Notable Scientology Critics

A rather exhaustive list of critics. Of course, I am not on the list. The fact that I also criticize anti-cultists does not make of me a "notable" critic ;-)

Notable Scientology Critics (many of whom are former Scientologists)

The Saga of Anne-Marie Lizin

Anne-Marie Lizin, Belgian Independent Senator and anti-cultist is in trouble and offered her resignation as Mayor.

In Dec. 2007 she used local government agents to distribute fliers for her election campaign and publically called "prostitute" a member of her office who confirmed the facts.

In Oct. 2007 an investigation of the regional hospital of Huy, of which she was the Administrative Council President, suspected unjustified expenses possibly linked to her credit card.

Her party's Committee on Audit wanted to hear her about it but she claimed she could not go because she was recovering from surgery - the same day as she participated in a television debate about Guantanamo! Her party was pissed and suspended her.

The local government then started a disciplinary procedure again her. The only way Lizin would be able to avoid having to answer the investigation would be to resign - which she just announced last Monday!

Not to be outdone, she also announced that she will be a candidate for the next local elections! She will also remain independent Senator.

Ironically, she qualifies the legitimate objections about her behavior as a "witch trial of the XXIth Century".

In French:

La saga de Huy, étape par étape, jusqu'à la démission d'Anne-Marie Lizin -- RTL info

L'AFFAIRE DES TRACTS

En décembre 2007, un journaliste dénonce un comportement illégal : lors de la dernière campagne électorale, des agents communaux distribuent des tracts pour faire la publicité d’Anne-Marie Lizin. Jusque-là, rien d’anormal. Or, l’enquête du journaliste révèle que ces agents communaux ont distribué ces tracts durant leurs heures de travail. Une journée de distribution de tracts revenait donc aussi chère à la communauté qu’une journée prestée à la commune. En ce qui concerne cette affaire, Anne-Marie Lizin dit à l'époque ne pas être concernée : "C’est le secrétaire communal qui gère les relations employeur-employé", avait-elle rétorqué.

Par après, Micheline Toussaint, (première échevine de Huy et sorte de rivale d’Anne-Marie Lizin) se fait traiter de prostituée par l’ex-bourgmestre de Huy… Anne-Marie Lizin n'a pas supporté que Micheline Toussaint confirme que les agents communaux aient effectué un travail illégal. L’enquête conclura enfin que les agents qui ont distribué ces tracts étaient en réalité en congé lors de cette distribution, mais qu’ils ne l’avaient pas annoncé à la commune.

LES DEPENSES VIA LA CARTE VISA

En octobre 2007, le Centre hospitalier régional hutois est perquisitionné : la justice soupçonne l’utilisation abusive des cartes de crédit de l’hôpital, et notamment celle d’Anne-Marie Lizin alors que celle-ci est présidente du Conseil d’administration de l’hôpital. Le montant ? 37.000€ dépensés en 4 ans et injustifiés.

LIZIN EN CONVALESCENCE NE SE PRESENTE PAS A SON AUDITION

Anne-Marie Lizin doit alors être entendue devant le comité d’audit du PS, qui se demande ce qui se passe. Mais elle dit ne pas pouvoir s’y rendre, car elle est en convalescence, et vient de subir une opération lourde. Or, Au même moment, elle participe à un débat télévisé en France à propos de Guantanamo. Elle provoque ainsi la colère du PS, et Elio Di Rupo, la suspend momentanément du PS.

LE GOUVERNMENT WALLON ENTAME UNE PROCEDURE DISCIPLINAIRE A L'ENCONTRE DE LIZIN

Il s’agit d’examiner les dépenses, pour infirmer ou confirmer les soupçons. Mais Anne-Marie Lizin annonçait lundi en exclusivité sur Bel RTL démissionner de son poste de bourgmestre : la procédure disciplinaire sera arrêtée dès que la démission de l’ex bourgmestre sera officialisée.

Lizin jette, temporairement, l'écharpe mayorale hutoise - Belgique - Actualite - Le Vif/L'Express

La sénatrice-bourgmestre de Huy, fragilisée depuis plusieurs mois par des accusations visant son utilisation de la carte de crédit de l'hôpital de Huy et suspendue par son parti, se dit victime d'un procès "stalinien" de la part du Parti socialiste.

Dans un entretien accordé à "La Libre Belgique", elle dénonce la procédure que le PS a mené contre elle. "C'est un procès de sorcellerie au XXIe siècle", déclare-t-elle. Tout était d'ailleurs écrit à l'avance. "Ma santé n'a pas été pour Elio Di Rupo, un argument suffisant pour attendre, c'est clair.", a-t-elle affirmé.

DEJA CANDIDATE AUX PROCHAINES COMMUNALES

Pour autant, la démission d'Anne-Marie Lizin ne signifie pas qu'elle tourne le dos à la politique. Elle a, en effet, annoncé qu'elle sera candidate lors des prochaines élections communales et que d'ici là, elle resterait sénatrice indépendante.

