The CoS will do it's usual claim it's copyrighted material out of one side of it's face (in court) and while out of the other it will maintain that it is not the actual details (in public).

I read an extremely long and incredibly thorough article about scientology written in the mid '80s, or so, and published, I believe, in Time magazine. It was pretty terrifying.

Before I read the article, I pegged scientology as a group of wackos who suckered people out of some money and went on their way. Unfortunately, this is not the case - the description I read was of a group which, after a recruit sold everything he owned to pay their fees and finally quit, hounded him until he committed suicide.

Then a whole group of them stalked his family until his funeral.

Police are apparently powerless to do anything, because individual officers are so intimidated - any individual who comes to their attention is gradually and methodically destroyed. And without 'real' crimes committed, the will to hold the organization accountable isn't there.

As far as I'm concerned, wikileaks is right, and more. Scientology, as far as I'm concerned, is a criminal organization, and I'd lose no sleep over violating their copyright, and more than I would over violating the Mafia's copyright. And I mean that in every sense.

Does anyone know how you can have a cognition? - how do you know you have one or have had one?

Paris because i dont have a clue!

Blimey, amanFromMars makes more sense than that lot.

Years ago I learned to use Lorum Ipsum instead of making things up as it always backfires in the end.

Are they sure those documents are kosher? Looks like a wind-up to me:-)

Yes, the definition of a cognition is the realisation, through careful thought, while walking around counting bodies, that you have just parted with a lot of money for some useless junk.

As with what happened with DECSS, I hope that the more the CoS protests and threatens wikileaks, more people will begin to host these files until its impossible for their 'secrets' to remain private. Scientology is a cult and a dangerous one at that. They ruin peoples lives for the benefit of their elite few and it needs to be stopped.

Aren't these documents the same as the so-called "Fishman papers" that have been floating around the 'net for years, despite the best efforts of the scientologists and their lawyers to suppress them? IIRC, the Fishman papers went all the way to OT13, ie several mortgages above OT8.

Paris, because she'd make such a wonderful recruit for the scientologists.

The fool, or the fool who follows the fool?

Idiots, all of them.

Yes it's important to shine light on this group of dangerous loonies but we have other dangerous loonies to cope with right now, possibly you could handle CoS on your side of the pond. We will be with you when we have figured out this whole forced-sex-teen-bigamy thing, kthxbai.

--USA

I knew they were a weird and crazy bunch (I meant, Tom Cruise is one...) but WTF does all that crud mean?

Note to self: Never get too close to a Scientologist.

Not L. Ron Hubbard.

IIRC, it was a "David Mayo" who wrote a great deal of the OT series and later got embroiled in a lawsuit with Scientology over exactly who held copyright to these inane maunderings. The lawsuit, as least the report of it I read, was interesting as an example of Scientology's love of saying X today and not X tomorrow, depending on which way the wind is blowing.

It's not even clear that the Church(spit!) of Scientology holds the copyright to the OT series, as they lost a lawsuit somewhere along the line that resulted in the loss of their assets to somebody or other.

It's a long tangled tale that I long ago lost interest in, but if you google the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology from 1995-1998, say, you will find all sorts of interesting dirt.

Operating thetans, my eye! Xenu would laugh if he heard that!

For the uninitiated, a quick summary: we are infested with "body thetans", who seem to be disembodied souls that parasitize us. The OT series purports to offer ways of detaching these body thetans from us, to our benefit, whereupon we ourselves become Operating Thetans. I forget where Xenu comes into all this, but it's so hokey it's beyond laughable. Sadly, there are people out there so desperate for a silver bullet to fix their lives that they'll swallow guff and lies and fantasies like these hook, line, and sinker...to their great detriment.

For those inclined to poke sticks through the bars and annoy the Scientologists, don't bother. They are quite nasty when aroused and will sooner or later self-destruct without any help.

Regarding Lorem Ipsum ....... and you might like to consider that Cicero plagiarised is the Bedrock Foundation of Christianity and its Biblical Compendium of Edutainment Tales, the NTFS of its Time ..... as novel and as innovative as one may think to be Secure Communication in any of its Forms and Encryptions when discussing the Meaning of Life and Everything, Just for the Hell and the Love of Life ITself, that novelty and innovation are a pure and real delusion, for the Steganographic Masterpiece of Original Thought by which Man has evolved and is evolving, and which lights the Way to States of Higher Enlightenment and Beautifully Imperfect Immaculate Grace in the Sins and Vices it is a Pleasure to Right when Wronged, is already long ago shared for the Future in "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC.

