The infamous Scientology episode of South Park, "Trapped In The Closet", was scheduled to air Wednesday but didn't. Tom Cruise is currently denying rumors that he threated not to do publicity for Paramount's Mission: Impossible 3 if the episode aired again on TV. Since Viacom is the parent company of both Paramount and Comedy Central, it's a viable theory.

Matt and Trey responded with the following:

"So, Scientology, you may have won THIS battle, but the million-year war for Earth has just begun!" the self-described "servants of the dark lord Xenu" said in a statement Thursday that does not mention Cruise. "Temporarily anozinizing our episode will NOT stop us from keeping Thetans forever trapped in your pitiful man-bodies."

I recommend that SP fans download the episode, because who knows if it will ever make it to DVD.

Tebor wrote:

RegalSin wrote: So are saying they pulled the Part II or the original since the orginal was aired. Not kidding. If they showed "Trapped In The Closet" again, I guess they pulled it for just the one time that inspired this thread in the first place. There is no part two due to the shows wacky disregard of continuity. Unless you meant the episode where Chef left the show... That could be a part II in a sense.

First of all, the epsiode didn't need a Part II nor did was it ever intended to have a Part II. The episode has a beginning, a middle, and an end. I don't know what more you wanted from it. Secondly, the show is actually very good with continuity, except for the whole Kenny dying thing.

Tebor wrote:

I didn't watch any other episodes of season 9, but Kyle, Cartman, and Kenny were clearly no longer Stan's friends by the end of the episode. How does Stan regain their friendship?

That's completely irrelevant. Kids fight all the time, they're friends one day, enemies the next. At point in life, friendship tends to be based more on geographic location than on any sort of actual bond. The kids don't particularly like Cartman, but they continue to hang out with him, with different degrees of tolerance.

Dr. Jeebus wrote:

Can we make a new forum rule to NOT revive dead threads just to say something irrelevant/incoherant?I don't need to see the Saw 2 thread bumped in 3 months so some douchebag can say "this movie was gay" and nothing else.

Or instead of demanding new rules, maybe we could reeeeeeeeeead the forum rules.

7. Don't bump old topics for no reason.
Sooner or later, all threads die. That's just the way things go. When new members join the forums, there is inclination to jump into as many topics as possible. And while that is certainly encouraged, please do not revive threads that have been dead for a month or more unless you can contribute something new and interesting to the conversation. It is considered bad etiquette to revive old threads, especially topical ones.