reply to post by WakeUpRiseUp
Here's a bit of what I understand about $cientology......
....you mentioned just two prominent male celebrities, who happen to be quite wealthy.
.....but how do they get so many celebrity supporters?
I know that celebrities are always for hire but there is a difference between being spokesman for a religion then for a new diet or perfume.
I know they are filthy rich but I imagine the asking price for changing Tom Cruises or John Travolta’s religion would be more then they
I'll stop there. And, this is an opinion based on some scraps of gossip heard along the way, over the years, mind you.
It is no secret that the "machine" of Hollywood can chew up people's egos. And, sudden "success" at an age when a person is too young to take it
all in properly, and
at the same time might lack the proper support structure to help them cope, that can lead to a sort of
"wasteland" syndrome, for want of a better term.
Now.....it is actually a fairly "open secret" among many, many so-called "Hollywood Insiders" that being Gay is a detriment to one's career.
Yes, even today. It shouldn't be, of course....but, many of the "heavy hitters" who are the heads of major studios and still have great influence
in the Industry are very old-school, even now.
But, let's re-wind back to the 1980s.....and, focus on young "Tom Cruise" (his 'stage name') and John Travolta.
Up-and-coming, each due to different career paths. But, scuttlebutt is, they have skeletons in the "closet".
Yes, 'gossip' is hearsay, yada yada yada..... however, someone I know personally has told me things, and I have to acknowledge this. It is not the
point, here, to cast aspersions...not the intent.
But....in regards to $cientology....once anyone with any feeling that he/she has a 'secret' that might have a potential impact on their chosen
career (whether it is accurate or not, it is their 'secret' and they think it could be damaging if it "got out")...once the $cientology peeps get
wind of it....through any sort of (what should be confidential) admission.....or, "sharing"?
It seems to me that calling it government Psy-Ops or anything of that nature over-complicates it. Although fun to speculate about......
The basic term that most likely applies, in regards to the wealthy $cientology spokespeople is summed up in one word:
Especially to something to something like scientology which would loose them millions of fans and subsequently millions in profit because not as many
people want to see their movies.
So what I'm wondering, is there possibly a government or big corporation agenda behind scientology?