Skip to content

The World is Watching

November 7, 2009

The world is watching to see how rank-and-file Scientologists react to the growing reports of abuse, violence and criminality among Scientology’s highest echelons.

How those individual Scientologists react will determine, to a large measure, how the subject of Scientology itself is perceived, now and in the future.

Consider the reaction of lay Catholics in the wake of the 2002 Boston Globe coverage of the priest abuse scandal. Parishioner meetings in the basement of St. John the Evangelist church in Wellesley, Massachusetts, soon expanded, thanks to the internet, to conferences of thousands – lay Catholics, victims of clergy sexual abuse, theologians, and priests from around the United States and the world. The resulting organization, Voice of the Faithful (VOTF), grew to 30,000 members within a year and is now a strong advocate for lay oversight of their parishes and dioceses. Their motto is “Keep the Faith, Change the Church.”

Whatever one might think of Catholicism, there is no doubt that these members were strong, independent thinkers not afraid to stand up to their Church elders. They had a sense of moral outrage about priest abuses and cared enough about the future of their Church to do something about it.

On the other hand, consider the reaction of members for the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) when their church was faced with charges of sexual abuse of minors. Law enforcement and social workers entering their compound encountered fear and mistrust from those inside. These members were silent, afraid, uncooperative. They denied knowledge of any wrongdoing and refused to speak out against their elders. Ultimately, it fell to courageous former members (like Carolyn Jessop) and law enforcement to bring their Church leaders to justice.

Whatever one might think of the FLDS and its beliefs, one is left with the impression that its members are cowed and muzzled, afraid to speak out against their leaders. And yes, one hears stories of people having to escape from their compounds and being pursued by “security guards.” The word “cult” comes to mind.

So how will Scientology be perceived?

Well, that depends on the reaction of rank-and-file Scientologists.

If they remain silent, claim ignorance of any wrongdoing, refuse to speak out against Church leaders, people may well think that Scientologists are too frightened, too cowed by their leaders, to speak out. They may conclude that Scientology has become an oppressive cult, where no challenge to the authority of the leaders is permitted, and where anyone speaking out is punished or expelled. A group where they are taught to fear the outside world as “enemies” and close ranks behind their leaders, no matter what they do.

On the other hand, if Scientologists stand up and speak out, if they call for reform, if they withdraw their support from corrupt leaders, then the world will know that these are people who stand behind their beliefs, who actually practice what they preach, who do have a sense of moral outrage when their fellows are abused.

We stand at a turning point in history. Individual Scientologists stand at the fulcrum. Which way Scientology turns hinges on the actions we take now.

Are Scientologists frightened followers, only thinking and saying what their leaders permit?

Or are they strong and courageous men and women who are a living embodiment of the philosophy they espouse?

The world awaits your answer.

Advertisements
27 Comments
  1. November 8, 2009 3:38 am

    Damn. I wish I’d written this.

  2. November 8, 2009 3:43 am

    Rebel yar battin’ a thousand 🙂

  3. November 8, 2009 3:59 am

    The day I stopped trying to apply “KSW” to the Church of Scientology was the day that my life turned around for the better. I had been trying to “handle” the out-policy and the out-ethics and the steady stream of fanatical pinheads coming out of Scientology training for years.

    I finally realized that it was always meant to be that way.

    L Ron Hubbard, and now David Miscavige, work on different ideal scenes than the ones LRH gave Scientologists to work on. So the abuse and the corruption and the fanaticism are only outpoints to Scientologists.

    They never were for LRH and DM. They were pluspoints.

    If they were outpoints, they would have handled them long ago.

    People have a responsibility to their own lives, and to their own families. They do not have a responsibility to clean up messes that they would have never created in the first place.

    There is no need to get yourself stuck to Scientology by telling yourself that “you are responsible for how abusive it is”. You are not responsible for things you never did.

    Only fanatics and con men run that one on you.

