I’m not a fan of of the scam that is Scientology but I’m less a fan of attempts by foreign Marxist governments and their state run media to slander the Americans involved, Americans who are guaranteed by the constitution the absolute right to believe in any kooky idea slapped together by a hack sci-fi writer they feel gives them the most meaning.
I’m even less of a fan of atheists and communists who get so upset that other people are happy in their religious lives, so go on a crusade to shatter the faith of adherents, or at least get others to ostracize the religious by painting them as a sinister cult. That is apparently what BBC shill John Sweeney was attempting when getting footage for a new state funded documentary about how evil Scientology is. As you could imagine, after the Hubbardians got wind of Sweeney’s attempt to discredit their Constitutionally protected kooky cult, it was game on.
Sweeney didn’t have the stuff. He reacted like any leftist cornered by someone on their rank hypocrisy:
[youtube]hxqR5NPhtLI[/youtube]
And you thought Scientologists were crazy. The truth is they’re no crazier than the next guy, but Sweeney is obviously unhinged. Sweeney’s documentary will be, no doubt, and indictment of Scientology, but how can people accept anything he says now that he’s been proved to be unstable?
The fact is that England’s attacking Scientology for the same reason China attacks the Fulan Gong, because the group is large and organized and may resist the absolute power of the state to control thought, which both England and China believe is an important part of government. Scientology, no matter how you feel about it, will not bow to the creeping Islamism in Europe, nor will it accept Marxist solutions to social ills as acceptable, and that’s why the BBC was sent out to do a hit piece.
And Americans know that the Scientologists are always ready to throw out a hit piece of their own, which will make this battle of kooks all the more fun to watch.
Fact it, mate, you’re as much a loony as the scientologists. “Foreign Marxist governments and their state run media”? A scam that is “constitutionally protected”? “The absolute power of the state to control thought, which both England and China believe is an important part of government”? Face it, you’re a fully fledged, whacked out right wing crackpot.
Champagne comedy! This should be submitted to UnNews.
Do it! We DEMAND more loony right wing frothery! Immanentize the Eschaton! To Infinity…And Beyond! Dance, monkey boy, dance!
Even a “religion” that is in fact a scam to seperate people from their money is protected in America because the Constitution protects all peoples rights to worship who or what they please. If you want to be in a kooky cult, it is your right.
If England didn’t believe in the right to control opinions and such, why is it “hate speech” to “insult” Islam? Don’t you have the right to debate religion? Why isn’t the BBC reporting on Blacks being attacked by Arab Muslims? Why isn’t Sweeney doing a documentary on the sinister cult of Wahabbism?
Because Scientology is an easy target for a Marxist governemt (are you really going to say that the Labor government isn’t Marxist?) to distract people from the real problems in society.
Now don’t you have some trolling on the ircs to do. Aren’t you late for a date where you pretend to be a woman while “cyber sexing” a teenager
And I don’t seem to be the one frothing, maybe given your history you should aviod web use, since it seems to make you hysterical.
If a scam is protected in America, that is nothing to be proud of, my friend. It isn’t good for a government to stand by and pretend to be powerless while its citizens are fleeced by the unscrupulous.
You are welcome to describe the government of Tony Blair as “Marxist”. It only makes my case that you’re a ranting ignoramus.
You show little evidence of understanding most things about your own country and most other countries (I read the “About” page of your site and it’s quite amusing), but in the case of Britain you’re especially ignorant. The next bit isn’t really for you, it’s for anyone who might be misled by your silly ranting.
In Britain criticism of religion is permitted, but deliberate incitement to racial or religious hatred is not (Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006). There is an article about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_and_Religious_Hatred_Act_2006
Recent BBC documentaries have covered instances of muslim extremism and cases of muslim insularity within the wider community. Full transcripts:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/4171950.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/6631541.stm
You will note that that last programme was broadcast last Monday.
It’s almost incredible to me that you can believe that the BBC does not report attacks by certain ethnicities on others. Here’s an example of the kind of attack you described, found on the BBC website in a couple of seconds:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4373040.stm
If you’re still reading, and not busy googling on whatever some troll has said about whoever tries to debate you, perhaps you’ll reflect on the depth of your ignorance that led you to make several easily refuted and blatantly false statements in your last post.
You don’t have to be ignorant, nor do you have to cling to these ridiculous extremist views. You can educate yourself. Don’t just except the crap because someone else says it. Test it, as I have done in this post. You might just find that your beliefs are incorrect.
What’s extremist about it? You haven’t demonstrated that my defense of people’s right to be kooky is an extremist viewpoint.
Islam is a scam, or at least an Atheist would see it that way, isn’t England sitting by and doing nothing about it? People choose to be Scientologists, and they should have that right. People have the right to make bad decisions, to follow the “wrong” people. It is dangerous to give the government of any country the ability to dictate what religion is or is not legitimate.
You can’t really think that by spending three hours searching an archive of the BBC and dredging up a story from Oct 2005 you’ve proved that your racist country isn’t basically allowing Blacks to be victimized by Muslims? The story itself implies that Blacks started these riots, which they did not. You know that the young Black victim of the rape refered to was not pressing charges because she was an illegal alien, you and your precious BBC gloss over that fact. As you gloss over many facts you don’t like I’m sure.
It’s ironic you call your critics trolls while in fact trolling my site. You appear in my comments section, call me names like the stunted middle aged shut in you are, and then accuse others of being trolls, as if I and everyone else should just accept your racist, nonsense. You come to my board and call me, a Black man, a monkey then post a link to a BBC hit job on the Black community in England but I’m the frothing wacko? You’re a racist.
If you expected civility you’d act differently, what you want is a place where you can insult people without fear, where you can vomit forth your bile on others without face to face contact. You found it on the internet and have trolled it ever since.
You’re not interested in debate, only virtual scream therapy where you can work out your frustrations caused by the inability of anyone to love you, starting with your parents. Test yourself Tom, ask yourself why you involve yourself in these interactions.
The answer will surprise you, but not me.
Firstly I’m an atheist. Most religions have to be wrong, simply because they can’t all be right. I don’t mind people holding kooky views, but you admit yourself that Scientology is more than that: that it’s a mechanism for parting the gullible from their money. My scorn for your extremism and ignorance comes from the nonsense you came out with in your criticism of Britain as some kind of marxist state.
You falsely state that I spent three hours searching the BBC archives. I see that you have not lost your taste for making stuff up. You report as fact unattributed rumors that the alleged victim was an illegal immigrant. You state as a fact that the riots were not started by blacks. Maybe they weren’t, no new source is always right, but you present no evidence to support your claim.
You falsely accuse me of *trolling* your ridiculously rabid right wing site, impervious to the fact that only your deadly earnestness gives the game away that the site itself is not a purely satirical work by someone who dislikes and wishes to discredit the extreme right.
Why do I involve myself in this interaction? To try to show you how stupid and ignorant you have let yourself become. And failing that, to show others who might be misled by your ill-informed ranting. How committed to falsehoods you have become that you cannot help, perhaps do not even recognise, that almost every single statement you have made has been a fabrication stemming from your hatred of those who are different. The BBC cannot have reporters, they must be “shills”. Britain cannot simply have a Labour government, it must be a “marxist” state that depends on the “absolute power of the state to control thought.” This hyperbolae is self-defeating. But keep it up if you want. As you say, it’s your blog.
Translation: You’ve finished looking at porn and have no one else to socialize with. Explain how you’re not a troll.
And no regrets about calling me a monkey I see. How typical of the “liberal” white racist angry that Blacks disagree with their nonsense. You’re saying I’m full of hatred of those that are diferent, yet it is you called me (a person different from yourself) a monkey, a vile racist slur that you seem rather proud of.
So if you’re an Atheist, use my comment section to attack the falsehoods of Islam. Prove I’m wrong when i say that you and your ilk are selective in your bigotry.
I on the other hand, will be living a life away from the ‘net. I’ll check back with you tommorw, sometime after noonish.
I’ve no idea of your ethnicity and no way to check it. Calling “monkey boy” a racist taunt in the circumstances is a stretch, In truth it was a comment on your clear ignorance, and if you’re honest with yourself you’ll know in your heart that I’ve amply demonstrated your propensity for baseless speculation, parading your ignorance, and reliance on poor sources. The word “bigotry”, incidentally, comes from “bigot.”
“A person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance ” -Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.
This would fit very well the description of your site’s “About” article, your wild and unsubstantiated claims in this article and in subsequent comments. You have made, and clung obstinately to the following false and unsupported claims, amongst others:
* that the UK is a marxist state
* that in the UK it is ‘“hate speech†to “insult†Islam’
* that reporting of crime by the BBC is subject to suppression according to ethnicity
You’ve failed to support these characterizations, and when shown direct evidence that a statement you have made is false you’ve presented some unsupported speculation or rumor in an attempt to pick fault with the refutation, or else you’ve ignored it, or else you’ve simply changed the subject and tried to blame the messenger. That’s bigotry, Rob. An obstinate inability to face the truth about your intolerant beliefs.
You ask me to attack “the falsehoods of Islam”. Is that what you think an atheist does? If I did, why would I choose *this* website when there are far more popular forums available to me? Oh tell me, Rob? Is that what *you* do? I’m almost afraid to check: do you use this website to advance intolerance against people of faiths other than your own? I hope not. But if you do, shame on you.
Rob, thank you so much for making Tony’s point for him – but I think your tinfoil hat has slipped. Blair a “Marxist”? Priceless! Truly beyond satire. You do know that Blair has a shoot-on-sight policy for anyone with the slightest tinge of leftism don’t you?
As far as I can tell your entire thesis is that scientologists may be a sinister manipulative extortionist cult, but it’s an *American* sinister manipulative extortionist cult, so nobody other than Americans may criticise them. Is that about the size of it?
If ever you decide to visit the planet Reality, where the rest of us live, do be sure to let us know so we can arrange to be out.
By the way – you do realise the people posting above are here from the Wikipedia Conspiracy?
Tony pretty much hits it on the head, Rob. You’ve made a number of claims that undermine your credibility. You are unhinged.
Oh, and to claim that ‘monkey boy’ is a racist slur indicates you haven’t seen the movie Buckaroo Banzai.
And finally, American scientologists certainly have the right to believe whatever wierdness they wish. Just as journalists have the right to point out what a vicious, manipulative, wrong-headed, money-grubbing, manufactured cult they are and shine the spotlight on them.
If you think it’s the first time scientology reacts like a mad bull when anybody including whole countries or whole religions want to investigate it, you’re wrong.
Scientology is certainly the maddest cult ever to try insanely to defend an image it has itself destroyed by its own activities, crimes and ridicule or antireligious methods, or thourgh its foolish sci-fi theories that people are invaded/parasited by thousands of space alien cooties fabricated by Xenu 75 million or four quadrillions years ago.
So, why should it complain because on has doubts AND evidences of its lies, false promises, lost trials etc?
Don’t forget that it could (and probably should) once again be put under Justice spots soon in Belgium – as an association of criminals?That it was able till now to escape such charges is not a reason why it should escape longer to its doom.
Relying on Scientology to stop the spread of radical Islam is like relying on flat earthers to stop the spread of creationism. There aren’t enough of them, and their beliefs are even crazier than those you’re trying to stop–but at least they’re not as dangerous (due, at least in part, to their smaller number of members).
I agree that it is dangerous to give government the power to decide what is and what is not a religion. That leads to situations like the secret agreement between the IRS and Scientology, giving their members the ability to do what no other religion can do–write off the full amount donations made in exchange for services (auditing). Every other U.S. religion’s adherents is only allowed to deduct donations minus the value received in return.
The law should apply equally to religions and non-religions–religion should not be a category given special dispensation, but treated the same as any other 501(c)(3), including required to file Form 990s for financial accountability to the public in return for its tax-exempt status.
Now, I’d be delighted if our Prime Minister was a Marxist, but… nope. If he is, China Mieville is a Thatcherite.
“foreign Marxist governments and their state run media”
The UK is Marxist? The same UK that has a monarchy, nobles sitting in the upper house of the legislature, a state church whose bishops also sit in the legislature, the land of Margaret Thatcher, privatisation and mandatory daily prayer in schools? Mr Blair isn’t a Marxist either, he’s a capitalist as they come, he’s also a good mate of a certain Mr Bush, who isn’t noted for his love of Marxism.
As for the BBC, it’s funded by taxation (TV licence) but it’s controlled by an independent board of governors. The government and the BBC are usually at daggers drawn, whoever happens to be in power.
RE Scientology’s video production – The Sweeny Video’s
Scientology did the same thing to me, and I once was one of them, and I know the routine, and knew what they wanted…
They wanted me to lose my tempter.
Which they webbed on their many depopularization pages..
What this amounts to is the contemporary use of “TOTEMS”. Described by a 20th century Russian genius named Bechterev, in his books about crowd manipulation and contagion of ideas. The technique is ingrained in our genetic heritage, from the first time a hunter was walking through a valley and came upon a scary looking wooden pole, with imagery that caused him to run away and never return to that particular area again… unless he was prepared for a war.
Totems are just another method used to warn off inquiry.
Scientology began yelling lies at me, telling me what they were projecting that I believed. It is also a stage hypnosis technique called the “Stage Attack”.. the lies grew more and more outrageous, and kept being repeated. REPETITION will induce a hypnotic trance state as the mind surrenders to the assault of its reason.
But scientology does not want reason, it wants obediance.
Does this remind any of you older fellahs of anything similarly odius??
In Mr Sweeny’s case and in my case, Scientology wants silence.
Mr Sweeney, at BBC, is a veteran of coverage of Chechnya Terrorists, (infamous for being at the top of the odius scale) ( they like to hold women and children hostage and then kill them anyway, sort of like Scientology, though scientology kills people slowly so they don’t notice until it is too late, but for the same end, influence, power and money) and he lost it covering Scientology?
What’s that tell you about the true nature of Scientology?
Oh, I get it. You people are the Scientology version of Satanic Ritual Abuse hoaxers or those North American Union folks. Your upset because I think that A religion that HASN”T crashed planes into the WTC or promote ethnic cleansing in the Sudan should be allowed to sit around being as kooky as they want. Roger G., you link to your crazy site doesn’t work. by the way
So this is what you people do with your free time? I’m not supporting the theology of Scientology, just the right of people to be Scientologist if they want and you’re attacking me because I wouldn’t ban a religion I don’t like? Scientology is more of a threat to the U.K. than Islamic Imperialism? Or Putin? This is you cause?
Tony S left a comment on this site that I didn’t respond to yesterday around 6:00, than he looked around the site (by his own admission), a site where the subject of Black empowerment and politics fro the perspective of a man of African descent come up alot, than around 6:30 after reading the aplogy I got from Pandagon abput there racist statement he comes back with “dance monkey boy” but I’m not supposed to think it was his “clever” way to slip in his white racism? You’re all racists for thinking I’m dumb enough to by that. And I’ve seen that Peter Weller crap fest, I’ve also seen movies where people say “Limey” is that O.K. to use because it was a line in a movie?
Secret deal with the IRS?
Third way parties like labor aren’t revamping Marxist policies?
Getting yelled at puts you in a trance?
Do you guys listen to yourselves?
This is a bizarre fantasy world you guys live in where Scientologists are more important than the Mosques in your country that your friend Tony pointed out were exposed on the BBC as preaching your destruction. The Hubbarians want you to buy a a copy of their crappy book, the Jihadist amongst you want you dead. Your country has a massive and unsustainable welfare state, takes so high that business is flree to Ireland and elects politicians like Ken Livingston, who admits he’s a communist, but it isn’t Marxist? I guess you’ll wait until they introdue a 30 year plan before you’ll admit it huh?
You guys are just conspiracy theorists, no different that “truthers” and I’ll tell you this. As long as a group isn’t killing, raping and looting, they have an absolute right to sit around being crazy. Just as you have a right to troll blogs, set up kooky anti-scientology sites where you lament the enforcement of copyright laws and tell black people that you think calling them a monkey is O.K., have fun, but is this really what you want to do with your life?
