a mildly amusing joke. I prefer the phrase 12 gauge anti-inflammatory.

Operation clambake was an anti scientology group. And everything done against them was 100% legal. Scummy lawyer tricks, but 100% legal.

"End of cycle" is another clam phrase. Apparently having a term for death is proof you murder people.

Fearless Ukemi
28th May 09, 11:28 AM
And the weak? Are you tired of the government locking-up muggers who legitimately take stuff from people too weak to hold on to their belongings?

Bad. Anology.

Craigypooh
28th May 09, 11:51 AM
Bad. Anology.

Are you saying tricking someone out of their money is somehow morally better than taking their money by force?

Fearless Ukemi
28th May 09, 11:55 AM
It's not a trick if it's willful. Comparing mugging victims to gamblers and scientologists is intellectually dishonest.

elipson
28th May 09, 12:14 PM
I'm tired of government interfering in everything on behalf of stupid people. This is really why gambling is not legal in most of the USA and why I can no longer prey on the epic fish pond that was Party Poker. The government wants to rip off all the stupid people without any of our competition.

As for the so called victims, let them get fucked if scientology appeals to them.

So all the stupid ppl who got ripped of by Madoff, should the gov step in for them or not?

On a related note, in 2008 there several french Co$ members arrested for kidnapping a person and holding them in a house against there will. Forgive me for not remembering all the details. Incidents like this aren't exactly isolated.

The french government is not trying their "faith". They are trying actions, which if they weren't done under the guise of a "religion", would be considered criminal.

Craigypooh
28th May 09, 12:26 PM
It's not a trick if it's willful. Comparing mugging victims to gamblers and scientologists is intellectually dishonest.

Are you saying that these people were completely aware that the cures they were being offered by scientologists were fake and handed over money anyway without any duress?

Fearless Ukemi
28th May 09, 12:39 PM
Caveat emptor

KO'd N DOA
28th May 09, 12:49 PM
- qu'ils mangent de la brioche-

Fearless Ukemi
28th May 09, 12:57 PM
Let them eat egg?

Spade: The Real Snake
28th May 09, 01:06 PM
So all the stupid ppl who got ripped of by Madoff, should the gov step in for them or not?
No, they shouldn't.
Investments are a gamble and anyone promising the rate or return he was is asking for it.
They should go after him and his wife in court and divide whatever is left.

Craigypooh
28th May 09, 01:08 PM
Caveat emptor

So tricking people out of their money is fine, as long as you trick them into buying some useless crap and you also trick them into not checking it out properly?

Craigypooh
28th May 09, 01:13 PM
No, they shouldn't.
Investments are a gamble and anyone promising the rate or return he was is asking for it.
They should go after him and his wife in court and divide whatever is left.

F-U thinks that the government shouldn't be interfering in Madoff's entirely legitimate business model at all. He thinks that if people give Madoff money thinking he's going to invest it, then that's their lookout for not checking properly. F-U thinks Madoff should be allowed to keep all the money he's taken from these idiots.

Spade: The Real Snake
28th May 09, 01:22 PM
F-U thinks that the government shouldn't be interfering in Madoff's entirely legitimate business model at all. He thinks that if people give Madoff money thinking he's going to invest it, then that's their lookout for not checking properly. F-U thinks Madoff should be allowed to keep all the money he's taken from these idiots.

I agree, the government shouldn't interfere.
The people that lost money should sue and not expect the government to secure their investment. If they wanted government protected investments, they should have put their money in the FDIC insured banks at 1% instead of trying to get 10% through Madolff.

Craigypooh
28th May 09, 01:25 PM
I agree, the government shouldn't interfere.
The people that lost money should sue and not expect the government to secure their investment. If they wanted government protected investments, they should have put their money in the FDIC insured banks at 1% instead of trying to get 10% through Madolff.

No no. F-U doesn't think they have any right to sue, as they shouldn't have give Madoff any money in the first place. He thinks Madoff should be allowed to keep all of the money and carry on taking more.

