notย Scientology’s most hysterical critics, led by the blind atheist cleric, Tony Ortega, are doing their best to nullify any attempt by Independent Scientologists to reform Scientology. This is very short-sighted. It’s based on a blinkered thought-stopping distortion that “it is impossible to reform Scientology.”

Anyone who has taken a course in a Scientology organization, which was not run by the fanatics in the Sea Organization, knows that the tired old distortion aboveย is not true. There are plenty of groups of Scientologists who have never been abusive. And the overwhelming majority of Scientologists throughout its history have worked to make sure that Scientology would never be abusive.

Two recent events have been minimized and largely ignored by Tony Ortega and his militant Bunkerites. These events are very important for ending the abuses in the Church of Scientology.

  1. The First Independent Church of Scientology received approval of its Articles of Incorporation by the State of California on March 7, 2016, as reported by the Religious Liberty League.
  2. Per Tony Ortega’s own reporting, Dani Lemberger and the Church of Scientology were ordered to settle a lawsuit in Tel Aviv this month – or the judge threatened to get rid of the Church of Scientology in Israel. The deal was sealed to the public. But what kind of bargaining position did Dani Lemberger have in those negotiations under a judge who said that?

I think these events might be viewed as two big legal wins for independent Scientology – a form of Scientology WITHOUT the Sea Org in it.

I’ve even seen Jeff Hawkins, a former Sea org member, now pretend to know what Independent Scientologists will do in the future – as if Indies are not aware of the abuses that can arise from Hubbard’s writings.

The route to ending the abuses in Scientology will not come primarily through Tony Ortega’s blog, nor his ex-Sea Org sources. In fact, almost 7 years of Ortega’s reporting has proven impotent in producing reform: No criminal charges have been filed against any Church official, and almost every legal attempt to force them to reform has shown loss after loss in court.

The end of Scientology abuse will come though many different routes, but it is clear now that it must mostly come from Scientologists themselves.

You can not rely on the David Miscavige Perp Walk to be the single thing to change conditions for the better in Scientology. Scientology already had a Perp Walk for Mary Sue Hubbard and 11 other top Scientologists in the late 1970’s. Look at where they are today.

It’s not very smart for anyone to treat Independent Scientology as the “brainwashed enemy” – if you are truly interested in seeing the end to Scientology spiritual abuse.

Now, if you are simply a blind follower of the atheist cleric Tony Ortega – and you hate all religion – then overlooking all this is understandable.

But – if you want to remain blind, you are never going to win against David Miscavige.

44 Comments
newest
oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Claire Swazey
Claire Swazey
April 16, 2017 10:31 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

Evidently he is a senior citizen. Bright, interested in higher education and other admirable things but still a bully who lacks empathy.

Claire Swazey
Claire Swazey
April 16, 2017 10:29 pm
Reply to  Eileen

I’ve often mentioned that indies are looseknit, not centralized and not all the same. But I do know what you mean and have seen it (well more like heard of it) -but only occasionally. I tend to think it’s not common.

But here’s the thing re having a new Scn church: I honestly don’t think its members would ever all agree on which policies to ditch. This is important.

That is why I think they’re better off being freeform/grassroots.

Claire Swazey
Claire Swazey
April 16, 2017 10:23 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

When I first met HH, I was really challenging with him and probably not that fair re the indie thing. We later made nice, exchanged genial pms and posts, etc. Later, he stated getting testy with me. I guess he didn’t like my views.

One day, someone started yet another flame auto da de thread. He went in there and complained about Mark Baker and me and that we’d ganged up on him. I was mystified as I thought we’d made up. Evidently he was still upset.

Point is, he.was.upset. As in he felt he’d not been treated nicely or fairly. As in he didn’t like things said to him.

But now he wants to excuse viciousness? Ummmm…

Dave Gibbons
Dave Gibbons
April 4, 2017 10:46 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

That seems like a nice response to me. Work on the charm, Al, you’ll thank me for it later. ๐Ÿ™‚

Richard
March 31, 2017 8:31 am
Reply to  Alanzo

They were on Skype

Gib
Gib
March 30, 2017 9:35 pm
Reply to  Richard

what do you mean by Tribal Witnessing

Gib
Gib
March 30, 2017 9:00 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

it can be killed, not necessarily thru the courts, but thru social media and news and blogs, why this can also be called word of mouth.

I wish members got the memo from Steve Sarge where he told of Hubbard saying he failed and wasn’t coming back, it’s in Martys book and Lawrence Wright book. Opps, there goes the upper OT levels, which are supposedly the OT levels as OT1-8 are pre-OT. It’s a dead end. The guru LRH is dead and ain’t coming back, LOL

I might add I didn’t need Sarge to make this statement to Marty, so he was not somebody that had credibility to me, I already figured it out by simple observation of so called clears and OT’s in action.

I know what you are saying. But I’ll always be saying the mantra of no clears, no OT’s. And afterall, Hubbard carried that mantra of clears and OT’s, so I reverse it. Religion, spiritual, what BS when it comes to scientology.

Richard
March 30, 2017 6:44 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

“The Tribal Witnessing”! Still Laughing!

