Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Advertising The Almighty Buck Politics

Google Aids Scientology-Linked Group CCHR With Pay-Per-Click Ads 186

Posted by timothy
from the don't-keep-that-all-bottled-up-inside-you-now dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), a Scientology front group, has received a 'grant from Google in the amount of $10,000 per month worth of Pay Per Click Advertising to be used in our Orange County anti-psych campaigns.' CCHR believes that ALL psychiatrists are evil. They believe that psychiatrists were behind the holocaust, and these shadow men were never brought to justice. CCHR also believes that psychiatrists were behind the 911 attacks. Scientologists believe that psychiatrists have always been evil, and their treachery goes back 75 million years when the psychiatrists assisted XENU in killing countless alien life forms. Thanks Google! We may be able to stop these evil Psychs once and for all!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Aids Scientology-Linked Group CCHR With Pay-Per-Click Ads

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 20, 2014 @02:02PM (#46800381)

    The more these beliefs are discussed and examined, the more they are revealed for what they are.

    • by Plunky (929104) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @02:18PM (#46800477)

      The more these beliefs...

      beliefs, you say? I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu.. L Ron Hubbard made it all up to bilk money out of desparate people, and plenty of other folk are happy to continue the premise and keep the money flowing.. but does anybody actually believe it? I doubt it..

      • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        getting people to 'believe' utter rubbish is part of the game plan

        the people most likely to remove them from the con will disparage these beliefs

        this will induce 'cognitive dissonance' in the person who will shrink away from the negative view of their beliefs and back into the arms of the con game

        we see this all around us, and not just religions/cults, just look at the tortured souls who exhibit the same behavior with Obama derangement syndrome or global warming denial. The world behaves differently than th

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by mbone (558574)

        The more these beliefs...

        beliefs, you say? I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu.. L Ron Hubbard made it all up to bilk money out of desparate people, and plenty of other folk are happy to continue the premise and keep the money flowing.. but does anybody actually believe it? I doubt it..

        I don't think you understand how bilking "money out of desparate people" works.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Vellmont (569020)

        I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu..

        It's no more or less believable than any other religion. Do you think people really believe that a dead guy came back to life? How about an entire ocean was suddenly parted so the good guys could get away and then collapsed again on the bad guys? Or that the earth is 6000 years old? Or that the guy who created the entire universe 12 billion years ago and billions of light years large is really really concerned about if human pe

        • by Concerned Onlooker (473481) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @03:21PM (#46800841) Homepage Journal

          "How about an entire ocean was suddenly parted so the good guys could get away and then collapsed again on the bad guys?"

          Actually, that is plausible. I saw the proof of concept at Disneyland.

        • by turgid (580780)

          It's no more or less believable than any other religion. Do you think people really believe that a dead guy came back to life? How about an entire ocean was suddenly parted so the good guys could get away and then collapsed again on the bad guys? Or that the earth is 6000 years old? Or that the guy who created the entire universe 12 billion years ago and billions of light years large is really really concerned about if human penises wind up in human vaginas before the correct ritual is performed?

          You can s

        • by jklovanc (1603149)

          How about an entire ocean was suddenly parted so the good guys could get away and then collapsed again on the bad guys?

          1. It was not an entire ocean. I was the Red Sea and a very narrow part in the Gulf of Aqaba.
          2. It could have been a natural phenomenon [archden.org].
          Please note that I do not believe in most of the things in the Bible but some things might be facts. The social aspects of the Bible are so outdated as to be laughable.

          • by guises (2423402) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @07:23PM (#46801977)
            As the AC pointed out, the actual translations is not "Red Sea," it's "sea of reeds" - i.e., a marsh. This makes sense, as the Israelites were in the delta region of Egypt, a marshy place that is not particularly close to the Red Sea. It's also easy to picture some poor people fleeing on foot through a marsh while the pharaoh and his men, riding chariots, would get bogged down.
      • by umafuckit (2980809) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @05:01PM (#46801275)

        I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu.. L Ron Hubbard made it all up to bilk money out of desparate people, and plenty of other folk are happy to continue the premise and keep the money flowing.. but does anybody actually believe it? I doubt it..

