The Student News Site of San Francisco State University

Golden Gate Xpress

The Student News Site of San Francisco State University

Golden Gate Xpress

The Student News Site of San Francisco State University

Golden Gate Xpress

Scientology tarnishes Cruise’s star power

Scientology+tarnishes+Cruises+star+power

I’ve made a lot of questionable decisions in my lifetime. I am a 21-year-old man who goes to One Direction concerts. I sleep in a bed covered in orange dust from off-brand Cheetos puffs, and, last weekend, I had a conversation about lasagna-like vaginas with a famous drag queen. But all of that is just water under the bridge compared to the poor decisions I made while choosing my best friends.

Last week, two of my best friends in the entire world both asked for the same thing for Christmas. They both wanted a Blu-ray Disc copy of “Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation,” the most recent film in Tom Cruise’s Mission Impossible series.

I found this problematic for two reasons. One, my pretentious friends only watch critically acclaimed movies that are going to be nominated for multiple Oscars, so I’m sad they broke their “quality-movies-only” rule for a Mission Impossible flick. And two, I’m mad they’re asking me to financially support a Tom-Cruise-led feature.

Besides acting and jumping on couches, Cruise is best known for being the face of the Church of Scientology. And unfortunately, Scientology and its members are the scum of the earth. And because of his heavy involvement in the church, I refuse to watch or support anything with Tom Cruise in it.

Scientology isn’t a religion; it’s a cult. In order to be involved in the church, you have to give increasing amounts of money, and once you’re in, you’re turned into a prisoner. Members of the church aren’t allowed to leave or they face constant surveillance and harassment, according to the Huffington Post. The church also takes children away from their mothers and abuses its members.

“Going Clear,” a documentary that highlighted the immorality of Scientology and focused on Cruise’s involvement, premiered last March to rave reviews. The movie gave a comprehensive picture of what was wrong with Scientology.

Cruise was never asked questions about the film, even though he did a press tour for “Rouge Nation” a few months later. The headline-making documentary and his involvement with the church were universally ignored during his interviews.

I’m almost sure Tom Cruise has a cyanide pill hidden in his cheek during every interview just in case he is asked about Scientology. Instead of answering, he can just die so he doesn’t actually admit the truth.

It’ll probably never come to that though. I’m positive there’s someone on Cruise’s team that monitors every question and prohibits any talk about his religion, so I can’t really blame the interviewers. I can blame Cruise though. It’s cool if he wants to be involved in a violent cult – that’s his business. You do you. Be human garbage all you want. Just don’t ignore your involvement.

If Cruise wants to be a respected figure, he needs to come out with his position on the church, why he is involved in it and why he chooses to ignore the church’s abusive nature.

It’s not like Cruise is just one minor member of the church. He is the celebrity poster child for the church. Former Scientologist and “King of Queens” star Leah Remini said Cruise was a “pillar to the church” and she had to donate $1 million to the church just to meet Cruise. She also said the church members mistreated Cruise’s daughter Suri and that she was written up for misbehaving at his wedding and was forced to apologize to his then-wife, Katie Holmes.

Tom Cruise isn’t alone though. Immoral celebrities are everywhere; from Sean Penn to Chris Brown to Mark Wahlberg. I’m not saying Cruise is on the same level of trash as those men, but he’s still trash that needs to be avoided. Cruise is synonymous with Scientology, so if Cruise wants to keep being a public figure, he has to address the church’s poor behavior. He has no excuse to ignore its violent tendencies. So until he explains himself and leaves the church, my friends aren’t getting what they want for Christmas.

978
View Comments (978)
More to Discover

Comments (978)

All Golden Gate Xpress Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • A

    anoni81b4uJan 1, 2016 at 2:27 pm

    Scientology .. Where you salute people even if you are not in the military or police !
    CRAZY UFO CULT !

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchJan 1, 2016 at 7:34 pm

      Or when you have the hots for each other…

      Reply
      • A

        anoni81b4uJan 2, 2016 at 12:17 am

        that too

        Reply
  • B

    Bob CrouchDec 26, 2015 at 11:51 pm

    What’s the big deal with Tom Cruise’s “religion?” Isn’t scientology just another harmless belief system?

    Even though it’s been out on Youtube for a few years now, I just discovered a video (TQxSuC9hqhY) that provides an interesting comparison between scientology and the People’s Temple/Jim Jones cult.

    The title is ”

    Scientology/David Miscavige/Int Base and People’s Temple/Jim Jones/Jonestown–Comparison”

    Is well worth the 10 minutes it takes to view.

    Reply
    • B

      Ben FranklinDec 27, 2015 at 7:27 am

      Both Jim Jones and L Ron Hubbard were two con men cut from the same cloth.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQxSuC9hqhY

      Reply
      • B

        Bob CrouchDec 27, 2015 at 4:41 pm

        In the final analysis, they turned out to be. But there’s also one difference: For a time, Jim Jones actually did some good things for the poor and the community.

        Hubbard never had such interests. He proclaimed that he would found a cult for the money, and he stayed the course. Charity was never part of his deal–still isn’t. He was a con man who ripped off anybody who’d cross his path: creditors, the VA, Jack Parsons, his wives and his cult. He’d steal a little or a lot–whatever opportunity would present itself.

        Reply
  • B

    Ben FranklinDec 26, 2015 at 11:29 am

    John Sweeny gets up close and personal with Church of Scientology in this Panorama documentary, and explores the allegations of it being a Cult.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9YQVJXaNK8

    Reply
  • B

    Ben FranklinDec 25, 2015 at 8:57 am

    Scientologists at War investigates the pressure tactics used to discredit and silence members who leave the church. The documentary provides a rare insider’s view of one of the world’s most mysterious organizations courtesy of its highest level defector. As the former Inspector General of Ethics, Marty Rathbun worked closely with leader David Miscavige and celebrity follower Tom Cruise. He claims that for many years he was Number 2 to Miscavige and acted as an enforcer punishing anyone who questioned the church’s leadership. Scientologists at War is directed by Joseph Martin and produced by Danielle Clark and Michael Simkin for Channel Four.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-RVYHpQDqE

    Reply
    • E

      elleDec 25, 2015 at 5:49 pm

      Murky Wrathbuns got busted, then busted again. There were very good reasons for that. He didn’t like not being important anymore and did not want to prove himself worthy of high office. He got worse as he saw his undeserved status slipping away. Have you seen his mug shot? https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cc73bfc6ecd68f809c6ea16f4147c28a06064c3d9a73150542260ffe461dce00.jpg

      Reply
      • B

        Ben FranklinDec 25, 2015 at 6:48 pm

        Reply
      • B

        Bob CrouchDec 25, 2015 at 10:29 pm

        I am sure that a little cult shill at the bottom of the pecking order like yourself would just salivate at the idea of being scientology’s #2! Here the cult is claiming these epic insights into human character, and yet they had the evil likes of Rathbun and Rinder right next to big beings like Miscavige for three decades–and despite all the “tech,” they had “COB” fooled?

        I don’t know what’s more pathetic, the “tech,” your transparent excuses or your jealousy for the status these two had before they had enough of it and went on with their lives!

        Reply
      • B

        Ben FranklinDec 26, 2015 at 6:43 am

        The mugshot was taken after Rathbun was arrested in New Orleans for drunken and disorderly conduct in public in July 2010 while he was celebrating his honeymoon. The arrest record was expunged, but, elle being as dishonest as she is, would never mention that part.

        You can see a copy of the original arrest record obtained from New Orleans police department and decide for yourself whether anything you hear from elle or the church is credible at all.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/dfd1548376a19de062ae34614d5c87d4aaba21127bb99e04df93077b183f2b27.jpg

        Reply
        • E

          elleDec 26, 2015 at 10:50 am

          So you see why maybe this “Ehtics” inspector got busted, stayed busted, and became persona non grata in the Church. But you believe him and his BS PR? You really have a weak malleable mind. You might want to keep a distance. He is known to being violent. And you are surprised the Church busted him! That continues to amaze me.

          Reply
          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 26, 2015 at 11:04 am

            Stop the nonsense. The Church did not bust Rathbun, he quit (blew) just like Mike Rinder and the rest of them, otherwise, he would still be beating people up in the Church just like Miscavige. There are many just like Rathbun who are still part of the Church of Scientology. The only reason you are badmouthing Rathbun here is because he left and denounced the church, otherwise, you would be protecting him just like you are protecting Miscavige are the rest of the deviants. Scientology ethics is a joke. Encouraging lying, cheating, abortion, and ruining the lives of others is not ethical.

            There must be something very wrong with Scientology then if it is constantly producing all these so called “criminals” like Rathbun, Beghe, Haggis, Rinder, Devocht, and the endless string of so called “liars” like Remini etc etc. Even a stupid person would see

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 26, 2015 at 11:48 am

            Persona non grata? Miscavige BEGGED him to stay in the “church.” Even years after he left, they are still so obsessed with him that they terrorized his entire neighborhood for 200 days.

            The “church” is playing high school games here: “No, I broke up with him before he dumped me…” Sure you did!

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 26, 2015 at 11:53 am

            Maybe we should post Hubbard’s arrest record too? Petty theft. Now that is a crime worthy of Hubbard!

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 26, 2015 at 12:02 pm

            Good point about Hubbard’s “Ethics”. L Ron Hubbard, the godfather himself, being arrested for petty theft, borrowing money and then skipping town without paying back the money, kidnapping and threatening you kill his own daughter etc etc

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 26, 2015 at 12:17 pm

            With Hubbard, it was a deeply ingrained pattern to take advantage of anyone he could. Here’s a guy who would not even take financial care of his own children. He wouldn’t hesitate to rip off his friends–and he often did.

            Would you buy a bridge from that kind of guy?

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 26, 2015 at 12:58 pm

            Hubbard literally sold bridges to the gullible.

          • J

            just another guy out thereDec 26, 2015 at 2:55 pm

            He is the one who keeps his temper in this video. It’s the insane behavior of Jenny Linson that makes her seem unhinged and possibly violent. Just read the over 2000 comments.

          • A

            anoni81b4uJan 1, 2016 at 2:25 pm

            Marty Rathbun is a horrible scum of the earth type guy .. I grant you that elle
            So why did it take Midget Miscavige 25 years to figure that out while they worked side by side every day?
            Does not say much for scientology or Miscavige to have a scumbag high up for years …
            LOL@ YOUR CULT !

      • A

        anoni81b4uJan 2, 2016 at 6:13 am

        Seen this one of him and his BEST FRIEND david Miscavige ?

        Reply
  • B

    Ben FranklinDec 23, 2015 at 4:32 pm

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 24, 2015 at 8:12 pm

      Good one! I second your recommendation. The description of the mind-control techniques is very interesting. The comparison to Bin Laden also very apt!

      Reply
    • I

      in fine fettleDec 26, 2015 at 11:02 am

      If you haven’t been living in a cave you know of the demonstrations and rallies ongoing over the last 13 plus years on a very large scale. All of which are incontrovertible proof that the public does NOT in fact “accept” greater government control over their lives. The premise of this film is that they do and that the cause can be found in black magic conspiracies involving L Ron Hubbard. It does not make sense to look for a cause to a phenomenon that simply doesn’t exist. If you truly believe that people are sheeple you need to look INSIDE of YOURSELF because it is your ideas that are the problem.

      Reply
      • B

        Bob CrouchDec 26, 2015 at 12:08 pm

        Funny! Here you are trying to distract with “gov’t control.” And yet you shill for a most controlling, oppressive, exploitative and abusive cult on a daily basis.

        So it’s like this: Gov’t control, bad. Scientology oppression, good? Really?

        Reply
        • I

          in fine fettleDec 26, 2015 at 12:19 pm

          So you don’t want to address whether I correctly identified the premise of the film or not.

          Reply
  • B

    Ben FranklinDec 23, 2015 at 6:21 am

    An article published in Washington Post on August 19, 1933 about one L Ron Hubbard claiming to have found gold at his home. Hubbard’s con game started way way before Dianetics.

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 23, 2015 at 8:11 pm

      “He hoped to find enough [gold] on which to get married.” One thing is pretty consistent about Hubbard: It did not occur to him to work for a living. Once married, he did not exactly take care of his wife anyhow, let alone his children. What a deadbeat!

      Reply
      • B

        Ben FranklinDec 23, 2015 at 8:39 pm

        He was a con man from the start, always bailing out on creditors, swindling money from people, eventually he hit the jackpot with Scientology. Hubbard was a sweet talker, who mooched off women, always liked to borrow money but hated to pay it back.

        Reply
  • S

    Sergeant PepperDec 15, 2015 at 6:51 am

    Reply
    • I

      in fine fettleDec 21, 2015 at 10:39 am

      Connect the dots to get a picture of Latin script. Too funny.

      Reply
      • S

        Sergeant PepperDec 21, 2015 at 7:56 pm

        Indeed. Sincere best wishes for you and yours this holiday season and in the coming new year.

        Reply
  • E

    elleDec 15, 2015 at 5:13 am

    Reply
    • S

      sundaygirlDec 15, 2015 at 5:43 am

      Have you scratched his name on your pencil box yet?

      Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 15, 2015 at 10:33 am

      The claim of this article is, correctly, that scientology tarnishes Cruise. I don’t see how this USA Today piece changes any of that.

      It’s going on about a stunt about Cruise hanging off a plane. (Big deal, Bond did this 25 years ago). So there are stunts in an action movie. However, if the cult had its way, he’d be jumping on sofas instead. Or making a fool of himself debating psychiatry–a subject he’s clearly ignorant of. Telling women what kind of medical treatment they should accept. Or putting on a turtle neck, laughing maniacally and claiming that only scientologists are equipped to lend assistance at the scene of a car accident (too bad for those victims that “helping” is not part of the cult’s agenda).

      However, USA Today fails to claim that the thing that tarnishes Cruise, the scientology cult, has in any way improved or changed its behavior. In fact, they don’t even mention the “tarnisher.” Stunts or not, the cult is any bit as bad as it was before this article; Tom Cruise’s shilling for it is any bit as unconscionable as ever!

      Reply
    • A

      Avid MiskaridgeDec 21, 2015 at 1:33 am

      Reply
      • E

        elleDec 21, 2015 at 7:59 am

        Ah, a sugar cinnamon donut served to the bunkerbutts.

        Reply
        • A

          Avid MiskaridgeDec 21, 2015 at 3:01 pm

          Nah, no cinnamon there. You mentioned a brainwashed turd being polished by USATODAY, I just wanted to get a good photo. MerryChristmas elle, waterhorse and in fine fettle. I do mean it, be safe and enjoy your holidays with your families. Peace.

          Reply
  • S

    Sergeant PepperDec 14, 2015 at 6:16 am

    Scientology tech can help you find a wife.

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 14, 2015 at 6:40 pm

      A good follow-up game would be “How to actually keep a wife–even when a cult interferes in your marriage.”

      Reply
  • E

    elleDec 13, 2015 at 3:21 pm

    What is interesting is that after Remini’s hit piece on Cruise, and his getting maligned in the media by the tabloid gutter dwellers, both Katie and Nicole have issued statements about having no regrets. Nicole especially spoke of how wonderful her 10 years were with Cruise and was so glad it brought her Bella and Conner. Sorry, bunker riff raff, Cruise’s ex-wives, the mothers of his children, have said kind and gracious things date coincident with Remini not only trashing Cruise (and Katie), but also with Remini implying that both Katie and Nicole align with her. Maybe they did not appreciate Remini trying to pull them into her sewer.

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 13, 2015 at 3:40 pm

      Sorry, but as someone who–unlike you–has read Remini’s excellent book I can assure you that its author does NOT claim any alliance or alignment with Katie or Nicole. She speaks for herself–and rather well at that.

      Kidman who, as a fairly young woman was systematically preyed on by the married Cruise (who dumped wife #1 over his adulterous affair with Kidman), lived with Cruise during a time where he severed his ties with the cult. So while she got to enjoy her children during the marriage, tragically she doesn’t now. As the cult has designated Kidman a “suppressive person,” her children are under the cult’s edict of disconnection from her. She does not get to have contact with her own children–that’s how the cult does!

      Despite Katie’s gracious comments, let’s not forget: Katie went through an elaborate process to escape her husband and the oppressive influence the cult was exercising over her. She did this, among other reasons, to save her daughter from cult indoctrination.

      Both women have expressed themselves very graciously about their past. Free from the cult, they have obviously regained their humanity. Let’s face it, nobody ever mentions the words “graciousness” and “scientology” in one breath! However, it must be noted that neither one’s comments have EVER included an endorsement of the cult or a characterization of their tenure in it as “time well spent.” People can come through crime, abuse, rape, domestic violence and many other calamities and live a life free of regret. In fact, regret does nothing but allow the evil-doers a continued hold over a person. That presents no excuse or absolution for those who committed those crimes against them.

      Reply
      • E

        elleDec 13, 2015 at 3:46 pm

        Oh, please, Remini was all over the media, all Verklempt over Katie’s non-apology. And then she was claiming that Nicole Kidman was her guardian angel as she left the Church because Kidman went on to have a great career.

        Both women said they have no regrets. Quit putting words in their mouths. You are not their confident. Neither is Ortega who has invisible friends that give him bogus insider info. meh

        Reply
        • B

          Bob CrouchDec 13, 2015 at 3:51 pm

          Putting words into their mouths? That’s rich when their words are re-interpreted for the convenience of the cult that these women fled in the first place! If life with Tom under the thumb of the cult is so great, why aren’t they doing it still?

          Three divorces and adultery! A great track record for a “big being” like Tom. But then again, “founder”and “source” Hubbard didn’t do any better. Par for the course!

          Reply
          • E

            elleDec 13, 2015 at 3:53 pm

            Read. Their. Statements.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 13, 2015 at 4:02 pm

            I read both their statements as well as your re-interpretations of them. But regardless, one thing is beyond dispute: Both of them wanting NOTHING to do with Cruise, the cult and the likes of you who pretend to act as their cult-appointed spokespersons.

        • S

          sundaygirlDec 15, 2015 at 5:40 pm

          Both women also have children they must protect. Imagine two mothers taking the high road when speaking of the father of their kids? Weird, right? I get that the high road is a road less traveled in Scientologyville, but their comments speak to their personal integrity and not Cruise’s greatness.

          Reply
          • E

            elleDec 15, 2015 at 6:33 pm

            They did not have to say a word–zip, zero, nada. That they CHOOSE to make statements at this time is a slam on Remini aka Ray Meanie.

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 15, 2015 at 7:10 pm

            If you are so naive to think that those two aren’t asked in every interview about their time with Cruise (and the clandestine divorce proceedings, unusual custody arrangements and subsequent near-deafening silence), it is sad. It is likely they signed non-disclosure agreements and would be monetarily penalized and harassed if they said one ill word about Cruise, so of course their comments would be moderate. Kidman, furthermore, has spoken previously several times about her first marriage, often mentioning that she wouldn’t speak ill of the father of her children. Was a book critical about your organization being released each time she’s said anything? Your argument doesn’t quite gel.

            You are proud of your childish nicknames. That is also sad. Is the organization supplying them or are you thinking those up all by yourself?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 15, 2015 at 7:14 pm

            You’re delusional. Both Katie and Kidman FLED the cult. While Katie managed to protect her child from them, Kidman was not so fortunate. She is now disconnected from her children; they refer to her as an “SP.”

            Now the same cult those women fled from tries to re-interpret their words as a “slam” on Leah. One of them said NOTHING about Leah, directly or indirectly; the other apologized and expressed her best wishes. Slam? Nuts!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 21, 2015 at 10:44 am

            For you the high road means the road travelled while experiencing something like narcotic intoxication.

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 21, 2015 at 11:03 am

            All that money you paid to your organization, in the hopes to gain big-beingness and superior communication skills, and this is what you ended up with. Call the person drunk or high when you have nothing to add. Sad.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 21, 2015 at 11:33 am

            To subtract. I was trying to clean up some of the garbage – what can I say, I’m a neatnik.

            P.S. You have no idea what I hope to gain through my affiliation with the Church of Scientology.

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 21, 2015 at 12:02 pm

            Truthfully, after reading many of Hubbard’s books, I can only come up with one reason anyone would join your organization: an ego stroke. Who’s a big being? Good girl, you are all paid up. You’re a big being.

