Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance (OCRT) on Scientology: Unbiased?

By Raymond Hill
Copyright 2006
Permission to reproduce in its entirety for non-commercial purpose.

About Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Scientology essay
Absence of critical information
Copy of large chunks of text from Church of Scientology publications
Flaws
Conclusion
Notes
Contributions

About Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance

The Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance (OCRT) is a Canadian-based non-profit organisation which claims to provide unbiased information on faith groups and various topics related to these faith groups. Their web site, religioustolerance.org, claims over 3,550 essays about religious faiths and various related topics.

One particular statement on OCRT's web site will be of interest for the present essay (highlight is mine):

This site describes both the positive and negative aspects of religions.

[Source: OCRT - About this web site]

Another statement by OCRT that is of interest (highlight is mine):

We will attempt to overcome our biases on each topic that we describe, by explaining each point of view carefully, respectfully and objectively. To this end, we have many of our essays reviewed by persons familiar with the issues who represent all sides of each topic.

[Source: OCRT - Our Statement of Beliefs]

Many seems to consider OCRT as a reliable source of information on religious movements. As an example, the U.S. Navy Chaplain Corps information page on Scientology is actually the OCRT's essay on Scientology. Also, this excerpt from The Good Web Guide:

Don't be dissuaded by the home-made quality of some pages, because the quality of the articles is extremely high, and (whatever your faith perspective) the site merits frequent visits.

[Source: The good web guide - Review of the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance]

OCRT maintains a web page that lists various sources, many prominent, identifying religioustolerance.org as a good resource to learn more about religious faiths.

When one search for the word "Scientology," OCRT's web site ranks highly in Google and Yahoo, and relatively high in Live Search. The U.S. Navy Chaplain Corps' essay on Scientology, which is essentially a reproduction of OCRT's essay on Scientology, also ranks high. Therefore, when one search for "Scientology" using the main search engines, they will likely be offered the OCRT's essay on Scientology, with the perception that it is actually an independent essay and thus reliable.

We will demonstrate here that it is neither independent and reliable, and actually strongly biased with the views of the Church of Scientology.

Scientology essay

The latest version of the OCRT's essay on Scientology appeared somewhere around March 2006, and is credited to Bruce A. Robinson and Al Buttnor.

Bruce A. Robinson wrote almost all of the essays available at OCRT. As per OCRT's web site, he is a graduate of the University of Toronto, with a Bachelor of Applied Science degree in Engineering Physics. He has no theological degrees.^[1]

Al Buttnor is actually spokesman for the Church of Scientology in Canada and Director of Public Affairs and Human Rights of the Church of Scientology of Toronto.^[2][3] Previous versions of OCRT's essays on Scientology, dated 2004, did not mention Al Buttnor as a contributor.

Absence of critical information

Previous versions of the OCRT's essay on Scientology, authored by Bruce A. Robinson only, had minimal factual critical information on Scientology. Even though this critical information was minimal and often offered in an apologetic context^[4], some controversial events that have plagued Scientology throughout its history were mentioned. The latest version of OCRT's essay on Scientology has seen all critical information removed altogether.

Examples of what could be found in earlier versions:

«The US Food and Drug Administration raided Scientology offices on 1963-JAN-4 and seized hundreds of the Church's E-meters as illegal medical devices [...]»^[5]
«[...] In 1977, as a result of an FBI raid, some senior people in the movement's Guardian's Office were convicted of stealing government documents.»^[6]
«[...] A series of lawsuits against individuals and service providers came to the attention of the Washington Post. They published a story on the dispute, and quoted a total of 46 words from the secret writings by Hubbard. The Church sued the Post and two of its reporters for copyright infringement.»^[7]
«The Free Zone Association is an international group centered in Germany which was founded in 1982 by Bill Robertson. [...] Such groups were never sanctioned by L. Ron Hubbard. Ex-members have complained of abuses [...]»^[8]

These no longer appear in the latest version of the essay, as of Dec. 2006.

Also, links to external resources, critical or otherwise not endorsed by the Church of Scientology — present in earlier versions — are nowhere to be seen in the latest version. Examples of this:

Reference to Dr. Touretzky's web site — a prominent and well documented resource for critical information about Scientology — has been removed: «The E-Meter page describes the E-Meter from a negative perspective at: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/E-Meter/»
Reference to Ron Newman's "The Church of Scientology vs. the Net" has been removed: «http://www2.thecia.net/users/rnewman/»
Reference to the Free Zone has been removed: «The Free Zone Association is an international group centered in Germany which was founded in 1982 by Bill Robertson [...] See: http://www.freezone.org»
Reference to the alt.religion.scientology newsgroup has been removed: «There is a Scientology newsgroup frequented by a few pro and many anti-Scientologists. See: news:alt.religion.scientology»

In essence, all critical information about Scientology has been removed (which was already minimal), despite their own statement of offering the "positive and negative aspects" in their essays.

Copy of large chunks of text from Church of Scientology publications

Also, and quite disturbing for an organization that pretend to "explain objectively" Scientology, their current essay contains large chunks of text taken directly from the Church of Scientology's own publications. Examples follow.

The new essay goes on to explain what is Scientology's "auditing":

Auditing uses processes — exact sets of questions asked [...]

This is a word to word excerpt of text found in an article titled "A Description of Auditing," found on the Church of Scientology's main web site.

Further, the new essay describes the Citizen Commission on Human Rights as an ABLE (Association for Better Living) sponsored program:

[CCHR] was founded in 1969 by the Church of Scientology and the internationally acclaimed author, Dr. Thomas Szasz, Professor Emeritus [...]

This is a word to word excerpt of text found in an article titled "What is CCHR?," found on the official web site of the Citizen Commission on Human Rights (CCHR). The CCHR is itself a Scientology front, as demonstrated by Dr. Touretzky on his Stop-Narconon web site. As can be seen on the Church of Scientology's own chart, the purpose of the various Scientology fronts is to "clear the planet." (which requires to convert everybody to Hubbard's doctrines.)

The section titled "Resolution of religious Intolerance towards the Church of Scientology" starts as follow:

"It goes without staying that all new religions have had to endure, at the times of their birth, trials of acceptance. The same was true of Scientology. But with the Church’s growing prominence [...]"

Pretty much the whole section is simply a word for word copy of text found in a document titled "Scientology: Effective Solution - Providing the tools for successful living" (PDF), copyrighted Church of Scientology International 2004, starting on page 8.

Also, the OCRT's essay has a section titled "Copyright conflicts on the Internet":

Sweden: Religious Technology Center v. Zenon Panoussis, Case No. T 87-866-96, District Court of Stockholm. This case was brought in 1996-SEP in Stockholm against an individual named Zenon Panoussis, arising from his Internet posting of Church works [...]

This is word for word of what can be found in a document titled "Briefing Re: The Church of Scientology and the Internet" available on the Religious Movements Homepage on the University of Virginia server.

It was prepared by the Church of Scientology, as seen from the note added at the bottom of the document:

"This Briefing was prepared at the request of Jeffrey K. Hadden by the Church of Scientology International and appears on the Religious Movements Homepage with permission of the Church of Scientology (June 30, 2000). This document may not be reproduced without the written consent of the Church of Scientology."

The parent document, titled "Group Profile: The Church of Scientology" linking to the essay prepared by the Church says:

"At our request, the Church of Scientology International prepared an update on the status of their litigation against parties accused of copyright infringement. Their reply, Briefing Re: The Church of Scientology and the Internet (June 30, 2000) is reproduced here in its entirety."

Note that the parent document, "Group Profile: The Church of Scientology" on the Religious Movements Homepage links to many critical web sites as well, and does not shy away from mentioning notable controversial events that litter Scientology history (ex. Paulette Cooper, Lisa McPherson, etc.)

While reproducing part of the Church of Scientology's briefing as part of their own essay, OCRT doesn't bother to update important information contained in the Church's dated briefing. For example "Netherlands: Church of Spiritual Technology and Religious Technology Center v. Dataweb, Stichting XS4ALL, et al., Case No. 96/160, Regional Court of the Hague", gives the impression that the Church of Scientology won that fight when ultimately they lost in Dutch Supreme court in Dec. 2005.^[9] One expects that OCRT would provide this important information on the outcome of that particular high profile case.

