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

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Happy New Year 2011

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:
I don't want to neglect the books that came earlier.  In 2009 we saw:
In 2008 we saw:
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?

Monday, December 20, 2010

"Real, live OTs!"

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.

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Contact Me

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 "".

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Why Scientology Isn't a Future Danger

"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.

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Hiding Scientology

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".

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Scientology and the Wrong "Why" Part 2

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?

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Scientology And The Wrong "Why"

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.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

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

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:
  1. 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.
  1. 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.
  1. 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!"
  1. 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.
  1. 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.
  1. 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.
  1. 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.
  1. 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.

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Message to Nation of Islam Members About Scientology

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.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Why Doesn't Scientology Publish Good News About Itself?

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.

Sunday, October 3, 2010

Scientologists: The Disappearing States of Clear and OT

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.

Monday, September 27, 2010

The Great Anti-Scientology Conspiracy That Never Was

... 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. 

Sunday, September 19, 2010

The Church of Scientology Does Nothing

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.

Sunday, August 29, 2010

Scientology: Selling Invisible Things

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.

Saturday, August 14, 2010

Scientology and Control

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.

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.

Monday, August 9, 2010

Scientology In Perspective

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.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Confidential to David Miscavige

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.

Friday, July 16, 2010

Summer Break

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.

Monday, July 12, 2010

Ask a Question

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.

Sunday, July 4, 2010

Scientology and Humor

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.

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Scientology's Logical Fallacies

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.