A Real dDeep Thinker Tinker was Cicero..... http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Cicero ... with his double dDutch GBIrish in Latin PGP2 ....Pretty Good Privacy PerlyGatesPython. A Man Born and Borne of Woman in a Time and Place in Time and Space and Born and Borne Immortal through Words for Deeds ReMembered for Recycling Repetition in Future Buildings that Create Noble Societies out of Chaotic Confusion and its ArchAlly, Hubris...... for the Vanity and Madness that is the Insanity of Man failing 42BTrue......a Prize Fool to Himself and Everyone Else and a Mother and Natures Greatest Gift Squandered and Mindlessly Abused.

Fortunately though, 42BTrue is the Simplest of Simply Complex Tasks, even though the Fool would think IT SMART to avoid its Full Disclosure, Free-Loving Embrace and Create a Parallel Construction wedded to Falsehood...... which when IT reaches AI Critical Mass will Big Bang Explode and Implode on itself, Destroying the Edifice and XXXXPosing ITs Core to Ridicule and Just Retribution.

CATS: All your base are belong to us.

CATS: you are on your way to destruction

Captain: What you say !!

CATS: You have no chance to survive make your time.

CATS: Ha Ha Ha Ha ....

they do not believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, praised be his noodly appendages!

Welcome our thetan-detoxed, xenu-worshipping, lawsuit-happy, tax-deducting, operating thetan overlords.

...and in penury bind them.

I am glad this dangerous cult is not recognised as a religion here, and long may it continue. It would be even better if it was expulsed from these shores.

I haven't seen these documents yet, maybe I'll go and download them before they're gone.

Wasnt there a good documentary on the BBC recently (last year) about them?

If i remember they showed a bit of a cartoon of all this Xenu stuff.....looked a bit like a cheap ripoff of a 70's Flash Gordorn cartoon.

Given that I'm always doing the drill of walking around noting females bodies. Sometimes I even get a cognition, if they're wearing a short skirt. Cognition is a euphemism right?

If scientologists consider simple documents to be advanced technology, they must consider computers to be purely the stuff of science fiction.

wasn't he the guy that used prehistory earth as a prison planet then blew up all the volcanoes killing the prisoners which freed their spirits and allowed them to become the body thetans??

i'd buy the book if iain banks wrote it

sounds like a corker

paris cos i wish i was a body thetan infesting her

Doesn't this sound a little worrying on its own? Do you have to find a handy massacre ground? And if you don't live in Rwanda/the Former Yugoslavia, are you required to make your own? Maybe the Catholic Church was trying to improve its meditation techniques on its little sojurns to the Holy Land...

Shouldn't we be condemning Wikileaks for abusing copyright? How are they different from the people we label "freetards", since both flout law and intellectual property rights in the name of 'openness' rhetoric? After all, if authors of intellectual property cannot be guaranteed a return over the course of their lifetimes because everyone's stealing it, they will stop writing fake-spiritual dangerous psychobollocks bibles...

...oh wait, I think I see where the hypocrisy train is going and for once it's somewhere quite nice. Single, please.

I've yet to hear what the Church of Scientology intends on doing once the copyright on their works expires and there's nothing to defend. Unless Hubbard only founded the Church as a money-making business and there was no point in it continuing after his death. I guess we'll never know. Oh wait, we do, he's on record as saying he was going to found a church as a money-making business.

You know, can't we collect up the sayings of amanfromMars and bind them into a copyrighted volume or two? At least he makes sense after you've studied his teachings for a while.

AmanfromMars deserves his own book! perhaps with a cd of the most twisted drum and bass ever to turn us all into wackos!

"ou know, can't we collect up the sayings of amanfromMars and bind them into a copyrighted volume or two? At least he makes sense after you've studied his teachings for a while."

yes but what would we call our new cault/riligon "marsintoligy"? "amanisum"? this is the most importent thing and the reasion 9/10 religions fail in there first year

Rather ask what you can do for Anon.

13th April - Operation Reconnect

If you think the Cult of Scientology is a dangerous organisation both to its members and its critics, why not join in the protests and do something to help those in its clutches.

Last month, Anon partied hard with plenty of cake! :)

Can these docs not be hosted somewhere where the copyright does not apply ? Or maybe where the Scientology is legally considered a dangerous cult (Germany ?)

Amanfrommars only make sense after a heavy dose of mind altering drugs.

Paris cos; just cos!

Normal Scientology tactics of litigation and intimidation won't work against WikiLeaks, because they can't get to the individuals to get to, and even if a US Judge rules in their favour, wikileaks can safely ignore it by being outside their jurisdiction.

WikiLeaks: Because anonymous is doing it wrong.

April the 12th IIRC.

I'd buy a copy of "The sayings of amanfromMars". It'l be the "Doctrine of Advanced Technology" for a religion based on ElReg, amanfromMars, and the Holy Mackerel.

Don't worry L. Ron was a sci-fi writer. I'm still waiting for someone to find the piece of paper where he explains how it was all a massive joke - although I suspect a) the believers will refuse to believe it and b) the organization will have too much to lose to release it.

It’ll probably go something like this:

Ha,ha. You fools. You'd believe anything. Makes you think, doesn't it?

