Colbert Report on Scientology

Like it or not, justified or not, the following segment on the popular Colbert Report (see both segments, second the interview with Lawrence Wright) pretty well sums up the public image of Scientology.  Not the church of Scientology in the eyes of the world at large, but Scientology.   A whacky religious cult with bizarre beliefs, violent practices and a threatening way of dealing with criticism.

The Colbert Report on Scientology

Do you believe this public image can change?   How?  How long will it take to change significantly?

282 responses to “Colbert Report on Scientology

  1. can’t view from the UK, although am LOVING the error message saying:

    “It’s one of the detriments of living under a monarchy…’

  2. It will take enormous goodwill on the part of the CofS to brung about a shift in perception, and that will take at least one full generation.

    • There are parts of the world where they’ve never heard all of this. All we need is your $100,000 donation to get our mission there and Scio will expand beyond all belief!…

      • That’s right! And in those parts of the world, buildings are cheaper!

        So instead is $100 million in new donations needed and a period of ten years over reg’ing once funded, we can do it with $50 million in new donations and 5 years of delay before any outreach program can start in earnest.

  3. It takes a “truly” honest person to confront what the organization was actually all about, without all the nice front labels such as “taking Mankind out of the mud it thinks conceived it” etc. The old “actions speak louder than words” applies here, and those who are sticking to their story that they were working for the greatest good while they committed assaults against others, all in the name of that greatest good, need to get one of those serious reality adjustments. Right now the Church of Scientology is on the fair games list. What goes around comes around, but that doesn’t mean we can’t all get off the automatic assembly belt we put ourselves on long ago. It takes 100% Honesty. That’s the only catch.

    • Marty’s comment on current image ~~
      Not the church of Scientology in the eyes of the world at large, but Scientology. A whacky religious cult with bizarre beliefs, violent practices and a threatening way of dealing with criticism.
      Check this out ~~
      “What the Internet thinks”
      Type in
      Scientology
      David Miscavige
      Mormons
      Buddha
      DaLai Lama
      or whatever you search to see what the Internet thinks

      http://whatdoestheinternetthink.net/

      • wow, Scientology is less negative than Catholocism
        ;-)

      • Interesting site indeed !

      • Hi Karen
        Interesting!
        7.4 positive, that’s still a lot of people!
        Also interesting the difference of Tom Cruise and John Travolta.
        JT positive 95.5 %, TC positive 31.4 %.
        I’m sure a lot of these folks know both are Scientologists, and they make a difference as to people. And that’s why word of mouth still works, especially if one explains the difference between the philosophy and the cult. Once the cult is gone, it will be much easier.
        Personally, I never believed in anything but word of mouth anyway.
        Marcel Wenger

      • Karen, David Miscavige has about as must ethics presence in our current universe as a Voodoo Doctor and has helped cause the Church of Scientology to attain the ranks of a Voodoo like cult in society’s eyes. That is pretty lethal when compared to LRH’s writings. :)

      • 90.5% negative on David Miscavige.

      • Scientology:
        Negative – 87.8%
        Positive – 7.4%

        Charles Manson:
        Negative – 56.1%
        Positive – 43.8%

      • Type in manipulation – over 90% positive?
        And psychology is more negative but psychiatry with over 51% more positive?
        heroin ist over 66% positive???
        I guess this machine is really still very beta …..
        Absolutely not reliable.

      • I don’t understand how and where they get their data. Without knowing that I can’t know what the results mean.

      • one of those who see

        this tells us something: Buddha – 96.6% positive

        Cool find Karen!

      • Cool site — thanks! I noticed that President Obama only comes out about 10% ahead of Scientology, by the way.

        I thought the Colbert report was funny. He lampooned Catholicism almost as sharply as he did Scientology. When a religion (or person, or group) can begin to laugh at _themselves_, I think that is a sign of healing and maturity.

        The good concepts in Scientology (and I may be sounding like a broken record, for anyone who remembers what records were) will stand the test of time and scrutiny.

        Just earlier today I was explaining the concept of a “ridge” and how an can easily create a ridge by cutting off someone’s communication sharply and repeatedly — to the point where they almost can’t talk without a great deal of effort. And then work with them to remove the ridge (normally just letting the person communicate with no cutting off until open communication is restored and the feeling of halting reservation is gone).

        Take just that one simple thing: a ridge. A concept that looks at behavior as having a sort of energy manifestation. It describes very well an easily observable phenomenon and points to how to overcome a ridge. I no other field have I seen this kind of insight applied to the various mental (or spiritual) phenomena one may encounter either rarely or in everyday life. The concept of a “ridge” is in my book part of the genius of obnosis (observation of the obvious) — or put another way, it is the genius of observing something from a new angle denoted by an original word for it when that new name semantically includes the seeds of a solution not apparent before.

        That sort of good stuff will survive. The stuff that Colbert is roasting should not, and it richly deserves to be roasted (IMHO).

        • PS When I say the other stuff deserves roasting, I don’t mean ridiculing. Let’s face it. All religions have some beliefs that some will call nutty. Scientology and Xenu, body thetans, etc. Mormonism with its holy underwear and certainty that we all can become gods and start our own planets. Islam with its seven heavens and genies (jinn). Christianity with the literal turning of crackers and wine to the body and blood of Christ. You name it. For anyone hearing these things for the first time, they sound bizarre. Once they become “normal” through repeated appearance in a culture, they just seem like another belief set and not that big of a deal.

          I believe that what American culture most wants to know about Scientology is that it will not take a dive in the fashion of Jonestown or Heaven’s Gate or become a crime syndicate.

          Part of how it can show it is not doing that is to for chrissake open up everything, ‘fess up, take ownership and responsibility, be able to laugh at and forgive earlier crap, focus on what is good and uplifting and get on with it.

          Just like evangelical religions (Mormonism, other forms of Christianity, Islam, etc.) want to convert, so too Scientology can aim for conversion (clearing the planet). In 1950, Earth had about 2.6 billion people, and no Scientologists. Today, it has about 7 billion people, and according to the church has around 8 million people (I am playing the devils advocate and being generous).

          So here’s the math on that. During the time Scientology supposedly grew to 8 million people, Earth added 4.4 billion. Take away 8 million from that 4.4 billion, and Scientology has _lost ground_ by 4,392,000,000 people.

          This is the straight up and vertical upstat? Even by its own most generous estimates, CoS is egregiously downstat when one looks at the total of Scientologists as a percentage of world population.

          So, Scientology as an evangelical, world-clearing organization is not working. At the current rates of world population growth, it will clear the planet … never! So. One of the definitions of insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results. Is CoS nuts? You be the judge.

  4. Marty,

    I think you have done quite a remarkable job in your blog and various media appearances of distinguishing between the Church and the subject of Scientology, and I see a bit of that being picked up in the mainstream press. My advice is, keep it up.

    Colbert on the other hand treats interviews as something of a blood sport, and typically gives no quarter in squeezing out some “humor” at the expense of his guest or the subject at hand. I would not ever assume I had gotten a balanced view of something or someone from his program.

    In the end, the only thing that will save the reputation of Scientology is the activity of real Scientology, with the results that come from that. And I mean the reputation of Scientology as a subject. The organization, the Church of Scientology, has dug themselves into a dark pit from which they will never recover.

    • Marty, Aeolus,

      I want to follow up on this. My message is simply to continue. It is imperative to continue to differentiate Independent Scientology from the corporate Church of Scientology. It is equally imperative to do so by not only talking the talk, but also walking the walk — by continuing to behave and act differently. By continuing to apply the ARC Triangle. By continuing to be more open, communicative, compassionate, and understanding.

      I mentioned this late in the prior thread, but believe the data is equally relevant here. In the Acknowledgements at page 404 of her book Beyond Belief – My Secret Life Inside Scientology and My Harrowing Escape, Jenna Miscavige Hill states:

      ********
      “I want to acknowledge all of the ex-Scientologists and even independent Scientologists who have spoken out over the years on Scientology’s abuses, negligence, and human rights violations, taking personal risk and attack to bring forward the truth and still persevering despite everything. Tory Christman, Mark Bunker, Marc and Claire Headley, Mike and Christie [i.e., presumably Mike Rinder and Christie Collbran], Marty Rathbun, Tom Devocht, Jeff Hawkins, Amy Scobee, Matt Pesch, Lawrence Woodcraft, Chuck Beaty, Paul Haggis, and the many others I have not mentioned. Thank you.

      Thanks to Anonymous, especially those I have met, for your continued support and care about this important issue.”
      ********

      The point is that while Jenna’s book is one of the most devastatingly critical and well-written books about Scientology I have ever read (and I’ve read them all; how can one handle that which one is unwilling to confront?), and she is most assuredly no longer a Scientologist, she not only differentiates between Independent Scientology and the corporate Church of Scientology, she actually thanks independent Scientologists, including specifically Marty, Mike and Christie.

      People who read Jenna’s book will learn many things about the subject of Scientology, but at least one them is that there are people called “independent Scientologists” who, after “taking personal risk and attack,” are worthy of thanks. That is something. Indeed, that is something very important.

      Focusing one’s attention units on the future, but borrowing Jenna’s words, it is only the “independent Scientologists who [continue to speak out] on Scientology’s abuses, negligence, and human rights violations” who can rehabilitate the public image of Scientology.

      The wonderful irony is this. Given Jenna Miscavige Hill is, in a strongly critical book, willing to express her thanks to Independent Scientologists on the same page she also expresses thanks to ex-Scientologists and Anonymous, all is not lost.

  5. I think this type of public image is something created by the media and shows like this (I’m not saying it’s a bad show as entertainment), and that most people don’t know much about Scientology and most people don’t hold onto a negative idea when positive information is received from a more personal source. Most people don’t relay negative information (at least with much certainty).
    I think Scientology succeeds and expands by personal contact and relay of information on a one-on-one basis and by results of correct application.
    It’s never been much for the media. I think during it’s greatest periods of expansion and delivery the Church essentially ignored the media.
    It seems like there was a period, maybe in the 90s where the Church had a “safe point” with it’s PR if I am using that term correctly. Was that due to application of LRH policies on PR?

    David Miscavige creates a lot of enemies which doesnt help the Church or Scientology PR much. Maybe he should go.

    • When I got into Scientology I didn’t pay much attention to the media or critics. It was @ 1990. I saw a Dianetics ad and it got my interest so I read the book and took myself to the Org. I think the negative criticism in the media actually made it more interesting.

      But what is in the news these days as a result of Miscavige mismagement is a bit different. That might have turned me away. I think it will settle out if Miscavige leaves, but I don’t think Scientology will ever be praised by the media. The day it is it may be an indicator something is changed with the subject. That it has been watered down and conformed to public opinion.

    • Chris: this public image was created by the actions and activities of Scientologists on behalf of Scientology. The media is reporting on those things, not inventing them for public consumption.

      Marty, to answer your question: separating Scientology from CoS is like trying to separate Catholicism from the Vatican.

      • I could have worded that better I guess. The church does create this bad PR, but the media loves it. They love to have juicy, blood drenched stories. Sex, violence, explosions, two-headed babies, fantastic!
        I like the Colbert Report, but part of the show is in mocking and ridicule. They do that on SNL and other shows and I’ve never been a big fan of that type of humor. I’m not sure if this is a more serious news-like story here because I havent been able to watch the video – it wont play properly- no sound and it skips. Maybe they are overloaded with downloads. He’s done other stuff on scientlogy before.

        • OK, I was just able to watch it. It wasnt that bad. If this defines “public opinion” I think it would still be easily handled in independent Scientology on a personal contact basis- “Dissem Drill” or whatever.

          • You may be able to address the considerations of the people you personally know and interact with, but the public at large? I don’t think opinion is going to change. The word Scientology is synonymous with too many negatives. Separating the subject from the church, even if you can explain it to your own satisfaction, is a tough sell, considering the author of the textbooks of the subject is the founder of the church and wrote the policies that gave the church exclusive ownership of the same. Isn’t the word itself still considered a trademark?

  6. It’s hard to know what to think. At best, the gap between those who have left the church and those who staunchly refuse to wake up is magnified here.

  7. Becoming the brunt of Stephen Colbert is not an ideal scene.
    If you created a multiple choice test to repair or fix Scientology,the
    ****** correct answer***** to all questions no matter how lenghty or complex the test is “David Miscavige must step down or resign”

    • If you watch the show- pretty much anyone and everyone is the brunt of Steven Colbert. Most celebs, politicians, public figures handle it by laughing it off or even joining in on the “fun”. The Church will probably make it worse by threatening legal action.

  8. That’s a good question.
    I’ll think about it and post later.

  9. I like to repeat this: I am 38 mrried, with child. No one in my family/circle of friends knows more than I do about the C0$. They constantly come to me for information about something they saw or read or heard. I have never met in person, a Co$ member.

    I can not tell you how many times I say the words: Scientologists are some of the best people on the planet. Every single person, from my sister in law to friends looks at me either – incredulously or shocked. I inform them what the Sea Org really is & that most of these members are dedicated to the GREATEST good of others and sacrifice more than you or I EVER would.

    THIS is the face of Scientology, everyone thinks they are all idiots and kooks. They do not know and understand that most of you are like any microcosm of society. (even though i feel there are WAY more good and great members than the opposite)

    I could NEVER see Scientology ever being anything but a mind controlling cult.

    The ONLY way Scientology can survive is if it has washed away it name and washed away LRH. (Even most people dont know who dM is)

    I know you had other “factions” that started new groups and used some of LRH materials to start these groups: THIS is the only way Co$ survives. IT is a cancer of a name.

    I defy any of you to tell me otherwise.

    If you started a new group based on Scientology principle & routines: you would have to call it ANYTHING but Scintology.

    Cheers Beers and its ok to be a queer.

    Your friendly neighborhood Bed Man

    Belly up at the bar, waiting for those shots of Jager

    & waiting on Rinder and Rath to show up.

    I dont drink beer, but I would actually drink my first one with Rathbun,

    Ill bet he has some stories to tell.

    BEDMANOKC

    • BM, I LOVE your insights and comments.

      I used to feel that the name Scientology really needs to be dumped in order for Scientology to survive. But history does not bear out this prediction. Early Christians suffered persecution that makes Scientology-sneering look like a vicious game of hopscotch. Look at Mormonism, also a very young religion – you can’t get much weirder than Joseph Smith’s visions and repeated, convenient failures at retrieving God’s sacred golden tablets. Yet, today, we do not judge Mormons by Joseph Smith’s treasure-hunting fantasies anymore than we judge Christians by the nutzoid ideas of virgin birth, mummies emerging from the tomb, or drinking the blood of a deceased savior/hero. In the long run, we judge groups of people by our experiences with individual people.

      Let’s take a look, for example, at your own fascination with the subject of Scientology. It appears to me that you are much more influenced by your observations of and communications with real, live Scientologists than with the wackiness of Xenu or talking to ashtrays. Like any decent human being, you are incensed by the abuses visited upon your fellow sentient beings who happen to be Scientologists. You (and every human!) share more in common with Scientologists as human beings than differences in nutzoid beliefs.

      Thank you, again, for your insights. I always look forward to your comments.

      Nancy

      • “In the long run, we judge groups by our experience with individual people.”

        That is why it would have been far wiser for dm to pay staff a living wage than to waste millions on super bowl ads and gaudy buildings.

        • Theo sismanides

          Yes, if DM REALLY wanted the dissemination of Scientology! But DM is a nut robot put there to just do THE IRRIDUCIBLE MINIMUM as far as Tech is concerned Plus some Posh stuff he knows best how to do.

  10. Jane Parker White.

    Yes Marty I do believe the public image can change. But it is only getting worse – as some things must FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE.

    HOW:
    For starters — Decent people abhor lies, deceit, abuse, families torn apart, loved ones driven insane, and people exploited. Cut the false PR and pretence of ‘see no evil, do no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.’ You and Mike – need to Come clean about the crimes committed against people – there is a long history of this. Get rid of the lies, the glitz, the worship of personalities. And – stop hiding ‘Scientology’ – behind ‘a religious cloak’ – go back to the subject matter being – an ‘applied philosophy’ – COME CLEAN about everything. Let people take the rap and or ask forgiveness for the part played in the oppression and suppression of others. Sell those effing over-the-top-ostentatious buildings. Get REAL.

    The tech of ‘how to be suppressive’ against one’s fellow human beings – in all it’s shades MUST GO!! This has mainly been used – to cover up the crimes of the cult. The Sea Org must go – completely. Leave what works that can really help one’s fellow man. Stop all hypocrisy – and make the Creed of ‘we believe… freedom of speech, freedom to communicate, etc. etc REAL.

    Get REAL with the subject matter of FORGIVENESS. Set people FREE. Stop worshipping Mammon and effing shallow ‘celebrities’. Everyone should have a Grade O release on the fourth dynamic – as well as – come clean Grade 2 style on participation in suppressive acts – against perceived ‘enemies’. You and Mike need to talk to Gerry Armstrong ~~ FOR REAL ~~ and anyone else long suffering abuse at the behest of the ‘church’. The bottom line is – GET REAL. .

    HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE?
    Who knows……. How long does it take to become honest and decent?
    Because that is exactly how long it will take.

    Greetings from Africa.

  11. I do not believe the philosophy will ever succeed as an organized system at this point. Clearing the planet is probably not going to happen. I think it will gently grow amongst individuals and very small groups of people who benefit from its use over the decades and perhaps centuries and millenia to come.

    The Colbert Report and the audience are understandably justified. Not that it makes me happy. I spent twenty years (some of them on staff), helping and hoping we could save the human race. I’ll never forget having held that view.

    But, by now, I have moved to a place of wanting ethics and justice put in on DM and crew. Unfortunately, but honestly, that holds my interest more than clearing the planet anymore.

    • Bryan
      “But, by now, I have moved to a place of wanting ethics and justice put in on DM and crew. Unfortunately, but honestly, that holds my interest more than clearing the planet anymore.”

      Having justice from the courts and police applied to DM will help with the other wish. Then people can then see that the problems of Scn
      stem from corruption from the top. “Justice must be seen to be done.” Also a proper reform code must be introduced. Finally get rid of disconnection and fair game properly, and make public statements to this effect and various other reforms as needed. Whether the Church can survive this one might speculate. However FZers/Indies will be in a better position to talk to people and have them listen.

      We don’t have 7 year olds doing hard labour!

      Then grass roots word of mouth has a better chance of working,
      and that is I guess decades of work.

  12. one of those who see

    My goodness, just watched. Yes, the image can change and it doesn’t necessarily take long. Just like an actor or a company that gets bad press for a while can completely turn their image around. We can too. And I think many in the Independent Field are on the correct road to do it. Practice Scientology with the intention to free people, to restore self determinism. Use ARC, Way To Happiness, What is Greatness etc…Free theta, don’t enturbulate it. If Miscavige was gone and the Church in it’s present form faded away the horrible reputation would fade away too replaced with the good word of mouth our works would generate. However, even if the Church holds on for a while, the differentiation can take place too between the Church & the subject. Marty and Mike and so many others have worked toward this. And even on Colbert, Wright did say that people do seem to get helped by Scientology auditing and courses. Important to note that That piece of truth shines through.

  13. I loved it! I am not a fake news fan, but Colbert did an awesome job.

    Can the public image change? Yes. Of course. Human beings can believe anything, and do believe anything – I mean, even Colbert contrasted the oddity of Scn Space Opera with a priest saying his sins can be absolved by God by praying the number of times the priest tells him to.

    How? In two ways. First, the Sea Org needs to be abolished and dismantled, and the church needs to get back to its core, which is to audit and train people. The church needs to kick DM out of office, and stop the abuse.

    Secondly, Scientologists just need to really understand and practice Scientology in a loving manner. They/we need to integrate into the world. And we need to forget who is or is not “suppressive” and live life. We also need to stop being so self-centered, but truly look out and share our blessings in a loving manner. I know this sounds Christian, but why not? To me, the lack of love and a genuine caring attitude is what allowed Scientology to go off the rails. The mission of a Scientologist should not be to prove others wrong, but to make people right.

    The opinions of non-Scientologists are driven by how they see Scientologists act. If Scientologists act like assholes, then Scientology is the asshole religion. We need to stop acting like assholes. People don’t care what you believe in as long as you are a good person. Love and goodness prevails.

    How long? 20-30 years. Maybe, if we are lucky, 5 years after DM leaves and the subsequent “management” reforms its ways… Or after the church collapses due to non-participation of members.

    Mark

  14. Dizzy Mizz Lizzy

    As long as the church keeps practicing the exact opposite of what it preaches, it will be in deep shit – with no chance of changing its image.
    I mean, if you keep doing the same thing expecting a different result, that´s insanity. People out in the real world don´t distinguish between The Church of Scientology and Scientology. They have no idea there´s a difference. How should they? – There shouldn´t be a difference!

    If this difference hadn´t existed, Scientology would have flourished and prospered all over the place and half the planet would have been cleared by now and everybody would have been happy – including me. Instead I´m just pissed.

  15. Marty,
    Yes I do. But it will be a very long process, and that will depend largely on how many independent Field Auditors actually practice and disseminate the philosophy solely for the benefit of all people.

    It is my opinion that Scientology since its inception has been a gigantic Bait & Switch operation, including when LRH was running it and still researching the Tech.

