Ask the Scientologist

Scientology's Peril Sensitive Sunglasses

2012-01-07T11:00:00.000-08:00

He... put on the sunglasses, annoyed to discover that the metal object had scratched one of the lenses. Nevertheless, he felt much more comfortable with them on. They were a double pair of Joo Janta 200 Super-Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses, which had been specially designed to help people develop a relaxed attitude toward danger. At the first hint of trouble they turn totally black and thus prevent you from seeing anything that might alarm you.
From The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, by Douglas Adams.

I must admit that I am a fan of Douglas Adams. I find his very quirky British humor refreshing and delightful. The above is a sample of his type of humor: Sunglasses that "help" you when danger looms by becoming completely opaque.

Ridiculous! Absurd! Hilarious!

Such an object makes no sense and would never exist.

Unless you are a Scientologist.

Danger is certainly looming for all Scientologists. Every year, every month, heck, every day it seems like, there is more bad news for the Church of Scientology. Secret documents are leaked; crimes are exposed in detail with lots of confirmation; lies are debunked; abuses documented. It just doesn't stop.

It used to be somewhat obscure websites only visited by the few. Today it is major media -- newspapers, magazines, television, radio and books by major publishers. Scientologists are leaving the church and telling their stories.

It just doesn't stop. Danger looms from every side.

And this is where Scientology's Peril Sensitive Sunglasses kick in. You can't see them but every Scientologist has a trusty pair firmly clamped on their faces. These sunglasses have been installed over many months and years of Scientology indoctrination.

When danger looms and Scientology is in peril, Scientologists' minds go opaque. They cannot and do not read. They cannot and do not look. They cannot and do not think.

Then they are safe. Totally safe. They look, childlike, at David Miscavige, who tells them "Everything is OK! Scientology is expanding! Scientology is winning!"

And the Scientologists, with their Scientology Peril Sensitive Sunglasses, set to totally black, can relax.

All is OK.
-

Happy New Year 2012

2012-01-01T13:50:00.000-08:00

It has been a considerable time since I posted any significant article. It isn't that nothing was going on, obviously, but it was, instead, a combination of too much going on for me personally (good things) and things going incredibly well in exposing the crimes, lies, abuse and fraud of the Church of Scientology.

All I could say was "Well done!"

But, here it is, a new year and I had in mind doing a pretty ordinary look back and then make predictions. It's fun to do.

But there is a new and significant event that just happened which changed my plans for what would probably have been a predictable and boring article.

I am, of course, referring to the Debbie Cook email.

This is significant. While it is true that Scientologists "in good standing" have been talking with each other about some of the problems and it is true that prominent Scientologists have spoken out after leaving the church, there has never been a prominent Scientologist speaking out while still, technically, "in good standing".

This email went to a lot of well connected Scientologists who have no reason to doubt that Debbie Cook is still in good standing.

Let's take a look at what Debbie says. She is not attacking Scientology or Hubbard in any way. She uses the line "The truth is that as a Scientologist you are more able, more perceptive and have a higher integrity" to appeal to the Scientology ego. While she names David Miscavige, she doesn't personally attack him (i.e. call him "suppressive"). She quotes Hubbard appropriately to make her points. While lengthy, her email does not get bogged down in too much detail as so many other "doubt formulas" have. She has done a good job talking to Scientologists in their terms.

I believe this will be effective. I'm guessing that speaking freely about everything Debbie has brought up will become common within Scientology. That is all to the good.

I read a concerned comment by someone to the effect that we don't want Scientologists to rebel and reform Scientology as Debbie urges. We want, the commenter insists, the church to continue to abuse and defraud Scientologists in order to speed up its collapse.

I'd say that this email will greatly speed up the church's collapse. First, Debbie urges all Scientologists to stop sending any money to the church except for donations for services -- which monies remain (mostly) local. This cuts off Miscavige's lucrative income from all his bogus fundraising tricks.

But wait! By pointing out all the "out-tech" now being enforced by the church, she is discouraging Scientologists from actually taking services.

And, finally, by detailing the total destruction of the upper management of the church, Debbie is making it perfectly "legal" to ignore the dictates coming from "management".

UPDATE: I see some speculation as to why Debbie emphasized that she hasn't spoken to the media and then says "Please keep this email among us, the Scientologists. The media have no place in this" when she must know it would be quickly spread everywhere.

I assume this has to do with her gag agreement with the Church of Scientology when she left the Sea Org. She is, undoubtedly, forbidden from talking to the media. By saying what she says, she is abiding by the agreement. If others ignore her request and spread it about, it's not her fault.

If this doesn't cause a majority of the remaining churchies to disassociate from the Church of Scientology, I'll be very surprised.

They may remain True Believers, and they may then be captured by the Independent Movement, but that group is not organized and is not effective.

And remember this: True Believers must use Scientology and only Scientology for all their endeavors. They must use the Admin and Ethics "tech". The built-in flaws in all of that ensure that any future Scientology organization will not succeed.

This certainly is a good way to start a New Year.
-

Ask a Question

2011-10-30T17:00:00.000-07:00

I find it inconvenient when the questions go past 200 and I have to click to go to the next page to see the most recent questions and answers. I'm sure you do too. So, I'm starting yet another Ask a Question thread.

There are some really great questions and discussions in Ask a Question 1, 2, 3 and the just-retired one, 4. I always enjoy going back and reading them.

You want to know something about Scientology or the Church of Scientology, ask here! You have a suggestion? Put it here. You want to start an argument or discussion? Here is the place. All non-troll, non-spam comments, suggestions, arguments, corrections are greatly appreciated.

Scientologist's contributions are still welcome. Trust me, I don't bite.

As always, I love to hear from you.
-

Scientology and the Amazing Psychiatric Conspiracy

2011-09-18T20:20:00.000-07:00

My attention was drawn to Scientology's Amazing Psychiatric Conspiracy recently. As a Scientologist, I had just accepted it. As an ex-Scientologist, I had simply rejected it -- but I really hadn't thought about it.

Scientologists have been indoctrinated into a complete, fanatic hatred of all psychiatrists. They have concocted a whole raft of "reasons why" they hate psychiatrists but those reasons don't really explain Scientologists' extreme, compulsive and absolute hatred.

They originally pointed to a number of reported abuses by psychiatrists and even created "Psych Busters" who would go out and dig up proof and have such psychiatrists put in prison. I've noticed that they've quit that and it appears that, ironically, they quit it because they were cleaning up the profession and giving psychiatry a good name.

Then CCHR started rewriting history so that psychiatry was behind every evil that has ever existed on Earth. Psychiatrists, in some mysterious way, have been behind every war, every mass murderer and every other horrible event. Evidence was lacking -- you had to just believe.

That hasn't been persuasive except for the gullible who don't check facts.

The latest "reason" is that psychiatrists are "over-prescribing dangerous drugs for children!"

That's actually a good reason to hate those who over-prescribe dangerous drugs, but doesn't hold up as a reason for extreme hatred of all psychiatrists. After all, some medical doctors are just as guilty, the psychiatric profession itself has condemned the practice and many doctors in both professions are not guilty of that at all.

And yet, Scientologists condemn ALL psychiatrists, the guilty and the innocent, and demand that the practice of psychiatry be banned.

I've asked Scientologists, "Given that some Scientologists are guilty of crimes and abuses, should we condemn ALL Scientologists and demand the practice of Scientology be banned?" But they don't get the point.

Why don't they get the point? Why are they unable to think logically and rationally on this subject?

Well, as you undoubtedly know, Scientologists believe that psychiatrists are the leaders of the Great Evil Galactic Conspiracy against L. Ron Hubbard and the Loyal Officers.

We all know that and we laugh and laugh. But think about what that actually means for Scientologists. For such a conspiracy to be true, for all psychiatrists to be part of such a conspiracy, the following must be true:

All psychiatrists are in on this Great Evil Galactic Conspiracy. Every single one. That's what Hubbard said and that's what Scientologists are required to believe. There are no good psychiatrists.
This means that all psychiatrists can remember their "past lives" when they were battling the Forces of Good all over the galaxy for quadrillions of years. You can't remember your past life. Scientologists may pretend but they can't remember their past lives either. But all psychiatrists must be able to so they know they must grow up and become psychiatrists, right?
In addition, obviously, no "normal" person can be allowed to become a psychiatrist. Apparently there is a review board in every psychiatric school that checks every applicant to ensure they are a card-carrying member of the Great Evil Galactic Conspiracy. Anyone who isn't a member is rejected and cannot become a psychiatrist.
And finally, psychiatrists, apparently, have extremely advanced communication technology so they can discuss their Evil Plans without ever being detected. Otherwise they would be some evidence somewhere.

Scientologists seem to believe that we already have Evil Alien Beings living among us today. They have phenomenal memory and technology. And only Scientologists stand between all these Evil Alien Beings and their conquest of Earth.

This is what Scientologists have to believe or their Evil Galactic Conspiracy led by psychiatrists doesn't stand up to the briefest of thought.

It's another fine example of Scientology Logic™ in action.
-

"Inside Scientology" by Janet Reitman

2011-09-07T20:00:00.000-07:00

I do apologize for coming late to this. I wanted to read this book when it first came out but I was in the middle of a couple of very large projects. Now that they are successfully completed, I've finally had time to read this wonderful book.

If anyone has not yet read this book and, if they have any interest at all in Scientology and the Church of Scientology, I highly recommend it.

In her Introduction, Ms. Reitman says:

It has been my goal to write the first objective modern history of the Church of Scientology.

To say that Ms. Reitman succeeded would be an understatement. I, personally, could not have done that -- as an ex-Scientologist, I am definitely not objective about Scientology. Most people who have been touched in any way by Scientology cannot be objective about it. Scientology is a completely black and white belief system -- there is no grey. You are either completely pro-Scientology or you are an Enemy. Those who become opposed to the Church of Scientology often, in reaction to Scientology's absolutism, take an opposite, and just as absolute, negative position. It's hard not to.

Yet, without a doubt, Ms. Reitman has produced an objective book. Since I know she too was attacked by the Church of Scientology for her earlier piece in The Rolling Stone, my admiration for her journalistic integrity is boundless.

But don't let the term "objective" mislead you. This is not a dry dissertation, it is not boring and it doesn't indulge in that false "journalistically neutral" rhetoric. You will get the facts surrounding the real events -- untouched by the Church of Scientology's spin, cover-up and lies.

Scientology is, ultimately, about people and Ms. Reitman brings the story of Scientology alive by bringing alive the people who have been involved in Scientology -- from L. Ron Hubbard, struggling to find his path to fame, to those who have struggled in and out of the church, to the latest wide-eyed, ever-hopeful new Scientologist. This is a book about how people were changed by Scientology -- and how Scientology has been changed by people.

I found it a bit disturbing to read this long history of Scientology from L. Ron Hubbard's troubled life, through the heady early days of hope and excitement and finally to the logical conclusion of Hubbard's paranoia and greed. It was disturbing because it was true. It stirred up memories of my own hopes -- and my own disappointments.

In case you might want to question how very thoroughly and diligently Ms. Reitman has researched and fact-checked the stories in this book, her extensive Notes section detailing the exact sources for each chapter is beyond impressive. This section alone makes the Church of Scientology's cries of "sloppy journalism" completely laughable.

All-in-all, this book was a great read, enlightening, fascinating, informative and with the ring of truth in every page. This book is now at the top of my list for anyone interested in Scientology and I would highly recommend this book for anyone currently in or recently out of Scientology.
-

Scientology "Betrayal"

2011-08-28T10:00:00.000-07:00

I was having a conversation with a Scientology troll the other day. Well, I was trying to have a conversation, but the troll wasn't able to handle that and ended up just ranting insane gibberish.

However, something the troll said struck me. This Scientologist was insisting that the ex-Scientologist whistle-blowers had "betrayed Scientology". And, because of this "betrayal" the Church of Scientology was "justified" in its very vicious, unethical and illegal attacks against them.

"Betrayed?" Really? That's pretty harsh. What, exactly, did the whistle-blowers actually do?

They told the truth.

The fact that stories of abuse and lies are totally true was confirmed by the Church of Scientology itself in the Headley trials. The significance of the trials was summarized quite nicely in the article on Examiner.com: Scientology wins legal victory, loses public image war.

So, in spite of the fact that the whistle-blowers told the truth, they had, according to the Church of Scientology, betrayed the church!

This sounded familiar. Where had I heard something like that before?

A little research and I found this:

The Blue Code of Silence (also known as the "Blue Shield") is an unwritten rule among police officers in the United States not to report on another colleague's errors, misconducts or crimes. If questioned about an incident of misconduct involving another officer (e.g. during the course of an official inquiry), while following the Blue Code of Silence, the officer being questioned would claim ignorance of another officer's wrongdoing. [Wikipedia]

That's close, but not exactly it.

Then I found an even closer match:

Omertà is the mafia code of silence and secrecy that forbids mafiosi from betraying their comrades to the authorities. The penalty for transgression is death, and relatives of the turncoat may also be murdered. For instance, a mafioso will not call the police when he is a victim of a crime. He is expected to take care of the problem himself. [Wikipedia]

There it is! That's what the Scientology troll was talking about. That is Scientology's definition of "betrayal".

Compare the above definition of omertà with the following excepts from Introduction to Scientology Ethics under the "High Crimes" section. ("High Crimes" are the very, very worst crimes in Scientology):

It is a high crime if a Scientologist does:
"Public disavowal of Scientology"

"Public statements against Scientology or Scientologists"

"Testifying hostilely before state or public inquiries into Scientology"

"Bringing civil suit against any Scientology organization or Scientologist"

"Writing anti-Scientology letters to the press or giving anti-Scientology or anti-Scientologist data to the press."

"Delivering up the person of a Scientologist ... to the demands of civil or criminal law."

Note that absolutely none of these "High Crimes" say anything about whether the accusations against Scientology or a Scientologist are true or not. Scientologists may not report any crimes by other Scientologists to the police.

Scientologists are required to handle it all internally, within the church.

"But," you are asking, "what if the church doesn't handle it? What if it is the leaders of the Church of Scientology who are committing the crimes and abuse? What if the Church of Scientology blames you for being a 'victim' and punishes you and lets the perpetrator go unpunished?"

Makes no difference. Scientologists may not report any crimes by other Scientologists to the police.

Take a look at these ex-Scientologists committing "High Crimes" by reporting Jan Eastgate (Senior Scientologist and President of CCHR) for covering up child abuse. Yes, according to the Church of Scientology, Jan Eastgate is a "good Scientologist" and those who reported her crimes have "betrayed Scientology".

Does this sound like omertà? Does this sound like a criminal organization "protecting its own"?

Time and time again, the Church of Scientology protects the criminals within its organization and attacks the whistle-blowers.

No matter how evil and corrupt a Scientologist is, you may not report him or her to the police. Ever. You may not sue them. You may not speak of their crimes to the press. You must remain silent or you will "betray" the Church of Scientology and they will viciously attack you and they will try to destroy you. Just like the Mafia.

This is Scientology. This is exactly how L. Ron Hubbard designed it. This is exactly how David Miscavige runs it. This is "Standard Scientology", straight out of Introduction to Scientology Ethics.
-

Who Will Lead the "Independents"?

2011-08-21T15:00:00.000-07:00

Grown men do not need leaders.
Edward Abbey

Anyone who has read much in this blog will already know that I'm no longer a True Believer of Scientology. If they have been paying attention, they would also realize that I am not, in actual fact, anti-Scientology (specifically, the belief system) either.

I think that some of Scientology can provide benefit to some people. If a person wants to practice Scientology (and if they can avoid the abuses and fraud that Scientology seems to engender), then they should be allowed to do so.

Also, readers of this blog will know that I consider the Church of Scientology, and its leaders, to be criminal and fraudulent.

But now we have the self-named "Independents" who appear to want to reconstitute the Church of Scientology in a "reformed" version. They want an organization. They want a leader.

OK, so looking at this from the viewpoint of a Scientologist, how could one go about picking a good leader for Scientology?

Scientologists have a limited but lousy record in their choice of leaders -- specifically David Miscavige. So far, they've "chosen" their leader by accepting whoever declared themselves leader. To put it bluntly: They have been sheep.

If we pretend they have a choice and they have the will and power to choose their own leader, what qualifications should they look for in their new leader?

Let's try to be serious here and list what a sane group of Scientologists would see as important qualifications for their leader, shall we? If I were a True Believer and if I were selecting a leader, I would want:

Someone who was personally trained by L. Ron Hubbard or, if no one was available, then someone who was directly trained by such a person.
Someone who has successfully completed all training and processing with excellent results and who has not been indoctrinated in any of Miscavige's "altered tech".
Someone who has successfully run a mission, an org and a Scientology "Continent" (group of churches/missions in one geographic area).
Someone who has a track record of successfully running a business in the real world.
Someone who has always fought David Miscavige and upheld "Standard Scientology" against Miscavige's rewrites, edits and corruption.
Someone who has never allowed or participated in any of the Church of Scientology's crimes, abuses or corruption.

Even with these qualifications, I see Scientology as doomed unless their new leader also is:

Someone who explicitly repudiates and rejects any and all Scientology policy that promotes the Scientology abuses, crimes, lies and fraud -- including disconnection, "Enemy" lists, "fair game" and all such anti-social policies.
Someone who acknowledges the crimes, abuses, lies and fraud committed previously by Scientology -- even those ordered or condoned by L. Ron Hubbard himself.

Not surprisingly, there do not appear to be any aspirants to leadership in the "Independents" movement who meet the criteria 1-6 and certainly none who meet the last two points.

Of course, these would be my criteria if I were a Scientologist and, before the "Independents" get their knickers in a twist, I would never tell them what to do. Besides, there is no indication that any of these are actually desirable to the "Independents".

No, this is just an exercise in logical thinking. I actually expect the "Independents" to use their previous method of choosing their leader: Don't look at a person's track record, don't look at what they've actually done, just accept whoever wants it the most and who says the correct-sounding things. After all, that worked so well in the past.
-

Is It Over Yet?

2011-07-30T17:53:00.000-07:00

Sometimes, when I am reading a novel or watching a movie, I realize that I simply don't care about any of the characters. Are they going to succeed? Are they going to fail? Who cares?

If I find I don't care, I'll put that book down or walk out of that movie. Why waste my time? There are too many excellent books and excellent movies for me to waste my time trudging through a boring one.

And so we get to the Glorious Battle between the mighty Church of Scientology and the bold rebels of the Independent Movement -- with the fate of "every man, woman and child for the next endless trillions of years" at stake.

Boring.

Really boring.

Really, really boring.

It appears that all the characters in this badly written drama are very excited, worried, angry and whatnot but I don't care -- and I don't see how anyone not directly involved cares one tiniest bit.

Certainly I care about all the victims of the Church of Scientology, but that isn't what they are fighting about. They are fighting over control of Scientology.

Is it important to "every man, woman and child" on this planet? No, of course not.

Is the fate of the Church of Scientology hanging in the balance? Nope. The church has been destroyed and all you see is the after-image after the implosion. The old image of the powerful and dangerous Church of Scientology has been shattered by David Miscavige's recent stupid, immature and idiotic orders to his mindless followers. It's a bad joke.

Is the fate of Scientology itself, hanging in the balance? Again, nope. All the facts and all the failures of Hubbard and Scientology are well known. Scientology doesn't produce "homo novis", it doesn't solve any of the world's problems and it isn't a miraculous solution to anything. People may still use Scientology but, since Scientology doesn't produce anything significant, its continued existence is of no importance.

So we have people of no particular importance battling over an insignificant "church" and an ineffective "tech" with nothing of any significance hanging in the balance.

I've walked out of better movies than this.
-

Scientology Has Failed

2011-07-25T20:00:00.000-07:00

One of the things a Scientologist must confront and must acknowledge is that Scientology has failed.

That is simply a fact. Until a Scientologist confronts and acknowledges this, they will not be able to move on. Even if they believe that "Scientology works", they cannot deny that Scientology has failed.

It could be said with considerable truth that failure actually defines the history and evolution of Scientology.

Scientology came into being when Dianetics failed. Certainly, Dianetics appeared to have promise and some interesting results were reported, but Hubbard promised miracles and, beyond rare, anecdotal stories, none of his promised miracles ever appeared. Worse, from Hubbard's point of view, his promised, miraculous state of Clear never appeared. Dianetics was a failure.

Scientology arose from the ashes of Dianetics and promised even more miracles. Not only was Scientology going to produce "Releases" with abilities far beyond the human state, not only was Scientology going to finally produce "real Clears", but Scientology was ultimately going to produce a god-like state Hubbard called "Operating Thetan".

And Scientology failed.

Along came "the Grade Chart” to fix those failures. The problem was, Hubbard explained, “out gradients” and “missing actions”. The Grade Chart was going to fix all that ... and failed. Still none of the promised results appeared.

The lack of results, Hubbard justified, was still due to “out gradients”, and so tons of new processes were added to the “lower Bridge”. And sold. And still the promised results failed to appear.

The next excuse for failure was “illiteracy” which led to Hubbard’s “Study Technology”.

Another excuse for failure was “drugs” which ended up with the “Purification Rundown” and Narconon.

One continuing excuse for failure was “out ethics” which engendered a whole raft of new products and controls: Ethics, Security Checks, FPRD, Criminon and so much more.

And still Scientology failed and failed and failed. Even those “solutions” were failing. In real-world, independent tests, Hubbard’s “Study Technology” was a failure. Doctors confirmed that the Purification Rundown failed to “detoxify” anyone. Criminon and Narconon were exposed as ineffective frauds.

And still there are no Releases, no Clears and no OTs. To this day, Scientology continues to fail to provide any of the results promised.

Each of Scientology’s failures engendered more excuses, more "reasons why", more justifications -- and more “services” to sell to “solve” those failures. And so Scientology became the “Science of justifications for failure”.

What does a Scientologist do with all these failures when they cannot confront them?

Ignore it. This is a Scientology Standard Tech method of dealing with it. Pretend you don’t notice the complete lack of results. Pretend that somewhere, someone is “winning”. Pretend that the temporary euphoria after a session means “real case gain”.
“Fix” it. That’s what the history of Scientology is all about: One “solution” to failure after another -- with each “solution”, in turn, failing.
Sell it. This is another Scientology “solution”. Ignore the failures and keep selling the promised results. In the real world, we call that “fraud”.
Try harder. Believe it would work if only you could “do it right” and so, Scientologists keep trying the same “solutions” over and over in hopes that some day the promised results will magically appear.
Give up. Accept the ultimate Scientology reason for all its failures: That all Scientology’s failures are your fault. You are too awful a being for Scientology to ever work on you.

These are all the standard Scientology solutions, they are built into Scientology itself. Scientologists are very familiar with all these, but may I suggest one additional choice that a Scientologist could make:

Reality. Recognize that Scientology has failed and cannot and will not ever deliver what Hubbard promised. Recognize that each “solution” just results in more failure. Take whatever bits you might have found useful and leave the rest. Step off the Bridge to Total Failure. Stop wasting your time, your money and your life on such consistent and continual failure. Start winning by deliberately not using Scientology.

Just because Scientology has failed doesn’t mean you have to.
-

How to Talk to a Scientologist

2011-06-10T10:00:00.000-07:00

I don't have the conceit that I'm an expert in this subject, but I think I can offer some advice and possibly point to other sources for more information.

This is an important subject. If a family member or friend has become a Scientologist, you can still talk to them, you can help, but you need to be careful.

You need to educate yourself on what is going on with the Scientologist. There are a number of good people with insight and great advice:

Steve Hassan's Freedom of Mind Center, especially his book, Combating Cult Mind Control.
Cult Information and Awareness Library
Wikipedia [cult]. Some good information and references.
Google is your friend.

The most important thing for you to know about Scientologists is that Hubbard has installed a minefield around them to “protect” them from outside influences. You need to avoid this minefield if you want to help them.

So the very first rule is: Do not say anything that will cause the Scientologist to disconnect from you. This means you should not say anything critical or negative about Scientology at this stage. This is one of the mines. If you have already moved in that direction you need to stop.

The reason for this is that you can't do them any good if you can't talk to them. That's why Scientology enforces disconnection so vigorously.

That doesn't mean you can't help them. You can help them leave the cult, you just need to avoid the minefield.

This may be difficult if you are aware of how dangerous and destructive the church is, but you must avoid disconnection to have them remain willing to talk to you.

You need to create a safe atmosphere for the Scientologist to talk and for you to listen. At first, that is the best thing. Do not comment or criticize at this point – just be a sympathetic listener. One of the key elements of listening is staying silent. The less you say, the better. Use “Uh huh?”, “Really?”, “I didn't know that” and anything else that is non-committal but encouraging. Allow the conversation to drift to other subjects but encourage them to talk about their experiences and hopes in Scientology.

Once this safe space has been established, you can ask carefully planned questions. You will know what questions, but along the lines of, "What do you want to accomplish?", "What do you hope for?" You don't have to sarcastically ask the obvious, "... and how's that going for you?" – they will automatically think that themselves. Try to be as non-judgemental as possible. The minute you scoff, criticize, roll your eyes or laugh at the wrong point, they will stop opening up to you.

The Scientologist may ask you “What have you heard about Scientology?” or “What do you think about Scientology?” Do not go into what you have heard or any criticism of Scientology. This puts the Scientologist into “handle the Enemy mode", another of the mines, and then you are no longer talking to the Scientologist but to automatic and carefully coached patter.

Say, instead, “Oh, you know, there are lots of rumors and stuff out there. It isn't important – I want to know about you. What have you been doing?” They may try to persist in their “handling” so you will need to persist as well. “Really, I'm not interested in what others say about Scientology. I just want to hear how you're doing.” Whatever happens, do not let them go into “handle the Enemy mode". That will not help them.

Note that you do not say "I want to hear about Scientology". That would be very, very wrong. You want to say something like, "I want to hear about your experiences." You want them to talk about themselves.

They may go into “recruitment mode". This may be inevitable and you may need some patience to get through this stage. This one may be harder to avoid since you have said you want to hear what they are doing. They will usually start talking about how everything is wonderful and Scientology is perfect and solved all their problems. Do not express any negative attitudes but do not express any interest in doing any Scientology. If they try to press you into taking a course or buying a book just say something like, "I'm doing fine, I'm not interested right now" and leave it at that. Be patient. Trust me, it's as boring to them as it is to you. They will soon move on.

What you are waiting for is for them to relax and just start talking. If you are patient and non-judgemental, this will happen.

You need to understand that the Scientologist already does know that something is very wrong with their church. True, they have no idea how wrong things are, and they don't know how corrupt the leadership is, but they are definitely aware that things are not right. You don't have to convince them of this. You are trying to create a safe space for them to talk about those things.

When they start talking about the stuff they have noticed that is wrong with the Church of Scientology, do not be too enthusiastic in your agreement. Be interested. Say things like “I didn't know that!”, "What happened next?" This is what you've been waiting for so just listening at this point is vital. If you immediately bring up all the negative things you know about Scientology, you will undoubtedly push them right back into “handle the Enemy mode" – and destroy any progress you've made.

Note that, at this stage, they will start to disagree with the church but will still consider Scientology to be "wonderful". Don't worry, almost all Scientologists go through this stage. For most, this is just a temporary stage. Note, also, that attacks against the Scientology belief system aren't very useful. For now, the Scientologist will start to blame everything on David Miscavige. Don't worry, this is OK at this stage.

After they have expressed some criticism of their own about the Church of Scientology, they might then ask you what you know. This is an entirely different question than the “handle the Enemy mode" earlier. Now, they really do want to know. Be careful. Do not, at that moment, bring up everything you know about the Church of Scientology, David Miscavige and L. Ron Hubbard – this might trigger “handle the Enemy mode". Answer any specific questions with specific answers and direct them to a specific Internet site. In my opinion, Wikipedia may be the best initial site for them. It really is one of the most balanced presentations about Scientology on the Internet – no ranting and each assertion, both pro- and anti-, must be documented.

If you want to know the attitude you should present to the Scientologist at this stage, read how the Wikipedia information is presented. Nothing extreme, nothing accusative, some acknowledgement of good aspects while calmly presenting the negatives as well.

Other good sites for newly-awakening Scientologists are those that present Scientologists' "Doubt Formulas". These are true believer Scientologists who are applying Scientology itself to decide about the Church of Scientology. Examples: Leaving Scientology, Geir Isene, Michael Tilse, Luis Garcia. As I've said, these people are using "standard Scientology" to determine that David Miscavige and his Church of Scientology are extremely bad and should not be supported. This may seem silly to you but, to a Scientologist, these are very persuasive arguments.

At this point, they will probably continue to investigate on their own. They will need your help and support. Your best bet is to continue to listen and help them find good sources of information – keeping in mind that they can't go from Scientologist to non-Scientologist in one leap.

It is normal for them to be very, very afraid of what the church will “to do them”. This is no idle fear. If they work for a Scientologist, they could lose their job. If they have friends or family who are Scientologists, they could be disconnected. Often, they need to keep their doubts secret from other Scientologists. Assure them that this is quite common and is being done by many Scientologists.

As more and more people leave the Church of Scientology, this becomes less important.

Good luck.
-

Easy There!

2011-05-14T17:28:00.000-07:00

I have noticed that some of the more enthusiastic whistle-blowers against the Church of Scientology tend to jump on comments and articles that are not, actually, all that pro-Scientology.

The fact that an article or comment isn't completely negative about Scientology does not warrant an attack.

The fact that a person might say something nice about Scientology or might protest against "attacking a religion" does not necessarily mean they are a Scientologist. With fewer and fewer actual Scientologists, it is more likely this will be the case as time goes on.

To viciously attack some article or comment when a more reasonable response would be more appropriate, makes us Scientology critics look like the insane fanatics. To attack a commenter, who really isn't pro-Scientology, looks very bad. A vicious anti-Scientology attack can invalidate everything a more reasonable whistle-blower might be trying to say.

Err, if you will, on the side of milder, more reasonable responses to articles and comments about Scientology. You can say the same things, but from the viewpoint that the author is merely misinformed. This is tremendously effective. When some Scientology sock-puppet attacks you, you own the high ground. When a Scientology apologist insults you and makes crazy accusations, you come out far, far above them.

If the author is not a Scientologist, you will get back an intelligent response and will, perhaps, change their mind about the Church of Scientology. If you attack the author, you will solidify in their mind the idea that critics of Scientology are insane fanatics.

Understand that you cannot change a Scientologist's mindset, but you will influence the lurkers. Keep that in mind. Do not engage in a battle with a Scientologist, just expose their lies.

Certainly, every single Scientology lie should be debunked, but it is most effective when done calmly, reasonably and with as much respect as you can muster.

Let the Scientologist froth and foam, insult and accuse. Let us take the high road, always -- because it makes them look horrible.
-

The Scientology "Soft Landing Place"

2011-05-07T11:30:00.000-07:00

Prior to 1800, there was a problem with opium addiction. In December of 1804, Friedrich Sertürner extracted a highly potent analgesic from opium, which he called morphine.

It was soon to be touted as a solution to opium addiction. Unfortunately, soon many people were addicted to morphine.

In 1895, a German drug company marketed diacetylmorphine as an over-the-counter drug under the trademark name Heroin. It was chiefly developed as a morphine substitute that "did not have morphine's addictive side-effects".

It was touted as a solution to morphine addiction.

However, contrary to the company's advertising as a "non-addictive morphine substitute," heroin would soon have one of the highest rates of dependence amongst its users.

In 1937, another lab developed methadone, a "safe" alternative to heroin. So the poor addicts could have yet another drug to be addicted to.

The problem with all of this is obvious. If you substitute one "solution" to addiction with another "solution" that works exactly like the original, you really haven't solved the addiction, have you? You've just substituted one addiction for another.

And so we get to "Scientology outside of the Church of Scientology".

While I'm not specifically comparing Scientology to a physically addictive drug, I will contend that Scientology, and specifically the temporary euphoria induced at the end of most auditing sessions, can be quite addictive in its own way.

While in this temporary state of euphoria, Scientologists will feel capable of almost anything. They will actually attest to "having gained" the most amazing abilities, knowledge and powers which, when the euphoria fades in an hour, a day or so, completely fail to materialize.

And most Scientologists crave that wonderful sense of power and ability more than anything else. They live to go back into session. They pay tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands, of dollars to get back into session.

The more consecutive sessions you have, the better it gets. Up to a point, the more consecutive sessions you have, the longer the subsequent euphoria lasts -- sometimes it can last for days -- but it always fades, leaving the Scientologist without any new abilities or powers, but with a craving for more.

While continuing to get these feelings of euphoria, Scientologists feel that they are "making progress up the Bridge" to OT. They have hope. They think it all "works" -- that all the time and money they have spent was worthwhile.

Yes, for many, Scientology is psychologically addictive.

And, despite the assurances of the original manufacturers and distributors of morphine, heroin and methadone, the solution to addiction is not "more of the same".

There are those who laud the providers of Scientology outside of the Church of Scientology because they provide a "soft landing place" for Scientologists who have just left the church. They provide a version of Scientology that "isn't as abusive" and "isn't quite so strict" -- and, therefore, "isn't as bad".

I do understand that concept, but I do not agree.

They are still delivering the same "drug". They are still promising the same false promises of "miraculous powers and abilities" but are only delivering the same, addictive, temporary euphoria.

They are still rushing their clients through to write their glowing "Success Stories" about how wonderful it all is -- quickly before the euphoria fades. They are still publishing these euphoric "Success Stories" as if these were talking about actual, permanent gains.

They are still pushing the same "drug" -- and more of the same is not a solution to that addiction.

My advice to Scientologists who have left the Church of Scientology is that they give it a rest.

There is no hurry. Scientology outside of the church will still be around in six months or a year.

Take your time. There is a ton of information that you have not been permitted to see and that you really do need to know. Don't rush into the arms of another group that dictates which information is acceptable and which is not. Take your time and read all that "forbidden" information. It may be upsetting at first -- the truth often is.

Let some time pass and take a look at what actually happened to you in Scientology. Without the temporary euphoria and without the relentless church propaganda about how "wonderful" and "successful" Scientology is, take an honest look at yourself and your friends. What were the actual results?

Stop using Scientology terms and concepts for a while and see what happens. Reframe your thoughts and questions into standard English (or whatever your native language is) and see all the ideas and solutions that have already been developed around those concepts outside of Scientology.

Look around at the world you have been cut off from. There are many, many people who are living great lives and doing wonderful things outside of Scientology's tiny world. You can learn a lot from just looking at the real world.

Get in touch with all those old friends and family that you disconnected from (officially or unofficially). Catch up on the news.

Then, in six months or a year, if you still think you need Scientology, go ahead and find a Scientology practitioner who you can trust -- who is honest and doesn't implement the abusive parts of Scientology -- if you can find one.

I'm betting that, by then, you will enjoy being free too much to exchange it for empty promises and temporary euphoria.
-

What's Wrong With the Simon Wiesenthal Center Honoring Tom Cruise?

2011-04-15T17:46:00.000-07:00

There has been a bit of a fuss about the recent announcement that the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Museum of Tolerance plans to honor Tom Cruise with its prestigious Humanitarian Award.

It is a very controversial decision. I suspect that the Simon Wiesenthal Center had no idea it would be quite so controversial when they made the decision.

I don't think they fully understand what is wrong with that decision.

It isn't about Tom Cruise. I don't know Cruise personally, and I certainly don't have any information about what he has done to warrant such an honor as a humanitarian. Maybe he has done some amazing things that we don't know about. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt on that.

The fact that Tom Cruise used to be the celebrity face of the Church of Scientology was not, and should not be, a factor in that decision. After all, the museum has "tolerance" in their name -- and tolerance is a very, very good thing.

The above are not reasons why this award is a bad idea.

The problem with this award is how the Church of Scientology will use this award. They will trumpet this award as if it means that the Simon Wiesenthal Center:

approves of Scientology,
endorses Scientology,
validates Scientology's claims that they are a "humanitarian group" and
confirms that Scientology supports Human Rights.

Of course none of those claims are true, but the Church of Scientology will spin the news of the award for exactly that purpose. That's what they do.

And that's what's wrong here. Even if the Simon Wiesenthal Center asks the Church of Scientology to not do that, they will anyway. Scientologists do not believe that requests by non-Scientologists are binding on them. They will do whatever they please.

The Church of Scientology is NOT a humanitarian group by any stretch of imagination. It is arguable that the church is the biggest violator of Human Rights in the United States. See my article Scientology and the Declaration of Human Rights.

The Church of Scientology does NOT contribute to any humanitarian efforts anywhere in the world. Individual Scientologists certainly may, and I do recognize and honor that, but the Church of Scientology itself does not contribute anything. See my article The Church of Scientology Loves Disasters. This is an excellent example of how the church exploits the good work of others to polish their own image -- exactly as they will with this award.

But worst of all, in relation to this award, is how the Church of Scientology frames the Holocaust in relation to their own dogma. I don't think the Simon Wiesenthal Center wants to have any association with Scientology because of their beliefs in this area.

The Church of Scientology redefines and exploits the Holocaust to forward their personal vendetta against the psychiatric profession -- they blame psychiatrists, and only psychiatrists, for the Holocaust. Professor Deborah Lipstadt has termed this "soft-core" Holocaust denial -- although I'd use harsher terms to describe such crass exploitation. Professor Lipstadt's writings on the church are here.

Second, and by far the worst, L. Ron Hubbard's dogma states that anything that happens to a person is their fault and only their fault. This is called the "overt-motivator sequence".

The following are direct quotes from Hubbard's Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary.

OVERT ACT: an intentionally committed harmful act committed in an effort to resolve a problem.
MOTIVATOR: an overt act against oneself by another. In other words, a motivator is a harmful action performed by somebody else against oneself.
OVERT-MOTIVATOR SEQUENCE: if a fellow does an overt, he will then believe he's got to have a motivator or that he has had a motivator.

Hubbard teaches that one cannot be harmed in any way by any action unless one has first committed a similar "overt" against someone else. To put it simply, one cannot be harmed by a punch unless one has first punched another. This is in the context that we have all lived thousands of lives and such overts may have been committed in some previous life.

Thus, in Scientology belief, all harm that happens to you is completely and totally your fault, you "pulled it in" because of your prior overt.

If you are paying attention then you will understand what this means in relation to the Holocaust. According to Scientology, all the victims of the Holocaust were guilty of overts and it was all their fault that this atrocity happened. Yes, this is straight Scientology dogma.

Understand that this is not some "fringe" belief of Scientology that can be changed or discarded, this is a fundamental teaching of L. Ron Hubbard. These concepts are core, unchangeable beliefs of Scientology.

I think it's wonderful that the Simon Wiesenthal Center demonstrates tolerance towards Scientology, but I really don't think they want to directly associate themselves with the Church of Scientology in any way.

To any Anonymous who might be reading this, I have some advice: Do not protest this awards ceremony, it is highly unlikely that such an action would turn out well for Anonymous. It would be easily misunderstood that Anonymous was protesting the Simon Wiesenthal Center. The Church of Scientology would have a field day making sure that was the perception.
EDIT: Never mind, I have been convinced that protesting would turn out fine.

Hubbard's Theory of Past Lives

2011-03-31T18:30:00.000-07:00

I've received a number of questions about Hubbard's theory of past lives and a number of requests to explain it.

OK, I'll try to explain what Hubbard's theory was, but it can be confusing, even to Scientologists.

When Hubbard wrote Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, and other early Dianetic books, he did not believe in nor espouse any theory of past lives.

He thought we only lived once.

Part of the Dianetic theory is that a person's mental or physical problems are caused by "chains" of related, harmful events. If a "preclear" (person getting Dianetic therapy) has, let's say, trouble hearing, it will be found, according to Hubbard, that there is a chain of harmful incidents related to his ears or hearing. As part of Hubbard's theory, this "chain" is held in place by one "basic" incident: the earliest incident related to ears/hearing. Once that basic incident was relieved, the person's hearing would be recovered.

I'm not saying this is true, just that's the theory. I bring up the theory because of this: As part of Dianetic therapy, the auditor keeps asking for an "earlier, similar incident" until they get to this basic incident.

With the idea that we only live once, the search for "earlier, similar" would often end up with "memories" from the womb. There is quite a bit from Hubbard about prenatal memories of harmful incidents.

And then a number of preclears, upon being asked for an "earlier, similar incident" started "recovering memories" from before this life.

Initially, Hubbard's reaction to this was to posit a "genetic memory". He decided that an entity he called a "genetic entity" (or "GE"), was remembering evolutionary information. Hubbard even wrote a book, A History of Man, about this. In that book Hubbard claimed that this genetic memory not only went back through evolutionary life forms to the earliest amoeba, but even further back to the earliest formation of atoms.

This book, The History of Man, is where the derogatory term "clam" for Scientologist comes from, although, technically, this is not part of Scientology and is not "whole track" (a thetan's complete life-after-life memory) or "past lives".

All this didn't last long. Rather quickly, Hubbard changed his mind and started recognizing and talking about past lives, not "genetic memory" but actual memories from previous incarnations. This was not a popular decision amongst many Dianeticists, who broke with Hubbard at that time.

But that was OK with Hubbard. He had discovered the "thetan", the soul, the spirit, the "being himself, not his body or his mind" -- and Scientology was born.

Hubbard's explanation of the life-death-birth cycle goes roughly like this: Everyone is a thetan. Scientologist or wog, everyone is a thetan, inhabiting a body. As part of arriving on this planet, almost all the people here (the thetans), have been programmed to "report to the implant station" when they die.

When and where did this programming occur? Primarily, that was the OT III "Xenu" incident, 75 million years ago.

So, when anyone dies, they immediately "report to the implant station" for a refresh of their programming.

Hubbard claimed that there were implant stations on the far side of the moon and on Mars. I don't recall him ever saying Venus had an implant station (just trains, apparently).

The implant stations are all automatic, no people there. The thetans receive a refresh of their programming ("implanting") and then are given orders to "go pick up a new body on Earth".

So the thetan just goes to Earth and picks up a body.

Exactly when they inhabit the baby body is not set. They might inhabit the body before or after birth, but they will hover nearby in any case. Thetans will fight each other for a body, since there are more thetans than bodies.

Some thetans will take an adult body that is in a coma or has been seriously injured which, Hubbard said, explained amnesia and drastic personality changes at those times.

That's the dogma, according to Hubbard, as near as I can recall. I may have missed a few minor details.

By the way, Hubbard got quite upset if you called previous lives "reincarnation" since, in his version, the birth-death-rebirth cycle is not tied to spiritual progress towards Nirvana. In his version, it's all a horrible trap that leads, in a dwindling spiral, down to total degradation. It is a Bad Thing that "Scientology can help you with".

In Scientology's system of belief, people's past lives can contain, literally, anything, including scientifically impossible things. No "memory" is doubted, all is accepted no matter what. Some Scientologists are quite enamored with who they were and what they did in all these past lives.

Hubbard, of course, more than anyone else. For a pulp science fiction and adventure writer, it was perfect. Here comes the space opera! For many, many years, Hubbard loved to tell audiences his "whole track" experiences -- usually space opera and usually with himself as the brave, wise, powerful hero. And his yarns told in private could, apparently, be even wilder.

Unfortunately, Hubbard forgot to take scientific progress into account. He made up stuff that he thought could never be disproven. But science does progress and science could discover what was previously unknowable.

I'm sure there are hundreds of statements we could mention, but let's limit ourselves to a few well-known claims.

Hubbard claimed that the physical universe was over "four quadrillion years old". Scientists have estimated the actual age of the universe to be closer to 12 billion years old.
Hubbard declared the location of the OT III "Xenu" events "75 million years ago" to be the current major volcanoes of Earth. He very specifically named them. The problem is that geologists all know that those volcanoes didn't even exist that long ago.
Most, if not all, ancient Earth civilizations used super-advanced technology.
The ancient gods and goddesses were real. They were actually "OTs" visiting Earth -- but have since been "trapped and degraded".

Anything Hubbard could think up, he claimed was a real, true whole track memory. Scientologists are pretty much obliged to go along with it.

If anyone else is seriously wondering if Hubbard's version of the whole track is true, you really need to stay far, far away from Scientology -- you are just the kind of gullible person they are looking for.
-

The Redefinitions of Scientology

2011-03-20T14:30:00.000-07:00

A while ago, I wrote about the false claims of Scientology, especially outside of the Church of Scientology. One practitioner claimed he was producing "Real live OTs!" I object to fraud and deception, and this claim certainly lands squarely in that category.

At least, within the Church of Scientology, they've stopped promising the "Clear" as Hubbard described and stopped promising the "OT" that Hubbard defined. See The Disappearing States of Clear and OT.

In that "Real live OTs!" article I urged Scientology practitioners to stop promising results they could not deliver. But Scientology practitioners still promise the Grade Chart results that they can't and won't deliver.

Recent discussions amongst Scientologists make me think that this fraud and deception may change and the promises will follow the current trend in Scientology of redefining the expected results until they don't promise anything at all.

We may soon see Scientology practitioners changing the Ability Gained of Grade 0 from "Ability to communicate freely with anyone on any subject" to "A person who feels better about communication."

Grade 1 will change from "Ability to recognize the source of problems and make them vanish" to "A person who feels better about problems."

And so forth.

Why do I think this? I've been following the raging debates on Leaving Scientology, Marty's blog and Scientology-Cult and I have seen Scientology True Believers come to an interesting consensus.

Scientologists seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of changing the definition of OT from Hubbard's:

A being who is cause over matter, energy, space, time, life, form and thought, subjectively and objectively

to:

A being who does things!

In the discussions and articles, this is the new definition of OT. You start a new business? You're an "OT"! You volunteer down at the local shelter? You're an "OT"! It was even mentioned that moving your hand is the act of an "OT"!

What is the difference, then, between a "wog" starting a business and a Scientology OT starting a business? The Scientology OT is aware that they are being OT! And they are "being OT" because of Scientology.

They don't do anything particularly exceptional, but they are doing it as an OT! That makes all the difference -- to a Scientologist.

And there you have it! That totally solves the problem of Scientology never producing an OT as Hubbard defined it. It solves the problem of Hubbard's last years, where he was sick, in pain, hiding from the law and betrayed by those he trusted. It solves the problem for all those OTs that didn't get the powers and abilities promised.

Just redefine "OT" and you're good to go.

Well, I have to admit that does come under the heading of "don't promise what you can't deliver". If you promise nothing, you're totally covered.
-

Calling All Scientology OTs!

2011-03-17T17:30:00.000-07:00

We have another guest blogger today. As a service to all Scientologists, I am publishing this Open Letter to all OTs from a Scientology OT.

- Just Bill

An Open Letter to All Scientology OTs
A Call to Action!

Dear OT,

As you are aware (because all of us OTs are fully aware of everything), Scientology is in grave danger.

The Church of Scientology is on the verge of complete destruction.  Even Scientology outside of the church is in serious trouble.  Major media are attacking Scientology, spreading misinformation about our wonderful religion.  Attacks and protests are continuing.  Legal actions are in progress.

It is time to go to battle.  We are OTs.  We are "at cause over matter, energy, space, time, life, form and thought, subjective and objective."  We have the power and we have the will to use it.

Yes, we've withheld our powers because it would be too steep a gradient for mere "wogs" to confront, but we can no longer hold ourselves in check.  The very existence of Scientology is at stake.  This is no time to be gentle.

Here is what you must do.  Go to a location where there are lots of witnesses.  Ensure that newspapers, TV and radio have been called and show up.

Then show your true OT powers!  Levitate your car, or make it disappear.  Grab Osama bin Laden from wherever he is hiding and fly him right to prison.  Create objects out of thin air!  Read people's minds.  Disarm all the criminals in your city without blinking an eye!  Show all these "wogs" the true power of Scientology.

You know that the minute we show all these "wogs" what Scientology really can do, all opposition will cease and everybody would flock to our churches, clamoring for our services.

It's time to stop the pretence that we're normal people with no more powers or any better solutions than these "wogs".

Take off the gloves!  Show your true powers!  It's Scientology's last hope - for us OTs, this will be easy!

Sincerely,
A Scientology OT

PS: And would all graduates from the PTS/SP Course please "confront and shatter" all the world's suppression?  Thanks.

Well, that's the letter. Sounds like a workable idea, don't you think? If all the Scientology OTs demonstrated their true OT powers, Hubbard would be vindicated and Scientology would be saved -- not just saved, but Scientology would become the most popular religion overnight.

Without some demonstration of Scientology's miraculous results, they haven't much hope.

There, I've published the call. All we can do now is look for the massive demonstration of truly amazing OT powers, soon to be unleashed.

Isn't this exciting? I can't wait!
-

How LRH Destroys Scientologists' Ability to Think

2011-03-11T08:30:00.000-08:00

It becomes obvious, while watching Scientologists* try to "think" their way through all their problems, that Scientologists, as a group, have completely lost their ability to think logically and rationally.

Now, I don't want anyone to construe this as a broad insult of Scientologists' intelligence. This has nothing to do with intelligence, it has everything to do with Scientology indoctrination. Certainly it makes Scientologists look stupid, but they all recover their original, higher intelligence when they free themselves of Scientology's thought-control.

While we have discussed Scientologists' inability to think logically before, we have never specifically addressed how they lost this important ability.

It is obvious, from the fact that this failing is universal to all Scientologists, that this destruction of the ability to think is built into Scientology.

I think you'll find that Hubbard intentionally created this nightmare. Let's see how he did it.

1. Hubbard Study Technology

This "technology" is key to destroying a person's ability to think logically and rationally. Every Scientologist is carefully indoctrinated into this method as the only way to study Scientology.

One of the fundamental assumptions in Hubbard's Study Technology is that the source material is always assumed to be completely and unquestionably correct in every detail. This flows from Scientology's basic premise that L. Ron Hubbard is always correct.

Therefore, any and all difficulties, confusions and doubts that Scientologists might have are their fault. The defect is always with the student.

So, when Hubbard's assertions don't match the reality that the student knows, the only solution allowed in Hubbard's Study Tech is for the student to modify their thinking so that they can "make Hubbard's words 'true for them'."

This aligns perfectly with Hubbard's statement that "what is true is what you, yourself, have found true." This is also called, in Scientology, "making the data your own".

Scientologists cannot use logic or scientific method or rational thinking to do this. Technically, logic, scientific method and rationality have proven most of Hubbard's assertions to be false.

Instead, Scientologists must alter the way they think, so that they can make whatever Hubbard says "true". They are actually learning a whole new way of thinking that doesn't use logic, but uses belief, "postulates" and quite a number of logic fallacies. "Your" opinion must always match what Hubbard said or someone will quote Hubbard to "prove you wrong". Eventually, Scientologists' "thinking" is reduced to just quoting Hubbard [Leaving Scientology].

After a Scientologist has completed a few Scientology courses, they will have mastered how to do this. This is not thinking in any normal sense of the word.

2. Redefinition of "true" and "false"

As part of his Scientology ideology, Hubbard coined two new, very unique words:

theta
The word "theta", in the context of information, means positive information about Scientology, Dianetics and Hubbard. More exactly, it means any information that aligns with Scientology's viewpoint. For example, negative information about psychiatry would be considered theta by a Scientologist.
entheta
The word "entheta" means negative information about Scientology, Dianetics and Hubbard. Specifically, it means any and all information that contradicts, disproves or disagrees with Hubbard's statements or Scientology's viewpoint.

Note very carefully that this is completely unrelated to whether a particular "fact" is true or false. If a "fact" aligns with Hubbard's statements, it is theta, even if false. If a fact contradicts something Hubbard said, it is entheta, even if true.

However, Hubbard and all Scientologists use theta as if it meant "true" and use entheta as if it meant "false". To Scientologists, "theta" equals "true" and "entheta" equals "false". They will say things like, "Oh you can't believe that, that's entheta!"

It becomes impossible to think if you don't know what is really true and what is really false.

3. Censoring "other" information

Further, Hubbard expressly forbade all Scientologists from viewing, reading or listening to anything labeled entheta. It would "enturbulate" them, he claimed, and interfere with their "gains". There are penalties for Scientologists who access entheta information.

Now to make sure you understand exactly what this means, let me use non-Scientology words. Scientologists are expressly forbidden from accessing, in any way, information that contradicts anything Hubbard or Scientology says.

How can anyone think logically and rationally about a subject when they are forbidden from seeing or even knowing any differing information?

4. Asking for proof is outlawed

The first thing any normal person would do, when presented with fantastic claims about some subject is to ask for proof. "Show me the data!" "Do you have pictures?" "Can I talk to them?" "Let's go look!"

This is normal. This is healthy. This is good, logical thinking.

Well, Hubbard condemned it. Demanding proof was bad, it was "suppressive". He devoted one entire lecture (Flows: Basic Agreement and Prove It!) where he ranted on and on about how horrible it was to demand proof of anything.

In Scientology, asking for proof of anything Hubbard said or anything the church claims is a punishable act. If you insist on seeing proof, you are a suppressive person!

And, with that, Hubbard yanked one of the most fundamental principles of scientific thought right out of Scientologists' minds.

In Scientology, you can't ask for, and you will never get, any proof of anything. You can't even notice that you have no proof. How can anyone possibly think about a subject that they cannot verify any part of?

And that is, in a nutshell, how Hubbard effectively and intentionally destroyed every Scientologists' ability to think logically and rationally about Scientology.

All that is left is belief. As Hubbard often said, if you believe strongly enough, it will be true. This is why Scientologists always state their beliefs as if they were proven facts. Hubbard taught them: this is how you "think".

After leaving Scientology, the most difficult task may be learning how to think again and how to tell what is true and what is a lie.

*EDIT: By “Scientologist” I mean, very specifically, those who believe in Scientology, exactly as Hubbard taught it. I do not mean Freezone or those who only accept some of Scientology. Anyone who rejects some of Hubbard's technology would be called a “squirrel” by true believers. I'm not talking about squirrels.

In my mind, those who are able to disagree with Hubbard and who are willing to reject parts of Scientology's dogma are well on the way to re-learning how to think. I commend them totally and this article is not about them.

What Annoys Me Most About Scientologists

2011-03-07T17:30:00.000-08:00

I do not and will never hate Scientologists. I was one. I think that most Scientologists are good people who have been trapped by their own desire to do good work and help others.

I will not attack Scientologists for practicing Scientology. That is their right. What a person believes is their business and no one else's. Scientology, the belief system, should not be banned. Ideas cannot be erased and to try to do so only gives them more importance.

I just want to point out where Scientologists' behavior varies significantly from what they say they advocate, especially Scientologists who have left the Church of Scientology.

First up, responsibility. Or, to be more precise, Scientologists' universal refusal to take responsibility for what they have done.

Scientologists simply don't take responsibility for their actions, or non-actions, in relation to Scientology. Ex-churchies inevitably blame David Miscavige for everything. It is his, and only his, fault that things are bad in the church.

Did they applaud when Miscavige changed everything? Yes they did. Did they hop right up and take the now-"corrupted" courses and buy the now-"corrupted" books? Yes they did. Did they pay lip-service to the "Keeping Scientology Working" policy while applauding every little thing that Miscavige did to subvert and violate that policy? Yes they did. Did they do anything to stop David Miscavige from taking over and destroying their church? Why, no, they didn't.

I know that some Scientologists did refuse to go along with Miscavige's crimes, lies and abuse but they were kicked out. And a vast majority of Scientologists whole-heartedly condemned the very people who were taking responsibility.

And now Scientologists blame Miscavige and only Miscavige for everything that they allowed to happen and even applauded.

No responsibility. None.

But wait, there's more! We have, in the Independent Scientology community, certain executives who worked directly with and for David Miscavige. While they were "in favor" they supported, forwarded and emulated Miscavige's corruption, crimes, lies and abuse. They were part of the machinery that corrupted the Scientology technology. They were part of the gang that beat up and mentally abused staff. They were part of the evil.

And, now, they are the biggest supporters of the "It's all Miscavige, it's only Miscavige, I'm not responsible at all!" propaganda.

In other words, those most responsible for supporting Miscavige, those most responsible for forwarding his corruption and his lies, those most responsible for the evil that they now condemn, are saying that, no, they "were not responsible at all!" Perhaps that's no surprise, but it is very disappointing. I'd much rather hear, in detail, how they are taking full responsibility for their crimes, their abuse and their lies.

Yes, I know that some of these top executives have "admitted" to some bad acts but they still blame Miscavige for "making them do it". It's still no responsibility. They were in positions of power in Scientology and they used their power to help Miscavige do his evil deeds and they used their power to destroy those who tried to stop Miscavige -- for years. They have much to answer for but, no, it's "not their fault".

It really annoys me that Scientologists emphatically will not take responsibility for what they have done or should have done. Truly, the dirtiest word in Scientology is "responsibility".

Next up is confront. Scientologists cannot confront.

And this is also very annoying to me. Scientologists will brag about their confront. They have done the TRs Course and, boy, can they now confront!

But they can't and they won't.

If you try to discuss simple facts with a Scientologist, they plug their ears and go "La-la-la-la-la-la", they delete your comments, they compile lists of websites they can't look at, books they can't read, newspapers they must not see, people they must never talk to and they generally run away.

They do not confront.

