×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Google Aids Scientology-Linked Group CCHR With Pay-Per-Click Ads

timothy posted about 7 months ago | from the don't-keep-that-all-bottled-up-inside-you-now dept.

Advertising 186

An anonymous reader writes "The Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), a Scientology front group, has received a 'grant from Google in the amount of $10,000 per month worth of Pay Per Click Advertising to be used in our Orange County anti-psych campaigns.' CCHR believes that ALL psychiatrists are evil. They believe that psychiatrists were behind the holocaust, and these shadow men were never brought to justice. CCHR also believes that psychiatrists were behind the 911 attacks. Scientologists believe that psychiatrists have always been evil, and their treachery goes back 75 million years when the psychiatrists assisted XENU in killing countless alien life forms. Thanks Google! We may be able to stop these evil Psychs once and for all!"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The Harsh Light of Day (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800381)

The more these beliefs are discussed and examined, the more they are revealed for what they are.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

davester666 (731373) | about 7 months ago | (#46800471)

Completely verifiable and valid.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 7 months ago | (#46800515)

PsyOntology. ScientTautology. As American as apple pie!

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1)

phrostie (121428) | about 7 months ago | (#46800533)

It all makes sense now!

http://tech.slashdot.org/story... [slashdot.org]

http://search.slashdot.org/sto... [slashdot.org]

http://tech.slashdot.org/story... [slashdot.org]

http://tech.slashdot.org/story... [slashdot.org]

http://tech.slashdot.org/story... [slashdot.org]

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/... [slashdot.org]

Xenu is google!

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (4, Insightful)

Plunky (929104) | about 7 months ago | (#46800477)

The more these beliefs...

beliefs, you say? I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu.. L Ron Hubbard made it all up to bilk money out of desparate people, and plenty of other folk are happy to continue the premise and keep the money flowing.. but does anybody actually believe it? I doubt it..

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800535)

getting people to 'believe' utter rubbish is part of the game plan

the people most likely to remove them from the con will disparage these beliefs

this will induce 'cognitive dissonance' in the person who will shrink away from the negative view of their beliefs and back into the arms of the con game

we see this all around us, and not just religions/cults, just look at the tortured souls who exhibit the same behavior with Obama derangement syndrome or global warming denial. The world behaves differently than their beliefs have led them to expect so they surround themselves with people who believe the same way and bark at anybody who does not think the same way

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1, Insightful)

mbone (558574) | about 7 months ago | (#46800737)

The more these beliefs...

beliefs, you say? I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu.. L Ron Hubbard made it all up to bilk money out of desparate people, and plenty of other folk are happy to continue the premise and keep the money flowing.. but does anybody actually believe it? I doubt it..

I don't think you understand how bilking "money out of desparate people" works.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (2, Insightful)

Vellmont (569020) | about 7 months ago | (#46800759)

I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu..

It's no more or less believable than any other religion. Do you think people really believe that a dead guy came back to life? How about an entire ocean was suddenly parted so the good guys could get away and then collapsed again on the bad guys? Or that the earth is 6000 years old? Or that the guy who created the entire universe 12 billion years ago and billions of light years large is really really concerned about if human penises wind up in human vaginas before the correct ritual is performed?

So yes, I really do think some people believe in the Xenu thing. Especially since they don't really tell you about the Xenu thing until you're really into it.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (4, Funny)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | about 7 months ago | (#46800841)

"How about an entire ocean was suddenly parted so the good guys could get away and then collapsed again on the bad guys?"

Actually, that is plausible. I saw the proof of concept at Disneyland.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801759)

Actually, I think it was just a sea, not an entire ocean.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1)

turgid (580780) | about 7 months ago | (#46800951)

It's no more or less believable than any other religion. Do you think people really believe that a dead guy came back to life? How about an entire ocean was suddenly parted so the good guys could get away and then collapsed again on the bad guys? Or that the earth is 6000 years old? Or that the guy who created the entire universe 12 billion years ago and billions of light years large is really really concerned about if human penises wind up in human vaginas before the correct ritual is performed?

You can sort-of understand why ancient religions came about and stuck. People in general, without education, before the formulation of the Scientific Method, living in a very uncertain world where starvation and disease were all about (and life was short and harsh) would invent supernatural explanations for things and perhaps like to believe that there was someone looking over them in judgement all the time.

However, there is absolutely no excuse for Scientology to be as big as it is. It was conceived as a cynical exercise in demonstrating that gullibility, ignorance and superstition, which are fundamental parts of human nature, are every present and easily exploitable (for money) and that society has not advanced to the point that the human race has outgrown its primitive cultural roots.

You have to hand it to L Ron, it was a dastardly,cynical plan to make money out of the stupid, and it has been a soaring success.

As they say, a fool and his money are easily parted. There are a lot of Hollywood actors involved...

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | about 7 months ago | (#46801095)

How about an entire ocean was suddenly parted so the good guys could get away and then collapsed again on the bad guys?

