I dunno 'bout you, but to me the guy comes off as arrogant and not
very bright in the way he's presenting himself. He's also most likely
in for a rude surprise if he thinks the US justice system is going to
entertain the vaguest notion of declaring his prosecution unwarranted
in his absence; they want you there to have the cuffs slapped on if
the decision goes the other way. Furthermore, even if he's found
completely blameless on the original charges, he's still guilty of
flight.
Quirk of the law.
Now I may be proven wrong, and I hope I am--but I've a pretty good
idea whose ass is going to kicked here when the dust has settled.
And it ain't the Church's.
Now I wonder if his snatch-and-grab comment is a prelude to a
prearranged vanishing act...
jm
On 24 May 2001, at 13:33, Eugene.Leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen wrote:
>
> Strange? Fucking brilliant, and remarkably gutsy. I bet he's having shitloads
> of fun, too. I hope I ever run into him, so I can shake his hand a buy him
> a beer.
>
> "Kick ass"? And how.
>
> http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/05/23/henson/print.html
>
> On the run from L. Ron Hubbard
>
> Keith Henson, Scientology gadfly turned fugitive from justice,
> explains his reasons for fleeing the United States.
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - -
> By Damien Cave
>
> May 23, 2001 | Keith Henson is waging a one-man crusade against
> Scientology. Arguing that the church threatens to undermine the First
> Amendment by suing opponents into submission, he has fought the house
> that L. Ron Hubbard built at every turn. Since 1995, when the church
> first angered Net users by trying to close down a newsgroup dedicated
> to discussing Scientology's practices, he has posted documents that
> the church considers secret on the Web, picketed the church's
> headquarters and defended his actions in court.
>
> Just last month, the California Superior Court in Riverside County
> handed Henson a major defeat. Citing Henson's picketing in front of
> Riverside's Golden Era Productions (a sound and film studio for the
> Church of Scientology) last summer and messages he posted in a
> Scientology newsgroup, the court found Henson guilty of violating the
> state's hate-crimes law. His demonstrations, the court ruled,
> interfered with Scientologists' constitutional right to religious
> freedom.
>
> Online critics of Scientology, and some free-speech advocates,
> responded to the decision with outrage, calling Henson "an American
> hero." His conviction, they said, was nothing less than a "miscarriage
> of justice," as one poster at geek site Slashdot put it. Others called
> Henson "a martyr."
>
> Meanwhile, Henson's tactics have often seemed a bit quixotic -- even
> his supporters say that he tends to act without thinking. They
> question, for example, the wisdom of Henson's two-line contribution to
> a thread in the alt.religion.scientology newsgroup about directing a
> nuclear missile at church members. Henson contends that his post
> implied no real threat to Scientology members and that it was merely a
> response to another post in a long-running joke about "Cruise" (as in
> Scientology celeb Tom) missiles.
>
> Still, it was an odd move for someone ostensibly dedicated to serious
> critique, and it brought an immediate outcry from
> Scientologists. "Free speech does not protect threats of mass
> destruction," said Scientology spokesman Ken Hoden. "It does not
> protect threats of missile attacks. It does not protect what he
> did. He's trying to hide behind the First Amendment."
>
> David Touretzky, a Carnegie Mellon computer scientist and fellow
> Scientology gadfly, says that Henson tends to incriminate himself in
> his encounters with Scientologists -- often providing church officials
> with legal ammunition they later use against him.
>
> Henson's legal strategy has been criticized as well. Cindy Cohn, legal
> director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says that Henson
> refused to let the civil liberties nonprofit represent him, choosing
> instead to have a court-appointed attorney. Henson contests Cohn's
> claim -- "I've never been offered help from the EFF," he says -- but
> just last week, he once again confounded his fans by failing to show
> up at his sentencing hearing, where he could have been sent to jail
> for a year.
>
> So where is Keith Henson and what is he up to? In a telephone
> interview from Canada -- where he's applying for political asylum --
> Henson explained why he played hooky from the hearing and what he
> hopes to achieve by moving his case forward from abroad.
>
> You're now a fugitive from justice -- why?
