Don’t worry, that’s not a wild assertion made to martyr myself as the next cause célèbre of the libel reform campaign (although that’s not a bad idea – I mean who’d heard of the Simon Singh fella before he pointed out the happily bogus claims of the BCA? That’s right: nobody. And now look at him – front page of the BBC, on every skeptical podcast going, and standingly-ovated every time he leaves the house. I think the only way, therefore, to get big in the world of skepticism is now libel martyrdom. Fuck it – Dereck Acorah eats babies and Rupert Murdoch is a first-class cunt).

Anyway, as I was saying, scientologists ARE criminals. Or, at least, some of them are – according to the cult themselves. In fact, more scientologists are criminals than we previously thought, if the cult is to be believed (which, of course, it probably isn’t – because lots of scientologists are criminals, as I say).

I’ll explain, or rather, I’ll let the Telegraph explain:

Scientology ‘has branch in every English prison’

Scientology has obtained a foothold in every prison in England and Wales, a spokesman for the religion claims, despite official figures which show only three prisoners acknowledge following the religion.

Essentially, the crazy cult (who were convicted of activities listed as ‘fraud in an organised gang’ in France last year) have been targeting prisoners across England and Wales, in an attempt to help them see the error of their ways, go straight, expunge their thetons, audit their woes and generally do all that fun scientological stuff that keeps Tom Cruise bouncing on couches and keeps the creepy, sinister smile on Tommy Davis’ face. You see, their organisation has an entire programme dedicated to the rehabilitation of lags (does anybody other than The Sun use the word lag? I don’t think I’ve ever seen it used. Other than, you know, jet lag – but I think that’s a different context. Is someone who gets jailed for hijacking planes is known as a jet lag? I’d like to think so).

And what’s this fantastic programme called? Bearing in mind this is meant to be the legitimate, socially-responsible, respectable wing of the weird space-cult?

Criminon.

Really, criminon.

CRIMINON!

Scientologist explain their prisoner rehab scheme

Which, to me, sounds less like a rehab scheme and more like the name of a robot in a sci-fi future – one of those ones that’s meant to be the butler and do all the menial tasks in a friendly and people-loving way, but entirely unpredictably breaks it’s programming and goes on a rampage, wiping out as much of the human population as it can, in a way that nobody could have ever possibly foresaw when they decided to call it the Criminon 3000. Or something.

Still, enough of the bizarre and evil science fiction – we’ve got scientology to talk about.

A spokesman for CRIMINON claim they’re working with every prison in England and Wales – 139 in all – to get their scheme rolled out. Of course, unsurprisingly, the numbers don’t reflect that – with just 3 prisoners in the country admitting to following Big LRon’s delusions. That actually puts the vast majority of prisoners in the UK in an intellectual class about Criminon’s celebrity advocates – like Kirsie Alley, Nancy Cartwright (the voice of Bart Simpson).

Unsurprisingly, there’s been a lot of criticism of Criminon – and it actually extends somewhat beyond the fact that the name’s really shit: the course is based not on peer-reviewed studies, but instead it’s based around the 1981 L Ron Hubbard booklet ‘The Way to Happiness‘; the course is, characteristically and predictably, incredibly disparaging of psychiatrists – something of a theme throughout the crazy and paranoid Hubbard’s work, for some reason; and the course has strong links to Narconon - the Scientological course for drug rehabilitation.

I swear I’m not making these names up (he was a poor science fiction writer, after all).

Both Criminon and Narconon involve the practice of ridding the body of substances via the Purification Rundown – a cleansing ritual involving B3 mega-doses and hyper-extended saunas, which have been linked to a number of injuries and deaths caused by Scientology. The Criminon website itself even hints towards this approach:

This course teaches the student exactly what drugs are and the effects they have on the body and mind. It explains how and why one becomes addicted to drugs in the first place and then details an exact regimen – which involves the use of vitamins and exercise – for freeing a person from the grip of addiction, and all without medical substitutes.

Criminon is an entirely volunteer organisaiton (although, of course, this is the Scientology version of volunteering – which is currently being debated in the courts as ex-Scientologists sue the cult for back pay, having been made to work over 100-hour weeks for almost no pay for years). Digging around the Criminon literature, the volunteer criteria has some interesting highlights:

1. Fund-raising. (Examples could be a sponsored run, setting up a Charity E-Bay account, a sports game where people paid to play or contacting local businesses to get donations). Criminon UK will pay 10% commission on monies raised.

