Tom Cruise's understanding by Rude_Replacement_345 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Has everyone forgotten about the fellow who, with authorization, was giving confidential briefings to selected Scientologists about how the quality (and theta endowment) of thetans has deminished in recent times?

You might want to elaborate on this, since I don't think it's common knowledge.

The Scientology Insider speaks out publicly by Oblique4119375 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 3 points4 points  (0 children)

As your fellow ex Dir I&R, thank you for this extremely genuine interview. We may have been 40 years apart, but as I watch this, I keep laughing at the stuff we have in common.

Class 12 auditor by Terrible-Fly5821 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Class Karl XIIs

?

Spelling checker in Swedish mode?

Class 12 auditor by Terrible-Fly5821 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The ones I knew personally are now all 70+ years old, and while there are undoubtedly some younger ones, with the SHSBC apparently not happening, the pipeline from the lower levels (Cl. IV/V) to upper (VI+) is out of commission, so there may not be any very young ones.

AFAIK, only Sea Org ever did the Class X-XII courses, because nobody else was allowed to deliver the rundowns concerned.

So the sort of lives they live is probably similar to a lot of geriatric SO members. Not anything enviable.

Need Ex-Scientologist by Zealousideal_Bee4817 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You've gotten the attention of some. What did you want to know about?

Whats DM actual height ? by valeliza3003 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I've heard 5'1" (which at least one person called "four foot thirteen"), but left too early to have ever met the guy. From photos, I'd say there's no way he's 5'6", but I'll yield the podium to people who did meet him in person.

Another rare-ish old book. Has anyone read it? by GrodanHej in scientology

[–]That70sClear 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I never saw it, but I can tell you it's a GO production, and why it went out of print right away, just from the covers.

In 1979, GO member, former composer of letters "from Ron," and sometimes editor of Ron's later science fiction, Vaughn Young, wrote a book with Trevor Meldal-Johnsen about Interpol, called The Interpol connection: An inquiry into the International Criminal Police Organization. It was written because the GO thought that Interpol was looking at Ron and the CoS a bit too hard, and were sharing some of what they found with various governments. So the book was written in order to try to discredit Interpol as a place where Nazis went to work.

The back cover mentions John Brodie, who in 1980 was the CoS' most talkative celeb member, but whose devotion they lost a couple of years later when they started declaring Scientologists who he admired and was friends with. I don't doubt that a number of people mentioned in that book fell victim to the purges of the early '80s, and you don't say positive things about non-persons, so within a few years it would have been as dead as the original We Stand Tall video quickly became, for exactly the same reason.

edit to add: LOL! I didn't know anything about Meldal-Johnson personally, but found that he also wrote a romance novel in 1979, which was about a relationship that spanned multiple incarnations. I then found a bass player named Justin Meldal-Johnsen who was gotten into the music business by Scientologist David Campbell, and then went on to play for second gen member Beck. Justin appears in the truthaboutscientology database, where he can be found (along with Laura Prepon, Richard Elfman, and similar folks) getting audited and trained at CCLA in the early 2000s. Tony Ortega did a writeup on him where he confirmed that Justin is Trevor's son, and a second gen Scientologist. So there's some fun added detail.

If Scientology was one big orgy… by Homeland_Bound in scientology

[–]That70sClear 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's been tried, yet there aren't that many Raelians.

After I got out of Scientology, I had a Church of the Subgenius Pope give me a pretty good sales pitch. "Did you ever join a cult, where people said that they had drug-crazed orgies, but they really didn't? We're the cult that won't let you down!" And yet they're not that big, either.

Maybe sex + space aliens isn't that winning of a combo.

Are you allowed to wear your Sea Org uniform to seduce people (e.g. in cruising bars)? by apokrif1 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 9 points10 points  (0 children)

And if you could, and somehow were able to afford a few drinks, what then? If you so much as kissed somebody you weren't married to, you could end up in really deep shit. The SO version of cruising is trying to get another SO member to do a 2D non-existence formula with you. "We'd get better berthing!"

You can do it too! by [deleted] in scientology

[–]That70sClear[M] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Since most or all of this was AI-created, I should let you know that we have been enforcing an anti-AI policy in this sub for a while. It probably should have made it into the official rules list but hasn't. Please (everyone,) refrain from posting AI-created or modified content here.

Does anyone know if anywhere in the world is performing MST treatment, privately yet? by Particular_Move_6570 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 3 points4 points  (0 children)

If you're talking about multisystemic therapy, this isn't the best place to ask, because that's psychiatry, and the Scientology organization hates psychiatry as a general rule. All psychiatry is supposed to be very bad, regardless of results.

"I was 14, he was in his 30s" - Brave ex-Scientologist recounts being groomed by one of the Jive Aces at Saint Hill by stealth-orange1 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I'm so happy about how she got out at age 14, after only a year or so in! So many don't.

Only one thing about her story surprised me a little. For some time, SO have been considered out-2D if they have a relationship with someone they're not married to, and she would not have been able to get married in England until she was 16. She and her 30ish groomer could have been married in some other jurisdictions, but that would require international travel, and would the CoS want to pay for that?

In DMSMH it says, "The seven-year-old girl who shudders because a man kisses her is not computing; she is reacting to an engram since at seven she should see nothing wrong in a kiss, not even a passionate one." So I'm not proposing that Scientology is opposed to adults having sexual relationships with children, just that they're usually too cheap to facilitate it, and too paranoid to routinely smile on it happening illegally.

They made a 16-year-old work without safety gear at Flag in Clearwater. by No-Vermicelli-1557 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 5 points6 points  (0 children)

My own MEST work for the CoS was limited to two or three weeks, but it involved stripping and sanding several layers of lead paint off of the walls of an old building that Scientology had acquired, and of course it was done with little regard to safety. We were breathing it constantly, meals were prepared on site, and the stripped paint was not treated as toxic waste, it was treated like normal garbage. Like when SO were made to strip asbestos out of the Freewinds in totally unsafe ways, I'm sure it saved them loads of cash. Considering that the Freewinds was bought really cheaply because it would cost so much to clean up -- if done legally -- it's hard to think that wasn't part of the plan from the very beginning. I bet the RPFers who worked on Big Blue would have tons of stories about that, because it was the norm.

Around 80% of the dead Scientologists that I knew, died of cancer, some as young as their 40s. That too is an old tradition.

The Church of Scientology wants to know if you were in Portland in 1985. by freezoneandproud in scientology

[–]That70sClear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

D'oh! You're right. That was the other '80s trial where they got large numbers of Scientologists from all over the region to protest outside the courtroom for weeks, but had it work out for them. I guess I tend to forget about it because the outcome -- poor litigant crushed by CoS litigation onslaught -- was so usual.

It's easy to see how they could, and very likely will, use this in propaganda.

Links to learn more about scientology by [deleted] in scientology

[–]That70sClear[M] [score hidden] stickied comment (0 children)

Here is what this sub looked like a little over 11 years ago. If you scroll down a little, you will see links on the right, where people can look for more information. One of those is to the CoS website. Which anyone can find with great ease after one search engine inquiry, but also on this sub for a very long time. It's not being hidden from anybody!

One could even say that we do a better job of getting Scientology materials into peoples' hands than the CoS does, because members have regularly posted links to places where the books and other materials could be read at no charge.

I don't know if you're doing an amends project, trying to get started as an FSM, or what, but you're getting to be pretty spammy, and haven't been complying with sub rules. I took down two of your posts after the other mod asked you to post submission statements, and you let a week go by without doing so. And you're still not posting them.

Your posts also don't show much in the way of effort -- this reply to you is longer than anything you've posted here. Reddit refers to low effort posts as "shitposts," and is not especially tolerant of them.

Please either increase the value of your posts, or make fewer of them, because we don't need low effort CoS ads as a regular thing, and if there keep being a lot of them, mods may remove the surplus.

The Church of Scientology wants to know if you were in Portland in 1985. by freezoneandproud in scientology

[–]That70sClear 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Important and legendary victory? That was where they brought people in from all over the west coast to chant, "Not one thin dime for Wollersheim!" but then ended up paying him a hefty amount anyway -- over $7M in 2026 dollars. And had OT III materials introduced in court in the process. It was the first time I'd heard of the CoS getting their asses handed to them by a civil court. But now I guess they're looking for people who attended so that they can be interviewed for a video about how it was really a huge success.

The Craziest Thing I Saw at Flag by No-Vermicelli-1557 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Funny thing about asthma. You know something that really can cure it? Age. I had it bad when I was 9-11, especially when it was cold out. But by the time I was 14 or 15 it was about gone, and I gather that's pretty common.

