From nickz Sun Dec 28 13:40:29 1997 Subject: 1997 Helsinki Report / Religious minorities in Greece To: helsinki@compulink.gr Date: Sun, 28 Dec 1997 13:40:29 -0500 (EST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 3252 Dear Sirs/Madams: I read with interest your Usenet Helsinki Report for 1997. You are performing a laudable function in protecting the rights of ethnic and other minorities. However, may I suggest that you are too lenient towards the abuses by bona-fide cults. This is particularly the case with KEFE (Scientology) but similar properties are found in Jehovah's Witnesses. I know this from personal conversations with cult members and from research. The concept of religious freedom ceases to apply when an organization (1) is not a religion but only postures as such to obtain tax or other advantages, and/or (2) deliberately and systematically engages in practices designed to erode and destroy human free will. For without free will there is no freedom of religion or otherwise, but only coercion by the cult. Scientology in particular has a gulag-like form of merciless punishment called the RPF (about which one can easily learn from an Altavista search on Scientology and RPF) where "church" members are confined in roach-infested dark basements without adequate food and medical care, and with deliberate and continuous mental torture. Many of its inmates are quickly driven insane or die, often by suicide. Surely you are aware of the Lisa McPherson case in the United States which the cult is trying to suppress and ignore because it so implicates standard Scientological practices. Such an organization is worthy only of contempt. It is insulting to all real religions for it to claim to be a religion. But we both know that Scientology pretends to be either a religion or a philosophy, depending on local laws, tax breaks and other things totally irrelevant to what a real religion should be concerned with. It is common knowledge that their core "theology" consists of a bad science fiction story about a Darth-Vader-like Galactic Warlord named Xenu who gave us cootie-like Body Thetans so that expensive auditing processes can be used to exorcise them. It is too kind to call this cult a mere sham. Common sense alone is sufficient to see that this is no religion. They have even coopted the Cross and put a registered trademark symbol on it -- this is a highly offensive and cynical action, especially considered how they use their trademarks and "trade secrets" (this is a religion?) to harass and even "crucify" their enemies. Though the Jehovah's Witnesses have nothing like the worst of Scientology, they also have a policy of separating families and mandating "disconnection" with family and friends who dissent from their views, and they also can be merciless in this. Many Witnesses have also needlessly died from the anti-transfusion doctrine, but not before being told to take out life-insurance policies in the name of the cult! Helsinki Watch has no business defending cults. There are too many real religions, ethnic groups, etc. which are genuinely persecuted to waste one's efforts on cults. These cults will scream persecution one moment, and then attempt to utterly destroy and defame anyone who criticizes it. Please reconsider your defense of these authoritarian groups in Greece and elsewhere. Thank you. Sincerely, Nicholas Zymaris nickz@tribeca.ios.com http://tribeca.ios.com/~nickz/cos.html From 101540.51@compuserve.com Sun Jan 4 07:59:33 1998 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [149.174.206.131]) by u3.farm.idt.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA18771 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 1998 07:59:32 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.9) id HAA03076; Sun, 4 Jan 1998 07:57:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 07:53:52 -0500 From: WEIGHTMAN <101540.51@compuserve.com> Subject: Scientology Sender: WEIGHTMAN <101540.51@compuserve.com> To: "Mr. Nicholas Zymaris" Cc: "(unknown)" , "(unknown)" , "(unknown)" , "(unknown)" , "(unknown)" , "(unknown)" Message-ID: <199801040757_MC2-2DFA-5179@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Status: OR Dear Mr. Zymaris, I was sent a copy of the communication that you sent to the Greek Helsinki Watch and it seems obvious to me that you have considerable false information about the Church of Scientology. I am currently in charge of the Church's European Human Rights Office which is based in Belgium. Let me give you some personal details. I have been a member of the Church of Scientology for over 20 years. I started in Scientology when I was 20 years old. Since then I have gained enormously from my religion both spiritually and practically. Whilst you have stated in your email that Scientology is not a religion - I can only ask you what right you have to determine whether or not my beliefs are religious or not - and furthermore - on what information you base your opinion. Perhaps this is more to the point because it seems to me that if you support the general activities of the Helsinki Monitor then you would support basic principles of freedom of religion. If this is the case and you were to read the basic goals and purposes of Scientology then you could only come to the conclusion that Scientology is a bona fide religion (as has already been validated in many courts and by many independent academics around the world). The point is, I think, that you have significantly false and misleading information. For example, you say that Scientology breaks up families. I am married with children ranging from 8 to 20 years. One of my children works in Scientology (after she finished a regular school) but the others do not. One of them is not interested in Scientology (and I do not include the youngest one but one of 20 years old) but she still lives with us and we get along very well. During this Christmas period my parents stayed with us for one week. We had a great time and my parents are not Scientologists. My youngest child stays with both his grandparents regularly and none of them are Scientologists. So when you say that Scientology has a practice of "disconnection" - I am sorry, but you just do not know what you are talking about. You speak of the RPF. I am personally familiar with this programme. It is a great programme to help an individual sort himself out. However, for a start it can only be done by certain members of the Church who have made a life-time commitment to working for the Church. Even then, no-one is obliged to do it, and if you chose to do so you can also stop at any time. There are no physical restraints and in fact it can only be done if the willingness to do so is there. It is certainly a demanding programme but there is no part of it which requires you to become involved in or submit to inhumanities or anything of this sort. With regards to your point about seeking to gain tax advantages. Of course it is true that we have tax advantages in certain countries because we are a religion. But this is no more than any other religion is entitled to. Do you think, for example, that the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) would have granted the Church this status if after thorough examination (many years) we had not deserved it. To gain such a status in the United States one has to minimally show that the finances of the organisation do not accrue to the benefit of any individual and that the activities of the organisation are not in violation of the public good. I can assure you that the IRS looked into the kind of "horror stories" that you refer to and found them to be without foundation. I could respond to each point if you like but the above must show you that your data sources are false. Either that or I am lying though my teeth. If you want to continue this communication I am quite willing to provide/send you with more information. You are quite entitled to