Oliver's Proof.

[Oliver]

You derailed it Oliver. The thread was about your silly conspiracy theory.


Which conspiracy theory? The cover-up concerning the saudi-connection still is a fact. I addressed the removed (blacked) Names in the commision report and the 9/11 congressional inquiry.

No one in here so far was able to get beyond these names - including me. All I have is Brisard and the "Golden Chain List". But until I understand all these people and if they are the same ones who were covered in the official investigations, I don't start a conspiracy theory about it. I'm not that type of Idiot who wants to get grilled without enough backing facts. :D

I hoped someone has more information - but I probably should ask at the LC-Forum because some in there looked deeper into it then people in here. The Problem is that Peolpe don't believe in Al Qaida as a real Terrorist Organization over there - otherwise it would have been much easier to differ between facts and fiction.

[Oliver]

And no US companies shipped any material or equipment that was used in the chemical attacks on the Kurds and Iran. End of story.

eta: and I still haven't heard an explanation about why Germany allowed chemical weapons materiel to be shipped to Iraq...


Wrong:
http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&q=rumsfeld+iraq+chemical+anthrax&btnG=Google+Search

(added):
"The US provided less conventional military equipment than British or German companies but it did allow the export of biological agents, including anthrax; vital ingredients for chemical weapons; and cluster bombs sold by a CIA front organisation in Chile, the report says."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,866942,00.html

The Hamburg Cell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg_cell).

Why did Germany allow this cell to operate for so long Oliver? Does this question bore you? By your standards of evidence, is this not direct proof of the German governmnents involvement in 9/11?


Germany observed them and their official excuse is that they didn't know enough to predict a terror-attack. They allegedly hadn't all necessary information.

Anyway: They shared the information with the US-Intelligence and gave several warnings that were pretty much ignored.

So my questions are - and maybe you address them yet:

1. What information do you think did Germany have that the US didn't about the Hamburg Cell?

2. Why were the Hijackers able to travel to the states - even if their Names were on Terror-Watch-lists?

3. Why was this Information handled improperly - meaning: without taking it more seriously in the United States?

[RandFan]

Which conspiracy theory? The cover-up concerning the saudi-connection still is a fact. I addressed the removed (blacked) Names in the commision report and the 9/11 congressional inquiry.

No one in here so far was able to get beyond these names - including me. All I have is Brisard and the "Golden Chain List". But until I understand all these people and if they are the same ones who were covered in the official investigations, I don't start a conspiracy theory about it. I'm not that type of Idiot who wants to get grilled without enough backing facts. :D

I hoped someone has more information - but I probably should ask at the LC-Forum because some in there looked deeper into it then people in here. The Problem is that Peolpe don't believe in Al Qaida as a real Terrorist Organization over there - otherwise it would have been much easier to differ between facts and fiction.Oliver,

Pure conspiracy theory. It's all been explained to you including the redaction. But like other troothers you simply reject the explanations.

[Oliver]

Oliver,

Pure conspiracy theory. It's all been explained to you including the redaction. But like other troothers you simply reject the explanations.


Let me try it this way because the discussion is going in circles:

The Saudis and the US are close partners concerning many interests. Fact.
The US helped the Saudis when Saddam was threatening these connections. Fact
Therefore the Saudis had a big interest to get Rid of Saddam and Invasion. Also fact, but I miss more information concerning details. (Never mentioned officially.)

-------------------------------------------

So here's a simple question a political skilled person should be able to answer if he's familiar with it:

What was the Saudis role concerning the Iraq invasion? And what concerning 9/11?

As a truther I would say: Hey, you know what? The Saudis pulled off 9/11 to start the war in Iraq. As someone critical I say that's pretty far-fetched - but concerning motives, it makes sense to some degree.

And no, I didn't make a final conclusion - I'm trying to find out what the connections were to get to a conclusion. That's why I hoped for some insights and help from skilled people in Politics. And I knew I wouldn't find helpful answers at /CT (Besides finding Pardalis complaining and reporting me. :p )

[gumboot]

Oh come on Oliver,

IRAQ AND 9/11 ARE UNRELATED!

-Gumboot

[RandFan]

sense to some degree.

And no, I didn't make a final conclusion - I'm trying to find out what the connections were to get to a conclusion. That's why I hoped for some insights and help from skilled people in Politics. And I knew I wouldn't find helpful answers at /CT (Besides finding Pardalis complaining and reporting me.)

I don't know.
That we don't know doesn't prove a damn thing.
Troothers are famous for that wink of the eye and cock of the head and asking questions about disparate data like you did.
Skeptics know that there aren't always answers.
If you find out please tell us.Until then that's it. End of story.

[RandFan]

BTW, let's keep in mind what this is all about.