If you mention the simple fact that Scientology has never produced a single OT, they cannot hear you. They actually are aware that there are no OTs but they cannot confront that fact. The same goes for the non-existent abilities of Clear and the promised-but-missing abilities from the Grades.

The same goes for all their world-saving "solutions". Their "solutions" have all failed in the real world, but those facts cannot, will not, be confronted.

These are simple facts. Every Scientologist knows these facts are true but they cannot confront them. Whenever I've mentioned some of these facts to a Scientologist, there is a deafening silence. No debate, no argument, just run-run away and never confront it.

And finally, justifications. In Scientology dogma, justifications are Bad. According to L. Ron Hubbard, when you have done something wrong, you will inevitably try to justify it in some way. Scientologists are supposed to recognize that, when you hear justifications, look for the harmful actions or neglect that preceeded it.

But all I hear from Scientologists are justifications. Scientologists are well-equipt with many "reasons why" things didn't work out as promised. They can give you all the justificatons why those processes didn't work, why these "solutions" never solved things, why those exhalted Scientologists were found to have committed massive fraud and why they ended up with their church destroyed.

And none of their justifications match reality or lead to any resolution. Here is where Scientologists' refusal to take responsibility and their lack of confront come together to create the justifications why it isn't their fault, it isn't Scientology's fault and it isn't Hubbard's fault. It is always someone else's fault, someone else's error or someone else's "evil intentions".

Scientologists' solution to Scientology's failings and broken promises is to justify, prevaricate and make up "reasons why" -- but never to simply confront the facts, take responsibility and live with the truth. It's hard work being a Scientologist.

I have no problem with Scientologists practicing Scientology and getting whatever gains they get from it. But they pretend to a reality that doesn't exist because they cannot confront the reality that is. Yes, they can feel better. No, they cannot "go OT".

Scientologists' universal lack of responsibility and inability to confront annoys me a lot. You see, these are things that Scientologists are proud of: their superior responsibility and their powerful confront -- and yet they have none. They don't even try.

This is Scientology. Scientology isn't what they say, it's what Scientologists do. And the above is what Scientologists do.

If I were still a Scientologist, I'd be so ashamed.
-

Why Is It So Hard to Give Up Scientology?

2011-03-04T17:30:00.000-08:00

One of the continuing mysteries about Scientology is the dogged persistence of some Scientologists, both inside and outside of the Church of Scientology, in their devotion to L. Ron Hubbard and to Scientology's technology despite its almost complete lack of success.

It is no secret that there are no Scientology OTs. Even Scientologists are aware of this, though they prefer not to think of it at all.

It is no secret that today's "Clear" does not match Hubbard's definition of Clear from Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. Unlike Hubbard's original definition, today's "Clear" doesn't have any more powers or abilities than non-Scientologists ("wogs").

And every Scientologist who has completed one of the Grades is very well aware that they do not have the promised Abilities Gained for their Grades as explicitly promised on Scientology's Grade Chart.

Yet, some Scientologists doggedly maintain that "Scientology works!" despite its consistent lack of results and failed promises.

Why is that?

There are, in my opinion, a number of reasons. While individual reasons undoubtedly differ, I believe one or more of the following justifications is the primary reason they simply cannot let go.

Investment. This can be a factor. Scientologists may invest hundreds of thousands of dollars and many years of their lives to Scientology. They may have sacrificed their family, their job, their property and their friends in support of Scientology. For some, it is extremely difficult to admit that they wasted so much on a scam. This leads us to:
Reputation. A number of people have made a big deal about how wonderful Scientology was and how very, very superior they are because they are a Scientologist. Think of Tom Cruise as a good example of this. As a result, they cannot confront the massive embarrassment if they had to admit they were wrong. (It does not appear that Cruise has woken up yet, but this factor might deter him from saying anything when he does.)
OT. Yes, despite the fact that none of Scientology's OT Levels have ever produced a person with any "super powers", some Scientologists still believe that some day, somehow, some Scientology technique will produce a "true OT" and they want to be there when it happens. Sixty years of failure hasn't convinced them that this isn't going to happen.
Having all the answers. In my mind, this is one of the biggest reasons some Scientologists stick with Scientology despite everything. Those inside of Scientology have all the answers. In their minds, this statement isn't hyperbole, it is the bare truth. According to Scientology they literally have the answers to everything: illness, insanity, war, crime, illiteracy, drug addiction, intelligence, failure, success, life, death, ... any situation, any condition and every problem has been "solved" by L. Ron Hubbard. There are no more mysteries, there are no more problems that can't be fixed. It is a feeling of tremendous power, certainty and superiority. Naturally, Scientologists cannot and must not check these "solutions" to see if they really do what Hubbard claimed, for, of course, they don't.

To any Scientologist clinging to that failed technology because of one of these reasons: You are not alone. All of us ex-Scientologists have had to confront the fact that Scientology has not delivered on any of its promises. All of us had to confront the scary fact that, no, we don't have all the answers. Many of us believed in Scientology long past the point when it should have been obvious, even to us true believers, that it was a fraud.

It may be difficult to admit you were conned, but that embarrassment passes quickly and, after that, you can live in honesty and truth. Trust me, the relief is incredible.
-

The New Yorker Article and All the Reactions

2011-02-10T11:00:00.000-08:00

The New Yorker article by Lawrence Wright, The Apostate, and all the follow-up commentary has been quite wonderful. Not only are whistle-blower sites covering this but major media all around the world. I can just applaud.

What can I add? Wonderful coverage and comments.

The information that the FBI is investigating the Church of Scientology and David Miscavige personally has certainly caught the attention of media around the world. OSA's attempt to "dead agent" that report was incredibly weak, but was spammed on almost every website that reported it. Here was their attempt:

"A federal law enforcement source told AOL News [that] the investigation has fallen short and no criminal charges are expected to be filed."

This is so typical of the Church of Scientology -- posting information that is lacking everything it needs to be checked. Let's investigate further. The full context in the AOL News story has a bit more information:

The author cites two sources in the FBI who "assured me that the case remains open." However, a federal law enforcement source told AOL News [that] the investigation has fallen short and no criminal charges are expected to be filed. Laura Eimiller, a spokeswoman for the FBI in Los Angeles, declined comment.

But wait, even that is still missing some very important information. What Wright actually said had significant information that AOL clipped off:

"I recently spoke with two sources in the F.B.I. who are close to the investigation.They assured me that the case remains open."

And now we see why AOL clipped it. Who would you believe more, a vaguely described "federal law enforcement source" or "two sources in the F.B.I. who are close to the investigation"? Hmmm?

And who do we think this vague "federal law enforcement source" is? Could it just be the mole that the Church of Scientology infiltrated into the Clearwater FBI office? Ya' think?

The church used some ally or "inside Scientologist" to get this anonymous quote into the news article published by AOL News and is now flogging that minor snippet for all it's worth -- and it really isn't worth anything.

The church is running scared and botching the job spectacularly, as usual.

But how are Scientologists taking the New Yorker story, not to mention all the other very, very negative press we've been seeing?

They are "shielding" themselves from it. They are discounting it. They are using their cult-thought-control to keep from thinking about it. As Lawrence Wright said in his interview about his article with Fresh Air's Terry Gross on NPR, The Church Of Scientology, Fact-Checked.

Wright said, when asked how his article might affect current members of the church that it "may not matter to people who are involved in it, who may feel they are gaining something from their experience — either because they feel like the truths of Scientology enhance their lives or because the community of Scientologists that they live among is something like their family. So they intentionally shield themselves from knowing these types of things."

Even "independent" Scientologists have this mechanism firmly in place. Here is Marty's comment:

Whether I agree with some of his views and conclusions or not, I am fairly certain about two things concerning Larry Wright and his work. One, he is honestly attempting to understand the phenomena that is Scientology from the outside. Two, he has opened a public debate on Scientology in such a thorough, balanced, newsworthy fashion it will have huge and continuing repercussions.

I do admire Marty's honesty in linking to and commenting on the article. This is a good thing.

But it is yet another example of the cult mindset of filtering information, not on what is true or false, but what is, to Scientologists, "theta" or "entheta". As I've noted before, Scientologists automatically reject entheta (negative information about Hubbard or Scientology) even if true and they accept theta (positive information about Hubbard of Scientology) even if false. They must do this -- it is what they are trained to do.

Here we have a very well-researched and thoroughly fact-checked article that exposes Hubbard's lies about his life and work. The article also quotes Paul Haggis regarding the universal lack of any of the "miraculous" results that Hubbard and Scientology promised.

But, as you can see, on Marty's blog, even outside of the church, true believer Scientologists continue to filter out the entheta. They believe in Hubbard and all of his stories, and no amount of real, verified documentation will change their minds.

The New Yorker article by Lawrence Wright is the way things will be from now on. The AOL News story is how the Church of Scientology used to control the media.

This nightmare for the church is not going away.

Certainly, major media is still worried about the Church of Scientology's stable of million-dollar lawyers, but how they protect themselves is completely different now. Instead of ignoring and minimizing Scientology stories of crimes, abuse and fraud, they thoroughly fact-check the information and then write it all up -- big and bold -- front page.

This leaves the Church of Scientology without a whole lot of ground to stand on, and they know it. There is nothing the lawyers can do about it -- and that is the only thing the church knows how to do.

God forbid the church would admit it and actually stop committing the crimes, lies, abuse and fraud! They can't even conceive of that route. And if they continue, as they have, to commit these crimes and fraud, to abuse people and to lie, their problems are just beginning.
-

Predictions 2011

2011-01-25T09:30:00.000-08:00

I really should finish up my predictions before January comes to an end.

What does David Miscavige predict? Well, several years ago, he promised, to wild applause, that he would "open 70 new Ideal Orgs" that year. That didn't happen. It would have required Miscavige to open up "his" church accounts and pay for it -- everyone knows that wouldn't happen.

Last year, as I recall, he promised to open up an Advanced Org/Saint Hill organization on "every continent". Tumultuous applause. Didn't happen. Not even one new AOSH was established. Again, it's "his" money and he doesn't want to let it go.

For years Miscavige has been promising that this year they will "eradicate psychiatry" from this planet. And every single year, nothing happens.

And, this year, Miscavige, once again, is promising he will "complete the Super Power building and start delivering Super Power".

So I'll start with the easy predictions:

Still no 70 Ideal Orgs created,
Still no new AOSH orgs created on "every continent",
Still no effect on psychiatry, and
Still no Super Power.

I found out that the official version of the Super Power building "promise", apparently, is that they will start on the Super Power building this year. Huh? For some of you, this may seem a bit of a WTF. What is that big, ugly building across the street from the Fort Harrison if it isn't the Super Power building?

That building is actually known as the "Flag Annex" by insiders. The Super Power section of the building hasn't been built. Rumor has it that the design for the Super Power part of the building has been "settled", but I doubt it.

However, the most important part of that huge, ugly building is not the Flag Annex part, nor is it the Super Power part. No, the most important part of that building is David Miscavige's Office. This started out as part of one of that building's massive floors, then half, and it now takes up almost an entire floor all by itself. This is one of the main reasons it has taken so long -- designing the largest, most luxurious, most secure single-person office this world has ever seen takes a long time! Every few weeks, Miscavige rips up the plans for his office and demands a redesign.

It will never get built. The Super Power building will never get opened -- not the Flag Annex part, not the Super Power part and definitely not Miscavige's office.

Some more obvious predictions:

Even more major media exposés of the church's lies, crimes and abuses,
More Miscavige insanity and abuse,
More government investigations,
More Scientologists leaving, and
More Scientology celebrities leaving. It will be fun to watch.

Everyone is wondering when certain mega-celebrities will officially leave. We've seen Tom Cruise emphatically disassociating himself from the Church of Scientology, but when will he repair the damage by publicly quitting?

Miscavige will continue to personally direct the church's "counter-attacks", which will fail miserably and will, instead, make the Church of Scientology look even worse,
At which point Miscavige will declare "victory", again.
David Miscavige will continue to live the lifestyle of a billionaire, while bankrupting and destroying the lives of the very few Scientologists left in the church.

Local churches will continue to close but, of course, secretly. Miscavige must keep the façade up. Since Miscavige has already "consolidated" all the orgs that were close to each other, he will have to find more creative ways to hide his org closings.

You might not know this but each Scientology org can be considered to be two orgs. One, called "Day", operates Monday through Friday during the day. The other, called "Foundation", operates evenings and weekends. These two orgs obviously use the same building but operate separately, with separate staff and separate "stats".

I expect many small orgs are already operating in Foundation-only mode. All they need is one person to cover reception and the book store to give the appearance of still being open during Day hours. I expect more and more orgs to go into this form of Foundation-only mode.

I also predict that more local orgs will sell their new, empty "Ideal Org" buildings once they realize they can't afford it. This will always be justified as "it didn't meet our needs", as Portland Org did recently. I expect orgs to "expand" into cheaper quarters -- while touting that as an "Ideal Org" move.

More and more orgs will have notices taped to their doors about unpaid utilities and unpaid rent but, since no one goes there any more, few will notice.

However, the main drama will center on the Independent Scientology movement. Tons of drama, but nothing much actually happening. Newly-out Scientologists may land there, temporarily, with more news of abuse and crimes so it's worth monitoring.

As long as the outside Scientology practitioners don't implement the abusive and fraudulent parts of Scientology, and if they can stop lying about their results -- we wish them well.

So those are my predictions for 2011. The Church of Scientology will continue to collapse. Miscavige will cover it up, and continue to make his stupid mistakes.

But, for the most part, the collapse of the Church of Scientology will be boring. Sorry about that.
-

Ask a Question

2011-01-15T08:00:00.000-08:00

Once again, the number of questions on the most recent Ask a Question have gotten unwieldy, so I'll start a new one.

There really are some great questions and discussions in Ask a Question 1, Ask a Question 2 and Ask a Question 3. I always enjoy going back and reading them.

You want to know something about Scientology or the Church of Scientology, ask here! You have a suggestion? Put it here. You want to start an argument or discussion? Here is the place. All non-troll, non-spam comments, suggestions, arguments, corrections are greatly appreciated.

As always, I love to hear from you.
-

Where Are All the Scientologists? Part 4

2011-01-09T11:00:00.000-08:00

We are now past the time when estimating the number of Church of Scientology members was even possible. The reason for this is that the number of church members for a country simply becomes lost in the margin of error of any poll. The last ARIS survey simply dumped "Scientology" into "Miscellaneous", with numbers too small to note. Of course, the numbers would be much worse today.

In addition, it looks like the number of people outside of the church, who might still consider themselves a "Scientologist" (and answer a poll that way) is already larger than the number of people in the Church of Scientology. Unless a poll specifically asked "inside or outside the church," the numbers would be meaningless.

Another problem in determining who really is a member of the Church of Scientology is that most people who no longer want to have anything to do with the church will pretend they still believe -- so they can talk to their friends and family who are church members.

For clarification, here are the different stages most Scientologists go through when waking up and leaving Scientology:

Scientologist finally admits that the actions of the church towards himself and others are abusive and wrong. I say "finally admits" because almost all Scientologists already feel the church's actions are wrong, but they just don't admit it at first.
This results in the Scientologist withdrawing support from the church while pretending they're still loyal. This means they might still show up for the major events and may still take a course or buy a book, but that's about it.
Next, the Scientologist starts talking with other Scientologists about the problems and abuses they see. As they learn to trust each other, they share their own stories of abuse and wrongdoing by the church. At this point they eagerly pass along reports from outside the church, like the ones from Luis Garcia and Geir Isene.
This results in a fifth column inside of the Church of Scientology. These Scientologists actually become a conduit from outside Scientology whistle-blowers right into the very heart of the Church of Scientology. This completely destroys the carefully constructed wall between the church and the real world. This development is significant.
Then these Scientologists start to read the Internet -- the "forbidden" sites! Initially, this can be very scary, since they have been assured that all sorts of terrible things will happen to them when they read these sites. But they do and they are shocked and outraged at what they find about David Miscavige, Scientology and their church.
This is the point where most stop having anything to do with the Church of Scientology.
Sooner or later they stop pretending they are still loyal to the Church of Scientology. From there, they may participate in some independent Scientology group, or may cease to have anything to do with Scientology at all. The latter is most common.

In the past, we have all wondered how to reach and talk to the very loyal, very dedicated believers at the core of Scientology. The dogma of Scientology has made them virtually impossible to contact in any practical way.

The Scientologists at stage 2 and 3 are the way this inner core can and has been reached. Reports from outside whistle-blowers like the reports from Luis Garcia and Geir Isene are written by Scientologists for Scientologists. They speak the language and they frame the crimes and abuse against the "Ideal Scene" that all Scientologists believe in. Some of these reports are from well-known and trusted Scientologists.

The previously impermeable bubble that protected members of the Church of Scientology from reality has been torn apart. The crimes and abuses of David Miscavige and other top Scientologists are now known about and discussed widely within the church. I'm sure the inner core of the most loyal Scientologists are fervently denying these reports, but they know about them. This shakes them up.

And here David Miscavige comes to help the inner core make up their minds -- and not in the direction he intends. He is attacking them.

As more and more Scientologists leave, the few remaining, very loyal Scientologists will come under increasing threats and increasing pressure. Where there used to be thousands of Scientologists buying books and courses and donating to Miscavige's latest money-making scam, now there are just a few -- and Miscavige expects them to take up the slack -- and his pressure on them is beyond intense.

In addition, because Miscavige has gotten the idea that the truth is getting through to his followers, he is suspicious of every Scientologist and he will demand more Conditions, more Ethics and more Sec Checks.

Get the picture? The increasing pressure, suspicion, Ethics, greed and threats will now hit at the most loyal, most dedicated Scientologists. Miscavige can't help it, he must demand more and more money while treating people with more and more suspicion.

And his most loyal, dedicated followers, who have now heard of, and dismissed, stories of crimes and abuse will get the full brunt of Miscavige's greed. They will get abused. Criminal acts will occur -- illegal charges on their credit cards, for instance.

That inner, unreachable core of dedicated church members is under attack -- by Miscavige -- and now they will get the truth, whether they want it or not.

We are in the final days, but what is going on will be mostly hidden. We will only hear about it later.
-

Scientology New Years Event 2011

2011-01-01T18:00:00.000-08:00

I know I promised some predictions, but this comment was just dropped into one of my Ask a Question threads, and I felt compelled to discuss it, and perhaps generate some fact checking.

We just heard about some of the announcements made at the latest Cof$ New Year's event. Here are some of the highlights:
The Australian government is now funding WISE courses for anyone who wants to take them in that country.
Superpower Bldg will be completed and superpower processes will start being delivered this year (2011).
The statistics at various Ideal Orgs around the world are higher than stats at those orgs for the last ten to fifteen years combined.
I'm particularly interested in the claims about the Australian government funding WISE courses. If this is not an outright lie, there should be some documentation available.

Did anyone on this blog attend the event?

Are there any Aussies here who have info about the WISE courses being funded by the government?

Interesting. I don't know if this description is accurate or complete, but the claims David Miscavige made are, as usual, hard to believe. Hopefully more information will be forthcoming.

First, Miscavige claims that the "Australian government" is funding WISE courses. Would that be the national government, a state government or what? If true, this would need to be corrected. Which agency? Why does that agency think WISE courses have any value at all? If this is true, the people of Australia need to raise the alarm that:

A government agency is funding a "technology" that does not work, and may actually cause harm.
The agency is funding a group that operates as a recruiting front group for the Church of Scientology.
A significant part of all funds to WISE goes directly to the Church of Scientology.

If true, we thank Miscavige for bringing this transgression to the attention of the Australian people.

As for the second claim, I actually believe that Miscavige will order the completion of the Super Power building. He has scammed over three times the money needed from Scientologists over the years -- hundreds of millions of dollars. Money was never the problem.

The problem was that some of the "Super Power Rundowns" are actually impossible to deliver. Some of the "rundowns" involved equipment and/or procedures that would never be approved by state and city regulators. Other "rundowns" would be completely unacceptable to the public -- like running around a pole all day, week after week.

This claim by Miscavige that he will start "delivering Super Power" simply means that many of L. Ron Hubbard's original "Super Power Rundowns" have been drastically altered or removed completely, never to be delivered. I was waiting for this to happen. Miscavige has no problem altering Hubbard's tech -- and removing large chunks of it. It was only a matter of time before he realized that was the solution to his Super Power problem -- just alter or delete large parts of it.

The fact that it no longer bears much resemblence to the original Super Power Rundowns by Hubbard won't bother Miscavige at all.

The third claim, that "statistics at various Ideal Orgs around the world are higher than stats at those orgs for the last ten to fifteen years combined" is classic David Miscavige misdirection and half-truths.

Here is the translated version: "Some [very carefully selected and meaningless] statistics at [some carefully selected] Ideal Orgs are higher than stats [not necessarily the same stats] at those orgs for the last ten to fifteen years [a time period which was selected because those carefully selected stats were lower then] combined.

One of the hardest tasks in all of Miscavige Event preparation is finding some statistic and some time period which could be manipulated, redefined and modified so that the stat looks like it went up.

The truth is that all the other, real statistics from those Ideal Orgs have crashed. That's why they weren't mentioned. The truth is that all the Ideal Orgs are struggling and failing, as are all the rest of the orgs. The truth is that all the Church of Scientology statistics, world wide, have crashed and have stayed crashed.

This is why Miscavige no longer displays his "exploding statistics".

Another Big Bogus Event, now with extra lies!

I appreciate the leaked information from the New Year's Event. If anyone can provide more information, I'll update this post.
-

Happy New Year 2011

2010-12-29T16:00:00.000-08:00

I would like to wish all of you a wonderful New Year 2011. I appreciate all your support and your comments, questions and suggestions.

I would also like to thank all those Scientologists who have argued with me. I do learn a lot from the arguments. As my understanding has been changed over the years by some of those who have argued with me, so I hope I have been able to change some of your understanding as well.

As it is traditional at New Years to look back and look forward, I have been thinking about all that has happened in the few years this blog has been in existence.

First, a look back.

Shortly after I started Ask the Scientologist, the infamous Tom Cruise video was leaked in January of 2008. At that time, no one knew how that would affect Scientology. It changed everything.

I don't need to rehash that in any detail, but from the efforts of the Church of Scientology to suppress the video came Anonymous' Project Chanology and from that came the collapse of the Church of Scientology.

In light of David Miscavige's recent announcement of his "victory over Anonymous", I want to point out exactly what Anonymous and the Internet did.

Before Anonymous, the Church of Scientology was, essentially, untouchable. Major media had learned its lesson from Time Magazine -- if you said anything negative about the Church of Scientology, even when completely true and proven in court, it would cost you millions and millions. No major media would risk that, so the church's crimes, lies, fraud and abuse were universally ignored.

Before Anonymous, critics and whistle-blowers were viciously fair-gamed, attacked, slandered and libelled. Once again, the Church of Scientology's million-dollar lawyers made it virtually impossible for the whistle-blowers to defend themselves.

Now it is true that the Church of Scientology was shrinking and had been for three decades, but this was primarily because of Miscavige's incompetence, poor leadership and stupidity, not because of any external force. It was a train wreck in slow motion.

Then came Anonymous.

Turns out it was the perfect way to attack and expose the Church of Scientology's crimes, lies, abuse and fraud. Every single weapon the church possessed was completely nullified. The attack had no leaders, no organization, no faces, no names, just information -- pure, verifiable information.

Almost immediately, many more people became involved in this fight. Suddenly the treasure trove of information collected by critics and whistle-blowers over fifty years, plus tons of new leaks, documents, affidavits, court records, confidential church issues and so much more, exploded over the Internet. The church's crimes, lies, abuse and fraud were exposed for all to see. And the Church of Scientology could do nothing to stop it.

The truth has always been Scientology's Achilles heel, and they could do nothing about these leaks and their ineffective attempts to do so just fuelled the flames.

Today, the environment is completely different for the church. Major media can and does report regularly on the church's crimes, lies, fraud and abuse. Virtually no one outside of the Church of Scientology has a good opinion of the church. The information about Scientology that was once so carefully hidden is now available for all to see -- and millions have seen it.

Very notably, in all this media coverage was the incredible exposés of the St. Petersburg Times by Joe Childs and Thomas C. Tobin. Their series, The Truth Rundown, was incredible -- and they aren't stopping.

And let us not forget Anderson Cooper's series, Scientology: A History of Violence. David Miscavige's incredibly stupid and incompetent rebuttals were more damaging than anything Anderson revealed.

And there were a lot more major media reports and exposés, all over the world. No one is afraid of the Church of Scientology any more.

Far from there being any "victory" here for Miscavige, the Internet has defeated the Church of Scientology at every turn. As the saying goes, the Church of Scientology can't afford any more "victories" like that.

As we come up on the third year anniversary of the protests, we see that, while the protests are often smaller and are no longer appearing at all the smaller orgs, they are still continuing. This is both impressive and important. The crimes, lies, abuses and fraud of the Church of Scientology continue to this day. That must not be forgotten.

This year we also saw the Headley case dismissed. That was disappointing, but not unexpected. However, the great part was, after evidence was presented in court, the Church of Scientology had to admit it was all true. Yes, they do abuse their staff. Yes, they don't give them any time off. Yes, they pay them next to nothing. Yes, they feed staff table-scraps and force them to sleep under their desks. Yes, yes, yes. But, they said, we're allowed to do that, we're a cult!

And the court agreed. Didn't like it but had to agree. Yes, they can abuse their staff. This is now public record. This was not the "victory" that the church claimed, was it?

Several new books have come out this year exposing Scientology's evils. No longer does the church have any power to stop them. This year we've seen:

Counterfeit Dreams by Jefferson Hawkins
Scientology: Abuse at the Top by Amy Scobee
My Billion Year Contract by Nancy Many
The Road to Xenu:Life Inside Scientology by Margery Wakefield
Understanding Scientology: The Demon Cult by Margery Wakefield

I don't want to neglect the books that came earlier. In 2009 we saw:

Blown for Good by Marc Headley
The Miscavige Legal Statements: A Study in Perjury, Lies and Misdirection by Larry Brennan
Deceived (One Woman's stand against the Church of Scientology) by Bonnie Woods
Hollywood, Satanism, Scientology, And Suicide by Jerry Staton

In 2008 we saw:

The Complex - An Insider Exposes the Covert World of the Church of Scientology by John Duignan and Nicola Tallent

The Church of Scientology is powerless to stop anything. Scientology's mythical power has been exposed as a flimsy paper tiger.

In 2010, Scientologists continued to leave the church, Miscavige continued to make huge mistakes and fail miserably, and the Church of Scientology continued to collapse. Overall, it was a good year.

Please let me know if I've forgotten any significant events of 2010.

Next: What about the future?
-

"Real, live OTs!"

2010-12-20T15:00:00.000-08:00

Well, this is certainly good news. An Independent Scientologist has announced that he is producing "real, live OTs".

Isn't that wonderful?

In addition, can we also assume he is producing "real, live Releases" and "real, live Clears"?

Think about it, even L. Ron Hubbard, in all his years, never produced real, live Releases, Clears or OTs. Hubbard himself was not Clear and was not OT. We now know that when Hubbard died, he was quite sick, in pain, hiding from the law and ultimately betrayed by those he trusted. Hubbard could not produce the miraculous results he promised, even on himself.

No, there is no verified evidence that anyone ever fully gained the promised, miraculous Abilities Gained from Scientology's Grade Chart -- not via Hubbard's personal auditing, not via Church of Scientology auditing and not via any outside Scientology practitioner's auditing. It never happened.

But now we find, after decades of Scientology failing to produce any of the promised, miraculous results, this Independent Scientologist has finally succeeded!

"Holy cats! Real, live OTs!"
...

Of course, if you look for specifics, if you look for any evidence that someone he audited is actually "cause over matter, energy, space, time, life and thought", you won't find any.

Now, I don't mind someone believing whatever they want to believe. That's their business. And I do know that Scientology can make some people temporarily feel wonderful.

What I object to is the trap.

Scientology traps people because they promise and promise and promise these miraculous results. I know of people who, even today, continue to tolerate the most horrible abuses and who ruin themselves to pay and pay and pay -- all because of this one specific promise: They believe that some day they would be cause over matter, energy, space, time, life and thought.

It's a lie and it is there only to trap people.

I object, as strongly as I can, to anyone who continues to promise this lie in order to trap people within Scientology.

Dear Scientology practitioner:

If you promise "OT" but only deliver a temporary "I feel wonderful" feeling, you trick people into coming back again and again (and paying again and again), believing you will eventually actually deliver on your promise. It's a trick, and it only works until the person wakes up to the fact that you can't deliver what you promised and that a temporary "I feel wonderful" is as good as it gets.

