Scientology

[mourgos]

Catherine Bell is a Scientologist, yet she portrayed many roles like that. What you say makes no sense. Why would Tom do that and deprive her of acting and income? It's her job as an actress to act of course. I admit I have not been following the news on this, but sounds pretty lame to me. Typical media hype. One of the definitions of 'cult' could fit any active, major religion. Look it up. Oh, the Buddism reference is ridiculous, since Hubbard wrote a Buddist poem (Hymn of Asia) which I think you can get on Amazon.com. Ciao.

[mourgos]

"lots of info" on www.scientology.org, too.

[plumflower_pm]

I agree, it definitely sounds lame. It sounds way too overtly controlling. However, it's been in the news for some time and has not been refuted by cruise or holmes. I think Cruise himself confirmed it when he was on Oprah recently.

http://www.ananova.com/entertainment...ws.celebrities


love and brainwashing make you do stupid things. Edie Sedgewyck would have been a great role.

[blooming tianshi lotus]

crux is that it's a wholelotta bs to negotiate a conversation with. Of course it's part of what's selling and in all earnmestness, I'm not dsure that there's even one intelligent person who hasn't once considerd the prosepct that we ( human kind) were at some time in some form brought here by aliens after whatever prequilitve tradgey made it neccessary.



It's not totaly ludicrous and beats the " man in sky with grey beard sending everyone to fire and brimstaone and a life time of guilt " theory, but uninformed ppl tend to make a whoile banal and productive nor intellegent and impartial argument about these sports of things so scientology half swore to keep a low profile on it... like Doc and his pains he insists he won't share......... too often there's just no point !!!

on the not talking to folks outside your belief thing, I totally get it...... I do teach to ppl of all sorts of background and belief myself and have to use social services every day for trade and business........ I guarntee though that it's nothing more than inch deep neccessities and trite impersonal as possible conversations and operandi ...... You just can't aford to be open to Tom , Dick his mates and their bs these days...... time is precious and attentoin earnt.......scandal mongers 'll do their best to try to create one outta anything, and media are much to par.
Just quietly though, as an internationally recognised expert in these things, If you yourself say you're doing otherwise , Imo you're just full - o - your - own self lying weaK assed cowering ignorant spiritualually unfamiliar bs!!! ( lowers eyes and and smiles half sadly anrd reflectively to your souls )


Blooming Lotus

[plumflower_pm]

oh yea, and Orwell was a socialist.


About that quote... VERY interesting stuff.
the below is from this link. Google the quote, lots comes up.
_____________
L. Ron Hubbard is widely rumored to have said "The way to make a million dollars is to start a religion." There are also variant rumors. For some reason, this is often mentioned on Usenet. Evidence is discussed below, but the short answer is that it's almost certainly true.

The Church of Scientology has actually taken German publishers to court for printing this story. (see below).

One form of the rumor is that L. Ron Hubbard made a bar bet with Robert A. Heinlein. This is definitely not true. It's uncharacteristic of Heinlein, and there's no supporting evidence. There is, however, inconclusive evidence that Robert Heinlein suggested some parts of the original Dianetics.

Another variant is that Hubbard talked of starting a religion to avoid taxes. Jay Kay Klein reports that Hubbard said this in 1947.

The Church's media guide tells reporters that the rumor is confused, and that it was George Orwell who said it. In 1938, Orwell did write "But I have always thought there might be a lot of cash in starting a new religion...". However, Robert Vaughn Young, who was Scientology's spokesman for 20 years, says that Hubbard learned about the Orwell quote from him. Young further states that he met three people who could remember Hubbard saying more-or-less the famous quote. Nor did Hubbard write a rebuttal of the rumor -- Young claims to have ghost-written the rebuttal in the Rocky Mountain News interview.

I found the following in books about Hubbard and Scientology:

"Whenever he was talking about being hard up he often used to say that he thought the easiest way to make money would be to start a religion."

-- reporter Neison Himmel: quoted in Bare Faced Messiah p.117 from 1986 interview. Himmel shared a room with LRH, briefly, Pasadena, fall 1945.

"I always knew he was exceedingly anxious to hit big money - he used to say he thought the best way to do it would be to start a cult."

-- Sam Merwin, then the editor of the Thrilling SF magazines: quoted in Bare Faced Messiah p.133 from 1986 interview. Winter of 1946/47.

"Around this time he was invited to address a science fiction group in Newark hosted by the writer, Sam Moskowitz. `Writing for a penny a word is ridiculous,' he told the meeting. `If a man really wanted to make a million dollars, the best way to do it would be start his own religion.'