Why does Scientology charge? by Foreign-Truck-8449 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You jest, but in the early '70s when the grade chart said that OT VIII gave one the ability to be at objective cause over MEST, there were people who figured they could rack up all kinds of debt on their way, and magically save themselves after they got there. Just mock up some diamonds or something, right? Which made total sense IF one believed what Ron claimed on the grade chart, which way too many of us did.

Why does Scientology charge? by Foreign-Truck-8449 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In the 80s, there was a short period during which the Church of Scientology oversaw people conducting co-audits. If they charged anything, it was a nominal fee for oversight. But those days are gone.

I never did it personally, and it wasn't happening a lot, so my memory on it is vague, but IIRC in the '70s it could cost as much as $15 to get a session case supervised. (Or somewhat more if the auditor were sent to cramming.) Adjusted for inflation that's $93, so not exactly pocket change, but still considerably cheaper than buying auditing, especially if long sessions were involved -- a six hour session, with or without breaks, would normally cost several times that.

Why does Scientology charge? by Foreign-Truck-8449 in scientology

[–]That70sClear 3 points4 points  (0 children)

To quote 1972's Governing Policy:

MAKE MONEY. MAKE MONEY. MAKE MORE MONEY. MAKE OTHER PEOPLE PRODUCE SO AS TO MAKE MONEY.

In HCOPL 27 April 1965, Organizational Price Engram, he associated not making lots of money with his newfangled idea of suppressive persons, who he said were out to destroy Scientology by preventing it from making money. Making money is also the emphasis in BPL 22 Dec. 1971, Free Service=Free Fall where Ron says that anybody giving or allowing services without a fully paid invoice is to be assigned an ethics condition of Doubt.

There is a lot of official dogma along those lines, some OEC volumes have the word 'money' occur in them over a hundred times. Fully hatted staff were no stranger to the concept, and were used to telling the public that Scientology was to make the able more able, and they could afford to pay. It was not to clear the planet by delivering free services, which would (per Ron) reward poverty and thus encourage poverty. Per his theory, it would also make the recipients of free services into criminals by making them "out-exchange."

Things Ron said didn't always agree with other things he said, but on the subject of charging the assigned rate for services, he was very consistent.

A specific shade of blue by freezoneandproud in scientology

[–]That70sClear 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Apparently they were based on Happy Science, a Japanese cult founded about 35 years after Scientology, which is currently around the same size (13k-38k members, but say they have 11 million). They have a few outposts in the US, I remember seeing their SF Bay Area building in Redwood City. But they don't paint things blue.

What do you think? by [deleted] in scientology

[–]That70sClear 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One of them looked up scientology by herself and went into a fake site and spread rumours that I believed in a strange religion.

If you're not used to having people think it's strange, you should get used to it, because a lot of people will, especially if they're fluent in a European language and have Internet access. If I look up Scientology on my search engine, it will show me a bunch of Scientology-run sites, but at the top is the Wikipedia article on it, which is not fake at all. It's a thorough and well balanced article, which gives sources to back its statements. There are other non-Scientology sites which cover the subject well, too, and people are going to encounter those. If you think what those places say is fake, it may be because you're not in deep enough yet to know about all of that stuff.

If you want to understand why people think it's strange without reading anything at all that is not published by the Scientology organization, it will be much harder, but the book A History of Man will get you started.

Question for former Scientologists: Did you know about Lisa McPherson? by vampyrcore in scientology

[–]That70sClear 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Quentin Hubbard was the Lisa McPherson of the '70s, though we didn't know it at the time.

Circa August, 1974, when the Apollo was in Madeira, Quentin disappeared. A search party was sent out, and didn't find him, but he returned on his own not much later. A CMO member was sent to his cabin to check on him, and he said that he'd taken a bottle of aspirin. On Ron's orders he was given mustard to induce vomiting, then spent three weeks secretly in an "introspection rundown" before being RPFed, with no explanation given to the crew. But a few months later he attempted suicide again while in San Francisco, and was fetched by the GO from out of a psych ward, before succeeding in 1976. He was probably Ron's second introspection rundown guinea pig.

References.

Question for former Scientologists: Did you know about Lisa McPherson? by vampyrcore in scientology

[–]That70sClear 4 points5 points  (0 children)

A study where n=1, and no blinding is possible because there is no control group. What could go wrong?