And since you know you've never delivered "OT", your continuing to "promise" that is fraud.

Stop claiming you can produce the results promised for "Release", "Clear" and "OT" -- because you haven't, no one has!
Tell the truth about what you actually do produce so you are not committing fraud.

Contact Me

2010-12-02T12:00:00.000-08:00

After years of procrastination, I've finally added a Contact Me form for anyone who wishes to contact me privately rather than post a comment.

I'm using Kontactr, we'll see how that goes. So far it seems acceptable. It does append an ad to the email, but since that only goes to me, I can live with it.

The form requires that you enter an email address, but it does not have to be a real one. If you don't want to include your email, use something like "bogus@gmail.com".
-

Why Scientology Isn't a Future Danger

2010-11-20T10:09:00.000-08:00

"Scientology" as practiced within the Church of Scientology is 100% pure cult-control. This "church" is a greedy, dishonest, fraudulent and criminal organization. However, it is no longer dangerous in a broad sense because it is extremely small and currently in the last throes of collapsing. It has no future and its danger is primarily to those still trapped inside the cult.

But what about Scientology outside of and disassociated from the Church of Scientology?

Anyone who has read this blog knows I am not an apologist for Scientology and its cultish thought-control, but I do contend that it isn't, and will never again be, as dangerous as some people seem to think it is or could be.

Now, it is true that L. Ron Hubbard created and institutionalized the abuses of the Church of Scientology -- things like the RPF, disconnection, fair game, "enemy" lists and declares and all such abuses. These abuses are built into the core of Scientology. Couldn't that happen again?

Certainly, but I believe that any attempt to implement such abuses outside of the church would result in the automatic destruction of any group that attempted it.

You see, the huge difference between Scientology within the Church of Scientology, and Scientology outside of the church is summed up in one word, "monopoly". The Church of Scientology contends that it and it alone is the proper and only purveyor of "Standard Scientology". According to the church, there is no "real Scientology" available outside of the church. If you are expelled from the church, you are doomed -- any "Scientology" you might get outside of the church is so terribly flawed that it would destroy you.

And so, according to the church, you must remain in the church and you must toe the line and you must do everything they tell you to do or you will be condemned to destruction forever.

And this dogma keeps the True Believers trapped inside the church's draconian control. Or, at least, it used to.

But now, more and more Scientologists are leaving the Church of Scientology and, if they still believe, they are finding Scientology practitioners outside who also claim to deliver "Standard Scientology". Suddenly, Scientology is available from hundreds (maybe even thousands) of groups and individuals. Once someone has left the church, they understand that there is no such monopoly.

And this is why outside Scientology cannot institute the exact same abuses as the church.

Imagine some True Believer, part of some independent Scientology Group A, runs afoul with Group A's leader and "gets declared". Well, so what? He or she just goes somewhere else. If Scientology Group A becomes known for their abuse, they will cease to exist. If Scientology Group A becomes greedy, they won't get any business.

You will, inevitably, see the following comedy played out in the independent Scientology field: "You're a suppressive! You're declared!", "No, you're the suppressive, you're declared!", "No, you are!", "No, you are!". Any attempts by one group to implement the abusive parts of Scientology will just become comedy.

In addition, without the million-dollar lawyers of the church, any Scientology group will be held responsible for any and all abuse, fraud and criminal behavior. These parts of Hubbard's technology cannot be implemented if the group wants to survive. Any attempt to implement Hubbard's more abusive practices will only lose them customers and, possibly, get them into legal trouble.

One of the most powerful tools against Scientology's abuses is all of you on the Internet. With all of Scientology's "secrets" and all of Scientology's abuses and failures exposed for all to see, any Scientology group is going to be hard-pressed to sell its "solutions" and its "miraculous results". The watchful eye of the Internet is not going to go away.

But there's even more. Outside Scientology is not just in competition with other Scientology practitioners -- it is in competition with every other self-help group, every other philosophy, every motivational speaker, every religion -- in short, they are in competition with every other person and group that claims to make you feel better and improve your life.

And, unlike Scientology, some of those other improvement techniques can actually prove their claims. This is a completely different world from Scientology's "monopoly" of the past.

I'm not saying those practicing Scientology understand this, I don't think they do. From what I see, they are still attempting to impose the same cult-thought-control on their membership. While they don't have the power to impose disconnection, they are still designating a lot of people and many websites as "unacceptable to associate with". They show signs of withdrawing into private, carefully censored, forums where any dissent is quickly shouted down and quashed.

But, without the monopoly, this kind of cult behavior will only repel potential new members and eventually disgust any intelligent, current members. Scientologists escaping from the Church of Scientology, and seeing just more of the same abuse and attempted thought control occurring in the "Independent" movement will, for the most part, stay far, far away.

No, any group "promising" Scientology's false claims and exhibiting cult behavior simply cannot expand. If they are any danger at all, it will only be to their small (and inevitably shrinking) group of "faithful followers".

Scientology's fangs have been drawn. If it wants to continue at all, it will have to become open and honest.
-

Hiding Scientology

2010-11-16T17:00:00.000-08:00

While watching the comments of Marty's group, which has declared itself the "Independent Scientology Group", I have been waiting for them to, well, implement Scientology.

I think it's great they are auditing each other and do Scientology training. Really. If someone wants Scientology auditing or training, and someone else provides that, well that's the way it should be. If no one is harmed, it's nobody's business but theirs.

But what about the other Scientology technologies? You know, the abusive stuff -- all those "enemy" lists, "Suppressive Person" declares, disconnection orders, "PTS" declares, punishments, lower conditions and all that stuff.

After all, these are key parts of L. Ron Hubbard's technology, Hubbard said so.

Is Hubbard's all-important Ethics Tech not being applied by this group? Did they realize these were primary policies for abuse? Are they altering Scientology to make it "kinder and gentler"?

Ah, not so much. Nothing of Hubbard's can be neglected or modified, that's the rules.

However, they do realize it would look bad if they started declaring people suppressive or PTS, so, like Hubbard banning the words "fair game" while at the same time urging its use, so this "Independent Scientology Group" simply doesn't use those words.

The people they have determined to be "suppressives"? Apparently, they use the label "haters". Suppressive groups are, therefore, called "hater sites" or "hater blogs".

Gee, isn't this the same code word, and the exact same meaning that the Church of Scientology uses for "suppressives" when they try to hide Scientology's abuse from "wogs" (non-Scientologists)? Why, yes it is!

If you've been labelled a "hater" by this group, congratulations! Apparently, you've been declared a suppressive. No "Independent Scientology Group" member may talk with you. They are supposed to disconnect from you.

And how about declaring people "PTS" (Potential Trouble Source -- someone "connected to a suppressive")? Are they implementing that bit of "tech"?

Yes, indeed. Look at how, and at whom, they direct the word "natterer". It's a code word for "has overts" (has done "bad" things), and for "PTS".

So you have "natterers" and "natter boards" to indicate those who might still be Scientologists, but who are not considered "pure". You see, these "natterers" have been corrupted by the "haters" to say bad things about Hubbard and/or Scientology.

Good Scientologists will not associate or communicate to these PTS people or groups, but there is still hope that, if the "natterers" disconnect from the "haters", they might still be recovered to "pure" Scientology.

And so it starts: the suppression of divergent thinking; the suppression of any "negative" information; the suppression of any disagreement, discussion, debate, questions or doubts. These are key policies for creating and enforcing cult-thought-control. No group attempting to implement all of Scientology would ever neglect these vital thought control policies.

But they hide it because, in Scientology, if something you do is considered unacceptable by society, you just change its name and continue doing it. (Apparently, they think "wogs" are too stupid to figure that out.)

Now don't get me wrong. Scientologists do have the right to say what they want, make "enemies" lists and declare people "haters" and "natterers". That is covered under freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

But I sincerely doubt that many Scientologists, escaping from the abuses and cult-thought-control of the Church of Scientology, are looking for someone else to control them.

This group is selling a straitjacket for the mind -- but freedom to think, freedom to look and freedom to disagree is just too precious for any intelligent person to buy that "tech".
-

Scientology and the Wrong "Why" Part 2

2010-11-04T17:30:00.000-07:00

We have a wonderful opportunity to actually test our various hypotheses, which we discussed on Scientology and the Wrong "Why".

[EDIT: I have been corrected. When I am referring here to "Independent Scientology", I am specifically referring to the group calling itself that, led by Marty Rathbun and associates. I do not know about the intentions, activities and plans of any other independent Scientology people or groups.]

With the "Independent Scientology" movement getting themselves all organized and sorting out who are real Scientologists and who aren't, we have an actual, real life test bed for "pure" Scientology and dedicated True Believers.

This will answer the question, quite conclusively, "Is it David Miscavige? Was it a one-time fluke? Or are the problems displayed by the Church of Scientology actually built into Scientology itself?"

Now, most of us figure we already know the answer to those questions, but it is quite fascinating to see this play out in the real world with real True Believers trying to make it all work.

And, yes, they are doing a bang-up job aren't they?

No, they haven't actually made it to full cult status, but they are making progress.

If you check out their various communications, you will see some very strong indicators of where they are heading. Disagreements are not tolerated. If you want to be considered a group member in good standing, you cannot criticize L. Ron Hubbard in any way or find any fault with any bit of Scientology.

The word "hater" is now being used to describe anyone who offers an unacceptable opinion. And people are being banned for such crimes.

The "Independents" are noting their "enemies" -- those who disagree with them. Good, upstanding members of the "Independents" must not associate with those "enemies".

There are more and more such indications happening, feel free to add your own observations in the comments.

The "Independent" movement is quite small and it will never grow much, so nothing big will ever happen. However, it is a fascinating look at how True Believers will implement "pure" Scientology -- even though they have such a clear and immediate example of what will happen if they do not recognize, admit and fix the problems of Scientology.

Scientology is, intrinsically, a cult. It cannot exist in its "pure" form in a free and open society. Freedom of speech, freedom of opinion and freedom of thought cannot be tolerated. Disagreement, dissent, creative ideas, investigation, testing, questions, proof, doubts -- none of that can coexist with "pure" Scientology.

And, because of that, the "Independent Scientology" movement must, inevitably, withdraw from free society and protect itself in its little cave-of-enforced-agreement.

And so we get to watch this drama unfold. Will this descent into cult-hood continue? Will some of the members of this "Independent" movement see it and try to stop the descent? If they try, will anything good happen, or will they just be banned for their "suppressive acts"? How far will this go before it implodes?

Here is a wonderful example of how "pure" Scientology, applied carefully and rigorously by True Believers, affects an organization -- played out in real time in front of us all.

Who's got the popcorn?
-

Scientology And The Wrong "Why"

2010-10-31T17:30:00.000-07:00

In a comment on my Scientologists: Can You Remove The "Cult" From Scientology? article, one commenter reminded me of one of Outside Scientology's major mistakes. In my experience, all the True Believers who have left the Church of Scientology make this same mistake.

The commenter, Vertley, stated:

Seems that practically everyone makes the same mistake when calling Scientology a cult.

Below is the "admin why" and a more correct statement. When broadly grasped, this then will open the door for the necessary handlings.

"The Sea Organization: The current senior management group of the "church" lead by David Miscavige, is a rogue cult within Scientology. In every sense of the word and by any definition this group is a CULT. Public Scientologists and Staff Members not in the Sea Organization, are sort of "collateral damage" victims of the activities of this toxic cult group within Scientology and therefore exhibit cult symptoms even though they would argue vociferously to deny such." Vertley

From the "The "WHY" For Scientology" article/project.

(To non-Scientologists: This use of "why" as a noun is from L. Ron Hubbard's Data Evaluator's Series and is basically defined as the true reason a "non-optimum" situation came to be. Part of the definition is that the "right Why" opens the door to a handling that reverts the non-optimum situation.)

Let me rephrase this as it appears in many of the Independent Scientology sites so it is clear what "non-optimum" situation we are talking about and what they claim is the source of all their problems:

The Church of Scientology is guilty of tremendous abuses, crimes, fraud and lies -- but all of it is because of, and only because of David Miscavige.

It must be noted that the "Why" espoused in Vertley's comment is not a good example of a "right Why". It's merely a description of the the existing scene, not the cause of it.

Going to Vertley's website to investigate, I find that he has a "Who". To no one's surprise, Vertley has decided that the "Who" is "David Miscavige". I'm sure he started his "analysis" with that "finding" already decided upon.

As with almost all Outside Scientologists, he has the wrong "Who" and the wrong "Why".

Certainly, David Miscavige is a primary player in this drama, but Vertley, and other outside Scientologists aren't even asking the right questions.

Consider what "handling" Vertley's "Who" and "Why" leads to: "Remove David Miscavige from the organization".

Yup, that's it.

Now, you need to understand that David Miscavige has set things up, legally and organizationally, so that he cannot, ever be removed. Get it? Pretty much every Independent Scientology analysis comes up with David Miscavige as the "Who" and "Remove David Miscavige" as the "handling". Just a little hint: An analysis with a "Who" you cannot touch and a "Handling" you cannot implement is, by definition, totally wrong.

Wrong "Who". Wrong "Why".

No, this "Why" is a justification for all the things that have gone so very, very wrong in Scientology -- both inside and outside of the church. This bogus "Why" is Scientologists' excuse as to why it isn't their fault.

Let's see how the data analysis could have gone a bit deeper:

The situation is that David Miscavige is abusive, destructive and has been destroying the Church of Scientology.
The earlier problem was that Miscavige was allowed to do it. He was allowed to take over the church. His sociopathic behavior was not a secret. It was well demonstrated before he came to power.
Miscavige destroyed L. Ron Hubbard's tech and Scientologists not only let him do it, they applauded him for doing so! Thousands of people worked to help Miscavige do it.
Miscavige had and has no qualifications to lead Scientology, no training and no experience, yet no one stopped him. Many Scientologists followed him and helped him.
Miscavige was abusive from the start and none of the senior Scientologists stopped him. In over thirty years, no Scientologist stopped him or stopped his abuses. Many Scientologists started emulating the abusive Misavige.
Only a few Scientologists stood up to him and they were destroyed -- and other Scientologists helped Miscavige destroy them.

The "Why" is not that "David Miscavige came to power" or any other equally careless, cursory "reason why".

Scientologists, you have to look deeper and look honestly or this "non-optimum situation" will come back again and again. Since you haven't figured out the real reason David Miscavige came to power nor the real reason no one stopped him in over thirty years, you have no way to stop the next sociopath -- or the next, or the next one after that. I'm talking about Scientology, inside or outside of the church.

As I said before, David Miscavige is a symptom of what is wrong in Scientology, not the cause of it.

Wrong "Who". Wrong "Why".

Here is a question that you need to investigate and answer honestly: "What, in Scientology, allowed a sociopath to gain power unopposed?" It was way too easy for him.

Here is another: "Why were and are Scientologists so lacking in responsibility?" They didn't take responsibility earlier and they uniformly refuse to take responsibility now. The new motto for Scientology should be "It's not my fault!"

You start talking about the problems of Scientology and Scientologists will unanimously point all their fingers at David Miscavige. We're supposed to ignore all their actions and inactions for the last thirty years and just focus on Miscavige. Wrong! He is only one man. He needed a lot of people to follow him and a lot more to say nothing.

Which were you, dear Scientologist? Were you the one who applauded while your church was destroyed? Were you one of those who disconnected from your parents, your friends, your children? Did you help the church destroy innocent people? Or did you just turn away, hoping "things would get better" and didn't say anything?

Were you the coward, or the enabler? How many of your principles did you fail to uphold? When did you decide it was too hard to be honest and decent? How did you help in the destruction of Scientology and your fellow Scientologists?

Don't look too far for the "Who" in all this. Some day you might grow enough to take responsibility for what you have done, what all us Scientologists have done.

I don't care much about the Church of Scientology, but what is important is all the people who have been harmed and destroyed -- with your assistance, or at least your tacit approval.

Now, do you think you can find the right "Why"? One that doesn't involve blaming David Miscavige for everything?

I doubt you can do it. Judging by the last thirty years, you have neither the courage, the honesty nor the decency to do it. As long as you keep insisting on the wrong "Who" and the wrong "Why" -- excuses for why you're not responsible -- you will never be able to stop the inevitable destruction of Scientology.

The ball is, as it always has been, in your court.
-

Scientologists: Can You Remove The "Cult" From Scientology?

2010-10-30T11:00:00.000-07:00

Scientologists keep insisting, "Scientology is not a cult!" OK then, if that is so, then removing all the cult characteristics from Scientology should be quite simple and certainly very desirable. After all, if you believe Scientology is not a cult, then you, of all people, would want to remove all possible doubt by eradicating as many cult characteristics as you can.

Of course, this couldn't be done by the Church of Scientology. David Miscavige has pushed the church too far into the cult thing to change now, but one would think that the outside Scientologists would want to avoid any and all aspects of cult behavior.

Unless, of course, you think that these cult attributes of Scientology are vital to its basic functionality. Do you?

No? Good. Let's look at how that could be done.

Most cult experts refer to Robert Lifton's eight criteria as basic indicators of cult behavior. (Robert Lifton, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of Brainwashing in China).

Lifton details the following eight characteristics that typify a destructive group environment:
Dictating with whom members can communicate
Boy, Scientology really does this one! You've got disconnection, "enemies" lists, suppressive declares, "lower conditions", "sources of entheta" and many other ways to interfere with and control Scientologists' communication. And, yes, this attitude is very much alive in Scientology outside of the church.

Scientology says this kind of super-control is "for your own good". Oh, really? In no other endeavor is less information considered good. The bottom line is that the ostensible leaders of Scientology benefit from this kind of control, not the members. They don't trust people to get all the information and make up their own minds. No, they say, you must be "protected" from other viewpoints and other ideas.

No legitimate philosophy, belief or religion requires this kind of super-control.

Get rid of it all: Disconnection, "enemies" lists, suppressive declares, "sources of entheta" and all other methods of restricting and controlling communication. Scientology is supposed to be all about "communication", so remove all the artificial and cult-like barriers to communication.
Convincing members they are a chosen people with a higher purpose.
The Scientology version of this is: Scientologists are Homo Novis, more advanced, superior beings who are the "only ones" who can save the universe from the "dwindling spiral". Part of the Scientology doctrine is that "Scientologists are better, more ethical, more causative and more intelligent. They are the top 1% of the top 1%."

While this may make Scientologists feel puffed up with self-importance, the real reason for this message is that it makes it easier for the leaders to keep asking for more commitment, more money and more effort from their followers without having to explain why or account for any funds. Scientology's professed leaders can suppress any questions or dissent because of this "higher purpose".

In the real world such statements of superiority are seen, quite correctly, as vain and self-serving. In the real world, the status of being better can only be bestowed by others in acknowledgement of a person's or group's good work or high quality results or products.

You'd best shut up about how "superior" Scientologists are. That's obvious cult-talk, guys. It would be an excellent improvement to Scientology's dogma if that disappeared.
Creating an us-versus-them mentality, whereby everything in the group is right and everything outside is wrong.
This attitude is embodied in the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy created by L. Ron Hubbard. Such a "conspiracy" doesn't exist. You are not surrounded and opposed by the "Enemy". You are not engaged in a "Great Battle". If you keep thinking like that, you will fail -- as Scientology has for so long. This "conspiracy" exists only to isolate Scientologists from the real world. It's a cult thing.

Already I see "Independent Scientology" moving in the direction of more and more us-versus-them, more and more isolation and more and more fear of contact with difficult questions, disagreements and other ideas.

You will never be accepted by society at large if you keep looking at society and non-Scientologists as either the enemy or as too stupid or evil to "see the 'truth' of Scientology." If you stop fighting your imaginary "enemies", you might just find the world is filled with some very good people doing very good things.

Drop the us-versus-them rhetoric and belief -- it really screams "cult!"
Encouraging members to share their innermost secrets and then purge whatever hinders their merging with the group.
In Scientology, whether on course or in session, any Scientologist who "disagrees with Hubbard", "questions Hubbard", "has doubts" or "thinks there is a better way" must be, and is, handled until they give up any disagreements, questions, doubts and such. Woe betide the student who says, "That doesn't match my experience!"

If the disagreement persists, Scientology's automatic accusation is that it is the Scientologist's "out ethics" (meaning evil acts) that is causing the disagreement. The Scientologist is required to confess all their transgressions to the "Ethics Officer" or auditor until they abandon their doubts and disagreements and fully agree with Hubbard's words.

The purpose of this is to punish disagreement and doubt. According to Scientology, the "source" of the disagreement is never Scientology, it is the person's evil intentions. The purpose of this bit of cult indoctrination is control, not enlightenment.

Why would any legitimate philosophy, belief or religion require such suppression and punishment for disagreement? This has got to go.
Convincing members that their philosophical belief system is "the absolute truth".
While early Hubbard was known to have admitted his mistakes and the imperfections of Scientology, his later pronouncements have led true believers to assign Scientology technology a status of absolute perfection. They now believe that every single piece of Scientology is perfect, "works 100% of the time" and solves every single problem known to man.

And the many, many times Scientology has failed? Well Scientology has a built-in excuse for that: "It was misapplied!"

This cult attribute allows Scientology to continue to fail, when it does, while continuing to claim "absolute perfection". Followers must continue to believe in Scientology's "perfection" or admit to the crime of "misapplying Scientology". It's a control thing, not an honesty thing.

The Scientology belief system is not perfect. There are significant flaws. All you have to do is take an honest, unbiased look. Honestly review your own experiences and the results of Scientologists in general.

Be honest, admit the failures of Scientology so that any successes might stand a chance of being believed. Any truth in Scientology, any good results from Scientology, will be proven in the real world, not in rhetoric.
Creating an "in" language of buzzwords and group speak which becomes a substitute for critical thinking.
You may have noticed that, from the cult attributes list so far, one of the overreaching themes of cults is isolation. Scientology's insistence on its own very unique terminology, and its insistence that these strange terms have nothing to do with concepts from other philosophies and religions, works very well to isolate Scientologists' thinking and concepts.

This is not for the benefit of members of Scientology. In truth, Scientology's terminology does have parallels to concepts from other philosophies and religions. A minor amount of thought and study proves this to be true. The more Scientology allows parallels to be drawn and the less Scientology insists on only using its very unique terminology, the better Scientologists will get along with the rest of the world and the better Scientologists will understand universal spiritual concepts.

Scientology must change to take advantage of all the richness there is in the world. Get rid of this cult isolation technique.
Reinterpreting human experience and emotion in terms of the group's doctrine.
Scientology does this in how it describes the mind. Scientology's "Reactive Mind" is, they say, the cause of all sickness, upset, problems and failures. Further, all difficulties that a person might have, every single one, has its cause in something Hubbard has described and is solved by something Scientology sells.

If a Scientologist feels good or succeeds at something, it is only "because of Scientology". If a Scientologist feels bad or fails, it is only because they "misapplied or failed to apply Scientology".

Nothing in this universe exists in isolation. To believe, as Scientologists now do, that all good things are due exclusively to Scientology, is ludicrous and very, very cult-like. Likewise, to believe that all bad emotions or failures are due only to a "failure to apply Scientology" is preposterous, extremely simplistic and, again, a cult thing.

What must be ignored by all Scientologists is that many in world outside of Scientology are happy and living quite well without Scientology. Quite a few are even doing much better than your average Scientologist.

To take all the complexities of life, all the factors, all the conditions and to reduce it down to just one cause and only one solution is neither logical nor sane. Cults are like that. Get rid of this cult attribute.
Reinforcing the idea that life within the group is good and worthy, and life outside evil and pointless.
Scientology teaches that the only good being done in the world is being done by Scientology. Scientology teaches that the only worthwhile activities and goals are Scientology's activities and goals. Scientology teaches that all other solutions in the world are worthless and pointless because Scientology has the solutions to everything.

Scientology teaches that life within Scientology is full of happiness and success, but life outside of Scientology is doomed to failure.

As with most of these attributes of a cult, this is designed to isolate members from the rest of the world. If the rest of the world is grey, pointless and doomed, why have anything to do with it?

Since the rest of the world is not grey, pointless or doomed, and is, in fact, filled with many good people doing many good things, the only purpose of this cult attribute is to further isolate the Scientologist to make them easier to control.

Get rid of this bit of indoctrination, it doesn't benefit Scientologists, only their purported leaders.

Summary.

Dear Scientologist, if you are like I was when I was first looking beyond Scientology, you will be shocked and alarmed by the fact that Scientology exhibits all the attributes of a cult. This cannot be acceptable to you.

This subject is very important to any Scientologist who wants Scientology to go forward into society. Cults cannot do that. You may insist that Scientology is not a cult, but unless you remove all the cult attributes from Scientology, it really doesn't matter what you believe. In the real world, if it talks like a cult, acts like a cult and controls its members like a cult -- it is a cult.

Can you remove the "cult" from Scientology? In truth, I'm betting Scientologists won't even try, especially those who aspire to leadership in the "new" Scientology.

The benefits of Scientology retaining all its cult characteristics are to the leaders of the cult, not to its members. When the supposed leaders of "new" Scientology vehemently support the retention of all these cult attributes, be aware of why they do so.
-

Message to Nation of Islam Members About Scientology

2010-10-17T10:00:00.000-07:00

This post is applicable to anyone who is looking into Dianetics or Scientology.

You are being asked to participate in Dianetics/Scientology services from the Church of Scientology.

That's fine, nothing wrong with that if that's your choice.

But you need to be very, very careful. You are being asked to believe quite a number of things without proof, and there is no reason for you to accept this situation. You should ask for, and should receive, valid proof before you give the Church of Scientology any of your money.

You may have read Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health. You may have read or heard about L. Ron Hubbard's description of "Clear":

A clear, for instance, has complete recall of everything which has ever happened to him or anything he has ever studied. He does mental computations, such as those of chess, for example, which a normal would do in a half an hour, in ten or fifteen seconds. He does not think “vocally” but spontaneously. There are no demon circuits in his mind except those which it might amuse him to set up -- and break down again -- to care for various approaches to living. He is entirely self-determined. And his creative imagination is high. He can do a swift study of anything within his intellectual capacity, which is inherent, and the study would be the equivalent to him of a year or two of training when he was “normal.” His vigor, persistence and tenacity to life are very much higher than anyone has thought possible.
L. Ron Hubbard
Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health

And you might think that this definition of "Clear" is what the Church of Scientology is promising when they say they are "producing Clears".

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I urge you to check it out for yourself. Ask to talk to one of these Church of Scientology "Clears". Find out what their "complete recall of everything which has ever happened to him or anything he has ever studied" is like in reality. Can they tell you the name of their second grade teacher? Can they quote, verbatim, from a book they read last year?

Can this "Clear" do "mental computations, such as those of chess, for example, which a normal would do in a half an hour, in ten or fifteen seconds"?

Check it out for yourself before you give the Church of Scientology any of your hard-earned money.

If you look, I am sure you will find what many ex-Scientologists already know, that not one Church of Scientology "Clear" has the abilities and powers that L. Ron Hubbard promised. In fact, you will discover that Scientology "Clears" have no special abilities or powers at all.

Look for yourself.

If you participate in any Church of Scientology "auditing" you may experience, as many have, a temporary feeling of euphoria at the end of the session. No one knows why this happens, but it is always and only temporary and does not indicate any permanent "gains".

Check it out for yourself. Talk to "Clears" and "OTs". Don't ask them about Scientology, because they will just give you the standard sales spiel. Ask them what they do for a living. Are they "industry leaders"? Are they successful? Are they still allowed to talk with their family? Ask them difficult questions. Press them to answer instead of evade.

Go to the Internet and search for "Scientology". No legitimate organization would forbid such an investigation. The Church of Scientology will tell you that "everything you read on the Internet is a lie" but they will never, ever provide any proof of that. They want you to trust them on this, but they don't trust you to make up your own mind. The Church of Scientology will tell you there is a Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy but they will never provide any proof of that either.

In fact, if you want to really upset a Scientologist, ask for proof of anything they claim -- they won't have any proof at all, but they will get very upset when you ask. If that doesn't ring any alarm bells for you, then nothing will.

I am not saying that Scientology does nothing. For some people, it certainly may help -- but it never, ever delivers on any of its big, miraculous promises.

Do what you want, believe what you want, but look for yourself and get actual proof before you give the Church of Scientology any of your money.
-

Why Doesn't Scientology Publish Good News About Itself?

2010-10-10T09:15:00.000-07:00

Here is a question for Church of Scientology members: Why doesn't the church publish good news about itself?

If you are a True Believer and a member of the Church of Scientology, you will, of course, believe in the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy. And this Conspiracy explains why everyone else doesn't publish good news about the church...

But why doesn't the Church of Scientology publish its own "Good News" for the world to admire?