Touretzky's Strange "Secrets" Sub-Directory

Strange that Dave Touretzky has a sub-directory on his "Secrets" page with pics of of Barbara Schwartz.

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/barbara_schwarz_files\

Why would he bother at all? And why put such a sub-directory in such a place?

RoadRunner says that a pic from this directory used against BS has been "fixed twice". By all means, based on other pictures I have seen of BS, she indeed does not look like that at
all.

Marty Rathbun Sees Through the Web

Marthy Rathbun posted two messages in the Exscn forum. I quite agree with most of what he says, except that his skill at breaking his stance into paragraphs does not seem better than his skill at making web pages, but that's admitedly a minor point.

Ex Scientologist Message Board - Search Results

Excerpt:

"One of Scn's greatest problems is its instilling of the “us vs. them” attitude in members. Having studied deeply of the causes of its conflicts from the outset I can see how the old man fell into that trap. I am not arguing it was justified or not. Unfortunately, it is largely responsible for the unproductive, divisive and, for some, traumatic current scene in the margins between Scn and former members. From my short encounter on this site, it appears some folks are still dramatizing what they consider is the winning valence. Example given, people instructing me what to say and to whom to say it and when sort of suggests a cyber SP Hall."

Needless to say, anti-cult fanatics have been hassling him to come over their side, and to "come clean" by taking on their cause - not something I would personally recommend, at least not in the way most critics engage in that "Cause".

[Note: I originally wrote "as if doing nasty things on the other side is going to offset the nasty things you did on the one side..." This has been criticized on the ESK board. Although this is obviously not what anti-cultists ask him to do, that's what most of them end up doing. Nevertheless, I must admit that their criticism is valid, in that I should not have put it that way, and I got carried away. I've tried to express my thought in a better way now, as above.]

I am glad that, so far, Marthy could see through that web of illusion.


Related blog entries: R-Rathbun-

Marty Rathbun

Marty Rathbun is now offering alternative services outside the CoS - which is a bit ironic knowing that as Inspector General Ethics for RTC he was responsible for getting rid of all the squirrel groups...

The undated picture he uses on his web page features him together with Jason Beghe. Some estimate that picture from 2005, but it may well be a recent one as Jason Beghe was the one to announce the departure of Rathbun from the CoS in Jun. 3, 2008:

GREAT NEWS!

I spoke with several VERY RELIABLE sources this weekend who say they are in contact with Marty Rathbun. He is very much alive and very happy! Apparently, he finally left for good due to his disgust with DM’s treatment of staff.

Marty is a great guy, a smart guy and a tough guy. Even if he isn’t nessasarily on ‘our team’, we are certainly fortunate that he is not on ‘their team’. I applaud his courage and integrity for leaving and wish him all the best with the rest of what I hope is a very long, rewarding life…..

You can also check the ARS thread about it (in which a critic demonstrates the "we-do-not-hate-Scientologists" moto with the remark: "Maybe the world will get lucky and Rathbun will choke on a shrimp and die"), the OCMB thread and the WhyWeBWAAA thread.

Rathbun was also spotted in Sep. 2008 as running the Barack Obama’s South Texas campaign branch.

http://rathbunmark.topcities.com/

I was a member of the Sea Organization for twenty-seven years. I learned how to audit and troubleshoot virtually any technical problem at every level of Scientology. For years prior to leaving the Church I was regularly called upon by its top-ranking members to resolve its toughest and, in many instances, most high profile cases.

Having dug myself out of the dark pit where many who leave the Church land, I began lending a hand to others similarly situated.

A lot of folks seem to be suffering from the inculcated idea that once they depart or cease to slavishly follow every arbitrary dictate they automatically forfeit any spiritual gains they may have attained along the road. Natively conscientious as most beings are, such an evaluation can begin a pernicious dwindlng spiral of self-invalidation and unhappiness.

I understand this phenomenon and the internal dichotomies extant within the organization that bring it about. In the process of reversing the decline in myself and in others certain lessons were learned that might be of some assistance to those who have experienced the same.

I offer a simple program of rehabilitation of previously recognized abilities and education on universal truths and principles of spiritual growth. I do not offer a substitute for Scientology nor am in competition with the Church. I am only offering to share all the skills I have learned – from a wide variety of sources - to help those in need who once formally participated in Scientology but who now hold no hope nor intention of ever seeking help from the Church.

My services are peformed in a relaxing, bayside environment with unlimited space and fresh South Texas air. Reasonably priced accommodations – which include plenty of Southern hospitality – are conveniently located within a short, pleasant walking distance.

My services cost whatever you think they are worth, within your means, after completion. I ask that you pay me one-half of whatever you determine that value to be when you head back home. Then, if after a month you believe your original estimation was correct you can send me the other half, or not. It is entirely up to you.

