More Accidental Truth From Scientology

If anyone is watching the Anderson Cooper 360 series, Scientology, A History of Violence, you have to be amazed at what the Church of Scientology is saying.

Of course they are lying, but look at what they are saying:

  • They admit that there was physical and mental abuse that went on for years!
  • They admit that nobody reported this to the police or ever talked about it to outsiders, even family members.

Excuse me?  What kind of cult is this?  Years and years of physical and mental abuse and they covered it up!

Naturally they are trying to say that David Miscavige was not involved and knew nothing about it.

Pay attention to what they are claiming:

  • David Miscavige, the leader of the Church of Scientology, was absent from the Church of Scientology’s International Headquarters for years!

Then who was running the Church of Scientology?

  • They assert that, for years, David Miscavige, the leader of the Church of Scientology, had no knowledge of what was going on at his International Headquarters!
  • They also claim that not one person at Scientology’s International Headquarters reported the horrible physical and mental abuses to David Miscavige in all the years that it continued!

These are astounding admissions by people at the very top of Scientology!  This is what they claim.

The leader of Scientology is absent from Scientology’s International Headquarters for years and years at a time; the leader of Scientology is completely unaware of and is not informed of what is going on at Scientology’s headquarters; and no one did anything to stop the abuse, year after year after year.

Do these people sound totally insane?

Yes, they do.  This is an example of what happens when you live in a cult.  You become completely unaware of what is normal.  So when you try to explain (and cover up) the things that go on inside the cult, you have no idea how very crazy you sound.

UPDATE:
The “bitter ex-spouses” show was pretty revealing, if lacking in information.  These “witnesses” weren’t actually witnesses, they were more of the “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” type.  These ex-spouses were bound and determined to prove that absolutely no abuse ever took place. “Nothing happened, and we would certainly know”. Apparently, they didn’t coordinate their lies stories with Tommy Davis’ lies story – that there was abuse, but it was “all Marty’s doing”.  That’s the problem with lies and cover-ups: It’s hard to keep it all straight.

They really should be given time to all get together and figure out what their official story is going to be.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to More Accidental Truth From Scientology

  1. Anonymous says:

    Not only that, but it was particulary telling that the "witnesses" seemed unfamiliar with the contents of their own statements.

  2. Anonymous says:

    It sounds eerily similar to what the catholics are saying about the pope…

  3. Just Bill says:

    Re: Unfamiliar with their own statements.Well, we all know that these "witnesses" for the church didn't actually write their own statements. All their statements were written for them by the church.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Not verbatim, but – My husband never showed signs of abuse, but he was attacked by Marty. Any way you write it or read it…WTF?

  5. Anonymous says:

    That's why it was all about inches

  6. Anonymous says:

    Also it's funny how Rinders ex-wife said she witnessed all of his broken wrists. The look of horror from the brunette woman who sat in front of her was obvious. They know they're lying, and have enough Hubbard induced transference to feed their lies until they go insane, or leave the cult

  7. Just Bill says:

    Great comments. I've added a note about the ex-spouse show. Great entertainment as they struggle to cover up (and then cover up the cover up).

  8. barb says:

    Cult spokesclam says,"You can't trust a thing these apostates say. They're testimony is unreliable, like that of an ex-spouse."Then they bring out the Ex-Wives' Club. Gotta love it!

  9. Anonymous says:

    Oh, wait…Who said that "you can't trust the word of ex-spouses because they're bitter and biased?" (I'm paraphrasing, here), er… it was the CoS, in response to the Saint Petersburg Times expose via Scientology's own *cough* Freedom Magazine.Ah, the irony here is DELICIOUS.

  10. Norman Starkey, Jenny DeVocht, Tommy Davis, et al, are so far from being capable of telling the truth, not even in their pseudo-therapy (auditing) sessions, or security checks (interrogations) can they admit David Miscavige did any physical abuse of upper Scientology echelon staff members. Starkey and Miscavige both used chewing tobacco when spitting Homer Schomer, see this from a Gerry Armstrong court case:http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/a1/trial-trans-schomer-4498-4515.html“…. he [David Miscavige] came in at a later time and spit in my face with tobacco juice during a sec check, which is heresy, if you want to think of Hubbard as a god and histechnology, and then Norman [Starkey] did the same thing…”

  11. Anonymous says:

    It IS delicious. One thing I know about liars–they hate the people who "force" them to lie (by demanding the truth) and can scarcely contain their rage at being put in that position–however, I also feel sorry for them because as someone said, they will probably feel insane. I sent this to AC360:Why don't you ask Marty why his job obligations were so crucial and important that failures necessitated hitting people? If he will explain, you and your audience will get a clearer idea of why and how the Church of Scientology tolerates no failure.Unfortunately, it is too late to get it asked, but wouldn't it be great to hear Tommy Davis explaining to Anderson that CoS has the ONLY truth in the universe and anyone who isn't IN is due to become a rock?

  12. Anonymous says:

    If it doesn't make sense, it isn't true, and what the Scientologists are saying doesn't make sense. Marty supposedly brutally abused various people but was allowed to continue doing it for FOUR years? It was "handled internally", yet continued for all those years? Why wouldn't he be removed immediately for violating the human rights of his victims??(remember, Scientology is "big" on human rights)Now if Miscavige was the one doing the abusing that makes sense. Who's going to call the police on the little sociopath? Who's going to tell him to stop? Surely anyone watching this fiasco can see right through the lies being told by Davis, the ex-wives and others. And how about those ex-wives? Hawkins says his ex has a heart of gold and she can't contain her utter hatred of him. Her response spoke volumes.Looking forward to more tonight.Rachel99

  13. Just Bill says:

    Re: Recent comment attemptsJust so you know, I'm not going to publish comments that contain links to Church of Scientology sites.

  14. Just Bill says:

    @Rachel99Yes, the truth is obvious, and I think all the AC360 episodes show that quite well. The whistle-blowers come off as honest and truthful. Tommy Davis, Yingling and ex-wives come off as devious, strident, defensive and confused. The fact that they can't get their stories straight is not getting lost.I didn't get the same impression of Hawkins' ex. His kind words, relayed by Anderson, seemed to hit her hard. She truly didn't expect it. I'm sure she had been told that Hawkins was EVIL-EVIL-EVIL – and she believed it right up to that moment. That's what living in a cult will do. Letting her out of the compound and putting her in a space where she might hear something like that was a HUGE mistake on the part of Scientology.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Funny how all the allegating people sounded calm and the scientologists were all angry and on the edge. I seem to recall somebody saying something like "the overt doth speak loudly in accusation."

  16. Anonymous says:

    More than one of the ex-wives came out with some version of "I slept with him for years, I know every detail of his body and he wasn't injured." Do you think they were given a script about what to say? Who would have prepared it? It actually seems fairly unusual for any woman to go on TV and start talking about inspecting her ex-husband's body in great detail.

  17. Just Bill says:

    Well, yes. It was quite obvious that all four were working off of prepared "talking points" or scripts. They probably drilled it, including the fake outrage when Anderson asked a question they couldn't answer.It was also obvious that they had been instructed to conduct their whole interview in the tone level of anger/antagonism. Did you notice? Scientologists believe they can control people using various emotions, and they were carefully drilled to do this with Anderson. Of course, it only made them look crazy.

  18. Anonymous says:

    Who is instructing and drilling the ex-wives? Tommy Davis? Lawyers? Miscavige himself?

  19. Just Bill says:

    Re: DrillingIt would be done under David Miscavige's direct orders, although he wouldn't do it himself. Scientologists going to court or going to be interviewed are always drilled and drilled.The words the ex-wives spoke (and that Tommy Davis spoke) and the exact emotions they displayed were what Miscavige wanted them to say in the way he wanted them said, were written by Miscavige and were drilled exhaustively under his direction.Anderson requested an interview with Miscavige, what he got was an interview with Miscavige-through-puppets. None of the Scientologists spoke their own words.

  20. Anonymous says:

    Getting the wives and others together to drill the responses is the same conspiracy that the DM bots are accusing Mark, Tom, Jeff and Amy of doing. It is really obvious the church is accusing these guys of doing what the CHURCH is doing.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Well… It's Saturday. The report over, and in my mind, it wasn't what it could have been. It focused mostly on the upper-management beatings and ever-so-briefly touched on disconnection talking-points.However, what it do, was establish -Prima facie- that abuse WAS happening at Gold Base which went unreported to the proper authorities. Crimes were committed, and were subsequently covered-up, only the true instigator (DM or Rinder) and the AMOUNT of abuse are unknown or unprovable.Overall, I consider it a win.

  22. Anonymous says:

    After all of the he said/she said regarding alleged criminal behaviour. The one thing that remains the eight hundred pound gorilla in the room is, if all of the "apostates" are lying, why doesn't Mr. David Mscavige sue them into oblivion. I mean he is being slandered all over the press and he has every right to try and clear his name.I guess he doesn't want to upset his "parishioners" with the truth.

  23. Anonymous says:

    Watching the scientologists on AC 360 was, among other things, a study of how to stick to talking points and never answer direct questions. You could tell when AC had them cornered. They would respond with "Here's the thing" or "The point is this" and then give the talking point. For example, instead of answering a question like, "why did it take 4 years to remove the instigators of violence", they would finally say "Here's the thing, in the end they WERE removed."

  24. Anonymous says:

    Has anyone contacted Anderson Cooper or Anonymous to inform everyone that Religious Freedom Watch is doing a slander page devoted to him, and that the Religious Freedom Watch website is hosted on the same server as Scientology.org? If not, please do!

  25. Just Bill says:

    Great comments and insights. Yes, those church members who are assigned to talk to reporters and such are drilled, with talking points and especially on how to not answer questions.All that became quite obvious watching AC360 — I hope to everyone watching.

  26. Anonymous says:

    The other obvious point was the scientologists' use of "tone scale" tech. They consider reporters, especially a gay reporter, as "1.1" – covert hostility. To control a 1.1, you have to go 1/2 to a full tone above. That means 1.5 (anger) to 2.0 (antagonism). That explains why they "handled" all those nasty 1.1 questions with anger or antagonism. Oops! It made them all look like wild-eyed lunatics! So much for their sooper-dooper tech!

  27. Anonymous says:

    Re: DM sueing Marty, et al, into oblivion.First of all, truth is the ultimate defense to defamation (slander/libel) actions.Second, Miscavige would not be able to prove that abuse didn't happen. It's extremely hard to prove a negative. At this point you've got the same number of witnesses on each side of the issue. Both sides would repeat their testimony.Third, a lawsuit would result in court orders for the church to produce many documents – that's the last thing the church wants . . . .

  28. Just Bill says:

    Re: LawsuitFourth, a lawsuit would result in David Miscavige being called to testify under oath to many things. One of the most unbreakable rules from Miscavige to his lawyers is to keep him out of court at all costs.

  29. Anonymous says:

    Re: Scientologists' use of tone scaleIt was presented to me that one uses a tone one half point above the one of the other person to bring them uptone, not control them. Was I missing what is told staff members and registrars, that is, that it is about control? I was public, and everything was presented to me as being about helping others. I realize that is not in reality the case with CoS, but that is how I heard it.

  30. Just Bill says:

    Re: Scientologists' use of tone scaleThe use of the tone scale is very much about control. That is in the LRH materials. All the "communications" stuff in Scientology is not about having a nice conversation — it's all about controlling communication and getting your command complied with. In other words, auditor training.

  31. Anonymous says:

    I wonder if DM has anything resembling Waco (Empty) Davidians!Both were saving the mankind and in secret!Why?CoS has to open up its Hemet building for anyone!

  32. Anonymous says:

    Stop calling this entity a church. I've been to church hundreds of times over decades. This entity does not look or act like a church.

  33. Anonymous says:

    Coming from outside this strange society with its odd concepts and childish affection for acronyms, I have nevertheless been fascinated by the fundamental hypocracy at the very root of this entire enterprise — for that's what it s: an enterprise. I am curious why the government hasn't initiated a RICO investigation into what clearly fits the definition of a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization. I'm sure there are some well-intentioned individuals inside the various drug cartels but that still doesn't merit them a slide. This is…outrageous.

Leave a Reply. It will be moderated.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s