This video link will take you to exactly what led up to this confrontation, in a well documented expose:
http://bbcpanorama-exposed.org

(Tom's Note: The link takes you to a video created by the Church of Scientology in response to the BBC Panaroma program on the church.)

Sent by Steve | 12:33 PM ET | 05-16-2007

Go John Travolta Go!!!! Put them in their place. I could not believe the idiot reporter. He needs to be dismissed. Who does he think he is, God??? The Scientology faith or I should say beliefs are wonderful. I have never met such peaceful, wonderful people as my scientology friends. They have beautiful spirits and souls. I tell the world "LEAVE THEM ALONE" and I am a Episcopolian.

Sent by Marti | 12:57 PM ET | 05-16-2007

Scientology is one of the finest organizations in the world today. Trying to portray the Church of Scientology as anything but the fine organization that it is would be rough on anyone. John Sweeny's addenda to miss represent the church ran into the truth, the result were his ridiculous reactions.

The definition of journalism today is: swearing to another's lies. Kudos to the Church of Scientology for exposing the treachery of John Sweeny and the BBC. The depth 'journalists' & the media will sink to for their continued pharmaceutical company money flows is appalling.

Sent by grnapl | 1:12 PM ET | 05-16-2007

I think whoever decided to turn on cameras to document the reporter was brilliant.

Great to have a camera handy when there is a possibility of being treated unfairly (ask Rodney King) and I can't imagine a tabloid show NOT slanting a story to make it sensational.

Sent by David | 1:30 PM ET | 05-16-2007

John Sweeney has done the world a favour. Well done. He did not lose his temper he was trying to stop their brain washing period, the scientologist was like a wind up clock, his people are very reminiscent of the Nazis

Sent by James T | 1:32 PM ET | 05-16-2007

The "he said/ she said" aside -- the core issue is that both the BBC and Sweeney knowingly violated the UK government's regulations governing the media. The violations are fully documented in the Panorama Exposed video.

It was well-known that Scientology produced and distributed 100,000 copies of the DVD. Did anyone actually think that the Church of Scientology would stand idly by? It didn't with the Russian government (and its accomplishment now protects the religious practice of every person in Europe). Does anyone expect anything less with the BBC? Hardly.

Scientoloy investigates those who seek to harm it, as does any organization seeking to protect its interests.

Reporters being hassled? Tough. How many people's lives have been ruined by reporters with lies and inuendos? Reporters have no special dispensation to spew their hatreds and bias.

I've been a Scientologist for nearly 40 years. I am not employed by any Scientology organization.

Sent by James Lightfield | 1:47 PM ET | 05-16-2007

Sweeney and BBC are dissimulating. They should just admit they have a lo-o-o-ong history of ineffective anti-Scientology coverage, dating back to the 1950s.

As there's nothing -- other than a fourth-degree black belt in self-defense -- the church can modernly be attacked for, BBC's "reporters" resort to creative writing, agitation and provocation.

Sent by Jed | 1:57 PM ET | 05-16-2007

If 60 minutes or Michael Moore whow up to talk to me, I think I'd want my own cameras running as well.

Certainly snippets of video can be taken out of context, and this is a great way to defend yourself from slanted filmaking.

I searched myself for what L. Ron Hubbard himself said about the press, and found an interesting article (think it's on an offical church site):
http://www.realscientology.org

In the article, he says "Their daily bread is made by creating chaos. If chaos were to lessen, so would their incomes."

I guess that applies to the tabloid guys, too.

Sent by James | 2:38 PM ET | 05-16-2007

Does anyone notice that all the comments above were posted within one hour and are all positive messages about Scientology? One of the most hated and insidious organizations on the planet? These scientologists will do anything for their cult!

Sent by cyang | 2:47 PM ET | 05-16-2007

I can just imagine a group of Church of Scientology Leaders sitting behind their desks on L. Ron Hubbard Way in Hollywood writing to this blog to tell us the virtues of Scientolgy.

