The Power of Citizen Journalism
Post News ($)»     Post Blog»     Upload Image»     Groups»     Events»     Alerts»     How do I ...»
Email Print Share

Email this article

Recipient email:
Your email:
optional
Message:
optional

article imageOp-Ed: Time Magazine shows some teeth, rips into Church of Scientology

Posted May 13, 2008 by  Paul Wallis (Wanderlaugh) in Lifestyle | 15 comments | 1729 views
Next in Lifestyle
Related News
Advertising
TIME was the first to start hitting the sacred cash cow known as the Church of Scientology in 1991. Its expose remains as a current article, a primer about the issues. Scientology continues to make headlines, the story is as relevant as ever.
TIME’s piece is a beautifully uncompromising piece, something mainstream should use as a template. This was an unprecedented level of ferocity from TIME, which if not laid back, isn’t a hotbed of activism.

If someone scams the rich and gullible, does anyone care?

Not much, but the tales here of some ordinary people who were more than spiritually enlightened by Scientology’s methods. TIME did 150 interviews back in 1991, and they can’t be called fond reminiscences. There are tales of suicides, ripoffs galore, scams, and fees for “treatments” which would fill a phone book.

There’s been recent activity by groups like Anonymous attacking Scientology, and ex-members have been very vocal, both in public and in court. TIME, however, isn’t exactly a collection of hackers from somewhere on the net. This is an unprecedented level of ferocity from TIME, which if not laid back, isn’t generally considered a hotbed of activism.

There’s also a history which reads like a sewer. Careers made of other people’s lives and money… and a lot of human misery. It’s a saga of greed, and TIME’s title for its piece, “The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power” is nothing less than a synopsis.

TIME:

The Church of Scientology, started by science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard to "clear" people of unhappiness, portrays itself as a religion. In reality the church is a hugely profitable global racket that survives by intimidating members and critics in a Mafia-like manner. At times during the past decade, prosecutions against Scientology seemed to be curbing its menace. Eleven top Scientologists, including Hubbard's wife, were sent to prison in the early 1980s for infiltrating, burglarizing and wiretapping more than 100 private and government agencies in attempts to block their investigations. In recent years hundreds of longtime Scientology adherents -- many charging that they were mentally or physically abused -- have quit the church and criticized it at their own risk. Some have sued the church and won; others have settled for amounts in excess of $500,000. In various cases judges have labeled the church "schizophrenic and paranoid" and "corrupt, sinister and dangerous."


That’s from the first page, and the rest of the piece is equally interesting. Just as well for DJ’s server it doesn’t easily break up into quotes, because you’d wind up with Britannica.

Scientology is loathed by its enemies, and bafflingly adored by its proponents. There’s almost no middle ground. The common image of Scientology is of an organization which is secretive, whose members, particularly in media, are privileged, with as many suggestions of an exclusive network of insiders as you could ever wish to see.

Apparently, though, there are two classes of Scientology member. The celebrities are the showpiece Scientologists. There’s another class that’s causing a bit more concern:

According to the Cult Awareness Network, whose 23 chapters monitor more than 200 "mind control" cults, no group prompts more telephone pleas for help than does Scientology. Says Cynthia Kisser, the network's Chicago-based executive director: "Scientology is quite likely the most ruthless, the most classically terroristic, the most litigious and the most lucrative cult the country has ever seen. No cult extracts more money from its members." Agrees Vicki Aznaran, who was one of Scientology's six key leaders until she bolted from the church in 1987: "This is a criminal organization, day in and day out. It makes Jim and Tammy ((Bakker)) look like kindergarten."


From the look of the money mentioned in TIME’s 11 page odyssey, “kindergarten” is about right. Hubbard himself, the founder, was accused of ripping off $200 million from the Church.

Nice place to work, from the sound of it, if you know how.

Money is the very common denominator to be found in most of the incidents, and some of them are nothing less than disgusting.

Actually, it’s hard to be surprised by the money angle. Not many homeless people seem to be on Scientology’s Celebrity roster, (even Tom Cruise has a house) and there don’t seem to be a lot of shelters, soup kitchens, or other trivia, like other “churches” that obviously don’t know much about what a church is supposed to do.

Just a lot of people with plenty of expensive information about themselves, committing suicide while going broke.

Maybe it’s an Urban Outreach program in disguise.

Read TIME’s return to the world of credible journalism, see what you think.

Meanwhile, a bit of research has found some more information worthy of note:
The Student Operated Press has a piece which gives an insight into the “Fair Game” policy enacted and then revoked by the Church:

"ENEMY — SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed."
- HCO Policy Letter, 18 Oct 1967 Issue IV, Penalties for Lower Conditions

The Fair Game law is actively practiced, despite claims that it has been canceled. The text of the cancellation policy is deceptively worded so that outsiders assume it is genuine, while Scientologists understand its meaning.

