Repost: Welcome to this Blog!

Hi there,

and thanks for visiting this blog! I put it up to give you the opportunity to ask questions, about Scientology, Scientologists, David Miscavige and whatever you feel is related to that. If you are here to make statements or raise a fuss, you are violating the only rule this blog has. So please, don’t to it.

– Louanne

30 Comments

  1. The truth of the matter is that I just don’t have time right now to go through each thread and pick out the actual questions or anything that is not c&p.

    I am closing this one and open a new one in a sec.

    – Louanne

  2. that’s really all that anyone can hope for; that one will unflinchingly look at all of the available data, pros, cons, neutral facts an subjective claims, and come up with a true belief.

    most often, when a neutral party is exposed to all of the information available, they end up critical or opposed to the group. you’ll notice that, most often, the critics are better educated and have more information than the adherents. that is, of course, only in general. this is why scientologists tend to avoid open debate.

  3. Thank you for posting that link. I had never heard those stories before, it certainly made me think.

  4. Sup OSA, how did you like our press conference in Hollywood this weekend?
    I heard your freedom mag team was also there.
    Vid from the press conference is here if you missed it:
    http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/4716775

  5. It’s pretty telling how “comments” are turned off in most these threads. For some reason this one is still open but for how long?

    Louanne has discovered that most of the world — outside of her Scientologist friends — generally has a negative perception of Scientology. Most see it as an opportunistic, money grubbing organization.

    This matters little to most people; Scientology remains a fringe organization with few followers, but people like Louanne get the brunt of it. Louanne, don’t you get sick of being reg’d left and right? Don’t you see that the “expansion” is all about buildings and not about, say, producing Clears? That they have been raising money for Super Power for 23 years with NO delivery? Can’t you see with your own eyes how the events are getting smaller? Are you not able enough to even read the sites BY TRUE-BELIEVING SCIENTOLOGISTS who are sharing what they know about COS Management? (the most Scn-friendly one would be http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/ ) You CAN’T call that a hate site. How can you ignore it?

  6. Point is well made, painful. Notice that ANYTHING she posts, now, is closed for comments. This is no longer a forum for discussion as it is a simple website with a one-way feed. I’ve actually yet to meet a scientologist that can debate their views as well or as honestly as “anons”. I guess anons, in general, are just more effective communicators.

  7. I suspect that Louanne is smarter than one would expect, by closing threads and not allowing comments on newer threads.

    Take, for example, her recent item about the Mayor of Las Vegas speaking at the church opening. I wouldn’t allow comments on this one either. This man has been twice convicted of ethics violations (once overturned on appeal), told 4th grade students that, if he were on a desert island, he would want only “A showgirl and a bottle of Bombay Sapphire Gin” and that his hobby is drinking, believes that children should be whipped and caned if in trouble, believes graffitiers should have their thumbs cut off on television, photographed a topless woman (not his wife) for playboy and wants to legalize prostitution in the downtown of las vegas. He also publicly told the President of the United States that he is not welcome in “his” city.

    Yeah, this is the sort of person that could be called on to support scientology.

  8. isn’t that what the national socialist party did when they seized power in germany? or saddam hussein when he consolidated control of iraq?

    if, I say IF, there were a hostile or other-than-honest takeover of the group, it would make sens to replace the old guard with those that are loyal to the new leadership.

    it’s either that, or Hubbard’s personal friends actually are/were a bunch of SPs…

