It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Church of Scientology is using a new tactic to deflect criticism

page: 1
13

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   
This is really disturbing to me.

I read reddit, and every so often submissions about the CoS make the front page. I have noticed a disturbing trend in the comments to these submissions.

After a damning initial link/post about the abuses and crimes of Scientology, a large number of comments will be made saying something to the effect of:

"All religions are bogus, why would you concentrate on Scientology only? Scientology isn't worse than other religions, it's just newer and more modern, so it's easier to see it for what it is. Christianity/Islam is way more powerful, and thus more deserving of your attention/criticism."

There are numerous examples of this, I will provide a few, but I don't want to make it seem as though my observation is dependent only on a few data points. Check it out for yourself. Go to reddit, or digg, or any link-submitting website and look at the comments posted to threads about the CoS.


I am convinced that this is a campaign by the CoS to water down or deflect criticism of their cult by redirecting it towards other, more "mainstream" religions. It is subtle and insidious, and very well executed.

The people making these posts sound genuinely abhorred by all religious abuses, but they utterly disregard and even steer people away from the fact that Scientology is leaps and bounds more evil, exploitative, and dangerous than any other "religious" organization.

I don't have the time to document this fully, but I feel it is very disturbing, and I hope that the ATS community can help me get to the bottom of it.

Here are a few examples of this:



www.esquire.com...

www.npr.org...

And here is one redditor's comment on his own observation that Scientology seeks to defend itself by unfairly comparing itself to other religions:

www.reddit.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.reddit.com...


And to anyone who fails to see the difference between the CoS and other religions, I would mention that the Christian and Muslim religions together operate more schools, orphanages, soup kitchens, and charity groups worldwide than any single government in the world. Whatever their failings, whatever evil people might use their doctrines to accomplish, these organizations remain magnets for altruistic people, and powerful forces for goodness and compassion in the world.

Scientology does hardly anything to make the world a better place, any more than the mafia or any other criminal organization. And I openly challenge anyone reading this to offer me evidence that the CoS has a comparable humanitarian record to today's mainstream churches, whether Islamic or Christian.

I doubt anyone would accept such a challenge, and it is precisely for that reason that I question the validity and forthrightness of comments on social networking sights comparing the CoS to mainstream religions.

This may not be the biggest conspiracy in the world of religions, but it is certainly one deserving of attention. The Church of Scientology is actively trolling social networking sights to deflect anger away from their own criminal organization and towards "religion" as a whole.

This is a conspiracy, and one we would do well to expose.





edit on 9-2-2011 by RedBird because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-2-2011 by RedBird because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-2-2011 by RedBird because: My links keep getting screwed up. Not sure why, They were fine when I first posted them. I am working to resolve the problem.

edit on 9-2-2011 by RedBird because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Personally, I think they almost have a point, in a way. Although, using x's actions to vindicate yours is wrong; two wrongs don't make a right, that I do not dispute. I don't hold a high opinion of scientology, and yes, perhaps they do do very little in terms of philanthropy- I will not argue with you there. However, though Christianity and Islam do carry out regular positive actions, and far more, even proportionally, than scientology, there has also been exponentially more murders in the name of Allah, or God, than there has been in the name of Xenu.

Though it's slightly off-topic, I'd also like to add, on a few TV channels, over the past few months, I noticed a particular "pseudo emotionally deep" advert, if you know what I mean- come out with a few cliches about how beautiful the world is, how amazing everything we have created is- and low and behold, at the end of the advert, it reveals the advert is for scientology. That creeped me out a little, you basically never see religious advertising in the UK, and scientology is very rarely mentioned. I did not understand the purpose of the advert, it was so off-topic in relation to scientology, and offered no selling points, or information, at all.
edit on 9-2-2011 by ScepticalBeliever because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 05:59 PM
link   
This is blatent anti-xenutism
. But seriously, the parallels in tactics between the xenuphiles and the israeliphiles, well it's almost as if they are all reading the same handbook. Or are they?

Maybe interesting, maybe not



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedBird
This is really disturbing to me.

I read reddit, and every so often submissions about the CoS make the front page. I have noticed a disturbing trend in the comments to these submissions.

After a damning initial link/post about the abuses and crimes of Scientology, a large number of comments will be made saying something to the effect of:

"All religions are bogus, why would you concentrate on Scientology only? Scientology isn't worse than other religions, it's just newer and more modern, so it's easier to see it for what it is. Christianity/Islam is way more powerful, and thus more deserving of your attention/criticism."


This is "exactly" my position also. The two most dangerous religions in the world are Christianity and Islam, each with 100's of millions of devotees, some who are in control of nation states, armies and nuclear weapons.

I have written numerous anti-Scientology essays over the years and it is clearly a malevolent religious cult, however I recently had posts removed from the Anonymous (Project Chanology) discussion board for making exactly the points that you mention above; that Scientology is nowhere near the major threat to humankind that Islam and Christianity are, nor does Scientology have a long history of genocide and Holy War. Further the "anti-Scientologists" seem all too willing to recruit everyone and anyone for their private anti-Scientology campaign, including evangelical Christians.

I should point out that many anti-Scientologists are "not" anti-cultists / anti-religionists; on the contrary many are persons who merely have a personal vendetta against Scientology, and many of them, including the "Freezone" crowd still use Hubbard's auditing and belief system..

Consider


"Scientology is the only specific (cure) for radiation (atomic bomb) burns."
L. Ron Hubbard, "All About Radiation (1952)" p. 109

"Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wanted to make a million dollars, the best way to do it would be start his own religion." L. Ron Hubbard


Clearly Scientology preys on the sick, the vulnerable and psychologically fragile, with pseudo-scientific claims and sells them alleged "spiritual enlightenment" for vast sums of money or a life of slavery in the Neofascist paramilitary, the "Sea Org."

However before we all start ridiculing the Scientologists and their belief that we are all possessed by millions "thetans (spirits)" who were subjected to genocide 75 million years ago by Lord Xenu, consider for the moment some of the equally ridiculous Christian beliefs of the proponents of the multi-billion dollar Jesus business.



Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." Mark 16





And Jesus answered and said to them, "Truly I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, `Be taken up and cast into the sea,' it will happen. "And all things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive." (Matthew 21:21-22)


Unfortunately this practice of claiming to carry out exorcisms and miracle healings is a multi-billion dollar business far in excess of the Scientology business.

I think that because people are conditioned to think of Christianity as an established and respectable faith, a person might laugh at the charlatan founder of Scientology's claims to cure cancer and radiation burns, but they might consider the charlatan founder of Christianity and his miraculous claims to be able to cure leprosy, blindness and human diseases in a different light, just as we consider the Christian charlatans with their multi-billion dollar Jesus business to be somehow more respectable and less dangerous and exploitative than Scientology.

The question is begged, "Why the double standard?"

Lux



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucifer777



"Scientology is the only specific (cure) for radiation (atomic bomb) burns."
L. Ron Hubbard, "All About Radiation (1952)" p. 109

"Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wanted to make a million dollars, the best way to do it would be start his own religion." L. Ron Hubbard


Are these actually the words of Hubbard or are they, as the link I provided might suggest, a fabrication designed to discredit the man. After all he is dead, and dead men cannot defend nor deny the words attributed to them.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 06:43 PM
link   
These are, emphatically, words spoken by the man. He was not a recluse. He was a science fiction writer and publicity fiend. He craved attention and it is no surprise that many of his "unfortunate" (in the eyes of his followers) words have been preserved.

As a response to the other posts so far, I would like to point out that although you have jumped on the anti-Christian/Islam bandwagon, you have yet to address my central challenge - has the CoS done any real good in the world? Have the religions of Islam and Christianity not?

I get the distinct impression that since this is a "conspiracy in religion" forum, there is a predilection for hating on the most 'well known' religions, simply because it is popular and easy.

Face the matter at hand. Is not Scientology orders of magnitude worse than other religions? How can it be argued otherwise? Present your evidence.

This is exactly what the Hubbard apologists on reddit are doing - muddying the waters by making the debate about something other than the CoS. We are talking about Scientology. ITS crimes, ITS depravity. There are no shortage of threads attacking Islam/Christianity - if you want to beat the dead horse, do it somewhere else.

Or are you the very same muddiers and apologists I am bringing to attention? I wonder...



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by quackers

Originally posted by Lucifer777



"Scientology is the only specific (cure) for radiation (atomic bomb) burns."
L. Ron Hubbard, "All About Radiation (1952)" p. 109

"Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous. If a man really wanted to make a million dollars, the best way to do it would be start his own religion." L. Ron Hubbard


Are these actually the words of Hubbard or are they, as the link I provided might suggest, a fabrication designed to discredit the man. After all he is dead, and dead men cannot defend nor deny the words attributed to them.


Both quotations are taken from en.wikiquote.org...

As with the religious charlatan Jesus, it is not necessary to "fabricate" quotes by L. Ron Hubbard to discredit him; there are endless lists of quotes which reveal him to be a psychotic madman.

See also my thread "L.Ron Hubbard: Messiah or Madman" on www.davidicke.com... and my mumerous responses on that thread, rather than just repeating myself on this forum.

Lux



Originally posted by RedBird

Face the matter at hand. Is not Scientology orders of magnitude worse than other religions? How can it be argued otherwise? Present your evidence.


Since the long and bloody history of Islam and Christianity covers many centuries of Holy Wars, tyranny, slavery, Inquisitions and genocides, etc., it would be more appropropriate for you to present an argument that Scientology is "worse" than these two major diseases of organised religion.



We are talking about Scientology. ITS crimes, ITS depravity. There are no shortage of threads attacking Islam/Christianity - if you want to beat the dead horse, do it somewhere else.

Or are you the very same muddiers and apologists I am bringing to attention? I wonder...


Scientology is a malevolent Neofascist cult religion with an insane psychotic deceased cult leader. There is no question of me ever having "defended" Scientology; on the contrary I have only ever written critical essays on that cult; however I am quite critical of the "anti-Scientology" and "anti-cult" movement, since many in the anti-cult movement are themselves cultists (many of them appear to be evangelical Christians for example); that is just one cultist attacking another cultist who is competing for marketshare in the multi-billion dollar religious business.

For part of the alleged anti-cult movement to be allied with evangelical Christians would appear to me to indicate that some anti-cultists are not anti-cultists at all; rather they are pro-cultists who often favour older more established and more dangerous religions and just don't like newer religions; personally I don't like either new or old religious cults.



Or are you the very same muddiers and apologists I am bringing to attention? I wonder...


I plead guilty of promoting the view that the two most malevolent and dangerous religions in the world are Christianity and Islam; each with 100's of millions of adherents, armies and control of nuclear weapons; both with genocidal deities and apocalyptic end times prophecies. Scientology on the other hand is a malevolent cult with probably no more than an estimated 50,000 members which is widely ridiculed and which does not have control of goverments, standing armies or nuclear weapons; it is essentially a business..

Lux

"The criticism of religion is the premise of all criticism"
Marx[


edit on 9-2-2011 by Lucifer777 because: Additional response



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Why no more posts? Is it too self evident?

This is worth talking about.



posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by RedBird
 


Have his words been preserved? The article I linked to previously would seem to contradict that statement. It claims that the Church of Scientology went through a hostile take over by a group of rather powerful Israelis who used the IRS as their proxy and that most of what is now attributed to Hubbard is nothing more than complete nonsense fabricated by this group in order to ensure people like yourself simply write the man off as an utter headcase. In otherwords, pure deflection.




For many reasons--religious, political, and strategic--the Israeli government, among others, has been involved in U.S. and Western allied covert operations to take over Scientology since at least the mid-1960s. As just one part of Israel's involvement, but a vital part, Israel's Mossad sent Uri Geller to the U.S. in 1972 to be part of a covert U.S. domestic CIA operation, carried out in conjunction with the CIA's "Amazing Randi," to discredit and "debunk" parapsychology around the world, just as the CIA was starting its Remote Viewing program in earnest. Israeli intelligence was well aware that the CIA program was based exclusively upon the secret upper-level works of L. Ron Hubbard, which had been stolen by three American covert agents who had infiltrated Scientology for that very purpose. The three--Hal Puthoff, Ingo Swann, and Pat Price--then were "hired" on a secret contract to run the CIA research program for the benefit of the U.S. and her allies. Geller's and Randi's sole role was to scandalize parapsychology research worldwide in order to deflect public interest away from what the CIA was doing in the field--and the crimes that CIA was committing to do it.

............

The restructuring and takeover of Scientology internationally was finalized on 1 October 1993 with the signing of the secret "Closing Agreement" between the Internal Revenue Service of the United States of America and agents representing "Scientology," all of whom were working for and on behalf of Meade Emory, Sherman Lenske, Stephen Lenske, and Lawrence E. Heller. The signing was only the somewhat visible (though even it was secretive) culmination of the plan described in this document. Though Meade Emory--as a "former" IRS executive purportedly working "for" Scientology--was the mastermind of the final restructuring for IRS control, he was helped from the inside of IRS by his former colleague at IRS Assistant Commissioner level, Howard M. Schoenfeld, head of the five member IRS panel overseeing the operation for the interests of the United States government in perfecting the takeover.


If you havn't already read the entire article perhaps you should, and then ask yourself just what Scientology actually is [in the present context], what is its purpose, and most importantly just how much of what we are told is Scientology resembles the genuine article. I mean if I decorate a pile of dog crap to look like a chocolate cake are you going to assume that all chocolate cake tastes like crap? How would you know unless you'd had the real cake first? Would you then go around telling everyone not to have cake because it tastes foul? On one hand it would be perfectly understandble if you did but then on the other your opinion on chocolate cake would be based on lies and ignorance would it not?
edit on 10-2-2011 by quackers because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by quackers

If you havn't already read the entire article perhaps you should, and then ask yourself just what Scientology actually is [in the present context], what is its purpose, and most importantly just how much of what we are told is Scientology resembles the genuine article.


The article your have cited is from a website whose author is Andreas Grosz; Andreas is still a Scientologist and is promoting the beliefs and conspiracy theories of the Freezone sect; the Freezoners consider themselves to be the true Scientologists and that the David Miscavage cult is "False Scientology."

The Freezoners still revere L. Ron Hubbard; thus I would suggest that you raise this issue on the Anonymous (Project Chanology) discussion board on forums.whyweprotest.net... There are numerous long term ex Scientologists there who will fill you in on L. Ron Hubbard, whom they universally consider to be a psychopathic charlatan; there are ample biographical books and essays on L.Ron by ex-cultists who knew him personally, including L.Ron's biography which was co-written by his son; you can read excerpts from this on www.davidicke.com...

I still have a profile on the Anonymous discussion board but I do not post there as my posts which were critical of both "Anonymous" and "Scientology" have been removed. The Anonymous movement are "not" anti-cultists and anti-religionists; on the contrary they concentrate on anti-Scientology, and that is not a main concern of mine.

The following is part of my analysis of Scientology's method of psycho-therapy which appears in the above article.

Pseudo-Psychotherapy: Dianetics, the Modern Science of Mental Health

Scientology atracts victims with the Freuduan psychotherapy technique of regression. This is a very powerful and effective technique which virtually all professional psychotherapists use, and I don't in any way mean to suggest that Freud's technique was or is innefective or malevolent; on the contrary. The professional psychotherapist essentially is a "listener" who explores the thoughts, mind, dreams, fantasies, beliefs, behaviour, relationships and sexual behaviour (etc.) of the client. It can be very liberating to have someone whom you can trust and express yourself to in such a way; it is the secular equivalent of the Catholic confessional, and often a "cure" for the effects of religious hypnosis and indoctrination.

In Scientology however, the purpose seems to be to create a mind controlled slave of the cult, who either pays large sums of money to the cult over many years and who eventually becomes a recruiter of others, or who joins their elite inner core as an economic slave; it is essentially a cult of "obedience."

Cultists are taught that sex is essentially "degenerate." This is a position which no genuine Freudian psychologist would take, since Freud took the opposite view; that it was sexual repression which was one of the main causes of psychosis. Scientologists on the other hand are taught to repress their sexual nature. Recruits to the elite Gestapo style inner core of Scientology (the Sea Org.) are expected to be celibate even if married.

Exorcism

Scientology claims to be both a "science" and an alternative form of therapy to the modern psychotherapy and psychiatry professions, however one needs to consider what their methods of "therapy" are. Essentially Scientologists believe in "exorcism;" that the human soul is possessed by myriads of evil spirits (Thetans); the purpose of therapy being the exorcism of such spirits, which in the Scientology cult often occurs through verbal and physical abuse, slave labour and forced imprisionment. Since this is a reincarnation cult, cultists who join the elite Sea Org are expected to sign a billion year contract; thus their slogan "We come back."



I mean if I decorate a pile of dog crap to look like a chocolate cake are you going to assume that all chocolate cake tastes like crap? How would you know unless you'd had the real cake first? Would you then go around telling everyone not to have cake because it tastes foul? On one hand it would be perfectly understandble if you did but then on the other your opinion on chocolate cake would be based on lies and ignorance would it not?


Since Scientology auditing is essentially based on "Freudian psychotheraphy" I would not suggest that psychotherapy has no value; on the contrary it can be incredibly liberating, however this is not unique to Scientology.

I (and indeed, I would assume, "all" Freudian psychotherapists) would consider it to be a general truthism that that we have what Scientologists refer to as a "reactive mind" where all our memories are stored including many traumatic memories, and by exploring these and discussing them with a sympathetic, intelligent and psychologically literate person, that we can come to deal with many psychological issues which are unresolved and reach a state of what Scientologists consider "clear;" I doubt if any secular psychologist would dispute the value of such a process, if it were separated from the Scientology cult and L. Ron's "spiritual possession" beliefs.

Every time in your life when you have ever felt unloved, depressed (unhappy), rejected, bullied, taunted, persecuted or in some way "put down" or devalued, there is a stored memory in your consiousness of that event; psychotherapy explores this and can to some degree assist a person to understand who they are and why they think and act as they do, and assist their psychological "reconstruction" through a better understanding of of themselves..

Psychotherapy will also try to concentrate on your past and present erotic and personal relationships and your erotic desires and fanatasies, and attempt to release all guilt, fear and insecurities; this can be a very liberating process, but it can also be exploited, as in the case with the Scientology cults (there are two main cults, the Church of Scientology and Freezone) which combine psychotherapy with cult mind control.

Lux


edit on 10-2-2011 by Lucifer777 because: mis-spelling-itis



posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucifer777
 


I won't argue that Scientology is cultist, nor that Hubbard might just have been off his tree. I think those two assumptions have been well and truely proven. However, and despite what Andreas' leanings might be, if the rest of the information in that article is in any way true, such as the involvement of the CIA and Mossad in Scientology then there are far more serious issues here than a bunch of deluded cultists preying on the rich and vulnerable. If true then focusing on Scientology in isolation excludes the bigger picture (not seeing the wood for the trees so to speak), especially if it is in itself a means to an end. It seems drawing peoples focus towards the "cultist" aspects of Scientology is a distraction technique.



posted on Feb, 12 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   


A BBC expose on Scientology from the inside. The reptilian conspiracy people should get a kick out of this one at 9.19 of the video.



posted on Aug, 6 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   


I am quite critical of the "anti-Scientology" and "anti-cult" movement, since many in the anti-cult movement are themselves cultists (many of them appear to be evangelical Christians for example); that is just one cultist attacking another cultist who is competing for marketshare in the multi-billion dollar religious business.

For part of the alleged anti-cult movement to be allied with evangelical Christians would appear to me to indicate that some anti-cultists are not anti-cultists at all; rather they are pro-cultists who often favour older more established and more dangerous religions and just don't like newer religions; personally I don't like either new or old religious cults.


This is very true. It is quite common to find that "anti cult" groups, those who speak out of the warning signs of unhealthy groups, mind control techniques etc (which IMO do have great merit) are actually members of one of the greatest plagues ever inflicted on humanity, historically speaking. The cult of Christianity. Which amounts to, my cult is better than your cult.

Which doesn't excuse Scientology in any way. Though the point should not be lost.


edit on 6-8-2011 by Cogito, Ergo Sum because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum
 

Didn't sound right when read that back. To warn people of cult tactics is a very worthy thing is what I intended to say. Though less convincing when it comes from cult followers themselves.



new topics

top topics



 
13

log in

join