If you died tommorow, this being the last thing you did today would be O.K. with you?
David, tell me more of the wiki conspirators. Use my contact form.
Tony… David… Rob… Arnie… Roger… Jim…
Holy crap! It’s like the 1990’s ARSCC in here!
Labour = Marxists! You are having a lagh – this must be the most right wing part in the UK at present. more right wing than Conservatives.u
Tony Marx and Gordon Engels are just puppets of Queen Elizabeth Stalin.
Rob Taylor, on the other hand, is just sheer plain weird.
Ouch. A person who pays more in sales tax than I pay in all my taxes combined thinks I’m weird, say it isn’t so. If you guys don’t think well of me, how will I go on?
If Labor is so conservative, I guess they’ll lower taxes and start telling poeple that they’re responsible for their own lives, that the government running health care’s a bad idea (thus why so many English people are here in America going to our evil free market hospitals) and that your taxes shouldn’t fund television stations and such. If they’re so conservative they’ll tell you that religious preference is a private matter, and no groups (including Muslims) should get any special allowances to break the laws (like collecting welfare for multiple wives) and that as long as Scientologists aren’t basically doing anything different than Krishnas, Wiccans or any other “new age” religion than making all kinds of accusations (most of which are rehashed from the debunked Satanic Ritual Abuse scare) is wrong. But they wouldn’t get involved because as conservatives they’d say you had a right to be wrong.
I think you mean they’re right wing the way you say National Socialism is “right wing”, in that they’re to the right of Leninism. Nazis and Labor are still far to the left of mainstream Americans left or right. The idea that the third way philosophy of the labor party is right wing like Republicanism/Libertarianism/Conservatism in America is nonsense.
The current Labour party is Marxist? Superb 🙂
US right-wing nut-jobs are amongst the funniest things on the net, so more of the same please. I’ve bookmarked your site for the next time I need a giggle.
NB: please also note the correct spelling of ‘Labour’.
The barbaric U.K. spellings of words have no place in civilized society. Why can’t you Brits write English properly?
On a serious note, you guys come to this site hoping to insult me, because you’re livejournal “friends” told you it’d be funny? Who’s the “nut job” me or an adult who has a livejournal page?
Do you seriously think that these comments would change my opinion or prove any point aside from the fact that racist whites from England hab=ve little to do with their time except troll blogs?
At least go to the front page.
Yawn…I did not visit your blog based on someone’s livejournal page.
And I did have a proper look around your site. The Sarkozy piece was quite interesting, but spoiled by all the reds-under-the-bed verbiage and the cheap shots against the French tendency towards civil disobedience, which I’ve always admired myself. Anyway, weren’t there some riots in LA not so long ago?
I’m not a racist either, as you suggest; I’m actually rather an Americanophile. I lived there as a kid & attended school. I can still recite the Pledge of Allegiance 🙂
There are a lot of things I really admire about the US, but it is also a society which seems to encourage the lunatic-fringe of right-wing politics, with all the attendant paranoia about any other country which does things a different way. Standard brain-dead, Dubya-level polarisation of ‘good’ and ‘evil’.
I’ve spent a lot of time arguing with ignorant Brits, explaining that not all Americans conform to the stereotype of the gun-totin’, commie-hatin’, loudmouthed, arrogant nutter. Was this time wasted?
And if I’m trolling your blog, surely that means you are trolling the internet itself? Free speech works both ways; if you’re posting this sort of contentious & partisan material, then don’t cry foul if someone throws some crap back your way. Argue your case, do some debating, but open your mind too.
Being an Americanophile doesn’t mean you’re not a racist, proof of you’re anti racism would be decrying racists like your friends who think it’s funny to call me a monkey.
The riots in L.A. resulted in dozens of deaths, rapes and assults, much as the rioting in France no doubt. The idea that riots are o.k. (as long as they’re not in the white areas, right) is itself racist, or at best classist. You’re implying that minorities/the poor/ young people should be expected to indulge in violence, as if they’re not really people like yourself, but animals.
Robert Byrd recites the pledge of Allegiance, is he not a racist? What about David Duke?
What is contentious about thinking individuals have a right to decide to make bad decisions? What’s contentious about pointing out that freedom of religion means that people are free to join religions you think are a scam? I’ve gone on record here stating that Christianity, Islam, Judism and plenty of other religions are wrong (in my opinion) does that mean calling me, a black person, a monkey is acceptable? If I called people I didn’t agree with “crackers” would you say that they shouldn’t have posted “contentious” material or would you say “that’s kind of fucked up.” and admit that the disagreement and the slur are seperate issues?
The name calling is what makes what you’re doing trolling, and I’m not saying you shouldn’t do it. I am just pointing it out because it says something about you that you’re claiming that my position of not accepting being called a monkey, you know because I’m actually proud of my Black heritage, is in some way keeping the crackers… oh I’m sorry the Brits..from having a civil exchange of ideas with me.
I welcome discussion and disagreement. I think “third way” political policies are Marxist, at least at their root, and had one of you’re pasty white nanny staters written in a simple ” You’re wrong Rob, and here’s how Labor politics differs from Marxism…” I would have indeed listened, challanged and not cryed foul, but the idea that I should just accept abuse, like being called a nutter, a monkey etc. is just a maifestation of you’re inflated sense of entitlement.
If you call a Black guy a monkey, you’re a racist. If you defend calling Black guys monkey, you’re still a racist. But I’m still open minded enough to leave your comments up, and let people make up their own mind about who’s right.
How many of you’re fellows would do the same?
And what’s wrong with owning a gun? Not to long ago my family needed them to keep people like your friends from burning crosses on our lawns. Judging from some of the above comments I think I’ll be hanging on to my shotgun, just in case.
None of the above posters who referred to you as a ‘monkey’ are even known to me, let alone friends. Why do you suppose you know anything about me?
I didn’t even realise you were black until you drew attention to it, and I don’t care one way or another. Both white & black people can be full of shit. I thought your reference to racism was because I had mentioned the US in my comment. I was commenting on your article, not on any previous responses from others.
The LA riots were caused by the police & judiciary collaborating to deny justice to a black man (Rodney King) who was viciously assaulted by cops who were supposed to be upholding the law. You are the one who then twists this into a racist/classist argument. You’re putting words in my mouth, and I’m not stupid enough to fall for it.
Look, I think I’m going to leave you to your own sorry little world of paranoia / self-flagellation / martyrdom. You clearly have a tremendous chip on your shoulder, which is probably incurable. Just don’t play the race card against me, when I have said nothing which is in any way racist. Racism disgusts me, end of story. Be careful with that scatter-gun approach to people who disagree with you.
And if you’re interested in learning some more about UK politics, spend some time checking out the non-tabloid UK press websites.
The L.A. riots were caused by a jury’s decision. The police and judiciary didn’t have any say in what the jury finding would be. Maybe in England those sorts of conspiracies happen, but in America it’s a jury of our peers that judge us.
Spend less time at leftist websites and you’d know a little more about how America actually works.
Will all persons willing to fight hatred and prejudice against the Church of Scientology online please join kittyradio.com. The site is a cesspool of virulent hatred, prejudice, ignorance and dishonesty. Help stop kittyradio.com!
Your rants are illogical and immature, not to mention racist.
I have my doubts if you have any sort of higher education at all or any actual knowledge about the problems that goverments face when dealing with scientology, before adressing this matter you should do somer research on it, not go on a long rant, the main purpose of which,seems to me, is to glorify your own country.
What’s illogical is you claiming that my position that Sceintology “ruins” no more lives than gold diggers or recreational drug use is “racist” or or something. Unlike you I have done my research, and not on an Internet forum full of weirdoes who think a person’s fundamental right to CHOOSE FOR HIMSELF his religion is something the state should be able to take away.
Wicca’s a scam and studies suggest that Wiccans are downwardly mobile and more prone to drug and alcohol abuse than other religious groups. Are they next?
And what country are you from that’s better than America? England which will soon be an Islamic state where the majority of people don’t work and there’s a camera on every corner or France where police have given up control of at least 760 areas to gangs? Maybe you’re from Germany where there were riots when the government had to slash benefits (because there is no money) because again the majority of people are too damn lazy to get a job.
It isn’t me that glorifies America, it’s America’s superiority to the moribund and decaying Europe.
I wouldn’t have a problem with Scientology if it weren’t a business disguised as a religion.
No religion has copyrighted sacred texts and uses copyright law to censor free speech.
No religion, in the civilised world, silences its critics through harassment and libel lawsuits.
No religion forces its followers to pay fixed fees for courses.
Scientology shouldn’t be recognised as a religion anywhere until it: releases all of its material into the public domain, stops charging fixed fees to followers and perusing critics vis liable lawsuits.
I don’t have a problem with people believing in Scientology. What I do have a problem with is the US government recognise it as a religion and gives it tax free status when it’s perfectly clear that it’s a business and should be regulated as such.
Because Scientology is recognised as a religion, it means that it can: use freedom of religion as a means to censor criticism, evade paying tax on profits and be above consumer protection laws.
Scientology draws parallels with dictatorships such as Singapore where defamation laws are abused to censor debate, which is why it is considered to be a fascist cult my many.
Er…you’re wrong. Wicca (Gardnerian for example) has material not availbale to the public in what we used to call the inner court/outer court system. Many religious texts are indeed copyrighted (Deepak Chopra for example, or Anton LaVey’s The Satanic Bible) and frankly Scientology is not more bogus than Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Atheism or a hundred other belief systems I think are nonsense.
But freedom of religion means that the government doesn’t regulate the spiritual lives of citizens because it has no right to. It is your responsibility to choose a faith, not societies. People like you (fascists) will start with Scientology, move on to Paganism then it’ll be Jews.When socity begins deciding what is and isnt acceptable for a person to beleive in, there’s a problem.
And is Scientology doing anything more dangerous than Islam? As of today there has been 14,452 Islamic terror attacks since 9/11. How many have there been by Scientology? The BBC has just run a story about Mien Kampf being a best seller among highly educated Muslims in Bangladesh. In Ohio a court had to step in to stop a Muslim from selling his daughter, on America’s very shores. But you’re complaining about some stupid scam that only idiots fall for?
If there was no Scientology these sheep would be following Charles Manson or Osama bin Ladin. At least Scientology keeps them from sneaking into your homes at night! I find it odd that this one scam so obsesses you weirdos when global warming, Marxism, multiculturalism, your “girlfriend” you met online and thousands of other things actually have an effect on your life. Scientology’s only effect on anyone is to gather together the kinds of people who would be Scientologists into one place to be snickered at.
Call me when Tom Cruise blows up a synagogue. Until then let it go.