Well, then be honest and explain these points to yourself:

Why were the Bin Ladens flown out?
When ended the Bin-Laden connections to the Bush family? (Did it end?)
Why are the Saudi connections blackened within the 9/11 investigations?
When ended the Saudi-Al Qaida connection? (Did it ever?)
Why is there no investigation concerning Saudi-Arabia?
How influential is the Saudi Money/Lobby within the US-System? (Speculative)

I will change my mind if you're able to give me some logical, factual explanations - so far I wasn't able to find positive answers.

This raises a couple of questions.

How can I honestly explain to myeslf something you don't even know?
What do you mean change your mind? Change your mind about what?

[Civilized Worm]

I care if I feel pissed about something that would affect my freedoms. But there are no such cases besides the Biometric Data that was pushed after 9/11. But I think that was a hype over here, too.


Really? How do you feel about Germany's laws against holocaust denial?


Honestly - I didn't investigate the British involvement yet because they didn't start the war based on lousy facts


Yes, we did: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodgy_Dossier

[Oliver]

Really? How do you feel about Germany's laws against holocaust denial?

Yes, we did: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodgy_Dossier


I'm opposed to intolerance - so even if I favor this law just because of that, it also makes sense concerning truthfulness. The Holocaust happened, just Idiots would deny it >>> Therefore it's not only a waste of time, but furthermore it's also some kind of libel to victims and relatives. >>> And libel IS against Free Speech - even in America. For good reasons, too.

Give it a try: Go to your next Police station and state that you like Jihadists and that Terrorism is a good Idea, you just would like to know how all these Bombs work they make in Iraq.

Of course, you will just do it because your right of Free Speech.
... and let's see if they respect your Free Speech or not.

And concerning Nazis: Watch this US-Nazi video, there are similar laws in the US concerning Nazis and Free Speech:

Skinheads USA:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3844699896127381386&hl=en

[Oliver]

Oh come on Oliver,

IRAQ AND 9/11 ARE UNRELATED!

-Gumboot


Nope, 9/11 kicked off Iraq. You know that. And you know that this was exactly the impression they made: "Yo, yo, yo: 9/11 = Terrorism ... Terrorism = Iraq". :boggled:

[Oliver]

This raises a couple of questions.
How can I honestly explain to myeslf something you don't even know?
What do you mean change your mind? Change your mind about what?


Look - the difference between you and me is that, for example, the Holocaust happened in my country, I wanted to know why. Now maybe many people in germany may not be interested in understanding "why?" nowadays. But my general experience with Patriotic People in here is, that they are not willing to question their own country. They don't care about "Whys" if it's embarrassing for them.

There is some widespread "It wasn't me" attitude in here: "Just wipe the dirt under the carpet" -type of mentality.

Or to say it more metaphorically:

"It was him!!! - No question, we suspected it and who needs missing facts anyway?"
"It was ME??? - That's BS, proof it, you are a liberal america-hater democrat socialist, evidence?"

:rolleyes:

[gumboot]

I'm opposed to intolerance - so even if I favor this law just because of that, it also makes sense concerning truthfulness. The Holocaust happened, just Idiots would deny it >>>



So you're saying you are opposed to intolerance, except with certain individuals whose beliefs or views you won't tolerate.

Do you not see a problem with that?




Give it a try: Go to your next Police station and state that you like Jihadists and that Terrorism is a good Idea, you just would like to know how all these Bombs work they make in Iraq.


Oliver, have you seen the documentary Obsession? In that documentary they have video of American Islamic Radicals, on the streets of New York, openly denouncing the United States and expressing a desire to replace US law with Islamic law. These people are not arrested. Because in America they actually believe in freedom. Real freedom. Not the "free as long as you don't say stuff that most of us don't like" version of freedom that you get in Europe.

I noticed just today that Germany has refused to allow Tom Cruise to film his new movie on government sites because of his religious beliefs. Way to shine the light of freedom...:rolleyes:




And concerning Nazis: Watch this US-Nazi video, there are similar laws in the US concerning Nazis and Free Speech:


Please cite which law forbids Americans from expressing support for a racist ideology.

YOUR country is the one demonstrating intolerance, Oliver. Freedom means freedom for everyone. Free Speech means free speech for everyone. Even the people you disagree with. Especially the people you disagree with.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

"It was ME??? - That's BS, proof it, you are a liberal america-hater democrat socialist, evidence?"

:rolleyes:



So you think the US Government was involved in the 9/11 attacks? Got it.

-Gumboot

[PhantomWolf]

Nope, 9/11 kicked off Iraq. You know that. And you know that this was exactly the impression they made: "Yo, yo, yo: 9/11 = Terrorism ... Terrorism = Iraq". :boggled:

Baloney. 9/11 was an EXCUSE to go after Iraq. Bushie had a mad-on for Saddam because Saddam tried to off his parents a few years eariler. He was going to take out Saddam with or without 9/11, 9/11 just gave him the excuse to get in there faster than he'd dreamed of doing it.

