Culture & Lifestyle

Rant

Lawyer Yingling: Dunk Scientologists? OK

Posted 35 months ago|88 comments|1,230 views
Written by
Top lawyer, Ms Monique Yingling Esq, has this week given her stamp of legal approval to physical punishment of Scientologists.

Ms Yingling approved the throwing of underperforming staff Scientologists overboard from ships, or into pools and lakes, as practiced by the Church's leaders.

As the St Petersburg Times reported, “Church lawyer Monique Yingling said overboarding is part of ecclesiastical justice. "They're not backing away from it or ashamed of it,'' she said. It has been done hundreds of times, with precautions taken to make it safe.”

Ms Yingling was speaking out in support of the Church, which has unjustly been vilified by psychotics as promoting a culture of abuse of subordinates.

Most of the serious assaults on subordinates were performed by Inspector General of Religious Technology, Mr Mark 'Marty' Rathbun, and former spokesperson Mr Mike Rinder, said Church spokesperson, Mr Tommy Davis. While Mr Miscavige had ordered overboardings, he never criminally attacked anyone, and he never attacked any of the psychotics who claim to have been attacked by him, stated Mr Davis and several other Scientologists in good standing.

Physical punishment is emphasized in the Church's “Sea Org” recruiting. As the St Petersburg Times further reported -
“[Mr Norman] Starkey, the 66-year-old former captain of the Apollo, said plenty of people have been overboarded in his 50 years in Scientology.

If a Sea Org member messes up, "you throw him over the g-- d--- side of the ship," Starkey said.

"He falls into the water, he swims around, climbs up the ladder, gets off at the dock, walks back in again. He never does that again. He knows that that is the way we operate. That is what the Sea Organization is like."

Mr Davis volunteered that he, too, had ordered overboarding. "It was a guy who was blowing it and kept blowing it and kept blowing it — making mistakes, underperforming," he said. "It was my responsibility to uphold the ethical standards of the Sea Org. Yeah, absolutely, I tossed the guy in.''

Most workplaces and churches would benefit from similar ethical discipline. A little more of this type of discipline, and Scientology traitors Mr Mike Rinder and Mr Marty Rathbun might never have commenced to psychotically and unauthorizedly attack subordinates in non-standard ways not provided for in written L Ron Hubbard policies. Mr Rathbun and Mr Rinder had disgraced the Sea Org naval uniform, the braid on their caps, and the campaign ribbons they used to wear on their chests.

The St Petersberg Times reported that if the defectors could not hack such punishments, Davis said, they could have left years ago. "The g-- d--- front door wasn't locked. And if they had a problem with it they could have walked out."

As Mr Davis stated, the Sea Org is a "crew of tough sons of b----es,''

"The Sea Org is not a democracy. The members of it agree with a man named L. Ron Hubbard. They abide by his policies . . . and we follow it to the T, to the letter, to the punctuation marks. And if you disagree with that and you don't like it, you don't belong. Then you leave."

The Church has emphasized that the 5'5” Mr Miscavige is a physically slight man, and many of his alleged victims are larger than him. Accordingly, it beggars belief to suggest that Mr Miscavige had, except for overboarding, physically punished these subordinates without fear he would receive the same treatment in retaliation.

As Mr Miscavige said in response to similar allegations in 1998 “I’ve not only not been convicted of anything, I’ve never been indicted for anything. Now I think that’s where you finally have to look at the, quote, critics and say, “Hey. Put up or shut up. Let’s see some evidence.’”

The St Peterburg Times has reported that Mr Rinder has received legal advice that he is constrained in his criticism of the Church by the action of Attorney-Client privilege. This doctrine means that it is absolutely unethical for Mr Rinder to reveal any information detrimental to the Church without the Church's consent.

Monique Yingling

It is this same Attorney-Client privilege that governs the actions of long-time Church lawyer and spokesperson, Ms Monique Yingling Esq. Although she has been an employee of Mr Miscavige for many years, she is not yet a Scientologist, and is not subject to the strict Scientology ethics discipline. However, as a lawyer, her personal religious beliefs and opinions do not impinge upon her duty to faithfully serve the interests of her client.

Ms Yingling is revered in the legal community as a tax lawyer, and by rank and file Scientologists, among whom she has many, close friends. Ms Yingling was awarded a beautiful crystal ornament as a reward for her contribution to securing tax exemption for the Church's enterprises.

All the work that Ms Yingling does for the Church, paid or otherwise, is, in effect, Pro Bono work, because the Church is a charitable organization. Ms Yingling has been central to getting more and more other people to join Scientology over the years, and helped to keep the Church going more than the traitors who have left it.

Ms Yingling, though not a Scientologist, provides an example that psychopathic traitors like Mr Rinder and Mr Rathbun, who worked with Ms Yingling on many issues before their true natures revealed themselves, would have done well to follow.
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
35 months ago: "Ms Yingling approved the throwing of underperforming staff Scientologists overboard from ships, or into pools and lakes, as practiced by the Church's leaders."

My hero. We need more upstanding patriots like this in our world today.
35 months ago: "Most workplaces and churches would benefit from similar ethical discipline."

I full heartedly agree. Offices could throw employees off of the side of the building. Restraunts could throw employees off the roof into a dumpster. Supermarkets could throw employees into the freezers!

The throwing method is a pioneering solution to underachieving employees. Not only do you throw them physically, but mentally too into enlightenment. Throwing is just not a punishment, it is the cup of knowledge that we must all have a drink from someday.

Thank Xenu for Scientology and for showing us the way to making underachievers into succesful people: by throwing them off of stuff into stuff.
35 months ago: "Mr Rathbun and Mr Rinder had disgraced the Sea Org naval uniform, the braid on their caps, and the campaign ribbons they used to wear on their chests."

NOT THE RIBBONS, OH NO!!!

Everybody knows how prestigious the Sea Org is. When little first graders think of the heroes they someday wish to become, they think of policemen, firemen, soldiers, and most importantly of all; the Sea Org.

Just think of all the honorable things that the Sea Org has done to better America: Fight Pirates during colonial times, sink Britsh submarines during the American Revolution, lead sucessful attacks upon the British Isles in the War of 1812, single handedly defeat the entire Confederate AND Canadian navy in the Civil War, and (possibly most importantly) defeat the Nazi Axis pirates in Galatitic War 1 and its sequel, Galatic War 2.

Just remeber the Sea Orgs valient heroic feats and you will realize how these psycopaths were hating america by disgracing the ribbons.
35 months ago: "Ms Yingling is revered in the legal community as a tax lawyer..."

Ya, because a tax free organization needs a tax lawyer. Just like how a smoking free zone needs smokers.
35 months ago: Dangerranger, you invented a list of silly achievements to make the Sea Org look silly, but it just makes you look ignorant. The actual achievements of L Ron Hubbard and the Sea Org make the things you listed pale in comparison. If you wanted to help humanity, joining the Sea Org is what you would be doing.
skeptic
skeptic
Canada
35 months ago: Brutal punishment is justified in Scientology (and there's a lot more, we haven't even gotten into the "Rehabilitation Project Force" which is a prolonged and methodical punishment falsely presented as a rehabilitation) under the familiar principle that the ends justify the means. If Scientology is in the process of elevating people to a super-human state, then a great deal would be justified in order to accomplish such an amazing goal. But alas, it turns out that Scientology lies about everything. Ruthless means are being used by the cult, but no worthwhile ends are being accomplished. It's all lunacy. Too bad, Jack, you have been fooled.
35 months ago: "Dangerranger, you invented a list of silly achievements to make the Sea Org look silly, but it just makes you look ignorant"

But I got all that information from my "Sea Org for Dummies book." I don't think the book is wrong, it has pages and chapters and a table of contents and a cover and pictures; its pretty legitamite.

I'm sorry Jack but I think your misinformed and ignorant. The Sea Org really has protected our American Freedoms by fighting Nazi Pirates and invading the British Isles with their aircraft carriers.
35 months ago: You couldn't know what is in that book because it hasn't been published yet, Dangerranger. You should look for "What is Scientology" in the meantime.
35 months ago: Skeptic, skepticism is a virtue,but not when carried to extremes. Scientology is in the process of elevating people.
35 months ago: "You couldn't know what is in that book because it hasn't been published yet, Dangerranger."

Ya it has been published. You can even find it on the web. Here is a pic of it.

http://www.davidcampisi.com/scientology%20is%20for%20dummies5.jpg
skeptic
skeptic
Canada
35 months ago: Jack, regarding your assertion that Scientology is in the process of elevating people, that is not the case. Scientology constantly tells people that they have been elevated, and it does have some very clever techniques used to fool people into thinking that they have accomplished something meaningful, but eventually most people will notice that this supposed benefit is just a delusional state. Even you will probably figure that out eventually.

The Church of Scientology has only one final product, which is ex-Scientologists. You too can be a product, some day.
35 months ago: "actual achievements of L Ron Hubbard and the Sea Org make the things you listed pale in comparison" There are actual achievements? Are you even capable of listing any?
35 months ago: "The Church of Scientology has only one final product, which is ex-Scientologists. You too can be a product, some day." 1-866-X-SEAORG. Try giving them a call.
Frederick
Frederick
Canada
35 months ago: This is the sort of information that a suppressive person like me would want to put up. I can only imagine why a Scientology supporter would want this to be made public.

Monique Yingling is paid to put a positive spin on all this. But really, only the most gullible would ever think that she is making sense. I wonder if she believes it herself.

I must add that there is a swimming pool at my place of work. To my knowledge, it has never been used as a motivational tool. I am sure that if it ever were used that way, the person who ordered the action and those carrying it out would be arrested and sued.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
35 months ago: Jack H Remington;

The actual achievements of L Ron Hubbard and the Sea Org make the things you listed pale in comparison. If you wanted to help humanity, joining the Sea Org is what you would be doing.

Wow, I didn't know that about the Sea Org, I am very impressed! They must have accomplished so many things -uhhhh... for some reason I've never heard of any though. Perhaps you could help me out Jack and tell me about a few?
35 months ago: The Sea Org has been getting ethics in across the planet for over 40 years.

This is the greatest achievement of any organization on Earth. None can match it.
35 months ago: Dear Jack,

Not all people who visit this site are fluent in Scientologese. Congrats on making up words and assigning your own internalized group meanings to them, but how about translating that into English. Currently, it would seem you are saying that the Sea Org has been forcing ethical behavior on society for over 40 years.

That's a drop in the bucket compared to any of the major monotheistic religions. Hell, Jews spent 40 years just wandering the desert getting their ethics in. I hardly think you can claim "longest running".
35 months ago: Dear Anonymous Voice, by 'ethics' I mean the active removal of counter-intention from the environment and the dissemination of pure tech. That is, Scientology is the only hope of salvaging humanity from the dwindling spiral, and the Sea Org is at the cutting edge of shattering suppression. Other groups might have been muddling along with little schemes or pushing their own barrows in deserts. Judaism is a practice specific to people who believe themselves to be YWH's chosen people, as far as I know, and I am no expert, but Scientology is for everyone, Jewish or not.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
35 months ago: Jack H Remington;


"That is, Scientology is the only hope of salvaging humanity from the dwindling spiral, and the Sea Org is at the cutting edge of shattering suppression."

You all let us know how that's going OK? I live a few miles from the largest concentration of Sea Org members anywhere and they are afraid to talk to me let alone shatter suppression.
35 months ago: @Jack

Well that's not really an accomplishment, because what other group besides the Sea Org would even bother with that task? I mean, as far as "saving the world" goes... Spider-Man has been doing it longer than the SeaOrg. But it's close!

Regardless of the many other things you've said which I'd love to question you about, I know that's not what's really at the heart of the matter. What is, is that Scientology is not compatible with Judaism. For starters, there's that whole "you are an immortal being with powers" thing. According to Judaism, that's not the case. You have a soul, but it is given to you by God. You live and you die according to God's will.

The reverence bestowed upon L Ron Hubbard is on a level of worship, and "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." In addition, quite a few of the policies are completely out of place with Jewish law, and don't even get me started on auditing.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
35 months ago: Ah yes, ethics - acording to Professor Stephen A. Kent;

"- the purpose of Scientology ethics is to eliminate opponents, then eliminate people's interests in things other than Scientology."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_beliefs_and_practices

That does not sound like much of an achievement to me.
35 months ago: First ask Prof Kent about Scientology, then consult Hitler on Judaism.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
35 months ago: You equate a sociologist with an early 20th century fascist dictator?

Let's see...
"In the early afternoon on Wednesday, September 3, 1997, 4 or 5 Scientologists protested against the work and activities of Professor Stephen A. Kent. Two people carried placards calling Dr. Kent's ("anti-Scientology" and "intolerant") scholarship into question. They repeated their picket on Monday, September 8th, until Campus Security sent them packing. They had not received permission from the appropriate campus officials to hold their event."

http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/kent_protest.htm

He researched wrote a paper on the Scientology prison camp system....

Brainwashing in Scientology's
Rehabilitation Project Force (RPF)

http://www.lermanet.com/scientology/gulags/BrainwashinginScientology%27sRehabilitationProjectForce.htm

And another one, "Scientology, this is a Religion?"

http://www.lermanet.com/cos/kent1.html

An interview with him by Stephen Crittenden;

http://www.anti-scientologie.ch/cruise-kent.htm

... And how about for contrast,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler.


And since you have already invoked Goodwin's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law) in your comments sections Jack, allow me to point out that Hitler and Hubbard both thought attack was allways preferable to defense. Even when the effort is hopeless as you so wonderfully demonstrate. And there are a number of other parallels between the opinions and activities of Hitler and Hubbard.
35 months ago: Jack, seeing as I'm actually JEWISH, and thus far more educated than YOU are on anything pertaining to Hitler (I only grew up learning and studying the Holocaust in depth), your comment is extremely weak in any logical link.

For starters, Hitler sought to exterminate systematically people of a particular ethnic/cultural/religious background. Individuals who were genetically tied to Jewish families were sought for execution. NEVER in the HISTORY of Scientology has any Scientologist's non-Scientologist family members been targeted by ANYONE critical of the cult for ANYTHING. Right there, your little "Boo hoo we're being targeted" speech is shut down.

At the end of the day, we do not care about what you believe, we care about what you DO, and what the management has done is break the law over and over again. Crime is crime, and all are accountable before the law. Those are the rules of this country.
35 months ago: I won't detract from your expertise on Hitler, but Hitler described what were, in his view, the 'crimes' of Jews, to justify their persecution. I don't think Hitler had theological issues with Judaism either, just as you claim not to have theological issues with Scientology. You ought to ease up on Scientologists, before you create a climate of hate.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
35 months ago: Jack, Jack!..The climate of hate already exists!

I challenge you, look the Scientology Organization's reaction to critics in the 1960s, in the 1970s, the 1980s and up until now. Have you ever seen the 60 Minuets segments where Heber Jentz would gang bang Mike Wallace?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-e7dHiZLps

He used the same methods that Tommy Davis uses today, even the same words!

Hitler was simply a product of his time, the Jews were an enemy of convenience, just like Scientology against Psychiatry. You folks don't really care what Psychology is doing. You folks just need someone to hate, someone to gnash your teeth over. Then when people notice what you are doing you play victim.

You need to hate Jack, Scientology needs someone to hate. Unfortunately that aspect of your "religion," your sacrament of Keeping Scientology Working, the HMJ and all that other rotten stuff will be your undoing.

You live in a climate of fear Jack, you live in a climate of hatred. Your leaders respond the only way they know how - with violence. Your rank and file don't know how to react any other way. See it, understand it believe it because it is truth.
skeptic
skeptic
Canada
35 months ago: Just a note to Jack Remington about his concern that criticism of Scientology will create a cliamte of hate. I criticize Scientology (as you may have noticed) and I do not do so out of any feeling of hate toward Scientologists; if anything, I am trying to help Scientologists, including you, to overcome your delusions so that you will be able to lead a happier and more successful life. And I might point out that although happiness and success are exactly what Scientology promises, it turns out that everyone has a greater chance of happiness and success when they are not burdened by relgious cultism such as Scientology.
35 months ago: Jack, Hitler scapegoated real societal problems onto people who were not at fault but were easy to blame because they were considered "outsiders". He did not target individuals with his accusations, he targeted a group, a culture, a "them".

We are accusing individuals of crimes. We are accusing an organization of crimes. Are the priests who sexually abused young children free from prosecution because they are members of the Catholic clergy? No. Nor should the administrators of the Church of Scientology be free from prosecution for their human trafficking, torture, child abuse, brainwashing, slave labor, and other heinous crimes.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
35 months ago: skeptic;
"Just a note to Jack Remington about his concern that criticism of Scientology will create a cliamte of hate"

My view is, they do this with the intent of driving critics away. While there are some people out there who will attempt to carry on a resonantly civil conversation, most people into scientology simply don't have the tools necessary to deal with criticism. They either shut down and won't talk about it or they will behave aggressively.

This is in keeping with Hubbard's direction, "never defend, always attack." Jack H Remington is just following instructions.

35 months ago: "You ought to ease up on Scientologists, before you create a climate of hate"

The scientologists Fair Game policy creates enough of a hateful climate by itself
35 months ago: "Fair Game" applied to Scientologists who sought Church Justice. But it only applied to those Scientologists, who sought Church Justice, who had removed themselves from the Church. After removing themselves, they could not seek Church Justice in the same manner that active members could seek Church Justice. The policy, while of some historical interest, was discontinued in the 1960's.

At no time and in no way did it ever apply outside of the arena I've described. When it was a policy in the 1960's it applied to former Church members who were attempting to use the Church's Justice system.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
35 months ago:
I've had very high level OSA people tell me the same thing and you know what? They were lying.

"The term Fair Game is used to describe various aggressive policies and practices carried out by the Church of Scientology towards people and groups it perceives as its enemies. Founder L. Ron Hubbard developed the strategy in the 1950s and established the policy in 1965. Three years later, he canceled use of the term because of negative public relations it caused. The policy remained in effect and has been defended by the Church of Scientology as a core religious practice."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_%28Scientology%29

These are well documented fact and no amount of double talk can change this reality. Fair Game was never canceled, according to Hubbard in HCOPL 21 Oct 68 Cancellation of Fair Game;

"The practice of declaring people FAIR GAME will cease. FAIR GAME may not appear on any Ethics Order. It causes bad public relations. This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP."