          • E

            elleDec 21, 2015 at 2:06 pm

            You have not read many of Hubbard’s books. There is no indication you have even read one. So stop lying and pretending you know anything at all.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 21, 2015 at 3:26 pm

            I’m celebrating the return of the light. I may or may not be popping in here every so often but in case I don’t run into you for a while, let me wish you Happy Winter Solstice! https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1ec5adf6775cdeb69e47134cb0e56c266e25942f6eeb411432366ca4401dcc5e.jpg

          • E

            elleDec 21, 2015 at 7:27 pm

            Beautiful. Always love to see you here but I know we have lives and projects that bring far more satisfying results than our frivolous teasing of the bunker kids. May a little light makes it’s way through to them. Merry Xmas and Happiest New Year. Flourish and prosper. Oh, and may the force be with you 😉

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 21, 2015 at 8:44 pm

            Nothing hilarious than two brainwashed cretins patting each other on the back for being brain dead.

          • E

            elleDec 22, 2015 at 2:21 am

            Joy and happiness to you, too. Grab some of the light.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 22, 2015 at 5:39 am

            Joy and happiness to you too. At least there is still some human in you lingering deep inside.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 22, 2015 at 1:20 pm

            Nice picture. Thanks for sharing. I believe it was Marty Rathbun who related this one: “Light is the best disinfectant.”

            Have a merry Christmas with your friend(s) and family you have not disconnected from (yet). Here’s to shedding more light in the year to come!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 22, 2015 at 2:56 pm

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 22, 2015 at 3:09 pm

            Your idea of spreading goodwill and holiday cheer? Ho ho ho

          • E

            elleDec 23, 2015 at 8:13 am

            Wrathbuns needs more disinfecting for sure. Glad he realizes that.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 23, 2015 at 11:18 am

            To be free of the infectious pathogen, he needs the same scrip I wrote for B.C.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 23, 2015 at 11:57 am

            And how original that was. And how revealing… But at least, compared to your cult leader, this was pretty tame. We all know how he talks if he doesn’t skip that step altogether and instead beats on people.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 23, 2015 at 11:53 am

            For elle, ’tis the season to be bitter. Too bad that scientology produces all of you haters. It is pretty sad when people over 10 mangle names in lieu of advancing a real point. But when a “religion” actually leads by example in that, it can only be a cult as bizarre as yours.

            Do you guys still have beheadings?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 23, 2015 at 12:02 pm

            Speaking of the Rathbuns: Did you hear that their lawsuit in TX brought them another favorable ruling? The cult tries to silence them with the force of 20 lawyers, and yet they refuse to be bullied by the forces of evil!

            I wonder how many people would still want to join a cult that treats people that way. Obviously, some folks “like” to be abused. But healthier ones undoubtedly will take a pass.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 24, 2015 at 7:41 pm

            And again, here’s a reminder of a post you up-voted, by your fellow cult guy keeponlearning:

            “Seriously? Name insults [he was referring to name mangling] are really second-grade intellect.”

            Hypocritical much?

          • E

            elleDec 23, 2015 at 2:39 pm

            Dec 23 celebration–Here comes the sun.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfMWJi4req4

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 23, 2015 at 4:16 pm

            George, a fine musician but a bit of a sucker for gurus and cults. In all fairness though, he never fell for scientology. So he’s one step ahead of you there, elle!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 24, 2015 at 12:11 pm

            https://youtu.be/V9Rb5WwwN9Q (I’m only pointing this out to you because there’s something bizarrely amusing about twisted logic and misinformation involved in this video. Still, it’s not recommended until after the holidays are over – and if you put in on high speed it only lasts about 13m.)

          • E

            elleDec 24, 2015 at 3:31 pm

            I will check this out. I know a few people who were around when he was. They were kids then, and said he was truly weird and did really weird things. Then they cut it a little short hinting that the guy was icky. Then they didn’t want to talk about him anymore. I’ll get back with my critique of his nonsense soon. Look forward to the laugh.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 24, 2015 at 6:33 pm

            Of course, you would say something like that. After all, the only thing you can ever come up with are ad-hominem attacks from unverifiable sources. Perhaps, people in the cult will believe you–they’re desperate to. The rest of us, not so much!

          • E

            elleDec 24, 2015 at 4:48 pm

            Watched it. Is he related to Gilbert Gottfried? First, “weird” was being kind. Next time I have a chance, I think I’ll see what more I can find out about him. Wonder what he was doing with his hands in this self- important worthless rant. Just something about his pace and the glee he would slip into. He should have his nasal whine voice checked out. Could need surgery to cure it. Listening to him is like nails on a blackboard. Has no one ever mentioned it to him?

            BTW. did he ever actually say anything, anything at all?

            Well, I have always enjoyed the Church’s High Holy Days. I see old friends, and new ones, and sometimes 3 generations all together. OK, even 4 generations these days 🙂 I look forward to New Year’s Event.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1e4c6cb43f17a998fff1e5bbb2c091a7390bafbdcc8f68cdf413a8a5fee8ca6e.jpg ?

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 24, 2015 at 5:15 pm

            Only if you listen then you can understand what he is talking about. The following might help you understand why you didn’t understand anything from the video clip.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFUGWyAHOaU

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 24, 2015 at 6:31 pm

            Also interesting is part 3 of the series. Rachel discusses the harassment she endured from the cult when they found out that one of their minions had wandered off the reservation and was looking for help in quitting the “church.” Not that any of that is a shock or surprise, of course…

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 25, 2015 at 7:44 am

            Typical of a Scientologist, if you cannot dispute or argue with the content, change the subject by attacking the person based on their looks or voice, call the person a liar or a bigot. If all fails then accuse the person of committing a serious crime without any evidence. It is funny that you are making fun of someone else looks and voice when you look like that. Go take a look at yourself in the mirror first before you insult other people.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 24, 2015 at 6:37 pm

            Thanks for the recommendation. I haven’t seen this one yet. I have found Chris to be spot-on in the videos I’ve seen so far. He has a youtube channel with a ton of informative postings about scientology, other cults, critical thinking, etc. Will give this one a listen…

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 24, 2015 at 11:34 pm

            Thanks again for the recommendation. Even though it contains no major surprises for me (Hubbard’s bio is largely fiction–check; scientology is a scam fixated on nothing but money–duh), it was pretty informative.

            So thanks for getting the word out about this fraud. Have a happy holiday season.

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 21, 2015 at 4:07 pm

            Unlike the Fettle/Elle comment, “You are not my confidant”, I’ve told you what I’ve read. Because I can. Because I don’t need to be secretive about my reading habits. Because I only paid a few bucks for used (discarded) copies of your dear leader’s scriptures instead of hundreds or thousands of dollars. Because I do not fear getting thrown into what amounts to a re-education camp for reading whatever my little heart desires.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 27, 2015 at 10:13 am

            Do you have to read Mein Kampf before you are allowed to say that there was something seriously wrong with the Third Reich?

            Please DON’T! Given your lack of critical reasoning abilities, if you were to read that book, you’d probably shill for them as well! You’d tell us that Adolph was a great humanitarian who never did anybody any wrong–kind of like Hubbard…

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 21, 2015 at 2:36 pm

            If you saw me in person you would not even know that I was a Scientologist, yet you chose to believe that everything you say here is true.

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 21, 2015 at 4:03 pm

            The things you write and your utter disrespect of anyone who disagrees with you is a telltale sign of your Scientological association. (I can make up words just like your dear leader!) If I saw you walking down the street, of course I wouldn’t know to what organization you pledge your allegiance and money. Duh. But, you have proudly touted your Scientology membership here and have been as nasty as you can be to critics in several instances, so, using my super power – free – deducing skills, I feel quite sure I am correct in what you get out of Scientology.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 22, 2015 at 1:16 pm

            Despite the bark-happy exterior, on the inside, she’s just a confused and scared little girl with a dictionary!

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 22, 2015 at 3:42 pm

            Ha! I’ve often thought that of Elle (although, perhaps minus the dictionary since her comments and language are pretty basic). Fettle truly thinks she’s special, I think. She pays Scientology to tell her exactly how special she is, how much of a superior big being she is, because she can’t get anyone in real life to do it. (I used to try to be as cordial as possible when dealing with both of them. I am growing tired of their nastiness, however, and am finding it more difficult to play nice.)

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 22, 2015 at 4:26 pm

            They may not mean to, but both of them are doing a great job getting out the truth about the cult. When reading an article about scientology, a lot of people who are new to this subject may incredulously scratch their heads and go, “Really, they’re THAT bad?”

            In waltz ettle and fettle, and remove all doubts. Of course, they don’t realize that, which lends even further confirmation. I find those two (and a couple others like them) very helpful!

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 22, 2015 at 8:42 am

            The thousand-yard stare would turn you in very quickly before you can blink.

          • E

            elleDec 22, 2015 at 9:35 am

            I am sorry that you do not associate with people who can look you in the eye.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 22, 2015 at 9:41 am

            There is a big big difference.

  • S

    Sergeant PepperDec 13, 2015 at 1:50 pm

    11 days ago Paulette Cooper Noble posted a thank you note to the author of this article. This action enraged the cult, which sent its paid minions here to spam the comments and personally attack any critic of the cult. I present it again. You can view the original, just sort by best.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f2e1ff8a2c551fc6894c95fd44f61bae702afcf85746218332635ad6f8625d2a.png

    Reply
    • E

      elleDec 13, 2015 at 3:02 pm

      You are full of BS. IFF was here first. I was posting here before I ever saw Pee Cooper’s post. She was late to the party. No one at the church noticed her because, well, she is inconsequential.

      What is interesting is how you lionize her for nothing, how you lie to prop her up. One way you do that is to fabricate an outrage that does not exist to make her look sensational. She isn’t.

      Reply
      • E

        elleDec 13, 2015 at 3:16 pm

        PS Pee Cooper revealed that church members recently sneaked into her home again. She didn’t see them but knows they were there because they left a toenail fungus cream next to her bidet.

        Reply
        • B

          Bob CrouchDec 13, 2015 at 3:42 pm

          You sound like a rapist mocking his victim. I appreciate your frank comments on Ms. Cooper though, as they lend invaluable insight into the cult’s depravity and inability to own up to its own atrocities. A truly sociopathic organization!

          Reply
          • E

            elleDec 13, 2015 at 3:47 pm

            You sound like a rapist, period.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 13, 2015 at 3:54 pm

            Keep digging! You’re doing nothing but providing further evidence for the depravity of your cult and lending a clear example for how credible your assertions really are. Thanks for helping me make my point.

        • A

          Avid MiskaridgeDec 15, 2015 at 4:17 pm

          All that money wasted on Scientology communication classes could have easily bought you a proper education at an accredited college. I would say enough to get you a double major and a doctorate. Instead, your classless, uneducated and assumptive diction paints an excellent portrait of the monsters Scientology creates. You are a creature created by the very evils of Scientology, let that sink in for a moment. How many family members and friends have you disconnected from because they knew better than to associate with some as vile as you. You are wasting your time and money; your life could be worth so much more but instead you waste it shilling for David Miscavige. When is your house foreclosing?

          Reply
          • E

            elleDec 15, 2015 at 4:19 pm

            Cruise is doing OK, so is Travolta, and many others are doing pretty danged good. Sorry you are not.

          • A

            Avid MiskaridgeDec 15, 2015 at 5:00 pm

            I am doing quite well fighting cult-style human rights abuses with a legitimate non-faith based organization but I am not concerned about how I am doing as I haven’t been thought-modified by a predatory cult. If you aspire to to be like those actors and take their success to be a possibility in your life then we can really see your psychology at play. When is your house foreclosing? Or have you lost it yet?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 15, 2015 at 5:25 pm

            How’s Travolta’s homosexuality going? All this auditing that promised to fix that, and he’s still a “pervert” (Hubbard’s term, not mine). And still a closeted second-class human being in scientology’s world. Except for when he writes a check, of course.

            And how about Cruise’s delusions of grandeur? He still the one who understands the human mind while nobody outside of the cult does?

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 15, 2015 at 5:35 pm

            Your worship of Cruise (and to a much lesser extent, Travolta) is scary. You take celebrity worship to astronomical levels. The fact that your world revolves around talking up a few celebrities on (mostly) gossip websites and trying to tear down anyone who doesn’t worship them shows just how small your world is. You and your fellow members aren’t concerned with saving the planet; if you were, you would spend your time helping people instead of glorifying movie stars. At least your organization’s critics care about exposing it for the space waste it is.

      • B

        Bob CrouchDec 13, 2015 at 3:46 pm

        So “inconsequential” that the “church” launched 19 law suits on three continents and a comprehensive criminal harassment campaign against a journalist who was simply doing her job and created an unbiased and restrained account of the cult. This whole effort took the “church” two decades and yielded them ZERO. Inconsequential?

        Reply
        • E

          elleDec 13, 2015 at 3:52 pm

          Pee Cooper said she went into the Church looking for a story. Biased, much? Except she can not demonstrate even a little that she was ever in the Church. If she ever did go inside a church, she was there 10 minutes so she could say she was there and then psychoanalyze the entire Church and religion in the worst light to “prove” her hate agenda.

          She just stated in an interview that she just heard Scientologists outside her door again–and again didn’t see them but knew it was “them”–humming “They’re coming to take you away, ha. ha.”

          Reply
          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 13, 2015 at 4:12 pm

            Actually the story came to her in the form of a former co-worker who was mentally deranged after having participated in “church” services. So, as a journalist that sparked an interest in the cult. That’s what journalists do! To somehow infer bias, or a “hate agenda” (poor victims that you are) is a complete non sequitur!

            Many journalists and academics have done so since. And to put it mildly, their findings have not been exactly positive. All that these professionals had in common was the subject of their investigation–and their inevitable harassment by cult operatives. That should tell you something!

            By your “logic,” if a dozen people go to the same restaurant and they all get food poisoning and they all get harassed by the owners not to tell anybody–it’s clearly the diners’ fault! No doubt, that must be it.

  • E

    elleDec 12, 2015 at 5:17 pm

    Nicole also said this:
    “But with Tom, it was a fantastic decade. I wish all of the people that have been involved in my life well, because it’s very important to me to be in a place of forgiveness and love.”

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 12, 2015 at 7:38 pm

      Having been declared a suppressive person and alienated from her children through scientology’s enforced disconnection policy, it’s good to see that she has recovered from the cult. That she’s not handling this the scientology way but with forgiveness and love. That way she won’t allow these creeps to live in her head, no matter how they treated her. Good for her. Free from the cult, she’s a bigger being than any of them will ever be.

      Reply
      • E

        elleDec 13, 2015 at 2:56 am

        Yeeeaaaahhhh, none of that happened.

        Reply
        • B

          Bob CrouchDec 13, 2015 at 4:20 am

          Whenever you hear something you don’t like you say that. But it did. There are multiple people who will attest to that. They were there and you weren’t…

          Reply
          • M

            madame duranDec 13, 2015 at 12:30 pm

            Note to lurkers:
            This is why it doesn’t pay to remain quiet when you leave the Cult of Scientology. Slinking away is exactly what the bully cult wants you to do. When you choose silence, the cult fills the void with its lies (e.g. “none of that happened”). It keeps on committing its fraud and other abuses with impunity because there is no opposition. By publicly speaking YOUR TRUTH, you retain the power of your OWN narrative, you actively challenge the cult’s lies and you no longer have to be bound by fear or guilt. By being vocal, you stand with others who have been through a similar experience and overcame adversity. You don’t have to suffer alone. Exposing Scientology’s harm is an effective WIN for justice. Do not underestimate the value of your unique story on surviving Scientology.

  • E

    elleDec 12, 2015 at 5:01 pm

    This just out from Nicole Kidman–“I got married really fast and really young,” Kidman told Who magazine. “But I don’t regret that because it got me Bella and Connor, and I did have a fantastic marriage for a long period.”

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 12, 2015 at 7:44 pm

      Being a young woman preyed on by the married cult boy Cruise definitely got her a lot more than she bargained for. It’s good to see that she recovered despite the cult-enforced disconnection from her children. Good for you, Nicole; life as an SP and free woman is good!

      Reply
    • M

      madame duranDec 12, 2015 at 8:02 pm

      Maybe it was fantastic because a) her own star began to rise in Hollywood and b)Tom Cruise drifted away from Scientology (i.e. he still identified as a Scientologist but wasn’t acting as fundamentalist about it as he does now). But we all know how that fairy tale life ended, don’t we? Nicole is being classy in her responses; no vindictiveness. Too bad that those under Scientology’s spell don’t exhibit the same qualities towards her or anyone else who has left the cult.

      Reply
  • B

    Ben FranklinDec 9, 2015 at 9:52 am

    The founder of Scientology has one of the strangest US Navy records ever.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/l-ron-hubbard-military-records-2015-4

    Reply
  • E

    elleDec 9, 2015 at 6:36 am

    Los Angeles Police Dept. Operations presented a Badge of Distinction to L. Ron Hubbard in appreciation for this service as a Special Officer of the LAPD in the late 1940’s. Moreover, the award recognizes “his subsequent humanitarian works that have contributed to improving the quality of life in the citizens of Los Angeles.”

    Reply
    • B

      Ben FranklinDec 9, 2015 at 7:07 am

      Reply
      • E

        elleDec 9, 2015 at 7:50 am

        Original docs from 1947 already posted. Badge number included. The appreciation award stands. Suck up your sour grapes.

        Reply
        • B

          Ben FranklinDec 9, 2015 at 8:01 am

          Nobody is denying the fact that L Ron was a Special Officer, just letting you know that there is nothing special about Special officer. It is a designation given to people doing community type police work such as public patrol, security guard type work.It is not extremely difficult to become a special officer.

          At the time L Ron got his Special Officer badge he was allegedly doing some work with Metropolitan Detective Agency. I bet L Ron probably just wanted the badge to con people into thinking he was a legitimate LAPD officer. The man was a conman. Conned Jack Parsons out of his boat, money and stole his girlfriend too. A dead beat father who was always running away from creditors. Never liked to pay his debts just like the Church he left behind.

          Reply
        • B

          Ben FranklinDec 9, 2015 at 8:11 am

          Following his short stint as a special Officer, Hubbard was arrested for petty theft as the record below shows.

          http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/ga/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/hubbard-arrest-record.pdf

          Reply
          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 2:11 pm

            Gerry Armstrong is on tape orchestrating thefts from the church, plan to forge documents to then plant in the Church to be “found” by the IRS. Armstrong’s “legal” tactic was to just make F’ing allegations. If challenged for proof, he said to just say the evidence was shredded and then blame it on whomever. There is no getting around this fact about your “source” for your information. Read the Declarations of Stacy Brooks, and V. Aznaran.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 2:37 pm

            On tape–in your imagination. This tape is about as credible as claims to a Cruise-Miscavige sex video as you are unable to produce such a tape. Quit making stuff up!

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 2:40 pm

            Nope, that is his face right on the tape, and it’s his mouth moving. Listen to it sometime. Shows what you guys are really like.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 2:50 pm

            I’d love to listen to it. Other than in your imagination, where is said tape?

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 6:25 pm

            You find it. I did.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 6:47 pm

            You made this claim before. You couldn’t produce then, and you can’t now. Because there is no such tape.

            The “church” lawyers would have had Mr. Armstrong’s head on a pike. Yet that NEVER happened. They were ordered by the courts to pay him a settlement instead.

            So where’s the imaginary tape? Same place as the Cruise-Miscavige sex tape? I always knew, these two… You can tell by the looks they give each other.

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 7:13 pm

            Look at his head. It’s on a pike. You missed the fun. You make up stuff to decorate your narrow moribund universe.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 8:32 pm

            Sorry, I forgot. You probably know very little about Mr. Armstrong. He was any bit as committed to the cult as you are. Possibly more so.

            He was helping Omar Garrison write Hubbard’s biography. In the process, he found that a huge part of Hubbard’s life and accomplishments was nothing but a pack of lies. How? Because he had access to the documentary evidence! He begged the “church” leaders to set the record straight because he knew that eventually this all would come out–as it has.

            They weren’t having any of it. So the “church” paid off Garrison NOT to write a truthful biography, then they went after Mr. Armstrong. How dumb was that? This guy was still committed to the cult!

            Many lawsuits later, Mr. Armstrong prevailed. The “church” had to pay him. So much for your head on a pike.