Related blog entries: R-Rathbun-

Quote of the Day - John and Jett

l.l.lipshitz:

"eg, do you have evidence that co$ and the travoltas deliberately killed jett? have you turned it over to the police yet?"

Elle (lipshitz) is questioning one Kennethnoisewater's assertions, the ludicrousness of which can be seen at:

http://stopscientology.blogspot.com/2009/01/jett-travolta-was-taken-off-medication.html
http://stopscientology.blogspot.com/2009/01/jett-travolta-dies-because-of.html
http://stopscientology.blogspot.com/2009/01/john-travolta-refused-to-help-his-son.html

Check also the rest of the thread, and see how quickly simply questioning and asking for dox turn into the usual "helping OSA" accusations, to which Elle had this to say:

"i told no one to shut up, tho i do understand that accusation is the traditional ars response tocontrary opinions. why am i 'helping them out' (doing osa's work??) by criticizing critics for slinging assumptions and innuendo like hog slop? when did it become a crime to ask questions or expect accurate info from critics? when did facts become so scary?"

Scott Pilutik Not a Free Speech Activist

Breaking: Scientology international headquarters seeks ban on HIV+ protesters : Indybay: "Constitutional free speech and church-state religious issues have caught the attention of the respected UCLA professor Eugene Volokh of the Volokh Conspiracy and Scientology critic and attorney Scott Pilutik."

This may look like constitutional free speech religious issues have only recently caught the attention of some sort of independent established attorney, Scott Pilutik, that in addition is associated in the same paragraph as a "respected UCLA professor".

In fact, Pilutk is a veteran anti-Scientologist who was still a student at law not long time ago and. to my knowledge, was a biased Scientology critic long before he even started studying law.

Since he supported the Kady O'Malley and Rob Clark driven ban against me on their pet IRC channel, whatever he would write about "free speech" does not have much credibility in my eyes.

The Perfect Apostate

If you ever want to see why the testimony of some Scientology ex-members can be totally biased and wrong, then you ought to watch this television interview of Jean Paul Dubreuil made in the wake of the Jett Travolta tragedy.

The interview was sub-titled by the Anonymous Credulous type, who, as witnessed by the comments, find it a wonderful source of information.

In the interview, Dubreuil claims that autism is not recognized by Scientology because Scientology does not recognize mental illnesses.

The problem with this is that autism is NOT a mental illness. His claim therefore that Scientology does not recognize autism is pure and unadulterated crap. Alas, one that has been repeated ad infinitum by the press.

He also says that he is really surprised that Travolta did not seek medical treatment for his son because he really can afford to find the best medical advisers there is.

How the hell does he "know" that they did not seek medical advises and medical treatment? Of course, he doesn't, but he heard that assertion in his closed group of "critics" and just repeat and present it as if it were a fact. Quite on the contrary we know now that the family did seek out and use medical doctors, something that any Scientologist with a modicum of common sense and knowledge about Scientology knew already because they would know that medical treatment is not forbidden in Scientology.

He then brings up his brother who died because, he says, he did not receive medical treatment, waiting to be cured by Scientology instead.

We don't know the details of this story but we do know for certain that it is definitely against Scientology policy and Scientology tech to sell people courses or auditing with the claims that they will get cured of this or that medical ailment. And of course we also know that Scientology does not prevent people from pursuing medical cures, quite on the contrary.

If that wasn't bad enough, we get treated with a description of auditing that supposedly consists of "trying to make the PC repeat and see what provokes his illness until the illness does not exist anymore".

What???

If that's the guy understanding of what auditing is, then I am not surprised he wrote a whole freaking book to complain about all the terrible things Scientology supposedly did to him and his brother, because he demonstrate here that he doesn't understand squat about Scientology!

Auditing really consists of following the chain of previous traumatic incidents until the source that lays in the past blows, at which point the person is freed from the mental effect of that particular chain of events (and not cured from illness, even though this may be a consequence).

Dubreuil, however, sounds as if he believes that auditing is just a sort of mantra that is constantly being repeated until the subject is hypnotized to think he is not sick anymore!

Asked what doctors think of Scientology treatments (as he would know), he bluntly proclaims that doctors proscribe it! No, he does not say doctors "don't recommentd" it, as is written in the sub-title, he really uses the term proscrivent". That's French for "proscribe". It seems that the Anonymous Credulous who made the translation tried to ease off and soften up some of the utter crap that was coming out from what is supposed to be the guy's mouth.

Dubreuil also claims that he tried to audit someone to cure him from autism, then complains that it did not work!

The reason it did not work is simply because auditing people to try and cure them from medical ailment is a no no, and because autism is not something you can cure, whether with Scientology or medicine or psychiatry or Voodoo dances.

Again, Dubreuil demonstrate his total ignorance, misunderstanding, and incompetence.