In 1991, policies for handling of "suppressive persons" was modified to preclude any illegal actions (presumably because that causes bad PR too, not because it's unethical.)


35 months ago: There are two situations.

One situation (long ago canceled) was about internal Church of Scientology justice. If a member of the Church, quit the Church, he could no longer receive Justice within the Church. This was the situation the Fair Game Policy covered.

You, and other anons, use the phrase as if that situation applied to all people, everywhere. People who have never been a Church member can not be "fair gamed" because the policy only applied to former members who were seeking Church justice. I hope this helps you understand why that argument is neither realistic nor effective.

35 months ago: Its still pretty scary that a church has a policy for seeking vendetta.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
35 months ago: Terryeo;

You, and other anons, use the phrase as if that situation applied to all people, everywhere. People who have never been a Church member can not be "fair gamed" because the policy only appied to former members who were seeking Church justice. I hope this helps you understand why that argument is neither realistic nor effective.

Great, glad to hear it. So what do they call it now? Hubbard insists that when a person of any stripe, scientology member or not speaks out against the organization they MUST be handled and silenced.

"People attack Scientology, I never forget it, always even the score. People attack auditors, or staff, or organisations, or me. I never forget until the slate is clear."

- L. Ron Hubbard, MANUAL of JUSTICE, 1959 "

BTW, this directive was never canceled.
35 months ago: I've seen "Manual of Justice" quoted before on the internet. So, I looked through various Scientology publications and couldn't find it. Then I personally asked an Ethics Officer about it. All of my efforts found no "Manual of Justice" within Scientology Organization or within Scientology publications.

Searching the internet I find it at a Scientology critic's website which says; "All of the information here is the author's personal opinion". Followed by the "Manual of Justice" at http://www.xenu.net/archive/go/man_just.htm

The first line of that page says that it is not part of the Church's publications. In particular the page says; copyright notice date of 1959, was not entitled to copyright protection since the original 28-year term expired in 1987 and no renewal was timely obtained.

In 1959 there were no Hubbard Communication Offices (HCO). But the first line of the "manual" says: "This is a confidential HCO Manual."

Such Communications Offices were not created until years later, until after the Church of Scientology was created (1954) and organization had grown. But the "Manual of Justice" (1959) is to be used by "HCO", handed out to "HCO personnel" and so on.

The Church of Scientology does not print, publish, use or educate about the "Manual of Justice". And such "manual" as appears on the internet is, at least in part, fabricated because it specifies distribution that did not exist in 1959.

You're fabricating data, or passing on fabricated data.
34 months ago: That's fascinating Terry. That you out and out lie to our faces. Nowhere on the website does it say "All of the information here is the author's personal opinion." Instead, it DOES say in the Legal Disclaimer that "I speak my own personal opinion," in that they do not present the opinions of others.

The RTC sued for copyright on this document, ergo it was initially part of the Church's publications. It is still is, but the copyright expired. THAT is what you are referencing, a court case that not only confirms this is Hubbard's, but it was used by the Church as recently as 1995 (date of the lawsuit). There is no line saying that it is not part of Church publications. You are outright making up lies, it is merely no longer part of their Intellectual Property.

The Manual of Justice was the first publication by the HCO. It was considered Church property in 1995, when it was declared the copyright had expired and was now freely available for reprint in the public domain.

Ladies and gentlemen reading this, the very basics of Fair Game at work. You are all considered "wogs", inferior beings who can be lied to, cheated, stolen from, or in any other war mistreated in order to protect the Church of Scientology.
34 months ago: Terry said:
"Such Communications Offices were not created until years later, until after the Church of Scientology was created (1954) and organization had grown. But the "Manual of Justice" (1959)..."

So the HCO couldn't exist because the Church of Scientology had been established 4 years PRIOR? What about the fact other bulletins were released in 1959?
Is it possible you were never told about this document because it is "Confidential"? You are obviously an ordinary, public Scientologist, so it would not be appropriate to confirm to you the existence of such secretive documents.
34 months ago: "The Sea Org has been getting ethics in across the planet for over 40 years.

This is the greatest achievement of any organization on Earth. None can match it. "

Please cite even one example of the sea org's (or for that matter, scientology's "achievements", anywhere.

Remington, do you have any brain cells of your own, or is every single one corrupted by the nutty organisation that you belong to?
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
34 months ago: Terryeo;
"The Church of Scientology does not print, publish, use or educate about the "Manual of Justice". And such "manual" as appears on the internet is, at least in part, fabricated because it specifies distribution that did not exist in 1959.

You're fabricating data, or passing on fabricated data. "

That's a bold statement! I will admit that the MJ did not come from any current Scientology fileset. I don't have accsess to those. Saying that, the evidence would suggest that the MJ documents do in fact represent Scientology policy as written by Hubbard in the late 1950s and to my knowledge it has never been publicly depreciated by the organization. In other words, I don't know if they still hold that directive as in effect or not.

In the face of those facts, us "Wogs" have little choice but to compare documents like KSW and the MJ against recent behavior by Scientology members.
34 months ago: Ms Dingaling gives a "stamp of legal approval" to physical punishment and that makes it OK???
The Sea Org "navy" sounds like a bunch of teenagers on a summer break. Campaign ribbons? What campaigns? Stealing another ship's flag?
What a bunch of nutters - it's time your government wakes up and sees this bunch of looneys for what they are.
Terryeo, Remington and Dingaling need to be confined, along with all the looney hierarchy of this "organisation" to a high security mental institution.
34 months ago: Definition from www.yourdictionary.com:
ding-a-ling definition

☆ ding·-a-ling (diŋ′ə liŋ′)

noun
Slang a crazy, stupid, or eccentric person

Etymology: < the ringing in the head of a punch-drunk boxer
34 months ago: What is it with you guys? "Provacateur", "XenuBarb", these screen names tell of intention.

What is it with you people that you don't recognize the right of people to worship as they wish to? Freedom of Religion is widespread in the Americas and in Europe, there is growing urgency for it in China, Iraq, Iran, and Africa. Why do you people wish to disallow it?

Why do you nit-pic and natter, provocate and barb? Why would it matter to you how people worship or study?