You go to David Miscavige's Big Events, and you hear about the church's "solutions" around the world, and you hear about the church's "expansion" and you stand and applaud, but none of these things appear outside of the church. The Big Event DVDs are kept under strict lock and key, and the penalties for leaking any of this information are very severe. No one but Scientologists must see these events, and even they must not record any part of it or take any notes.

Why is every bit of the Church of Scientology's "good news" secret? Why doesn't this "news" get released and reported? Not only do major media not report anything and not only are all other news outlets silent about this "news" but the Church of Scientology itself doesn't even report it via press releases.

Don't you find that quite odd?

We know the Church of Scientology understands press releases because you will see their press releases appear now and then -- but those only contain anecdotal stories about individual Scientologists' personal opinions and personal experiences.

Never news. Never facts. (But you are not supposed to notice that.)

And Scientologists need to be asking why. Why doesn't the church issue press releases about all its "good news"? If there is all that good news, why doesn't the church tell the world?

The answer is quite obvious and quite simple. The Chuch of Scientololgy only issues stories about personal opinions and personal experiences because no one can fact-check those.

The church knows, from past experience, that if they publish any of the claims from Miscavige's Big Events, people around the world will fact-check everything, and every single lie the church tells will be exposed.

This is not some idle fear, it has happened time and time again: One of Miscavige's "amazing" claims gets leaked and people around the world visit the locations and contact the people involved -- and inevitably find Miscavige has lied. Again.

And so, knowing that everything he claims will be fact-checked, David Miscavige keeps his events very secret and the church makes no claims at all in any of their press releases. They know that nothing they claim will withstand careful investigation.

Everything Miscavige claims is a lie. The proof is in the Church of Scientology's complete silence.
-

Scientologists: The Disappearing States of Clear and OT

2010-10-03T19:00:00.000-07:00

When I was first introduced to Scientology, I was quite enamored with the states of Clear and OT as described and promised by L. Ron Hubbard.

In Dianetics, the Modern Science of Mental Health, in 1950, Hubbard described Clear:

A clear, for instance, has complete recall of everything which has ever happened to him or anything he has ever studied. He does mental computations, such as those of chess, for example, which a normal would do in a half an hour, in ten or fifteen seconds. He does not think “vocally” but spontaneously. There are no demon circuits in his mind except those which it might amuse him to set up -- and break down again -- to care for various approaches to living. He is entirely self-determined. And his creative imagination is high. He can do a swift study of anything within his intellectual capacity, which is inherent, and the study would be the equivalent to him of a year or two of training when he was “normal.” His vigor, persistence and tenacity to life are very much higher than anyone has thought possible.

L. Ron Hubbard
Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health

I also discovered Hubbard's description and promises for OT from his lectures and materials from 1952. Hubbard said, when a person attained OT:

They would be "cause over matter, energy, space, time, life, form and thought".
An OT could leave the body at will and go anywhere in the whole universe in an instant.
An OT could view any portion of the time track clearly and precisely.
An OT could easily create and destroy MEST (matter, energy, space and time).

Who wouldn't desire these states? I wanted the powers and abilities of Clear and OT.

So, I did Scientology, and I became Clear. And I was quite disappointed that I never gained any of the abilities and powers that I expected. But I forgot that these had been promised to me by Hubbard.

I continued, and I did OT levels. Again, I was disappointed. Where were the powers and abilities that Hubbard had promised?

Weren't all those wonderful things promised to all of us?

Well, no, they aren't. Not any more.

In Scientology today, those things are not promised any more. Oh, sure, Scientology wants you to read Dianetics and think that you are getting that kind of Clear -- but that isn't what they promise. They love for you to listen to Hubbard's lectures about OT from 1952 and think that's what you'll be getting -- but they don't promise anything.

Today, this is what Scientology "promises":

Clear: a highly desirable state for the individual, achieved through auditing, which was never attainable before Dianetics. A Clear is a person who no longer has his own reactive mind and therefore suffers none of the ill effects that the reactive mind can cause. The Clear has no engrams which, when restimulated, throw out the correctness of his computations by entering hidden and false data.

That is very, very different from what Hubbard promised. It used to be an amazing state full of abilities and powers far beyond the normal person. Now it is a vague state, described as "highly desirable" but without any specific reasons why anyone should consider it desirable at all.

Today, a Clear, is just someone who "no longer has his own reactive mind", but that no longer means any specific improvements or abilities. Nothing is promised and nothing is delivered.

Today, the determination of whether you are Clear or not has nothing to do with abilities or powers, the determination is, if you had the "Clear cognition", you are Clear -- until David Miscavige decides you aren't.

So, between Hubbard's fantastic descriptions and promises of 1950 down to the vapid and meaningless description and promises of today, the State of Clear has become powerless and meaningless.

For OT, it's even more drastic. Today, the Church of Scientology's description of OT is:

By “operating” is meant “able to act and handle things.” And by “thetan” is meant the spiritual being that is the basic self. “Theta” is Greek for thought or life or the spirit.

An Operating Thetan then is one who can handle things without having to use a body or physical means.

Basically one is oneself, can handle things and exist without physical support and assistance. This state is Operating Thetan, or OT. It doesn't mean one becomes God. It means one becomes wholly oneself.

Very little is said and nothing is actually promised.

The statement "handle things without having to use a body" sounds pretty good, but, well, what "things", and what does "handle" mean? Is anything specific actually being promised here? The statement could mean anything and so, ultimately, it means nothing.

And the statement: "One becomes wholly oneself" is devoid of any actual meaning. With that description, anyone could be "OT" as long as they considered that they were "wholly themselves".

Whatever happened to "cause over matter, energy, space, time, life, form and thought"? Whatever happened to "going exterior at will"? Whatever happened to "creating and destroying MEST"? Whatever happened to OT?

In today's Scientology, there are no promises or expectation of any special abilities or powers from becoming OT. You finish OT VIII and, "Congratulations, you are OT".

Again, from the fantastic promises and descriptions by Hubbard in the 1950s down to the vapid and meaningless description of today, OT has become nothing much.

While Scientologists may have been lured in by the description of Clear from 1950 and the descriptions of OT from the early days, they have no reason to complain when those states never occur -- because the actual descriptions used today by Scientology for their "advanced states" are empty of all meaning and significance. Today, nothing is promised and nothing is delivered.

This is why David Miscavige can declare thousands of Clears and OTs "not Clear" and "not OT" and send them all back to redo everything -- there are no criteria to determine or validate these states. It's completely arbitrary, no one can say otherwise.

This is why there are constant arguments inside and outside of the church about who is and isn't Clear -- there is no way to test it, no way to prove it or disprove it. You are "Clear" only if some "authority" says you are.

Neither Clear nor OT actually exist as exceptional states, they are just arbitrary labels assigned by some "authority" to indicate you finished some level -- nothing more.
-

The Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy That Never Was

2010-09-27T16:00:00.000-07:00

... but, apparently, will never die.

You can't have much contact with Scientology without running into the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy.

It is one of the core beliefs of Scientology. L. Ron Hubbard was quite paranoid. He believed that pretty much everyone was working against him. This belief is built into the core of Scientology and is the motivation behind much of the abusive policies of Scientology. The Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy is the primary reason for fair game, "enemy" declares, disconnection and other such illogical, abusive and sometimes illegal actions of Scientology.

But, as a friend of mine once said, "It isn't paranoia if people really are working against you."

Well, was it real, or was it paranoia?

The most noticeable thing about The Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy is the complete lack of any proof. Outside of Hubbard's own claims, there isn't a single shred of evidence.

From the very early 1950's Hubbard told stories about this conspiracy. "They" tried to kidnap him; "they" tried to lock him up; "they" tried to drug him. Exciting adventures that no one ever witnessed. Stories that changed with every re-telling. The Great Anti-Hubbard Conspiracy changed and grew with every telling. Eventually, it became the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy.

In 1967, Hubbard announced that the people behind the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy were just twelve, powerful people -- but he provided no proof. In truth, his announcement surprised his closest staff, because they had not seen nor forwarded to Hubbard any such information. "Where," they wondered, "did Ron get all this information?"

Some Scientologists believe that the FBI raid in 1977 confirmed the existence of the conspiracy, but that belief completely ignores the actual cause and effect. The FBI raid was in response to Hubbard's "Operation Snow White", his massive spying operation on the government, which was implemented in 1974 and continued until the FBI raid and subsequent arrests in 1977.

Think about it. If Hubbard and the Church of Scientology had been the object of a Great Conspiracy earlier, in 1974, the FBI would have already known about "Operation Snow White", even as it was planned, and it would have never succeeded as long as it did. The only actual conspiracy was the church's conspiracy against the U.S. government.

That's simple logic. But then, logic has never been Scientology's strong suit.

It should be pointed out here that one of the goals of "Operation Snow White" was to find and steal the evidence of this conspiracy. Despite the tons and tons of documents stolen, absolutely no such evidence was ever found.

There is not, and never has been, any proof of any such conspiracy.

Psychiatry, the primary actor in Hubbard's Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy, doesn't pay any attention to Scientology. While the church carries out huge, million dollar campaigns against psychiatrists and psychiatry, their response has been mild confusion and ... nothing. What does it indicate when your "biggest enemy" isn't doing any fighting?

Again, simple logic says, "no conspiracy". There is no evidence and there is no proof of any Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy.

Of course, today, Scientologists are told, in various "confidential briefings", that the "Anonymous" protests are the latest manifestation of the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy.

Are you kidding? Are you kidding?! A lot of kids in masks, carrying crude signs, dancing, telling jokes and Internet memes? That's what Scientology's super-powerful enemies came up with? Not in any way to denigrate the wonderful protesters, I admire them greatly for their selfless actions, but they are simply not what a Great Billion-Dollar Anti-Scientology Conspiracy would come up with as a method of destroying Scientology. I mean, come on!

Not only that, but the birth of the Anonymous protests has been well documented -- and it was in response to the Church of Scientology's attempt to suppress embarrassing revelations on the Internet. Very well documented, indeed.

Do you begin to the logical pattern here? Any attacks on the Church of Scientology are in direct response to illegal and unethical actions by the church. These illegal and unethical actions by the church and the connection to the subsequent reaction and exposure of those illegal actions are very well documented.

But, says the Scientologist, it's all true! David Miscavige said it, so it must be true.

OK, logic time again. If it were true, if any of the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy were true, why hasn't the church leaked one tiny bit of proof? If the Church of Scientology actually presented proof of this Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy, the resulting exposure would be totally wonderful for the church. With irrefutable proof of the conspiracy, the church would demonstrate to the world that:

They were right about psychiatry and Big Pharma.
Scientology is the most important group on the planet.
Scientology's solutions do work and are a threat to psychiatry and Big Pharma.
Hubbard was right and was a genius who changed the world.

Those conclusions would follow automatically if the Church of Scientology presented the actual proof of the Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy. This kind of recognition and validation is what the church desperately wants and needs, so why doesn't the church present this evidence?

There is only one reason the Church of Scientology can't, won't and will never present their "proof" to the world and garner all these wonderful benefits:

There is not and never has been any Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy.

All of the Church of Scientology's problems were caused by the church itself. There is no one else to blame for their problems -- they have been battling themselves for over sixty years -- and losing all the time.
-

The Church of Scientology Does Nothing

2010-09-19T18:18:00.000-07:00

If you are like me, you are pretty bored right now with the Church of Scientology. They do nothing.

Day after day, month after month, they do nothing. You might hear fantastic claims being made by David Miscavige in one of his Big Events, about the "world saving solutions" that Scientology is implementing -- to great acclaim -- but that's just empty words, made up stories. Nothing actually happened. The church didn't actually do anything.

Here's what happens. Some Scientologist gets excited, works real hard and "does something". They might form a small group in their community. They might discuss Scientology with some minor local government official.

In actual fact, it isn't much, and it never amounts to anything.

But they report it as a "win" to David Miscavige, and that's where things go crazy. Miscavige gets all excited and dispatches his Gold Film Crew to "document this major breakthrough".

And by "document" Miscavige means, very specifically, "create a huge, exciting story about Scientology expansion and impressive impact on the world" (without any regard to what actually happened).

The Gold Film Crew know that they will be in deep, deep trouble if they report what actually happened -- and I mean RPF-prison-camp trouble.

So when the crew arrives and starts filming, they don't pay much attention to the original Scientologist or what he says. They create a story that Miscavige wants.

Example: The Scientologist's small group has, since the report was filed, actually disbanded. It was only three people anyway and they lost interest. The Gold Film Crew will gather up people, any people, put them in a room with Scientology books and charts, and film them as if they were the group.

If the story was about Scientology Volunteer Ministers, the Gold Film Crew will put those yellow VM shirts on everyone who tolerates it, pose them as if they were helping people, and film that.

If the story was about some conversation with some minor, local government official, the official will be "promoted" by the film crew to a much more prestigious position, and the story will be created about Scientology being "implemented broadly" throughout the whole country.

And nothing actually happened. The Church of Scientology did nothing and the individual Scientologist did very little, the effect of which soon disappeared.

All the rest of the big "news" at Miscavige's Big Events is equally bogus. At every event Miscavige announces the "destruction of psychiatry" or "unprecedented Scientology expansion" or "Scientology's solutions impacting the world"...

And nothing actually happened. Psychiatry is doing quite well, Scientology's "solutions" aren't implemented anywhere in the real world and Scientology has collapsed and shows no signs of recovery.

David Miscavige, and his little Church of Scientology are boring -- all talk and no do.

The only excitement, and it is minor, is when David Miscavige reacts to a news report about his abuses, or when he reacts to the imagined threat of an "Independent Church of Scientology". But even then, it's bluster and threat rather than action.

The Church of Scientology does nothing. That's the news for today.
-

Scientology: Selling Invisible Things

2010-08-29T13:00:00.000-07:00

There is a marketing phrase, "selling the invisible", used to describe the challenge faced by advertising to sell potential customers on the "sizzle" instead of (or in addition to) the steak.

But that's not what I'm referring to when it comes to Scientology's selling of the invisible.

What I'm referring to is the amazing marketing success of L. Ron Hubbard and his Dianetics/Scientology organization in selling something that may not exist at all.

I don't want to get into an argument about the validity of Scientology, since that is a matter of belief, I only want to point out this amazing fact: There is, and never has been, any actual, valid evidence that Hubbard's "Reactive Mind" exists. It cannot be detected by any physical means. It cannot be measured, weighed or tested.

And yet Hubbard sold it quite lucratively for many, many years and his Church of Scientology continues to sell it to this day.

Hubbard said, "You have this very, very evil, horrible thing attached to you that is the cause of all your problems. You can't see it. No one has ever seen it or detected it, but it is there and it is very evil. Pay my organization a lot of money and we will get rid of it for you."

And then, after tens thousands of dollars and many months, or even years, of "auditing", the Scientology organization declares: "We did it! Your Reactive Mind is now gone! Congratulations! You are 'Clear'!"

What is the difference between having something you can't detect at all and not having it? Apparently, tens of thousands of dollars.

Whether it is true or not, the miraculous thing is, how the heck do they sell that? This truly is the ultimate in "selling the invisible".

I have spoken to many "Clears" after they have left Scientology and have recovered from the Scientology thought control, and every single one of them has confessed that they felt no significant difference after they were "declared Clear".

And yet, most of them were happy to continue on "up the Bridge". I know I was.

"But," as they say on TV, "that's not all!"

After Scientology has gotten rid of this invisible, undetectable thing, what else is there?

Amazingly, but not surprisingly, it turns out there are a lot more invisible, undetectable things that you need to get rid of.

Sure, there is no physical evidence that these things exist. Sure, there is no way to measure, test or validate their existence -- but they are there and only Scientology can get rid of them -- if you give them much more money and spend much more time getting auditing.

And quite a number of people buy that.

And, after much, much money -- now hundreds of thousands of dollars -- and many years, Scientology finally declares, "We did it! All those bad things are now gone! Congratulations! You are 'OT VII'!"

And all these "OT VIIs" and "OT VIIIs" look and act just like everyone else. They aren't demonstrating any amazing successes or powers. They aren't demonstrating great changes. Again, I've talked to a number of "OT VIIs" after they have left Scientology and they confess that things aren't that different.

Even current True Believers only claim vague gains, "My life has changed," "I'm better," -- the kind of "improvements" reported by any and all religions and self-improvement technologies.

What do you want to bet that, if David Miscavige decides to create some OT levels above OT VIII, that it involves some newly discovered, undetectable, invisible things that only Miscavige knows about and you just have to get rid of?

Hubbard, and Scientology, do an amazing and, some would say, an impossible job of selling invisible things. There is no evidence that any of these things exist. There is no evidence that these things have been removed. And there is no indication that the "removal" of these things made any noticeable difference. And yet the Church of Scientology rakes in millions and millions selling these invisible, undetectable "results".

There are, I am sure, many sales people who would love to know how to do that. It is a truly amazing sales miracle.
-

Scientology and Control

2010-08-14T19:00:00.000-07:00

There is "good control" and "bad control." The difference between them is certainty and uncertainty.
L. Ron Hubbard
New Slant on Life

Most people are not aware of how much Scientology is about control.

This is not emphasized in their literature, nor broadcast when they are trying to sell you things, but much of their technologies are about control -- how to control others.

You will notice, in the quote from L. Ron Hubbard, above, and in all teachings of Scientology, that nothing is said, and nothing is taught about ethical control. "Good" control is defined as effectively getting others to carry out your wishes, no matter what those wishes are, no matter what the other person might wish.

Let's look at specific examples.

The "Communications" Course

The Scientology Communications Course, which is one of their introductory courses, is promoted as teaching a person how to "communicate effectively". This course utilizes Hubbard's "TR Drills" to do this. These TR Drills are done on many courses as one trains on Scientology technologies.

And what are the goals of these TR Drills? The TRs are there to specifically and only teach a person how to get their commands complied with or get their questions answered. Period. They have no other purpose.

How to have a normal conversation? Not taught. How to create a friendly environment where normal conversations can take place? Not taught. How to make people feel at ease and draw them out? Not taught.

No, the Communications Course and all courses that utilize the TRs are only teaching a person how to control others through communication.

Hubbard's Tone Scale

Here is a simplified version of the Tone Scale:

4.0   Enthusiasm
3.5   Cheerfulness
3.0   Conservatism
2.5   Boredom
2.0   Antagonism
1.5   Anger
1.1   Covert hostility
1.0   Fear
0.5   Grief
0.0   Death

Many people have now seen this scale. The emotions are pretty easy to understand, but what's with all those numbers?

It's all about control. Hubbard created and taught his tone scale as a method of controlling others. No more, no less. Hubbard taught that, if you assumed a "tone level" that was .5 to 1.0 above another's tone, you could control them, and make them do what you want. Or, you could assume a "tone level" .5 to 1.0 below their tone to drive them "down tone" and make them ineffective.

It's all about control.

The "ARC Triangle"

L. Ron Hubbard taught that Affinity, Reality and Communication were the three corners of this ARC Triangle. When dealing with others, if you raised one, you would automatically raise the other two. If you lowered one, you would automatically lower the other two.

In other words, the purpose of this "ARC Triangle" is to control others.

Lying

The only way to control people is to lie to them.
L. Ron Hubbard
On Control and Lying

Scientologists are taught, from very early on, not to tell non-Scientologists all about Scientology. Don't talk about past lives. Don't talk about "space opera". Don't talk about OT. Scientologists are carefully coached as to what to say and how to say it. And what not to say.

They call this "acceptable truths", "shore stories", "communicating at the proper 'reality level'" and other such euphemisms for lying.

Scientologists are told such lying is necessary because, otherwise, the public wouldn't respond correctly and wouldn't come in. In other words, Scientologists are taught to tell lies in order to control the public and bring them in.

It's all about control

There are many, many other examples of this in Scientology. Hubbard taught that there were many key phrases to cave a person in -- so you could control them. Hubbard said that certain images from OT III materials would control people and cause them to be unable to resist buying his books. Hubbard believed in positioning as a way to secretly control the way people thought about Scientology so that they would react favorably, without facts and without logic.

Control is a major part of Scientology. Controlling people. Controlling you.

So, when you are trying to have a conversation with a Scientologist, they are using "communication" to control you. When you try to be open about your emotions with a Scientologist, they are figuring out which "tone level" to use to control you. They are working to manipulate your affinity, reality and communication to control you.

And, when you are looking for the truth, Scientologists are trying to figure out which "acceptable truth" to tell you -- to control you.

Hopefully, this will help people understand why talking with Scientologists so often seems artificial, stilted, awkward and non-sequitur. Scientologists have had all their natural social skills replaced with Scientology techniques for control.
-

Scientology In Perspective

2010-08-09T06:30:00.000-07:00

We're not playing some minor game in Scientology. It isn't cute or something to do for lack of something better.

The whole agonized future of this planet, every Man, Woman and Child on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology.

This is a deadly serious activity. And if we miss getting out of the trap now, we may never again have another chance.

Remember, this is our first chance to do so in all the endless trillions of years of the past. Don't muff it now...

L. Ron Hubbard
Keeping Scientology Working Series 1

Scientologists live in a mythical world of titanic, universe-wide, trillion year struggles between Ultimate Good and Ultimate Evil.

The above quote from L. Ron Hubbard has been read by every single Scientologist many times. They believe it with all their hearts.

Today, they are fighting for their very survival and the survival of "every Man, Woman and Child". I simply cannot exaggerate how very serious and crucial everything is to a Scientologist.

Every time David Miscavige announces his fictional "Good News", it is a sign that Ultimate Good is winning. But every protest, every bad news article, every exposé on TV is a sign that Ultimate Evil is winning.

It is all so very, very, very important. To them.

And sometimes, with all this importance being artificially imprinted on Scientology by Scientologists, it is difficult to keep things in perspective.

Let's look at reality, shall we?

Scientology doesn't exist. That is the reality in the rest of the world. Outside of Scientology and its critics, Scientology really doesn't show up on the radar of most people. A few might know that Scientology has something to do with Tom Cruise, and that's about it. To most of the world, Scientology simply does not exist.

Scientology's "solutions" have been tried in a very few places, but were found to be expensive and to not work very well. So these "solutions" have been, or are being, dropped wherever they were tried. You look for what effect Scientology is having on the world and the answer is: None. For all their posturing and bragging, their results are nowhere to be found. It's like they don't exist.

Psychiatrists are not much aware of Scientology. They know that, for some reason, Scientology attacks them, but, since the effects of those attacks are negligible, it doesn't matter to psychiatrists what they do.

Politicians are finding out that, as celebrities already know, association with the fraudulent, deceitful Church of Scientology is a huge negative to their careers. The church has no influence there.

And, actually, Scientology is not very important to Scientology's critics either. Yes, critics care about the victims. Yes, they want the abuse, lies, fraud and crimes to be stopped. Yes, they want the destroyed families to be brought back together. But criticizing and protesting Scientology is what they do with their spare time. It isn't their life, it isn't their survival, it isn't some "epic battle".

Outside of Scientology's bubble, Scientology just isn't important.

In this struggle, Scientology is fighting a desperate fight for "the whole agonized future of this planet, every Man, Woman and Child on it," while its critics are happily living their lives and, occasionally, when they have some spare time, criticizing and protesting Scientology.
-

Confidential to David Miscavige

2010-07-17T10:00:00.000-07:00

Dear David,

Are you aware that, with all your recent, whiny attacks on Anderson Cooper, Marty Rathbun, Mike Rinder et. al., you are revealing the exact truth that you hoped to never disclose?

Anyone reading your bellicose and petulant screeds in your little Freedom Magazine can easily see how completely bogus your attacks are. But they also realize why you are staging these attacks.

You are deathly afraid.

Any honest person who was the victim of such lies, as you claim to be, would take all the guilty parties to court for libel and slander. An honest person wouldn't fuss and moan in some little self-published magazine. An honest person would want their day in court to prove themselves innocent of the charges.

But you don't and you won't.

Obviously, if a person didn't have any money, they might not be able to afford such a court case. But, that's not your excuse, you have hundreds of millions at your disposal and many lawyers who will do anything you ask.

So that leaves the real reason you won't take your accusers to court for libel and slander:

Everything they say about you is TRUE.

We all know that's the reason you whine and complain but never do anything. All the stories of your vicious mental and physical abuses are true. All the charges about your complicity in the many crimes, fraud and human rights violations in the Church of Scientology are completely true.

If you took anyone to court, they would then have the right to subpoena people and documents -- and you know there are people and documents in the Church of Scientology that would prove what a sociopathic criminal you are.

If you took anyone to court, you would be required to testify, under oath. And you would lie. You'd have to lie. And your lies would be proven to be lies and you would go to jail. You know all this.

And that would destroy your little money-machine called the Church of Scientology.

And that's why you won't take anyone to court.

The fact that you will never take anyone to court is a complete admission that what they say about you is true.

That is what you've revealed by your little hissy-fit in Freedom Magazine. Gee, that was a big mistake.

But then, big mistakes are one of your defining characteristics.
-

Summer Break

2010-07-16T18:24:00.000-07:00

Don't worry if I'm slow in moderating comments for awhile, nothing is wrong. It's Summer for all of us here in the northern hemisphere -- take a break.

Ask a Question

2010-07-12T19:30:00.000-07:00

One of these days, I really need to go back through the previous Ask a Questions and pull out the good stuff -- and somehow present it in a better format. There really are some great questions and discussions in Ask a Question - 1 and Ask a Question - 2.

But, once again, the most recent Ask a Question got unwieldy, so let's start a new one.

You want to know something about Scientology or the Church of Scientology, ask here! You have a suggestion? Put it here. You want to start an argument or discussion? Here is the place. All non-troll, non-spam comments, suggestions, arguments, corrections are greatly appreciated.
-

Scientology and Humor

2010-07-04T11:00:00.000-07:00

How many Scientologists does it take to change a light bulb?

First, 12 Scientologists have to carefully research all writings and lectures of L. Ron Hubbard to find everything that LRH ever said that, however remotely, might have something to do with light, lightbulbs, repairs, the effect of electricity on thetans, and so forth.

This research will result in several Scientologists being assigned to revise the official L. Ron Hubbard biography to include the newly discovered fact that Ron actually invented lightbulbs (and, it may be hinted, even light itself).

30 Scientologists will then be assigned by David Miscavige to create a "standard" program, with purposes, policies, major targets, etc., etc. They will work for months to try to get the program approved through David Miscavige. This approval can never happen.

Eventually, Miscavige will, with great drama, declare everyone a Suppressive Person and "do it all himself" (meaning make minor, unnecessary changes to the original program).

150 Scientologists (everyone left at Int. Base) will then work for years on this program, attempting to create and pilot the "Hubbard Standard Tech Lightbulb Changing Course". The course will include extensive, new Golden Age of Tech drills for changing lightbulbs.

This will never get approved by Miscavige.

Eventually, Miscavige will, with great drama, declare everyone a Suppressive Person, again, and "do it all himself" (meaning make minor unnecessary changes).

1,256 Scientologists (all Scientologists left in Clearwater) will show up at the Big Release Event put on by Miscavige to wildly applaud this new step in "Bringing Scientology Effective Solutions to a Dark and Troubled World".

The new course will be priced at $10,000.00 and will also require the purchase of all Miscavige's newly re-re-revised "Basics" books.

13,126 Scientologists (all remaining Scientologists in the world) will be forced off of whatever they were doing to purchase and take this new course. Promoted as something that can be done "in a week", the course will actually take over six months. Only 153 Scientologists will ever actually complete the course.

They will never be able to change a lightbulb again.

I was recently reminded of the fact that all Scientologists, as part of their indoctrination, receive a humorectomy. Scientology carefully and thoroughly removes all possibility of a sense humor.

While "jokes" might be permitted if the target is a declared Enemy of Scientology, these must be approved by Miscavige and, if approved, are not funny. Humor, laughter, sarcasm, parody -- these things are not allowed by Scientology dogma and are thoroughly removed through Scientology indoctrination. Believe it or not, Hubbard actually wrote a Policy Letter forbidding jokes.

This is an effect of Scientology, not just the Church of Scientology. Scientology, even outside the church, is Serious Business. No one is laughing. If you read any of the Independent Scientologists' websites and blogs, you will be overcome with how Serious It All Is. A criticism isn't just a criticism, it is an attempt by Whole Track Evil to destroy all of Scientology forever. A bit of a fuss is A Major Battle. Without humor, every molehill becomes a mountain.

Even some ex-Scientologists do not recover a sense of humor. They are battling Scientology and the Church of Scientology and they are very, very serious about it.

But then there is Anonymous. Where Anonymous has been most wonderfully successful is with humor. They laugh at the church, they laugh at Scientologists, they even laugh at themselves. They are a lot more sane than any True Believer.

