Should Scientology Critics Get Involved in Family Disconnection Conflicts?

This begins a new weekly feature here on AlanzosBlog.

Heresy, means “to choose”. Labeling certain ideas as heresy has been going on for a couple of  thousand years now. What’s so great about heresy is that it forces scrutiny of assumptions that too often remain hidden and unexamined. The consideration of heresy and heretical questions was what broke Alanzo free from Scientology.

That was one of my “successful actions” which worked like a bomb for me in thinking for myself again after Scientology, and ever since I have always regretted it when I quit asking heretical questions.

If there was ever a purpose for AlanzosBlog, it is for the promotion and celebration all kinds of heresy.

So, this blogpost is comprised of a blog post by “ZaneX”, a too infrequent poster here to AlanzosBlog.

It is a rant of the highest order, and it deserves it’s own post as our inaugural heresy of the week.


“Disconnection” has and continues to be a classic case of anti-Scientologists making a mountain out of a molehill. For heavens sake, “disconnection” happens between Scientologists in good standing and quite frequently. One of the best examples is that of Tom Cruise and Michael Doven. Doven was Cruise’s personal and professional assistant for many years, beginning with “Far and Away” in 1992 and ending during production of “Collateral” in 2004. He even got himself producer credit on some of those films and a cameo in “Eyes Wide Shut”. But like most “production” assistants, he mostly ran daily errands. The guy literally did Cruise’s laundry and dry cleaning. But something happened (which may or may not have something to with allegations of Doven spying on him for Miscavige) and Cruise became sufficiently pissed off at Doven to not only fire him, but disconnect from him completely to the point that Cruise will not allow Doven to be anywhere near him. The “Freedom Medal of Valor” awarded to Cruise in 2004 was a direct result of this situation, as was the secret “scholarship award” that Miscavige granted to Doven to allow him to study the Basics, Congresses and ACCs full-time at Celebrity Centre and become the first Golden Age of Knowledge completion. I put that in quotations because it wasn’t really a scholarship award; Doven not only did not have to pay for the massive number of courses to complete the entire Golden Age of Knowledge line-up, but he was actually paid a generous living allowance since he had to be on course full-time 7 days a week and Doven isn’t exactly wealthy.

That’s just one example. There’s many others, like the dozens of Scientologists I know who disconnected from Grant Cardone and consider him a vulture and charlatan. Like the Cruise/Doven flap, as long as they keep their grievances on the downlow and don’t air them publicly (including within Scientology itself) and limit them to proper terminals, it’s considered a legit action. Why? Because according to Church policy, a Scientologists has the right to communicate or not communicate with anyone they choose.

Anti-Scientology zealots like Ortega, as you’ve so clearly indicated, deliberately ignore the fact that the Church does not and cannot put a gun to anyone’s head. They can’t “force” anyone to do anything. They can sure as hell try to coerce people, but that’s as far as they can take it and the worst thing they can do to someone who refuses to disconnect from an anti-Scientology family member is not allow them to continue in Scientology. And if they’re refusing to disconnect from someone who hates Scientology, they’re already on their way out, whether they’re aware of it or not.

I think you might actually be the first person I’ve encountered among all the former Scientologists who write a blog that raises this basic issue, that the bizarre zealotry of Ortega and his ilk in demanding (!) that Scientologists must maintain connections with their Scientology-hating parents or relatives is beyond irrational. They also ignore the fact that Ethics Officers always go out of their way to keep the peace within families and advise disconnection as an absolute last resort. That’s Hubbard’s own policy, right there. Hubbard even did a recording, “Can We Ever Be Friends?” to that effect. I was in the Sea Org for years and each and every case that I observed or was involved with where disconnection was a possibility, it was always the anti-Scientology family member that refused to compromise in the name of keeping the peace.

Case in point, the recent obsession Ortega has with Phil Jones and his billboard campaign. I personally know Mike Jones and I know for a fact that he doesn’t want anything to do with his parents. According to Mike (who isn’t “missing”, just like Shelly Miscavige isn’t “missing” — what is it with Ortega and his idiot fans?), his parents hate Scientology with a passion and insist that he and his sister leave. According to Mike, and he’s told me his sister concurs, his parents have consistently refused to shut the hell up about their problems with Scientology and every time they talked with him or his sister, they would always keep demanding that they both leave Scientology.

If Phil Jones could actually have a civilized conversation with his son and daughter without constantly, obsessively dumping on Scientology and demanding they leave the Sea Org and even worse, join them on their anti-Scientology crusade, there’d be no problem and no disconnection! It’s that simple.

But Ortega is a mentally sick individual who hates Scientology to such an extreme that he would never in a million years even acknowledge the possibility that Phil Jones and his wife are actually the problem, not Scientology or David Miscavige or L. Ron Hubbard.

Let me be emphatically clear: Mike Jones, who is not missing and who does not wish to leave the Sea Org, does not want anything to do with his parents, and he has the absolute right not to communicate with them.

I’m certain this is also true of most other Scientologists who have chosen to disconnect from their anti-Scientology parents or relatives. They have every right to leave Scientology, but they sure as hell don’t have the right to subject their kids or family members who remain Scientologists in good standing to a constant barrage of anti-Scientology propaganda and demonizing.

So, to those parents who keep crying and whining to Tony Ortega, the formula to use in avoiding the possibility of disconnection is this: have enough respect for your children to shut the hell up about Scientology when you’re talking with them, and also have enough respect for them as Scientologists in good standing to not be in contact with a bigot like Tony Ortega. That’s all. Agree to disagree on the subject of Scientology and just avoid discussion about it, and don’t hang out with mentally sick losers like Tony Ortega.

Like most things in life, it really is that simple.”

First published here.

72 thoughts on “Should Scientology Critics Get Involved in Family Disconnection Conflicts?”

  1. I’m changing my opinion again on Zane. I forgot that he made comments on the “Disconnection? Really? . . .” topic. As is his right, he made no statement about his status within the CoS or relationship with the CoS. His main point was the embarrassment and trouble the Billboard Campaign caused Mike Jones whom he knows. He’s certainly not the only person who has an “intense dislike” of Tony Ortega. He also made one or two logical, in my opinion, statements in defense of the CoS such as low staff turnover at some locations. I hope he comes back, but even on Alanzo’s blog he’s an army of one in any defense of the CoS and may not bother.

    • I have a soft spot in my heart for “army’s of one”.

      Getting out of Scientology and criticizing them on the Internet has put me in that position more than once. And I know what it takes to maintain it.

      So I will be protecting minority opinions here against unfairness.

      My blog remains open for these individuals, no matter their views on Scientology.

      Unless I don’t feel like it.

      • I’m sure you were an army of one at times in the past. I hadn’t thought of that. When I joined the conversation on Marty’s blog about three years ago you had some allies. There was still some fierce debate going on about the pros and cons of scn. Aah – the good old days.

  2. Speaking of disconnection, Rollins Band “Disconnection”

    “Don’t like to think too much, it makes me think too much, it keeps my mind on my mind. . . .I want to disconnect myself, I wanna pull my brainstem out, and unplug myself, I want nuthin right now.” LOL


  3. If ZaneX is truthful about knowing Mike Jones personally, that would in all probability indicate that ZaneX is a member in good standing in the CoS. He may simply be a person who is satisfied with his own pursuit of happiness and was appreciative that he could express himself on Alanzo’s blog, hopefully without undue criticism. He got a full scale investigation!

    • My above comment was in keeping with the “Heresy” theme. In actuality I am currently unable to maintain cosmic consciousness about being nice to cults, ideologies, scn, and most scn-ists. It needs work.

        • Laughter – Hi Eileen! – Scn-ists are dead serious. Anti scn-ists are dead serious. Anti-Anti scn-ists just want to have fun. 🙂

          P.S. Alanzo – So far today I’ve changed the bedding, vacuumed the upstairs, mopped the kitchen floor and later I’ll mow the lawn and take the dog for a walk. I’m not an internet addict.

          • oops – I don’t mean to be flippant. Many people have experienced hardships and few people find value in the current incarnation of the CoS. The degree of activism. I suppose, is what’s under consideration.

  4. I’ll join in on the heresy. If ZaneX is John Sugg, then it’s nice to know that he’s not in The Hole (if The Hole still exists.) He’s a good writer and is probably paid well. Also, if he’s reading all the scn blogs, then I know that at least one person is reading my comments. Hi John!

    • I’ll say “Hi John” too! In a way, I owe John Sugg a big thank you. It was because I dared to question someone in the bunker ‘in crowd’ for making a fat shaming shoop of Sugg, that lead me to finally permanently sever my connection with the bunker. THANK YOU!!! You should not have been fat shamed. They, in the bunker, were being hypocritical about it, the shooper twisted things, I got attacked, then attempts to get me back in line, and SNAP! Connection severed!!

      The connection by that point was barely a thin string, but it was a strong thin string.