    • November 8, 2009 4:53 am

      The thing I can’t understand why you even bothered to post this. I mean I can understand preaching to the choir but as far as I’m concerned you’re just preaching to yourself.

      I mean if you don’t see any point to Scientology. Why bother coming here?

      My suggestion is go live that happy little life of yours and leave us poor deluded fools alone.

      • rebel008 permalink*
        November 8, 2009 8:18 am

        RJ, your input is always appreciated. But let me give you a bit of my own philosophy, learned the hard way. While it’s always tempting to flash back at a poster you disagree with, and believe me I’ve done it many times myself, it rarely does anything except start a flame war. These days, when I read a post I disagree with, I try to, first, understand it, second, try to understand how the person’s life experiences may have brought them to that state of mind, and, third, see if I can learn anything from their views. A wise man once said that you only learn from people you disagree with. True, sometimes there is nothing there to be learned, and yes, the person may just be trying to pick a fight or antagonize. If that’s the case, I often find it’s best to let it go, just let it wash over me and be gone. I honestly think that if the C of S didn’t automatically attack critics, if they listened and tried to be a bit more tolerant, or at worst, just let it go, they would not have made so many enemies. The fact is, we don’t all agree – but that’s a good thing, in my view! Not to say we can’t argue and press our own views – but I think we can do so with mutual respect and tolerance. You too Alanzo.

      • November 8, 2009 10:08 am

        Busted 🙂

        You do have a point Rebel.

        I’ll go off and bury the blow torch, now.

    • Been There permalink
      November 8, 2009 11:02 am

      In this short, succinct commentary by Rebel 008 is the essence of religious reform. Geir Isene had a similar piece on his blog yesterday, but was more accusative of those who don’t do something to handle church abuse.

      I’ve followed Alanzo for years on various message boards. He never scruples to defend his position. While I dislike the flame wars that often result when two viewpoints collide, I do sometimes find wisdom in Alanzo’s posts. And I have to say there is some wisdom in his statement that responsibility as blame benefits few.

      Thanks Rebel008 for your measured response. For those of us who have been in the church for decades, we have had our fill of make-wrong, enforced overt havingness, endless amends and blame, shame and regret. We are all in new territory now and will have to work out our individual salvation with diligence. We will need civil discourse across a spectrum of viewpoints to do that.

      • November 8, 2009 11:32 am

        Hey I hate to admit it but Alanzo is very right on that point. We should stop blaming ourselves for what happened in the Church. Also you are also right Been There about the fact that more open communication and even debate on the subject in a polite, respectful and dignified manner is probably the key to our salvation.

        Some of us OTs, by that I mean old timers that have been through the flaming net wars on ARS, have got to learn to chill, sometimes and avoid trying to turn any one who disagrees with us into a crispy critter. Any way I’ll try and be more loving and understanding, even if it kills me 🙂

      • Lindsay permalink
        December 9, 2009 9:23 pm

        I’m doing this re project on Scientology and i need to know why scientology is important and relevant to the world today. Could you be kind enough to tell me some facts??? xx

  4. SherryMK permalink
    November 8, 2009 7:48 am

    Brilliant post Rebel008. We are indeed at a turning point. I was contemplating today on how the spiral of Church of Scientology is at the end of it’s cycle…and spinning faster and faster out of control. It started with Anonymous in 2008. People began to feel safer speaking out, then Marty Rathbun came out publicly and the floodgates opened with news of Rinder, St. Pete’s times and tons of Ex Int Base staff going public..Marc and Claire Headley’s court case and on and on. Then Paul Haggis and OTVllls picking up their nerve to tell it like it is.

    You are right. We are at the turning point. Which way will YOU, the Scientologists reading this, turn?

  5. scooter permalink
    November 8, 2009 9:25 am

    Love this – we ARE at a turning point and it WILL depend on how the rank-and-file react as to how the CoS is perceived.

    Hate to say it but I fear that there will be cowering and muzzling more than personal courage and integrity shown.

