We reported a few days back that Will Smith is backing a school that will use the teachings of the Church of Scientology, even though he has said that he is a Christian. So many people criticized Smith for putting his money into this new kind of faith. You have to ask yourself though, are the likes of Will Smith and Tom Cruise risking their successful carriers for The Church of Scientology?
It seems as the news about Will Smith angered many of my readers, some did make sense, but some was a little over the top, but we all have an opinion. One reader said I’d say he’s an intelligent man that would want to learn the Pros & Cons of anything, but frankly I doubt he’s getting the other side of the Scientology story.
Another reader added I think it’s awesome. I have been using the study technology from Scientology for years now, and it has helped me a lot.
There is no doubt it works and I am happy to see that Will Smith, although not a member of the church (to my knowledge) is willing to use something that works to help children really learn.
The ability to learn is probably the single most important ability one can have, for it underlies every other ability, and Mr. Hubbard’s contributions to the field will live long in my heart.
So you can see that people have mixed views on this. I do understand that Tom Cruise and Will Smith are just like me and you, they are normal people. However; there is one difference, when I make a choice, only my friends and family have an opinion, when stars like Smith and Cruise make a choice like choosing Scientology, we all have an opinion and it is us who can make or break any one of these A-list stars. I just hope that Will Smith, who is known for being super cool, will not go on Oprah and announce his love for Jada Pinkett Smith
The “Study Tech” of N. Ron Hubbard is completely and utterly without scientific or psychological basis. It’s the education system’s equivalent of ‘faith healing’, something $cientology is equally keen to profer upon unsuspecting innocents.
Comment by Anne — May 27, 2008 @ 1:29 pm
Will doesn’t know anything about Scientology. He’s doing it to show support for his close friend, Tom Cruise. Scientology has no record in education. Their founder lied about being a nuclear physicist and he bought his PhD from mail-order, “Sequoia University.”
Scientology is about INDOCTRINATION, not education. Their “tech” is not effective in education at all, exemplified by the poor product of their own schools, which turn out glassy-eyed obedience but students who are very poorly educated. Scientology is over 50 years old, and the tech has not produced one distinguished scientist or educator. Hubbard himself, was a middling sci fi writer, and a college drop-out. Scientology demonizes the profession of psychiatry while creating its own pseudo-scientific methods that are malarkey.
Comment by Donna Forsythe — May 27, 2008 @ 2:21 pm
Who would have thought Will Smith endorses Child Abuse! Any of you parent’s who are not familiar with “Study Tech” you need to be. http://www.studytech.org/home.php
Will Smith supporting Child Abuse!
Expect Us
Worldwide 06-14-08
http://www.whyweprotest.org
Comment by Mr Longcat — May 27, 2008 @ 2:21 pm
Views aren’t all that mixed on the matter of Scientology. About 55,000 Americans, 1200 Canadians, 1700 British are pro. They are Scientologists and these numbers were arrived at by census and a university study.
On the other hand there are many who are against. These are people who have looked at Scientology from the outside and found that Scientology just can’t do what they claim to do. No one know how many critcs there are.
Most people, say 300 million Americans, 30 million Canadians and 80 million Brits don’t even know what Scientology is. Some of them think it is Christian Science! The Scientologists want to clear the planet, that is, convert the uninvolved. The anti-Scientologist want to get the uninvolved on their side and have Scientology prosecuted (again) and have their leaders thrown in jail (again).
Comment by Gonzo Gateway — May 27, 2008 @ 2:24 pm
Yes, Will and Tom could be risking their careers by supporting Scientology. They certainly aren’t helping their careers.
Top movie stars sometimes develop an inflated ego from their wealth and power. They play characters that can do everything, and soon they believe they are capable of anything. Scientology plays into this ego, since scientologists believe they become super-human, and can move objects with their minds, and will rule the world one day, in education, business and government, while DESTROYING their critics by any means possible. Beware of this group. Read the TIME cover story from 1991. Google it. The group hasn’t changed since then, it has only become more wealthy.
Comment by Blu Morgan — May 27, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Will Smith should be held responsible for all the crimes of Scientology.
http://www.scientology-victims-testimonies.com
Comment by Scientology is Scientology — May 27, 2008 @ 2:42 pm
Regarding the quote in your article, from the person who said the study tech has helped them a lot. Unfortunately, Scientologists are paid to make these posts and work in a special propaganda division. Ordinary Scientologists must used filtering software on their computers that screen out any sites or articles that question Scientology, or present open comments like this.
If you were in Scientology, and paid over $100,000, to get one third of the way up the levels to enlightenment, you’d feel stuck and duped. Notice how the person doesn’t talk about HOW the tech helped them. KSW (Keep Scientology Working) is their general policy at the bottom of all the testimony they give. Yes they are individual human beings, but they are trained to say the same things, think the same way, and present the same face to the public. That Scientology is about “helping,” that Scientology is about keeping children off Ritalin….anything but the truth, which is Scientology is about sucking huge amounts of money for bogus courses, hoarded by the top level of Scientologists, while enslaving members at the bottom to do their bidding. The effective part of the tech, is in MIND CONTROL.
Comment by Angela — May 27, 2008 @ 2:44 pm
I couldn’t care less about Will Smith OR Scientology and wish everyone would just shut up about it all. Most people feel the same way.
Comment by Chomp — May 27, 2008 @ 3:13 pm
Will Smith is responsible for his actions. In the past he hasn’t investigated allegations against the cult, attacked the critics, and defended the cults methods. He is either being handled by a cult member (i.e. wife and co.) or he just doesn’t care, either way it’s on his head.
Comment by Anon — May 27, 2008 @ 3:31 pm
Obviously Donna, Anne and Mr Longcat have no clue what they are talking about and are simply using this as a forum to be hateful. How can anyone oppose something that helps people study? Attack the church all you want but the only reason it still stands- and grows- is because the technology does work. If it didn’t, it long since would have been dead and gone.
More power to you Will!!
Comment by Robert — May 27, 2008 @ 4:57 pm
no, robert…the reason it has been around for so long is its unrelenting harrassment of critics, its secretive nature and its tax-exempt status. if you look at the shrinking number of people willing to financially support the church (this does not include a handful of wealthy pawns who donate regularly), the declining numbers of books sold at their annual bookathons, and the staggering contrast between public opinion (including census data) and the inflated numbers provided by the “church”, youll see that the church is NOT growing. more people are becoming away of its inherently criminal nature and steering clear. the internet is making it impossible for you to suck in unsuspecting people…i mean, my 85 year old grandmother checks the news online every day, and the internet is chock full of concise, well-documented information about the predatory nature of the cult.
and as for you, chomp, the forums at enturbulation.org are a good place to go to see how many people really care about this cause. check out the flash raids going on all over the world, as well as the big monthly protests, and then tell me no one cares about this.
Comment by XENU — May 27, 2008 @ 6:05 pm
Growing? The CoS has shrunk to about 50,000 members worldwide in the past 10 years. The current book sales for their big yearly push are down from over 33, 000 in 2007 to just a little over 2,000. Only 18 sold in all of Canada and a whole list of orgs with zero sales. Money is pouring out to cover expenses like the freewinds’ asbestos clean up and the PIs/Fair Game tactics they’re using to try and hunt down critics, not to mention slumping recruitment drives and a steady stream of people escaping out of the CoS. The desperate begging for funds and stalking of Public Scientologists to pressure them for money has skyrocketed.
It’s fine if you believe the tech has helped you, but it has no basis of success in recognized studies.
And give it time, Robert. The CoS will be gone soon enough, it’s collapsing in on itself. Don’t be afraid to look at the truth. Criticisms are always necessary to promote new thinking and innovation. You should never believe something just because you were told to believe it, even if it was by someone you trust. Think for yourself, Robert. Look at the other side and really THINK. Don’t be scared to see something you disagree with, you might be surprised.
Comment by HT — May 27, 2008 @ 6:13 pm
It’s not hateful to warn people about an abusive scam. Hubbard’s learning “tech” sets the stage for rote learning, not thinking. The church’s stats are crashing and the orgs are largely empty. I live near one, I’ve seen it with my own eyes. And Lay honey, it’s “career” not “carrier”, unless you’re referring to Mr Longcat’s favorite mode of transportation.
Comment by Artoo45 — May 27, 2008 @ 6:35 pm
Robert, I see absolutely NO hate in those comments.
I see people discussing their valid concerns about a program that has not shown any adequate evidence of it’s effectiveness.
You accuse us of attacking something that helps people study, when all they are saying that Scientology’s methods are not at all up to par with VALID peer-reviewed methods.
In fact, some studies and reviews have shown Scientology’s methods to be potentially detrimental to a child’s development.
The only positive reviews I’ve ever seen have been from Scientology associated groups.
If you could simply provide us with an adequate third party or peer review (NOT associated with Scientology) that says otherwise, none of us would be on here expressing our concerns about it.
It really IS that simple, but I already know you are going to try and dismiss this as hate so you won’t have to address the issue because you just can’t provide sufficient data to substantiate the “success” claims.
Comment by MarkayBayan — May 27, 2008 @ 7:02 pm
Come on Robert, why not prove us ALL wrong with some adequate, substantiated data that proves the effectiveness of scientology’s study technology? - that could shut us up and you would be “an hero.”
Go for it hotshot! Be the savior of scientology!
Comment by MarkayBayan — May 27, 2008 @ 7:17 pm
Oh and Chomp, your “apathy” about the situation is the same kind that allows events leading up to things like the Jonestown Massacre to go unchallenged.
“All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.”
— Edmund Burke
I mean really, if you are so sick of hearing about this, just go read something else. This isn’t the only news on the net.
Comment by MarkayBayan — May 27, 2008 @ 7:35 pm
The Scientology study technology works. And you certainly do not have to be a Scientologist to use it. I know something about this because I’ve used it successfully for over two decades and I know I can learn anything. I use it every day of my life. It gives you abilities only dreamed of before. You become more aware, more capable, even happier.
Well some people just can’t stand that last part. So they attack it. Somehow using a dictionary to learn the meanings of words you don’t know is considered harmful and nefarious. If you really want to know what Scientology is, you really do have to find out what it is, not what someone else says it is. That is why the critics don’t want you to read anything by L. Ron Hubbard. They would rather you just take their word for it.
Comment by Mike — May 27, 2008 @ 8:09 pm
Alot of you people on here need to get lives seriously everytime tom’s beliefs get brought up you bigots flood the comments section with your same bullshit. Those people protesting outside of the church and i’m supposed to take seriously people who wear wacky masks?
Comment by Jason — May 27, 2008 @ 8:10 pm
If you want to hear a scientologist change the subject real fast, or clam up altogether, ask them to produce 3rd-party double-blind studies of their ‘tech’.
It’s funny how there is zero empirical evidence and no studies done on the efficacy of their tech, if it works so well. All they have to offer is anecdotal evidence and testimonials.
So in other words, scientology/study tech/narconon is on the same footing as the male enhancement pills advertised after midnight. They don’t claim to be “scientifically formulated” but they do have “scien” in their name! Sounds like a winner to me!
Comment by Rick — May 27, 2008 @ 8:34 pm
Of course doing a double blind study for most anything but a substance (drug) is utter nonsense and completely unworkable so it’s a very silly statement. Double blind studies are mostly the domain of drug research, where a drug is compared to a placebo for efficacy.
In the case of study technology, the study would be comparing a systematic method of study to an absence of a study methodology. That’s right, there is no current methodology of how to study. You never learn that in school. Students are left on their own to come up with their own bag of tricks, which may include caffeine and late nights of cramming, study groups, guessing what the teacher might ask on a test, you name it.
So how could a student not know that they are using study tech. For starters, they would have to learn study tech in order to use it. So a student would instantly know they don’t have the placebo.
Comment by Mike — May 27, 2008 @ 9:17 pm
Doing a double blind study for most anything but a substance (drug) is utter nonsense and completely unworkable so it’s a very silly statement. Double blind studies are mostly the domain of drug research, where a drug is compared to a placebo for efficacy.
In the case of study technology, the study would be comparing a systematic method of study to an absence of a study methodology. That’s right, there is no current methodology of how to study. You never learn that in school. Students are left on their own to come up with their own bag of tricks, which may include caffeine and late nights of cramming, study groups, guessing what the teacher might ask on a test, you name it.
So how could a student not know that they are using study tech. For starters, they would have to learn study tech in order to use it. So a student would instantly know they don’t have the placebo.
Comment by Michael — May 27, 2008 @ 9:52 pm
Lollll, Mike posts as Mike at 9.07 and as Michael at 9.52 using the EXACT same words.
Copied & pasted your own response, eh?
Or was it a standard text that you were ordered to post to get your stats up?
People who study cults and brainwashing techniques note that many of Hubbards books & bulletins are designed to brainwash. So that’s why many are a bit cautious to try it themselves…
Also, most of the critics are ex-scientologists who HAVE done the tech, so they DO know what they are talking about. It’s not just ignorant people, most critics know more about scientology then current scientologists themselves.
Also, I’d like to talk about this whole: ” I know I can learn anything. I use it every day of my life. It gives you abilities only dreamed of before. You become more aware, more capable, even happier.”
Seriously, do you believe that yourself? ARE you more happy and capable? Truly? Do you really have superpowers that you only dreamed of before? If so: What are they?
And are you TRULY able to learn anything? If so, what have you learned the past 20 years besides scientology-tech? Have you studied anything else? And are you really that aware about what happens in the rest of the world? It’s easy to be aware of what happens within scientology if you are a follower, but do you ever look out? Do you ever study anything other then scientology doctrine?
I’m asking you personally. Please think about your life in scientology. Are you really more happy then before? Are the people around you very happy? Does everyone in your group seem very capable?
Please think about this. Are the people around you all very capable?
Do they all seem very happy?
The whole “abilities beyond your wildest dreams! Capable to do anything! So happy that other people can’t do anything but jealously attack it! line sounds so much like an advertisement slogan on the home shopping channel that I am wondering if you really mean those things, or just mindlessly write them down.
Either way Mike, my sincere question to you is: Are you really and truly happy? If so: Good for you. Please continue to evaluate your life though. Don’t get stuck in an endless thought-circle.
If you’re not happy… here’s a hug: *hug*
There’s people out there who would help you if only you gave them the chance, you know?
Comment by Just me here — May 27, 2008 @ 10:58 pm
Well, I’m never going to pay to see his movies again, so that should answer your question nicely.
He gives money to a dangerous cult that ruins people’s lives. I feel like I shouldn’t be funding that with my theater ticket money.
Comment by Yoni — May 27, 2008 @ 10:59 pm
What I find most disturbing about the report or a school using Hubbard “tech” is that children who misbehave will be sent to an “ethics” teacher.
Will this teacher handle those children in the same way as scientology “ethics” officers do?
And the misunderstood word idea is straight out of scientology. In the introduction to Dianetics there is a section explaining that you should never go past a word you don’t understand. There are also footnotes explaining the meaning of some words. Dianetics is what scientologists sell on their “stress test” tables.
To claim that study tech is entirely seperate from scientology is an absolute falsity.
Essentially, Hubbards “Study Tech” is just another way of indoctrinating the unspuspecting into scientology practices - just as all the front groups of the organisation do.
Comment by Lucy — May 27, 2008 @ 11:45 pm
Alright, admittedly the “double blind” study was more for Narconon than Applied Scholastics/Study Tech, but you could still quite easily test for its efficacy.
Student A and Student B, fitting a general profile in terms of grades and behavior. Teach A with study tech, B with another method (and there ARE other codified methodologies, fyi. What do you think they teach future educators?). Simmer for a few weeks. Then test them on the information they have studied. Now present them with several essay questions and scenario-based questions. See who scores higher. Repeat a few hundred times with different students to get an adequate sample.
I’d be willing to bet that the student who is taught to contextually analyze the problems and apply reason will do better in the essay and scenario. The Study Tech kid might do better in the first part, since ST is simply drill, drill, drill, repeat. Its an indoctrination method, nothing more or less.
That’s just my take on it; it also happens to be shared by many school districts across the country who denied AS/ST programs.
Comment by Rick — May 28, 2008 @ 1:03 am
You guys,,,,dear dear dear, what a sad lot.
so hyped up on your own sense of self belief and wanton plight….
what the hell is wrong with using a dictionary when you study?
i did the study course,,,it really helped me. i have never been a good student however after doing the study course i managed to really make some improvements and feel more confident studying anything
dont take that away from me………….
never go past a word you dont understand
be disciplined
set a schedule
so much common sense
you guys ridicule anything.
Comment by Gill — May 28, 2008 @ 1:13 am
I cannot believe all of these people have an opinion on something they do not understand or bothered to try. Study tech is not Scientology, it is a way the LRH came up with to improve the way people learn Scientology, but it applies to learning anything. I have used it to help people learn a number of subjects with great success. It enables you find the thing that is holding you back. Learning is about making sure you understand one thing before you move to the next. Build on what you know.
Please do not try to mystify something you do not know about. When you learn about this technology, it really does make sense how it works. Are you really that impressed with the way they are teaching our kids in regular schools? If they used these basic fundamentals in our schools the kids would be way ahead of where they are now, that I am sure of. Check out Applied Scholastics and see for yourself; common sense really, I don’t know why it isn’t adopted by everyone.
Comment by Steve6f8eh — May 28, 2008 @ 1:47 am
‘Study Technology has the potential to eliminate exam malpractices, school dropouts, lack of co-operation, problem of handouts and other vices which currently has a vicious grip on our school system’
#quoted from Applied Scholastics, the education arm of Scientology
This is most certainly teacher’s/educator’s/school principle’s dream. Not only can ‘study tech’ improve individual student’s school grades, it engages the class and focuses attention (perhaps by giving you better control over the class), it improves your handouts (useful thing!), it gives the student the moral fiber not to cheat during an exam and helps the students home life and prevents school bullying. (Nobody drops out from school due to boring lessons, mind you.)
So wow… no education method I know off can accomplish so much. Has the thought ‘This is too good to be true’ occurred to anyone yet?
What does this teaching method (Study tech) that L Ron Hubbard encompass.
Word Clearing
-Alright better vocabulary.
Spot Check
-In other words exams and spot quizzes. Making sure said student understands the lesson material
Course supervisor
- I guess that is my self and my colleges.
Clay demonstration
-Well… maybe (cynically) this must be the missing ingredient. I teach mathematics and I don’t use clay during my lessons. Clay… right.
Comment by Kate — May 28, 2008 @ 1:53 am
Scientologists are their own worst enemies …
By their own actions they have created a public spectre of fear & distrust. They confront criticism with denial, mockery & attacks. They are currently defining hatred, drug use or mental illness against anyone that questions or criticizes their motives.
Where exactly is the “hatred” in a statement about learning the Pro’s & Con’s of anything ? EVERYTHING you hear from current Scientologists is PRO Scientology, so of course people will look for the CON’s.
We have people providing court documents, FBI files & historic evidence of these CON’s - So Scientology attacks them for it. Like the 15 year boy in the UK arrested for quoting a court document declaring Scientology a cult. How does Scientology rationalize locking up some kid for saying anything ?
Comment by Joseph — May 28, 2008 @ 2:48 am
The Hubbard study tech is almost useless for anything but learning-by-rote.
The method is great for making robotic students without any critical or analytical skills.
I feel sorry for Will Smith and Tom Cruise. These guys are very successful actors who want to to do something worthy. Unfortunately, their lack education leaves them open to manipulation.
Anyone who has studied education, psychology, sociology, philosophy, or linguistics will know all too well that the pseudo intellectuality of Scientology and its’ tech has its’ foundations in B.S.!
Sorry if this offends any Scientologists but there’s a huge difference between pursuing your own beliefs and the misrepresentation of education as a Scientology recruitment tool - somewhat akin to opening a Muslim school without telling the majority Christian students what they have enrolled in and that they are in fact infidels as defined by those who run the school.