    For if it LRH was not done researching it, for him to claim invariable results on its application or that this “Science/Philosophy”, could invariably and universally be replicated, as advertised by its Centers and Franchises, when they clearly failed to do so, it is nothing but fraud.

    So it is fraud to have a Big Brother Church full of arbitrary policies in place of functional Centers, which simply engage in auditing and training, without all the religious idiocies attending Scientology
    .
    And the ultimate fraud of all, to have the Sea Org, a loony bin Cult, meddling and corrupting the most basic promise that LRH made to all of us, that of an Auditor and a PC quietly engaged in session, solely for the benefit of the person being audited.

    Scientology, Corporate or otherwise has a long way to go, and a lot to make up for all the damage and deceit it has done to so many people in the last 60 years.

    So it remains to be seen if we can pull it off. I hope we do.

  16. LOL, there is no “Public Image” issue here, only mass media making 3rd party as usual to justify it’s idiotic existence. In any case ridicule is the best disguise until we come of age or get us a “Constantine”.

  17. I think Lawrence Wright said it best in the interview with Colbert: “Scientology is the most stigmatized religion in the country*…”

    (*I’m thinking perhaps “world”)

    Looking at what a stigma is, its derivation comes essentially from a “mark, brand or puncture” on the skin. In essence then, Scientology (independent or otherwise) has become more or less “branded” PRwise (like a slave or prisoner) with its “beliefs.”

    I believe until (or unless) one can show they are not “branded” with a specific form of idolatry, maniacal or agendized manner or behavior, a Scientologist is going to be in for a rough ride for some time.

    My own personal think on how to truly avoid this (or to renew oneself from the ashes, like a Phoenix perhaps), is to completely make the subject (or its key principals) one’s own; with the attendant ability to think and act independently – along with what might be called “Groking Ghandi”: The practice of granting of beingness; not making others “wrong,” as well as not making others “smaller than thou…”

    Definitely would be a good place to start any sort of repair on the subject :)

  18. Before I started Scn, I studied “other practices”. Some of them included techniques that had similarities to auditing. Perhaps some of them were squirrels or squirrels of squirrels or had studied ancient understandings and came to some of the same awareness as LRH about the underlying cause of human sufferings. I had life-changing wins with some of these. I helped others using these. In truth, I felt more success at helping others before I started studying scn. I found my reach to help was thwarted by my fear of the repercussions of “doing it wrong” or getting cross-ways with the organization. I was already on thin ice because of my prior association with squirrel groups.

    I am reluctant to be seen as a fatalist. However, the executive in me wants to face the facts so that plans can be made based on actual scene. I fear that the image of Scn is damaged beyond repair – no matter how hard some of us may try to distinguish between the church organization and the philosophy or subject, the general public is not going to get it.

    There will be those who continue to apply the technology to help others. This is a good thing. Some will have a better understanding than others and will be more effective at helping than others. Some will continue to call it Scn and some won’t. If I were a skilled auditor and I wanted to help people who had never walked into a church of scn, I would consider finding something nice and new-age-ish to call it. There is a giant pool of people who are looking for non-traditional therapies to help with the travails of life.I refuse to be critical of anyone who is helping someone else through a life problem. Will we be leading them to “total spiritual freedom”? Maybe not, but they are so far from there, does it really matter? If I only patch up a marriage, then they go back to believing that they are headed for heaven/hell after death, they are still better off than before my interaction. No harm, no foul. Those who are high enough in awareness to seek real spiritual freedom with find a path there whether it be LRH’s path or not.

    • Another lady whose writings I enjoy reading! :) Thanks Yvonne, because if more people were packed with the kind of wisdom that just your causual conversation carries with it, this world would indeed be a better place. Sometimes I wish I could clap my hand and all the drugs that people require OT IV for in the world would just go away, but alas this universe is not built that way. But patching up a marriage or two here or there, NOW THAT *is* progress! :) If my marriage ever breaks, I’ll be on the phone! :)

  19. Thanks for the notification Not something I am responding too.

  20. DM has become a laughing stock and there is an open
    season on this paper tiger plus at the same time he’s
    taking the church with him (explicit deleted).
    Yes the public image can change (anything can and does)
    but it will take another generation. It will have to be built up
    from scratch once the PR has changed and the church has
    been dismantled. It will be the indies who resurrects the tech.

    • I think you have to stop laying the blame soley on DM and take some of the responsibility of yourselves. Marty Mike and many others in the religion went along blindly with DM, followed his rules and basically helped turn it into the mess that it is today. Fair enough that you have now walked out, but it is incredible to say that this one man held so much power. Were you brain washed zombies when in the religion? Probably – and the fact is that this is still the position most of the outside world see in the interviews with scientologist and ex-scientologists talking about their experiences. This is why it is called a cult. Yvonne said many good things above. Move forward with the ‘tech’ but distance it from Scientology. Take what works and throw away all the ‘tech talk’ that makes you sound so robotic and unreal. Throw away Xenu, disassociate with Ron and get rid of the term ‘clearing the planet’, get rid of the OT’s and the money chasing. Nancy Many (?) book was good. She helped people where she thought they needed help and ignored the tech that wasnt needed and was just a money push. I like listening to Tori and Marc and a few others. They talk about how there are SOME things that work but A LOT of things that are just rubbish and are level and money based. Scientology will never work in the long run under that name. As a word it is like AMWAY.

  21. It seems the media has been used to try and get rid of MIscavige who is like an annoying fly that won’t go away, and wake up people.I t could be used in the end to rebuild the reputation of Scientology , or am I being naive?
    Ultimately ,it will be back to the individual, as it always should have been,to win and set the exemple , word of mouth is the best bet.
    Along with this blog and Steve Hall’s great work on his sites
    How long is a difficult question to confront ,for me.After all Who cares?The mess is what it is ,let’s keep telling the truth and keep going each with our own sphere of influence and capabilities.

    • Yes, you are being somewhat naive. However, PR capers, carefully designed to maximize the medias great love of controversy, secrets, lies, and sexsational, sensationalism could go along way to remedy this. There happens to be a couple of people who post on this blog (including its owner) who do know exactly how this is accomplished. The trouble is that PR and propaganda have a might fine line between them and they can and do backfire, especially if there is too much venom in the mix.

  22. The only way it can possibly change its public face is if the core training materials are identified, isolated and presented in the context of modern society with all of its changes in language and culture using the current mediums such as itunes, youtube, and online articles.

    Jeff, one of the commenters on this blog a few posts back brought this into focus when he pointed out that studying the LRH library was a very LONG LONG and arduous process and he doubted that anyone could or would take the time to do it. I responded by explaining that no one studied all of those materials, rather they studied prepared course materials that focused on the current and key information and skills.

    An excellent example of this being done in an effective manner is the lectures on the tone scale offered by Mark Shreffler, and posted online on youtube. I found a website one day where an individual had studied the materials on tone scale and had written his own synopsis. Never a Scientologist himself, he had done an EXCELLENT job and had posted disclaimers that he was NOT affiliated in any way with SCIENTOLOGY or the organizations of Scientology. He was THRILLED with the information. I sent him the link to Mark Shreffler’s videos and received profuse thanks from him. He added the links to his website. That is how it will spread. But its so damned difficult for it to spread with the materials in their current form that only a guy like that who is seriously motivated to do the work will be interested.

    For this approach to work over the long term, there would be a VITAL target necessary of immediately producing as many videos of the remaining successful and working Class 8s and 12s as possible with as many examples of TRs, metering and auditing styles as possible. Otherwise, important bits of information will be lost forever as the last Class 8s and 12s were trained many years ago.

    Another VITAL target would be to handle the issue of confidentiality, which that miserable excuse for a Church has abused so badly that the trust factor is so OUT that no session would be possible. There must be a measure of trust between the auditor and the pc. There was a video posted online with a couple of young guys in a storage shed filled with pc folders, where they were opening folders and reading the contents aloud and having quite the lulz. Funny to them, but not funny to whoever’s folders they were prying into and publishing online.

    Another VITAL target is some kind of group rudiments materials as regards legal necessities — i.e. religious status, diagnostic versus spiritual approach, staying out of the road of licensed areas in medical and psychiatry, and so on. This is an area ALL of the successful alternative health and spiritual practices have learned to clearly and carefully delineate.

    By all means preserve the original materials. Set up a foundation to do that and collect every possible bit of material that can be found. Digitize and publish it, all of it, and make the originals available for study at a physical location. Make little training videos, no more than 10-15 minutes long. TALK TO PEOPLE. Give examples, open discussion. Get people past their FEAR of doing anything with the mind and their own human and spiritual potential. Teach them what is dangerous so they aren’t worried that they will somehow harm another by talking to them. Clear up the meanings of brainwashing and so on. Demonstrate!

    But the MOST VITAL target would be to teach people about PROPAGANDA!!!!!!!! And this is not confined to Scientology, but every subject the media gets its hands on. This is the target that allows smear campaigns to run rampant, that foments wars nobody wants except arms manufacturers and multi-national corporations, hiding their despicable role in all this, that allows all manner of vested interest steering of public information to ends that are vicious and destructive. If you want a real eye opener, watch the video “The Shock Doctrine 2009″ a documentary adaptation of Naomi Klein’s 2007 book, The Shock Doctrine. I thoroughly recommend watching it to get a global perspective. The C of S is really a teeny tiny problem in the grand scheme and may very well be a strategy to shock and awe people into dismissing the constitutional protections on religion. I wouldn’t be surprised. Scientology may have won its war in 1993, but trust me, in the larger world that war is ongoing and it is VICIOUS.

    This is the age of Internet. Something can go viral in hours and days if it is properly managed and the younger generations already have a healthy disrespect for mass media and lying vested interests.

    Never mind protecting LRH or Scientology. How about putting the focus where it belongs, and on protecting, teaching, helping and enlightening the beleaguered public, caught in a web of deception and manipulation and erosion of their rights in the guise of “the common welfare.”

    And then it will be alright because the truth is that people really do want to be beneficial. They just find themselves at impasses that make it seem like there are no other and better means and so do the best they can with what they know. Empower THEM. And they will act to EMPOWER others. You can count on it.

    • Another brilliant post Maria.
      I really like the idea of “packaging” certain LRH references into a nice bundle of relevant data so people intersted in that topic can see the best of LRH.
      This to me, is another example of why KSW 1 fails miserably. How would the average “raw meat” public interpret KSW 1?? Would he grant it as much beingness as the “true believers?” I think not. Most public reading that reference would see LRH as an arrogant fanatic and thus the whole body of his work would be tainted to that degree.

      • Right, KSW#1 is nothing for newbies to Scientology.

      • And plus another thing Tony. I don’t see why it makes sense, EVEN when LRH was alive, that KSW has to placed in every course pack and read before each and every course is started. If a person is star rated on something they are star rated on something, that’s it. It’s like putting the NED course in every pack a person studies (instead of the KSW policy per se) so that “One does not forget one’s NED” when studying TR’s courses or E-Meter drills, or even a staff hat! Every single course has the KSW in the front to be RE-STAR RATED. Isn’t that like an over run? Forced re-tread? Inval of one’s previouse training? I don’t know too many people’s opinions on it, but then again I never mentioned it to anybody except you, but I feel like as if when a person studies Scientology, that one should be presented with a question like “And do you remember reading this policy from the last 18 courses that you did Lawrence?” Meaning that KSW policy being there. It was not in any of my books, ONLY in my course packs. :)

        • Lawrence, once at my local org I was assigned to M9 KSW#1 three times in a row with an Ethics Officer feeding me his “cogs” over my shoulder, while the Qual Sec fed me her “cogs”. For instance, did you ever wonder what “degraded novels” LRH is talking about? According to that Qual Sec, if you dig into a fat enough dictionary, you’ll find that “novels” are amendments to Roman law. Finally, I told them that nowhere in KSW#1 did it say that they should feed me cognitions. That wrapped it up.

          • That is the wisest choice. WHEN one cannot communicate LRH tech in its pure form, if it has to be twisted, altered and re-invented then WHY is that a bad idea? :)

      • Tony, you know what’s funny? KSW was given to me along with about 100 other PLs in a big pack (this was before the green vols were issued) in 1970 when I joined staff. I was a college student, I took the pack home and read the WHOLE thing, looking up NO words at all. You know, yeah, I bypassed looking up TA motion, the conditions, the org board, the whole deal. Never bothered me. Ha. I understood some of it, thought it was interesting, paid little attention to other stuff. No big deal. that’s the way I ALWAYS studied, and at 19, I was already in my third year of college. I was really interested in the whole reactive mind thing, that’s what got me into Scientology and to join staff. Wanted to postulate better too, you know? Guess that was all too simple. When I came back to the org three or four days later, folks thought I had blown with the pack. I said no, I just was studying the whole thing, thought I was gonna get a test. Well, very funny now to look at that. I guess I didn’t hit second phenomena, or maybe I was always in it, who knows. Was a Cl IV auditor a year and a half later in my study time.

        • Do I think the public opinion of Scientology can change?

          I think the public opinion of Scientology could eventually change, but only IF INDEPENDENT SCIENTOLOGIST TRAIN AND AUDIT PEOPLE.

          I don’t see it happening by way of the church because even if and when DM finally meets his demise and is outed, and this will be newsworthy, the group will still need to 1. de-pts, 2. reorganize 3. spend time healing staff 4). Make up damage done by amnesty to those harmed (ex-staff and public). 5) listen to those highly trained auditors and c/s’s who have found technical outpoints 6) reprogram cases. In the meantime on the div 6 front, they will still have the cloud of entheta pr mass of yesteryear that never as-ised. Additionally, they have more locks and secondaries accumulated on that chain under DM, while newer engram chains developed as well. That is quite a cross to bear.

          Then, the question remains: will they be able to stand three feet in back of the organization and honestly evaluate the scene? Will they make the necessary changes in bad policy? Will they dump the SO, or utilize some tech members to research further to qual and then build on the tech to further the bridge? My usual attitude is that anything is possible, but the probability of the church reinventing itself is zero.

          Producing good products which are needed and wanted do not have to be sold like soap at high prices like MEST objects. Word of mouth about how Scientology auditing works is very powerful and the association with other groups and professionals (and therefore those seeking mental and spiritual therapies) should be employed, rather than shunned as they were in the past.

          The planet is in a bad way, and there are more people than ever in ruin and those who are up to demand for improvement, hope and help. Auditors can help. Eventually, with the distinction between the ‘church’ and the philosophy being promoted,the philosophy will spread at a grass roots level because of the good ‘products’ being created.

    • Smart and correct.

    • Excellent post. Ultimately, we need to own Scientology, and be responsible for it. I used the term “Open Source Scientology” a few years ago to describe activities like this.

      http://ahgrasshopper.wordpress.com/2010/09/18/open-source-scientology/

      We need to own it and run with it, and we need to trust each other to do it right – or at least with the right “heart.” In any event, it is better to push the positive than engage in holy wars about it.

      Truth and love will prevail.

      • Yes exactly so. And the bulk of the population really do want truth and love to prevail. So help them to learn better and better ways and means to help that along. They will. No doubt about it.

    • Theo sismanides

      Maria I think it takes some kind of organizing to do all this. Otherwise you are quite right.

      • Yes, Theo it does. But think guerrilla tactics — give people the info in ways that they can rapidly, inexpensively and freely use it. They will use it. It isn’t just up to ex Scientologists, there are millions of kind and generous hands out there. MILLIONS. And they can and will think, do and act across a broad spectrum and on many venues unless they are actively stopped from doing so.

      • Example, if Mary Freeman did a youtube talk a day for no more than 10 to 20 minutes, at the end of the year there would be 365 little segments to choose from from a person who really understand how to effectively use the ethics tech to rehab individual integrity. And I guarantee you that within a month of her starting this, there would be hundreds of presentations all over the Internet as people got the hang of it.

        But it won’t happen if there is insistence that LRH and Scientology must always get the credit and must always be the source of it and no one else is allowed to create and work with it in their own way. We’ve got to get off this business of “protecting” the tech from thieves and shift it to a viewpoint of getting to everyone in the best ways possible. They aren’t thieves for Gawd’s sakes! They are people who are trying to help people!!

        • Theo Sismanides

          Hehe, I am with you Mary. We don’t have to “protect” anything or better hoard it like the Church does. We know better. LRH knew better. All I am saying and I will be writing on this more is that, there is now a stronger, much stronger 3rd Dynamic of people who do know their stuff. We can even DISAGREE and AGREE on having the right to DISAGREE on certain points.

          This “organisation” does have the idea of a guerrilla war. But even guerrillas do get ammunition.

          For example, I want to do something with the study tech here in Greece. There are people who do know the value of study tech and who can contribute with ideas on this.

          There are auditors who can move around and visit places and do a whole seminar with new people. Those are things we need to think of and do more and more of. They could see our one auditor here and see how he could be doing more on the auditing side. I got a few sessions by him and it was great. I got a serious somatic repaired with Dianetics and that was fantastic.

          As you are saying very correctly there are MILLIONS of people out here. And they can be disseminated to. They are actually waiting just for this.

          So guerrilla tactics, yes. But still they are tactics. This is the only point we are going to fail upon: the fact that many people don’t trust Admin anymore because of Miscavigement. This still has to be worked upon because there is a tremendous amount of resources that is waisted.

          We are all gonna win when this starts rolling more and more.

    • You just wrote twice what I was going to say…and you said it better.
      Thanks
      Les

      • I am honored to have you acknowledge what I said. You and Anita have my utmost respect. You won’t remember me, as I was just one of the many people you helped along the way for a brief, brief time, but way back, way way back, you made all the difference in the world to my introduction to the subject of Scientology in your role as the PES. Warm, friendly, funny, helpful and so caring! Kudos to you Les! Thanks for your warmth and care all these years.

        • Roger from Switzerland Thought

          Maria,

          Since your first post I read by Geir I’m fascinated about your viewpoints…So reasonable,intelligent, clear and simple.

          If we ever create a Foundation I vote for you becoming a member of it ! :) :) :)

    • Awesome Maria,
      excellent out-of-the-box perspective giving a stable datum to keep those confusions at bay.
      Greta

  23. Well, this is what DM & Co. have brought the subject to. I wonder if he is laughing today. Personally, I laughed my ass off. Colbert is by far the funniest person on TV, IMHO. I hope people could take their finger off the seriousness button for a few moments and get a laugh out of it.
    My own view is that the government is unlikely to do anything to shut Scn down anytime soon (in the U.S, at least). Short of that, whatever jokes DM and Scn become the butt of is irrelevant because the family member or trusted friend of a Scientologist who puts forward a good example of what Scientology actually is will outweigh any an all negative media in the mind of the person helped. And therefore, in that particular sphere, Scientology has just doubled.

    • Dan,
      I agree with your views. When dealing with the public as a Kool-Aide addict I seldom received even queries from folks who knew I was a Scientologist. Now that people are aware I have disconnected from the cult I receive regular questions about all sorts of aspects of the CO$. It has provided an excellent platform to distinguish the philosophy from the current practices of the cult.

      “Do you believe this public image can change?” Yes, however I don’t think it is likely to happen quickly if at all.
      “How? ” By getting the tech applied without coercion or agenda. This includes two key issues. 1) Differentiating the CO$ from the actual auditing tech. 2) developing a level of trust so the PC would know that his words would truly remain confidential. Not sure how this could occur in any broad based manner without a ‘church’ type of organization. I think the best alternative would be to let the PC manage his own folders. Full transparency!
      “How long will it take to change significantly?” Very difficult to perceive this one. Change is the one constant in the universe. It’s rate has infinite variables. It’s like an earthquake………..things can be quiet for long periods and when change comes it is quick and loud. I postulate the latter!

    • Dan,
      I thought it was hilarious, as Colbert consistently is night after night. It was surprisingly well-informed, though Colbert and his staff are generally amazingly well-informed. I perhaps left out an important point in making my point in the intro to it. That is, Colbert is probably the most trustworthy source for the straight dope on world affairs. The only way one can get away with broadcasting the truth of a lot of important events is through satire, comedy. The networks and very best journalism sources are virtually all owned by the corporate powers whose games don’t make it onto the evening – or even cable network news. That is why Bill Maher and Jon Stewart too are so important in the age of information. When I said that this is an accurate take on the public image of Scientology, it was precisely because Colbert has huge credibility capital – particularly with the next generation of leaders. It was hilarious to boot because it so mercilessly pounced on the actual illogics.
      Marty

      • I loved the watermelon with the knife in it!! Lol!!

      • Good job on getting your mug and brief quotes into the video Marty!

        I’d like to add that I thought the show it was quite fair as well as funny, from both Colbert and Lawrence Wright, who in this interview comes across very distinctly as an interested journalist with no axe to grind at all.

        I liked that the subject was actually treated with respect, as the show was a good balance of Colbert’s joking slant and Wright’s informative earnestness.

        And I felt the opportunity to make the distinction between the Church and the philosophy was left open.

        Go Middle Path!

      • As an outsider, I think your analysis is spot on. Ironically, the “Scientology = Church of Scientology” stance has been one of COS’ most frequently used weapons to quell dissent, not it is dragging all Scientology down with it.

      • Marty, I agree with you. I thought it was really well done and hilarious. I too was surprised as how well informed Colbert was. He definitely had the lingo down.

