Why I don’t agree with ‘Anonymous’ attacks on Scientology

In 1979, just 33 days after being sworn in as Pope John Paul the first, Albino Luciani was murdered for his want to change the Catholic church, into a better organised faith for the 20th century. Those dark forces within the Church, who covered up the truth about individuals within the Vatican, who were directly implicated in David Yallop’s book ‘In God’s Name’, in connection to Luciani’s death, continued to climb the ranks of the mother church throughout Karol Wotija’s papacy.

During Pope John Paul the second’s reign, several American diocese would go bankrupt, paying out millions of dollars in hush money and legal settlements to victims of clerical sexual abuse, while blatantly fraudulent claims of miracle appearances of the virgin Mary, in backwater towns around the world, enjoyed unprecedented levels of endorsement by association, from a pope who publicly offered up prayers to the apparitions, in pleas for peace and the ending of world hunger and the suffering of the poor.

Non of the people who brought these facts into the cold light of day hid from their findings. They wrote publicly about them. Neither of Yallop’s books on the subject of Vatican incompetence, complicity with organised crime or the murder of the pope were questioned on points of fact by the church, because its vast majority of members accept that they are likely closer to the truth than the versions of events which the church stands by to this day.

Christopher Hitchens didn’t have to go into hiding for revealing that Mother Teresa of Calcutta’s organisation couldn’t and can’t to this day account for the millions of dollars in donations which it received, without ever showing proof they were being used to help the people who the saint-in-waiting believed came closer to the suffering of Jesus on the cross, by being kept in the impoverished conditions her high profile money raising campaigns ostensibly sought to, but rarely delivered on her promise to ease.

When cartoons, which depicted the Islamic prophet Muhammad, were published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, neither the staff of the paper or the cartoonist in question, suggested for one second that they were engaged in religious hate crimes, merely airing their freedom of speech, and outlining in the ensuing media frenzy, the facts as they are written in openly available fundamentalist Islamic literature, about how non-believers are to be treated.

And yet, on the claim that these well documented crimes pale into insignificance compared to the crimes of Scientology, ‘Anonymous’ seems to think that the best way forward, in alerting the world to the truth as they see it about Scientology, is to literally remain invisible.

Yes, it must be frightening to be confronted in the street by people who accuse you of being a child molester. Yes, it must be terrible to have lost a loved one under extremely suspicious circumstances. And yes, it must be a tremendously painful experience to realise, only after spending thousands of dollars on courses and treatment, that there are some questions to which the only answers are more questions – but if you believe in something so strongly, that you are prepared to pick up a protest banner, you must accept that the only logical next step to this direct action, is face to face dialogue.

I would be astonished if there is not a single person of authority within Scientology who is not prepared to answer head-on, the specific accusations made against the organisation; namely that they are responsible for the deaths of Josephus Havenith, Heribert Pfaff and Lisa McPherson. But I can not find a single shred of evidence to show that David Miscavige has been asked directly about these allegations – either by mainstream news media or the text-to-voice YouTube clips posted by people, claiming to belong to the Anonymous group.

If I have simple not looked hard enough, I apologies and I would appreciate links in the comments, but it seems extremely odd to me, that in the early part of the 21st century, an organisation which boasts so many high profile public figures among its number would score so many own-goals, in terms of completely ignoring these claims, if they were not essentially baseless or had simply not been addressed to them directly in a calm and respectful manner.

It is not my concern what followers of Scientology think about alien souls in volcanoes, anymore than I am interested in what celibate men in dresses think about the line between eternal damnation and eternal salvation being dependant on a piece of rubber between the sexual organs of a married couple. It is my concern that these attacks on Scientology, which are clearly being carried out in the name of Anonymous, while having no direct relation to the peaceful search for the truth among its genuine membership, are going to lead to the sort of violence and hatred neither those who want answers to their questions, nor the vast majority of Scientology members who simply want to be left alone to think what ever they want to think, would want.

Silence and fear do not encourage dialogue. Talk to one another. We’re all on this rock together.

8 comments on “Why I don’t agree with ‘Anonymous’ attacks on Scientology

  1. Nick and Tamphex…
    Went to Tamphex site, and found a link to http://www.exscientologykids.com
    Read these stories. Astral’s (third founder) is heartbreaking.

    On these women’s site, they mentioned Nick’s site — scientology myths — as a supposedly ‘neutral’ site but that its run by prominent scientologists and its all a cover up.
    http://www.exscientologykids.com/warnings.html

    They even laughed that the contact email for this website is ‘scientologyworks@gmail.com’ So much for neutral myth dispelling.

    So jim — when you browse, be aware :)

  2. I’d already detected a certain one sided air to that site Kim, but you must agree that it must be difficult for people who have had positive experiences of Scientology to get their story out, without being branded insane?

  3. Hmm… kind of like many children raised to go to Catholic church have positive experiences, but then there’s the ones who got sodomized by priests. I’m not trying to be harsh, and I’m not against people trying to help other people. I’m sure there are scientologists who are NOT crazy (like Tom Cruise), but the organization is under leadership that is insane and manipulates people. One of the reasons years ago I started to get disgusted with Christianity is for one of the same reasons — people use it to validate some disgusting things. I *personally* never had a bad experience with any Christian.

  4. I couldn’t have put it better myself. Mr. Sheehan, for example, is clearly not mad, yet he is a committed Scientologist. His positive experiences of the group outweigh the negative ones a vocal minority have had. Not that I am suggesting I would be any less vocal if I felt that a group my son or daughter had become involved with was responsible in some way for their death – but the point surely is that thousands of CoS members do believe the organisation gives them something to focus on, despite the evidence suggesting that certain individuals have used cloak and dagger scare tactics on people they have a personal problem with and are hiding behind the generally held assumption that this is CoS policy, when it would appear if you do any serious digging that this is not the case.

    Like I said earlier, perhaps on the old blog, billions of people around the world think that everything in the entire universe was brought into being by sheer force of will, on the part of an invisible, omniscient, misogynistic, vengeful God, who loves us despite our inability to reach beyond the failings He built into our character in the first place. This is no more or less insane than thinking Xenu flung our Thetan souls into several volcanoes, before catching them again and planting them in the bodies of Mormons – or something.

    The point is, yes – think what you like. Just don’t insist that those of us who see your fears for what they actually are, are the ones who are being mislead by charlatans and crooks. This truism goes for Anonymous as much as it does Scientology and in particular those in CoS who know full well that the death threats and other unlawful acts, directed at them, have nothing to do with the genuine questions some of these family members have, to which it is simply baffling that no one in the legal system has thus far sought to ask.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s