  9. I do have one more question.
    The last organization that Hubbard personally worked with was the “Old Saint Hill” org in Saint Hill, England. At that time, he worked with fifty people.
    To date, 49 of those people, those that worked directly with the Commodore, have been declared SP’s.
    That includes Philip Quirino, Pat Bloomberg, Peter Hemery, Mike Rigby, Ken Urquhart, Joyce Popham, Len Regenass, Joan McNocher, Dalene Regenass, Robin Hancocks, Frank Freedman, Betty James, John McMaster, Otto Roos, Pam Pearcy, Reg Sharpe, Leon Steinberg, J.J Delance, Tony Dunleavy, Connie Broadbent, Craig Lipsitz, Marilynn Routsong, Brian Livingston, Herbie Parkhouse, Anton James, Jenny Parkhouse, Virginia Downsborough, Van Staden, Sheena Fairchild, Jennifer Edmonds, Bernie Green, Gareth McCoy, Dalene Regenas, Felice Green, John Lawrence, Peggy Bankston, Helen Pollen, Fred Fairchild, Dorothy Knight , Judy Gray, Cal Wigney, Mary Long, Bill Robertson, Linda Nussbaum, Robin Lindsell, Jenny Parkhouse, Val Wigney, Edith Hoyseth, Roger Biddell and Cyril Vosper.
    Many of these were personal friends of Hubbard. Most of these were “clear”. Most of these were declared after Hubbard’s death, but the miscavige management.
    So out this staff, those that worked directly with Hubbard, 98% of those have been officially declared as “SP’s”. Now, scientology tells us that 2 and 1/2% of all mankind is actually an SP.
    The question is, did Hubbard surround himself with Supressive Persons, or did DM declare those that worked directly with Hubbard for other reasons?

  10. valid point.
    This, of course, opens other previous questions. For instance, scientology claims that “no” scientologists use illegal drugs. However, I wonder if all scientologists will simply take that for granted, take the leadership’s word for it, when we’re seeing yet another major crime take place. What’s drug use when compared to blatent murder?
    7

  11. Well, look at it this way. At least one scientologist felt is was okay to shoot a man three times in the head. Would it be a sretch to think that at least one scientologist out there may feel the same way?

  12. I’m very concerned about the current scientology-connected murder case.

    I see tons of press releases from scientology, with grand claims about unprovable achievements (such as “hey, we just saved Africa from a giant space lizard!”, but as usual, the mainstream press won’t agree), but I don’t see any press releases about this incident.

    Do they have an official position? Will they be defending or supporting his actions?

    I would wonder if the average scientologist would actually applaud his actions. After all, the victim was not a scientologist, and actually OPPOSED stealing money to give it to scientology.

    Is it possible that SOME scientologists would consider his actions justified, in the grand scheme of things? More to the point, does the owner of this site agree or disagree with what he did?

  13. Being new to this conversation, I would like to add a few very simple, straightforward questions:

    -Aside from some celebrity faces, why is it that public scientologists don’t seem to know who actually runs their church? I myself tried to look it up, and couldn’t find much. Shouldn’t you be privy to that information?

    -Where does all the money go? The church, of course, won’t reveal its financials, but they pull in a lot of money from book sales (at least, those that are internal to scientologists) and other fees and costs, but I can’t find anywhere showing where the money actually GOES! I’ve heard it said, on this site, that it goes towards printing and distributing books and other material, but are they really performing so poorly that the books, etc, won’t pay for themselves?
    Consider this numbers: For a large commercial run, printing costs are generally 10% of the book consumer price, and distribution accounting for another 10%. I would assume that royalties are not a factor, and retailer profit is negligible, given the tendancy for direct sale. Buying directly from Bridge Publications (the in-house scientology publishing arm), “Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought” costs $15. Give the removal of the middle man, the profit should be roughly $12. Not too bad. Clearly, the books are sold at a profit, or as an income generator. So, if it is true that OTHER funds must be secured to cover the printing costs, it is clear that the book sales are not supporting the printing runs.
    So, the question remains, where does all the money actually go?

    -How is the scientology website doing? They make claims, I have seen, regarding the number of visitors and the popularity of the website, but I haven’t seen them, not once, actually release any information that would allow that very important information to be verified! If they are verbally (written, but you know) releasing this information, why would they avoid giving the same (?) information in a way that could support their claims?