        I wouldn't be so sure. I think the main reason it sounds crazy is because this particular belief is shared by comparatively few people. When few people are involved, such beliefs are called cults and are rejected by wider society. It's when crazy beliefs spread and are shared by many people that they're called a religion. Of course different societies draw the line differently [wikipedia.org].

        The beliefs of the Christian church are pretty crazy too, when you stop to think about it, but they're widely accepted in our society so they no longer draw incredulity. Think how crazy this sounds: the Catholic church tells us that during communion the bread and wine literally turn into the blood and body of Christ. However, through some mysterious process, they appear to our senses as unchanged. So the Catholic church tells you that what you're seeing and tasting is wrong, and you should ignore the evidence right in front of you. Presumably, millions of people accept and believe this. Then we have the fact that many Christians believe that everything in the Bible is the inerrant word of God. Yet these same people ignore the parts they don't like (Christians choose to eat pork even though their book tells them not to), they ignore the fact that the Bible is often self-contradictory, and they ignore the fact that the Bible we have today is based on copies of copies that include known errors, additions, and omissions. If God is all-powerful, why is He unable to provide "his inerrant word" in an accurate form, and why is it that he never shows his face?

        • Yet these same people ignore the parts they don't like (Christians choose to eat pork even though their book tells them not to),

          Acts 10 9-16 repeals the unclean animal laws that the Mosaic Law brought in to keep nasty diseases out of the population. Both the prohibition and the repealing are couched in "Orders from God" terms, but are actually based on prevailing understanding of health and hygiene at the time of each event. And which got unfortunately ritualized.

          In a primitive civilization, pork and other meats can be severe risks if they don't know how to cook it properly. A lot of early civilizations had pork prohibiti

        • by jandersen (462034)

          Think how crazy this sounds: the Catholic church tells us that during communion the bread and wine literally turn into the blood and body of Christ. However, through some mysterious process, they appear to our senses as unchanged. So the Catholic church tells you that what you're seeing and tasting is wrong, and you should ignore the evidence right in front of you.

          Ah, but you forget that Jesus was not of this world, and who are you to say that the bodies of the residents of Heaven are not, in fact, made of substances that to our limited senses are indistiguishable from bread and wine?

          • I was going to argue with you, until I realized you were claiming the Heavenly Host was actually made up of something almost, but not quite, entirely unlike bread and wine. I for one welcome our animated bread-and-wine overlords!

      • by Cinder6 (894572) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @07:03PM (#46801891)

        The more these beliefs...

        beliefs, you say? I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu.. L Ron Hubbard made it all up to bilk money out of desparate people, and plenty of other folk are happy to continue the premise and keep the money flowing.. but does anybody actually believe it? I doubt it..

        I may be able to provide a few insights on this.

        My parents were in Scientology in the 1970s and early 80s. My mom signed up because of her sister and brother, and my dad signed up to meet girls (he was successful, as my parents are still together, so I guess some good can come from the organization!).

        There are a few things you have to realize about Scientology; some of it has already been said. First, the nutso stuff isn't presented early on. It only gets revealed at a certain point, after you have invested years and tens of thousands of dollars. During that time, you are constantly bombarded with Scientologist propaganda and vocabulary, which serves to drive you away from your non-Scientologist friends. When you do "go clear" and learn about Xenu and the other stuff, they have done their hardest to brainwash you into their way of thinking. These days, they even install Internet filters onto your computer to block anti-Scientology websites.

        Leaving Scientology presents its own problems. When my parents left, they lost all their friends. Their Scientologist friends would no longer talk to them, and they had already alienated their non-Scientologist friends. People higher up in the organization face more obstacles, including personal and legal threats. (My parents were never high up--an ex-Scientologist told them what it was all about, and they left. The church later sued him for all he was worth, and he had to publicly apologize and retract his words.)