Just because they read a load of whacky shite doesn't make it dangerous.

While people should be cautioned against joining whacky cults, it's not really any of our business is it? What happened to religious freedom?

People should be cautioned against all sorts of dangerous pursuits, sky diving, gambling, drinking, smoking, (most fun things actually :( ) but that doesn't mean we should be staking out sky diving centres wearing masks and jeering.

It's their stuff, and it's basically nicked isn't it? Just cos it's shite doesn't mean that copyright doesn't apply or Britney would be in trouble as well.

I don't think there's anybody who's not in this cult that doesn't think it's bollocks anyway.

Hmm, second thoughts, unfortunately It'd be one of those books that I get two pages into before giving it up as unfathomable and putting it on my shelf alongside A Brief History of Time. A bit like an SNMP book I went through a few years ago (which included a line that went something like "This SNMP book isn't supposed to be fun" - well the author was right about that).

As was once stated "I may not agree with you, but I will fight to the death for your right to state it".

I hear a lot about people spouting crap, a lot of which I disagree with; but as long as they are not promoting the killing of innocent or infringing on other rights then this right has to be paramount. The issue is not whether you agree but how far are you willing to let business and gov't go to censor stuff and remove your rights. Today it is just a book like this, but in a few years time it could be your right to complain about thier being idiots on a forum.

Sound far fetched, just take a look at what the US, UK, and Canadian gov't are currently doing.

"How many Scientologists does it take to change a lightbulb?"

"Twenty. One to change the bulb, eighteen to stand around, and one to walk around and count bodies until he has a cognition."

However, CoS say they are a religious organisation. For tax breaks etc. But how many bibles do you know that are copyrighted? None?

Also, if it is a Trade Secret, that secret is lost. If it's copyrighted, it's not a trade secret.

And copyright is STILL a civil tort. So how much are CoS harmed financially by the reviewing of their religious texts? Not at all, unless they themselves know it to be useless junk that would scare off any sane person before they get to brainwash them.

And if that doesn't show up how they are talking out of both sides of their face(?), what will?

No, the outpourings of amanfromMars doesn't make sense, no matter how much you read it. What you may get is cognition.

Whatever that means...

I suggest you check out about operation freakout. where they harassed and made up false bomb threats against themselves and others by paulette cooper, because she wrote a book critical of the Co$, they broke into her house and stole headed stationary that had her finger prints on.

Also watch the panorama documentary by John Sweeney, yes the one where he blows his top, you can see the same type of harassment going on. then watch the "panorama truth" video and looky here a bomb threat from either John Sweeney or the BBC. If you believe that the beeb or sweeney issued a bomb threat then you'll believe anything.

Oh by the way they mostly deny the wacky beliefs until too far in, because they claim that scientology is compatible with other faiths. By which stage the Co$ has so much stuff to blackmail you with through the "auditing sessions" it's dangerous to leave.

It's not like censorship though, this is their own material they are attempting to restrict. If someone got their mitts on your diary wouldn't you expect to be able to stop them publishing it?

If there was some disclosure in the public interest in this then I'd agree with you. If your diary had some admission of guilt for instance there'd be a reason to publish that too. But this isn't whistle blowing, it's just winding up a bunch of nutters by exposing their secret magic book.

...well...you can actually

http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH6_3.HTM

Its all here...heal thyself

Is not really a religion and while it acts like a business, it's not that either. They are using advanced psychology and the so called OT levels are steps of self induced brainwashing. The so called 'getting rid of thetans' thing is actually the erasing of various parts of one's personality. They start with willpower and memories, then switch to various lower levels, until they earase everything that makes someone a person. Btw, this thing is called 'soul' by some older religions. When someone reaches the highest levels, they earse the control over basic biological functions. This makes someone 'clear' or in other worlds soulless.

If we think the church of science fiction psychology (short: scientology) is just a cult we are right, but they are one of the more dangerous kind, because all that someone finds in it is just death, just not their body, but their soul. I doubt even the leaders realize this though.

"But how many bibles do you know that are copyrighted? None?"

actually, quite a few translations of the bible are still in copyright...

Pairs : becuase i like stale and unfunny jokes

"this is their own material they are attempting to restrict."

Is it? I thought this was the Word Of Xenu. The Words Of Truth From A Dim And Distant Past Kept For The Present.

And so is out of copyright.

Unless it's a load of shite made up by someone recently (and HOW recently, because copyright terms changed a lot). In which case, it can be considered merely whistle blowing. After all, Deep Throat gave away State Secrets, the US was mostly UK property and so both should be rescinded and the heirs punished for stealing others' property.

If we're going to found a new religion, let me chuck in a couple of ideas:

(1) The universe is only 200 years old. (Hey, if the fundamentalist Christians can deny everything that predated the Agricultural Revolution, we ought to be able to deny everything that predated the Industrial Revolution.)