            But back to the crux of the matter. Where is that tape where Mr. Armstrong allegedly admits to lying and manipulating documents. The “church” hate video–for all of its wild lies and claims–does not refer to a source. They never do, because they make it all up anyway. But here’s your chance to put it to rest:

            You claim there is such a tape. OK then. NONE of your (or the lying “church’s) claims means ANYTHING without the evidence. Where is it?

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 9, 2015 at 9:17 pm

            The only thing I’ve been able to find is a vague description of an “…an edited version of an illegally obtained 1984 videotape…” Many people would like to see this video; if you’ve actually found it on the Internet, please provide a link.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 9, 2015 at 7:44 pm

            Like always when you are scared to confront the truth you blame the source. You can obtain the same documents through Freedom of Information Act. Armstrong just published them online, and he is not the only one. If you somehow think the document is forged make a request yourself and you will get the same exact copies from the government. Hubbard had a lot of skeletons in his closet that Scientologists are never aware that is why you are told not to read anything on the internet. Do your own research and you will discover how much you have been taken for a fool by your own church.

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 8:26 pm

            watch armstrong on tape and listen to him. You are talking about something different and you are even wrong about that.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 9, 2015 at 8:34 pm

            You cannot deny the evidence, therefore the best you can do is say the information is somehow tainted just because it was posted by Armstrong. Keep in mind that sometimes the tape you see from OSA does not always show the whole picture. As much as you think Armstrong is such a terrible person,in large part he has mainly told the truth about the church, same with Paulette Cooper, Same with Mike Rinder, same with Leah Remini,Same with Debbie Cook. If you leave the church today, they will attack you too as a liar. In your case I might believe the church because I have caught you in so many denials and obvious lies.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 9, 2015 at 8:36 pm

            By the way, what Armstrong tape are you referring to,and where is it?? Where is the link to it?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 8:39 pm

            It’s in her head. And if there’s a link to her head, I refuse to click on it. Yikes!

            Don’t hold your breath; I asked about it a while ago–nothing. Asking for facts is a sure conversation killer with liars.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 9, 2015 at 8:52 pm

            Whenever she is caught in a lie she just pretends she never saw the question or runs away.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 9:46 pm

            Like just now

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 9:45 pm

            Ah, the imaginary tape again. Still peddling the same lie. Let’s wait if Ben asks for evidence too. At that point, the jig is up and the debate is over. Don’t you get tired of having your ass handed to you?

            Or maybe you’re hoping he won’t ask? We’ll see. LOL

        • I

          in fine fettleDec 9, 2015 at 8:11 am

          Oh dear ;( I thought those were the shriveled balls of a brass monkey.

          Reply
        • B

          Ben FranklinDec 9, 2015 at 8:25 am

          British diplomats investigating the qualifications of L Ron Hubbard exposed the Scientology founder as a fraud 30 years ago.

          The science-fiction writer, who invented the religion now followed by celebrities including Tom Cruise and John Travolta, awarded himself a PhD from a sham ‘diploma mill’ college he had acquired in California.

          British consulate workers in Los Angeles secretly gathered information on behalf of the government.

          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1204715/Scientology-founder-L-Ron-Hubbard-exposed-fraud-British-diplomats-30-years-ago.html

          Reply
        • B

          Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 1:23 pm

          I don’t doubt the existence of the badge. Perhaps you can enlighten us and explain what the accomplishments (if any) were that the badge was “awarded” for? What exactly did it mean? Is there an independent source for that? An excerpt from a “church” hagiography just won’t be credible.

          Also, it is a bit perplexing how–short of prescience–a 1947 “award” can recognize “his subsequent humanitarian works.” Hubbard did not make up “dianetics” until three years later, let alone scientology which came to LA in 1953. And I imagine those are the alleged “humanitarian works.”

          Up until then, Hubbard’s only contributions to LA life were his participation in Jack Parsons’ occult activities, adultery with Sara Northrup and Hubbard’s attempt to steal Parsons’ nest egg. Certainly, none of those would qualify as “humanitarian works that have contributed to improving the quality of life in the citizens of Los Angeles.”

          Reply
    • S

      sundaygirlDec 9, 2015 at 10:39 am

      I once received a trophy for winning the chili cook-off at my husband’s office. That was pretty neat, and about as meaningful to the world as LRH’s 70 year old participation award.

      Reply
    • M

      madame duranDec 12, 2015 at 5:38 pm

      “We know Alex Gibney is obsessed with his awards but we aren’t”. — Karin Pouw, Scientology spokesperson. (in reference to director Gibney’s documentary, “Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison of Belief” being potentially nominated for an Oscar)
      Yet here is Elle, boasting over one of Hubbard’s awards and exaggerating its significance as if he’s the only person in Los Angeles to ever receive such an award of distinction. Anyone else see the irony? Scientologists can’t be trusted because they talk out of both sides of their mouths.

      Reply
  • E

    elleDec 9, 2015 at 6:32 am

    I saw an article in, I believe the 70’s, from a small community in the mid-west that was remembering the anniversary of the day LRH landed a plane there because fuel was getting short. When he fueled up, he took residents for plane rides, a huge thrill in those days. There were many residents still around who remembered it. I did not save it but I’m sure the Church still has copies. It was very charming.

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 10:24 am

      I read that story too. Unfortunately, after he left it was discovered that an inordinate number of wallets and other valuables had up and disappeared right along with him. The issue was never conclusively resolved but the circumstantial evidence (and knowing Ron’s “character” and greed) suggested but one conclusion.

      On the positive side, as far as I know nobody came up pregnant in any way they were unable to explain…

      Reply
      • E

        elleDec 9, 2015 at 2:06 pm

        This proves just how evil and insane you really are. You are a vile human being. The anniversary article was a celebration, all good and fun news and some nostalgia. Not a word you say is true, but it shows your intense drive to lie just to be lying.

        Reply
        • B

          Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 2:47 pm

          Then again, we started with an imaginary town in Hubbard fantasy land to begin with. Hubbard was a hobbyist GLIDER pilot in the DC area during his ill-fated brief college stint (that he somehow later embellished into claims of being a “nuclear physicist” and “civil engineer” despite failing even introductory classes in related subjects).

          The rest of the stories is–as usual with the guy–also imaginary grandeur of things that never were. You can’t even name the town where imaginary people commemorate an imaginary festivity about an imaginary cross-country pilot!

          Reply
          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 2:50 pm

            You are a low-life bottom feeder–we all know that. No lie is too outrageous for you to spew.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 2:58 pm

            “No lie is too outrageous for you to spew.” You should tell Hubbard that! There is abundant PROOF that this statement applies THERE!

            All of that foaming at the mouth because I debunked your little story? Go for it, prove me wrong!

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 3:00 pm

            You debunked nothing. It stands in history with evidence and witnesses, a wonderful story of fun and kindness. Your lies and warped soul change nothing.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 3:02 pm

            Very well. Let’s start with baby steps: What is the name of this town? When did this fantasy event of yours occur?

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 6:24 pm

            I’m sure you can find it online, or the LRH life exhibition. In fact, I believe the article was reprinted in a Church publication or two. Your gang has all that.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 6:38 pm

            How about some credible sources? These places regurgitate even the most debunked and provably false garbage about their idol.

            I’ll settle for the name of the town. If the story were true (which it won’t be as the stories about Hubbard’s flying exploits are 95% lies just like the rest of his bio–by his own son’s estimate), it would be easy to confirm from this fictitious town’s paper or some online announcement.

            Supply the town name. I’ll do the research from there.

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 6:46 pm

            You have already supplied your own venomous narrative about the event with hideous details. Now you are saying you don’t know anything about the event–nothing? That’s why I seldom bother talking to you.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 6:50 pm

            And the name of the town is…

          • E

            elleDec 10, 2015 at 6:59 am

            You already commented on this article, telling us all about it. So don’t play dumb now.

          • J

            just another guy out thereDec 10, 2015 at 7:10 am

            Certainly you have access to all of the $cientology information about Hubbard. Why not share the name of the town and the date of the event?

          • E

            elleDec 10, 2015 at 8:08 am

            Ask Crouch. He already posted alllllll about it. Of course, then he acted like he knew nothing about it. Too late. He staked his claim.

          • J

            just another guy out thereDec 10, 2015 at 8:30 am

            Why are you unwilling to verify the story? It makes you appear to be unable to do so. Why deflect when you imply that you have superior knowledge of the event?

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 10, 2015 at 9:50 am

            Just another day another lie by elle. Anyway, prove me wrong by providing a link to the article you are referring to, or at least the name of the magazine where you read the article about Hubbard giving free airplane rides to locals so that we can all check it out.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 10, 2015 at 3:54 pm

            And elle is right. For well-informed and unbiased facts on scientology, just ask Crouch:

            In a nutshell: During his freshman (and only) year at GWU, Hubbard became a hobby pilot flying gliders. It appears that he was very committed to that hobby. In fact, so much so that he was unable to complete most of his classes successfully (for example, he flunked introductory nuclear physics and math, even though he later often claimed to be a nuclear physicist as well as a civil engineer as well as a–you get the picture). He flunked out of school; that was also the end of his flying days.

            Now Hubbard being Hubbard could not help himself: So his dabbling in gliding quickly became blown up into a bigger story. In that story, he set various records, flew engine planes and became a barnstormer. As usual with the guy, NONE of that is true. But the “church” faithfully repeats these stories as they cannot admit that their “founder” was a sociopathic liar.

            So in a further embellishment, Hubbard does his barnstorming thing, lands somewhere in the mid-west, and the little townspeople are so taken with him (or have so little else ever happening there), that they celebrate the day of his arrival there annually to this day. A thoroughly hokey story of course. And impossible to be true as it is based on false premises.

            But elle would not be elle, if she did not buy into all the crap stories her cult tells. So she faithfully reposts this here as proof of what a great man Hubbard really was. Unfortunately, when pressed for even minimal evidence–the town name would be nice–she sucks wind as, obviously, the story never happened. And so it goes with “cult facts,” yet again.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 10, 2015 at 3:30 pm

            OK, so here goes another “elle” scam. Making a claim, hoping that no one will ask for FACTS. If they do, shine them on. If they still do, move on and sell the same lie to someone else.

            Dear elle: It is abundantly clear that this story of yours is entirely fabricated. I am not even asking for sources anymore. All I asked for is the name of the town. And you can’t deliver that! Let me suggest that you stop lying as you are making a fool of yourself as well as your cult.

    • I

      IASREGDec 10, 2015 at 12:42 pm

      Liar Ron Hubbard could not have landed a plane. Ron never learned to fly powered aircraft and never held a license to fly airplanes. Ron only had a small amount of experience with gliders, that is all.

      Reply
      • E

        elleDec 10, 2015 at 4:32 pm

        IASSRAG, you are a LIAR.

        Reply
        • S

          Sergeant PepperDec 11, 2015 at 1:57 am

          You forgot to claim you saw a film somewhere of L Ron Hubbard receiving his pilot’s license from President Herbert Hoover.

          Reply
        • I

          IASREGDec 14, 2015 at 12:03 pm

          You lie!

          Reply
      • I

        in fine fettleDec 10, 2015 at 9:33 pm

        LRH obtained license to pilot motor powered aircraft in 1931. He even did barnstorming (which I think is awesome.)

        Reply
        • S

          Sergeant PepperDec 11, 2015 at 1:54 am

          You are incorrect, L Ron Hubbard only had a glider pilot’s license. Phil Browning was the pilot in this article, Hubbard was just a passenger.

          Reply
        • B

          Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 11:43 am

          He CLAIMED to have done these things. Other than his gliding hobby while failing across the board at GWU, there is NO evidence to corroborate that any of this is true!

          Reply
          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 12:01 pm

            He never claimed to have obtained license or told a story on that topic that I’ve ever seen or heard. I just happen to know that because of the Department of Commerce Aeronautical Division regs of the day he would have been required to pass a physical and the CARs test for aeronautical knowledge. Otherwise he wouldn’t have been legally credentialed to perform the feats he performed.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 12:45 pm

            YOU claimed he had obtained a license in 1931. HE claimed those “feats” of which you speak. Pathetically enough, you seem to believe him too despite of all his feats that have been so thoroughly debunked.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 1:55 pm

            As far as I’m concerned you still haven’t made a complete point. Is your quarrel with LRH’s narrative that he should have had more and better propulsion-aircraft experiences, or that he never piloted the flight control systems of a jet at all?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 2:32 pm

            My “quarrel” is with the ficticious narrative that elle put out about Hubbard still being celebrated in the midwest for his landing there about 80+ ago. It’s yet another “church” fiction.

            Aside from that, I have yet to see any evidence anywhere that he ever piloted anything than gliders during his abysmally failing tenure at GWU.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 3:16 pm

            When that is your attitude towards people who share their life experiences with you, you must know that you are doomed. What a sad fate you have chosen for yourself.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 5:48 pm

            Since when is making up a patently phony story, designed to promote sympathy for a con man cult leader, “sharing your life experience?”

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 8:44 pm

            Either you are claiming that I wrote the story under the penname L Ron Hubbard or you are claiming that LRH was already a “con man cult leader” when he wrote it at the age of 21.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 9:58 pm

            No. As be both know, that came later

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 10:32 pm

            That’s right. People like you couldn’t have invented that patently phony label for LRH in the early 1930s because 1) most of you weren’t born yet, and 2) LRH hadn’t yet become famous enough to be a threat to you.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 10:51 pm

            With a few exceptions, I always had him figured to be more of a threat to the few left in the cult. Which is why so many of them are bolting. Except for the “slower” ones, of course.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 12, 2015 at 9:14 am

            Someone being born earlier than you and not yet being famous by the time they are 21 is about my manipulation of you?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 12, 2015 at 12:43 pm

            Acting obtuse may make you seem silly. However, it will do NOTHING to remedy the fact that Hubbard has been widely recognized as the fraud that he was. In keeping with his fake-Navy affectations: That ship has sailed.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 12, 2015 at 3:36 pm

            Obtuse? lol. No, it is precisely the sharp-edge that you can’t stand. Which I must admit is as amusing as it is transparent.

          • E

            elleDec 11, 2015 at 4:51 pm

            I read the article. It was on some anniversary, maybe the 50th, making that about 1982. Sounds about right. I recall the local Church bulletin board in the reception area posting articles. It was very cool. I also remember an archivist that would occasionally bring the staff meeting some tidbit. Once it was a catchy poem written by LRH about a pirate.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 5:56 pm

            Did Hubbard cast himself as the pirate? As insatiably as he pursued other people’s loot, it would have been a good fit and a rare moment of honesty in his life.

      • I

        in fine fettleDec 10, 2015 at 9:38 pm

        The picture shows a Model T Ford aircraft. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/37631a5b5e3926c973e1c048415d6f8fb36fb4e7524043b4d629567a4347b10d.jpg

        There’s a plethora of documentation about LRH’s career as a pilot so I won’t pick a favorite, but I will say that I like this article from January 1932 issue of a popular journal called Sportsman Pilot.

        Tailwind Willies by L. Ron Hubbard

        Last August, my friend Phil Browning (otherwise “Flip”) and I found that we had three weeks’ excess time on our hands before we had to get back to the college grind. Our resources were one Arrow Sport biplane (companion cockpit, sixty-horse LeBlond), two toothbrushes and four itchy feet. We had accomplished the old stunt of rattling around the country in a Model T in search of adventure, and after a few hours’ cogitation, decided that we had a new idea on an old plot. We carefully wrapped our “baggage,” threw the fire extinguisher out to save half a horsepower, patched a hole in the upper wing, and started off to skim over four or five states with the wind as our only compass. We had no idea of what we would encounter, but we knew that our “Model T” plane would get us out of whatever we got into and there we rested content. ‘We had no idea of what we would encounter, but we knew that our ‘Model T’ plane would get us out of whatever we got into…’

        Our primary thought had been to get away from people, but we reckoned without the kindly curiosity of the Middle West. Our very first landing in the southern part of Michigan assured us that we belonged to the curio section. We had spotted a nice green meadow and as the LeBlond had begun to drum too incessantly upon our ears we landed to obtain some relaxation and a quantity of quiet. We rated neither. Almost before our gear touched the grass we were surrounded by an anxious crowd which wanted to know whether or not we were still alive. There ensued an hour of continuous caution concerning the prop and an hour’s effort to keep alien feet off the catwalk.

        Aviation had become commonplace to our locale, so we found it hard to understand all this curiosity, this abundance of questions. Flip tired himself out explaining all the functions of the parts and finally in self-defense we cranked up and continued our journey, resigned to the truth that after all aviation was still a sideshow to some people. For the next two weeks all the rest we received was found upstairs in the little companion “office.” Our time on terra firma was mostly spent in guarding our precious Sparrow from thoughtless damage, explaining why airplanes really flew and refusing invitations to “make ourselves right at home.” Hospitality was proffered in all its forms, and if anyone thinks that this modern machine age has deadened our American kindliness and good fellowship, just let them take a backyard tour of the Middle West. We spent only one night in a hotel, and that because we landed in a thunderstorm after dark. The food offered would have done credit to the Waldorf. At the beginning of the trip we were a little skeptical of our ship’s abilities, but when, time after time, she pulled us out of small, muddy fields, we rested assured that the orange wings and wide-spanned wheels were capable of anything.

        Her faculty for ground-looping at sixty miles an hour saved us from caressing many a fence. Though she climbed slowly when once in the air, she lost very little time whenever we zoomed her out of cornfields to miss trees. At Newport, Indiana, we landed to take on gas, but the second our wheels touched the grass, we sunk a foot and stopped without rolling twenty feet. We fully expected to nose over, but the Sparrow set her teeth and put her tail right down. We took on the gas—only five gallons, to save weight—and then used up half the fuel attempting to get off. Although the field was a mile long, we spanked grass the entire length without rising an inch. The prop almost completed the harvest by chopping at the tall growth and making the sound of a machine gun quartet.

        At last we gave up. I crawled out to let Flip take a whirl at it alone. By using up half the field, he managed to wish the muddy Sparrow into her element, and after building some altitude, wheeled over the place where I stood and called down that there was another field a short distance away. After pacifying a sheriff, who was about to lock me up for trespassing, by shoving him into a mud puddle, I hopped onto the running board of a Purdue boy’s car and burned road over to Flip’s new landing place—if you could call it that.

        The second field was little better than the first, and three attempts were necessary before we willed the Sparrow up just in time to see a nine-foot telephone wire at the height of our prop. Flip threw the nose down and the wires were a scant foot above my head.

        We had intended to leave this section of the country for keeps; but a thunderstorm was all around us, we were almost out of gas, the magnetos weren’t functioning right, and it was almost dark, so we hit dirt again five miles away to stop dead in the middle of a wet plowed field.

        L. Ron Hubbard taking a photograph from the wing while airborne After that performance we left southern Indiana for more stout-souled fliers, and picked up the thread of adventure in Kentland, where a county fair was progressing nicely without our help. We tried to buy all the watermelons in Indiana by confining our menu to that fruit for dinner, breakfast and lunch. Some of the grifters showed us around, and that night after the midway darkened we were involved in a minor auto wreck. While the car was being repaired in a garage, Flip and I tried our best to “borrow” the siren of the VFD [Volunteer Fire Department] engine which was housed in the same garage. We were unsuccessful, however, and the forthcoming towns were spared the terrors of screeches issuing from the blue. In Ohio, we dropped a pushrod over a solid, if small, field and were lucky enough to find a machine shop close by in the town of New London. We spent the night as the guests of a gentleman farmer, the son of a famous professor, whose house was pleasantly cluttered with all manner of things Chinese. That morning had found us trying the only piece of navigation we attempted on the trip, and the results were marvelous. When we were forced down near New London, we found that we were only twenty-seven miles off a fifty-mile course.

        Almost every flier has heard that the cows love to eat the dope off the wings and even the fabric. Flip and I had put that fact down as just another one of aviation’s tall stories. At Andersonville (I forget the state)—whence we had flown in search of beer, which we didn’t find and wouldn’t have wanted, anyhow—we floated too far and when we landed we ground-looped too fast in avoiding a fence. One tire blew. While we were pumping it up, the other went down. Then the first refused to stay inflated, and evening found us marooned in a cow pasture. A farmer let several cows into the field, and though the cows had never seen a plane before, they dashed up and began to lick the fabric in ecstasy. We spent the next few minutes trying to keep them off until the puzzled farmer came and took them away again. After this we are going to keep the tongue away from the cheek around the hangars.

        One scene we witnessed will remain in my memory a long, long time. It was evening and the sun had almost vanished over the rim. Clouds were all around us on the horizon, their uppermost rifts so level that they made a continuous, circular black curtain which, though miles away, seemed to frown at us as they gradually came closer. We were flying at 3,000 feet, and though we traveled at ninety miles an hour, we seemed to have paused with the rest of an eerie world. Down below, the ground was streaked with long shadows made by trees and houses, small on a rolling terrain. Above the clouds, starting from a sharply defined line, the sky was a magnificent blue, dotted here and there by faint golden stars. For an hour we roared on, the LeBlond seemingly puny in all this expanse. Finally, I looked in back of us, and there above that black curtain, reared three flaming red tufts which seemed to blaze. I nudged Flip. He stared back at the clouds and began an immediate search for a landing field. Too much was too much. We had been up there in all that terrible grandeur so long that we had almost ceased to be earthly beings. We circled and circled over a huge stubble field trying to get back to earth. Finally our sense of dimension returned, and we set the Sparrow down. Anyway, with all our mishaps, we proved three or four things (something always must be proved by a flight): Light planes are practical for cross country work; a pilot doesn’t have to follow the air lanes and empty his purse into hangar fees—he can get along just as well trying this backyard stunt; and touring for pleasure in a plane is not half as dangerous as the skeptics like to believe, and twice as much fun as any other way. Sportsmen pilots do not have to limit their flying to their own backyards. The more the US is informally toured, the quicker aviation will find a place in the hearts of the chaps on the byroads. And they say romance is dead!

        Reply
        • S

          Sergeant PepperDec 11, 2015 at 6:35 am

          ” LRH’s career as a pilot”? He dabbled in gliders. Only a kool aid drinking scientologist would call that a career.

          Model T aircraft? Did you even read the article? It’s an airplane not a car.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c7d17ad161cd4081ead443f2a4a788e40cba14ac898e55e6c48ed9939366fc25.jpg

          Reply
          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 10:38 am

            You question the existence of Model T Ford airplanes. Whatever makes you “happy” I guess.

          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 11, 2015 at 7:04 pm

            Wrong. The article clearly states the make and model of the plane Hubbard claims to have “barnstormed” in. It’s not a Model T. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/90bbcc32012496c10f2cc3d6bcc014d6024cd7cdbd5cf8ee926e3fe739f15b13.jpg

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 8:29 pm

            Nice picture. Good to know that you are taking back your silly comment about Model T only ever meaning one thing. I heard there were only one or two people who ever flew the pictured plane in its entire incarnation as a product. Although lots of people playfully used the tag name “Model T” for The Tin Goose and the many other planes built by Ford as well as those equipped with Ford engines. At that time, Model T was a household name so if you can project your imagination to that time you will easily understand the popularity of the term. As far as the article you are so impassioned about is concerned, the author directly states not only the brand name of the aircraft model but also other features of the plane, including the engine type and the fact that it had a companion style cockpit for the co-pilot.

            So I guess the question I’m interested in (since you keep posting to me) is, do you have ANY IDEA what point you are trying to make? And, are you ever going to make it?

          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 12, 2015 at 3:16 am

            The point is you didn’t know the difference between a Model T airplane and the airplane you posted. Your lengthy evasion doesn’t change that fact but your feverish attempt to conceal your error is typical. Thank you for demonstrating how scientology makes a person less capable, not to mention dishonest and evasive.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 12, 2015 at 8:55 am

            The one I posted is a Model T.

          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 13, 2015 at 2:25 pm

            I happen to have knowledge of that particular plane in the picture you posted. If you could provide some proof that it is a Model T, I would be pleased to pass it on to the current owner even though it would perhaps mean the forfeiture of awards he has won presenting it as something other than a Model T.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 14, 2015 at 7:46 pm

            Your acquaintance may be familiar with this particular kind of biplane, but not this particular biplane. Anyway, my “lengthy description” should have given you the answer already. I thought it was arbitrary and solely the prerogative of the pilot to blazon their “baby” as they wanted. Who am I to question a matter of personal taste?

          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 15, 2015 at 5:15 am

            Wrong. The plane you pictured is not your “baby”. It belongs to someone else, as records of the tail number show, so it’s not your prerogative to rename it. Call it a Model T and pretend Hubbard is at the controls all you want, it doesn’t make it fact. It’s highly unlikely Hubbard ever laid his grubby mitts on the aircraft pictured and the rest of his barnstorming “flight of fancy” doesn’t pass the smell test.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 15, 2015 at 7:40 pm

            When you forecast that I might want to be recognized as the pilot you were indeed wrong. Anyway, that’s not my style. I think Ford has been lauded far above his due. By the same token, I don’t even like it when people use the epithet Edsel to speak derogatorily about a vehicle. But all that’s just me.

            I think the true issue is that even with the successful elimination of all non-technical features of storytelling (as if that were possible) you wouldn’t respect even a less significant antecdote rendered by anybody you suspected of being a Scientologist. Your mind is already steeled and all you are doing is trying to twist everything others say or do into an example of how your preconceived notions are right. You’re even threatened by the prospect of taking minor things we say at face value. Or maybe I’m giving you too much credit – maybe your unwholesome determination runs so deep that you just can’t.

          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 16, 2015 at 5:19 am

            Edsel and scientologist together in the same post, very amusing.

            I ask again, have you read “Tailwind Willies”? Hubbard claims to be a renowned photographer (a legend in his own mind, I say) who often took photos while wing walking, yet he has no photos of the actual aircraft he allegedly barnstormed in, no photos of the thrilled crowds who witnessed his exploits, no photos of Hubbard at the controls. At the very best Hubbard is an incompetent journalist, but more likely this is another example of self aggrandizement from a habitual liar.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 11:09 am

            Very nice. So what do we know so far? L Ron Hubbard existed. The Model T aircraft existed. Groovy!

            However, the claim was that Hubbard flew these planes. It was also that he landed such a plane in the midwest somewhere, much to the delight of the locals who fondly remember (and commemorate) this event to this day (about 70 years later).

            Plane pictures (posted twice) notwithstanding, there is ZERO evidence that these claims hold true. In fact, despite repeated inquiries, the claimant is unable to provide even the name of the town, let alone when this event allegedly occurred. Like most of Hubbard’s biography and extraordinary claims about himself, it appears to be a simple fabrication.

          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 11, 2015 at 7:21 pm

            Tailwind Willies is the article. It appears only on cult sites. No photos of Hubbard at the controls, no logbook entries as Pilot in Command, no logbook entries of passengers. What a crock.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 9:55 pm

            Straight from the horse’s mouth, or really horse’s axx

        • B

          Ben FranklinDec 11, 2015 at 9:25 am

          Wow, A magazine article written by non other than L Ron Hubbard describing how great and wild a pilot he was. It is like listening to Donald trump tell us how he is the greatest and smartest human to ever walk this planet of ours. Why would anyone have any doubts about what they are reading?

          Reply
          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 10:36 am

            Do you imagine that the account of the trip published in the magazine is false?

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 11, 2015 at 10:59 am

            What do you imagine?

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 11:27 am

            I respect your decision not to answer the question.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 11, 2015 at 11:35 am

            What makes you think that I have decided not to answer the question? I am just interested in hearing your answer first.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 11:43 am

            Did I specify for how long? I don’t remember commenting on that and I don’t see it written anywhere. I would say that too is up to you. In my view, it’s a man’s prerogative to change his mind liberally.

            Anyway, thank you for your interest, but I asked you first. 😉

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 11, 2015 at 11:55 am

            No worries Fettle. I understand. I know these are extremely hard questions to answer.

            To answer you question: I don’t know. I was not there.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 12:24 pm

            Where do you believe that your imaginings take place? Don’t worry, you can plead the 5th on this question just as you did with the last one – it won’t bother me. But just so you know – I do wish you the best of luck in relocating your lost imagination. Life must be so hard without it.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 11, 2015 at 7:01 pm

            Fettle, you are absolutely blind. I really mean that.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 11, 2015 at 8:28 pm

            I have no doubt you are thoroughly convinced.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 11, 2015 at 11:37 am

            Being free means being able to speak truthfully and not be afraid of the consequences.

          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 12, 2015 at 5:18 am

            Of course it’s false. The “barnstorming” was allegedly performed in an Arrow Sport biplane, yet all the photos are of a Travel Air biplane. That Travel Air was used by the George Washington University flying club, where Hubbard apparently spent his study time while flunking out of school. Another transparent work of fiction by L Ron Hubbard.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 12, 2015 at 8:58 am

            I don’t know what photos you are talking about. As far as I know there were no photos taken of the plane when it was in the air – which makes sense because only rich people and the government that kind of capability.

          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 13, 2015 at 2:17 pm

            LOL. That article claims that LRon Hubbard would wing walk to take photos and you’re claiming he couldn’t take photos of the plane in the air. I must ask again, did you even read the article?

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 14, 2015 at 7:59 pm

            Taking a picture of the plane in flight while wing walking? LOL is right!! What a way to take the term barnstorm (i.e. air circus) literally! Perhaps he could have used a tightrope to accomplish that feat. Actually, if we’re going to indulge in flights of fancy let’s just go for it and say he should have been able to astral project with his camera to get the right angle.

          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 15, 2015 at 4:48 am

            Hubbard was far too cowardly to wing walk.Here he is, on the wing with his camera (safely on the ground of course). So where are the aerial photos Ron claims to have taken? Why are there no photos of the actual aircraft he allegedly used?

          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 15, 2015 at 5:02 am

            Hubbard was far too cowardly to wing walk. Here he is, on the wing with his camera (safely on the ground of course). So where are the aerial photos Ron claims to have taken? Why are there no photos of the actual aircraft he allegedly used? Not one picture of the Arrow Sport plane, not one picture of Hubbard at the controls or even spinning the prop, not one picture of the awed crowds which came to see him or even one pic of an amazed passenger. Just a bunch of pics of a different airplane with Hubbard hanging around, on the ground, and a cock and bull story about a barnstorming “career”. It’s typical Hubbard: exaggeration, outright lies, and bait and switch.
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/44a7b651c47a20b8eec923c3fefeb3ee581fca120555e072b979e8ac9d753dfd.jpg

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 12, 2015 at 8:59 am

            But I will say that your nerdish obsession about grades at school is quite revealing.

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 12, 2015 at 10:19 am

            What is revealing is that LRH felt the need to talk up his academic career and award himself fake degrees, even though he failed so miserably in college. One doesn’t necessarily need a grand education to do important things, but it is truly “nerdish” to pretend you’ve accomplished something you haven’t.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 12, 2015 at 11:10 am

            I am familiar with the MO you are adhering to. In the culture one can have a certain amount of latitude when it comes to refusing to goosestep to the tune of the status quo, but only as long as he sits down and stops rocking the boat when he’s told. When it comes to achieving freedom, you are a sucker who rallies to the side of the “close, but no cigar” caucus.

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 12, 2015 at 12:58 pm

            Ha! A Scientologist calling someone else a sucker. That’s rich.

            Your comment makes little sense and offers no defense to the fact that your dear leader faked all of his credentials. How about focusing on the point instead of creating your own.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 12, 2015 at 3:32 pm

            A Scientologist calling someone a sucker is rich because you already decided Scientologists are suckers. And you aren’t even self-conscious enough to be embarrassed to put a “thought” like that down into writing. lol

            Anyway, your other point is the closest to making sense I’ve ever seen you get. It would be true to say you want to me to focus on YOUR point instead of creating my own. But I don’t focus on your point in the exact way you wanted me to because your are wrong, and the one I “create” (i.e. acknowledge the existence of) is the real issue. If you had been interested in the truth you could have seen the connection between the two points and commented directly by agreeing or disagreeing with that.

            I will try to help you by dumbing down the issue down for you EVEN MORE. You believe that you get to be for some “universal” value of “credentials” and that means something. It doesn’t. Furthermore, LRH never made up any “credentials” to prove to you that he was suitable for anything. Instead he did want he wanted and was generous enough to share his experiences and insights with others so that anybody who WANTS to use him as an inspiration is free to do so.

            Don’t worry. If you still want to call the point solely “my creation” it doesn’t matter. It is true that I put it into words for you. But objective reality exists independently of the mind – i.e. apart from whether anybody chooses to recognize it or not.

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 12, 2015 at 4:41 pm

            There are multiple things wrong with that comment:

            1) “I will try to help you by dumbing down the issue down for you EVEN MORE.” Nice sentence, especially for someone who likes to promote herself as a published author with the crazy ability to look things up in the dictionary.

            2) “A Scientologist calling someone a sucker is rich because you already decided Scientologists are suckers. And you aren’t even self-conscious enough to be embarrassed to put a “thought” like that down into writing. lol” You are 100% correct that I feel no embarrassment with regards to my belief that members of your organization have been suckered. Duped. Flipped. Scammed. Whatever word you prefer. Anyone paying to put himself or herself under the fog of LRH has been damaged and, yes, suckered.

            3) “Furthermore, LRH never made up any “credentials” to prove to you that he was suitable for anything.” LRH called himself all kinds of things – commodore, Purple Heart recipient, nuclear physicist, etc – when he had not an ounce of the proper training/experience one needs to be accepted as such. He made himself appear large for someone, maybe not me personally, but for someone. Or, more factually, for something – money.

            4) ” Instead he did want he wanted and was generous enough to share his experiences and insights with others so that anybody who WANTS to use him as an inspiration is free to do so.” What is just as rich as a Scientologist calling someone else a sucker is a Scientologist mentioning the word “free” in any relation to your organization. LRH gave nothing for free.

            5) “It would be true to say you want to me to focus on YOUR point instead of creating my own.” Right, because that is what communication is. You tiptoe around anything of substance to add your unique spin to try to get the focus off of the misdeeds of your organization and your dear leader. You just stick your fingers in your ears. That’s what a child does; that is what a Scientologist does.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 12, 2015 at 6:03 pm

            Okay, I’ll PROVE to you how without substance I am. The only thing I can take from what you’ve written here as a reflection of reality is that you don’t believe in the existence of others. Or in other words, you don’t believe in energy.

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 12, 2015 at 7:14 pm

            The only thing you’ve proven is that you are capable of writing more claptrap. Your well never runs dry.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 12, 2015 at 8:16 pm

            With substance or without?

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 13, 2015 at 11:53 am

            Babbling about energy and reality and existence doesn’t make you deep. It certainly doesn’t mean your statements have substance.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 13, 2015 at 12:28 pm

            The thing you’ve denied that I’ve proven wasn’t to be a point about “deepness” it was to be a point about how without substance my babbling spring of energy is. But that’s okay. You already proved the more interesting thing, which is that you don’t believe in any of that empty, nonsensical “claptrap.”

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 13, 2015 at 3:24 pm

            I have to come to your defense here: “Babbling” DOES sum it up rather well.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 12, 2015 at 12:40 pm

            Don’t feel bad if fettle’s “reply” seems like nonsense to you. That’s because it is. If you need a grand pronouncement that means absolutely nothing at all, you can always turn to fettle. Or Hubbard, for that matter–the master communicators race!

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 12, 2015 at 1:00 pm

            Yep. Fettle is the master of pretentious babble. If there was a competition to see who could make the most words without actually saying a thing, she would win. Hands down.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 12, 2015 at 3:21 pm

            Yes, in the highly competitive field of meaningless babble generated by cult shills she has earned herself a special place.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 12, 2015 at 12:47 pm

            Actually, the revealing part is that the same Hubbard who was unable to attain even a low passing grade in subjects like freshman math and intro nuclear physics would later claim to be a nuclear physicist, a civil engineer and a variety of other false impersonations. Nothing “nerdish” about recognizing a complete fraud!

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 14, 2015 at 6:38 pm

            So how did a simple statement of fact become a “nerdish obsession?”

            A person’s grades may not matter. Unless this person claims multiple degrees and academic accomplishments that they never attained. Or pretends to be an expert at education when they proved themselves so inadequate in that regard. Hubbard University? Surely, that’s meant as a joke!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 14, 2015 at 7:31 pm

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 14, 2015 at 10:27 pm

            A little distraction from Hubbard’s many lies. It changes nothing but it’s cute.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 11:39 am

            It’s certainly not the only one. He also laid some doozies on the fine citizens of Alaska. As usual with the guy, he claimed to be conducting a “research expedition.” Needless to say, there is nothing other than his claims to corroborate any of it. Oh, but there is the matter of the loan he took out from an Alaska bank that was–surprise–never repaid.

            It’s funny that in this article he talks about hanging with “grifters.” Birds of a feather…

            Big surprise: Googling these little towns, there is NO EVIDENCE of Hubbard leaving any lasting, let alone positive, impressions there!

        • E

          elleDec 11, 2015 at 4:46 pm

          Totally delightful. Thank you so much. He was just 21. Already a gifted writer and adventurous.

          Reply
          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 11, 2015 at 6:03 pm

            So nice and cuddly too. Too bad his greed led him to start a cult and bring misery to so many lives he ruthlessly exploited. Cause that’s where the money is, as he used to say.

          • E

            elleDec 12, 2015 at 7:15 am

            He never said that. When you provided the name of someone YOU claimed was a witness to it, I chased it down and it turned out that you lied lied lied, like you always do.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 12, 2015 at 11:49 am

            El Con also said “deny, deny, deny.” Your response was SO predictable. You would deny Kennedy saying “I am a Berliner” if you’d thought it would help your “cause.”

            Too bad for you that there were quite a few occasions when he said this. And several occasions means all the more witnesses. See, the problem with a sociopath is: It’s not enough to con, hurt, sometimes even kill people. He has to brag about it. And true to form, that’s exactly what he did.

            This quote is any bit as sure as the Kennedy one. Three minutes on google will confirm that for you abundantly.

        • I

          IASREGDec 14, 2015 at 11:56 am

          Hubbard tall tales. Ridiculous foolishness. Ron was never a pilot in real life. Never a war hero. Never wounded in combat. Never in combat. Never a college graduate. Never a nuclear physicist. Those were just a few of the many tall tales Hubbard told.

          Reply
  • B

    Ben FranklinDec 8, 2015 at 8:44 pm

    25 bigest lies ever told by L Ron Hubbard and the Church of Scientology:

    1. The lie: “I happen to be a nuclear physicist; I am not a psychologist nor a psychiatrist nor a medical doctor.” — L. Ron Hubbard, in the 1952 lecture “Dianetics: The Modern Miracle.” Also found transcribed in the Research and Discovery series, Vol. 3 page 470, and New Tech Volumes, Vol. 5 page 143.

    The truth: Hubbard flunked both high school and college, leaving after his sophomore year at George Washington University during
    which he failed a course of “Molecular and Atomic Physics.”

    2. The lie: Hubbard was a “blood brother” of the Blackfoot nation.

    The truth: Blood brotherhood was not a practice of the Blackfoot.

    3. The lie: Hubbard slept with bandits in Mongolia, and traveled to India and Tibet.

    The truth: Hubbard never traveled to those countries.

    4. The lie: Hubbard was a “pioneering barnstormer at the dawn of aviation in America.”

    The truth: As Jon Atack points out, Hubbard flew gliders in the early 1930s, which doesn’t really put Hubbard there with the Wright Brothers (1903) or Charles Lindbergh, who crossed the Atlantic in 1927.

    5. The lie: Hubbard’s 1940 adventures in Alaska led to the development of LORAN, a radio-based system for navigation.

    The truth: Alfred Lee Loomis invented LORAN (Long Range Aid to Navigation) in the 1920s and 1930s at Tuxedo Park in the US. Hubbard was not even remotely qualified to do any serious electrical engineering.

    6. The lie: Hubbard created the US Air Force.

    The truth: In 1941, Hubbard was one of many people offering free advice to government officials about how the US should prepare for a war the country seemed sure to get involved in. On June 30, Senator Pat McCarran of Nevada wrote a letter to Hubbard telling him the he would, indeed, push for a bill to create a US Air
    Force. But ten days earlier, the US Army Air Corps had already changed its name to the US Army Air Force. The US Air Force, under the name we know today, came into existence later, in 1947.

    7. The lie: Hubbard claimed to have been awarded 21 or 27 combat medals in World War II as a navy lieutenant.

    The truth: Hubbard never served a single day in combat and was never awarded any combat medals.

    8. The lie: Hubbard was wounded in combat and was awarded two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star.

    The truth: Hubbard’s US Navy service record shows that he never received Purple Hearts or a Bronze Star.

    9. The lie: Hubbard was “returned home as the first American casualty of the war in the South Pacific.”

    The truth: The US Naval Attache in Brisbane ordered Hubbard returned to the US for being meddlesome and quarrelsome.

    10. The lie: Hubbard was a “commander of corvettes” in the North Atlantic.

    The truth: Hubbard was assigned command of navy yard patrol vessel YP-422 in Boston Harbor. However, he was relieved of command before the vessel
    was commissioned after getting into an argument with the Commandant of the Navy Yard.

    11. The lie: Hubbard fought German U-Boats in the North Atlantic.

    The truth: No he didn’t.

    12. The lie: Hubbard was machine-gunned in the back by Japanese soldiers on the Indonesian island of Java.

    The truth: Not even close.

    13. The lie: Hubbard escaped from Java with a fellow spy in a rubber raft and drifted 2,000 miles back to Australia.

    The truth: As if.

    14. The lie: Hubbard sank a Japanese submarine after a battle that lasted 35 hours.

    The truth: He actually launched depth charges at a magnetic deposit on the ocean floor off the coast of Oregon.

    15. The lie: At the end of the war, Hubbard had “an almost non-existent future” because he’d been “crippled and blinded.”

    The truth: Hubbard was actually in good enough shape after a stay at the Oak Knoll Naval Hospital in Oakland that instead of heading north to his wife and two children in Washington, he went south to Pasadena to join Jack Parsons in his Thelemic sex magick rituals. Hubbard promptly took Jack’s girlfriend Sara Northrup away from him and eventually married her — even though he was still married to his first wife, Polly.

    16. The lie: In a lecture, Hubbard described English occultist Aleister Crowley as his “good friend.”

    The truth: Hubbard never met or corresponded with Crowley. Reading about Hubbard in letters from Jack Parsons, Crowley wrote to a friend, “Apparently Parsons or Hubbard or somebody is producing a moonchild. I get fairly frantic when I contemplate the idiocy of these louts.”

    17. The lie: Hubbard was actually participating in sex magick rites as an undercover spy from US Naval Intelligence, sent in to break up Black Magic in America.

    The truth: There’s no evidence of this claim, which was put out by the Church of Scientology. Hubbard’s son Nibs confirmed years later that his father had a deep interest in the occult and sex magick.

    18. The lie: Hubbard’s 1950 book Dianetics claims from the start that it was “a milestone for man comparable to his discovery of fire and superior to his invention of the wheel and the arch.”

    The truth: 65 years later, Dianetics has failed to deliver on even its most basic claims.

    19. The lie: In Dianetics, Hubbard said that following his counseling techniques, “Arthritis vanishes, myopia gets better, heart illness decreases, asthma disappears, stomachs function properly and the whole catalogue of illnesses goes away and stays away.”

    The truth: With no proof that Dianetics and its successor, Scientology, cured anything, in 1971 Hubbard settled with the Food and Drug Administration by putting a label on all “E-meters” that it was not a tool for the diagnosis of any disease.

    20. The lie: Dianetics promised the state of “Clear,” which would include “complete recall of everything which has ever happened to him or anything he has ever studied.”

    The truth: When Hubbard introduced his first “Clear” in August 1950, she was unable to remember what she had eaten on certain days, or even the color of the tie Hubbard was wearing. Hubbard didn’t claim to produce another Clear until 1966.

    21. The lie: “Dr.” L. Ron Hubbard earned a Ph.D. from Sequoia University.

    The truth: Sequoia was a notorious diploma mill which awarded bogus degrees based on no coursework or exams.

    22. The lie: “I never had a second wife.”

    The truth: While married to his third wife, Mary Sue Whipp, Hubbard made this bizarre claim in 1968 to Granada Television about Sara Northrup, who he badly wanted to erase from his life.

    23. The Lie: On January 27, 1986 Scientology attorney Earle Cooley told the assembled crowd of church members at the Hollywood Palladium that L. Ron Hubbard had been in perfect health on January 24 when he decided to drop his body in order to move on to do higher levels of spiritual research to which his physical body was an impediment.

    The Truth: Hubbard was in very poor health at the end of his life. Hubbard had a stroke about a week before his death. Following this stroke, Dr. Gene Denk gave Hubbard intramuscular injections of Vistaril, a psychiatric medication. About a week later Hubbard died alone in his Bluebird motor home, located on his remote ranch.

    24. The lie: A person can be a member of any religion and still be a Scientologist.

    The truth: In its application for its 1993 tax exemption, the Church told the IRS: “Although there is no policy or Scriptural mandate expressly requiring Scientologists to renounce other religious beliefs or membership in other churches, as a practical matter Scientologists are expected to and do become fully devoted to
    Scientology to the exclusion of other faiths. As Scientologists, they are required to look only to Scientology Scriptures for the answers to the fundamental questions of their existence and to seek enlightenment only from Scientology. Thus, a Scientologist who grew up in the Jewish faith who continues formal membership in his synagogue and attends services with his family violates no Scientology policy or tenet. On the other hand, such a person is not permitted to mix the practice of his
    former faith into his practice and understanding of Scientology so as to alter orthodox Scientology in any way.”

    25. The lie: Disconnection is a personal choice made by individual Scientologists.

    The truth: No….It….Isn’t.

    Reply
  • B

    Ben FranklinDec 8, 2015 at 11:10 am

    Reply
  • S

    Sergeant PepperDec 8, 2015 at 5:10 am

    “THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN CONTROL PEOPLE IS TO LIE TO THEM. You can write
    that down in your book in great big letters. The only way you can
    control anybody is to lie to them.”

    – L. Ron Hubbard, “Off the
    Time Track,” lecture of June 1952, excerpted in JOURNAL OF SCIENTOLOGY
    issue 18-G, reprinted in TECHNICAL VOLUMES OF DIANETICS &
    SCIENTOLOGY, vol. 1, p. 418

    Reply
  • E

    elleDec 7, 2015 at 6:57 am

    The award winning interview by Koppel of Mr. Miscavige has picked up over 5,000 hits since Nov 14 on just this copy found in my profile. Koppel held the interview over to keep it going. Enjoy.

    Reply
    • B

      Ben FranklinDec 7, 2015 at 12:05 pm

      How many people do you think have either left or joined Scientology since Nov 15? I am willing to bet that there are more people who have left Scientology than joined. There is no real expansion, just renovated buildings being opened all over the place by Miscavige to create the Illusion that Scientology is expanding when it is actually shrinking very fast.

      Reply
    • J

      just another guy out thereDec 7, 2015 at 12:38 pm

      Nightline interview – almost 26,072
      “Scientology Leader David Miscavige caught lying on Nightline 1992” – 375,951 views

      Reply
      • E

        elleDec 7, 2015 at 5:33 pm

        Almost another 400 just since you posted this.

        Reply
        • J

          just another guy out thereDec 7, 2015 at 8:50 pm

          Impressive! Since May 3rd, .0031% of the English speaking world has watched it! To be fair, there is the 9 part version too, posted Oct.2006, and the first part of that has 350,208 views so if you add them together that comes to .0448% of the english speaking world!

          The problem is that in the 9 part version the viewership drops off with each part. Part two is down to 134,317. Part 9 down to 91,281.

          Still with the recent version and part one combined, that is only a little over 770 more views than “Scientology Leader David Miscavige caught lying on Nightline 1992” You’ve got your work cut out for you!

          Reply
          • E

            elleDec 8, 2015 at 1:49 am

            There was another copy with many more views that I originally linked but as soon as the guy started getting new hits, he took it private. Weird. And there are other copies. Not interested in your opinion hit piece. I’ve witnessed enough of it here and it’s boring.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 8, 2015 at 2:23 am

            YOU may not be interested in knowing the truth about some of Miscavige’s ludicrous claims. But for those that are: “”Scientology Leader David Miscavige caught lying on Nightline 1992”

          • E

            elleDec 8, 2015 at 2:35 am

            You do not have nor disseminate any truth. You have a hate filled biased agenda, and you are egged-on by Ortega and his bunkerbut tools.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 8, 2015 at 5:53 am

            I’m willing to bet you’re having a lot of good moments throughout your day today. Do I win big bank?

          • E

            elleDec 8, 2015 at 5:58 am

            That is very true! This time of year seem to be “lucky.” So you win. Just send me your account info and I’ll load it up for you 😉

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 8, 2015 at 6:57 am

            You have so many O/Ws.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 8, 2015 at 12:57 pm

            Miscavige’s lies in the interview are DOCUMENTED. I know you are probably afraid to look it up.

            The biggest set of lies was the claim that Congress (at the prompting of the psychiatric profession) was going to build a big psychiatry gulag in Alaska. The gov’t would be able to commit people there arbitrarily for things such as losing their temper (definitely a concern for Miscavige, the physically and verbally abusive cult leader). He claimed that this plan was only derailed when scientology stepped in. He also offered to supply documentation. It is now 24 years later and he still has not done so.

            The lies:
            1. He misstated the purpose and intent of the law. It was to make AK independent in providing care to its own people
            2. There NEVER was a plan for a gulag
            3. There were NO changes of commitment law that were part of this
            4. Scientology did NOT avert ANYTHING. The laws that Miscavige misstated were passed by House and Senate UNANIMOUSLY! There was NO scientology “victory” over the evil psychs!
            5. There is NO documentation Miscavige could have provided. The who story he told NEVER HAPPENED!
            6. Scientology uses its great claims of keeping psychiatry in check as a fundraising tool. The fact is that the psychiatric profession is largely unaware of the minute cult.

            elle, if you think that this is “biased,” look up THE FACTS and tell me where I have made a mistake. You won’t because you don’t want to know the truth. You may think the interview is to Miscavige’s credit. On the contrary, it reveals him as a deceitful, conspiracy obsessed halfwit who would have been better off not dropping out of high school and not joining the cult of scientology.

          • J

            just another guy out thereDec 8, 2015 at 4:21 am

            Nice open mind you’ve got there! Did you get that from $cientology?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 8, 2015 at 2:22 am

            “Scientology Leader David Miscavige caught lying on Nightline 1992” is a great piece. Fact-checks and debunks some of fake-navy Davey’s tin-foil hat claims.

        • B

          Bob CrouchDec 8, 2015 at 2:25 am

          I wonder: How many of those came from click-farms in the Philippines and Mexico. It has been conclusively proven that the “church” employs those liberally. A deliberately dishonest and manipulative “church?” Of course, we’re talking scientology here!

          Reply
          • J

            just another guy out thereDec 8, 2015 at 4:18 am

            Click farms are a possibility but I have noticed that the views have skyrocketed since the publication of Leah Remini’s book Troublemaker so it’s probably people wanting to see what the monster described in the book is all about.

    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 7, 2015 at 3:43 pm

      If you’ve seen “Going Clear” and you want to see the beady eyes of the abusive little cult leader for yourself, or if you’re wondering if scientologists are really as crazy as the documentary so convincingly asserts, and want to hear their side, sadly there is not much to choose from. This is because said leader is afraid of the press, and has spoken to them only twice in 30 years–too much to hide and answer for.

      The best you’ll be able to do is this 24 year old interview Koppel conducted with the cult’s chairman. After watching it, you’ll understand why the somewhat dim Dave is terrified of further press encounters.

      Another couple of fascinating Miscavige clips were posted on 12/6 on The Underground Bunker blog. They were leaked from an internal speech where he spun a fascinating conspiracy tale about the death of Lisa McPherson (Lisa died 20 years ago st the hands of the cult). Listens and learn

      Reply
      • E

        elleDec 7, 2015 at 5:29 pm

        You don’t know what I have seen or read. You are not my confidant.

        Reply
        • B

          Bob CrouchDec 7, 2015 at 6:24 pm

          No, I am not your confidant. I continue to be amazed that people in a group that touts their “communications” courses turn out to be so terrible at it.

          Just like your post, mine was directed at the generic (plural) “you.” Believe it or not, I was doing the same thing that you were: I was recommending that people (whom I addressed as “you”) check out this relic of an interview, as well as that other two-part video about Lisa’s death under scientology “care.”

          That way they don’t have to wonder whether your cult and “captain” Dave are really as crazed as the documentary shows them to be. The viewers will KNOW for sure! The videos speak for themselves.

          Reply
        • I

          in fine fettleDec 7, 2015 at 7:33 pm

          😊 If Disqus were kin to that splendidly vetted online encyclopedia (bearing a hallmark commencing with the character W) and I could edit your comment to make it read whatever I wanted to have avowed, I would change your entry to “You don’t know what we’ve have seen or read. You are not our confidant.” Of course, it would make no difference as Crouch would go on denying (without actually “saying”) that he doesn’t know what ANYBODY but his confidants have seen or read and all those who already understand you will continue to understand you just the same. But no matter, this is not said illustrious encyclopedia, and so all of that has zero chance of ever coming to pass in any event.

          Reply
          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 8, 2015 at 2:33 am

            Don’t be sore losers now, girls! Work on your famous “communication tech.” You’ll be OK–as long as you don’t look to the cult for that kind of help… We all know how well Hubbard’s tech works–or not!

          • C

            Captain MustSavageDec 8, 2015 at 10:45 pm

            Apparently ‘W’ (wikipedia) blocked all IP addresses from the church of scientology and its associates in 2009, effectively banning scientology from editing Wikipedia entries. According to Wired magazine (with similar stories in The Guardian, The Huffington Post, The Telegraph, Reddit..) the “punishment (was) for repeated and deceptive editing of articles related to the controversial religion.” I guess that does now make it splendidly vetted.

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 6:28 am

            I used to donate to wikipedia. But Scientology is not the only entries with false data. I found others. There is also an author–name escapes me at the moment, wrote thrillers I think–who found errors about his life and books. He corrected them and W delete and put back the false info. I don’t donate anymore.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 9, 2015 at 8:18 am

            Did you know that World Book is the only company that publishes “hard” encyclopedias anymore? Yes, even Britannia (ooops I meant Britannica) stopped the presses. No I don’t work for World Book and this is not a paid advertisement, but they do have a really cool sounding CD-ROM as well. It includes not only the material of the latest encyclopedia set but the material from archives going back to the early 20th century. I may or may not have nonessential crib space for an encyclopedia set, but that’s how *I* want to spend my money in support of universal access to knowledge.

          • J

            just another guy out thereDec 9, 2015 at 1:10 pm

            When you look up Scientology in the online version of World Book, there is a link to an excellent review of Lawrence Wright’s book “Going Clear the Prison of Belief” written by Randall Balmer, an Episcopal priest and chair of the religion department at Dartmouth College. One of the last lines of the review is” Perhaps it’s time we peek out from behind the ruse of “New Religious Movements” and denounce abuse perpetrated in the name of religion as well”
            Universal access to knowledge is a beautiful thing!

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 1:25 pm

            Balmer makes an excellent point! It’s time indeed!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 9, 2015 at 4:26 pm

            Nobody’s perfect.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 10, 2015 at 9:54 am

            except L Ron Hubbard?

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 10, 2015 at 10:43 am

            You can’t be trusted to ascertain the simplest of contexts. Okay, how’s this? No publishing house in the U.S. is perfect. I don’t like it because it doesn’t have the same ring to it, but the possibility of you grasping the basic meaning are now probably a tad bit higher.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 10, 2015 at 12:42 pm

            You did not answer the question.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 10, 2015 at 12:55 pm

            True.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 10, 2015 at 1:27 pm

            Is L. Ron Hubbard perfect? Just a simple Yes or NO

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 10, 2015 at 1:38 pm

            While it is true that I did not answer the “question” and verified the fact when you questioned it, it is also true that under the circumstances I WILL not answer the question. Hope that clarifies. Have a nice day!

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 10, 2015 at 8:12 pm

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 6:23 pm

            Seems he not only doesn’t know anything about Scientology but exhibits a bias common to liberal institutions. Episcopal churches have a long history of shifting and changing and splintering over every issue. Nothing much definitive. Some Episcopal priest(s) can and will come up with other opinions. Experience in one end of my family is they go to an Episcopal church, but if they get a new minister they don’t care for, they go find another they agree with.

          • J

            just another guy out thereDec 10, 2015 at 7:05 am

            Did you read the whole review? Have you read “Going Clear”? He chairs the religion department at Dartmouth. Is it impossible that he has a valid opinion?

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 2:03 pm

            Ditto. I even have a 100+ year old set of dictionaries to find what words meant at different times and how so many have been altered since then. I think I’ll get that World Book CD. Wikipedia is unreliable, and online dictionaries are so abbreviated.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 2:53 pm

            I know scientologists hate ALL sources of information they can not control. But “Wikipedia is unreliable?” Really? And this coming from someone who finds stories about Xenu and the need to exorcise body thetans reliable?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 10:32 am

            Of course, there is also elle’s issue that Wikipedia no longer accepts edits from known scientology IP addresses. Imagine this: Here’s the world’s most democratic place for sharing your knowledge. And scientology sock puppets became such a plague that they had to ban them as an organization.

            It’s truly impressive that an organization no less managed to rise to such levels obnoxiousness! No other organization, let alone “church” has managed to do that!

          • C

            Captain MustSavageDec 9, 2015 at 11:12 am

            Its pretty convenient to forget the name in your story or what other entries you ‘found’ with false data. It allows you to present some sort of rebuttal without providing any information others can check to see if you’re being truthful or just making up a story. My understanding is that Scientology is the only entity in the world banned entirely from editing Wikipedia entries. That doesn’t happen for no reason.

          • E

            elleDec 9, 2015 at 2:01 pm

            You are lying.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 2:54 pm

            Actually, he’s NOT! A couple of minutes on google prove his point.

          • C

            Captain MustSavageDec 9, 2015 at 7:59 pm

            Can you be more specific about what you think I’m ‘lying’ about? According to L R Hubbard the first characteristic of an anti social personality is that

            “He or she speaks only in very broad generalities. “They say…” “Everybody thinks…” “Everyone knows…” and such expressions are in continual use, particularly when imparting rumor. When asked, “Who is everybody…” it normally turns out to be one source and from this source the antisocial person has manufactured what he or she pretends is the whole opinion of the whole society.

            This is natural to them since to them all society is a large hostile generality, against the antisocial in particular.

            I’m asking you to be specific as I’m sure that you don’t want to be labelled an anti social personality. Do you think I’m lying about Wikipedia’s banning? Its true. Anyone can google that. You can look it up on Wikipedia’s own site. Unfortunately for scientologists though this information would be considered “entheta” and so they’re not allowed to check for themselves.

        • B

          Ben FranklinDec 7, 2015 at 7:50 pm

          Below are just a few books I bet you have never read, otherwise you would no longer be a Scientologist.

          Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science
          The Mind Benders
          Scientology – Abuse At The Top
          Blown for Good
          Inside Scientology: The Story of America’s Most Secretive Religion
          Beyond Belief: My Secret Life Inside Scientology and My Harrowing Escape
          Counterfeit Dreams: One Man’s Journey Into and Out of the World of Scientology
          Leaving Scientology: A Practical Guide to Escape and Recovery
          A Doctor’s Report on Dianetics
          Tom Cruise: An Unauthorized Biography
          Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief
          The Church of Fear: Inside the Weird World of Scientology
          The Unbreakable Miss Lovely
          Troublemaker: Surviving Hollywood and Scientology
          My Billion Year Contract: memoir of a former scientologist
          The Complex: An Insider Exposes the Covert World of the Church of Scientology
          A Piece of Blue Sky: Scientology, Dianetics, and L. Ron Hubbard Exposed
          The Scandal of Scientology
          Bare-Faced Messiah
          Ali’s Smile: Naked Scientology
          Believe What You Like
          The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power
          Inside Scientology: How I Joined Scientology and Became Superhuman
          Scientology: The Now Religion
          Brain-Washing

          Reply
    • C

      Captain MustSavageDec 8, 2015 at 10:50 pm

      What did you think of the bit where a simple little Ted Koppel question forced Mr Miscavige to back track on a statement he’d made that scientology did more charity than any other organisation in the world? The question? “More than the Catholic Church?”

      Reply
  • B

    Bob CrouchDec 5, 2015 at 4:31 pm

    To some, it may be puzzling how Tom Cruise’s advocacy for what may appear like just another small “religion” could tarnish his reputation or “star power.” A good place to start investigating this would be Alex Gibney’s recent documentary “Going Clear.” Enormously critically acclaimed and the winner of 3 Emmys (as well as on the 2016 Oscar shortlist), this documentary provides an excellent overview.

    One of Cruise’s more bizarre advocacies for the group was his 2005 interview with Matt Lauer. In it, he proclaimed that he knew the “history of psychiatry.” However, Matt Lauer, along with most of the rest of us non-scientologists, had–or so Tom calimed–no clue about the horrors visited upon us by the psychiatric profession and its various evil conspiracies.

    Not by nature a man given to deep or original thought, Cruise was repeating the ideas of scientology founder L Ron Hubbard. Undaunted by his notable absence of any qualifications, Hubbard had nevertheless developed the “Modern Science of Mental Health,” proclaimed himself “source” of everything anyone had to know about life (or lives, as we are apparently subject to reincarnation), and declared war on the “evil psychs.”

    20 years ago today, Hubbard’s teachings bore tragic fruit in the death of 36-year old Lisa McPherson. A scientologist, Lisa–after having been declared “clear” by none other than scientologist’s current head, “captain” David Miscavige–suffered a mental breakdown and was taken into a hospital for psychiatric evaluation. Scientologists strong-armed their way into the hospital and checked Lisa out to submit her to their own form of “care.” After 17 days of incarcerating her in a Clearwater, FL, hotel room, denying her qualified medical care and providing their own brand of remedies for her psychotic condition, Lisa passed away on December 5, 1995.

    A detailed breakdown of these events is provided in the “Underground Bunker,” a blog by journalist and scientology expert Tony Ortega. Additionally, many other documents are available online.

    Sadly, Lisa’s is only one of many examples of scientology quackery yielding fatal results, whether under the scientology logo itself, or in front groups such as its controversial “drug rehab” front Narconon.

    A more thoughtful person than Tom Cruise would probably think twice before lending his name, reputation and “star power” to luring others into such a nefarious–and potentially lethal– exploitative enterprise!

    Reply
  • I

    in fine fettleDec 5, 2015 at 11:29 am

    Tom Cruise’s appearance in Times Square on Monday, July 27, 2015 was a huge success! He was so nice with his fans who turned out en masse to see him there. Great high resolution image representing the event! Ooooh, he’s so handsome in this picture too.

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 5, 2015 at 1:20 pm

      While in NY, did he find time to visit Suri? Or is his cult leader, “captain” Dave still not letting him? It’s pretty sinister to find a cult that considers ordering its members to disconnect from your own flesh and blood (or face being disconnected from and harassed yourself) a “religious practice!”

      Reply
      • I

        in fine fettleDec 5, 2015 at 1:23 pm

        Your wet blanket isn’t big enough to cover the enthusiasm depicted in that picture. You’d better go back to the drawing board.

        Reply
        • B

          Bob CrouchDec 5, 2015 at 1:44 pm

          A little bit of “enthusiasm” on Tom’s part for his own flesh and blood may not be such a bad thing either. If the cult only let him…

          Reply
          • E

            elleDec 5, 2015 at 4:00 pm

            You know nothing at all about his life–nothing.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 5, 2015 at 5:41 pm

            But, as usual, you are the keeper of the superior knowledge by which you get to grade ours? I know enough to be quite certain that scientology-ordered disconnection is an immoral, inhumane thing. Thankfully, it’s only the practice of the “fringest” of cults.

      • M

        madame duranDec 6, 2015 at 7:33 pm

        Please…spare little Suri from having to see that egg-toothed fake of a father (emphasis on the word “FAKE”). She has her maternal grandpa and uncle (and possibly other older males I’m unaware of) who are more reliable father figures than that fly-by-nighter Cruise. My heart usually breaks for kids raised without a loving, supportive daddy but in this case, Suri is better off without Tom.

        Reply
    • E

      elleDec 5, 2015 at 3:59 pm

      Yes, he is such a great looking guy. And always so gracious to his fans and he sure has plenty of those.

      Reply
      • S

        sundaygirlDec 5, 2015 at 6:04 pm

        Tom Cruise is super handsome, agreed. But, he’s the #2 man in an organization that harms people financially, emotionally, spiritually and mentally. Good looks don’t erase that. Neither does good box office.

        Reply
        • E

          elleDec 6, 2015 at 3:40 am

          Nor can all your lying make anything you say true.

          Reply
          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 6, 2015 at 11:42 am

            “Nor can all your lying make anything” sundaygirl says false.

  • I

    in fine fettleDec 5, 2015 at 11:12 am

    Fun facts

    Pure gold does not tarnish.

    Gold items less than 24-karat can show signs of tarnishing because the other metals in the alloy may react with oxygen or other compounds.

    Academy Awards of Merit have a 24-karat gold plating on their surface.

    Beneath the gold, the award’s interior is a metal alloy of tin (93 percent), antimony (5 percent), and copper (2 percent) known as Britannium or Britannia metal.

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 5, 2015 at 1:35 pm

      Neither Cruise nor Travolta have any of the worries that come with owning an Academy Award.

      Of course, both of them received their share of “Razzies.” Tom got one of his in 2006, his scientology “banner year” for “Most Tiresome Tabloid Targets.” Without going into the “tiresome” details, one hint should suffice: Oprah.

      John swept the Razzies for bringing the works of a third-rate pulp sci-fi writer turned cult founder to the big screen. (Hint: LRH would be the initials of the epic wanna-be.) The result set an all-time Razzies record that has yet to be beaten.

      Reply
  • M

    madame duranDec 5, 2015 at 12:26 am

    Serious question for Reid Cammack: why don’t you give the “Going Clear” DVD to your friends as gifts? It’s one way of giving them something heartfelt while providing a visual explanation of why you couldn’t get them what they wanted on moral grounds? Maybe you should try being honest with them about your refusal. If your friendship breaks down as a result, they weren’t real friends to begin with.

    Reply
    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 5, 2015 at 1:38 pm

      I would imagine that as individuals who appreciate great cinematic achievements they would appreciate being gifted with a documentary that has received three Emmys and is on the Oscar shortlist.

      Reply
  • D

    Doc MDec 4, 2015 at 9:09 pm

    To Paulette and Ben, why bother responding to Elle.

    1 She won’t be able to hear you
    2 Just responding causes a cycle of back and forth
    3 It’s a waste of time

    I do understand why you try, but look at my avitar Polly (the Dog). She has much more heart and soul than any Scientologist I know.

    I’m sure you would say the same for your dogs Paulette.

    Reply
  • S

    Sergeant PepperDec 4, 2015 at 6:50 pm

    Nice article Reid Cammack. I wager you did not expect so many comments, or, even more surprising and disgusting, to find Scientology cultists attacking a holocaust survivor in your comment thread.

    Reply
    • I

      in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 7:30 pm

      That fixed “wager” reeks. I could more legitimately “wager” that you are the Queen of Scots, but even if I were proven right, all the luck in the world couldn’t make you welshers turn my winnings over to me.

      Reply
      • S

        Sergeant PepperDec 4, 2015 at 7:53 pm

        I decline your wager. You appear to be an apologist for a cult which trains its adherents to lie.

        Anyway, it’s an amusing article about a social dilemma, with a hard kernel of truth. I think it’s nice, but obviously the cult doesn’t.

        Reply
        • I

          in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 8:25 pm

          You can’t decline a wager that was never made.

          Reply
  • P

    Paulette Cooper NobleDec 4, 2015 at 4:16 pm

    I don’t think it makes an iota of difference that I did what was then called the HAS course… Scientology has tried for years to find out what name I used and I think it’s amusing that 40+ years later they’re using you to try to find out. Anyway, I described my immediate disillusionment with the techniques in my book which you can read free at http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/cooper/sos.html. There are many better books that have come out since then so I would recommend them instead. Don’t be insulted but I really don’t have time to correspond with someone who doesn’t have an open mind.

    Reply
    • E

      elleDec 4, 2015 at 4:27 pm

      Ah, that’s why I don’t remember what you did. It’s just a little too convenient that you cannot prove that you did anything at all, or ever stepped foot inside a Church. Perhaps you did not go there to get a story, as you claimed, but to make a story. That is nothing new, but you have perhaps set the bar on keeping it going and milking it.

      Your psychology history makes you doubly suspect. You adhered to a practice that is adversarial to religion in general, and Scientology in particular. It was competition for you. And if it were revealed that you never so much as put a toe in the doorway of the church, you would be discredited in the eyes of your fellow psychs–or maybe not given their lack of integrity in general.

      You would think that in almost 40 years, the Church would have found out what name you used by now. That’s another reason to think that you were never inside the door.

      PS I think my mind is as open as yours. I’m sure you are familiar with what “open mind” really means.

      Reply
      • B

        Ben FranklinDec 4, 2015 at 7:24 pm

        Paullete Cooper is a Harvard Graduate and you are a nobody, just a confused cult shill with a pea sized brain and a big mouth. Always remember that.

        Reply
        • G

          GlenDec 4, 2015 at 10:08 pm

          Brandeis, I believe.

          Reply
      • S

        sundaygirlDec 4, 2015 at 8:06 pm

        After 40 years, if no one in your organization “cares a wit” about her, why would it still be trying to figure out what course she took and what alias she used? Your comments are betraying your pretense.

        Reply
        • E

          elleDec 4, 2015 at 8:15 pm

          No one cares. I just want you nitwits to prove yourselves with producing a certificate. Now I know why you can’t do it. She never did any Church services. She just blows wind.

          Reply
          • R

            romanescoDec 4, 2015 at 9:27 pm

            Quit saying “no one cares” when you mean you don’t care. Or more precisely, you want other people to think you don’t care, when in fact you care very much.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 4, 2015 at 9:36 pm

            I would be surprised if she never burned that garbage. The most useless certificates in the universe.

          • C

            Captain MustSavageDec 5, 2015 at 4:24 am

            Perhaps you can provide us with documents relating to Lafayette’s university qualifications? You know, his degree in nuclear physics perhaps? By your logic someone who can’t show documents clearly never did what they claimed, they just blow wind. Imagine that. It might be the one accurate thing you’ve said.

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 5, 2015 at 7:47 am

            Continue the “no one cares” bit, but continue to be very much invested in proving she didn’t take a class. 40 years ago.

          • C

            Captain MustSavageDec 5, 2015 at 10:44 pm

            Come on, elle, I just want you nitwit to prove yourself with producing a certificate. Now I know why can’t do it. He never completed any university degree. He just blows wind.. Your words are super applicable to Lafayette, don’t you think?

      • R

        Robert EckertDec 4, 2015 at 9:09 pm

        “I think my mind is as open as yours” Outside observers would not agree. Misjudging one’s own mental abilities is common. You may believe you have the ability to remain open to other viewpoints, but no such openness has actually been seen to occur from you.

        Reply
        • E

          elleDec 5, 2015 at 6:23 am

          You think Pee Cooper is open to other viewpoints? Don’t think so.

          Reply
          • R

            Robert EckertDec 5, 2015 at 8:35 am

            She has had an extraordinarily wide range of experience and exposure to people of very different kinds. You look very foolish trying to take potshots at a woman with her breadth of knowledge.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 5, 2015 at 2:05 pm

            As a holocaust survivor, I don’t imagine that she is open to viewpoints glamorizing that event. As a survivor of decades-long campaigns by scientology to destroy her life with illegal and immoral means, I would imagine she has developed a definite and informed outlook on that cult as well. She’d be a naive fool not to!

          • E

            elleDec 5, 2015 at 4:02 pm

            What did she do to survive the holocaust? I want to know what she did that deserves my admiration and respect.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 5, 2015 at 5:37 pm

            Are you still having trouble choosing sides on the holocaust issue? Maybe, you are unsure whether you’d rather admire and respect those that were out to kill her and her sister (after already killing both of their parents)?

            If you need more details to make up your mind, feel free to consult Tony Ortega’s excellent “The Unbreakable Miss Lovely.” It discusses how she survived as a Jew in WW II and as a journalist up against a criminal cult.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 5, 2015 at 6:16 pm

            It sounds like she was very lucky to have born to a father with a committed and principled friend. A piece about her survival I read said that as an infant in 1943, the year following the Wannsee Conference, she was freed from a Nazi concentration camp – likely right before being transported to Auschwitz to be killed. This evidently occurred after her father’s friend bribed a prison guard to let her and her sister go. Both of her parents, according to the definitions stipulated in the “1935 Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor” were Polish Jews who could be and were killed earlier as part of the “final solution” to the “Jewish problem.”

          • E

            elleDec 6, 2015 at 3:38 am

            Correct, she was lucky. Her father’s friend is the hero and deserving of admiration and respect. Pee Cooper herself did not do anything. I hope she donates generously to organizations that support Jewish causes that rectify the atrocities as best possible.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 6, 2015 at 8:50 am

          • E

            elleDec 6, 2015 at 9:24 am

            She hugged and kissed the son of the man, de Hoo, who saved her? Is she a practicing Jew? Did she reimburse the family for what the father paid to save her? What Jewish causes does she support that help rectify damages done to the Jews? How generous is she? Was de Hoo a Jew, or a righteous gentile?
            Not only did Pee Cooper not do anything herself that merits respect, she has made a career out of black propaganda against a religion much like what the Nazis did against the Jews to garner support (or at least silent opposition) to every atrocity the Nazis committed against the Jews. It appears she is dramatizing the oppression she believes she once suffered and aiming it another innocent demographic. It’s off target and is a mental derangement. No wonder she hears cackling out side her door.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 6, 2015 at 9:52 am

            What exactly did Paullete cooper write that is not true in her book “The Scandal of Scientology”. You have never even read Paullete Cooper’s book to know what is written in it. You just condemn her because your church leaders tell you that she is a terrible person. What is if you have been lied to? Have you ever thought about that possibility? Read before you make any judgements or insult a person. If you want to believe your Church, that’s fine, but it is only fair that you read her book too, otherwise, you are condemning something that you don’t even know or have a clue about.

            https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/cooper/sos.html

          • E

            elleDec 6, 2015 at 10:28 am

            Pee Cooper personally has convinced me she is a terrible person.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 6, 2015 at 11:10 am

            You can’t point one single thing that she has done that is terrible. I know you are angry because she told you that she is not going to get into silly arguments with you since you don’t even understand what you are talking about.

          • E

            elleDec 6, 2015 at 11:17 am

            Her fictitious experience about going into a church and doing a service showing she had a prior agenda to forward forms a foundation of quick sand for her entire narrative.
            And she hears cackling but never sees the people. And unseen people sneak into her home to leave a token like a glove. She “knows” they are Scientologists. Either she is nutty and therefore deserves a modicum of sympathy, or she is evil. Maybe both.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 6, 2015 at 11:27 am

            You have no proof that her experience was “fictitious.” Hence, the ” foundation of quick sand for YOUR entire narrative.” 45 years later, her book still holds up. Many others have come forward and confirmed her account, doing their own research and drawing on their own experience.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 6, 2015 at 11:29 am

            She is not the only person who has gone into a Scientology Church and taken a course with the aim of exposing the church as a fraud. Why is criticizing the Church of Scientology such a terrible thing? So what if someone criticizes something. That is why we have Freedom of Speech and Freedom of religion. Anyone can choose whatever religion they like and others should be free to criticize a religion if they believe that it’s practices are harmful.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 6, 2015 at 11:32 am

            Although the Church of Scientology creed states that “all men have the right to think freely, to write freely, their own opinions and to counter or utter or write about the opinions of others,” this has not applied to anyone who wishes to think, speak or write against Scientology.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 6, 2015 at 11:32 am

            A journalist and author who enjoys world-wide respect and admiration for her backbone in standing up to the relentless attacks of a criminal cult, Ms. Cooper was kind enough to condescend and talk online to none other than you–a nobody shilling for that same cult. Her response evidence something that yours yet have to develop: class.

            So that’s a “terrible person?” Could you possibly get any shriller? I love your posts, elle; they reflect so well on what the cult is really like. And they show how clueless you are as you apply your master’s “tech” and embarrass the whole lot of yours. Your good work is not going unnoticed!

          • O

            One HumanDec 7, 2015 at 12:52 pm

            Your abject callousness to someone surviving The Holocaust has fully demonstrated that YOU are a terrible person.
            How dare you!

          • E

            elleDec 7, 2015 at 6:25 pm

            She was an infant, 11 months old, right? What did she do–nothing. She was lucky. Good for her, but that does not entitle her to special adulation. It was not something she accomplished.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 7, 2015 at 6:35 pm

            Nobody recommends “special adulation” of Ms. Cooper. However, as a journalist she undoubtedly made her mark. So much so that your cult tried every dirty trick in the book to silence and ruin her, for decades. In fact, you are continuing to this day to make her out as a “terrible person.”

            Every time you do, it demonstrates the continuing importance of her ground-breaking journalistic achievements and the despair of your pointless little snipe attacks.

          • O

            One HumanDec 8, 2015 at 6:50 am

            She lost both parents, lived in a few orphanages, came to a new country with one sole passion, and was separated from her sister for decades.
            And what the f@*! have you done that’s so special?

          • E

            elleDec 8, 2015 at 4:28 pm

            Tough. She got here and should be very very very grateful. What Jewish causes does she support to rectify the damages done to Jews? Maybe she does–never hear about them. Her BIG claim to fame is being an alleged victim and writing a lying book. meh

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 8, 2015 at 5:43 pm

            Actually, your label of “alleged victim” is not only cynical but also dishonest. Unless you are a holocaust denier, of course. Then you have even bigger problems than the ones you so faithfully exhibit through most of your posts. As to her being a “victim” of outrageous atrocities committed against her by scientology, this part is well documented in documents the FBI recovered in its raids on the cult.

            If hers were a “lying book,” one wonders why scientology lawyers–the expensive and unscrupulous kind the cult copiously employs–as well as all shady kinds of scientology operatives were NEVER able to give ANY evidence of her alleged dishonesty. They tried in 19 law suits in every major country in the English-speaking world and they got–ZILCH! In fact, numerous books have appeared since then that make the same (and often even more damaging) allegations. And how many times has the cult prevailed? NOT ONCE!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 7, 2015 at 7:50 pm

            Would you allow that there are are ANY individuals who themselves harmed others despite having survived The Holocaust?

          • O

            One HumanDec 8, 2015 at 6:53 am

            Perhaps, but I’m sick of elle pulling $#!* out of her ass to slam Paulette Cooper.
            While I know that either of you reading “The Unbreakable Miss Lovely” is highly unlikely, it is a fine example of the human spirit overcoming incredible hardships.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 8, 2015 at 2:54 pm

            MANY people who are known to have been victims of atrocities have gone on to be perpetrators, sometimes doing less harm and sometimes more harm to others than was done to them. I’m sure if you were to reflect on it for a moment you would remember knowing that before, because it is a global phenomenon.

            I don’t consider a soul overcoming hardship to be an inspiration. To me what matters is what kind of qualities a person develops as a result of overcoming hardship. I believe that what is and ought to be inspiring to all is when a soul refuses to become tarnished as a result of bad actions against it.

            Back to Ms. Cooper. You are right that I have not read the book you mention in its entirety. But I have read enough to know that it is not a book either about an individual who overcame hardship or an individual who did so by becoming a greater person for it. It DOES NOT PROFESS TO BE such a book. (Read the Forward if you doubt my recollection on this point.) And the stories around the book reflect the same – Cooper is depicted as someone who has overcome many obstacles in the way of her goals but never as a woman who endured privation or hardship. Nor is it denied in the book you mention that the years of ideological confrontation between Cooper and the Church of Scientology took place as a direct result of her desire to initiate them.

            Elle and I are among those whose activities are dealt with in this book. When you say that elle is pulling the things she believes out of her ass you are letting it be known in no uncertain terms that you are not in the least interested in finding out what she has to say about her own reality although she is the one being memorialized. You are consciously avoiding the possibility of ascertaining the other side and in so doing you are killing the personality of the other AS WELL AS YOUR OWN. You are not thinking of her words as the extension of a human soul, instead you are thinking of them from the standpoint of an object. This is a negative way for you to go in the personal history of me and you.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 8, 2015 at 5:55 pm

            “Ideological confrontation?” Usually, that means an exchange of ideas. It does NOT mean trying to ruin someone, framing them for a serious crime, posting flyers about them alleging all kinds of filth, etc. All of thees things were done to Cooper by the cult.

          • E

            elleDec 8, 2015 at 6:22 pm

            You grossly exaggerate, and whatever did happen, or was thought about doing, was 40 years ago. Since, we just cackle outside her door but she never sees us. Get over yourself, Pee Cooper.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 8, 2015 at 6:48 pm

            Not a single one of the atrocities that scientology directed at Cooper was exaggerated. Some of them were 40 years ago, some of them much more recent. But more revealing, the cult tries to justify them to this day. There has never been ANY admission of wrong or culpability. And YOU are part of that evil! Just read your own posts.

            But there are plenty of other recent similar activities to point to. “Squirrel busters” terrorizing an entire neighborhood for 200 days. Miscavige using tax-exempted “donations” (more like “forceful extractions”) at $10k a week to send heavily armed thugs after his own father. Telling them to “let him die” should they see this almost 80 year old man in a medical emergency.

            The cult has not changed its mind, has not reformed, is no better today than 40 years ago.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 8, 2015 at 7:26 pm

            Awwwww poor baby.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 12:07 am

            It is telling that you can be so cavalier about a person having been targeted with so much harassment, including a slew of illegal activities–as long as this occurred in the “best interests” of the scientology cult. Says a lot about how that “church” thinks and operates. Also says a lot about how it affects its “parishioners”–I don’t imagine you were this callous before falling in with these people.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 8, 2015 at 7:20 pm

            confrontation (noun) the act of confronting

            confront (verb) to face boldly, defiantly or antagonistically; to meet in hostility; to oppose

            (Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary)

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 8, 2015 at 8:25 pm

            As much as I think you talk a lot of nonsense at times, you are a bit more honest as than elle. I respect the fact that you admit that you haven’t read Cooper’s book. You say that you do not “consider a soul overcoming hardship to be an inspiration.” I disagree, but that is Okay because it is a personal opinion. “what is and ought to be inspiring to all is when a soul refuses to become tarnished as a result of bad actions against it.” Ms. Cooper was hounded for years by the church of Scientology for writing a book that church officials disliked. Despite being fair gamed Ms. Cooper never held any grudges, persevered through, and helped others. I encourage you to read about Ms Cooper yourself and may just be shocked to find out that she is not really such a bad person. She never hated Scientology, she just wrote what she felt was the truth and she was attacked viciously by the church for it. The least you can do is read for yourself what she wrote and then decide instead or relying upon someone else interpretation of the book.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 8, 2015 at 8:43 pm

            You do not know whether or not I read Cooper’s book. You are not my confidant.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 8, 2015 at 8:54 pm

            You just mentioned in your comment that you haven’t read it.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 8, 2015 at 8:59 pm

            What have you been smoking?

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 8, 2015 at 9:03 pm

            You cannot claim to have read a book if you only read a portion of it.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 8, 2015 at 9:09 pm

            Where is your Paranoid schizophrenic friend?

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 9, 2015 at 6:10 am

            Is that the one who whispered 411 in your ear about my familiarity with Cooper’s book? Wise up because that “friend” is lying to you.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 9, 2015 at 6:27 am

            You know the one I am talking about. Your friend who is allergic to truth. The one that claims to have been a part of every major Scientology event and have worked with several Scientology celebrities and know them personally.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 10:35 am

            What? You’ve been accused of actually having read a book that you are dismissing online? Outrageous!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 9, 2015 at 3:33 pm

            Did Franklin share with you some of that LSD laced wacky weed he’s been smoking?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 4:18 pm

            How is volcano-dude Xenu? Any luck with the body thetans yet? Still waiting for that “tech” to do something–anything? Still believe that Hubbard was a “civil engineer” as well as a “nuclear physicist?” How about the 12 million scientologists the cult claims? Any news on Hubbard’s return–Davey sure could use some help?

            Wacky weed? YOU of all people should NOT be going there!

          • S

            sundaygirlDec 9, 2015 at 4:21 pm

            What would have been polite and communicative is if you had cleared up the confusion about which book you were talking about. Instead of being childish and confrontational, you could’ve acted like an adult and just typed Ortega’s book’s name. I guess that’s too much to ask for though from a member of an “attack don’t defend” organization.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 9, 2015 at 4:26 pm

            You know exactly what you are doing.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 10:43 am

            Usually, you don’t have to be someone’s confidant to discuss a book. Usually, there’s this concept called “intellectual honesty” that demands that you only discuss books that you have actually read. Of course, that does not apply when “discussing” with scientology shills who are prohibited from reading certain books but mandated to savage them anyway. Poor things, they’re “flying blind,” and it shows!

            Scientology is an amazing “religion:” They offer a “Training Routine” on lying (Hubbard’s chief area of expertise) but NONE on honesty. Go figure!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 9, 2015 at 3:37 pm

            He did not issue a civilized invitation to discuss the previously unmentioned book. He simply relayed a message about it out of the blue. A message evidently voiced by his paranoid schizophrenic “friend” who whispered something in his ear about the Cooper’s book. So much for your “intellectual honesty.” But your new rumor based on the theory that I discussed Cooper’s book and then deleted all the textual evidence will be amusing so carry on.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 9, 2015 at 4:14 pm

            I did not say anything about the nature of his invitation. And YOU are one of the most ill-prepared people in this forum to be discussing “civility.” (Note: I did not say “the” most ill-prepared as there’s always your little friend elle to compete with for those “honors.”)

            As I said: Scientology is an amazing “religion:” They offer a “Training Routine” on lying (Hubbard’s chief area of expertise) but NONE on honesty. Go figure!

          • O

            One HumanDec 10, 2015 at 6:34 am

            I appreciate the thoughtful response.
            Indeed, what one does after their hardships is the proper measure of honorability.
            Among those that have impressed me in this regard are John Howard Griffin, the Bielski Brothers, and even Muhammad Ali.
            I certainly do not wish to diminish the personal experiences of you or elle, I in fact welcome you to share them, even more so as it may pertain to Paulette’s story or other areas you may feel deserve an alternate perspective.
            Hopefully we can continue to do so in a respectful and welcoming manner.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 10, 2015 at 8:28 am

            Do you believe in the right to confine information about his or her personal experiences to the purely private realm? And if so, to fortify that space against incursions from the outside?

            To be clear, there is no alternate perspective on my private space. Others either honor it or they do not.

          • O

            One HumanDec 10, 2015 at 8:35 am

            I accept that, I was merely suggesting that details that can comfortably be offered to refute or add dimension to accounts from others are more appreciated than simply disavowing them.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 10, 2015 at 10:34 am

            A helper actualizes his or her caritas (to chose a non-Scientology word) by actively working to fortify the venerated space all beings are entitled to by right. Efforts worthy of a helper are welcome and efforts unworthy of that status demand to be permanently abolished. If one cannot respond to this minimal standard of genuine respect in all human relations, all of one’s efforts to “find out” about the conditions of others will be cut off and rejected with more and more forcefulness as time goes on.

          • E

            elleDec 8, 2015 at 4:25 pm

            Oh, boo hoo for Pee Cooper. Saint Augustine of Hippo is an inspiration. CS. Lewis is an inspiration. Dr. Ben Carson, Justice Thomas, Louis Zamperini–these are inspirations, the human spirit overcoming incredible hardships.

            Maybe I missed something. I don’t see that Pee Cooper overcame incredible hardships. As IFF points out, that alone is not enough to be an inspiration. What did they become after they overcame hardships? Pee Cooper certainly eats Martin Luther King’s dust on that count.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 8, 2015 at 5:48 pm

            And all of these inspirations that you name wouldn’t sink to wiping their xxx with anything that Hubbard has written. I’d be curious what Augustine or CSL, lovers of truth that they were, would have to say about a liar and impostor such as Hubbard. Or wouldn’t it be fun to hear MLK speaking out about the human rights violations in the cult? I’m sure he would also “enjoy” your glibness about what was done to Jews in WW II.

          • E

            elleDec 8, 2015 at 6:24 pm

            I think they would understand very the religious nature of Scientology, and how the religious people are assassinated in every way possible by the forces of evil. So there.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 8, 2015 at 6:41 pm

            Assassinated? So here we go again with the drama.

            And if you think that they would indeed “understand very,” you are deluding yourself. To name just one, CS Lewis was a very astute thinker. He would have spotted a fraud like Hubbard a mile away. And you really think that MLK would have subscribed to the idea of equal rights for all–except the ones we don’t like? In that case, no atrocity is too severe?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 6, 2015 at 11:37 am

            I take your point, loud and clearly: You would have preferred it if the Nazis had taken care of this “Jewish problem.” But it is very bad form for you to advertise it this publicly. Even more people will be turned off of your hateful little cult!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 6, 2015 at 10:10 am

            I don’t know about it being either all luck or constituting her doing exactly nothing or that her father’s friend is likely the only one to deserve credit. True, she wasn’t an adult and others would undoubtedly be hearing an entirely different kind of story if she had been. Nevertheless, according to the information you now have about it (thanks to me), you now know that those events were part of her life and that she did survive Nazi rule even after having been incarcerated and marked out by them to die.

            But the entire idea that somebody deserves respect and admiration because of something horrible that happened to them is incorrect – I strongly believe in that sentiment. To assert that they are is to repeat demagogy and is highly disrespectful of everybody, including the person “annointed” in that way. You show her a thousand times more respect than the groveling sycophants around here because you take her words and deeds on their own merit. They are wrong and anti-virtuous because they try to use her to exploit the Nazi Shoah for selfish ends.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 6, 2015 at 12:11 pm

            The majority of people who respect and admire Ms. Cooper don’t do so because she managed to survive the holocaust. In fact, most people probably did not even know that about her until recently. And true enough, she obviously did not play an active role in her escape from Nazi rule.

            However, she stood up to a criminal cult and refused to wither under decades of attacks. She brought truth to the world that many were unaware of at the time, and encouraged others to follow in her footsteps. THAT is admirable in the extreme!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 6, 2015 at 12:35 pm

            With this kind of childish nonsense you ACTIVELY work to bury the truth about the victories of all the anti-fascists, including the military men and women of your own country who fought side by side with and shed their blood alongside the British, Soviets, French and others to defeat Nazi expansionism. You will claim ignorance (in part by blaming me and asking me to “prove” what I say about the history that EVERYBODY KNOWS) but that is NO EXCUSE. You certainly know you are repulsive to me.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 6, 2015 at 1:06 pm

            Too bad I did not say any of the things you are so valiantly refuting. That left you to set up your own strawman. And what a transparent one at that. So go ahead: Entertain yourself by being “repulsed” about what I did NOT say. “Childish nonsense” is an apt description of your own feeble tactics.

            It is equally telling that you have no defense for the atrocities committed against Ms. Cooper by your own cult. Then again, there are none!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 6, 2015 at 1:29 pm

            Oh yeah I forgot your “trump card” of “what I say about a phenomenon determines its being.”

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 6, 2015 at 1:34 pm

            Care to talk about the cult’s atrocities committed against Ms. Cooper? I didn’t think so…

            And so the transparent distraction continues. True to the cult’s motto: If you can’t dig yourself into a hole fast enough, get a bigger shovel…

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 6, 2015 at 1:36 pm

            Fascist.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 6, 2015 at 11:43 am

            I hope you donate to causes that rectify scientologist atrocities. There are plenty of those. Start with the atrocities against Ms. Cooper!

      • C

        Captain MustSavageDec 5, 2015 at 4:22 am

        How is psychology adversarial to religion in general? In what respect is psychology adversarial to Scientology in particular? What actions and behaviours has that profession engaged in that provides evidence of these assertions? Perhaps Scientology felt psychology was a competitor. I’ve seen no evidence that psychology knows Scientology exists.

        Perhaps you might be able to point out what the inaccuracies were in Paulettes book?

        Reply
  • P

    Paulette Cooper NobleDec 4, 2015 at 6:45 am

    Hey Elle, how’s the cackling inside your head going? You know, that little voice that tells you that you don’t really feel good/better despite those success story you wrote up (in fact you feel worse after your latest step up the Scientology ladder)… and that little voice in your head that tries to blot out their constant regging, demanding more and more money from you, and that little voice that asks why all the orgs (and ideal orgs) are half-empty and closing when they tell you Scientology is expanding, and that little voice in your head that says that maybe you ought to go to the Internet and read some entheta (try tonyortega.org each day) because it isn’t right that someone is telling you that you can’t think for yourself.

    This is my last post to you because you, like Scientology courses, are a waste of time. One day you’ll get out (if you’re lucky) and realize the whole world was right and you were wrong. Hopefully, it won’t be too late by then. And oh yes, drop an e-mail to [email protected]; she’s good at getting deluded Scientology shills out. You can ask her questions — unlike what you can do with Scientology — and she’ll give you honest answers — unlike what Scientology will do to you.

    Reply
    • E

      elleDec 4, 2015 at 7:00 am

      Tory McPoo offeres nothing. Shrill lunatic.
      Another problem you have is telling me that I can’t believe my own eyes, or my own experiences. Your extreme bias and how it benefits you is the prism through which you see everything. Par for the course, you insult and ridicule me, my life, my wins. If you think your camp offers anything attractive, uplifting, upbeat to me, you are dead wrong.

      You deal with you immortal soul the way you want, and I’ll deal with mine.

      PS That psych inval and eval is wasted on me because it’s evil.

      Reply
      • B

        Ben FranklinDec 4, 2015 at 7:29 am

        You live in a bubble and the only things you hear and see are Hubbard’s nonsense. That is why everyone you are coming across is telling you that you are insane, and you somehow think you are normal. You are insane. You are a raging cult lunatic. Parroting Hubbard’s fictional nonsense that has no basis in science or logic.

        Reply
      • D

        Dead SisterDec 4, 2015 at 8:11 am

        You certainly make the case for CoS bringing stability and happiness to people, elle. Now, tell us about Xenu. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/eaaec0a1c6d90fc515f9fc24b0b4945a650711f62d077978d44c91121588f628.jpg

        Reply
      • S

        Sergeant PepperDec 4, 2015 at 3:00 pm

        Tory Christman is shrill? LOL. Please call your mother, elle.

        Reply
        • E

          elleDec 4, 2015 at 3:20 pm

          Guess you did not see her harassing Aletha. It was interesting to see her give a visual to illustrate her verbal and textual screed.

          Reply
          • S

            Sergeant PepperDec 4, 2015 at 6:12 pm

            Have you seen the video of church executives Marc Yager, Dave Bloomberg, and Jenny Linson Devocht harassing Marty Rathbun? That’s what I call shrill. Such ecclesiastical behavior! Google “Marty at LAX”. NSFW warning, vulgar expletives from the “church” representatives.

    • E

      elleDec 4, 2015 at 4:04 pm

      Ms. Cooper, sorry you had to skedaddle so quickly. Perhaps you could provide me with some information I’ve asked your fan club to provide. Could you provide a copy of the certificate(s) showing that you completed any service at the Church? It’s been many years since I heard about that, or what motivated you to cross the threshold. What service(s) did you take and complete? I seem to recall an old interview of yours saying you went into the Church to get a story.

      Not only did no one provide a certificate(s) showing your service completion(s), the whole issue was dropped like a hot rock. But I think it is fair to ask for some small evidence that you actually participated in a service or two.

      Reply
      • B

        Bob CrouchDec 5, 2015 at 9:20 pm

        Someone asked about Hubbard’s certification as the nuclear physicist he claimed to be (I’d settle for certification that he passed his freshman year. Despite the lies the cult tells you, don’t try too hard to dig it up–he didn’t). As you put it, “the whole issue was dropped like a hot rock.” By you, no less!

        Reply
  • B

    Bob CrouchDec 3, 2015 at 4:01 pm

    It’s not like Cruise is exactly a “respected figure.” He is extremely bankable when it comes to light-weight entertainment. When it comes to actors of known intelligence, his name never comes up. In 30+ years, his name hasn’t been on the Academy’s radar. Whenever he decided to make himself his cult’s spokesman, his career and PR took a dive. Which is why he refuses to discuss his insane and odious cult now.

    Since your friends appreciate high-quality movies, perhaps the highly acclaimed “Going Clear” would make a great gift. They’ll learn why you can’t support the Cruise money machine in good conscience any more than a Michael Jackson sleep-over.

    Reply
    • I

      in fine fettleDec 3, 2015 at 8:01 pm

      Who else acknowledges these groups of “actors of known intelligence” to which you refer? That is certainly at the Academy Awards or the Screen Actor’s Guild or any other even semi-related organization that I can think of. It sounds like something that is not on anyone’s radar but your own.

      Reply
      • B

        Bob CrouchDec 3, 2015 at 8:22 pm

        No, it is certainly NOT an AA category. However, there are some actors who are often mentioned as being smart, insightful, astute, and other things along those lines. The simply have that kind of “reputation.” Sometimes, the kind of work they take on gives them that as well. I have yet to hear Cruise’s name being mentioned in such a context–anywhere.

        You don’t listen to the guy being interviewed and go, “Wow, what a brilliant man. How smart and well-informed.” My point is that just because an actor is very bankable, that does not make them particularly expert at anything, other than pulling in money. Their choice of cult may still be PLAIN DUMB! It certainly shouldn’t be imitated.

        Reply
        • I

          in fine fettleDec 3, 2015 at 8:36 pm

          Name an actor who is often mentioned as being smart, insightful or astute. Then clarify where this occurred and who the commentator was.

          You are again trying to pass off your personal opinion as well-thought-of by others and therefore worth more than it’s worth. It’s all well and good to believe that Cruise isn’t “expert” at his profession, but to try to pass that off as a consensus opinion is ludicrous.

          Reply
          • R

            Robert EckertDec 4, 2015 at 9:23 pm

            Daniel Day-Lewis. Benedict Cumberbatch. George Clooney. Matt Damon. Tom Hanks.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 5, 2015 at 1:03 pm

            Seems like you’re struggling to remember a story about somebody saying something about these people you’ve mentioned. Here’s a popular technique. Ask yourself “Who? What? When? Where? Why?” and then maybe the flow will come back to you.

          • R

            Robert EckertDec 5, 2015 at 5:03 pm

            You could look for yourself to see what thoughts those actors have expressed and how others have engaged with them.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 5, 2015 at 6:50 pm

            Seven random projects chosen by Robert Eckert. Sure, why not? I’ll put that on my bucket list.

          • R

            Robert EckertDec 5, 2015 at 6:56 pm

            You asked for actors who are considered more intelligent than Tom Cruise. I listed some just off the top of my head. I have heard all of those speak on serious subjects. I have never heard Tom Cruise speak on any serious topic except to make an ass of himself, as in the Matt Lauer interview or the turtleneck sweater video.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 6, 2015 at 10:55 am

            So the identity of the person who thinks Cruise is unintelligent is YOU. Thank you for finally making your point in answer to my inquiry.

          • R

            Robert EckertDec 6, 2015 at 11:30 am

            Not me only: if you had more of a capacity to read for comprehension you would find that I said nothing of the kind. If you wish to find examples of statements they have made and other people reacting to them, you are welcome to Google. You think that I have some obligation to spoon-feed you, which only serves to show the limits of your own intelligence.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 6, 2015 at 11:34 am

            I don’t think you even know what it is you want me to eat much less would you be able to motive me to try harder on your behalf to find out. Nevertheless this little tangential exchange has been quite amusing. Chau.

          • R

            Robert EckertDec 6, 2015 at 11:59 am

            “I don’t think you even know what it is you want me to eat” WTF??? I don’t actually have any concern about what you do or do not eat. Like some of your other strange utterances, this one leaves me wondering what in the world you think you read in my post and what thought processes happen in your head.

            “much less would you be able to motive me to try harder on your behalf to find out” This clause does not even parse. Unlike the beginning of the sentence, which at least said something even if that was puzzling, this word salad fails even to say something.

            “Chau” You probably mean “ciao”, an Italian greeting used either for hello or goodbye. Spelling, like clarity of thought, is something Scientologists fail to learn in their “communications” courses.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 6, 2015 at 12:38 pm

            You are TOO amusing! Keep ’em coming. When I’ve got the time I will certainly read…although just now I think I’ll go get myself a cup of tea with a spoonful of sugar in it.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 6, 2015 at 12:00 pm

            It is pretty difficult to watch Cruise’s exchange with Matt Lauer or his maniacal scientology promo (claiming that only scientologists are prepared to help at the scene of an accident) and conclude that this guy has all the fries it takes for a happy meal! Those utterances go a long ways toward casting doubts on Cruise’s intelligence!

        • I

          in fine fettleDec 3, 2015 at 9:04 pm

          Wow that’s a radical revision of your original comment. You must have read my reply and taken it to heart somewhat.

          Incidentally, my personal impression based on my own experience and that of friends and colleagues doesn’t jive with the idea that people imitate famous people based on the model’s IQ. I think that what inspires people to imitate others is much more varied than that and tends to center on things like “charisma” and other aspects of the person’s lifestyle.

          (P.S. I have no idea what Cruise’s IQ is, nor do I care.)

          Reply
          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 4, 2015 at 10:33 am

            No it’s not. Maybe you just didn’t read my first post or are just beginning to catch on. No real difference between the two posts

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 12:28 pm

            Right, that’s exactly what happened. Wink, wink.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 4, 2015 at 10:39 am

            I agree with you there. Like Cruise or not. Think of him as charismatic or not. But none of that is a reason to think of him as an expert at anything, other than filling cinema seats. I certainly wouldn’t want to take marital, political, medical, religious or “religious” advice from him.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 2:12 pm

            Yeah, I didn’t say any of those things so it’s hard to imagine you agreeing with me about them. But I do definitely agree with what I take to be your basic sentiment that people shouldn’t substitute their desire to emulate others for decisions based on what works for them.

  • E

    elleDec 3, 2015 at 1:25 pm

    I see you are compensating, over compensating, for your short comings. Cruise is an international mega star–did you miss that? Even your 2 friends who want his MI 5 movie get it. You should dump them as friends as they don’t see eye to eye with you.
    Fact–nothing tarnishes Cruise’s star power. And he credits Scientology for his success.

    Reply
    • O

      One HumanDec 3, 2015 at 3:00 pm

      But his star power is fading, and he will likely never become renowned for his acting ability.

      Reply
      • I

        in fine fettleDec 3, 2015 at 11:47 pm

        Your predictions about the future are baseless and he is already renowned for his acting ability.

        Here’s a list of awards he’s either won or “only” been nominated for.

        http://www.famousfix.com/topic/tom-cruise/awards

        Reply
        • E

          elleDec 4, 2015 at 7:06 am

          I had no idea. Incredible!
          Add to that the stats on highest paid, world famous and all that–he can’t be beat.

          Reply
          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 4, 2015 at 1:29 pm

            I’m sure the high pay comes in handy when joining a cult known for its unvarnished greed in taking advantage of its steeple. Hubbard made it abundantly clear that it was about nothing but the money. Too bad for him that his career and reputation take a hit every time he brings up the cult. Seems like he finally learned his lesson.

            Miscavige is afraid of the press, Cruise prohibits them from mentioning the cult and the ways its true face has been exposed. The price of drinking the Kool Aide.

        • O

          One HumanDec 4, 2015 at 7:16 am

          Among the list, the long ago Academy Award and BAFTA nominations are notable, but the rest are mostly for popularity, which he has enjoyed for a long time.
          I simply find it unlikely that he will be considered exceptional for his ability to be versatile or to really absorb a role with depth. Meryl Streep, John Hurt, Ben Kingsley, and many more from the last century, are in an entirely higher caliber of performances.

          Reply
          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 12:18 pm

            I will agree with your idea of creating a comparison between Cruise’s prize portfolio and that of the other prospective gold medalists. But it is by fiat that only one can win a single trophy at a time. It seems like you have built a mental hierarchy (metaphorically speaking), where the upper echelons win recognition and below that level there are no calibration marks. As a result you are overlooking all but a few aspects of the craft and contriving that a three-time Academy Award nominee is circa zero in terms of his brilliance.

          • O

            One HumanDec 4, 2015 at 12:40 pm

            No mental hierarchy necessary, I simply can’t stand Tom Cruise, and will express my opinions as respectfully as possible.
            I’ll add, his brilliance is quickly fading.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 12:56 pm

            Gotcha. Now that’s what I like – putting it straight instead of blending one’s feelings about an individual with attempts at objective judgement of their performance.

            But what I still don’t get is that if you can’t stand him then why do you agree to assign the quality of brilliance to him in the first place?

          • O

            One HumanDec 4, 2015 at 1:06 pm

            I can respect a person’s work and dislike their off-screen personality. I was never impressed with his early works, but did enjoy ‘Rain Man’ and ‘Born On The Fourth of July’.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 1:36 pm

            By all means. Feel free and don’t sell yourself short.

            So even some of his biggest detractors such as yourself have been known, on more than one occassion, to credit him with a great performance as an actor. That’s pretty impressive.

            The main reason I have avoided the vast majority of his movies is that they never seem to touch on themes that interest me. The only one that I know of that did was “The Outsiders” which was based on a book I absolutely loved as a child. The more I hear what you have to say though, the more I am convinced I need to give some more of his movies a try despite my not really being a member of the target audience.

          • O

            One HumanDec 4, 2015 at 1:52 pm

            That’s just it for me, most of the “popular” movies just don’t interest me ( ‘Fast & Furious, ‘Transformers’, etc.).
            Agreed, S. E. Hinton books were great!
            I am a huge movie junkie. Classics, offbeat, documentaries…I’m always finding something unexpectedly interesting.

          • E

            elleDec 4, 2015 at 4:11 pm

            Edge of Tomorrow turned out to be a fan favorite. It didn’t get a great start as I (and others) thought it was a Sci Fi Ground Hog Day. meh. But my husband likes the genre, and likes the sub-genre. I ended up enjoying it greatly. That seems to be what happened with many viewers and so word of mouth carried it to an ever bigger audience that found it very entertaining. It now has a bit of a cult status among Cruise fans.

            I got a kick out of War of the Worlds. Nice effects. Thought Cruise did a great job. It also shows a father redeeming himself, a son who … never mind, don’t want to spoil that little piece. I thought it was a pretty good family show.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 4:45 pm

            Great. As an indirect result of this article I am becoming much more “open minded” (excuse me while I clear my throat) about Tom Cruise movies. I’ll put War of the Worlds near the top of my “to watch” list now too- primarily because I want to be more like you. 😉

          • E

            elleDec 4, 2015 at 8:09 pm

            hahaha–I will admit that because I enjoy Cruise on screen, it makes the movie more enjoyable. Some other star may not have made the movie as good as he can make it. But it that genre is not your cup of tea, skip it. Of course, then you will never be like me 😉

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 8:22 pm

            lol, Actually, it was your description made it sound like a candidate for my list. But you know me. Like you, my brain is washed and so I can’t respect or listen to “my own thoughts” before taking the path of an apostate.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 4, 2015 at 10:20 pm

            Or like the Academy who has skipped all of his genres for his entire career.

          • R

            Robert EckertDec 4, 2015 at 9:26 pm

            The effects in War of the Worlds were due to Spielberg. I liked a lot about that movie, but not Cruise particularly. Tim Robbins in a brief role and the relatively unknown Justin Chatwin as the son both outacted Tommy.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 4, 2015 at 1:57 pm

            There are artists, like the ones you mentioned, and then there are commercially highly successful entertainers. Few people would be confused as to which category Cruise belongs in. And if they are, no amount of explanation will help.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 2:07 pm

            So much for your claim that the Academy Award business means something to you.

    • B

      Bob CrouchDec 3, 2015 at 3:33 pm

      Dump them? Why communicate (the “universal solvent” according to your cult founder), if you can “disconnect” instead.

      Reply
    • A

      Avid MiskaridgeDec 3, 2015 at 11:16 pm

      Yes Elle, compensation, overcompensation and undercompensation are all psychological constructs used by individuals to shelter themselves. Your use of psychology concepts to aid your point of view is commendable.

      Reply
  • I

    in fine fettleDec 3, 2015 at 12:48 pm

    Tom Cruise is already a respected star so your advice is as overdrawn as it is misplaced. Oh well – “You do you” so stop ignoring your involvement in what you and you do.

    Reply
  • F

    Frodis73Dec 2, 2015 at 2:57 pm

    Great article! All sci celebs should be boycotted…the list isn’t as long as it used to be, but there are many. Laura Prepon, Danny and Chris Masterson, Jenna Elfman, Kirstie Alley, John Travoltra, Greta Van Sustern, Nancy Cartwright, Beck, Erika Christianson, Elizabeth Moss…I know I am forgetting some, but boycott all of them for supporting child abuse, child labor, forced abortions, disconnection, forced labor, etc.

    Reply
  • L

    LiberatedDec 2, 2015 at 2:25 pm

    Loved the cyanide in the cheek part. Great article!

    Reply
  • T

    TheHoleDoesNotExistDec 2, 2015 at 10:55 am

    Tom Cruise has supported an organization that acts like a mixture of the mafia, North Korea and Scams R’ Us. No one joins an abusive cult. People get suckered in by false and misleading blah blah that scientology’s golden boy, Cruise, spits out for decades now. And yet he takes no responsibility whatsoever for luring them in.

    Tens of thousands of former members, myself included, escaped before the worst that could happen happened. I lived to talk about it, to warn others. Tom never asks where did 90% of the scientologists go? Tom never cares. Scientology routinely breaks human beings down, slowly, piece by piece, financially, physically, mentally, and in every other way that you can possible destroy another person’s life. Paulette Cooper mentioned John Travolta. He currently promotes Narconon, Scientology’s faux drug rehab scam. I’ve lost count of the lawsuits piling up over the last 3 years or the number of mothers and fathers who cry themselves to sleep after their son or daughter died in one of them. John does not weep for them or ask about them either.

    There is no more excuse of “I didn’t know” or “just following orders”. All you have to do is ask Google and the truth pops up in 5 seconds. Thousands now have told their stories of unbelievable horror. Thousands ask how this can still happen in the USA. But not Tom or Cruise. In over 40 years, they haven’t asked about a single one of “Scientology Disappered”.

    Reply
    • P

      pluvoDec 2, 2015 at 11:30 am

      When one googles “Former_Church_of_Scientology_members_who_have_spoken_out” there is a list with over 2600 ex members of the Church of Scientology who have spoken out (with there real names). They have been (devoted) members for many years and even decades.

      Reply
      • C

        Captain MustSavageDec 2, 2015 at 11:37 am

        That figure makes a complete farce of scientologys claim that there are only a handful of critics out there.

        Reply
  • M

    MaryDec 2, 2015 at 8:24 am

    Thank you. You are right. Cruise should be held accountable. He knows a good part about the abuses first hand. I lost my son because I made it my business to find out the truth about the church of scientology and its leader david miscavige.

    Reply
  • P

    PRenaudDec 2, 2015 at 4:50 am

    That guy has a “ENORMOUS” personality problem to take care of, he will have to step down that ladder where he thinks he’s “king shit of turd island” and realize he’s nothing more than any other human being. Most of my family, my friends, my neighbors, my colleagues at work have decided that they are not longer supporting that nitwit’s acting career.

    Reply
  • P

    Paulette Cooper NobleDec 2, 2015 at 4:14 am

    Thank you for this article and letting people know that seeing Tom Cruise’s movies helps bring money to Scientology. Add John Travolta (Revolta) to the list. Although he isn’t nearly as high in Scientology as Cruise, he too has done the world a great disservice by speaking up for Scientology and luring unsuspecting people in.
    Paulette Cooper, author of “The Scandal of Scientology”

    Reply
    • O

      One HumanDec 2, 2015 at 10:32 am

      Bless you Paulette, you warned the world early on.
      Thank you for never giving up.

      Reply
    • E

      elleDec 3, 2015 at 1:29 pm

      But you hear imaginary Scientologists cackling outside your door. And you claim they sneak into your home, and although you never see them and they don’t take anything, they leave something behind, like a glove, to let you know they have been there. Really, now, don’t you think that is a bit nutty? Or, maybe you will stoop to anything to manufacture “proof” that Scientologist give a hoot about you.

      Reply
      • P

        Paulette Cooper NobleDec 3, 2015 at 2:28 pm

        Yes, indeed, Scientology does these type of things — and much much worse. For decades. Against all enemies, which happily I am no longer. If you would quit the “Church” and open up your eyes — read tonyortega.org each day — you’d realize who’s the nutty one. (And no they don’t give a hoot about me any more; happily they have far more important things to worry about.)

        Reply
        • B

          Bob CrouchDec 3, 2015 at 3:29 pm

          It’s extremely generous of you to take the time to honor one of these hate-filled nameless cult shills with your reply. You are a class act and a heroine to many of us!

          Reply
          • I

            in fine fettleDec 3, 2015 at 8:22 pm

            What are you, a medieval court jester?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 3, 2015 at 8:49 pm

            According to one of Hubbard’s half-baked opinions, the fact that you think so must make it so.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 3, 2015 at 8:55 pm

            So you agree with my characterization of you?

          • E

            elleDec 4, 2015 at 5:21 am

            I agree with you. Like a court jester, he bounces all over the place, injects himself everywhere, garish, mugging and grimacing. I can really see it.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 4, 2015 at 1:29 pm

            Of course, you agree. You are the genius who came up with this brain storm. “What can I call him to confront and shatter him? Let’s try jester.” Hubbard would be proud of you–and laugh about you behind your back

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 2:00 pm

            Yes and picture lady blue-blood momentarily deigning to enter the scene and immediately getting heckled by the riff raff. Groucher immediately kneels (not quite a full kowtow) and positions himself before her ladyship, before ingratiating himself as follows: “It’s extremely generous of you to take the time to honor one of these hate-filled nameless cult shills with your reply. You are a class act and a heroine to many of us!” This oration he delivers in full before again tipping his head to the floor and then scurrying back to his assigned position. There he quickly resumes his standard antics – including clumsy cartwheels off the wall and snorting while firebreathing.

          • E

            elleDec 4, 2015 at 3:18 pm

            And in the midst of all that, he tried to lick her to death.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 4:10 pm

            I sincerely doubt that lady blue-blood would allow herself to be seen being licked by a court jester. Any public attempt of that kind on his part would have earned him a sound thrashing and maybe even a premature discharge.

          • P

            Paulette Cooper NobleDec 3, 2015 at 8:29 pm

            Thanks… I’m sure Scientology told Elle what to say ….It’s sad. Perhaps one day she’ll start thinking on her own — and might then leave!

          • E

            elleDec 4, 2015 at 5:22 am

            That’s a problem with you. You are sure of so much that isn’t true. Like the cackling outside your door.

          • J

            Jack99Dec 4, 2015 at 5:43 am

            Have you ever said anything you didn’t read on scientologymyths or in statements by Pouw or the church? Have you ever contradicted anything the church has said?

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 4, 2015 at 10:06 pm

            Well, your cackling is quite real and rather repetitive.

          • C

            Captain MustSavageDec 5, 2015 at 3:37 am

            “You are so sure of so much that isn’t true.”
            This from someone who believes that gamma rays go through walls but not human bodies because human bodies resist radiation ( All About Radiation. LRon Hubbard); from someone who believes that the human jaw evolved from the hinges of a clam (A History of Man. L Ron Hubbard); and from someone who believes that space DC8’s dropped frozen aliens into Hawaiian volcanoes that didn’t exist at the time (OT III Wall of Fire). Just a tiny selection of non scientific nonsense that you buy into because you choose to believe without question every single thing ‘Source’, a comprehensively debunked fantasist, made up. Your’re the one who is ‘sure of so much that isn’t true’. It’s sad and creepy to see the cult mindset in action.

        • E

          elleDec 3, 2015 at 4:08 pm

          And yet you hear cackling outside your door? It behooves you to fabricate a Scientologist lurking in every shadow, and quiver in mock fright. No one has cared wit about you for a very very very long time.

          Reply
          • I

            in fine fettleDec 3, 2015 at 10:39 pm

            Oh, poor elle. It looks as if you’ve been diagnosed by Ms.Noble as an empty vessel who channels the views of your superiors instead of “thinking on your own.”

          • A

            Avid MiskaridgeDec 3, 2015 at 11:06 pm

            Poor Elle is psychologically projecting herself onto others and continues with her cognitive dissonance. Her feelings of persecution are very real to her because she only knows how to attack; as she herself has likely been attacked and abused by her own cohort and others who don’t share in her delusion. Elle appears to hold a lot of ideological opinions and likely demonstrates passive aggressive to full blown aggressive behavior when challenged.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 3, 2015 at 11:14 pm

            psychobabble

          • A

            Avid MiskaridgeDec 3, 2015 at 11:17 pm

            Lol guilty.

          • V

            vicariousthrillDec 5, 2015 at 6:25 am

            Read Hubbard’s “affirmations”. You would be surprised.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 5, 2015 at 10:25 am

            Oh, so you believe that Avid Miskaridge was quoting LRH then?

          • J

            Jack99Dec 4, 2015 at 12:17 am

            If I had a nickel for every time elle did some thinking of her own, I’d have… no nickels. And Paulette has more class than elle has in her keyboard tapping little finger.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 12:33 am

            [If I had a nickel for every time elle did some thinking of her own, I’d have… no nickels. And Paulette has more class than elle has in her keyboard tapping little finger.]

            Okay, but not more class than elle has in two of her keyboard tapping little fingers.

          • J

            Jack99Dec 4, 2015 at 1:00 am

            Elle does a lot of keyboard tapping, that’s true. I’m not sure what good she thinks she does. Is her goal to piss off scientology critics, or is it to be an ambassador for the church of scientology? If 1: Yes, she’s not completely without talent. If 2: No way, Jose.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 6:18 pm

            Wow, elle must really pack a punch with fingertips as loaded as all that. Not that surpassing the “class” level of Cooper in <2 of elle's dedos is really that big of a feat.

            But you still haven't picked up on the significance of your statement have you. I've been giving you so much credit for playing well with the cards you find yourself holding, but now I'm beginning to think the phrase "I've seen better heads on nickel tap beers" might be the best judgement of you after witnessing the latest jewels unearthed from your reactive mind.

          • J

            Jack99Dec 4, 2015 at 10:37 pm

            My active mind is happy to disappoint you, iff. The question remains, though. If you think you and elle are doing a good job representing the church to people outside of your little bubble, well, good luck to the both of you.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 5, 2015 at 12:50 pm

            I’m sorry that is still a question for you Jack99. Although it seems highly likely that you are not pleased with how things are being represented to you, you don’t seem to be able to bring your thought process about that to a head. There isn’t much more I can do to help you with that. It’s on you and no one else can control such inward processes on your behalf.

            (P.S. No sweat, your active brain hasn’t been a disappointment. Out of curiosity, have you or anyone else ever given it a proper name? On a scale of 1-10 how would you rate the action had by Mr. Active in the last week? Have you and he been happy?)

          • J

            Jack99Dec 5, 2015 at 9:43 pm

            How about 7/10? That’s probably laughable to you scientologists who are 10/10 24/7. The thing is, iff, you and elle are doing such a good job showing the true face of the church, that my presence here isn’t really needed. I’ve enjoyed sparring with you, iff. Take care.

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 6, 2015 at 10:32 am

            This particular version of a Scientologist is much more like 36-24-36. But since you’ve got to hit the road ________ let me first just say “thanks for the compliment” and “chau.”

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 6, 2015 at 12:05 pm

            Or the “Miscavige version:” 4’13”–2.5”

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 4, 2015 at 5:20 am

            Elle lives by Hubbard’s rules. Elle Cannot say or do anything not approved by the church of Scientology and remain in good standing. That’s a fact. She can’t think on her own because she is totally brainwashed.

          • E

            elleDec 4, 2015 at 5:23 am

            Bob, the court jester.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 4, 2015 at 5:26 am

            You are not only dumb and deaf, you are blind too.

          • B

            Bob CrouchDec 4, 2015 at 1:29 pm

            What a wit you aren’t!

          • I

            in fine fettleDec 4, 2015 at 4:58 pm

            You have invested a lot of energy into that belief – you repeat it often.

          • B

            Ben FranklinDec 4, 2015 at 7:02 pm

            Yes I do very often, for brainwashed folks like you.

          • E

            elleDec 5, 2015 at 7:46 am

            Ben, you have no facts. You have been brainwashed by Ortega.