Interesting notion of fund-raising there – collect for us, and we’ll let you keep part of the donations: sounds legally dubious. If I’m wrong there, I’ll happily retract.

The following attributes are essential for becoming a Criminon Tutor.

• You have a minimum of three hours a week to give to Criminon.
• You find it easy to write/type a personal letter.
• You are persistent on a given course of action and are willing to continue to write to offenders even if they don’t reply for a while.

Ah, there’s the scientology we know and love – persistently hassling people even when they don’t reply. Leopards and spots.

Still, it makes a change to see the cult taking criminals, and turning them into Scientologists; we’re used to see it happen the other way around, after all.

Haggis’ action not only follows the ruling in France, but also the outburst made by Scientology spokesman Tommy Davis on Nightline where he linked the Anonymous movement – a movement allegedly set up to allegedly expose alleged crimes and alleged violations of alleged human rights allegedly by the allegedly alleged church of scientology – to a number of unproven illegal allegations which, to be fair, the presenter did a great job taking him to task on and highlighting that the allegations made by Tommy were not backed up by the FBI. The video is currently up on Youtube and is worth a look. On top of that, Tommy was recently interviewed by journalist Martin Bashir, citing offence of his religious beliefs and storming out after being politely asked to comment on the alien Xenu and the alien tales associated by some to Scientology, which is not recognised as a religion in the UK, Canada, Germany, France, Belgium, Ireland, Luxembourg, Isreal, Greece and Mexico, among other countries.

You might remember Tommy from the BBC Panorama programme, where he met with reporter John Sweeney – many times, during John’s attempts to interview other people with views on the practices of Scientology. On the back of those high-profile PR disasters, the open letter from Paul Haggis could not have come at a worst time for the group France classes as a ‘sect’.

For those who aren’t familiar with the name, Paul Haggis won the Best Film Oscar as screenwriter for “Million Dollar Baby” and “Crash”, the latter of which he also directed. He also wrote for Bond films “Casino Royale” and “Quantum of Solace”, so he’s pretty respected in Hollywood. His letter, which was published online after it’s veracity was verified and the validity of which has not been called into doubt, was eloquent and provoking on what Haggis states are his reasons for leaving the group:

Tommy,

As you know, for ten months now I have been writing to ask you to make a public statement denouncing the actions of the Church of Scientology of San Diego. Their public sponsorship of Proposition 8, a hate-filled legislation that succeeded in taking away the civil rights of gay and lesbian citizens of California – rights that were granted them by the Supreme Court of our state – shames us.

I called and wrote and implored you, as the official spokesman of the church, to condemn their actions. I told you I could not, in good conscience, be a member of an organization where gay-bashing was tolerated.

In that first conversation, back at the end of October of last year, you told me you were horrified, that you would get to the bottom of it and “heads would roll.” You promised action. Ten months passed. No action was forthcoming. The best you offered was a weak and carefully worded press release, which praised the church’s human rights record and took no responsibility. Even that, you decided not to publish.

The church’s refusal to denounce the actions of these bigots, hypocrites and homophobes is cowardly. I can think of no other word. Silence is consent, Tommy. I refuse to consent.

I joined the Church of Scientology thirty-five years ago. During my twenties and early thirties I studied and received a great deal of counseling. While I have not been an active member for many years, I found much of what I learned to be very helpful, and I still apply it in my daily life. I have never pretended to be the best Scientologist, but I openly and vigorously defended the church whenever it was criticized, as I railed against the kind of intolerance that I believed was directed against it. I had my disagreements, but I dealt with them internally. I saw the organization – with all its warts, growing pains and problems – as an underdog. And I have always had a thing for underdogs.

But I reached a point several weeks ago where I no longer knew what to think. You had allowed our name to be allied with the worst elements of the Christian Right. In order to contain a potential “PR flap” you allowed our sponsorship of Proposition 8 to stand. Despite all the church’s words about promoting freedom and human rights, its name is now in the public record alongside those who promote bigotry and intolerance, homophobia and fear.

The fact that the Mormon Church drew all the fire, that no one noticed, doesn’t matter. I noticed. And I felt sick. I wondered how the church could, in good conscience, through the action of a few and then the inaction of its leadership, support a bill that strips a group of its civil rights.

