Daily Archives: January 10, 2013

What More Can I Say?

There is an interesting little undercurrent rumbling through the “Independent community.”   It is peppered with lines like this:

“Something has changed with Marty recently; and I don’t like the feel of it.”

“Marty has all the sudden stopped making a stark distinction between Scientology Inc. and Scientology.”

Rumor mills – generally energized by the not so bright false data prone – have embellished and alarmed it with bells and whistles.   All the way to the recent Chicken Little claim in the comments section of this blog itself:

…Tony Ortega has taken over the blog.

To highlight how absurd that conclusion is, though I haven’t spoken to (nor read much of his writings) in months I bet Ortega fell off his chair laughing on that one.  He is more frustrated and perplexed by my criticism of his views than he is of Scientology Inc. propaganda about him.  Incidentally, that Tony Ortega line, along with several of the others circulating were first published on OSA anti-Marty sites.

To all of you who are getting on the back channels alarmist rumor mill bandwagon, I suggest you are in denial.   To those actively fueling it, I suggest you are cowards.

I published a book almost a year ago where I made my views – that are not dissimilar to those expressed on this blog of late – about as crystal clear as a person can make them.  Those blog views are consistent with what I took the time to lay out in context and with supporting history in my book, What Is Wrong With Scientology?  That I am not a robotic, lock-step follower of Scientology has been made clear in the continuously posted Welcome section of this blog since its inception.  I haven’t heard a single comment on the blog, or even in communications directed to me or relayed to me that challenge any of those views, at least not by the very best Independents now covertly fueling the alarm wave.

I am beginning to express them more often in posts in the hopes that it will prompt some thinking and exchange of ideas and views.   I am not seeing much reasoned debate with them.  Instead, I am seeing Scientology Inc. style undercutting, back biting, rumor milling, questioning of the source of views.  The dead agent caper.  David Miscavige and OSA are having a field day with this coffee klatch mentality.  The big shots originating it are, at best, oblivious to the fact that they are doing the work of Scientology Inc.

To those engaging in such, and energizing and forwarding it,  is that Independent Scientology?

It is not what I considered Independent Scientology to be when I suggested people declare their independence from Scientology Inc.

The thrust of the backchannels chatter is “Maybe the guy who coined (or as freezoners assert, re-coined) the term Independent Scientologist doesn’t qualify for membership.”

Your views?

Scientology Inc. Obsession With Celebrity

For how  Scientology Inc.’s obsession with celebrities turned its greatest Public Relations assets into liabilities,  see excerpts from Lawrence Wright’s book concerning the courting of Tom Cruise and  John Travolta.

Is there something about Scientology that would lead to this inevitability, or is this simply a Miscavige Scientology Inc. deal?

While the Miscavige/Cruise business is in a league of its own in terms of excess and obsession, is the inhumanity exhibited by Scientology Inc. pre-Miscavige (as most of the cruelty reported in the Travolta sections are) any more tolerable in a civilized society?