      • I reread ZaneX’s post, and, you know, there is a sincerity in what he wrote. Yes, there is some righteous indignation. I can imagine myself writing something similar if I were still a true believer.

  5. Hmm…the cult often crosses the line from coercion to force. DM hits people. Staff often physically prevent people from leaving. People have been physically pushed and taken to the RPF. Those are things that happen in the SO more than in orgs and missions but they do happen and it IS force.

    So maybe Zane should start listening to Tony Ortega.,

  6. Alanzo, you said in your post “Heresy, means “to choose””

    Where did you get that definition from?

    • Middle English: from Old French heresie, based on Latin haeresis, from Greek hairesis ‘choice’ (in ecclesiastical Greek ‘heretical sect’), from haireisthai ‘choose.’

      It comes from the time in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD when the establishing orthodox church told people which books (which later comprised the Bible) to study. Anyone studying any other books than the ones on the list, or “canon”, chose to study outside the orthodox teachings. Thus they were called heretics, and burned.

      So Heresy of the Week has a long and proud tradition here at AlanzosBlog.

  7. Alonzo, you said in your post “Heresy, means “to choose”

    Where did you get that definition from?

  8. yah, there are no clears or OT’s, to answer your post title.

    definition of heresy: “a belief or opinion that does not agree with the official belief or opinion of a particular religion ”

    ok, lets consider stats. How many clears and OT’s are there?

    Where are they?

    How many people from the get go of 1950’s dianetics, where are they, who are they?

    How many people from the development of dianetics and scientology?, where are they?

    From my research all the original people involved are gone and not part of the crowd scientology, in fact many have come out from hiding speaking their minds.

    But who are the folks speaking their minds in present? Are they the original founders?

    • Where have all the flowers gone, long time passing
      Where have all the flowers gone, long time ago

      (I don’t recall the rest of the lyrics right now)

  9. Xanax, where are you? You nailed your poorly reasoned diatribe to the wall, then ran and hid.
    From your writing we can deduce a few things:
    -Your “mansplaining” writing style indicates male over 50 (apologies to the men over 50 who don’t do this).
    -You use many psychiatric terms (obsessive, mentally sick) about people whom you do not (presumably) know.
    -You present “insider” information without regard for confidentiality.
    -You made a point of dropping in the Shelley Mis. Information, trying to make it appear casual. You know something about her.
    -You are casually cruel, which indicates you enjoy seeing people cry. You may be a sociopath. If not, you were “trained” in sociopathic logic.
    -You are intelligent and crafty, but not wise.
    -You are not accustomed to being questioned, you like to lay out the “truth”
    -You rely on a tightly “reasoned” version of reality, it does not recognize the distinction between logic and truth.
    -You have no understanding of the real critic world, you probably thought that the Ortega Calvary would crash down the doors. Silly boy, you haven’t figured out that you are irrelevant.
    Ergo: Alanzo, I think you pulled in one of the big fish!
    Hi Davy!

          • I obviously can’t say anything definite about Mr. ZaneX, but months ago on Marty’s blog someone with a similar writing style showed up. Myself, Alanzo and maybe someone else smelled something fishy and quizzed him. Someone else then showed up and posted that the same guy using the same handle (not ZaneX) had been posting on the Bunker and was in fact a well known OSA operative. Alanzo was familiar with his real name and grilled him pretty good, but the guy wouldn’t fess up – laughter – such intrigue!

            • Ha! Richard! We had the same perceptions both times!

              I chose not to attempt an uncovering here.

              I do not know, but I kept thinking it was John Sugg, both here and at Marty’s blog.

              ZaneX is always welcome to post here, as is John Sugg. They just need to be able to confront people and their ideas which will not be pro-Scientology, and they need to stay on topic. In return I will allow them safe passage and a space to say what they want.

              AND – if they can make a good point, I’ll recognize it as such.

              How’s that for heresy??

            • What an investigative team! The most significant info in his writing was the tidbit about Shelly. Would Sugg be in a position to know about her current status? It was a little chilling..

                • My last comment for a while. My internet addiction is kicking in.

                  Someone in the comments said the Rollins Band is recommended listening for anger management.

                • Good luck on your quixotic journey to delay your inevitable return to Internet addiction!


                  – Your beckoning circle of Internet addicts

                • Regarding my inevitable return to internet addiction, Lol. You gotta admit that BS-ing on the internet is more fun than going to work or doing chores. I promised myself that tomorrow I’ll diversify myself and continue reading Mark Rathbun’s “Texas Tropics” novel which I started reading six months ago. Just five or six more comments and then . . .