Sent by Terry | 2:58 PM ET | 05-16-2007

Do you not believe in freedom of speech? The gentleman who was seen on camera in Mr Sweeney's hotel did not deny following him when confronted. this surely would be harrasment or stalking. I think if the Church of Scientology had allowed greater access during the research of the documentary, the people would not be so sceptical of it. The representatives of the church did lose their cool on a few occassions when confronting Mr Sweeney. If it has nothing to hide then why is the church so worried about someone reporting on it?

Sent by e | 3:45 PM ET | 05-16-2007

I've watched the BBC documentary and the Scientologists' "counter-documentary". It's obvious that the Scientologists have a highly organized PR machine which will go to great lengths to discredit anyone who speaks out against their organization.

I've also surveyed responses on news sites like this one. It's astonishing how the first several responses on every page are pro-Scientology and anti-Sweeney, using almost exactly the same language as "grnapl" above. The coordination would be disturbing if it weren't so transparent.

Sent by Josiah Rowe | 5:05 PM ET | 05-16-2007

Mr Sweeney was up against a choreographed effort to make him a hypnotized drone of Scientology.

Here is the written training routine that the scientologist that was INCITING Mr Sweeney had practiced and drilled for many hours:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/CoS/reporter-trs.txt

Unless you read this closely, you might even think he was crazy.

But that was their INTENT.

They create a false Totem - The outburst, and then selectively
(propaganda - lies), amd repetitively (hypnosis) claim all
kinds of things... but you were never supposed to see this.

This document came from the 1977 US Federal Raid of scientology's headquarters, in that was to be described as the largest domestic spying case in US history.

Scientology likes to claim "we don't do that anymore.

Judging from their contrived treatment of Mr Sweeney, it is evident, that they don't do that any less.

Regards
Arnie Lerma
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON

Sent by Arnie Lerma | 5:17 PM ET | 05-16-2007

The church of scientology has proven itself to be little more than the next step in Star Wars/Star Trek fandom taken to its ultimate extreme.

"The story of 'a tyrant named Xenu (pronounced Zee-new)' who 75 million years ago 'ruled the Galactic Confederation, an alliance of 76 planets, including Earth, then called Teegeeack,' is just what Shatner was warning about in a skit on Saturday Night Live, lo, those many years ago! I mean, get a life, people!!

Although....there seems to be money pouring into the organization...do they have stock!

Sent by Badgertale | 6:01 PM ET | 05-16-2007

Yay Jesus!

Boo L. Ron Hubbard!

Sent by L.Ron Hubbard Jr. | 6:04 PM ET | 05-16-2007

To: e
Fascinating. See what really happened at the online video: http://bbcpanorama-exposed.org

The documentary contains time, place, form and event.

(Tom's Note: This is a video specifically created by the Church of Scientology to rebut the BBC Panorama film.)

Sent by James Lightfield | 7:34 PM ET | 05-16-2007

Why would someone go attack a person of a different religion? I don't go running around to Mormon Churches saying how their is no Jesus in America? I don't try to convince Jews that Moses never parted the Red Sea. If Scientologists are happy and not hurting anybody let them be.

Sent by Kevin | 10:44 PM ET | 05-16-2007

This noise about Scientology and all these opinions are just put out to prevent people from finding out what Scientology is. The bias of the BBC is evident, has been documented and published. Now numerous "anti-cult drones" are flying about to stop anyone from learning about it. To get the full picture, check out the BBC Documentary, go to bbcpanorama-exposed.org and go to scientologyreligion.org to get an idea what Scientology actually is.

Sent by Luana | 1:22 AM ET | 05-17-2007

Shame on you Tom Regan of NPR. Have you called or stopped by a Scientology church to meet a Scientologist and find out what we do and what we believe? Did you watch the documentation Scientology provided in http://www.bbcpanorama-exposed.org? Did you see how much the Church tried to simply provide BBC with factual information about Scientology? What kind of reporter sets off with a story in mind and refuses any evidence that his story may not be true? NPR certainly does not abide by such a policy. I would expect you to check all your facts before publishing a blog like this. Go to some or our web sites. Check out what Scientologist are doing at http://www.scientologytoday.org -- the Scientology news site, or read some chapters from the Scientology Handbook at http://www.scientologyhandbook.org. Or take a trip down to the DC Church and talk to some Scientologists. You would never say what you said in this posting if BBC were coming after the Muslim faith, or an evangelical Christian group, or Jews. And that's the whole point.

Sent by Jeanne | 1:38 AM ET | 05-17-2007

I've watched both videos (Sweeney's documentary as well as Scientology's propaganda video against Panorama) and what is most apparent to me is that the "Church official" wouldn't even let Sweeney get a word in edgewise.

He talks a whole lot about freedom of speech but he won't even allow Sweeney to give his own opinions about it. Dare I say, hypocrite?

Why should he expect to be given the benefit of the doubt, when he won't even give another man the same consideration?

I think it's clear that the only persons who behaved badly in this case were the Scientology official and his henchmen.

If you ask me, certain sects of Scientology are just another People's Temple in the making. I'm sure there are individuals in the organization who don't act like the Church official who terroized Sweeney and his crew, but people like him sure are giving Scientology a bad name.

Sent by E.K. Tisdale | 2:20 AM ET | 05-17-2007

As an outsider looking in i noticed that large sections of the Scientology rebut documentary was voice overs of their members which must of been recorded using some bug in the room while video of a dvd was being shown.

In stark contrast, the bbc story only used voice overs for the interviews of the Scientology celebs that they were prevented from showing on tv via legal intervention. All other interviews and peoples voices were caught on camera.

I also noticed that during almost all of the bbc report there was a Scientology camera there filming everything. Why then is the Scientology documentary relying on voice overs?

Very strange....

Sent by sturdy | 2:46 AM ET | 05-17-2007

I watched both, and what I found disturbing is that Sweeney was actually caught on camera, trying to hide in a crowd of Travolta fans at a movie premiere ... yelling out "sinister brainwashing cult", while the people around him seemed annoyed by him.

Additionally, the evidence appears to show that BBC/Sweeney either manipulated or staged a separate four-man "picket of scientology", pretended to have nothing to do with it, and then went to film it as though they were just documenting something that "they heard about".

Isn't manufacturing stuff like that and calling it a "documentary" illegal?

Sent by MargoM | 2:53 AM ET | 05-17-2007

I would encourage everyone who's following this story to check out the other bits and pieces found via a Google new search. Fascinatingly, the first handful of comments on each of the various news pieces are exactly like the ones above, a glowing list of talking-points to hype up Scientology. After thinking about it, I realise that it actually wouldn't take that much to flood the internet with this sort of PR attack -- just a dozen people in a room with their laptops, constantly refreshing their search parameters and then furiously piling on new stories. But most organizations would be a bit more subtle, I think, realising it looks manipulative.

Ground's been well-covered in pointing out how Scientology is alarming. The pay-as-you-go religion has a foul track record of alienating families and intimidating critics, not to mention a few lurid "Operations" in the mid-70s. Their range was pretty stunning -- "Operation Snow White" infiltrated US government departments, while "Operation Freakout" harassed an author critical of the group (no joke -- they tried to get her arrested or institutionalised for over a decade). This isn't rumour or slander; it's easily found in FBI court records, where you can also view Scientology "teachings" that were entered into evidence.

Sweeney's question was to find out if the CoS had successfully shed this sinister image as they claimed. Instead, he was confronted with strangers following him around his hotel, cars tracking him through the streets, and the CoS rep Tommy Davis ambushing him at his hotel and during an interview. Davis himself is flat-out alarming; his posture and attitude were so like Tom Cruise's that I can only come to the conclusion that Scientologists are specifically taught to firmly, loudly, and accusatorily drone when they start hearing conversation they don't like. There are certain social niceties observed by Western culture, including personal space, moderate volume, and the ability to both speak and listen -- when faced with someone who unabashedly ignores those conventions and forces their opinion on you, it can not only be alarming, but sometimes a little brainwashy.