[Texas]

Baloney. 9/11 was an EXCUSE to go after Iraq. Bushie had a mad-on for Saddam because Saddam tried to off his parents a few years eariler. He was going to take out Saddam with or without 9/11, 9/11 just gave him the excuse to get in there faster than he'd dreamed of doing it. OR it could have been that during Clinton's term the United States had in place the formal policy of regime change in Iraq. That policy was endorsed by Clinton and almost every member of both houses of congress. I didn't vote for Clinton but I feel he was a pretty decent president. Had he not been accused of "wagging the dog" every time he used force he may have actually made stronger military moves against Iraq than he did. Yes 911 helped galvanize public support to take care of Saddam but I don't think Bush was just on a personal vendetta .

[Oliver]

So you're saying you are opposed to intolerance, except with certain individuals whose beliefs or views you won't tolerate.

Do you not see a problem with that?


No, I don't see a problem because facts are facts. If some loon says Gumboot is a reptile, no one will spend any more time discussing this issue with that loon. What's your take on that in terms of "tolerance"?

Nevertheless: You are allowed to discuss the "Holohoax", but you're simply not allowed to publish this lie anymore. And while you criticized the law concerning "tolerance", I see that you seem to agree with the "Libel-Factor" that justifies such a law, don't you? :confused:

Oliver, have you seen the documentary Obsession? In that documentary they have video of American Islamic Radicals, on the streets of New York, openly denouncing the United States and expressing a desire to replace US law with Islamic law. These people are not arrested. Because in America they actually believe in freedom. Real freedom. Not the "free as long as you don't say stuff that most of us don't like" version of freedom that you get in Europe.


No, I don't have a documentary obsession, but it's easier to remember them in contrast to URL's on the internet.

Anyway: We also have the basic law that you're allowed to demonstrate your opinion. But there are restrictions like in the US, for example: Start a demonstration that engages people to kill Bush. (As an extreme example.)

I noticed just today that Germany has refused to allow Tom Cruise to film his new movie on government sites because of his religious beliefs. Way to shine the light of freedom...:rolleyes:


Well, I saw that on "Olbermann", too - and it made me laugh because the Moral-Babbling about it here in Germany looked ridiculous. But even if I missed this discussion in the German Media so far, Scientology is no religion over here, simply because the treatment of their "Non-Prominent" members, social responsibility in general and their efforts to invade political positions (Like Clearwater, USA).

So no: Cruise has a nice cult - just like some truthers, that has nothing to do with a "religion defined by german laws".

Please cite which law forbids Americans from expressing support for a racist ideology.

YOUR country is the one demonstrating intolerance, Oliver. Freedom means freedom for everyone. Free Speech means free speech for everyone. Even the people you disagree with. Especially the people you disagree with.

-Gumboot


BS. I made the example about going to your next police station in the US. Once you're suspected to be a terrorist supporter, you will be observed and facing legal consequences, no matter if free speech or not. Wrong?

ETA: Just out of curiosity: Is Scientology a religion in New-Zealand? :confused:

[Elizabeth I]

Nevertheless: You are allowed to discuss the "Holohoax", but you're simply not allowed to publish this lie anymore. And while you criticized the law concerning "tolerance", I see that you seem to agree with the "Libel-Factor" that justifies such a law, don't you?

Oliver, "libel" is a form of defamation. "Defamation" is defined on Wikipedia as "the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government or nation." "Libel" is defamation "in a fixed medium, especially writing but also a picture, sign, or electronic broadcast."

If I write, "The Holocaust never happened and all those photographs and eyewitness accounts were just fakes," I look pretty stupid but it's hard to see how it would fall under any definition of libel. Whose reputation does it harm? (Besides mine, displaying my idiocy as it would if I made such a statement.) Yes, it's an untrue statement, and if I say it on purpose, knowing it's untrue, that makes it a lie, but just because something is a lie doesn't mean it's libel. So, no, I DON'T see that there is a "libel-factor that justifies such a law." Is it just flat against the law to lie in Germany? If so, your police must be busy.

Well, I saw that on "Olbermann", too - and it made me laugh because the Moral-Babbling about it here in Germany looked ridiculous. But even if I missed this discussion in the German Media so far, Scientology is no religion over here, simply because the treatening of their "Non-Prominent" members and their efforts to invade political positions.

So no: Cruise has a nice cult - just like some truthers, that has nothing to do with a "religion defined by german laws".

Okay, so because Tom Cruise (who is just a joke anymore as far as I'm concerned) belongs to a religion that Germany doesn't recognize as a religion, it's all right for the government to tell him he can't film there?

[Oliver]

Oliver, "libel" is a form of defamation. "Defamation" is defined on Wikipedia as "the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government or nation." "Libel" is defamation "in a fixed medium, especially writing but also a picture, sign, or electronic broadcast."