From all this, ensues shocked expressions of horror at the thought of Scientologists taking on to themselves to audit their children to cure them from autism or other medical ailments rather than follow medical advises. It never occurs to that journalist that the assumptions and information at the basis of these claims are just totally wrong. No. That "ex-member" is taken as an authority on the subject, by the sole fact of him being an ex-member and his accusations going in the direction of the general mob understanding of Scientology.

As Lisa Marie Presley wrote in her Facebook today:

“Just like anyone else, If one is sick, they go to the doctor, If a medication will make it better then they take it. If they don't then they are an idiot and you can't blame their religion.”

That guy Dubreuil falls perfectly under the definition, trying to blame Scientology for what is mostly his misunderstanding and misapplications.

But hey, he wrote a whole *book* with his "criticism", and, you know what? He goes to *schools* to preach his anti-Scientology views. And of course he is ailed by so-called "critics" of Scientology...

Jean-Paul Dubreuil is the example type of the perfect apostate. Having an axe to grind but ignorant about the very subject he is supposedly expert about, as well as other subject which he pretends to know about, such as autism and what doctors say, and in which he has of course not competence whatsoever - and yet preaching the world over that Scientology is BAD BAD BAD.

Scientology Treatment of Medical Conditions

Scientologists Sponsor the Drug Free Ambassadors of Australia


We have seen constantly repeated in the press these last days the following assertions:

• Scientology does not allow medical treatment or the use of medical drugs
• Scientology does not recognizes autism
• Scientology is against the use of drugs for the treatment of seizure

These statements are totally false and come from anti-Scientologists with an axe to grin. Nevertheless, these false statements have been repeated in the press without verification of source whatsoever and as if they were facts.


MEDICAL TREATMENT

The assertion that Scientology does not allow medical treatment is easily proven false. The Church of Scientology always had clear statements to this effect on its web site:

http://www.scientology.org/religion/catechism/pg016.html
http://scientologytoday.org/Common/question/pg27.htm

In the meantime, it also issued an official statement that basically repeats what was posted on the addresses above already (though I wonder why they don't publish it on their own web site).

Tommy Davis, spokesman for Scientology International, and Frank Flinn, religious studies professor at Washington University, have both made comments to that effect as well.


DRUGS

While it is true that Scientology does not approve of the use of drugs for the treatment of mental conditions, they have no such directive whatsoever towards drugs for the treatment of physical ailments. See the above references for confirmation, or this paragraph from the official statement:

"Scientologists use medical drugs and prescription medication when physically ill and also rely on the advice and treatment of medical doctors. Scientologists do not take street drugs or mind altering psychiatric drugs of any kind."

AUTISM

Neither I nor the Scientologists I inquired with ever heard of any rule or position regarding autism from the CoS. One has to wonder, then, where anti-Scientologists and the press who repeated their false and fallacious assertions got the idea from.

While it is true that the Scientology does not believe in the treatment of mental illnesses through drugs, autism is not a mental illness. It is a neurological based condition, thus a medical condition. It would therefore fall under the medical treatment rule as above.

However, there is no medicine to treat autism. Nor is there any cure for it. Nor is it lethal on its own (the seizures being only a co-morbid conditions and not part of the syndrome).

Those who have taken pride about "predicting" the death of Jett if his supposed autism condition was not treated have in fact spoken from the top of their head and only displayed their ignorance and prejudice.

Being without clear directive from the CoS regarding this question, the two Scientologists to whom I put the question simply extended the existing rules to the case:

Louanne:

"There are no claims whether “autism” exists or not and I don’t think the Church has any official policy about autism. Whatever that condition may be, any physical component (like brain damage, seizures etc) would certainly be treated medically."

Grahame:

"The truth is that autism is a physical problem and is therefore addressed by physical means. If by "Scientology" they mean the subject itself, then in my study of the subject I have never seen any mention of this condition, probably because it's a physical condition and Scientology deals with the spiritual."

There is something else you need to know about autism. Autism is not a condition you can diagnose "on sight", as Tim Kenny, Travolta's neighbor, did, and which was readily reported as if his amateur diagnostic was an established fact. Check this out:

"The process for diagnosing autism is complex and generally requires not just one professional, but often multiple professionals.

Almost all of the symptoms of autism which must be established also occur in other, similar disorders, so all these other possible diagnoses need to be eliminated as well. There are also many marginal cases where something could be autism or something else, and it isn't easy to decide even after gathering all appropriate diagnostic information.

A diagnosis of autism is something which follows someone for life. No competent medical professional would just look at someone and make a snap diagnosis. "

Is there any reason to doubt that Travolta and Preston would not have the resources to avail the best medical opinion there is? I believe that if they have been "in denial" about the fact that Jett suffered from autism, it simply was because he wasn't. I am quite confident that if the doctors they consulted had made this diagnostic, they would have deployed all the means at their disposal to give Jett the best treatment there was, even if none could cure him. And no non-existent Church policy would have stopped them, contrary to what critics said about them supposedly putting their religion before the wellness of their children.

Now this does not mean that Jett did not suffer from another neurological based condition. As people noted, he did give the appearance of it and I believe that claim to be valid, though nobody, including John and Kelly, seem to know what it was exactly. The important point, though, were the seizures, and these were fully taken into account.

Even admitting that the Travoltas were in denial of an existing autism condition, it would not have changed a thing, since it is not lethal, does not have a cure, does not have drug or medicine. Some people said Jett would have had a better quality of life if the family acknowledged Jett's autistic condition, but I doubt anybody suffering from a neurological disorder, whatever the name, could have had a better quality of life than Jett.

The important thing is this: Jett had a history of seizure, and this was fully acknowledged by the family. They certainly were not in denial about what was the dangerous aspect of whatever neurological disorder Jett may have had - the seizures, that eventually killed him, which is our last point.


SEIZURES

In its press release, the CoS explicitly addressed seizures, aligning it with medical conditions, and thereby making it fall under the rule of medical treatment. It also is false to claim that Scientology would be against the use of drugs to treat seizure. Again, whoever spread that rumor was either misinformed or malicious, or both.

However, there is a catch:

"The majority of seizure medications out there are also used as psychiatric medications - Tegretol and Depakote are used for bipolar illness, Klonopin and Valium for anxiety, Lamictal for depression, and so on. "

That would probably be a dilemma for many Scientologists, but at the end of the day, they don't have much choice. From what I understand, as long as these drugs are being used to threat medical ailments and not mental symptoms, Scientology would not object and would consider it a personal matter, leaving to the parents and individuals affected to decide.

This is also confirmed by the to Scientologists I consulted:

Grahame:

First of all, a Scientologist is not "instructed" to seek medical advice or any other kind of advice by the Church. You write as if the Church runs our entire lives. When my friends' little girl first had a seizure they called an ambulance. They didn't call the Church and ask what to do.

More Grahame:

Physical problems like seizures need to be addressed with the appropriate physical handling. If a drug that handles seizures can also be used for other purposes then I don't think that is important. It is up to the person or parent to get the facts and make a decision based on their own due diligence and the advice of their medical practitioner.

Louanne:

Seizures are a medical problem and certainly anti-seizure medication is ok in the Church’s book. I can add some personal experience to this, namely from knowing two epileptics and Scientologists who are taking their medicine regularly. Such medication is absolutely part of some Scientologists life and the Church of Scientology does not interfere in that.

And of course, we also know now that the Travoltas have been using Depakote for many years, all the while being in perfectly good standing with the Church of Scientology.


CONCLUSION

As it turn out, thus, the truth is that:

• Scientology does allow medical treatment or the use of drugs
• Scientology does recognizes neurological conditions as medical conditions
• Scientology is not against the use of drugs for the treatment of seizure

Not only those anti-Scientologists, who burst in mourning comments, pointing fingers and assigning blame, have shown themselves totally insensitive and heartless, they also were damn wrong!

At the end of the day, more than something that badly reflects against Scientology, it turns out to be something that badly reflects against critics.

They have called this upon themselves by prematurely jumping to conclusions before all the facts were known, making demeaning and hurtful comments towards a family deeply in pain, and failing to display any measure of true critical thinking, something they supposedly possess in great abundance...

This obviously is no surprise to me, as I have reported many other instances of such behavior over the years on my web site.

Not all critics did engage in such a fanatical and de-humanized behavior, though. Some did put the human aspect before their personal engagement, to wit, Mark Bunker and Howard Stern, but what the public have seen in the news comment is the impression they will retain, the end result being more sympathy for the Scientologists and less credibility for their critics.

Those critics who have jumped to conclusions and blame have now switched tactic. They can't find any valid argument to blame Scientology for Jett's death anymore, so they just use innuendos to give the impression that similar deaths plague Scientology's history. But this is another story, another of their countless myths.

Mark Ebner Strikes Low

In 2006, Mark Ebner wrote an excellent article about Philip Gale's death. The article was such that Mike Gomez removed Philip Gale from his Scientology associated deaths page because it convinced him that Scientology really was not implicated in it (as if Scientology has that more a role in the other deaths listed on that page but that's another subject).

Philip's mother played an important role in Ebner's article, providing him with many precious information.

There was one condition she put forth, though, as Mark wrote himself in the article:

"She agreed to talk about Philip on condition that his story not be used to attack Scientology."

However, Mark is now so enthusiast at the opportunity to capitalize on the emotional wave of Jett Travolta's unfortunate death that he just could not resist to include Philip on his new page. The page tries to associate Jett's death to other supposedly similar "Scientology-related" deaths and incidents.

By using the story of Philip Gale in a vile attack against Scientology, he betrayed the trust Philip mother's bestowed on him, and which was the condition under which she released the information that helped Mark's article to become a success.

In so doing, of course, he also betrayed his own integrity.

Tim Kenny Commits Suicide

I just found out that Tim Kenny, the father of the autistic child quoted as the source of Mark Ebner's article about Travolta and his son, committed suicide last March.

Another sad news for 2009 :-( My heart goes out to his family.

Update Jan 5:

Mark Ebner in fact reported the incident in May.

Through the comments, we learn that Tim was fiercely anti-COS:

"My husband Tim Kenny was a wonderful man and a huge supporter for autism awareness and a crusader against scientology. he hated scientology and all that it stood for. he was very proud that he stood up to John Travolta and his suicide was due to fnancial problems."

Anti-COSers are of course blaming his death on Scientology (who else?):

"... [various death blamed on the COS] ... Tim Kenny (a neigbor of the Travoltas who had called child protective services on them, dead of an apparent suicide"

Related blog entries:

• Why is Tim Kenny Dead?
• Scientology Treatment of Medical Conditions
  

Religious Freedom Watch

I was not prompted to make a blog entry when I observed the reaction of Scientologists to the hideous Anonymous harassment I just posted about, in which they seemed to genuinely believe critics still indulge in the type of forcible deprogramming depicted in the deprogramming manual.

However, I was prompted to do it when I read this blog entry, because the two situations are very similar.

It surprised me to see this entry because the Life Repairman has been blogging for quite a while now... I thought he would be more knowledgeable about criticism. Yet, he only now discovers a site that existed for years already, and he is quite stunned by it. Of course, he does not realize that almost for sure, that web site is created and maintained by the CoS.

What is more, he actually beliefs that critics are really the way they are being depicted in this web site, and of course he is horrified:

These scumbags are the lowest of low. The crimes many of these wackos are accused of include kidnapping, child molestation, theft, extortion, copyright infringement, stalking, drunk driving, frivolous lawsuits, harassment, forgery, embezzlement, to name a few.

Then, he of course falls in precisely what the CoS wants him to believe:

EVERY negative or crazy sounding rumor (all lies) about Scientology or L. Ron Hubbard on the Internet was started and spread by one or more of the criminals exposed on this site.

And now see how reading the kind of (xenu.net) horror stories critics run against Scientology (in the same spirit and manner the CoS run its horror stories against critics), just confirms him in his belief that the CoS is right regarding critics:

Every one of the usual negative rumors I've ever seen on the Internet about Scientology was either a flat out lie, or was something completely normal that was twisted and slanted to sound crazy and weird.

We are in a situation similar to what I wrote in my Deprogramming Manual blog entry above, in which critics are demonized by the CoS, and in which critics, by their own beligerent attitude, confirm Scientologists in the depiction made of them by the CoS.

Not that what either side say about the other is necessarily false. It may have a basis of truth, and sometimes more than just a basis, but eventually each side end up demonizing the other to the point that it completely distords reality.

This is the tragedy of the Scientology controversy, and why we see so much ugliness on each side.

What Motivates Tom

wistv.com has an interesting article that provides us with more insights on Cruise's motivation to push through with such a film:

Cruise said he was struck by Von Stauffenberg's elaborate plot, even to the point that he believed the script doctored history for the sake of suspense. "When I put it down, I thought, this can't be true," he said at the film's press day in New York.

Cruise felt compelled to share the story. "It's important to know that it wasn't everybody — not everybody felt the way [Hitler did] or fell into the Nazi ideology," he said. "I grew up wanting to kill Nazis and wanting to kill Hitler, and remember thinking as a child, 'Why didn't someone just shoot him?' So it's an important story to tell.

Another sign showing how Cruise was personally motivated to do the film was Singer comments:

"As a director you always feel that nobody cares about the movie as much as you do," Singer said. "With Tom, you get the rare honor of having a partnership with someone who cares about this movie as much as I do. We experimented, and it was phenomenal because anything I'd ask he'd be like, 'Let's do it.' There was never a lack of wanting to try and never a lack of trust."

There is, however, another aspect I found of interest through this interview.

On top of the story itself, and Cruise's own background as a child, I think that what also motivated him was the parallel of someone standing against the prevailing mob propaganda of the time, and his own standing regarding Scientology:

"The thing that stood out to me was Stauffenburg himself and the amount of desperation and pain for him," Cruise said. "He wanted a moral country that participated in the world, not one of annihilation and Holocausts and world domination. He was a man who was able to see through all the propaganda and see how utterly insane Hitler was, and ultimately he was the one to say, 'Somebody's got to shoot that bastard.'"

The two situations are of course not comparable, because at the time it would have cost you your life to stand against the wave (not speaking of attempting to kill Hitler!), but it does take some courage and insight to be able to stand up to any form of ignorance and prejudice when they are being echoed and perpetrated by the masses, and I believe his own experience being a Scientologist in today's world may have been one of the reasons Cruise found the scrip to be admirable.

Not that I agree with him on Scientology. I think it would take more insight even to quit the movement, but I place myself on his perspective, and from his perspective his stand is quite admirable, because he holds it against the world as, for him this is what he believes in.

It would take more than the stupid bashing fanatical critics call "criticism" to get Cruise out of Scientology, and in the meantime this kind of "criticism" is no better than mob hysteria indeed.

Updates Jan 1, 2009:

"I've had lots of luck and earned much money during my career. Now I don't do movies for the money. I pick the projects that I feel like doing, and lots of people earn a lot of money with me."

"... and the certainty of being branded a traitor to his country - because he knew it was the right thing to do [...] As he elaborates, it's apparent that he identifies with von Stauffenberg on some personal level that he can't quite verbalise. And it strikes me that what he's saying about the man's character is very similar to what he wrote in his eulogy for his friend Paul Newman [...] When I point this out and the conversation shifts to Newman[...] "Paul lived with such dignity and left such a legacy - as an actor and a philanthropist - that words can't do justice to his accomplishment." [...] "Now that I think about it," he says with a smile, "this idea is probably one of the reasons that made me want to make Valkyrie. Like Paul, von Stauffenberg is a good role model. So I guess you could say that both men have been a gift to me."

Fume, Seethe and Rage

axcessnews.com has an article that could have been written by a fanatical anti-Scientologist, so biased and unrepresentative it is.

Indeed, it makes it sound in the title, and throughout the article, as if film critics unanimously gave the film and Cruise two thumbs down.

It obviously is not true when you check out the facts through actual film critics web sites such as Metacritics, RottenTomatoes or IMDB. In fact, it is blatantly false and quite a shame for that web site and its author.

Here are some pearls:

"Horrible", "Tom Cruise's worst picture", "Nazi bomb" where all terms used by film critics who gave two thumbs down to Tom Cruise's latest film about the plot to kill Adolph Hitler, "Valkyrie"

critics say that next to the line up of British actors, Cruise's acting bombed more than the plot to kill Hitler

Perhaps the kindest comment towards the super star of Valkyrie might be to call Tom Cruise 'frustratingly stupid"

That would be Tom Cruise's only excuse to fans and come clean at some juncture with just how lousy Valkyrie really is

As for the anti-Scientology bias of the author, it comes out quite clear through this sort of sentences:

Anytime the Scientologist Supreme bows down before a hack pseudo news anchor and kisses butt in order to promote a movie you know he's been bent over the contractual clause of his contract.

John Brown reported another instance of such a press article on his blog.

Who's the Oddest?

From celebuzz.com :

“One demonstrator shouted through a home made bull horn equipped with lips and eyes made of felt and Styrofoam. Lesson learned, Scientology may be odd but the protesters don't seem very far away.”

Musing on Bernie and Other "Stooges"

Even though I am not posting to ARS I get my daily dose of "criticism" from so-called critics in ARS, just for maintaining this blog and expressing views that are not approved by the ARSCC committee. Critics who happen to have similar views as mine, or who dare say that Bernie may not be a complete evil moron after all, get to be tagged likewise.

Just check this thread for entertaining reading.

Even Ted Mayett, who is far from being a "cult apologist" as he almost solo picketed the CoS for years long before Anonymous got its pampers changed, is now assimilated to one for the mere crime of expressing doubts about Anonymous.

Here is a poetic excerpt from this piece of high level "criticism" on the part of so-called critics:

As an apologist, he's comparable with J. Gordon Melton, the "scholar" who is periodically paid to suck David Miscavige's cock and studiously put a stamp of approval on the RPF gulags or commit other gross insults to modern civilization.

Pretty soon they'll have their own "SP List", reminiscent of the one that was once maintained on the now defunct Anonymous forum "enturbulation.org", and of course just like the one of the CoS.

But of course "we are not cultists, they are" - right?

R.I.P. Dave Bird

I am stunned. I have been so disconnected with the Scientology-related issue over the years that I was completely unaware that Dave Bird passed away on Feb.10 of this year (ironically the same day as one of the biggest Anonymous protest against Scientology, which I am sure he would have loved to attend or at least to see).

I just got a hint of his demise today, reading this ARS post,then confirmed my suspicions through a Google search that led me to David Gerard's R.I.P page on Dave.

Even though Dave was a staunch (and some may say obsessed) opponents of mine, making posts after posts calling me "Barnie", "Barmpot the barmy Belgian", and comparing me to Barney the purple dinosaure because what I was saying made for him no more sense than what the child mascot was blatering, I cannot help feeling deeply sad learning of him having passed away.

I always remembered Dave upon seeing the Rubeus Hagrid character in Harry Potter's movie. A gentle giant with a big beard and a big heart. Of course, "gentle" would not exactly describe Dave's impetuous character, but one thing I know for sure, is that he did have a big heart, and his anger with me was prompted by his sincere activism and involvement against what he considered an evil cult, and me "defending" it.