There's a lot of argument around as to whether Scientology's a religion or not. I have no idea, the word's sort of lost all meaning to me by this point. But one line of argument doesn't make any sense to me: that Scientology is secretive and aggressive and has shifty practices, but that should be allowed because they're growing pains that every major world religion went through. What?! Why?! Many of the old religions came about in an age where education was nowhere near as widespread as it is today, and where society was very different. Sure, Christians placed unwanted daughters into convents -- but we live NOW, not then, and we live in the Western world where that's basically outmoded.

The major world religions got away with murder because the people at the time didn't know any better. There's absolutely no reason that Scientology should get a free pass and hold their own version of the Inquisition merely because it's their turn. In two thousand years, we've learned, and by now we should know better.

Sent by Nina | 3:06 AM ET | 05-17-2007

How John Sweeney kept his cool for so long I do not know. The 'cult' intimidated him from the beginning and that Tommy was so aggressive it beggars belief. Don't condemn John, praise him for keeping his cool for so long!!

Sent by Jan | 7:44 AM ET | 05-17-2007

If you are part of a religion, why spy on someone who wants to learn more and in a sense "spread your word".
Watching the documentary many people either took good or bad points from the CoS.

Being atheist, to me this all sounds like codswollop!

Grow up Humanity!

Sent by Sia | 8:29 AM ET | 05-17-2007

The fact that the Church of Scientology (CoS) employ people like Tommy Davis to harass people investigating Scientology should heed as a warning to just how dangerous a cult the CoS is. Scientology is not the issue here and that is what many people are missing, the investigation was focussed on the practices of the CoS as an organization.

Sent by mart | 8:40 AM ET | 05-17-2007

Don't kid me please Scientology is no religion. How on Earth can you describe it as such. The publications are weak, the think tank is daft and the only reason such a movement finds itself in the daily papers has little to do with its beliefs and more to do with the weird world of the celebrity who hops on and off such ideology as if it were a fashionable merry-go-round. Give me a break go and read some proper educated literature. Trust me when I say that Scientology will disappear from the face of the Earth sooner rather than later. No doubt it will be replaced by some other cultist religion which unearths itself in the not to distant future.

Sent by OSSY | 8:41 AM ET | 05-17-2007

I watched with utter disbelief the abhorent behaviour of the Scientology sect/cult. The chances of anyone who watched that footage, and the unfair treatment of the BBC reporter would even consider converting to the offensive and brainwashing organization I imagine are NILL!!

Sent by Sarah | 10:37 AM ET | 05-17-2007

The church of Scientology is desperate to prove it is not a cult. But make a list of characteristics that mark a cult, and you will find all the marks of it evident in this organization's tactics. While we respect anyone's freedom to believe what they will- there is a reason why we need to protect the vulnerable from cults, and expose these frauds to the public.
The press should protect it's freedom to report and opposition should be able to peacefully exist (eg. Paulette Cooper and Lisa McPherson foundation) and the law should safeguard that. It is not happening in Clearwater, in our very own U.S.A. Shame on us.

Sent by Med | 1:09 PM ET | 05-17-2007

Scientology, this bizzare cult based on the idea that repeated non-sensical questions (auditing) will produce confusion and a sugggestible state shows it can attract intelligent professionals like Tommy Davis. when confronted by someone as cool and well trained as Mr. Davis, hold onto your wallet! Me, I think I'll have another plate of laughing Clams.

Sent by boyd | 1:28 PM ET | 05-17-2007

"Scientology, evil cult or a cruel hoax? Our reporter's balanced view -- up next."

It's great to see someone fight back.

Sent by tengah | 1:30 PM ET | 05-17-2007

Sweeney turned down repeated invitations to tour Scientology facilities, drug rehab centers, classes and management offices--yet he brays about inadequate access.

