The fact you're trying to avoid, and granted it is an unfortunate one, is that at least in the eyes of the US legal system the Scientology cult is considered a religion today and it's members are afforded those protections under the US Civil Rights Act of 1964.
No, Herro's silly little point he's belabouring, is that NOT EVERY Scientologist is a mindless ronbot who would break the law if ordered. Statistically, he's probably right, which will thrill him I'm sure. But I have seen Scientologists, regular public, shut down and turn away from Tory as if she has cooties. This is the same thing that controls family disconnection and unsavory behavior. Couple that with the utter incompetence of their belief system, and you come up with a construct that probably shouldn't be driving cars. They're too distracted, changing traffic signals with their mind, directing road debris, and keeping the thetans out of the carbs. Seriously, the whole belief system is skewed from reality enough that heavy machinery and sharp things should be made unavailable to them. Because over all, the majority of them are under some kind of control, or they would've blown by now.
If the US hadn't been sucking Cult Cock for years, this wouldn't even be an issue. But the IRS didn't have the balls to stick by its convictions, and now here we are, in a world where the abuses the Headleys suffered can be excused under a ministerial exemption. Fuck you, America, and your colossal institutionalised faggotry
Boris, you are an idiot. The ColdFusion that Aden is involved in is a COMPUTER PROGRAM. It has nothing do do with fusion or fission or nuclear material. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ColdFusion "In computing, ColdFusion is a commercial rapid application development platform invented by Jeremy and JJ Allaire in 1995. Originally designed to make it easier to connect simple HTML pages to a database, by version 2 (1996) it had become a full platform that included an IDE in addition to a "full" scripting language. As of 2010, versions of ColdFusion (sold by Adobe Systems from 2005) include advanced features for enterprise integration and development of rich Internet applications (RIA)."
A few scattered incidents is hardly sufficient grounds for discriminating against an entire group. I'm just going to keep saying that until it sinks in.
A "few" scattered incidents? Im just going to bang my head against a brick wall till my brain leaks out.
Yes, there are numerous instances of the church controlling its members but I know of only such control used for "internal" reasons; i.e. to not publicly attack the church, to not stop another from doing Scientoloigy, perhaps to remain in the Sea Org, etc. I know of zero, nada, zip instances where a member was coerced to do something "external" that would even come close to compromising national security. There are obviously instances where such excesses were done but there is not mention of coercion involved, just zealots practicing zealotry.
And those instances are very scattered and perhaps historical - name one since "Snow White" that had anything to do with anything that could be termed national security.
We don't know that they are "scattered and perhaps historical", only that the reports are. Many only come to light from ex-members years later and finally tell what they were involved in. And what is this crock of an argument that "nothing recent involved national security"? That's like saying that since Davie beats people up, but probably hasn't killed anyone, that it's okay. But hey, I'll name one since the (ongoing) Operation Snow White: Greece.
The only thing I can find that ties Mr Aden to NRC is: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/dave-anderson-anderson-dave-gmail-com/1/307/874 Looks like NRC contracted out to Webworld to build them a web site. The comments about "Cold Fusion" being web design technology, not high-energy physics are accurate. Boris: sry. You goofed the floof there. Still, Webworld looks very (extremely) likely to be a WISE business. It employs several Scientologists. Possibly non-CoS as well. I would be concerned about them having access to things they aren't properly cleared for, but the way the NRC operates I would imagine they're pretty well walled off from access to anything sensitive. It might depend on what security clearances Aden and his creepy crawlies hold. Worming his way into NRC, angling for "elevation of privileges" seems like typical Scientology sleaze. NRC tends to be careful with their own junk, and Webworld getting caught with their hands on NRC's private junk would not end well for Webworld. Not CoS per se, but Aden for sure. Webworld writing shoddy code, overcharging the government, sending money to Flag, freaking out when a former co-worker stops by to pick up their severance check, and failure to an hero - are what concern me the most.
Web monkeys padding out their portfolio by exaggerating the importance of their contracts isn't restricted to Scientologists.
It's because there are over a billion Muslims outside of al-Qaeda, the Nation of Islam, and other hate groups, while there's only a small handful of Scientologists outside of the Church of Scientology, and of those, even fewer have been found guilty of criminal activities. Do I trust them? Not any farther than I could throw them with my unibrow. Is that sufficient grounds to discriminate against them in violation of the law? No.
No. He / she is appealing to the lack of evidence of systemic criminality which would be grounds to discriminate. If you have evidence that would make it reasonable to discriminate in job hiring, do share.
You mean that stack of evidence of how successfully CoS manipulates its members that you have been ignoring for every thread you infested? Get a new record Herro.
You guys are debating belief vs. group affiliation so far, but let me point something out here: "Loyalties" is an operative word here, perhaps even more so than just group membership in an extremist group with a history of infiltration and criminality. Christians, Muslims, Hindus, or Jews don't generally keep audio and video recordings of you confessing to your most embarrassing things in your life, to be used for potential blackmail. If I remember correctly, the fact that auditing leaves a paper/audio/video trail is one of the reasons why it's been hard for Scientologists (at least before) to get security clearances. If you want a security clearance, you can't have anyone have that sort of potential pressure against you. Actually, the best way to get a clearance would be to confess what you've done publicly, because then you can't be blackmailed about those matters anymore. Sounds stupid, but it's logical. Smoked pot in your youth? No problem son. Lied about smoking pot on your security clearance form? Sorry, no job for you. Also, what AnonVix said.
Unlike the mafia and terror groups you have cited, it is mainly their leaders/middle management and the more unhinged members who have been proven guilty of crimes recognizable by the courts of several governments. The average public getting regged to death right now has likely not done worse than a traffic violation, in part because many of them are too fucking tired to. Their leaders and those with some power in the Church of Scientology, and I would be willing to wager even the remaining Scilebritards, have some pretty nasty stuff in their closet, though even the last would require proof before it would have any bearing in the sense you would like it to. Would I trust a Scientologist? No further than I could throw them with my unibrow. Is that sufficient grounds to discriminate against them? No.
As long as that Scientologist does not allow his or her personal beliefs to influence his or her ability to carry on his or her duties, then it's not an issue. If it becomes an issue than that's a perfectly legitimate reason to not hire that person or to fire him or her. It would be similar to not hiring a pious Muslim to work at a bar because he or she refuses to handle alcohol.
A better analogy would be a member of a mafia family working in the prosecutor's office. We're talking about Scientology as an organization with a hold over its members here - not people who just happen to believe in Hubbard. Islam as a whole is far less hierarchical and controlling than the CoS is. Even al-Qaeda doesn't control its members. That automatically means not being a member of good standing. So independent Scientologist - might be fine. Controlled member of the "Church" of Scientology in "Good standing"- not fine, and a risk to patients. You already know this though, so responding here is only good for passing the time.
The fact that our government is stupid and employs members of CO$ in sensative positions does nor mean we should applaud it. Chances are we will have another affair, theft, destruction of classified documents and eventually espionage acts and money for secrets deals with unfriendly regimes. Every government tries to keep weirdos away from infiltrating their offices, plants producing weaponry, banking records, accounts etc.Communication is an important tool within governmental offices and can be used to do a lot of damage to the society at large, industry and defense systems. Stay safe and keep CO$ members away from all the above. BK
Of course he would, but that's not the crux of the issue. OSA officers aren't the only ones doing OSA work - regular public Scientologists who are doing amends or who are doing their required "volunteer" work also get drafted into OSA ops by their local org's Director of Special Affairs from time to time. So all Scientologists in good standings are liable to betray you unless they have a steel clad integrity and are more loyalty to you than Scientology, and there no blackmail potential is in their files. There have indeed been some such Scientologists, but you it's hard to tell them apart from the others until they speak out publicly or are thrown out for refusing to betray you. I have tons of respect for those Scientologists, and in fact they may be in the majority, but not in a majority inside the CoS.
So, in a time and place where the Church of Scientology views the government as an enemy of the group (Church of Scientology), it has only to declare a member of the Church who holds a position in the government to be in the Ethics condition of liability and that member will have no choice but to strike a blow against the government or face the consequences of being out-ethics (being labled PTS or SP, disconnection, etc...) Is the government considered an enemy by the "100% standard tech" of the Church of Scientology?
So we should keep Scientologists under constant surveillance at work to see if it ever becomes an issue.
who knows where they are right now gathering confidential in govt agencies around the world...HERE WE GO OSA!
FACT. I would NEVER knowingly hire a scientologist. IF I found I had hired one I would find a way to let them go. As a group they have shown their willingness to follow unethical illegal orders, and a brainwashed employee can't possibly be a good thing. Yes, I would discriminate. For the good of all of us. Perhaps if it was just a convenience store, or a boutique..but then they'd have access to credit card information of customers and that might prove too tempting the next time the bridge bill comes due. Perhaps landscaping, or auto mechanic.... I could never conscientiously give a job in banking (for example) or in the airline industry, computer or IT industry. There are a lot of things I would avoid in hiring, a drug addict, alcoholic, gambler...same difference. They're all addicted to something and need money to pay it off, they are then vulnerable to blackmail or pressures from their cult. Yes I would discriminate. I have YET to meet an ethical clam. That would be like hiring a priest in a day care center.
everybody keeps saying the same things over and over again. The majority of people in this thread are saying that all scientologists are security risks either because of their beliefs or because they can be easily coerced into subverting the governmnet. And then a small handful of people, including me, ask for evidence to support this claim. And evidence is not shown. And I still find it somewhat disturbing that a group of people claiming to fight for important rights, is so willing to deny those same rights to others based upon fear and bigotry. And here's a thought, has anyone ever stopped to wonder what your typical scientologist thinks of all of this? Oh wait, they're all liars, right? You can't trust what they tell you because of Tone 40 or whatever that thing is. And, because it's always entertaining to me, it's time to play my favorite game:
Herro, it is possible to quote Scientology policy --not "beliefs," but instructions, imperatives dictated to members by recognized leaders in the organization. Some Scientologists are members in good standing; some are merely passing through; some are ex-members. Those in good standing, by definition, accept the group's policies. Insofar as a Scientologist is a member in good standing, he must be held responsible for the group's policies. If he or she is unhappy with that responsibility, he should resign his membership. A Scientologist who claims discrimination on the basis of Scientology policies just wants to have his cake and eat it too. He outs himself a manipulator, which gives us even less reason to trust him as a fellow citizen.
