Xenophon fails in Scientology bid

http://www.theage.com.au/national/xenophon-fails-in-scientology-bid-20100512-uy4b.html

This guy reminds me of a bull chasing a red towel. Deadly. If you are in Spain. In Australia you probably get knocked out by a kangaroo.

– L

54 Comments

  1. Very impressive. Hopefully this sets a precedent for other Nations to see the truth in what Scientology does.
    It requires churches to give free services if they want religious status….oops there goes Scientology.

  2. The SPs made it go right!
    They are more OT than you will ever be. LOL
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/07/3005360.htm?section=justin

  3. Actually, I think that Xenophon has been pretty successful in what he was trying to do. Only problem is that, apparently, scientology is targeting those that are aligning with him through FOI requests. Of course, apparently, they all expected it. Still, it’s sad.

  4. Is quoting LRH to much for you? Can you not understand what it is he’s saying there. BY GOVERNMENTS!!!

  5. “The only thing you can be upbraided for by students or pcs is “no results”. Trouble spots occur only where there are “no results”. Attacks from governments or monopolies occur only where there are “no results” or “bad results”.”

    L. Ron Hubbard

  6. Biddaddy, it’s already beyond allegations. They can already see that the finances don’t add up. But what they will do is another story in the end.

    I see another “Portland 1985” going on in Australia.
    Minus the amount of Scientologists of course.

  7. Welcome back, I though we had lost you!
    Maybe you could be a little but more specific. When you say “australian crap”, are you referring to the torture allegations, allegations of tax fraud, or the public benefits test proposal?

  8. No, I just had other things to do for a while. I was following the Australian crap though. interesting.

    – L

  9. Having trouble with your confront on this matter there Lou?

  10. Also on the topic of public benefit tests and Scientology.
    CCHR’s application for charitable status in New Zealans has recently been denied.
    Here is the decision by the charity comission NZ:
    http://charitiesgovtnz.axiion.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=NXZMKLK5mJM%3d&tabid=250

  11. After all Senator Xenophon didn’t fail.
    Videos from the senate inquiry into tax laws amendment (public benefit test) bill 2010 hearing can be watched here:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/mnql2

  12. Oh yes and here we go. Scientology pulling out personal information from those who were trying to be good people and write down their Liability formulas…even if most of the lower conditions are forced on staff members.
    This is where Scientology losses even more credibility.

  13. Maybe it did have an effect. You have to admit, For failing, he’s been quite successful.

    http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/fair-work-ombudsman-looked-into-church-of-scientology/story-e6frfku0-1225874128083

    THE industrial inspectorate has confirmed it is investigating the employment practices of the Church of Scientology.

    Fair Work Ombudsman Nicholas Wilson told a Senate estimates hearing it had looked into the controversial religious group but declined to give details.

    It is understood opposition frontbencher Eric Abetz wrote to the ombudsman in March with the idea of an inquiry.

    The inspectorate has subsequently interviewed Scientology members along the east coast of Australia to establish whether they are being properly remunerated for their church work.

    Asked by independent Senator Nick Xenophon if children were working within the organisation, the Fair Work Ombudsman was coy.

    “We don’t confirm or deny whether that is likely what they’re doing,” Mr Wilson told the Senate hearing.

    “As a matter of policy, the assertion that … children are underpaid in and of itself means nothing to the investigation.

    “What that means in this particular investigation I don’t want to say.”

    The Senate economics committee is expected to hear evidence from former Scientology members in late June.

    It is receiving submissions into a possible public benefits test for charitable and religious groups after Senator Xenophon moved a private senator’s bill in May.

  14. Do you think that Italy will follow the same route as Australia, given what they found in the recent raid?

    http://www.lifeinitaly.com/node/28376

    (ANSA) – Turin, May 20 – Police raided a local Scientology chapter here and discovered a hidden archive which contained not only information on the group’s members but also on the sect’s ‘enemies’, the Turin daily La Stampa reported on Thursday.

    La Stampa said magistrates were now examining these documents which were “chock full” of sensitive information dealing with sexual habits, health and political inclinations.

  15. “She wasn’t kicked out. She wanted to leave and as a prerequisite she probably had to sign this false affidavit as an “insurance” for your organisation.
    That’s what every Sea Org member, who wants to leave goes through.”

    louanne, of course, will deny this to be true. However, she doesn’t know. She’s never left, so she can’t honestly speak as to what happens when one does. Indeed, the only people that do know were in that room- the rest of us are only guessing. I would submit, however, that the cos would have reason for deceit…

  16. ” And attacking an organization means attacking each one of those individuals personally. And mind you, this includes me.”

    much like attacking anons, or critics in general?

    At what point is it okay to criticize an organization? Can I criticize the catholic church for the sex abuse scandal? Or the government for certain policies? Or japan for overfishing? By your logic, NO criticism is okay.

  17. “The Amy Scobee affidavit is what she signed before she left and it includes the reason why she was kicked out.”

    She wasn’t kicked out. She wanted to leave and as a prerequisite she probably had to sign this false affidavit as an “insurance” for your organisation.
    That’s what every Sea Org member, who wants to leave goes through.

  18. Scientology expert Laurie Hamilton wrote:

    Sec Check means “Security Check.”

    It’s for security.

    Sec checks may be administered for a variety of reasons – to aid in investigating internal misconduct, to ensure persons who are entrusted with sensitive duties or materials are worthy of that trust, to rule out a person as a “plant” or “spy” if they have exhibited signs they may be such (pretty rare, but it’s happened a number of times).

    It’s always done with a person’s consent, or not done at all. ”

    So it has nothing to do with confessions in a religious sense. Absolutely nothing at all.
    The original purpose as intended by L. Ron Hubbard is imho thought control and to make someone feel guilty if he has for example bad thoughts about Hubbard or Scientology.
    I also doubt that the sec check is always done with a person’s consent. People who want to leave the Sea Org for example have to do sec checks in order to route out properly otherwise they lose their good standing with the church and as a consequence have to disconnect from every Scientologist.
    Therefore it is not voluntarily.

  19. ““2010/05/19 at 9:19 am
    Scientology security check for children.”

    Confessionals (security checks) are Priest-penitent privilege, i.e. session information that cannot be viewed by anyone who is not an auditor and sworn in to shut up. And certainly you would not find anything like this on the internet. ”

    That doesn’t make it better. I think it is psychologically damaging for young children to ask them these questions.

  20. ” Comment by bigdaddy on May 19, 2010 8:59 pm
    So, there’s a few disturbing point here.
    Number 1: you, as I, ack that we don’t have all of the data. We don’t know WHEN or HOW she confessed her sexual infidelity.”

    Absolutely we do. When: Before or on 27 January 2005. The date of her affidavit. Where: In her affidavit.

    “However, you have already reached a conclusion, and one that speaks poorly of Ms. Scobee.”

    I got that conclusion from reading her latest email interview (published on Popeater, yes, seriously, that’s the name of it). There were obvious lies in this interview.

    “How did you arrive at your conclusion without knowing the data?”

    Personal knowledge and observation. And when it comes to 3rd party information I trust my friends more than her.

    ” Is it solely based on what you were told?”

    No. Actually I wasn’t told anything. I was doing a little research of my own.

    “Number 2: So you’re saying that the ends justify the means? That if someone speaks out against the ORGANIZATION, that it’s okay to attack the INDIVIDUAL?”

    Yes. She was kicked out in 2005 and chose to get on with life for years. Actually up to the point somebody promised her a couple of things. She sold herself to attack her former friends. Ugly.

    “Louanne, you seem to have a lot of hate for someone you know nothing about, save for what you’ve been told from others.”

    You are assuming a lot here. I actually pity her but yes, I think that she has no right to slander her former friends. That thing with “only speaking out against the organization” is missing a very vital point – and is meant to, being one of the oldest propaganda tricks – and that is that organizations are created and maintained by individuals. And attacking an organization means attacking each one of those individuals personally. And mind you, this includes me.

    – L

  21. So, there’s a few disturbing point here.

    Number 1: you, as I, ack that we don’t have all of the data. We don’t know WHEN or HOW she confessed her sexual infidelity. However, you have already reached a conclusion, and one that speaks poorly of Ms. Scobee. How did you arrive at your conclusion without knowing the data? Is it solely based on what you were told?

    Number 2: So you’re saying that the ends justify the means? That if someone speaks out against the ORGANIZATION, that it’s okay to attack the INDIVIDUAL?

    Louanne, you seem to have a lot of hate for someone you know nothing about, save for what you’ve been told from others.

  22. “Comment by bigdaddy on May 19, 2010 8:46 pm
    Regardless of how she intended her information to be used, do you, personally, believe that it should have been put in a public magazine and widely released, damaging her personal character? Do you support such a thing?”

    If it helps to understand why people are doing what they are doing, yes, absolutely I do support revelations like that. BUT – as I said elsewhere yesterday – this information must be public information or research data not anything from confessionals or the like. Aside from the fact that this is Church policy, written and implemented by L. Ron Hubbard, there is a very practical viewpoint to this: a) things said in session are only the subjective truth of the preclear (the one being audited) and might not be true objectively and b) session write-ups are noting e-meter behavior and certain parts of the session, never exactly what the preclear says (at least not word by word and never more than a couple of notes as a reminder for later sessions).

    “Also, I don’t have a copy of her “confession”.”

    I don’t have a copy of her confession either. I am not even sure there is such a thing. All I have is the affidavit that is floating around the internet, likely from a court case and personal stories from (former) friends of hers. The affidavit includes all that I need to know to understand what character this chick is.

    “All that I’ve heard is that she had stated it with the intent that it is private.”

    I think it would be typical for her to invent something like that. That the big bad scientology is spreading a confession of hers that actually does not exist.

    “Do you have any statements from her, acknowledging it in public, indicating that she had intended it for such wide dissemination, only after speaking out?”

    No. But that is not her call anymore. She is running a slander campaign and scientologists and the church have a right to fight back. And will.

    – L

  23. Regardless of how she intended her information to be used, do you, personally, believe that it should have been put in a public magazine and widely released, damaging her personal character? Do you support such a thing?

    Also, I don’t have a copy of her “confession”. All that I’ve heard is that she had stated it with the intent that it is private. Do you have any statements from her, acknowledging it in public, indicating that she had intended it for such wide dissemination, only after speaking out?

  24. BTW, anyone, I updated scientologymyths.info with a section on Mark Rathbun:

    http://scientologymyths.info/squirrels/who-is-mark-rathbun.php

    Maybe the squirrels section is not exactly the right choice but I wasn’t planning on creating a section for these type of people. Not my game.

    – L

  25. “Comment by bigdaddy on May 19, 2010 8:16 pm
    Are you saying that Amy intended her confessions about her sexually activities for public release?”

    Public release in the sense to inform her fellow group members, yes.
    Public release in the sense of reading it as a newspaper ad, no.

    “Are you saying that she knew that they would release her information, publicly, with the sole purpose of damaging her credibility?”

    If she is lying and evidence for the lies is obvious, there is no reason why this evidence should not be released (especially if it is a legal or court document). She knows that and she chose to lie.

    – L

  26. Louanne,
    Are you saying that Amy intended her confessions about her sexually activities for public release? Are you saying that she knew that they would release her information, publicly, with the sole purpose of damaging her credibility?

  27. ” Comment by Anon on May 19, 2010 9:27 am
    Just because you claimed that sec checks were not part of Scientology and that only Mark Rathbun did this. L. Ron Hubbard himself invented them.”

    Gosh, take a walk or something. You are hallucinating again. Where would I claim that sec checks were not part of scientology? I was talking about Gestapo type gang bang “confessionals” that Mark Marty Rathbun did and covered them up by sabotaging the cameras that are supposed to control the auditors for correct application of auditing. In Scientology this is very criminal behavior and close to unforgivable. Especially towards an asshole like Marty who pretends that he wants to get himself straightened out and then lets himself being duped. That is so low that I am missing words for it. Lower than low. Shudder…

    – L

  28. ” Comment by Anon on May 19, 2010 5:12 am
    “Listen, you creepy slime bag: you either give documents or any kind of evidence for your absurd claims or you get the fuck out of here!

    Ask yourself why he would even write such a thing to begin with.”

    I understand that the concept of personal responsibility, change of behavior to the better and such things are alien to you but they are normal for Scientologists. And certainly the recognition of past wrong-doing is very normal. It is usually followed by corrective action.

    I have seen many of such write-ups (not as strong as the one Rathbun did though) and wrote some myself, in a recognition what went wrong and what needs to be done to change it to the better. They usually get posted on a notice board in the Church. Giving up your sins is part of self-improvement and ethics in Scientology.

    – L

  29. Just because you claimed that sec checks were not part of Scientology and that only Mark Rathbun did this.
    L. Ron Hubbard himself invented them.

  30. Scientology security check for children.
    http://file.wikileaks.org/file/scientology-cult-childrens-security-check.pdf

    • “2010/05/19 at 9:19 am
      Scientology security check for children.”

      Confessionals (security checks) are Priest-penitent privilege, i.e. session information that cannot be viewed by anyone who is not an auditor and sworn in to shut up. And certainly you would not find anything like this on the internet.

      You are mixing these things up as usual. The Amy Scobee affidavit is what she signed before she left and it includes the reason why she was kicked out.

  31. What ralph posted is another example of this.

    • “2010/05/19 at 7:39 am
      What ralph posted is another example of this.”

      thanks, i hadn’t looked at this yet. looks genuine to me.

      I wonder what you would have to give up, that you are so resistive against the idea of confession.

      – L

  32. “Listen, you creepy slime bag: you either give documents or any kind of evidence for your absurd claims or you get the fuck out of here!

    You posted the evidence yourself. Apply some logic and common sense and you will realize that Mark Rathbun’s confession that you posted is false.
    Ask yourself why he would even write such a thing to begin with.

  33. Scientology Expose: Read the Amy Scobee Tell-All Story:

  34. “Comment by bigdaddy on May 18, 2010 9:08 pm
    Wow, Louanne… Might want to step back and take a break. You’re sounding pretty out of control, here.”

    Thanks for the reminder.

    – L

  35. “Comment by Bigdaddy on May 18, 2010 9:26 am
    Anon, you mean like they did, very publicly, for ms scobee, calling her, in print “the adultress”, based on what she revealed (she thought) in confidence.”

    In confidence? As far as I have seen this was a very obvious breach of the ethics codes she had sworn to follow. Hell, she left because of that.

    ” Surely you dint support that, louanne?”

    There is no such thing as “using information that was revealed in confidence” and if there were I would not support it. But there is a point where you have to let people know who is making these claims, because it is relevant to the story. Amy Scobee did not produce in her time being a Scientology exec but to the contrary fucked around with a bunch of guys, wasted funds needed elsewhere and had herself bought off by some slime bag. She is free to be a slut if she wants to. But then she should not claim to be a scientologist and sea org member. That’s her betrayal and she is dramatizing it like hell. Pitiful. I feel sorry for her.

    – L

  36. Wow, Louanne… Might want to step back and take a break. You’re sounding pretty out of control, here.

  37. “Comment by Anon on May 18, 2010 8:43 am
    “28 September 2003
    Public Announcement
    [..]”
    This is what i was talking about: False confessions obtained via coercive interrogations (sec checks and gang bang sec checks), which are now used by CoS to discredit its dissidents internally.”

    Listen, you creepy slime bag: you either give documents or any kind of evidence for your absurd claims or you get the fuck out of here!

    – L

  38. Do you think this recent news item from ‘the australian’ will impact their decision regarding the public benifit test?:

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/church-of-scientology-toxic-for-children/story-e6frg6nf-1225868419294

    “THE daughter of the president of the Church of Scientology in Australia has spoken out for the first time about her “toxic” childhood, claiming many children who have grown up in the organisation have been subjected to physical and emotional abuse.

    Scarlett Hanna, whose mother Vicki Dunstan is the president of the Church of Scientology in Australia, said she wanted the church to “take accountability” and apologise to those who were victims of its abuse.

    In an interview with the ABC’s Lateline, aired last night, Ms Hanna alleged children, including herself, who were born to members of the sea org — Scientology’s elite unit — were deprived of contact with their parents, given a lack of medical attention and forced to live in cramped conditions. “It was an incredibly lonely childhood.” Ms Hanna said.

    “I had no one to talk to or to look after me, or to ask me how I was after school or any of those things that most of us take for granted.””

  39. No wonder the cos opposes a public benefits test, when it was applied to the cos in the uk, it soundly failed with the determination that the cos did not benefit the public.
    http://dialogueireland.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/cosdecsum.pdf
    a few items of note:
    “…was not established for public benifit”
    “…was not established for the charitable purpose of promoting the moral or spiritual welfare and improvement of the community”
    so of course the cos opposes this, although it applies to all equally.
    According to the proposal, the following must be shown:

    · There must be an identifiable benefit arising from an organisations aims and activities

    · The benefit must be balanced against any detriment or harm; and,

    · The benefit must be to the public or a significant section of the public and not merely to individuals with a material connection to the entity.

    What is the problem with this?

  40. “No, he wants a public benefit test for charities, just like in the UK.”

    strange, Scientology seems to oppose this when it applies to them…

  41. Anon, you mean like they did, very publicly, for ms scobee, calling her, in print “the adultress”, based on what she revealed (she thought) in confidence. Surely you dint support that, louanne?

  42. “No. But this is not what Xenophone is talking about. He wants public smear campaigns against groups he does not like. And does exactly that. ”

    No, he wants a public benefit test for charities, just like in the UK.

  43. “28 September 2003

    Public Announcement
    [..]”

    This is what i was talking about: False confessions obtained via coercive interrogations (sec checks and gang bang sec checks), which are now used by CoS to discredit its dissidents internally.
    Standard operating procedure in the Church of Scientology.

  44. ” Comment by ralphyking on May 14, 2010 7:20 pm
    Download Amy Scobee’s Explosive Scientology Book!!!!
    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Z8PBQF6M

    ralphyking, you have something sensible to say? Either that or GTFO.

    – L

  45. ” Comment by Anon on May 14, 2010 7:41 am
    Do you have any arguments against a public benefit test for charities, louanne?”

    No. But this is not what Xenophone is talking about. He wants public smear campaigns against groups he does not like. And does exactly that.

    – L

  46. “Comment by Anon on May 14, 2010 8:36”

    “This reminds me of the gang bang sec checks that Scientology uses, where they interrogate their dissidents for hours and demand from them to sign false affidavits and make up false confessions when they leave. The false confessions that CoS likes to spread all over the internet on sites like religiousfreedomwach.org or http://www.marcusbrutusrathbun.com to smear its dissidents.”

    gang bang sec checks? Are you talking about “auditing” a la Mark Rathbun? A.k.a Gestapo style? This has nothing to do with valid scientology, not the slightest. The church can be very happy that this psycho left. A lot of sanity, correction and good, workable scientology came back after he did. I am told that also the work atmosphere has relaxed tremendously since he is gone.

    In my book he lost the last ones of his marbles after 2003 when he was instigating beatings on one hand while deceiving others with his “public apologies” at the same time, like this one:

    28 September 2003

    Public Announcement

    “My continuous actions over the past two decades have suppressed Scientology dissemination and the purposes of this base. It has been carefully masked by a façade of being important or working on important things. It is all the more insidious because that “importance” has been by association with COB.

    “I instigated a pattern of operation that is 180 degrees opposite to the purpose of orgs, this base, and ethics and justice. By enforcing parts of this pattern on others by order or example, I have driven in the following pattern.

    “Find a target…. Interrogate the individual for personal out ethics and bad intentions.

    “Write up a report… that contains lurid details, making the target out to be an incorrigible threat.

    “Write it in such a way that some senior or [personnel officer] feels compelled to take the target off post or tell the person myself he is busted. Write the report in such a way to justify my existence by proving the base is dangerous and requires my “services.”

    “Do nothing to get the target replaced. Do nothing to get out the product that the target was not getting produced.

    “The end result is unmocked org form, overworked and enturbulated executives and staff, bad news about the intentions and activities of staff members, lowering production and morale and the creation of “threats” to justify my own existence and suppressive operating basis.

    “This suppressive operating basis was employed to try to maintain the false impression that I have some other production record externally that warrants me maintaining a high position. In fact, this is a fraud I have perpetrated. On external lines my operation is the same—it consists of the [suppressive] characteristic of only restimulating and never destimulating. That is, when there is a threatening situation or suit, I get the [external affairs] staff and attorneys wound up toward “destroying the threat.” This has resulted in some very expensive situations becoming much bigger than they were…and winding up on COB’s plate to terminatedly handle. Each and every time on major situations, COB has had to intervene to clean up wars I had exacerbated. For example, left to my own devices in handling IRS litigation, the end result would undoubtedly have been no exemption, a billion dollar tax bill, and possible shutting down of the Church. I have developed a slick false PR technique of positioning myself as having been integral in handling threats during and after the fact, when they are actually terminatedly handled by COB. By calculation I have lost the Church 43 million dollars on losses and expenses that could have been avoided.

    “By perpetuating these operations internally and externally, the worse suppression has been visited upon COB RTC. It is the worst suppression because COB RTC is the person who has single-handedly salvaged Scientology from potential external ruin, and single-handedly salvaged Scientology itself by holding the line technically, administratively, and on dissemination. Had he not been here and done what he has, Scientology would have been lost. There is no slightest doubt about that. The cumulative amount of COB’s time I have cost in terms of dropping balls, creating situations internally and externally, is on the order of eight years.

    “The motivations for these acts are the psychotic computation for self-preservation: keep enough chaos and threat stirred up in the environment, make myself appear to be a solution to it instead of the instigator of it, and lots of people go down and remain in turmoil while I go unrecognized as the source of it and survive.

    “There is no conspiracy connected with this pattern of suppression, except a portion of it. That is Mike Rinder who has gone into tacit agreement with me on making nothing of situations, false reporting on them, and allowing them to expand until they explode on COB’s plate to handle. The rest of the operation described in this announcement is an individuated and psychotic activity. I know of no one who agrees with it or condones it, or who participated in some part of it except by having been sufficiently electrified or intimidated by me to act reactively or to think it was somehow pro-survival for the group.”

    (signed by Marty Rathbun)

    -L

  47. ^you should read the book “thought reform and the psychology of totalism” by Robert Jay Lifton. He describes the brainwashing method that communist china used on dissidents in its prisons and reeducation schools. One of the methods was to interrogate the dissident and demand from him to confess his crimes against “the people” , even if he didn’t actually commit any crimes. Since the prisoner had no other choice he simply made up any crimes, just so that he would be left alone. This reminds me of the gang bang sec checks that Scientology uses, where they interrogate their dissidents for hours and demand from them to sign false affidavits and make up false confessions when they leave. The false confessions that CoS likes to spread all over the internet on sites like religiousfreedomwach.org or http://www.marcusbrutusrathbun.com to smear its dissidents.

  48. Download Amy Scobee’s Explosive Scientology Book!!!!

    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Z8PBQF6M

  49. Do you have any arguments against a public benefit test for charities, louanne?

  50. Louannes site is spin, is all. Just a perspective, out of many, that happens to fit her world view. Even the news site itself says:

    “All material on Fairfax Digital is provided in good faith. It is derived from sources believed to be accurate and current as at the date of publication. Your use of Fairfax Digital is at your sole risk. Access to Fairfax Digital is provided on an ‘as available’ basis. Neither Fairfax Digital its related bodies corporate nor its or their directors or employees make any representation or warranty that (i) any material on Fairfax Digital will be reliable, accurate or complete (nor do they accept any responsibility arising in any way for errors in, or omissions from that material)”

    what worries me is when she says that he’s dangerous… To who? If there’s no crime, what’s the danger in an enquirey? Maybe Scientology has reason to want to avoid one?

  51. That’s not the way I heared it

    http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s2899026.htm

    TONY JONES, PRESENTER: Well the Senate has agreed to hold inquiries in the laws regarding the tax exempt status of religions and charities.

    Independent Senator Nick Xenophon has proposed a test which asks groups to demonstrate whether their activities are of public benefit or cause harm before being granted tax exempt status.

    The inquiry was sparked by allegations of serious abuses within the Church of Scientology.

    And we obviously have a problem with that piece, but Senator Nick Xenophon, in any case, says the Senate inquiry will not focus on a single group.

    He says any religious or charitable organisations found to have harmed individuals should lose their tax exempt status.


Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  • 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

    Road Cross

    Raquel llora por sus hijos

    LOPBURI TEMPLES

    More Photos