(2) Pre-pay confession. Instead of confessing your sins to a priest, you tell the priest how many Hail Marys and Our Fathers you have said and how many old ladies you have helped across the road, and you get given a choice of sins you can commit. Or you can save up the grace already accrued to use against a bigger sin the following week.

"Do step over until you do."

That looks like an infinite loop to me. I think these instructions need a thorough debugging...

When I hear a actor is a member of Scientology I do my best to boycott them.

Hit them where it hurts. In their wallet!

... I learned from the now infamous 'closet' episode.

Oh, and trying to read LRH's books!

Black Helicopter, 'cos it could all be a double-bluff?

Which SF writer came up with ElRonners - a mindless horde of joggers?

Anyway, El Ron was a poor writer, the same old Aryan Race tm. images of big chested, strong men and big chested, strong (but not quite as tall) women. Phil Farmer had odd aliens shagging blonde large-breasted women and humans shagging large-breasted women. Bob Heinlein gave us 'Stranger in a Strange Land' which seems to be adopted as the sort of New Testament of El Ron's blatherings. Even though they now read just a tad sexist the writing is miles better than El Ron could ever manage.

Better watch it though or Space Captain Travolta will be visiting on a bombing run. Accompanied by Space Cadet Cruise, of course.

I sincerely hope that it is.

The thing is, the article that was linked to by the hyperlink marked 'bullet proof' seems to imply two things.

1) Wikileaks is based in Sweden

2) They have their own servers.

If they have records of where these servers are or people within Wikileaks know where these servers are then they have two weaknesses.

One is that Sweden can be pressured to shut down the organisation.

The other weakness is that the staff of Wikileaks can be infiltrated or interrogated in person.

I thought that mother Hubbard is the prophet and says that he wrote it, I don't think they claim it to be the word of god otherwise copyright claims would of course be tricky - unless god actually showed up (I feel that's an unlikely event).

>Unless it's a load of shite made up by someone recently

Please don't think I'm one of them - I'm very definitely an atheist. Hubbard wrote it in '65ish I think. Which means the copyright is due to expire and then it's quite rightly a free for all, we can all grab a copy and set up our own whacky cults.

>Is not really a religion and while it acts like a business, it's not that either.

Most religions act like a business.

It's not considered a religion in the UK for the purposes of charity law, that law requires worship and veneration of a supreme being, thus Christianity, Islam and the Flying Spaghetti Monset (praise be to his noodly appendages) all count and scientology, spiritualism certain types of bhuddism and ancestor worship don't.

Also, a charity of course, should have some kind of benevolent purpose, which scientology clearly doesn't. But it terms of language it clearly is a religion.

I can't believe I'm defending these loonies, but regardless of what you think of them they should be allowed to believe whatever bollocks they want to believe.

Like the poem; First they came for the scientologists, and I didn't speak out because I thought they were nutters and deserved it...

Nah - that is an unfinished loop.

An infinate loop would be;

Do count until no more bodies

When no more bodies, do count

>where they harassed and made up false bomb threats against

>themselves and others

A bunch of Muslim fanatics blew up themselves and others on 7/7 do you go on demos outside mosques? Do you demand that Islam is dismantled?

>Also watch the panorama documentary by John Sweeney, yes the one where

>he blows his top, you can see the same type of harassment going on.

You mean like when the infamous Danish cartoons that got withdrawn and people were forced to go into hiding in fear of their lives? Was it as bad as that?

In fact, why aren't they on wikileaks? Are they not truly censored? Even the authors wanted them to be published.

>If you believe that the beeb or sweeney issued a bomb threat then you'll

>believe anything.

Why would you think I might believe such a thing?

My point is about freedom of religion. The law should be enforced where it has been broken, without doubt and bomb threats, libels, perverting the course of justice and harrasment are all illegal whether conducted by a recognised religion or not.

US Copyright remains for 50 years from the death of the author (for works published before 1978, newer works get an extra 20 years of protection), so ElRon's writings are still very much in copyright - he died in 1986.

The Co$ will probably try to argue that their copyright works are a corporate work, so benefit from extended protection of up to 95 years. Funnily enough, this is the Disney approach, so it seems both companies are copyrighting fairy stories :)

'Please don't think I'm one of them - I'm very definitely an atheist. Hubbard wrote it in '65ish I think. Which means the copyright is due to expire and then it's quite rightly a free for all, we can all grab a copy and set up our own whacky cults.'

'Dianetics' was first published in 1950, but it's copyright will belong to L Ron who went to meet Xenu in 1986. Under US copyright law, it will expire in 1986 + 70 = 2056. Unless of course a powerful, rich, well-connected organisation can persuade Congress to extend copyright again. Ah...

On an unrelated note, is there any chance we can get amanfrommars in a conversation with a Scientologist, or would that break the universe at a fundamentally weird level?

