The St. Petersburg Times is running a series on the Church of Scientology that has some pretty eye-popping allegations, particularly with regard to Church leader David Miscavige. For those who have long argued that the Church is a cult (most recently in Europe) the exposé will likely reinforce their views.
The newspaper reports bizarre and abusive conduct by Miscavige, including hitting high-ranking officials and forcing them to play a game of musical chairs (where the losers allegedly are banned from the Church).
The Los Angeles Times also has a story alleging rampant corruption in the Church.
The series on Scientology is something of a surprise. Many reporters that I have spoken with over the years are privately reluctant to do Scientology stories because of the Church’s aggressive reputation in responding to press. The Church has a history of suing critics and pursuing members who have joined the movement opposing Scientology. This has led to recent lawsuits ( and here) and complaints. Recently, Scientology also was barred from making edits on Wikipedia because of what it viewed as a pattern of misleading or false changes on sites referencing the Church.
For the first part of the three-part series, click here.
For the second part of the three-part series, click here.
Pinkos.
Nice. There go the pants!
1955 called and wants its’ insults back.
The caterer is that way . . .
BIL:
the shrimp are very good here and I dont care much for Long Island Ice Tea.
But the Manhattan’s and Rusty Nails are going down well. Ah cocktail hour, kick back enjoy a drink, read the blatherings of pinkos knowing they will never run anything except their mouths. Although I will give the head commiefacist credit, he did put GM under his spell.
Mespo:
“Ok, so jim byrne and lottakatz are now on the side of stupidity, perversion, and irrationality because they are free to be so”
Your first response to Jim make the point that you make in your posting above- If people blather on ignorantly then the can expect criticism. I agree with that and so did Jim. It only got weird when you expanded that to “stupid, perverse and irrational” thought or behavior, it wasn’t clear. Then you jumped him for saying he would be tolerant of that. It looked to me that you laid a ‘straw-man’ trap and Jim fell into it.
To address your comment directly, hell YES. If it’s not illegal or doesn’t infringe my rights I’ll not only tolerate it but I’ll defend it no matter how odious it is to me. I won’t end up kicking hippies around because they have long hair or stealing McCain signs out of my neighbor’s yard. Tempting as the later was.
I’d rather be in a Trolls company (and I’m NOT calling Jim a troll) on the matter that in the company of a learned man that would possibly limit free thought and action that was legal. You indicate you would limit your displeasure to criticism. Fine. That’s your right.
What’s funny (comic relief) about tolerating or advocating free thought and action that is legal? I thought that’s a virtue of a free society.
Mike Appleton,
If you need a derogatory title to feel that you are a member; you’re not an elitist.
Sorry. Better luck next time.
And here comes Troll with the exact same play.
I’ll say something for you boys. You’re consistent.
IS,
The propensity to inject words not stated, or to give one’s desired meaning to a word (that is in conflict with the accepted definition), is a trait found in most extremists. As they say in the HULU commercials; “that’s how we roll”.
For those that fall into that category, what has been said is not nearly as important as who said it.
IS,
Formula? Talk about trying to smear the opposition with your own weakness! Did you learn that trick from Karl? You had to have. That’s one of his signature plays. That’s really funny coming from a propagandist – inadvertent or not. I see you found the shrimp cocktail. Have another Long Island Ice Tea.
Hey, I’ve criticized a number of comments by IS and others, so how come I don’t get to be labeled an elitist? Fair is fair.
BIL:
very funny. Not cutting a pasting today?
Mike Spindell:
go back to sleep, what are you a government worker with not much to do?
Gyges, did not want to leave you out as you might have been tarred as a troll sympathizer.
Troll:
“I see a pattern here. One can say “I like pancakes”. The adversary will say “You’re an idiot. There’s nothing wrong with waffles” In defense, the initial commentor attempts to defend with “I didn’t say anything about waffles”. The adversary replies with “That’s what you meant to say. You just think you’re clever enough to get away with it.”
That is exactly what they do, I wish I would have said that, brillant. They get you doubting you even said I like pancakes. I dont know if it is a formula they adhere to or they are just to stupid to argue the points. Personally I think it is a formula but I dont count out stupidity so they rely on a formula.
Troll:
“Your choice does well to exemplify the elitist attitude of far too many members of the legal profession.”
*********************
Next time you go to the hospital I ‘ll put in a request for a mediocre surgeon for you instead of the elite one you obviously disdain. When charged with a felony, I bet you’d take the average lawyer instead of the elite one. When did elite get to be a dirty word? Yours in the whine of the “mass man,” holding on to some vague notion of nobility of the mediocre. Their is nothing wrong with being an elite–that is, unless you’re not.
