Hackers declare war on Scientology.

Our "pub" where you can post about things completely Off Topic or about non-silent PC issues.

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Bluefront
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 5316
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2003 2:19 pm
Location: St Louis (county) Missouri USA

Hackers declare war on Scientology.

Post by Bluefront » Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:44 am

"For the good of your followers, for the good of mankind--for the laughs--we shall expel you from the Internet and systematically dismantle the Church of Scientology in its present form. We acknowledge you as a serious opponent, and we are prepared for a long, long campaign. You will not prevail forever against the angry masses of the body politic. Your methods, hypocrisy, and the artlessness of your organization have sounded its death knell."

You Tube Video Link

I can't watch video with my dial-up. Could somebody report on it.....sounds pretty good. How such a cult religion like this one can hook so many people, is a mystery. Frankly I see it doing only one thing....separating followers from their money.
[size=75]"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill disciplined, despotic, and useless. Liberalism is the philosophy of sniveling brats." - P.J. O'Rourke[/size]

seraphyn
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:26 pm
Location: Netherlands

Post by seraphyn » Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:06 pm

'Hackers'

One or two hackers wrote a bunch of DDoS tools and spread em through 4Chan, which resulted in the 4Chan army bringing down every single Scientology site and keeping it down for some time.
They also Google bomb sites so the anti Scientology sites show up higher in a Google search concerning this 'religion'.

While 4Chan is good for some laughs, a lot of it is just retardism and bandwagon following the 'cool guys'. Some times however, they do some good and this is one such time.
FORCES OF THE INTERNET

SOMETIMES SOMETHING HAPPENS, AND IT'S SO HUGE, SO EPIC , SO DAMNED LEGENDARY, THAT ALL OF THE WARRING FACTIONS, ALL OF THE REACHES OF THE INTERNET, ALL OF THE BICKERING MEMBERS OF THE LEAGUE OF FACELESS,
NAMELESS INTERNET JUSTICE UNITE UNDER ONE BANNER.

EVERY ONE OF THE MAGNIFICENT BASTARDS OF THE DIGITAL WORLD COMES TOGETHER IN A SINGLE HIVE MIND WRITTEN IN BINARY. UNITED BY A CAUSE, UNITED BY THAT ONE SHARED FACET OF EVERY DIGITAL VIGILANTE.

WE DO NOT FORGIVE.
WE DO NOT FORGET.
WE ARE LEGION.

WE ARE ONE NATION UNDER THE INTERNET.

NOW...

MAN. THE. FUCKING. HARPOONS.

UNITED AS ONE.

DIVIDED BY ZERO.
4Chan at its finest.

Fred
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Northern Sweden

Post by Fred » Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:50 pm

This takes epicness to a new level.

Matija
Posts: 780
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 3:17 am
Location: Croatia

Post by Matija » Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:13 pm

Yeah, it's going to be truly epic when tens of thousands of people install their DDoS tools (hey, it hit the front page of Digg) and the Russian botnet mafia finds a flaw in the code and takes all the PCs under their control.

Das_Saunamies
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2000
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 1:39 am
Location: Finland

Post by Das_Saunamies » Sun Jan 27, 2008 12:02 am

/b/ - for the lulz. It's just a (more or less) hilarious message board with a lot of bored people joining whatever cause catches their interest on a given day. Hope they stick to this one though.

What happened was technically tantamount to internet terrorism (ooo, the big T-word), like any other DoS attack, but I agree on the target. It's a cult, and I thought quite a few of those got outlawed already. Mitigating circumstances.

Aslo, AFAIK, the "tools" are just simple snippets of code that bombard an IP with requests, all done with system commands. You'd have to hijack the system to hijack that, and that's not the "tool's" fault, now is it. :lol:
Case: Define Mini
Parts: P8Z77-M Pro µATX, i5-3570K, STRIX-GTX960-DC2OC-4GD5, 8 GB G.Skill DDR3U, Xonar DX, WD B-G 1 TB, mx100 256 GB, RX-5300 PSU
Cooling: Noctua NH-U12P SE2 + Scythe SS PWM, 2x Noctua NF-P12
Extras: Eaton UPS, Dell 24" EIPS, MS Sculpt, Logitech G303, Synology DS213j 3+3 TB NAS

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Sun Jan 27, 2008 2:53 am

Das_Saunamies wrote: What happened was technically tantamount to internet terrorism (ooo, the big T-word), like any other DoS attack, but I agree on the target. It's a cult, and I thought quite a few of those got outlawed already. Mitigating circumstances.
To play devil's advocate for a moment, would you consider Christian or Islamic websites (for example) to be equally legitimate targets? If not, why not?

walle
Posts: 605
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 10:52 am

Post by walle » Sun Jan 27, 2008 3:39 am

Off topic/

Last night I hade access to the delete post feature, would actually had come in handy right now and I do wonder where the heck it went. :?