All of a sudden, I do miss his harangues on ARS and his lyricism in his essay on me: "Hercule Barmpot: the Case of the Missing Marbles", in which he displayed a real talent for writing stories.

Rest in peace, Dave. Even though I do not think your arguments and tactics with me were right, I am certain that your heart-felt involvement in severals causes which you deeply and sincerely felt for will speak favorably for you up there.

Gorman Bullies for Lerma Too

One should not be surprised to see Tommy Gorman in bed with people like Magoo and Lerma. In this post, Fluffy girl reminds us how Gorman enforced the ban of people Lerma did not like, for no better reason that they do not share his fanatical anti-Scientology views, and also how Gorman kept on bully her in OCMB:

"They can start with his tendency to libel people he does not know and to make assumptions about them. Arnie placed Tommy Gorman in charge of Factnet's Scn subforum(Arnie and Wolly are evidently friends) and Tommy immediately threw off everyone Arnie told him to, which, IIRC, was Tigger, UMike and myself. The grounds were that those individuals were supposedly mean to his friend. Yeah, that's a great reason to do that, sure. It's very Cof$-like.

Then, as a topper, Tommy posted a vile accusation about my husband and myself (that we are "perverts") on OCMB because of my husband's humorous and critical JPGs about Scn. I told him OSA didn't like the JPGs and he all but called me a liar.

He then informed me that I didn't like his commentary because "The truth hurts-LOL" to which I responded that he hadn't actually posted any truth regarding this and that anytime he'd like to get around to posting some truth, I'd sure like to see if "it hurts-LOL".

Personally, I think that he's got a learning disability of some sort or has some mental problems or both. He spent a lot of time spamming the hell out of the "your story in Scn" section of OCMB before they assigned a moderator.

I know people who've met Tommy Gorman and really liked him but I've not had the opportunity to encounter anything likeable.

He'd have far more credibility with me if he didn't attack other critics. My guess is that he doesn't like whomever Arnie tells him not to like. That's exactly why he did what he did on Factnet and OCMB.

It's sad when people leave the cult and still cannot think for themselves."

David Feherty Regrets Savaging Tom Cruise

David Feherty, the former professional golfer who now works as a writer and broadcaster and who savaged Tom Cruise because he said depression was best cured by physical exercise, now says that part of his reaction was due to the fact that

"if I kicked the hell out of Tom Cruise, I'd feel a lot better about myself"

That may also be partly why celebrities are so easy targets for so many.

Encyclopedia Dramatica Entry for Critics

Encyclopedia Dramatica as a rather accurate description of critics in its anti-Scientology page. Worth quoting - it's almost as if it was written by me :-)

"If one wishes, one may also troll on the "other side of the fence". That is, troll the critics of Scientology. This is often the source of many epic lulz, since critics get so caught up in their "activism" in railing against Scientology, that they often don't see that they are, themselves, becoming the very model of what a Scientologist should be.

Trolling critics is generally a longer set up that your garden variety troll, but depending on the set up can last anywhere from a couple of months to over a year. The troller should find a Scientology critic message board (Operation Clambake being the largest example thereof), create an account and once situated within the community, incite chaos by doing one (or all) of the following:

• Declare your love/admiration/respect for L.Ron Hubbard. Add that he was brilliant.
• Start every topic and answer every question with a Hubbard quote.
• Say that Scientology means "Study of truth" and ask the critics why they are against truth.
• Claim that there is actual "value" in Scientology "tech"
• Claim that Scientology is a "bona fide" religion.
• Say that Fair Game doesn't exist. And Xenu is an invention of ex-members.
• Claim that Scientology "helps people become more able"
• Say that all critics are oppressors, bigots, intolerant, Nazis etc.
• Bad mouth psychiatry
• Suggest to bomb the Church and say it will be a kewl terrorist attack.
• Threaten to drop docs on someone's Powerword: IRL Name on the boards.

(Note: Threatening to drop docs, or "outing" a critic is a troll ending move, but the resultant panic generates much lulz)

Any or all of the above will brand you immediately as a "Scieno", "Clam" or the entity most dreaded by the critic "community", O.S.A. which is short for Office of Special Affairs, the "dirty tricks/litigation" arm of the Scientology "Church". Many lulz ensue as the critics bad mouth you, tell you you're stupid, that Hubbard was a mad man, sling epithets and generally attempt to butthurt you with tired, cliche arguments over and over. These critics have developed a kind of "visual stealth technology" wherein if you point out that they're acting exactly like the big, bad entity they're fighting against, blinders will come down, your observation will be either categorically denied (despite the obviousness) or ignored.

Remember: these "critics" are the ones who claim to want to "help" people exit the cult of Scientology, but seem to be the first ones to drive Scientologists running screaming right back to their E-Meters for "Life Repair Handling" or courses in shattering "Suppressive Persons" (more like Smart Persons amirite?). "