Both quite right.

Literary works have a different lifespan to music...

(I had the Beatles stuff expiring in the back of my mind)

>Duration of copyright

>The 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act states the duration as;

> 1. For literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works

> 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last remaining

> author of the work dies.

> 2. Sound Recordings and broadcasts

> 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was created.

Interesting difference. If it were on tape then it'd be a different matter.

"But how many bibles do you know that are copyrighted? None?"

Almost all, under UK law. The King James Bible has perpetual copyright to the British Crown, at least in the UK, though there are certain effects of that which make it's protection untypical. Modern translations of the Bible would also get their own protection for 70 years after the death of the translator too.

Not that the So$ getting screwed is a bad thing.

(one would note that being on tape doesn't make any difference - the audio recording may be out of copyright, but as the recording is of the book that is still within copyright you still aren't allowed to distribute it without the permission of the author until the book and any other copyrighted items contained within expire as well).

>one would note that being on tape doesn't make any difference - the

>audio recording may be out of copyright, but as the recording is of the

>book that is still within copyright you still aren't allowed to distribute it

>without the permission of the author until the book and any other copyrighted

>items contained within expire as well

I doubt you're correct here, most audio recordings will originate from a paper copy, be it lyrics, sheet music, or a book.

If it were the case then copyright on audio recordings could be prolonged by retaining a written copy (such as song lyrics, which are a "literary" work in relation to copyright in the UK).

Obviously the copy would have to be audio as well, a transcript would be reproducing the literary work.

Ah, but that's the point: if it is just a bunch of stuff written by Ron, then there's no truth to it (he wasn't there when Xenu was squashed under a mountain). And if it's been bandied about, then all CoS have lost is the cost of the book (nil pounds).

If it's a take of truth, then it's just a buncha facts and not expressive and so not deserving of copyright.

And if it is real and written from ancient knowledge, copyright ran out.

But you can reprint them. The bible story is out of copyright and someone would have to show that you copied the King James version (which is quite happily done in critique on the sceptics annotated bible on the internet and not been persued by attack lawyers) and therefore show that it is NOT the bible, but a derived work (and therefore necessarily not the True Word Of God).

Which is kind of why copyright cases aren't persued.

I suspect it is more to ensure that nobody else copyrights the bible and sues the crown, really...

""But how many bibles do you know that are copyrighted? None?"

Almost all, under UK law. The King James Bible has perpetual copyright to the British Crown, at least in the UK, though there are certain effects of that which make it's protection untypical. Modern translations of the Bible would also get their own protection for 70 years after the death of the translator too" ...... By Anonymous Coward Posted Tuesday 8th April 2008 14:50 GMT

That is patently unfair and an abuse of Royal Privilege?

"I haven't seen these documents yet, maybe I'll go and download them before they're gone."

Don't bother unless you have something in mind more than merely satisfying your curiosity or being able to crow about the Top Sekreet Scientology Documents on your hard drive.

They are beyond dreary. They're not even bad science fiction. They make no sense, no matter which way you turn the page. I used to have the entire NOTS series I'd downloaded from somewhere, but finally decided to junk them because they were of no earthly use to anybody (except CoS bigwigs who use them to rake in the cash).

Haven't missed them for a minute.

But if you don't believe, go ahead. You won't be sorry, but you''ll agree with my assessment once you've read this trash.

Paris because tho' she's trashy, at least she makes sense.

This is an organisation who would wish to call itself a 'church' but is not recognized as such by all. The same organisation which in germany has after governmental evaluation of the organisation been concluded to be "an anticonstitutional movement with criminogenic structure".

See the detailed report on:

http://www.stmi.bayern.de/imperia/md/content/stmi/sicherheit/verfassungsschutz/scientology/system_so_engl.pdf

There is also an interesting variant on the following link.

http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/germany-wis.htm

Scientology is just a para-religious Pyramid Scheme. I think it is all a big joke.

A man from mars is welcome to adopt/adapt my religion... project343.blogspot.com (it comes with a Creative Commons license ... it must be good?)

History books are true, about past events and copyright.

(I'm not saying this bollocks is true of course)

>all CoS have lost is the cost of the book

Well, under British law they'd have to demonstrate damage for compensation - I would have thought that would be hard. :)

Under US law they could attempt punitive damages, which could be costly, depending on who is to be punished.

@amanfrommars: That is patently unfair and an abuse of Royal Privilege?

Wow, 4 beers and Daft Punk on 11 you finally start to make sense..

As someone mentioned above, that "closet" South Park episode is still the best description of Scientology yet. Watch it if you want to know what it is all about.

"Make a list of terminals who have had ARC Breaks, PTPs or have committed overts against you to Fly Ruds on them ..

If reading, then ARCU, CDEINR E/S to F/N, VGIs and no more reads ..

Do this action until you have a big win, persistent F/N and cognition on doing the action. Good Luck!"