your opinion of course - but you have to at least respect the fact that in Scientology rests my religious beliefs and that my experiences are sincere. Best wishes and a Happy New Year Martin Weightman Director Church of Scientology European Human Rights Office From nickz Sun Jan 4 10:54:47 1998 Subject: Re: Scientology To: 101540.51@compuserve.com (WEIGHTMAN) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 10:54:47 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <199801040757_MC2-2DFA-5179@compuserve.com> from "WEIGHTMAN" at Jan 4, 98 07:53:52 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 15218 > > Dear Mr. Zymaris, > > I was sent a copy of the communication that you sent to the Greek Helsinki > Watch and it seems obvious to me that you have considerable false > information about the Church of Scientology. I am currently in charge of > the Church's European Human Rights Office which is based in Belgium. > Dear Mr. Weightman: I find it interesting that I never got a response from the Helsinki Watch itself, but only an official Scientology response. There does not seem to be any dialogue or debate on this; merely a compulsory acceptance of a "party line" implying that all those who disagree with CoS are Nazis, etc. The recent broadcast on national U.S. television (60 Minutes, December 28, 1997) about CoS taking over CAN by legal harassment (and calling the former management of CAN Nazis, of course) would suggest to many that CoS may have similarly targeted Helsinki Watch. I did not expect that when I wrote to Helsinki Watch I would instead get a response from Scientology. Are these organizations now affiliated in any way? Is Helsinki Watch as zealous in defending CoS as it is in defending opponents of CoS who also have sincere beliefs? For example, where do you stand on the German Free Zone organization which also has Hubbardian beliefs but is not connected to CoS? They bought the rights to a 1934 book entitled "Scientology" which predated Hubbard yet has similar ideas, and established a website using the original German name of this book (scientologie.de). Since this is embarassing to CoS and suggests that Hubbard may have plagiarized, they are being persecuted by CoS. Does Helsinki Watch stand up for these Free Zoners and call CoS Nazi-like? > Let me give you some personal details. > > I have been a member of the Church of Scientology for over 20 years. I > started in Scientology when I was 20 years old. Since then I have gained > enormously from my religion both spiritually and practically. Whilst you > have stated in your email that Scientology is not a religion - I can only > ask you what right you have to determine whether or not my beliefs are > religious or not - and furthermore - on what information you base your > opinion. Perhaps this is more to the point because it seems to me that if > you support the general activities of the Helsinki Monitor then you would > support basic principles of freedom of religion. If this is the case and > you were to read the basic goals and purposes of Scientology then you could > only come to the conclusion that Scientology is a bona fide religion (as > has already been validated in many courts and by many independent academics > around the world). > I do not oppose freedom of religion, and deal with that question below (second-to-last paragraph regarding the institution vs. personal beliefs). There are, moreover, many sincerely-held beliefs in the world which are not considered religions (such as those of adherents of certain political parties and nationalistic groups) even though they share many of the same qualities. There needs to be more discussion, and discernment, on this issue. You would of course deny that Scientology tries to take advantage of countries' religious protections. Would you deny that other groups such as the Moonies, Heaven's Gate and Jim Jones' group tried to take advantage of this? Should not there be some mechanism for preventing destructive organizations from hiding behind such protection? Furthermore, courts have not validated Scientology as a religion. Some courts have accepted that premise, and some have rejected it. It is well known that someone who publicly opposes Scientology is considered a "Suppressive Person", and Hubbard authorized all the former "Fair Game" actions against them, with the caveat that one cannot call it "Fair Game" any more for PR purposes. As a result, many judges and lawyers have halted legal actions against CoS as a result of this relentless intimidation. If a judge has a choice between going against his conscience and saying "yes, it's a religion", or else having his family harassed by shady private investigators and their pets killed, many will capitulate for the sake of their family. Shame on Helsinki Watch if they do not vigorously oppose such actions. If Scientology is a real religion, why did Hubbard deny that it was until he began having legal trouble with the FDA and other U.S. agencies? (I asked this before, and you did not address this.) He was making medical claims for the E-meter, which could not be sustained (do you deny this?). Thus, he made Scientology a religion so he could make any claims he wants, hiding behind the mantle of "religion". Scientologists of the time state that the directive to use ecclesiastical words like "minister", "sacrament", "penance", and the wearing of crosses and clerical collars were considered a joke and were certainly for PR purposes. Do you deny this? On the subject of religious intolerance: Hubbard said a number of very insulting things about my Christian religion. Do you deny that he called the Lord a pedophile, and His Crucifixion a false "implant"? If this is what Scientologists choose to believe about Christ, why did they suddenly adopt a cross? Obviously this is to make people think they are a church. Do you find this to be deceptive? How about Scientologists use of the registered trademark symbol next to the Cross on their home page (http://www.scientology.org/worlds.jpg)? Your organization aggressively sues those it perceives to violate their trademark and copyright rights and brands these people as criminals and bigots. If you believe that, then Scientology is just as much a thief (in appropriating the Cross as its own registered trademark when it has no legal or moral right to the symbol of Christ) and a bigot (in what it says about Christ) as you claim your opponents are. > The point is, I think, that you have significantly false and misleading > information. > Do you dispute the above facts about Scientology's bigotry against Christianity and its fair game treatment of opponents? It does not improve its reputation by avoiding those issues; even less when it attempts to dig up "dirt" on opponents rather than answering the questions. > For example, you say that Scientology breaks up families. I am married with > children ranging from 8 to 20 years. One of my children works in > Scientology (after she finished a regular school) but the others do not. > One of them is not interested in Scientology (and I do not include the > youngest one but one of 20 years old) but she still lives with us and we > get along very well. > > During this Christmas period my parents stayed with us for one week. We had > a great time and my parents are not Scientologists. My youngest child stays > with both his grandparents regularly and none of them are Scientologists. > I am happy to see that your family is functioning well. However, the non-Scientologists in your family (according to what you have described) have not said anything in criticism of Scientology, nor have any of the Scientologists attempted to leave the organization. If this were to occur, would they not be considered (at the very least) a Potential Trouble Source, if not a Suppressive Persion? And what does Hubbard teach regarding how to "handle" PTS and SP's? Though you may be entitled to believe Hubbard's teaching on this, it also leads to denial of freedom of association and freedom of speech for the PTS and SP, which is what Helsinki Watch fights against, among other things. Would Helsinki Watch support a family member who tried to leave Scientology and was harassed for doing so? > So when you say that Scientology has a practice of "disconnection" - I am > sorry, but you just do not know what you are talking about. > So, you consider the Hubbard directives ordering this to be forgeries? And escapees to be liars? What evidence do you provide to prove this? Furthermore, many high-profile Scientologists (particularly the Hollywood celebrities) are shielded from the more sordid aspects of RPF, etc. so that they can be of PR and monetary benefit to the organization, with no danger of leaking secrets (otherwise known as release of such information only on a "need to know" basis). This is common in many organizations, and is a common technique, but is prominent in CoS. For example, Tom Cruise stated in 1983 that he disagreed with the management of CoS. Surely everyone has a right to make such a statement, especially since Mr. Cruise is a U.S. citizen protected by the First Amendment. Does not Helsinki Watch agree? He has not stated anything on that subject since except for officially approved information. Do you think this means that the management style of 1983 has changed materially, or that the reports of him being threatened with release of personal information from auditing folders has had an intimidating effect? > You speak of the RPF. I am personally familiar with this programme. It is a Does this mean that you have been in the RPF? What was it like for you? > great programme to help an individual sort himself out. However, for a > start it can only be done by certain members of the Church who have made a > life-time commitment to working for the Church. Even then, no-one is > obliged to do it, and if you chose to do so you can also stop at any time. > There are no physical restraints and in fact it can only be done if the > willingness to do so is there. It is certainly a demanding programme but > there is no part of it which requires you to become involved in or submit > to inhumanities or anything of this sort. > I am quite familiar with the www.scientology.org FAQ which claims that RPF is a voluntary program in which Sea Org members appreciate being able to get a second chance rather than being expelled from Scientology. It sounds to me like the symptoms of the Stockholm Syndrome, which is only confirmed by the accounts in sworn affidavits of victims of the RPF. These accounts indicate quite clearly that there is plenty of coercion and inhumanity in the RPF. And this is also repeated by those who are not involved in any litigation, and thus have no financial or PR interest in distorting the facts. Hubbard directives, also, specify procedures of the RPF. > With regards to your point about seeking to gain tax advantages. Of course > it is true that we have tax advantages in certain countries because we are > a religion. But this is no more than any other religion is entitled to. Do > you think, for example, that the United States Internal Revenue Service > (IRS) would have granted the Church this status if after thorough > examination (many years) we had not deserved it. To gain such a status in > the United States one has to minimally show that the finances of the > organisation do not accrue to the benefit of any individual and that the > activities of the organisation are not in violation of the public good. I > can assure you that the IRS looked into the kind of "horror stories" that > you refer to and found them to be without foundation. > With all due respect: Do you really believe this? Are you aware that the secret IRS agreement has now been leaked to the Wall Street Journal and from there to the other media? The IRS had indeed examined the "horror stories" and as a result had _revoked_ Scientology's tax advantages. As a result, the IRS was "Fair Game" to the "church" and subject to endless harassment and litigation for many years. The IRS capitulated and made a secret agreement with the "church", utterly contradicting what it had said earlier. Why was it kept secret if there was nothing shady about this agreement? I applaud the recent efforts to get to the truth of this matter, and as a U.S. taxpayer I fully support efforts to eliminate such corrupt practices. > I could respond to each point if you like but the above must show you that > your data sources are false. Either that or I am lying though my teeth. > > If you want to continue this communication I am quite willing to > provide/send you with more information. You are quite entitled to your > opinion of course - but you have to at least respect the fact that in > Scientology rests my religious beliefs and that my experiences are sincere. > There are two issues here. One is the actions and beliefs of the _institution_ of Scientology: this includes Hubbard's slanders of Christ and the harassment by litigation. These are reprehensible. The other issue is that of individual Scientologists' personal beliefs. Everyone is entitled to their own personal beliefs, regardless of how others may disagree with them. This is a basic aspect of a civilized society; "live and let live". The actions like those in Greece occurred because the institution went beyond "live and let live" and denied parents contact with their children, and declared priests and other opponents of KEFE to be suppressives and fair game. There were no apologies for these actions, only denials and further attempts to depict these opponents as Nazis. Thus, this goes well beyond a simple issue of respecting someone else's personal belief. If you wish to believe that the world's problems are caused by Xenu imprisoning our souls in volcanoes 95,000,000 years ago, that is not my concern. My concern is that when people try to publicly discuss this, they are ruthlessly attacked by Scientology. Frankly, as a non-Scientologist, I do not understand the attitude that Scientologists hold about Xenu and the other parts of the OT III course. If this is truly sacred scripture and the key to the universe's problems, as is stated in affidavits, why is this not ever defended or discussed openly? OT III being a "trade secret" is not an excuse. Either CoS is a profit-making business (for which trade secrets and trade marks protect said profits legally) or it is a religion (which must be nonprofit). Adherents of other religions have no problem discussing their beliefs, but no one in Scientology does, except for the generalizations ("it is very beneficial, it causes great wins"). This is another reason why many become skeptical of CoS's claims to be a religion like any other. As another example, I can respect someone's belief that auditing is beneficial, for example, regardless of my personal opinion of auditing. However, when Scientology opponents are harassed and made "fair game", it is the function of law to step in and stop the outrage -- if you want others to tolerate your organization (though they disagree with it), you need to begin to respect them as well. Since you are an official of Scientology, would you apologize to the Greek parents who just wanted to see their children who were being held in KEFE? These were concerned parents, not Nazis, not bigots. Yet they were subject to smears by the "church" that claimed not to be a church in Greece. > Best wishes and a Happy New Year > Likewise, to you and yours. > Martin Weightman > Director > Church of Scientology > European Human Rights Office > > Sincerely, Nicholas Zymaris nickz@tribeca.ios.com IC XC + NI KA From nickz Sun Jan 4 11:28:01 1998 Subject: Scientology and Helsinki Watch To: jwgre241@athena.compulink.gr Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 11:28:01 -0500 (EST) Bcc: abrahaf@hrw.org, office@ihf-hr.org, nasos@greekhelsinki.gr, nafsika@greekhelsinki.org, murry@cyberlink.bg MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 16707 Dear Helsinki Watch and/or Scientology officials: I recently sent an e-mail to Helsinki Watch as a result of reading a very biased account by Helsinki Watch of Greece's recent actions against the Scientology organization. I find it quite curious that Helsinki Watch itself never responded, but instead, someone took the liberty to forward my letter to a Scientology official in Belgium who speaks as if his organizations's party line and that of Helsinki Watch are one and the same, who in turn forwarded the correspondence to you. This is quite alarming to us in the United States, who have become aware that Scientology harassed an anti-cult group in the U.S. to bankruptcy then bought it outright. Thus, when someone stuck in a cult seeks help by calling the "Cult Awareness Network", they now get a pitch for Scientology instead (Do not tell me that CAN is a criminal organization. I saw the good work they did in the 1980's, then never heard of them again until the recent litigation). I would suggest that it is a conflict of interest for Helsinki Watch to be affiliated with Scientology, to say the least. >From nickz Sun Jan 4 10:54:47 1998 Subject: Re: Scientology To: 101540.51@compuserve.com (WEIGHTMAN) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 10:54:47 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <199801040757_MC2-2DFA-5179@compuserve.com> from "WEIGHTMAN" at Jan 4, 98 07:53:52 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 15218 > > Dear Mr. Zymaris, > > I was sent a copy of the communication that you sent to the Greek Helsinki > Watch and it seems obvious to me that you have considerable false > information about the Church of Scientology. I am currently in charge of > the Church's European Human Rights Office which is based in Belgium. > Dear Mr. Weightman: I find it interesting that I never got a response from the Helsinki Watch itself, but only an official Scientology response. There does not seem to be any dialogue or debate on this; merely a compulsory acceptance of a "party line" implying that all those who disagree with CoS are Nazis, etc. The recent broadcast on national U.S. television (60 Minutes, December 28, 1997) about CoS taking over CAN by legal harassment (and calling the former management of CAN Nazis, of course) would suggest to many that CoS may have similarly targeted Helsinki Watch. I did not expect that when I wrote to Helsinki Watch I would instead get a response from Scientology. Are these organizations now affiliated in any way? Is Helsinki Watch as zealous in defending CoS as it is in defending opponents of CoS who also have sincere beliefs? For example, where do you stand on the German Free Zone organization which also has Hubbardian beliefs but is not connected to CoS? They bought the rights to a 1934 book entitled "Scientology" which predated Hubbard yet has similar ideas, and established a website using the original German name of this book (scientologie.de). Since this is embarassing to CoS and suggests that Hubbard may have plagiarized, they are being persecuted by CoS. Does Helsinki Watch stand up for these Free Zoners and call CoS Nazi-like? > Let me give you some personal details. > > I have been a member of the Church of Scientology for over 20 years. I > started in Scientology when I was 20 years old. Since then I have gained > enormously from my religion both spiritually and practically. Whilst you > have stated in your email that Scientology is not a religion - I can only > ask you what right you have to determine whether or not my beliefs are > religious or not - and furthermore - on what information you base your > opinion. Perhaps this is more to the point because it seems to me that if > you support the general activities of the Helsinki Monitor then you would > support basic principles of freedom of religion. If this is the case and > you were to read the basic goals and purposes of Scientology then you could > only come to the conclusion that Scientology is a bona fide religion (as > has already been validated in many courts and by many independent academics > around the world). > I do not oppose freedom of religion, and deal with that question below (second-to-last paragraph regarding the institution vs. personal beliefs). There are, moreover, many sincerely-held beliefs in the world which are not considered religions (such as those of adherents of certain political parties and nationalistic groups) even though they share many of the same qualities. There needs to be more discussion, and discernment, on this issue. You would of course deny that Scientology tries to take advantage of countries' religious protections. Would you deny that other groups such as the Moonies, Heaven's Gate and Jim Jones' group tried to take advantage of this? Should not there be some mechanism for preventing destructive organizations from hiding behind such protection? Furthermore, courts have not validated Scientology as a religion. Some courts have accepted that premise, and some have rejected it. It is well known that someone who publicly opposes Scientology is considered a "Suppressive Person", and Hubbard authorized all the former "Fair Game" actions against them, with the caveat that one cannot call it "Fair Game" any more for PR purposes. As a result, many judges and lawyers have halted legal actions against CoS as a result of this relentless intimidation. If a judge has a choice between going against his conscience and saying "yes, it's a religion", or else having his family harassed by shady private investigators and their pets killed, many will capitulate for the sake of their family. Shame on Helsinki Watch if they do not vigorously oppose such actions. If Scientology is a real religion, why did Hubbard deny that it was until he began having legal trouble with the FDA and other U.S. agencies? (I asked this before, and you did not address this.) He was making medical claims for the E-meter, which could not be sustained (do you deny this?). Thus, he made Scientology a religion so he could make any claims he wants, hiding behind the mantle of "religion". Scientologists of the time state that the directive to use ecclesiastical words like "minister", "sacrament", "penance", and the wearing of crosses and clerical collars were considered a joke and were certainly for PR purposes. Do you deny this? On the subject of religious intolerance: Hubbard said a number of very insulting things about my Christian religion. Do you deny that he called the Lord a pedophile, and His Crucifixion a false "implant"? If this is what Scientologists choose to believe about Christ, why did they suddenly adopt a cross? Obviously this is to make people think they are a church. Do you find this to be deceptive? How about Scientologists use of the registered trademark symbol next to the Cross on their home page (http://www.scientology.org/worlds.jpg)? Your organization aggressively sues those it perceives to violate their trademark and copyright rights and brands these people as criminals and bigots. If you believe that, then Scientology is just as much a thief (in appropriating the Cross as its own registered trademark when it has no legal or moral right to the symbol of Christ) and a bigot (in what it says about Christ) as you claim your opponents are. > The point is, I think, that you have significantly false and misleading > information. > Do you dispute the above facts about Scientology's bigotry against Christianity and its fair game treatment of opponents? It does not improve its reputation by avoiding those issues; even less when it attempts to dig up "dirt" on opponents rather than answering the questions. > For example, you say that Scientology breaks up families. I am married with > children ranging from 8 to 20 years. One of my children works in > Scientology (after she finished a regular school) but the others do not. > One of them is not interested in Scientology (and I do not include the > youngest one but one of 20 years old) but she still lives with us and we > get along very well. > > During this Christmas period my parents stayed with us for one week. We had > a great time and my parents are not Scientologists. My youngest child stays > with both his grandparents regularly and none of them are Scientologists. > I am happy to see that your family is functioning well. However, the non-Scientologists in your family (according to what you have described) have not said anything in criticism of Scientology, nor have any of the Scientologists attempted to leave the organization. If this were to occur, would they not be considered (at the very least) a Potential Trouble Source, if not a Suppressive Persion? And what does Hubbard teach regarding how to "handle" PTS and SP's? Though you may be entitled to believe Hubbard's teaching on this, it also leads to denial of freedom of association and freedom of speech for the PTS and SP, which is what Helsinki Watch fights against, among other things. Would Helsinki Watch support a family member who tried to leave Scientology and was harassed for doing so? > So when you say that Scientology has a practice of "disconnection" - I am > sorry, but you just do not know what you are talking about. > So, you consider the Hubbard directives ordering this to be forgeries? And escapees to be liars? What evidence do you provide to prove this? Furthermore, many high-profile Scientologists (particularly the Hollywood celebrities) are shielded from the more sordid aspects of RPF, etc. so that they can be of PR and monetary benefit to the organization, with no danger of leaking secrets (otherwise known as release of such information only on a "need to know" basis). This is common in many organizations, and is a common technique, but is prominent in CoS. For example, Tom Cruise stated in 1983 that he disagreed with the management of CoS. Surely everyone has a right to make such a statement, especially since Mr. Cruise is a U.S. citizen protected by the First Amendment. Does not Helsinki Watch agree? He has not stated anything on that subject since except for officially approved information. Do you think this means that the management style of 1983 has changed materially, or that the reports of him being threatened with release of personal information from auditing folders has had an intimidating effect? > You speak of the RPF. I am personally familiar with this programme. It is a Does this mean that you have been in the RPF? What was it like for you? > great programme to help an individual sort himself out. However, for a > start it can only be done by certain members of the Church who have made a > life-time commitment to working for the Church. Even then, no-one is > obliged to do it, and if you chose to do so you can also stop at any time. > There are no physical restraints and in fact it can only be done if the > willingness to do so is there. It is certainly a demanding programme but > there is no part of it which requires you to become involved in or submit > to inhumanities or anything of this sort. > I am quite familiar with the www.scientology.org FAQ which claims that RPF is a voluntary program in which Sea Org members appreciate being able to get a second chance rather than being expelled from Scientology. It sounds to me like the symptoms of the Stockholm Syndrome, which is only confirmed by the accounts in sworn affidavits of victims of the RPF. These accounts indicate quite clearly that there is plenty of coercion and inhumanity in the RPF. And this is also repeated by those who are not involved in any litigation, and thus have no financial or PR interest in distorting the facts. Hubbard directives, also, specify procedures of the RPF. > With regards to your point about seeking to gain tax advantages. Of course > it is true that we have tax advantages in certain countries because we are > a religion. But this is no more than any other religion is entitled to. Do > you think, for example, that the United States Internal Revenue Service > (IRS) would have granted the Church this status if after thorough > examination (many years) we had not deserved it. To gain such a status in > the United States one has to minimally show that the finances of the > organisation do not accrue to the benefit of any individual and that the > activities of the organisation are not in violation of the public good. I > can assure you that the IRS looked into the kind of "horror stories" that > you refer to and found them to be without foundation. > With all due respect: Do you really believe this? Are you aware that the secret IRS agreement has now been leaked to the Wall Street Journal and from there to the other media? The IRS had indeed examined the "horror stories" and as a result had _revoked_ Scientology's tax advantages. As a result, the IRS was "Fair Game" to the "church" and subject to endless harassment and litigation for many years. The IRS capitulated and made a secret agreement with the "church", utterly contradicting what it had said earlier. Why was it kept secret if there was nothing shady about this agreement? I applaud the recent efforts to get to the truth of this matter, and as a U.S. taxpayer I fully support efforts to eliminate such corrupt practices. > I could respond to each point if you like but the above must show you that > your data sources are false. Either that or I am lying though my teeth. > > If you want to continue this communication I am quite willing to > provide/send you with more information. You are quite entitled to your > opinion of course - but you have to at least respect the fact that in > Scientology rests my religious beliefs and that my experiences are sincere. > There are two issues here. One is the actions and beliefs of the _institution_ of Scientology: this includes Hubbard's slanders of Christ and the harassment by litigation. These are reprehensible. The other issue is that of individual Scientologists' personal beliefs. Everyone is entitled to their own personal beliefs, regardless of how others may disagree with them. This is a basic aspect of a civilized society; "live and let live". The actions like those in Greece occurred because the institution went beyond "live and let live" and denied parents contact with their children, and declared priests and other opponents of KEFE to be suppressives and fair game. There were no apologies for these actions, only denials and further attempts to depict these opponents as Nazis. Thus, this goes well beyond a simple issue of respecting someone else's personal belief. If you wish to believe that the world's problems are caused by Xenu imprisoning our souls in volcanoes 95,000,000 years ago, that is not my concern. My concern is that when people try to publicly discuss this, they are ruthlessly attacked by Scientology. Frankly, as a non-Scientologist, I do not understand the attitude that Scientologists hold about Xenu and the other parts of the OT III course. If this is truly sacred scripture and the key to the universe's problems, as is stated in affidavits, why is this not ever defended or discussed openly? OT III being a "trade secret" is not an excuse. Either CoS is a profit-making business (for which trade secrets and trade marks protect said profits legally) or it is a religion (which must be nonprofit). Adherents of other religions have no problem discussing their beliefs, but no one in Scientology does, except for the generalizations ("it is very beneficial, it causes great wins"). This is another reason why many become skeptical of CoS's claims to be a religion like any other. As another example, I can respect someone's belief that auditing is beneficial, for example, regardless of my personal opinion of auditing. However, when Scientology opponents are harassed and made "fair game", it is the function of law to step in and stop the outrage -- if you want others to tolerate your organization (though they disagree with it), you need to begin to respect them as well. Since you are an official of Scientology, would you apologize to the Greek parents who just wanted to see their children who were being held in KEFE? These were concerned parents, not Nazis, not bigots. Yet they were subject to smears by the "church" that claimed not to be a church in Greece. > Best wishes and a Happy New Year > Likewise, to you and yours. > Martin Weightman > Director > Church of Scientology > European Human Rights Office > > Sincerely, Nicholas Zymaris nickz@tribeca.ios.com IC XC + NI KA From xxxxxxx@hrw.org Mon Jan 5 20:32:42 1998 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by u3.farm.idt.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA17946; Mon, 5 Jan 1998 20:32:40 -0500 (EST) From: xxxxxxx@hrw.org Received: from hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: email.hrw.org [199.173.149.11]) id QQdxby00287; Mon, 5 Jan 1998 20:32:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from ccMail by hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.01) id AA884050580; Mon, 05 Jan 98 20:36:24 -0500 Message-Id: <9801058840.AA884050580@hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org> X-Mailer: ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.01 Date: Mon, 05 Jan 98 20:36:30 -0500 To: , Subject: CoS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: OR Dear Mr. Zymaris, I apologize for my earlier email since I only now found your letter. I was away on a research mission in Macedonia for three weeks and have only returned to the offices today. Still, I do not know how your letter ended up with the Scientology official in Brussels. I can assure you that we did not send it to them and that there is no institutional relationship whatsoever between Human Rights Watch and the CoS. Based on your letter, I believe you are commenting on the Human Rights Watch 1998 World Report. In the chapter on Greece, we say: "In December 1996, the Greek Helsinki Monitor reported that the closing of the Church of Scientology also violated freedom of religion." (page 260) I am not the author of the chapter, but I will try to find out more. xxxxx xxxxxxxx ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From xxxxxxx@hrw.org Mon Jan 5 12:49:27 1998 Received: from relay1.UU.NET (relay1.UU.NET [192.48.96.5]) by u1.farm.idt.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA28861 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 1998 12:49:26 -0500 (EST) From: xxxxxxx@hrw.org Received: from hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: email.hrw.org [199.173.149.11]) id QQdxat00745; Mon, 5 Jan 1998 12:49:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from ccMail by hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.01) id AA884018396; Mon, 05 Jan 98 12:53:09 -0500 Message-Id: <9801058840.AA884018396@hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org> X-Mailer: ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.01 Date: Mon, 05 Jan 98 11:40:06 -0500 To: Subject: CoS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: OR Dear Mr. Zymaris, I have just received a copy of your letter and an exchange between yourself and the human rights officer from the Scientology officer in Belgium. Although I have not read the correspondance thoroughly, please allow me to clarify an important point. There are two separate organizations: the Greek Helsinki Monitor and Human Rights Watch (where I work). It is a bit confusing since Human Rights Watch is the new name for what used to Helsinki Watch. HRW (now and under its old name) and the Greek Helsinki Monitor cooperate but are separate organizations. So, I never received the letter you are mentioning and I can assure you that there is no institutional connection between HRW and the Church of Scientology. I am not even aware of the "biased" report that caused you concern. Pleaes let me know if any of this is unclear. Sincerely, xxxx xxxxxxxx HRW Researcher From nickz Thu Jan 8 00:56:06 1998 Subject: Re: CoS To: xxxxxxx@hrw.org Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 00:56:06 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <9801058840.AA884050580@hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org> from "xxxxxxx@hrw.org" at Jan 5, 98 08:36:30 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2397 > Dear Mr. Zymaris, > > I apologize for my earlier email since I only now found your > letter. I was away on a research mission in Macedonia for three > weeks and have only returned to the offices today. Still, I do > not know how your letter ended up with the Scientology official > in Brussels. I can assure you that we did not send it to them > and that there is no institutional relationship whatsoever > between Human Rights Watch and the CoS. > > Based on your letter, I believe you are commenting on the Human > Rights Watch 1998 World Report. In the chapter on Greece, we > say: "In December 1996, the Greek Helsinki Monitor reported that > the closing of the Church of Scientology also violated freedom of > religion." (page 260) I am not the author of the chapter, but I > will try to find out more. > > xxxx xxxxxxxx > > Dear Mr. xxxxxxxx: Thank you for your replies. There has since been some discussion on Usenet and further correspondence with another HRW contact. My guess at this point is that Greek Helsinki Monitor may be CoS affiliated. I would like to ask this. The Scientology official in Belgium, Mr. Weightman, CC'd his reply to you and several others. Some of these addresses were indicated as "unknown" in the header. Does Human Rights Watch have a working relationshop with these other groups, and particularly: is it customary for HRW to receive CC's of Scientology mail? I also hope that the various human rights groups and Helsinki Watch(es)/Monitor(s) will be aware of this, as Scientology has a 40-year reputation for misusing information and egregious violations of human rights. They are famous for declaring anyone critical of them "fair game", which for them justifies any and all kinds of harassment and intimidation (this is a teaching of their founder, L. Ron Hubbard, and as such is considered gospel by them). Thus, it is quite a serious matter that human-rights-related mail can go to CoS with no explanation as to how this happened. I would also be very cautious with sharing any information with them, even as independent, non-affiliated organizations. Any further light you may be able to shed on this situation would be much appreciated. Sincerely, Nick Zymaris nickz@tribeca.ios.com IC XC + NI KA From xxxxxxx@hrw.org Thu Jan 8 13:50:40 1998 Received: from relay6.UU.NET (relay6.UU.NET [192.48.96.16]) by u3.farm.idt.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA26224 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 13:50:39 -0500 (EST) From: xxxxxxx@hrw.org Received: from hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org by relay6.UU.NET with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: email.hrw.org [199.173.149.11]) id QQdxlz17983; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 13:50:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from ccMail by hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.01) id AA884279552; Thu, 08 Jan 98 13:54:21 -0500 Message-Id: <9801088842.AA884279552@hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org> X-Mailer: ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.01 Date: Thu, 08 Jan 98 12:12:44 -0500 To: Subject: Re[2]: CoS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Mr. Zymaris, The Greek Helsinki Monitor is affiliated with the International Helsinki Federation in Vienna, with whom we (Human Rights Watch) also cooperate. In my experience, it is a highly professional and credible organization - one of the very few NGOs in Greece to consistently take principled stands on difficult human rights issues, especially the rights of minorities. I have never seen any indication that they are connected with CoS and would have to strongly dispute such a claim. I did notice, however, that your original letter was sent to a number of addresses, not just us and the Greek Helsinki Monitor (seven people in total). Is it not possible that one of these people passed the letter on? As to whether we usually receive cc copies of CoS letters, to my knowledge this is the first time it has happened. I can only assume they sent it to us because they saw that your original letter had been sent to us. Of the other recipients, I only recognize one: the International Helsinki Federation office in Vienna. I hope this helps to clarify the situation. Yours, xxxx xxxxxxxx Human Rights Watch ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: CoS Author: at Internet Date: 1/8/98 1:00 AM > Dear Mr. Zymaris, > > I apologize for my earlier email since I only now found your > letter. I was away on a research mission in Macedonia for three > weeks and have only returned to the offices today. Still, I do > not know how your letter ended up with the Scientology official > in Brussels. I can assure you that we did not send it to them > and that there is no institutional relationship whatsoever > between Human Rights Watch and the CoS. > > Based on your letter, I believe you are commenting on the Human > Rights Watch 1998 World Report. In the chapter on Greece, we > say: "In December 1996, the Greek Helsinki Monitor reported that > the closing of the Church of Scientology also violated freedom of > religion." (page 260) I am not the author of the chapter, but I > will try to find out more. > > xxxx xxxxxxxx > > Dear Mr. xxxxxxxx: Thank you for your replies. There has since been some discussion on Usenet and further correspondence with another HRW contact. My guess at this point is that Greek Helsinki Monitor may be CoS affiliated. I would like to ask this. The Scientology official in Belgium, Mr. Weightman, CC'd his reply to you and several others. Some of these addresses were indicated as "unknown" in the header. Does Human Rights Watch have a working relationshop with these other groups, and particularly: is it customary for HRW to receive CC's of Scientology mail? I also hope that the various human rights groups and Helsinki Watch(es)/Monitor(s) will be aware of this, as Scientology has a 40-year reputation for misusing information and egregious violations of human rights. They are famous for declaring anyone critical of them "fair game", which for them justifies any and all kinds of harassment and intimidation (this is a teaching of their founder, L. Ron Hubbard, and as such is considered gospel by them). Thus, it is quite a serious matter that human-rights-related mail can go to CoS with no explanation as to how this happened. I would also be very cautious with sharing any information with them, even as independent, non-affiliated organizations. Any further light you may be able to shed on this situation would be much appreciated. Sincerely, Nick Zymaris nickz@tribeca.ios.com IC XC + NI KA From mjemike@ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 8 17:07:00 1998 Received: from dfw-ix14.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix14.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.14]) by u3.farm.idt.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA10662 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 17:06:55 -0500 (EST) Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix14.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id QAA15920; Thu, 8 Jan 1998 16:06:17 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 16:06:17 -0600 (CST) Received: from whx-ca5-07.ix.netcom.com(204.31.115.167) by dfw-ix14.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id rma015903; Thu Jan 8 16:05:59 1998 X-Sender: mjemike@popd.ix.netcom.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: nickz@idt.net From: Mike Farrell Subject: Human Rights Watch Dear Mr. Zymaris, I just received word from xxxx xxxxxxxx at Human Rights Watch that in fact your letter did come to him. Unfortunately, because of his schedule, neither he nor anyone else in that division was aware of it when I made my inquiry and sent out the message that is now posted on the Internet. I apologize for the confusion. As I assume you now understand, though I was incorrect about our not having received the letter, the rest of the information in that posting is correct. We did not send a copy of your letter to anyone at Scientology, nor would we do so. Though I'm unaware of the names of the people and organizations who received a copy of the letter, I do understand that there were others who got it, so I hope you'll check with them as to the possibility that someone else sent it on. On a personal level, if I may, I quite agree with your expressions of concern about some of the things that have happened in the past with regard to misinterpretation and/or mis-use of information on the part of some associated with Scientology. My own experience as a member of the Board of Advisors of the Cult Awareness Network (the old one, not the one currently in existence) has led me to suggest caution to anyone who crosses their path. With that in mind, please be assured that I am trying to insist on a high level of care taken in our organization with regard to anything having to do with claims made by on or behalf of those associated with Scientology. Thanks. And again, I'm sorry for the confusion. Mike Farrell From nickz Thu Jan 8 21:36:56 1998 Subject: Re: Re[2]: CoS To: xxxxxxx@hrw.org Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 21:36:56 -0500 (EST) Cc: mjemike@ix.netcom.com In-Reply-To: <9801088842.AA884279552@hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org> from "xxxxxxx@hrw.org" at Jan 8, 98 12:12:44 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1901 > > Dear Mr. Zymaris, > [...] > > I did notice, however, that your original letter was sent to a > number of addresses, not just us and the Greek Helsinki Monitor > (seven people in total). Is it not possible that one of these > people passed the letter on? > This is not true. My original letter was only sent to one address. This was the address given on the original document I was referring to. This address was . The only reply I had received to that was the one from Scientology Belgium. The Scientologist's letter had several cc's in it. Your address was in the cc list. Several of the other cc's were shown as "unknown". Thus, the helsinki@compulink.gr address would appear to be the suspect one; however I again emphasize that I only found the "real" addresses through the headers of the Scientologist's letter (and it is hard not to wonder if those "unknown" addresses were concealed as a result of them being "stealth" branches of CoS such as their OSA). I am glad that Helsinki Monitor is, from what you say, a credible organization. I would not want to disparage any legitimate human-rights organization. Do you know what the helsinki@compulink.gr address is? > As to whether we usually receive cc copies of CoS letters, to my > knowledge this is the first time it has happened. I can only > assume they sent it to us because they saw that your original > letter had been sent to us. Of the other recipients, I only > recognize one: the International Helsinki Federation office in > Vienna. I hope this helps to clarify the situation. > Thank you for your information. Perhaps CoS is merely trying to feign legitimacy by including IHF, HM, etc. in the cc list. Sincerely, Nick Zymaris nickz@tribeca.ios.com IC XC + NI KA From nickz Thu Jan 8 22:04:03 1998 Subject: Helsinki Report / My previous e-mail To: helsinki@compulink.gr Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 22:04:03 -0500 (EST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2788 Dear Sirs/Madams: On December 28, 1997 I e-mailed your organization regarding the Helsinki Report and Scientology. To this day, I have not received any reply from you. However, someone at your organization forwarded my e-mail to Scientology in Belgium without my consent. The Scientologist official was the only person to reply to my e-mail. Therefore, I must ask you: what is your organization? Is it a Helsinki Accord monitoring group such as Helsinki Monitor? (This is what the report I originally responded to would indicate.) Or is helsinki@compulink.gr a "stealth" branch of KEFE or Scientology, which was recently shut down (again) in Greece and is an illegal organization? If you have no connection to Scientology, why is it that someone with access to the helsinki@compulink.gr account sent my correspondence to a Scientologist official in another country, who then proceeded to CC his correspondence to many other addresses, as well as BCC-ing the same e-mail. Scientology has a long history of misusing information; it has stolen information from both the IRS and FBI in the United States and has caused grave concern with regard to its human-rights violations in Greece (having cooperated with the junta), as well as Spain and other countries. If there is someone in your organization who is clandestinely routing your mail to Scientology, this should be dealt with quite firmly. I'm sure that Compulink also would not want to risk the problems that could result from the clandestine forwarding of mail to an illegal organization. If you are not familiar with what Scientology is, I refer you to last Sunday's (January 4, 1998) _Apogevmatini_ newspaper, as well as the voluminous information on the internet. This is not an attack on anyone's religious or philosophical beliefs. Please, I am not interested in a personal testimonial about how wonderful Scientology has been for an individual. Individuals are free to believe what they wish, and should be able to disagree civilly. However, an organization representing itself as a Helsinki Accords monitor must not divulge its e-mail to organizations such as Scientology without the sender's consent: this is a gross violation of my own human rights, and that of anyone else who has written to you. Despite what it may say about its heinous "Fair Game" policy having been revoked, this so-called revocation explicitly stated that only the _name_ "Fair Game" is revoked for "PR" (public relations) purposes. The actions associated with this policy are very much in force, and are diametrically opposed to the Helsinki Accords. I would appreciate any information you could provide regarding this incident. Thank you. Sincerely, Nick Zymaris nickz@tribeca.ios.com IC XC + NI KA From nickz Thu Jan 8 22:19:21 1998 Subject: Misdirection of mail to an illegal organization To: postmaster@compulink.gr Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 22:19:21 -0500 (EST) Cc: abuse@compulink.gr MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1976 Dear Compulink postmaster, On December 28, 1997 I sent e-mail to an organization representing itself as a Helsinki Accords human-rights monitor, at helsinki@compulink.gr. Instead of getting a reply from them, my e-mail was forwarded _without my consent_ to the "Church" of Scientology in Belgium. You may be familiar with the history of Scientology in Greece. They attempted to become established in Kerkyra during the junta period by making deals with officials who were later convicted by the legitimate Greek government. They were expelled from Greece after 17 months as a menace to society. In the 1990's, they again tried to become established in Greece. Though they claim to be a religion in other countries, they knew this would not be possible in Greece, so they claimed to be a philosophical organization and opened "KEFE" at 200 Patision St., in Athens. The Panhellenic Parents' Union demanded an investigation upon finding that their children were being imprisoned there and they were not permitted to see them. The end result is that Scientology and all its affiliates have once again been banned from Greece (see _Apogevmatini_, 4 January 1998) by court decision and on appeal. They have been convicted of kidnapping as well as quite a few other crimes. I am concerned that an organization with a Compulink account, representing itself as a human-rights organization, may be connected to, or an actual affiliate of, this international organization which is totally antithetical to any notion of human rights. I do not appreciate that they have sent my private e-mail to a criminal organization with a 40-year history of harassment of anyone deemed "suppressive" by them. I am informing you of this so that this will not happen again, and so that you can take appropriate action against this account in accordance with Greek law and your terms of service. Meta timi, Nicholas Zymaris nickz@tribeca.ios.com IC XC + NI KA From xxxxxxx@hrw.org Fri Jan 9 10:25:30 1998 Received: from relay7.UU.NET (relay7.UU.NET [192.48.96.17]) by u3.farm.idt.net (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA09426 for ; Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:25:29 -0500 (EST) From: xxxxxxx@hrw.org Received: from hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org by relay7.UU.NET with SMTP (peer crosschecked as: email.hrw.org [199.173.149.11]) id QQdxpd03095; Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:25:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from ccMail by hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.01) id AA884359749; Fri, 09 Jan 98 10:29:11 -0500 Message-Id: <9801098843.AA884359749@hrw_ny_smtp1.hrw.org> X-Mailer: ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.01 Date: Fri, 09 Jan 98 10:29:24 -0500 To: Cc: Subject: Re[4]: CoS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mr Zymaris, Then perhaps what I received in my email was not the original. If you only sent it to one address, helsinki@compulink.gr, then that is the Greek Helsinki Monitor. xxxx xxxxxxxx _________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: Re[2]: CoS Author: at Internet Date: 1/8/98 9:36 PM > > Dear Mr. Zymaris, > [...] > > I did notice, however, that your original letter was sent to a > number of addresses, not just us and the Greek Helsinki Monitor > (seven people in total). Is it not possible that one of these > people passed the letter on? > This is not true. My original letter was only sent to one address. This was the address given on the original document I was referring to. This address was . The only reply I had received to that was the one from Scientology Belgium. The Scientologist's letter had several cc's in it. Your address was in the cc list. Several of the other cc's were shown as "unknown". Thus, the helsinki@compulink.gr address would appear to be the suspect one; however I again emphasize that I only found the "real" addresses through the headers of the Scientologist's letter (and it is hard not to wonder if those "unknown" addresses were concealed as a result of them being "stealth" branches of CoS such as their OSA). I am glad that Helsinki Monitor is, from what you say, a credible organization. I would not want to disparage any legitimate human-rights organization. Do you know what the helsinki@compulink.gr address is? > As to whether we usually receive cc copies of CoS letters, to my > knowledge this is the first time it has happened. I can only > assume they sent it to us because they saw that your original > letter had been sent to us. Of the other recipients, I only > recognize one: the International Helsinki Federation office in > Vienna. I hope this helps to clarify the situation. > Thank you for your information. Perhaps CoS is merely trying to feign legitimacy by including IHF, HM, etc. in the cc list. Sincerely, Nick Zymaris nickz@tribeca.ios.com IC XC + NI KA