This was my state of mind when I was online doing research and chanced upon an interview clip with you on CNN. The interview lasted maybe ten minutes – it was just you and the newscaster. And in it I saw you deny the church’s policy of disconnection. You said straight-out there was no such policy, that it did not exist.

I was shocked. We all know this policy exists. I didn’t have to search for verification – I didn’t have to look any further than my own home.

You might recall that my wife was ordered to disconnect from her parents because of something absolutely trivial they supposedly did twenty-five years ago when they resigned from the church. This is a lovely retired couple, never said a negative word about Scientology to me or anyone else I know – hardly raving maniacs or enemies of the church. In fact it was they who introduced my wife to Scientology.

Although it caused her terrible personal pain, my wife broke off all contact with them. I refused to do so. I’ve never been good at following orders, especially when I find them morally reprehensible.

For a year and a half, despite her protestations, my wife did not speak to her parents and they had limited access to their grandchild. It was a terrible time.

That’s not ancient history, Tommy. It was a year ago.

And you could laugh at the question as if it was a joke? You could publicly state that it doesn’t exist?

To see you lie so easily, I am afraid I had to ask myself: what else are you lying about?

And that is when I read the recent articles in the St. Petersburg Times. They left me dumbstruck and horrified.

These were not the claims made by “outsiders” looking to dig up dirt against us. These accusations were made by top international executives who had devoted most of their lives to the church. Say what you will about them now, these were staunch defenders of the church, including Mike Rinder, the church’s official spokesman for 20 years!

Tommy, if only a fraction of these accusations are true, we are talking about serious, indefensible human and civil rights violations. It is still hard for me to believe. But given how many former top-level executives have said these things are true, it is hard to believe it is all lies.

And when I pictured you assuring me that it is all lies, that this is nothing but an unfounded and vicious attack by a group of disgruntled employees, I am afraid that I saw the same face that looked in the camera and denied the policy of disconnection. I heard the same voice that professed outrage at our support of Proposition 8, who promised to correct it, and did nothing.

I carefully read all of your rebuttals, I watched every video where you presented the church’s position, I listened to all your arguments – ever word. I wish I could tell you that they rang true. But they didn’t.

I was left feeling outraged, and frankly, more than a little stupid.

And though it may seem small by comparison, I was truly disturbed to see you provide private details from confessionals to the press in an attempt to embarrass and discredit the executives who spoke out. A priest would go to jail before revealing secrets from the confessional, no matter what the cost to himself or his church. That’s the kind of integrity I thought we had, but obviously the standard in this church is far lower – the public relations representative can reveal secrets to the press if the management feels justified. You even felt free to publish secrets from the confessional in Freedom Magazine – you just stopped short of labeling them as such, probably because you knew Scientologists would be horrified, knowing you so easily broke a sacred vow of trust with your parishioners.

How dare you use private information in order to label someone an “adulteress?” You took Amy Scobee’s most intimate admissions about her sexual life and passed them onto the press and then smeared them all over the pages your newsletter! I do not know the woman, but no matter what she said or did, this is the woman who joined the Sea Org at 16! She ran the entire celebrity center network, and was a loyal senior executive of the church for what, 20 years? You want to rebut her accusations, do it, and do it in the strongest terms possible – but that kind of character assassination is unconscionable.

So, I am now painfully aware that you might see this an attack and just as easily use things I have confessed over the years to smear my name. Well, luckily I have never held myself up to be anyone’s role model.

The great majority of Scientologists I know are good people who are genuinely interested in improving conditions on this planet and helping others. I have to believe that if they knew what I now know, they too would be horrified. But I know how easy it was for me to defend our organization and dismiss our critics, without ever truly looking at what was being said; I did it for thirty-five years. And so, after writing this letter, I am fully aware that some of my friends may choose to no longer associate with me, or in some cases work with me. I will always take their calls, as I always took yours. However, I have finally come to the conclusion that I can no longer be a part of this group. Frankly, I had to look no further than your refusal to denounce the church’s anti-gay stance, and the indefensible actions, and inactions, of those who condone this behavior within the organization. I am only ashamed that I waited this many months to act. I hereby resign my membership in the Church of Scientology.