He droned his single point--"You must be brainwashed"--scores of times, purposefully to goad nearly every Scientologist he talked to. And *he* claims the right to explode?

He was given armloads of information on our literacy campaigns, drug rehab work, crimnal reform and volunteers at disaster scenes. Yet he couldn't see what was in front of him, couldn't hear what was offered to him, wouldn't access the new information given him.

He sacked it all in favor of pushing his hate-speech.

That is the classic definition of a reporter brainwashed by his editor.

Sent by Jed | 2:13 PM ET | 05-17-2007

the Scientology is about as real as the religion of Jedi.

Sent by Luke Skywalker | 3:49 PM ET | 05-17-2007

I was raised a Scientologist and am raising my daughter this way as well. I could write an entire book listing out all of the ways that Scientology has helped me live a happier and more successful life. My daughter is about to turn thirteen. She has been studying basic courses on communication and the parts of life. She uses what she has learned to handle the usual problems that pre-teen children face. She is a productive member of the family who does her chores and works hard at school. I know that her current happiness and success in her endeavors is because of the courses she is studying that are teaching her about life. I am grateful for what Scientology has done to improve my own life, but I am even more grateful for what it is doing for my child.

Rather than taking someone's word for what Scientology is all about, you should pick up a copy of Dianetics and find out for yourself.

Sent by A.W. | 5:28 PM ET | 05-17-2007

I don't know if every scientology member has a cult-like mentality, but that you all seem to blindly defend the pretty obvious harrassment of this reporter is pretty telling. Can't you guys see that the man was harrassed? So he yelled at him, why pretend that that is such a big deal? Have you all never been yelled at before? If a scientologist yells at another scientologist, do you call them a nazi? Time to reflect guys, obviously cultists don't think they are being victimized, so the mere fact that you don't feel you are in one doesn't make it so. I know there must be some good people in the organization that can stand up for human decency, and condemn the harrassment and smearing of this reporter. anyone? anyone? It makes me sad that there is so little diversity of opinion among scientology responses. why is that? Surely there is a dissenting voice? just one?

Sent by machty | 4:34 PM ET | 05-18-2007

I have to agree with Jed.

Calling Scientologists brainwashed because of our beliefs is simply insulting and disrespectful. Why bother interviewing a Scientologist if you're just going to dehumanize their opinion with "you're brainwashed". The fact is Sweeny is the one who can't disprove that we are helped by our religion so he has to go around accusing us of being "brainwashed". It's simply insulting and oppressive.

I think Tommy Davis speaks for me when he says he's had it with being insulted for his religious beliefs. I hope my Church does sue the BBC/ Sweeny simply intends to breed an atmosphere of hatred and violence against Scientologists, and that is a hate crime that should be punished by law.

Sent by techno | 6:48 PM ET | 05-18-2007

i believe that people should be allowed to follow whatever beliefs they want. i think the majority of scientologists are peaceful people. however i believe the people in control of the cos(church of scientology) are corrupt and sinister. why are they so paranoid and defensive if they have nothing to hide? check out this website www.xenu.net L ron Hubbard the founder of scientolog was qouted as saying: THE BEST WAY TO MAKE A MILLION DOLLARS IS TO CREATE A RELIGION.

Sent by jonny | 10:40 PM ET | 05-24-2007

I read all the posts there and my oh my the members of scientology toss in a lot of links to scientology sites or a scientology front group site.

You guys can say the truth is on these many sites but anyone with any common sense will understand that if they so to thses silly sites they will see only what you wiah them to see.

At least with the critic site xenu.net you can see offical court and public records. At the xenutv.com site you can see many video's of the members of scientology in action. You can also see video's of court cases and public hearings. And many interviews of ex members who were in for up to 30 years before they freed themselves.

It's real easy to say the scientology sites are slanted. The xenu sites admit they are critical of scientology also. But really hard to dismiss the video's and public and court records you can see at the xenu sites.

Sent by JeraldR | 9:32 PM ET | 05-25-2007