"The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations. This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP."
- HCO Policy Letter, 21 Oct 1968, Cancellation of Fair Game


This is a charming little piece worthy of study by anyone who wants to see a Nazi like policy at work. That could have come from Mein Kampf, the section about enforcing political power.

Then there’s the gruesome story of Paulette Cooper, a New York freelance writer with a tale so hideous that it really defies analysis, let alone description:

It all started after I wrote an article, “The Scandal of Scientology,” for Queen magazine in the U.K. I had a master’s degree in psychology and had studied comparative religion at Harvard for a summer and what I learned during my research about the group founded by L. Ron Hubbard was both fascinating and frightening. The story cried out to be told. I received one death threat after the article was published, but decided nonetheless to write a book on the subject. I knew the Scientologists wouldn’t like what I said but I was naïve and had no idea of the horrors that lay in store for me over the next two decades.

The Scandal of Scientology was released by a small publisher, Tower Publications, in 1971. After fighting five lawsuits brought against them (and me) by the Church of Scientology, the publisher signed an apology and recalled the book. However, I refused to be silenced and the suits were soon directed at me, along with death threats, pretexting and harassing calls. So why were they so concerned about what a young New York writer had to say? No hard-hitting exposé had ever been written about Scientology.


Things got considerably worse for Cooper after that. Warning: This is not pleasant reading.

The Church of Scientology is one of the most publicly hated organizations on the planet. There might be a reason for that.

F.A.C.T.net has come up with a comprehensive site detailing any amount of information you could want regarding the Church of Scientology. Bring a tent and start reading. F.A.C.T.net itself suffered a raid, based on allegations by the Church of use of copyrighted materials. Read enough of this stuff and you find that the patterns repeat endlessly.

Let’s do some definitions: What is the Church of Scientology? It’s a corporation. It’s a business, and its trade is in people’s mental states.Believe in it or disbelieve in it, that’s its physical status. It’s a continual litigant, for and against others. Few organizations on Earth use as much court time as the Church. It’s the legal angle that is the crux of the matter.

Many allegations against the Church are allegations of actual crimes. Threats, intimidation, blackmail, extortion, smear campaigns, defamation, libel, assault, fraud, and others aren’t misdemeanors. They’re serious crimes. The Church is entitled to its presumption of innocence, as are individuals.

The question, however, is where the law stands with regard to an organization that seems to be so frequently receiving findings of this nature against it, over a period of 50 years. There’s no lack of convictions, and certainly no lack of anecdotal information.

Apparently the U.S. policy about “3 strikes and you’re out” doesn’t apply to organizations. Corporations are legal entities. The law can deal with illegal activities by corporations, as well as individuals. Church or no church, it’s not above the law.

The First Amendment is not a license to commit any criminal act. Nor is it a license for courts to go on holiday regarding criminal activity.

The potential for backlash against the Church is another factor which ought to be seriously worrying law enforcement.

So far, miraculously, there have been no really serious attacks on the Church. The growing hostility, however, is new, and it’s global. Anonymous got a lot of support for its anti-Scientology campaign.

There’s no shortage of people with anti-Scientology sites, either. You could write at least three books on what I was able to find in an afternoon. There are obviously a lot of people with personal issues with the Church. Ex members, in particular, are vehement in their allegations. This piece from Glosslip.com relates to "Modern Day Slavery Within the Church of Scientology"

Says Glosslip:

This is an amazing piece of work, and I encourage EVERYONE who cares about exposing the abuses of the Church of Scientology and the enforced slavery it imposes on its Sea Org member and those who’ve been off-loaded into the Rehabilitation Project Force (aka RPF, or Scientology prison camps) to spread the word of this video.


Historically, the equation is that hate = trouble. The author of that TIME article got his own sample of his interviewee’s experiences. From lermanet.com:

In May, 1991, TIME magazine published and article titled, Scientology: The Cult of Greed,'' which said that the so-called religion is ''really a ruthless global scam.''

The Church of Scientology harassed and sued the author, Richard Behar, TIME Magazine, Time-Warner, and several people quoted in the article for libel. Scientology lost that case, again and again, until - in October, 2001 - the Supreme Court refused to reinstate the organization's libel suit.


That said, Richard Behar became the target of Scientology's hate and harassment activities. From Apologetics Index.org’s Hate Group pages:

Scientology used at least 10 lawyers and six private detectives to ''threaten, harass and discredit'' Time magazine writer Richard Behar, who wrote an article titled "Scientology: the Cult of Greed."