“Wicca (Gardnerian for example) has material not availbale to the public in what we used to call the inner court/outer court system. Many religious texts are indeed copyrighted (Deepak Chopra for example, or Anton LaVey’s The Satanic Bible)”
It’s questionable whether all of the above are legitimate religions.
“But freedom of religion means that the government doesn’t regulate the spiritual lives of citizens because it has no right to. It is your responsibility to choose a faith, not societies.”
I completely agree.
“But freedom of religion means that the government doesn’t regulate the spiritual lives of citizens because it has no right to. It is your responsibility to choose a faith, not societies. People like you (fascists) will start with Scientology, move on to Paganism then it’ll be Jews.When socity begins deciding what is and isnt acceptable for a person to beleive in, there’s a problem.”
Hang on a second, where did I say that the government should regulate the beliefs of its citizens?
I didn’t say that.
You didn’t bother to read and fully understand my post.
“And is Scientology doing anything more dangerous than Islam? As of today there has been 14,452 Islamic terror attacks since 9/11.”
All religions have been used as an excuse for terrorist activities.
That wasn’t my point.
My only beef with the US government is that they are giving religious previsions i.e. tax exemption to a business, have allowed its libel laws to be abused and have failed to prosecute people for fraud and tax evasion.
My issue with Scientology is not with its followers but some of its clergy who use lawsuits to censor criticism, just as I have no problem with Catholics but I do have a problem with the priests who abuse children same with harmless Muslims vs Osama bin Laden.
“Scientology’s only effect on anyone is to gather together the kinds of people who would be Scientologists into one place to be snickered at.”
You obviously don’t know about the harm Scientology has already done to your society.
As I said before, it’s a business not a religion, it’s purpose is to make money. Scientology’s “clergy” have convinced your government that it’s a religion so they are guilty of both fraud and tax evasion.
I suggest you study, Operation PC Freakout, Operation Snow White and Scientology’s Fair Game policy.
The trouble with Scientology is that most of the bad stuff is done covertly or with in the bounds of the law. Scientology extremists may not have blown up buildings but they’ve infiltrated your government and have harassed people and ruined plenty of lives.
To clarify my point: people should be allowed to believe what they like, whether it be Scientology, Satanism or Islam and practise any religion so long as it doesn’t hurt anyone. Scientology should be allowed to continue to operate but be treated as a business unless it can prove otherwise. The fraudsters, tax evaders and those guilty of harassment in the clergy should be prosecuted just like any paedophile priest or Jihadist trying to recruit people to blow themselves up in the name of Islam.
If they are in the bounds of the law then they are not doing anything I need to be concerned about no? If they were indeed tax evaders they’d be breaking a law and they are no more fraudulent then Code Pink (who stole money from the peace movement to send to communist Cuba as I’ve blogged about) Starhawk and modern Wicca (which is recognized as a tax exempt religion even though it was made up in the 50s) and the cult of anti-Scientology which is a group of weirdoes who think Scientology is more important than the work I’m doing here exposing pedophiles, Communist groups etc.
But let’s talk about real harm “ghost.” Was it Scientology that turned you into a mincing, whining anonymous grievance monger desperate for the online agreement of others? What was it that so thoroughly emasculated you that your crusade, your big contribution to safety and security, is claiming that a phony Religion that operates just like many other phony religions (and ideologies) should be treated differently than all the others? In America we even allow radical mosques, NAMBLA and even a Communist party to operate freely. But you’re claiming we should not treat Scientology the same way based on claims made on websites run by other Internet weirdoes.
Is that what a man should be doing with himself?
I have 30 years of research that show Marijuana is indeed linked to mental illness. There are people however who falsely claim it’s harmless. I have never claimed they should be silenced even as they claim I should be. But aren’t they causing more harm than Scientology?
The only harm Scientology has caused is to people who willingly joined their cult. If not for Scientology they’d be in some other cult. Why should I care? Would it be better if they were sacrificing children to Ngangas like the cult in Mexico they found in the 90s? Would it be better if they were killing people and selling their fat like the Brujerias they just caught in Peru? Would they be better off blowing themselves up for Allah?
I have more important things concerning me than idiots buying into Dianetics, and you should too. The fact that you think this is more important than pedophilia, drug addiction, Islamic imperialism, the mutation of H1N1 that causes hemorrhagic pneumonia and the fact that the dollar is about to collapse proves to me you’re more of a cultist than any sucker who thinks they can “clear” themselves of negative influence with poorly constructed sci-fi props.
I’m working on a story now about a site called AgeMatch.com where older people meet younger people for sex; I mean “relationships.” Surprisingly there has already been a case of a 50+ year old man convincing a 16-year-old to run away and do S&M porn for him. That’s the kind of story I’m interested in, because it’s actually important.
When you have proof (not forum postings) of Scientology committing a crime that my readers need to hear about let me know. Until then get a girlfriend or something because I’ve got to tell you this is pretty sad. Stop crying about Scientology and go do something with your life.
I have formed by views on Scientology from sites such as Wikipedia and internationally respected news agencies, not geek sites such as myspace, Usenet and YouTube.
I’m not going to bother going through your post and point out where you have misquoted or misinterpreted me.
“The only harm Scientology has caused is to people who willingly joined their cult.”
So you now seem to agree that Scientology has harmed its members?
Like any business Scientology should have to comply with consumer protection laws.
