• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
Mighty_Emperor said:
I'm so tempted to get the free DVD but might be leaving myself wide open for blank-eyed automatons to turn up on my doorstep. Anyone up for it?

No - but I am up for us to write a collective email (all pool in and all edit) and then use an anonymous email address (my yahoo one has none of my personal details on it, I got in before they started asking for them) to send it to the cult.

Then post a link to their response or something...

As they claimed our pitbull journalist said - Poke a stick in a crocodile's eye, step back and see what happens next. :twisted:
 
rynner said:
Mighty_Emperor said:
I wonder if we should set Derren Brown on them?
Harry Hill: Fight, fight, fight!




PS: is scraily an Irish word, or what? ;)

They would be out there waiting for him (deeming him a murdering psychiatrist) with pitch forks and blazing torches etc. ;)
 
Ravenstone said:
All of which just reinforces my view that all of the Scientologist actors films should be boycotted. And I'm quite happy to sign any petition to refuse them the status of religion. Status of con-artists and sad losers - I'd support that.

S'funny you should mention that. I wouldn't touch a Tom Cruise dvd with a long smelly stick these days, even though they are mostly all selling for only a fiver thanks to blue ray coming out.
 
Mighty_Emperor said:
I'm so tempted to get the free DVD but might be leaving myself wide open for blank-eyed automatons to turn up on my doorstep.
That's not the problem - watch the DVD and we'd have a blank-eyed automaton for a Moderator. Don't do it! Use the DVD as a beermat or to scare away housemartins - anything but watch it.
 
What I loved about this Panorama/Scientology business is the fact that the scientologists' rather smug strategy of placing Sweeney's outburst on the internet has backfired massively.

What the scientologists failed to realise is that not many people in the uk watch Panorama, seeing it as a rather boring politics/current affairs type show. Unfortunately for these scientologists (ho ho), their airing of Sweeny 'goin'-right-mental-like' gave the programme a lot of free publicity - said programme being a right hatchet job on a cult that, quite frankly, does itself no favours.

True, the show was biased, and Sweeney went in there with the sole agenda of making the whole lot of them look bad. But Scientology itself is far from innocent when it comes to such subversive tactics, and hypocrisy - as I have seen time and and time again - is par for the course when it comes to any religion, be it mainstream or not.
 
barfing_pumpkin said:
True, the show was biased, and Sweeney went in there with the sole agenda of making the whole lot of them look bad. But Scientology itself is far from innocent when it comes to such subversive tactics, and hypocrisy - as I have seen time and and time again - is par for the course when it comes to any religion, be it mainstream or not.

Fair game, one might say. ;)
 
Mighty_Emperor said:
I have seen guys do that in the pub in a less controlled manner - they spot the weak point and push and push and then the other person looses their rag and they stand back and go "bloody Hell mate calm down."
...
...
I wonder where he learned techniques like that?

Down your boozer? ;)
 
Interesting. A shave, a hair cut and a bath it could just be the guy who gave me a handful of maggots one Halloween!!

coldelephant said:
Mighty_Emperor said:
I'm so tempted to get the free DVD but might be leaving myself wide open for blank-eyed automatons to turn up on my doorstep. Anyone up for it?

No - but I am up for us to write a collective email (all pool in and all edit) and then use an anonymous email address (my yahoo one has none of my personal details on it, I got in before they started asking for them) to send it to the cult.

Then post a link to their response or something...

As they claimed our pitbull journalist said - Poke a stick in a crocodile's eye, step back and see what happens next. :twisted:

Hell no!!! Can you imagine what this place would be like if 2,000 Scientologists descended on it!!

barfing_pumpkin said:
What I loved about this Panorama/Scientology business is the fact that the scientologists' rather smug strategy of placing Sweeney's outburst on the internet has backfired massively.

What the scientologists failed to realise is that not many people in the uk watch Panorama, seeing it as a rather boring politics/current affairs type show. Unfortunately for these scientologists (ho ho), their airing of Sweeny 'goin'-right-mental-like' gave the programme a lot of free publicity - said programme being a right hatchet job on a cult that, quite frankly, does itself no favours.

Also their continued attacks on him pretty much prove his point. If they are trying to preach to the unconverted they are having the opposite effect.

It makes the whole thing even more meta. A documentary about making a documentary, with the people being documented making their own documentary about the documentary about the making of a documentary which unintentionally proves all the point they were trying to argue against.

Possibly.
 