-- Bare Faced Messiah p.148. Reference given to LA Times, 27 Aug 78. Supposed to have happened in spring 1949.

"Science fiction editor and author Sam Moscowitz tells of the occasion when Hubbard spoke before the Eastern Science Fiction Association in Newark, New Jersey in 1947: `Hubbard spoke ... I don't recall his exact words; but in effect, he told us that writing science fiction for about a penny a word was no way to make a living. If you really want to make a million, he said, the quickest way is to start your own religion.'"

-- Messiah or Madman, p.45. No reference given. Yes, the spelling of Sam's name differs: this book got it wrong, it has a "k". I don't know why the two books disagree by two years.

(Oddly, the same misspelling occurs in Eisenberg. From this and other similarities, it seems likely that Corydon is quoting the Eisenberg article, rather than quoting Moskowitz directly.)

The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction lists Sam Moskowitz as the first good historian of science fiction [among other things]. In 1994 Moskowitz wrote an affidavit which states:

"After speaking for about an hour at the meeting, Mr. Hubbard answered questions from the audience. He made the following statement in response to a question about making money from writing: `You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion.'"

The affidavit states that this was the 7 Nov 1948 meeting of the Eastern Science Fiction Association, of which Moskowitz was the director.

Now, there is a problem with the three Moskowitz reports. Specifically, the Church obtained affidavits in 1993 from David A. Kyle and Jay Kay Klein. Both names are well-known in science fiction, and both say that they went to the 7 Nov 1948 talk by Hubbard. Both say that they didn't hear any such statement. Puzzling.

I believe that these dueling affidavits have met in court. Stern, a German magazine, was sued by the Church, and the suit was thrown out of court after they obtained the Moskowitz affidavit.

On 9apr94, jittlov@gumby.cs.caltech.edu (Mike Jittlov) posted (about a conversation with Theodore Sturgeon):

Back in the 1940's, L. Ron Hubbard was a member of the Los Angeles Science Fantasy Society (when its old clubhouse was just north of Wilshire Blvd). Ted vividly recalled being a few yards from Hubbard, when he became testy with someone there and retorted, "Y'know, we're all wasting our time writing this hack science fiction! You wanta make _real_ money, you gotta start a _religion_!

Though I didn't ask, I think Ted would've mentioned it if the second person was Heinlein or another author of note. He had an extremely accurate memory, and I'd trust Sturgeon over anyone else's account.

Reportedly Sturgeon also told this story to others. Theodore Sturgeon was one of the truly great science fiction writers, and someone whose word and memories were trusted. (John W. Campbell commented that Sturgeon should have written the definitive history of SF fandom.) Mike Jittlov is a respected Hollywood filmmaker and stopmotion actor, and can be found on the net at "alt.fan.mike-jittlov".

Lloyd Arthur Eshbach was a science fiction writer and publisher between 1929 and 1957. His autobiography, says on pages 125 and 126 (about the events of 1948 and 1949):

I think of the time while in New York I took John W. Campbell Marty Greenberg, and L. Ron Hubbard to lunch. Someone suggested a Swedish smorgasbord, and I had my first--and last--taste of kidney. Yuck! Afterward we wound up in my hotel room for related conversation.

The incident is stamped indelibly in my mind because of one statement that Ron Hubbard made. What led him to say what he did I can't recall--but in so many words Hubbard said:

"I'd like to start a religion. That's where the money is!"

Eshbach based his autobiography on detailed records and dated diary entries, and is therefore likely to be quite accurate on this point.

Harlan Ellison is a science fiction author and movie scriptwriter. In an interview, he has said such things as "I was there the night L. Ron Hubbard invented [Dianetics]". However, I have decided not to give Ellison's version of the famous Hubbard quote, nor am I counting Ellison in my witness list. I respect Mr. Ellison, but after much discussion on "rec.arts.sf.written", it became clear that some well-informed science fiction fans do not take Mr. Ellison's words literally. He does not necessarily keep history and storytelling separate.

Reportedly, a Vonnegut biography mentions the Hubbard quote. If anyone can find an exact reference, I would appreciate email. Similarly, L. Sprague de Camp is reported to have said something in his handbook on writing science fiction. Randall Garrett also supposedly talked about this. Again, I would appreciate email.

To summarize: we have eight witnesses: Neison Himmel, Sam Merwin, Sam Moskowitz, Theodore Sturgeon, Lloyd Arthur Eshbach, and the three unnamed witnesses of Robert Vaughn Young. There is some confusion and doubt about one of the five (Sam Moskowitz). Two are reported via Russel Miller: one is reported via Mike Jittlov: one reported in his autobiography; and one reported in an affidavit. The reports describe different events, meaning that Hubbard said it at least five times, in five different venues - definitely not just once. And the Church's official disclaimer is now reportedly a flat lie.