Not only are you guys foul of mouth and poor of grammar, but you foolishly persist against freedom of religion. Why? You clearly don't understand the realities of the situation. You don't show aptitude for understanding, discussing, or resolving issues. Instead you're much like schoolchildren who throw another gob of snot because, if you do, you'll be counted among the "rebels" who attack freedom of religion.
skeptic
skeptic
Canada
34 months ago: Terryeo, you are now resorting to the standard Scientology defense, by claiming that it is necessarily wrong to criticise Scientology because Scientology is a religion. The fact that Scientology was not founded for any religious purpose, but was created merely to defraud people of their money, is the primary weakness of this defense. Scientology claims to be both a science (as in Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health) and a religion, yet it is actually neither. it is merely a fraud. Calling yourself a church does not make you a religion. The Mafia could change its name to the Church of the Cosa Nostra, but it would still be just a criminal organization. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet, and con game smells just as bad, even when it pretends to be a religion. Do you get my drift?
34 months ago: Skeptic, I don't agree with your opinion. I do see that it is your opinion. I disagree with it. But I've stated in good detail why I know Scientology is a religion, offers a both books for sale and services that help people, for a donation, and other details.

When you go to the barber and your hair is cut, you pay the man for his service. When you go to a Church and donate, you insure the Church will be there next week. If, in return for your donation, you receive something that you consider valuable, that's another reason why you want to see your Church there next week.

I've experienced something of value, of great value really, myself. And I've seen this with other people.

You don't think so. Fine, good, have a nice day. However, why would you take the time to persistently criticize what I have found useful and helpful, both for myself and others.

Think of something you have found useful and helpful. Perhaps your profession, or your men's club, or your bar where you have a drink once in a while, or your Church or local organization that distributes christmas trees every year. What would you think of a dedicated group of critics who ignore every datum you carefully explain, while throwing gobs of snot at the organization? Look how Xenubarb, Provacateur, and dangerranger talk. Often, not addressing any issue at all, only name calling or finger pointing, whatever you call that snot-throwing, we-are-all-fail-anyway, attitude.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
34 months ago: Great analogy! Let us say you are member of a men's club. Every year you hold a secret ritual (which consists of nothing more than reading passages out of an old book of poetry.)

Some people wander by, one of them asks "what do you folks do in that locked room every year?" Your club president answers "non of your business! You can find out if you join!."

One of the people responds "that sounds like a stupid club, I'm not joining."

It would end there, except your club president uses club funds to hire a private investigator and starts keeping files on the group of people. He begins trying to intimidate them by having folks skulk around their houses. He sends people to their employers telling hair raising stories about how all the people in the group are secretly communists or child molesters. He starts calling them late at night and threatening them, arranges club members to infiltrate the group.

Finally he slaps each member of the group with lawsuits, not to win, just to harass.

So the group starts protesting, writing letters to the editor and they start telling all of their friends about this men's club. The story spreads and soon, where there were a handful of people, now there are dozens.

The club president goes on the radio shouting about how unfair it all is and how "those people" are enemys of the men's club - they must be destroyed!

That's just the bare-bones of how it works. Sure the fellow who said that the men's club was stupid was himself being rude, but the president of the men's club had no business investigating and harassing the person and all of his friends.

Scientology needs to grow some skin. You want to be a religion? Start acting like one! Someone says something you don't like? Big deal! You don't harass and bully them over it! Every ten year old knows that!

34 months ago: I am a great supporter of freedom of religion. I have no problem with anyone worshipping anything, I just think fanaticism is what causes nutters to fly into buildings. But, that said, $cientology is a fraud, a scam who use whatever means (legal or illegal) they see fit to silence their critics. Church? of $cientology - not a religion. I live in South Africa and I will use any (legal) means at my disposal to ensure that Anonymous has a presence here. I don't live far from your new Kyalami castle. Expect us to be there - soon.
34 months ago: And terryeo, your poor thing, you carry out your mind numbing orders to the letter. Discuss? you don't know the meaning of the word. Attack, attack, exactly as your LRH commanded you. Resolve? you don't know how. There are so many of your "church" documents in the public domain, thanks to the Internet (your worst enemy) that your feeble remarks don't ring true. And if you really are a thinking person, you will know that you are fighting a losing battle. You have been conned, get out while you still can.
34 months ago: Provocateur, you say "Please cite even one example of the sea org's (or for that matter, scientology's "achievements", anywhere"

The Church of Scientology has disseminated the works of the humanitarian L Ron Hubbard all over the world. Millions of people have been helped by Scientology. If you don't think that's an achievement, then that's your look-out.

"Remington, do you have any brain cells of your own, or is every single one corrupted by the nutty organisation that you belong to?"

The brain is just a shock absorber. You might as well imply that I think with my kidneys.

"Ms Dingaling gives a "stamp of legal approval" to physical punishment and that makes it OK???"

Just because you can make fun of someone's name doesn't make you right, Provocat***. In the adversarial system of justice, an unchallenged legal opinion has a lot of weight, I understand.

"The Sea Org "navy" sounds like a bunch of teenagers on a summer break. Campaign ribbons? What campaigns? Stealing another ship's flag?"

That's a serious allegation. I doubt that you can back it up.

Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
34 months ago: "The brain is just a shock absorber. You might as well imply that I think with my kidneys."

I suppose that one could just get rid of the brain altogether and be perfectly happy, sort of like getting rid of a kidney. How come we can't even come close to building an artificial brain? It's just a shock absorber, it should be easier to build than an artificial heart.



Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
34 months ago:
Although; you folks touched upon an interesting thing. What are the campaign ribbons for? Is there a Scientology page like this?

http://www.usamilitarymedals.com/us-navy-ribbons-and-awards-c-2070_21.html
34 months ago: You should visit your local Org and ask about enlisting. Then you can earn your own decorations.
34 months ago: Jack, maybe you should join the REAL Navy if you want to earn some REAL medals. See, now I'm going to accuse you all of being a militia. You have a rank structure, you wear uniforms, you call yourselves a Navy, pretend to use nautical terms, and even have shiny little ribbons to make yourselves think you're sailors.

I hope you realize you are making a mockery of the sacrifice that millions of REAL Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines have made for over 200 years. People who've done real things to help people.