If I write, "The Holocaust never happened and all those photographs and eyewitness accounts were just fakes," I look pretty stupid but it's hard to see how it would fall under any definition of libel. Whose reputation does it harm? (Besides mine, displaying my idiocy as it would if I made such a statement.) Yes, it's an untrue statement, and if I say it on purpose, knowing it's untrue, that makes it a lie, but just because something is a lie doesn't mean it's libel. So, no, I DON'T see that there is a "libel-factor that justifies such a law." Is it just flat against the law to lie in Germany? If so, your police must be busy.

Okay, so because Tom Cruise (who is just a joke anymore as far as I'm concerned) belongs to a religion that Germany doesn't recognize as a religion, it's all right for the government to tell him he can't film there?


Honestly, I have no clue why the German government is playing on their "Morality-Flute" about it. I heard about it in the US-Media but missed the discussion, if there is a big one, over here.

So I can't answer your question until I know all arguments. What I CAN tell you is that Scientology is no religion over here. (In my last post, I updated the reasons why the German government decided this way.)

Concerning the law: You have to understand how people here think about the Holocaust. They are endlessly ashamed about it and there is no way to make up for it in terms of "make it forgotten". That's why it's a very unpopular issue to be confronted with a Fact that most people here accepted. And yes, we consider this as libel against jewish people who died or had relatives who died.

This may not be 100% correct in terms of "Freedom of Speech", but it's absolutely correct in terms of empathy and moral comprehension in Germany - and widely accepted this way.

[gumboot]

No, I don't see a problem because facts are facts. If some loon says Gumboot is a reptile, no one will spend any more time discussing this issue with that loon. What's your take on that in terms of "tolerance"?


But Oliver, here's the point. NO ONE WILL ARREST THEM FOR IT. Americans, and many other people around the world (myself included) are vehemently opposed to the notion of the Government being able to arrest someone purely for having said something. No matter who the person is, and what he said.

This is a the "idea" of freedom that I was talking about.

If Hitler the psychopathic scum himself arose from the dead, I would defend his right to say whatever he wanted. Laws should only dictate what people can do.




Nevertheless: You are allowed to discuss the "Holohoax", but you're simply not allowed to publish this lie anymore.


And that's wrong. It's in conflict with the values of freedom.




And while you criticized the law concerning "tolerance", I see that you seem to agree with the "Libel-Factor" that justifies such a law, don't you? :confused:


No, I don't. For starters, Libel is prohibited by civil law, not criminal law. The government cannot arrest you and throw you in jail for libel. The people you libel are allowed to sue you, but that's it. Secondly, if a holocaust survivor sued a holocaust denier for libel I seriously doubt they would win, because holocaust denial does not harm the reputation of the holocaust survivor.




No, I don't have a documentary obsession, but it's easier to remember them in contrast to URL's on the internet.

I was asking if you had watched a Documentary called "Obsession". It depicts the scenes I described.





Anyway: We also have the basic law that you're allowed to demonstrate your opinion. But there are restrictions like in the US, for example: Start a demonstration that engages people to kill Bush. (As an extreme example.)


I would be willing to bet money that the rights of demonstration are greater in the US than in Germany.




Well, I saw that on "Olbermann", too - and it made me laugh because the Moral-Babbling about it here in Germany looked ridiculous. But even if I missed this discussion in the German Media so far, Scientology is no religion over here, simply because the treatment of their "Non-Prominent" members, social responsibility in general and their efforts to invade political positions (Like Clearwater, USA).

So no: Cruise has a nice cult - just like some truthers, that has nothing to do with a "religion defined by german laws".


EXACTLY! Your government is dictating what people can and cannot do. The only difference between a cult and a religion is popularity. In most nations the government is absolutely not allowed to dictate what religions people can and cannot practise, and absolutely will not in any way punish or reward people for following a particular religion.

Not in Germany though. That is not freedom Oliver.




BS. I made the example about going to your next police station in the US. Once you're suspected to be a terrorist supporter, you will be observed and facing legal consequences, no matter if free speech or not. Wrong?


Once you're suspected of being a terrorist supporter, certainly. Because it's illegal in the USA. Just as it is in Germany. It's illegal under international law. But you're assuming the police would be convinced you were a suspect simply because you told them you were. More likely they'd do a quick background check, threaten to charge you with wasting police time, and tell you to go home.




ETA: Just out of curiosity: Is Scientology a religion in New-Zealand? :confused:


Oliver, Scientology IS a religion. Governments do not have the right to dictate what is and is not religion. Do people practise Scientology in New Zealand? I have no idea, and I don't care. I hope none of us are that stupid.

We have another religion in New Zealand, called Ringatu. (Maori: "Upraised Hand"). It was started by a Maori chief called Te Kooti who claimed Maori were the the lost thirteenth tribe of Israel. He used to put his hand in white phosphorus which made it glow, and convinced people he was a prophet. In their early days Ringatu fought battles with the Government because Te Kooti was an escaped rebel.