    I’d like to be proved wrong tho’. 🙂

  6. November 8, 2009 11:21 am

    “The fact is, we don’t all agree – but that’s a good thing, in my view! Not to say we can’t argue and press our own views – but I think we can do so with mutual respect and tolerance.”

    Thanks Rebel,

    There are only a few people that attempt to stop other people from communicating their views on LRH and Scn and it’s nice to experience a moderator that pushes respect and tolerance from both sides of the issues.

    I truly appreciate your fairness.

    • November 8, 2009 2:08 pm

      Rebel’s post made me think of the day my life got immeasurably better – it was the day I quit trying to take responsibility for things I never created, and never would create in a million years.

      It was the kind of realization you have when you recognize the correct ownership of problems. Misownership of problems causes people to have a lot of unnecessary problems. And that is something that the Church has run on Scientologists continually – you are responsible for the survival of Scientology.

      Well, no you are not.

      That should be part of your understanding, too. If Scientology was really what it said it was, as expressed in the Creed of the Church, etc. none of this would be happening. And there would be no need to defend against any “enemies”, or to take responsibility for things you never believed were right, and never created yourself.

      I know that it’s not the normal view in Scientology. But I think that the correct ownership of problems should start to be part of Scientologists’ thinking in the months and years ahead.

      Thanks for letting me say my piece.

      • SherryMK permalink
        November 8, 2009 9:07 pm

        Alanzo, It is quite an interesting and valid(IMO) point you have brought up here and another one that I myself have pondered over in the last few months. Just how much responsibility I can I talk myself into having had, not only in the C of S..but also in the world and universe at large?. As an OTVlll, the amount of “your are totally responsible for everything that happens” is so ingrained into you, that an earthquake that happened 6000 miles away and kills 300 people starts to get you to think how you might have been responsible for that! This is no joke. The amount of introversion as regards to what amount of responsibility you have to anything and I mean anything that occurs anywhere is astonishing. The higher up you go, the more you introvert as the whole world, every person in it, every event that occurs etc etc has “something to do with me”.

        I am still “coming down” from the pressures of all the mess I created world-wide like Hurricane Katrina, the LA fires, the LA riots, the Tsu Nami, the burglary down the street..man am I one hell of a creator. I don’t know if I’ll ever be forgiven for those ones.

        It’s a funny story : when the Berlin Wall got taken down, us on OTVll at the time at Flag were told at some event that it was we OTs auditing that had actually brought the wall down!

        Arrogance, pure and simple.

      • Jim Logan permalink
        November 9, 2009 10:45 pm

        Sherry,
        I recommend reading over the Introspection Rundown bulletin. You’ll notice the questions on it have to do with introverting on overts that don’t exist, withholds that aren’t and so on.

        Looking for something there that isn’t, given wrong indications these are the stuff of introspection and cutting reach.

        Truth isn’t about ‘guilt’ as some sort of foisted off ‘responsibility’. Truth is the exact time, place, form and event. I didn’t ’cause’ Katrina as such. On the other hand, for a certain amount of Action tone, and interest in living, I certainly had my hand in the solidity of MEST. From there, it’s ‘weeeee’ and randomity. Hurricanes being part of the randomity.

      • SherryMK permalink
        November 9, 2009 11:49 pm

        Thanks Jim..I was making an obviously feeble attempt at humor. Probably not my calling in life. Sher

  7. Anon permalink
    November 8, 2009 5:22 pm

    A relevant excerpt from a lecture by L. Ron Hubbard:
    “[…]Check these facts, you will find they are always true. That person who is trying to control you is lying to you. He’s
    got to tell you lies in order to continue control, because the second you start telling anybody anything close to the truth,
    you start releasing him and he gets tougher and tougher to control. So, you can’t control somebody without telling
    them a bunch of lies. You will find that very often Command has this as its greatest weakness. It will try to control instead
    of leading. The next thing you know, it is lying to the crew. Lie, lie, lie, and it gets worse and worse, and all of a sudden
    the thing blows up. Well, religion has done this. Organized religion tries to control, so therefore it must be lying. After a
    while it figures out (even itself) that it is lying, and then it starts down tone scale further and further, and all of a sudden
    people get down along this spring-like bottom heresy) and say, “Are we going into apathy and die, or are we going to
    revolt?” And they revolt because you can only lie to people so long. Unfortunately there is always a new cycle of lying. As
    I use the word “Religion” it has nothing to do with the word “God”.