Humor brings perspective and sanity. It may be Scientologists' lack of humor that is most responsible for Scientology's destruction. They just don't get the joke.
-

Scientology's Logical Fallacies

2010-06-26T18:00:00.000-07:00

You may recall, in Scientology Logic, that I thought that analyzing and listing all the logical fallacies that Scientologists use would be entertaining. It has proven to be so.

As I discussed in that previous article, Scientology not only does not teach logic but it actively suppresses logical thinking.

What is even more interesting is how Scientology deliberately uses logical fallacies to justify its dogma and control Scientologists' thinking.

I've cribbed this list of logical fallacies from Wikipedia, which I find to be a wonderful source for many subjects, including Scientology.

Note that these aren't all the logical fallacies that Scientology uses, these are only a representative sample.

Fallacy of Accident or Sweeping Generalization: a generalization that disregards exceptions

Scientology example:

Argument: Anyone who opposes Good Works is Evil. Scientology does Good Works. Therefore, anyone who opposes Scientology is Evil.

Problem: While it may be true that some Scientologists do some Good Work, that is not necessarily true of Scientologists in general and definitely not true of the Church of Scientology.

The various programs that the church parades as examples of their "Good Works" have not held up under any independent inspection. The claimed "good results" from these programs never materialized.

Scientologists who try to do good things via the Church of Scientology's programs such as "Volunteer Ministers" are effectively sabotaged by the church's greed and lack of support.

Converse Fallacy of Accident or Hasty Generalization: argues from a special case to a general rule

Scientology example:

Argument: The other Scientologists I know are good people, so it must be true that all Scientologists are good people.

Problem: Most Scientologists have only met is a small subset of the entire group.

Specifically, most Scientologists have not worked in the Sea Org under David Miscavige, they have not experienced the pervasive criminal abuse in the Sea Org at his hands and at his orders.

In addition, most Scientologists have not had dealings with the various Scientologists who have been arrested for many crimes.

Begging the question: demonstrates a conclusion by means of premises that assume that conclusion is true. "Beg" in this context means "dodge or avoid".

Scientology example:

Argument: Scientology always works, I know this because, if it fails, it "wasn't Scientology".

Problem: The argument assumes that Scientology always works.

This is the classic and best-known Scientology logical fallacy. Discuss Scientology's failures with any true believer, and their argument will inevitably beg the question.

Begging the question is also called Petitio Principii, Circulus in Probando, arguing in a circle, assuming the answer.

Scientology true believers cannot think their way out of this logical fallacy -- it is deeply embedded in their belief system.

Fallacy of False Cause or Non Sequitur: incorrectly assumes one thing is the cause of another. Non Sequitur is Latin for "It does not follow."

Scientology example:

Argument: It's OK to go deeply into debt to pay for Scientology services, because Scientology will greatly increase your income.

Problem: There is no evidence that there is such an effect from Scientology.

Scientology registrars use this logical fallacy more than any other.

If one simply looks at the many, many Scientologists who have declared bankruptcy, who were forced to close their businesses and/or lost their homes through foreclosure, it is quite obvious that an increase in income does not happen as a matter of course for Scientologists.

Yet this sales pitch is still used.

Fallacy of False Cause - post hoc ergo propter hoc: believing that temporal succession implies a causal relation.

Scientology example:

Argument: After Sally completed Grade I, she got a new job, therefore Grade I resulted in a new job.

Problem: Since people get new jobs all the time, without any Scientology at all, such a direct correlation is unproven and highly unlikely.

Scientologists like this particular logical fallacy a lot. Since they are not seeing the promised gains from their auditing, they attribute any good thing that happens to them to Scientology, no matter how far-fetched or disrelated.

Straw man: A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.

They must get training on this in Scientology. When a Scientologist posts a comment on some blog or forum critical of Scientology, they often use the Straw man.

Anyone who has read the comment thread on my first article on Scientology Logic is well aware of how "Sylver" tried to do this.

Scientology example:

Person A claims: While many Scientologists are good people who are trying to do good things, the Church of Scientology is run by criminals who must be brought to justice.

Argument Person B: You claim to like Scientologists, but you want to destroy their church. You are a hypocrite!

Problem: Obviously, person A never said what person B claims. Person B is creating a straw man so he can "win the argument".

There are more logical fallacies, and more that Scientologists either use or fall for (or both) but the logical fallacy that L. Ron Hubbard used most of all was this one:

Proof by verbosity, sometimes colloquially referred to as argumentum verbosium: a rhetorical technique that tries to persuade by overwhelming those considering an argument with such a volume of material that the argument sounds plausible, superficially appears to be well-researched, and it is so laborious to untangle and check supporting facts that the argument might be allowed to slide by unchallenged.

All of Dianetics and Scientology could be called Proof by verbosity. There is no real proof in all those millions of words, there is no research, there is no logic, there is nothing there -- but, boy, there sure is a lot of it.

Logical fallacies are embedded throughout the doctrine of Scientology. If you remove the logical fallacies, you remove Scientology's foundation.
-

More on the Scientology E-Meter

2010-06-14T18:00:00.000-07:00

Now that I've upset those who believed that the e-meter didn't work, I'll now really upset those who believe it does.

In my last article, I gave examples of tests and drills that appeared to prove that the e-meter reacts to thoughts. I also mentioned that it reacts to a lot more than just thoughts.

I also presented Hubbard's explanation as to how and why it works. I even said it was a reasonable explanation that fit the facts. But, on purpose, I skipped the complications and contradictions between the theory and practice.

Let's delve a bit deeper into this subject.

To repeat the basic theory according to Hubbard, some thoughts have "charge". When a person "activates" the charge by thinking some thought, the associated charge impinges on the body changes the body's resistance. The meter measures these changes.

The charge, according to Hubbard, comes from some past trauma, which was called, in Dianetics, an "engram" - essentially a moment of pain and unconsciousness.

While this seems pretty far-fetched, the "pinch test" (as described in my last article) certainly seems to validate this idea. No matter the theory, the "pinch test" proves that the meter does react to a thought (or, to appease the more critical reader, a thought can impinge on the body in a way that is detectable by the e-meter).

But I want to emphasize that this is all that it proves. There is a lot of Hubbard's theory that is not proven and, in fact, doesn't make much sense.

First, let me tell you a bit more about Hubbard's explanation of the e-meter. Hubbard said that the e-meter reacts to charge that is "just below the person's awareness". This means that the person is not aware of the problem, but is "ready to confront it". As the person becomes aware of the problem, the charge "blows" and it no longer "reads" on the e-meter.

By the way, this part of Hubbard's theory about his e-meter is necessary to explain why so many things do not register on the e-meter until later up The Bridge -- the person, you see, "isn't ready to confront" the higher levels.

That's the theory about the e-meter that is accepted by Scientologists.

But when you get into actual practice, things start to fall apart.

First, let's visit the Scientology course room again. When you are learning how to operate the e-meter, you must do the "Dating Drill". In this drill, one student thinks of a date and writes it down, the second student puts the first student on the e-meter and attempts to find out the date using only the e-meter.

Now, if Hubbard's theory about the e-meter is correct, this drill would never work. There is no trauma (and therefore no charge) associated with that date. And the first student is fully aware of the date -- it isn't "just below his awareness".

So why does the Dating Drill work? There is only one explanation: It works because they believe it should.

Oops! That isn't part of the theory -- and that drill alone destroys the certainty about any read on the e-meter. If something reads only because someone believes it should, then how can anyone determine which reads are "real" and which are "belief"?

In this same theme, let's look at a question asked at the beginning of every session about a person's "witholds" (things they have hidden and don't want found out). Why do they read on the meter? Where is the trauma? The meter may read even though no one was hurt at all. The person may have participated in some victimless, harmless activity that is nobody's business -- and the meter reads. Why? Because the person was afraid it would. All Scientology auditors know this happens but they don't question it. According to theory, the meter shouldn't read because the person is fully aware of what they did, there was no trauma and there was no harm.

Well, what if a person doesn't believe the e-meter will react? What happens then? Well, apparently the meter doesn't react. You get the all too frequent situation where a Scientology criminal continues their criminal activities for years and years -- all while getting auditing. Apparently, they don't believe the meter will react to their crimes, and it doesn't.

All these contradictions between theory and practice suggest a rather different theory than Hubbard's: The e-meter reacts not only to actual memories of actual "trauma", but also reacts because the person on the meter believes or fears that it will.

Do you see what this means?

This means that the e-meter is almost completely useless, since a reaction on the meter might indicate a real problem or it might not -- and the meter cannot detect the difference.

One result of this is the incredibly bizarre "4 trillion year past track history" that is accepted as truth by Scientologists but is logically, obviously and scientifically proven to be false.

Another result is that it seems there are thousands of Scientologists who were famous people. In fact, there are many who share being the same famous person -- and all these past identities were fully verified by the e-meter.

But the worst result of these reads-just-because-they-believe is the entire Bridge. Scientologists, and their auditors, believed they were uncovering and "handling" vast amounts of past track incidents of trauma and upset -- 4 trillion years of it, no less -- but what is the truth? No one has become Clear. No one has become OT. Scientologists, even those high up The Bridge are struggling. Where are the miraculous gains and the incredible abilities that were promised and were supposedly delivered?

They believed and the e-meter showed them what they expected to see.
-

The Scientology E-Meter

2010-06-12T19:30:00.000-07:00

There is a lot of misinformation, speculation and strange claims about the Scientology E-Meter. Since I try to clear up such confusing areas, it is high time I tackled this subject.

People (who have not actually studied or used the e-meter) very often claim the instrument is bogus; can't work; doesn't work. It has been described by uninformed critics as "a crude lie-detector".

I recently had a conversation with someone who had heard it was only measuring skin resistance and reacted only to sweat and grip. This is not accurate.

I have to tell you -- it works.

Before I get into a lot of caveats about that statement, about what it doesn't do, let me first establish what it does do. The following is a description of a test, called the "pinch test", that anyone trained in the e-meter can do to anyone to show what the e-meter does. I've done this myself on non-Scientologists, it is pretty convincing.

The "Pinch Test"

The person with the e-meter, let's call them the operator, sets the meter up and hands the other person the electrodes, the "cans". The operator then has the person watch the needle while the operator pinches them, hard.

The person will see the needle immediately and quickly move to the right in response to the pain.

The operator then gives the command, "Recall the moment of the pinch." When the person does so, they immediately see the same motion of the needle, usually a bit smaller. The person can, again and again, recall the pinch and, the instant they do so, see that needle motion, a little less each time.

If you know someone who has a meter and has been trained, they can do this for you.

This is obvious proof that the meter really does react to the thought.

This is actually pretty amazing.

There is another test, a drill used during training, where the student puts another student on the meter and says, "Consider the events of today." The other student does so. When the first student sees a distinctive needle movement, he says, "That". As prearranged, the second student immediately thinks of something else for a little, and then thinks the same thought he was thinking at the moment the first student said "That". The first student is supposed to see that same needle movement and say, "That is the same thought."

Every graduate of an e-meter course has done this drill and passed it.

This shows that different thoughts can cause different and individually identifiable needle motions.

The unproven theory about all this is that some thoughts have "charge" attached to them, that this "charge" impinges on the body when the thought is "activated" by thinking it and this effect can be detected by measuring the change of resistance of the body.

There is no proof that this is true, but it's the only explanation at this time and it does seem to fit the current evidence. It sure would be nice if someone competent did some scientific research on this.

So, that's what the meter can do. Here's what it can't do.

It can't read or measure emotions. It can't tell truth from lies. It cannot tell what a person is thinking. It cannot make a person do anything. It can be rather easily fooled. And the meter is affected by many other factors than just thoughts.

The meter is affected by sweat, the grip on the cans, body motion and some other things. This is a significant problem and requires much training on the part of the operator and much instruction of the person holding the cans (the "preclear"). Of course, sweat doesn't cause needle movements because it is slow to occur and very slow to evaporate, but sweat can affect the range, causing the meter to read too low. Likewise, dry hands can make the meter read too high.

Preclears are carefully instructed on grip, and this is also why each meter comes with many different sizes of cans.

The meter operators are instructed and drilled on body motion, so they can, it is hoped, recognize and ignore needle motion caused by that.

The e-meter, as sold by the Church of Scientology, is a very expensive, but still somewhat primitive instrument. It has never been analyzed in any scientific way. It has many limitations. The meter is quite easily fooled, if you know what you are doing. The mind is a complex thing and the meter is a very simple thing, so problems can and do occur because the meter reads on something other than what is expected.

More research has been done in the Freezone concerning the e-meter and they claim they have improved it, but there is still no independent, scientific research on the e-meter.

How the E-Meter is part of the trap

It is the fact that the e-meter actually works that makes it a very integral part of the very effective trapping mechanism of the Church of Scientology.

Very early on, every new Scientologist is led to believe that they cannot keep any secrets from the e-meter. In session, when the auditor asks about their secrets, their bad actions, the meter reads. And the auditor won't stop until the meter stops reading, meaning the Scientologist has "told all".

In this way, the Church of Scientology can and does get all the person's crimes, sexual problems, secrets and so on. Every session starts with those questions. The church's files are quite full and quite complete.

In addition, the existence and apparent effectiveness of the e-meter convinces the new Scientologist that the rest of the Scientology tech must be just as effective.

Of course, neither the e-meter nor the Scientology tech is as effective as claimed. But that isn't obvious at the beginning. By the time the Scientologist might detect the failings of both, they are usually too far into the indoctrination and can't perceive the flaws any more.
-

To Scientologists Newly Out of the Church

2010-06-04T09:30:00.000-07:00

To you, dear Scientologist, who have finally decided to leave the Church of Scientology:

Congratulations! You have made that important, first step to a new life.

Perhaps you haven't yet understood the magnitude of what you have done.

You have disagreed.

All Scientologists know that you may not disagree and remain in Scientology. Oh, sure, you "can disagree", but only if you agree to get your disagreements "handled" by the church. And that, we all learned, meant they would "handle" you until you realized "how wrong you were" and how right Scientology, the church and its leaders were. There is no other "handling" -- you were wrong and Scientology, whatever they said and whatever they did, was right.

And, even though Ron said that agreement is effect and disagreement is cause, Scientology only tolerates agreement.

And you have disagreed. What's more, you refused to agree that you were wrong so you could be "handled" by the church. You disagreed and you said, "I am right!"

This first disagreement after so much agree-agree-agree is a major step toward sanity. If you are like I was, it is a great relief.

However, if you are like many Scientologists who have finally had enough and have stepped away from the Church of Scientology, you may still be wrapped up in the culture of agreement that is Scientology.

You might be tempted to return to that warm, welcoming culture of agreement with Scientologists outside of the church, like the "Independent Scientology" movement. There, your disagreement about David Miscavige will become agreement, they all agree that "Miscavige is bad", and you could safely drop back with them into that safe world of complete agreement in Scientology.

You became a Scientologist because you found some of the things in Scientology to be worthwhile and workable. But one of the characteristics of Scientology that is quite attractive to many Scientologists is that it is a pre-packaged set of beliefs where "all of that is bad" and "all of this is good", you don't have to think, you don't have to worry, all you have to do is agree. And once a person becomes a Scientologist, they are required to agree that everything in Scientology is good and workable -- no matter what their actual opinions or experiences are.

Hopefully, that's over for you. Now you can make up your own mind about each and every thing in your life. You can choose a life where you make the decisions about what you are going to think and believe.

You have taken the first step towards sanity and taking back your own life, don't stop now. You can disagree if you want to. You can disagree as much as you want, even with parts of Scientology.

And that is a road to greater truth.
-

Scientology Logic

2010-05-23T12:30:00.000-07:00

In a recent comment, a Scientology True Believer was absolutely convinced that when I criticized L. Ron Hubbard, it was exactly the same as saying I wished for the total destruction of the belief system of Scientology. No amount of logical discussion could alter that bizarre thought process.

Anyone following along in the discussion thread would have thought the Scientologist to be very, very stupid. There was no way the actual words written could mean what he interpreted them to mean.

But to the Scientologist, it was completely logical.

Let us explore, once again, a bit more into the strange world of Scientology.

For those who have never talked to a Scientologist, Scientology logic looks, to an outsider, like this:

If A
And if B
Then: Tuesday!

It just doesn't seem to make any sense. For instance, let's take a very common example:

Does Scientology work?

L. Ron Hubbard proclaimed that his technology would and does produce a "Clear", who would have perfect memory, be able to do lightening fast calculations, be free of most diseases and mental upsets.
On inspection, in the entire history of Dianetics and Scientology, with tens of thousands of people applying Hubbard's technology, not one person has attained this mythical state of Clear.
Therefore, Scientology works!

This is exactly what happens when you try to discuss Scientology's failures with a Scientologist. Of course this makes it impossible to have any reasonable discussion. But how can they be so, so ... illogical?

Logic is not taught in Scientology, obviously. In fact, logic is frowned upon. They have a drill, called the "Obnosis Drill" which drills a Scientologist to not draw logical conclusions. (Ironically, "obnosis" is a bafflegab word created by Hubbard to mean "observing the obvious"). For example, the course supervisor brings in a person for the students to do the drill on. The drill would go like this:

Supervisor: What do you see?
Student: I see an old man.
Supervisor: Flunk! Do you see "old"? Do you see "man"? What do you see?
Student: I see a person with wrinkles and short grey hair.
Supervisor: Where do you see wrinkles and grey hair?
Student: I see a person with wrinkles on this side of its face and on the one hand I can see, and grey hair on this side of its head.

Do you see? Students are drilled not to think, not to draw obvious conclusions, not to assume the self-evident fact that there is an old man there. As ridiculous as you may think my example is, it is essentially a verbatim quote from a real course room drill I witnessed.

And that is just one of a number of Scientology techniques that turns off logic.

Another technique is the constant repetition and enforcement that you may never question anything Hubbard says. What you see, if it contradicts what Hubbard said, is wrong. You must work at it until you can work out that what you saw actually validated what Hubbard said.

The final trick is the installation of certain "truths" that may never be questioned. Some of these are:

L. Ron Hubbard is always right.
Scientology always works.
Evil forces are fighting Scientology.
Anyone who disagrees with this is Evil.
... and so on.

And now you have Scientology Logic. Let's look at that example, above, but let's peek behind the scenes to see what is going on inside the Scientologist's mind:

Does Scientology work?

L. Ron Hubbard proclaimed that his technology would and does produce a "Clear", who would have perfect memory, be able to do lightening fast calculations, be free of most diseases and mental upsets.
L. Ron Hubbard is always right.
On inspection, in the entire history of Dianetics and Scientology, with tens of thousands of people applying Hubbard's technology, not one person has attained this mythical state of Clear.
That statement must be a lie because it contradicts what Ron said, and Ron is always right.
There must be Clears somewhere, even if I've never seen any, because Hubbard said that Scientology does produce Clears.
L. Ron Hubbard said Scientology always works.
Therefore, Scientology works!

Now you can see it. Now you can see why, to a Scientologist, that whole "logic" sequence makes sense. They have these additional, hidden, "truths" that color every thought -- and they can't think about or question these "truths", they must only believe and accept them.

Now you can see why, when I dared to criticize Hubbard, I was (to the Scientologist) actually saying that all of Scientology should be destroyed. That's Scientology Logic!

And, until a Scientologist recovers their ability to think logically, to perceive what is really there and think about and draw obvious conclusions from what they actually see, they will continue to make the most bizarre statements and erroneous "leaps of logic".

But now you know why you can't reason with a True Believer. Their "logic" is pure Scientology Logic.
-

Scientology: Seeds of Its Own Destruction

2010-05-11T18:00:00.000-07:00

With any in-depth and dispassionate analysis of Scientology, it becomes obvious that the organization and technologies of Scientology contain the seeds of their own destruction.

This is almost impossible for a True Believer to understand or detect, but it is clear to anyone who can see and think logically.

Now, I have written about some of this, such as Scientology's Admin Tech, which, while some is workable, if applied fully and exactly as written will effectively destroy any organization. And there is a great essay on why Scientology's Ethics Tech is so destructive over on Leaving Scientology.

But now I'm talking about how the very structure of the Church of Scientology, as carefully designed by L. Ron Hubbard, made the takeover and subsequent destruction of the Church of Scientology not only possible but inevitable.

Let me explain.

You see, Ron carefully structured the whole organization of the Church of Scientology around himself. In all the thousands of policies that he wrote over all those years, there is one huge, glaring omission concerning the very top of the church: The leader of Scientology and his duties, his responsibilities, how he is chosen, how he is removed, how he is evaluated, are all completely undefined.

Because of this, the leader may never be removed. There simply is no way to remove the leader. There is no way within the church to evaluate how the leader is doing. There are no requirements that a leader must meet. There are no results a leader must produce. No one in the whole world has the power or authorization to remove the leader of Scientology. This, of course, was intentional, since Ron had no intention of ever relinquishing control -- but it was a fatal omission for the church.

Some may believe that there are currently "others" who are really in charge and who could remove the leader, but that simply isn't true in the slightest. The leader of the Church of Scientology has no boss and cannot be removed. For more information about that, see Larry Brennan's blog.

The leader of Scientology is fully protected from everything. Any internal threats or attacks are immediately dealt with, per policy, by the destruction and expulsion of the attacker. The leader is always assumed fully innocent and any attacker is always presumed horribly guilty. Any external attacks against the leader are, per policy, met with everything the Church of Scientology can throw against the attacker, both legal and illegal. No expense or effort is spared in the leader's defense.

The leader's word is law within the Church of Scientology and must be complied with immediately and without question. The leader can order anything be done and it will be done, no matter how much money or how many people are required. If it is impossible, the church must still keep trying as long as the leader desires it. The leader's power is absolute within the church.

The actions of the leader are completely protected by the church. His whereabouts and actions are secret and carefully concealed by the church. What the leader reveals is all that is visible, all else is hidden behind many curtains of secrecy created for that purpose. If the leader commits crimes, lies, fraud and abuse, these actions will never be reported to the police (or anyone). The leader of the Church of Scientology is protected from any exposure.

The leader of the Church of Scientology has absolute control over all of Scientology, all the money, all the property and all the people. This is much more than just being very, very wealthy, this is total domination.

In case you are thinking this sounds like a super-desirable job, to an honest person, it really isn't. Obviously it was perfect for Ron, because it was whatever he wanted it to be. But now, because the job has no defined duties or limits, all the problems, disasters, failures and chaos of Scientology would end up at that desk. The job is totally responsible for everything, but no clear limit to what the job actually is or is not. For an honest person, it would be a horrible position, a complete disaster waiting to happen.

So, what kind of a person would want the job? Not only would want it but would do anything and everything they could to gain that position? What kind of a person would feed on chaos and disaster?

Yes, the person most likely to want that position would be a psychopath. They would only see the unlimited power and wealth and care nothing about the responsibilities. Who cares about responsibilities, problems and failures when you can just lie about everything?

And that is why David Miscavige took control of the Church of Scientology, the position is perfect for a psychopath. He just had to have it, and he took it.

But the truth is, if Miscavige hadn't been there and hadn't taken over the leadership position, it is inevitable that some other psychopath would have done so. Such a cruel and destructive person would be in danger of being found out and expelled unless they got to the safety of the top job of the church. That is why it was inevitable that it would happen.

The seeds of the takeover of the Church of Scientology by the most destructive person is built right into the way the position of the leader was set up. Once Ron was no longer able to defend his leadership, the church was truly doomed.
-

Conversation with a Scientologist

2010-05-08T17:00:00.000-07:00

The following is pure fiction, and is not intended to insult anyone. It comes from my frustration with attempting to have a rational discussion about the pros and cons of the subject with some hard-line Scientologists.

Non-Scientologist: So, tell me about Scientology.

Scientologist: Well, it’s a religious philosophy which contains tools that anyone can use to improve their life. These are workable tools that have been proven to be uniformly successful if they are applied correctly.

Non-Scientologist: OK, but forgive me if I question your statement about being uniformly successful. I’ve seen some disturbing things online. Apparently the head of Scientology is physically and verbally abusive to his staff, people are forced to disconnect from their families, the Scientology organizations are emptying out, and there are a lot of defections, including top level OTs. That doesn’t seem to indicate uniform success.

Scientologist: Well, people in the Church are not correctly applying Scientology. They’ve altered the technology. What they are doing is not Scientology.

Non-Scientologist: I see. Well, if alteration of the technology is such a major problem, maybe Hubbard should have warned people about it. Maybe he should have written an issue alerting them to the dangers of altering the technology, and had every Scientologist read it at the beginning of every course.

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did that.

Non-Scientologist: Oh. Well, then, why didn’t that work?

Scientologist: Well, that’s because people have misunderstood. They can’t duplicate what they are reading.

Non-Scientologist: I see. That sounds like a serious block. Maybe Hubbard should have written something warning people about the importance of understanding words. Maybe he should have developed a technology of how to study.

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did. It’s called Study Tech.

Non-Scientologist: OK. Well, why didn’t that work?

Scientologist: It’s because people are out-ethics! They are just blinded by their own overts –transgressions – and they have withholds.

Non-Scientologist: Well, I can understand that could be a problem. Hubbard should have invented a technology of ethics to help people be more ethical and disciplined.

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did. There’s a whole book on it.

Non-Scientologist: OK, well, why don’t people apply that?

Scientologist: You don’t understand. Technology doesn’t get applied because the Orgs are a mess! They are off-purpose, more interested in income than really helping people. They are understaffed and desperate, and it’s hard to get anything standard done!

Non-Scientologist: Sure, I can see how that would be. Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology of organization; how to keep organizations on-purpose and functioning properly. Maybe he should have written up all of their duties in detail so they know exactly what they should be doing.

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did do that. It’s been published in ten big volumes.

Non-Scientologist: Well, then, why doesn’t that get applied?

Scientologist: Staff don’t have time to study it. There’s too few of them and they are desperate. There are just not enough people in the orgs!

Non-Scientologist: Oh, I see. Well, then, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology of how to promote and market Scientology. Maybe he should have provided drills telling people how to effectively disseminate Scientology.

Scientologist: Well, actually he did do that.

Non-Scientologist: Ok, why isn’t that correctly applied?

Scientologist: You don’t understand! The whole of the Church of Scientology has been taken over by Suppressive Persons. They are perverting the tech! They are destroying the Church! Everyone is PTS to them!

Non-Scientologist: Goodness, that sounds serious! Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology to show people how to spot Suppressive Persons, and how to handle them once you’ve spotted them, so you don’t go PTS.

Scientologist: Well, actually, he did that too.

Non-Scientologist: Oh! Well, then, why doesn’t that get applied?

Scientologist: There are so many other factors I haven’t even mentioned! People have something called GPMs, they have whole track implants, they have evil purposes in restimulation, they have…

Non-Scientologist: Well, why didn’t Hubbard develop technologies to…

Scientologist: He did! He did! But you don’t understand! You can’t get technology correctly applied when you have people who are not rational, who are not sane, who are low on the Tone Scale, who are aberrated…

Non-Scientologist: Well, maybe Hubbard should have developed a technology to make people rational and sane, to raise them on the Tone Scale, to get rid of aberration.

Oh wait. Isn’t that what Scientology is supposed to do?

- Arthur

Scientology and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

2010-04-24T18:00:00.000-07:00

From the Look-at-what-we-say-not-at-what-we-do department, we have the Church of Scientology vs. Human Rights.

One of the Church of Scientology's big PR stunts is their "support" of the United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They have their "Youth for Human Rights International" Campaign and their "Citizen's Commission on Human Rights" and such.

And everyone is supposed to think, "Gee, the Church of Scientology must, itself, be very good about Human Rights! Certainly they must be a Very Good Group."

But that's all just talk. Let's check the walk. Let's see how their actions stack up against the very document they say they support.

From the United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

The Church of Scientology coerces people, especially young people, into signing a billion year contract to work for the church at slave wages of -- if they are very good and very lucky -- around $50 a week. These staff members are worked 18 to 20 or more hours per day and are denied any vacations, weekends or any other time off -- month after month, year after year.

Every minute of the "staff member's" day is tightly controlled, with frequent "musters" and constant monitoring. If they don't look serious and busy at all times, they get into trouble.

These slaves, I mean staff, have 15 minute meal breaks, 4 to 6 hours of "personal and sleep time" per day -- if they are lucky. They must comply with every single order given to them by their "superiors", and the orders are constant and unrelenting.

If a staff member is from another country, the Church of Scientology steals their passport, effectively trapping them.

If someone does manage to escape from the International Headquarters, security personnel execute a well-practiced drill to track them down and then use whatever threats or promises necessary to bring them back. If they have family members who are also Scientologists, threats against their family is a common tactic of the church.