You’re “The KING of RHETORIC”, Alanzo!

The Commodore would be proud of you!

Dave Gibbons
Dave Gibbons
March 29, 2017 5:31 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

I’m happy to see you so positive about it. You must spend more time there than I do. I’ve always been rather fond of Paul/DullOldFarts’s commentary myself. ๐Ÿ™‚

Richard
March 29, 2017 10:06 am

“Ex-Scientologists At War” would be an interesting book title.

Mary Aiken mentions cyber stalking, the danger of allowing children to have smart phones, and studies of cyber trolls among other things in an interview on Booktv.org on her book “The Cyber Effect:A Pioneering Cyberpsychologist Explains How Human Behavior Changes Online”. There’s also a transcript for people wishing to save time.

https://www.c-span.org/series/?bookTv

(search Mary Aiken)

Dave Gibbons
Dave Gibbons
March 28, 2017 8:58 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

Al, why even bother? These days, I’m sad to say, ESMBs seems more like an echo-chamber than a discussion board. Can you even recall the last constructive exchange of ideas about scientology?

Eileen
Eileen
March 28, 2017 7:45 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

What a great story, and an impressive real gain, and I am glad you had that experience. Where we may differ is that I I credit the ethics officer, he helped you a lot, and helped you gain an important insight. I credit him, Scientology was just the tool he used. I would posit that it was the person, not the tech, that caused the shift.
Glad you had that experience. Maybe I will vote for you ๐Ÿ˜‰

Eileen
Eileen
March 28, 2017 1:30 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

Might a good therapist been just as helpful?

Eileen
Eileen
March 28, 2017 1:29 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

Alanzo,
I respect your opinion and experience, but I believe that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” No one should hold power over another persons ethical decision making. Besides, the term ethics when used in Scientology is not really accurate, is it? I think by ethics scientologists mean obedience.

Ethics is the study of those things that are not absolute, that “depend” on context. I don’t believe in murder, but might kill someone who attacked me, and would almost certainly kill to protect my children.
I have participated in administering doses of morphine to someone dying in agony. I am a killer, but does that make me a murderer?

Scientology is not a science, science trades in ambiguity and probability. Scientology is rather a belief structure of absolutes. I was amused to hear one of the Indie scientologists refer to the fact that he did not “believe” something, he “knew” it to be true. The thing is was referring to was something that can never be known as a fact, but only known as a belief (might have been his existence billions of years ago). So many years out of the cult and he still doesn’t know the difference between believing and knowing!

In my opinion, the construct of “ethics” as used by scientologists will always make the practice dangerous.
So, I guess that means I won’t be voting for an Indie Scientologist come November!
Eileen

Eileen
Eileen
March 28, 2017 8:41 am
Reply to  Alanzo

Unfortunately, I am afraid that Indie Scientology (at least the Milestone Two commenters) were pretty focused on reconstituting Scio ethics procedures. I remember one discussion about how “traitors” like Hanna Eltringham would face severe ethics procedures before being allowed to become considered in good standing. I believe this was a discussion around the First Independent Church of Scientology.
It was remarkable to see the vitriol directed at those who had spoken their personal truth. And the smug judgemental belief.
Does anyone know if the scientologists portrayed on the Aslan show, or the Dror Center, have ethics enforcement? If so, it is (IMO) a strong argument against the Indie movement. Aslan made them seem benign, this would be an important omission.

Eileen
Eileen
March 27, 2017 7:37 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

Quality matters more than quantity.

Virginia
March 27, 2017 1:49 pm

Scientologists are obsessed with stats (statistics). Did you notice how many times commenters at ESMB today attacked your STATS?

And how would they even know how many READERS or VIEWS you have anyway…unless I missed it I don’t see any view counts on your posts.

Virginia
March 27, 2017 1:23 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

It is!

The anti-conspiracy-theorists at ESMB (ad the bunker) have apparently been spinning a conspiracy theory. You, me, and Oracle are — how do they usually put that? “are OSA agents or might as well be”.

Its funny how these “people” jump up and down attacking any REAL conspiracies that exist in and around scientology, and yet are the first to invent conspiracy THEORIES when someone threatens their continuity of narrative game.

Remember when we were all posting at Mark’s blog last fall and various abusive persons weren’t allowed to do their usual dog-piling? This twitter account was created with the sole intention to position Marty Rathbun (and Mike and I etc.) as OSA…

https://twitter.com/MarkRathbun_OSA/status/776284864634957825

https://twitter.com/MarkRathbun_OSA/status/776323432245923840

https://twitter.com/MarkRathbun_OSA/status/776282440817971201

I’m thinking that next (if it hasn’t happened already) we’ll be portrayed as some sort of SCIENTOLOGY SHADOW GOVERNMENT agents. So deep under cover not even OSA knows we’re OSA.

lol

Lone Star
Lone Star
March 27, 2017 1:01 pm
Reply to  Alanzo

Lol….. Oh Veda. Dear sweet Veda.

I still have to keep reminding myself that he’s a guy. From the beginning I had him pictured as an uptight, stuffy, know-it-all, old fashioned librarian type who never smiles or laughs.