I suggest you read “Scientology and the legal system” article Wikipedia and pay attention to what’s happened outside the USA.
So what there are more important things to worry about: paedophile priests, Jihadists?
Does that mean nothing should be done?
If I were to get caught steeling a 10 penny sweet from a shop then I would get prosecuted for shop lifting.
Why would I bother with that when I now know that there are better ways to steel from people and get away with it?
I think I’m going to move to the US, start my own business masquerading as a religion, rip a load or people off, commit fraud and tax evasion and best of all get away with it because I can always argue religious freedom if anyone suspects anything.
The fact that you use Wikipedia as a source speaks to your intellectual honesty ad capacity. Wikipedia is an OPEN SOURCE site meaning that the people writing the article you site are not experts in religion, crime or Scientology. What you’ve done as research is the equivalent of walking into a hipster coffee shop and using the opinions of the unemployed people there as evidence of your thesis.
My point is this. Scientology is no different than Wicca (and I was a Wiccan for many years, I’m a generic Pagan now) and the same “evidence” you use to claim Scientology isn’t a religion can be applied to Wiccans. It’s literally a slippery slope. Wicca sells books and goods to suckers and anyone who has been a Wiccan for more than 5 years knows it’s bogus. Are we going to attack them for it?
Having freedom mean people being responsible for themselves. I disapprove personally about some aspect of almost all religions but my own. I do not try to legislate against them, including Islam. I proudly support several Muslim organizations even though I don’t personally think Islam will ever be reformed and it is a false religion. What you advocate is the state telling people what religion is or is not valid. I think that’s one of the pillars of Fascism and I know that because rather than looking up fascism on Wikipedia I went to the source and read Mussolini’s essay on Fascism.
I have a degree in Religion, I have a Masters as well. I have objectively studied Scientology. It is not the Illuminati you’re trying to make it out to be, just another secularized “religion” in the style of Depak Chopra’s nonsense. Spiritually void and full of fools, but these are fools that must find their own way in the world.
Your thesis starts with the idea that the people running Scientology are not really Scientologists themselves, that they aren’t believers. This is not the truth as far as I know but it is the plot of an episode of South Park i thought was rather funny. If you want to debunk Scientology stop being lazy about it and read that gods awful Dianetics, which will give you plenty of ammunition to poke wholes in their religion. It speaks ill of you that rather than prove their religion false you want the state to make their religion illegal. This is anti-Western, Marxist misanthropy.
If you think Scientology is wrong, prove it. You can’t do that reading Wikipedia.
“The fact that you use Wikipedia as a source speaks to your intellectual honesty ad capacity. Wikipedia is an OPEN SOURCE site meaning that the people writing the article you site are not experts in religion, crime or Scientology. What you’ve done as research is the equivalent of walking into a hipster coffee shop and using the opinions of the unemployed people there as evidence of your thesis.”
I had a feeling that you would say that.
Why don’t you do as I do: check out the article and look at the references rather blindly believing it, as you’re accusing me of doing?
Wikipedia is no more or less reliable than any other source of information; any source can be subject to errors and bias. In my view the argument that anyone can write what they want is countered by the fact that it’s open to a greater amount of peer review than any other source. Generally I avoid using only one source of information (Wikipedia or otherwise) when I’m building my opinions; anyone who forms their ideas based on one source of information doesn’t have a very informed view.
“Wicca sells books and goods to suckers ”
Sorry but that makes it a business as far as I’m concerned and the people who purchase those goods should be protected by consumer laws.
“Having freedom mean people being responsible for themselves. ”
I agree.
The trouble is that people don’t know whether a business’s services or products are any good before they buy them.
Unfortunately in the case of Scientology it is difficult to get an unbiased opinion on it’s goods and services because it has done a very good job of censoring dissatisfied customers.
Do you think cannabis should be legalised?
It may be harmful and linked to mental illness but so is alcohol which claims far many more lives for the same number of users.
“What you advocate is the state telling people what religion is or is not valid. I think that’s one of the pillars of Fascism and I know that because rather than looking up fascism on Wikipedia I went to the source and read Mussolini’s essay on Fascism.”
Right, now you’re actually debating something rather than just slinging childish insults as you have mostly done in your previous posts.
That is a perfectly valid point: who should decide what is a religion and what is not?
If the state is going to give religions special treatment such as tax free status and constitutional protection then clearly someone needs to decide what organisation is worthy of these privileges and what is not, otherwise anyone could create their own enterprise, make loads of money, abuse their customers and get away with it, claiming that they’re a religion.
So what criteria should the state judge the validity of religious organisations on?
I think that not for profit should be the number one priority. In my opinion any group that sells copyrighted books, offers services in exchange for money and pays members 10% commission, on money spent by new members, is a business, others may disagree.
One of the things I’m asking for is a proper debate on the matter without fear of people being labelled as fascists, which you have done on many occasions.
Of course, some would say that all organisations, whether they be political, businesses or religions should be treated equally and that Churches, Mosques, Temples etc. should all have to pay tax and comply with consumer regulations like everyone else.
Perhaps that is the the way to go? There again, I know the majority of people in the US believe in God so that might not go down too well.
“Your thesis starts with the idea that the people running Scientology are not really Scientologists themselves, that they aren’t believers.”
Well Hubbard as good as admitted that but members or the church dispute it.
That’s not really my point though; the best businesses actually recruit people that genuinely believe in their code of ethics and their products and services. Word of mouth is also very important; people are often very passionate about products they use and will try to persuade others into using the same products: search the Internet and you’ll find many flame wars invoking PlayStation vs Xbox users, Firefox vs Internet Explorer users etc. which are often just as emotionally charged as any religious discussion.
“If you think Scientology is wrong, prove it.”
Compare the legal action taken against those who have criticised Scientology with that taken by Singapore’s authoritarian government against those who criticise the regime – it’s amazingly similar.
On the other hand, plenty of people have won cases against Scientology for fraud and libel.
Scientology fell short of being banned in France, not because of religious discrimination but because six of its “clergy” were convicted of organised fraud.
Here in the UK the church of Scientology was ordered to pay £55,000 damages and £100,000 costs to the Bonnie Woods.
Plenty of sources can can be found to back up these claims.
I don’t check out Wikipedia articles for facts for the same reason I don’t go to forums. It’s not real verifiable and often not valid. I myself was slandered by a Wikipedia editor a few years ago, who ran through the web making up outrageous lies about me. I have a list of three active Wiki editors who are known pedophiles and have been editing child sexuality articles to reflect their bias.
As an academic I believe in using ethnographic research on religions to come tot my conclusions. I don’t take anyone’s word but my own. I read the material, interview members and ex-members and come to my conclusions. You have never done that.
And let’s be clear here. There’s no debate on this topic. I’m not a Scientologist, I don’t care about Scientologists and I’m not interested in spending my time supporting a attack on some crappy new age religion that has, at it’s center, the same people who created and inflamed the Satanic Panic here in America, which we Pagans still deal with. I was just recently accused of being a devil worshiper by someone.
Maybe it’s you who should do some research. Who runs those forums you like so much? Prior to this what were they up to? Are there groups financially benefiting from the marketing of anti-Scientology tracts? Are some of those tracts plagiarized from anti-Catholic/anti-Mason tracts from the 1800s? I did that research and know the answers. I suggest you do the same.
France has over 730 areas police have ceded to Muslims where gang rapes are essentially legal. The Scientologists were a diversion for a government powerless to stop their collapse to show they could be tough on Religion. It should be pointed out that among the chief proponents of anti-Scientology in France are…Muslims who make the same charges against Masons, Catholics, Jews and Pagans.
The idea that someone getting sued for libel proves they aren’t a religion is silly. I have been libeled and threatened legal action to rectify it. All this proves is that I take my reputation seriously.
And England? Really? England banned guns as well. I won’t be giving up mine to follow the example. England has been run by Labour for a decade, and Labour is a Fabian Socialist party. Using that country as a pattern for what people who love freedom should do is laughable.
Let me be clear though. I. Don’t. Care. I may address the anti-Scientology emails/comments I have been getting later, but if you dislike Scientology so much take it up with them. It’s a great use of your time.
Hey, just a thought about the whole “Wicca sells books to suckers” : firstly, Wicca is not a centralized religion, therefore it is not Wicca itself that is selling books and profiting from it; rather, it is the individual authors who want to make a quick buck by jotting down a couple of “spells” and selling them to kids and teens who are under the delusion that they can do magic like in Harry Potter. Also, don’t other religions have books on them they can sell to “suckers”? Do you know how many Bibles are sold on an annual basis? Christian self-help books and faith-tinged stories of miracles and whatnot? Wicca CANNOT be like Scientology because Scientology is an organized group who tricks people into spending vast sums of money on their “courses”; they deplore free speech, and ex-members are harassed and humiliated. Wicca, on the other hand, is decentralized, and members do not need to buy books or courses in order to advance spiritually. Wiccans are free to discuss their beliefs openly and, if they choose to leave, they will not be scorned. Another thought: don’t most religions have you pay money in some form? Does the collection plate ring any bells?
A) Wicca has a de facto centralized structure because it operates more as a sub-culture. However my point has always been that Wicca is in and of itself a bit of a fraud (Gerald Gardner plagiarized Aradia and OTO rituals and there is no “ancient tradition” of Wicca) not that there’s a Wiccan pope committing the fraud. I was a Wiccan for more years than you’ve probably been alive, so trust me on this kid.
B) Are you comparing Silver Ravenwolf’s book of Tenny-bopper sex rites to the Bible? Do you have the guts to make that same statement about the Koran?
C) Not that it matters but most Bibles are given away by churches to converts, at least in Protestantism.
D) I never said Wicca is like Sceintology in structure or content, only that both are scams. Wicca lost all hope for being a real religion in the 90s when people like you became the majority.
E) I don’t think you know what decentralization means, or organized. Wicca may be de-centralized (though I would argue that since there is a definite power structure within it isn’t) but that doesn’t mean it’s not an organized religion. Is Zen Buddhism not an organized religion because there’s not Zen pope? Is Hindusim not an organized religion? Islam?
F) The idea that you don’t need to buy books to practice Wicca is laughable. And telling. In my day you needed access to dozens of books to make the most important one .. your Book of Shadows. These days I guess you just watch Twilight.
G) Many ex-Wiccans are scorned, including me … by you. Grow up.
H) Does Selena Fox raising money for a Wiccan retreat (that you’re not allowed on) ring any bells for you? How about Starhawk collecting for causes that she can’t prove used all the money?
I was going to go through the whole alphabet because my wife thinks that’s funny but we’re heading out to a late lunch so how about this? Go fuck yourself. I’m not interested in what some high school drop out thinks about a article I wrote three years ago. Get a job.