    – Technique 88:Overt Acts, Motivators & DEDs

    • November 9, 2009 3:34 am

      Thanks for posting this Anon.

      Very true, very true indeed 🙂

  8. craig permalink
    November 8, 2009 9:40 pm

    Hi. I’m a first-time poster. I just wanted to say that I agree with Alanzo. I didn’t create this mess and I’m not sure where to even begin to clean it up.

    I got into Scientology in 1984 and was very active through the mid-90s, getting through OT IV, KTL/LOC, Class IV, L11, part of the BC and becoming an IAS Patron. I have been less and less active since then. Now, obviously, I’m out.

    Over the past year, as I was investigating on the internet, and trying to find holes and falsehoods in the stories I was reading, or devise elaborate reasons and excuses for the stories and the storytellers, I came finally to understand and accept that there was just too much smoke for there not to be a fire somewhere.

    Having crossed that threshold at about the same time that Gier’s letter hit the internet (or when I became aware of it), then the SP Times articles — well, it’s only gotten smokier.

    So back to Alanzo’s post: Until recently, I have been trying to figure out what I did wrong or what I didn’t do right that has contributed to the present situation in the Church.

    In other words, how am I responsible?

    The quick answer is — I didn’t stand up when I saw outpoints.

    However, the more accurate answer is — I’m not responsible. That’s a blasphemous thing for a Scientologist to say, I know. But it’s true.

    I didn’t know or even venture to imagine that DM and Upper Management were working from a playbook that was 180 degrees from the one I and other Scientologists had. I was told and believed that we were all on the same team, headed in the same direction.

    Our religion was young, manned by human beings who were simultaneously trying to improve themselves and conditions on earth — but who were still human beings. Fallible. Mistakes were going to be made, no doubt, but we also believed we had the tech and the intention to correct those mistakes. It turns out that I was, at least partly, wrong in that belief.

    So yes, I am responsible to the degree that I did not speak up when I saw outpoints. But as we all now see from the fortunes of some on this post and elsewhere, had I done so, it would not have changed the Church one bit — as my intentions didn’t align with the Church’s — and I would have simply been removed or left sooner.

    At the present juncture, I’m afraid I don’t see how the current Church can survive. Even if DM and Upper Management were removed, Int Base closed and razed to the ground, the damage is done. Trust is gone.

    Despite the good intentions of local staff members, and those who may rise to fill the leadership void, there isn’t a Church or Mission in the world I personally would trust to use standard policy and deliver standard tech.

    I can’t even trust what standard tech or policy even are anymore. A shadow of doubt and distrust lays across Point 1 of KSW, effectively and unfortunately negating the entire subject.

    Any vestige of the Church that emerges from this era will have a long road to rebuild trust.

    It will have to slowly, by demonstration of success, rebuild Point 1 of KSW and move on from there.

    It’s like 1950 all over again, only those interested will have to recover and rebuild the tech and trust in it on their own.

    • SherryMK permalink
      November 8, 2009 10:09 pm

      Dear Craig, Welcome. A great first post. I agree with you 100%…stated as if you were reading from my mind. Thanks.

    • J. L. Seagull permalink
      November 12, 2009 3:31 am

      ” There are people right here right now that still, maybe, are grieving to some degree about some incident like a marital separation or the loss of a child or something like this, that find that persistent with them, who are saying to themselves, ‘If I could just admit that I really did it.’ Or, you know, ‘I really realized to a large degree that it’s my fault. (sigh).’ And it doesn’t go away. They’re trying to accept the responsibility. They’re trying to accept the blame for this incident and they didn’t do it! Somebody else did.