Time will tell…even if the quotes get garbled. I’d say that TIME article is sitting there 17 years later as an article of faith.
article:254632:73::0
4 subscribers
Subscribe To This Thread[?] :
  • Bruce Wagner Posted May 13, 2008 by  Bruce Wagner
    #1
    How is it that the Cult of Scientology is able to place ADVERTISING on this very page? There is a huge ad for "The Scientology Video Channel" in the right-hand side-bar.

    Who is accepting this advertising?

    How dare they?

    Who can we contact to complain about this offensive advertising of the Cult?
  • avatar Posted May 13, 2008 by  Paul Wallis (Wanderlaugh)
    #2
    @ Bruce Wagner
    How is it that the Cult of Scientology is able to place ADVERTISING on this very page? There is a huge ad for "The Scientology Video Channel" in the right-hand side-bar.

    Who is accepting this advertising?

    How dare they?

    Who can we contact to complain about this offensive advertising of the Cult?


    Google strikes again? Keyword = ad, I would think.

    Or maybe ratings are low...
  • Connie M (Catana) Posted May 13, 2008 by  Connie M (Catana)
    #3
    It's about time the MSM stopped actiing like cowards on this issue. I never would have expected Time to be the publication to lead the way, but kudos to them -- and to you, Paul. Hubbard created one of the biggest scams in history, and now it's time to bring it down.
  • GoonyGooGoo Posted May 13, 2008 by  GoonyGooGoo
    #4
    The Time article was written back in 1991. They ended up paying a few million in legal costs to defend this against lawsuits from Co$.
  • Connie M (Catana) Posted May 13, 2008 by  Connie M (Catana)
    #5
    Oops. Spoke too soon. You're right, Goony, that's an old, old article. But bringing attention to it at a time when public opposition to Scientology is growing can help pile more fuel on the fire.
  • avatar Posted May 13, 2008 by  Paul Wallis (Wanderlaugh)
    #6
    @ GoonyGooGoo
    The Time article was written back in 1991. They ended up paying a few million in legal costs to defend this against lawsuits from Co$.


    The TIME site is still running this as a current article. Obviously they're making it an article of faith, if you'll excuse the expression.

    The current upsurge against Co$ is indicative of the fact that the hostility level isn't going down.
  • avatar Posted May 14, 2008 by  Orange
    #7
    Thanks for this article. Scientology deserves the attention. It really is one of the most vicious, greedy, and evil cults on the planet Earth. There are very good reasons why Scientology is banned in Germany and France. The German and French people are smart enough to not allow criminal organizations to thrive by calling their rip-off scam a "church".

    Similarly, the Victorian Board of Inquiry into Scientology, in Victoria, Australia, investigated Scientology and its leader Lafayette Ronald Hubbard, and in October, 1965, diagnosed L. Ron Hubbard as "a paranoid schizophrenic of long standing, with delusions of grandeur. He claims to have twice risen from the dead."

    Now that Hubbard has died (again), Scientology says that he is just doing research in other dimensions. Is that story good enough to make you want to mortgage your house to the hilt and max out your credit cards, and give all of the money to Scientology? Heck, they can give you vast mind powers and make you immortal just like L. Ron Hubbard...
  • Connie M (Catana) Posted May 14, 2008 by  Connie M (Catana)
    #8
    Excellent reworking. Wish it could get back on the front page.
  • avatar Posted May 14, 2008 by  Paul Wallis (Wanderlaugh)
    #9
    @ Orange
    ...Now that Hubbard has died (again), Scientology says that he is just doing research in other dimensions. Is that story good enough to make you want to mortgage your house to the hilt and max out your credit cards, and give all of the money to Scientology? Heck, they can give you vast mind powers and make you immortal just like L. Ron Hubbard...


    Yeah, all that commuting between life and death must cost a fortune.
  • AJ Simkatu Posted May 16, 2008 by  AJ Simkatu
    #10
    It is amusing that you added a hyperlink to the Cult Awareness Network, since that organization is now owned by Church of Scientology itself. The web space is provided by Thunderstar which is owned by one of the deluded cult members.

    There is a long story about how the Cult Awareness Network went from becoming one of the best resources to rescue family members from cults to becoming yet another front group for this terrible and abusive cult.

    Now when people call for help, the Church of Scientology just uses their information against them to make sure nobody gets out of their RPF concentration camps or escapes from Gold Base in Hemet, CA.

    Read about the old and new Cult Awareness Network at Wikipedia or at XENU.com.
  • avatar Posted May 16, 2008 by  Paul Wallis (Wanderlaugh)
    #11
    @ AJ Simkatu
    It is amusing that you added a hyperlink to the Cult Awareness Network, since that organization is now owned by Church of Scientology itself. The web space is provided by Thunderstar which is owned by one of the deluded cult members.

