This week, Leah and I are joined by our old friend Chris Shelton. He is a very well-informed former scientology executive who has provided some of the most cogent analyses of scientology in his podcasts, appearances and writings. He is studying Psychology of Coercive Mind Control at the University of Salford. This is a fascinating discussion that covers a wide range of topics — so much so that we recorded a second episode which will be Part 2 next week, taking a deep dive into two topics. A lot of what we talk about today concerns the fake “religious” aspects of scientology.
I said I would provide links to various things during our talk. I think I have included them all below:
Chris’ YouTube channel where he posts his “Critical Thinker” podcasts:
Chris’s book: Scientology: A to Xenu
Scientology Background and Ceremonies book and the scientology description of a “Sunday Service” — something done entirely to try to create a “religious image.”
The description from scientology.org:
And this is the only prayer that exists in scientology — written by the Guardian’s Office back in the 70’s when they were trying to gain tax exempt status. As you can see, it is carefully worded so as not to be too offensive to real scientologists who would never “pray to God”:
My earlier post on Scientology and whether it is compatible with Christianity or other religions Can Scientologists be Christians or Jews Too?:
Braving the Wilderness by Brene Brown
The Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan
Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism by Robert Jay Lifton
Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini
Why are we not doing a crusade and picketing the White House with signs that say:
“PULL SCIENTOLOGY’s TAX EXEMPTION for using funds to harrass critics”
“Google How Scientology got it’s tax exemption in 1993 ”
“What crimes can Scientology get away with by hiding behind a Religious Cloak”
“Google: Scientology Fair Game”
“Scientology uses tax exempt money via donations to harass people who tell the truth about Scientology”
Google: “Paulette Cooper Fair Game”
“Scientology attacks and destroys critics. Time to yank their tax exempt status”
We have enough people that would make an impact. Mike and Leah could help get publicity and then speak at the crusade.
Never put much stock in these sort of demonstrations myself. I dont think they are effective.
Oh My God, I Love You.
You said all the things I know and experienced but didn’t want to piss around talking about, I just wanted to ask about this thing that’s been bugging me!
🙂 🙂 🙂
Remember when there were those phases of
“If you are on a scholarship you have to maintain a standard schedule”
or,
“that’s true, IF the org has TWO fully standard course rooms, one for standard schedule, one for non=standard”?
AND
when GAT One came out there was a HUGE push to get in “full schedule only”.
The problem is, in real life, it’s as you say, and capitulation wins.
and…
MIKE is RIGHT.. as is LEAH
there is totally policy on course schedules, as well as “Courses their Ideal Scene” “What is a Course”, “Student’s Guide to Acceptable Behavior, “What We Expect of a Scientologist”, “Code of a Scientolgist” “KSW”
……ad
……………………infinitum
But take it from someone who has TABLE clay demoed, sec checked, and M f*ckin 9ed a whole lotta shit……..
I’ve never ran into a POLICY or HCOB
that gave me the power to order every Scio to 2.5 hours a week.
Cuz…………..
I WOULD HAVE USED IT AND ORDERED THEM INNNNNNNNNNN
(this was in reply to Dave Fagen)
🙂
<3
but I love all you as well.
<3
Thanks Rip. Nice little ex-Course Supervisor therapy session we had here.
Has anyone heard from Stacy Brooks in a while? I would love to hear her on the podcast! She was the first to open my eyes many years ago, and she’s always been a paragon of light. Any chance of connecting with her? What about Tory or Dave Touretzky? I know I’m showing my age here but those are some of the originals and would love to hear their take on the recent movements!
Stacy is fine but has a signed agreement not to appear in the media.
Well, that sucks. I guess that blood money Scientology pays off ex Scientologists is hard to turn down. I wonder if those like Stacy Brooks, Debbie Cook and Marty Rathbun feel any remorse for “Keeping Scientology Working” by accepting blood money ( regged out of some poor bloke Scientologist who experienced financial ruin) in exchange for the gag orders or reversal attack programs on Critics
much like what “Marty” Mark Rathbun has been doing?