        Some of my parents' Scientology friends eventually left the church as well, and they've stayed in touch. One couple in particular was high up in the organization (well past OT3x--I think 6 or maybe even 7). Even after all these years, they still have a hard time not believing in Scientology's teachings, even the Xenu stuff. To paraphrase, they say they have a hard time accepting that they spent so much of their lives believing in a lie. It's not a rational thing, but then, faith often asks people to be irrational. When you've spent so much time having one set of beliefs drilled into you, it's hard to just let it go.

        • You're the first person I've heard of who's gotten something positive out of Scientology (your existence :-). Hope you and your family can recover from the rest of it.

          • by Cinder6 (894572)

            It really is a terrible organization. There are actually some positive aspects to their teachings, but there are so many subtle, subversive elements that it's a net negative (to put it very mildly). To this day, my parents sometimes have a hard time getting out of the mindset that if something bad happens--no matter how unavoidable or random--it was somehow their fault. That kind of thinking is just plain toxic.

        • Some of my parents' Scientology friends eventually left the church as well, and they've stayed in touch. One couple in particular was high up in the organization (well past OT3x--I think 6 or maybe even 7). Even after all these years, they still have a hard time not believing in Scientology's teachings, even the Xenu stuff.

          Why did they leave, then?

          • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

            by Anonymous Coward

            The Scientology organization is abusive enough even if their teachings were true; peoples' disillusionment can be with the organization while still keeping their brainwashing with regard to their beliefs.

            There's even a non-CoS scientology organization, I think it's called "free zone" or "free zoners" or something.

          • by Cinder6 (894572)

            I don't think it's really my place to tell, sorry. It was something highly abusive; there's a book called Going Clear which details similar circumstances to what they experienced.

      • I don't believe that anybody actually believes all that claptrap about Xenu.. L Ron Hubbard made it all up to bilk money out of desparate people, and plenty of other folk are happy to continue the premise and keep the money flowing.. but does anybody actually believe it? I doubt it..

        Does anybody actually believe it? Given the tenacity of the Co$, sadly I'd have to say the answer is yes. Not everyone involved in that group is exchanging winks off-stage. Some have actually drunk the kool-aid.

      • by Maritz (1829006)
        Seems to me the only person in a religion who knows it's bullshit is the one who made it up. When he croaks without admitting it's bollocks, well, that's probably how these things get started. I don't see anything very different about scientology other than we've seen its creation out of whole cloth. We don't get that kind of view with ancient religions.
    • by johanw (1001493)

      I would hope so. On the other hand, it didn't help much against other superstitions like chrisstianity either.

    • by mbone (558574)

      Bad science fiction

    • by manu0601 (2221348)

      The more these beliefs are discussed and examined, the more they are revealed for what they are.

      Sure, but do we need to discuss forever? In France, scientology is officially considered as a sect.

    • Well, it's certain that someone at Google needs their head examined... not that they would show up for the appointment...
  • by Anonymous Coward

    It's Psychlos.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    There is no belief so stupid, so crazy, so totally deranged that it won't speak to someone.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    You can't make this shit up.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Just based on their name, you would think that it is a good group of people. They might as well be called the 'Children's Safety Council', while they barbecue infants.

  • Credible Source? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Thruen (753567) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @02:09PM (#46800421)
    I know Slashdot editors like to sleep on the job, but where does this story even come from? Is it really all based on a blog some supposed letter with no explanation behind it? Is this even true? Searching for it turns up some other articles (blogs) from sources I've never heard of, and nothing seems to point to this being real. Can somebody help me out here? Is the future of Slashdot fictional stories and Bennett's Blog?
    • Re:Credible Source? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ColdWetDog (752185) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @02:13PM (#46800447) Homepage

      Yes, interesting. It's an unsourced statement from somebody's blog. But it has two of the Slashdot keywords - 'Google' and 'Scientology' so, as someone mentioned in the last thread about some other Slashdot keywords (Guns, 3D printing, drugs and The Feds), grab your popcorn and super size your Mountain Dew.

    • Re:Credible Source? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Thruen (753567) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @02:16PM (#46800463)
      A commenter on the linked blog sums up how, even if this is true, it's not news in the way the headline makes it seem.

      FOTF2012 says
      April 18, 2014 at 11:26 am

      The Boris letter is misleading. Makes it sound like CCHR applied for and got a grant from Google in the sense of a monetary gift.

      Pretty much anyone can set up a Google ad words account (https://support.google.com/adwords/answer/1704354?hl=en) and then learn how to manage the details (https://www.google.com/grants/details.html). Here are the basic qualifications: https://www.google.com/grants/... [google.com].

      One requirement is to be a 501(c)3, which CCHR is. You can search for them on GuideStar (http://www.guidestar.org/?gclid=CKDF0e2q6r0CFVKFfgodPrMAHA) and you get 38 results. Apparently CCHR sets up separate entities in each state — maybe they have to as a charity.

      One of the Google Ads program restrictions is that you can only link to one legitimate website. So I imagine they will link to http://www.cchr.org/ [cchr.org].

      Anyway, this “grant” is something that any “non-profit” can use. It is nothing significant Google has given CCHR specifically. It is part of a program that no doubt profits Google while they can say they are helping non-profits. Further, given the eligibility criteria (which CCHR meet), if Google were to deny CCHR use of the program, they would be in a lawsuit and would probably lose.

      • Ah, thank you.

        These are not the Evils you are looking for.

      • if Google were to deny CCHR use of the program, they would be in a lawsuit and would probably lose.

        Google is under no obligation to provide free services fairly and without bias.

      • by yakatz (1176317)
        I am involved with several organizations that are members of Google Grants. As long as you meet the eligibility guidelines (when we applied, you were not automatically accepted if you were a 501(c)(3), but it could have changed), they give you the same benefits.

        Google recently renamed the program: It used to be called "Google Grants" and you would get all the benefits at once. It appears that you now need to request each one only if you plan to use it.
      • by mwvdlee (775178)

        Mod parent "+1 informative and no further discussion required".

      • This kind of misleading crap posted as front page news is the reason I read Slashdot less and less these days.

    • Hilariously, we didn't know about these nutjobs before. Now we do. Looks like Google just elevated the idiot campaign to the public mind, and probably did more than $10,000 of damage with this little PR slip.

      You would be surprised how easy it is to get somebody attacked by helping them, if you can handle the heat from the splash damage.

  • is more good speech. However preposterous their ideas trying to silence any cult will just end in their views being discussed in secret and away from the bright light of open debate.
    • by seebs (15766)

      That doesn't mean they need to be actively funded by others.

      • Well, imagine if Google supplied a $25,000 public grant to the National Coalition for the Advancement of Marriage Rights in America, a group with a fancy name whose primary goal is to make it a capital crime to be a nigger-lover.

        Oh sure Google might take some heat on that. But then everyone would know that there is a group out there lobbying to make it illegal to marry, impregnate, or hook up with a black chick if you're white. Possibly if you're black, too.

    • by Vellmont (569020)

      This isn't "free speech", it's advertising. Google needs to be more selective about who it gives free advertising to. That's certainly not silencing anyone.

  • I think you're a little slow to post ... April Fools was three weeks ago. Just say'n...
  • by openfrog (897716) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @02:15PM (#46800459)

    After reading Slashdot for many years, I am coming back after two months of not visiting and what do I see? Another anti-Google posting using all the power of the anecdotal... This is a non-event, and Google will change track in this case as soon as they are pointed out their mistake.

    I am not sure if I will have the courage to go through today's list. I remember this place as one where I could read intelligent comments, but those who used to make this place what it was have now almost all left...