JazzJackRabbit
Posts: 1386
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 6:53 pm

Post by JazzJackRabbit » Sun Jan 27, 2008 9:20 am

I would have been more sympathetic to their cause if they chose "Intelligent Design "Theory"" followers to pick upon. We don't need that crap in schools.

Das_Saunamies
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2000
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 1:39 am
Location: Finland

Post by Das_Saunamies » Sun Jan 27, 2008 9:30 am

nick705 wrote:
Das_Saunamies wrote: What happened was technically tantamount to internet terrorism (ooo, the big T-word), like any other DoS attack, but I agree on the target. It's a cult, and I thought quite a few of those got outlawed already. Mitigating circumstances.
To play devil's advocate for a moment, would you consider Christian or Islamic websites (for example) to be equally legitimate targets? If not, why not?
Having posted what I did, it struck me a few hours later I perhaps shouldn't have, seeing how I might have to argue my points. Oh well. :lol:

To keep this brief, I regard Scientology as a modern cult, founded by a man for little else than ripping off fools for his own benefit. Whether or not the "get rich, start religion" quote is a real one makes no difference to me - that's how I see their guiding principle.

Christianity and Islam, on the other hand, are established religions, and I personally agree with the core values of the former. I have seen Christian and Islamic organisations do a world of good globally, and I'm sure the total of the actions taken in either's name would be more good than bad, so I have no reason to wish their websites ill. I don't find their holy texts any less ridiculous than those of Scientology, only older, but it is indeed the practise I'm interested in. As far as I can tell, Scientology has only done harm to people's lives, and Christianity in its protestant form has helped in the founding and shaping of the country I live in today. And I like my country the way it is. Enough said.

--removed offtopic, learning from mistakes--

FYI I don't take part in illegal activities like this, but I can't deny feeling satisfied when someone does. I recognise that there are ethical debates to be had though, as it is the freedom of the Internet on the line.

PS. The Intelligent Design people are to me a fringe faction, and I find them being able to substitute the theory of evolution with theirs alarming.
Case: Define Mini
Parts: P8Z77-M Pro µATX, i5-3570K, STRIX-GTX960-DC2OC-4GD5, 8 GB G.Skill DDR3U, Xonar DX, WD B-G 1 TB, mx100 256 GB, RX-5300 PSU
Cooling: Noctua NH-U12P SE2 + Scythe SS PWM, 2x Noctua NF-P12
Extras: Eaton UPS, Dell 24" EIPS, MS Sculpt, Logitech G303, Synology DS213j 3+3 TB NAS

andyb
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Post by andyb » Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:45 am

People DoS attack websites for various reasons, these include fun, to annoy the people/organization that own/run the website, to create a loss of service thus directly affecting that websites ability to gain money or deliver information, hatred.

Seemingly these people fit all of the above, but why, what are their motives.??? The only obvious motive I can see is that Scientology is a scam, and people object to scammers. The fact that someone objects to something and can take direct action does not make this right, and these kind of activities often backfire leaving many people hating the hackers more than the scammers. A much better way of eradicating Scientology is with education. Generally not much needs to be said to make people understand that Scientology is not a religion at all and is just a scam to make money.

Scientology was founded by a (bad) science fiction writer.
Scientology requires its followers to pay an anual subscription.

Does the scam of Scientology present itself as a more reasonable target than established religions, I believe so, but only because it is not a religion yet it claims to be. This could very well mean that Scientology is a valid tarket for persons of all religions simply because one religion can respect another, but one religion can not respect something that claims to be a religion yet is not.