Scientology makes all kinds of claims about being the “authorities” on the mind and getting people off drugs but where is the evidence. Where are the independent, peer reviewed academic articles praising their excellent work and recommending their techniques? (A link anyone?)
Answer: there isn’t any evidence because IT JUST DOESN’T WORK!
Comment by AnonymAz — May 28, 2008 @ 4:22 am
WHAT’S ANNOYING ABOUT SCIENTOLOGY BASHERS IS THAT THEY MAKE THE MOST BOORISH, SELF AGRANDIZING STATEMENTS AND NEVER SUBSTANTIATE THEIR OPINIONS. WHY SHOULD ANYONE LISTEN TO SUCH FREBLE WHINING?
THOSE WHO TOUT SCIENTOLOGY ARE SUCCESSFUL AND CERTAINLY CAPABLE OF MAKING THEIR OWN CHOICES AND FORMING THEIR OWN OPINIONS.
I THINK IT MUST HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH BOOSTING ONE’S OWN SELF IMAGE BY PRETENDING TO BE ABLE TO JUDGE SOMEONE WHO IS OBVIOUSLY IN A BETTER POSITION. MAYBE THAT’S WHAT GOSSIP IS ALL ABOUT.
Comment by pat luefan — May 28, 2008 @ 4:41 am
Study Tech is an absolute joke. Out of curiosity, I’ve researched it, and its hilarious how much of it is lifted directly from both comparative and cognitive psychology, misinterpreted, and then having a sci-fi spin put on it. Especially considering how dangerous Scientology claims psychology and psychiatry to be, it sure steals alot of its principles from it.
Using a dictionary to understand difficult words, so you can put what you are reading into proper context? Gee, I wonder why most books have fucking glossaries in them. How retarded are you, that you needed Study Tech to figure that out in the first place? I’ve been using a dictionary to study since grade 7, and L Ron did not invent that. If you believe that, you can’t possibly be smart enough to even be literate, so who are you fooling.
Using clay models to visualize difficult concepts? Too bad modeling and spatial reasoning has been recognized as a teaching method for at least the past two thousand years. I’m pretty sure that why I was taught to draw flow charts when studying, and use other visual cues to help me learn. All this time, I’ve been using Study Tech, without even knowing it! Thanks L Ron! I wouldn’t have my university degree if it wasn’t for you! But, I guess thats where we part ways then isn’t it, you uneducated fraud.
Thats the most retarded examples I could think of. Study Tech is a complete fucking joke. It works, kind of, only because Scientology stole basic principles from actual legitimate methods and then claimed they “perfected” it. What a travesty. What I feel sorry for the most is Will Smith’s kids. They are the victims in all this. I hope they become good at acting, otherwise they will be working at Denny’s when they grow up, with all that fake, noneducation under their belt.
Speaking only for myself, I absolutely fucking hate Scientology. Everything about it is horrible, through and through. Even if it one day stops being a abusive criminal syndicate, it would still be nothing more than pathetic “roadshow medicine”, selling phony cures to anyone silly enough to believe in it. Scientology DOES NOT WORK. ALL IT DOES IS STEAL YOUR MONEY AND RUIN YOUR LIFE.
Comment by Graeme — May 28, 2008 @ 5:59 am
Oh and as far as “helping humanity” goes, there are thousands of legitimate groups out there that do exactly what Narcanon, Crimanon, The Way To Happiness, and Applied Scholastics all claim to do, except they do it by using proven testable methods, and gain the acceptance of legitimate governing parties.
Please don’t be fooled for one second, there is a complete and distinguishable difference between altruistic actions in helping enrich the lives of others, and simply using the weakest, most exploitable members of a society as a pawn for your group to gain acceptance and public appeal. Guess which one Scientology uses?
As I just said, even if Scientology didn’t constantly commit atrocious crimes, it would still be nothing more than a business hawking methods that don’t work, using fraudulent claims. But you can’t be mad at them just for that, otherwise you’d have to be mad at everyone who’s ever sold anything on late night TV.
“Scientology works, that’s why Scientology is still here.” Yeah, and thats why people still buy Spray on Hair in a can, Penis enlarging pills, and follow the South Beach diet, oh and spend billions of dollars a year gambling in casinos. Because people are fucking idiots. If they weren’t, you’re right, Scientology wouldn’t be there. So what does that say about it?
Thanks Scientology, for being the worst thing to ever happen in the past 100 years. Second only to World War 2.
Comment by Graeme — May 28, 2008 @ 6:17 am
And while I’m riled up,
as far as “helping humanity” goes, there are thousands of legitimate groups out there that do exactly what Narcanon, Crimanon, The Way To Happiness, and Applied Scholastics all claim to do, except they do it by using proven testable methods, and gain the acceptance of legitimate governing parties.
Please don’t be fooled for one second, there is a complete and distinguishable difference between altruistic actions in helping enrich the lives of others, and simply using the weakest, most exploitable members of a society as a pawn for your group to gain acceptance and public appeal. Guess which one Scientology uses?
As I just said, even if Scientology didn’t constantly commit atrocious crimes, it would still be nothing more than a business hawking methods that don’t work, using fraudulent claims. But you can’t be mad at them just for that, otherwise you’d have to be mad at everyone who’s ever sold anything on late night TV.
“Scientology works, that’s why Scientology is still here.” Yeah, and thats why people still buy Spray on Hair in a can, Penis enlarging pills, and follow the South Beach diet, oh and spend billions of dollars a year gambling in casinos. Because people are fucking idiots. If they weren’t, you’re right, Scientology wouldn’t be there. So what does that say about it?
Comment by Graeme — May 28, 2008 @ 6:20 am
as far as “helping humanity” goes, there are thousands of legitimate groups out there that do exactly what Narcanon, Crimanon, The Way To Happiness, and Applied Scholastics all claim to do, except they do it by using proven testable methods, and gain the acceptance of legitimate governing parties.
Please don’t be fooled for one second, there is a complete and distinguishable difference between altruistic actions in helping enrich the lives of others, and simply using the weakest, most exploitable members of a society as a pawn for your group to gain acceptance and public appeal. Guess which one Scientology does?
Even if Scientology didn’t constantly commit atrocious crimes, it would still be nothing more than a business hawking methods that don’t work, using fraudulent claims. But you can’t be mad at them just for that, otherwise you’d have to be mad at everyone who’s ever sold anything on late night TV.
“Scientology works, that’s why Scientology is still here.” Yeah, and thats why people still buy Spray on Hair in a can, Penis enlarging pills, and follow the South Beach diet, oh and spend billions of dollars a year gambling in casinos. Because people are fucking idiots. If they weren’t, you’re right, Scientology wouldn’t be there. So what does that say about it?
