pembrokestephen
New Member
FabricLiveBaby! said:surley though people must be very wary of Scientology now?
If they are corrupt and wierd (which IMHO they are), and there are people like Tom Cruise and Travolta advocating it. Joe Public will get intrested and do a bit of research. And it's not that hard to find reams and reams of nast stuff on scientology.
Surley they are just diging their own grave with this constant secrecy/publicity discrepancy?
ETA: I don't know ANYONE who doesn't think that scientology is a bit crock of shite and would be that gulliable to fall for it given the heaps of publicity it has reacently obtained.
Well, I can think of one: that senior City of London policeman.
And, sadly, all too often, officialdom WILL take the line of least resistance - if it weren't for a fairly constant level of awareness and lobbying from anti-Scientology protesters, I think that the clams would have made many more inroads into UK society than they have. Narconon got pretty close to being used in the Prison Service (indeed, it might actually have got involved at some point), and the carrion birds that are the "touch-assist" merchants who turn up at any catastrophe STILL aren't told to take their snake oil and shove it where the sun doesn't shine.
It's that old thing "all that requires for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing". Scientology is evil, there's no doubt about it - any organisation that exercises the level of undue influence Scientology uses on its members, and that exercises the level of blackmail, slander, and threats that we saw on the Panorama programme cannot really be anything other than evil.
Their beliefs are just so much cod sci-fi hokum. The tactics they use to get people to pay money to share those beliefs, and to silence anyone who criticises or even asks the wrong questions, are something else altogether.

IT would have been good to ahve a discussion.