Tom, Katie, Suri and the Media Reaction

When I first started this blog, my primary intention was to clear up the misinformation about Scientology, the Church of Scientology and ex-Scientologists.  Sometimes I think I've done a good job.  Then there are times, like recently, when I'm amazed at how much misinformation still persists.

Katie recently had her dad fire all her Scientology "handlers" and help her file for divorce from Tom Cruise in New York.

The media has gone absolutely crazy with the news and got some very important things totally wrong.  Don't they do research any more?

What the media got right:
The media has rather consistently framed Katie's actions as an "escape from Scientology".  Correct, it is.

The media has viewed Scientology as weird and dangerous.  Again, correct.

The media appears to consider Suri turning six as the primary trigger for the divorce and Katie asking for sole custody of Suri.  I also believe this is correct.

There are other, less important things, that the media got mostly right.

What the media got wrong:
No, Suri was not in any danger of being "sent to the Sea Org".  That outcome is not and was not in the cards.  While I have never seen or heard of a six year old in the Sea Org,  that isn't the point.  Celebrities do not get sent to the Sea Org and Suri, because of her parents, is a celebrity.

Many years ago, Yvonne Jentzsch, who ran Scientology's "Celebrity Centre" used to make some celebrities "honorary Sea Org members".  These people never did any Sea Org things, they just continued whatever they were famous for, but that idea died with Yvonne.

Today, celebrities, and their children, are coddled and, if they are top tier like Tom or Katie, they are assigned "handlers" to spy on them and keep them isolated.

No, Suri going to the Sea Org wasn't what Katie feared.

Suri was not in danger of being "sent to the RPF".  That's just stupid.

Suri was not going to be "interrogated" (Sec Checked), at least not right away.

None of the media understood the very real danger Suri was in.

Suri's actual danger:
L. Ron Hubbard said that you don't "audit" a child before they turn six.  Auditing, in this case, means all the Scientology activities that use the "e-meter".

So, that meant no "counselling sessions", no "word clearing" (no Scientology courses) and no "Sec Checks".  And that meant that Suri wasn't getting any of the standard Scientology indoctrination.

But that was just about to end.  Suri was six.  Time to get her "in session" and "on course". You just know that Tom was heavily pressuring Katie to get Suri active in Scientology.

The divorce is Katie's unequivocal answer.

Good for you Katie, you did exactly the right thing: get Suri somewhere safe where the cult can't indoctrinate her.

UPDATE
It has now been reported (July 9th) that Katie and Tom have reached a settlement in this divorce.

This was completely expected.  Tom Cruise would have received strict, emergency instructions, directly from David Miscavige, to "keep Scientology out of this!"  The divorce was tied directly to Scientology and every report was mentioning all the reasons why Katie needed to get Suri away from "Scientology's evil, abusive, cultic influence" (or something like that).  Miscavige would have been going insane.

So, Tom needed all this to go away.  Details have not been announced, but IMHO Tom pretty much had to give Katie what she was asking for to make this settlement happen so quickly.

UPDATE 2
I hate to brag but, as the details have been leaked about the settlement, it looks like my prediction was the only one that called it 100%.  Katie got everything she asked for and Tom got the "shore story" that this had "absolutely nothing to do with Scientology", just as I predicted.
-

Endings

The recent announcement from "Emma" of Ex-Scientology Message Board that, after October, she is no longer going to run the message board, has gotten me thinking about those on the front lines.

First, I think this is a very good thing for Emma to do.  God! What an incredible job she has done over the years maintaining some control over that herd of cats while under continuous attack from the Church of Scientology.  In 2010, when the church uncovered her real name, the attacks got considerably worse with bogus legal actions.  Then, as if that wasn't hard enough, recently, her mother passed away.

Emma's message board has helped thousands, probably tens of thousands, of people recover from Scientology's thought control and abuse.  Her board has been read by millions.  She is awesome.  And, while she will be greatly missed,  there comes a time when a fighter should retire -- undefeated and victorious, for sure -- but enough is enough.

At its core, the Church of Scientology is evil, degraded, abusive and destructive.  Those who help people escape from, and recover from, Scientology's abuses and thought control methods and who work to expose the crimes and abuse, are directly connected to this evil.  How much can a person take of such evil?  How much should a person put up with before they back off and someone else takes their place?