    -According to one of your previous postings, the DM team has just rewritten and re-released much of Hubbard’s works. This would only be required, logically, if the previous material was incomplete or incorrect. How much, in total, will Scientologists be required to pay to have the correct information? Do they have to pay the full public price for the replacement books?

    Thank you, and I hope you will consider my questions.

    Paul

  14. I don’t know where else to ask this question.

    Miscavige has been married to his wife for almost 30 years, and they have no children. The “second dynamic” claims that we are compelled to ensure survival of the family line through procreation. Have they stated whether or not the intentionally chose to not have children, or has this been addressed?

    I would also like to ask if scientology has ever produced an actual, verifiable clear?

  15. That Fowler story is sick.

    You know what’s odd? I can’t find a single anti-SCN site celebrating his arrest. Not like this site, which celebrates when a young kid is arrested and charged for a crime against scientology.

    Of course, he was only arrested because the CoS pressed charges and made it a legal matter. And then they celebrate it here. Congrats, you landed a kid in jail for a computer crime. We’ll take the high-road and send our condolences for your latest murderer.

    By the way, have you ever heard of an “anon” killing anybody? Not your trumped up “online threats”, but I’m talking about actually commiting pre-meditated murder, close up, in cold blood.

  16. Nope, I’m wrong about the site. It’s a hate-site made by a scientologist to target an enemy, Mark Rathburn.
    You can tell by the raw hatred and paranoia.

  17. “Marty” is pro-scientology, anti-Co$. He realizes that the tech is all well and good, but the organization has grown corrupt and unweildly.

    Consider this, Hubbard himself couldn’t stop his wife from committing crimes and possibly attempting to take over the group, so the high-school dropout Miscavige could stop it from happening again? Surely Scientologists wouldn’t claim that DM is “better” than LRH.

    No, sadly, more and more scientologists are leaving, in record numbers. Many of them are joining “Freezone”, where they can learn Hubbard’s teachings for free, rather than for the very expensive fees charged by the Co$.

    The Co$, of cours, claims that FZ is somehow less than their group. But consider this one point- how much does it cost the Co$ to hold an auditing session? Nothing, except some electricity maybe. But they charge a great deal for it. The E-meter costs very little to produce, but it’s very expensive to purchase- and they recommend you have two! The FZ, however, believes that what is free should be given free, and what has cost should be given without profit, whenever possible.

    The Co$, of course, disagrees.

  18. This seems odd coming from http://www.marcusbrutusrathbun.com.

    Aren’t these statements footbullets coming from a pro Csn site? They seem to be stating that the current state of things are more about the image than the beliefs.

  19. note to louanne:

    it gets very confusing, the way you close threads and comments so frequently. I believe that the most recent two or three are closed!

    that leaves people with only one option to discuss certain concepts that you feel are important enough to post, so those that agree that they are worthy to discuss must do so in other threads.

    perhaps you could post more specific rules regarding what you allow and what you don’t? your single “rule” is very vague and is not enforced consistently.

    would you do that for us?

  20. um… enhance?

  21. This seems odd coming from “marcusbrutusrathbun” .com.

    In fact there is a lot of policy that supports having an Ideal Org, some of which I have posted in this site already. Here are some more quotes.

    “A poor org public image can cost an org nine-tenths of its income, thus greatly curtailing pay and facilities. It can lead to trouble with the area. It can reduce the expansion of Dianetics and Scientology to near zero.

    “When important people enter an org and find its premises messy, themselves and their requirements neglected, the org not only loses their fee, it also loses the important friends who would actively protect it.

    “If an org and its staff display a downstat image, public confidence in Dianetics and Scientology is shaken.

    “By showing a good org mock-up, we are living examples of what Dianetics and Scientology can do. …

    “As our organizations are built (due to tech concentration) on handling the individual, any PRO must be very alert to any point which would seem to the “customer” to diminish his status.

    “A PRO should himself look at the given points from the viewpoint of an important potential “customer”. Would the org environment and handling attract or drive off an important person (let us say, the mayor) as a “customer”? If the answer is “yes” in any point, then the org is losing up to 90% of its income through these PRO omissions.”

    HCO PL 17 June 69 The Org Image

  22. I wonder if scientology knew that he was giving them stolen money? and now that they do… will they be keeping it?

  23. Yes Scientology has taken a position….”catigorically denied”…..LMFAO.

    Every time you see them say that, mostly Tommy boy, you know there’s truth behind the acusations.

    Keep in mind here that Rex was an OTVII. That is only one step from the top of the current Scientology bridge.

    “A civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology.”

    Go figure…

  24. I think you were reading the notation that his “clear” status was reported in the “auditor” bulletin. easy mistake.

    otherwise, all of your facts are accurate.

    so with this and other crimes (espionage, intimidation, fraud, harassment, etc), then we can all agree that not all scientologists are ethical. we’re not talking all, but establishing it to be a fact.

    has scientology taken a position?

  25. This is a very multi-faceted case that I shall follow with great interest.

    But I think that the facts say a great deal.

    It is a fact that this man killed another in cold blood.
    It is a fact that this man planned it, by acquiring the gun and preparing the notes.
    It is a fact that this man illegally took money from the company and gave it to scientology.
    It is a fact that this man was a scientologist.
    It is a fact that this man was an OTVII and (by his claims) a scientology minister.
    It is a fact that scientology documents report that this man was a clear, and also an auditor.

    As Peter Griffin would say, “These are facts”.

    So I believe that we would all agree that this scientologist was not an ethical person.

    If we can agree on that, we must accept that not ALL scientologists are ethical people.

    With that being accepted, we can see that there are some scientologists that are criminals, or have the capabilities (physical and mental) necessary to commit crimes.

    So, at the least, I believe that we can all agree that some scientologists are, or have the potential to be, criminals.

    We then must acknowledge the fact that Fowler received extensive scientology training and auditing, and was said to be “clear”. Therefor, we can assume that his status as a high-level scientologist, with auditing and courses, was not enough to prevent this crime, or to give him the tools to confront his situation without violence.

    The question is- is he the only one?

    Or is it possible that some of the many claims about scientologists (such as allegations of crimes or abuses) may be true?

  26. another sad part, I just learned that the man was murdered on his seven year old son’s birthday. they were going out to dinner after he got back from work.

    surely, louanne, you can’t defend or excuse the actions of this scientologist?

  27. perhaps because of the alligations that fowler embezzled $200,000 from the company to give to scientology. when the murder victim had asked for a severence payment, it may have been too much of a strain.

    and this is a scientology minister, in his own words.

    the sad part? after fowler tried unsuccessfully to kill himself, and lay in critical care in the hospital, his wife irately demanded the briefcase that was taken from the murder scene, which contained scientology material. priorities, I suppose.

    you know the sick part? the address lused to register the murder weapon was the saint hill org address.

  28. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/28/rex-fowler-scientology-co_n_440371.html

    How could an OTVII be the one to murder another?

  29. I do like your blog very much, and I think the site below adds some extra insight to your project…

    [spam link removed]

  30. if I may ask, there are many that oppose or protest scientology. why is that so?


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Comments RSS

  • What is this blog?

    I am running a website, ScientologyMyths.info which deals with critical questions about Scientology.
    So naturally I am into finding answers to the questions that are constantly being asked all over the internet about Scientology, Scientologists, the Church, L. Ron Hubbard and the Church's leader, David Miscavige. I want to find answers from independent sources, not only Church of Scientology owned sites or anti-Scientology hate sites. So what's left? Court documents, photos and other reliable sources. Help me find stuff and ask whatever you want. Thanks!

    The easiest way to shoot a question over to me is to click here.

    Or search below.
  • Archives

  • Religion Photo Feed

    S. Spirito in Sassia

    San Pietro

    Flight into Egypt

    More Photos