One wonder how the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance can seriously characterize itself as "independent" while ignoring a good source of independent information to focus solely on the Church's of Scientology's views.

Flaws

The OCRT's essay on Scientology is plagued by many flaws that go counter to their own stated goal of independence and objectivity. Not providing this negative but factual information is contrary to what we would expect from a reliable and independent source.

No link to prominent and well-documented external resources which provide critical information about Scientology (ex.: Xenu.net, Dr. Touretzky's Secrets of Scientology, etc.)
Major negative aspects of Scientology are ignored:
- "suppressive person" doctrine — which potentially makes the Church of Scientology a hate group;
- the policy of disconnection (religious shunning);
- irrational anti-psychiatry stance;
- recurrent theme of hard sell;
- well-documented history of fraud, misrepresentations;
- notable criminal convictions (U.S., Canada, France, etc.);
- significant controversial events of L. Ron Hubbard are ignored (lying about achievements, etc.);
- etc.
No disclaimer that the bankrupted Cult Awareness Network was bought by a Scientologist. (see Wikipedia: Cult Awareness Network)
No reference to the Free Zone (Scientologists practicing outside the Church of Scientology)

Conclusion

The Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance's current essay on Scientology...

... is co-authored by Al Buttnor, spokesman of the Church of Scientology in Canada, and Director of Public Affair of the Church of Scientology in Toronto;
... contains big sections of text taken directly from the Church of Scientology's own publications, word for word;
... have seen all traces of critical information — available in previous versions — removed;
... blocked access to its own pages on the Internet Archive so that earlier versions are now unavailable (they used to be available up to late 2006);
... no link to prominent and well documented external resources providing critical information about Scientology (ex.: Xenu.net, Dr. Touretzky's Secrets of Scientology, SPDL, etc.)

Publishing factual information which is not flattering to the Church of Scientology is not "religious intolerance." OCRT fails completely to satisfy its self-advertised goals of "explaining objectively" and of "showing all sides." Not allowing readers to educate themselves more thoroughly by providing them significant factual information about Scientology is pure and simple censorship, which serves only the Church of Scientology, and penalize people who are looking for reliable information about the Church. Therefore, the OCRT's web site, religioustolerance.org, is not a reliable resource on Scientology and demonstrate a unambiguous violation of its own stated purpose.

For readers who want genuinely independent and objective information about Scientology, they are invited to visit the Religious Movements Homepage @ University of Virginia and their essay on Scientology, titled "Group Profile: The Church of Scientology." Also a good place to start to learn about Scientology is Wikipedia, which provide plenty of well-sourced information.

Notes

[1] OCRT: "Who are our web site's authors, and what are their credentials?"
[2] The Buffalo News (Jan. 2005): "Being In, Breaking Out" by Mark Sommers

[3] Church of Scientology International: "Church of Scientology International Announces World-wide Human Rights Hero Contest"

[4] Example: "[...] Many anti-cult groups accuse the Church of Scientology (and hundreds other religious groups with which they disagree on theological grounds) of not allowing members to leave the church, or of endlessly harassing them in an attempt to force them back into the fold. We have found these claims to be false with other religious groups, and we believe that it is also untrue in the case of Scientology. [...]" See Scientology: False imprisonment.

[5] For more information about this event, see Wikipedia: "Medical claims in Scientology doctrine"

[6] For more information about this event, see Wikipedia: "Operation Snow White"

[7] For more information about this event, see Wikipedia: "RTC vs. Lerma"; The Watchman Expositor: "Scientology's Internet Wars"; Ron Newman's "The Church of Scientology vs. Arnie Lerma, Digital Gateway Systems, and the Washington Post"

[8] For more information about the Free Zone, see Wikipedia: "Free Zone (Scientology)"
[9] See XS4ALL press release (Dec. 2005): "FINAL VICTORY! XS4ALL AND SPAINK WIN SCIENTOLOGY BATTLE"

Contributions:

Ron Sharp

Version history of this essay:

Jan. 20, 2007: hyperlinks.
Jan. 7, 2007: revised as per suggestions.^[ref]
Jan. 6, 2007: first release