Yet the religion is allowed to be practiced by about 16,000 New Zealanders. Frankly I think the religion is totally ridiculous. But if my government ever tries to stop people from practicing that religion I'll be protesting loud and clear.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

Honestly, I have no clue why the German government is playing on their "Morality-Flute" about it. I heard about it in the US-Media but missed the discussion, if there is a big one, over here.

So I can't answer your question until I know all arguments. What I CAN tell you is that Scientology is no religion over here. (In my last post, I updated the reasons why the German government decided this way.)

Concerning the law: You have to understand how people here think about the Holocaust. They are endlessly ashamed about it and there is no way to make up for it in terms of "make it forgotten". That's why it's a very unpopular issue to be confronted with a Fact that most people here accepted. And yes, we consider this as libel against jewish people who died or had relatives who died.

This may not be 100% correct in terms of "Freedom of Speech", but it's absolutely correct in terms of empathy and moral comprehension in Germany - and widely accepted this way.




Maybe Germans just like being supressed?

Oliver, if you actually valued freedom, you would be outraged at how Scientology is treated in Germany. The Government spies on them, a German official in Switzerland was arrested for spying on Scientologist there, Germany banned Windows 2000 because the CEO of a company that developed a defrag used by the programme was a Scientologist, the US State Department has repeatedly reported on German discrimination against the religion, there has been complaints at the United Nations Human Rights Committee, and in Hamburg there's a special task force just for spying on the local Scientologists there.

If my government was doing that to a bunch of religious idiots here in New Zealand I would be furious. This has been going on for YEARS and yet you don't even seem to be aware of it, let alone care.

And yet you get very vocal at the slightest hint of the US Government doing anything wrong. Why don't you address your own Government, Oliver? And leave Americans to address theirs.

If anything, it's Germany where freedom is a joke. Not the USA.

-Gumboot

[Oliver]

But Oliver, here's the point. NO ONE WILL ARREST THEM FOR IT. Americans, and many other people around the world (myself included) are vehemently opposed to the notion of the Government being able to arrest someone purely for having said something. No matter who the person is, and what he said.

This is a the "idea" of freedom that I was talking about.

If Hitler the psychopathic scum himself arose from the dead, I would defend his right to say whatever he wanted. Laws should only dictate what people can do.

And that's wrong. It's in conflict with the values of freedom.

No, I don't. For starters, Libel is prohibited by civil law, not criminal law. The government cannot arrest you and throw you in jail for libel. The people you libel are allowed to sue you, but that's it. Secondly, if a holocaust survivor sued a holocaust denier for libel I seriously doubt they would win, because holocaust denial does not harm the reputation of the holocaust survivor.

I was asking if you had watched a Documentary called "Obsession". It depicts the scenes I described.

I would be willing to bet money that the rights of demonstration are greater in the US than in Germany.

EXACTLY! Your government is dictating what people can and cannot do. The only difference between a cult and a religion is popularity. In most nations the government is absolutely not allowed to dictate what religions people can and cannot practise, and absolutely will not in any way punish or reward people for following a particular religion.

Not in Germany though. That is not freedom Oliver.

Once you're suspected of being a terrorist supporter, certainly. Because it's illegal in the USA. Just as it is in Germany. It's illegal under international law. But you're assuming the police would be convinced you were a suspect simply because you told them you were. More likely they'd do a quick background check, threaten to charge you with wasting police time, and tell you to go home.

Oliver, Scientology IS a religion. Governments do not have the right to dictate what is and is not religion. Do people practise Scientology in New Zealand? I have no idea, and I don't care. I hope none of us are that stupid.

We have another religion in New Zealand, called Ringatu. (Maori: "Upraised Hand"). It was started by a Maori chief called Te Kooti who claimed Maori were the the lost thirteenth tribe of Israel. He used to put his hand in white phosphorus which made it glow, and convinced people he was a prophet. In their early days Ringatu fought battles with the Government because Te Kooti was an escaped rebel.

Yet the religion is allowed to be practiced by about 16,000 New Zealanders. Frankly I think the religion is totally ridiculous. But if my government ever tries to stop people from practicing that religion I'll be protesting loud and clear.

-Gumboot


We have a different world view on that, A - but that's completely okay for me.
Maybe you like to review my argumentations in JREF/Politics on these matters.

[gumboot]

We have a different world view on that, A - but that's completely okay for me.



It's obviously not okay by you, because you constantly criticise the USA on this exact subject. Until you understand how important these values are to Americans, you will never understand their culture. I suggest you read the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. And I mean really read them. Read them and truly think about what they are actually saying.

-Gumboot

[PhantomWolf]

Oliver, Scientology IS a religion. Governments do not have the right to dictate what is and is not religion. Do people practise Scientology in New Zealand? I have no idea, and I don't care. I hope none of us are that stupid.

Unfortunately there are some, I'd link to their webpage, but it seems to have developed a Body Thetan problem. ;)

[Oliver]

Maybe Germans just like being supressed?