>
> I actually came up here for a different reason. I came up here to
> picket for another cause. But while I was here, a bunch of people were
> trolling on the Net, talking about my coming up here as a political
> refugee. And there was so much trolling and so much interest that we
> said, "Why not?" So I stayed over an extra day and we checked with
> Guidy Mamann, who is apparently a top immigration lawyer in Canada. We
> chatted for a while, and I filled out the paperwork. He fired up a Web
> browser, found some stories and said this was a viable case. So I blew
> off [the California court] and I've already paid [Mamann] a retainer
> to deal with this from up here.
>
> Why not stay and fight from the States?
>
> Well, I would have gotten a certain amount of PR and done a certain
> amount of damage to [the church] had I gone back and gone to jail
> there. But there's a justification for being here. In spite of the
> fact that there's more risk and that it generates even more criminal
> problems for me, nonetheless, being here has the potential to generate
> more heat on Scientology.
>
> Have you been in touch with the American courts?
>
> Oh yeah, I talked to the probation guy down there this morning
> [Thursday]. I just updated him on where I was and what was going
> on. He didn't have much to say.
>
> You seem to enjoy being a martyr for the cause.
>
> Other people hold me up as a martyr. I'm not a martyr; I just kick
> ass.
>
> But it must feel good to be in the spotlight. How much of what you're
> doing has to do with the a desire for attention?
>
> It's a minor factor. The social strokes are reward for doing good
> stuff -- I wouldn't deny that. People work hard to get the Nobel
> Prize. I'm not going to get the Nobel Prize. I'm not going to get any
> kind of prize. But I'm a known person because I've been involved with
> this stuff for a long time.
>
> How much have you spent on your case?
>
> I've spent about $35,000.
>
> How long do you plan to stay in Canada?
>
> Forever. If the U.S. government decides that what I did was not within
> the framework of free speech, if the [U.S.] State Department supports
> the government of Riverside County in what I'm arguing is an abuse of
> human rights, then I ain't going back.
>
> So what happens next?
>
> Well, there's going to be a review of the situation. Because when you
> apply for refugee status on the basis of human rights, your lawyer is
> your advocate and the Canadian government is your opposition.
>
> An immigration review board adjudicates this thing. And in order to do
> this, by treaty and custom, the Canadian [authorities] go to the State
> Department. They have to go in and investigate, and come up with the
> transcripts and motions and all of that. They need it in order to
> defend themselves, to prove that what went on was a fair and unbiased
> problem.
>
> So the State Department sometimes does this [itself], and at other
> times [it has] the Justice Department do it. But I suspect that when
> they start doing this thing -- and they realize that there were severe
> violations of protocol -- what may well happen is that they may march
> through Riverside County, Calif., and deal with [the church].
>
> What's the goal of your efforts?
>
> The ultimate goal is to reform or completely destroy Scientology.
> It's completely undemocratic.
>
> Do you feel like you're getting anywhere with this, in the big
> picture?
>
> Oh yes, yes indeed. This is the endgame. I don't know whether we're
> years away or months away or even weeks away. But the problems that
> Scientology has at this time are legion. Let's put it this way: a
> [Scientology] event that for years had been attended at a fairly high
> level had 40 percent of the people show up that they expected.
>
> Where'd you get that number?
>
> >From people who were there. We have spies with Scientology --
> disaffected Scientologists -- all over the country.
>
> It all sounds so cloak-and-dagger.
>
> Oh, it's definitely that. For example, we think there's a pretty fair
> chance that Scientology will try to do a snatch-and-grab situation up
> here, where they come after me.
>
> Are you saying that you're afraid you'll be kidnapped?
>
> Sure.
>
> So are you just staying at that same house -- the one where you're
> talking from?
>
> No. I'll be living at a number of safe houses here. I'm also taking
> perhaps as [much] as a billion dollars of electronics work out of
> California.
>
> Are you talking about a business that's already established in
> California?
>
> No, it's a huge development project, a huge development and production
> project. But I'm not going to go into detail about it. You'll find
> out. If it works, you'll find out about it shortly.
>
> Since when are you the kind of person who protects secrets?
>
> OK, I'll give you this. Let's just call it a billion-dollar-scale,
> cryptic stealth surveillance technology. That'll keep them guessing.
>
John Marlow
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 10:00:07 MDT