Andy
Main PC, P180, CM Silent Pro 500M, i5 3570k @ 4.2Ghz, 8-GB @ 2,400MHz, 512GB 850 EVO, 500 Extreme II, 2x 2.5" drives, MSI 660Ti Twin Frozr.
Server, under reconstruction, 380W Enermax Pro82+, positive pressure only.

AZBrandon
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 867
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:47 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Post by AZBrandon » Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:57 am

nick705 wrote:To play devil's advocate for a moment, would you consider Christian or Islamic websites (for example) to be equally legitimate targets? If not, why not?
Scientology charges money for "salvation" and elevation to higher levels in their church. Gideons provide something like a hundred million free bibles around the world, not to mention churches all around the world give out bibles and provide church service for free too. Yes, offerings and tithing is absolutely encouraged, but it is not required, nor does the bible indicate any correlation between money or even works and salvation. In fact, in Christianity, you are saved by God's grace by your profession that Christ is Lord. Acts are the result of grace, not a prerequisite for grace.

I don't know nearly as much about Islam, but again, I don't believe that you have to pay much money for a copy of the koran, and the only "sure" way I know of to be saved in Islam is to die fighting infidels, which is in essence free. Other than that, Islam is kind of the opposite of Christianity, in that your works are what provide salvation, and strict adherance to the pilars of Islam such as prayer, fasting, obediance and so on are basically things that cost nothing and gain you the grace of god.

Between Islam and Christianity, you're talking about at least 30-40% of the world population who follow beliefs that don't require you to pay money for salvation. Scientology is the opposite of that from what I've read.
[size=67]Phenom 1090T / 9800GTX+ / Antec P180 / Seasonic S12-600[/size]

LAThierry
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:15 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California

Post by LAThierry » Mon Jan 28, 2008 10:59 am

As others have mentioned, the money requirement is a definite red flag.

I also would like to add that legitimate religions tend to happily share their sacred texts because they want their message spread. The Church of Scientology however will send their DMCA-lawyers after you for violation of their "copyrights" if you post any of their information online, for example, which is basically legal censorship racketeering.

AZBrandon
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 867
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:47 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Post by AZBrandon » Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:18 am

On that topic, does anyone know where to find how many English-language translations of the Koran exist, which ones are currently accepted, and where to access them? I found sites like this one that says it is a "Tahrike Tarsile" Koran. I know with the bible there's lots of translations, such as this site which lists 50 translations, 22 in English alone. I'm curious if there's similarly a great number of English translations of the Koran, but can't find a good resource for this. I hear so much about the Koran but haven't read it myself and have been considering adding it to my list of literature to read.
[size=67]Phenom 1090T / 9800GTX+ / Antec P180 / Seasonic S12-600[/size]

Das_Saunamies
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2000
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 1:39 am
Location: Finland

Post by Das_Saunamies » Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:31 am

Apparently the Koran is still regarded too holy for translation. As I understand it, any translation of the original scripture taints the text, making an official, clergy-blessed version impossible.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

PS. Thought to check Wikipedia, and look what was in there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Translation_of_the_Qur'an. Hope it helps.

PPS. The board code doesn't take kindly to that apostrophe, no matter what I try. :x
Case: Define Mini
Parts: P8Z77-M Pro µATX, i5-3570K, STRIX-GTX960-DC2OC-4GD5, 8 GB G.Skill DDR3U, Xonar DX, WD B-G 1 TB, mx100 256 GB, RX-5300 PSU
Cooling: Noctua NH-U12P SE2 + Scythe SS PWM, 2x Noctua NF-P12
Extras: Eaton UPS, Dell 24" EIPS, MS Sculpt, Logitech G303, Synology DS213j 3+3 TB NAS

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:25 pm

LAThierry wrote: I also would like to add that legitimate religions tend to happily share their sacred texts because they want their message spread. The Church of Scientology however will send their DMCA-lawyers after you for violation of their "copyrights" if you post any of their information online, for example, which is basically legal censorship racketeering.
Islam (which you'd presumably describe as a "legitimate" religion, whatever that means) prescribes death as the penalty for blasphemy, apostasy and a long list of other things, and plenty of its followers are only too willing to carry those edicts out. Which is more reprehensible?

Das_Saunamies
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2000
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 1:39 am
Location: Finland

Post by Das_Saunamies » Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:29 pm

It's not the theory, it's the practice. Blame the individuals who commit the acts. It's not like the Bible doesn't outline unpleasant things one should do to adulterers and the like, but luckily most Christian countries seem to have a population who knows better. Or at least is in a position that allows them enough security and wealth for them not to take things to the extremes.