> "Make a list of terminals who have had ARC Breaks, PTPs or have committed

> overts against you to Fly Ruds on them ..

>

> If reading, then ARCU, CDEINR E/S to F/N, VGIs and no more reads ..

>

> Do this action until you have a big win, persistent F/N and cognition on doing the

> action. Good Luck!"

You need to try a lot harder if you were trying to fake an amanfromMars posting.

This is argued very well by freenet. Essentially, Free Speech *must* trump Copyright law. http://freenetproject.org/philosophy.html

BTW, the CoS are a pretty nasty lot: http://www.xenu.net/

sorry the calothlic church allready did number 2 in the middle ages they where caled indulcences and you could buy them for your self or a family menber 2 for 1 get the whail they are hot!!!!

I'll say one thing for Ron Hubbard, he made some brilliant tunes on the Commodore 64.

Well if the documents are copyright then you can expect them to complain.

The problem with Scientology is that people who come up against them tend to commit suicide CIA style. In a TV documentry about Scientology (the one where the reporter so much lost his rag that his head almost exploded), one of those he interviewed recently commiteed suicide.

Good luck to Wikileaks, I hope no one gets suicided, or trapped in an airtight room as all the oxygen is removed.

The issue isn't copyright, all authors should have the right to benefit from their work; however in this case there is an overiding public interest.

The documents that the CoS claim are copyright are not freely available for purchase, and may well provide proof that the CoS is acting unlawfully; no-one would argue that Al-Qaeda could copyright its materials to protect them from being used against them.

I don't think that CoS are worried about the potential loss of sales revenue on the documents; only that they may be exposed to riducule or as criminals, or both.

A way out of this could be to amend copyright law so that copyrighted materials have to be made available to public libraries where they will then be available for academic use; this would prevent copyright laws being used to suppress material in this way.

There are allegedly chapters in the particular document called 'Handling BTs Messed Up', 'BTs With Misunderstood Words' and 'Repairing And Blowing BTs And Clusters'

Does this mean that:

a) Da L Ron Ron Ron predicted the whole BT/Phorm thang

b) There is an even more tenuous IT angle (Clusters...)

* Paris 'cos am sure she's blown clusters before.

"You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion." - L Ron Hubbard @ Eastern Science Fiction Association meeting 11 November 1948.

www.xenu.net

With apologies to suppressedperson over at entubulation.org, who's words these are - but I knew reg would like them:

"In the blue corner, the Church, on a heavyweight supersecure DDoS-proof steel tank of a server, with an armada of lawyers ready to fire barrages of legal missiles, a mountain of a boxer in the heaviest of weight divisions, raging on roids and ready to rip an ear off somebody...

Versus Wikileaks, who aren't in the ring. They're in Sweden. And they pissed in the protein milkshake you drank this morning."

Normally, these posts attract the scientologists and their lawyers instantly.

So far, I have only seen the normal level of highbrow discussion that is created by reg regulars.

I am actually planning my own religion as we speak. One of the key milestones in this project will include a retro sealab 2021 (not 2020, thats sooo last year) undersea base where I will peform cognitions on many female bodies.

And it shall be good.

They may do, but actually, they don't.

I agree that if there were a public interest then it woudl be different, but there isn't a public interest. In fact I would suggest that the entire reason these docs were made public is to ridicule their beliefs and not for any "whistle blowing" purpose.

>copyrighted materials have to be made available to public libraries

Everything? For free or paid? The CoS doc isn't publicly published, do you really think that copies of everything ever produced without necessarily being published would have to be sent to libraries?

That's every single newspaper, plus drafts, revisions and pre-prints of course, every email, letter, post-it note, email address, drawing, line of code, membership lists of any clubs or political parties you might be in.

What do you base those 'arguments' on? How do you know that they act lawfully? Just because they say so themselves?

Actually, they do systematically act unlawfully when following the recommendations of their 'church' and this practice results in that they have a real track record in the judicial systems in many countries - as many investigation have shown. Which is the reason why for example Germany is still insisting on having this organisation under surveillance. They are grouped together with terrorist, neo nazis and other extreme and violent organisations which pose a significant and real threat to the common citizen in the western democratic society (and in Germany in particular).

as you can read for yourself just follow a few of the links presented earlier in this discussion (such as information on xenu.net or go direct to the sources in germany (see for example the links in 'science of control' posting above).

>What do you base those 'arguments' on?

>How do you know that they act lawfully?

>Just because they say so themselves?

Well, yes, I presume you to be acting lawfully too, I don't have to print all your personal details online to be sure of that. In fact, I don't even need to be sure of it at all.

The issue is the publication of a doc, if it doesn't show them to be acting unlawfully, and it doesn't appear to, and there is no other public interest served then you should ask what the purpose of distributing it online actually is.