    • by Aighearach (97333)

      Sorry froggy, they've been on an anti-google kick for years. I'll tell exactly when since... since Jobs declared nuclear war on Android!

      Most of the old-timers are on soylentnews dot org

    • Dice Dice Baby, Dice Dice Baby
      All right stop, collaborate and listen
      Dice is back with my brand new invention
      Something grabs a hold of me tightly
      Flow like a harpoon daily and nightly
      Will it ever stop? Yo – I don't know...

  • If you can look past the weird conspiracy theories and Xenu stuff. Late last year I saw a documentary called "The Marketing of Madness." It makes a compelling case about how over-medicated we're becoming, and how simple quirks are now being labeled as illnesses to turn a profit. There might be some truth to this. CCHR might not be an entirely awful group.
    • by sjames (1099)

      I would say the field of psychiatry is long overdue for an overhaul. It has a great deal of baggage that it refuses to put down. It's unfortunate that Scieentology has gotten involved. They do have a few good points here, but bring a lot of baggage of their own and then muddy the water by WAY overreaching and injecting the crazy Xenu stuff into the discussion.

    • by ColdWetDog (752185) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @02:49PM (#46800661) Homepage

      This is precisely how crazies work. They take a perfectly reasonable statement - The practice of psychiatry has problems / Vaccines CAN cause harm, etc and then push their agenda far and beyond any rationale discussion. Yes, the practice of psychiatry is primitive and has been subject to considerable abuse in the past (lobotomies, insulin shocks to name a few). Yes, this country is overmedicated - but not just with psychoactive drugs - and this isn't just the 'fault' of psychiatrists but instead involves doctors, patients, drug companies, government and bog knows who else.

      But the victrolic, angry and anti intellectual approach of CCHR and Scientology in general should continue to be exposed for what it is - a scam. They should be allowed to express their opinions and, if the IRS says they are a 501C3 corp and Google gives something extra to non profits, well then, let'em at it. But it's still a scam. Along with quite an number of other 'non profits'.

      • by gtall (79522)

        Before we absolve the sainted American people of medication, who's taking the illegal drugs, binge drinking, etc.? A good segment of the American people is predisposed to self-medication for whatever they think ails them.

    • Every crazy person has a few valid points. Black people have sickle cell anemia much of the time, as this prevents malaria--a worse problem than clots caused by anemia. A highly racist group could advocate cleansing this damaging disease from our genetic assets by cleansing ourselves of every drop of nigger blood.

  • I don't understand, how is this any different than any other religion that someone doesn't believe in? There are plenty of christian churches, etc that pay for advertisements against equal rights for homosexuals. This doesn't seem any more crazy.
    • by sjames (1099) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @02:34PM (#46800563) Homepage

      Motive comes into question. Imagine if the christian church charged admission for services.

      • by Tablizer (95088)

        Imagine if the christian church charged admission for services.

        Mormonism doesn't outright force a 10% income "tithing", but you are pretty much ostracized if you don't pay up.

        • I divide the world of churches into two groups.....those who get paid, and those who don't. I've met a lot of good people in the churches where people are all volunteering, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, even Catholic. Good people who actually care about the community and try to make the world a better place.

          On the other hand I've never met a pastor who got paid for his preaching that I felt i could trust. As soon as those preachers are motivated to get more people in church because they will make more money
      • Imagine if the christian church charged admission for services.

        Imagine if a christian church ran a vast real estate and financial empire, built palaces with 15,000€ bathtubs for Bishops of Bling, and systemically obstructed justice in cases of sexual abuse of minors.

        Oh, yeah . . . no need to imagine. They should be hit with RICO charges.

        I can't see any difference between political action committees and churches. The NRA spends money supporting a pro-gun political platform. Churches spend money promoting their own religious beliefs in political platforms.

        Like

        • Like it or not, those Tea Party folks could probably register themselves as a religion. All those Ayn Rand Objectivism rants, like, "Altruism is evil" sounds like religious beliefs to me.

