Cult or Miscavige of Justice? Newspaper Runs Indepth Exposé on Church of Scientology

488px-scientology_symbolsvgThe 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.

268 thoughts on “Cult or Miscavige of Justice? Newspaper Runs Indepth Exposé on Church of Scientology”

  1. Author: Buddha Is Laughing
    Comment:
    GWLSMom,

    Last time I saw Hilton it was on a New Orleans local channel.

    Here’s a little career summary.

    hilarious. just hilarious.
    where do they get that hair? is there some special evangelical barber shop they all go to?

  2. mespo,

    But that being said, the un-American thing is always uncalled for, even when true (see Cheney comment).

  3. Buddha:

    Having read your running gun battle with jim byrne,I do conclude JB is not a troll, merely dyslexic. I simply said to jimbo that stupid ideas are not free from criticism just because someone sincerely believes them. Jim morphed that into some notion that I advocated that the government should come down on these dunderheads which is far from the truth. Jim then proceeded to wrap himself in the flag while whisting Yankee Doodle while slapping red, white and blue paint on everything. Jim can’t distinguish between public scorn over stupid ideas (which I advocate),and government action to prevent or discourage them (which I do NOT advocate). Your are locked in a battle with a second rate advocate, and try as you might, you can’t make him smell the coffee.

  4. IS,

    Still waiting for a neutral source. I understand your distaste for Wikipedia (although I find it funny coming from a man whose sole argument against a book is “I read a biography about the guy that wrote it years ago, I don’t remember the name of the book or author”), but give me a dictionary or something other than “Conservative is everything I think is good.”

  5. IS writes: I am sure leftist intellectuals went ape shizzle in the late 40’s and 50’s back peddling from association. It must have been such fun to watch.

    me: I am so done with you. you ignorant jerk. in the 40’s my leftist intellectual family was pretty much incinerated. the ones who did manage to crawl out of the ashes were not fun to watch. neither was it fun to watch my family spend most of the 50’s trying to find family who may have survived and trying to get on with their lives.
    wanna know what the gift that keeps giving is from that period? an 85 year old man who can’t recognize his wife and kids but screams very night because he does remember every detail of Buchenwald.

    try to be a mensch. I know it doesn’t come easily to you but it will make you more popular at cocktail parties.

  6. I love this cant refute what I have said so everyone of you has gone to ad hominum attacks. It really is grand, sputtering all about.

    and GWlawmom, I suggest you go do some reading instead of parroting Buddha and Mike and Gyges because they dont know what they are talking about either as far as this is concerned. What they know is the leftist slant to the NAZI issue, if I were a leftist I would not want to be associated with a group of thugs like that either. I am sure leftist intellectuals went ape shizzle in the late 40’s and 50’s back peddling from association. It must have been such fun to watch.

  7. Buddha writes: think I finally understand the appeal of NASCAR.

    you mean the round and round real fast thing? the only appeal nascar has for me are the drivers. hot men in tight jumpsuits. and not even so much compared to say, your average UPS guy.

  8. Buddha writes: Speaking of Hinn, how does he compare to Robert Tilton? Anyone seen them both in action? I’ve seen articles about Hinn, but never the show, but Tilton is like watching services where the pastor has dropped a heroic dose of mescaline.

    me: I’ve never seen Tilton in action. is he on TV? where does he get his mescaline? can you buy some on his church giftshop website?

  9. GW MOM:

    yes I did know that, its pretty basic knowledge. The NAZI’s and the communists were the same kind of thugs and so did not care much for each other. Like opposing mafia orgs. They were both competing for the same territory, and the NAZI’s won.

    So that makes communists good? When did your ancestors come here? I bet it was during that wave of immigration from central Europe, those intellectuals thought Marx was such a great guy and they brought that stuff here.

  10. IS writes: NAZI stands for National Socialist-they were socialists

    me: jesus h christ. i’m losing my patience with you. just because the word “socialism” was part of their tag does not mean that the nazi party was socialist in any real or imaginary way. because you are such a literalist and seem to be immune from any advice given you regarding the nazi party, its organization, its founder and his ideas and because you seem to be incapable of learning, my role in this very weird dance with you is over.
    you may continue to believe what you will. you are and will always be wrong.
    don’t believe me, or anyone else here. check with someone in real life, say, some history prof if the town where you live has a university. if that’s too advance, try any high school world history book. Better still, try your local public library. you don’t even have to read a whole book.

  11. Mike A writes: IS, my disagreement with your position is based upon my opinion, from everything I’ve read or seen about the man, that Hitler did not have a coherent political or social philosophy. He was a megalomaniac with some serious anger issues. He had an ideal of the German state, which he believed he epitomized. All of the rest was simply words tossed out in the consolidation of power. Marx and Engels actually had some valuable insights into human nature and the power of capitalism to destroy human lives. It is for that reason that they are still read by students of political philosophy. No one reads Hitler, including the right-wing militia groups in this country who idolize him.

    me: I kinda wish I’d written this. In fact, its what I’ve been waiting for. Even Hitler’s ideas about the 1000 year reich and master race were not his own. the final solution was not his idea. he may have wanted a pure aryan germany but had no idea how to accomplish it on his own.
    the only part of hitler’s ideology from mein kampf that the neo-nazis know is the “14 words” and that’s because it can fit on a t-shirt.
    what IS doesn’t know is that the first group Hitler went after long before he went after the jews were communists.

  12. lotta,

    I define American as a natural born or legally naturalized citizen who upholds the Constitution and the principles therein and is willing to defend those principles from all enemies foreign and domestic. Now, you are operating under a misconception I’ll need to clear up. Because of the nature of Dick’s treason (violating the Constitution by authorizing torture in addition to other crimes) is so egregious and strikes directly at the taproot of our legal system that I should stipulate that I do in my interior monologue consider Cheney un-American. Compare that to Aldrich Ames whom I consider a convicted traitor but totally American. He like Cheney committed crimes for a money motive, but Ames attacked the mechanisms of State, not the validity of the singular founding document that is the Constitution. Also they way in which Dick did it was so counter to the image of America abroad. Suspending habeas corpus was bad enough, but torture? To me, as you can see by how I define American, how that is axiomatically anti-American. I never called Cheney un-American because it’s uncouth and a tool of the Neocon enemy that they employed in the run up to the Invasion for Exxon’s P/L Statement, not because I don’t feel he’s not acted against our best interests as citizens.

  13. Buddha, according to the article the copyright expires in 2015. Then we can all publish it. But since India is big on trains, why is there not a big demand for Mussolini’s autobiography?

  14. BIL, What is “American”? Define that and you have your definition of “Un-American” Same for “Traitor”.

    I believe without reservation that Bush et al are traitors and should have their backs to a wall for their treason. I know how I define the enemies of America (based on my definition of America as place made up of citizens adhering to American ideals) so the Bush cabal to me provided them aid and comfort, became one with them. I suspect from your reluctance to call Cheney a traitor that we have a difference of opinion on what it means to be an “American” in the most refined terms.

    I’m curious- how do you define “American”?

Comments are closed.