Comment by Graeme — May 28, 2008 @ 6:44 am
Graeme, Darling, calm down you’ll burst a blood vessel.
Let me say this quite openly, to anyone still awake:if you want to really understand Scientology you do not have to listen to anybody else but L Ron Hubbard the original source.
After studying many of his audio tapes, watched him on film, and read his very own words I can convince myself, without a shadow of a doubt that he is the essence of Scientology. Of course you might say, that’s obvious, but to me this must be firmly established in our minds that the two are inseparable.
My conclusion after thorough examination that can distinguish between fact and fiction, for I have a logic and scientific brain and I trust myself, is that the character of L Ron Hubbard is so clearly base and degenerate that any claims the organisation of Scientology make can never be taken seriously. Hubbard’s war time heroics were made up. Or the Navy Department is lying.
All his other claims, explorer, atomic scientist and so on can be proved to be falsehoods. His claim, and Scientology’s claim to this day is their compatibility with other religions. But Hubbard is on tape calling Jesus a “..lover of men and young boys.” Elsewhere he denies the existence of major historical characters, including Jesus again, Buddha and others by telling us they were mere implants forced upon minds by Xenu, some Galactic Overlord 75 million years ago.
His praise of the black-magic scoundrel Crowley and the suggestion to read one of his books “…if you manage to find it.” is an illustration of his perverted mind. Just one. Another example is his plan to do away with people on the ‘lower tone scales’ quietly and without remorse. This is an incited to kill reminiscent of the treatment of the Jews by the Nazi’s.
Having discovered this I no longer bothered with Scientology’s assertion to be a religion, which their members maintain is true. But Hubbard planned from the very beginning to use these very people to make him money. A better and more accurate picture of the organisations reason for being would be to compare it with the totalitarian character and structure of National Socialism.
Comparing Hubbard with Hitler is not a superficial exercise. Hitler is said to personify evil, yet it must be remembered that Hitler was not a monster from the depths of hell but a human being. What he did was monstrous, and though Hubbard cannot match Hitler ‘s responsibility for the numbers of dead his mind, ambitions and motivations were the same.
All that Scientology do for the ‘benefit of mankind’: Narcanon, Criminon, the campaign against psychiatric abuse and now the bringing of this StudyTech to schools have the underlying motivation, of Hubbards and now Miscavige’s desire to benefit themselves first and foremost. In order to achieve their aims they will be behaving as they have always done: lying, cheating, misleading, destroying.
Jason Beghe said “…the further you go up the Bridge the worst you get…..” Eventually, through the ‘tech’ you make your own prison, he explained. This is one of the major characteristics and achievements of a typical evil system of thought.
Comment by WifeOfBrian — May 28, 2008 @ 10:24 am
Poor old Will Smith, capable and rich beyond my dreams, indulges his fantasy to help others only to be misused by a so-called friend. Will he wake in time?
Poor old Tom Cruise, capable and rich beyond my dreams, deluded by the lies of a so-called friend betrays others in turn. Is he really too far gone?
Poor old David Miscavige, capable and rich beyond my dreams, will like Hitler, Stalin, Ceaucescu, Saddam Hussein and other all powerful dictators, die a typically miserable and lonely death unloved by anyone.
Will it be in prison.?
Poor old me, incapable and poor beyond my expectations, see the suffering they are causing, the ignorance they are suffering, the devastation they will suffer when their structures are exposed and destroyed, and I thank my own fortune to be wiser than them.
Should I have pity for them?
Comment by Puddles — May 28, 2008 @ 11:11 am
Blah, Blah, Blah. Keep bashing. Keep making things up. The people who KNOW how to look for themselves will look, and the sheep will listen to the likes of you. Your hate and lies will change very little. Like I said look for yourself at the results, don’t listen to the opinions of others……on either side!
Our society is creating a race of sheep….and you are contributing to it by spreading these lies! Studytech works……lying about it does not stop it from working!
Comment by Steve6f8eh — May 28, 2008 @ 1:13 pm
Are Will Smith and Tom Cruise risking their careers by doing what they think is right?
In a country supposedly respecting human rights, free will and freedom of religion, it’s a shame that this question can be asked seriously and even more shameful is the fact that answer could well be “Yes, they are risking their careers for doing what they think is right.”
But in the end, a man has got to do what he thinks is right and I admire those who do.
I won’t bother answering to all the intolerant bigots who insist on repeating the same old tired lies, but one points caught my attention and I would like to take It up:
“Study tech and rote learning”
Now, this is just about as absurd as it gets. The basic study manual literally starts by insisting upon the fact that a student must evaluate and weigh data according to their importance. Next is a little-known thing called “The Data Series”, the most logical and thorough data evaluation methodology I have ever seen.
Then, there also is heavy emphasis on application of the data. With study tech, just spitting back the data isn’t good enough. You have to demonstrate your ability to use them correctly to get the results expected.
Using the study tech, you study so that you can apply the data, you evaluate it, reject what is useless or wrong, and you learn how to do what you want to do. Some say, “you will earn a good degree”. We say, “you will learn how to do what you want to do”.
Learning rote and spitting out what the teacher wants to hear will get you through the exams at most schools. But show me a Scientology run school where that’s true and I will show you a school that should get its license revoked.
Study tech isn’t about rote learning at all, it’s about understanding the data and being able to use them.
Comment by Sylver — May 28, 2008 @ 1:26 pm
Poor old Steve6f8eh, on a sinking ship filled with asbestos, ignoring everything except his orders. Hate and lies ? Where exactly ?
Be precise, instead of flailing around like a drowning man. How can I help you help me if you continue shouting?
If the tech works you should give me the results with the research that went behind it. I’ll be very suspicious if you don’t - I’ll be thinking you’re not allowed to.
Comment by Puddles — May 28, 2008 @ 2:58 pm
Say Sylver, who are these intolerant bigots exactly? What are those tired old lies you’re talking about? I don’t expect an answer. That might mean a discussion and I don’t want you to have to go to the RPF just for talking to me.
Comment by General Public — May 28, 2008 @ 3:06 pm
I think I might be one of those intolerant bigots along with Graeme, Kate, Joseph. Some of the tired old lies are ones I got from LRon himself, I could quote a few things if he wanted. But he’s ignored them before.
Comment by WifeOfBrian — May 28, 2008 @ 3:22 pm
As a member of the woolly race I object to the tired old cliche that I would follow anyone regardless. My life is spend eating whatever I can graze and my main concern is getting it down my neck, like any other animal. If someone whistles because they’re signalling that the grass is greener in the other field I will have a look. But when I get there and I find it isn’t -I never follow their whistle again. I think this is a perfectly normal response. What’s being a sheep got to do with it? Last year I saw David Miscavige and he whistled to me, but he was standing in a field full of bullshit, so I didn’t go near him.
Comment by shaun the sheep — May 28, 2008 @ 4:03 pm
Does Will Smith know about Hubbard calling Christ a paedophile?
Did Hubbard really say on tape in one of his lectures: “Christ on the cross, there was no Christ.” ?
Did he really say he’d been to heaven and found the place scruffy?
The man was having a joke obviously, terribly tragic though that people can still believe such rubbish. Of course having spent so much dosh getting to the stage where you are privy to this secret information you can’t even admit to yourself that you’ve been duped.
It’s a pity he never got banged up in jail but at least he could never live his life in peace, and full of drugs at his end before being smothered by you-know-who he deserved his crappy end.
Comment by Laughing Gravy — May 28, 2008 @ 4:27 pm
Gee, why would’nt anyone want Hubbard’s influence around children, his one son committed suicide and his other son hated him so much he
changed his last name to DeWolf. Narconon,Criminon, and “study tech”
have only one goal, to get people to join the cult of Scientology.
Comment by bob dobbs — May 28, 2008 @ 6:57 pm
‘The basic study manual literally starts by insisting upon the fact that a student must evaluate and weigh data according to their importance.’
@Sylver
‘You study so that you can apply the data, you evaluate it, reject what is useless or wrong, and you learn how to do what you want to do.’
@Sylver
I am beginning to wonder if we are talking about the same school and age group. If I am not mistaken; Will Smith’s school, the New Village Academy is for children from kindergarten to 6th grade. I wonder how children of that age group are supposed to;
‘evaluate, weigh data according to their importance and reject what is useless or wrong’
I can see researchers and PhD students evaluating data, weighting up one piece of evidence against another and forming, modifying or rejecting hypothesis. And testing that predictions of that hypothesis and evaluating the data derived from the experiment. So starting the cycle again. (This manner of reasoning is called the scientific method).
But at elementary school level… your statements on ‘Study Tech’ makes it appear that the material taught in the class of an elementary school (or any level other than PhD level) is controversial and subjected to rapid change. I can assure you multiplication, division, addition, subtraction, and learning how to count pass a hundred is unlikely to change due to new discovery. There is nothing to reject as wrong.
As for a 7 or 8 year old ‘evaluating and reject what is useless,’ I will be somewhat amused if a 2nd grader came up and told me he didn’t want to learn multiplication as he had evaluated my lesson, weighed the importance of learning multiplication against a calculator and rejected learning multiplications as a calculator was easier to use. Children that age will find many things in school useless as most would rather play.
I have stated that the claims made for the ‘Study Tech’ method were too good to be true, now I state that the focus of ‘Study tech’ method is inappropriate at the elementary school level.
Lastly; I have a question, how does the ‘Study Tech’ method eliminate exam malpractices (cheating) and school dropouts (high school I assume.)
Comment by Kate — May 28, 2008 @ 9:03 pm
Dear Kate,
There are undercuts within study technology to the basic study manual for
the students you name. I’m glad you have an interest in the methodology keep
asking questions you are on the right track.
Best.
Pat Luefan
Comment by pat luefan — May 28, 2008 @ 9:37 pm
I see that Mike/Michael is so concerned about this subject that he posts the same text under different names twice (proving he actually comes back to this comments-section) but he does not answer my questions.
Are they too personal to deal with? I’m sorry if I upset you, Mike. Just want you to think about stuff instead of following a drill…
As far as the whole study-tech goes: Many people use dictionaries. I mean, why do you think they were invented to begin with? To look up words!
Only Hubbard could claim that HE developed a totally new tech based on something that already existed. Of course it works! That was the whole point of dictionairies in the first place.
What *I* don’t understand is how you guys can be so naive to think that this (looking up words, using scientific methods like described above) is something SPECIAL and are willing to pay big bucks for it.
If Hubbard had said that he had figured out this fantastic new tech called ‘breathing’, would you hail him as a wonderful inventor as well?
I guess I just don’t understand the mindset you guys are in. You try to educate us on something we all know (looking up words is a smart thing to do) and you completely fail to understand that this completely normal and regular thing has been sold to you as a wonderful new way of approaching things.
It’s not. You’ve been sold a cloud of nothing. The tech isn’t making you smarter, it’s narrowing your independent-thinking skills.
The best examples of that can be found right here in this thread.
And I am seriously upset that Will Smith is selling a cult to the kids.
My respect for him has reached zero.
Comment by Just me here — May 28, 2008 @ 11:09 pm
to Just me here
you dont understand. Full credit to you for trying but without actually doing then you can never really know.
there is alot to learn and there are many paths. I want to understand what life is all about.
I feel scientology helps me toward that understanding. Its not the only thing. I also like reading about history and i have a very great / intense passion for Karate. Im just searching for truth and understanding.
i prefer the eclectic approach. i trust my own charater enough to select what works from what doesnt work.
In Karate however we learn allthe basics then apply them through natural postures. that concept in itself is difficult to grasp.
Comment by Gill — May 29, 2008 @ 4:57 am
There is a law of Nature or law of God called “Physiological Reactions” that is the true secret behind Scientology’s Dianectic study technology.
The LRH discovered that when you passed a misunderstood word—you manifested many reactions of various types: Yawning, sleepiness, not there feeling, dizziness, blurry eyes, nervousness and dozens more.
Being the liar that he was, he claimed that Dianetics was “‘his” invention and not a law of God; he hid the fact that it is our human inheritance since time began.
Granted that his power of obnosis was the best in the world, his crime against humanity was to make a “religion” based upon the falsehood, that it was his invention or creation and not a law of God.
There is an EBOOK that explains and reveals the dark and evil secrets of this cult and a few others.
It teaches a person the ways of natural self-healing and also exposes this cult for the thieves that they are.
Go to: http://selfhealingdata.com/
There you will learn to self-heal and learn how to expose the crimes of Scientology.
The Ronbot Hunter.
Comment by The Ronbot Hunter — May 29, 2008 @ 1:02 pm
Gill, how old are you Gill? In your teens? 20s, 30s?
‘Study tech’ like yourself are talking about rejecting things that don’t work. Rejecting ideas which are wrong or misleading…(actually I am getting worried here.)
Will Smith’s New Village Academy is an elementary School. 12 year old and younger, Gill. We are (I am at least) talking about children’s basic education; Learning how to read, spell, write, count, basics of history and science. Gill, I am not sure we are on the same page or even in the same section of the library. How controversial do you think the material in elementary lessons will be?