You the official interrogator 'round these parts? :P

Valid but obvious questions - and one wrong doesn't make another wrong any less so in this case.
Case: Define Mini
Parts: P8Z77-M Pro µATX, i5-3570K, STRIX-GTX960-DC2OC-4GD5, 8 GB G.Skill DDR3U, Xonar DX, WD B-G 1 TB, mx100 256 GB, RX-5300 PSU
Cooling: Noctua NH-U12P SE2 + Scythe SS PWM, 2x Noctua NF-P12
Extras: Eaton UPS, Dell 24" EIPS, MS Sculpt, Logitech G303, Synology DS213j 3+3 TB NAS

Sendorm
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:21 pm

Post by Sendorm » Mon Jan 28, 2008 1:36 pm

If you want to learn about islam I would recommend a approved movie, the message. ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074896/ ) All the facts depicted in the movie are approved by islamic scholars and historians.

Translations of quaran are actually possible. But there are some problems with the translation itself. If you believe in islam then you also believe that the quaran is sent by a omnipotent god, Allah. Human words are not capable of fully describing this god's words. So any translation to another language can only be a simple understanding of the translator. This is why the translations are only done by reliable islamic scholars.

Let me give you a pretty simple example of the case.
The first ayeths send to Mohammed were like this:

Arabic:
Ikra'bismi rabbikel-ledhi halak, Halakal-insane min alek, Ikra've rabbukel-ekrem.
English:
Read in the of thy lord, who created man from a sensitive drop of blood, who teaches man what he knows not.
(the whole text can be found under the Suratu-l-Alak portion of quaran)

Actually the english "translation" is from the movie "the message". In those years people thought the word "alek" meant "a drop of blood". That Arabic word has many meanings, another meaning is "a thing that clings" like a leech. Of course the second meaning made sense only recently, the first ayeth of quran nearly 1400 years ago pointed out the fact how a embryo lived in his mothers womb.
New translations all point out to this fact and translate "alek" as "embryo". There are many more examples like this, which I won't further go into.

I know this is off-topic but I just wanted to clarify some points, which I thought were understood incorrectly.

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Mon Jan 28, 2008 1:48 pm

Das Saunamies wrote:You the official interrogator 'round these parts? :P
Yup. "No-one expects the Spanish Inquisition..." :P

To be honest, to some extent I'm arguing for the sake of arguing (there's nothing much on TV). Still, obvious questions they may be, but they haven't received a satisfactory answer.

Scientology may very well be a money-making scam started by a bad science-fiction writer, but the fact remains, most of its followers genuinely believe in it, so why should their irrational beliefs be less deserving of respect than other people's irrational beliefs?

Scientologists believe in Xenu the Galactic Tyrant, Christian fundamentalists believe the world was created in seven days about four thousand years ago, and that women were created out of a man's rib. All of them totally wacky (and equally *undeserving* of respect) if you ask me, but that's not the point.
Das_Saunamies wrote:It's not the theory, it's the practice. Blame the individuals who commit the acts. It's not like the Bible doesn't outline unpleasant things one should do to adulterers and the like, but luckily most Christian countries seem to have a population who knows better. Or at least is in a position that allows them enough security and wealth for them not to take things to the extremes.
I'm not entirely clear what you're saying here - it's not the theory that's wrong, it's the practice, but the unpleasant things mandated in the theory are (wrongly) put into practice by some individuals, therefore there's nothing wrong with the theory?

Anyway, if we're getting into a pissing contest about which religion ("legitimate" or otherwise) has heaped the most collective misery on mankind, with me defending Scientology, I reckon my stain will reach higher up the wall than yours (for example, see "Spanish Inquisition" previously mentioned). Yes, you can say that *most* Christian countries *nowadays* have a population who knows better, but I'd argue that's a function of their generally more secular (I'd say "educated" or "enlightened") nature rather than a virtue of the religion itself. You only have to take a look around the bible belt of the USA for a chilling look at how bad things *could* be, if some of the noisier (and wealthier) fundamentalists had it all their own way...

