Wednesday, February 11, 2009

More Banning on the Part of Shallonymous

There is a discussion going on on a board called "Freethought and Rationalist" discussing the reports that Amnesty International is looking into allegation of "Human Trafficking" in Scientology. AI will probably eventually reject these claims for the ridiculous assertions they are, so that's not really newsworthy at this stage.

However, I found more interesting the fact that there is a poster on this board, named "whichphilosophy", a veteran member who has already made 6,870 posts and counting, and who comes up with very good arguments. He seems to be a moderate Scientologist. In one of his posts he writes:

Amnesty International to investigate Scientology? - Page 2 - FRDB:
"Say what you like it's a liberal board. Besides when I answer Anonymous forums presenting facts such as actual court documents or affidavits I am soon blocked from posting (often on the 3rd time). Here people are not so fanatical in their beliefs though really all they have to rely on are what they see on the internet."
Not sure that this really happened but I would not be surprised, knowing Shallonymous cultishness and the hypocrisy of critics regarding "free speech".

This is further illustrated through a recent PR news report, written by Shallonymous themselves (since the press in general just ignores them, including for their "one year anniversary"), in which they boast about various events which they attribute to themselves (just like they did in their Dec. 8 propaganda video), and in which one of their boasts is:
"4) German government extend official invitation to Anonymous. German authorities organised a conference last September in Hamburg entitled "What is Scientology?" and extended an official invitation to Anonymous to attend. Scientology representative Tommy Davis was denied access on the grounds that "If you discuss the dangers of illegal drugs, you do not invite the drug dealer to speak on stage"
This is typical of critics' justification to prevent free speech: first label accordingly, then you do not need to feel guilty about banning the representation of opposed viewpoints. Never mind the fact that the title of this conference was "What is Scientology"? So you would not want a Scientology representative to give his view or defend Scientology against accusations, right?

Note - About this invitation see my posts of Aug 3, 2008 and Feb 10.

1 comment:

M Pignotti said...

I'm not so sure what was described even amounts to an actual investigation by Amnesty International. What was written is that some reports on Scientology practices were found "important enough" to be sent uplines to national offices in NYC and that was then forwarded to London offices, but that wouldn't necessarily mean that they are actually engaging in an investigation. This could be yet more exaggeration. It sounds like they are sending things uplines to people who might be more knowledgeable about human trafficking and still trying to determine whether they should actually investigate, unless we want to use the term "investigate" very loosely.