Spade: The Real Snake
28th May 09, 02:04 PM
No no. F-U doesn't think they have any right to sue, as they shouldn't have give Madoff any money in the first place. He thinks Madoff should be allowed to keep all of the money and carry on taking more.

Ah.
Well, I disagree with that part of it.

Robot Jesus
28th May 09, 02:13 PM
Remember that Emily girl they starved to death? RC-45? Operation Snow White? Operation Clam Bake? End of Cycle? Good times, good times.

There's actually records of people being harrassed into committing suicide by the cult of scientology. Ron Hubbard said it was perfectly all right to kill SPs and religiously justified shooting people with a colt 45.

People do end up destitute or dead [remember that Emily girl, whose body was dumped in front of a hospital once the COS fuckers realised they'd killed her?] in that organisation.


from what I understand the people directly involved got hung out to dry, and since no one wanted to make a RICO case out of it the church got away. they have since been more careful; I don't think of a second they've stopped, just kept it to things that are harder to prove. see :ex-scientology kids.

KO'd N DOA
28th May 09, 02:21 PM
Let them eat egg?

It translates as "cake".

Fearless Ukemi
28th May 09, 02:42 PM
So tricking people out of their money is fine, as long as you trick them into buying some useless crap and you also trick them into not checking it out properly?


Government shouldn't be our big brother. If people can't be bothered to adequately research what they invest their money in, or don't care, then fuck them.

Fearless Ukemi
28th May 09, 02:44 PM
No no. F-U doesn't think they have any right to sue, as they shouldn't have give Madoff any money in the first place. He thinks Madoff should be allowed to keep all of the money and carry on taking more.

No no no. They have the right to sue. Just as they have the right to part with their money pursuing the American dream. If it can be proven in court that laws were broken, then those responsible should be held accountable.

Robot Jesus
28th May 09, 02:45 PM
it actually translates as a type of sweet bread serves only to the royal family, what is traditionally held to be a statement of contempt and arrogance my Marie Antoinette is actually an order to open their private food stores.

KO'd N DOA
28th May 09, 03:29 PM
it actually translates as a type of sweet bread serves only to the royal family, what is traditionally held to be a statement of contempt and arrogance my Marie Antoinette is actually an order to open their private food stores.

Merci Buckets Napoleon.

What happens when X3NU takes the stand?

Craigypooh
28th May 09, 04:12 PM
No no no. They have the right to sue. Just as they have the right to part with their money pursuing the American dream. If it can be proven in court that laws were broken, then those responsible should be held accountable.

But surely for them to sue involves some law being in place other than "caveat emptor"? We don't want pesky laws making us give back money to the stupid people we've fleeced now do we?

bobyclumsyninja
28th May 09, 04:27 PM
Government shouldn't be our big brother. If people can't be bothered to adequately research what they invest their money in, or don't care, then fuck them.

So you propose what? A lawless US, with any, and all scams legit, because it's the victims fault? Hey I got this bridge.....


It's disruptive to an orderly society for confidence games, especially massive ponzi schemes, that have far reaching economic implications, to go unchecked. Fraud is illegal for good reason....it's not about big brother.

Fearless Ukemi
28th May 09, 04:43 PM
Well, now that we are way off topic, might as well just let the thread die.

First we jumped to mugging, now fraud.

elipson
28th May 09, 06:37 PM
The thread STARTED with fraud. Because that is what the French government is pursuing.

FickleFingerOfFate
28th May 09, 06:52 PM
Well, now that we are way off topic, might as well just let the thread die.

First we jumped to mugging, now fraud.


Oops,
you might want to read that first page a little closer.



The thread STARTED with fraud. Because that is what the French government is pursuing.

Dagon Akujin
28th May 09, 11:12 PM
Government shouldn't be our big brother. If people can't be bothered to adequately research what they invest their money in, or don't care, then fuck them.