LAThierry
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:15 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California

Post by LAThierry » Mon Jan 28, 2008 2:41 pm

You're absolutely right, I should not have used the adjective "legitimate" in front of "religion".

Given their respective era, why should there be more legitimacy in a person roaming the desert claiming to converse with a talking, burning bush than a 20th century science fiction author claiming space DC-8's were throwing nukes into volcanoes?

jaganath
Posts: 5085
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 6:55 am
Location: UK

Post by jaganath » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:22 pm

Scientologists believe in Xenu the Galactic Tyrant
actually IIRC you have to be rather high up in Scientology before they tell you about Xenu, presumably so you won't laugh in their faces.
[size=75]JFK:
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean...someone who looks ahead, who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions,who cares about the welfare of the people, who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad...then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."[/size]

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:45 pm

jaganath wrote: actually IIRC you have to be rather high up in Scientology before they tell you about Xenu, presumably so you won't laugh in their faces.
Oh dammit, I've been rumbled... :(

Image

This is what I look like in real life...

AZBrandon
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 867
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:47 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Post by AZBrandon » Mon Jan 28, 2008 5:32 pm

Just as a point of clarification, Jesus Christ gave no justification for killing. It is men who try to justify it, either by ignoring Christ and referring to the old testament, or by just ignoring Christ entirely and making up a religion and saying "We worship Jesus, but we also have a bunch of people that make up our own rules that supercede Christ too." Not to point any fingers, but I think you know who I'm talking about.
[size=67]Phenom 1090T / 9800GTX+ / Antec P180 / Seasonic S12-600[/size]

walle
Posts: 605
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 10:52 am

Post by walle » Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:07 pm

...or by just ignoring Christ entirely and making up a religion...
All religions are made up...in spirit of clarification and all.


Added:

We have more than enough of religious nutcases freely roaming our streets making sure that more than enough hate is pouring out of this planet as it is already, and as far as I’m concerned we need not yet another of those groups that suffers from insanity by consensus joining the others. Its religion, its enemy is logics, and it takes away peoples curiosity as well as ability to reason, please note the last part…reason.


And I for one, rather have my mind opened to wonders than closed by belief !


Peace

floffe
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 4:36 am
Location: Linköping, Sweden

Post by floffe » Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:43 am

Das_Saunamies wrote:Apparently the Koran is still regarded too holy for translation. As I understand it, any translation of the original scripture taints the text, making an official, clergy-blessed version impossible.
Now, if more people and religions understood this, the world might be a nicer place.

Bluefront
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 5316
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2003 2:19 pm
Location: St Louis (county) Missouri USA

Post by Bluefront » Tue Jan 29, 2008 2:53 am

What I could never figure out about religions is just what is the attraction? Are religious people so weak they need to rely on "fairy tales" to maintain. This Scientology is the worst offender I know about, with the Mormons coming in second worst.

Sit down in front of a keyboard and you can invent your own religion in a few hours, including gold tablets that vanish, invisible men in the air, virgin births, and a life after death in a heaven-sort of place with free beer fountains and strip clubs......only if you can pick up poisonous snakes of course.

Don't laugh....those are essential parts of several "religions". And many believe in such nonsense. But why?
[size=75]"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill disciplined, despotic, and useless. Liberalism is the philosophy of sniveling brats." - P.J. O'Rourke[/size]

Das_Saunamies
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2000
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 1:39 am
Location: Finland

Post by Das_Saunamies » Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:36 am

nick705 wrote:
Das Saunamies wrote:You the official interrogator 'round these parts? :P
To be honest, to some extent I'm arguing for the sake of arguing (there's nothing much on TV).
I had that distinct feeling.
nick705 wrote:Scientology may very well be a money-making scam started by a bad science-fiction writer, but the fact remains, most of its followers genuinely believe in it, so why should their irrational beliefs be less deserving of respect than other people's irrational beliefs? -- I'm not entirely clear what you're saying here - it's not the theory that's wrong, it's the practice, but the unpleasant things mandated in the theory are (wrongly) put into practice by some individuals, therefore there's nothing wrong with the theory?
If I was unclear on what I said before, I'll clarify this here: I don't regard religions by their holy texts that are mostly fairy tale and fiction. In them, though, can be found the core values that shape a society's morality, and in those I believe. For Christianity, those values deal with Love and Respect, Forgiveness and ultimately the Salvation. Those values to me are sound: love those around you, respect those above you, forgive those below you, and be humble, for you shall be rewarded. AZBrandon summed up nicely what the rest of it is about.