Many people have documents that they don't want the world to know about, personal diaries, medical records, political affiliations. Should I find out about them the only reason I should publish them is if a public interest is served by that publication. I should not publish them just because I want to wind them up.

Obviously at least some of the members do act in very odd ways, which I'm sure, makes the German authorities feel they have to watch them. I would expect the British police to be interested in their activities too.

"Obviously at least some of the members do act in very odd ways, which I'm sure, makes the German authorities feel they have to watch them. I would expect the British police to be interested in their activities too."

Sorry but this is a complete misunderstanding of why the organisation is watched in Germany. The reason for why they are watched is because of the instructions for actions, policies and strategies that the organisation invokes in their members. The issue has nothing to do with 'some lost irrate members activities'. The issue is very much the result of the ORGANISED AND PLANNED activities IN ACCORDANCE with their policy. This is why it is associated with terrorist organisations and in some respects organised crime.

Please do read the german report referred to in earlier posts.

How have you decided that the publication of religious texts is NOT in the public interest?

Can someone explain to me how it is any different from any other religion?

Commit to promises that can never be proven (usually a donation of cash is a good way to signify your commitment), then cross your fingers and hope you have plumped for the right one.

OK, so if you want to leave the CoS, they f*ck you over using your own personal history (extracted during the audit) to persuade you to stay. Terrible.

Of course, if you "leave" a major (respectable) religion, such as the Church of England, you get to spend eternity in hell, which if you are a true believer is terrifying prospect (so I am told).

As someone who does not believe in Thetan's, or any of the Gods prescribed in any religious texts written by humans (word of god my....), to me, there are all as insidious as each other.

Paris, because she's a cult.

They bring it on themselves... the more they respond to attacks the more they will happen, and as long as they continue to operate as if they are a secret society these attacks will always continue.

If they are legitimate why don't they just come clean on everything? Instead of unleashing their lawyers and spreading lies about people/organizations that question CoS beliefs. Is it because if people knew the truth then their scam would be over?

If they would give people the reason to trust them things might be different... instead they basically consider anyone not involved in their 'church' to be criminals.

I think they need to be exposed, and applaud everyone working hard to do so.

>How have you decided that the publication of religious texts is NOT in

>the public interest?

-It's an organised religion that holds the copyright on the text and they don't want it public.

-There's no indication of wrongdoing or interference with outside people or organisations.

-The activities that are outlined in the doc seem harmlessly eccentric.

Why do you think it should be published? Because it's a religious text? Does that automatically grant absolution from copyright?

Why do you want to hurt them? Is it because they believe something different to you?

If a major public figure dressing up as a Nazi and fucking prostitutes in a bizarre concentration camp oriented sex game isn't in the public interest then this isn't either.

"Normally, these posts attract the scientologists and their lawyers instantly.

So far, I have only seen the normal level of highbrow discussion that is created by reg regulars." ..... By Karim Bourouba Posted Wednesday 9th April 2008 11:58 GMT

Probably because there is nothing being shared which would unduly concern

them and reveal their Virtual XXXXistential Methodology and ITs Higher Planes in XSSXXXXuality Controls, Karim Bourouba.

Although that is not at all surprising given the Delights which Reward such Subtle Responsible Acknowledgement /Patent Steganographic Disclosure to Controlling Administration ......In Order to Enable a Secure Exercise of ProActive Engagement ..... Prime Contact with Proxies.

"Paris, because she's a cult." .... By Anonymous Coward Posted Wednesday 9th April 2008 17:32 GMT

Hmmm? Do Scientologists believe we are all cults? And I ask that most sincerely, Folks.

How very Universal Inclusive of them, if they do. ........which would make them a better Order than any exclusive religion or sect/politically motivated grouping?

And Paris, because it is Spring Time when Flights of Fancy Naturally take Mates, Magical Mystery Turing towards the Big Bang Climaxes, if you know the Answer that Unlocks all Doors.

According to a previous post,

"The 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act states the duration as:

1. For literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works:70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last remaining author of the work dies."

But scientific theories can't be copyrighted in that way, can they? Surely it only applies to works of the imagination. Einstein couldn't claim copyright infringement for anyone using E=mc^2.

So, if Scientology claims copyright infringement, its materials must be non-scientific, which is sorta contradictory, no?

It's Called ScienceDollar. Count the number of automated teller machines which will accept your credit card. Cognate it. Note large post offices, count the number of stamps and envelopes you have. Soon you can free yourself of several spiritual zeros on your bank account total.

Paris, because she's destined to end up in one of these cults and hopefully mine.

Thetans? Souls? Spirits?

Oh, for crying out loud! Don't any of these people realise the fallicy of Dualism? Besides which, surely if Scientology was a functional, practical and good way of life they'd be happy to spread it around the world?! (Gideon society, anyone??)