It is amazing to me that one single person can do so much against everything the insane, wealthy Church of Scientology can throw at them.  Emma is not the only such person, and they all deserve our gratitude, our thanks and our admiration.  The ability of these single individuals to defeat the Church of Scientology shows how decency, goodness and truth can defeat evil.

And don't doubt we all have defeated the Church of Scientology -- especially folks like Emma who have borne the brunt of Scientology's attacks.

Today, Scientology's secrets are all well-known.  Today, Hubbard is known in the real world for exactly what he was.  Today, Scientology has very few adherents and virtually no new recruits.  Today, every Scientology "church" is empty and struggling -- or closed.

Yes, Scientology's few remaining, hard-core believers are still fighting, lying, abusing and attacking but their teeth have been pulled.  For the most part, police and the courts recognize their lies and quickly shut down their bogus, desperate attacks.

New allies are showing up to see that Scientology's lies, abuse, crimes and fraud are exposed and the guilty are brought to justice.  The opposition to the Church of Scientology actually grows daily.

So, some of the fighters are taking a well-earned break.  Some of the blogs and message boards are quieter now, like this one, or even dormant, like Leaving Scientology.  These fighters have earned a respite from the front lines.  Don't worry, there are lots and lots of fighters on the job, and more to come.

Those fighters who are withdrawing from the front lines do so as victors and those who take over the fight are grateful and thankful.
--

Laughing at Scientology

We really have entered into a new stage in the fight against the Church of Scientology's crimes, abuse and fraud.

For the most part, previous exposure of the church's evil has been brought about by outsiders -- ex-Scientologists, reporters, critics and various victims.  Marty and the Independents have been exposing carefully selected abuses (making sure that nothing is exposed that might reflect badly on L. Ron Hubbard himself) but they are, by their own statements, outsiders to the church.

With Debbie Cook's email and subsequent reactions, we have exposure of abuses coming from inside the church.  The battle is now also between the Church of Scientology leadership and people who still consider themselves members of the church.

In addition, there are, today, a number of other very serious actions going on.  There are serious books about Scientology, serious newspaper, TV and magazine exposés about Scientology and other serious court cases involving the church.

All this is good and necessary to the exposure of the Church of Scientology's crimes and eventual bringing to justice of David Miscavige and other Scientology criminals.  Pop the popcorn and pull up a chair, this show is getting very interesting.

But I don't think we should take any particular event too seriously.  No one court case is that important.  Inevitably, the church will still win some while it loses others.  It will be the mass of exposure and court losses for the church that count.  Bit by bit the crimes and abuses are being exposed and documented.  Things proven in court cannot be "unproven".

However, speaking of all this serious business reminds me: Let us not forget what was key in helping destroy the myth of the "great and powerful" Church of Scientology -- laughter!

It was, more than anything else, Anonymous and their monthly protest-parties that destroyed the Church of Scientology's mythical shield that protected them for so long.  It was Anonymous that showed us that the church had no answer to laughter, happiness and fun.

Certainly, the seriousness is important in the court and in well-researched book, newspaper or TV exposés -- but if we become too serious, we will have abandoned our best weapon against the Church of Scientology and David Miscavige.

Happily, the irrepressible Tony Ortega at the Village Voice and a few others continue the tradition of laughing at Miscavige, Hubbard and the Church of Scientology.  And, yes, some Anonymous are still protesting.  With all this seriousness going on, we shouldn't forget to also keep laughing -- it's good for the soul and bad for the church.
--

Scientology "Betrayal"

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

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

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

They told the truth.

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

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

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

A little research and I found this:

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

That's close, but not exactly it.

Then I found an even closer match:

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

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

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

It is a high crime if a Scientologist does:

• "Public disavowal of Scientology"
• "Public statements against Scientology or Scientologists"
• "Testifying hostilely before state or public inquiries into Scientology"
• "Bringing civil suit against any Scientology organization or Scientologist"
• "Writing anti-Scientology letters to the press or giving anti-Scientology or anti-Scientologist data to the press."
• "Delivering up the person of a Scientologist ... to the demands of civil or criminal law."