Damn those government agencies! They are the ones who made it so I couldn't label my cat meat as "ground beef" and made sure my food wasn't stuffed with e-coli! If people can't cook their food properly and don't know the difference between pork and poodle, then fuck them.




http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2391/2058803676_4b0e494967.jpg

WarPhalange
28th May 09, 11:43 PM
That is my new favorite picture.

I totally sold this guy some physics the other day, but he had no idea that it was debunked years ago. Haha, if he can't do the research on it himself, then fuck him.

Dagon Akujin
29th May 09, 12:08 AM
That is my new favorite picture.



^^^^^^^^Mark Ryden


http://www.neublack.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/mark_ryden.jpg
http://www.markryden.com/images/painting/blood/lincoln/lincolns_head.jpg
http://laughingsquid.com/wp-content/uploads/hi_fructose_3.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3497/3254689018_e7b92e9ce7.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3441/3254688318_bbb9dc7207.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3441/3254688004_8c7f35250d.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3389/3253861073_d6dcc75182.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3319/3253860791_5a56966694.jpg





http://www.markryden.com/images/painting/bunnies/puella/puella_animo_aureo.jpg
http://www.markryden.com/images/painting/bunnies/circus/magic_circus.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3502/3253862197_a769126948.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3534/3253862155_85b8098307.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3444/3253860995_ce245a9797.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3446/3253860905_57f71c4c7c.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3427/3254686952_f793992f4b.jpg





http://farm1.static.flickr.com/223/470170201_a4642170df.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/207/470159685_5df58db2f6.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/185/470148024_103fbe980a.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3375/3253861605_c5f6672499.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3063/3253861147_e101ba14ab.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3298/3254687194_c7862c5f87.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3450/3253860445_af2c81d209.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3472/3254687040_3707ac566c.jpg

elipson
29th May 09, 01:03 AM
...moving on...

Doritosaurus Chex
29th May 09, 11:35 AM
In other scientology news, they've just been banned by wikipedia.


Wikipedia bans Church of Scientology

* Track this topic
* Print story
* Post comment

Wikioperating Thetan Level Zero

By Cade Metz in San Francisco • Get more from this author

Posted in Music and Media, 29th May 2009 00:23 GMT

Free whitepaper – Making large UPS systems more efficient

Exclusive In an unprecedented effort to crack down on self-serving edits, the Wikipedia supreme court has banned contributions from all IP addresses owned or operated by the Church of Scientology and its associates.

Closing out the longest-running court case in Wikiland history, the site’s Arbitration Committee voted 10 to 0 (with one abstention) in favor of the move, which takes effect immediately.

The eighth most popular site on the web, Wikipedia bills itself as "the free encyclopedia anyone can edit." Administrators frequently ban individual Wikifiddlers for their individual Wikisins. And the site's UK press officer/resident goth once silenced an entire Utah mountain in a bizarre attempt to protect a sockpuppeting ex-BusinessWeek reporter. But according to multiple administrators speaking with The Reg, the muzzling of Scientology IPs marks the first time Wikipedia has officially barred edits from such a high-profile organization for allegedly pushing its own agenda on the site.

The Church of Scientology has not responded to our request for comment.

Officially, Wikipedia frowns on those who edit "in order to promote their own interests." The site sees itself as an encyclopedia with a "neutral point of view" - whatever that is. "Use of the encyclopedia to advance personal agendas – such as advocacy or propaganda and philosophical, ideological or religious dispute – or to publish or promote original research is prohibited," say the Wikipowersthatbe.

Admins may ban a Wikifiddler who betrays an extreme conflict of interest, and since fiddlers often hide their identity behind open proxies, such IPs may be banned as a preventative measure. After today's ruling from the Arbitration Committee - known in Orwellian fashion as the ArbCom - Scientology IPs are "to be blocked as if they were open proxies" (though individual editors can request an exemption).

According to evidence turned up by admins in this long-running Wikiland court case, multiple editors have been "openly editing [Scientology-related articles] from Church of Scientology equipment and apparently coordinating their activities." Leaning on the famed WikiScanner, countless news stories have discussed the editing of Scientology articles from Scientology IPs, and some site admins are concerned this is "damaging Wikipedia's reputation for neutrality."