1. It was not an entire ocean. I was the Red Sea and a very narrow part in the Gulf of Aqaba.
2. It could have been a natural phenomenon [archden.org] .
Please note that I do not believe in most of the things in the Bible but some things might be facts. The social aspects of the Bible are so outdated as to be laughable.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801173)

"Red Sea" isn't even a bad translation, its flat-out incorrect. The actual translation for where the crossing occured is the Sea of Reeds [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Red Sea tsunami (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801465)

I saw a documentary once where it was explained that the parting of the Red Sea could have been caused by a tsunami (the water retreats before the actual tsunami), which was caused by the Minoan eruption [wikipedia.org]

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801169)

One thing to keep in mind is that most "preclears" have never heard of Xenu because they actively avoid "out tech" (unsanctioned) discussions of scientology, if not because its heretical then because it will cost them $10k in auditing to get back on track.

The way this works is that until you "clear" most of the mythology is about self improvement, no aliens, etc its still popsci gobbledygook but of a more palatable type. Once you have cleared what they really want you to do is pay for all of the "OT levels" at once which they call "Charging across the bridge to total freedom" once they have your money then you get to find out about the space aliens and (if wikileaks is to be believed) the final revelation is that the whole mythology is "mocked up" (i.e. fake). In any case they are in to you for at least $250K and you have most likely "disconnected" from your non scientologist friends and family by the time it turns into a sci-fi mystery cult.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 7 months ago | (#46801667)

I think you needed a "BRB, door" or perhaps a @.;'0 no carrier in there somewhere.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801231)

In general the religious beliefs of others are ridiculous. I believe I'll have another beer.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800955)

Sure. You spend $100k-200k, get progressively more and more brainwashed along the way, have your entire life, friends and support group wrapped up around your belief system, and they could probably make you believe the sky is green. People believe in exceptionally strange things all of the time, when you're on the outside looking in.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801025)

beliefs, you say? I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu.. L Ron Hubbard made it all up to bilk money out of desparate people, and plenty of other folk are happy to continue the premise and keep the money flowing.. but does anybody actually believe it? I doubt it..

I believe that what one man wrote is more inerrant and consistent than the Bible, regardless of any intent to bilk money out of people or that a collection of verbal and even written (and copied) histories with good intentions are neverless riddled with the L Ron Hubbards of their day and generally just the mental unstable or generally creative who believe a bit too much in their own works of fiction later in life...

Where was I going... Oh, yea, if people can believe in Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, etc, it'd seem a lot easier to believe in Xenu all things considered.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801105)

If you have reached the level of OT3 in Scientology, and you profess that you don't believe the story of XENU, you will be sent to "Ethics [cmu.edu] " to determine what is wrong with you. If you continue to say that you don't believe Xenu existed, you will be sent to the RPF [wikipedia.org] (Scientology's thought reconstruction prison camp) where you could stay for years. Finally after all that, if you state that Xenu doesn't exist after reaching OT3, you will be labeled an SP [wikipedia.org] (suppressive person). All Scientoligists (including brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers) will be forced to disconnect from you [tonyortega.org] . If you speak to the press about Xenu or talk bad about scientology in an unflattering way, you will be targeted for "Fair Game [wikipedia.org] ". Hubbard stated that a suppressive person can be destroyed under the "Fair Game" policy.

I realize it is shocking, but there are many individuals that believe in Xenu. These same individuals believe that discussing Xenu with "Wogs" (non scientologists) is a high crime and a suppressive act. In fact, Hubbard said that Wogs that learn of Xenu without proper counseling risk death (R6 Implant [wikipedia.org] ).

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801171)

I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu.. L Ron Hubbard made it all up to bilk money out of desparate people, and plenty of other folk are happy to continue the premise and keep the money flowing.. but does anybody actually believe it? I doubt it..

don't the desparate people count?

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (3, Insightful)

umafuckit (2980809) | about 7 months ago | (#46801275)

I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu.. L Ron Hubbard made it all up to bilk money out of desparate people, and plenty of other folk are happy to continue the premise and keep the money flowing.. but does anybody actually believe it? I doubt it..

I wouldn't be so sure. I think the main reason it sounds crazy is because this particular belief is shared by comparatively few people. When few people are involved, such beliefs are called cults and are rejected by wider society. It's when crazy beliefs spread and are shared by many people that they're called a religion. Of course different societies draw the line differently [wikipedia.org] .

The beliefs of the Christian church are pretty crazy too, when you stop to think about it, but they're widely accepted in our society so they no longer draw incredulity. Think how crazy this sounds: the Catholic church tells us that during communion the bread and wine literally turn into the blood and body of Christ. However, through some mysterious process, they appear to our senses as unchanged. So the Catholic church tells you that what you're seeing and tasting is wrong, and you should ignore the evidence right in front of you. Presumably, millions of people accept and believe this. Then we have the fact that many Christians believe that everything in the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Yet these same people ignore the parts they don't like (Christians choose to eat pork even though their book tells them not to), they ignore the fact that the Bible is often self-contradictory, and they ignore the fact that the Bible we have today is based on copies of copies that include known errors, additions, and omissions. If God is all-powerful, why is He unable to provide "his inerrant word" in an accurate form, and why is it that he never shows his face?

