Re: A survivor of Scientology's "RPF" speaks

In article <3pr5i4$c2b@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>, dynamicd@ix.netcom.com (Dan Sigal ) wrote:

> In <3pqkao$b5o@agate.berkeley.edu> lyman@ajohnson.stpaul.gov (Chris
> Lyman) writes:
> >
> >
> >The following is an excerpt from the affidavit of Hana Eltringham
> >Whitfield, who worked in the Church of Scientology from 1965 to 1984.
> This is just another disaffected S.O. member who has done actions
> against Church Policy, and then tries to justify her evil acts.
This is a priceless sentence and oh so typical of the standard Co$ response. One word immediately catches the attention - "evil". Without that word, the writer comes across as reasonable. However, the use of the word indicates the mindset of the Co$ and its supporters.

Because, in this context, "evil" does not mean what we have all accepted it to mean. It is actually applied to any action that is seen as in opposition to the Co$. Actions that the vast majority of people would regard as reasonable are categorised as "evil" by the organisation/corporation. After all, it is SO much easier to hate people if you regard them as "evil".

In "1984", Oceania is at constant war with one or other of the other world empires. The regime which controls Oceania uses the war to engender hatred against the other empires. Oceania is always under threat and in those circumstances (them against us) people become more concerned about the externally perceived threat than they do about the conditions under which they live and are governed.

So with the Co$. Outsiders are labelled "wogs", critics who have left the Co$ are "suppressives", "Suppressed Persons" or "SPs". How much easier it is to dismiss criticism from outside when you are able to label everyone.

Noone has come up with any evidence that Hana carried out any "evil" acts (in the normal meaning of the word that is). She was apparently Deputy Commodore at one time, ie extremely senior in the organisation. She answered directly to Hubbard. How could one who rose so high be dismissed as "just another disaffected S.O. member"? How many are there, for goodness sake?

Let us put this "religion" rubbish to one side and examine the Co$ under another light. It is my view that, in its behaviour, the Co$ behaves as a totalitarian state within a state. Look at the evidence. Note that individual points may be fine in isolation. It is what those individual points add up to that matters.

1. It has a hierarchical structure

2. It has had a history of purges and clashes between powerful factions. The losers find themselves punished or are forced into exile.

3. It fiercely attacks those who criticise it, particularly in the case of "exiles".

4. It operates a regime of punishment for "deviant" behaviour - the RPF.

5. It has its own "secret police" - the OSA.

6. It has panderings to world domination (it was Hubbard's published intention to make the whole world "clear"). It is currently trying to manipulate the regime in Colombia by influencing key members, particularly in the armed forces

7. It exhibits an on-going paranoia about those who live outside its "frontiers"

8. It continually rewrites its own "history".

> Sorry Hana, your affi doesn't reflect all the truth, just what you feel
> others might believe. ^^^
Interesting use of the word "all". By implication, Hana's affidavit reflects most of the truth........

-- Sister Clara *********************************************************************** *** Vote NO to the proposal for talk.religion.scientology *** ***********************************************************************