‘Wanting to understand meaning of life. Searching for personal Truth and understanding.’ has no place in the class room of 6-12 year old children. Who, mind you would prefer to play games than debate philosophical questions that nobody has an answer too. I would rather have my class know how to do mental addition and subtraction, and having the useful skill of knowing what is the correct change when paying for something. And yes, even memorizing multiplications tables (2x to 9x) by rote learning.
Those big ideas and concepts which ‘Study Tech’ focuses on have no use in an elementary school. And as best as I can see, there is no nothing special in ‘Study Tech’ (with its silly idea of children not comprehending an idea the moment they meet a word they don’t understand). I would even say that ‘Study Tech; is missing many of the ideas required to teach children of that age level.
P.S: Karate Gil, is not applying karate stance to natural posture. But to practice Karate stance until it becomes a natural posture. If you recall your basic Karate lessons, a person standing up normally is unstable. Kick high enough or pull his shoulder fast enough and putting your leg in the way (before your attacker has time to react) and he falls down. (The concept is not difficult to grasp)
Comment by Kate — May 29, 2008 @ 2:21 pm
For Kate:
It seems to be there are a few misunderstandings:
1. I was responding to the ridiculous claim that study tech resulted in rote learning. As such, I pointed out that a significant part of the study technology was concerned with the evaluation of data.
Scientology study tech is a fairly complete body of works covering the various aspects of learning how to study, but it is understood that a third grader is quite unlikely to fully assimilate it all at once, and for this reason, the subject is approached at a level on which it can be understood by the student.
There are study tech-based programs specifically addressed for children.
2. The Study tech is not a subject per se. It is a technology helping the student to study efficiently other subjects. It helps the student identify what is preventing him from learning a subject and remedy it.
As you seem to be a teacher, I will venture that you have already seen many students, otherwise intelligent, struggle with a specific subject or concept. You have already seen students become exasperated, exhausted, sleepy (even though they *did* sleep correctly), students bent over their desks, students looking massively bored (and no, it’s not because you are boring), students doodling and otherwise exhibit other signs of troubles.
Well, these are symptoms for what we call “the three barriers to study”. And once these are identified, they can be remedied. And the proof is in the pudding:
Take a student who is bored and bent over his desk. Give him some mass of what he is studying (like photos, illustrations or demos) and you will find out is no longer bored, and he is no longer bent either.
Take a student who “just doesn’t get it”, no matter how much you explain. Find out what word(s) he doesn’t understand in his prior studies and once these are cleared up, you will discover this student can now understand the subject.
You can take a failed student and turn him around. You can take a student falling asleep on his desk, remedy the relevant barriers to study and notice that same student is now alert and ready to study some more (assuming he had enough sleep and was in proper condition to study at the beginning of the course).
Have you ever noticed how some students are apparently exhausted and sleepy and yet burst with energy just a few minutes after leaving the class? Were they faking? Nope.
This technology works. Learn it, use it and make up your mind based on the results you get.
>>
Lastly; I have a question, how does the ‘Study Tech’ method eliminate exam malpractices (cheating) and school dropouts (high school I assume.)
>>
Study tech is not aimed at exam malpractices. It is meant to help the student actually learn the stuff. Whether the student is a cheater or not is hardly a study tech issue. However, if a student *can* really learn and understand, there isn’t much of a reason for him to cheat at the exam.
In regards to dropouts, the study tech provides an explanation of why students give up on their studies. You can avoid dropouts by using the study tech to remove the real reason behind dropouts.
I make a number of claims for study tech in this post. I don’t expect you -or anyone else for that matter- to just take my word for it. But, you can learn the basics of the study tech online* for free, and you can try it and see for yourself if it does indeed work that way.
I guess that’s about as fair as it gets. You read the stuff, try it and see if it works for you.
It works for me, so I am quite happy about it. If it works for you too, well, great. If it doesn’t, too bad - won’t wake me up at night, I can tell you that much.
—–
* see http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH1_1A.HTM
Comment by Sylver — May 30, 2008 @ 8:07 pm
“Take a student who “just doesn’t get it”, no matter how much you explain. Find out what word(s) he doesn’t understand in his prior studies and once these are cleared up, you will discover this student can now understand the subject.” @ Sylver,
I am at a lost for words. Do you honestly believe that every problem faced by a child trying to comprehend a new concept lies in not understanding a ‘word’? Has it ever occurred that child may not be able to grasp a concept, simply because it is new? And some practise is required. (such a carrying numbers when subtracting 56 from 100.) Or that some children are faster at grasping concepts while others are slower and require more attention.
“Take a student who is bored and bent over his desk. Give him some mass of what he is studying (like photos, illustrations or demos) and you will find out is no longer bored, and he is no longer bent either.” @ Sylver,
This is a very old and basic technique; the equivalent of explaining a concept, helped with an illustration shows the concept (eg common factions). Might I introduce you to the ‘new’ concept of making breaks in the lesson? It helps keep the class focussed. I shall also add that a 6 year old’s attention span is about 15-20 minutes long. Thus the lesson plans have to be tailored to fit this time span. Lastly using too much ‘mass’ (as you have termed it) will also cause the attention of the class to lose focus. It is important to make a clear point, with an easy to understand message, uncluttered by too many distractions. Not to mention, having a demonstration and hands on experience at every lesson is impractical. Teachers are only human (Despite the jokes).
“Study tech is not aimed at exam malpractices. It is meant to help the student actually learn the stuff. Whether the student is a cheater or not is hardly a study tech issue. However, if a student *can* really learn and understand, there isn’t much of a reason for him to cheat at the exam.” @ Sylver,
‘Study tech’ may not be aimed as such, but Applied Scholastics, the education arm of Scientology claims it can ‘eliminate cheating, lack of co-operation, school dropouts, problem of handouts and other vices.’ Bold and large claims are made concerning ‘Study tech’ yet nobody can explain how ‘Study Tech’ can support these claims. This just raises alarms, and seems to support the conclusion that many posters have made concerning the true purpose and nature of this teaching technique.
Lastly has the thought occurred that a child might cheat simply because he doesn’t want to put in the effort required to study. Thankfully this is not common. But saying just because a child has no barriers to learning automatically means he will not cheat, is overly optimistic and naïve.
Comment by Kate — May 31, 2008 @ 4:00 am
Well like usual the people who come to the defence of scientology and “study tech”[rantings of a lunatic] can offer no evidence or documents to counter all the facts they have been presented with.
Don’t you realize by now (OSA) the more you post comments with no back up all over the internet, the more people reading see what ridiculous tactics you resort to. PLEASE keep it up, you guys are providing all the ammo we need.”Self inflicted foot-bullets” day, after day, after day.
I beg just one of you to respond to the FACT that you have exposed thousands of people to Blue Asbestos on that piece of sh*t boat of yours the FREEWINDS. Just ONE! But we all know you won’t !! Any response?