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Who Will Lead the "Independents"?

Grown men do not need leaders.

                                                        Edward Abbey

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is It Over Yet?

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

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

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

Boring.

Really boring.

Really, really boring.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to Talk to a Scientologist

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Good luck.
-

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:

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

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

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

In 2008 we saw:

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

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

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

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

Next: What about the future?
-

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.

2. 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.

3. 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!"

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. Reinforcing the idea that life within the group is good and worthy, and life outside evil and pointless.

Scientology teaches that the only good being done in the world is being done by Scientology.  Scientology teaches that the only worthwhile activities and goals are Scientology's activities and goals.  Scientology teaches that all other solutions in the world are worthless and pointless because Scientology has the solutions to everything.

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

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

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

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

• Summary.

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

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

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

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

Message to Nation of Islam Members About Scientology

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.
-

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.
-

The Scientology E-Meter

There is a lot of misinformation, speculation and strange claims about the Scientology E-Meter.  Since I try to clear up such confusing areas, it is high time I tackled this subject.

People (who have not actually studied or used the e-meter) very often claim the instrument is bogus; can't work; doesn't work.  It has been described by uninformed critics as "a crude lie-detector".

I recently had a conversation with someone who had heard it was only measuring skin resistance and reacted only to sweat and grip.  This is not accurate.

I have to tell you -- it works.

Before I get into a lot of caveats about that statement, about what it doesn't do, let me first establish what it does do.  The following is a description of a test, called the "pinch test", that anyone trained in the e-meter can do to anyone to show what the e-meter does.  I've done this myself on non-Scientologists, it is pretty convincing.

The "Pinch Test"

The person with the e-meter, let's call them the operator, sets the meter up and hands the other person the electrodes, the "cans".  The operator then has the person watch the needle while the operator pinches them, hard.

The person will see the needle immediately and quickly move to the right in response to the pain.

The operator then gives the command, "Recall the moment of the pinch."  When the person does so, they immediately see the same motion of the needle, usually a bit smaller.  The person can, again and again, recall the pinch and, the instant they do so, see that needle motion, a little less each time.

If you know someone who has a meter and has been trained, they can do this for you.

This is obvious proof that the meter really does react to the thought.

This is actually pretty amazing.

There is another test, a drill used during training, where the student puts another student on the meter and says, "Consider the events of today."  The other student does so.  When the first student sees a distinctive needle movement, he says, "That".  As prearranged, the second student immediately thinks of something else for a little, and then thinks the same thought he was thinking at the moment the first student said "That".   The first student is supposed to see that same needle movement and say, "That is the same thought."

Every graduate of an e-meter course has done this drill and passed it.

This shows that different thoughts can cause different and individually identifiable needle motions.

The unproven theory about all this is that some thoughts have "charge" attached to them, that this "charge" impinges on the body when the thought is "activated" by thinking it and this effect can be detected by measuring the change of resistance of the body.

There is no proof that this is true, but it's the only explanation at this time and it does seem to fit the current evidence.  It sure would be nice if someone competent did some scientific research on this.

So, that's what the meter can do.  Here's what it can't do.

It can't read or measure emotions.  It can't tell truth from lies.  It cannot tell what a person is thinking. It cannot make a person do anything.  It can be rather easily fooled.  And the meter is affected by many other factors than just thoughts.

The meter is affected by sweat, the grip on the cans, body motion and some other things.  This is a significant problem and requires much training on the part of the operator and much instruction of the person holding the cans (the "preclear").   Of course, sweat doesn't cause needle movements because it is slow to occur and very slow to evaporate, but sweat can affect the range, causing the meter to read too low.  Likewise, dry hands can make the meter read too high.

Preclears are carefully instructed on grip, and this is also why each meter comes with many different sizes of cans.

The meter operators are instructed and drilled on body motion, so they can, it is hoped, recognize and ignore needle motion caused by that.

The e-meter, as sold by the Church of Scientology, is a very expensive, but still somewhat primitive instrument.  It has never been analyzed in any scientific way.  It has many limitations.  The meter is quite easily fooled, if you know what you are doing.  The mind is a complex thing and the meter is a very simple thing, so problems can and do occur because the meter reads on something other than what is expected.

More research has been done in the Freezone concerning the e-meter and they claim they have improved it, but there is still no independent, scientific research on the e-meter.

How the E-Meter is part of the trap

It is the fact that the e-meter actually works that makes it a very integral part of the very effective trapping mechanism of the Church of Scientology. 

Very early on, every new Scientologist is led to believe that they cannot keep any secrets from the e-meter.   In session, when the auditor asks about their secrets, their bad actions, the meter reads.  And the auditor won't stop until the meter stops reading, meaning the Scientologist has "told all".

In this way, the Church of Scientology can and does get all the person's crimes, sexual problems, secrets and so on.  Every session starts with those questions.  The church's files are quite full and quite complete.

In addition, the existence and apparent effectiveness of the e-meter convinces the new Scientologist that the rest of the Scientology tech must be just as effective.

Of course, neither the e-meter nor the Scientology tech is as effective as claimed.  But that isn't obvious at the beginning.  By the time the Scientologist might detect the failings of both, they are usually too far into the indoctrination and can't perceive the flaws any more.
-

To Scientologists Newly Out of the Church

To you, dear Scientologist, who have finally decided to leave the Church of Scientology:

Congratulations!  You have made that important, first step to a new life.

Perhaps you haven't yet understood the magnitude of what you have done.

You have disagreed.

All Scientologists know that you may not disagree and remain in Scientology.  Oh, sure, you "can disagree", but only if you agree to get your disagreements "handled" by the church.  And that, we all learned, meant they would "handle" you until you realized "how wrong you were" and how right Scientology, the church and its leaders were.  There is no other "handling" -- you were wrong and Scientology, whatever they said and whatever they did, was right.

And, even though Ron said that agreement is effect and disagreement is cause,  Scientology only tolerates agreement.

And you have disagreed.  What's more, you refused to agree that you were wrong so you could be "handled" by the church.  You disagreed and you said, "I am right!"

This first disagreement after so much agree-agree-agree is a major step toward sanity.   If you are like I was, it is a great relief.

However, if you are like many Scientologists who have finally had enough and have stepped away from the Church of Scientology, you may still be wrapped up in the culture of agreement that is Scientology.

You might be tempted to return to that warm, welcoming culture of agreement with Scientologists outside of the church, like the "Independent Scientology" movement.  There, your disagreement about David Miscavige will become agreement, they all agree that "Miscavige is bad", and you could safely drop back with them into that safe world of complete agreement in Scientology.

You became a Scientologist because you found some of the things in Scientology to be worthwhile and workable.  But one of the characteristics of Scientology that is quite attractive to many Scientologists is that it is a pre-packaged set of beliefs where "all of that is bad" and "all of this is good",  you don't have to think, you don't have to worry, all you have to do is agree.  And once a person becomes a Scientologist, they are required to agree that everything in Scientology is good and workable -- no matter what their actual opinions or experiences are.

Hopefully, that's over for you.  Now you can make up your own mind about each and every thing in your life.  You can choose a life where you make the decisions about what you are going to think and believe.

You have taken the first step towards sanity and taking back your own life, don't stop now.  You can disagree if you want to.  You can disagree as much as you want, even with parts of Scientology.

And that is a road to greater truth.
-

Scientology: Seeds of Its Own Destruction

With any in-depth and dispassionate analysis of Scientology, it becomes obvious that the organization and technologies of Scientology contain the seeds of their own destruction.

This is almost impossible for a True Believer to understand or detect, but it is clear to anyone who can see and think logically.

Now, I have written about some of this, such as Scientology's Admin Tech, which, while some is workable, if applied fully and exactly as written will effectively destroy any organization.  And there is a great essay on why Scientology's Ethics Tech is so destructive over on Leaving Scientology.

But now I'm talking about how the very structure of the Church of Scientology, as carefully designed by L. Ron Hubbard, made the takeover and subsequent destruction of the Church of Scientology not only possible but inevitable.

Let me explain. 

You see, Ron carefully structured the whole organization of the Church of Scientology around himself.  In all the thousands of policies that he wrote over all those years, there is one huge, glaring omission concerning the very top of the church:  The leader of Scientology and his duties, his responsibilities, how he is chosen, how he is removed, how he is evaluated, are all completely undefined.

Because of this, the leader may never be removed.  There simply is no way to remove the leader.  There is no way within the church to evaluate how the leader is doing.  There are no requirements that a leader must meet.  There are no results a leader must produce.  No one in the whole world has the power or authorization to remove the leader of Scientology.  This, of course, was intentional, since Ron had no intention of ever relinquishing control -- but it was a fatal omission for the church.

Some may believe that there are currently "others" who are really in charge and who could remove the leader, but that simply isn't true in the slightest.  The leader of the Church of Scientology has no boss and cannot be removed.    For more information about that, see Larry Brennan's blog.

The leader of Scientology is fully protected from everything.  Any internal threats or attacks are immediately dealt with, per policy, by the destruction and expulsion of the attacker.  The leader is always assumed fully innocent and any attacker is always presumed horribly guilty.  Any external attacks against the leader are, per policy, met with everything the Church of Scientology can throw against the attacker, both legal and illegal.  No expense or effort is spared in the leader's defense.

The leader's word is law within the Church of Scientology and must be complied with immediately and without question.  The leader can order anything be done and it will be done, no matter how much money or how many people are required.  If it is impossible, the church must still keep trying as long as the leader desires it.  The leader's power is absolute within the church.

The actions of the leader are completely protected by the church.  His whereabouts and actions are secret and carefully concealed by the church.  What the leader reveals is all that is visible, all else is hidden behind many curtains of secrecy created for that purpose.  If the leader commits crimes, lies, fraud and abuse, these actions will never be reported to the police (or anyone).  The leader of the Church of Scientology is protected from any exposure.

The leader of the Church of Scientology has absolute control over all of Scientology, all the money, all the property and all the people.  This is much more than just being very, very wealthy, this is total domination.

In case you are thinking this sounds like a super-desirable job, to an honest person, it really isn't.  Obviously it was perfect for Ron, because it was whatever he wanted it to be.  But now, because the job has no defined duties or limits, all the problems, disasters, failures and chaos of Scientology would end up at that desk.  The job is totally responsible for everything, but no clear limit to what the job actually is or is not.  For an honest person, it would be a horrible position, a complete disaster waiting to happen.

So, what kind of a person would want the job?  Not only would want it but would do anything and everything they could to gain that position?  What kind of a person would feed on chaos and disaster?

Yes, the person most likely to want that position would be a psychopath.  They would only see the unlimited power and wealth and care nothing about the responsibilities.  Who cares about responsibilities, problems and failures when you can just lie about everything?

And that is why David Miscavige took control of the Church of Scientology, the position is perfect for a psychopath.  He just had to have it, and he took it.

But the truth is, if Miscavige hadn't been there and hadn't taken over the leadership position, it is inevitable that some other psychopath would have done so.  Such a cruel and destructive person would be in danger of being found out and expelled unless they got to the safety of the top job of the church.  That is why it was inevitable that it would happen.

The seeds of the takeover of the Church of Scientology by the most destructive person is built right into the way the position of the leader was set up.  Once Ron was no longer able to defend his leadership, the church was truly doomed.
-

Scientology and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

From the Look-at-what-we-say-not-at-what-we-do department, we have the Church of Scientology vs. Human Rights.

One of the Church of Scientology's big PR stunts is their "support" of the United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  They have their "Youth for Human Rights International" Campaign and their "Citizen's Commission on Human Rights" and such.

And everyone is supposed to think, "Gee, the Church of Scientology must, itself, be very good about Human Rights!  Certainly they must be a Very Good Group."

But that's all just talk.  Let's check the walk.  Let's see how their actions stack up against the very document they say they support.

From the United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

The Church of Scientology coerces people, especially young people, into signing a billion year contract to work for the church at slave wages of -- if they are very good and very lucky -- around $50 a week.   These staff members are worked 18 to 20 or more hours per day and are denied any vacations, weekends or any other time off -- month after month, year after year.

Every minute of the "staff member's" day is tightly controlled, with frequent "musters" and constant monitoring.  If they don't look serious and busy at all times, they get into trouble.