One admin tells The Reg that policing edits from Scientology machines has been particularly difficult because myriad editors sit behind a small number of IPs and, for some reason, the address of each editor is constantly changing. This prevents admins from determining whether a single editor is using multiple Wikipedia accounts to game the system. In Wikiland, such sockpuppeting is not allowed.

The Wikicourt considered banning edits from Scientology IPs only on Scientology-related articles. But this would require admins to "checkuser" editors - i.e. determine their IP - every time an edit is made. And even then they may not know who's who.

"Our alternatives are to block them entirely, or checkuser every 'pro-Scientology' editor on this topic. I find the latter unacceptable," wrote one ArbComer. "It is quite broad, but it seems that they're funneling a lot of editing traffic through a few IPs, which make socks impossible to track."

And it may be a moot point. Most the editors in question edit nothing but Scientology-related articles. In Wikiparlance, they're "single purpose accounts."

Some have argued that those editing from Scientology IPs may be doing so without instruction from the Church hierarchy. But a former member of Scientology's Office of Special Affairs - a department officially responsible "for directing and coordinating all legal matters affecting the Church" - says the Office has organized massive efforts to remove Scientology-related materials and criticism from the web.

"The guys I worked with posted every day all day," Tory Christman tells The Reg. "It was like a machine. I worked with someone who used five separate computers, five separate anonymous identities...to refute any facts from the internet about the Church of Scientology."

Christman left the Church in 2000, before Wikipedia was created.

This is the fourth Scientology-related Wikicourtcase in as many years, and in addition to an outright ban on Scientology IPs, the court has barred a host of anti-Scientology editors from editing topics related to the Church.

Many Wikifiddlers have vehemently criticized this sweeping crackdown. Historically, the site's cult-like inner circle has aspired to some sort of Web 2.0 utopia in which everyone has an unfettered voice. An organization editing Wikipedia articles where it has a conflict of interest is hardly unusual, and in the past such behavior typically went unpunished.

But clearly, Wikipedia is changing. In recent months, the site's ruling body seems far more interested in quashing at least the most obvious examples of propaganda pushing.

Scientology's banishment from Wikipedia comes just days after the opening of a (real world) trial that could see the dissolution of the organization's French chapter.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/29/wikipedia_bans_scientology/

Basically, they're getting the same treatment as Ashida Kim for pulling the same stunt. I also just learned that wikipedia has its own court system. Weird.

elipson
29th May 09, 01:28 PM
That's total win.

But lol at wiki having its own court. That's cool and sad at the same time.

bobyclumsyninja
29th May 09, 02:08 PM
yeah wow, and wow. Thanks for posting that.

The church was built on the idea that anything goes. It's not for the outside world that they do all of this illegal/immoral stuff....it's to get that money, and anything goes.

It's like LRon summarized all the religious/culty rackets, and did his own, super racket. A lot of lives are ruined, but what did he care, he was a total degenerate.

Ajamil
29th May 09, 02:29 PM
Back to the fraud thing, did anyone figure out what CoS said the pills were supposed to do?

jkdbuck76
29th May 09, 02:32 PM
Dunno.

I thought they didn't believe in taking meds.

elipson
29th May 09, 09:57 PM
It's psychiatric drugs they have a prob with, as well as most other things. but they still give out pills with stuff like super high doses of Niacin.

Sun Wukong
30th May 09, 05:47 AM
Bottom line: $cientology filed as a religion for tax protection and the ability to avoid being prosecuted for medical malpractice.

The organization is a corporation that pretends to be a religion that is quite clearly completely aware that their medical and general advice is only designed to protect their profit margin. Not only is this a disgusting abuse of the legal system, but they don't just stop there: they wage legal warfare on every vocal detractor, and don't care whose life they destroy to protect their petty interests while engaging in textbook cult creation complete with a total devaluation of individual drones and every kind of attempt to make their "congregation" completely dependent on the church for their psychological and emotional welfare while stripping them of every once of material wealth possible.