I have the utmost respect for you, Mike Rinder. Scientology did not audit out your integrity. Your wife is a class act too. Other ex Scientologists who have integrity- Aaon Smith Levin, Chris Shelton, Tory Magoo, Leah Remini, Mary Kahn, Valerie, RON Miscavige Senior, Jenna Miscavige, Jason Beghe etc….all Class Acts!
As a note. Stacy got no money. It’s a long story. She wishes she could talk. I have also explained the situation with Debbie Cook previously.
Understood. Many well wishes of her for a fantastic life ahead!
That is interesting as without quid pro quo that type of legal “agreement” is VERY hard to enforce… Under CA law I don’t even know if it possible
I thought Scientology was a religion. I bought the whole biscuit.
“scientology is a religion in the truest sense of the word”
I worked with new public in so many ways over the decades, explaining how Scn dealt with people as spirits and was fully and wholly for the spirit and to raise the awareness etc blah blah.
We were THE religion. Everything else was make believe.
This podcast episode is an instant classic. Thanks Chris. Sunday service? I only ever attended one in the years that I was going to an Org. I attended one or two in a mission before I became a member. Dog collar? Funny. All I remember from the Sunday service was the group processing… Like ‘feel your chair, feel the wall, feel the ceiling’.
Darn! I somehow wound up putting my reply to Mike Rinder in the wrong place.
Mike posted that he recommended using Taylor Holley’s analysis when anyone emails their Federal Govt Representatives. I meant to reply to that with the above post.
I think it’s important to make it easy for anyone who wishes to contact their Member of Congress or their Senator and ask or demand they help revoke this cult’s Tax Exemption Status. To that end, I would like to see a sample email and a summary of the reasons why the Tax Exemption Status put in one place so it is as easy as possible for people to send email to their Federal Govt Reps.
I apologize for somehow getting these posts in the wrong order and hope you all can understand them. Thank you.
I have written to both my PA congressmen to investigate the tax exemption. I just want to help eradicate this awful cult.
Amongst other things in this Fair Game podcast episode, #1 of 2 with Chris Shelton, I am so glad the trio resolved the mystery around Scientology Sunday Service. Always, since this came into the scene, I experienced as the dumbest possible activity in a Church of Scientology. So fake. Every service requires “the minister” to recite an “Integrity” reference about the critical importance of each person to make their own observations and think for themselves. #ridiculous I always wanted to get up and walk out of the “chapel” during this because a Scientology org is the last place you would be allowed to observe and think for yourself.
At the org where I participated, Sunday Service must have been a stat. If you were studying in the Academy, you would be mafia strong-armed out of your seat and commandeered to the designated “chapel” in the building to attend an 11-minute Sunday Service. Uniformed org staff sentinels would be stationed along your path out of the course room to the designated Sunday Service room. Hostile and creepy, permitting you zero own-determinism in any way. Typical no trust and over-control.
The heaviest emphasis on this charade (to use the apropos Mike Rinder term) happened a few times per year when the org was granting hospitality to a small group of visitors, often high school or college students who were taking a World Religions course. The org “Director of Special Affairs” would be the host for these guests. The enforcement that you attend enhanced the fakery. You might even be called during the week at home, asking you to come in for Sunday Service that week because the org wants to put on a good show for these expected visitors. The org (as discussed in the podcast conversation) wants to put out a fake image that it is “a real religion.” Staff considers this can be achieved by showing off its “parishioners” attending a “normal” religious Sunday church service.
As the thriving and great Moon Unit Zappa once sang, “Gag me with a spoon.”
And of course all the policy forbidding the interruption of students…..
I hated that but truly didn’t get much of it at AOLA 77-97. Got it at LAOrg and ASHO mid 2000s.
So happy to be out 😅
I don’t understand why Leah regularly emphasizes “All Scientologists have to study 2.5 hours a day MinImuM”
This is not true and and never has been true.
At any given time only a small percentage of an org’s field is actively on course or getting auditing.
The academy supervisors DREAM would have been if Leah’s stock declaration were true.
Scientology courses have checksheet time and schedule requirements. Course rooms are supposed to
“be run on a standard schedule”
over the decades, what that means and how it gets enforced has been the subject of comm evs and declares.
“five days a week during the day hours is full time”
“foundations schedule full time study is 5 nights per week and both weekends”. (or not. it’s just weekends or nights – – what year is it?)
Auditing is supposed to be delivered intensively and 12.5 hours per week IS the basic expectation. But those are paying PCs in the HGC usually. Sometimes orgs have 2-3 paying PCs and they count themselves LUCKY. (what staff member ever gets 12.5 hours of auditing a week?)
I would guess, in any given field, a tiny percentage of the people who call themselves Scientologists are actually actively on service. TINY percentage.
…
Staff are “entitled” to 12.5 hours of enhancement per week”. This can be Bridge auditing and training or staff training and correction.
Most staff never get those hours in. Ever. Study time when squeaked in, is correction, cramming, or sec checking…
Public on service at higher orgs are usually from out of town, they’re paying through the nose to stay at the approved places and eat in the approved restaurants. These public are going flat out generally.
….
With the Basics and Extension course push they bulit themselves a better stat push and invisible dog collar.
Before, we used to have get the same old field in for tape plays and seminars and special group processing events in order to pad the stats. Bodies in the shop, paid starts, paid comps, re-signs, success stories. Yep. You need something to keep ahold of them so the scientology doesn’t wear off.
…..
So no, every scientologist doesn’t put in 2.5 hours a day on study.
They put in 24 hours a day trapped in bonkess nonsense in their own heads, but study?
“I have a study bug” hahaha. Remember that one?
………
P.S. I always figure that Leah says it because maybe that’s what they tell celebs. Maybe that was a whip held to her. ……….. But what reference?
To @RipVanWinkle – I think Leah states this because, having been put into the Sea Org in her teens (for a year), her Mom an org staff member, and much of Leah’s growing up years and into adulthood was spent in an org, that is what she was told and what was routinely enforced. I think this is, in the vernacular “true for her,” based on her experiences.
When I was “Still-in,” I had many of these. A staff member, if they could get away having me “buy” their domineering instruction, would do it. Often, the only way I got “saved” from some of the heavier weirder indoctrination was by doing a course that spoke to NOT doing that at all. (Data Series material, to me, spoke to MANY things that are simply never done by staff in orgs.)
Then again, as comes up in this blog community, commonly if you show a policy to cover what you are requesting, that will get countered by a staff member who has a different L. Ron Hubbard policy which “proves” the policy that you are attempting to use is not the right policy.
An example is “standard schedule,” to which you put in some things in your message. Where I was, we had it enforced SEVERAL times that we could only do Academy services if we were in the org either all-day Mon-Friday or Every Single Night Mon-Friday plus all-day Sat and all-Sunday. That’s it. Those were the 2 approved schedules. Nothing else, nothing less. Straight to Ethics for you if you disagreed. (I don’t actually think that is the definition of an Academy “standard schedule,” but you see my point: If staff at an org could get their public fearful, agreeing to, and operating off this, some will.)
For myself, when Still-In, I underwent a few training actions, where I was in the building morning through evening, for two or three months, even as a non-staff. It would have taken an emissary from the Int base itself for me to get approved to take my foot off the gas pedal and have time off.
In the business world, maybe we would refer to this as “Whatever the market will bear.” If you are selling umbrellas and it is raining, you might charge a lot of money for each umbrella–if you can get away with it, the buyers agree and not question.
Mike is free to invite Leah to speak more to this in a future podcast. I can see with a celebrity, “You have to be on service daily” being enforced under the guise of they have a more “important” role in bringing the peoples of Earth into Scientology. Or if a celebrity is away for three months on a music tour or shooting a movie, I could see org Ethics enforcing, while they are in town, they must be in the org seven days a week on-service, perhaps characterized “to make amends” for being off (doing their job). (I know: #ridiculous)
all scientologists are not on service 2.5 hours per day every day.
the exact opposite is true.
most scios do scientology courses and auditing in short spates over time.
In class V orgs you have at least 30 percent of public that can’t really afford to do much of anything. They don’t get far, spend most time doing Div 6 stuff etc.
Scientologists don’t go to the org every day.
and actually?
In Class V orgs, the parents do not relinquish all parenting to the cult. The parents don’t force the kids on course, or write KRs on them, or sec check them.
That HAPPENS, but it’s not the norm. The children of STAFF get the most neglect.
Not all husbands and wives KRed each other. In fact, I know FEW who did.
they end up divorced.
In class V orgs, the kids often grow up and don’t become second gens. These days that’s generating unprecedented disconnection.
I want to take on the point about the cult doing the parenting . Leah is right , even though there was various degrees of it , from giving your child to the sea org to using « the tech » on your children at home , relinquishing your own ability to listen , love and solve problems. There was of course the idea that « only the church « could solve conflicts and other emotional problems . It is terribly sad and led to more problems , unresolved to this day for many.
I fully agree. I never KRed my offspring or forced them upon course or auditing or even staying in ABLE approved school, but I ran BS Scio Nonsense harmful crap 24/7. It was who I was. regardless of alllll the nice things about me.
Snippets and paraphrased starting at 5:40,
“When you are in scientology as a parishioner you are forced to read scientology a minimum of two and a half hours a day.. . . under duress . . . If you sneeze,cough,wink . . . you are pulled into a room and forced to look up every word you don’t understand . . . etc.”
This is hyberbole and inaccurate, at least in my scn experience which ended in 1980.
If that’s the way Leah remembers her study time in scn then she does.
If you agreed to be on course Monday through Friday in the evenings then it was expected that you would show up on time and keep your commitment. Lame excuses as often given for missing work were for the most part unacceptable. Any type of “self improvement” course of study would have some emphasis on developing self discipline.
If you were “doping off” (losing attention) on course it was the job of the course supervisor to see what was happening. Maybe you went past a misunderstood word or words or maybe it was something else. In my experience the course supervisors weren’t radical drill sergeants but were attempting to be helpful.
Naturally the case can be made the scn was a progression of regimentation, indoctrination and programming to enforce compliance to Hubbard/Scn doctrine and in hindsight that is factually true.
For myself I enjoyed my time in study. At the time I believed I was learning worthwhile knowledge and some of it was. Your mileage may vary.
Someone once said. “Most of us were intellectual adolescents when we entered Scientology, having little or no background in science, religion or philosophy.” The concepts presented in scn whether true or false would be new and different from previous experience.
An often repeated saying was, “Either you control time or it controls you.” which might be a truism.
End of my two cents.
Rip. Now, not necessarily wanting to add more to what has already been said however I don’t think Leah says it without a reason.
First of all, she was a CC Int public where the standards are much higher, and if hubbard has mentioned it somewhere every micro piece of tech is forcefully enforced. Nothing to compare with CL 5 orgs.
Furthermore, as regards the 12.5 hours, she certainly refers to the schedule that should be requested from every public for the week.
Then again it depends on the level of the org and how it handles things.
Now, I don’t remember a specific reference about it but not one that says “Of course, get them to give you their schedule they want, even a couple of hours a week is fine, stay friendly”.
I ‘m not trying to give Leah a hard time. I’m trying to ask a question, actually.
We know all this, the differences in Orgs, higher orgs, outer org training, staff, public, Div 6 public vs Div 4… soooo many variables in schedules and “regimes”.
I’ve been staff and public in all the places practically.
Leah always says “ALL” scios have to do 2.5 daily.
I’m trying to ask why, because it was never a policy and it doesn’t happen in real life so why say it?
I’m familiar with some of the differences celebs experience. But she’s not phrasing it as her experience.
It’s been there itching in my mind since I heard it on the first episode of the Aftermath show. Always wanted to ask about it.
Well, there is a policy. It’s called Course Schedules. I am going to do a post about it as this seems to be something that has attracted attention.
Mike,
I don’t necessarily think you should make a point of what I have to say on your post, that depends on how relevant you think it is, but I’ll add my 2 cents, as a former course supervisor in a Class V Org.
The Course Schedule policy says that a student can study 5 weekdays of about 8 hours a day, or every weeknight for about 2.5 hours a day, or 2 weekend days of about 8 hours a day.
And it says to set up a second courseroom called the “special schedule courseroom” in its own separate room with its own separate supervisor. That’s supposed to be the courseroom for students who can’t do a standard schedule. They are supposed to pay more for those courses and the courses will take longer.
But the loophole is that it also says that if an org doesn’t set up a separate courseroom for special schedules, then it can’t do this thing of charging extra fee for students who can’t do the standard schedule.
The policy called Course Schedules is the only attempt made to lay down a set policy of how to deal with course schedules of students. Before this policy came out, there was no policy on it. So when a student would say that he could only do a few days a week, or one full day a week, or whatever, the Course Supervisor had no way to show them a policy that definitely said that a student could not do a course unless he did such-and-such a schedule.
Then when the Course Schedules policy came out (sometime in the early 90’s), it still didn’t usually do any good in enforcing a certain type of schedule that students had to do, because (as far as I know) very few of the orgs (definitely not my org) made it happen to set up the separate courseroom for the “special schedules”.
So the chaos and confusion about course schedules still remained after the Course Schedules policy came out. In my experience, most students who wanted to do a course would say that they could not do the standard schedule. And it was a problem because there was no definite policy to enforce a certain schedule. But whenever a supervisor would let a student do whatever schedule he wanted, he would face trouble with some seniors for being “reasonable” or “not tough enough” (a “kindly old fumbler”). The Supervisor was expected to be relentless about schedules so that the students would just go, “Oh, I better do what he says, he’s just too tough for me” and do whatever schedule was considered to be “standard”.
But usually, not just in my org, but I think in most, students would do whatever schedule they could, and pretty often the course supervisors and their seniors would get tired of constantly trying to fight a lost cause.
And most of the org’s field at any given time was not going to course at all, but they still considered themselves to be Scientologists and the org really couldn’t do anything to force them to be taking courses, we just had to do things to get as many people on course as possible.
So if Leah’s experience is that she and everyone else she knew was absolutely required to study two and a half hours a day, and if she thinks that this is enforced on all Scientologists, it might be because she is only speaking from her own experience and maybe she doesn’t know what it was like in other orgs than where she did her Scientology, and is assuming that it is done the same way everywhere.
@DaveFagen Yes, Yes, Yes. This explains the super firm yet simultaneously vague experiences I had concerning COURSE SCHEDULE. I did sometimes observe an otherwise kind, earnest course supervisor, who was glad you were in the building and enjoying study, turn “drastic” on this topic of schedule because—exactly as you say—they were getting “commanded” harshly by their seniors to stop letting students set their own schedule.
Err…. Foster and support people’s #OwnDeterminism much?
I guess not. (insert sad face here)
#CognitiveDissonance
That 2.5 hours of study is true. You are totally wrong Rip VW.
Some people are just better at saying NO.
it’s not course schedules that is the salient point.
It’s the concept that every single scio studies 2.5 per day, that it is per a policy, and is enforced.
Anyone who has been staff in a class V org will tell you this is not true .
It’s not even possible, because it all costs money. Every Scio on service every day in all orgs?
Chris’s microphone sounds really harsh and spitty to me, listening on an android phone. Mike and lea are coming across great, so it must be the connection or something on Chris’s end.
If it is the kind of mic that has a battery, it probably needs to be replaced.
If it is the same setup as he is using for his YouTube videos, possibly the setting for the phantom power is wrong. Can’t really see the brand name, but usually those big-diaphragm microphones need the full 48V setting.
I am hearing some dynamic processing too, maybe it is simply a matter of trying to use settings that are a bit too extreme to deal with ambient noise. Hitting some peripheral a bit too hard, perhaps.
It’s not really bad, just a bit distracting. If you listen to the stream and then compare it to what you are hearing in your headphones you will probably be able to track it down.
Great podcast otherwise. Glad I never got up to the bogus OT levels, sounds like a real mind-bender.
Chris just moved to a new place and has said he’s not fully set up yet. I hope this accounts for the sound issues.
I loved today’s episode! “I have today.” Thank you Leah and Mike!
I really enjoy the podcast, but I have bone to pick with today’s episode. There absolutely can be a real religion without a requirement to believe in God or a higher power. I am a Unitarian Universalist and one of our core principles is a “free and responsible search for truth and meaning.” We have members who identify as Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Humanist, deists, athiests and agnostics, etc etc. (https://www.uua.org/beliefs/what-we-believe)
Of course, unlike Scientology, we don’t charge people to attend, our books etc are not secret. We’re about as far from a cult as you can get.
Thanks. And agreed. I have a friend who attends UU and I have been there for a naming ceremony. Absolutely wonderful people.
The other huge difference is you dont PRETEND to believe in a “God” that is like a Judeo-Christian God. Scientology does. But they don’t believe it. Just pretend to in order to seem “mainstream.”
Great podcast – moved along with humor. To me it showed the extreme cult like nature of Scientology and how ex-members deal with the serious and painful damage.
O/T. The Sydney Morning Herald: Labor flags parliamentary inquiry into Scientology’s tax-free riches
By Ben Schneiders
April 6, 2021 — 5.56pm
https://www.smh.com.au/national/labor-flags-parliamentary-inquiry-into-scientology-s-tax-free-riches-20210406-p57gvt.html
* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *
Labor charities spokesman Andrew Leigh has flagged a parliamentary inquiry into Scientology, expressing concerns about its “unprecedented” wealth and shifting of assets into Australia.
The comments come after an investigation by The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald found that the Church of Scientology had shifted tens of millions of dollars into Australia from offshore and had made $65.4 million in tax-free net profits since 2013.
Mr Leigh now backs Greens calls for the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) to investigate Scientology but has also flagged the potential for a federal parliamentary committee to conduct an investigation.
* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *
/
Wow, wonderful news 😘
I have one word for this weeks podcast
PERFECT
I can also add many adjectives: wonderfully, incrediblly, heartily informativeily …
Carl Sagan’s book is on every geeks bookshelf and Chris is right, Robert Jay Lifton’s Thought Reform book, is a scary and dense true read if you want to understand how mind control works
Thank again for another brilliant podcast
I certainly enjoyed hearing from Mr. Shelton. He has much to say that is of considerable value.
Mike & Leah concluded this podcast by asking themselves, “What is the appropriate way to end one of our podcasts? What should we say?”
They considered, “See you next week” but rejected that because when it comes to podcasts, the viewers never get to see the people delivering the podcast. Mike suggested, “Tune in next week” which certainly seems better than “See you next week.”
I am certainly not schooled in the subject of Podcasts. In fact, podcasts are so new that I don’t believe anyone is schooled in the subject of podcasts. There are no university courses or degrees in podcasts. People who produce podcasts have not ever gone to school and studied how to best create podcasts. It seems to me that current podcasts are produced by people who just fly by the seat of their pants and try to do the best they can. Some of them certainly do a much better job than others.
I have been thinking about this and I have a lot more to say on this subject. Unfortunately, my current thinking is not very refined and if I were to discuss it now, it would just be a big mess.
So I would just like to contribute one thing about how to end a podcast. As far as I’m concerned, Mike & Leah can end these podcasts by saying most anything they like except for – “Much Love”. That just makes my skin crawl every time I see or hear it and I think most people will understand why that is.
Skyler – is there a Scientology connection to the phrase “Much Love”? Otherwise, I admit I don’t understand your reaction. Seems like a nice sentiment to me.
Hello Briget.
“Much Love” is the standard salutation that all people in scientology use to end letters and flyers advertising upcoming events.
I always felt that was very similar to them calling themselves, “the most ethical people on the planet”.
It just a big lie disguised with language that is completely opposite to the truth.
The people who send out these notices of upcoming events and sign off with, “Much Love” are just disguising the fact that all they care about is getting you to donate as much money as they can squeeze out of you. So, it has nothing to do with love and I think it is astounding for them to use such a big lie.
I was just trying to give people a laugh. My sense of humor doesn’t often work out as I intended. I hope I explained this OK.
Given this, your reaction makes perfect sense. Thanks for answering – I wondered if it was something like this! I agree that no Scamologist has any business saying “Much Love” 🤢
I’m a big fan of Mr. Shelton. I’m glad you’ve done two episodes with him.
Awesome that you are having Chris Shelton on your podcast. He is another humanitarian that does something about it every day. Thanks Chris. Thanks Mike. You all are courageous people to confton and shatter the Scientology Bully Organization hiding behind a religious cloak and tax exempt status.
The more persons speaking out and educating the world about the evil and downfalls of L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology the better.
Someday there will be a lawsuit against Scientology and they will be shut down.
And it will be because of people that put their life aside to some degree and did the right thing and spoke out. From Paulette Cooper in the 70s to the current flood of departing members on utube channels, showing up on FB posts and in various Blog comments and chat boards.
It all helps 😘
Chris remained a decent human being while in the Sea Org. Our ‘service’ overlapped with him coming in a few years before I left in ’96. I’ve enjoyed listening to his podcasts that cover after I left. It certainly got worse. I really loved the ones with his mom.
Chris Shelton, the Master
Paulette Cooper, Mike Rinder and Leah Remini have to be my most revered heroes in the fight against this ” terrible criminal organization set up as a for-profit business masquerading as a religion.”
The part in quotes – perfectly worded!
That is the description that Yashar Ali used to describe this cult. I agree that it is just about the perfect way to describe this scam and I like to keep it handy and paste it into any posts that I feel should describe the cult.
This goes along with the strategies that Mike and Leah have suggested for terminating this cult and others that commit human rights violations.
Currently, when people bring up the subject of scientology, they usually just discuss how silly it is and they laugh about it. I think it is critical to work towards changing that so the general public understands just how harmful this cult really is and that they force their members into bankruptcy by forcing them to give all of their wealth to the cult.
Then, when the topic comes up in public, people will not just laugh about it but they will discuss how truly harmful this cult really is and they will have a good idea of all the atrocities they commit against their members.
In my opinion, that may well be the first step in the process to force this cult out of existence.
Someone once labelled Chris the ASC’s “Chief Science Officer” which I thought was funny satire. I’m sure Chris has a sense humor and laughed at the label if he saw it.
I remember getting goosebumps watching Chris’s videos.
He spoke my language – I understood him and it was scary that he had so much courage to just SPEAK THE TRUTH and unravel the lies. I watched every video as they rolled out!!
He helped me have courage.
O/T. ABC News Australia Podcast: Call for review of Church of Scientology’s charitable status
https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/drive/call-for-review-of-church-of-scientologys-charitable-status/13289740
/
Thanks for this link. It looks like the straw that could break the camel’s back.
Mike and Leah have often made the point the single most important thing we need to do to ensure the destruction of this cult is to keep on shining a light on its abuses so that the public will understand this terrible cult is not a joke and its not something to laugh about.
It’s extremely important for the public to understand just how incredibly harmful this cult truly is. One of its worst atrocities is that it forces its members into bankruptcy by forcing them to transfer all of their wealth to the scam.
Mike and Leah have also said the single most important item on the list of things we must get done may well be to revoke their ridiculous Tax Exempt Status.
To that end, our Dynamic Duo (you know who I mean?) has told us we must contact our respective government officials (our members of Congress and our Senators) and demand they revoke this Tax Exempt Status. It would be best to explain why and maybe we can prevail upon Mike – when he is including all of the documents he includes in these blogs … maybe he could draft a letter demanding our government representatives revoke this Tax Exempt Status – and maybe he could write a few sentences explaining exactly why we need to have it revoked.
The ball is in your court, Mike.
When I said, “The ball is in your court”, all I meant was that it would be really good when writing a letter to our govt reps to demand we revoke this Tax Exempt Status, it would be a good idea to explain exactly why to our govt reps.
Otherwise, they may not have any idea why it is so iimportant to revoke the TES. After all, I wonder how many of our govt reps really understand what this cult does and how it works. I would guess most of them really don’t understand very much and a letter demanding they revoke the TES without explaining why would just leave them scratching their heads.
So, I probably should have phrased my request to Mike better and I should have asked if he would write a few words to our govt reps that we could paste into any letters we send our govt reps to help them understand why it is so important to get this TES revoked.
Please Mike?
I suggest referring them to Taylor Holley’s excellent analysis.
Taylor Holley wrote an excellent analysis to be sure. But the purpose of her writing is very different from the purpose of someone who is writing their elected Federal govt reps to request (or demand) the abolition of this cult and also its Tax Exempt Status.
Ms. Holley is a student at the Faculty of Law for Texas Tech University. She is studying to become a JD (which is somewhat equivalent to a PhD of Law) and she wrote this article for the Law Review which is a group of Law students that usually includes the best and brightest students.
But I fear this paper she wrote is not really directed towards Federal govt representatives (meaning the members of Congress and the Senators).
I would think a document that is specifically written for these people that describes the way this cult works and explains its abuses and atrocities would be far more effective to help them understand why it is so dangerous and why it should be abolished and why its Tax Exempt Status should be revoked.
There is nothing wrong with using the paper that Taylor Holley wrote. But I fear it would not be very easy for these Federal lawmakers to read it and to use it to get an understanding of how this cult works and why it is so important to revoke its Tax Exempt Status.
I could easily be wrong about this. But I get the feeling there are an awful lot of these Lawmakers who have not really studied this cult and do not have a good understanding of how it works and why it is so dangerous.
Just my opinion, but I believe that a brief document written with the specific purpose of informing Federal Lawmakers just how this cult operates and why it is so dangerous would be far more effective in getting these people to act in revoking the Tax Exempt Status and in abolishing this evil cult.
My problem is that I tried to start writing this document and it is a huge task. I’m not at all sure how to proceed. If I was ever able to complete writing such a document, I wonder if I posted it here on Mike’s blog if people would help to refine it and make it appropriate for Federal Lawmakers?
The odds that I will ever complete such a task is very low. But I have started and I have an outline. It needs an awful lot of work and I’m not really sure how best to proceed.
Any of us who encountered and worked with Mr. Chris Shelton when he was still-in know he was steadily and refreshingly terrific. He was (is) honorable, sane, decent; never ludicrously bossy or hyper overcontrolling. He exited the Sea Org peacefully of his own decision, thinking he would remain active and “go up the Bridge,” only to be bizarrely “informed” he could not…because he was (instead) “declared” a “suppressive person”? I think this has happened to a number of people who leave and Sea Org members who leave, even though the person has done absolutely nothing “suppressive” and, in fact, they have dutifully complied with the steps on the “routing form” to exit. The man’s a treasure.