alt_religion_scientology/FACTNetARS20011206

FACTNet would like to applaud those anti-cult activists who successfully
lobbied the world's media so as to create the paradigm shift that enabled
today's TIME Magazine to write a story like this:

Found at:
http://www.time.com/time/columnist/reaves/article/0,9565,187206,00.html

Did John Walker Join a Cult?
The country is horrified by the apparent defection of Walker, the "American
Taliban." Would our reaction change if it turned out he'd been brainwashed?

Wednesday, Dec. 05, 2001
John Walker, the "American Taliban" whose furry, burned visage has been
plastered across our television screens since his capture last week, is
becoming something of a celebrity in the U.S. That's not to say Walker
should expect a ticker-tape parade if and when he manages to make it back to
U.S. soil - this celebrity is more like the kind that sends mob informants
hurtling into the shadows of the Witness Protection Program.

It's easy to understand the rage Walker inspires. At a moment when America
is experiencing a rare and very real moment of national unity, this guy
shows up fighting for the enemy - the same enemy accused of harboring the
mastermind of the most horrible terrorist attack in American history.

We can't (and shouldn't) forget that. But even in the midst of our pain and
frustration, we need to debate Walker's case, not simply pass judgment.
There's a difference between engaging in a discussion about the ignorance of
youth, personal responsibility and the power of cult figures and simply
waving a white flag to the Taliban. We reserve judgment because we are
Americans - other countries hang first and ask questions later.

Tricky questions

Despite his mass media ubiquity over the past several days, Walker remains a
mystery. Here's what we know: He comes from a well-to-do home in suburban
San Francisco. We've learned that an adolescent fascination with Islam led
to his conversion and subsequent embrace of the Bay Area Muslim community.
This interest, in other words, was not a passing fancy. After his high
school graduation, Walker's passion for his adopted religion spurred trips
to Yemen and later to Pakistan, where he was last heard from in May of this
year.

Now that he's resurfaced, we're faced with some tricky questions. Is this
kid a criminal? Here's the case against him: He converted to Islam, which is
not a crime. Traveling abroad to explore an adopted religion and culture?
Also not a crime. Expressing support for the September 11th attacks?
Reprehensible, but not criminal. Taking up arms alongside Taliban forces?
This is where certainty takes a back seat to speculation.

Try him for treason, scream the pundits. Hang him! Rip his limbs from his
body! While the charge sounds suitably dramatic, legally, treason is a
pretty tricky crime to prove (and is punishable by death). Article III,
Section 3 of the Constitution reads, "Treason against the United States,
shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their
enemies, giving them aid and comfort." Walker may well have fulfilled those
requirements, but there's more. A defendant may be convicted only "on the
testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open
court." Will two fellow fighters come forward to offer witness accounts of
Walker's crime? Will an unrepentant Walker tell his own story to a judge and
jury?

It's conceivable that he'll never have to. In the upper echelons of
Washington, D.C., where one might expect the most heated of responses to the
Walker case, there is a perceptible push to withhold a verdict. This week,
President Bush referred to Walker as "this poor fellow," and Defense
Secretary Rumsfeld told reporters his fate would be decided "in good time."

Did he join a cult?

Meanwhile, Walker himself remains a total mystery. By most accounts, he
seems to be at least slightly unhinged (an observation echoed by a Northern
Alliance fighter who, according to wire reports, indicated the young
American and made the universal gesture for "crazy"). Whether he's mentally
competent to stand trial remains to be seen, but some legal experts suspect
Walker will not be tried as a traitor; instead he'll be charged with
sedition - a largely unused charge that implies the advocacy of violence
against the government - or some other, lesser crime.

But what crime, exactly? Did Walker commit a crime by simply joining
opposition forces? While we don't know if Walker ever fired a gun against
the anti-Taliban forces, we know he was prepared to fight. Should we make a
distinction between carrying a loaded gun and actually firing it?

Then, if we're willing to abandon, just for a moment, the framework of legal
retribution, there is another lens through which to examine Walker's
situation: The Taliban could easily be considered a cult, and Walker simply
one of its brainwashed groupies. That's the take from Rick Ross, an expert
on cults who lectures frequently on the topic. "My conclusion," Ross
explains, "is that this group is an apparitional cult, and not in any way
indicative of Islam in general. We've suspected this for some time now, and
Walker's presence and behavior provides a sort of missing link."

Ross speculates that Walker, who by all accounts went through a truly
astonishing metamorphosis - from shy, quiet teenager drawn to the peaceful
tenets of Islam to armed military man - was sucked into al-Qaeda networks
during his time in Pakistan. He was taken to Afghanistan, and that's when
the trouble really began. "Walker's transformation probably place in one of
al-Qaeda's training camps, which are very similar to training ground we see
in American-based cults. Bin Laden does what every good cult leader does: He
isolates these people within an environment he totally controls - everything
they see, hear and do is controlled by the bin Laden." The leader presents
himself as God's prototype of the "perfect" person, or in this case,
specifically, the "perfect Muslim" - dedicated in the way every Muslim
should be dedicated, focused in the way every Muslim should be focused.

That's particularly dangerous for impressionable types, says Ross, made
worse by the absence of any objective analysis or perspective. This is not a
situation in which one can just ask a string of questions to a group of
learned Islamic scholars. "Which is really too bad," says Ross, "because I'd
imagine there would be quite a reaction to some of the Taliban's teachings.
So it's okay if I commit mass murder and suicide in the name of jihad? Oh,
and by the way, I'd like to visit a strip club beforehand.'"

While he's personally sympathetic to Walker's situation, Ross doubts the law
will share his view. Generally, he explains, the law will excuse cult
members' behaviors up to a certain point. "Once you cross that line," Ross
says, committing rape, for example, or murder, "regardless of an undue
influence of a leader, you are held responsible for your actions."

And that's what most of us were waiting to hear, isn't it?

Jessica Reaves
Columnist
www.TIME.com

--
F.A.C.T.Net, Inc.
PO Box 3135
Boulder, CO 80307-3135 USA

Web site http://www.factnet.org/
E-mail manage@factnet.org
Donations http://www.factnet.org/donation.htm
Subscriptions to Newsletters http://lists.factnet.org/mailman/listinfo/factnet-news

F.A.C.T.Net is a non-profit 501(c)(3) news source, referral service, and
archive protecting freedom of mind from harms caused by psychological
coercion.

This editorial opinion provided by FactNet, Inc. FactNet is a nonprofit
Internet archive and newswire service dedicated to protecting freedom of
mind by reducing harms caused by cults and mind control. FactNet's web page
is located at http://www.factnet.org and has received over 21,000,000 hits.
Re-distribution and proper re-posting of this document is appreciated.
Please use proper net etiquette when doing so.