Forgive me. This "religion" isn't on trial for it's belief system; it's corporate management is on trial because it's an unconscionable scam of monumentally disgusting proportions.

Lebell
30th May 09, 06:14 AM
scientologists are takin ur jubz!

HappyOldGuy
30th May 09, 11:15 AM
Forgive me. This "religion" isn't on trial for it's belief system; it's corporate management is on trial because it's an unconscionable scam of monumentally disgusting proportions.

So other than your shadow like ability to look into the hearts of men*, do you have any actual you know, evidence or rules to decide which kinds of socially adaptive self deception should be allowed versus which kind is bad bad evil?




* which is cool by the way, how many boxtops did it cost?

Lebell
30th May 09, 12:00 PM
they took our.....JUBZ!!!!!!

socratic
30th May 09, 11:09 PM
Socratic at least tries. It's just that his try proves that he is just parroting something he read on 4 chan.
I heard about R2-45 from Project Chanology but I already knew about the Lisa case (sorry, forgot her name). I also knew about Operation Snow White long before Chanology.


It's R2-45 and it's a mildly amusing joke. I prefer the phrase 12 gauge anti-inflammatory.
In the sense that shooting people with a gun was actually something Hubbard encouraged.


Operation clambake was an anti scientology group. And everything done against them was 100% legal. Scummy lawyer tricks, but 100% legal.
Legal=/=good. The part where they to this day go around posting flyers claiming their detractors to be sexual offenders (under psuedonyms so the church can't be sued) is also pretty shitty. You know, their entire policy towards those who disagree with them (yay SPs) is kinda evil. Oh, and the part where they encourage people to sever all connection with non-scientologist relatives or friends if it sounds like those friends are gonna cause trouble for the scam.


"End of cycle" is another clam phrase. Apparently having a term for death is proof you murder people.
Except 'end of cycle' is something that people can and have been ordered to do, so it not only means 'die' but 'kill yourself'. As in the cult of scientology has told its members to kill themselves, literally. I remember (I paraphrase here) one testimony along the lines of: "Hey, friend, if you kill yourself now, I can promise you'll be reborn to a scientologist family where you can ascend to a much higher rank of OT than you would in this body."


Government shouldn't be our big brother. If people can't be bothered to adequately research what they invest their money in, or don't care, then fuck them.
If you lie blatantly to someone to trick them out of their money you're breaking the law. 'Fraud' is a crime in the US, last I checked. "But but but, cults should be allowed to brainwash people into handing over all their money!" Sounds good to you, huh?

So HoG and Ukemi, why the apologist streak? You aren't dumb people, you should know better than this. Are you guys CoS members or something? Related to them? Friends with them?

socratic
30th May 09, 11:12 PM
PS: Killing someone through negligence is still killing them. This should be self-evident, HoG.

HappyOldGuy
30th May 09, 11:21 PM
PS: Killing someone through negligence is still killing them. This should be self-evident, HoG.

It is, but you keep tossing out bullshit accusations like the r2 45 and the like, even though there is no credible evidence that scientology has ever murdered a single critic or enemy.

So it becomes important to be accurate.

Ajamil
30th May 09, 11:31 PM
Not so much apologists as Devil's Advocates, I think.

Discussions need counterpoints, and since I doubt many outside of the church itself will agree with the CoS itself, arguing the accusations is all that's left.

HappyOldGuy
30th May 09, 11:45 PM
Not so much apologists as Devil's Advocates, I think.


I am never a devils advocate. I despise the church of scientology. But they are an annoyance. Governments getting in the business of deciding what is and isn't a valid religious expression is a threat.

Ajamil
31st May 09, 01:21 AM
Corrected then, carry on.

socratic
31st May 09, 08:45 AM
I am never a devils advocate. I despise the church of scientology. But they are an annoyance. Governments getting in the business of deciding what is and isn't a valid religious expression is a threat.

Why'd you have to go make a good point, you asshole? I had all my youthful ignorant rage all ready to go and everything. Jeeze!