      Full responsibility contains the willingness to let somebody else be responsible, too. ”

      L. Ron Hubbard
      From the lecture The Descent Of Man, 5 June 1955

  9. Friend permalink
    November 9, 2009 12:21 am

    Not to beat a dead horse, or whipped RJ, (even if he does deserve it a little bit, lol), the responses to this post are incredibly important and pertinent to the struggle at hand.

    To the unbiased eye, Scientologists are incredibly arrogant, and it is intrinsic to the culture and operations of the money making machine today. This indoctrination of the superiority of the tech and group and ethics, all aspects are a control mechanism of sorts. “We are the only ones that can help” means don’t waste your time or life supporting or doing anything else. “We have the only workable technology on the mind” means we are the only thing that can help you. “We are the only hope for the spiritual future of mankind” might mean do what we tell you or else we will deny you and your family your immortality.

    The Church has been, to the general public, increasingly repulsive with the arrogance of the likes of Tommy Davis and Tom Cruise, and DM.

    If there is any value to Scientology, it is that some part of it can be used by people to improve their lives, it has workability. You can’t class people by what aspect of it they like or use. People here are trying to help themselves and others. Anonymous scientologists, anonymous members itself, freezoners, independents, or just good people like sherry who are sick of themselves and their friends being shredded by the oppressive church.

    Many things have contributed to the current status. The people like Jeff Hawkins, Marc Headley, who told their stories when few would. The dozens before them that were literally destroyed for doing the same, when few would speak up and the church was stronger. Anonymous has played a huge part in weakening the overall church with an attack against their injustices never before comprehended, contemplated or experienced. If it were not for anonymous, we wouldn’t have this freedom to criticize the church to openly.

    Some people still tend to deify Hubbard, which is something Hubbard and his family never wanted. They are unwilling to view the man or his accomplishments as they really occurred, flaws and all. They want to view him as perfect in all ways, which just isn’t true. Everyone can admit the man accomplished some amazing things in his life. He was also a man, as imperfect as most of us. Those fragile of thought might feel that discussing his flaws weakens his legacy. I believe they strengthen his legacy, what he had to overcome, that he was a man and did so much … that is more inspirational than a demi god coming down to mingle with mortals as a Greek god falling from Olympus after a drunken binge.

    Hubbard’s church was not perfect, he did create the GO and many of the policies it used and monitored most, if not all of its activities. Anyone who denies that simply wasn’t there or doesn’t really know.

    Hubbard did deteriorate in his later years, who knows why, but the machine he set up in the church allowed for the likes of DM to control the comm. lines and his eyes and ears of his beloved church. Hubbard loved the church, some say even more than his family.

    Why did he die a recluse and in hiding, only having a small handful of people around him? I don’t know, I didn’t know him then. My romantic ideas of the man want to say, it was in part he was blinded by guilt and remorse for letting his wife go to jail and serve time for things he was equally responsible for, he let his wife fall on her sword to protect him. If I could only find that love from a woman, what a gift in life.

    Jeff, thanks for keeping such a safe and open forum.

    • November 9, 2009 10:26 am

      Total over run Friend, like the processes being run in the Church these days under Slap Happy Dave’s new “improved” definition of an “F/N”.

      My point if you don’t dig Scientology there is always Kabala, Tarot, Astrology or something else you might like more. You don’t have to dig Scientology and frankly I don’t care if you or anyone else does or not.

      However I do not like being patronized, because I still consider myself a Scientologist.

      There are plenty of discussion boards they can go to if they want to make nothing of the subject or its founder. Maybe I’m mistaken but as far as I understand this is not one of them.

      We used to have a saying way back that “Scientology isn’t for everyone”. No one is holding a gun to your head telling you to be a Scientologist. Not even David Miscavige, though I’m pretty sure he has no idea what Scientology is. If this is an “arrogant” attitude than I’m guilty as charged.

      My reason for defending Ron is because I consider him a friend and I’ll always defend my friends. Not because I think he’s a god or anything like that.

      Really, I don’t care if anyone agrees with this philosophy or not, because it’s now hip and trendy to bash the Ol’man.

      I’d do the same for anyone else I considered a friend.

      Personally, I think if we defended our friends against false accusation, gave them the benefit of the doubt and actually applied the Code of Honor regarding not allowing our affinities to be alloyed or never abandoning a comrade in need in trouble or in danger, Miscavige’s little game of disconnection would be over. This is how he divides and conquers the Scientology community.

      Regarding the tech, well anyone studying it should come to their own conclusions about it. I think Geir did a good job on covering this point on his blog:

      http://elysianchakorta.wordpress.com/2009/11/08/how-to-study-scientology/

      So I won’t as you say beat a dead horse.

      Really I don’t mind you or anyone else pointing out the error in my ways but it can be carried on to the point where it becomes a annoying didactic exercise.

  10. TRUTH permalink
    November 9, 2009 3:24 am

    Craig says “So yes, I am responsible to the degree that I did not speak up when I saw outpoints. But as we all now see from the fortunes of some on this post and elsewhere, had I done so, it would not have changed the Church one bit — as my intentions didn’t align with the Church’s — and I would have simply been removed or left sooner.”

    You nailed it dear Craig! We are responsible for holding others responsible for their goofs and out- ethics.

    Although I faced many attacks and make-wrongs by some staff at the CoS for standing up and holding them responsible for their off-policy, out-tech over the years, but I never gave up and continued doing so. Those irresponsible, cowered people don’t have the guts to confront me or shut me up, because each time I refer them to the correct LRH policy that they are violating.

    I wonder why Scientologists don’t ask DM, how comes with all the people on OTVII and New OTVIIIs (the church claims we have over 5000), 2009 has been so far the worst year with war all over the planet, ie: Afghanestan, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Shootings in USA and so on….?

    Why DM is not interested in getting in session or even continue with the OT levels to help to “stop the war”? Oh, I see! He doesn’t think LRH tech works. You are right little Davey, it doesn’t work on SPs.

  11. Friend permalink
    November 9, 2009 2:52 pm

    RJ,

    This isn’t just about you, but you did beautifully illustrate the point, the impish nature of those from the colonies just won’t let things like that pass without suitable grief being issued! I was using your example to illustrate a bigger picture that I believe is important to address. I am just not as tactful or politically correct as Rebel!

    Questions;

    Who said I don’t want Scientology? What if the Scientology I am interested in is in the books, or what if I feel the greatest value of Scientology would be the materials together with a true history of the imperfect nature of the man and what he had to over come … inspiration of human growth or suffering? What If I believed, and had the ability to write a book that became an international best seller on Hubbard himself, which showed the real man, but communicated the truth of his history in a way that inspired and intrigued, making people laugh and cry, making Hubbard a household name as a philosopher. What if I could undo all the PR damage miscavage had done and have 25% of the world population know of and feel positively about LRH. What if I were to do this and felt the ot materials were bunk? Would I be “enough” a scientologist to be permitted on a site you controlled? What if I was rich and famous, or only liked the basic books? What if I thought it was all bunk but felt reform of scientology was important for the world and financially backed the movement? What if, like anonymous, I had no life experience with the subject, but was willing to sacrifice of my time and risk my livelihood to openly protest human rights abuse? If we make grad selections on achievement or level of dedication or belief, who makes the rules, and how are we different to the church?

    At what point is our shared experience and interest enough to create shared community? Rebel008 built this community and seems to define that point at the mutual respect of divergent viewpoints and attempt to understand them before understand them.

    RJ, this is not just about you, I wanted to smack some other guy saying similar things a month or two ago on Marty’s site, but didn’t. This is an evolving environment, more and more people coming in, DePTSing and becoming freer. Take Jason Beghe, he left the church, was open, was attacked, slandered, probably was blacklisted in holywierd, yet his defection was a powerful blow, and his voice still a potent force. He is open and public, his name, his feelings, his peccadilloes and all … at first he was antagonistic as hell to the tech, then some people helped him with it, and he is now a friend to all. If people would have rejected his divergent viewpoint, radical at the time, even if due to out list, we would have missed out on something great.