You've "spread the word of Scientology" as your good deed? I fed and clothed the homeless and made a real difference in people's lives. I've done more for the good of the world than your whole sham SeaOrg has in 40 years. How self-absorbed as a group do you have to be to think that sharing yourselves with others is the best good deed you can do? That reeks of narcissism on a level that would make even its namesake vomit in disgust.

Get over yourselves and imbibe a little humility with your rice and beans.
34 months ago: "The brain is just a shock absorber. You might as well imply that I think with my kidneys."

You made the claim, Jack. Now I challenge you to back it up with even the slightest iota of proof. Let me save you the time and tell you that scientists have already taken pictures of the biological formation of memories in the brain. Ergo, the brain is used for memory. Ergo, the brain is used for thinking. Would you like me to continue and discuss that even a layman on the streets knows more about the inner workings of the brain than L Ron Hubbard ever did? After all, he didn't even have a college degree.
34 months ago: This entire thread shows how brainwashed these poor $cientology victims actually are.
@Remington - "The Church of Scientology has disseminated the works of the humanitarian L Ron Hubbard all over the world. Millions of people have been helped by Scientology. If you don't think that's an achievement, then that's your look-out."
I asked you to cite an example, not some of the twaddle that DM plants in your addled brain.
You guys are in need of some psychiatric help.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
34 months ago: Jack H Remington;

"You should visit your local Org and ask about enlisting. Then you can earn your own decorations."

Well my local org is the Flag Service Organization in Clearwater Florida. Do you think they would take me?

But Jack here has reinforced my postulate that those campaign ribbons don't rally mean anything. They are just part of the intimidation factor so when a sea org puke marches into an org with his decorations on his dress uniform he's bound to be respected.

Thanks Jack. You have just created a "what is true for me" and when I tell people of this exchange I will mention how I asked a reasonable question and got a "no U!" kind of answer.

Good job Jack, now report to ethics!
skeptic
skeptic
Canada
34 months ago: Terryeo, the problem with your reply to my previous comemnt is that no, the critics of Scientology do NOT (as you claim) ignore every datum that you carefully explain; on the contrary, we have paid the most meticulous attention to the data that you have presented, and we have replied very specifically and in great detail, using facts and logic. And while you now accuse us of "throwing great gobs of snot" the reality is that we have been very careful to give meaningful and relevant replies, rather than resorting to character assassination, unlike you and your fellow cultists who specialize in character assassination as a means to avoid facing the reality that you have been terribly deceived by the cult to which you belong.
34 months ago: Remington, "In the adversarial system of justice, an unchallenged legal opinion has a lot of weight, I understand." Something that $cientology is obviously very adept at, being that you use the legal system to attempt to silence all your critics. That said, just because some lawyer says something is OK, it does not make it OK. Your pathetic sci-fi club "concerned citizens??" is even attempting to hold PRIVATE meetings to silence free speech, which is a cornerstone of the US constitution. I wonder how much the scilons are offering in bribery and corruption to get protest permits revoked?
The faalout from that could be catastrophic if the permits are revoked. Anonymous is not asleep.
34 months ago: @remington - you say that the people who have left your nutty "church" are traitors. This is another (of many) indicators that you are part of a cult. I don't know of any other church (or religion) that brands those who leave as "traitors".
My opinion is that those who left have realised that they are being conned and brainwashed. And I firmly believe that soon you and others will be doing the same. And it's OK, only those who prefer to remain will brand you as traitors. Those of us outside will realise that you have come to your senses. And if you leave, you will be welcomed, believe it or not!
34 months ago: Provocateur, you apparently misunderstand how people leave and rejoin the Church.

The Scientology philosophy and the organization that disseminates it, the Church, are based on understanding knowledge.

With this basis, it is only logical that a person might misunderstand and act on their misunderstanding. Combined with other reasons, a person might leave the Church.

However, understanding is dynamic and not fixed, it is personal and not necessarily fixated. Thus, there is procedure that a person can fulfill if they leave. Procedure they can optionally follow, to rejoin, to gain the status, "In good standing".

Unlike your implication, not all human relationships are fixated like rocks in a field.
34 months ago: @Terryeo, amongst all the twaddle you are spouting, are you actually trying to say something? Because if you are, remove all the $cientology speak, and say what you mean. I might then be able to ascertain whether you have a point to make.
This entire comment and all other comments made by me are (C) Copyright Provocateur 2009 and may not be quoted without my express permission and then only after payment of a fee of $1000.00 per word.
34 months ago: @Anonymous, the copyright restriction does not apply to you. You may quote me without permission or fee.
34 months ago: The comment about traitors was made by a $cientologist, Jack H. Remington, viz "Ms Yingling, though not a Scientologist, provides an example that psychopathic traitors like Mr Rinder and Mr Rathbun, who worked with Ms Yingling on many issues before their true natures revealed themselves, would have done well to follow." and "Ms Yingling has been central to getting more and more other people to join Scientology over the years, and helped to keep the Church going more than the traitors who have left it."
These comments are not mine, but are quoted in the opening statement for this thread.
@Terryeo, READ before you comment. It may inject a bit of intelligence into your comments.
(C) Copyright Provocateur 2009 - except comments in quotes.
34 months ago: There are two situations.

One situation (long ago canceled) was about internal Church of Scientology justice. If a member of the Church, quit the Church, he could no longer receive Justice within the Church. This was the situation the Fair Game Policy covered.

You, and other anons, use the phrase as if that situation applied to all people, everywhere. People who have never been a Church member can not be "fair gamed" because the policy only applied to former members who were seeking Church justice. I hope this helps you understand why that argument is neither realistic nor effective.

Tell that to Paulette Cooper and a host of other critics who've been fair gamed by the cult. Pfttt.

Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
34 months ago:

"You, and other anons, use the phrase as if that situation applied to all people, everywhere. People who have never been a Church member can not be "fair gamed" because the policy only applied to former members who were seeking Church justice. I hope this helps you understand why that argument is neither realistic nor effective."

So, what do you call it? When your church harasses people as a matter of policy, what is your name for that?
34 months ago: How about this one:

http://www.fairgamed.org/minton.htm

34 months ago: In this thread Anonymous 1 scilons 0

This is becoming boring!
34 months ago: You are misapplying misinformation to come up with misleading and mistaken misstatements, Anonymous.