          Have you ever heard a tea-partier say "altruism is evil?" Serious question.

          • Have you ever heard a tea-partier say "altruism is evil?" Serious question.

            Yes, in a TV interview a Tea Party spokesman who identified himself as John Galt said it. Serious answer.

            The Tea Party seems to have a lot of folks named "John". Other Tea Party rally folks said their names were:

            John Whorfin
            John Bigboote
            John Ya Ya
            John Small Berries
            John Fledgling
            John Milton
            John Nephew
            John Two Horns
            John O'Connor
            John Grim
            John Many Jars
            John Coyote
            John Chief Crier
            John Littlejohn
            John Mud Head

            • BLACKS ARE HERE IN NEW JERSEY TO DESTROY US!

              Bring me my overthruster! John Bigboote I swear!!

            • See, here's the thing, you can like the Fountainhead and still favor charity. Think of it as wearing a Guy Fawkes mask even though they don't fight for Catholicism, or even have an opinion on the protestant divide.
          • by meglon (1001833)
            There's the rub.... actions speak louder than words, as long a you don't have your head buried so far up your six you can't see their actions. However, if you need words to appease your brain:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
            • Yeah, I thought you were making stuff up.

              You're making stuff up when you talk about their actions, too. Try doing research to find how much tea-partiers actually give to charity. You will be surprised (assuming you ever actually thought they hate altruism, and weren't just trolling).
    • by seebs (15766)

      There's a lot of very good material already written on the topic. Quick summary:

      1. The people who founded Scientology explicitly stated that was not a religion, but a scientific practice. They changed to calling it a "religion" solely for tax/legal purposes. That's an official statement from Hubbard himself, not speculation.
      2. Fairly dangerous and abusive. Look up Lisa McPherson, or Paulette Cooper.
      3. Lots of very shady practices, like pressuring members to have abortions so they won't be wasting money on k

    • Trouble from religion seems to be associated more with dosage level than theology. Once a week seems to be a safe dose for most people, while several times a day is an overdose. The nuttier religions tend towards the overdose end of the scale. Islam and the haredi branch of Judaism go for All Religion All the Time. Scientology goes in that direction, but more through intermittent intense experiences rather than constant daily obsession.

      Fortunately, Scientology is stuck, by policy, with Hubbard's 1930s te

  • by snemiro (1775092) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @02:34PM (#46800559)
    If there were a race about which "religion" is getting more members with the most insane ideas, yep, they would take the 1st place!... In your face, resurrected Jesus.
  • Where are all the Freedom of speech proponents? .... Oh, I forgot, it's freedom of speech for things I agree with. Sorry.

    • by meglon (1001833)
      I do not think that means what you think that means. Wait, no, i know it doesn't mean what you think it means.

      The first amendment is a restriction on THE GOVERNMENT from abridging a persons right to free speech. Google is NOT the government. Why is it that people who want to bring up the constitution, bill of rights, liberty and freedom and such almost never have a clue what they're talking about?
  • Well... (Score:4, Funny)

    by aevan (903814) on Sunday April 20, 2014 @06:00PM (#46801563)
    I dated a psychology student once. Now i'm not saying I agree with scientology...
  • 'Scientologists believe that psychiatrists have always been evil, and their treachery goes back 75 million years when the psychiatrists assisted XENU in killing countless alien life forms. Thanks Google! We may be able to stop these evil Psychs once and for all!"'

    How is this any less believable than, we killed our deity, and once a year he comes back to life and we consume of his flesh?
  • ....because L Ron was a delusional narcissistic paranoid and pathological liar, and he was scared of the doctors.

    Great read if you want to learn about the sociopath: http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/b... [holysmoke.org]
  • ... it has usually been referred to as "putting the inmates in charge of the asylum".

The number of arguments is unimportant unless some of them are correct. -- Ralph Hartley

Working...