Of course, the church wouldn't call it servitude, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, what else would you call it? The Church of Scientology violates Article 4 every day.

Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

The Church of Scientology runs a number of their own, private prisons, called "RPF" ("Rehabilitation Project Force"). The church assigns members who the church deems as "bad", to these prison camps. Those assigned have no choice and no recourse, they must submit to this imprisonment or be forever banished from their religion.

Those accused of whatever crimes they are alleged to have committed are not allowed a trial, representation, rules of evidence, or any recourse of modern justice. They are not allowed to confront their accusers or defend themselves. They are simply assigned to the RPF by the church.

Members of the RPF are subjected to the following cruel, inhuman and degrading punishments.

They are not allowed to talk to anyone, even their spouse, even their children.
They must run everywhere.
They must wear black boiler suits everywhere.
They are fed table scraps from the dining room after "their betters" have eaten.
They must submit to hours and hours of indoctrination and "confession".
There is no limit to their imprisonment. No matter what their "crime", they can be, and are, forced to stay in this prison for many, many years.
If they are "bad" while on the RPF, they may be assigned to the "RPF's RPF" which is much, much worse.

The church will claim that "participation is voluntary", but that isn't exactly true. As the church itself would phrase it to those being sent to the RPF, "It is either the RPF or we will deny you your only hope of salvation forever." No Scientologist would see that as any kind of choice at all.

The Church of Scientology violates Articles 5 and 9 every day. To be honest, there are a lot more violations that I haven't mentioned here.

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

At any Scientology organization, but especially at Scientology's International Headquarters in Hemet, California, the staff privacy is invaded to an astonishing, and criminal level.

No staff may have a phone conversation with anyone outside the base unless a security person is listening in and taking notes. There are no exceptions.

Every single piece of mail, especially private, personal mail is opened and read by security personnel. Mail deemed "unacceptable" will simply never be delivered to the staff member it is addressed to. This is in direct violation of United States law. In addition, every letter a staff member attempts to send out is first read by security personnel and may be stopped.

Staff at the International Base are not allowed to leave the base without an escort -- to ensure they don't speak to the wrong people or just run off. In general, they simply are not allowed off the base.

As for "attacks upon his honour and reputation", if a staff member is "in trouble" (and that is most of the time) leaders of the Church of Scientology, especially David Miscavige himself, will read embarrassing confidential information from the person's private confessional folders to the entire staff at their "morning muster" -- to embarrass them, to humiliate them, to degrade them.

The Church of Scientology violates Article 12 every day.

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

While this article would be the real reason the Church of Scientology pretends to support this Universal Declaration of Human Rights, they, themselves, do not comply with this article in the least way.

Oh, yes, the Church of Scientology will support your right to choose Scientology, but if you subsequently attempt to leave Scientology, you will be punished. Leaving is not your right. You will be declared "Suppressive" and if your family, your children, your friends, your boss are Scientologists, they will be forbidden from having any contact with you. You could lose your job. Married couples are forced to divorce. If you complain or speak out against what you see as wrong with the Church of Scientology, information from your confidential confessional folders just might end up disseminated broadly.

Many, many people today have left Scientology, but keep it quite secret, so that they can remain in contact with family and friends.

The Church of Scientology violates Article 18 every day. It is the enemy of freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Like the old joke, in Scientology you may have any opinion you wish as long as it is official Church of Scientology opinion. There is no tolerance for any freedom of opinion or expression by the Church of Scientology.

Inside Scientology, if you disagree in the slightest with any Scientology pronouncement or dogma, you will be "corrected" until you agree. If you disagree in any significant way, you will be banished.

Outside of Scientology, it is worse. If you speak out against the Church of Scientology, you will be declared an "Enemy" of the church, and they will come after you to shut you up. As an "Enemy" of the church, they believe they have the right, and some would say mandate, to destroy you. Their own policy, as written by L. Ron Hubbard, says that such enemies "May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed."

Does that sound at all like the Church of Scientology supports Article 19? No, they are an enemy of Article 19.

Article 23.
Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24.
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

And we come back to the Church of Scientology's attitude and treatment of their own staff.

The Church of Scientology, especially at their higher level organizations and their International Headquarters, treat staff like slaves.

"Just and favorable conditions"? Not unless you think 18 to 20 hour work days are "just and favorable". Not unless you think constant supervision, no breaks, constant pressure, yelling and such are "just and favorable". Not unless you think physical assaults, verbal harassment and exposure of confidential confessional information is "just and favorable".
"Just and favorable remuneration"? Are you kidding? No person can live on what the church pays. Certainly no one is attaining an "existence worthy of human dignity".
"Trade unions"? Don't even think about it.
"Rest and leisure", "limitation of working hours", "holidays with pay"? Not one of these rights is allowed to workers in the Church of Scientology. Not one. No rest and leisure at all. The only limitation of working hours is there are only 24 hours in the day. And no staff gets any holidays or even weekends off.

The Church of Scientology violates Articles 23 and 24 every single day.

In other words, the Church of Scientology "supports" the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, except for Articles 4, 5, 9, 12, 18, 19, 23 and 24 -- and any other Articles that might interfere with their raking in money and abusing staff and public.

So, when you read the Church of Scientology's press releases about how "wonderful" they are because they "support" this Declaration, remember this: They never actually said they followed the Declaration in any way, they only want you to follow it.
-

The Scientology World

2010-04-12T18:00:00.000-07:00

Someone, a while ago, asked me to expound on what a "Scientology World" would be like, and the story about Germany would be a good place to start.

In 2008, Germany, after an extensive investigation of the Church of Scientology, declined to ban the group (which is not recognized as a religion) in Germany. The church likes to tout this as a "win", but it was and is very, very far from the success that Scientology claims.

The German government did find that the Church of Scientology was anti-constitutional. This is very far from finding the church "innocent".

The German constitution guarantees basic human rights, and the Church of Scientology violates human rights every single day. The church works very, very hard to suppress free speech and freedom of religion all over the world. The church does not support a decent wage or adequate time off for its workers. The church runs secret prison camps where it sends its "dissidents" without due process and without recourse.

While it is true that the human rights record of the Church of Scientology is abysmal, that isn't actually what the problem is in Germany. The German constitution is quite special. In addition to many other good features, it also is carefully designed to safeguard the German people from fanatic, totalitarian groups bent on world domination.

And, yes, that is exactly what the Church of Scientology is.

However, the German government declined to ban Scientology. While the Church of Scientology intends to take over the world, suppress free speech, suppress freedom of religion and suppress basic human rights, it has, so far in Germany, been unable to make much headway in its goals. Therefore, the German government stated that they will keep monitoring the group because it is a potential threat but declined to ban it at this time.

Not banning the church may seem wrong to some, but it really is correct. Germany grants freedom of speech even to groups that work to suppress freedom of speech. Germany grants human rights even to groups that work to suppress human rights. As unfair as this may seem, it is the decent thing to do. It would only be if the Church of Scientology became an actual, realistic threat to the German people that the government would be forced to take action.

A Scientology world would be just as Germany found: a threat to all free people, a threat to democracy and the end of human rights.

Let's look at some specifics of Scientology's planned wonderful world, shall we?

Totalitarian

Democracy would end. There would be no elections. The general public would have no voice in how, or by whom, they were governed. According to L. Ron Hubbard, the "ideal government" is a "benevolent monarchy", therefore that's what it would have to be -- and you know the leader, and all people of power, would have to be Scientologists.

You have to understand that "wogs" (meaning all non-Scientologists) are, according to Scientology, "aberrated" (meaning unable to think clearly), and so no wogs would be allowed to have any power or any say in matters of importance. Only Scientologists would be trusted in this Scientology World.

All the wog laws would be replaced with Scientology policies, because these were written by Hubbard and are the only rules the Scientology World would need.

Scientology "justice"

All wog justice would be replaced by Scientology justice. Let us review what that means.

There would be no judges. The most severe justice action would be the Committee of Evidence. The Scientologist in charge of that sector would, as "Convening Authority", assign three Scientologists (with no specified qualifications) to sit in judgement.
There would be no lawyers. The accused would not be able to bring anyone to advise them, speak for them or defend them.
All rules of evidence would be discarded. Under Scientology justice, any "evidence" presented has more-or-less equal validity. Nothing is excluded (as immaterial or prejudicial, for instance) but there would be no particular effort to be complete, or accurate. In practice, all Scientologists are assumed to be telling the absolute truth (because they were asked to) except for the accused. However, the "evidence" provided by the Convening Authority, no matter how vague or unproven, is assumed to be true and factual unless disproven.
The accused would no longer be permitted to confront or even know about his or her accusers. In fact, in a Committee of Evidence, the accused might not hear, read or see the evidence against him or her and might not even be allowed to attend at all.
While an appeal is "permitted", that means little, since it just involves more of the same.

Yes, justice, as you know it, would cease to exist in this Scientology World.

And there is more. Assuming that the Scientology world is run exactly like the Church of Scientology, then the leader or any Scientologist in a position of power, would be able to assign people to prison at any time and not necessarily for any specific crimes. Those assigned to prison would have no appeal, would have no specific sentence duration and could be held in prison forever without recourse.

Scientology prisons would undoubtedly be patterned after the church's RPF (Rehabilitation Project Force) and would carefully treat all prisoners like scum, giving them table scraps, requiring all prisoners to engage in hard labor, and to run everywhere. Prisoners would not be allowed to communicate to anyone outside of prison at any time for any reason. And all prisoners would be required to study and practice Scientology every day.

Human rights

Under a Scientology-controlled world, there would be no human rights. Dissent or, indeed, even the mildest disagreement with Scientology would not be allowed. Period. Anyone who persisted in such disagreement would be declared "Suppressive" and would be cast out of society.

Likewise, anyone deemed "low-toned" would also not be tolerated. Homelessness, joblessness, depression, mental illness, and so on would not be allowed. If someone persisted in "being low-toned", they also could be "disposed of quietly and without regret". In Science of Survival, Hubbard spoke of an unnamed "Venezuelan dictator" who got rid of leprosy by the "simple expedient of collecting and destroying all the beggars in Venezuela." A good example of how this Scientology World would deal with such "low-toned" problems.

Other religions might be tolerated if they supported all the Scientology principles and beliefs -- since, according to Hubbard, all other religions are "false".

The idea of a living wage and decent working conditions would cease to exist. In the Scientology world, working to further Scientology's goals should be all the reward you need.

Marriage and children might be permitted, but not if one were deemed "low-toned".

Scientology Ideals

Mostly, the Scientology world would be dominated by Scientology's ideals. No, not the words they mouth, but the "ideals" as shown by their actions today.

The most important Scientology concept is that being "correct" (by Scientology definition) is much more important than truth, facts, evidence, honesty or dignity. In the Scientology World, you will listen and believe everything that Scientology tells you, and you will close your eyes to the truth you can see. In this world, you will always bow to their dictates rather than stand by what you know to be right.

The second concept is that approval, authorization, adherence is much, much more important that doing what actually works. Hubbard has created "solutions" to every single problem that plagues mankind. None of his solutions have been actually proven to solve anything, but they would be the only allowed solutions. Any other solutions, no matter how effective, would be outlawed and only the approved, authorized, Hubbard solutions would be permitted.

And how soon can we expect to enjoy this Scientology world?

Luckily for all of us, the Church of Scientology religiously follows all of Hubbard's policies and procedures in its quest for world domination. I say luckily, because the result of that is failure after failure after abysmal failure.

David Miscavige, while obviously having even greater desire for world domination, has expanded and improved on Hubbard's failure rate by orders of magnitude. He has made unworkable solutions even more unworkable.

The Scientology world was never going to happen.
-

More Accidental Truth From Scientology

2010-03-30T18:00:00.000-07:00

If anyone is watching the Anderson Cooper 360 series, Scientology, A History of Violence, you have to be amazed at what the Church of Scientology is saying.

Of course they are lying, but look at what they are saying:

They admit that there was physical and mental abuse that went on for years!
They admit that nobody reported this to the police or ever talked about it to outsiders, even family members.

Excuse me? What kind of cult is this? Years and years of physical and mental abuse and they covered it up!

Naturally they are trying to say that David Miscavige was not involved and knew nothing about it.

Pay attention to what they are claiming:

David Miscavige, the leader of the Church of Scientology, was absent from the Church of Scientology's International Headquarters for years!

Then who was running the Church of Scientology?

They assert that, for years, David Miscavige, the leader of the Church of Scientology, had no knowledge of what was going on at his International Headquarters!
They also claim that not one person at Scientology's International Headquarters reported the horrible physical and mental abuses to David Miscavige in all the years that it continued!

These are astounding admissions by people at the very top of Scientology! This is what they claim.

The leader of Scientology is absent from Scientology's International Headquarters for years and years at a time; the leader of Scientology is completely unaware of and is not informed of what is going on at Scientology's headquarters; and no one did anything to stop the abuse, year after year after year.

Do these people sound totally insane?

Yes, they do. This is an example of what happens when you live in a cult. You become completely unaware of what is normal. So when you try to explain (and cover up) the things that go on inside the cult, you have no idea how very crazy you sound.

UPDATE:
The "bitter ex-spouses" show was pretty revealing, if lacking in information. These "witnesses" weren't actually witnesses, they were more of the "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" type. These ex-spouses were bound and determined to prove that absolutely no abuse ever took place. "Nothing happened, and we would certainly know". Apparently, they didn't coordinate their ~~lies~~ stories with Tommy Davis' ~~lies~~ story - that there was abuse, but it was "all Marty's doing". That's the problem with lies and cover-ups: It's hard to keep it all straight.

They really should be given time to all get together and figure out what their official story is going to be.
-

The Church of Scientology Accidentally Tells the Truth

2010-03-27T18:30:00.000-07:00

If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.
Mark Twain

The Church of Scientology has a problem. Well, actually, they have a lot of problems, but one major one is that the Church of Scientology can't keep all its lies straight.

As any accomplished liar knows, you should always tell the truth as much as possible. One lie engenders another to back it up, then another and another. Unfortunately for the church, they have drifted so far from the truth, so long, long ago, that they are trapped. They can't even begin to tell the truth now.

But, oddly enough, if you look carefully, you can discover the truth in what the Church of Scientology says.

Let's take a look.

Non-OTs, reading OT III, are not harmed. In fact, even running OT III when you "aren't ready" does not harm you.

Yes, this is true. The church has definitely said that.

You've heard the stories, there are hundreds of them, but you may not have realized what they meant. Certainly the church didn't understand the truth they let slip.

Typical story: A loyal Scientologist, an OT 3, 5, 7 or even an OT 8 is informed that they "aren't Clear", they "never did the lower levels". They are told they must go all the way back to the beginning and start (and pay) all over again.

You've heard those stories, they are quite common in today's Scientology. But understand what the church is actually saying. You see, these people were not "properly set up"; these people "weren't ready"; these people "hadn't properly done their lower levels" -- and they read the super-dangerous OT III materials without any problems! That's what the church is saying!

Not only that, these poor, unprepared souls actually ran the dreaded OT III materials without any harm! No flu-like symptoms, no coma, no death.

The OT III materials can be read and even run by un-prepared individuals without any harm at all. The Church of Scientology has officially said so!

L. Ron Hubbard is a huge embarrassment to the church.

Miscavige was interviewed at length by Ted Koppel of ABC News. When played an audio recording of L. Ron Hubbard describing a visit to the Van Allen belt, Miscavige rejected it as "[not] part of current Scientology." Wikipedia

That is exactly what Miscavige and the Church of Scientology are doing to handle the "L. Ron Hubbard problem".

You see, at first they tried to cover up the truth about Hubbard and that didn't work. They then tried to disprove the truth and that didn't work. All that's left is to distance themselves from Hubbard.

They are rewriting and "sanitizing" what Hubbard said and wrote to remove the embarrassing, discreditable, racist, homophobic and just plain crazy statements by L. Ron Hubbard. As time goes on, there have been fewer and fewer references to Ron at events, fewer and fewer mentions and photos in church publications.

All of Hubbard's books have been sanitized. All the lectures are being gone through with large sections excised. Some lectures have been removed entirely as "too crazy". In fact, there is an entire congress put on by Hubbard that will never, ever be heard.

Not only has the church removed large chunks from Hubbard's lectures, they have employed a voice actor to add in words that they think Hubbard should have said.

All of this is a clear and obvious acknowledgement by the Church of Scientology that they find L. Ron Hubbard to be a big embarrassment. He lied -- a lot. He was a racist and a homophobe. He was into crazy, space opera fantasies.

Soon you will hear the Church of Scientology quietly add a notice that "Scientology is based on 'concepts from L. Ron Hubbard', but that Hubbard is no longer considered the source of current Scientology practices."

The Church of Scientology knows that their "solutions" do not actually work.

In this case, you need to pay attention to what the Church of Scientology is not saying to get to the truth.

Scientology's "solutions" have all been commercialized. They are all actual businesses, selling their "solution" to the public. There are dozens of various front groups, but the main ones are:

Narconon/Crimanon - Selling drug and criminal rehabilitation.
Applied Scholastics - Selling Hubbard's "Study Technology".
W.I.S.E - Selling Hubbard's "Administration Technology".

Like I said, there are dozens and dozens of others.

Now, these businesses are selling their "solutions" and they promise fantastic results. But listen to what they do not say.

The Church of Scientology does not, ever, show actual, verifiable, evidence that their "solutions" work. They are amazingly silent about that. Any normal, legitimate business would happily provide proof of all their claims -- but the Church of Scientology will not do that.

If you request actual evidence, you will only get PR and glossy brochures. If you insist that they provide actual proof of any of their claims, they will stop talking to you.

The Church of Scientology's refusal to provide any evidence of their claims is their tacit admission that their "solutions" do not work -- and that they know it.

This, by the way, is Scientology's kryptonite. Just ask them for proof of anything they claim and they wither and fade away.

This is, by far, not a complete list of all the truths that the Church of Scientology has accidentally admitted to, but it's a start.

When the Church of Scientology says something, it is a sure thing that they are lying. But if you pay attention to all they are saying, or notice where they are conspicuously silent, you can find out the truth -- the truth the church doesn't know they let slip.
-

Scientology: Apostates, Ex-Spouses and Whistleblowers

2010-03-14T09:00:00.000-07:00

I want everyone to pay close attention to the statements made by the Church of Scientology in "defending" the church against accusations of mental and physical abuse, human rights violations, crimes and fraud.

The Church of Scientology uses mental manipulation, and their statements are very good examples of exactly what they do -- or try to do. Time after time, I notice that reporters accept, or at least not challenge, premises from the Church of Scientology spokesman that are simply not true -- because they are quite subtly done.

Lets take the first example, from Tommy Davis' statements as quoted in the New York Times:

As for the defectors, Mr. Davis called them “apostates” and said that contrary to their claims of having left the church in protest, they were expelled.

Note the use of pejorative terms: "defectors" and "apostates". This is quite deliberate. This is "standard tech" in Scientology, attempting to alter the perception of Scientology and Scientology's enemies by subtle mental manipulation.

a·pos·tate [noun] a person who forsakes his religion, cause, party, etc.

Now get this, as part of this word's description:

Related words: deserter, ratter, recreant, renegade, turncoat

This is the label that the church wants everyone to associate with those who have left and who are critical of the church. It was very deliberately chosen for its negative meaning and association.

Of course, the term "apostate" is quite incorrect. Many of those who have left the church still consider themselves true Scientologists, and they still practice Scientology. By definition, they are not and never have been "apostates".

Naturally, the church disagrees:

Mr. Davis said there is no such thing: “One can’t be a Scientologist and not be part of the church.”

But, of course, he doesn't get to define who is and who is not a Scientologist. Only the people themselves can make that determination. Obviously, if they still believe in and practice Scientology, they are not apostates.

So what term should be used?

There are several terms that more accurately describe those who have left. Some good ones are detractors, escapees, reformists, protesters or possibly rebels.

But these are Scientologists who saw abuse, crimes and fraud at the highest levels of the church, and saw that the church cannot and will not correct itself. The correct term for such people is whistle-blowers.

whis·tle-blow·er [noun] a person who informs on another or makes public disclosure of corruption or wrongdoing.

The Church of Scientology will fight very hard to keep reporters from using this term, because whistle-blower has very positive connotations. The fact that "apostate" is quite inaccurate, and "whistle-blower" is quite accurate is immaterial. When you wish to manipulate people, you don't care too much about accuracy.

Another phrase the Church of Scientology has been throwing around a lot recently has to do with "ex-spouses". For example, again from the New York Times:

Joanie Sigal is a 36-year parishioner in Clearwater who promotes the church’s antidrug campaign to local officials. She said the defectors’ stories were like what you would hear “if I asked your ex-husband what he thought of you.”

Note, again, the attempt to manipulate public opinion by using negative images and terms.

(Now, personally, I think asking an ex-spouse about a person is a very good idea. There are many people who got into a bad relationship who wished that they had asked an ex-spouse, ex-girlfriend or ex-boyfriend about their prospective partner.)

But, of course, that's intentional misdirection by the church. This statement by the church is completely lacking in logic. This is nothing like marriage and divorce -- unless someone can have tens of thousands of ex-spouses!

What the church is fighting is thousands of ex-churchies who are all telling the same stories about the greedy demand for money, money, money coupled with pervasive lies and a consistent failure to deliver anything that the church has promised. More importantly, the church is fighting hundreds of Scientologists who worked at the highest levels of the church who are all telling the same stories about crimes, physical and mental abuse, human rights violations, lies and fraud by the Church of Scientology -- even by David Miscavige personally.

This is absolutely nothing like a disgruntled ex-spouse. Come on, nobody should be falling for that analogy!

The Church of Scientology desperately wants reporters to equate these incredibly serious charges with a private marital spat.

A few reporters fall for it. But not many, and fewer every day.

The charges levelled by these Scientology whistle-blowers are very, very serious. And it should be noted by everyone that the Church of Scientology has presented nothing except tricks to answer these accusations. They use loaded language, vague, unsubstantiated slander and misdirection instead of actually confronting and addressing the whistle-blowers' accusations. This is quite significant.

They will not answer these serious charges. They will not open up their compounds and their "RPF" prison camps for inspection. They will not permit any of their Scientology staff or public to talk to the press or to anyone about these things. They will not be open and honest about their organization, their hierarchy, their policies, their punishments, or anything, really, at all. All they have is tricks to manipulate people's opinions. Tricks.

Pay attention to these tricks, or you may find yourself unknowingly manipulated by the Church of Scientology. It's what they do.
-

Scientology's "Investigations"

2010-02-25T20:30:00.000-08:00

I am so glad the Church of Scientology has staged their "independent investigation" of the St. Petersburg Times.

Of course it's a blatant attempt to intimidate the journalists who have been doing such a good job exposing the church's crimes, abuse and fraud, and the St. Petersburg Times is absolutely correct in refusing to have anything to do with it.

And, of course, the Church of Scientology can never release the "investigation", because it, obviously, would have shown that the journalists did a good job.

But I'm still glad the church did it, because it reminded me of many of the other "independent investigations" they did.

While not quite the same, they are still delightful stories.

One of my favorites is the independent investigation of Scientology's "Purification Rundown". Non-Scientology doctors were paid by the Church of Scientology to thoroughly test the Purification Rundown and determine how effective (and wonderful) it was. As with the St. Petersburg Times investigation, the church swore everyone involved to absolute secrecy -- only the church could publish the results.

This investigation was going to put all the critics and naysayers in their place! This investigation was going to be the basis for a gigantic push to get the Purification Rundown accepted everywhere.

You've surely read the comprehensive Purification Rundown report, haven't you?

You haven't? Oh, that's right, the Church of Scientology suppressed that report. Do you need to ask why?

Here's the kicker: What did the church do when the Purification Rundown was proven, in their own tests, to be bogus? Did they cease selling and delivering the service? Did they refund all the monies paid for this proven bogus service?

Nope. The Purification Rundown is still required for every Scientologist. They are still pushing their Narconon program, which is based on the Purification Rundown, as the replacement for all other drug treatment programs.

Next: They did the same thing with their "Hubbard Study Technology". Another independent investigation sponsored by the church and involving non-Scientology teachers and students -- carefully monitored and tested by independent researchers. Again, everyone was sworn to secrecy -- only the Church of Scientology could release the results.

You've read that report haven't you? Oh, that's right, that report was suppressed by the church as well. Color me surprised.

And, of course, the kicker: They are still pushing the proven bogus "Hubbard Study Technology" as the replacement for all other study methods.

I'm sure there are even more examples of independent investigations, funded by the Church of Scientology, that never made the light of day. This latest investigation is just more of the same. It won't be released.

Regular Scientologists don't know this, but the leaders of Scientology know all about these investigations and their results.

The horrible thing is, they don't care that their "solutions" are proven, by their own research, to be useless and worthless. They still sell them. And they still work very hard to throw out all other solutions. This goes well beyond innocent belief and faith. When they know their own "solutions" do not work and they still sell them, that is intentional fraud.
-

True Believers Confirm That Scientology Is Very Weak

2010-02-23T19:30:00.000-08:00

According to the True Believers of Scientology, the Scientology technology is absolutely perfect, 100% effective, a solution to everything, and ...

incredibly weak.

Let me explain this carefully, because the facts speak for themselves.

There are hundreds, maybe even thousands of True Believers who say "Standard Scientology" is absolutely, positively 100% effective. A vast majority of these self-proclaimed "appliers of standard Scientology" were in the Church of Scientology when David Miscavige was in charge. They were there as Miscavige destroyed the church and perverted the technology.

And, (this is key) these Standard Scientologists insist that all the problems and failures of the church are all Miscavige's fault. All the failures, crimes, perversions and abuse are not failings of the Scientology technology, which is "perfect", but the fault of only one man: David Miscavige.

These Scientologists vehemently insist that there is no fault in Scientology, and, if Miscavige were removed all would be well.

Let's go over this very carefully. Here we have hundreds, maybe even thousands of self-proclaimed "appliers of Standard Scientology", applying this Standard Scientology technology within the Church of Scientology -- and they were defeated by one man. All Standard Scientology being applied by these hundreds of Scientologists was no match for one evil man, apparently applying his Super Evil Technology.

That's pretty amazing. According to them, Scientology is one incredibly weak technology -- one man defeating hundreds of Standard Scientologists.

But that's not all.

According to standard Scientology, any Scientologist who has any contact at all with anyone who has expressed any disagreement with or criticism of Scientology or L. Ron Hubbard will have trouble, will get sick, and will lose their gains from Scientology. The higher up the Scientology levels a person goes, the more this a factor. Apparently, there is no amount of Scientology processing that will proof you up against a person who disagrees with or criticizes Scientology.

Let's go over that carefully. Scientology is, apparently, so weak, that all gains are lost simply because one person has disagreed or criticized the Scientologist, Scientology or Hubbard! That's what Scientology says.

But wait, there's more!

Again and again, these "appliers of Standard Scientology" justify Scientology's continual failure to produce the stellar results promised on The Scientology Grade Chart by saying, "Well, that wasn't Standard Scientology". In the entire history of Scientology, there is not one documented case where a true Clear was produced; there is not one documented case where a true OT was produced.

Again and again, the excuse is that it wasn't "Standard Scientology".

Do you see what that means? Thousands and thousands of people studying Scientology, trying as hard as they can to exactly practice Standard Scientology, for over sixty years, and they couldn't do it. Apparently, Scientology technology is so sensitive that the slightest variation makes it invalid and it won't produce the promised results. That is not what you could call a "robust" technology.

No, that's the opposite of robust. That's a very, very weak technology!

All this is exactly what these Champions of Standard Scientology are saying, but they're not paying attention to what it means. It means that, deep down, they believe that Scientology technology is incredibly weak.
-

How Scientologists Will Destroy Scientology

2010-02-19T17:00:00.000-08:00

We all know that the Church of Scientology has collapsed but that isn't the subject of today's post. Today I'm talking about the belief system of Scientology as embodied by the ex-churchies calling themselves "Independent Scientologists".

A number of these stalwart true believers are factually and thoroughly destroying Scientology.

Now, in my opinion, some parts of the Scientology technology are beneficial, or could potentially be useful, and should be investigated. A majority of Scientology technology could be considered harmless -- if someone wants to work with it, no known harm will befall them.

A small, but growing, portion of Scientology is harmful, destructive or just plain evil. The Church of Scientology itself, under David Miscavige's direction, has been emphasizing and building upon these harmful parts. It now could be said, with some validity, that the evil parts of Scientology have become the dominant technology used by the church.

Earlier escapees from the Church of Scientology, often referred to as the Freezone, have, for the most part, discarded such harmful aspects of Scientology. However, many of the newer ex-churcies, these new "Independent Scientologists" seem to have embraced the most disturbing, most barbaric, most tyrannical aspects of Scientology as practiced by the Church of Scientology.

Early on, L. Ron Hubbard said that Scientologists should not consider Scientology the only way out, and not even the best possible way out. They should, he said, only consider Scientology as a workable way out.

Hubbard also admonished his followers, most specifically auditors, to never, ever invalidate or evaluate for others.

As with David Miscavige's Church of Scientology, a number of these "Independent Scientologists" do not seem to follow these precepts from Hubbard. They are offensive, insulting and arbitrary.

They will tell you that Scientology is perfect, and that all other technologies are wrong-wrong-wrong. And if you don't agree with them, completely, you are evil, you have crimes, you must accept the "truth" of Scientology and follow all the "formulas" and "procedures" to "correct yourself" and become a good, compliant, obedient, "standard" Scientologist.

These autocratic Scientologists are heavily into labels: you are a Suppressive Person; you are a "No Case Gain" case; you have "continuous present time" crimes, and on and on.

They are always and forever right, can never be wrong and you must agree with them or suffer the appropriate consequences. They can dictate to the rest of the world because they are applying STANDARD SCIENTOLOGY.

Of course this only describes a few of the "Independent Scientologists", but they are the vocal ones -- and few of the others dare voice any disagreement!

It's the Church of Scientology mindset all over again. The threats, the accusations, the labels, the invalidation and evaluation, the capricious and punitive "assignment of conditions", the attempt to dictate what other people see and think, and the suppression of dissent.

This attitude and public face of Scientology guarantees the destruction of Scientology. Sane people will categorically reject these tinpot dictators and their crazy communication. Appropriately so.

Obviously, I'm not talking to these fanatics. I wouldn't expect these self-proclaimed "STANDARD SCIENTOLOGISTS" to listen to reason -- but I do expect the other Independent Scientologists, who are sane, who do know better, to challenge these fanatics. If you truly believe in Scientology, then you must protect it from the fanatics. You must let them know that they do not speak for Scientology and they do not speak for Scientologists. Call them out for the fanatics they are.

More than the fanatics, it is the silence of other Scientologists in the face of such fanaticism that guarantees the destruction of Scientology.
-

The Church of Scientology Responds!

2010-02-11T06:00:00.000-08:00

This is very good.

The Church of Scientology has gotten quite upset with my post The Church of Scientology Loves Disasters as quoted in Catholic Online's article Scientologists in Haiti: Volunteers or Vultures?

It seems they took issue with my statement:

“The Church of Scientology provides no money towards the victims in Haiti. None. Not one penny. The church supplies no food, no water, no medicine, no building materials, no personnel, no expertise, nothing for Haiti.

“But they claim, in their press releases, that their Volunteer Ministers are 'a major relief agency' helping in Haiti. If they do nothing, how can they claim this?"

Well, do I need to issue an apology? Do I need to make a correction?

Let's take a look at the Church of Scientology's claims, shall we? Here's the "facts" from Tommy Davis, Church of Scientology spokesman:

- Volunteer Ministers who have served or are currently serving in Haiti: 146

OK, but a lot of people would not call that a good thing. These Volunteer Ministers have been known to interfere with vital, legitimate help.

- Doctors, nurses and EMTs transported to Haiti since January 16: 394
- Doctors, nurses and EMTs on waiting list for next VM flight: 100

These were not Scientologists. The Church of Scientology is trying to claim credit for what other organizations are providing. These other organizations accepted the church's offer of transport, not realizing the church would try to claim credit for all their good work.

How many Scientology doctors has the church provided? None! How much medicine and medical equipment has the church paid for? None! What has the Church of Scientology done besides fly planes donated by others?

- Approximate individuals directly helped by Volunteer Ministers: 41,000

And that "help" was... what? "Touch assists?" Directions to the locations where the victims could get real help from real aid organizations? Interference in the activities of the real aid organizations?

- Approximate meals served to patients, refugees and medical teams: 6,000
- Tons of food and supplies transported to Haiti since January 16: 20
- Tons of food and supplies distributed with World Food Program: 420

The Church of Scientology wants you to think that they supplied the food, but the Church of Scientology didn't give one penny for these supplies. It just so happens that Volunteer Ministers were there, as were hundreds of other non-Scientology volunteers, to assist in distribution.

Oh, and by the way, the Church of Scientology didn't pay a penny for the Volunteer Ministers to be there. Those Scientologists paid their own way, and use their own money while there. The Church of Scientology didn't and doesn't help.

Seven MDs and two Volunteer Ministers gave tetanus shots and delivered hygiene supplies to 175 villagers in a remote area cut off from supply lines.

Seven non-Scientology doctors. Note that all the other non-Scientology volunteers who were there and helped are carefully not mentioned -- as if the Scientologists were key organizers. Nope!

And the claims go on and on, I won't bother quoting them. In each claim made by the Church of Scientology, they want you to to be fooled into thinking they organized things (they didn't), they provided food, doctors, specialists (they didn't) and were doing vital, important work (the Volunteer Ministers are untrained, fit only to "help" the real relief agencies).

Go ahead and read the full statement from the church. Look at what isn't being said. Look at the carefully worded claims. Note that the Church of Scientology's official statement confirms everything I said. The Church of Scientology didn't supply anything, didn't pay for anything, didn't send doctors, didn't send skilled personnel, didn't pay for food, clothing, shelter -- even for Scientology volunteers, in short, they are making vast claims without having to pay a single, solitary penny.

No, what I said in my post is absolutely true. The Church of Scientology didn't spend a penny to help the victims of the Haiti earthquake. But with this "response" they continue their real agenda -- using disaster as a public relations opportunity without spending any money.

Sorry Tommy, no corrections or apologies coming from here -- I told the truth and your church is trying to profit from disaster.

What I said before still stands -- even more so:

All decent people, including Scientologists, should add their voice to absolutely condemn the Church of Scientology for their disgusting greed in the face of such human suffering.

Squirrel!

2010-02-08T15:00:00.000-08:00

If you love a good comedy, especially one with a hefty dose of irony, then you will be loving the accusations all the various flavors of Scientologists are slinging at each other.

It really is quite wonderful.

Squirreling: The act of using Scientology techniques in a form different than originally described by Hubbard is referred to within Scientology as "squirreling", and is said by Scientologists to be a "high crime".

According to the Church of Scientology, every single person who practices any form of Scientology outside of the church is a squirrel -- unless, of course, they pay a licensing fee to the church.

So the Church of Scientology is crying that, well, everyone else is a squirrel.

Oh, this is a terrible insult!.

One of the earlier breakaway groups was the rather large Ron's Org groups established by "Captain" Bill Robertson. Robertson established his Ron's Org because, in his words, the Church of Scientology was squirreling the tech.

Other individuals and groups have broken away from the Church of Scientology before and since. Many of them have also accused the Church of Scientology of squirreling. However, these other individuals and groups avoided joining Ron's Orgs because, they said, Ron's Orgs were squirreling.

David Mayo, kicked out of the Church of Scientology for protesting David Miscavige's squirreling of the tech, established his AAC (Advanced Ability Center) group to deliver "standard Scientology". He was, of course, condemned by the church for squirreling the tech.

And so it goes. Each new breakaway accuses both the Church of Scientology and all previous breakaway groups of squirreling!

So, today, you have all the newest Scientologists who have left the Church of Scientology, but who still believe in Scientology, eschewing the Freezone and all other non-church groups and calling themselves "Independent Scientologists" -- although they are, truly, no different than those who have gone before. Of course, all the older breakaway groups will undoubtedly accuse these newest ex-churchies of being squirrels, since they are tainted by Miscavige's squirreling!

So, it appears that everybody practicing any form of Scientology, inside or outside the church, are, in fact, all squirrels.

Well, I have something to add to all this. Since L. Ron Hubbard knowingly used the "Ls" and "NOTS", both of which are proven to be authored by David Mayo (not Hubbard), not to mention Hubbard adopting into Scientology various techniques from many other people, I'd like to add to this universal list of squirrels the name L. Ron Hubbard.

There, the list is now complete. Might as well call it Squirrelology, everybody is doing it!

Look, a squirrel!
-

The Scientology Conundrum: What Are Lies?

2010-02-07T18:30:00.000-08:00

It is quite interesting to me that Scientologists who are now waking up to the fact that David Miscavige has been doing bad things and is a liar, still believe almost everything Miscavige and the Church of Scientology had said in the past.

For instance, while finally seeing that David Miscavige has been corrupting and destroying Scientology, some Scientologists still believe that the criticisms and protests against the church are “unfounded”, “anti-religious” and “a conspiracy”. They believe that Anonymous is a "terrorist, hate group" in the pay of big drug companies. They believe that all critics are "suppressive persons". They believe that the Freezone is filled with squirrels. They believe these things because David Miscavige said so.

You would think that, seeing with their own eyes some of the blatant and profound falsehoods that Miscavige has been spreading, Scientologists would automatically question everything the Church of Scientology has been claiming. Now, it isn’t necessarily that everything was lies, it is just that the source of all the church’s proclamations, David Miscavige, has been proven to be a destructive, corrupt, habitual liar – so, really, you have to be suspicious of everything Miscavige or the church has said.

You’d think so. But many Scientologists, while rejecting a few, isolated and obviously false statements by Miscavige, still accept, without question, just about everything else. This really doesn’t make any sense.

Well, the problem is that most Scientologists don’t realize what they are doing. They have been trained to always completely trust all information coming from the Church of Scientology leaders. Always. And they have been trained to always reject all negative information about Scientology coming from any source. Always.

This has become so automatic that it ends up operating below the conscious awareness for many Scientologists. They “know” something is true, but they don’t realize their only criteria for “truth” is that the source was the Church of Scientology. They also “know” that anything at all negative about Scientology “is false”, but they don’t realize their only criteria for that judgement is that the church said it was “false”. Even when a Scientologist sees and thinks negative things about Scientology, they still reject such negative information from elsewhere as "false".

The simple concept that the Church of Scientology might be lying simply cannot be contemplated by true Scientologists. It isn’t that they considered it, evaluated it and rejected it; it is that they cannot even consider it.

And most don’t know they have this blind spot. They actually believe they are being intelligent, logical and observant. They will get quite upset with the idea that they are not in full command of their thoughts and conclusions.

This makes it difficult for these Scientologists to come to terms with, and effectively handle, what is and has been going on in their church and in the world. It is quite difficult to reconcile a church that is “always right” and “superior to the rest of the world” with the obvious and consistent failures Miscavige and the Church of Scientology have created.

So what to do? How does anyone talk to a Scientologist about this stuff? What does a Scientologist do to inform themselves? What is true? What are lies?

Simply listing list all the “facts” from Miscavige and the church that have been proven false, with all their associated links to documents, evidence and other proof simply does not work. Scientologists, after all, have been trained to automatically reject such information – Scientologists are probably not going to suddenly throw off all that Scientology training in a day.

But they will. Most Scientologists actually want to know the truth; the problem is that they are only used to accepting “truth” from the church. It will take awhile for Scientologists to break that habit.

I have one piece of advice for newly-awakened Scientologists. You do have one piece of information you can be sure of, because it is obvious now: David Miscavige is a liar and has been for decades. This is what you know. As for everything else, you can now find out for yourself.
-

Ask a Question

2010-02-02T17:58:00.000-08:00

The old Ask a Question thread has gotten quite large and unwieldy. It's still there and has some great questions, but please put any new questions into this thread.

I'm serious. All questions and suggestions are welcome.
-

The Church of Scientology Loves Disasters

2010-01-24T11:02:00.000-08:00

This really is the most disgusting thing I've seen recently about the Church of Scientology: Their reaction to the Haiti earthquake.

The actions of the Church of Scientology are dispicable, in the extreme.

The Church of Scientology provides no money towards the victims in Haiti. None. Not one penny. The church supplies no food, no water, no medicine, no building materials, no personnel, no expertise, nothing for Haiti.

But they claim, in their press releases, that their Volunteer Ministers are "a major relief agency" helping in Haiti. If they do nothing, how can they claim this?

John Travolta supplied an airplane, not the church. Individual Scientologists volunteered to go using their own money. As usual, the Church of Scientology did nothing.

Along with a few untrained Scientology "Volunteer Ministers", Travolta offered a lift to health-care workers from the Association of Haitian Physicians Abroad and from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Those other non-Scientology groups were sending trained medical personnel and the Scientologists were completely untrained. And yet, in a most disgusting bit of lying, the Church of Scientology is actually claiming they sent the medical personnel!

As is usual, the Church of Scientology volunteers showed up at the disaster without food, without medicine, without supplies, without equipment, without shelter, without expertise -- so they are a burden on resources already stretched very, very thin. As is usual, the Volunteer Ministers make the situation worse by requiring food and shelter that should be going to the victims!

But they have bright yellow t shirts that show up well for the Church of Scientology photographer! Yes, while the Volunteer Ministers are useless to real relief agencies, they are very useful to the Church of Scientology's PR department.

But, as disgusting as all this is, the Church of Scientology's response to this disaster is much, much worse.

The Church of Scientology is officially urging all Scientologists to "help Haiti by giving to the IAS (International Association of Scientologists)". Not to any legitimate relief agency. No, Scientologists must help Haiti by "giving to the IAS".

And the IAS has not ever given a penny to any disaster relief effort. The IAS will never give a penny to any disaster relief. The money goes to David Miscavige. Period. Last I checked, David Miscavige wasn't in Haiti and didn't need any assistance.

Yes, the Church of Scientology is using the Haiti disaster to make money! They are profiting on human suffering!

But wait, there is more!

Bridge Publications, the publisher of Scientology books, is urging Scientologists to buy Scientology books to "send to Haiti"! Scientologists are not being urged to pay for food or water or medicine or shelter for Haiti. No, they are being urged to pay for Scientology books to Haiti!

But get this: Bridge Publications is charging full price for these donated books, meaning Bridge Publications is making full profit on all the books. They are profiting on human suffering!

Further, judging by how Bridge Publications handles donated books (Library Program, Mission Starter Program), those donated books will never be shipped. Of course the books are useless to Haitians, but it is highly likely that Bridge Publications will simply keep all the money. Profit!

Yes, the Church of Scientology has reacted quickly and decisively on the Haitian disaster -- they are making millions of dollars of profit, generating many nice press releases for the church, without having to spend a single penny, nor actually help anyone.

All decent people, including Scientologists, should add their voice to absolutely condemn the Church of Scientology for their disgusting greed in the face of such human suffering.
-

What Does Being "Pro-Scientology" Mean?

2010-01-09T10:00:00.000-08:00

When I started this blog, my motivation was to clear up much of the misinformation and misunderstandings about Scientology and the Church of Scientology that were rampant at that time. The bad information came not only from the church itself, but even a lot of the negative information about Scientology was incorrect as well.

I knew a lot, and I was in touch with many Scientologists and ex-Scientologists, so I felt compelled to clear up the confusion.

All I have endeavored to do was get the truth better known and to expose the lies.

Obviously, this would cause the Church of Scientology to consider me an Enemy. The church is built on lies, misinformation and exaggeration and they didn't appreciate what so many, many people were doing.

Today there are many people who have left the church but who still firmly believe in the Scientology belief system. One would think that, free from the systemic lies of the Church of Scientology, these people would seek to discover and live with the truth. One would hope that Scientologists would seek to root out all lies from their lives. After all, they are on the "Road to Truth".

So it is with considerable surprise that I find that my blog, Ask the Scientologist, is considered, by some true believers, to be "anti-Scientology". I read that "true" Scientologists are being warned to avoid this blog at all costs.

Let me be very clear about this, I am not anti- the Scientology belief system. Never have been.

However, I am pro-truth.

All I have asked from believers of Scientology is honesty. It's a simple request: If a Scientology process, formula or procedure does not deliver what was promised for that process, formula or procedure, then don't claim that "it works"! That's all.

This isn't about whether "Scientology works". Whether it does work, or should work, or might work is not the point. The point is whether or not the explicit promises made for various Grades, Rundowns, Levels, courses are actually delivered.

And, for a large majority of the services delivered by Scientology, the promised results are not delivered.

I experienced some good things in the early days. But I can see -- anyone can see -- that the grandiose claims of Scientology on its Grade Chart, in its promotions, in conversations with Scientologists, are not happening. I've listed many of these things before. The actual results from public school students using the "Hubbard Study Method" have been analyzed and the technology does not detectably improve student results. The actual results from Narconon show worse results than other methods. Grade 0 Releases are not able to "talk to anyone on any subject". Grade I Releases still have problems. Graduates from the PTS/SP course can't handle antagonistic people or situations. Clears and OTs do not have the promised abilities and powers. And so on and so on. Whether Scientology could, possibly, produce those results is not the point. The point is that it hasn't.

The Church of Scientology does something quite evil about this. When a Scientologist does not receive the promised results from a Grade, Level, course or Rundown, the church says it is the Scientologist's fault, and has them pay for their own "correction". When the Scientologist still does not receive the results promised by the church, the church again blames the Scientologist and has them pay to redo everything. This goes on and on with the church forcing Scientologists to pay and pay and pay and never delivering what was promised. And all the time blaming the Scientologist for the missing results.

Finally, when it becomes obvious that the church will never deliver what was promised, and the Scientologist has run out of money, the church blames the Scientologist, saying the Scientologist is "too out-ethics" and kicks them out.

This policy of the Church of Scientology of blaming their customers for the church's failures ultimately destroys Scientologists. Many Scientologists end up firmly believing that they are evil, they are the cause of the failures, they are "degraded beings" and "suppressive".

This is so very wrong.

All I'm asking of the true believers of Scientology who wish to practice and promote the Scientology belief system outside of the church is that they don't do that.

If those who believe in the Scientology technology want to stop destroying people, then they need to promise only results that they can actually, provably and consistently produce. They need to actually deliver every result promised -- and if they don't deliver it they must not blame the customer. And they need to stop claiming results for Scientology that Scientology has not delivered.

Believe what you want but only promise what you can, for certain, deliver. And then always deliver what you promised.

That is living with the truth. That is honesty.

Now, if that request is "anti-Scientology", then you Scientology true believers have major problems -- because all I'm asking for is honesty and truth. If that's unacceptable to Scientologists, then that says worse things about Scientology than any real anti-Scientology blog or site ever did.
-

The Hubbard Scale of Formulas and Procedures

2010-01-02T21:00:00.000-08:00

(Many Scientologists would take that title seriously and expect this post to be about something called "The Hubbard Scale of Formulas and Procedures". But it's just a joke.)

L. Ron Hubbard was compulsive about putting everything into some kind of scale. He developed the Tone Scale, the Communication Scale, the Behavior and Physiology Scale, the Cycle of Action Scale, the Admin Scale, the Scale of Conditions, the Tone Scale of Decisions, the Scale of Whosits and Whatsits, dozens and dozens of scales, lists and codes.

And he was compulsive about creating very exact procedures for everything. Every condition, problem, situation had an exact Hubbard-written procedure for solving it or changing it. Thousands and thousands of procedures.

Scientology is all about Hubbard's scales and his procedures, processes and formulas. And Scientologists are supposed to know and follow all the key Hubbard formulas and procedures.

As a Scientologist, you are not allowed to just "work things out". You can't ignore things. You can't think for yourself. You are always, always, always in a specific "condition" and you are always, always, always supposed to follow Hubbard's "condition formulas" to improve your condition. Before taking any action, Scientologists must first check these formulas to see what Hubbard said to do.

[sarcasm]That's why you see so many successful Scientologists [/sarcasm]

This is what Hubbard did. Everything had to be plotted against some kind of scale and every situation had to be solved via one of his procedures. He just didn't trust "humaniods" to do things the "right" (meaning Hubbard) way, so he wrote procedures to ensure everyone would do everything "correctly".

And they must be followed, even when they don't work, as is often the case. Even when the formulas don't fit the situation. Even when those scales don't make any sense.

Of course, public Scientologists are not strictly held to these standards. They are expected to do all that, but the Church of Scientology doesn't have that kind of absolute control, so many Scientologists go on with their lives mostly ignoring all that stuff.

But on staff, and in the Sea Org, under David Miscavige, all these procedures, checklists, formulas, scales and whatnot must be adhered to religiously (pardon the pun). As a result, this usually brings everything to a grinding halt. There are factually more people "ensuring compliance" than there are people doing actual work. There is absolutely tons of paperwork, requests for authorization, proof of compliance, formula write-ups, programs written, filled out, verified, checked, rejected, redone, and on and on.

It is micro-management gone insane. You can't do anything in the Sea Org without a massive amount of paperwork, with all the associated time wasted in writing these things up and verifying and authorizing and rejecting.

And this is all because this is the way Hubbard said to do it.

You can't, according to Hubbard, just go out and get something done. That is wrong. You have to work out what condition you are in, what formula to apply, what is your Admin Scale, what policy are you applying, what are the Hubbard-specified procedures? And this must be all analyzed (using Hubbard procedures) and written up in a program, with all the "proper" policies and procedures noted.

And then it must be authorized.

And, of course, it is never, ever authorized. The people who are supposed to authorize your program never will. You see, they must forward everything they authorize up to David Miscavige, who is the ultimate approval for everything, and they know that David Miscavige will hate it and he will assign everybody in that hierarchy some low condition for approving such a "horrible, f**ked up program". So every program gets rejected and rejected and rejected.

Eventually, the program probably will get approved by the middle managers and sent up to Miscavige, who does hate it and does assign everyone some lower condition. Then Miscavige will "write it himself," which usually means copying the original program as written, with a few insignificant changes.

And then the program must be complied with, exact step by exact step.

Now, you understand this program was written before any work was done and before anything was investigated, so the steps of the program are, invariably, completely bogus and don't fit the actual situation once real work starts.

But the program steps cannot be altered and must be complied with, no matter how ridiculous they become. It was approved, it was "written by David Miscavige!"

So, as the situation changes, and as the changes multiply, you have the ridiculous situation where people are being forced to comply with steps that have become meaningless and forced to ignore new conditions and problems that have popped up.

You can blame Miscavige for making it so horrible, but, actually, that's what Hubbard created. That's all strictly according to Hubbard's policy letters and his tech.

That's the inside view as to why pretty much nothing gets done in the Church of Scientology and why, if something ever does get done, it is such a mess. Hubbard built it that way.
-

Happy New Year

2010-01-01T17:43:00.000-08:00

Just a note to wish everyone a happy New Year.

In the Ask a Question thread, I made a few predictions for 2010, and I'll paraphrase them here, since it is appropriate.

I'm thinking that 2010 will contain a lot more of what we've already seen in 2009: More major media stories around the world exposing more and more of the Church of Scientology's crimes, abuses and fraud. There will be more investigations and legal actions against the church from governments and individuals. Who knows, there even may be a class action lawsuit.

There will, of course, be a lot more people leaving the Church of Scientology. It is collapsing and even hard-core Scientologists are well aware of that.

As Miscavige drops farther and farther into insanity, the church's actions, under his close supervision, will make less and less sense, which will only increase the exodus of Scientologists and will engender even more major media stories -- all of which, in turn, will cause Miscavige to go even more insane.

It just isn't going to stop.

Note to David Miscavige: You know how you really hated 2008 and hoped 2009 would be better? You know how 2009 was a lot, lot worse? Are you hoping that 2010 will be better? It won't be.

I made a few other predictions, such as that we'd see a local Scientology Org declare its independence from the Church of Scientology, and that David Miscavige would run-run-run away in abject fear of prosecution. Those are more speculative. We'll see.

In any case, it will be another interesting year in the wacky world of Scientology.
-

Scientologists, Trapped by Lies

2009-12-24T17:30:00.000-08:00

When I stepped away from the Church of Scientology, I experienced an amazing feeling. It took a while to recognize the feeling. After all, I'd been in Scientology for over 30 years. I finally recognized what it was: I was overwhelmed with relief that, now, at last, I could accept and live with truth.

Up until that exact moment, I had not allowed myself to see how much lying was part of Scientology.

Now, it isn't that everything in Scientology is a lie. There are things that are true. In fact, it is the truth in Scientology that brings you in.

It is the lies that trap you.

After I left, I was free to look at everything, all the "forbidden" sites and the "forbidden" books. I could talk to "forbidden" people. There was lots and lots of information out there and I wanted all of it.

But, at first I could not figure out what was true and what was false. That simple ability had disappeared over my years in Scientology. While in Scientology, it was the church, and only the church, that told me, and all Scientologists, what was true and false.

Without this "guidance", I had to figure it out for myself. But how?

Well, to help any newly-out Scientologists, I'll give you a few pointers. Of course, you have to work out what is the truth for yourself, but here are some simple rules of thumb.

Liars will, of course, insist that they are telling the truth but, when challenged, will get very, very annoyed, adamant, defensive and/or insulting. But they will never, ever provide proof of their claims.

Those telling the truth will, when challenged, provide proof. If they have an opinion, it will be stated as such.

Liars will insist that you not look at opposing viewpoints, not do any research on your own or read anything that contradicts their lies. They will say terrible things about anyone who dares contradict them, accusing them of crimes and horrible behavior (but never providing actual proof).

Those telling the truth will have no objections to your research, your reading habits or who you talk to. They will ask you to look for actual proof when deciding on something, but won't care where you get it.

As "proof" of their lies, liars will provide anonymous anecdotal stories, vague "statistics" that say nothing, and more lies. They will not provide actual statistics, real facts or any proof.

Those telling the truth have evidence like original documents, videos, photos, court documents, official papers, declarations, attestations and so on.

When presented with evidence of their lying, liars will claim the evidence is false (but not provide any proof of that). When presented with an overwhelming amount of evidence of their lying, liars will claim there is a vast conspiracy against them (but not provide any evidence of that either).

In case anyone missed it, my description of liars' behavior is exactly what the Church of Scientology does.

To newly-out Scientologists: It is embarrassing to find out how much you've been lied to, but that isn't any reason to continue believing in lies. True freedom comes from living with the truth, whatever it is.
-

Understanding the "Scientologist Attitude"

2009-11-28T12:00:00.000-08:00

As an inevitable result of the collapse of the Church of Scientology, there are lots of Scientology true believers appearing outside of the church. There will be more.

This means that non-Scientologists are going to have a lot more exposure to the Scientology true believer's attitude and statements.

And this will, inevitably, be quite annoying.

To be specific, I am talking about the Scientology dogma and beliefs such as:

L. Ron Hubbard was a genius and was never wrong.
Scientology is perfect and can and will solve all the world's problems.
Scientology works 100% on 100% of the people.
Scientologists are homo novis, existing at a new, higher state of existence.

Disputing these "facts" with a Scientologist is a waste of time as they are forbidden from moving one inch from this ideology.

But there is something about this dogma and about Scientologists that you should know. It may help you tolerate Scientologists a bit more.

They actually know that those precepts are not true. If you can talk to many of them in a trusted, off-the-record environment, they will easily admit exactly that.

But any Scientologist, even outside the church, who wants to have the image of being a true Scientologist must echo these absolutes with never a visible question or doubt.

Scientologists must say these things, and they must believe these things and they must think these things, even though they really do know they are untrue.

It may be a bit difficult to understand how one can make oneself "think" something that one knows is untrue, but that is a skill that can be learned -- and Scientology does teach it.

Anyone who has studied Hubbard, especially any of Hubbard's lectures knows, without a doubt, that he was a story teller. The stories he told were quite fanciful and wondrous. Too wondrous. I've never met an ex-Scientologist who was ever surprised to discover the proof that Hubbard was, let us say, less than honest in his story telling.

As for the perfection of Scientology and the all-encompassing solutions it allegedly provides -- every Scientologist has experienced the failures of Scientology technology. Yes, every single Scientologist.

Sure, Scientologists have experienced some workable stuff, which is what convinced them to become Scientologists, but every single one of them has been promised "higher states of being" which, when they have "reached that level", be it Release, Clear or OT, has turned out not to exist.

Every Scientologist has experienced some "bad results" and "no results" from Scientology. So every Scientologist knows that Scientology is definitely not 100% workable on 100% of the people, they know that it does not have all the solutions.

And they do know that they did not become homo novis.

While true believers still believe that Scientology is mostly good, they do know those absolutes, as stated above, are definitely not true.

But they will continue to make those statements as if it were true because believing, thinking and saying those things are required by Scientology dogma. You cannot call yourself a true Scientologist unless you adhere to those requirements.

Which, by the way, explains why Scientologists are so strident and defensive about these precepts -- they know they aren't true and therefore they know they cannot prove them true, but they are still required to claim they are true.

And so Scientologists are very, very annoying and confusing to non-Scientologists.

Just understand that, beneath all those words and insistence on their dogma, all Scientologists really do know that these absolutes they are claiming for Scientology are not true.
-