Oliver, if you actually valued freedom, you would be outraged at how Scientology is treated in Germany. The Government spies on them, a German official in Switzerland was arrested for spying on Scientologist there, Germany banned Windows 2000 because the CEO of a company that developed a defrag used by the programme was a Scientologist, the US State Department has repeatedly reported on German discrimination against the religion, there has been complaints at the United Nations Human Rights Committee, and in Hamburg there's a special task force just for spying on the local Scientologists there.

If my government was doing that to a bunch of religious idiots here in New Zealand I would be furious. This has been going on for YEARS and yet you don't even seem to be aware of it, let alone care.

And yet you get very vocal at the slightest hint of the US Government doing anything wrong. Why don't you address your own Government, Oliver? And leave Americans to address theirs.

If anything, it's Germany where freedom is a joke. Not the USA.

-Gumboot


No, "Clearwater" controlled by Scientology is a joke. Get familiar with it before you understand what the decision in Germany was about.


There are no restrictions if there is a religion - but I have to admit that I have to review the german definition of "Religion" to fully understand why Scientology is no religion by this definition. Nevertheless, I understand the constitutional concern which is: Religion and Government are two different issues. Any interference concerning interventions in political decisions is prohibited - which is one of the main reasons why Germany is very opposed to Scientology: "You want to believe in aliens? Fine. But don't exploit your members and don't try to undermine the political system".

Here's Wikipedia's summing:

Germany

In Germany (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany) Scientologist are free to practice. The German administrative courts and appeals courts have consistently held that the Scientology is to be afforded protection under the German Constitution.[123] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-RESOLUTION) But the church is considered a commercial business association and with no tax exemption. Scientology's attempts to be recognized as a church by courts have been without success. [136] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-112)[137] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-113)[138] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-114). Scientology is currently being monitored by some German intelligence agencies for perceived anti-constitutional ideology. [139] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-115) In the city of Hamburg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg), the Scientology Task Force for the Hamburg Interior Authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_Task_Force_for_the_Hamburg_Interior_Au thority) also monitors the group.
The US State Department's has repeatedly reported on Germany for government and societal discrimination against minority religious groups and Scientology. [140] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-116)[141] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-117) On June 2000, the U.S. House of Representatives held hearings concerning Germany's discrimination against American Products based on religion.[142] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-118)[143] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-119) Most notable was Germany's boycott of Windows 2000 because a defrag program used by Windows was developed by an American company whose CEO is a Scientologist.[144] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-120)
On Nov 1999, a German official was arrested in Switzerland and given a 30 day suspended jail sentence for spying on Scientology. The German government apologized to Switzerland for the incident.[145] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-121)
On Dec 2001, Administrative Court in Berlin ruled against the Berlin Office for the Protection of the Constitution and ordered it to stop the recruitment and deployment of staff and members of the Church of Scientology Berlin as paid informants. The court ruled that the use of informants was disproportionate. [146] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-122)
Germany's handling of Scientology has also been called into question before open hearings of the United Nations Human Rights Committee. The hearings ended up without any consequences or criticism from the Comittee regarding Germany's handling of Scientology. [147] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-123)
In March 2007, it was reported that Scientology had opened a new headquarters in Berlin, and that German authorities were responding by increasing their efforts to monitor Scientology.[148] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology#_note-124)

[Oliver]

Even you know what "Protection of the Constitution" is about, don't you, Gumboot?

[gumboot]

Even you know what "Protection of the Constitution" is about, don't you, Gumboot?


Oh so now the German Government is targetting Scientology because they're a political group?

Oh that's okay then. :rolleyes:

-Gumboot

[Oliver]

Oh so now the German Government is targetting Scientology because they're a political group?

Oh that's okay then. :rolleyes:

-Gumboot


:boggled:

Just for you, A. :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy


1 Church of Scientology dealing with critics and perceived enemies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Church_of_Scientology_deal ing_with_critics_and_perceived_enemies)
1.1 Alleged abuse of Copyright and Trademark laws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Alleged_abuse_of_Copyright _and_Trademark_laws)
1.2 "Attack the Attacker" policy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#.22Attack_the_Attacker.22_ policy)
1.3 Fair Game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Fair_Game)
1.4 "Dead agenting" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#.22Dead_agenting.22)
2 Criminal behavior and allegations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Criminal_behavior_and_alle gations)
3 Allegations of mistreatment of members (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Allegations_of_mistreatmen t_of_members)
3.1 Lisa McPherson and the "Introspection Rundown" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Lisa_McPherson_and_the_.22 Introspection_Rundown.22)
3.2 Brainwashing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Brainwashing)
3.3 Disconnection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Disconnection)
3.4 Abuse of donations and preferential treatment of celebrities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Abuse_of_donations_and_pre ferential_treatment_of_celebrities)
4 The legitimacy of Scientology as a religion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#The_legitimacy_of_Scientol ogy_as_a_religion)
4.1 L. Ron Hubbard and starting a religion for money (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#L._Ron_Hubbard_and_startin g_a_religion_for_money)
4.1.1 Free Zone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Free_Zone)
5 The Church of Scientology's replies to its critics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#The_Church_of_Scientology. 27s_replies_to_its_critics)
6 References (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#References)
7 External links (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#External_links)
7.1 Church of Scientology views (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Church_of_Scientology_view s)
7.2 Opposing views (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy#Opposing_views)