Mighty_Emperor said:
Hell no!!! Can you imagine what this place would be like if 2,000 Scientologists descended on it!!
No different to having 2,000 militant atheists descend on it. ;)
 
The times I've run into Scientologists (and given bogus name and address obviously) dropping into the conversation that you know that Hubbard at one time was a member of the LA, Ordo Templi Orientis and hence a disciple of Aleister Crowley provokes interesting reactions.
 
Emps - what if the email address that was used was annonymous, and there was a cut and paste and not a link so that the OT's/Auditors could not trace us?

As regards poking the Scientologists, if some of you have some spare time and money...

...you could arrive at a premiere that Tom Cruise was due to appear at, and make it so that when he arrives he is greeted by lots of people wearing t-shirts and there would be big banners, all saying things like;

"Tom is a phsychiatrist with a PhD in Psychiatry"

Just to see what the reaction would be.

Childish I know... ;)
 
coldelephant said:
Emps - what if the email address that was used was annonymous, and there was a cut and paste and not a link so that the OT's/Auditors could not trace us?

Xenu sees all.
 
'Im Indoors spent one cold, wet, windy afternoon having a 'stress test' in Brighton. He had the warm tea and biscuits, sat through a bit, then beat a hasty retreat. There's no lasting effects as far as I can tell. ;)

What happened was....he was asked in the street, "If you could change one thing about yourself, what would it be?". He replied something along the lines of "I wouldn't mind being a bit taller". They then asked whether he was interested in why they were asking about how he wanted to improve himself, and he said not really. They then said that if he joined them, they would teach him to be better in interviews, more confident, make friends easily, live without stress, be successful in life....all the usual suspects. Then they took him upstairs in this building, where he was given a book and told to read a passage aloud. Now, 'Imself is not the most confident of public speakers, and whenever he hesitated over a word or stumbled, they would say, "Don't worry about that - we'll come back to it". When he'd finished, they then analysed the words he had stumbled over, and told him their 'hidden meanings'. So that, rather like a Tarot reading, words had meanings other than what the word itself actually meant. They said these words indicated the hidden stumbling blocks and stressors in his life, and they would help him with that.

He said he felt strongly that he couldn't leave. In the end, he bought the Dianetics book just in order to get out. He gave them his name, but no address, and they wanted a telephone number, but he wouldn't give one. So there was no further repercussions.
 
barfing_pumpkin said:
What I loved about this Panorama/Scientology business is the fact that the scientologists' rather smug strategy of placing Sweeney's outburst on the internet has backfired massively.

What the scientologists failed to realise is that not many people in the uk watch Panorama, seeing it as a rather boring politics/current affairs type show. Unfortunately for these scientologists (ho ho), their airing of Sweeny 'goin'-right-mental-like' gave the programme a lot of free publicity - said programme being a right hatchet job on a cult that, quite frankly, does itself no favours.

Damn right! That was the first Panorama I've watched in years, and I only watched it to find out what had caused the guy to freak out so badly.

Nice one, Church of Scientology, large numbers of people (myself included) would never have seen the show if you hadn't launched your pre-emptive smear campaign.
 
The documentary was rubbish. They went in with a lot of speculation and came out with a lot of speculation. It just felt like he was back at square one again by the end of the show but with a higher blood pressure. The rep from the Scientology group just sounded like any number of trolls on these boards, but made flesh. From the get go he was out to wind the presenter up, and got what he wanted in the end.
 
As a documentary about scientology itself, it was rather poor - but as a window into an attempt to make a documentary, it did okay. But the journo losing it at the end was... ahem... playing right into the hands of the scientologists. So it was all a bit of a mess really - bad reportage, but at the same time an interesting insight into some of the techniques used by scientology whenever it feels threatened. The jouno should've really done a bit of research into initimidation techniques before he started talking to any of the scientistologists, seeing as it's well known that they use a variety of techniques to counter adverse publicity. This may have helped him put things into persepctive as they were happening. He should've just smiled as much as possible IMHO ;)
 
I think the fact that a BBC journalist/reporter, one experienced enough to be on the Panorama team, could be goaded, so completely, into losing the plot, by these pod people, is significant, in itself.

Having said that, it's also significant that fewer and fewer of the BBC team, either fought in the Battle of Britain, or were Cockleshell Heoroes of one sort, or another.