These slaves, I mean staff, have 15 minute meal breaks, 4 to 6 hours of "personal and sleep time" per day -- if they are lucky.  They must comply with every single order given to them by their "superiors", and the orders are constant and unrelenting.

If a staff member is from another country, the Church of Scientology steals their passport, effectively trapping them.

If someone does manage to escape from the International Headquarters, security personnel execute a well-practiced drill to track them down and then use whatever threats or promises necessary to bring them back.  If they have family members who are also Scientologists, threats against their family is a common tactic of the church.

Of course, the church wouldn't call it servitude, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, what else would you call it?  The Church of Scientology violates Article 4 every day.

Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

The Church of Scientology runs a number of their own, private prisons, called "RPF" ("Rehabilitation Project Force").  The church assigns members who the church deems as "bad", to these prison camps.  Those assigned have no choice and no recourse, they must submit to this imprisonment or be forever banished from their religion.

Those accused of whatever crimes they are alleged to have committed are not allowed a trial, representation, rules of evidence, or any recourse of modern justice.  They are not allowed to confront their accusers or defend themselves.  They are simply assigned to the RPF by the church.

Members of the RPF are subjected to the following cruel, inhuman and degrading punishments.

• They are not allowed to talk to anyone, even their spouse, even their children.
• They must run everywhere.
• They must wear black boiler suits everywhere.
• They are fed table scraps from the dining room after "their betters" have eaten.
• They must submit to hours and hours of indoctrination and "confession".
• There is no limit to their imprisonment. No matter what their "crime", they can be, and are, forced to stay in this prison for many, many years.
• If they are "bad" while on the RPF, they may be assigned to the "RPF's RPF" which is much, much worse.

The church will claim that "participation is voluntary", but that isn't exactly true.  As the church itself would phrase it to those being sent to the RPF, "It is either the RPF or we will deny you your only hope of salvation forever."  No Scientologist would see that as any kind of choice at all.

The Church of Scientology violates Articles 5 and 9 every day.   To be honest, there are a lot more violations that I haven't mentioned here.

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

At any Scientology organization, but especially at Scientology's International Headquarters in Hemet, California, the staff privacy is invaded to an astonishing, and criminal level.

No staff may have a phone conversation with anyone outside the base unless a security person is listening in and taking notes.  There are no exceptions.

Every single piece of mail, especially private, personal mail is opened and read by security personnel.  Mail deemed "unacceptable" will simply never be delivered to the staff member it is addressed to.  This is in direct violation of United States law.  In addition, every letter a staff member attempts to send out is first read by security personnel and may be stopped.

Staff at the International Base are not allowed to leave the base without an escort -- to ensure they don't speak to the wrong people or just run off.  In general, they simply are not allowed off the base.

As for "attacks upon his honour and reputation", if a staff member is "in trouble" (and that is most of the time) leaders of the Church of Scientology, especially David Miscavige himself, will read embarrassing confidential information from the person's private confessional folders to the entire staff at their "morning muster" -- to embarrass them, to humiliate them, to degrade them.

The Church of Scientology violates Article 12 every day.

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

While this article would be the real reason the Church of Scientology pretends to support this Universal Declaration of Human Rights, they, themselves, do not comply with this article in the least way.

Oh, yes, the Church of Scientology will support your right to choose Scientology, but if you subsequently attempt to leave Scientology, you will be punished.  Leaving is not your right. You will be declared "Suppressive" and if your family, your children, your friends, your boss are Scientologists, they will be forbidden from having any contact with you.  You could lose your job.  Married couples are forced to divorce.  If you complain or speak out against what you see as wrong with the Church of Scientology, information from your confidential confessional folders just might end up disseminated broadly.

Many, many people today have left Scientology, but keep it quite secret, so that they can remain in contact with family and friends.

The Church of Scientology violates Article 18 every day.  It is the enemy of freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

Article 19.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Like the old joke, in Scientology you may have any opinion you wish as long as it is official Church of Scientology opinion.  There is no tolerance for any freedom of opinion or expression by the Church of Scientology.

Inside Scientology, if you disagree in the slightest with any Scientology pronouncement or dogma, you will be "corrected" until you agree.  If you disagree in any significant way, you will be banished.