I will tell you this much mesothelioma is a horribly painful way to DIE. Good luck with that!
You better pray you don’t end up in my hospital, cause you will get the same treatment from me that you dish out. I can’t wait! See you all soon enough.
Expect Us
Worldwide 06-14-08
PTS - Potential trouble source, as in, “That bitch at Glosslip is a real PTS!”
http://www.blogtalkradio.com
Comment by Mr Longcat — May 31, 2008 @ 7:18 pm
Will Smith is a MO-RON.
Comment by AC — June 1, 2008 @ 4:01 pm
I wonder if this is what they will be teaching children at the scientioogy school?
On 05-31-08 Vicky Boyce, the head of the local Scientology org, Plymouth City UK. Steals protest signs from peaceful protesters and then assaults a disabled person.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA0L_ICdz-I
Comment by Mr Longcat — June 1, 2008 @ 6:53 pm
ASSULTING A DISABLED PERSON!!!
I wonder if this is what they will be teaching children at the scientology school?
On 05-31-08 Vicky Boyce, the head of the local Scientology org, Plymouth City UK. Steals protest signs from peaceful protesters and then assaults a disabled person.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA0L_ICdz-I
If you thought I was fired up before, You have no idea!
If you think you can get away with physically assaulting disabled persons you are Fu*kin crazy!!
What? Were the children not enough! You guy’s are real tuff. Huh!
Comment by Mr Longcat — June 1, 2008 @ 6:58 pm
you guys just dont get it. too much into believing all the crap they write in the glossy magazines.
You have to look with your own heart and eyes.
Study hard
Comment by Gill — June 1, 2008 @ 9:12 pm
Hey Gill, try this for Glossy, BITCH!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA0L_ICdz-I
Comment by Mr Longcat — June 1, 2008 @ 10:17 pm
Its funny how the Scientologist always attack the fact that the protestors wear masks!
The protesters wear masks because Scientologist don’t believe in free speech.
Heres how it works: Protesters mask falls off. Scientologist takes his picture and gives it to private investigator. Private investigator searches for protesters identity and then fair games them.
Its this FAIR GAME practice that creates most of the Cults critics.
Search: Scientology FAIRGAME
Comment by lordxenu — June 9, 2008 @ 11:07 pm
Steve6f8eh wrote “Our society is creating a race of sheep….”
Exactly: Scientology’s brainwashing has created a flock of sheep that all say the same things over and over. Read any of the post by any Scientologist and its always the same.
Summary of every post ever posted by a Scientologist: Everything you read on the internet except on the Cults web page is all lies..
That has me LMFAO every time.
Comment by lordxenu — June 9, 2008 @ 11:43 pm
Sylver wrote: “I won’t bother answering to all the intolerant bigots who insist on repeating the same old tired lies.”
Do you care to talk about all the KNOW Facts.. Like “Operation Snow White”
Operation Snow White was the Church of Scientology’s name for a project during the 1970s to purge unfavorable records about Scientology and its founder L. Ron Hubbard. This project included a series of infiltrations and thefts from 136 government agencies, foreign embassies and consulates, as well as private organizations critical of Scientology, carried out by Church members, in more than 30 countries;[1] the single largest infiltration of the United States government in history[2] with up to 5,000 covert agents.[3] This was also the operation that exposed ‘Operation Freakout’, due to the fact that this was the case that brought the government into investigation on the Church.[3]
Under this program, Scientology operatives committed infiltration, wiretapping, and theft of documents in government offices, most notably those of the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. Eleven highly-placed Church executives, including Mary Sue Hubbard (wife of founder L. Ron Hubbard and second-in-command of the organization), pleaded guilty or were convicted in federal court of obstructing justice, burglary of government offices, and theft of documents and government property.
+++++++++++++++
Church spokespersons on the Internet and elsewhere have been known to claim that the operatives “had done nothing more serious than steal photocopier paper.”
A Scientologist is taught to lie like hubbard & well always deny everything, even the KNOWN facts.
Comment by lordxenu — June 10, 2008 @ 12:12 am
Sylver wrote: “I won’t bother answering to all the intolerant bigots who insist on repeating the same old tired lies.”
Do you care to talk about all the KNOW Facts.. Like “Operation Snow White”
Operation Snow White was the Church of Scientology’s name for a project during the 1970s to purge unfavorable records about Scientology and its founder L. Ron Hubbard. This project included a series of infiltrations and thefts from 136 government agencies, foreign embassies and consulates, as well as private organizations critical of Scientology, carried out by Church members, in more than 30 countries;[1] the single largest infiltration of the United States government in history[2] with up to 5,000 covert agents.[3] This was also the operation that exposed ‘Operation Freakout’, due to the fact that this was the case that brought the government into investigation on the Church.[3]
Under this program, Scientology operatives committed infiltration, wiretapping, and theft of documents in government offices, most notably those of the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. Eleven highly-placed Church executives, including Mary Sue Hubbard (wife of founder L. Ron Hubbard and second-in-command of the organization), pleaded guilty or were convicted in federal court of obstructing justice, burglary of government offices, and theft of documents and government property.
+++++++++++++++
Church spokespersons on the Internet and elsewhere have been known to claim that the operatives “had done nothing more serious than steal photocopier paper.”
A Scientologist is taught to lie like hubbard & well always deny everything, even the KNOWN facts.
+++++++++++++++
What! What!
What do you gotta say??
Comment by Mr Longcat — June 10, 2008 @ 9:20 pm
Gil wrote “you guys just dont get it. too much into believing all the crap they write in the glossy magazines. You have to look with your own heart and eyes. Study hard.”
Gil you dont get it.
You are lost in a fantasy world. From the very first moment you walked into an auditing session your reality has been compromised. You have been brainwashed to dismiss anything you didn’t learn from the church/cult. There are millions of people on the internet trying to help you & your eyes and ears are closed to the truth.
Maybe you are just another lost cause.. oh well, we can’t save everyone.
We are more interested in educating the world of your organizations crimes against humanity. We want the flow of fresh meat into the cult to screech to a halt. With the number of critics now speaking out against the cult the future of your organization is in question.
Any high profile celebrity in the Cult trying to promote any movie or product in the future well have so many protesters at the event or premier, the cults crimes well be the only thing talked about. Eventually these actors/people well lose all work and credibility and slowly drift off into oblivion.
We are everyone! We do not forget! Expect us.
Comment by lordxenu — June 11, 2008 @ 1:05 am
Gil,
I’m sorry you don’t have the same access to information to information as the rest of us do. Try buying a new computer without telling anybody, or go into an internet cafe or something.
Comment by Laughing Gravy — June 19, 2008 @ 6:23 pm