Let's face it, Richard Dimbleby, or Raymond Baxter, would have been perfectly decent about the whole thing. And the pod people would still have been shown up for, creepy, manipulative, mind screwing, cultist thugees.
 
ghostdog19 said:
The documentary was rubbish. They went in with a lot of speculation and came out with a lot of speculation. It just felt like he was back at square one again by the end of the show but with a higher blood pressure. The rep from the Scientology group just sounded like any number of trolls on these boards, but made flesh. From the get go he was out to wind the presenter up, and got what he wanted in the end.

The documentary was rubbish - but it did show the Scientologists are creepy, follow you, harrass you, make defamatory remarks about critics to the point that the victims could sue (why haven't they for goodness sake?), and have been recorded on film as saying that the psychiatrists are responsible for the Holocaust.

These were rumour before, and now have been verified by the Scientologists themselves.

Nutcases.
 
coldelephant said:
The documentary was rubbish - but it did show the Scientologists are creepy, follow you, harrass you, make defamatory remarks about critics to the point that the victims could sue (why haven't they for goodness sake?), and have been recorded on film as saying that the psychiatrists are responsible for the Holocaust

Hear, hear - if the only good thing to come from the documentary was that it showed the depths to which these scum are prepared to sink in order to further their point, it was more than worthwhile :evil:
 
It may have been rubbish but how good can it have been with the head scientologist following him around and no one answering his questions or being threatened with law suits if he did use any footage he managed to get from the celeb scientologist. Its hard to make a goood documentary when all you have to work with in the first place is bone heads who won't accept or tolerate any disagreement with their ideas. Maybe their should be a follow up documentary focusing solely on the destruction scientology brings to families and also on Mr L. Ron Hubbard himself and how big a liar he was.
 
Agreed, it's difficult to be balanced on either side when the Scientologists are shouting you down and intimidating you no matter what tack you take. I don't see how it's possible to have a level-headed discussion on the subject under those conditions.

But the documentary was interesting, if only for being revealing. What a psychiatrist could make of this cult.
 
Would you say they practise Thetanism? That they are a Thetanic cult? Maybe they perform Thetanic rituals...

They are all Thetanists anyway. :lol:
 
Am I the only to think that just *perhaps* when originally setting out to make an unbiased documentary on Scientology (which quite obviously must include asking them about the critisisms of Scientology and asking if they are true) and faced with all the obstruction that this Panarama show then evolved into a documentary on how Scientology acts against perceived enemies (as obviously they were not going to get anywhere on the original idea).

Is it not possible that Panorama actually SET this up by giving the Scientologists a gift, knowing what they were going to do with it and then basking in the amazing free publicity? :D hahahaha

The nutters make themselves look like complete idiots on this one. If they had sat down and talked calmly and rationally with Panorama then few people would have watched the show. Instead they gave panorama plenty of ammunition. If you are a manipulative git, it might work short term but when people find out what you are really like you get shunned. Same with Scientology.
 
Which is probably why they were in Tottenham Ct Road giving out leaflets the other day.

Desperate nutters now.
 
Is it not possible that Panorama actually SET this up by giving the Scientologists a gift, knowing what they were going to do with it and then basking in the amazing free publicity? hahahaha

That's what I reckon, too. And frankly, any organisation which basks in the suffering of holocaust victims in an attempt to 'prove' its pissy little pseudoscientific agenda deserves it (and note the false logic, too - psychiatrists were involved in the holocaust, therefore psychiatry must be bad. Indeed - but note that doctors of medicine were also stationed at concentration camps (re: Mengele). Does that, therefore, make medical science a bad thing too?).
 
barfing_pumpkin said:
Is it not possible that Panorama actually SET this up by giving the Scientologists a gift, knowing what they were going to do with it and then basking in the amazing free publicity? hahahaha

That's what I reckon, too. And frankly, any organisation which basks in the suffering of holocaust victims in an attempt to 'prove' its pissy little pseudoscientific agenda deserves it (and note the false logic, too - psychiatrists were involved in the holocaust, therefore psychiatry must be bad. Indeed - but note that doctors of medicine were also stationed at concentration camps (re: Mengele). Does that, therefore, make medical science a bad thing too?).

Yep. I'd go with that theory too. The BBC handed the Scientologists a shovel and the CoS started enthusiastically digging themselves into a hole. Good on the BBC for having the chutzpah to do it, I say.
 
One wonders how Louis Theroux would've handle this subject. He's much better at actually getting people to speak, even if they seem overtly confrontational.
 
MPs Call For Tax Probe Into Cult

MPS CALL FOR TAX PROBE INTO CULT

Sunday May 20, 2007

James Murray


THE INLAND Revenue is being asked to investigate why British Scientologists are refusing to pay a tax on the grounds they do charitable work – even though the controversial religion has been refused charitable status.