Anyone is free to believe what they will in the confines of their reason, as far as I am concerned - but I'm also concerned by what those beliefs, faith, lead to. This is what I meant when I said "it's not the theory, it's the practice": the texts are for individuals to read as they will, but their actions speak the loudest. If someone reads passages urging to harm a fellow man, that event is no concern of mine. If this leads to them doing so, then it is.

So, actions and the world today. What is in the past we cannot change. But today there has been much change, and the Christian church is no longer ruled entirely by people willing to start wars or witchhunts based on questions of faith. Other abolishments include paying for your way to salvation (coughScientologycough) for example. Things have moved on, and so should those who still criticise the past mistakes.

Incidentally I talked to a friend of mine whose relative was in a chapter of the Finnish Scientologists. Here are a few practical examples she gave me:
- The starting fees are high. As Scientology (like other intensely salvation-y cults) most speaks to people who have been traumatised or are otherwise at a low point in their lives, their assets are not much. It is not uncommon to have to resort to loans to get accepted.
- You have to keep paying increasing amounts to receive further acceptance. It is expected and mandated for you to do so.
- Scientologists often back or are forced to back each others' loans. This leads to a cycle that binds you to the "faith". As most are, to put it bluntly, deadbeats, the financial downhill only steepens.
- Scientologists actively separate initates from their normal circles of life, taking over their social activities. This confines the initiates to the chapter.
- It is immensely difficult to get out of Scientology once you're in it deep. Your debt and your backings bind you, and your social life has been taken over by the chapter. You are trapped.

The money is the key to Scientology. It is the financial ruin and social isolation that the cult brings that I most object to - their practice. There if anywhere the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. All the fancy mansions and wealth come from scamming the less fortunate. (I saw one such mansion in Washington D.C.)

And to clarify my personal stance, as the word "defend" came up:
I don't believe in the Christian God per se, but I do believe in good will amongst men, higher powers and order, if just natural ones, and in good and bad. Core values matter most of all, dress them up with a cross or a crescent, and the actions and consequences will speak the loudest.
So far Scientology has been a scam to ruin people's lives, and so it will remain in my books. I'm not trying to be for Christianity here, mind you, nor do I expect anyone to be defending Scientology. Believe what makes YOU happy, do what makes EVERYONE happy.

Hope the last bits at least answer your question as well, Bluefront? :) I would love to get into the Latter Day Saints and Jehovah's Witnesses, but fortunately that is not my fight, not today. It's a real minefield when you deal with established cults like those (although only the LDS is technically a cult, founded by a man for his own benefit... but don't drag me in there).

And for walle, extensive reasoning and human logic only take one so far. I like a bit of magic and mystery in my life, and that does not mean I believe in an omnipotent bearded man on a throne... but I wouldn't rule it out (see Family Guy). :lol: But you of course also promoted an open mind, so let us not clash on that one!

And thank you, Sendorm, for the information on the movie and the difficulties a translation faces. I'm familiar with the hurdles, as I'm studying for a degree in translation myself. :wink:
Case: Define Mini
Parts: P8Z77-M Pro µATX, i5-3570K, STRIX-GTX960-DC2OC-4GD5, 8 GB G.Skill DDR3U, Xonar DX, WD B-G 1 TB, mx100 256 GB, RX-5300 PSU
Cooling: Noctua NH-U12P SE2 + Scythe SS PWM, 2x Noctua NF-P12
Extras: Eaton UPS, Dell 24" EIPS, MS Sculpt, Logitech G303, Synology DS213j 3+3 TB NAS

LAThierry
Posts: 95
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:15 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California

Post by LAThierry » Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:46 pm

Das_Saunamies wrote:In [religions], though, can be found the core values that shape a society's morality, and in those I believe. For Christianity, those values deal with Love and Respect, Forgiveness...
Do you think, for example, that Buddhists are incapable or love, respect or forgiveness? It's typical of Christians to assume or to make it come across as if Christianity had a monopoly on those virtues, when in fact they can be found in just about any social group.
Das_Saunamies wrote:I don't regard religions by their holy texts that are mostly fairy tale and fiction.
Das_Saunamies wrote:... and ultimately the Salvation.
To me, I find these 2 statements highly contradictory. You claim, on one hand, to spot the "fairy tale and fiction" within sacred texts and yet, on the other hand, believe in the concept of Salvation. Please give me an example of sacred text fiction that you decided must be false and contrast that with your reasoning that Salvation must be true.

