Scientology; More from John Sweeney

I really do hate scientology. They actvely target young vulnerable people, particularly those with learning difficulties and people with drug problems. They say they can cure them of addiction and personality disorders.

I think children and parents of kiRAB with special neeRAB should be warned about them like "stranger danger". They are basically enslaved within the scientology organisation and are made to cut all ties so they end up totally depend on scientology for everything with no outside support.

It really is a sinister, wicked organisation.
 
Now I remember, I think I agreed with the South Park writers, as Hayes had said something about intolerance and bigotry... as you say Hayes didnt mind them taking the piss out of Christians, Muslims, Jews etc... but he didnt like them making fun of scientology.;)
I think Parker's quote was "He wants different standarRAB to beliefs other than his own, and to me that is where intolerance and bigotry begin"
;)
 
These guys are serious - a couple of years ago they drove a guy to suicide in Poole and used to spend their time on Poole high street trying to entrap vulnerable people. Without being dramatic i am sure they will monitor this thread.
 
Surely there's an obvious "one-rule-for-them-one-for-us" going on here? I can't believe Tom Cruise or John Travlota were told, when they joined, that they had to cut off all contact with their families??
 
Look out for posters from East Grinstead, it's mzing how many phone in callers are from there whenever there's a radio phon ein on the subject, I assume there's some sort of headquarters there.
 
Almost everything I read and hear about Scientology unsettles me. It is part new age "enlightenment" course, part naff collection of Barnum statements and confidence tricks, part pay-as-you-go cult, and part (a large part) Mafioso protection racket.

Still, as much as I was rooting for him, Sweeney isn't the world's greatest journalist. First of all this documentary did not in itself expose a great deal. Evidently, information about Scientology is hard to come by, and his expose was limited to the personal stories of a few people, which we only have their word for. The most damning practice it did expose, ironically from the Scientologists' point of view, was their relentless hounding of Sweeney and their utterly, mesmerizingly creepy penchant for filming his every move. Secondly, I don't personally think Sweeney speaks well. Most of his questions are weak, he stumbles for worRAB, he seems genuinely flustered and intimidated a lot of the time (which in fairness one can't entirely blame him for).

I can't help thinking that his only reason for making this film was to try and counteract his embarrassment of 3 years ago; the journalistic equivalent of throwing good money after bad. That said, I am glad someone is prepared to go after Scientology. Not many journalists would willingly submit themselves to such harassment.
 
I think the accusation that Sweeney made the film just to get back for the saga of a few years ago is disingenuous. This is hardly the second programmes the BBC has made about this cult (as clips in the episode attested), and the focus on this one was more about how the cult operate to produce the sort of results we saw last time. At every stage Sweeney was excruciating careful to let the cult have their say, however obviously made up and deceitful whatever rubbish it came up with were. A great example of letting the cult hang themselves with their own rope.
 
Hmm! As a parent with autistic children, which the scientology says can be "cured", I've always viewed them as dangerous.
Oh! yes and a cult.
Roll on Tuesday.
 
just watched the 2007 documentary, sure i had seen it before, the last 5 minutes definitly.

It will be interesting to see and will watch it on tuesday
 
Also what people don't realize is how totally different Scientology treats the influential people they target.

How they treated Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman:

When Tom confided to the Scientology leader about the couple's fantasy of running through a meadow of wild flowers together, his friend apparently decided to make his dream come true.

"A team of 20 Sea Org disciples was set to work digging, hoeing, and planting wheat grass and wildflower seed near the Cruises' bungalow.

"Naturally the work was regularly inspected by David and Shelley Miscavige [his wife], who would ride over to the site on his motorbike. They were apparently unhappy with the finished appearance and had the area ploughed over and reseeded."

- Article in Daily Mail

That's 20 non-important "slaves" sent to make a flower meadow (The mind boggles) to try and lure someone influential.

It is just appalling.
 
That's as may be, but surely they haven't been cut off from communication with "the outside world" (ie anyone they knew who isn't a Loon, sorry, Scientoligist!)? I'm sure the Stars are free to associate with who they like. Can't see the CoS Mafia coming down hard on them if they "break the rules" --- what's more important? Their big money and famous support, or the rules of the "church"?

Answers on a postcard, please...
 
The wording of their statement (PDF) on the latest BBC programme - written by Tommy Davis - is also somewhat twisted and disturbing.

For interest, here is a 1987 documentary on the Church of Scientology - by BBC Panorama. This would have been broadcast about a year after L Ron Hubbard died.
 
I can not take Scientology seriously at all....Knowing what it is based on..
I have heard some C.R.A.P in my time, but a religion based on a old Sci fi Story.. is taking the biscuit.

I saw this documentary, and thought it was good, it really tried to get to the bottom of the cult.
When the basis of this religion was mentioned to the famous actors, and their reactions made me laugh.

Any one in my opinion taken in by all this are complete Idiots... Unfortunately there are a lot of them around
 
Back
Top