Australian Senate rejects Scientology inquiry call

KnightVision

Gold Meritorious Patron
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100318/ap_on_re_as/as_australia_scientology

CANBERRA, Australia – Australia's Senate on Thursday overwhelming rejected a call for an inquiry into allegations against the Church of Scientology made by former members who claim to have been abused, harassed or coerced into having abortions.
Sen. Nick Xenophon's motion to authorize a senate committee to hold a wide-reaching inquiry into the church that was founded in 1953 by the late U.S. science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard attracted only six votes in the 76-seat chamber. Another 33 voted against it and the remaining senators abstained.

More at Link above
 

AnonKat

Crusader
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100318/ap_on_re_as/as_australia_scientology

CANBERRA, Australia – Australia's Senate on Thursday overwhelming rejected a call for an inquiry into allegations against the Church of Scientology made by former members who claim to have been abused, harassed or coerced into having abortions.
Sen. Nick Xenophon's motion to authorize a senate committee to hold a wide-reaching inquiry into the church that was founded in 1953 by the late U.S. science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard attracted only six votes in the 76-seat chamber. Another 33 voted against it and the remaining senators abstained.

More at Link above

It aint over untill its over.
 

Carmel

Crusader
It aint over untill its over.
True. :)

Considering the number who abstained, the fact that many who voted had to toe the party line, that both Labour and Libs have very much changed their tune since this time last week, and Xen's determination on this, I'd say that it's looking good. Nuff said. :coolwink:
 

SchwimmelPuckel

Genuine Meatball
Overwhelmingly even!!!?? - Sheesh.. I'm beginning to think that politicians actually supports the right for scammers and con artists to cheat people.

:grouch:
 

Carmel

Crusader
Overwhelmingly even!!!?? - Sheesh.. I'm beginning to think that politicians actually supports the right for scammers and con artists to cheat people.

:grouch:
Not these Politicians, I don't think.....They've just gotta save face and justify any *current* stance that is in the public arena. Politics always comes first and *process* is usually always followed. Xen is using process, and so are the Senators. While it may not look like it, a lot of ground has been made and it's still being made as we speak.

"Crossing the floor" has serious implications. Allowing "process" to take its course is the way to go. It's a bitch that Xen can't just get what he wants with a click of the fingers (I hate it :grouch: ), but by the same token I appreciate the bigger picture and after speaking with Senators today, I feel confident that Xen will be successful with his objective.
 

Kookaburra

Gold Meritorious Patron
I agree, Carmel. Headway is being made with the senate. And also with the public. At least 80% of the public are now very aware of the issues and are strongly in favour of an inquiry. Of the remaining, most are just wishy washy, and one or two percent opposed. Lots of press there today, too. It's red hot issue.

I see you are home safely, Carmel. Everyone else?
 

Carmel

Crusader
I agree, Carmel. Headway is being made with the senate. And also with the public. At least 80% of the public are now very aware of the issues and are strongly in favour of an inquiry. Of the remaining, most are just wishy washy, and one or two percent opposed. Lots of press there today, too. It's red hot issue.
Yep, major headway. :thumbsup:

I see you are home safely, Carmel. Everyone else?
Yeah, and you too! A bit of a whirlwind in the last 48 hours, but all good and now it's nice to be home. :)

Not sure about the others.....I'm sure Feral will check in when he gets back home to whoop whoop, and no doubt Tony will be saying g'day on ESMB when he gets the chance.
 

mnql1

Patron Meritorious
Video from the March 28, 2010 session of the Senate of Australia

Video from the March 28, 2010 session of the Senate of Australia:

Scientology Inquiry Debate in Australia, March 18, 2010 (1/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1J7AMm0N_h0
Scientology Inquiry Debate in Australia, March 18, 2010 (2/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVhUHc8H0pU
Scientology Inquiry Debate in Australia, March 18, 2010 (3/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEmO7xgGJV0
Scientology Inquiry Debate in Australia, March 18, 2010 (4/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmPisiH-xxc
Scientology Inquiry Debate in Australia, March 18, 2010 (5/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd86zsWSiqc
Scientology Inquiry Debate in Australia, March 18, 2010 (6/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Amxj1Er24s
Scientology Inquiry Debate in Australia, March 18, 2010 (7/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwiBZZ3QEeU
Scientology Inquiry Debate in Australia, March 18, 2010 (8/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qnq8bSl9vGI
Scientology Inquiry Debate in Australia, March 18, 2010 (9/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RF2S2kNK9Os
Scientology Inquiry Debate in Australia, March 18, 2010 (10/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikoUfIcMNbA
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Eric Abetz made me really cross. The fact that he seemed to think Scientologists have free recourse to the police and judiciary shows that he has not been hearing those speaking out and has no understanding of the strictures of Scientology.

Most of the abuses are not police issues. Am I seriously going to go to the police and say, "I worked 100 hours last week," if I am in a cult?

Why doesn't he simply require 'religious' organisations to abide by the same rules as other employers?

I thought he was mind-bogglingly out of touch with the issues at hand, and the mood of the electorate.
 

RogerB

Crusader
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100318/ap_on_re_as/as_australia_scientology

CANBERRA, Australia – Australia's Senate on Thursday overwhelming rejected a call for an inquiry into allegations against the Church of Scientology made by former members who claim to have been abused, harassed or coerced into having abortions.
Sen. Nick Xenophon's motion to authorize a senate committee to hold a wide-reaching inquiry into the church that was founded in 1953 by the late U.S. science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard attracted only six votes in the 76-seat chamber. Another 33 voted against it and the remaining senators abstained.

More at Link above

Wait a moment!

My math tells me the majority of the house did not vote against an inquiry! (I'd love to bold and highlight the important words here . . . but my computer is screwing around again).

Only 33 out of 76 voted against the inquiry . . . . that's only 33 against 43. This is evidence of movement in our favour! . . . . . all it'll take now is more crimes Scn exposed, more deceit and violations of its charter and religiosity exposed, more bad press . . . and that is a given . . . and the "party system process" will have to give way.

I see a magazine in the US carrying a front cover story on TC's wife being "forced to have pre-natal processing and/or purification" for their second child . . . . with a very sour looking face for her picture.

Rog
 

Carmel

Crusader
Eric Abetz made me really cross. The fact that he seemed to think Scientologists have free recourse to the police and judiciary shows that he has not been hearing those speaking out and has no understanding of the strictures of Scientology.
Yeah, I got really cranky when I heard his *spew*. It took all the discipline I could muster not to yell out from the gallery and call it for the BS that it was.

I believe though, that he knows it's BS too. He's wearing a "hat". The Libs currently have a certain stance, and it was his job to make it acceptable or palatable. To do so, he twisted the truth to justify that stance.

We know and he knows (I'm sure), that the avenues he suggested are and would be useless when it comes to this issue......He was just making an attempt to cover the arse of the Libs on their current stance, IMO. :grouch:

I've drafted a letter to Abetz on his address today, but won't send it till I've chilled a bit on the pile of crap he dribbled out. His argument was BS, he knows it, and I think it would be a good thing if we who know that it was BS, would write to him, tell him so, and point out why. He needs to know that we *know*, that we don't buy it, and that we will tell others why *his* solution is bogus and why they shouldn't buy it.

Yep, Abetz address was awful......On the other hand, GO CHRISTINE MILNE!!! :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:

Carmel

Crusader
<snip>
My math tells me the majority of the house did not vote against an inquiry! (I'd love to bold and highlight the important words here . . . but my computer is screwing around again).

Only 33 out of 76 voted against the inquiry . . . . that's only 33 against 43. This is evidence of movement in our favour!
<snip>
Exactly. :)
 

The Great Zorg

Gold Meritorious Patron
Fall back, regroup and fight the good fight

Just a temporary set back.

The ruling party and it's opposition leader and their advisors are the ones to target for awakening. They either don't care, have been dead agented already or fear they will lose votes. I will contact them before May and give them my 2 cents worth.