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Tue Jan 29, 2008 1:55 pm

Das_Saunamies wrote: Incidentally I talked to a friend of mine whose relative was in a chapter of the Finnish Scientologists. Here are a few practical examples she gave me:
- The starting fees are high. As Scientology (like other intensely salvation-y cults) most speaks to people who have been traumatised or are otherwise at a low point in their lives, their assets are not much. It is not uncommon to have to resort to loans to get accepted.
- You have to keep paying increasing amounts to receive further acceptance. It is expected and mandated for you to do so.
- Scientologists often back or are forced to back each others' loans. This leads to a cycle that binds you to the "faith". As most are, to put it bluntly, deadbeats, the financial downhill only steepens.
- Scientologists actively separate initates from their normal circles of life, taking over their social activities. This confines the initiates to the chapter.
- It is immensely difficult to get out of Scientology once you're in it deep. Your debt and your backings bind you, and your social life has been taken over by the chapter. You are trapped.

The money is the key to Scientology. It is the financial ruin and social isolation that the cult brings that I most object to - their practice. There if anywhere the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. All the fancy mansions and wealth come from scamming the less fortunate. (I saw one such mansion in Washington D.C.)
All true, I'm sure, but you still haven't addressed my question as to why a cult/religion which asks for money (eg Scientology) is less deserving of respect, and freedom from having their website vandalised, than a cult/religion which calls for the murder of people who criticize it (eg Islam).

The argument "it's just the action of individuals distorting the meaning of the religion" simply doesn't fly - those individuals are interpreting the teachings of their religion literally, and acting accordingly. The fact that others (maybe most) choose not to do so doesn't "legitimise" the religion itself - quite the reverse, I'd have thought.

As for Christianity, the Catholic church's assets are... errr... considerable, and I don't see that many cardinals or Anglican archbishops living in poverty, not to mention the multiple-Rolls-Royce-owning bible bashers of the American deep south. I fully understand (and agree with) the points you made above, but you imply that Scientologists are somehow unique in obtaining pecuniary advantage from their cult/religious status, and I'm quite sure you're not that naive. :P :wink:

Somewhat OT: it would be a mistake to assume that *only* traumatised people, or those at a low point in their lives, are vulnerable to cult/religious indoctrination - from what I understand, virtually *anyone* is potentially susceptible, no matter how rational and mentally strong they may believe themselves to be. The methods used are often sophisticated and insidious, and exploit the vulnerabilities we all share simply by virtue of our humanity.

Just in case anyone actually thinks I like Scientology - of course I don't, I find its dogma risible and its practices contemptible. Much like many other religions...

walle
Posts: 605
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 10:52 am

Post by walle » Tue Jan 29, 2008 2:21 pm

Das_Saunamies wrote:I like a bit of magic and mystery in my life, and that does not mean I believe in an omnipotent bearded man on a throne... but I wouldn't rule it out (see Family Guy). :lol: But you of course also promoted an open mind, so let us not clash on that one!
I was not talking about faith and spiritually per se, but religion; faith and spirituality don’t require religion. Perhaps we’re not on all too different pages here Das_Saunamies, after all; we're spiritual beings in our very essence.
nick705 wrote:Much like many other religions...
I perceive a double standard here, may I ask which religion you view as the exception? if any of course.

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Tue Jan 29, 2008 2:50 pm

walle wrote: I perceive a double standard here, may I ask which religion you view as the exception? if any of course.
I don't have any particular exception in mind - to clarify, I haven't yet encountered a religion whose dogma I haven't found risible, and I find the practices of some religions contemptible. I don't have an exhaustive knowledge of all religions though, so I'd hesitate to write them all off out of hand, even though I've no time for unreason and superstition in general.

I used a poor choice of words, but no double standards, at least I hope not - I'll leave that to the wealthy Christians of this world, all of whom no doubt have a get-out clause for the camel/eye-of-the-needle thing...

Post Reply