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

gtall (79522) | about 7 months ago | (#46801585)

He's a funny G-d!! Men pee out of the same organ they use to have sex. Yeah, it might optimize the plumbing but I rather think quite a few Heavenly jokes get cracked about that one. The Universe periodically tries to kill us. Gamma ray bursters, asteroids, comets, Madonna...these are not the acts of a vengeful G-d, this guy has a sense of humor. Tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanoes, Paris Hilton...c'mon, it's a dead giveaway. Shopping malls AND Karl Marx, the mind boggles, G-d is funny guy.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 7 months ago | (#46801679)

I think he likes beer. Just look at an aardvark, that's a morning-after-the-night-before job if ever I saw one..

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801743)

No, it's definite proof he was outsorcing.
"Ok, what we've got on project Aardwark?"
"Oh, there's a tech demo..."
"Tech demo? Tech demo?!?! Did you wankers see the deadline? The customer's expecting it by Day Fifth, can we fucking ship a tech demo?"
"Well, if we..."
"Oh, I fucking give up, at least polish it up a bit before shipping, will you?"

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800509)

Scientologists sounds like a good name for a Global Warming Alarmist front.

they should take ownership of it like they did Climate Change.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800513)

More people need to read up on historic con games

They usually involve getting people to buy into ridiculous mythology with the implied promise that they will receive some treasure (money, sex, immortality) for their belief

It is also helpful if the mythology includes prohibitions against those forces (religion, psychology, rational thought), that may convince the target that they are being duped

One early indication to any potential target should be whether or not the person peddling these eternal truths is particularly interested in money

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1)

johanw (1001493) | about 7 months ago | (#46800639)

I would hope so. On the other hand, it didn't help much against other superstitions like chrisstianity either.

Re:The Harsh Light of Day (1)

mbone (558574) | about 7 months ago | (#46800727)

Bad science fiction

It's not Psychs ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800387)

It's Psychlos.

Re:It's not Psychs ... (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 7 months ago | (#46800479)

Khronos was just the front man?

Re:It's not Psychs ... (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 7 months ago | (#46800633)

Psychlops: the one-eyed mutant psychologist.

Belief (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800395)

There is no belief so stupid, so crazy, so totally deranged that it won't speak to someone.

19 days late (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800407)

You can't make this shit up.

Messed up organizations with happy names. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800417)

Just based on their name, you would think that it is a good group of people. They might as well be called the 'Children's Safety Council', while they barbecue infants.

Re:Messed up organizations with happy names. (4, Funny)

Aighearach (97333) | about 7 months ago | (#46800573)

I'll have you know that the Children's Food Safety and Quality Control Council cannot endorse the barbecuing of infants. The harsh smoke is too strong for the tender meat. We recommend braising or low-temperature smoking

Re:Messed up organizations with happy names. (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 7 months ago | (#46800669)

My favorite are "Peoples' Republics", which obviously aren't. At least "Islamic Republics" are honest about what they are.

Re:Messed up organizations with happy names. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800967)

Except for that pesky "republic" part.

Re:Messed up organizations with happy names. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801243)

They might as well be called the 'Children's Safety Council' while they barbecue infants.

I bet most of the proposals from that council would be quite modest [wikipedia.org] .

Credible Source? (5, Insightful)

Thruen (753567) | about 7 months ago | (#46800421)

I know Slashdot editors like to sleep on the job, but where does this story even come from? Is it really all based on a blog some supposed letter with no explanation behind it? Is this even true? Searching for it turns up some other articles (blogs) from sources I've never heard of, and nothing seems to point to this being real. Can somebody help me out here? Is the future of Slashdot fictional stories and Bennett's Blog?

Re:Credible Source? (5, Interesting)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 7 months ago | (#46800447)

Yes, interesting. It's an unsourced statement from somebody's blog. But it has two of the Slashdot keywords - 'Google' and 'Scientology' so, as someone mentioned in the last thread about some other Slashdot keywords (Guns, 3D printing, drugs and The Feds), grab your popcorn and super size your Mountain Dew.

Re:Credible Source? (2, Interesting)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 7 months ago | (#46800893)

One word: Dice and page views.

Re:Credible Source? (5, Informative)

Thruen (753567) | about 7 months ago | (#46800463)

A commenter on the linked blog sums up how, even if this is true, it's not news in the way the headline makes it seem.

FOTF2012 says
April 18, 2014 at 11:26 am

The Boris letter is misleading. Makes it sound like CCHR applied for and got a grant from Google in the sense of a monetary gift.