[Oliver]

And to add to this anti-religious "German" intolerance:

Many governments (including Belgium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgium), Russia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia), Greece (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greece), France (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France), Germany (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany), the United Kingdom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom) and Spain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spain)) reject the Church of Scientology's claims to be a legitimate religious organization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion-supporting_organization); it has been variously judged to be a commercial enterprise or a dangerous cult (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult) (see the list of alleged cults (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_purported_cults#Alleged_cults)).

[gumboot]

And to add to this anti-religious "German" intolerance:

Many governments (including Belgium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgium), Russia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia), Greece (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greece), France (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France), Germany (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany), the United Kingdom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom) and Spain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spain)) reject the Church of Scientology's claims to be a legitimate religious organization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion-supporting_organization); it has been variously judged to be a commercial enterprise or a dangerous cult (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult) (see the list of alleged cults (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_purported_cults#Alleged_cults)).



And how many of the governments of those countries suppress or spy on members of the religion, or boycott products because members of the religion were involved in creation of the product, or spy on members of the religion in other countries?

Because all of the other countries that do things similar to the things above, also, are not free countries.

-Gumboot

[Oliver]

And how many of the governments of those countries suppress or spy on members of the religion, or boycott products because members of the religion were involved in creation of the product, or spy on members of the religion in other countries?

Because all of the other countries that do things similar to the things above, also, are not free countries.

-Gumboot


Quite frankly: I don't know other countries stance on that. Why did the New-Zealand ignore constitutional doubts about Scientology? Didn't they addressed it at all? :confused: Or were they "bought" on this issue? Was there any controversy at all in NZ, and if so, what was it?

[gumboot]

Quite frankly: I don't know other countries stance on that. Why did the New-Zealand ignore constitutional doubts about Scientology? Didn't they addressed it at all? :confused: Or were they "bought" on this issue? Was there any controversy at all in NZ, and if so, what was it?



I have no idea what you are talking about. What are "constitutional doubts"?

(By the way, New Zealand doesn't have a constitution).

-Gumboot

[Oliver]

I have no idea what you are talking about. What are "constitutional doubts"?

(By the way, New Zealand doesn't have a constitution).

-Gumboot


You know what I meant: I was talking about if there were any doubts before legalizing Scientology as a religion. Or did they just say: "Hey, we're Scientology, a new religion" and New-Zealand's reply was: "Hey, cool - you're in".

Anyway: I go to bed now. :blush:

[gumboot]

You know what I meant


No, I didn't. I had no idea.




: I was talking about if there were any doubts before legalizing Scientology as a religion.


In a free society governments do not "legalise" religions.




Or did they just say: "Hey, we're Scientology, a new religion" and New-Zealand's reply was: "Hey, cool - you're in".



No. New Zealanders are free to practise whatever religion they wish. They do not need approval from our government.

That's because New Zealand is a free country.

-Gumboot

[PhantomWolf]

You know what I meant: I was talking about if there were any doubts before legalizing Scientology as a religion. Or did they just say: "Hey, we're Scientology, a new religion" and New-Zealand's reply was: "Hey, cool - you're in".

Anyway: I go to bed now. :blush:

Not sure if it answers the question, but from what I can find to qualify as a religion in New Zealand the group must:

Have the belief in a supernatural being, thing or principle and the acceptance of certain canons of conduct in order to give effect to that belief.

and to be consider a Religious Charity they must:

be involved in the advancement of any religious doctrine which is the promotion of spiritual teaching in a wide sense.

if that is at all helpful. It would seem that NZ law is pretty open on the situation (though NZ Statistics still won't accept Jedi as a religion for the Census form. However perhaps if someone actually activity created a Jedi church then they would....)

[chillzero]

I am not going to go back through and trim out this discussion, but after this post please take the discussion of scientology in Germany to this thread:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=85758
Thanks.

[Oliver]

I am not going to go back through and trim out this discussion, but after this post please take the discussion of scientology in Germany to this thread:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=85758
Thanks.



Appreciated, Chillzero. Thanks for the heads up.