              • We do not know if it is John Sugg.

                And we do not know anything about Shelly Miscavige at all. There is all kinds of speculation. Well, actually not all kinds. Only the bad kind.

                Everyone assumes that she is being held against her will. Mostly because of what Tony Ortega says.

                But the police have been repeatedly involved and they have decided to do nothing. Does that automatically mean the police have been paid off?

                Are there other possibilities here that too few critics are considering?

  10. Not Scientology related, but Scientology critic related–if you can call the bunker critics, for sake of argument, lets do so.

    I cannot recall the specific circumstance where/when I brought this up, I know it was long before the billboard campaign. I don’t think it was a ‘well known/widely published’ disconnection story, such as the Jones, Lori Hodgen [sic?], etc. Anyway, I made a comment along the lines that I had essentially ‘disconnected’ from my entire biological family due to the extreme abuse my ‘mother’ subjected me to. My ‘father’ didn’t stop it, relatives knew she was very mentally unstable, no one helped me, so adios all of ’em.

    The responses were supportive of me, that I had had to do that to get away from that toxicity, etc. I then mentioned that perhaps in some disconnection cases the family member felt the same way. Oops! That’s totally different, apples to oranges, those people are wrong to do that, etc. Back in line I got, shamefully.

    I think everyone has had a circumstance in their life where they’ve cut someone off. Be it permanently or temporarily. Why can’t they view Scientology disconnection like that? Cuz some people ::cough::Ortega::cough:: fan the flames, beat the drum, and drill into their followers that’s it’s evil and wrong. It shouldn’t exist, just like Scientology. They don’t realize the hypocrisy when they themselves disconnect from people, such as myself, for daring to publicly write about how I felt and viewed the bunker after I had detached myself. I’m not the only one they’ve done that to, but I can only speak for myself.

    • You have once again showed the hypocrisy of ideological thinking. Whether it’s Scientology or anti-Scientology.

      A Scientologist is a hypocrit when he says “Never desert a group to which you owe your support” and also “You must disconnect from your parents if they are declared SP by HCO”

      And an Anti-Scientologist is a hypocrit when he says “Families must NEVER disconnect from each other!” and “You need to leave the Church of Scientology because it’s a cult!”

      It’s thinking with an ideology – any ideology – which causes this hypocrisy.

      The real heretical question is: does an adult Scientologist have a right to lead their own life?



        • interestingly, Aristotle defines love as ” Wishing for a person those things which you consider to be good—wishing them
          for his sake and not your own–and tending so far as you can to affect them.”

          from this link:

          go Phil & Willie, may the Phil Board long live! “Call me” is the slogan from a parent to a child.

              • Yes. These are all the things which are none of our business, but the business inside the Jones family only.

                That you and I are even discussing it is because they put their private family business, literally, on a freaking billboard.

                I think it also serves as a distraction from all the actual crimes that need to be concentrated on by critics and others.

                Legal things, things that scientologists have every right to do no matter how distasteful we find them – should not waste our time and attention.

                • well apparently Phil and Willie decided to make it our business, for as the last line of love “and tending so far as you can to affect them”

                  I somehow doubt Phil and Willie have read the emotion of Love from Aristotle, but yet there it is innate, or natural. We certainly know Hubbard did not express or define love in his emotional tone scale.

                • Here is another very important factor to ponder in Scientology-influenced disconnection stories.

                  From Tolstoy:

                  Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.

                • Now, this is interesting! Alanzo, are you positing that “legality” is a dividing line, beyond which issues become “family business?”

                  I would suggest that Law follows social change, rather than lead it.
                  From that perspective, the important distinction is not “what is legal” but rather “what may be discussed”.

                  From that angle several Interesting questions include:
                  Does Mike Jones’ desire (right) for privacy trump Phil Jones’ desire (right) to communicate as best he can with his son?
                  Does Phil Jones’ billboard help (or harm) people other than Mike Jones?
                  Who should be most influential in influencing Mike Jones regarding the nature/extent of communication, the church or the parent?

                  A good heresy should (IMO) challenge both sides equally. I think we are on the right track!

                  BTW: what happened to Xanax? A one shot poster? A diatribe without an ability to reason? I think he deserves the Senator Cruz Award. All vitriol but no fangs.

          • From Aristotle’s list, “envy”. Someone expanded that definition to “Wanting what someone else has without having to work for it”. This might apply to communism or socialism. Scn has it’s own viewpoint about rewarding upstats and denigrating downstats. Depending on point of view, “Call Me” might be upstat or downstat, having envy about other people having a happy family.

  11. ZaneX has a mean streak that is a mile wide.
    No heresy posted here, nothing to respond to. just the same tired drivel that the church puts out intermittently on this topic.

    • OK wait a minute.

      I realize that the Church says a lot of things that are designed to discredit their critics and try to shut them up.

      But what about Phil and Willie’s childrens’ rights? Don’t those exist, too?

      Do you really want to insert yourself into the internal conflicts of someone else’s family to the point where you support one or the others’ side in disconnecting from each other?

      I mean my God. Is it really the place of Scientology criticism to list the families who have decided to break up over Scientology, such as Tony Ortega has now done, and chastise members of someone else’s family for their decision?

      I don’t think so.

      I don’t know about your family, but my family has squabbles all the time. I am currently not speaking to my brother because he supported Trump in the last election. Should I whip up a whole bunch of people against him on the Internet for his personal decision?

      I mean really. How manipulative would that be?

      Come on, Eileen.

      Heresy is fun! You should try it!

      • I agree, it is extremely manipulative of ZaneX to take the actions described above.
        I have no problem with heresy, but what ZaneX posted is not heresy. Some of my best friends are heretics.
        It is same old, same old. Maybe written by Tommy Davis or Monique Ying-Ling?

        • That’s just a rhetorical trick you are playing. I specifically pointed out that questioning whether it was the place of critics of Scientology to get involved in the inner dynamics of families was heresy to the prevailing practice of doing just that.

          You’re ignoring that just to attack ZaneX.

          That’s not heresy. That’s being Tony Ortega’s lapdog.

          Declare your independence, Eileen! Or state why you support the orthodoxy.

          You are to allowed to sit on the fence – or in anyone’s lap – during “Heresy of the Week”!

          • “Heresy of the Week” could become like Mike Rinder’s “Thursday Funnies”. That said, I read Zane’s post and totally agreed with him. Then I read Eileen’s post and totally agreed with her. And then I read Alanzo’s reply and totally agreed with him. And then I read . . .

            Regarding politics, it’s best to proclaim yourself an Independent. That way you can usually come up with a lame excuse when you irritate someone with the way you voted.

            Most of the electorate is politically uninformed. Some people advocate a short multiple choice quiz in order to prove voter literacy and be allowed to vote. A question for the midterms might be

            “Trump” is – a) an expression used in playing bridge b) the U.S. president c) to beat someone up d) a sound made by elephants

            • Too much?

              I’m trying to get you to open up and engage this heresy.

              What are your specific arguments against ZaneX’s specific points?

              • Way too much, unless you think it is OK for me to label you OSA’s lapdog for printing ZaneX’s tripe. I was not plying a rhetorical trick, I was pointing out that ZaneX is doing every single thing that he accuses the Ortega crowd of doing, he is just a mirror image, but with the temperament of a viper. Full of ad home attacks, calling people idiots etc.
                The arrogant certainty of “like most things in life it is really that simple” gives away his game. We all know these types.
                Plus a heresy is a new and different view, this is neither.
                I thinkI will call him Xanax, might do him some good.
                Alanzo, find me a good heresy!!!

      • Other critics got involved in Phil and Willie’s family because Phil and Willie asked them for this help and involvement.

        Brainwashing is such an odd and freaky phenomenon. People who are successfully turned end up doing stuff others wouldn’t do- like hit a nice older Italian lady cuz she wouldn’t cough up a million bucks or clean the floor with their tongue. I know everyone has rights and that trying to push someone can lead into a grey area. All I can say is it’s not a perfect world and there are no perfect solutions. Don’t you think others can spot brainwashing? If you see or hear of someone cleaning a floor with their tongue or something that extreme- you KNOW they’re brainwashed. So under those circumstances, if you apply a little verbal pressure in a legally compliant manner, then I don’t have a problem with it. We’re not talking Ted Patrick here. We’re not talking ’bout kidnapping or something like that. Humans do not stay in separate boxes. We DO interfere, give feedback, urge, cajole-and those things aren’t illegal or immoral in of themselves.

        • How many people in Scientology have been forced to clean a bathroom floor with their tongue?

          These atrocity stories get told over and over on the internet between critics. We all believe them.

          But how often do they really happen?

          I’m not asking this question to deny that they ever happened, but to gain a more accurate perspective on Scientology and what exactly happens in it.

Comments are closed.