Because of various problems with Blogger, I've copied everything as of November 26, 2012 over to WordPress. The new location is Ask the Scientologist. I am not deleting this blog and will still accept comments and answer questions here too, but any new articles will appear at the WordPress location. I apologize if this causes any problems.

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Scientology Reveals Its True Self

Just today, the St. Petersburg Times started their newest series on the Church of Scientology. This looks to be a very informative series of reports and I highly recommend it.

But I want to highlight the Church of Scientology's response. Their response is exactly the same response they always present -- it's all lies, these people weren't there, they are horrible people, blah, blah, blah. And the church presents "evidence" of how horrible they are ...

Hold on, don't go past this very key and revealing point!

Catholic priests have taken a lot of heat over the years because they will not ever disclose what was said to them in confession. I'm sure that, sometimes, it has been very, very difficult for them to adhere to this principle -- but they do. Information from confessionals must be kept confidential and, against all external pressure, and maybe even against their own desires, they keep the information completely confidential.

And here we have the Church of Scientology. Time after time, when the church feels attacked, they can't wait to force a parishioner's confidential, secret and discreditable information on the press! The press doesn't want it. But the church forces it on them.

This action, repeated again and again by the Church of Scientology, under direct orders from their leader, David Miscavige, reveals the true nature of the church and the true reason the church keeps such careful written and even videoed records of all their member's "confessionals".


Once you have "confessed" to a Church of Scientology "auditor" -- and they do insist that you do so, regularly and often -- you will be forever in their power.

Unlike a real religion, the Church of Scientology can and will use anything and everything you confess against you.


  1. Just read a comment on the newspaper article that is worth paraphrasing:

    When you picture these "confessions", do not picture a Catholic confession. That isn't what's actually going on.

    A more accurate picture is of a Communist re-education camp "confession". You "confess crimes" that you are expected to confess, not what really happened and not what you really did.

    Because this is what these "confessions" really are, the exposure of them by the church is even more heinous!

  2. After doing much reading about Scientology over the last couple of years, I paid a visit to their deceptively named site out of sheer curiosity. I was utterly shocked at the depravity - in particular their multi-page character assassinations of individuals they label as "antireligious extremists," which even included image files of bank and credit card statements, bankruptcy filings, police reports, personal letters, etc.

    It appears that some of these poor people have been targeted for no other reason than their casual association with others considered troublemakers by Scientology.

    It appears patently obvious that the majority of this info was gleaned from ethics files, knowledge reports, "sec checks," or simply fabricated on the spot.

    No wonder Scientologists live in fear. Is there no legal recourse for these individuals?

  3. Yes, that is a particularly loathsome web site. I don't know anything about what kind of recourse those who have been libelled might have.

    One thing that is consistent in the Church of Scientology's attacks, they always accuse others of the exact crimes the church is guilty of. You want to know what secret crimes the church has been and is committing? Just listen to what they accuse others of doing. It's quite consistent.

  4. I found the Tommy Davis recording interesting, not least of all over his low-tone moment!

    The man never denies the allegations. He starts off by saying that Sea Org is a strict religious order, and it is tough in there. Sounds more like a "so what?" than a "it never happened".

    The nearest he gets to denying outright that Miscavige beat up his staff is in statements like "I've spoken to these people and they will tell you that the events didn't happen" which just smacks of coercion, or "I can tell you factually that I have signed affidavits from these people saying it never happened".

    He never even says anything to suggest that he himself is happy and content that the events Rathbun et al describe never took place, merely that the reporters will not get confirmation from the alleged victims of the beatings that are still in the church.

  5. Reading the article, I returned to a thought I've had several times before. In this specific case, speaking about Mike Rinder, I find it troubling that even as they claim he's been known as a fantastic liar, he still spent many years in high positions. They "knew" that someone had reliability issues, and yet kept him on as a representative throughout.

    Then the mind wanders up the chain... Well, did someone Goof the Floof on auditing? How is that tolerated? Did someone make a poor choice on promotions? What if, gasp, the Tech was wrong (implying LRH had it wrong [then covering that up by blaming the transcriptionist])? Now that it's been corrected, why is it still not working?

    At some point, I'd love to see Truman's "The Buck Stops Here" plaque on DM's desk, and allow him to either demonstrate perfect Tech to Handle all this Entheta. For him to be At Cause rather than Effect. For him to realize that
    defense by counter-attack is still a defense, a retaliation.

  6. @Beacon Schuler

    Interesting observation! The best lies are those where you tell the truth, but in such a way that the listener draws the wrong conclusions -- just like it appears Tommy is doing. Slimy!

  7. @omnom

    Yes, that is the inevitable result of following the logic, from the horrible mess that is the top of the Church of Scientology, right to the technology itself, and the purported technical and administrative skills of Miscavige himself.

  8. Regarding the audio tapes(all over You Tube) of Tommy Davis "defending" Miscavige from the SP Times article: 1)He comes off sounding like a raving lunatic because he just keeps yelling the same talking points over and over again. Is this really the best PR person they can come up with? 2)His main line of defense is: Miscavige didn't hit people, Rathbun and Rinder did. He states that Rathbun attacked others about 50 times. 50??!! How did it get past 1 or 2 times?? He basically admits that there is a culture of violence and cover up in the church. Way to go Tommy!

    By the way, isn't it perfect that the abbreviation for the newspaper is the "SP" Times?

  9. @Anonymous

    Yes, what is so very obvious and very striking about the church's response what its utter incompetence.

  10. Ethics files are not secret files. O/W writeups are not secret and they are actionable. Only auditing is confidential. At least that's what a Scientologist told me.

  11. Re: Not secret

    Yes, the Church of Scientology is very weird about that. It officially considers some confessional material "not secret". WTF?

    But that's all beside the fact. It happily releases even the material it says is "confidential".

    Hint to the "Church" of Scientology: Nothing a parishioner confides to his/her church should ever be used by the church to attack the person later. That's just wrong!

    Scientology has no idea how wrong that is!


Comments will be moderated. Have patience, I get around to it pretty quick. As a rule of thumb, I won't approve spam, off-topic, trolling or abusive stuff. The rest is usually OK. Yes, you can disagree with me.