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.

Saturday, May 14, 2011

Easy There!

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.


  1. Don't underestimate the power that seeing a rational critic to influence current Scientologist.

    You are right that heavy-handed critics will simply go over a Scientologist's head, but, simply stating the facts does put the seed of doubt in a lot of current members that see wrong happening around them but can't bring themselves to open their eyes.

  2. Re: Seed of doubt

    Yes, that could happen. If the critic isn't over the top and abusive, that may impinge on a Scientologist. However, the Scientologists assigned to "handle" the Internet are pretty well indoctrinated. Normal Scientologists are forbidden from browsing the Internet.

  3. Well said. I remember that Tory Christman said that is was Andreas Heldal-Lund's kindness that allowed her to make her way out of the cult.

  4. Thanks Damian. Yes, I think it's an important thing to remember.

  5. NOTE: If you made a comment, and it has never shown up or it disappeared, let me know.

  6. Thanks Bill - I've found this way to be by far the most effective way to get people on-side of the message about the abusive cult of $cientology.

    Unfortunately the ranters just do the job of OSA, wittingly or not. And they tend to make the waverers go straight back into the fold of the cult.

  7. @Learning to Fly

    In actual fact, the ranters could very well be from the Church of Scientology. It's a well-known and well-tested trick: Have pro-Scientology posters make polite, reasonable sounding comments and then have those same people, under different names, make very nasty responses.

    By comparison, most folks will believe the pro-Scientology people.

    While we can't do anything about the sock-puppets making crazy comments, we can add our own sane and reasonable criticisms -- and we can even speak against the crazy sock puppet comments.

    We speak the truth, we don't need anything more.

  8. Bill you make an extremely valid point here, and I hope people think about this carefully, and consider how they communicate with Scientologists.

    Scientologists are told that the "wog world" is very hostile and unfriendly, and that is part of the trap that keeps them in.

    If they then pluck up the courage to look on-line and see lots of aggressive posts they are very likely to see this as validation of their fears.

    The story of Tory and Andreas is a classic one. He saw errors in her postings and offered to help - he didn't call her names or insult her, he offered to help, and it made a dramatic impact on her.

    Then, when she later voiced her fears about leaving and how her friends would most likely disconnect he simply asked her what kind of friends could they be if they wouldn't let her change her mind. He didn't attack them, or try and slur them, he simply asked an honest question.

  9. I think this is one of the traps the Angry Gay Pope has fallen into; many times he poses as a sincere possible convert, then somebody who knows who he is comes along and has him ejected from the building or he drops the act and begins yelling "DAVID MISCAVAGE BEATS HIS STAFF" as he leaves Scientology-land. I often wonder: does this freak the SOs out and drive them further into Sci-ism*, or shock them into looking up who that guy was? He didn't yell when he was up at Twin Peaks because there was no street audience, though he did shock the gate woman by his mere presence and have a catty battle of wits with Sarah Bellin. It would be interesting to see what would happen if he infiltrated some place in an area he hasn't hit (Florida maybe, or San Diego) and NOT pull the street theater when he is found out (and he would be; Mark Ames of "The Exiled" tried to join the Co$ under his real name and they nailed him on the first day.)

    * "L. Ron make the bad man go away!"

  10. Good post! Also reminds me how a few of the more hardcore longtime critics continue go out of their way to badger and even verbally attack other critics for differences in viewpoint that will never be agreed upon, despite years of conflict. Lets just say that some take the high road and some take the troll road and never the twain shall meet.

  11. Copied your post to ESMB. Hope you don't mind.


  12. @VaD

    Of course I don't mind. I'm always happy when something I wrote gets copied and discussed elsewhere.


  13. One must remember that Euphoria is an emotional state attached to a high degree of stress. It has been well documented and nearly everyone can look in their lives and remeber a moment when they were so stressed out that their "rational" mind shut off for a moment. In that moment of surival you experience a rush. A rush of both adrenaline and many neurotransmitters going full blown in your brain. A rush of endorphins and increased Dopamine levels feels so good, but is quite addictive. But as with all highs, the rush eventually wears off and you will crash and burn.

    As a former cult child from a Scientology offshoot (Berkeley Psychic Institute)I became hooked on the euphoria. But it never got me anywhere in my life. No magic, no miracles, no god no healing. As a regathered my wits and moved foreward and came back to reality I realized the changes which came about in my life were due to my hard core efforts and work. So I eventually gave up everything, including the belief system. I am now free and moving forward as a normal rational sane human being who is capable of a lot more than these peoole will ever be who are very stuck with it.

  14. If you are public and have an unlisted telephone number it is very easy to leave Scientology. They send you letters and that is it. It is up to you whether you open them or not. When a Scientologist leaves the Church normally it is because someone on staff has really pissed them off using heavy control. If you are public it normally involves money. I am thankful for the education and processing I received over a ten year period. When I left I could solo audit and had a good enough understanding to do whatever I wanted to on my own. Professional processing is what makes people dependant. The internet did help me a lot because I did not understand intermingled theta lines when I left. In my opinion that has to be resolved before you can achieve any kind of stable wins from postulate processing. I could never understand why anyone would join staff for as little as they paid. I never even imagined the stress they are under to perform. My experience was different from some as I always knew I could walk away when I wanted to and did.

  15. @Bruce D.

    You said "When a Scientologist leaves the Church normally it is because someone on staff has really pissed them off using heavy control."

    Of course that's your opinion, I don't think there has ever been a study of this.

    In my opinion, from reading the stories from many people, it appears to me that the primary reason people leave is that they never got what was promised -- often getting worse instead of better.

    I think most people feel that "heavy control" is acceptable if they were getting what was promised.

  16. Bill,
    You are right it is just my opinion from my own personal experience and that of my friends in Scientology. I do not understand why anyone would sign up for another course in Scientology if the one they just finished didn't help them. Even if Scientology was free I would not do that. When you are paying money for the course it doesn't make any sense at all.

  17. @ Bruce D. - Why would anyone would sign up for another course in Scientology if the course they just finished didn't help them?

    Scientology processes produce temporary euphoric states which are addictive like heroin and crack cocaine.


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