In order for evil to win, it must rely on good sitting back and doing nothing.

This link regarding 'Mind Control Made Easy': http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...ind+control+made+easy&hl=en&client=firefox-a#
What an EXCELLENT video. $cio is written all over it! Everyone alive should see this video, or it should be played at schools, real relgious gatherings, etc.
 

byte301

Crusader
It seems that things are looking up. If we can get those who didn't vote to grow some balls we would actually win. :yes:

Carmel, I was wondering if there was an investigation done by the police yet? Seems like someone said there would be.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Yeah, I got really fuckin' cranky when I heard his spew. It took all the discipline I could muster not to yell out from the gallery and call it for the BS that it was.

I believe though, that he knows it's BS too. He's wearing a "hat". The Libs currently have a certain stance, and it was his job to make it acceptable or palatable. To do so, he twisted the truth to justify that stance.

We know and he knows (I'm sure), that the avenues he suggested are and would be worth FUCK NOTHING, when it comes to this issue......He was just making an attempt to cover the arse of the Libs on their current stance. :grouch:

I've drafted a letter to Abetz on his address today, but won't send it till I've chilled a bit on the pile of crap he dribbled out. His argument was BS, he knows it, and I think it would be a good thing if we who know that it was BS, would write to him, tell him so, and point out why. He needs to know that we *know*, that we don't buy it, and that we will tell others why *his* solution is bogus and why they shouldn't buy it.

Yep, Abetz dished out a load of crap......On the other hand, GO CHRISTINE MILNE!!! :thumbsup:

Good idea! I will write to him also. It probably won't be more than a few sentences but it will certainly express how I feel.
 

skollie

Silver Meritorious Patron
Wait a moment!

My math tells me the majority of the house did not vote against an inquiry! (I'd love to bold and highlight the important words here . . . but my computer is screwing around again).

Only 33 out of 76 voted against the inquiry . . . . that's only 33 against 43. This is evidence of movement in our favour! . . . . . all it'll take now is more crimes Scn exposed, more deceit and violations of its charter and religiosity exposed, more bad press . . . and that is a given . . . and the "party system process" will have to give way.

I see a magazine in the US carrying a front cover story on TC's wife being "forced to have pre-natal processing and/or purification" for their second child . . . . with a very sour looking face for her picture.

Rog

:thumbsup:
 

Ladybird

Silver Meritorious Patron
This is from 1998, but I think it is relevant to what is happening in Australia right now.

Despite all the overwhelming current evidence and historical data about scientology abusing it's members and taking advantage of it's tax free status and obviously hiding behind it's false religious cloaking some Senators and members of Parliament are refusing to even investigate.

This makes me wonder: What does scientology have on these cowards? How is the cult shuddering them into silence?

Scientology's foolproof method of judge tampering
[September 30, 1998]

I recently spent about 20 hours interviewing a Scientology defector named Jesse Prince about his experiences in the leadership of Scientology. He was second in command of all Scientology's operations worldwide. In these conversations we talked about many of Scientology's covert criminal activities decreed by Scientology's top executives and law firms. One area of particular interest was how Scientology secretly tampers with judges and doesn't get caught.

I have already submitted to the FBI the names of certain judges who were tampered with, along with other information from my interviews with Jesse Prince , but I am somewhat conflicted about making this information public. On one hand, Scientology's judge-tampering tactics are so effective and ingenious that once they are public I believe other ruthless organizations will soon begin using them. On the other hand, to conceal these tactics would corrupt critical ongoing litigation involving Scientology around the world. Notwithstanding this conflict, I will continue.

To understand Scientology's methods of judge tampering, one must be aware of the `sacred scripture' behind Scientology's notorious intimidation tactics. It is called The Art of War by Sun Tzu. This text, written in China more than 2,400 years ago regarding the planning of military operations, has been adopted by Scientology as a training manual for its staff. Scientology requires its intelligence division to know the text inside and out.

The Art of War describes tactics of knowing one's adversary, especially knowing his or her connections and vulnerabilities. According to my conversations with Jesse Prince along with knowledge I have acquired elsewhere, here is how Scientology uses Art of War tactics to tamper with judges and get away with it.

Step 1: Collect information necessary to blackmail the judge
According to Jesse, EVERY judge that sits on a Scientology case is the target of two types of data collection by Scientology's private investigators and attorneys. One is `overt data collection,' or `ODC'; the other is `covert data collection,' or `CDC'.

In overt data collection, every source of legally-obtainable information on the judge is tapped, and a complete profile on the judge is assembled including legal rulings, legal documents, personal and professional connections, and life history. With little concern of the cost, the judge is researched in utmost detail: what the judge likes and dislikes, where the judge eats, drinks, and plays. The judge's past and present friends, acquaintances, and colleagues are interviewed for `friendly' or "near invisible" information gathering.

While or after over data collection is being done, covert data collection is done as well. This process involves the illegal acquisition of documentation on the judge, including tax returns, phone records, bank records, medical records, credit card records, and any other private records. Again, cost seems to be no concern. These records are minutely reviewed for anything that could be as a source of leverage over or embarrassment for the judge. They are looking for information to signal the judge that someone knows enough about his or her life to cause ruin.

In addition to compiling the above records, covert data collection can also include confrontational interviews (as opposed to the `friendly' interviews during overt data collection) with the judge's past and present connections. Investigators now delve much more deeply into the judge's personal habits, indiscretions, embarrassments, and/or family problems. Anyone holding a grudge against the judge is particularly courted for damaging information as well as referrals to others with ill will for the judge.

The type of information investigators seek includes anything and everything that could prove damaging or embarrassing for the judge, such as: credit charges for pornography or sex services, illegal money handling or financial problems, conflicts of interest within judicial duties, connections to unsavory characters, and family, marital, mental, or medical problems.

Step 2: Reveal damaging information to the judge without putting Scientology at risk for tampering
This step is the real genius of Scientology's foolproof method of judge tampering. Here, they hire new people to go to the judge's personal and professional connections. Through seemingly innocuous conversations, in seemingly safe settings, Scientology's messengers speak to the judge's former law partners, former clerks, friends, ex-wives, girlfriends, golf buddies, bartenders, etc.

In these meetings, two important messages are to be conveyed by Scientology's hired messengers to the person affiliated with the judge. One, the judge's connection is given some subtle but disturbing piece of secret information regarding the judge's private life. And two, during another part of the conversation, Scientology is mentioned. The Scientology messenger either makes favorable comments about Scientology, or mentions "by the way" that they heard the judge was handling a Scientology case and the judge should go easy on Scientology because Scientology is such a good religious group.

The reaction on the part of the judge's connection to the disturbing revelation and subtle promotion of Scientology is predictable. The connection gets in touch with the judge and inquires about the rumor. The judge likely wants to know who delivered the information and may or may not discover that Scientology came up in the discussion.

What makes this a truly powerful tactic for leveraging the judge is that rather than coming in one sudden single impact, it comes through a number of impacts, accumulating and compounding the distress caused to the judge. The judge will not hear potentially damaging information from only one acquaintance, but rather from many, interspersed over time, each relaying a different alarming personal secret. After a number of these calls, the judge begins to confirm fears that someone can expose vulnerable spots. Sooner or later the judge also discovers that a favorable discussion of Scientology is always associated with each of the disclosures to the judge's connections.

A clever aspect of this subtle leveraging tactic is that Scientology cannot be connected to it. No one from Scientology is delivering the messages to the judge. It is the judge's own connections who are duped into delivering Scientology's messages, via their personal and legitimate concern for the judge's well-being.

The judge is stymied too. Obviously, there is no basis for turning in the friends and former associates to the authorities. Although as a group they in effect have delivered a veiled threat to the judge, they acted of their own volition and out of friendship or professional concern for the judge, they had no idea they were working on behalf of Scientology, and no single person delivered a message of intimidation complete enough to be a clear and obvious effort to tamper with the judge. The individual messages have presented a threat so subtle, the judge can't bring it to the attention of the authorities without seeming foolish or paranoid.

