In 2009 the Church of Scientology submitted a letter to a commission in Australia. The letter concerned Anonymous. This letter is extremely revealing as it shows how much Scientology feared Anonymous’ street protests and online activism. True to form, Scientology tried to paint Anonymous as terrorists, criminals, and cyber-terrorists.
The letter shows just how effective Anonymous’ use of Guy Fawkes masks was in defeating Scientology’s cameras and ability to identify individuals for Fair Game. OSA taunted Anons to take off their masks for a reason this letter revealed: If OSA could identify Anons then it could sue them. In order words, Scientology could use the legal system to harass critics.
Scientology revealed its “buttons” in this letter:
1. Anonymous was creating “loathing of Scientology and Scientologists through a deliberate campaign of public disinformation.” Translated, this means Anonymous’ was exposing Scientology’s inhumane practices of Disconnection, greed, exploitation of Sea Org members, the physical violence of David Miscavige, and were publicly exposing the OT materials. As a consequence of this exposure, Scientologists felt they had become loathsome and disgusting to the general public.
Our Response: The fact is that if your “Church” uses child labor, breaks up families, covers up for rapists and pedophiles, exploits Sea Org labor, bankrupts its own members, engages in credit card fraud and creates hate websites in which it libels and defames its former members and critics, then your Church and its members should incur the public odium and disgrace that comes with such unconscionable, immoral, and evil conduct. Scientologists are loathsome and despicable for supporting their Church’s campaigns of psycho-terrorism.
Tom Cruise needs to own this as does every Scientologist whose donations pay for the atrocities perpetrated by Scientology’s Office of Special Affairs. It is schizophrenic for Scientologists to claim Scientology is engaging in good works even as Scientology engages in horrific acts of psycho-terrorism designed to destroy others.
Scientologists don’t want to publicly own up to who they are as a group and would rather call those who expose them “haters” and “bigots.” This ruse is phony and the public sees right through it.
2. In its letter Scientology complains that, “The Church of Scientology has regularly been subject to relentless ridicule and misinformation by the media. The adverse effect of such media reports on this Church and our parishioners was reported to the Commission….”
Our Response: What this shows is that satire and humor are effective against Scientology. For example, Scientology cannot publicly admit that Xenu and body thetans constitute the core of the OT levels. Nobody cares what Scientologists believe. The humor is in watching Scientologists trying to deny what is in the court record due to Steven Fishman and Karin Spaink.
In the Rathbun v. Miscavige et. al. lawsuit, David Miscavige’s attorneys protested against their client being called “Captain David Miscavige.” However, David Miscavige is a Captain in the Sea Org. Why is he so unwilling to publicly own his rank and all of his fake medals? This naturally invites satire.
3. Scientology characterizes all factual exposures of its depredations as “misinformation” and complains in its letter, “In Australia Anonymous have mounted a sustained campaign of misinformation against the Church. As we are a minority religion with the vast majority of the population unaware of our true beliefs and humanitarian programs, their campaign has no justifiable purpose and violates the Church of Scientology’s and parishioners rights to human dignity and religious freedom under the Constitution.”
Our Response: Scientology talks out of both sides of its mouth. Scientology calls itself a minority religion to an Australian commission and in other official contexts even as it publicly claims to have millions of members and to be the fastest growing religion in the world. Aside from this obvious contradiction and lie, Scientology wants all factual disclosures about it from third parties to be characterized a misinformation that has no “justifiable purpose and violates the Church of Scientology’s and parishioners rights to human dignity and religious freedom under the Constitution.”
This is as hypocritical as it gets when one considers Scientology’s vicious campaigns of Fair Game in which engages in character assassination, libel per se, and slander in order to destroy the dignity of those who have exposed its criminal behavior. Scientologists demand to be treated with dignity even as they engage in psychotic and deliberately vicious behaviors. Scientologists are correctly viewed a delusional and angry cultists because that is how they behave and that is how Culture sees them.
4. In its typically self-serving way, Scientology called upon the Australian commission to legalize censorship and enact laws criminalizing free speech directed against Scientology. Here is what Scientology recommended to the Australian commission in 2009:
Recommendation 1: The implementation of Criminal and Civil Restrictions on Religious Vilification.
Recommendation 2: Restriction on Anonymity on acts of Religious Vilification:
2.1 Websites created with primary purpose of inciting religious vilification shall be removed or their access to the Australian public restricted.
2.2 Creators of websites whose primary purpose is the incitement of religious vilification shall be prevented from concealing their identity.
Recommendation 3: Restriction on Religious Misinformation and Misrepresentation known or reasonably known to be untruthful in the Media
This is Scientology’s game plan: Attempt to redefine and outlaw any free speech directed against it as “religious vilification.” The problem here is that Scientology is villainous and is definitely not a religion in any meaningful, traditional, or classical sense of the word.
Here is the 2009 letter. Please hover your cursor over the document to invoke the page up/page down controls at the bottom of the page frame:
Categories: The Scientology Money Project
When done by Scientology, they feel it is okay, when done TO them it is not? That sounds like a double standard. It is unacceptable for a “Church” to act that way.
If what is being said against them is false, why don’t they have the balls to sue? They’ve brought suit for far more trivial things.