    There is a long story about how the Cult Awareness Network went from becoming one of the best resources to rescue family members from cults to becoming yet another front group for this terrible and abusive cult.

    Now when people call for help, the Church of Scientology just uses their information against them to make sure nobody gets out of their RPF concentration camps or escapes from Gold Base in Hemet, CA.

    Read about the old and new Cult Awareness Network at Wikipedia or at XENU.com.


    The ref to CAN comes from the original TIME article. The custom is to provide links to quoted sources. I wasn't aware of the history of CAN since.

    Xenu, for those who don't get the reference, is the galactic overlord of Scientology texts.
  • antisectes Posted May 17, 2008 by  antisectes
    #12
    Sure the cult has lost the war since the very first days it appears in the world, 58 years ago: that was on may 9 1950, and Hubbard had launched his sci-fi book called "Dianetics, mdoern science of mental health". Since almost everything from the techniques derives from the first book, since that book has been republished as essentail year after years, ans since it has been ridiculized as wrong and antiscientifc years after years, the only way for Hubbard to keep on stealing money to his victims was to keep on and allegating the same old lies, adding new ones above the past ones.
  • avatar Posted May 17, 2008 by  Orange
    #13
    @ antisectes
    ...the only way for Hubbard to keep on stealing money to his victims was to keep on and allegating the same old lies, adding new ones above the past ones.


    Yes. Some of the dogma was just added on as was convenient, like the idea of reincarnation. There was no mention of that in the beginning. Then some of the fledgling Scientologists claimed to remember past lives during their "auditing", so Hubbard decided that reincarnation was part of the "church" dogma.

    Similarly, the whole ridiculous story of Lord Xenu dumping the souls of millions of his excess population on the planet Earth and creating a plague of unhappy ghosts that cling to our bodies was just some crazy science fiction story that Hubbard made up as the secret knowledge that was available only to the upper-level "Operating Thetans" -- i.e., the people who had paid him hundreds of thousands of dollars. I really have to wonder how the Scientologists felt when they learned that they had paid $250,000 to hear about Galactic Overlords and interplanetary cooties.
  • Martha Posted May 17, 2008 by  Martha
    #14
    As a former member, I can say unequivocally, that reading that stuff about Xenu for the first time was completely overwhelming. I did not have any idea what to do: should I tell someone it sounded like garbage to me? should I just try really hard to believe it, like maybe it was true?

    I was in an untenable situation -- I couldn't say I didn't believe it. It's too long a story to go into here, but suffice it to say, I went on through it like it was real. Too weird.

    Fortunately for all of us, the "church" is shrinking fast and will soon topple. All this attention, and none of it is good, plus the monthly protests, plus the uncomplimentary interviews by former highly placed members, are taking their toll. David Miscavige is reportedly drinking half a bottle of Scotch a day. (For the uninformed, Miscavige is the leader of the cult.)

    There's just so much going on and it's really a delight to watch the "PR" people flounder around and try to come up with something sane and intelligent to counter the accusations. Actually, I feel sorry for them all. They need to wake up like Mike Rinder did and get the heck out of there.

    Here are the best articles to help a person understand just exactly what is going on and why $cientology seems so batsh*t crazy:
    http://askthescientologist.blogspot.com
  • avatar Posted May 18, 2008 by  Paul Wallis (Wanderlaugh)
    #15
    @ Martha
    As a former member, I can say unequivocally, that reading that stuff about Xenu for the first time was completely overwhelming. I did not have any idea what to do: should I tell someone it sounded like garbage to me? should I just try really hard to believe it, like maybe it was true?

    I was in an untenable situation -- I couldn't say I didn't believe it. It's too long a story to go into here, but suffice it to say, I went on through it like it was real. Too weird.

    Fortunately for all of us, the "church" is shrinking fast and will soon topple. All this attention, and none of it is good, plus the monthly protests, plus the uncomplimentary interviews by former highly placed members, are taking their toll. David Miscavige is reportedly drinking half a bottle of Scotch a day. (For the uninformed, Miscavige is the leader of the cult.)

    There's just so much going on and it's really a delight to watch the "PR" people flounder around and try to come up with something sane and intelligent to counter the accusations. Actually, I feel sorry for them all. They need to wake up like Mike Rinder did and get the heck out of there.

    Here are the best articles to help a person understand just exactly what is going on and why $cientology seems so batsh*t crazy:
    http://askthescientologist.blogspot.com


    I can truly say that it's like seeing another world. What I've discovered so far is that I can write an article like this one, do that much reading and research on the subject, and still be quite sure I'm an almost complete ignoramus.

Add a Comment

You have to Login or Register to comment


Email:
Password:
Remember meForgot password?