Conclusion: He definitely said it (and more than once).

[doc]

I saw this latest monstrosity, "War of the Worlds", with bumbling fool Cruise, many weeks ago.

I was appalled at what I saw on the screen. It really bothered me.

HG Wells wrote this magnificent tome sometime around 1895. It was heavily influenced by then recent observations on the planet Mars, that had triggered speculation of life there. Also, the emergence of Germany as a warring power (with subsequent fears of the invasion of Europe) might have played some sort of role in Well's creation. Wells was also making a commentary on England's far reaching empire throughout the world, and its possible consequences of destruction of species and societies. Considering these concepts as being important in the structure and design of his story, that is, the whole concept of an outside alien force, one which is not native to its future potential conquest, invading and causing death and destruction, the recent Tom Cruise / Spielberg movie really makes a significant change.

One which I have yet to see a reviewer notice, or comment about.

In 1938, Orson Welles stunned the world with his magnificent rendition of Well's original story. And, I think in the fifties, yet another manifestation of this work, this time a sci fi movie, made its debut, keeping as close to the original story as possible. What Spielberg has done, is alter Wells' original concept of this work, to be more in line with Cruise's religious beliefs.

The Spielberg movie changes one very significant premise. That the invaders, actually were not alien to the planet earth, but, were earth's original inhabitants over a million years ago. And, they came back. How more Scientology oriented can one get?

I find this to be downright scary. A director of Spielberg's ability, quality, and,especially, influence, changing an original, important, history making story, so that if fits more in line with his main star's religious beliefs. Instead of telling this remarkable and historic piece of literature's story, as it was originally meant to be told, Spielberg and Cruise use their money and their influence to help spread Cruise's thoughts on how he sees the world.

At least when Travolta tried to do this, he made one hell of a bomb of a movie, and people laughed at it.

[zachsan]

and thus it will go down in history: War of the Worlds: The First Movie in Which the Creators Tried to Impress Their Version of the World on Us via Cheap Fictional Situations.

[plumflower_pm]

It seems many people feel this way, and think the film was altered to promote the scientology agenda. There are quite a few online petitions calling for boycotts of the film.

For the activist in all of us, here's the addresses to mail those letters to:


Paramount Studios
5555 Melrose Avenue
Hollywood, CA 90038
323.956.5000

Speilberg's contact is:
DreamWorks SKG
100 Universal Plaza, #601
Universal City, CA 91608
(818)-777-4600

[zachsan]

i still stand by this as maybe the best quote ever:

"Some people, well, if they don't like Scientology, well, then, **** you. Really. **** you. Period." sincerely, tom cruise

[Firbolg]

For anyone who hasn't read the original war of the worlds (or wants to read it again!) you can download it from project gutenburg for free (legally!) along with all the other HG Wells classics and thousands of other great books..

War of the Worlds

I haven't seen spielbergs rendition and I am not looking forward to it. On the bright side there is supposedly another new version coming from an english director soon which I think sticks close to the original... and it doesn't star tom cruise..

[zachsan]

just found this interesting article on the life and times of the esteemed mr. hubbard. it includes a lot of stuff i didn't know about.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2122835/

[doc]

There's a deep chasm between the erudite, noble Hubbard of Scientology myth and the true identity of the church's wacky founder. To those not in his thrall, Hubbard might be better described as a pulp science-fiction writer who combined delusions of grandeur with a cynical hucksterism. Yet he turned an oddball theory about human consciousness—which originally appeared in a 25-cent sci-fi magazine—into a far-reaching and powerful multimillion-dollar empire. The church now claims about 8 million members in more than 100 countries. The slow creep of Scientology's anti-drug programs into public schools, the presumably tens of millions of dollars the church keeps with the help of its tax-exempt status, and the accusations that the church has convinced people to hand over their life savings, make Hubbard's bizzarro legacy seem less like tragicomedy and more like a scandal.

Wow. You think I can do the same thing with russbo.com??? Start a cult. make it a non profit religious organization, have followers from all over the world. Have youngsters follow me with ashtrays in case I ever start smoking?

[shaolinstylee]

Hey Zach.... First time....

they've been doing that forever. walking on water, splitting the red sea, healing the ill, what, isn't the Bible the first sci fi novel?

[shaolinstylee]

this isn't a cult!?









I'm outa here.

[zachsan]

doc, we all know you've already got your own cult. you're not fooling anyone.