Comments:Church of Scientology warns Wikileaks over documents

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Well done by wikileaks to keep up with ensuring documents of all kinds that expose governments, cults or corrupt corporations be freely and easily available to the public. 00:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The approach taken by wikinews to countering Scientology and its minions is correctEdit

I congratulate Wikinews for taking this bold approach to countering the legal threats sent in by Scientology. This move could result in CoS revising its methods of dealing with copyright on their documents.

The threat that this disclosure of the scientology documents poses to CoS cannot be underestimated because it makes it difficult for CoS to oppress its members if information about their beliefs and their methods is exposed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikinews is not affiliated with Wikileaks ... --SVTCobra 23:33, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That is so awesome. Xenu will be so mad at you.  ::shivers:: It looked to me like a legal threat and commends to wikileaks to show some backbone and fight back with the ultimate comeback. South Park explained scientology perfectly.. these thousands of documents won't mean anything to anyone but gape-mouthed scientologists. Down with legal threats!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Digg effectEdit

I apologize to Wikileaks now for bringing down their servers because of At 3:30 a.m. eastern time, Wikinews went on the front page of digg. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 08:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


YESSSS! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Church of Scientology - what a bunch of ibecilesEdit

Church of Scientology - what a bunch of ibeciles —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Might want to check your spelling there. 15:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Lulzfactory

Good for wikiEdit

more pain for the fake church of runninig members lives. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


Looks like they got taken down one way or another. Loads blank page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


..FACK EM! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)




Wtg Wikileaks! Fephisto - (talk) 01:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Where there is smoke .. you will find a lawyer!Edit

As with so many of the fantastically corrupt scenarios that cram newspapers all over the world, this organization seem to believe that 'the truth will NOT set you free'! Religion is and has always been a really handy way to con people! How great is it that we are now in a position to expose it for what it really is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

There is something of a large difference between a religion and a cult. One easy way to tell them apart is that religions love to spread their beliefs around; only cults want to hide them. You don't see Christians suing over there being unauthorized copies of their religious "tech" in every motel room in America, do you? That's hint #1...  ;) --on WP as user:Kasreyn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


Bwahahahahaha suckers...

It came to me in a dream...Edit

...and I don't care if I get the credit for having the idea that finally brought CoS down.

It's very simple. Here's the new rule:

If you want to be a tax-exempt religious organization in the USA, you can't be a for-profit organization, and you can't have any IP (intellectual property) - everything goes public domain.

No valid religion would be harmed by either of those requirements. Only cults would.

Save your applause and write your reps! :P --on WP as User:Kasreyn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Where's the Beef?Edit

I really fail to understand why so many people are so hostile to the so-called Church of Scientology. It's not really a church in the usual sense, of course, and maybe that's not a bad thing? People are entitled to believe what the want to believe. After all, a whole lot of people believe that 2000 years ago a guy died and rose from the dead after three days and then ascended to heaven and is gonna come back and whup up on everybody who doesn't believe it at some point. That's pretty far out in my opinion. The bad thing is that the people who believe that nonsense are mostly the ones in charge of this planet and have a lot to answer for.

So why don't all these people with these do-gooder impulses start working over the groups that back crazy presidents who start wars over mythical WMDs and kill millions because god told him to. So far, I haven't seen the Scientologists doing anything like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not Scientology that people have a problem with, it's a problem with the Church of Scientology 14:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
The CO$ tried to censor the internet. The internetz got pissed off. That's basically why Anon is after the CO$. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

C.O.S. isn't making it any easier...Edit

I, as a full supporter of anon, will cower slightly in fear of my life while saying “GO WIKILEAKS!”. Like I have previously stated, I support anon, and as such, believe the C.O.S. (Church of Scientology) is, for the thousandth time, overreacting when people don’t have to pay $600 before reading church documents. I fully support Wikileaks and will rejoice when the internet explodes when they release these “millions of C.O.S. documents”. The fact that people are actually reacting and paying attention to this news simply means that anonymous is winning this “war”. By “requesting” that Wikileaks take of the Church documents, the C.O.S. is simply digging a deeper grave for themselves. After the incident of taking videos of youtube, the Church doesn’t need another excuse for people to call “breaking of the right to free speech”…again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Bravo!! Wikileaks continue, to resist the greed of this satanic octopus organization, if your effort can save only a life of a vulnerable youngster, you have accomplished a “miracle”. Thank you. Rene 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rene000000 (talkcontribs) 08:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Bravo!! Wikileaks continue, to resist the greed of this satanic octopus organization, if your effort can save only a life of a vulnerable youngster, you have accomplished a “miracle”. Thank you.

Rene 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rene000000 (talkcontribs) 08:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


Wikileaks further states that, "in response to the attempted suppression, Wikileaks will release several thousand additional pages of Scientology material next week."



You Go Wikileaks!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:50, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments from feedback form - "OMG, that is brilliant!"Edit

OMG, that is brilliant!

Comments from feedback form - "I'ts about time !! Cheers fo..."Edit

I'ts about time !! Cheers for Wikileaks !! — (talk) 14:17, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Freedom of ReligionEdit

As a Unitarian Universalist I believe open enquieries into religious freedom should be tolerated by all participants of religion, and that religions should serve to help all people get along together. Transparency is vital to help serve the trust of the people! As we all know as students of history, it is rarely the case when religion cooperates with all of the people all of the time. For example, I believe that female sexual equality under the secular law should be respected and observed, and don't understand why religions are tax exempt when they openly defy the secular laws put in place for the good of the people! All religions should be bound by such humanistic concerns, with Catholics bound to hire women to highest church positions; but, rather than to encourage religious organizations to do the right thing, we allow them to run media empires to spread propaganda of foolish science and magic to the masses that subvert and defy good government run on behalf of the best interests of a free society. We should hold All Religions to the fire, even the one's misnomered as of true Science, the Scientologist's.

                     Eric Wynne Taylor

Comments from feedback form - "more detail needed"Edit

more detail needed — (talk) 04:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

usa-the assassins' nationEdit

                 Scientology confirms its own decadent culture by its threats.
             usa-the assassins' nation/church of scientology-a supporter of assassins

usa- the assassins' nation seeks to divide & conquer all nations and all peoples.

Regarding the leaks,

Well, USA-if you have done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to fear from the T R U T H. Be Set Free by admitting to ongoing & insufferable crimes against H U M A N I T Y .

questions! GERAL SOSBEE(956)536-3103

Are You Being Fair people. . . .Open your eyes.Edit

Free press = aware and strong citizens. I am disgusted at Julia Gillard joining the states in their quest to cover their constant disgraces. I am disgusted to be Australian. Who would have thought governments would be held accountable, and people like Cheney would start facing the courts.

If the news provided is bad, it's because of poor administration, not true journalism. All media in Iraq was controlled and spoon fed. Wake up people. Wake up now. There is blood on all of our hands when we plead ignorance. USA and now Australia love war on nouns. . .well this is a war on factual information, on accountability and simple truth.

Where in the world does "freedom" or "morality" still exist when facilitators of truth are threatened with execution?

Comments from feedback form - "yea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ..."Edit

yea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I pledge my support 4 assange 4 one billion years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — (talk) 03:36, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments from feedback form - "Nothing on this site is unbias..."Edit

Nothing on this site is unbias, but that is what gets the truth out! — (talk) 17:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)