Outside of Scientology, it is worse.  If you speak out against the Church of Scientology, you will be declared an "Enemy" of the church, and they will come after you to shut you up.  As an "Enemy" of the church, they believe they have the right, and some would say mandate, to destroy you.  Their own policy, as written by L. Ron Hubbard, says that such enemies "May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed."

Does that sound at all like the Church of Scientology supports Article 19?  No, they are an enemy of Article 19.

Article 23.

1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24.
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

And we come back to the Church of Scientology's attitude and treatment of their own staff.

The Church of Scientology, especially at their higher level organizations and their International Headquarters, treat staff like slaves.

• "Just and favorable conditions"?  Not unless you think 18 to 20 hour work days are "just and favorable".  Not unless you think constant supervision, no breaks, constant pressure, yelling and such are "just and favorable".  Not unless you think physical assaults, verbal harassment and exposure of confidential confessional information is "just and favorable".
• "Just and favorable remuneration"?  Are you kidding?  No person can live on what the church pays.  Certainly no one is attaining an "existence worthy of human dignity".
• "Trade unions"?  Don't even think about it.
• "Rest and leisure", "limitation of working hours", "holidays with pay"?  Not one of these rights is allowed to workers in the Church of Scientology.  Not one.  No rest and leisure at all.  The only limitation of working hours is there are only 24 hours in the day.  And no staff gets any holidays or even weekends off.

The Church of Scientology violates Articles 23 and 24 every single day.

In other words, the Church of Scientology "supports" the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, except for Articles 4, 5, 9, 12, 18, 19, 23 and 24 -- and any other Articles that might interfere with their raking in money and abusing staff and public.

So, when you read the Church of Scientology's press releases about how "wonderful" they are because they "support" this Declaration, remember this:  They never actually said they followed the Declaration in any way, they only want you to follow it.
-

The Scientology World

Someone, a while ago, asked me to expound on what a "Scientology World" would be like, and the story about Germany would be a good place to start.

In 2008, Germany, after an extensive investigation of the Church of Scientology, declined to ban the group (which is not recognized as a religion) in Germany.  The church likes to tout this as a "win", but it was and is very, very far from the success that Scientology claims.

The German government did find that the Church of Scientology was anti-constitutional.  This is very far from finding the church "innocent".

The German constitution guarantees basic human rights, and the Church of Scientology violates human rights every single day.  The church works very, very hard to suppress free speech and freedom of religion all over the world.  The church does not support a decent wage or adequate time off for its workers.  The church runs secret prison camps where it sends its "dissidents" without due process and without recourse.

While it is true that the human rights record of the Church of Scientology is abysmal, that isn't actually what the problem is in Germany.  The German constitution is quite special.  In addition to many other good features, it also is carefully designed to safeguard the German people from fanatic, totalitarian groups bent on world domination.

And, yes, that is exactly what the Church of Scientology is.

However, the German government declined to ban Scientology.  While the Church of Scientology intends to take over the world, suppress free speech, suppress freedom of religion and suppress basic human rights, it has, so far in Germany, been unable to make much headway in its goals.  Therefore, the German government stated that they will keep monitoring the group because it is a potential threat but declined to ban it at this time.

Not banning the church may seem wrong to some, but it really is correct.  Germany grants freedom of speech even to groups that work to suppress freedom of speech.  Germany grants human rights even to groups that work to suppress human rights.  As unfair as this may seem, it is the decent thing to do.  It would only be if the Church of Scientology became an actual, realistic threat to the German people that the government would be forced to take action.

A Scientology world would be just as Germany found: a threat to all free people, a threat to democracy and the end of human rights.

Let's look at some specifics of Scientology's planned wonderful world, shall we?

Totalitarian

Democracy would end.  There would be no elections.  The general public would have no voice in how, or by whom, they were governed.  According to L. Ron Hubbard, the "ideal government" is a "benevolent monarchy", therefore that's what it would have to be -- and you know the leader, and all people of power, would have to be Scientologists.

You have to understand that "wogs" (meaning all non-Scientologists) are, according to Scientology, "aberrated" (meaning unable to think clearly), and so no wogs would be allowed to have any power or any say in matters of importance.  Only Scientologists would be trusted in this Scientology World.

