New book on Scientology: Going Clear

fredcarr said:
Does that mean you saw the web site and read it all or you just saw the site?

Edited to add...or did you read a part of it and if so which parts? Curious as to your take on the alternative view this website presents.
Click to expand...

I will say this: What I have read so far is the first page that you linked too. I have not read all of the sub-pages after that, although I may read some more later when I have more time.

I'll address a couple of the charges they made:

Instead of seeking information from the Church, Mr. Wright continued to seek out a small group of bitter apostates, many of whom are self-confessed liars, removed for malfeasance and immoral conduct whose ever-morphing stories have been questioned for the past several years:

1. Removed for malfeasance more than a decade ago, Marty Rathbun admitted lying to the media about the same allegations made in the book and admitted to a newspaper to suborning perjury and obstructing justice.
Click to expand...

Of course, there is no easy way for me to know exactly what they are talking about here, but are they saying that he admitted to lying and the other things when he was a Scientologist? If so, what does it mean that he once had such a high position in the Church? Wiki page on Mark Rathburn

2. Mike Rinder is also on record contradicting himself, asserting the very same allegation he alleges to Mr. Wright was “rubbish” to another media and when questioned on network television “If you lied before how do we know you’re telling the truth now?” Rinder responded, “You don’t.” He, too, was removed from the Church for malfeasance.
Click to expand...

Again, they don't tell the reader what it is that he contradicted himself on.
Is it that he once publically espoused the Church's line and now says something different? These are very vague allegations, long on character assassination and short on specifics or evidence.

According to Wikipedia he was formerly the "chief spokesman of the Church of Scientology.[2]" The chief spokesman! Why doesn't the rebuttal mention this, or the former position of Mark Rathburn either?

I'll just quote what it says about the circumstances of his leaving the Church:
In March 2007, Rinder was sent as a junior assistant to the Church spokesperson to defend Scientology from John Sweeney, who was filming a BBC documentary titled Scientology and Me.[5] Rinder defended Scientology leader David Miscavige, but Miscavige was unhappy with the documentary.[5] As a result, Rinder "was to report to the church's facility in Sussex, England, and dig ditches" and then was allowed to return to the United States.[5] Rinder decided to leave the church instead.[5] Rinder went to Virginia and told the church he wanted to talk to his wife and also wanted his possessions. He did not talk to his wife, but was sent a FedEx package with a check for $5,000, but his family photos were not sent.[5] Rinder and his wife Cathy of 35 years are still legally married, and he has no contact with his two adult children.[5] Rinder's official biography has since been removed from the official Church of Scientology website.[3]
Click to expand...


3. Marc Headley provided three different versions of the same tabloid gossip story. He also made wild allegations in a federal lawsuit against the Church that a judge tossed out of court, but not before admitting under oath to twice selling stories to tabloids. The judge ordered the Headleys to pay $40,000 to the Church to cover its legal costs in defending against such a frivolous lawsuit.
Click to expand...


I couldn't find confirmation that the judge ordered the Headleys to pay $40,000 to the Church to cover its legal costs, but the Church did win that lawsuit and its appeal.

Someone pointed out that because the Church pays its SEA org members so little ($50/week) despite working 80-hour weeks, they qualify for food stamps and other government assistance. Yeah, taxpayers make up the difference. What do you think of that?
 
Last edited:
Here's what they say about the E-meter:

E-Meter is a shortened term for electropsychometer. It is a religious artifact used as a spiritual guide in auditing. It is for use only by a Scientology minister or a Scientology minister-in-training to help the preclear locate and confront areas of spiritual upset.

In itself, the E-Meter does nothing. It is an electronic instrument that measures mental state and change of state in individuals and assists the precision and speed of auditing. The E-Meter is not intended or effective for the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of any disease.
Click to expand...

Is it a religious artifact used as a spiritual guide or an electronic instrument that measures mental state and change of state? Also, does it "do nothing" or does it really measure something? Their own description seems to contradict itself.
 
fredcarr said:
I haven't read the book so can't comment upon any of the broad points. I would assume one's resource's for the broad points would be relevant to the validity of said points though I could be wrong as I haven't read the book in question.
Click to expand...

I haven't read the website in question. But I'll make you a deal. You read the book and I'll read the website and then we can have an intelligent discussion about it. What do you say?

Ward
 
hgc said:
You may not realize, fredcarr, that these articles are not intended for me anyway. They're intended for you. I can promise you that almost no one outside the church would be moved by that article. If they intended for outsiders to believe it, they wouldn't toss around the "apostate" epithet, for instance. No one considers apostasy from a religion that they don't adhere to as a
Click to expand...

You're quite correct.

The short period of time I was involved in Scientology coincided with when the Time magazine article (Cult of Greed) was published (and would hand out to people walking by outside). I remember people in the org devouring the softcover book COS published which tried to discredit the article paragraph by paragraph. It made the people in the org feel like martyrs because of the "prosecution" they were facing.

I actually remember the org I was visiting held a meeting when the article was published telling us not to read the article because, aside from being filled with lies, the false data in it could harm your future progress up the bridge.

And even when I read the article (on microfilm at my college) after I essentially quit Scientology I didn't believe most of what was written. I saw none of this madness at my old org so how could it be true?!

But now with the Internet, Scientology is toast. They have cash but they have no new members (anyone who has a mild interest in it will flee as soon as they type "Scientology" in a search bar) and top execs "blow" on a regular basis.

I just don't know why the OT VIIIs in the world use their powers to make things go right for their church.
 
fredcarr said:
hgc - here I am!

And here is a resource for looking at that book from a different perspective:

http://www.lawrencewrightgoingclear.com/
Click to expand...

From the link:

Mr. Wright continued to seek out a small group of bitter apostates, many of whom are self-confessed liars, removed for malfeasance and immoral conduct whose ever-morphing stories have been questioned for the past several years:


So it's just a bunch of disgruntled ex members?

How did so many immoral characters slip thru the tech?
 
Puppycow said:
I will say this: What I have read so far is the first page that you linked too. I have not read all of the sub-pages after that, although I may read some more later when I have more time.

I'll address a couple of the charges they made:



Of course, there is no easy way for me to know exactly what they are talking about here, but are they saying that he admitted to lying and the other things when he was a Scientologist? If so, what does it mean that he once had such a high position in the Church? Wiki page on Mark Rathburn



Again, they don't tell the reader what it is that he contradicted himself on.
Is it that he once publically espoused the Church's line and now says something different? These are very vague allegations, long on character assassination and short on specifics or evidence.

According to Wikipedia he was formerly the "chief spokesman of the Church of Scientology.[2]" The chief spokesman! Why doesn't the rebuttal mention this, or the former position of Mark Rathburn either?

I'll just quote what it says about the circumstances of his leaving the Church:






I couldn't find confirmation that the judge ordered the Headleys to pay $40,000 to the Church to cover its legal costs, but the Church did win that lawsuit and its appeal.

Someone pointed out that because the Church pays its SEA org members so little ($50/week) despite working 80-hour weeks, they qualify for food stamps and other government assistance. Yeah, taxpayers make up the difference. What do you think of that?
Click to expand...

Actually that link confirms that the church uses tactics such as smearing a person with unproven accusations and generally making their life hell.

I guess when all you got is a shovel then you dig regardless.
 
fredcarr said:
I haven't read the book so can't comment upon any of the broad points. I would assume one's resource's for the broad points would be relevant to the validity of said points though I could be wrong as I haven't read the book in question.
Click to expand...

Does your church allow you to read the book?
 
Orphia Nay said:
Thanks, Kajata. That sounds like what I'd expect from Lawrence Wright.

His Pulitzer Prize winning "The Looming Tower" was a brilliant book, and extremely, thoroughly researched.
Click to expand...

I recently bought that book and am working my way thru it, it takes time to absorb all that's being said.

If this one is as good it is worth a read.

(I'm glad you went back to the pyramid avatar i like it and have been wanting to start a thread in Community for "Best Avatar" and would like to use yours as my example if it's OK")
 
Last edited:
Puppycow said:
Here's what they say about the E-meter:



Is it a religious artifact used as a spiritual guide or an electronic instrument that measures mental state and change of state? Also, does it "do nothing" or does it really measure something? Their own description seems to contradict itself.
Click to expand...

It extracts money from the gullible as does any good con-prop.
 
fredcarr said:
hgc - here I am!

And here is a resource for looking at that book from a different perspective:

http://www.lawrencewrightgoingclear.com/
Click to expand...

From the link:

People all over the world embrace the Scientology religion because of the workability of L. Ron Hubbard’s discoveries about the mind, the spirit and life and the Church is set to service them all.

Like the bull services the cow.
 
Puppycow said:
Someone pointed out that because the Church pays its SEA org members so little ($50/week) despite working 80-hour weeks, they qualify for food stamps and other government assistance. Yeah, taxpayers make up the difference. What do you think of that?
Click to expand...

Interesting point (I was in the Sea Org back in the eighties.)

Since I was provided room and board, etc. I never needed any sort of government assistance. I found it a bit amusing that I had more spending cash burning a hole in my pocket than I did in times before and after being in the Sea Org as a result of having all my necessities taken care of.

And on the topic of food...I could eat unlimited quantities of food as it was buffet style serving. So no need for food stamps.
 
kajata said:
Why did you route out? (I'm going to assume you've probably been asked this question here before so forgive me)
Click to expand...

I think your apology is premature. fredcarr answers about 1 out of 50 direct questions. Notice the pattern already in this thread.
 
hgc said:
I think your apology is premature. fredcarr answers about 1 out of 50 direct questions. Notice the pattern already in this thread.
Click to expand...

What an amateur. A true Scientologist wouldn't ignore questions without threatening litigation first.
 
kajata said:
Why did you route out? (I'm going to assume you've probably been asked this question here before so forgive me)
Click to expand...

Interestingly, I don't think I have ever been asked that before. But it was for personal reasons so don't take offense if I choose not to answer this in a public forum.
 
In the second NPR interview, the author directly addressed the complaints leveled against his book by the organization.
He said they were simply lying. That he and the publisher had reached out dozens of times for interviews, information, documents, etc. Their requests were either directly refused or ignored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom