Many incremental victories have gone to Anonymous in their fight against the Cult of Scientology, and we sort of stopped keeping score but do enjoy declaring the major victories. At the moment, the CO$ must be wondering how to amp up their chronic crisis operations, for the so-called “religion” is officially on trial in France and, now, the internet is slowly closing its doors to them as well. In an unprecedented move, Wikipedia has banned all Scientology-affiliated IP addresses (those “owned or operated by the Church of Scientology and its associates”) from editing its wiki entries. The Register gives the necessary details:
Admins may ban a Wikifiddler who betrays an extreme conflict of interest, and since fiddlers often hide their identity behind open proxies, such IPs may be banned as a preventative measure. After today’s ruling from the Arbitration Committee – known in Orwellian fashion as the ArbCom – Scientology IPs are “to be blocked as if they were open proxies” (though individual editors can request an exemption).
According to evidence turned up by admins in this long-running Wikiland court case, multiple editors have been
penly editing [Scientology-related articles] from Church of Scientology equipment and apparently coordinating their activities.” Leaning on the famed WikiScanner, countless news stories have discussed the editing of Scientology articles from Scientology IPs, and some site admins are concerned this is “damaging Wikipedia’s reputation for neutrality.”
. . . .Some have argued that those editing from Scientology IPs may be doing so without instruction from the Church hierarchy. But a former member of Scientology’s Office of Special Affairs – a department officially responsible “for directing and coordinating all legal matters affecting the Church” – says the Office has organized massive efforts to remove Scientology-related materials and criticism from the web.
“The guys I worked with posted every day all day,” Tory Christman tells The Reg. “It was like a machine. I worked with someone who used five separate computers, five separate anonymous identities…to refute any facts from the internet about the Church of Scientology.”
Seriously, if the CO$ is so afraid of the information that’s out there, perhaps they should actually work from within to figure out why such horrible things are being reported. Oh wait — I know — it’s because this stuff may actually be true. Of course, I’m just an unenlightened, psychiatry-controlled “wog” and, obviously, have no idea what I’m talking about. We’re all just suppressive persons whose minds are controlled by parasitic thetans, right?
7 comments
On last report many of the orgs are dead and empty. A combination of the cultural inoculation done at the hands of dem turrible hackers on steroids and now also the fainting economy. Word is that the major source of income is now through the front groups who campaign against the psychiatric profession and try to put Scientology “study tech” into schools. This will be the next big exposure.
Cockroaches scurry when you snap on the light.
Oh, they’re no cockroaches. Those little critters could survive a direct nuclear blast. In contrast, the CO$ has kept itself so well-insulated for decades that this (relatively) sudden exposure of their fraudulent practices and human rights violations will probably cause them to destroy themselves faster than the law can actually take action.
I’ve heard that David Miscavage has gone into Napoleonic mode and has been yanking all sorts of middle management out of the orgs that aren’t pulling their sales quotas. Sending them straight to RPF to examine their lack of faith. It would be rather hilarious if it weren’t so bloody disturbing.
Bless them internets.
[...] Internet 2, Scientology 0 (AgentBedhead) [...]
It would be great to see anyone who violates human rights punished, I’m all for that.
However, I can’t imagine anyone being silly enough to believe Wikipedia is “neutral”.
People posting on it all have an agenda, and Wiki “editors” either agree with what’s posted and promote it or they do all they can to censor it. In this case, Wiki doesn’t like Scientology, we get it. So they’re censoring those who have a pro-Scientology agenda, as well as though who might have a pro-unbiased opinion forum agenda.
(my question would be–why just pick on Scientology? Each of the “major” religions are guilty of far more human rights abuses and violations, but everyone’s somehow more comfortable with that).
Why just pick on Scientology? Well, Wikipedia probably feels rather harassed at this point, after years of their need to police the overactive CO$ IPs. No other religion has been so abusive of Wikipedia.
As to the general population, it hasn’t been just the CO$ that’s been “pick[ed] on,” or whatever the loaded term may be. That’s a logical fallacy & appeal to emotion that does nothing to further an argument. Even if people have that perception, it shouldn’t lessen the magnitude of what the CO$ does. Further, one group or organization cannot take on all religions that have done wrong. Time/resources/efficiency all weigh in. Pick your battles, right?
Most people who stand up and fight against the CO$ have either escaped its clutches and/or know close friends or family members who have been bankrupted, RPF’d, or worse by this cult. And, yes, it is a cult. Just go google “what is Scientology?” and you’ll see.
chachaheels – “(my question would be–why just pick on Scientology? Each of the “major” religions are guilty of far more human rights abuses and violations, but everyone’s somehow more comfortable with that).
Click wikipedia and look up “logical fallacy.” You’ll have your answer.
Scientologist scare me!