“The reality of the other person lies not in what he reveals to you, but what he cannot reveal to you. Therefore, if you would understand him, listen not to what he says, but rather to what he does not say.” – Kahlil Gibran
Sage advice in any endeavor, not just troll analysis.
Vince,
Oh come on you know you’re a bad person just like us. How dare you try to inject fact into a discussion with proponents of fantasy?
Vince,
Good eye. Well worth considering.
IS,
I’ll let you decide what you find insulting and I’ll decide what I think is insulting.
As for the rest of your drivel? Well, considering you’ve just been handed your hat by five or six people in a row, your attacks are really just funny at this point. That is funny in a very pathetic way. Seriously, learn when to walk away. The more you talk, the more you prove everything said about you during your repeated hammerings. Take a lesson from your buddy Jim. You won’t win and your continued flailing is just embarrassing. It’s like watching the bride’s drunk ex-lover at the reception standing on the buffet table in the middle of the shrimp cocktail to announce his undying love for the just married woman before mooning the crowd, tongue kissing the caterer and passing out in his own sick. Nobody is physically harmed but everyone is thinking “What a jackass. Glad that isn’t me!” Jim at least walked away with some shred of dignity in tact. You’re just self-immolating at this point. But I guess that assumes you had any sense of dignity to start with.
Troll said “Buddha is laughing, mespo, Mike Spindell, and Vince Treacy have been very effective in exploring those ‘metaphysical subtleties’.”
How did my name get in there? I have not posted anything on this thread.
I have, however, responded to Jim Byrne over on “Obama adopts Cheney policy,” but haven’t heard from him lately. I see that Troll popped up after Byrne said goodbye, and seems very solicitous about how Byrne is treated here. My stuff on Obama birth is boringly fact based, epistemological maybe, but not metaphysical. Byrne dropped in an untranslated Latin phase, suggesting a background as a medieval scholastic. Is Troll Byrne.
I am not drawing any conclusions, you know, just making an observation.
mespo,
That is one of the most ambiguous statements Jefferson had ever made.
Most of the judges of Jefferson’s time had never attended law school. It wasn’t until the 1880’s that the first Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court had earned a modern law degree.
Your choice does well to exemplify the elitist attitude of far too many members of the legal profession.
Troll,
You are a breath of fresh air in letting us know beforehand your intentions by your name, so we can ignore you now without thinking we missed out on a opportunity for good discussion.
“oh my is it that obvious? all you wise old intellectuals. Oh please tell me what to read I am waiting with baited breath. I so appreciate the opportunity to learn at the feet of the Masters:”
The old saw about giving someone enough rope has rung true for IS. I think we should all appreciate and applaud how long he kept his particular farce going and even strung some of us along in the belief that he was capable of actually engaging in discussion rather that mindlessly parroting Rovian memes. However, slowly but surely the catchphrases leeched to the surface as we can see in this example above. Call those who discredit your nonsensical cant, intellectuals or elitists. As if people of your kind represented the majority of American’s. No wonder you are all so angry now, America didn’t back your guys in the election. So you deal with it by trying to discredit those who won, by trying to characterize them as effete snobs, by turning disputable history on end.
You represent the elitists, IS, as even your nom de plume illustrates. You are the servant of the real elitists. You slavishly sniff their behinds and love the smell that emanates. You are indeed a servant, willing to do your master’s bidding. Make no mistake you masters, the real elite have no respect for you except as a servant. The difference between you and a real indentured servant though is that you are never going to be able to buy your freedom.
Your just a trained puppy, barking when you’re told. People like you don’t upset me, because perhaps I have too much compassion for the terminally pathetic, but you do disgust me
in your smug stupidity. What could I expect though, you probably think that Rush, Bill, Sean, Glenn and Michael are
intelligent and knowledgeable. Your shame is that in that belief you’re probably right, but they’re the ones driving the Mercedes, that fools like you pay for with your slavish devotion.
Troll:
BTW you forgot Jefferson’s caveat about law and the role of lay people in the judicial system:
“[The people] are not qualified to judge questions of law, but they are very capable of judging question of fact. In the form of juries, therefore, they determine all controverted matters of fact, leaving thus as little as possible, merely the law of the case, to the decision of the judges.” –Thomas Jefferson to Abbe Arnoux, 1789. ME 7:422, Papers 15:283