Bunker Mentality: YouTube Bars Account of Leading Scientology Critic

YouTube has pulled the account of popular anti-scientology channel “Xenutv1” run by Mark Bunker — just before it aired a long-anticipated three-hour interview with Jason Beghe – a film and television actor who recently came out against his former Scientology church. The church as been aggressively pursuing and threatening such sites under copyright laws to prevent the disclosure of material on the church. In the meantime, hackers have “declared war” on the Church, which they denounce as a dangerous cult.

Bunker insists that the interview has no copyrighted material and that an earlier warning was heeded about the presence of such material. Critics of Scientology see the hand of the Church, though YouTube has been pretty draconian with other controversial subjects, click here.

Bunker was first notified of a problem when he aired a bizarre video in which Tom Cruise praises the Church. Beghe has said that Tom Cruise and John Travolta believe believe that they are no longer part of the human race but a new race, click here.
For the full interview with Beghe, click here.

Notably, Bunker’s teaser for the Beghe interview received over half a million hits in just four days.

For the full story, click here and the video teaser of Beghe, click here.

In the meantime, the Church may have irritated the wrong crowd. Hackers have declared war on the Church and are hitting its various sites, here.

8 thoughts on “Bunker Mentality: YouTube Bars Account of Leading Scientology Critic

  1. Thanks, Jonathan! I love your appearances on Countdown. Thanks for being a voice of sanity about the shredding of the constitution by the Bush administration.

    And tell Keith I’d be a good guest.

    – Mark Bunker

  2. Thanks for writing about this.

    If Homo Novis and all their gnarly powerz are for real, why do they have to take such a barratrous approach to open discourse?

    Time for a federal investigation into Scn, Inc. When the protections we afford religion start to allow for fraud and victimization, those protections are no longer appropriate.

  3. Hi maggie,

    I loved your reference to gnarly powerz! But it would be unjust to use these powers for the betterment of all people. Only people with a whole lot of money to burn are capable of using them.

    Jill

  4. This type of super aggressive litigation technique with regard to the Interent was not invented by Scientologists, but by followers of Werner Erhard (Jack Rosenberg), EST (Erhard Seminars Training)and what is now known as the Forum. They had great teachers who consistently whip everybody’s ass. Even in France, recently, where they are trying to expand there teachings, as they are in many countries.

    Google Rick Ross
    ‘Encountering Werner Erhard/ Washington Post’
    April 14, 1979
    By Megan Rosenfeld

    or his Page for a multitude of interesting links spanning decades.

    Werner a/k/a/ Jack Rosenberg, who formerly owned the for-profit company and is hiding out somewhere, is now owned and run by his brother, Harry, and original trainers/coaches used to be a follower of L. Ron Hubbard. But when he left Scientology and started this new for-profit venture bakc in the mid 70’s, combining many philosophies, L. Ron and Scientology developed a vendetta against him.

    EST made a ton of money. The two ‘leaders’ had a really, nasty, ongoing battle which included surveillance, threats, FBI, IRS, lawyers, and accusations of marital abuse and child incest.

    With the one link I’m allowed I wanted you to listen to to this
    – it’s a hoot!

    [audio src="http://www.rickross.com/reference/est/werner.mp3" /]

    I, too, would love for Keith to do a show with Jason Beghe and Mark Bunker, AND I think it would be interesting if he looked beforehand at the history of Werner Erhard (Jack Rosenberg)and EST/the Forum as part of his research, as well.

  5. …Even in France, recently, where they are trying to expand there teachings, as they are in many countries….

    ********
    3 videos

    http://lippard.blogspot.com/2006/11/landmark-forum-abuses-copyright-t

    The San Francisco-based Landmark Education, an offshoot of Werner Erhard’s est, has been misusing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to threaten online video providers and cause the removal of material critical of the organization. They’ve specifically targeted a film that was broadcast on French television titled “Voyage to the Land of the New Gurus” (“Voyage Au Pays Des Nouveaux Gourous”) which was posted on Google Video, YouTube, and the Internet Archive. This film included footage shot undercover at Landmark events.

    In addition to demanding removal of the film under the DMCA on the bogus ground that their copyright in the “Landmark forum leaders manual” is being infringed, they have issued subpoenas to try to identify the individuals who have uploaded the video.

    The Electronic Frontier Foundation has acted to support the Internet Archive and Google in actions to fight the subpoenas; YouTube has notified its user and given them an opportunity to quash the subpoena. The EFF’s website documents their activities and the status of the case.

    These three videos include part of the content that Landmark Education is trying to suppress. The first begins with some references to Scientology and a quote from Christian anti-cultist Walter Martin (the late “Bible Answer Man,” whose successor was discredited creationist Hank Hanegraaf), followed by video footage of Anthony Rapp from “Rent” talking about Landmark Education. It then goes into “Voyage Au Pays Des Nouveaux Gourous” beginning at about 3 minutes in, which is French with English subtitles. Unfortunately, this is not the complete show, though it does show some interesting undercover footage of Alain Roth of Landmark Education verbally abusing a woman at a Landmark seminar.

  6. Patty, what’s all that Forum stuff have to do with Scientology and Youtube? Nothing. I saw that documentary – It was one of those tabloid TV hit pieces that made a lot of insinuations and made an argument for something sinister that just wasn’t there.

  7. “discredited creationist Hank Hanegraaf)”
    What makes him discredited except for your saying so?
    (Frankly, I personally discredit him for what I consider faulty arguments, but that’s not the same as calling someone “discredited.”)

    “the bogus ground that their copyright in the “Landmark forum leaders manual” is being infringed”
    Why is it bogus? I’m trying to imagine that I had my own seminar, with thousands of hours and dollars put into the material. I wouldn’t want someone videotaping it. (Note: I’m not a fan of Landmark.)

Comments are closed.