  24. Hi Marty, I don’t think is going to change that PR that the Church have in present time, the best thing to do is to continuo Scientology on the field, that Church become money motivation, just read my new story at:

    http://cristianlandivar.wordpress.com/2013/02/07/when-there-is-pressure-to-make-money-untold-story-taiwan/

  25. Scientology….It’s figure heads…..It’s staff and most of it’s PT members are getting exactly what they have projected out into society for decades. You cannot pull in what you don’t project out. It will keep happening as long as the “church” projects what it always has…”We are the big beings and anyone who doesn’t agree with the tech and policy are just DB’s”

  26. What exactly did Mr. Wright or Mr. Colbert say that was incorrect?

  27. An outsider’s perspective.

    I was never in, and I live in the Netherlands where Scientology is mostly unknown. I guess only a few hundred people use it – inside or outside COS. To most people with whom I talk about the subject I have to explain what scientology is.

    So… when someone hears about it the first time I’d guess they will be searching the net before doing anything else. Well: go to
    http://whatdoestheinternetthink.net/ and use “scientology” for your search. Quite a devastating result.

    I think Scientology will have to be promoted using another name in order to have any success. IMHO the Scientology brand is filled with so much negativity it cannot be used anymore.

    If the brand and the philosophy or tech are inseparable, I don’t have any high hopes.

    • I agree. And if you hold honesty as a virtue, do not deify LRH. Just call him an inspiring idea man.
      I would love to hear ideas for new names for using the technology.

  28. “Short of that, whatever jokes DM and Scn become the butt of is irrelevant because the family member or trusted friend of a Scientologist who puts forward a good example of what Scientology actually is will outweigh any an all negative media in the mind of the person helped.

    That right there was what I was trying to say above.

  29. Yes, I believe this public image can change. It can change to the degree that it is practiced under the governance of the strictly free-market principles of the four Conditions of Exchange. To change significantly, it will take as long as it takes for scientologists around the world to truly help enough individuals that the subject achieves a perceptive validity and the word “scientology” gains cachet (in the “public eye”) as a legitimate technology.

    If this current stigma cannot be overcome, perhaps it can still exist in some workable form under the newfound freedom granted by integration and a “Change of Environment”.

    Sorry to be so cryptic, but that’s all I’m willing to say on that subject at this moment because I really do see that public opinion really could go one way or the other over the long haul.

  30. So Dark The Con Of Man...

    If you don’t mind the opinion of a wog, I think the bizarre beliefs are not your main problem. Yes, people laugh about tales of space aliens and what not, but people also laugh about Mormons f.ex., and a little bit of humor doesn’t hurt. (In the mind of wogs, there’s a large difference between joking and degrading.)

    The main problem in my humble opinion is that there is no clear and vocal commitment of Independents to end the intrinsic abuses. DM is responsible for many abuses, yes, but some of them are laid out in Source, and the main task of the Independents is to remove or defuse these practices. If the figureheads of the Independent movement stood up and denounced the harmful practices together and explicitly, the way for a renewal would be perhaps not 100% free, but much freer than it is now.

    • I like this approach, makes sense and will certainly get the public to see that the Indies are different. Goof thinking!

      • Maybe Indies could formally protest or send out press releases when COS has big events or announcements. Or use the opportunity when being interviewed to state Indy ideas.

    • Grasshopper (Mark P)

      I’m not sure who you are referring to as “figureheads of the independents” but regardless, each independent I know denounces the abuses, and have been clear about it.

      I’m curious as to what you consider are “intrinsic abuses.” If you mean certain policies laid down by Hubbard, well I think indies by their actions have rejected them. You can’t be an indie and by 100% in support of all of Hubbard’s policies.

      I have not yet heard of an indie trying to recreate the sea org outside the church. And it won’t happen, either.

    • I think the “leading lights” of the Scientology indie movement have been pretty clear and vocal regarding their opposition to the main problems with the religion. So have most of us regular folk.

      Fair Game, Disconnection, crush selling, over-pricing, Super Power and IAS and Ideal Orgs and similar scams, physical abuse and psychological abuse at the Int Base, etc, etc. If guys like Marty, Mike Rinder, Steve Hall and many others hadnt come forward many of these would not be understood and known to the degree they are now.

      Besides, the indie movement is not a monolith, therefore no grand proclamations or dictates are possible or maybe even desirable.

      The fact is, the in every society and culture where a particular religion has become dominate, the corporate entity of that religion has become coersive and abusive in direct opposition to its own basic tenets.

      In our case, Scientology never has become the dominate religion anywhere.

      So, if those of us who care about it recognize the difference between the religion and its corporate self (which most of us here certainly do) then we can solve the image problem by simply applying Scientology to our lives, bettering conditions, moving up a little higher each day, and helping others to do the same.

      Who cares how long it takes? We have all of eternity.

  31. Independent Scn needs to look outwards. As Mr Martiniano said, ‘If LRH wants Orgs, then by God build Orgs’. Independents need to be much more active in promotion of their faith.

    Corporate Scn wont change under Miscavige rule, and it is perfectly capable of subsisting at its current level for a long, long time. Same behaviours continuing. A common reaction when the external worlds tests your beliefs is to double-down – “We’ll show them!”. Im also inclined to think Miscaviges successor when he dies will be a crony. They are all that are left, and DM wont let the Church leadership get taken the way he took it. He will lock the CoS into its current course as best he can for as long as he can.

    Therefore, any quantum shift in perceptions about Scientology need to be generated by the Independent field. Herein lies the rub: most (not all) people interested in Scientology will head to the CoS to learn about it. Independent Scientology needs to be something people are ‘aware’ of. Media being media, this is only ever going to be interesting to them if it is related to someONE they’re writing about.

    In short, to change perceptions about Scientology as a belief, you need:

    1) One or more Celebrity Independents, who the media care enough about that they’ll bother to report the difference

    2) A field of Independents offering auditing, discussing the tech, holding Open Houses, doing cheeky things like running reprints of earlier LRH books (you know, the ones WITH the semicolons) and selling them under the table. The Independent Scientology Logo needs to be used at protests, on business cards, on websites, on tshirts. It needs to be a ‘thing’ that the media can easily latch onto.

    The first is probably only an issue of time; the second is a bit of a way off (trust me, have you ever tried to find an Independent Auditor in the UK? I have managed to find one mobile number for someone that lives several hundred miles away. No webpage or anything. That took several months to find. Meanwhile there is a CoS building 30 minutes walk from my house…). Its a shame, because a church being ‘taken back’? That’s a media story the American Press would rag to death. They’d love it.

    There’s my read of the situation anyway…

  32. 1) do a strict unbiased analysis of the data inherent in the subject including it’s founder and publically apologize for the ‘tech’ that has and is victimizing human beings. This won’t be easy because you will have to dismantle, within yourself, cherished beliefs that have become fixed ideas. Ideas that are heretical to the wrong knowledge cognized as truth.

    2) serve people selflessly. Don’t use service as a photo op for PR. Which is what Scientology does.

    3) come to grips with the data on the OT 3. Many X members now consider this data untrue. Xenu is the icing on the cake for public ridicule. There are many reasons why realizations occur on these levels.

    4) See Ron as he is and was. Allow yourself to feel safe while doing this.

    5) serve serve serve serve serve serve

    • Grasshopper (Mark P)

      Re OT III, I received significant benefits doing that level, whether the story was true or not. Many others have as well. We have to deal with that too.

      Personally, I see no reason to apologize for the tech. There is nothing wrong with the tech. There are gaps. But that is because people are greater than any subject or tech. I will apologize for bone-headed execution and overdone zealotry. But not the tech. The tech says don’t abuse children. Yet certain SO and church members missed the memo. The tech says you need to balance your dynamics. Yet SO members are forbidden to have children or any significant property. The tech says don’t borrow money. Yet over zealous reges will call Visa for you to up your credit limit and have take out mortgages. The tech says that pan determinism and high-ARC (I.e. love and understanding) and freedom is the goal of Man. The SO says “Cold Chrome Steel” and “Make it go right you MF’er” is the ideal.
      The tech is beautiful and awesome if read and applied with a loving heart. I will never apologize for that.

      • Dizzy Mizz Lizzy

        Grasshopper
        Beautiful! You speak out of my own heart.

      • I am including tech as Ron’s written word which was always worshiped as perfect. If its not written it is not true. Consider that statements corollary. It is frightening. .

        The tech says Jesus was a child molester.

        The tech also says every mental therapy but Scientology is evil.

        The tech also says all unresolved upsets are caused by a third party: it’s the law!! That one has certainly caused craziness in groups and relations. It is the law of blame. Of course it does occur but not all the time. It is not a law.

        All accidents caused by SP or PTS: ALL?

        The Ethics Tech has been the source of horrendous crimes against humanity.

        There is a lot to be apologetic.

        Consider security sec check tech developed by Ron and the unspeakable distortions it created in
        trusting minds.

        • “If is is not written it is not true” does not mean that “if it is written it is true.”

          The tech does not say Jesus was a child molester. If Ron or anyone else uttered that as an opinion, it was incorrect. It has no bearing on the tech.

          The tech does not say all mental therapy save Scientology is evil – but Ron was very down on Lobotomy and ECT and pushing drugs. You cannot deny that many psychiatrists do not even talk to patients anymore – they just hand out a scrip. That is evil. However, the tech has no opinion on other practices.

          Third-party is interesting, and it may not be a law, but it is a minor piece of the tech – only one HCOB.

          Not all accidents are caused by SPs or PTS-ness. This is not the tech. Nor is all sickness caused by PTS-ness. I noted in another post that there is a difference between what Ron wrote to staff members and what Ron wrote to auditors as the tech. To staff members, he “dumbed it down” to me more black and white. Hence, “All accidents are caused by PTSness” and the third party “law”. I don’t agree with his approach. On the other hand he meant for people to think with the tech and not be robots.

          If you think sec checks are evil, you have no idea what they are about. One thing people need to get in their skulls about sec checks is that just because a question is on a sec check, it does not mean that it is part of an established moral code. It is only on the check because a PC may THINK it is an overt, and may have charge on it, and therefore it needs to be addressed. Scientology deals with real shit, which is why people can get so screwed up when someone perverts it maliciously.

          Dave and his minions have butchered sec checks and O/W, like they butchered much more of the tech, but that does not mean that the tech is at fault. It means that anyone can pervert any technology.

          Now, again, there have been bone-headed policies and execution, but the tech is the tech and has nothing to do with policies and opinions.

          So, Brian, what is your opinion of R2-45?

          Mark

  33. The show was quite hillarious.
    I can see why the public at large has this opinion. The “church” of Scientology has done a dissmal job of explaining it’s beliefs to the public and the actions it takes to detractors says it all to the public. Scientology is a dangerous cult. Therefore the philosophy must be equally crazy. Right or wrong ,it is easy to see why the public could come to this conclusion.
    Oh, it could have been done so much better. LRH could have stayed more relaxed and dm who I put most of the blame, is just insane.
    For someone who developed the ARC triangle to also come up with signing a “billion year contract” and the “Sea Org” is hard to think with.

    • Tony, you are so smart. :) How can anyone not agree with that? :) A person goes Clear, or OT or becomes an auditor and someone that never has been involved with Scientology learns this fact and says “Oh my! Do you mean that church that ________________________?” Fill in the blanks! :)
      Even LRH’s ideas (some of them) were off at certain points. Why is it a suppressive act to know this if it is the truth? :) Can people get result applying lies to their life? The church seems to think so. If people like you or me can afford to work all week and then take some well earned time off to go up the bridge, then WHY should a Sea Org member have to refrain from watching TV, going on the internet, talking to their neighbors, only have 1 day off a year or live in “The Hole”? :) Wait 100 years and see what happens. The church is going to spend the rest of its eternity battling is own O/W’s that people no longer can believe are others O/W’s. :) Tony, you are a smart guy. I agree 100%. :)

  34. The answer to the original question. For this public image to be changed one would first have to remove Miscaviage from office and start to get the church back on track by applying the emergency formula, not unusual solutions.

  35. Things will not change as long as dm controls the church.
    In 30 years of his rule, not one thing has been done by dm that has not perverted tech or policy.
    Tech will not go in when ethics is out. The out ethics is dm.

  36. Yes it can change- as we all noticed he mentions the Church, Scientology, LRH and Miscavige. So from here you can establish differences, ie, he talked much more about the bad reputation of Miscavige than whatever else he said about LRH. If there are differences, then it can be handled. Second, we should use the PR References on “Do not forward the enemy line”, thus instead of saying Scientology is not (and then repeat the enemy line) one should be ready to handle it per that PL (How to handle Black PR Policy Letter). How long will it take?- if we keep auditing and training very, very standardly theta will expand and we will get somewhere. How fast? I do not know, but lets just keep the standar delivery and training and we will get somewhere.

  37. I think the image will not change. The word Scientology is inextricably linked to what has been done to people by the organization and on behalf of Scientology. It plays no major role, what the content of the faith is. It is the abuse and the criminal behavior that will not be forgotten. The situation reminded me of Bagwhan that the end had a very bad reputation. Later he was called Osho. The next generation had it easier. In the exercise of their faith, she was no longer burdened by the bad reputation.

  38. windhorsegallery

    “Do you believe this public image can change? How? How long will it take to change significantly?”

    After watching Lawrence Wright on Colbert and of course others during this media blitz … I say, as I have in the past, there is not a hope in hell that the public image of scientology will change.

    But I’m constantly wondering WHY there is such a huge effort on the part of so many to attempt to put the toothpaste back into the tube … when a relative cursory look at the history of RELIGIOUS movements will show, I believe, that there is NOT one religious movement (including buddhism, hinduism, sufi, muslim) that has not had sects arise from the teachings.

    Just look at Christianity. It’s changed from the days of the inquisition – Catholic Church to the Catholic Church of today that is morphing as I type.

    Actually LOOK at religions. They cannot STAY the same from the get-go because the world they exist in — changes.

    Of course – those who are cemented fundamentalists will ATTEMPT to insist they are correct. At first fundamentalism, like cement, hardens and brings the flock more tightly aligned. HOWEVER cement through the years starts to crack and eventually crumbles. Or the cracks are patched but cement never is malleable material. And thus ALL religions change.

    THEREFORE — why sweat the big stuff? Seriously.

    Let the existing Church with DM at it’s helm work through it’s own mess.

    ALL that said — I applaud those speaking out against the abuses and am hopeful from those ashes the workable parts of scientology will rise like a phoenix. But I’m betting it’s going to have to be called something different. Perhaps the Reformed Movement of Scientology …

    Or nothing at all remotely connected to LRH and Scientology. In the end, what is happening to LRH, his reputation and scientology IS part and parcel of his karma. Blasphemy I know but why is he immune from his own actions?

    Christine

  39. Not sure the image of Scientology can be repaired with the current generation; it could take decades or longer. It depends on how independents are able to create a differentiation in the public’s mind between the organization and the subject; that is, if the media and people like Colbert allow it. If independents could get just as much airtime, then this would certainly help, but unfortunately, funny and bizarre beat truth and understanding in the ratings game.

    In a January issue of The Hollywood Reporter, widely read in the film industry in LA, there was a huge illustrated spread on Wright’s book, focusing on both Cruise and Travolta, and quite embarassing. I felt bad for both of them, but maybe the article will serve as some sort of community intervention. If either could see that defending the organization is not the same as defending Scientology, and they came forward, this would make a big statement to the public, but I think Tom’s reaction is just to make himself more right for supporting DM, and John may understandably be afraid of the consequences.

  40. I believe the public image can be changed, but not while the Co$ continues its shenanigans.

    Once Scientology goes back to its source and brings sanity instead of insanity, I believe someone like Jeff Hawkins can restore its PR. How long it would take, is his question to answer.

  41. To change the public perception of Scientology will take MAJOR changes in PR.
    I think if the “church” wanted to do this, as it would require tons of cash, would be taking out big adds the way they did with the USA Today Newspapers a few years back and admitt that dm was a cloaked criminal and YES he DID abuse people. Then doing some restitution to those wronged. Paying damages to those physically assaulted and ripped off. There is a good chance that this step would cost the “church” hundreds of milions of dollars. This would actually be the “church’s” LIABILITY formula. The one that they have been resisting to do for years now.
    1. Decide who are ones friends.
    2. Deliver an effective blow to the enemies fo the group despite personal danger. (the enemies of the group would be dm and those perpetuating dm’s criminality) this could be done by exposing the crimes, pressing charges and convicting the criminals, as well as exhonerating the whistle blowers and rewarding their actions.
    3. Make up the damage done by personal contribution above and beyond the normal demands of a group member.
    4. Apply for re-entry.

    • Grasshopper (Mark P)

      You’re being kind Tony. The church’s condition is far lower than Liability. They don’t even see the planet they are on.

      • Hi Mark,
        I didn’t say their current condition is liability. When they get to that point, if they ever do, then they could apply that condition and they could start to reverse the damage they have done.

    • Forget about the church. Practice Scientology.

      • DM and his co-conspirators should get Scientology justice
        after the state and federal laws have been applied and
        worked through.
        PLUS all the SO-members and all staff and public should
        really do a thorough search where their ethics is and have
        been on really all their dynamics, as they have in one way
        or another strayed so far from the basic concepts of Scientology
        that it is time to face the consequences.
        In other words, let’s not forget all the goodness these people
        inherently have and can get back again.
        Short of all that, yes, let’s forget about the church!

  42. Of course it can change. People are fickle and if someone were to just offer simple comm, it is very easy to dispel black PR in an one on one situation.

    For the church though, it seems like they have a lot of amends.

    For independents, who are not looking at global domination but rather to help the people in front of them, it is easy. One of my friends once said that her hairdresser said all Scn are wacko and she was stumped. I said you might have said Oh my gosh, did you meet my friend? She laughed so hard.

    All churches have their own ugliness but if one cares for the person in front of them, it is easier to talk and handle.

    Have fun, it is easy to handle Black PR.

  43. Scientologists are the nicest people in the world.
    For Instance:
    Paula Quigley joined Scientology at 16 and worked at the DC, NY and ASHO Orgs, for 44 years
    When she was dying of lung cancer at 60, no one from Scientology came to see her
    Despite this, she left all her worldly possessions to Scientology and only asked that her ashes be spread in the Pacific Ocean
    Scientologists did clean out her apartment, but they abandoned her ashes at the LA Coroner’s office, who contacted her Scientologist executor, Stacey Wells to please have the decency to pick them up – she never did – because Scientologists are too busy being the nicest people in the world

    • They won’t stop until they have sucked all of the life out of you.

    • OMG re Paula Quigley! I had no idea that that happened to her. We had auditing rooms next to each other at AOLA.
      I am so sorry to hear that.
      Thank you for bringing her name up. May she rest in peace despite the goof with her ashes.
      Greta

  44. Your humble servant

    Marty,

    Thank you for letting us know that. I am happy to answer your exact questions without spouting off too much with personal asides, opinions beliefs, and observations. I believe you are absolutely correct that the current, corporate Church of Scientology represents what Scientology is to most people, and the reputation has become just horrible. Just the other day I was watching the super bowl with few friends, and friends of friends, and one of the younger guests, seeing the super bowl ad, and not knowing I had any connection to the subject, took the opportunity to make a snide and derisive, contemptuous crack about the subject, which no one there ventured to disagree with at all. I think this sums up the public attitude in a nutshell.

    You asked: Can the image be improved? How? How long might it take? Yes, of course I believe that any image can be improved eventually. In the case of the subject and philosophy, and yes perhaps the religion of Scientology, it will certainly take the independent practice of the subject to gradually grow over time and for people to reach an awareness that there is a vast difference between the subject and the present organization. It will take the present Church shrinking much more from what it is today. As we know, the actual stats have been abysmal and are probably getting worse. So, it is shrinking fast. However, new buildings being purchased and exceptional fund raising efforts tend to lend a sort of permanence to the thing.

    I think it will take 20 years to really turn the thing around.

    I really pay no attention to know-nothing jokester celebrities and irresponsible journalists who would just as soon throw out the baby with the bathwater.

  45. Back in April 2010 Colbert did a segment on Scientology (about the time the Andersen Cooper segment was on CNN) http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/268825/april-01-2010/elephant-graveyard—david-frum
    It still makes me laugh…
    There is a maxim in marketing: “Great word of mouth about your company makes all of your other marketing efforts much more effective.”
    If the word on the street about your company or product is good, then when people see/hear your ads they often remark to those nearby about the positives they have experienced or heard about you.
    The corollary of this maxim is illustrated perfectly by Miscavige and the current Church of Scientology.
    When there is already bad word of mouth about your company or product, then your ongoing marketing actions only serve to spread more broadly the ill-will you have already generated.
    I was with a whole room of non-scientologists when the super bowl ad came on, and all it did was start a conversation about what a screwy cult it is.
    None of these people would have discussed Scientology had it not been for the ad. But when ad played, the conversations started.
    They are idiots to advertise Scientology until the horrible, “swinging a dead cat at a wedding”, PR is handled. Any and all advertisements only create MORE derision and bad word of mouth…
    Of course we all know that the ONLY reason the super bowl ad was on was to raise more IAS donations.
    As for is there any change possible? Of course! I am always insanely optimistic!
    From my way of looking at things anyone or any group can always make an about face and change. It may not be very likely, but its always possible.
    As has been discussed here at great length there would need to hundreds of actions taken: new management, cancellation of “policies” like disconnection and extortion, getting the tech back in, issuing an amnesty, on and on.
    If Scientology was gotten honestly and completely back “on purpose” then, and only then, would it make any sense to do super bowl ads.
    With the current short attention spans and even shorter memory of people these days I would say the current cluster f**k of the current church scientology could be as glorious as a green meadow in as little as 5 to 10 years.
    Note to OSA people: Give me a call when you’re ready!

  46. Stephen Colbert is winning. He’s glowing. He’s happy. He’s creative. He’s wealthy. He’s fit and healthy. He has a huge fan base.

    The church think is that he is 1.1

    But I say he is living the dream on a very high level. And all he’s really doing is mirroring the communication that the philosophy, its founder and the church have put out there to be observed and evaluated by the masses.

    It’s not Colbert’s evil-doing that is in question. It is the philosophy, its founder and the church who are being and have been the cause point on all of this current hazing. That’s where the real responsibility lies.

    I’ve often wondered how things would be if DM was a good leader and had helped grow the church. It wouldn’t erase certain things I consider to be mistakes, such as the paramilitary Sea Org. Or saying that homosexuals are 1.1 and placing such in writing in Science of Survival. Or referring to non-believers as wogs. Those errors would still be the butt of jokes on night time talk shows, regardless.

    • I agree Bryan, as I replied earlier, with no one answering..what exactly did Lawrence Wright and Stephen Cobert say that was incorrect…

      • Jane Doe2,

        I know, right? As an example of cause points, Mary Sue went to prison. LRH theoretically ran from the tax man. Some folks from the days of the Apollo have stated that kids were basically abused/tortured at LRH’s direction, etc. You can find it on Youtube. I think it’s called Secret Lives or something. I mean, there is this whole series of dramatic events which, if the church was actually growing in present time, would be the subject of even more media fodder today than we’re currently seeing. It would be quite the war to witness, I feel.

        I’m both grateful and pissed off about how LRH lived his life. He went out of his way on a grand scale to help. But he also seems to have created a horrid personal legacy, as can be exemplified by the status quo on him, even from plenty of indies on this very blog.

        So what exactly is it that Lawrence Wright and Stephen Colbert and Anderson Cooper and Piers Morgan and The View and all the rest of them are doing wrong?

        LRH, the way the philosophy was presented and the current church are the absolute cause point on this whole media circus act.

      • Grasshopper (Mark P)

        Well for one thing Scientology is not a prison of belief.

        • Interesting point. I think that when your founder tells you that it’s up to you to wear his boots and clear an entire planet because there’s no time left, once you decide that this is true, you’ve just trapped yourself.

          I think that the philosophy, pre-DM, suggested in several spots that your next two hundred trillion are going to be very tough if you don’t get up the Bridge immediately. Again, once you decide this is true, you have trapped yourself.

          And, of course, the current “church” is nothing but a prison of belief. You do it to yourself, as Jason Beghe once stated (paraphrasing).

          The phrase “prison of belief” is, in my view, totally accurate.

          • The phrase is only accurate if you also call Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Higher Education, the Sciences, and any other system of belief a “Prison of Belief.” The name is sensational. And meaningless. Is a nun a prisoner of belief? Is a Mormon missionary? Is a Jehova’s Witness? Is a member of Earth First? Is a football player? A Marine?

            Anyone can commit themselves for a cause or belief, and put their whole life into it, and even die for it.

            You don’t have to look very far to see that this world is a screwed up place and is in need of help. You don’t need Ron to tell you that.

            Lawrence Wright said he tried to answer why people became Scientologists – like how could some otherwise rational human being possible think this crap has any value? Well, how can any otherwise rational human being believe that rocks can think and be conscious and yet have zero free will? That would be the materialistic “reason” view of life. How can any reasonable person belief that God exists? “We can’t prove that a toaster is not orbiting Mars, but we can reasonably expect there isn’t one” is how some atheists explain their atheism. How can any reasonable person believe that a lone Jew hoisted up on a cross has saved Mankind from eternal damnation?

            So what does Larry do? He punts! He doesn’t dig. Look, obviously there is value to Scientology, but non-Scientologists can’t see it. Who is really blind, then?

            Now, yes, people do go too far, and there is “thought stopping” and all that. But that is not Scientology. That is people limiting themselves, and other people taking advantage of it, and you can see that in any subject or belief system under the sun.

        • Really Grasshopper? You don’t think it can be interpreted as a prison of belief for anyone who has allowed themselves to be literally imprisoned on the RPF for days, months or years..most could leave but they have been brainwashed to think they can’t…how about the belief you should disconnect form ANYONE that leaves the church or speaks unkindly of it..this is also a form of brainwashing and a very strong indicator of cult like thinking…or should I say belief…..

        • Grasshopper,

          Once an individual decides that he MUST go up the Bridge, based upon the threat of great future suffering if he doesn’t, (and this is coming from the highly respected founder), that individual will beg, borrow and steal money and bring it to the registrars. That individual will create all sorts of PTS type A situations and horrific personal debt scenes with friends, co-workers, credit card companies and family. That individual will, in many cases I’ve seen, give up his artistic goals, his career goals, his life goals, and he will devote himself to this new purpose.

          I’ve witnessed many young people give up their ambitions and sign a staff contract, or worse, an SO contract. Again, the founder stated that this would be “the sensible thing to do”.

          The individual does this to himself. It is a prison of belief, IMHO.

          In present time, I have knowledge of a family potentially breaking up very painfully because one of them has been declared for waking up and being honest. It’s horrible. And even though Disconnection was cancelled by LRH in ’68, he nonetheless created it in the first place and paved the way for psycho-midget to re-establish it as a horrid weapon.

          To give up a family member because they are not “on board with Command Intention” is the worst kind of prison of belief.

          • Grasshopper (Mark P)

            Bryan, I understand your point, and I know that these are all-too-common stories. I understand the metaphore. However, it is not all Scientology is. And this phenomenon is not unique to Scientology. This is what I object to.
            We have detractors saying that disconnection and being a slave to the bridge and being dictatorial and being unfeeling robots are systemic and inevitable consequences of Scientology. That is not true. I was on staff twice in my life. Both were very intense experiences, but i do not regret it, and i was not in prison. Far from It. I was on the BC for five years. It took dedication and persistence to do it. I am glad I did it. Does Larry talk about this in his book? I don’t think so. So this “prison of belief” metaphore is not a full picture.

          • I disagree. I decided I must go up the bridge and did not have to walk over dead bodies to do it. So did MANY others.

      • Its entertainment, irony and satire. All rejection.

        ML/A

    • Bryan | February 7, 2013 at 4:02 pm | Reply

      “Stephen Colbert is winning. He’s glowing. He’s happy. He’s creative. He’s wealthy. He’s fit and healthy. He has a huge fan base.”

      Never heard of him before today.

      He is pan determined and very funny. A brilliant comedian, such are rare.

      As a wish list I’d like to see him use his comedy to promote Scn.

      So I wish.

    • Grasshopper (Mark P)

      Colbert did a great job. I really enjoyed this and did not expect to. I loved his reply to the 14 people who had been hit by DM, scaling it against the abuses of the Catholic Church. It is hard to do what he did and he did it well.

    • Regarding Homosexuals and the Tone Scale:

      I love the tone scale and made quite a study of it. LRHs discovery and description of it is nothing short of brilliant. The only puzzle for me was the placement of homosexuals at 1.1 Covert Hostility on a strict basis.

      My observation in life is that while many homosexuals are indeed at 1.1, and probably at a higher percentage than the general population, certainly not ALL are. I’ve spotted homosexuals all over the place on the scale and many times at higher levels (and yes, i know the difference between social tone and chronic tone levels).

      So why did LRH do this?

      My conclustion is that cultural factors skewed LRHs observations and data. in the 1940’s and 1950’s, society by in large, was highly intolerant of homosexuals. Therefore, they had to hide it. Really hide. Certainly some didnt, but those who didnt then had to live largely as outcasts to the society at large.

      If you wanted to work in corporate america, professional athlete, military, government, the local bank, as a mechanic (or whatever) and were gay, you kept that fact strictly secret. Moreover, you probably got married and had kids as further disguise. This kind of stress must have caused widespread pscyhic trauma in this group of people.

      Society now, is much more open and tolerant of it. Not totally…but to the degree that is more tolerant, i beleive homosexuals are less repressed and therefore more free to move on the tonescale.

  47. Well said Dan Koon and Yvonne Schick. I agree. And I think we should as Indies start the Reformation of Scn and choose a completely different word for it. The Lutherans broke off from their mother church and used a totally different name too. How long will it take to change the image? Too long. Just break off, get a new name and run it as the Indies have been doing.

    • Thanks, Jane Doe. Someone used the word “brand”. The brand “Scientology” is severely damaged. It would first take a total change in the leadership (not prediction on who would step in even if DM was out), then a gargantuan public relations campaign flawlessly executed, accompanied by valuable products (another huge effort to restore the auditing and training tech) to turn the brand around. I would not buy stock in that company even at $.01 a share.

    • SCN is a revolutionary movement, desiring to be “liked” by wogs is senseless to say the least. DM is doing us a favor in a way by making us look like an inoffensive and stupid cult.

    • Shit in a different box is still shit.
      There’s nothing wrong with the word Scientology.
      What’s wrong with Scientology is the aberration of the 3rd dynamic.

      You can have a new Name for a certain association. But you still would use Scientology, right? What do you want to do? Rewrite all the LRH materials and hope no ones takes notice you are still using Scientology?
      No. Wan’t work.

      What could really work, in my opinion, is a op term Association. “Liberal Association of Independent Scientologists” (choose your name).
      In this way you could discharge some of it for the outside observer.
      You could give introduction to the subject and answer FAQs about Scientology.
      This Association should be for the sole purpose of truth-based public relations on the subject of Scientology (not a technical entity).

      If you really want to have some impact, organize a public demo against abuses in the church and invite the media. (Like the CCHR demos)
      That would pull some attention and you could bring your message across – “we are liberal scientologists, we are not the church”.

      • SKM
        “You can have a new Name for a certain association. But you still would use Scientology, right? What do you want to do? Rewrite all the LRH materials and hope no ones takes notice you are still using Scientology?
        No. Wan’t work.”

        Been done successfully. See Clearbird

        http://freezoneearth.org/clearbird/

        Probably easier to use than CO$ materials.

        This was a massive effort to stop CO$ legal attacks among other things. Its the bridge up to OT 4.

        Take it or leave it.

        • Terril,
          Do you have any info about Tommy Thompson’s ICAUSE?
          He claims his materials are standard LRH up to OT8, rewritten to avoid copyright issues.

          http://icause.net/

          • What I know is that many years ago he being fearful of attacks re copyright created a non standard OT 2 which was nothing like OT2.
            He later repented. My advice is stick to original materials.

            • Mr Clearbird got everything cross checked by excellent tech terminals
              and by and large they are generally approved of. It was a magnificent effort at a time when the threat, or percieved threat of copyright attacks was much greater than now. However just about everything can now be easily obtained.

            • Thank you for all the info, Terril.

        • Yes, but did it help the reputation of Scientology in the world?

          Probably easier to use than CO$ materials.
          I doubt it.
          I go with original LRH.
          It’s stupid to rewrite LRH “because of the copyright issues”.
          You can always use your copied materials for personal, spiritual (religious) needs and purposes.

          • Enid Vien was sued by CO$ and lost re copyright issues. She was teaching the tech.

            • Eric S AKA WindWalker

              Terril

              My understanding is that “copyrights” only apply to actual copying of some media already published and “copyrighted” by someone else. The “copyright” protects the copyright holder from someone else being able to REPUBLISH his material without his approval.

              I cannot see the actual “teaching” of data can be “copyrighted” at all, nor can the action of “auditing”, or running courses, or giving lectures, etc., using “copyrighted” data. (so long as you have not REPUBLISHED the data without permission from the copyright holder.)

              But once you have made and sold, or distributed, “copyrighted” materials, you are now open to legal action. I would be so bold as to bet that anyone who has lost a “copyright” battle has been found to be doing just that, not because they were running courses or auditing.

              There is potentially a solution… Get your materials from an approved source, and you cannot be found guilty of copyright infringement.

              Eric S

              • Enid Vien copied stuff from Red Vols best as I recall. A student given a condition shopped her.
                An approved source?

                Suggestions!

                • Eric S AKA WindWalker

                  Terril

                  Are you saying that Enid Vien was sued for HAND COPYING materials for her own use? Or was she copying stuff and giving it to students?

                  By “approved source” I mean books, tapes, issues, etc., distributed by the church, not things that have been copied from church issues. I have personally acquired multiple sets of the red and green volumes, books, course packs, loose issues, tapes, etc. I highly recommend others do the same. As far as I know, it is not illegal to get together with some friends and go over LRH data together, from these sources.

                  I understand that there are definitely going to be some challenges in getting some of the actual materials. And, of course, some of the materials available from the church are already altered. And it is certainly not going to be a long term solution, but it could satisfy small groups if they are creative and understand the ins and outs of copyright law that apply to such a situation.

                  As to future possibilities,there have been some posts here recently, that suggest that the church’s hold on certain of their copyrights might be getting a bit frail at this point, due to their handling, or mishandling, of copyright law.

                  Of course, as has been done, the concepts, can simply be “re-written” by others. It is not going to be “straight LRH”, of course, but someone else’s interpretation of LRH. Personally I would still want to have access to the original LRH materials somehow.

                  Unfortunately, the reason why it is difficult to “get around” copyright law is because that is why it was designed in the first place, to protect the holder of the copyright from having his stuff randomly copied and distributed by others.

                  Eric S

                  • Google:
                    “True Source Scientology Foundation” located in the Netherlands.
                    This may answer some of your questions.

                    • Eric S AKA WindWalker

                      SKM

                      Thank you. Some very interesting legal meanderings there. What evidence is available seems to suggest that the copyrights might well be “in the public domain” and no longer protected by copyright.

                      Is it not also true that if a copyright holder is aware of copyright infringement upon their copyrights, and they take no action to defend the copyright, at some point they lose their right to do so?

                      Are you, or is anyone else, aware of any recent copyright suits (concerning LRH’s original works) launched by the church?

                      Eric S

                    • Hello Eric.
                      I have many printed (hardcopy, original) Materials but not the old ones.

                      I do not care about any kind of copyright infringement, because I do not sell any of these – I only use it for my personal, spiritual needs.

                      I can’t guarantee for the correctness of the materials. They were compiled by this association/foundation. I think they have good intentions and I also think something like this is a good start in order to preserve the materials.

                      You should be able to find one Max Hauri on You Tube (use the same search terms as above).

                      Where I am living I can make personal copies of everything I want.
                      So if I study it, I am using the materials myself. If I run a list, I am using it myself. It should be similar in another countries. I don’t know how it is in the US.

                  • Erik
                    “Are you saying that Enid Vien was sued for HAND COPYING materials for her own use? Or was she copying stuff and giving it to students?”

                    Thats what she did.

                    ERIK
                    “Of course, as has been done, the concepts, can simply be “re-written” by others. It is not going to be “straight LRH”, of course, but someone else’s interpretation of LRH. Personally I would still want to have access to the original LRH materials somehow.”

                    Indeed. Note though that processes and procedures are not protected by copyright [ I think I'm correct here], and thus for example
                    OT 2 platens are OK to copy.

    • No need to change the name. Change the practice – DELIVER. With shining products, the PR will take care of itself and the tarnish on the name will buff out.

      • Exactly.
        People don’t judge us by our beliefs but by our deeds.
        I don’t even think the “Space Opera in Scientology” is a big issue, because:
        1) other traditional religions also have acknowledge the fact we are not the only one in the universe
        2) Scientology teaches: what ist true for you is true for you
        3) You don’t need to touch the (space opera) materials in order to benefit gradually from Scientology

  48. Marty: thanks for this interesting conversation. You start by writing (and rightfully so): “ Like it or not, justified or not, the following segment on the popular Colbert Report pretty well sums up the public image of Scientology. Not the church of Scientology in the eyes of the world at large, but Scientology. A whacky religious cult with bizarre beliefs, violent practices and a threatening way of dealing with criticism.

    I’m glad you understand and make it clear that, in the public’s mind, there is no distinction between the Church of Scientology, and Scientology. Nor will there ever be. Public opinion is not subtle enough to make this kind of distinctions. Never has, never will. I beg to differ with Aeolus, when he writes: “… you have done quite a remarkable job …….. of distinguishing between the Church and the subject of Scientology, and I see a bit of that being picked up in the mainstream press.” …….. no matter how hard some of us may try to distinguish between the church organization and the philosophy or subject, the general public is not going to get it.”

    Iv’e observed and studied religions and have been active on my own spiritual path for the last 41 years. To my knowledge, there is no documented case in the 20th century of the public making a significant distinction between a Church damaged in the court of public opinion, and its credo or tech or one of its splinter groups. Public opinions works in stereotypes. Kim Loss puts it further down in another comment: “separating Scientology from CoS is like trying to separate Catholicism from the Vatican.”

    Now… here is a big catch 22, a big double bind…… If a splinter group is in disagreement with the way a religious movement is run, and if this group believes that the original beliefs, practices, or tech of the religion are valid, what happens when this group generates (possibly with very good reasons) negative media against the original religion, in order to distinguish itself (as most splinter groups do).

    20th century history shows that the bad PR generated toward the original movement also invalidates in the media and public opinion any chance of the splinter group becoming successful. People out there, while they like to watch the battle between the bad Church and the martyred followers, if they need to make a choice for themselves, do not distinguish between the good side and bad side of controversy. They do not want to associate with the followers of the “good”, “original” religion behind the “bad” church.
    Who would want to be associated with a “good” version of “Aum” or the good, uncorrupted version of the “Solar Temple”. Too risky.

    Based on these peculiarities of public opinion, it would appear that the current radicalization of the church of Scientology in the court of public opinion diminishes the chances for an independent movement with “Scientology” in its name to be taken seriously by the media and the public. Whether that is fair or not is a whole conversation.

    So what is the alternative, for those who dissent with a religion with a bad reputation and want to become successful? Yvonne Shick writes further down in the comments: “If I were a skilled auditor and I wanted to help people who had never walked into a church of Scn, I would consider finding something nice and new-age-ish to call it.
    There is a giant pool of people who are looking for non-traditional therapies to help with the travails of life.”

    I’m not a Scientologist, as I see this situation from the outside, I’d say…
    A new name would be nice, but more is (otherwise the media would denounce the name change as a fraud). What may be needed is new twist at the more core level, in the set of fundamental beliefs, and in terms of inclusion of other creeds. A new position embracing mainstream values like transparency, for sure, but most importantly a new, fresh blend of tech that infuses core Scientology tech with some respected tech from more broadly accepted religions, old and new. Something that says: “different, open, accepting of other paths, not cultish”. I see how such movement could have a chance to succeed. It would be seen as something new, with origins in Scientology, but having kept only the good and eliminated of pretty much all that public opinion was attacking. As an outside, this is the only successful path to an independent Scientology that I am able to see, and my sense is that there may be a big potential for that, actually, ready to be taken, by the right person with the right vision.

    To sum it up, my view is that the current negative media is as detrimental to a possible Scientology independent movement taking off as it is to the Church.

    • “separating Scientology from CoS is like trying to separate Catholicism from the Vatican.”

      Maybe not.
      But the public will distinguish Catholicism from other branches of Christianity. Do you really think its all the same (A=A=A) for the average person? If so, why even bother?
      Of course they see differences.

      And the only thing we can do now, as Scientologists, is to build a distance to the Church which was corrupted by Miscavige.
      We Scientologists must have a distance from the abuses on the top, the out-exchange vulture-culture, greedy behaviour and all the negative aspekts of the organisations of Miscavige.

      My advice is simple: set a good example!
      Don’t pay too much attention to “how bad all that is”.
      It isn’t.
      At the moment the attention goes to the abuses and that is ok.
      We have colleteral demage – true. But why? Because DM won’t evaluate the scene and won’t work with the correct Why.
      What is the correct Why for the current media?
      Abuses on the top. Beatings. Corruption. Misleading of parishioners. Lies. Out exchange.
      We, independent Scientologists, are not the church.
      It’s our own responsibility to work out WHAT image we want to create for Scientology.

  49. I think it could be handled in one action. The instant removal of David Mismanage. He is the source of the problem and the public, former members and staff would recognize that and instantly come uptone and start handling the public. Its easy to hang your hat on that as its his actions that have caused the trickle down effect. Many groups have continued with the removal of SP’s and moved on.

  50. Back in the mid 80’s when I volunteered as a public reg there was some bad press about Scientology in the newspaper. I thought it was going to be tough evaluating personality tests, but I was surprized to find out that if my TR’s were in and I did my job correctly that it made no difference in my stats. As time went by, when this type of situation occurred, I found the same thing to be true. I believe there’s always going to be bad press on Scientology. Because of what Scientology does, it’s always going to be attacked by certain people. The more it is correctly applied the more some people are going to screem. Fortunately, correct application overcomes this.

  51. Scientology tech will have to produce some of the über-beings or full OTs that Ron promised throughout the 50’s and on the grade chart in the early 70’s. Short of that, the subject might never resurrect at this point.

    Many people joined the Scientology movement to unleash and return their full native OT capabilities. LRH made some hyperbolic claims about these abilities over the years. It’s all on the record in his books and tapes.

    Until people are walking around with these capabilities, the subject will probably not gain any kind of mass acceptance, even though it does deliver nice gains at lower levels that people might appreciate having.

    Even myself, I’ve gotten pretty jaded and feel a touch betrayed after a lifetime of massive sacrifice. I do feel good about the gains I did get, just not the ultimate capabilities that were promised for decades. Color me a somewhat disappointed buyer.

    I know many OT7s and OT8s personally. Just not very impressed with the real results I’ve seen. And I am one, a very trained one, so I speak from a real place.

    One in my area has spent 40 years in training (Class 8) and 40 years in processing (OT7) and 40 years practicing an auditor career professionally and is a serial “home wrecker,” twice having had affairs with married women to find his next wife. Now I look at this and I say to myself what a waste of 40 years to reach the most upper attainments of “the tech” and he still does that? Really? And this is very well known story in two major metropolitan fields. Truth be told, the tech will have to do better than that. And right now, it does not, at least not consistently enough.

    I’m sorry that I think this but a lot of the time I feel he should have committed himself to Christianity early in his life. Perhaps, maybe, possibly, its strict biblical pronouncements and rules would have put him on the straight and narrow path to a more decent and honest life.

    How about all the execs locked up at the Int base? Most of them have had 30-40 years of processing and training and that’s all they got? Content being locked up? My non-Scientology friends have voiced this exact question to me at a dinner party, asking what’s the point of it all if that’s the case shape you end up in after decades of therapy and spiritual enlightenment. I had no answer for them. Very embarrassed that night to say the least.

    Am I being too disparaging here. No, absolutely not. I was promised so, so much more for me and for others when I was asked to devote my whole life to this quest back in the 70’s and assured by LRH over and over that the road was already completely laid out.

    Short of Scientology tech producing some of the über-beings or full OTs, LRH will have to return and finish researching and developing the tech. Honestly, the tech should be more realistically portrayed as a pilot project that LRH began and he didn’t stay around long enough to see the full results of roll out into the real world. Most of the results are being revealed only today, decades after the tech was stamped as fully baked and ready. Today, the results are blogging on the Internet. The results are quietly hunkered down at Int base. The results are all around you. You know them, you see them, you are them.

    Scientology is not a science but a protoscience, a new science trying to establish its legitimacy, and needs to have further research and work done with it. KSW and Scientology’s strict copyrights will prevent this in the future, so here we sit. We have what we have.

    Many of the kool-aid drinking faithful will simply await the founder’s return and that could be a very long time coming. The faithful of Jesus have been waiting for his return for about 2000 years from what I’ve been told. I predict the same to happen in Scientology. A long, long wait.

    All this said, I’m happy with the results I got on the bridge so far, just not what was promised exactly . . . that I would have devoted all my entire life and sacrificed what I did had I known the whole story. And Sarge’s little epilogue story in the Wright book left me very unsettled about further fiddling around with the tech. I’ll just hang pat where I am, a pleasant stable point, and enjoy the rest of my life. After all, that’s why I paid for three decades.

    Do I believe the public image can change? Not until LRH returns and finishes the work. His resurrection or return is a necessary “proof point” for this world to believe in Scientology again or give it the benefit of the doubt once more.

    • You’re waiting for LRH to come back?
      Wow.

    • Forever Lurker
      “Scientology tech will have to produce some of the über-beings or full OTs that Ron promised throughout the 50’s and on the grade chart in the early 70’s. Short of that, the subject might never resurrect at this point.

      Many people joined the Scientology movement to unleash and return their full native OT capabilities. LRH made some hyperbolic claims about these abilities over the years. It’s all on the record in his books and tapes.” snip

      Years ago I thought that LRH felt he had failed because of this. I considered
      his apparent PTSness was because of this. Sarge seems to have confirmed this. I agree with you that the work is unfinished. But it got started……

      • TP: “But it got started…… ”

        And I’m grateful for that as well, despite my decades-long personal crusade for full disclosure and clarity.

        I never needed to be lied to or fooled with. All I ever wanted was honest characterizations, honest descriptions of outcomes, being dealt with honestly, no conspiracies of silence . . . and most importantly, full disclosure. I could take it from there perfectly well myself.

        TP, you’re a good guy with a good heart. Thank you.

  52. The media associated COS with DM.

    This, on its own, swiped away years of hard work and dedication of so many good, intelligent and honest people! LRH included.

    The public, as a majority, is not used to think on its own anymore. They don’t like to chew. They like to gulp what is already chewed for them.

    Sad.

  53. My answer to this and earlier similar is, contained in “reconciliation” and “unconditional amnesty”.

    ML/A

  54. The amount of time is proportionate to the amount of change, and how rapidly it changes and how widely that is publicized. It took 50 years to earn truly broad public disdain, but this was more recently hastened by the internet. So the road to recovery and good repute COULD be much less. It could be only years IF enough true change occurred and enough resourses were thrown at it. An overthrow of the regime, full disclosure, immense amends, all for starters. The turnaround itself would have to become the story. Something that is celebrated within the church. Because without that there is no reversal. Without that an onerous burden is upon those who practice outside the church. All the good works of independents will be offset by the continued bad press generated by the church. As Marty said, its not the Church they are talking about, its scientology. The public sees no difference. Germany has had clean hands for 60 years and folks still remember or are reminded of their past. The bad repute will ever disappear from the record. But those who value the tech and have a personal mission to help others should simply carry on and let their good works speak for themselves. If they expect no change in public perception, they would be wise. Think globally is you like, but act locally. If you can help someone with the tech, just do it. Do it for yourself and that person you help. Let the ripples go where they will.

  55. Theo sismanides

    I saw the show and the interview!!! Hillarious! The Watremelon is what DM gets! Marty you stubbed him hard with all the people who came out and talked on this.

    However if Scientology is going to make it….? Well…my opinion is that the Church is gonna continue because the Elite on this planey wanna grab it totally and keep it for their purposes!

    Then it’s the Indies! But this will take Ethics, (the tech we do have it) and Admin (organizing).

    It takes a Team of OTs to undo the whole thing.

    No Leader is needed BUT a Team Of OTs! Who will set STAR HIGH GOALS!!!

    The zinc is gone guys!! Why? LRH IS GONE! Only hope for Mankind is us, but with no purpose, Ethics and Admin the Tech will barely survive.

    LRH didn’t say for nothing in the Ethics Tech that numbers (statistics) are important. He knew this universe upside down! He wouldn’t fool around with it….

  56. Nickolas Lister

    This current image is not a new one. When Operation Snow White took place, the world shook it’s head in dismay at “The Criminal Cult”. The image has just been broadened by the new multitude of media outlets as well as the extreme speed with which knowledge is communicated and spread, opposed to ten years ago. This snowball which has turned into a PR nightmare for the Church began very long ago.

    The image can’t be changed as there were and are far too many narcissistic, egotistical individuals in management over the years who lorded over their juniors and parishioners to create the current ethos. The end product of that pomposity and mental abuse is this – a beautiful science seen as a pile of shit in the eyes of the world.

    Generation Y statistically retaliates against control, authority and monopolies. Scientology as a strictly managed organization with stringent command lines cannot exist on a broad scale as such moving into the future. The management which has existed over the years has abused their rights and power. I for one would never again pledge my allegiance to another church with any form of hierarchy or control.

    • In any case SCN aim is to topple the current reality. It will never be liked unless very stellar people show up within its rank.

    • Theo sismanides

      Beautifully said!!!

    • “This current image is not a new one. When Operation Snow White took place, the world shook it’s head in dismay at “The Criminal Cult”. The image has just been broadened by the new multitude of media outlets as well as the extreme speed with which knowledge is communicated and spread, opposed to ten years ago. This snowball which has turned into a PR nightmare for the Church began very long ago.”
      Yes.
      I think, with a little work you’ll still have lots of interested people in the subject of Scientology.
      Same old, same old.
      “Entheta” is not the Why for DMs down stats. It’s his non-delivery and out-exchange.

  57. As long as its EX Members keep saying bad things about it then things will never change. There are not many of you on this blog that are helping matters really are there. Yes this is going to be an unpopular comment but really you are all adding fuel to the fire.

    • Annon,
      It’s known as truth, something you obviously can’t handle…

    • What’s being exposed is important because it’s a criminal organization that’s detrimental to its members in numerous ways. Everyone’s voice does help, even if just comments on their own experience.

    • Annon,

      When you have the press, governments and even your own people spreading bad word of mouth, it means one thing…..the guy(s) at the top of the church are fucking up, very badly.

      Trying to stop a locomotive of truth (even if you consider it “adding fuel to the fire”), is a blind reaction and is also the wrong target.

      We are a symptom of the church management’s cause.

    • Nickolas Lister

      Annon, not sure if you were a Scientologist or not. I was born into and left. Lost my family and friends. Tad rough. Exposing the Church’s crimes and cutting its reach via media and forums such as these are actually the reason a reform would eventually come about. Would we be better off extolling the plus points of David Miscavige publicly? In that case, he’s very charismatic.

      I’ve thought about it a million different ways. I’ve come to the conclusion that the entire system needs to be destroyed and rebuilt with more sanity.

    • Nope. The fire was raging internally and it is burning the house down, spreading outwards and burning people. What remains to be seen is if anything can be salvaged from the ashes.

    • True responsibility would be to change the bad things without relying on whether or not others are pointing them out.

    • Really, you are along the same lines as a family that discovers one or more of the children has been molested by a family member and requires all to remain silent for the good of the family. The group is all and the individuality is nothing. People only have bad things to say when bad things happen, Instead of addressing the bad things that happen, you move to shut up the people that discuss it. You are still part of the problem, not the solution.

  58. Mark my words: When the Super Power building is open and delivering (next month, right?) the positive perception by the public will become really real.

    • I have obtained all secret documents to Super Power. I lay them down here now.

      First, you are given a DMPL , No! It is not dumpling! (David Miscavige Policy Letter) that reads, “Power is getting others to listen to you!” Clear all the words in that sentence.

      The rest is process’ where you command the machines in the Super Power Building, and they do what you say!

      The first one is a giant blender! You put carrots and other vegetables inside and command “BLEND!” by pushing the blender button, and it does it!

      You then announce that YOU blended it!

      Then you are sent to attest that Power is getting others to believe you.

      It moves forward from there. Needless to say this must have created quite a bit of interest already. So just succumb to this future superman program and lay down in surrender before you have no ability to fight back against the super power super men David has yet to unleash.

      He would have unleashed them all already to handle all of this anarchy, except some of the machines have not been tweaked.

  59. I think a good point could be:
    Any game is better than no game.
    Beating on scientology is a game. (Games condition, people who “not know’, “refuse to know” the actual intentions, objectives and uses and results (or not) of the subject).
    A better game is of course HELP and KNOW. In that order, as a person can act and be “neurotic or psychotic” in life, or any part thereof if HELP is proven to be BETRAYAL or a complete (to the person) FAILED HELP has occurred.

    I’d say “as long as it takes”, and IT defined as, basically auditing on the subject, that can be as simple as presenting an orderly idea of it, disorder comes up, more orderly idea, disorder blows off (games condition blows off).

    I could write more, like “perhaps run WASTE on the subject, until substitute or better yet HAVE (on the real data and the real intention behind each independent persons goals and use of philosophy comes up)”, but there’s probably 100 angles on it.

    • Oh I failed to elaborate on a key point I was trying to make:
      Showing how it can help, and how much we want that help, how much we really deeply invest our hearts in helping, may provide a worthy goal to substitute for the game of having a “games condition”.

      The “thank you”s that I have received from helping with it are priceless to me, and it takes a pretty cold heart and blank mind to miss this point for too long.

  60. In truth, the Sea Org would have to change for the perception of the Church to change. All of the bad P.R. is because of abuse from the para military. That would take David Miscavige stepping down and those that have propped him up over the decades, to follow him, including the OSA staff and OSA spies, some of which are volunteers. All of the people involved in Fair Gaming and social abuse.

    The perception of entire countries has changed with the leader stepping down. You can not change the truth. There is a long history of abuse that really happened. I just finished reading Jenna Miscavige’s book (admits that Marty was a person of mercy in the Sea Org, I have sent him an audio copy) and what has happened to the tech, and how the Sea Org is using the meter to torture people is simply ghastly.They have simply laid it all to waste with torture and abuse.

    The ONLY hope we have is that Marty has separated out and distinguished Independents as a group NOT supporting the abuse. That shows that we all are not behind it and do not support it. A percentage of us can be trusted to co exist in society without creating damage. That is why abuses in the Independent Movement with the tech or people’s trust is a virus that should be circumvented or handled if we are to survive at all and keep the Scientology knowledge available .

  61. Colbert Report and Lawrence Wright:
    YAWN! (and that’s not blowing off charge
    or an MU.

    This all SOS (Same Ole Sh*t) not
    Science of Survival.

    Again, 3rd and 4th Dynamic abberation
    manifesting.

    The public will never differentiate between
    the Church of Scientology and the
    subject of Scientology. A=A=A.

    Most individuals don’t even know
    the Men of Scientology:

    Stephen Pearl Andrews (22 March 1812 – 21 May 1886)
    The Primary Synopsis of Universology and Alwato:
    The New Scientific Universal Language (1871)

    Anastasius Nordenholz (February 1, 1862 – September 21, 1953)
    Scientology: Science of the Constitution and Usefulness of Knowledge (1934)

    Lafayette Ronald Hubbard (March 13, 1911 – January 24, 1986)
    The Dangerous Dimension (1938)
    Excalibur (1938)
    Abnormal Dianetics (1948)
    Introduction to Scientology: Milestone One Lecture (1952)

    Ah! Floating TA.

  62. A couple of observations.

    1. Nothing is going to change unless there is a significant change in the perception of the church and Scientology until two things happen: a) there are valid PRODUCTS produced and real goodwill generated as a result and b) the lies are stopped. This is NOT going to happen as long as DM is running the show.

    2. The actions of the church in response to the media are creating new enemies daily. The media itch for the opportunity to do what they want without the restraints of their legal department telling them what they cannot say: a) The church refuses to provide spokespeople – the instant assumption is there is something to hide. b) Miscavige himself refuses to respond to anything — the (correct) assumption is that the “peons are beneath him” and he is “too important” to waste his time with the press. c) The tired statements that EVERY source the media talks to is a liar unless approved by the church are really lame now and the statements are read out with “eye rolls” or even to show how nutball the church is.

    Creation of enemies in the media is a direct result of Miscavige living in a bubble – he seems to think the world are all “SO members” and if he says something everyone just goes “Yes, Sir” and accepts his kooky pronouncements without critical thought. “Everyone is a lying, bitter defrocked apostate”, you are missing the “true story” of the astonishing expansion, more in the last year than the 50 previous years, as “proven” by the “new” churches opened everywhere and our rapidly expanding membership, and “we don’t practice disconnection.” So, his idiotic statements sent out in the name of Karin Pouw land like turds in a punchbowl and the splash gets bigger every time a new pronouncement issues forth.
    3. Meantime, the media now have come to learn that the legal threats are nothing more than threats. They will never carry through with a lawsuit because: a) truth is a defense to libel, b) you cannot libel someone who has no reputation to harm, c) they have not done anything about the original Truth Rundown in 2009 or anything since and the statute of limitation is passed and they are thereby precluded from acting on subsequent similar alleged libels and d) Miscavige cannot afford to be made to testify under oath and as every story relates to him there is no way he could avoid being dragged into court if the church were to sue. So, the legal restraint is no longer effective.

    So, the media that is being antagonized more each day and is less and less threatened by the church threats is hammering in an image of a lying cult, led by a violent man who is carrying on the nuttiness of L. Ron Hubbard. And the hammering is not going to stop because there is a pent up reservoir of ill will that has been generated, particularly of late, and as the old adage goes “Never pick a fight with anyone who buys ink by the barrel.”

    The only way out of this mess is to do what is unthinkable for Miscavige (and here he could follow in the footsteps of LRH when confronted with this sort of onslaught and issue a “Reform Code”) – admit there are things wrong, change them and spend some money on things that actually HELP people (like REAL disaster relief or helping the homeless or cleaning up the environment – not hollow “campaigns” that are just photo ops to “bring human rights to the world”). But this is not going to happen, and eventually whole rotten house of cards is going to cave in on itself.

    And perhaps then there will be a chance of changing the public perception by making the actual writings of LRH widely available and letting people experience them and apply them and have wins and tell their friends. No pressure. No demands they buy 5 sets of every book. Just getting the word out and let it spread because it will happen if its available and then used. And then the stories will be written about the underlying genius/goodness of the subject.

    But its going to get worse before it gets better. As the “handling” of the media will continue to be directed from the Bubble and they will not get saner, only nuttier and more unreal.

    Finally, a sense of humor is something that is worth a great deal in one’s journey through life. The lack of humor and thin-skin that has characterized the church is another indicator of how out of touch the church is with planet earth. There are a LOT of jokes about Christians, Mormons, Jews etc. It’s a part of becoming mainstream. But Dave will never get this. He cannot laugh at himself. Ever.

    And you KNOW he was not laughing last nite, even though that was VERY funny.

    It sucks to be Miscavige.

    • Well put Mike. This year I have been on the internet full time, reading news articles and comments, watching the many interview shows with Wright, Jenna Miscaviage, Colbert, and seeing 3 new book sales zoom. You’re apparently up on what’s happening in the world and can garner a credible picture to as it is. Good on ya.

  63. Let’s liken corporate Scientology to Germany through to the WWII era.

    RTC (especially) and the Sea Org (by association and “policy”) are the worst of the SS and brown shirts. RTC even runs its own death camp, the Hole.

    Further, the sawed-off sociopath pygmy Pope sure is similar to Herr Hitler.

    Now consider, did the German people recover? You bet. Will they ever support a NAZI party again? No way!

    Scientology, as the applied spiritual philosophy, will recover and flourish once the ‘official organization’ finishes collapsing. RCS well on its way to that final implosion just like NAZI Germany circa 1942 to 45.

    Orchestrated evil finishes itself off.

    So buh-bye Dave. There is a hell fire licking your ass right now. And it’s only going to get worse.

    That karma thing sure is a bitch, isn’t it Pope Dave, you self designated ecclesiastical usurper.

    By the way, Miscavige, when’s your next Hollywood celebrity date with your BFF?

    • Gerhard Waterkamp

      Tom, I would not use that analogy involving my home country in this way.
      Yes, the German people recovered, but it took a SRA executed by 2,800,000 tons of bombs, countless bullets and artillery shells, that left every major city in Germany between 30% and over 80% destroyed and more than 10% of the population killed.
      Germany recovered because “Nazi Germany” was routed out and a differentiation between “Nazi Germany” and “Germany” got drawn. “Nazi Germany” never recovered, it was wiped off the planet and made place for “Germany”. “Germany” then got rebranded with good products and proper engineering :-)
      This maybe a reminder also for everybody who might think, let us just get DM out of there and things will turn around. I see no evidence in reality supporting that happy wishful thought.
      This ship of Nazi-Scientology is going south since 30 years and like a big ship once full speed in motion there is no turning back by a new captain. 750,000 short tons going in one direction, supported by officers and crew who are sworn in on the course heading south, it will take an impossible amount of tug boats to turn that ship around.
      With all the known transgressions against human decency it should not be too hard to brand DM’s group as “Nazi-Scientology”. It kind of hits the core of the problem and maybe if used frequently it will catch on with the media. That will create room for “Scientology” which when filled with good products and good will (“made in Germany”). It may separate “Scientology” from “Nazi Scientology”. “Scientology” is a huge brand with tremendous awareness. By attaching the bad parts to the brand “Nazi-Scientology” maybe “Scientology” is salvageable over time, especially if Scientologists outside of Nazi-Scientology are able to create good effects in society.
      That is my five cents to Marty’s question and what I believe can be learned from the recovery of “Germany”.

  64. Nikolas Lister comments in this blog today: “Generation Y statistically retaliates against control, authority and monopolies. Scientology as a strictly managed organization with stringent command lines cannot exist on a broad scale as such moving into the future. ..” I can’t agree more. Generation Y, and those after them. This also means that there is a huge opportunity to be seized, for a religion attuned to the likings of these new generations.

    I can relate with Nikolas’ list of the barriers to acceptance, for people to embrace a new religion, thee days: the religion cannot be controlling, it cannot exert authority and it cannot position itself as a monopoly. This means that any new religion, to succeed, would need to be fairly democratic in terms of decision-making, to distribute authority broadly, and to integrate its own set of beliefs and religious technologies with other beliefs and technologies or at least leave plenty of space for its students to do that.

    Accepting to let go of exclusive adhesion to one set of core beliefs is the hardest part, as all religions train its practitioners into believing that the promise can only be achieved through extreme and exclusive dedication to the creed. Contrast that with the fact that the fastest growing religious affiliation these days (in the Western part of the world) is apparently “spiritual but not religious”. This is what most people under 40 nowadays supposedly describe themselves as.

    There is a huge opportunity to help these hundreds of millions of people find what they are looking for. My sense is that these people want something new, fresh, that they can approach as their own. Something without luggage, something that is trending, and something that reflects the diversity of views in which we are now living.

    My sense is that this could come out of an existing religion, but it would need first a major transformation along the three criteria outlined by Nikolas: distributed authority, democratic decision-making, and peaceful coexistence with other faiths/religious technologies in the set of core beliefs. Based on historical precedents with other religious movements, there would likely have to be a new name, and a mch more “cosmopolitan” set of beliefs, i.e incorporating Scientology tech, but not relying exclusively on it.

  65. EnthralledObserver

    Okay… here’s my opinion:

    If you want ‘Scientology’ as a subject to attract more positive credibility, then offer and subject it, in its entireity, to official and credible SCIENTIFIC evaluation, testing and reporting. If it works it will survive and others will start looking at it with interest and will gain that credibility.
    First of all, of course, advocates of the Scientology technology will need to decide definitively what results Scientology can deliver. This is a major area of disagreement currently, and I would suggest the subjects’ greatest downfall.
    Another point I find distasteful is the absurd amount of money being charged for (at this point) an unproven therapy. Until this subject is proven to deliver the results promised uncategorically, then nobody should be allowed to charge a fee. Scientologists need to stop being lazy and greedy and PROVE scientifically (meaning appropriate documentation and data) that their trade works! Every other business is required to, lest they subject themselves to the possibility of accusations and charges of fraud.

    Lastly – ditch the founder and his ‘church’. Much of the man’s writings were contradictory at the least, if not downright absurd; not to mention in a lot of cases outdated. IF, and I mean if, there is any workability in any of the ‘technology’, adherents must come to terms with the fact that that does not automatically mean every word the man spoke or wrote was correct or genuine. L. Ron Hubbard was just a man, not the ‘chosen one’. He died, he did not ascend. He had MANY documented flaws; exaggerating or outright lying being just one of them. And it is widely known the man only made his creation a ‘religion’ to gain tax benefits – witnesses confirm it. Which leads me to the point that ‘if’ there is workability in the tech, and if it is provable, then it stands to reason that any person educated enough will be able to ‘cherry pick’ the parts of LRH’s doctrine that are usable, versus those that were wrong or written purely to maintain and protect Ron’s income, credibility (and safety) and the con, and can further research the field and make new discoveries, etc.

    I offer these opinions to all here advocating Scientology as a subject being someone you would need to convince to change ‘public opinion’. I AM that so-called public – it’s people like me whose opinions matter to this particular topic. I have no connection to Scientology or LRH at all, whatsoever, with the one erroneous decision of buying the movie “Battlefield Earth” from a $5 bin because it had John Travolta in it and I assumed from that it would be a good film to watch – I was wrong – lame! And this was at a time where I didn’t even know what Scientology was, or that JT was a member.

    One final point – the ONLY people who advocate Scientology are those who are ‘in’ it. The rest of us either don’t have an opinion because we don’t know about it, or find it insidious or ridiculous or both.

    • EO, you posted:

      “If you want ‘Scientology’ as a subject to attract more positive credibility, then offer and subject it, in its entirety, to official and credible SCIENTIFIC evaluation, testing and reporting.”

      Clinical psychology or even psychiatric counselling have never been “scientifically proven” in the way you suggest Scientology tech needs to be.

      Yet clinical psychology, not to mention psychiatry, are multi-billion-dollar businesses. And the only evidence they help at all is “anecdotal”, not scientific.

      Related fields like “life coaching” haven’t been scientifically validated either. How about “psychics” you can call on the phone, paying lots of dollars per minute? It seems to me all counselling techniques ought to be subjected to the same scientific standards, shouldn’t they?

      Otherwise it seems like a double standard at work here. But I do feel your heart is in the right place.

  66. I don’t think it can be changed. It’s history has been recorded by those of us who experienced it. Many different people have testified to some very horrific events and they won’t go away by simply denying that the events occurred. Nor will they go away by having current Scientologists file false depositions.

    Hubbard was caught lying about his biography and the “research” he performed in developing Scientology and Dianetics. Miscavige will be caught having lied about his treatment of staff as well as many other things. Cleaning up Scientology’s public image would be comparable to trying to clean up the image of the National Socialist Movement or Nazis. What was done has been recorded. The individuals who administered Scientology in the ways that they did have tainted it permanently and forever.

    Individual Scientologists may receive forgiveness for their crimes and misdeeds but the subject of Scientology and the Organization itself will not.

    • What most people here tend to not realize is that the internet has long been the Liberty Tree for people to provide and read the many testimonies of Scientology experiences, organizational or tech wise, long before and after Miscavige came into power. One can see that this Internet Resoiurces on Scientology for Newcomers, which has not been updated since 2009 mind you, is chock full of internet web links of information and personal stories posted on the internet since the mid 1990s

      http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?21499-Internet-Resources-on-Scientology-for-newcomers&p=550308&viewfull=1#post550308

      From the posting of information on the internet, the media attention grew. Not just television, but internet and print news media. While things ebb and flow over the years, depending upon the heaviness of the Church’s legal & harassment threats, the media does not forget. We are fortunate today that Scientology’s threats are being taken so seriously anymore. Free speech and freedom of the press were never really negotiable.

      Perhaps the most profound miscalculation Hubbard made was not anticipating how computers and the internet would become a reckoning force in exposing things that the church could not control the spreading of. It’s been ‘too little, too late’ for over nearly 20 years on this issue and the church has never caught up. It’s doubtful it ever will.

      Scientology will never be able to change the public perception of the name Scientology. It’s embedded on the internet forever. All one has to do is actually look on the internet in order to see this.

      If Hubbard had anticipated what the internet would bring mankind, if he had then figured out the potential of the internet, who knows. But he didn’t and neither did Miscavige. No amount of money or power can erase the testimonies, the experiences and knowledge that are to be found on the internet about Scientology.

      • Right,
        but most of these (bad) testimonies are related to organized Scientology.

        People who think for themselves will be able to see through it.
        The others won’t.

      • It’s almost like Hubbard should have said “Communication is the univeral solvent” or some such. Oh wait, he did.

    • Dean Blair: “Many different people have testified to some very horrific events and they won’t go away by simply denying that the events occurred.”

      I guess the question you should be asking, Dean, is: Will they go away by admitting that they did?

  67. I thought the interview was funny as hell! Had me laughing big time.

    I do believe the public image of Scientology can change, but ONLY outside of the orthodox “church”. DM has thoroughly poisoned the once fertile soils of Scientology, to a point that you can only get Scientology outside of the church.

    SCNs image can change – it will take a while. Scn will reimerge in the shadow of a crumbling “Ideal Org”.

    “You can change the world, one boy, one girl, one person at a time.”
    Jonny Lang

    Andy

  68. Clearly I don’t spend enough time on Comedy Central, never heard of this guy. Wiki cut: “The Colbert Report is a spin-off from and counterpart to The Daily Show that comments on politics and the media in a similar way. It satirizes conservative personality-driven political pundit programs, particularly Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor.[1][2] The show focuses on a fictional anchorman character named Stephen Colbert, played by his real-life namesake. The character, described by Colbert as a “well-intentioned, poorly informed, high-status idiot”, is a caricature of televised political pundits.”

    I wouldn’t put too much weight on his view as a cultural guru, but his general perception and satire probably isn’t too far off either given how bad the press is treating the Church these days.

    The Church of Miscavige will have a lot of work to do, after he finally blows, which will take years, possibly a decade or two of good honest reports and PR to work up condition through the biggest mess of public opinion it has ever faced. If that even happens it will be a miracle. LRH didn’t have the internet to think with, and yet Mr. Monkey Dung has almost from day one and he continues to fuck it up day in and day out it.

  69. First of all, I thought Colbert was very funny and Wright was quite convincing.

    The church of scientology is dead. It’s vital organs are being used for transplants. The brain, on life support, still makes the mouth utter nearly incomprehensible sounds…bitter defrocked hogwash apostate…lies…all lies…t o m c r u i s e…s a v e…..meeeeeee

    Wright said the one thing that will keep the subject alive. He said that people do get helped when they go to scientology. He said that quite sincerely.

    How well we execute our help, and how utterly candid we are about expected results, LRH, the church, aliens, etc will determine our future. “Public Opinion” is irrelevant and always has been. Oh, it helps to have a good public image but it hasn’t mattered even a tiny bit to our practice.

    As I’ve said before, the only people who have attacked us for what we are doing is dave and his cult members. None of our neighbors or family or friends have a problem with us. And everyone knows that miscavige is nothing but a tyranical little dweeb who took a cool, new-age religion and turned it into a money-grubbing cult.

    That’s not us, and we’re okay:)

    • Les,

      Your comments are so very valuable because you are doing it! You are delivering service very actively. You are helping people. You have even created an organization to allow you to do that more effective and expand your delivery. You are no spectator in this game. It does still boil down to the bottom line – did you deliver what your promised to the guy in front of you. Thank you for being an excellent example of how it is done.

      • You took the words right out of my mouth. There they are – “did you deliver what you promised to the guy in front of you”. Yvonne, 2 strikes this week, one more and you’re IN! :) The Church of Scientology NEVER delivers what is promises and never promises what it delivers! They are the most shady organization on the face of the planet! :)

  70. For the foreseeable future, I believe that Scientology is not just a severely damaged brand, it is a destroyed brand. After Miscavage is out of the way, if he does not destroy what is left of the organization when he departs, and if another leader does not turn the scene around with what remains, the workable parts of the technology, which are basically unkillable, will emerge under new names or appended to other practices.

    I realize this is rather pessimistic, but I think it is realistic.

  71. @Maria..A path that each person involved can make their own… where the shared bond between the people is in the freedom for exploration that this path affords, rather than their joint submission to a rigid code of behavior.

    • I agree. There is possibly an additional element at work on all of this. In one of my recent studies, the overarching impact of different approaches taken by various professions were explored — Doctor, Professor, Officer, Teacher, Instructor, Therapist, Counselor, Consultant, Coach, Facilitator, Partner, etc. Most of them immediately established an inequality between the practitioner and the recipient of the services offered.

      “Fix-it” relationships require broken recipients to fix. Teaching / Expert relationships require uninformed recipients. Assisting / Enabling relationships work to augment and clarify the recipients own efforts.

  72. Dear Marty,
    I really had no opinion of LW previous to his “Going Clear…” book. After watching this video, he has skyrocketed into Awesome Person status in my estimation. Once Colbert launched into his opening volley, LW responded congenially that he thought he might be on the wrong show. In other words, he was not there to make meaningless jokes about Scientology or Scientologists. He takes his research and his mission quite seriously. He NEVER belittles Scientology or Scientologists, EVER.

    Colbert asked about what celebrities get from Scientology that makes them so devout. After the jokes about Tom Cruise not aging, LW honestly related what he learned from Scientologists – that they honestly feel they have been helped. LW actually diffuses some of the lunacy associated with the generallly uneducated public perception of Scientology.

    Marty, if I recall correctly, you predicted Wright’s book would spell a long, dark winter for Scientology. I respectfully disagree. General, uneducated perception paints a bleak, black-and-white image of Scientology and Scientologists. That general, albeit simplified image has been useful in getting Scientology onto the public screen. However, LW’s work takes that public image as it is and then provides a path to a deeper level of understanding. Wright takes away the mystery sandwich that Hubbard counted on to entice people’s interest. Thanks to Wright there is a PATH to learing about and understanding Scientology that circumvents the routing form into the church’s cycle of brainwashing.

    Scientology, the subject, CAN be liberated from the Church of Scientology. If historical precedence provides a vision into the future of Scientology, we can expect such liberation to take place after those who knew LRH in person have passed on or let go of their attachment to his “presence” in thier physical universe. I do not believe any of us will be alive in our current forms to observe this transition.

    We have a lot to look forward to!

    Nancy

  73. I think one of the main obstacles is that Hubbard himself tightly tied together the organization and the philosophy – more so than any other religion I can think, even Catholics and the Vatican. I’ve read many places where Hubbard doesn’t mince words about loyalty to the organization – in fact they tend to be one in the same after 1960 or so. The Church was Scientology to Hubbard and anything trying to use scientology tech outside of the CoS should be destroyed. Now maybe this is because Hubbard was the leader and it was his organization – therefore it was one entity for him. Now that he’s dead and the founder /creator is no longer the cult leader things have changed, but unfortunately Hubbard didn’t account for this eventuality in much of his writing. The CoS can quote Hubbard endlessly to justify alligence to the cult, and Scientology equals the CoS.

  74. Who is Colbert? why does she/he/it have any credibility? seems like a “online gossip column” to me.

  75. I think for the image to change one needs to change policy (especially those about harsh ethics, disconnection, etc.) as Scientology is seen to be equal with what LRH wrote and did. As this is not possibly and the word Scientology itself is so overcharged (same as with Nazis, Hitler or other “bad” names) I cannot see that the overall opinion will change. Maybe in the far far future (as it happend with the christians) …

  76. That is the next level or stage of any movement. Ridicule it. Usually what is following next is that this movement disappears from the surface and operates hidden. That period can be 100 or 1000 years or even longer. And those hidden movements also have some surface contact group that is needed for funding and getting in new people (or the old ones from last life).
    Thus this is all normal operation here on planet earth. Not a Scientology only thing. Nothing special or something to worry about.

  77. Do you believe this public image can change?
    I think that the public image of the Scientology religion can be changed but it won’t be easy.
    It takes a while to build a good reputation by giving good service and being a good, helpful person or organization.
    But a good reputation can be lost very quickly by committing anti-social acts and being a dishonest or hypocritical “flake”.
    And bad reputations take a loooong time to repair. to do so it is necessary to acknowledge transgressions, show remorse and contrition, and make amends. If a person or organization does that honestly, people will forgive because people are basically good, but it has to be real and it has to be sincere.
    Scientology is something new and prone to be misunderstood anyway. I mean with Dianetics we are telling people that they can actually still remember stuff that happened when they were unconscious (out cold).
    To the average person walking down the street that is kind of weird to begin with. It also tends to scare people in society who have vested interests in others NOT being able to remember certain things. So this is a cross the subject has to bear anyway. I believe that LRH worked to minimize this by use of the ARC triangle during the late 1960’s and 1970’s primarily by emphasizing real things that we were and are AGAINST through Freedom Magazine and CCHR which struck a chord of agreement in society. (I mean who likes electro-shock treament, violations of civil rights, governmental abuses of authority, betrayal in the name of “help”, etc?) And then the subject was promoted as a way for people to have better lives on all dynamics. And then there was a good amount of delivery that did exactly that.
    So I think that the public impression could be improved by doing the above. It would take a long period of time where real Scientologists just “walked the walk” and helped people to lead better lives and lots of emphasis on the many things that the subject AGREES WITH that aligns with society’s goals and mores.
    However, as long as Miscavige heads the COS that change will not come from that organization because he has absolute control and apparently Miscavige is one of those individuals who cannot for a moment consider that he has ever done anything wrong or immoral. As long as his guy is in power he will continue, acting through the COS, to do things which sully the reputation of the religion. Therefore, it looks like a long process to improve the reputation of the religion at this point, and the only ones who can accomplish this are people in the Independent Scientology Movement. We can do this by simply LIVING our religion, being who we are, being kind, walking the walk, being good people, being helpful to others, giving good service, and letting people know that we too are against the bad things that they are against.

  78. Roger from Switzerland Thought

    The best would be:

    1: To put all of the writings and lectures of Lrh onto the Internet, and some Intelligent people sorting it out, that there would be a structure in it that makes sense and is simple to navigate .

    2. That people write books about it like : Modern Dianetics , ” Scientology Tech today..etc..and all kind of expertises about it in any subjects !
    Look at all the money people are making by writing books about LRH and Scientology. LRH and Scientology are now known around the world. If Marty would write something just for non-Scientologist. I bet it would be a success !

    The inherent power in Scientology will do the rest. the word will just spread around the planet …..

    When all the materials are on the Internet people will get answers from Lrh directly when they Google certain questions.

    As Maria said people will just start to apply it and will have wins ! As there are intelligent people on planet earth that can read and apply and don’t need KSW to be able to get some wins out of the materials !

    Also one has to bear in mind that Dmsmh didn’t hold it’s promises and didn’t really create the intended grass root movement.as Dianetics wasn’t fully developed then and the technology used in it isn’t as lasersharp as NED.

    Ned would have this power. So for any person wanting to run out engrams there should be a simple manual of NED and a cheap E-Meter,

    There was a huge boom once with standard Dianetics when Dianetics was before the grades, people learned Standard dianetics in 2 weeks (with handling the E-meter) and were co-auditing like mad and it was totally fun and a amazing experience and 2-3 years later sudd3nly there were over 50 000 clears. That was a real boom !

    Since 30 years we were trying to create a boom with DMSMH, this never succeeded as giving book 1 to a customer rather than Ned is cheating, it’s a very cheap placebo and has only the purpose of wanting to sell the whole bridge. This is dishonest. !
    If somebody comes in after having read Dmsmh or a similar book and wants Dianetics auditing you don’t give him something else or sell him something. You would give him NED as most of those people are able to confront it because they have the attention on it and wants it.

    VERY SIMPLE !

    DMSMH was sold 1 Million times, but the following book SOS didn’t have the same success. Why ?
    Because the Millions of people that read DMSMH didn’t have the promised results and so weren’t interested in reading the next book of the subject and the boom was gone ! Dmsmh didn’t create the millions of auditors it intended as the technology in there was still in evolution and too complicated to apply.
    There was again a boom with sales (read sales not application) of DMSMH in the nineties and it created a huge demand (promised heaven on earth) and the people reaching for it were cheated by the Church as it didn’t deliver modern Dianetic but squirrel or book one.

    Marty,

    You’re going into the right direction. If we all work together for 2-3 years we would have all the products ready and could relaunch Scientology and Dianetics. We wouldn’t be able to control what will happen to it as Mankind is very creative and 1000ds of organisations, clubs and whatever would start around the planet. So what ? It would be very fun and very interesting to see the thousands of new ideas that people will create in the application of this technology.

    For any activity that has kind of above purpose I would give about 20 hours per week to help on it. Kind of a foundation to spread the word.
    :) :) :) :) :) :)

  79. Roger from Switzerland Thought

    About my above post ! I really mean it serious. perhaps there are people here that understand my thoughts and can use better wording to explain it !

  80. The only positive image which could persist would have to be built on hundreds of thousands or even more people who were helped. I am not an expert and cannot say nothing about politics and war with opponents and SP, which may have some validity, but the only “building of positive image” that was ever needed could be to increase number of people reaching Scientology – to deliver to them and bring them among the above mentioned hundreds of thousands and millions. Whoever thought that just building an image without actual delivery is the way to go was a moron and what we see now has to do with that (Potemkin villages being exposed). And Scientology generally has a backlog of people who were not helped after they had given their money, efforts and lives. Repairing the image has to do with removing this backlog. I see no way how I could agree that honest results be substituted by state-of-the-art printing facilities, videos, www or tons of bricks.

  81. Roger from Switzerland Thought

    To Steve:
    I hope you are not disillusioned with your work. You made some experiences and learned a lot. I hope you’ll not give up, But if we could create a foundation and team up with some Indies with the same purpose we could make a formidable relaunch in a very short time !
    :) :) :) :)
    I think we are coming to the END of all those discussions and all the why’s are known and should start to formulate real purposes as a loose team, granting beingness to everybody, and letting them contribute whatever they want without becoming militaristic. If somebody wants to do a KSW orthodox group..Great the foundation would support him but also criticize him, if somebody wants to use Dianetics for to help disabled people, great ! the foundation would help him ! If somebody wants to use Dianetics in the business world …great or in politics great or or or or …….Nobody should be hindered in applying the technology in whatever way they want. If they misuse it they’ll be in prison like DM will be very soon. The world is very alert now about people misusing it (see the troubles of narconon, or in France , Germany or Belgium)

    I really hope we are at the END or are there some more questions ? Marty ? You like to play Socrates :) :) :)

  82. Roger from Switzerland Thought

    After the formulation of some sane purposes and the working on it there would be again thousands of discussions, but it would be very creative and very fun ! :) :) :)

  83. It looks like it would be good a double rebranding.

    The public should get the meaning of the brand just by reading the brand name without further explanation.

    Co$ could be rebranded as Nazi-Scientology or Fascist- Scientology or Totalitarian-Scientology or Perverted-Scientology, etc. (Ref: Gerhard Waterkamp February 8, 2013 at 12:43 am).

    The Indies could be rebranded as Reformed-Scientology or True- Scientology, etc. (We know the meaning of Independent-Scientology, but the public doesn’t get the meaning just by reading the words “Independent-Scientology”).

    There are a lot of professional materials about how to make a successful rebranding.

  84. OK,
    first of all, what is the current “public image” of Scientology?
    ~ Scientology is a Cult?
    ~ Scientology is greedy? Takes all your money. Is all about money.
    ~ Scientology is a paramilitary organization?
    ~ Scientologists believe in aliens?
    ~ Scientology Management beats its staff?
    ~ Scientology uses hypnosis and brainwashing techniques?
    ~ LRH was a con man? A lyiar.
    ~ LRH created a religious movement/organization to get rich?
    ~ Scientology is dangarous to your well-being?
    ~ Scientology wants to trap you?
    ~ Scientology is engaged in politics?
    ~ Scientology wants to clear the planet?
    ~ Scientology is not easy to comprehend?
    ~ Scientology is useless?
    ~

    Which ever it is. This is not new.
    And nothing of the above is really true in all cases.
    Why bother?

    More than one half of the above buttons fade away once we establish ourselves as independent from the organizations of Miscavige.
    (And while doing so, still indicating the abuses of Miscavige.)

    At the other hand I wonder what “public image” is desireable.
    As long as we don’t establish it, we can’t work together to put the mock up there and work towards this postulate.
    This would be a good survey for independents. Constructive.

    Do you believe this public image can change?
    Yes. I belive it can be changed positively.

    How?
    First if all, we need the public to know, that the Church is NOT everything there is about Scientology. They need to know, there are Scientologists outside this madness.
    We need to move from the current positioning of Scientology = Corporation.

    How long will it take to change significantly?

    “The safe way to intend life to go on happening is the way life goes on happening. A much healthier attitude is to change life where one can change it and not be heartbroken because one has not changed it further. In other words, one can intend to change life for the better and can succeed. With Scientology, particularly, one can accomplish this.” – LRH, The Anatomy of Failure

    I don’t know how long it will take.
    I only know we won’t get anywhere from here without some agreement about the “image” we want to work towards.

    I don’t think we should work for broad public acceptance in the first place (because this is an inflow).

    Again, I think a survey about “what public image is desireable” is a good start.

  85. Do I believe this public image can change? That would require Miscavige to leave in disgrace and some sort of Truth and Reconciliation action to be done (as was done after the Apartheid in South Africa) to change this image. The likelihood of Miscavige leaving is very low, so I would say the chances of restoring this image is just as low. It will have to wait till Miscavige passes away and more benevolent types emerge in church leadership.

  86. I haven’t read the other responses yet, pressed for time at the moment, so here’s my two cents (and then later today, I’ll get a chance to review the other responses).

    No, Scientology will not be able to change it’s reputation in the near future. It will probably get worse. I’m 62, so I remember the bad PR that visited the Unification Church (the Moonies) about 40 years ago. This is TONS worse. The Moonies responded essentially by withdrawing and keeping a low profile, their recruitment went sort of underground compared to the early 70s. That was FORTY years ago.

    My guess is that after this current PR cycle runs its course in the next year or two, we’re talking fifty years (at LEAST – could be over a 100 years) before Scientology will get any kind of broad audience to even CONSIDER it on its merits. That means everyone now alive is pretty much dead before that happens.

    Well, that’s what happens when you violate the ARC Triangle. EVERY fucking single time, not only Miscavige, but every time an individual got shit who was just trying to do his post or go up the grade chart, every time someone’s finances were destroyed by force regging, every time ANY individual was lied to or given a “reality adjustment” severe or not, or given a gang sec check, or degraded in any way by “ethics” or “justice” procedures … every single time that happened, from LRH’s time to now, HAS CAUSED AN EFFECT, sometimes many effects, and always BAD. Those things happen in any group activity, but as in each one of our personal experiences, in Scientology, it reached critical mass (or tipping point as they say now) and so, BOOM.

    LRH defined “promotion” as making something known and well thought of. Good definition. One of his definitions of PR was to change the way people thought of things. Wrote a whole series on the subject, which kind of missed the main point in my opinion. He left out THE MOST IMP[ORTANT STUFF (well, he mentioned it on manners and his PLs on quality and delivery, but as in so much of his stuff, its emphasis, emphasis, emphasis. It ain’t about surveys and positioning, folks. And the people who Ron trained in PR and management? And who they trained? I give you folks … (over the past 40 years) … your Church of Scientology management team.

    A FREAKING SUPER BOWL AD????????

    And Jenna Miscavige was just on Piers Morgan’s show. Uhm, not a nice picture painted.

    Maybe in a hundred and fifty years from now, a very respected world opinion leader who is an expert in communication and whom people WANT to listen to, will get interested in LRH’s work and on a VERY haveable gradient, will start to explain it to the world and slowly get people interested again.

    Yes, small groups of people will still be open to Scientology, as they are to any religion. SMALL groups. But like it was back in the 70s? Uhm …. no. Ain’t gonna happen for a LOOOOOOONG time.

  87. When talking about the RPF Lawrence Wright said “It’s their will that’s holding them there”.
    To me, this serves as a reminder that the majority of members are there because they have a will to help others. Unfortunately their devotion to this purpose has been turned into sacrifice and destructive activity.
    Destructive cultish type behavior has been added a little at a time until it has become the new norm. These good people think they are doing the right thing by being sleep deprived, assaulted, neglected and overall damaged mentally and physically and doing the same to others. It’s not until you get some distance and time that you realize how backwards that is.
    I say the majority because, the field is fertile for those who enjoy punishment, control and domination.
    .

  88. you can look at the Mormons history, joe smith the founder was hung, the u.s. gov. considered killing all Mormons, so they had worse pr then scientology. 100 years later there considered a world religion,had a guy who almost became president. they cleaned up there image.
    i feel, Scientology will have to get rid of the sea org and billion year contracts, get rid of zeno, maybe forget about being a church, sell auditing and courses like a school or self help group which it is, and have realistic pricing, then i think the public will like it. and forget about the total freedom hype.
    it is such a small organization, maybe 30,000 people world wide, the only reason there getting this much air play is because of tom cruise, most people dont know what it is or really care. if they get honest they may get people in there ideal buildings. if none of that changes the pres and public will continue the attacks and ex staff will fight them for all the injustices.
    inmy life time i dont seeing it happen.

  89. Just Another Anon

    To get the public image of Scientology to change would be an uphill battle, if not an outright impossible task. To most people, there is no difference between the official Church of Scientology and the practice, and both have become equally damnable in the court of public opinion. Trying to repair it is a bit like trying to win a race after the finish line has been crossed and a trophy has already been handed out… no amount of spin nor positive PR is going to change the results. While the sudden onslaught of media attention may be new simply because the media is no longer scared to voice itself against the church, dislike for Scientology and laughing at its practices, its founder, and its beliefs isn’t new at all.

    Can one really bounce back from the word “cult” in this day and age?

    At its core, Scientology is a dated and often obtuse practice. It promotes a technology with no scientific backing, despite being under a banner that ironically seems to be derived from the word. It has its own language that is inapplicable and incomprehensible (and at times, completely inaccurate) to anyone outside it. It makes grandiose claims that are unrealistic and even absurd. Its built on contradictions, false promises, lies, fraud, and countless dissatisfied customers/parishioners. Its deified a blemished and flawed man, and continues to make excuses or blame the blamer when those flaws are pointed out. Miscaviage and the church as it currently stands is the fruit of a poisonous tree. Whether the space opera aspects of it are called metaphors, parables, or taken literally, it’s still kooky, weird, and even laughable to the average person.

    Scientology is (no pun intended) alienating. The same often can, unfortunately, be said of Scientologists. There seems to be an inherent need to advertise and announce everything that shouldn’t matter, from donation levels to levels of spiritual enlightenment or classes completed. Having a pseudo-navy, ranks for everything, titles for everyone to tout, and labels for everything is overwhelming and eye roll-inducing. Hard sells of books only available in a printed, tangible medium (which are practically archaic anymore) doesn’t help. Countless quotes from random policies, lectures, orders, and anything else considered Source is as annoying as the extremist Bible thumping Christians (and those aren’t widely popular either).

    There may be aspects of Scientology that could be widely used, disseminated, and accepted by the public, but it won’t happen under the banner of Scientology (in any form). These practices need to be adapted and opened up to criticism, without the first instinct being to attack the attacker. I agree with the others who say it would be best to remove the name and the founder and start something entirely new based on the parts of the practice that work or aren’t extreme. It may be the only way it would get a fair shake after everything that has been exposed. Scientology, the church, LRH, Miscaviage, the Sea Org, disconnection, calling people “raw meat” and “wogs”… they all seem like a diseased limb that’s only festering at this point. There is no saving it as it stands, but it can be amputated before the disease reaches the heart.

    And the heart of it all can be saved, because people understand the difference between Scientology and and those who practice or practiced it. That’s the reason people encourage and embrace people like Marty, Mike, Marc, Claire, Jenna, Karen, Tory, Derek, Denise, Nancy, and so many others (too many to name) who have had the courage to leave the oppressive, violent organization and speak up and out about it, regardless of the cost. It’s why we root for you to evolve and “move on up higher,” in whatever form or course that may be.

    I’m not a Scientologist, I never have been, and I know by saying that my opinion might be discounted by many. I’ve been a Scientology “watcher” and lurker on this blog and many other places for a long time, but this is the first time I’ve ever made a post anywhere, simply because I want to say thank you for your courage and good luck to everyone who might happen to read this who might be struggling with everything that’s been mentioned in this post and more. You’re the real “baby in the bath water,” and you’re definitely not going to be thrown out by this anon.

    • Solid analysis. The brand is toxic.

    • BRAVO! and Thank You.

      Just a note:

      I have never been connected with the organization, but I have
      run many of the processes solo with both a work horse left-handed Mark V
      and Quantum Mark VII meter with solo TA. Many were run straight from the
      1950s books without a meter. The results, although not being able to verify the phenomena encountered by the physical sciences, were quite
      remarkable. Afterwards, I did find the phenomena encountered in the materials, so I was not predisposed to having known the data and my imagination creating the phenomena. OT ability evidently does exist and
      we all have it once we dig ourselves out of the mess we got ourselves a long, long time ago.

      Again BRAVO for your comment.

      P.S.

      You may want to reference my previous above comment if you are
      curious and/or doing research.

  90. i enjoyed reading all the above reply’s all were valid, we will see what happens, each day something new unfolds

  91. To reiterate “Just Another Anon” statement, Miscaviage and the church as it currently stands is the fruit of a poisonous tree.
    There are bible verses that compliments this:

    Matthew 7:15-20
    “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit.

    Also: Galatians 5:22
    But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

    If you want to continue your practice, then to be accepted you must produce good fruit. But remember the greatest of all is LOVE. Love, not only for yourself, but for others…

    • This is better encompassed with:

      There can be love for self…,
      There can be love for family..,
      There can be love for groups…,
      There can be love for mankind…,
      There can be love for animals…, (and insects too)
      There can be love for earth…,
      There can be love for spirits…,
      There can be love for god….

      ML/A

  92. DM’s internal support base is crumbling rapidly. The media are flogging Scientology in a manner not seen since the 60’s. DM himself is getting solidly lashed in the media and as Mike Rinder so astutely pointed out, DM is unable to respond. The end is approaching because if DM cannot prevent the media beating Scientology into pulp, then his supporters will abandon him. So DM is going to try one last hurrah – open the superpower building and release superpower and the cause resurgence rundown. This is his last big charge to revitalize the faithful. However he has a huge problem coming his way. Superpower was hyped by LRH based on it being used first on all staff to improve efficiency of Scientology organizations. That was where it’s much hyped world-changing power would come from – having better, more sane and more productive Scientology organizations. DM has taken all these quotes about it’s power out of context, to try and portray the rundown as something that is super duper awesome for the person getting it – and thus worthy of huge donations. Meantime DM has no intention of letting more than a handful of staff anywhere near that technology so there will be no big change in the course of Scientology. The misrepresentation works fine all the way up till the time people get the rundown. Then they will realize it’s great auditing but not world changing and he is going loose support like water running through a sieve. And meantime the media are just getting warmed up. I would say to anyone that has an interest in seeing DM go down, whatever you do, pour it on in 2013 because the momentum there. Anonymous, Free Zone, Ron’s Org, Indy’s, pour it on with whatever you are doing – do it more. The dam is cracking and leaking and the walls are starting to crumble. And when DM goes down, there will be a chance to have something better arise from the ashes.

  93. MRInder, I’m reading your interesting comment,. You write: “eventually whole rotten house of cards is going to cave in on itself…..And perhaps then there will be a chance of changing the public perception by making the actual writings of LRH widely available and letting people experience them and apply them and have wins and tell their friends. No pressure. ….. Just getting the word out and let it spread because it will happen if its available and then used. And then the stories will be written about the underlying genius/goodness of the subject.”

    For the last 40 years Ive been studying religions, particularly new ones, and been involved in a new religious movement (I’m not a Scientologist…ive been fascinated by Scn but not interested in adding one more religion in my own life).
    Ive seen in a number of authoritarian religious movements a rise in sentiment that: “in the end, the bad structure will collapse, and the underlying goodness of the subject will be recognized..”. This, in my experience, is a noble vision, but it is an insider’s vision, and somewhat utopic. I know of no historical precedent in modern history where such vision has materialized for a new religious movement, and cant’ envision how it would.

    In reality, the public bundles the “bad” religion and the “underlying goodness”. People don’t want to think. They are looking for one basic stereotype to tag onto a movement. Yes, the media separates the “bad” (oppressive leaders) and the “good” (innocent cult members) but is purely to create a drama-rich storyline that activates archaic archetypes in the readers’ minds, and sells.

    The public comes to a different conclusion. They see both sides of the controversy between the bad cult and the good followers or the supposedly good technology as the two sides of the same coin. While the public may, while they watch a show, sympathize with a “good” oppressed cult member, they would never want to associate with her/him if this person offered them a new spiritual path partly inherited from her controversial past.

    Bottom line, the public loves to read about controversy and to watch the battle between evil and good, but nobody wants to be associated with any of the stakeholder on either side of the controversy. Sadly so, the public will, every time, throw the baby with the bathwater. They do not want to have to think and try to figure out if there is some “underlying good. After all, why should they? There are so many non-controversial, spiritually and socially gratifying spiritual paths out there.

    If the objective is to take the “underlying goodness” and to allow it to rise and be embraced, my view is that the only feasible strategy left is, paradoxically, to avoid creating any possible damage to the “bad religion” as any negativity on the “bad” religion will drag the “underlying goodness” with it.

    What ive seen work best is to take the high road, i.e “We wish them (the bad religion) well, but the world wants a kinder, gentler Scientology, with more possibilities to incorporate other faiths or beliefs into it, a Scientology for the 21st century,” etc.. and we have just that, and it is what people are asking for, and so we are creating a new movement with a new name, and a more holistic approach to spirituality, etc, incorporating the best of Scientology and of several other paths, .and we trust that it will get the success that it deserves..”

    Marty and all of you guys thank you for the interesting conversation

  94. Roger from Switzerland Thought

    What I don’t understand here when I read the posts. people think Scientology has to be Marketed or must be Pred or sold or it’s image has to be changed. Why ?

    It doesn’t make any sense at all. This was done now for 62 years and all kind of promises were marketed, PRed and sold and thus created so many ArcX’s as the promised results weren’t fully delivered since the first days.

    We shouldn’t do the same thing again. Scientology tech doesn’t have to be sold or pred. The Greeks never did that with their philosophy and knowledge and their stuff is still very much alive today.

    Let’s Scientology speak for itself by putting the whole data onto the Internet and people can find out for themselves. I’m pretty sure amazing things will happen then.

    More isn’t needed.
    I’m I too simple ?.

    • Roger,
      I really think that you are on to something with all of your posts today. I especially liked your comments regarding giving people who have read DMSMH modern Dianetics (NED) when they want some Dianetics. NED is really the finished product and it IS cheating people not to deliver it to them when they want some Dianetics. Ron developed several ways to run engrams and NED was the finished product.. Also, I might add that for a person who has no meter training, Self Anaysis is VERY underrated as to what applying it cant do to improve someone’s life. And LRH did develop it as a gradient to Dianetic auditing.
      Also I agree that putting all of the Tech and all of LRH’s writings on the internet is the way to go.
      Great posts

  95. I’m glad that Mr. Colbert allows individuals the opportunity to espouse their opinions especially when controversial, however the one sided viewpoint has to be balanced with other like or of class data. Lawrence Wright is only a facet of all of Scientology and showing that there is some part that is trying to turn around abuses and with our personal ethics intact, then the public court of opinion will be lenient or maybe in the future forgive and see the lies. Change? How can one not change? I still stand with LRH and his philosophy. ARC Bill Dupree

  96. Marty, it won’t change under David Miscavige. It won’t change as long as the corporate structure (which has billions of assets) stays in place. It won’t change if all non-scientologists are ridiculed as “wogs”. It’s like Romney accusing the public of being lazy instead of saying “the public is right–politicians of both parties led us into the fiscal cliff by listening to wealthy donors instead of common sense.”

  97. Whatever happened to Jack Krushko?

  98. There is a big unanswered question that is gnawing at people regarding Scientology, that critics have always been confounded by and have never been able to adequately answer. The question was posed in the introduction to Lawrence Wright’s book, but he got so caught up in the drama of it all, that it was never fully answered. Once it gets honestly and thoroughly looked at and answered, it will turn around the public perception of Scientology (the subject) in a massive way, imho. The question is:

    Why do people remain Scientologists?

    Or in Lawrence Wright’s words:

    “What is it that makes the religion alluring? What do its adherents get out of it? How can seemingly rational people subscribe to beliefs that others find incomprehensible? Why do popular personalities associate themselves with a faith that is likely to create a kind of public relations martyrdom?”

    The first person or group that can fully and honestly answer that question for the masses, at the level that it can be understood and to a degree that they “get it”, will create a wide-spread public interest in Scientology (even if just a quiet, and private one in the beginning, which may already be occurring).

    The nuttiness of Miscavige and the organization will keep people from joining the CoS most likely (thank god!), but as the actual and honest answers to that question start getting heard and understood more and more, there will be a broader and broader interest in the subject out here in the indie field.

    To me, the amazing thing is not that the question hasn’t been answered. The amazing thing is that it was ASKED by Wright. That shows a sign of something breaking through. And I suspect it has something to do with the interviews he had with various indies.

  99. Is it too much to ask: What would Ron do? I think naught.
    Is Scientology salvageable? I think so.

  100. “Do you believe this public image can change? How? How long will it take to change significantly?”

    Marty, the public image won’t change until ‘Official’ Scientology reforms. I’ve given this a lot of thought and came to the conclusion that the Co$ will never reform. As long as the corporate ‘church’ follows antiquated and ineffective policies like ‘Fair-Game’, Disconnection, The Suppressive Person Doctrine, bad publicity will follow. In their mind, especially Miscavige’s, is that they’re superior to the ‘Wog’ world. They are completely blind to the fact that Hubbard’s policies on handling criticism by aggressive litigation, and intimidation have brought failure time and time again. ‘Attack, never defend’ has not worked and never will work. It has created legions of disaffected members, enemies, bad press, and a horrible reputation.

    Independent Scientologists are capable of recognizing the shortcomings of Hubbard’s policies on what works and what doesn’t. Corporate Scientologists live in a fear vacum of what may happen to them if they question Hubbard’s policies or Miscavige’s rule. They’ll lose their eternity if the question authority. They can’t think for themselves much less realize that their actions are leading their group to a downward spiral.

    Miscavige consolidated his power by putting himself at the top of the food chain. He dismantled the only two things that Hubbard created to prevent someone like him taking over: The Watchdog Committee and The Executive Strata. They’re either all incarcerated in ‘The Hole’ or have been offloaded and paid off. In my honest opinion, because of the stated reasons above there’s no hope for any reformation from within.

    Realistically, I don’t think Scienology’s reputation would have faired any better if someone else had taken the mantle after Hubbard’s death.

  101. windhorsegallery

    I’m pretty confident that the snowball from hell rolling down the mountain towards corporate scientology is not going to stop. There is momentum. Although I haven’t heard of another high powered book on the horizon or high powered defection, what happens when a boulder or giant snowball (avalanche) starts its decent down the mountain it takes trees, rocks, houses along with it.

    It has it’s own momentum and no amount of money is going to reverse this avalanche.

    There are thousands of scientologists who are not actively taking classes BUT unwilling to step up and out. They appear to keep the corporate church alive. Why don’t they speak out?

    Because of what a friend said to me yesterday — there isn’t 6 degrees of separation between me and Joe Blow scientologist. There are TWO maybe THREE tops.

    We are so interconnected and interrelated that if we were to create an enormous data base of everyone who was in with everyone who is out, — you’d be shocked. Every day I learn of several more connections.

    Those who are still in might try to pretend that disconnection doesn’t occur but they KNOW it does. They KNOW people who have been declared. They FEAR for their families or their jobs or their businesses.

    Fear is not a winning emotion. And is certainly incapable of stopping an avalanche.

    KUDOs the Jenna for her courage in stepping up and making sure that the momentum started years ago is going to actually take out the corporate church.

    And ONLY at THAT time, when it’s a rubble can rebuilding occur. How? What flavor? It’s really too early to predict.

    IMHO

  102. A few points worth mentioning: Any organization, group or individual that actively seeks to improve the human condition and/or aid in spiritual growth/freedom is going to come under attack by those who have in part or in whole an agenda of human and/or spiritual oppression. How would you destroy a perceived enemy effectively? Rot it out from the inside. Infiltrate, take over and destroy. The mere fact that L. Ron Hubbard suggested a way of curing mental ills without the use of drugs, electro-shock therapy, surgery or certain psychiatric dogma was enough to put him and his works under attack by organizations who feared a potential loss of power and control (not to mention revenue). It appears to me that Scientology as an organization as we know it now is not the same organization back when LRH was still alive and in good health. I will offer the suggestion that the organization has been infiltrated by those with less than good intentions.

    I will admit I have had no personal contact with LRH or those close to him in Scientology during the time he was alive and active in the organization. So I cannot say for certain that current day Scientology has strayed completely off the original path. Being open minded I have to be willing to accept and weigh information as made available in order to build an accurate opinion. However I will say that to this day Dianetics still makes 100% sense to me, and that much of what I know of LRH and his unadulterated works and efforts seems to me logical and intent of goodwill. To say that Scientology is all about money, power over people and nefarios manipulation would contradict (in my opinion) LRH’s own words and efforts. Additionally I will say that there seemed to be a change in the organization known as Scientology from the period of a couple years before LRH’s death up to present day. I was rather shocked to hear a few years ago that Scientology had decided to release a “more accurate” version of most if not all of LRH’s written works. Rather odd considering that most of LRH’s written work was published to his satisfaction while he was alive and well and that he by no means implied his published works as being somehow incomplete.

    It is quite possible that as oppose to out and out destruction of Scientology that certain individuals in the organization have merely repurposed it to serve their own desires. Name me one religion or philosophy that hasn’t been the victim of wrongful interpretation or otherwise has successfully withstood all attempts to be adjusted for the use by weak individuals with unhealthy (for lack of a better word) wants and desires. Well, I’ve seen it. I’ve seen it first hand in Scientology as well in other religions. All I can say is hopefully whatever positive contributions LRH made to humanity prevail and the rest is discarded appropriately.

  103. Some were asking about superpower.

    This is relevant.

    Originally Posted by Flag-2005 [ on esmb] More details if you want to search.

    ” Flag 2005″ has commented how almost all superpower trainees
    failed. Flag it seems can no longer train auditors,.

    “The Superpower R/Ds are only for Auditors with set pre-reqs.

    Should be Grad V

    Also this is where KTL and LOC come from so you have to do them

    Due to no-one making it, KTL etc and others got dropped off the line up.

    But these courses are the fundimental so go figure..

    I refused to take them off my TIP got in trouble, I fought and just did it.

    Loved by my peers and hated by my seniors..”

  104. Lansford Hastings

    The beginnings of the California and Oregon Trails were laid out by fur trappers and fur traders from about 1811 to 1840 and were only passable initially on foot or by horseback. South Pass, the easiest pass over the U.S. continental divide, was discovered by Robert Stuart (explorer) and his party of seven in 1812.

    The rest of the California Trail route was partially discovered and developed by American fur traders like, Kit Carson, Joseph R. Walker, and Jedediah Smith, Peter Skene Ogden and U.S. Army Colonel John C. Frémont of the U.S. Corp of Topographical Engineers.
    Pioneered by Lansford Hastings in 1846, the Hastings Cutoff left the California Trail at Fort Bridger in Wyoming. Lansford Hastings made a name for himself as a trailblazer and was particularly fond of his Hastings Cutoff. He wrote a book called “The Emigrants Guide to Oregon and California,” which describes this shortcut in one brief sentence. His route was supposed to go west from Fort Bridger, Wyo., through the Wasatch mountains, south of the Great Salt Lake and across the Salt Lake Desert, where it would rejoin the familiar California Trail at the base of the Sierra Nevada range.
    Hastings wrote a widely circulated open letter to all westward travelers urging them to use this route, even though he hadn’t tried it himself. He promised that it would reduce travel by at least 350 miles, cutting three weeks off the journey. He also claimed that the roads were smooth, hard and level, that there was no threat of attack from aggressive local tribes, and that there was plenty of water and grass for animals. This misguidance led directly to the Donner Party’s monstrous fate. The Mormon Trail when it was built to the future state of Utah in 1847 built a much improved trail down Emigration Canyon to get to Salt Lake valley—this was their main route across the Wasatch Mountains to and from Salt Lake. All of the Hastings Cutoffs to California were found to be very hard on the wagons, livestock and travelers as well as being longer, harder, and slower to traverse than the regular trail and was largely abandoned after 1846.

    After word got out about the Donner Party, emigration to California dropped severely. Hastings’ Cutoff was deserted, and Lansford Hastings’ reputation as a trailblazer was lost forever. The flow of westward immigrants all but stopped until early 1848, when gold was discovered in California. By 1849, more than 100,000 people had decided to put the Donner tragedy in the back of their minds and move west.

    In April 1859, an expedition of U.S. Corp of Topographical Engineers led by U.S. Army Captain James H. Simpson established a route across the Great Basin to California, which became the Central Overland Route. The Central Overland Route was about 280 miles (450 km) shorter than the ‘standard’ California Trail Humboldt River route. This Central Overland Route, with minor modifications was used by settler’s wagon trains, the Pony Express, stagecoach lines and the First Transcontinental Telegraph after 1859.

    Travelers rarely made the entire trip without one or more in their traveling group dying. According to an evaluation by Trail Authority John Unruh a 4% death rate or 16,000 out of 400,000 total pioneers on all trails may have died on the trail while making the trip. They died of cholera (6,000 – 12,000+), Indian attacks (500 – 1,000), freezing to death (300–500), drowning in river crossings (200–500), getting run over by wagons (200–500), accidental gun deaths (200–500), kicks by animals, falling off the horse or mule, getting hit by a falling horse or mule, stampedes, bear attacks, wounded animal attacks, etc.. (100- 200), homicides, lightning strikes, childbirths, snake bites, flash floods, falling trees, wagon wrecks etc. (200- 500).

    Nonetheless, today the route consists of modern highways, in particular U.S. Highway 40 and later Interstate 80. Ruts from the wagon wheels and names of emigrants, written with axle grease on rocks, can still be seen in the City of Rocks National Reserve in southern Idaho.

    So what’s the moral of this story?

    1. Blindly following the misdirection of a wannabe can result in the near loss of the entire party and cannibalism, but ceases to be a threat once fully exposed.
    2. Don’t be such a whiny bitch. Pioneering new territory was never easy, is fraught with dangers and you’re bound to get hurt, but if you make it the rewards could be life-changing – if only from the journey itself.
    3. What was once a rough but navigable trail to something worthwhile will ultimately become a superhighway.

  105. If you truly believe Scientology therapy is a global panacea that can bring about a utopian age for man, then, yes, image might be important.

    Image might also be important, god forbid, to an indie practice that’s opened up on a busy high street touting for new business.

    To those who simply wish to improve themselves and (spiritually) develop as a being, does it really matter what other people think? I’d say no.

    Word of mouth is arguably the most powerful form of advertising. While it’s apparent through the media that every man and his dog despises Scientology and Scientologists, most people I have come across genuinely “know” very little about it other than “Tom Cruise does it” and “they all worship aliens”. Explaining the subject and the differences between it and the actual “church”, particularly from a logical, non-religious viewpoint, is universally welcomed and well-received in my experience.

    The future of Scientology will ultimately rely on those who give/receive auditing, their results, and the perception of results by others. If they are significantly positive, the “image” could well become so. Time will tell.

  106. The question of WHY people remain Scientologists is the million dollar question. I was in the church 30 yeas before I stopped drinking the Kool Aide. I keep asking myself why I stayed so long. I think my “in” Kool Aid drinking friend sums it up. When I tried to enlighten her on Debbie Cook’s letter and abuses in the church, she said, “Stop. I don’t want to hear anymore. I know there are things that I don’t agree with in the church and bad things have happened; but I want my Elig for OT VII,so I can’t talk about this or I”ll never get Elig. We just have to put up with the bad in order to have the good of spiritual freedom and our eternity.” Those were her words. And that sumarizes one of the biggest Clubs that DM bludgeons his followers with: the threat that they will never achieve OT states, never have spiritual freedom, never reach Nirvana if they speak out against him or the church. And I found out this so false! There are great auditors in the Indie field, the best the church had to offer are now outside the church, auditing, freeing beings, and Clearing the planet as Ron envisioned. So the people still drinking Kool Aid are doing it to be “good little boys and girls who will get Elig.” Eligibility for what|?|???? Elig to have Squirrel Tech delivered to them. May they rest in peace.

    • The contract fact such “Scientologists” refuse to confront is that a corporate culture which has descended as a group so low on the emotional tone scale as to manifest force, threats, abuse, violence and alarming lies is, by it’s very nature, incapable of at the same time delivering individual personal liberation while in fact doing the exact opposite. What your friend wants so badly is just no longer there to be had. That’s the real pity of the scene – it’s now a box canyon.

    • Your humble servant

      Jane Doe,

      You are right that they are not training auditors. God knows what they are training, but it is not auditors. Anyone who wants to be an auditor had now better stay away from the official Church of Scientology. Sorry, the just the way it is according to my reality. There are no more Class XII’s, no more Class VIII’s, no more real auditors at all there.

  107. Also to add to my last post. I talked to a highly tech trained Indie. I won’t use his name without his permission, so he’ll for the moment remain anonymous. He said that there are 3 levels of being a prisoner or being trapped. First is being trapped and can’t get out such as a jail or something. Next lower level is being trapped so badly that you go into apathy about it and finally give up hope and don’t care if you ever get out. An example of that would be many of the Jews imprisoned in concentration camps during Nazi Germany. And the level below that, the lowest level, is that of being trapped and so broken down mentally, spiritually, emotionally, to the point of becoming a degraded being who will never leave even if the gates were opened and rescuers were there to take them out. They don’t leave because they think they “deserve it” and “deserve to be there”. They are even below apathy.

    And this, my friends, is the condition our former Exec Strata at Flag and Int are in, those that are still in the Hole. Heber would never leave even if we stormed the place, same for LeSevre and Mitthoff and others. Apparently the “fire in the belly” that is requisite for an executive to be an executive can be extinguished by enough suppression. DM should rot in hell for all that.

  108. I think the image of Scientology could change over night. First thing that would have to happen though is that David Miscavige would have to drop dead. You know, like heart attack, brain tumor, cancer, some terminal disease that he picks up along the way. Then, who ever takes over, and ideally it would be a woman, announces to the world at large, that after careful investigation and several financial audits, Miscavige was actually found to be a bad guy who had terrible faults, and that this is the beginning of a new era of leadership. And she would go on all the TV talk shows and do a nice little Non-Existence formula, straighten everybody out on what it means to go up the Bridge, and that it’s not gonna be about money anymore, that we’re CUTTING our prices! That we are abolishing the Disconnection Policy, that we are abolishing the multi-level financial hierarchy of the IAS, that we are abolishing the unnecessary Sec Checks on OT 7, and that we are going back to the original definition of a Floating Needle!! Ha Ha!! And that is ALL it would take!! Stats would SOAR!

    • And a general amnesty (does not include DM and co.).
      And unused money back if wanted.
      And all “ideal orgs” back to orgs’ ownership.
      And a sincere apology to all people who have been
      harassed and fair gamed by the GO and OSA and
      full disclosure what was done plus monetary recompense
      as wanted.
      And a complete overhaul of staff members’ and Sea Org
      members’ salaries.
      And just get rid of the IAS.
      And all staff and SO who wants to leave getting a sincere
      thank you for all the work done plus help with getting
      back into the society with jobs and accommodations.
      And last but not least full steam ahead on just TRAINING
      and AUDITING and nothing else. No other fish to fry.

  109. Anonymous Confused Person

    I like how Colbert skewered Catholicism, too: he essentially said something I’ve felt: all religions’ backstories/essential mythologies are fantastic and unreal from a third-party point of view. To call the Scientology (or Mormon, another faith skewered by Colbert on the segment) mythology “weird” or “ridiculous” by holding it up to the Christian mythology (as the “normal” comparative mythology) is silly to me. They’re all silly, in a sense, but that’s not the point.

    I personally agree with what other people have said in posts past: Scientology needs to be a process, not a religion. There was a Kickstarter campaign recently that was an effort to make a Princess Luna plush (from “My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic”). The creator’s written description of the project was an elaborate attempt to convince not the fans, but Hasbro’s lawyers, that the plush is about some fan-fiction related to Sailor Moon. It didn’t fool anyone, and turned a lot of people off of the project, because it was a blatant lie about its nature. I know that some may disagree strongly with me, but everything I’ve seen about Scientology — at least about the benefits its supporters cite — is about how the process (“tech”) is helpful to unlocking one’s potential. I understand that there is a spiritual component to it (i.e., that we are more than just our bodies), but it is still a process, not a religion (and, in fact, the “Church” tries to have it both ways: telling people that they don’t have to abandon their own religion, while calling itself a religion). I feel that this is a central “it’s not Princess Luna, it’s a Sailor Moon cat who transformed herself into a generic pegasus that just coincidentally looks /exactly/ like Princess Luna, right down to the unicorn horn and cutie mark” lie that most people can perceive and that cripples Scientology’s respectability right from the start.

    So, in summary: stop being a religion. Be a business promoting a self- or other-help process. Charge reasonable prices and pay taxes, like all good businesses. I think Scientology would experience a real revival if this were how it was presented.

    I also think that it would really behoove Scientology, if it’s going to continue to refer to science in its name or present its methods as scientific, to actually start to use the scientific method to revise/refine the processes (that is, the idea that “you can’t change the tech” is fundamentally unscientific, so again it is a fundamental blow to its respectability to have a contradiction present). For example: exteriorization: there are some pretty simple tests to determine whether people really /can/ leave their bodies or whether it’s a vivid hallucination. Either we really /are/ capable of something amazing like exteriorization, or our minds have some capabilities that are pretty darn astonishing (which is why I would never refer to this as “just vivid hallucinations”, because “just” would make one thing that this wasn’t extraordinary, and I think it would be). In my opinion, either result would be fascinating and would lead to all kinds of other fascinating questions to be explored.

    As always, YMMV.

  110. “Do you believe this public image can change? How? How long will it take to change significantly?”

    Having read this entire thread, I have to respectfully disagree with my colleagues on the point that getting the general public to accept the CONTENT of Scientology as necessary to affecting a public image turnaround. And I must also disagree with those so uninformed as to consider that Scientology is not a religion.

    Let me address the latter issue first.

    Despite arguments to the contrary, Scientology IS a religion just as valid as Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, et al. That they don’t conveniently fit into the Judeo-Christian box that most Westerners use to judge whether something is or is not a religion is irrelevant. Scientology is a religion built upon the older and more fundamental religious tradition to which the very existence of Judeo-Christianity is traceable – the religious philosophies of the Axial Age:

    “In a seminal work, The Great Transformation, Karen Armstrong details the origins of our religious traditions during what is called the Axial [pivotal] Age, a seven-hundred-year period dating from 900 to 200 BCE, during which much of the world turned away from violence, cruelty and barbarity. The upwelling of philosophy, insight and intellect from that era lives today in the works of Socrates, Plato, Lao-Tzu, Confucius, Mencius, Buddha, Jeremiah, Rabbi Hillel and others. Rather than establishing doctrinaire religious institutions, these teachers created social movements that addressed human suffering. These movements were later called Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, monotheistic Judaism, democracy, and philosophical rationalism; the second flowering of the Axial Age brought forth Christianity, Islam, and Rabbinical Judaism. The point Armstrong strongly emphasizes is that the early expressions of religiosity during the Axial Age were not theocratic systems requiring belief, but instructional practices requiring action. The arthritic catechisms and rituals that we now accept as religion had no place in the precepts of these sages, prophets, and mystics. Their goal was to foster a compassionate society and the question of whether there was an omnipresent God was irrelevant to how one might lead a moral life. They asked their students to question and challenge and, as opposed to modern religion, to take nothing on faith. They did not proselytize, sell, urge people to succeed, give motivational sermons, or harangue sinners. All relied on a common principle, the Golden Rule: Never do to anyone what you would not have done to yourself.

    “‘The Axial sages were not interested in providing their disciples with a little edifying uplift, after which they could return with renewed vigor to their ordinary self-centered lives. Their objective was to create an entirely different kind of human being. All the sages preached a spirituality of empathy and compassion; they insisted that people must abandon their egotism and greed, their violence and unkindness. Not only was it wrong to kill another human being; you must not even speak a hostile word or make an irritable gesture. Further, nearly all of the Axial sages realized that you could not confine your benevolence to your own people; your concern must somehow extend to the entire world. . . .If people behaved with kindness and generosity to their fellows, they would save the world.’”
    “No one in the Axial Age imaged that he was living in an age of spiritual awakening. It was a difficult time, riddled with betrayals, misunderstandings, and petty jealousies. But the philosophy and spirituality of these centuries constituted a movement nevertheless, a movement we can recognize in hindsight. Their aim was to understand the source of violence, not to combat it. All roads led to self, psyche, thought, and mind. The spiritual practices that evolved were varied, but all concentrated on focusing and guiding the mind with simple precepts and practices whose repetition in daily life would gradually and truly change the heart.”

    Accordingly, a religion does not have to be a belief system. It does not have to worship a supreme being. It does not have to have authoritarian dogma or rituals. And it doesn’t need a license to survive by the IRS (as if THEY were qualified to be the arbiter of what’s valid religious thought. Ha!) It only has to deal with spirituality and attempt to define reality and Mankind’s place in it and his relationship to his fellows.

    In fact, the Supreme Court doesn’t even require that much in their definition of what qualifies as a religion:

    “The Supreme Court has interpreted religion to mean a sincere and meaningful belief that occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to the place held by God in the lives of other persons. The religion or religious concept need not include belief in the existence of God or a supreme being to be within the scope of the First Amendment.” http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Religion

    So, let’s put that issue to rest. By any legal or philosophical litmus test, Scientology is most definitely a religion in the truest sense of that word, like it or lump it. As such, one can better appreciate the horror and abhorrence real, trained Scientologists feel towards the sociopathy that’s being acted out within the walls Corporate Scientology, and their passion about rapidly bringing it to any end.

    With respect to getting the general public to accept the CONTENT of Scientology as necessary prerequisite to affecting a public image turnaround, as a religion Scientology is not subject to scientific peer review (at least not until scientific dogma recognizes the validity of non-material consciousness as the source of matter, energy, space and time – which is beginning to inexorably and reluctantly dawn on scientists in the field of quantum mechanics). Until then, Scientology is in its proper safe-point as a valid religion exclusively.

    A religion’s CONTENT does not have to be accepted by the general public for the general public to respect a religion as a religion. Religious TOLERANCE is a hallmark of a civilized society and those who manifest religious intolerance become social pariahs as religious bigots, thus dead-agenting themselves. The fact that the other guy’s religion has enough wacky, incredible content as to prompt unsociable behavior is what gives rise to the social requirement of religious tolerance, a line crossed only by religion haters from whom no religion will ever gain respect.

    No, the idea of getting antagonistic sources to accept the validity of the content of Scientology is impossibly unworkable. It’s like saying that a PTS Type A handling is not successful until the antagonistic source accepts Scientology – false data that accounts for many failed handlings. As in a PTS Type A handling, all one need do is identify what one is doing to create the antagonism, knock it off, apologise and thereby reestablish ARC and thus respect – no “proselytizing” or “conversion” required.

    So, what is “Scientology” doing to create public antagonism? One need only knock that off, admit it was totally uncool, apologize and demonstrate a change in behavior. Such a public handling could be done in relatively short order and thereby affect an almost overnight turnaround in public perception. The general public is very forgiving when presented with a genuine mea culpa with full accountability. I would C/S it as follows:

    1. Lawsuit brought against the culpable parties within Corporate Scientology based on a viable, bullet-proof legal theory by those who were illegally removed from positions of fiduciary responsibility.
    2. Press conference announcing the suit attended by all such former-management plaintiffs, initially dressed in the Class A Sea Org uniforms as the “management in exile”.
    3. In the press conference, public delineation of:
    a) The basis for the suit
    b) The abuses it is intended to curtail
    c) A statement of Scientology core values
    d) The reforms that will be enacted upon successful resolution of the legal action, including:
    i. Disbanding of the Sea Org and the RPF
    ii. Abolition of Disconnection and Fair Game
    NB: At this point, all former-management plaintiffs would stand and discard their Class A uniforms.
    iii. Implementation of the corporate structure of checks and balances LRH left behind that never got implemented.
    e) The public transparency and accountability measures that will be installed, starting with a thorough, searching, independent audit by credible and respected experts.
    f) A public apology to anyone who had been harassed, abused, coerced or damaged in any way with a promise of rapid payment of refund and repayment claims upon successful resolution of the suit.

    Such an event alone would get international coverage on all channels and the tsunami of love, admiration, respect, moral and financial support and subsequent criminal investigations would swamp the unwanted regime onto the trash heap of history virtually overnight.

    How long would it take? Only so long as it would take for us to get our shit together enough to execute the above.

  111. Brad Halsey, I like your mock up for how to change Scientology’s bad brand overnight almost. Except why does the successor to DM (if he died or was assassinated or blew or something), why do you say the successor has to be a woman? Any man or woman who is capable and can do it should be welcomed. By the way, kidding about the “assassinated” part. (maybe) lol

  112. The image won’t change, even if David Miscavige is somehow ousted, because public opinion of LRH isn’t much better. You can’t change what’s in the Tech, and there’s some pretty brutal stuff in the Tech. That’s what people are going to focus on.

  113. The funniest bit on the Colbert Report was when Colbert questioned Wright about the Sea Org. Wright explained that Hubbard had a small Scientology navy that sailed around the world. Without skipping a beat, Colbert said, ‘Is that why Hubbard dressed like Thurston Howl the 3rd?’. Looking back on Gilligan’s Island, I see the similarity in both their dress attire.

    • The knife through the watermelon message from Miscavige to Colbert was hilarious! Colbert understands The Dwarf very well.

  114. Something worth noting is that approx 10% of the population get life coaching or some form of therapy. Thus at least potentially there is hope for Scn.

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