Try to stick to the facts.
34 months ago: Jack, how about you be a grown up and back up your claims? You present crappy Scientology data, we present actual scientific and historically documented data that refutes yours and makes you all look like a brainwashed cult.
We present actual scientific and properly documented data and you try to go "NUH UH! YOU CAN NOT SAY THAT!"

If my misapplying you mean presenting truthfully, yes.
If by misleading you mean accurate, yes.
If by mistaken misstatements you mean anything critical of a crazy cult called the Church of Scientology, then yes.

I'm curious Jack, how many of YOUR friends in Scientology have left? How many do you simply no longer have contact with? Ever wonder if they were placed in the RPF? Or perhaps escaped?
You should go to http://tinyurl.com/scientologyex and look over the long list of over 300 former Scientologists who've been brave enough to speak out. You'd be surprised how they do not fit the description your organization routinely provides.
34 months ago: AnonieMouth, clearly, you are infatuated with "over 300 former Scientologists". You keep saying those individuals have enormous importance. Pounding your drum, you present their failure as a situation to study, fondle, and know everything about.

Apparently you have not run a parallel situation through to a conclusion. Take, for example, a beginning baker who begins to study baking. He makes his first batch of cookies and they come out just swell. But after some additional study, he fails his study and quits baking. Now, why would every baker on the planet give a writhing hot damn about the failed baker, when they are producing good cookies and cakes and hope to become professional bakers?

Meanwhile, the only people on the planet you want to talk about are 300 people who have quit. Okay, talk away, but don't expect everyone to jump on your bandwagon.
34 months ago: Many have "jumped on the bandwagon" about the atrocities and scandal of your autocratic "religion", terryeo. And your analogy of a baker is pathetic. Your organisation is not baking cookies, it is destroying people's lives, including yours. How many of your friends have left, how many of your family have left? Are you permitted to contact them? Have you been through their punishment rituals?
And, for once, answer specific questions.
34 months ago: @Remington "You are misapplying misinformation to come up with misleading and mistaken misstatements, Anonymous.

Try to stick to the facts"

Whose facts? Scilons have a history of denying the facts. Answer specific questions and stop trying to muddy the waters with your dubious twaddle.
34 months ago: TerryEO, thank you so much for trying to dismiss these 300 critics as "quitters". Perhaps it would be of interest to you that nearly every person on this list of mine was in Scientology over 10 years.
That's not being the baker who quits after their first batch of cookies. These are people who've been going to the cooking class over and over and over and over and over and OVER and spent a fortune but every time their cookies come out burnt.

About half of those were in for 20 or more years. 20 years. These are the people who not only COMPLETED your hypothetical little cooking school, they've been doing advanced level cooking courses and still the cookies are getting burnt. It can't be them, the cooking school said they were good at it and let them move onto cakes and pastries and all so many more complex dishes! But if its not them...that leaves the cooking school!! (HINT: THE COOKING SCHOOL IS SCIENTOLOGY IN THIS ANALOGY YOU CREATED).

What's most telling is that there are OT VIIIs, Class VIII+ auditors, high ranking members of staff, countless members of the SeaOrg, even L Ron Hubbard's own son on this list. So your analogy is wrong. These are not people who tried it and quit. These are people who faithfully were part of Scientology most of their lives. Many were born into it. And now they're speaking out against it.

YOU. ARE. WRONG. The Church of Scientology, to you, to public Scientologists, to the world, lies about its critics. This is proof. THEY ARE LYING.

Don't believe me? Read the list for yourself. http://tinyurl.com/scientologyex
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
34 months ago: Of course terryeo or Jack has brought up the fact that - it's only 300. Why not 3000 or 30,000?

That's an easy one, it is simply human nature coupled with Scientology's habit of harassment. Most people don't like ot talk about unpleasant things. Most people don't like to talk badly about their friends and family. When most people quit Scientology they quite and don't look back, coupled with the fact that they might have family in the cult and seeing how Scientology will open thier files if they leave.

Big deal you say? It is a big deal to them. PC folders contain detailed record of their "confessionals " in Scientology. Records that are sworn to be confidential and private. Here people are encouraged to divulge their "crimes" and if they don't have any? They are prodded to make some up.

All of that is so, if they become estranged with Scientology there will be some coin to buy their silence.
'
The people who are speaking out are simply the brave vanguard, of an army. They speak out despite the pressure from Scientology not to. How many people are in that army no one knows, yet.

Look at your orgs, empty and silent. Your members are leaving and they are losing their fear, they shall speak out. They are speaking out!
skeptic
skeptic
Canada
34 months ago: Terryeo, I happen to be one of the former Scientologists on the list in question (although not under the name "skeptic") and I want to reply to your assertion that we left Scientology because of our own failure. To leave Scientology is a success, not a failure; I left because I finally figured out that Scietnology is based upon lies and does not deliver what it promises, in addition to being a fascist bureaucracy and a ruthless and destructive organization. The Scientologists who have not yet figured this out are the failures. They are dupes. Nobody can actually succeed as a Scientologist because there is no success to be had. Of course, lots of people write success stories, but success stories is in this case merely reflect the delusion of those who write them. The only success in Scientology is L. Ron Hubbard's success as a liar on a grand scale. He succeeded in fooling us. But at least I did figure it out eventually. Perhaps you will too, some day.
Mecca  Anon
Mecca Anon
Clearwater, FL
34 months ago:
Hubbard died (by many accounts) alone and raving in a Blue Bird motor home, hiding out from the authorities. Possibly with anti psychotic drugs in his bloodstream. Not a particularly auspicious end for the "savior of humanity."

The point here is, Hubbard could not even help himself in the end. He got old and died a pathetic wreak of a man, friendless and scared of his own shadow. As an example of the "power in Scientology," Hubbard certainly was not.
34 months ago: Scientology is an ongoing process, like humanitarianism. When you give up on it, it doesn't really matter for how long you used to observe it. When a 20 year old commits a murder, it's not a defense to say "for the last 20 years I was a functioning member of society".

Scientologists are running the bakery. Apostates are in the half-bakery.
34 months ago: skeptic - I'll tell you buddy, as far as I know, you're free to do anything. Earth is a big place, teeming with life, there is opportunity and space, land untrodden by mankind and global warming promises to make vast areas of northern land more friendly. Have fun.

However, I've experienced and seen to many BIG WINS to turn from Scientology. Areas of living that were huge and unapproachable became things I could understand and become part of, could contribute to or even manage. But as you have adroitly implied, it is a personal thing and I too know it requires personal effort, persistence and willingness to understand.
34 months ago: BIG wins? In the non-scilon world, there are very big wins (and losses). And scilons, please answer this question. Who are the big guys in scilonese? We have Gates, Mandela, Obama, Branson, a host of BIG stars in Hollywood, big names in business, politics, research, etc. Name some scilons who can hold a candle to the names I have mentioned. But, you won't, coz all you have are Cruise and Travolta. And they aren't doing you too much good on the PR front. Our (non scilon) world is far from perfect, but each one of us can succeed or fail without some loon telling us what to do. We can accept or reject advice from others without being punished. We are allowed to make mistakes and nobody puts us into a punishment camp - unless the mistakes are illegal or criminal. You want each of your little robots to toe the line and not talk to anyone (even family) if they disagree with your "philosophy". No thanks, keep your "religion", we don't want it.
Get out, before you sit in our "punishment" camps for the illegal deeds your "church" commits.
skeptic
skeptic
Canada
34 months ago: Terryeo: regarding your BIG WINS in Scientology and the fact that areas of life that were huge and unapproachable became things that you could understand, I can believe that this has happened to you, but I would like to point out that most people will, in the normal course of growing up and becoming adults, have to deal with huge unapproachable areas of life and figure out how to understand them. L. Ron Hubbard has mastered the trick of taking credit for anything good that happens in the lives of his followers, while avoiding the blame for all the bad things that happen. He has made himself into the source of all blessings. But it's just a trick. You would have mastered those unapproachable areas of life anyway, even without Scientology.

Objectively speaking, if Scientology really did give its practitioners some huge advantage over non-Scientologists, the results would be very visible in the real world, not just inside your mind. Scientologists would already be running the world and solving all of the world's problems, just as the official Aims of Scientology (a world without war, without insanity, without crime) would require Scientologists to do. And it is not happening, not even a little bit. That is the very sad reality. I wish Scientology did deliver what it promises; we could all use the help. But it doesn't. It's just a con game, and you are one of the people who have been conned, buddy.
34 months ago: Just as an aside, are terryeo and remington not breaking scilon laws by even talking to us? They (according to Ron) are not permitted to communicate with SPs or those who criticize $cientology. DAVID, DAVID, you little poison dwarf, you have some bad little scilons here!!!
34 months ago: Skeptic, as you know, not every Scientologist states their religion publicly. You don't know that all the "big names" you mentioned aren't Scientologists.
34 months ago: The reason I know that they are not $cientologists is that they still have their money.
skeptic
skeptic
Canada
34 months ago: Your suggestion that there are indeed tremendously important and powerful people in the world who are secretly Scientologists is obviously a lie (but then, in accordance with the Fair Game Law, it is your responsibility to lie when dealing with critics of Scientology). Everyone involved in this discussion knows perfectly well that the Church of Scientology will go to any lengths to exploit the fame and influence of any famous people who become members. There is no reason why you would not do so. However, hypothetically, let us say that these secret Scientologsits do exist. So what have they accomplished? I am still waiting for a world without war, without crime, and without insanity. We see no actual progress - absolutely none! - toward the stated aims of Scientology. This is a failure that you cannot explain away. All these (supposedly) super-human Operating Thetans with their incredible powers, who are assisted immeaurably by the power of LRH technology, which (supposedly) contains the answer to every problem of either individuals or organizations, seem to have accomplished absolutely nothing in terms of the stated aims of Scientology. Doubtless you will urge me not to be in such a hurry, but Scientology has been at work since (more or less) the publication of Dianetics: etc., in 1950, which is now 59 years ago, and in 59 years I expect to see at least some visible progress toward the stated aims of an organization. If you had a group officially devoted to feeding the hungry which had not actually fed so much as a single slice of bread to anybody in 59 years, I don't think the response would be "let's give them more time".
34 months ago: The scilons time is up! They've already done more than enough damage. The poison dwarf needs to spend some time in a Federal Pen.
34 months ago: "Scientology is an ongoing process, like humanitarianism. When you give up on it, it doesn't really matter for how long you used to observe it. When a 20 year old commits a murder, it's not a defense to say "for the last 20 years I was a functioning member of society". "

Yes, in a way, it is. It's known as a mitigating factor and plays a small part in determining a person's sentence. A person who murders random people is likely to repeat the offense, but someone who kills their mother because for years she abused them... well they aren't likely to kill their mother again and may receive a less severe punishment.
But you wouldn't know any of that because you and all other members of the Church of Scientology feel you can ignore non-CoS laws when it suits your need.

According to you, Scientology is a study. If I study something for 20 years, reading the most technical books on the subject, receiving praise and accolades from highly respected members of the field, then I clearly know something about the field and by virtue of that study can be deemed to be an expert in it.

Of course, you could also be correct, in which case David Miscavige has no place in running the CoS because he's gone insane and has started beating the staff and throwing them into icy cold water and locking them in their offices!!!! Which means that the tech doesn't work, because for over 20 years it was applied meticulously to numerous individuals and yet it failed EACH AND EVERY ONE.

In science, that's whats known as a trend. And when you see a trend, you can predict that the outcome will repeat in the future. So, just as there has been a massive drop in new members (and there has), and just as you've seen old members turning their backs on Scientology and refusing to affiliate with the organization (and they are), the process will continue because the Church of Scientology does not change. In a closed system, one without change, the process will continue along its trend.
34 months ago: remington and terryeo, just for interest's sake, how much has $cientology cost you so far? Or are you not prepared to answer a simple question? How long have you been in the "religion"?
I have no idea how non-Christian religions donate, but I do know that most Christian religions request a tithe (10%), but it is not demanded. And I don't know of any other religion where the members have mortgaged their homes to pay for religious teaching.
Louanne
Louanne
Los Angeles, CA
33 months ago: Jack H Remington is a troll, not a scientologist. He utterly fails to trick a real Scientology member.

- L

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.