And while this has nothing to do with Scientology but the discussion I had with Gumboot, which will also be my last reply on this "religious" issue because it's pretty off-topic to the thread and subforum:

This made me laugh concerning freedom of religion, Gumboot:

New Zealand Cult List
http://www.cults.co.nz/

[Civilized Worm]

I'm opposed to intolerance - so even if I favor this law just because of that, it also makes sense concerning truthfulness. The Holocaust happened, just Idiots would deny it >>> Therefore it's not only a waste of time, but furthermore it's also some kind of libel to victims and relatives. >>> And libel IS against Free Speech - even in America. For good reasons, too.

Making incorrect statements is not libel.


Give it a try: Go to your next Police station and state that you like Jihadists and that Terrorism is a good Idea, you just would like to know how all these Bombs work they make in Iraq.

There are plenty of lunatics saying just that, they only get charged for incitement to violence.


Of course, you will just do it because your right of Free Speech.
... and let's see if they respect your Free Speech or not.

This makes no sense. I have the right to have sexual intercourse with another man but I'm not going to because I don't want to.


No, I don't see a problem because facts are facts. If some loon says Gumboot is a reptile, no one will spend any more time discussing this issue with that loon. What's your take on that in terms of "tolerance"?

So we should lock them up for saying that?


Anyway: We also have the basic law that you're allowed to demonstrate your opinion. But there are restrictions like in the US, for example: Start a demonstration that engages people to kill Bush. (As an extreme example.)

That's incitement which is quite different.


BS. I made the example about going to your next police station in the US. Once you're suspected to be a terrorist supporter, you will be observed and facing legal consequences, no matter if free speech or not. Wrong?

What part of "Glasgow, Scotland" don't you understand? I agree that there have been many unjustified arrests against supposed "terrorists" and I object to them. However I also object to the arrest of holocaust deniers because I am not a hypocrite


Concerning the law: You have to understand how people here think about the Holocaust. They are endlessly ashamed about it and there is no way to make up for it in terms of "make it forgotten". That's why it's a very unpopular issue to be confronted with a Fact that most people here accepted. And yes, we consider this as libel against jewish people who died or had relatives who died.

Most americans feel bad about slavery but they don't take away the rights of racists to try and make it up to black people.


This may not be 100% correct in terms of "Freedom of Speech", but it's absolutely correct in terms of empathy and moral comprehension in Germany - and widely accepted this way.

What's moral about persecuting people for their beliefs?

[PhantomWolf]

Appreciated, Chillzero. Thanks for the heads up.

And while this has nothing to do with Scientology but the discussion I had with Gumboot, which will also be my last reply on this "religious" issue because it's pretty off-topic to the thread and subforum:

This made me laugh concerning freedom of religion, Gumboot:

New Zealand Cult List
http://www.cults.co.nz/

How does a private website being run from what looks like a Christian point of view got anything to do with New Zealand's freedom of religion?

[gumboot]

This made me laugh concerning freedom of religion, Gumboot:

New Zealand Cult List
http://www.cults.co.nz/


What makes me laugh is how incompetent your research abilities are:

The NZ Cult List was started on 11 September 1999 by Ian Mander as a list of cults operating in New Zealand.

...

The list will be of most use to Christians in New Zealand, as the list entries have been written from a Christian perspective with New Zealanders in mind.

From their About Page (http://www.cults.co.nz/about.php)

For what it's worth, Ian Mander is not even a Member of the New Zealand House of Representatives (http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/MPP/MPs/MPs/), let alone a member of the current government.

-Gumboot

[PhantomWolf]

I thought Oliver might find this amusing (http://www.ejpress.org/article/news/germany/11173) since he believes that Germany doesn't have overly oppresive laws.

[PhantomWolf]

For what it's worth, Ian Mander is not even a Member of the New Zealand House of Representatives (http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/MPP/MPs/MPs/), let alone a member of the current government.

There isn't even any evidence that he's a member of or even voted for the current Government in fact the odds are he didn't. (I base this on the fact that most of the Christian votes go to the Right and we have a left wing Government.)

[Corsair 115]

So, to summarize Oliver's point, it would be:

America = bad.

Have I got that straight? Or is there more nuance to his argument that I'm not seeing?

[Oliver]

So, to summarize Oliver's point, it would be:

America = bad.

Have I got that straight? Or is there more nuance to his argument that I'm not seeing?


No, you didn't get it straight - but I wrote a good summing some days ago:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=84158&page=6

[Overman]

^Ummm....you have no posts on that page.

[Oliver]

^Ummm....you have no posts on that page.


I see two replies from me on page six of this thread - and the link also works. :confused:

[gumboot]

I see two replies from me on page six of this thread - and the link also works. :confused:

They're on page 7 (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=84158&page=7).

-Gumboot

[Calcas]

They're on page 7 (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=84158&page=7).

-Gumboot

So, if I can summarize.

"I don't have a problems with 'Americans, per se', it's your government that's [Rule 8] up."

Pretty vanilla sentiment.

Who doesn't think their government is screwing at least something up?

[Civilized Worm]

I don't like any governments, especially not governments that imprison people for their views such as the german government.