Scientology, which came under fierce attack on the BBC last week, was denied the special status by the Charity Commission eight years ago.

In a 49-page landmark ruling, commissioners said the church had not demonstrated it was "established for the public benefit as to satisfy the legal test of public benefit of a charitable purpose for the advancement of religion or for the moral or spiritual welfare or improvement of the community".

Yet church accounts filed at Companies House argue it does not have to pay corporation tax as it was established for "charitable purposes".

Lib Dem MP Norman Baker disagrees: "In my view they should be liable to pay corporation tax," he said. "As far as I am concerned there is no evidence to suggest they are a charity. I am not even sure they are a religion. I want a full and detailed explanation from the Inland Revenue."

The organisation files accounts as the Church of Scientology Religious Education College Inc, which was incorporated in Australia as a religious charity in 1976. It "commenced activities" in Britain in 1977. Under "taxation", it states: "The church is a South Australian charity and is established in England for charitable purposes only. The trustees consider that corporation tax is therefore not applicable."

Church secretary Massimo Angius told the Sunday Express: "This does not matter because we are a non-profit organisation and we posted a loss, so we are not liable to pay corporation tax. The fact is, the Charity Commission got it wrong when they made their decision in 1999. We are a charity, there is no question about that."

Accounts for the year ending December 2005 show an income of £10,311,696 in England and Wales. With expenditure of £10,372,066 it recorded a loss of £60,370. They also reveal it had £6,749,972 cash in the bank, net assets worth £10,371,401 and total assets (less liabilities) of £19,704,389.

Founded in 1952 by US sci-fi writer L Ron Hubbard, Scientologists believe his claim that evil solar system warrior Xenu put beings in volcanoes 75 million years ago before vapourising them with nuclear bombs and that their radioactive "souls" are responsible for many of earth's problems today.

Celebrity Scientologists Tom Cruise and John Travolta have helped boost the church in Britain, its increased income helping establish more churches around the country including Blackfriars, London.

Mr Angius said councils give them reduced business rates as their "charitable work is good for the community". The Sunday Express understands Westminster Council cut the business rate bill by 80 per cent for a building in Leinster Gardens, London, and the City of London Corporation did the same for the Blackfriars site.

Mr Angius produced a Westminster council document deeming the church beneficial to the community for work, including drug awareness visits to schools, concerts, volunteer ministering and donations, including to Great Ormond Street hospital for sick children. It notes the organisation is not a registered charity but says it does not have to be.

The report's author wrote: "Having visited the property, I find it difficult to understand how the church's 'reverence to a Supreme Being' is not in line with other forms of 'worship' at more mainstream religions. A key principle of Scientology is the requirement to help others in the community."

Scientology executive director Bob Keenan said: "After the 7/7 bombings we provided 300 people to help victims with counselling and support. This is just one example of the sort of charity work we do." About 400 staff work at the church's Saint Hill HQ in East Grinstead, West Sussex. Several hundred live at Walsh Manor, Crowborough, East Sussex, a former institute for miscreant youths. Each morning 20 minibuses ferry them to HQ, 10 miles away.

A local said: "There seem to be more and more of them, young, old, men and women. Even at six in the morning you see them reading their books on Dianetics. They smile in the street but don't really get involved with the community.

"Since the Panorama programme a lot of people have a different view of them and there is genuine concern about the increasing numbers."

Church leaders are consulting libel lawyers over the BBC Panorama programme, in which journalist John Sweeney crosses swords with US-based church official Tommy Davis, son of Hollywood actress and church member Anne Archer(!).

International external affairs director Mike Rinder said: "Tommy felt let down by Panorama because he set up all the interviews, even one with his own mother, then Sweeney subjected them to abusive questions about brainwashing."

Mr Sweeney stands by his exposure of Scientology methods, particularly claims that psychiatry is an "industry of death". But when he interviewed former Cheers star Kirstie Alley she asked him: "Would you ever sit down with a Jew and tell them their religion is a cult?"

Copyright ©2006 Northern and Shell Media Publications.
 
zarathustraspake said:
Yep. I'd go with that theory too. The BBC handed the Scientologists a shovel and the CoS started enthusiastically digging themselves into a hole. Good on the BBC for having the chutzpah to do it, I say.
Don't you feel though that you've been patronized a little and that all they've really done is not shed any light on anything just preach to the converted (the reporter I mean)?
 
Back
Top