Therein lies the brilliance of Scientology's judge-tampering procedures. Only through the accumulation of partial messages do all pieces of the puzzle spell the clear threat: `Go easy on Scientology or every secret of your life will be exposed.' The threat looms, and yet it isn't connected to Scientology. The judge can't do anything about it.

Part 3: Entrapment
If the above tactics do not seem to alter the judge's rulings so that they are more favorable to Scientology's interests, the next step to take is covert entrapment operations. By this point, Scientology has accumulated all the information needed to set up the judge in a `sting' operation. One of their favorites is the sex sting. Scientology once spent over $260,000 to set up a judge on a yacht in Florida with two prostitutes. For more information on Scientology entrapping judges, go to www.factnet.org/Scientology/adversa.htm (Scroll down to sections on judges).

Recently there have been some rulings so bizarre by judges in Scientology cases that even the Wall Street Journal wrote an editorial on how odd they seem (see www.rickross.com/reference/scientology/Scien54.html). Maybe there is more going on behind the scenes than we know. Hopefully judges currently sitting on Scientology cases around the world will read this, notify their clerks, and find some way not to let their judicial integrity be compromised by this ruthless cult.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This editorial opinion provided by FACTNet, Inc. FACTNet is a nonprofit Internet library dedicated to protecting freedom of mind from harms caused by destructive cults and mind control. FACTNet's web page, which is located at www.factnet.org and has received over 2.1 million hits since January 1997, is now equipped with a unique web crawler-based search engine capable of simultaneously searching every word on most Internet sites on cults and mind control with the click of the search button. For this information, it is no longer necessary to tediously visit hundreds of individual web sites. If you would like to subscribe to our free FACTNews newsletter please go to http://lists.factnet.org/mailman/listinfo/factnet-news ~ Appropriate re-distribution and re-posting of this document is appreciated.

http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/judge_tampering.html

http://www.rickross.com/reference/scientology/Scien54.html
 

Chess

Patron with Honors
Eric Abetz made me really cross. The fact that he seemed to think Scientologists have free recourse to the police and judiciary shows that he has not been hearing those speaking out and has no understanding of the strictures of Scientology.

Most of the abuses are not police issues. Am I seriously going to go to the police and say, "I worked 100 hours last week," if I am in a cult?

Why doesn't he simply require 'religious' organisations to abide by the same rules as other employers?

I thought he was mind-bogglingly out of touch with the issues at hand, and the mood of the electorate.

Even though stuff like this makes ya bum go tight :angry: there's indeed a wonderful aspect to all of this.
Parliament is actually arguing about the Scn Organisation! 10 years ago when most of us were shell shocked with the effects of the corrupt juggernaught and its beasties in B&W uniforms, solutions and exposure were few and far between and if anything were generally personal or minor - now they are mainstream and top headlines.
There is no doubt Zenophon is the key player here and while he cracks the whip the road forward looks pretty good. Patience for due process is required, politicians play by a weird set of rules centuries in the making - the system is complex and ruthless but predictable by those gifted or game enough to play in that arena but all you are seeing are literally set formulas for survival and towing the party line.
The $cn foundations have severe cracks with which every mention of that organisation at this level of societies (global) attention widens those cracks considerably.
They are squirming :nervous: in their braid and you better believe it.:dieslaughing:
 

Carmel

Crusader
It seems that things are looking up. If we can get those who didn't vote to grow some balls we would actually win. :yes:
With many, I don't think that it's just a matter of balls. The way the *system* works, there is a lot at stake, including many issues aside from this one. Things need to be put in place to get an end result..... I believe that this is occurring now.

Carmel, I was wondering if there was an investigation done by the police yet? Seems like someone said there would be.
Some specific things are being investigated by police, but much has gone past the statute of limitations and won't be.
 
Top