    You have a lot of very valuable experience and intellect to add to this forum. Your Technical knowledge and group experience are deep and thorough. Your breadth and tenure of experience with scientology is vast, the passion with which you embraced it deeper than most, the love you have for it great. These are important perspectives for all of us.

    Something that you must consider, that all of us who were involved, even if in senior positions must realize is that few, if any people have the whole picture because of incessant compartmentalizing.

    Conversations with the biggest names in the game including the biggest names on the boards always turn to “hey what happened here” “what did you get when this came down”. Marty himself states in his blog that he is continually learning.

    On Hubbard, it was not my intent to diss the man, but bring context. People ask how this “super man” let a little Napoleonic emperor take over his empire. Mis information, deceit, concealed violence and manipulation. If Hubbard had skeletons in his own closet, and DM knew about them, it starts to make sense that he could use that to manipulate Hubbard into hiding and backing off. If DM had the same on the Brokers, makes sense. Church history is full of finding or creating black mail material on people, or as Terl in Mission Earth called it “Leverage” and using that for all sorts of things. DM learned it well.

    One must also realize that in DMs youth, he did not know the LRH whose charisma, charm and wit built scientology and his lore. LRH was under tremendous attack and stress when DM came on the scene; DM’s entire LRH experience was in a stressed state, his wife going to prison, the government trying to shut the church down, and all the rest. If you talk to other still loyal senior messengers such as Janis Grady or even Nancy Many, The LRH in the late 80s was very different to the LRH of the prior two decades who inspired masses.

    An idea for you, your passion and intellect, start a blog that gives the real story of Hubbard. You write well (native speaker through not American or the queens English?), have a good sense of humour. Make it real, learn about your friend that you want to defend, compile inspiration in a way that relates to everyone. The guy is unquestionable an important part of history, from many perspectives.

    • November 9, 2009 10:06 pm

      Well sorry if I took umbrage here Friend or as we say here in the colonies, got pissed off 🙂

      Someday I may write that book on my experiences in Scientology, maybe a blog. Personally I think Rebel, Steve, Geir and Marty are doing a great job of speaking for the “disaffected”. Half the stuff I know that would be of interest I couldn’t post anyway because of various confidentiality bonds I’ve signed, though I may allude to some of my experiences without being too specific.

      The other half would probably bore most people to tears!

      Anyway, I am a writer and working on a series of novels which I devote most of my spare time to.

      I wasn’t specifically referring to you when I was writing about those who continually want to dis (a good enough word) the founder and the subject. My point is there are so many other places they can go to do so where they can get the broad agreement they crave on how Scientology is an evil cult and the founder is nothing but a con man and how they were helpless victims utterly “brain washed” till they googled “Scientology” and found the “true” information in Wikipedia or some rabid critic website who to them has become some kind of patron saint or martyr and now wants to demonstrate to us how deluded we all are for continuing to “believe” in Scientology.

      Oh paleeeze! Gawd! Short circuit this guy’s keyboard!!!!!

      Any way now I’ve gotten that out of my system, I feel better 🙂

      Any way I agree with your point Friend that we should take a more ARCfull approach to people who want to discuss what is going on with Miscavigology these days for people who are interested as long as their effort is not to make us wrong for being Scientologists and asking for reform.

      • Squatting Bill permalink
        November 13, 2009 2:37 am

        Oh yes RJ, and do NOT underestimate the effect this blog, together with Marty’s, scientology-cult of course and now the new TSF is having. A mere 6 months ago I would have defended Miscavology to the ends of the earth. It is thanks to these sites that a very dark veil of ignorance and PTSness has been lifted. I’m having the time of my life, and actually being a scientologist again.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: