This week we talk with our guardian angel at A&E, Devon Graham Hammonds.
Devon was VP Programming (she has since moved on and is now an executive at the production company that produced the show) and oversaw The Aftermath show in every respect.
We talk about how the show came to be with a lot of behind-the-scenes glimpses into what it was like to make The Aftermath — including the Fair Gaming of everyone concerned and the challenges the network and production company and everyone who worked on the show faced.
We also cover why the show ended (it was not, as scientology crowed “because we got it canceled”):
We also cover what surprised Devon most in the journey from knowing nothing to working on 3 seasons of a show that delved deeply into the world of scientology and advice for others who want to do something.
A couple of things related to our discussion.
The link to the show on Netflix (it is also still available on A&E On Demand and on their website).
Some scientology price lists that I have published on my blog before
Hi Mike! I have a question in case you guys do another Q&A podcast. Do you think, at some point, the Sea Org will start encouraging pregnancy among members because their #s are dwindling…thanks to the courageous efforts of you guys and the other speaking up?
Hello Lauren. I certainly cannot speak for Mike.
But I want to tell you that I think that is a really interesting question. I don’t know the answer. But I imagine the answer may have something to do with the original decision made to force lady Sea Ogres to have abortions instead of raising their children in the cult and when those children grew up they would be fully fledged cult members – all prepared to carry on the scam.
Imagine that you were a completely unscrupulous and incredibly greedy monster who just cared about amassing as much money as you could in the short term and the only concern you had for the government was to do whatever was required to keep yourself out of jail.
Why would you decide to force lady Sea Ogres to have abortions instead of raising their babies? I’d be very interested to hear what other people think about that.
Could the answer be that he was so incredibly greedy that he did not want to forego a single penny that lady could bring into the scam by allowing her to spend time raising her child instead of grabbing every penny she could for him? Could it be that simple?
If so, it means this cult cares nothing about the long term and is only interested in the immediate short term. If that is true, I’d love to know how we could use that against them to bring them down and have their leader imprisoned.
In thinking more about this, could it mean the founder cared nothing at all about the future of his cult? All he cared about was grabbing every single penny he could while he was alive and after he died, he cared nothing at all about the cult or any of its members?
This was marvelous everywhere.
The depth and strength of the friendship was a joy to be invited into.
You all deserve this.
Nothing about Scientology is true, and least truthful of all is anything they say about a critic.
And all it takes to know the truth is to listen to you and Leah and those you speak with.
I just wanted to say thank you to you Mike and all the sacrifices you made filming this series with Leah. This episode really stood out for me. We all appreciate so much what you have done in exposing abuses and for truly making this world a better place in the here and now, despite any imperfect past. It’s what we are all aspiring to. To build a strong, courageous, wonderful life after having suffered through SCN lies.
The fact that scn is structured in such a way that it cannot correct and evolve (correcting just to start certain aspects such as disconnection or fair game) makes it a candidate for extinction.
In this universe where everything is constantly changing, being stuck in the certainty of knowing everything is suicide. It removes the person dangerously from the reality of the present moment and one ends up being stuck in mental “certainties”.
LMR said: In this universe where everything is constantly changing, being stuck in the certainty of knowing everything is suicide.
What will happen when technology evolves to the point where windows are no longer used?
What will this criminal cult do with all the newspapers they have been saving to clean their windows?
What will they do with all their windows that are no longer used?
IMO, LMR is correct. Anyone who believes they know everything is doomed to become a laughing stock.
No more newspapers.
No more windows.
No more criminal cult! HOORAY!!!
Love the picture above (Emmy Win Night). Thank you Devon for what you did to get this series aired and again Thank YOU, LEAH!
I knew when I spent a few hours on my episode that there was SOOOO much more time and energy and expertise that went into getting it into its final form. BUT listening to Devon talk more about this made me appreciate all that much more what Mike and Leah did to get this series done. And Mike’s passion and expertise was KEY in making this series watchable and UNDERSTANDABLE. So, thank you again Mike for doing something that took so much from you for so little monetary reward in that first season. I hope you carry the greatest reward of all in your heart – knowing that you have saved lives and further hope that the rest of your life continues to reward you in abundance.
Wonderful podcast conversation – definitely informative and interesting, the behind-the-scenes, and great career tips from programming executive Devon (Leah & Mike television guardian angel). : -)
Great to see total public rejection of Scientology after three seasons of Aftermath. Congratulations to all who participated. Hubbard invented such an old style religion based on Fascism, Satanism, Demonism, Gestapo tactics, and even anti-familial values. Goodbye Scientology.
After OT VIII, he had me thinking that Christians were the greatest evil in the world. Could never see my mother as Satan.
There is a really informative article on Tony Ortega’s web site about the upcoming Preliminary Hearing concerning Danny “Rapist” Masterson. Here is a link to his site: tonyortega.org
I think everyone interested in this case and/or this cult would find the following article very interesting:
“IN HER OWN WORDS: Danny Masterson accuser rips LAPD miscues in 2017 letter”
This article begins as follows:
“We’ve been telling you for four years now that Danny Masterson’s accusers have overcome incredible obstacles to get heard in a court of law, and now we have for you one of the most eye-opening pieces of evidence of it.”
Off Topic Reminder:
Tony Ortega reminds us that the “all important” Prelminary Hearing in the case against Danny “Rapist” Masterson is scheduled for May 18 2021.
This is exactly two weeks from today and it could well mark a major development in this case and I would like to suggest that everyone interested in this case and/or in this cult should make a reminder and check both Mike Rinder’s site as well as Tony Ortega’s site to find out what happens at that hearing.
Unless, of course, you know some way to watch the case online when it happens? If so, please do post a note here and tell us how? Thank you.
O/T. This is an update to a story that I posted several days ago. Given the Church of Scientology’s recent Twitter response regarding homosexuality, I decided to check their other Twitter responses on the subject. The results are below.
The big news is that the Church of Scientology admits that it does not perform gay weddings.
—————————–
The Church of Scientology says that gay people are welcome in the Church. Again, we have questions.
https://twitter.com/Scientology/status/1085380137669976064
Question:
“@Scientology so, I am gay. Am I welcome in your organization?”
Response by the Church of Scientology:
“Yes. Sexual orientation is not a criteria for membership in the Church. The first statement in the Creed of the Church of Scientology is that “All men of whatever race, color or creed were created with equal rights.”
NOTE: The Creed of the Church of Scientology does not say anything about sexual orientation. The Church of Scientology’s argument is non-sequitur.
https://twitter.com/Scientology/status/1033406015855681536
The Church of Scientology says:
“3a: Scientology deals with the individual as a spiritual being and is not concerned with sexual orientation. LRH’s observations about life are contained in 35 million words of writings and recorded lectures on the subjects of Dianetics and Scientology.”
https://twitter.com/Scientology/status/938165223885758464
The Church of Scientology says:
“1) L. Ron Hubbard was writing in the nineteen-fifties and sixties, when the dominant culture also characterized homosexuality as perversion. However, Scientology deals with the individual as a spiritual being and is not concerned with sexual orientation.”
NOTE: The use of the word “also” is an admission that Hubbard also instructed as a matter of religious doctrine that homosexuality was a “perversion” when he wrote in the nineteen-fifties and sixties. The question is, why should we believe that anything in Scientology religious doctrine regarding homosexuality has changed?
Nonetheless, the Church of Scientology admits that it does not perform gay weddings.
https://twitter.com/Scientology/status/1084947089967046658
The Church of Scientology says:
“We don’t discriminate for reasons of sex, however there is no service in the Church available for such a wedding. Gay parishioners traditionally marry in civic court and are welcomed at Church services.”
In any event, we have questions.
Sexual Orientation Questionnaire for the Church of Scientology.
1) Does the Church of Scientology support adoption by gay and lesbian couples?
2) If the Church of Scientology supports adoption by heterosexual individuals, does the Church of Scientology also support adoption by gay and lesbian individuals?
3) Can a gay or lesbian person become and remain a member of the Church of Scientology in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay or lesbian sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?
4) Can a gay or lesbian person receive Auditing (Scientology Pastoral Counseling) without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay or lesbian sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?
5) Can a gay or lesbian person become and remain Clear in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay or lesbian sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?
6) Can a gay or lesbian person become and remain OT 8 in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay or lesbian sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?
7) Can a gay or lesbian person become and remain a non-Sea Org staff member in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay or lesbian sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?
8) Can a gay or lesbian person become and remain a Sea Org member in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay or lesbiann sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?
9) Can a gay or lesbian person become and remain a member of the clergy of the Church of Scientology in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay or lesbian sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?
10) Is it TRUE that the Church of Scientology does NOT perform, endorse, advocate or accept the validity of any form of gay or lesbian conversion therapy, or any form of therapy or spiritual practice or technology intended, designed or that has the purpose of changing a gay or lesbian person’s sexual orientation from gay or lesbian to heterosexual?
Ver. 4.0
NOTE: In Version 4.0 above, I revised question number 10 to (perhaps awkwardly) include a double negative. I did this so that the Church of Scientology will pass as not discriminating against gay and lesbian people if and only if all of the questions are answered “yes.” I believe that overall the questionnaire is less confusing that way, and less likely cause question number 10 to be answered inaccurately.
*************************
Background:
VIDEO: Why You Can’t Be Gay In Scientology.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=_-lkYwv-nHQ
Scientology Homophobia
https://www.mikerindersblog.org/scientology-homophobia/
Scientology’s Homophobia: Even the Church’s Token Gay Guy Was Disgusted
https://www.villagevoice.com/2012/09/02/scientologys-homophobia-even-the-churchs-token-gay-guy-was-disgusted/
Memorialized with six screenshots on ESMBR at:
https://exscn2.net/threads/the-church-of-scientology-says-sexual-orientation-is-not-a-criteria-for-membership-in-the-church-we-have-questions.3088/post-87479
/
ISNOINews,
Whew! Does this questionaire nail the cherch’s ass or what?
“L. Ron Hubbard was writing in the nineteen-fifties and sixties, when the dominant culture also characterized homosexuality as perversion.”
It’s rather telling that Hubbard, in his infinite humanitarian wisdom, could not foresee a future where homosexuality would be generally accepted, at least in some parts of the world. Instead, he captured a snapshot of society’s views at the time, added his own toxic philosophical ramblings, then set it in stone as unalterable “scripture” to grow more and more out of place as time goes on.
Then again, the best he could come up with for OT3 were “space planes” resembling the DC-8, which just so happened to enter service around the time he wrote it. No foresight at all, or else he could have envisioned something like the Airbus A380 (with room for almost 900 aliens in a high-density configuration!).
I also wanted to comment on the fact that Mike Rinder described the importance of keeping from backsliding and using Scientology terms.
I am a firm believer that for some people the terms are very strong in their influence, particularly the ones they read, heard, wrote, said and THOUGHT the most while believing in them.
I recently saw an excellent video on mental health. It explained that when we create something and spread it via media it can have two audiences.
It was regarding a show on teenagers and suicide. It featured a main character who committed suicide.
The video gave an example of the issue with such communication.
When a certain film about the Vietnam war came out it featured very realistic combat and death scenes, far more than predecessors.
The result was a surge in suicides for Vietnam veterans who saw the film but no increase in suicides for the general public.
The Vietnam veterans had different vulnerabilities and if they had been warned to bot watch the film it may have been different.
Similarly, the video described how the teenage population has a subgroup that is especially vulnerable to suicidal ideation, they might get pushed over the edge by seeing a protagonist in a show “solve” her problems via suicide.
I bring all this up to expand on Mike Rinder’s point. Ex Scientologists and Scientologists are often vulnerable to entering trance states simply from seeing, hearing, or thinking certain terms from Scientology.
This is why I try to avoid writing in pure Scientology terms and call the founder Ronald Hubbard, to not use other name which is a trigger for thousands of people.
I hope that in future podcasts Mike Rinder and Leah Remini have more material on these issues and refer people to specific books and resources to study further, I know they have been essential for my recovery and education.
I had my comment cut off before I could include the link.
Scientology The Evidence What Convinces Them?
https://mbnest.blogspot.com/2019/04/scientology-evidence-what-convinces.html
Off topic comment.
I just listened to episode 38 of the podcast, viewer questions.
I wanted to say that I appreciate that Mike Rinder and Leah Remini took the time to go over the indoctrination techniques.
I am particularly pleased that they discussed several aspects including the hypnotic techniques used to get you to as they said brainwash yourself with the “study technology” that has you look up thousands and thousands of English words AND simultaneously look up thousands and thousands of Scientology words to learn all the definitions of both.
Hubbard in getting Scientologists to believe their doubts, desire to leave, questions, exasperation, confusion, and awareness of contradictions ALL stem exclusively from the “barriers to study” especially “misunderstood words” is the key piece of the puzzle.
They act to take in the contradictions between how they feel and perceive problems with the ideas Hubbard’s doctrine presents (like thousands of contradictions in the materials) and their indoctrination that the problem is not the materials but deficiencies in the student, always the student.
Several outsiders have said imagine using Hubbard’s techniques in another context. Imagine reading a book on Jews written by Hitler and applying Scientology “study technology” to your indoctrination.
As you set aside your disagreement and doubts and read Hitler’s definitions and cleared words and restudy and drill the materials until you are in full agreement with it it should become obvious what the indoctrination is. It’s reshaping a person into a deployable and zealous pawn of the source of the doctrine.
You might object to Nazis but the fact is the same regardless of the group. It could be a book on flat earth geography or any other non reality based system. Scientology certainly qualifies.
I can’t stress enough that this is a key component of the Scientology persuasion method.
I want to add a short excerpt from a blog post on this and a link.
“If a doctrine is not unintelligible, it has to be vague; and if neither unintelligible nor vague, it has to be unverifiable.”
― Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements
Margaret Singer as a top cult expert in her book Cults In Our Midst described cults and Scientology in particular quite well:
First a quote that struck me instantly. It reminded me of an analysis of Scientology written by a class XII auditor. She said Hubbard’s writings can seem contradictory and paradoxical. That is actually intentional.
The more complicated and filled with contradictions the new system is and the more difficult it is to learn, the more effective the conversion process will be. (page 67 Cults In Our Midst)
That fits Scientology. It’s incredibly complicated and embodies contradictions and is almost impossible to learn, certainly in full.
What is the effect of all this ? Immense confusion, anxiety and cognitive dissonance. Scientology is promoted as consistent but is not consistent at all.
This prompts cognitive dissonance in Scientologists. What are phenomena associated with cognitive dissonance ? Blankness, confusion, anxiety, reelingness.
The phenomena Hubbard described as created by his three barriers are well established as fitting two mental states – cognitive dissonance and hypnosis.
A not there feeling and postural slump are long known as accompanying hypnosis.
The pattern in Scientology is incredibly – almost idiotically simple – confuse a person by some method even slightly then offer a “stable datum” for that confusion that is accepted. Here is the important part I just now got this exactly – the stable data is ALWAYS meant to be two things – a lie and a method to induce further confusion that leads to accepting another stable datum, over and over. That is the con. The details vary and their effects and deserve tremendous study and dissection but the formula has only a few basic parts always. Confuse, offer solution to confusion give “solution” it is a lie designed to bring more confusion immediately or later. Sometimes there is a delay or apparent relief for a time before the confusion is back. Why ? Because if it does not add up if the truth was not part of the equation – it is all lies. Always was always will be. No truth ever, no workable anything, no miracles. One formula one conman one con. And by confusion I mean the confusion and reelingness and mental blankness associated with cognitive dissonance – it is a distinct feeling of being baffled or beffudled or overwhelmed and can be from contradictory or surprising info, behavior or emotions – ANYTHING that creates or brings back those phenomena even slightly.
That is his method. In my mind whether it is from his love of hypnosis and it having confusion and repetition in it or rhetoric or somewhere else he arrived at 1) get attention 2) create confusion 3) lie to direct attention while pretending to resolve the confusion (without resolving the confusion as it is his basis for an entry point for exploitation – so he will never give it up) 4) create another confusion requiring more attention and controlled action to pursue a claimed resolution that never comes 5) get more compliance from the victim and gradual increase via the first four steps over and over in confusion and compliance. And by compliance increasing I mean getting greater and greater degree of how willing and unthinking the victim is. How willing to do more and more extreme things and give more money and adulation and trust and even the victim’s life and blind loyalty are they ? Never enough for Hubbard – he wanted gradual building to absolute devotion. With no other priorities even left at all. And the confusion is to grow too as he saw it holding this all in place. Some will look at his study of hypnosis and say the growing confusion acts hypnotically and some would say it creates a condition of hiding the cognitive dissonance and discomfort in the subconscious via trance logic so it gets directed via projection or other psychological defense mechanisms at any who bring the confusion back to the surface but that is not the main point and that is for those who pursue the finest details on this to consider. And the growth of confusion is vital as it leaves those who do realize something is not true or right to often take forever to unstick the lies one by one as they feel odd about the ideas and unsure what is untrue or not. They do not see the pattern and so are emotionally still prey to it and emotion influences thought and behavior.
I had an encounter with a recruiter for the Unification Church. I said I didn’t believe in Christianity and the recruiter went away.
Thanks for the detailed comment.
When it comes to Mike’s daughter and the “Justice for Mom” campaign, I have always been highly conflicted about posting anything and I’m pretty sure that I have never said anything relevant about his daughter as it pertains to this issue. Why not?
I figure no matter what has been said, no one can be certain how Mike feels about his daughter. It may be a good guess that he may no longer love his first wife like he used to. But there is a real good chance that anything that people say about his daughter, anything unpleasant, would cause Mike some hurt feelings.
So, I’ve always thought that it would just be best to say as little as possible about Mike’s daughter – especially anything unpleasant and just wish Mike the best of luck in having his relationship with her restored however he would like to have it restored and however long that might take.
It’s astounding to me that Taryn could be so deluded … about her own Dad. Of course, it’s not her actually writing, but some OSA flunky sowing as much discord as he possibly can. I expect that she’s actually seen her mom since that wholly overblown incident and can SEE that she recovered about as quickly as would be expected for a woman who is poorly fed and often sleep-deprived; they don’t heal as well or as quickly as they normally would.
Oooh – so “justice4mom” made a “holiday wish” and “was blessed.”
Isn’t that all a bit wishy-washy? Doesn’t whoever is in charge of granting holiday wishes do proper smitings? Whatever is the world coming to?
Oh and a hash tag with Love Not Hate. Isn’t that special.
Mike, it is hard to know if the OSA slaves pushing this onto social media even believe that it will have an impact – they must know that the vast majority of eyeballs looking at it will also look at the open Internet and find out which side is most likely to be truthful. OSA has to do this, because L Ron Hubbard said it was the thing to do – at some point they are going to realise that the world does not work that way. Hopefully, your family will also figure it out.
She’s so full of it. “Holiday wish” my ass. She received her orders and complied with them immediately and to the letter. God, these Sea Ogres make me ill.
Aqua wrote: Sea Ogres. What a great name for them!
They truly are bullies, thugs and bandits and they really do belong behind bars.
Many of the people who are conned don’t want to believe they’ve been conned. From the objective perspective Scientology is clearly a con job.
Mike, unpretentious in knowing the soul of others, however, what your daughter continues to do is, for me, illogical.
If she is the one who writes, then she should be motivated by such deep hatred that it also leads her to lie shamelessly but which remains still an unnatural behavior.
However, I do not think possible that one can keep himself in such a constant hatred as she knows how things have really unfolded.
So she is forced to lend her name and image to OSA for their fair games.
That said, I guess the girl has realized several times that she doesn’t hate you at all. In fact, she could have liked to talk to you about it. That’s my opinion.
Taryn has little to do with the content of these videos.
The background is obviously a set. She probably lives in a tiny dormitory room with many room-mates. If she is married it would be an even tinier room with only one room-mate. More like a closet than what free people would call a dormitory, they don’t have kitchens, living rooms or TVs!
She is being used as a prop to attack her father. Only someone like Dave Miscavige would think of doing something like that.
Excellent point, Bruce!
Bruce, her NAME is being used as a prop. Quite likely, she has no idea what’s being posted in her name and has no control over it in any case.
She’s not writing anything, Loosing. She’s the Charlie McCarthy and Miscavige is the Edgar Bergen. She’s just a puppet, doing and saying exactly what she’s being told to do and say. That said, it is my opinion that one day she will cringe in shame and shake with frantic regret for having permitted herself to be used in this disgusting manner by the monster David Miscavige.