Pretty much anyone can set up a Google ad words account (https://support.google.com/adwords/answer/1704354?hl=en) and then learn how to manage the details (https://www.google.com/grants/details.html). Here are the basic qualifications: https://www.google.com/grants/... [google.com] .

One requirement is to be a 501(c)3, which CCHR is. You can search for them on GuideStar (http://www.guidestar.org/?gclid=CKDF0e2q6r0CFVKFfgodPrMAHA) and you get 38 results. Apparently CCHR sets up separate entities in each state — maybe they have to as a charity.

One of the Google Ads program restrictions is that you can only link to one legitimate website. So I imagine they will link to http://www.cchr.org/ [cchr.org] .

Anyway, this “grant” is something that any “non-profit” can use. It is nothing significant Google has given CCHR specifically. It is part of a program that no doubt profits Google while they can say they are helping non-profits. Further, given the eligibility criteria (which CCHR meet), if Google were to deny CCHR use of the program, they would be in a lawsuit and would probably lose.

Re:Credible Source? (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 7 months ago | (#46800537)

Ah, thank you.

These are not the Evils you are looking for.

Re:Credible Source? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800547)

Erm, it is precisely as newsworthy as the headline makes it seem. "Non-profit" does not mean ethical or even not-very-evil - there are some horrific non-profits in the US. If you give a blanket allowance to them - and it is, after all, for your own benefit as it makes you look like a "good corporate citizen" (heh) - you share the blame for the results of that promotion.

Re:Credible Source? (1)

Thruen (753567) | about 7 months ago | (#46800699)

In that case, they deserve as much credit for supporting every other organization that doesn't agree with this view. Google's program would be just as helpful to a non-profit that advocates for psychiatrists, should we run a story about that and act like it makes them heroes to the community? How about we dig up a list of everyone they support so we can all blame them for supporting and opposing every controversial subject there is?

For that matter, why don't why all take the blame for allowing these organizations to exist? After all, we aren't stopping them, and we're funding a government that gives them tax breaks and benefits just for being non profits.

Re:Credible Source? (2)

wiredlogic (135348) | about 7 months ago | (#46800553)

if Google were to deny CCHR use of the program, they would be in a lawsuit and would probably lose.

Google is under no obligation to provide free services fairly and without bias.

Re:Credible Source? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800937)

So denying services based on a protected class (religion) is perfectly legal?

Time to make those blacks sit back in the alley, like they deserve. Nothing worse than trying to eat in the same room as one of Those People (tm).

Re:Credible Source? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801063)

No, denying free services based on a protected class (religion) is almost perfectly legal.

It's funny, btw, how in the US one group wants to use their religion to deny paying for a service--abortion and/or birth control--yet you want to claim that any free service must specifically never exclude them for their religion. Talk about trying to have their cake and eat it too.

Now, of course, whether it *should* be illegal is another issue. But then if we want to play that game, I think we should expanded the protected classes to include the specifically non-religious, age, sexual orientation, etc. That way we can have 18yo gay bishops who spend the required time giving the required sermon and spend 2 hours rallying about the insanity of Catholicism, Christianity, heterosexuality, and the general way in which people are such hypocrites.

But then I don't see it happening any time soon that we demand that preachers and bishops be hired regardless of theme being Muslim or Atheist or whatever if they're the otherwise most qualified candidate--and plenty of die-hard anti-Christianity folk know the Bible a lot better than the preachers and bishops do.

Re:Credible Source? (1)

yakatz (1176317) | about 7 months ago | (#46800555)

I am involved with several organizations that are members of Google Grants. As long as you meet the eligibility guidelines (when we applied, you were not automatically accepted if you were a 501(c)(3), but it could have changed), they give you the same benefits.

Google recently renamed the program: It used to be called "Google Grants" and you would get all the benefits at once. It appears that you now need to request each one only if you plan to use it.

Re:Credible Source? (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 7 months ago | (#46800763)

Mod parent "+1 informative and no further discussion required".

Re:Credible Source? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800979)

if Google were to deny CCHR use of the program, they would be in a lawsuit and would probably lose.

Most certainly not, since - and that should really surprise no one - the eligibility guidlines state explicitly:

Google reserves the right to grant or deny an organization's application or participation at any time, for any reason, and to supplement or amend these eligibility guidelines at any time. Selections are made at Google's sole discretion, and are not subject to external review.

Re:Credible Source? (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | about 7 months ago | (#46801259)

No matter what someone puts on a web site it is still illegal to discriminate based on a protected aspect such as race or religion. Policy statements do not override law. Denying the Scientologists would be the same issue as denying the NAACP.

Re:Credible Source? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801283)

Which law would that be? You seem confident, you probably could tell me at least which act(s) applies to this case, if not specific sections/paragraphs.

Re:Credible Source? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800959)

Tony Ortega's blog, he used to be editor for Village Voice and is now executive editor for Raw Story, his posts on Scientology tend to be 100% fact.

{ Thuen ... oh hai OSA :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Special_Affairs }

Re:Credible Source? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800997)

It's from the CONservatives that now run this site. They're simply not logical. Just look at the Beta. Their kind is anti-education, and it shows in their insane rants. Of course, today is the worst of their xtian rituals where they celebrate a zombie on Hitler's birthday.

Ugh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800431)

Yet again Google is used to promote utter bollocks alongside homeopathy...

The answer to bad speech (1)

Iamthecheese (1264298) | about 7 months ago | (#46800433)

is more good speech. However preposterous their ideas trying to silence any cult will just end in their views being discussed in secret and away from the bright light of open debate.

Re:The answer to bad speech (2)

seebs (15766) | about 7 months ago | (#46800453)

That doesn't mean they need to be actively funded by others.

Re:The answer to bad speech (1)

Vellmont (569020) | about 7 months ago | (#46800873)

This isn't "free speech", it's advertising. Google needs to be more selective about who it gives free advertising to. That's certainly not silencing anyone.

Entertaining, but dated (1)

Shadoefax (1037810) | about 7 months ago | (#46800449)

I think you're a little slow to post ... April Fools was three weeks ago. Just say'n...

So what's the problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800457)

What's the point here? Do you claim that we should stop any group to express themselves when you consider that what they think if wrong?
If so, then you're part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Let them talk. And then, say why they are wrong.

(I admit, I started to RTFA but then stopped when I saw that there actually was 6 articles!)

Non event... (2)

openfrog (897716) | about 7 months ago | (#46800459)

After reading Slashdot for many years, I am coming back after two months of not visiting and what do I see? Another anti-Google posting using all the power of the anecdotal... This is a non-event, and Google will change track in this case as soon as they are pointed out their mistake.

I am not sure if I will have the courage to go through today's list. I remember this place as one where I could read intelligent comments, but those who used to make this place what it was have now almost all left...

Re:Non event... (1)

Aighearach (97333) | about 7 months ago | (#46800617)

Sorry froggy, they've been on an anti-google kick for years. I'll tell exactly when since... since Jobs declared nuclear war on Android!

Most of the old-timers are on soylentnews dot org

Re:Non event... (1)

theskipper (461997) | about 7 months ago | (#46800789)

Dice Dice Baby, Dice Dice Baby
All right stop, collaborate and listen
Dice is back with my brand new invention
Something grabs a hold of me tightly
Flow like a harpoon daily and nightly
Will it ever stop? Yo – I don't know...

Re:Non event... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801237)

A growing portion of the intelligent users left for a fork [soylentnews.org] after Dice started to push the disastrous beta on everyone.

Troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800481)

Thanks /. for the heads up. I'll be on the lookout for them and click away there monies.

CCHR has made some valid points... (2)

SubtleArray (2633093) | about 7 months ago | (#46800483)

If you can look past the weird conspiracy theories and Xenu stuff. Late last year I saw a documentary called "The Marketing of Madness." It makes a compelling case about how over-medicated we're becoming, and how simple quirks are now being labeled as illnesses to turn a profit. There might be some truth to this. CCHR might not be an entirely awful group.

Re:CCHR has made some valid points... (2)

sjames (1099) | about 7 months ago | (#46800621)

I would say the field of psychiatry is long overdue for an overhaul. It has a great deal of baggage that it refuses to put down. It's unfortunate that Scieentology has gotten involved. They do have a few good points here, but bring a lot of baggage of their own and then muddy the water by WAY overreaching and injecting the crazy Xenu stuff into the discussion.

Re:CCHR has made some valid points... (5, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 7 months ago | (#46800661)

This is precisely how crazies work. They take a perfectly reasonable statement - The practice of psychiatry has problems / Vaccines CAN cause harm, etc and then push their agenda far and beyond any rationale discussion. Yes, the practice of psychiatry is primitive and has been subject to considerable abuse in the past (lobotomies, insulin shocks to name a few). Yes, this country is overmedicated - but not just with psychoactive drugs - and this isn't just the 'fault' of psychiatrists but instead involves doctors, patients, drug companies, government and bog knows who else.

But the victrolic, angry and anti intellectual approach of CCHR and Scientology in general should continue to be exposed for what it is - a scam. They should be allowed to express their opinions and, if the IRS says they are a 501C3 corp and Google gives something extra to non profits, well then, let'em at it. But it's still a scam. Along with quite an number of other 'non profits'.

Re:CCHR has made some valid points... (1)

gtall (79522) | about 7 months ago | (#46801607)

Before we absolve the sainted American people of medication, who's taking the illegal drugs, binge drinking, etc.? A good segment of the American people is predisposed to self-medication for whatever they think ails them.

Re:CCHR has made some valid points... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801035)

On the large scale, it's drug companies and society, not doctors. You tell people there's something wrong with them (and here's the cure!) for long enough and they will really believe it.

While there are some instances of doctors doing inappropriate or harmful things, those instances are fairly few and far between. Doctors do not directly benefit from prescribing drugs, and the more ethical among them will refuse to accept the various 'gifts' drug companies tend to push. Of course this 'gifts' aspect of things can be a major concern in some cases, but the solution is not to get rid of doctors -- the solution is to get rid of the other side of the problem.

Re:CCHR has made some valid points... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801127)

It is part the fault of doctors, thought more often not because of them being pushy with drugs, but being lazy and/or spineless. A lot of patients demand pills for their problems and don't want to do any other work or followup. Then you have a person always on some antidepressant or other drug, with no followup to see if they actually need to stay on it or to see if something could be done to see to take them off of it (just cold turkey quitting reminds them of "needing" it), or even not checking in the first place if something else could have been done instead.

But is their criticism of Psychiatry wrong? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800501)

They are a weird "religion", and the parts about Xenu are, ahem, interesting. But most of their criticism about psychiatry is rather accurate.

Psychiatry is the least scientific and most pretentious part of medicine. No real disorders have been detected yet, the DSM is a political document and not a medical one. The drugs do not perform much better than placebo, the level of fraud and misrepresentation in psychiatric drug trials is very high and the side effects are often pretty bad. Psychiatric drugs are often given freely for solving administrative problems (Ritalin or Adderall for "ADHD").

But let's be honest, the only reason the theology of Scientology is bizzare to us is that is it new. Catholic dogma is not much better.

Re:But is their criticism of Psychiatry wrong? (1)

linearz69 (3473163) | about 7 months ago | (#46800679)

Who cares about their take on psychotherapy or weather or not they believe in Xenu or if they are run by Tom Cruise. Heck, sometime I'll dress like a Pirate and discuss Flying Spaghetti.

The parts of Scientology that are concern me are the reports of abuse and indenturing of children and the mentally ill. Take that, along with the fact the Hubbard explicitly stated he made up Scientology as a tax dodge for profit, and you have what looks like a creepy mafia outfit.

Re:But is their criticism of Psychiatry wrong? (1)

seebs (15766) | about 7 months ago | (#46800715)

I think there may have been a true statement somewhere in there, but it was too subtle for me to find. The anti-ADHD stuff is pure Scientology spin, promoted aggressively precisely because the benefit of ADHD medication for most people is so very, very, obvious. Similarly, the "not much better than placebo" claim is a massive overclaim. There's some specific drugs that are pretty unreliable, but the key is that that's averaging over a general population; if you look only at the people who react well to them, and you move other people to something else, it actually works pretty well.

The claim that "no real disorders have been detected yet" is just plain stupid. Talk to people who are doing neuropsych, there is a ton of very nice, concrete, research being done on various cognitive abnormalities.

Re:But is their criticism of Psychiatry wrong? (3, Insightful)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 7 months ago | (#46800823)

Scientology's beliefs are idiotic, but not much more idiotic than believing in some guy walking up a hill and coming back down with slates with "commandments" apparently handed to him by some deity.

The problem with scientology is the frequent intimidation, their extremely litigious habits, the abusive behaviour towards members, the rampant commercialism, the indocrtination techniques and a bunch of other things that are decidedly evil and beyond the comprehension of any decent human being.

Scientology isn't a church, nor is it a cult. Scientology is a corporation. And whereas most corporations are just greedy and soulless, scientology doesn't stop at mere ruthless money grabbing; scientology seems to want to actively hurt it's victims as well.

Re:But is their criticism of Psychiatry wrong? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800983)

Scientology's beliefs are idiotic, but not much more idiotic than believing in some guy walking up a hill and coming back down with slates with "commandments" apparently handed to him by some deity.

The Bible claims he went to the hills, and came back with stone tablets, carved with rules. For all we know, he carved them himself, and lied to keep the people in line. Sounds like something a politician would do, and that's what Moses was. Also, it's been said that the burning bush was a volcanic vent, and the toxic gases triggered hallucinations.

Re:But is their criticism of Psychiatry wrong? (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | about 7 months ago | (#46801221)

Gotta love these statements. What have you been reading? I would prefer my life experience as proof. I have taken antidepressants and after finding the right one I can attest that some do work.

Psychiatric drugs are often given freely for solving administrative problems (Ritalin or Adderall for "ADHD").

Autism and ADHD is not an "administrative problem". I have Aspergers Syndrome (a form of Autism) and I know how it feels during an episode. To put it simply my cognitive mind would recede and my lizard brain would take over. The problem with the lizard brain is that it only knows fight or flight. Too often it chooses fight. It is quite an interesting feeling when my lizard brain is yelling "MUST FIX PROBLEM NOW" while my cognitive brain is a voice in the distance saying "chill out". I found a med that actually reduced the frequency and severity of these episodes.

I lived with an autistic kid and we knew when he missed a dose. On the meds he was a quirky kid , Off his meds he was a kid who could not control himself no matter how hard he tried. He would usually apologize for his bad behaviors once he was medicated again. Please note that the medication did not make him a zombie. It just slowed things down so he could handle it.

Are some kids over medicated? Yes. are Ritalin or Adderall useful in some cases? Yes.

How is this different than christianity? (1, Insightful)

Thantik (1207112) | about 7 months ago | (#46800521)

I don't understand, how is this any different than any other religion that someone doesn't believe in? There are plenty of christian churches, etc that pay for advertisements against equal rights for homosexuals. This doesn't seem any more crazy.

Re:How is this different than christianity? (4, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | about 7 months ago | (#46800563)

Motive comes into question. Imagine if the christian church charged admission for services.

Re:How is this different than christianity? (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about 7 months ago | (#46800589)

Imagine if the christian church charged admission for services.

Mormonism doesn't outright force a 10% income "tithing", but you are pretty much ostracized if you don't pay up.

Re:How is this different than christianity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800839)

10% is a lot less than 100%.
Mormonism still cares that it's members have a decent life.

Re:How is this different than christianity? (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 7 months ago | (#46800999)

Imagine if the christian church charged admission for services.

Imagine if a christian church ran a vast real estate and financial empire, built palaces with 15,000€ bathtubs for Bishops of Bling, and systemically obstructed justice in cases of sexual abuse of minors.

Oh, yeah . . . no need to imagine. They should be hit with RICO charges.

I can't see any difference between political action committees and churches. The NRA spends money supporting a pro-gun political platform. Churches spend money promoting their own religious beliefs in political platforms.

Like it or not, those Tea Party folks could probably register themselves as a religion. All those Ayn Rand Objectivism rants, like, "Altruism is evil" sounds like religious beliefs to me.

I think all folks should be free to practice whatever religion they choose, or not choose. However, when their religion is organized into something that walks, talks and acts like a business . . . they have no right to escape the taxman than any other folks.

Re:How is this different than christianity? (2)

seebs (15766) | about 7 months ago | (#46800749)

There's a lot of very good material already written on the topic. Quick summary:

1. The people who founded Scientology explicitly stated that was not a religion, but a scientific practice. They changed to calling it a "religion" solely for tax/legal purposes. That's an official statement from Hubbard himself, not speculation.
2. Fairly dangerous and abusive. Look up Lisa McPherson, or Paulette Cooper.
3. Lots of very shady practices, like pressuring members to have abortions so they won't be wasting money on kids that they could be donating to the organization. Yes, really.

Plenty of stuff here you could look up. It's not so much about the specific beliefs as about the organizational structure and practice.

Not your problem (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800909)

1. And you care because? All churches operate that way.

2. All religions are abusive and dangerous. That is why they are evil. Two people harmed by Scientology? Awesome! Judeo- Chrisitainity and Islam hace harmed millions.

3. Again, ALL religions can be accused of those things.

I don't get this particular hatred to some cult that affects only a few thousand people when Judeo-Christianity has caused the suffering of millions for thousands of years - greatly outweighing any good that has been done in its name.

Oh, Buddhists! - see SE Asia for their assholishness.

In 3,000 years, mankind hasn't progressed emotionally and we won't until we give up these primitive ideas of God and Gods and the supernatural.

When we can embrace our humanity and acheive humility (Being "made" in God's image is the most arrogant thing ever said.), we can progress beyond being blad super smart apes.

It's all about the dosage level (1)

Animats (122034) | about 7 months ago | (#46801133)

Trouble from religion seems to be associated more with dosage level than theology. Once a week seems to be a safe dose for most people, while several times a day is an overdose. The nuttier religions tend towards the overdose end of the scale. Islam and the haredi branch of Judaism go for All Religion All the Time. Scientology goes in that direction, but more through intermittent intense experiences rather than constant daily obsession.

Fortunately, Scientology is stuck, by policy, with Hubbard's 1930s technology and their skin-resistance meter. If they were keeping up with technology, they'd have mobile apps tied to wristband sensors reporting to HQ in Clearwater, FL, auditing using functional MRI machines, and big data systems analyzing all member communications.

Scientology wins! (4, Funny)

snemiro (1775092) | about 7 months ago | (#46800559)

If there were a race about which "religion" is getting more members with the most insane ideas, yep, they would take the 1st place!... In your face, resurrected Jesus.

Re:Scientology wins! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800739)

I dunno.. expecting 72 virgins after becoming a "martyr" is pretty whacko too

Re:Scientology wins! (0)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 7 months ago | (#46801227)

In your face, resurrected Jesus.

That's zombie Jesus to you.

Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800585)

Oh boy. I suppose the honest headline that "Google offers 10k in free ads to ALL NON PROFITS" didn't fit the meme-of-the-day that Google is evil? (http://www.google.com/grants/)
CCHR is a non-profit, Google offers aid to all non-profits, therefore Google offers aid to CCHR. Two uterrly inocuous facts from which Slashdot manages to draw the most dramatic and misleading headline possible.

At least this time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800591)

it isn't about the jews. Thumbs up for scientology

Getting the hang of the GoogleWay(tm) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46800827)

$100K/mo for 'this', $0 contribution to OpenSSL, and Google Voice is "still in beta".

I think I'm getting the Google-Hang of this!

I am a Scientologist. Hail Xenu. I come in Peace t (1)

Larry Moore (3623185) | about 7 months ago | (#46801211)

I am a Scientologist. Hail Xenu. I come in Peace to save humanity from the earthlings that have gone astray. Praise Ron Hubbard (and the L. in his name). Listen children, the evil psychiatrists on your planet earth have been stealing your hard earned money from you for years and years on end. They make up stuff and then sell it to you for extremely high prices . This is against the intergalactic code of this sector of this galaxy (see the Oscar award winning movie: 'Battlefield Earth' for details). Which I know for the simple reason we have had a cosmic-patent on such transfers of wealth from peasants and fools to masters of con for nearly 700 million years. And what's fair is fair. I will share the secrets of the entire universe with you today. In fact, your timing is perfect as we are offering a special one time discount at this very moment. Below is our current price sheet. Read it well as you consider the fact that the entire destiny of earth and the foreseeable future of this entire universe depends on how much you can spend (i.e. give to us) right here and right now! The REAL meaning of being HUMAN: $ 5,000.00 The REAL meaning of TRUTH: $ 10.000.00 The REAL reason your life SUCKS: $ 25,000.00 The REAL purpose for your life: $ 100,000.00 The WAY you can have POWER: $ 1/2 million bucks. Another WAY you can have POWER: 5 million bucks. The list goes on and on, but hurry as this offer won't last. Much Love, Xenaluthanian All Praise to Scientology

Free speech? (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | about 7 months ago | (#46801267)

Where are all the Freedom of speech proponents? .... Oh, I forgot, it's freedom of speech for things I agree with. Sorry.

Re:Free speech? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801349)

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from criticism.

Well... (3, Funny)

aevan (903814) | about 7 months ago | (#46801563)

I dated a psychology student once. Now i'm not saying I agree with scientology...

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46801689)

... But?

CCHR is actually a great organization. (1)

strstr (539330) | about 7 months ago | (#46801731)

Psychiatry has a long history of mentally and physically maiming people, from shock torture, to lobotomies, to forced subjecting people to cold and heat and torture to modify behavior, to drugs that damage the brain and cause death 25 years sooner, to drugs that cause CTE/chronic traumatic encephalopathy, to drugs that induce psychosis, to drugs that cause dementia, to drugs that prevent recovery of a persons mind, etc. They are in fact behind the holocaust because it was psychiatrists coming up with the idea of eugenics, to cleanse the human race of what psychiatrists deemed were "bad DNA" of the homosexuals, jews, mentally ill, etc. Then psychiatrists were responsible for MKULTRA and CIA mind control programs here in the United States; and today they are responsible for the mind control program of operating "forced chemical lobotomy" centers to drug our youth, prisoners, and mentally ill subjects in hospitals and jails and community centers and schools all around the country.

Learn more about MKULTRA, how the drugs damage peoples brains, and how people are tortured in the mental health system. In fact, the United Nations is calling forced psychiatric treatment a form of torture, and WHO/World Health Organization has called it a secret hidden emergency (torture by psychiatrists in the mental health system): Reports from Dr. Grace E. Jackson and Robert Whitaker back this up and all this info for download from the source here: http://www.oregonstatehospital... [oregonstatehospital.net]

More info on the homepage of that website: http://www.oregonstatehospital... [oregonstatehospital.net]

I also recommend Mad In America for a source of the truth: http://www.madinamerica.com/ [madinamerica.com]

And Mindfreedom International: http://www.mindfreedom.org/ [mindfreedom.org]

Legal help from PsychRights: http://www.psychrights.org/ [psychrights.org]

CCHR hooked me up with two attorney's when I was down in Los Angeles last week, visiting UCLA for a brain injury, when the psychiatrists there misdiagnosed me, refused to do tests or treatment for my physical injury, then had me committed to UCLA Resnick and tried to force medications when I had no signs of mental illness. I was informed by CCHR that UCLA is a military research facility and they just try to fill their beds for human experimentation, which I believe, based on what I know of UCLA's history of mind control programs funded by the CIA (MKULTRA participation). Without CCHR, it's possible I would have had no help whatsoever, because they are the only ones actually telling the truth about psychiatry and its' dark history (with lawyers, doctors, and money to back it up).

Re:CCHR is actually a great organization. (1)

strstr (539330) | about 7 months ago | (#46801787)

Watch the true History on Psychiatry in this video: http://www.oregonstatehospital... [oregonstatehospital.net]

Then tell me with a straight face that Psychiatry isn't the end-all evil that it is, mostly allowing select minorities in our country to be illegally controlled, targeted, set up, and abused by the government.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?