Sincerely,
Paul Haggis

The sentence comes at the culmination of case which saw two female former members allege that they were pressured into paying large sums of money to the church after joining in the 1990s. They also alleged that members of the church had harassed them to buy a variety of products including vitamins and to sign up for “purification” courses costing thousands of euros. For listeners who aren’t familiar with purification, it’s a detoxification technique used in scientology variously for religious, spiritual and medical benefits. The program consists of large doses of vitamin B3 Niacin and long, hot saunas, both beyond what is usually considered a safe level, as was detailed in the New York Press in June 2007.

One of the successful female plaintiffs in this landmark case said she had even been advised by a financial adviser from the group to take out a large loan to finance her activities within the organisation, while another woman has alleged she was fired by her Scientologist boss after refusing to undergo testing and sign up to courses. The organisation maintain that no mental manipulation took place – but of course they lost this case, which suggests the judges disagree with their protestations of no wrongdoing. The judges found there to be wrongdoing – ‘fraud in an organised gang‘, specifically. Olivier Morice, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said:

“This is a historic decision. It’s the first time in France that the entity of the Church of Scientology is condemned for fraud as an organized gang,” as opposed to simply individual members. - Source: New York Times

He also said that the tribunal “expressed its will to maintain the structure of Scientology in order to make it easier to control,” adding that “it gave this decision a national and international dimension so that potential victims can be warned of the methods of Scientology.”

The result isn’t a perfect win for the many rationalists and critics of the sect – groups of whom have been outspoken throughout internet forums and sites such as Youtube, posting a range of videos and staging peaceful demonstrations under the name ‘Anonymous’ in order to put forward criticisms of Scientology while staying safe from any potential ramifications – legal or otherwise. In fact, prosecutors had at one point requested that the group be entirely dissolved in France and be fined as much as €4m, so the €600,000 looks somewhat paltry by comparison. However, last month it was revealed that an obscure modification of French law meant that courts no longer have the power to dissolve organisations found guilty of fraud.

The news sparked controversy forcing the minister of justice, Michèle Alliot-Marie, to explain the change on television. Lawyers representing those who brought the current case alleged that scientologists had infiltrated the national assembly. That’s the allegation made by the plaintiff’s lawyers, I’ll reiterate. I have no inside knowledge into the alleged workings of the French national assembly, nor any opinion on how alleged influence by alleged scientologists may have allegedly led to this alleged – no, sorry, definite – law change. Those allegations are allegedly allegations made by those lawyers. However, that amendment has now been changed back, after this case.

Georges Fenech, head of the Inter-ministerial Unit to Monitor and Fight Cults, told French TV:

“It is very regrettable that the law quietly changed before the trial. The system has now been put in place by parliament and it is certain that in the future, if new offences are committed, a ban could eventually be pronounced” – Source: Yahoo News

Which should serve as stark warning, should senior members of the scientology group ever be convicted again of ‘fraud in an organised gang‘, or in fact any crimes similar to those they’ve been convicted of this time.

Judges did go so far as to point out that had they been able to enforce a ban, the cult (as Scientology is classified in France) would be likely to continue its activities outside of a “legal framework.” Read into that what you will. Instead, the sect (again, French definitions state it is not a religion by their classification) will be allowed to continue its activities in France where it is estimated to have 45,000 members. As to why the newly-convicted fraudsters within the group’s leadership team escaped imprisonment for their ‘fraudulent and organised gang’ activities, judges cited the four’s “efforts to change its practices”.

Catherine Picard, who runs an association to help victims of sects, called the verdict “subtle enough and intelligent,” saying that it would help control Scientology in France, and expressed the hope that the state would be “more vigilant.” She said:

“Scientology can no longer hide behind freedom of conscience.” – Source: New York Times

Defence lawyers for the church – sorry, my mistake, for Scientology – have called for the debate to be reopened to “wash” their clients of any suspicion. The sect denies all wrongdoing – although just to reiterate, the current legal position states that the church are guilty of “fraud in an organised gang“. Which constitutes wrongdoing. Eric Roux, a spokesman for the Celebrity Centre, urged France to recognise Scientology’s “legality”:

“Religious freedom is in danger in this country” – Source: Al Jazeera English

Quite where religious freedom becomes proven “fraud in an organised gang” would make for an interesting debate – but given that Scientology has been shown in this case, in a court of law, to be defrauding customers, the religious freedom defence is nothing but a smokescreen. The leading members of the group in France have been demonstrably shown to have acted fraudulently, and this landmark case holds them accountable. It’ll be interesting to see if any future rulings against religions – and against sects and cults – emerge to follow this one.