That aside, *all* religion is bunk, and I hope that it isn't recognised in UK law that the dedication of oneself to belief in a 'sky-god' is what it takes to create a religion! (Although, that explains why Jedi was rejected during the census eh?).

Yes, I will cheerfully warn the world about the dangers of so-called religion, but at the same time I will defend peoples right to be stupid and believe in what they wish because that, in turn, defends my right to point out how truly misled they are.

"Why do you want to hurt them?"

Hmm. Have we found out why you are stating your position: you think that people knowing about an organisation necessarily and in any form hurts the organisation?

It isn't a trade secret, there's no money made from sale (in legitimate terms, anyway), so how will sending copies around "hurt" them?

It would only hurt them if it's all a scam and printing the contents helps people avoid it (rather like the 419 scam emails printed profligately without so much as a murmur from you).

>But scientific theories can't be copyrighted in that way, can they?

No, but the documents describing them can, thus I can write science text books, for instance, and so can other people but we can't copy each others book.

I can write a hisotry of time that's not very long, but I can't just copy a Brief History of Time, even if we say the same things.

So you could write the same "discoveries" in a different form, from a different or an original source (Xenu I guess?) and they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

>Have we found out why you are stating your position: you think that

>people knowing about an organisation necessarily and in any form

>hurts the organisation?

Absolutely not, however it clearly hurts the scientologists who want their secret rituals kept secret.

>how will sending copies around "hurt" them?

Emotionally, because they believe this gumpf and they want it kept secret and because people who don't believe it will use it to mock them - see comments above for that.

Imagine you wrote all about your first sexual experiences in a diary in total detail, would you have wanted that published? Would that have been a scam or a trade secret?

There's no automatic benefit to publishing things that the owners of don't want published, it's up to them whether it's done or not. Another example may be early drafts of a novel for instance, that the author has decided is crap and thus doesn't want to be embarrased by.

To publish such things should be done with an explanation of the supposed benefit of publishing the document, a "justification" if you like, that should correspond to the doc being published. If this were an inside letter demonstrating that they were in fact a brainwashing group in it for the money, then it would be different, this is being publsihed just because they don't want it published.

BTW I resent the implication that I'm in some way complicit with them or something, I'm not and consider scientologists a bunch of nutters best avoided. My concern is a combination of freedom of religion and the gradually eroding right of people to do what they want with their own stuff.

1. It is an organisation which is NOT recognised to satisfy the requirements on what is a 'church' in several countries. Therefore not at all obvious that it is a church.

2. There's a lot of indication of wrongdoing or interference with outside people or organisations. Which is the justification presented by the German Ministry. This is a publicly available line of argument and it has been substantiated in a number of reports and investigation.

3. The activities that are outlined in the organisational documents seem NOT AT ALL harmlessly eccentric. The main justification for the continuous watch of the organisation in Germany is based upon the recognition that the documents spreading the 'beliefs', policies and plans for actions are HARMFUL to the public and outside organisation. This is exactly the same justification for why terrorist organisations, their activities and fan clubs are worth while keeping an eye on.

The three points above have been rigourously justified over and over again in actions and investigations as presented in numerous reports by the German judicial system etc. There are several examples of references in previous posts to such material. It would be nice if people who have other opinions would start presenting some grounds for their beliefs and show their frame of reference. Otherwise it is difficult for their opinions to become accepted as valid arguments and they could easily become misunderstood as unsubstantiated 'beliefs' only (e.g. NOT arguments).

Of course he's not demonstrating outside mosques - not all Muslims are extremists.

However, Extremist Muslims are probably more dangerous than Scientologists -- but that's no reason not to criticise Scientologists. Like, Robert Mugabe isn't _quite_ as nasty as Kim Jong Il, but we still criticise him, qithout feeling the need to criticise all Zimbabweans.

Short sweet and simple.

US Copyright Laws apply to the US, Wikileaks servers are NOT in the US so there is almost NOTHING that COS can do about it. Remember a Judge already blocked wikileaks once just to reverse it since his order violated Constitutional Law.

Lets play like Wikileaks is in the US, "Fair Use" would protect most information as long as the rules for fair use were followed.

I have nothing to say about COS other than they seem to make a BIG DEAL anytime someone says or does something against them. Making a BIG DEAL often brings more attention to things that otherwise would have gone un noticed. If COS just ignored things like this or issued a "Cant Confirm" statement it seems they would have less headaches.

I am not sure where you live, but where I live it's a clear definition:

Every Church that somehow prays to the one same God as mentioned in the Old/New Testament (so that includes Allah, Jehova or how it may be called) can call themselves a Religion.

Anything else is a sect.

thought Dewey,Cheatem?How were legal reps of cos with help fron Fatten,Farten,Bursten&Ooz pr firm. Is cos selling fiction or is sf selling cos?

This is a COMPLETE work of fiction.

Lord Envay

Royal Historian

Chairman, Board ofCensors

Royal Palace

Voltar Confederacy