All the wog laws would be replaced with Scientology policies, because these were written by Hubbard and are the only rules the Scientology World would need.

Scientology "justice"

All wog justice would be replaced by Scientology justice.  Let us review what that means.

• There would be no judges.  The most severe justice action would be the Committee of Evidence.  The Scientologist in charge of that sector would, as "Convening Authority", assign three Scientologists (with no specified qualifications) to sit in judgement.
• There would be no lawyers.  The accused would not be able to bring anyone to advise them, speak for them or defend them.
  
• All rules of evidence would be discarded.  Under Scientology justice, any "evidence" presented has more-or-less equal validity.  Nothing is excluded (as immaterial or prejudicial, for instance) but there would be no particular effort to be complete, or accurate.  In practice, all Scientologists are assumed to be telling the absolute truth (because they were asked to) except for the accused.  However, the "evidence" provided by the Convening Authority, no matter how vague or unproven, is assumed to be true and factual unless disproven.
• The accused would no longer be permitted to confront or even know about his or her accusers.  In fact, in a Committee of Evidence, the accused might not hear, read or see the evidence against him or her and might not even be allowed to attend at all.
  
• While an appeal is "permitted", that means little, since it just involves more of the same.

Yes, justice, as you know it, would cease to exist in this Scientology World.

And there is more.  Assuming that the Scientology world is run exactly like the Church of Scientology, then the leader or any Scientologist in a position of power, would be able to assign people to prison at any time and not necessarily for any specific crimes.  Those assigned to prison would have no appeal, would have no specific sentence duration and could be held in prison forever without recourse.

Scientology prisons would undoubtedly be patterned after the church's RPF (Rehabilitation Project Force) and would carefully treat all prisoners like scum, giving them table scraps, requiring all prisoners to engage in hard labor, and to run everywhere.  Prisoners would not be allowed to communicate to anyone outside of prison at any time for any reason.  And all prisoners would be required to study and practice Scientology every day.

Human rights

Under a Scientology-controlled world, there would be no human rights.  Dissent or, indeed, even the mildest disagreement with Scientology would not be allowed.  Period.  Anyone who persisted in such disagreement would be declared "Suppressive" and would be cast out of society.

Likewise, anyone deemed "low-toned" would also not be tolerated.  Homelessness, joblessness, depression, mental illness, and so on would not be allowed.  If someone persisted in "being low-toned", they also could be "disposed of quietly and without regret".  In Science of Survival, Hubbard spoke of an unnamed "Venezuelan dictator" who got rid of leprosy by the "simple expedient of collecting and destroying all the beggars in Venezuela."  A good example of how this Scientology World would deal with such "low-toned" problems.

Other religions might be tolerated if they supported all the Scientology principles and beliefs -- since, according to Hubbard, all other religions are "false".

The idea of a living wage and decent working conditions would cease to exist.  In the Scientology world, working to further Scientology's goals should be all the reward you need.

Marriage and children might be permitted, but not if one were deemed "low-toned".

Scientology Ideals

Mostly, the Scientology world would be dominated by Scientology's ideals.  No, not the words they mouth, but the "ideals" as shown by their actions today.

The most important Scientology concept is that being "correct" (by Scientology definition) is much more important than truth, facts, evidence, honesty or dignity.  In the Scientology World, you will listen and believe everything that Scientology tells you, and you will close your eyes to the truth you can see.  In this world, you will always bow to their dictates rather than stand by what you know to be right.

The second concept is that approval, authorization, adherence is much, much more important that doing what actually works.  Hubbard has created "solutions" to every single problem that plagues mankind.  None of his solutions have been actually proven to solve anything, but they would be the only allowed solutions.  Any other solutions, no matter how effective, would be outlawed and only the approved, authorized, Hubbard solutions would be permitted.

And how soon can we expect to enjoy this Scientology world?

Luckily for all of us, the Church of Scientology religiously follows all of Hubbard's policies and procedures in its quest for world domination.  I say luckily, because the result of that is failure after failure after abysmal failure.

David Miscavige, while obviously having even greater desire for world domination, has expanded and improved on Hubbard's failure rate by orders of magnitude.  He has made unworkable solutions even more unworkable.

The Scientology world was never going to happen.
-