Comments (206)

To the one with all the answers, I completely understand where you are coming from and I agree. Freedom of religion is a hard-won and important freedom for the American people. Although I am European myself, where separation of Church and State is probably more thoroughly enforced, freedom of religion is deeply and widely respected here too, including by myself. So what is happening here, why did Scientology create such a storm in Ms. Hoffman’s initial post?

Being the one with Google, I Googled Scientology. And what did I find? I found Time magazine called the Church of Scientology ‘The cult of greed and power’. I found Justice Latey of the London High Court called the Church of Scientology ‘A sinister, corrupt and dangerous cult’.

Since Ms Hoffman’s primary type of argumentation seems to be to ask a rhetorical questions, please allow me to ask one myself: Is Scientology perhaps not a religion?

I hope readers will care enough to form an answer for themself. An overview of Scientology can be found on xenu-directory.net. Be warned however, that the abusive practices of this ‘religion’ run very deep and you will encounter claims that you will strike you as paranoid and that you feel must be unbased. So did I, when I first Googled Scientology. However, I did my research and I have reached a firm conclusion: Scientology has nothing to do whatsoever with a proper religion.

I will do short to the complexity of the scam and the organization by trying to describe Scientology in a few words, but this is my go at it. Scientologists are indoctrinated to believe they are saving the world, but are in reality operating a vast bait-‘n’-switch scheme. They looks like a self-help group on the surface, but once they have entangled you, they charge obscene amounts of money for courses which make completely unbased claims to outrageous gains (perfect memory, higer IQ, never sick at the lower levels, God-like abilities at higher levels). Although this in itself is worrisome, it is the abuse inflicted on the most loyal followers which is outright disturbing. Please Google Scientology in combination with words such as forced abortion, slave labor or child labor and look at the number of hits to get a taste of it. And this is, sadly enough, substantiated with internal documents, hundreds of testimonies, reports from established journalists and dozens of court rulings. It really, really is true. They do have gulags. They do destroy families. They do ruthlessly try to destroy critics. And yes, there are numerous accounts of child labor and forced abortions.

I hope people reading this will take time to follow the path down the rabbit hole.

I'm with you on this one, Claire. I hate reading religious tirades and soul-saving missions over comments. But on the other hand, I guess I am a bit fascinated by them at the same time. Here's my two or three cents worth of thought.

Being a member of a certain faith, I believe that MY way is the truth and believe in it with all my heart. Along with this, I believe that it would behoove others to believe in my faith as well. Judging from the number of religions that employ missionaries, I think it's safe to say that I'm not alone in this. If you write something about my faith with even a skeptical tone, immediately I take the defensive. If you write something that is incorrect in the slightest (and let's face it, you can study other religions all you want, but until you actually practice and believe it, there is no possible way for you to understand it completely), I take the defensive.

What I'm trying to say, and I know you can relate to this, is that I become frustrated when I feel that something I value and cherish is being misunderstood and misconstrued.

Claire,

You are as deluded as the Co$. You are so firm in your beliefs about this "religion" that you refuse to see the truth. You seem very critical of the true religions yet give Scientology a pass for being "quirky."

To be honest, most of us feel you've either been converted to the Co$ or threatened and coerced into your views. Which is it?

Kaos

Lama Surya Das, an American Tibetan Buddhist, has very good advice for spiritual seekers, including a checklist to identify dangerous cults in his book, 'Awakening the Buddha within.'

Scientology vs. Anonymous

A group that calls itself Anonymous has been putting the Church of Scientology in a world of hurt lately-with cyber mischief and costumed protests around the world -- but nobody much seems to care. Why?

In Monday's LA Times Michael Shermer, the publisher of Skeptic magazine, says it's because most people don't consider the Church a church.

Shermer writes that "this latest turn against the organization founded in 1954 by science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard has an air of farcical comedy to it. Why? Why aren't civil rights organizations and anti-hate-speech activists pouncing on these protesters? The reason, I suspect, is that most of us do not consider Scientology a religion, at least not a religion that resembles in the slightest the world's major faiths."

He continues:

"I'm a scientist who studies belief systems for a living, so take it from me: Scientology is unlike any other religion in history. Although the Church of Scientology is recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as a tax-exempt religion (despite years of litigation by the IRS to collect taxes on its income), no other religion I know of considers theological doctrines and core religious tenets to be intellectual property accessible only for a fee."

Just to re-cap what's been going on, a group of anti-Scientologists calling themselves "Anonymous" have been organizing on the web and in the streets for at least the last few weeks. On January 21st, they released a YouTube video and then another on the 10th of February, which coincided with demonstrations at Scientology centers in New York, Toronto, Britain, Australia. Protestors creepily wore Guy Fawkes/"V for Vendetta" masks and, in Los Angeles, held posters that read "Religion Is Free, Scientology Is Not" and "Trade Secrets Are For Business, Not Religion" and "Honk If You Hate Scientology."

Certainly, as Shermer points out in his column, the Church of Scientology has a highly commodified approach to religious teaching, with expensive books, audio recordings and lessons necessary to achieve spiritual enlightenment. But Shermer starts to sound naive when he says that what isn't tolerated these days is "the hypocrisy of comporting itself as a faux religion in a society willing to reward corporate success but not religious greed."

For a skeptic, Shermer sounds like an optimist. I think most readers of this blog who have belonged to a religious organization at some point in life will agree with me that Scientology is by no means alone in it's pursuit of worldly gain. So is it because most people don't believe Scientology is deserving of the First Amendment shroud?

Posted by Claire Hoffman on February 18, 2008 11:20 PM

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2008/02/there_was_an_interesting_item.html

Claire,

I have read your blog entry here today, and I thought that perhaps I could offer the following perspective:

Claire, you are a PRODUCER, and what you write here in this blog is your product. The people who read what you write are the CUSTOMERS of your product.

(I know, journalism isn't exactly like manufacturing, but I think it can be a useful analogy.)

Customers are often demanding and annoying, but remember, the first motto of business is "The customer is always right."

It appears to me that as a result of your blog entry on Germany vs. Scientology, your customers have complained loudly that your product is inferior.

The most successful businesses today put a very high value on customer complaints. Customers provide the critical feedback a business needs to help improve its product.

For every customer who complains about a product, you can bet there are 10 others who just don't bother. They might remain silent but they are unsatisfied and will take their business (or readership,) elsewhere, so when we do hear back from a customer, we take that very seriously.

Today you have offered your customers even MORE inferior product, and repeatedly insulted them while doing it!

You should be THANKING those people who left their comments on your Germany vs. Scientology piece. THEY are the people who could help you achieve excellence in your chosen field. Can you see how your stance today suggests that you don't appreciate this sort of feedback? Instead, it seems that you want your customers to change to suit you.

Do you expect to see 500 comments such as,
"Bravo Claire, you are oh, so, Brilliant?"

I looked at those comments. Out of over 500, a few are crap, that is for sure. Simply to be ignored. However, it seems to me that MOST of those comments are very helpful and informative. Many of the comments are part of an ongoing lively debate, which you must have known you were inviting when you chose your topic. Some of those commenters have even thanked YOU, Claire.
Wow, some of them actually took the time to thank you!
And you insulted them ALL today.
(Yes, you did, in your very first sentence, you insult ALL of your commenters.)

I sincerely hope that you can take a step back, put yourself in your readers' shoes, and try to gain an objective perspective on all of this.

(I wrote this, not for Scientology, not for Anonymous, but because I thought it might help you, Claire.)

Claire, you wrote:

"The discussion was about why the German state would feel a rather marginal and odd religious group, with a taste for nautical uniforms, would be a threat to their constitution."

The above sentence is structured so as to minimize the abusive, intrusive, deceptive, and greedy nature of scientology.

Here you write:
"It feels like the audience out there on the web for these topics are already in a corner with their knives out."

This sentence is structured to invoke fear in the reader. You're portraying critics of scientology as violent. Otherwise, why not choose the word "pens" or "keyboards" instead of the provocative image of the "knives?"

Claire, please be honest with us.
You are intentionally provoking your readers. Again. So why? Stats?

Our Father who art in heaven
Holy be Your name
Your kingdom come
Your will be done
On earth as it is in heaven
Give us this day our daily bread
And forgive us our sins
As we forgive those who sin against us
Do not lead us into temptation
But deliver us from evil.
For the kingdom, the power and the glory
Are yours now and forever.

Amen!

The explanation why you got such an enormous reaction:
(from the blog entry in question:)
"Ban Scientology? Doesn't that seem kind of extreme? They are a religion largely focused on self-improvement. WHILE I'M WELL AWARE OF THEIR CHECKERED PAST, decrying it unconstitutional seems like a threatened position to take by a nation."

The highlighted part is extremely vague, and moreover sounds like you think their malpractices are all in the past. The cult of Scientology is bent on maintaining a polished public image, even going as far as patently lie about aspects of their organization(see the recent appearance of Tommy Davis on CNN deny the existence of Disconnection), and there are many journalists pressed on time who have fallen for this without digging in deeper.
Furthermore, the somewhat paranoid reactions on the blog stem from the fact that anti-Scientology activism is mainly concentrated on the internet. An active particpant has likely seen the way Scientology deals with critics up close: active surveillance and even stalking after protests. When they see a journalist for a highly esteemed newspaper write a piece that seems uninformed, they are eager to share their experiences, mainly by quoting a wealth of sourced material that shows the dark underbelly of the CoS.

On a broader note, be prepared that arguing on the internet is no holds barred, especially on hot topic issues. Grow a thicker skin, and be glad that your blog gets sourced and spellchecked replies, which means that you have an educated circle of readers. Consider it a success when you actively spark a discussion, because that is the purpose of an opinion piece.

"Es braucht den Mut zur Intoleranz denen gegenüber, die die Demokratie gebrauchen wollen, um sie umzubringen."

It takes courage to be intolerant towards those who exploit democracy in order to destroy it.

--- Carlo Schmid

Third attempt to post

Democracy in Action - MoveOn(dot)org

Democracy in Action

MoveOn.org

CoS might interest the Democracy in Action group

http://www.MoveOn.org

Be grateful that Claire Hoffman brought up such a sensitive topic on her blog at considerable risk to herself. It takes extreme courage to open this can of worms.

Information about CoS for the public from the state of Hamburg, Germany

http://fhh.hamburg.de/stadt/Aktuell/behoerden/inneres/arbeitsgruppe-scientology/publikationen

testing

testing

Books about CoS

Ursula Caberta:

Schwarzbuch Scientology (Black book of Scientology)

Gütersloher Verlagshaus 2007
ISBN: 3579069748

Wilfried Handl:

Scientology: Wahn und Wirklichkeit. 28 Jahre in einer Psychosekte (Scientology - Illusion and Reality - 28 years in a Psycho-Sect)

Eigenverlag 2005
ISBN: 3200003944

Bing:

You are the reason why I protest. I find it said to see someone so entrenched in the cult, so deep in to it that they will ignore well structured arguments, that they blind themselves from the truth,the various sauces, and the staggering amount of court dox that are found on the subject. Yes some are looking for a cause, yes some are doing it because their bored. But I am doing this for You Bing, and my Sister. You both are whom I am fighting for.

cheers <3

Claire:

I used to want to write for the Washington Post. That used to be my dream. Now after reading your last post and now this. I do not think WP is the place for me. I want you to endeavor to do more in depth research of any thing that you are writing about. It makes you sound like a raging idiot when you post drivel. People will call you out on it and it does your journalistic career harm, and if you ever do leave the Washington Post any person will look back on this and would be "What the hell?" It is not about hating you or the tenants of scientology. Its about Journalists doing a half-assed job, and corporations masquerading as religion getting away with murder,abuse, and fraud.

Claire you wrote:
"I certainly make my living by communicating and I do feel like a miscommunication has been made when I get sincere and heartfelt emails from those who have been hurt by the Church of Scientology. In saying that the Church was largely about self-improvement, I referred to their entry-level doctrine. The discussion was about why the German state would feel a rather marginal and odd religious group, with a taste for nautical uniforms, would be a threat to their constitution."
You do understand you are writing the way a scientologist speaks here, right? "A miscommunication has been made..." Re: why does Germany feel threatened, Claire, you missed your true calling (it wasn't journalism). Neil Gaiman's father (THE Neil Gaiman) David burgled the Max Plank Institut in West Germany in order to prove one of LRH's harebrained theories about SMERCH and how the bankers/trilaterals/psychiatrists all had it in for him personally. And yes Neil Gaiman was a level 7 auditor and headed the Birmingham org in the UK before getting big in comics and moving to Minnesota. THAT's the kind of sensational stuff a real journalist would focus on at least for a second before moving on to more checkered pasts.

I hope you read his Claire.

It is a great shame that while you received hundreds of responses to your misleading, and frankly offensive (to victims of Scientology) article, you still have not strived to actually show journalistic integrity and admit that you did not research the piece as would be appropriate for a journalist in your position.

The greatest shame is that you can be spoon-fed all the necessary facts by concerned citizens and still not care enough about the truth to put it first.
Instead you defend yourself, imply that people referencing court documents are "crazies" and that people who know, and care, more about this topic than you are "radical", "venomous", "hysterical", "hateful" and their comments are "knee jerk reactions".

This is sad, and frankly, you should be ashamed of what you have done here.

Claire.

If your goal was to get many reponses to your blog to prove that somebody is looking at it - you have succeeded.

If your goal was to defend your previously published fluff piece on scientology and the German government - you have failed. The evidence clearly points to you either not doing your homework or forgetting that you had done your homework and winging it.

Did you even bother to attemtp to find out what the German constitution is all about in regards to this case before you began to critize the document and Germany?

I hope that somebody at your publication with editorial oversight takes note of this glaring deficiency in your journalistic efforts.

Undercover journalist
"Scientology sect wants to crack Berlin"

For five months, journalist Fredy Gareis investigated undercover at scientology. Whether at parties or during the twisting courses: The hidden camera always on. In the interview with Stern TV, he explains why Germany is the most important area of operations for the scientologists.

Mr. Gareis, some weeks ago you left Scientology again. Does the cult accept your departure?
Not at all. I still get daily calls. It is like fishing, sometimes they gives it more cord and are completely understanding and friendly. And then they increase the pressure again and the frequency of the calls.

What does Scientology still expect from you?
I must absolutely go back again to the center in Berlin. There are still hopes to be able to turn me in. In the meantime I do not go however any longer to my telephone.
Scientology is very interested by Germany. One says internally: "if we crack Berlin, then we can do it everywhere." That is their ambition. Germany is considered as the most difficult field for the cult, nowhere does it face so much antagonistic winds. Therefore a success in this country is for Scientology more important than in every other country; it would have an enormous symbolic value for the organization.

At the end of March a large party was held in Berlin with approximately 250 Scientologists. Is it correct that no other European meeting had as much participation as Berlin?
I am not sure. That can also be propaganda turned inwards, in order to motivate the members. The course areas, into which I could throw a view, were never full. However I saw a few new members. It was frightening to see how many children ran around in the center. I found it uncanny to see these eight to ten-year old children attached to these e-meters and questioned.

What is the most important recruiting method for Scientology?
The stands on the street are extremely important. There up to 200 contacts are made daily, i.e. those bring 200 people daily to make a so-called stress test and leave their address.

Is there a certain clientele, which falls for it?
It would be a big mistake to be believed that e.g. only unstable humans came into the catches of the cult. Scientologists try to find your crucial weakness and offer then a solution. But in principle everyone is susceptible, because who does not want to improve their life?

Have you experimented changes, even if your intention was to research scientology from the beginning?
To my own astonishment a conflicting thought developed inside me: I surprised myself to want to reach this stupid "bridge". Sometimes after the courses I asked myself: "Damn, why did I not yet come higher?" In addition one takes over this typical propaganda language: In the end I spoke also privately of "church" and "religion" - although I knew that the terms do not apply.

Did you learn something meaningful in the courses, which occupied you at Scientology?
The predominantly banalities are spread, added with lessons such as "let yourself be controlled", which are natural in the sense of the organization. I can understand that these courses can appeal to some people, because they aim at a better life. The costs are at first relatively low and rise then strongly. One must invest a quantity money and time, in order to advance on the "bridge".

Did they try to fool into believing that they can later heal diseases such as cancer?
Yes, one told me very seriously that I can fly when achieving a certain status to the universe. One must release not only the human citizens, but also billions of extraterrestrial ones.
But do not the today followers really believe any longer in stories of the Scientology founder L Ron Hubbard that an intergalactic ruler named Xenu hunted so-called Thetans with hydrogen bombs millions of years ago?
Do not laugh, that are uncanny. This founding myth is probably to give a religious painting to the organization. They really believe in it, even if it does not follow any logic. Scientologists can switch off their understanding completely, function like robots and are immune to each criticism or skeptical questions. However the majority of the members cannot give you any details, because they did not attain yet the status, at which this knowledge is taught.
In an interview with Stern TV, the German Scientology spokeswoman said: "We will come closer with security not at humans and state, we can heal." The internal and external communications are completely different. A further example: Officially Scientology sect does not aim at influence in the politics, but internally one is called however to build "roads into the Bundestag". At Scientology one told me even proudly that they have already won important politicians, who would only wait for a signal, in order to admit it publicly.

Scientology is known to deal not very nicely with critics. What do you fear after publication of your history on Stern TV and in Stern?
Usually the organization attacks aggressively at a personal level. Perhaps one will try to defame me; perhaps they get something on me from the five months of investigation, which are suitable for a public dirt laundry. On the other hand the opportunity would be offered now for a critical argument. I believe, Scientology will not want to risk too large public annoyance in this country. Because Germany is simply too important.

Interview: Soenke Wiese

About the person
Fredy Gareis, 33, is graduate of the German journalist school in Munich and is active as a free journalist. Contact him on his homepage: Fredy Gareis :: Freier Journalist & Autor

In case there were any remaining question about what does and does not constitute in-depth journalism on this topic, Anonymous delivers a rough english translation of the investigative reporting from German magazine Stern (just published today).

-----
Page 1:
-----

While the sun sets behind the Berlin scenery, Scientologists are celebrating a birthday. The 97th of their founder L. Ron Hubbard, died in 1986. Torches line the red carpet leading into the Scientology-Residency in Charlottenburg. The building at the Otto-Suhr-Allee is a complex of glass and steel, the Scientology-cross above the entrance. The Scientologists – dark suits, dresses – are jolly laughing in the foyer. Berlin, so is the internal saying, allegedly works ten times better than planned.And: Berlin is meant to grow even further.

To the Scientologists I am Thorsten Brock, workless specialist in American studies, fan of Tom Cruise and his success. I pretend to live with my girlfriend in a 2-room-flat in the Prenzlauer Berg quarter. Sandra is against Scientology. For five months overall I have been able to hide my true identity .Have smuggled in a micro cam. I am a journalist and want to document what is really happening behind that glass front.
About 250 Scientologists, among them obviously lots of newbies, have gathered on this saturday in the end of march. They want to reflect on the past year and set the marching route for the future. There will be a video from Los Angeles, then buffet on the 6th floor.

On the 1st floor Irmi Tjarks, Executive Director Berlin, goes before the audience. Her red short hair is shimmering in the lights, her smile is bright. The former real estate agent has just been to the USA. She brought along her a gold cup, with a galopping horse on top. In the worldwide comparison of the Scientology-organizations – a yearly race for fixures, sales, stats – Berlin made the top. Allegedly. Not even the local Scientologists had been reckoning that. "The start for a new civilization" says Irmi Tjarks "here in Berlin and in the whole of Germany." Stong applause. "And with that we gonna turn Europe around!".

Statements like that the general public doesn't get to hear usually. The video tape is about the expansion as well. David Miscavice, Ron Hubbard's successor, presents 13 new "orgs" - that's how Scientologists call their "parish" - as well as plans for Africe and China. Confidently he lays out the charactor of Scientology "We are a train without brakes, and we're even putting more coals into the fire." After leaviing the the room, I am being intercepted by someone in a dark suit. "I am Sören", he says "Director personnel." Kennen wir uns? "No", he replies smilingly "but I know of you – come along."

It started last year. A Scientologist called Corinna accosted me on the street right outside the Berlin Org. Tight white shirt, black trousers, crimped hair, 19 years old. She opened her mouth to a shining white smile and asked, whether I wouldn't like to come in. She was very nice, sweet even.

So I went in and filled out a personality test. The result was "inacceptable". All stats severely down. But they would be able to help. With a course called "Troubles of work." Pay rightaway, start now. Tom Cruise did that course too, they said.

My provisional membership ID dates from the 22th of November 2007. Since then I did 4 courses, und the Scientologists tightened the circle around me. The phone rang more frequently, more often I was meant to come, and ever longer I was meant to stay. Four months that went on, first with a loose leash, that was strained always further – and now, on Hubbards birthday they wanted to get the catch into the boat. I was to be a part of the system.
While the others are moving to the buffet, Sören leads me to the 2nd floor on the back stairs. The window is open, it's chilling. Sören is blond, in his early 20ies and suddenly has a form in his hand. "That's how an employee contract looks like", he says, and his green eyes drill into me. He keeps eye contact till I turn away. A trick of the Scientologists. Who looks away, gives in. Sören wants me to sign.

In my distress I pretend to be hungry, to evade Sören. On the 6th floor I am putting some salami on my plate, more is impossible, my stomach is a fist.When my plate is emtpy, Sören appears again, his hand behind his back. He won't take his eyes away from me. All other, who are relatively new, experience the same. They are being worked on by Scientologists with clipboards in their hands.It's about donations, course, staff work.

In case there were any remaining question about what does and does not constitute in-depth journalism on this topic, Anonymous delivers a rough english translation of the investigative reporting from German magazine Stern (just published today).

-----
Page 2
-----

Sören wants me to come with him to the 2nd floor again. He points to the contract and tells me that in contradiction to a normal company there is no pay. Company? I always thought they would denounce themselves as church. At some point Sören talks about his partents. They were against Scientology till he "handled" them. A word I will encounter often. In Scientology-jargon it means: to win somebody for the cause. Time passes and it becomes more exhausting to fight off Sören. As I am leaving the building shortly before midnight it feels like peeling off a heavy coat.

Tuesday, April 1st. On my way to the course Sören intercepts me in the foyer. "I want to show you a movie", he says, "about the meaning of Berlin." Sören starts playing a DVD. The movie shows Kennedy, he speaks his famous words in front of Schöneberger Rathaus. Berlin has ethic presence, the movie argues, Berlin stands for freedom. Us against them, the movie narrates. And about the resistance they encounter. "So bad things we already had to experience in Germany" Sören says. What bad things? "Scientologists have been tortured, to reprogram them." By whom? "By the church, secret service, Interpol. By those who have money."

Money is what they want as well. In the movie Hubbard appeals to push people into closings, to put them on courses, to sell them books: Don't be stopped. No matter what excuse they have. "Clear Deutschland!" The movie ends with that. "Clear" in Scientology means the liberation of the psyche from the subconscious. Sören switches off the tv and presents the workcontract to me. This is no job, he clarifies. This is a crusade.
I hesitate. Sören alters his tactics. He shows me on the organigram positions I could work in. Org-security for instance. What are they doing? Sören's fingertips touch each other: "Press can write anythng" he says "but someone has to leak this information – we find these people and put them to court."

I nod. I hear yelling: "Let me go! Let me go!" It has to be in the room around the corner. I look at Sören askingly. Is that by chance? He only smiles und shrugs his shoulders. "I am expecting a decision till thursday, 2 pm", he says.

Wednesday, April 2nd. Courseroom. My current course is called "Selfanalysis." A mixture of philosophy, psychology, banalities and lies. The target: dressage to unresistancy. If I am not asking a question for 10 minutes, I am suspect. Then the course supervisor appears on my side, goes through my book, asks questions. Until the answer is congruent with Hubbard's demand. If I am looking out of the window for a bit, the course supervisor stands besides me again. Might say that I should use the "demokit" - a bowl with some kind of building bricks – to receive "more mass". If I don't do it, I am urged to it over and over again.
I answer the question in the books and write essays. As long as I am using Hubbard's key words, everything is fine, then the rest can be the biggest rubbish.Any critical discourse about the content ends most likely like that: "who believes to know everything never learns the right thing." To end a course one has to get attached to the infamous "e-meter", the central tool of the Scientologists, a sort of a lie-detector. One has to "attest" to have understood everything. One gets a certificate and holds a speech in the courseroom. The applause does good to many. After to the "registrar", pay for the next course. One of my first lessons was: Let yourself be controlled.

I learn that you can heal diseases as a Scientologist. "Skin diseases too?", I ask course supervisor Hermias. He: "Exactly." Me: "And if I continue: Can I then cure cancer?" He: "Totally. You are then the cuase over the physical universe." Hermias isn't the only one telling me that so cloudedly. At what point, I think, does one stop to ask questions? At what point one starts to adopt that nonsense?

Thursday, April 3rd. Sören's office. The recruitment form Sören gave me last time I didn't fill in. Ten pages of personal questions. For instance question 41: "Have you committed crimes you haven't been convicted of?" Question 42: "Did you ever had anything to do with prostitution, homosexuality, illegal sex oder any sexual perversions? Please state with any incident with who, where and when it happened."

I tell Sören my girlfriend has found the papers and torn them apart. "Hm", Sören says. "It's best you do a different course now." Immediately. "To overcome the ups and downs in life." 90 Euro and 50 Cent. "Do you have the money?" Of course not. "I am unemployed."

In case there were any remaining question about what does and does not constitute in-depth journalism on this topic, Anonymous delivers a rough english translation of the investigative reporting from German magazine Stern (just published today).

-----
Page 2
-----

Sören wants me to come with him to the 2nd floor again. He points to the contract and tells me that in contradiction to a normal company there is no pay. Company? I always thought they would denounce themselves as church. At some point Sören talks about his partents. They were against Scientology till he "handled" them. A word I will encounter often. In Scientology-jargon it means: to win somebody for the cause. Time passes and it becomes more exhausting to fight off Sören. As I am leaving the building shortly before midnight it feels like peeling off a heavy coat.

Tuesday, April 1st. On my way to the course Sören intercepts me in the foyer. "I want to show you a movie", he says, "about the meaning of Berlin." Sören starts playing a DVD. The movie shows Kennedy, he speaks his famous words in front of Schöneberger Rathaus. Berlin has ethic presence, the movie argues, Berlin stands for freedom. Us against them, the movie narrates. And about the resistance they encounter. "So bad things we already had to experience in Germany" Sören says. What bad things? "Scientologists have been tortured, to reprogram them." By whom? "By the church, secret service, Interpol. By those who have money."

Money is what they want as well. In the movie Hubbard appeals to push people into closings, to put them on courses, to sell them books: Don't be stopped. No matter what excuse they have. "Clear Deutschland!" The movie ends with that. "Clear" in Scientology means the liberation of the psyche from the subconscious. Sören switches off the tv and presents the workcontract to me. This is no job, he clarifies. This is a crusade.

I hesitate. Sören alters his tactics. He shows me on the organigram positions I could work in. Org-security for instance. What are they doing? Sören's fingertips touch each other: "Press can write anythng" he says "but someone has to leak this information – we find these people and put them to court."

I nod. I hear yelling: "Let me go! Let me go!" It has to be in the room around the corner. I look at Sören askingly. Is that by chance? He only smiles und shrugs his shoulders. "I am expecting a decision till thursday, 2 pm", he says.

Wednesday, April 2nd. Courseroom. My current course is called "Selfanalysis." A mixture of philosophy, psychology, banalities and lies. The target: dressage to unresistancy. If I am not asking a question for 10 minutes, I am suspect. Then the course supervisor appears on my side, goes through my book, asks questions. Until the answer is congruent with Hubbard's demand. If I am looking out of the window for a bit, the course supervisor stands besides me again. Might say that I should use the "demokit" - a bowl with some kind of building bricks – to receive "more mass". If I don't do it, I am urged to it over and over again.
I answer the question in the books and write essays. As long as I am using Hubbard's key words, everything is fine, then the rest can be the biggest rubbish.Any critical discourse about the content ends most likely like that: "who believes to know everything never learns the right thing." To end a course one has to get attached to the infamous "e-meter", the central tool of the Scientologists, a sort of a lie-detector. One has to "attest" to have understood everything. One gets a certificate and holds a speech in the courseroom. The applause does good to many. After to the "registrar", pay for the next course. One of my first lessons was: Let yourself be controlled.

I learn that you can heal diseases as a Scientologist. "Skin diseases too?", I ask course supervisor Hermias. He: "Exactly." Me: "And if I continue: Can I then cure cancer?" He: "Totally. You are then the cuase over the physical universe." Hermias isn't the only one telling me that so cloudedly. At what point, I think, does one stop to ask questions? At what point one starts to adopt that nonsense?

Thursday, April 3rd. Sören's office. The recruitment form Sören gave me last time I didn't fill in. Ten pages of personal questions. For instance question 41: "Have you committed crimes you haven't been convicted of?" Question 42: "Did you ever had anything to do with prostitution, homosexuality, illegal sex oder any sexual perversions? Please state with any incident with who, where and when it happened."
I tell Sören my girlfriend has found the papers and torn them apart. "Hm", Sören says. "It's best you do a different course now." Immediately. "To overcome the ups and downs in life." 90 Euro and 50 Cent. "Do you have the money?" Of course not. "I am unemployed."

'Is there no room for a little gray in the area of religious belief?'

Ms Hoffman,
The question you should be asking is where does that 'little gray area' cross the line and become unacceptable to the community. And the answer is quite simple, that line varies between individuals and between nations. People of different cultural backgrounds draw the line at different places.

It is thus interesting to note that current anti-scientology sentiment, comes from people all over the world, from Japan, Philippines, India, Canada, US, Greece, South Africa, Isreal, Europe, Russia, France, Holland, Germany, Ireland, Sweden, Austria, Australia, New Zealand, and UK.

So the question becomes, why and how can one organisation cause the ire of people from so many nations? And if you had done a little digging the answer is self evident. The Organisation of Scientology, I believe is unique. Its' problems lie in fact that it done so many different reprehensible deeds that the Organisation of Scientology can infuriate and frighten just about any body.

And like you said, people are talking time out of their daily lives to read and comment about Scientology. And if there was nothing wrong with Scientology or even only a few things strange about it, this snow ball of anti-Scientology feelings would not continue to grow with every passing month. It would just melt in the heat of day to day life.

And finally, I ask you, would you defend a religion which uses a racial slur when referring to non-believes? What does it say about the religion? Especially since it was formed in modern times and its aims are to clear the world of undesirable people. What if that racial slur they use referred to people of your race?

If this blog succeeds in initiating a full scale US Congress investigation and an intense education campaign in all possible ways it will have served its purpose.

Vulnerable citizens deserve to be informed and protected.

Even one person who is negatively affected by CoS is one person too much.

The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.

Claire,

Passionate responses to say the least! I won't dare to speak for the critics of scientology as a whole. What I will do instead is speak for myself and try to give you insight into the reasons that, in my opinion, I believe this subject draws such heartfelt emotion from every side.

I have researched scientology for some months now, spending more time than I should have diving down what many equate to 'the rabbit hole'. I have done what many scientologists on forums and blogs accuse me of not doing, which is reading L. Ron Hubbard's writings. I have made the best attempt possible at understanding both sides of this loaded debate. So far as I can tell, if actual research is done that does not begin and end with scientology promoted websites, one can only come out on the side of the critics.

There are books, news articles, television news reports and court testimonies to draw information from. There are Internet websites, Internet groups and support groups full of interviews, video, articles, and all manner of testimony from ex-scientologists. All of this information combined seems to point to a secretive, cult-like and often dangerous business hiding behind the cloak of religious status.

This organization has many front groups that claim to be secular yet apparently recruit for the religion while operating under charity non-profit status. Some of these groups relate to child education and promote L. Ron Hubbard ‘technology’ for use in our public schools in the form of a program called Applied Scholastics.

The Church of Scientology has been sued repeatedly for failure to deliver on their promised claims such as improving eyesight, raising IQ, etc. Others have refused traditional medical treatments for diseases such as cancer in exchange for scientology's "tech" and have lost their lives. Some ex-scientologists speak of being the victims of all manner of abuses as children and adults. Many, including Jenna Miscavige Hill, the niece of scientology's leader, claim to have been separated from their parents and families as children. A handful of claims could be dismissed but I personally could not dismiss hundreds.

There are many reasons to believe this organization is a potential threat to society. Families have been ripped apart by a scientology policy called “Disconnection” which is addressed on its own Website while their PR spokespersons publicly deny its existence. The church’s practice of following, investigating and harassing critics is alarming enough but in researching you find that one alarming bit of information only leads to another, more frightening one. Scientology has been compared to a heavily layered onion. It is one I am sometimes sorry I started to peel.

What anyone chooses to call his or her religion is obviously a personal choice. I doubt many critics would want to take away the right of scientologists to cling to Hubbard’s writings. The law, nor society at large, should dictate one’s personal religious beliefs or morals but it is the duty of all government bodies and the prerogative of the private citizen to do what is legal and necessary to protect the general public from those that would prey upon it. It is unacceptable and not the right of any one person or organization to do harm in any form under the guise or name of religion.

“We do not have to blindly respect something because it calls itself a religion or a church.” - Andreas Heldal Lund

I would encourage you to do more research for any future articles you might decide to write. Even an opinion piece can carry weight if it is in print as I'm sure you know. With your career title comes responsibility and I would ask that you not take that lightly if there is even a chance you might sway someone toward a life of ruin.

Carrie

> The discussion was about why the German state would feel a rather marginal and odd religious group, with a taste for nautical uniforms, would be a threat to their constitution. That seems weird to me and even more important, makes the German government look kind of like pansies for spending a lot of money surveilling and punishing people who mostly walk around modeling their emotions and listening to the recordings of LRH. Right?

Ok, let's say I'm building a corporation. Let's say I'm in latex and I have several bald and short men as my salesmen.

To be profitable and compete, I make the following rules:

1) You must sign an agreement stating that you cannot sue my corporation for anything, regardless if I violate your human rights.

2) If you are female, the corporation will pressure you to have an abortion if you become pregnant. If you decide to have your child, it will be taken away so you can continue your work for the corporation.

3) Your child will be reared by the corporation and upon reaching the age of 12, will be employed by the corporation. He/She will be expected to handle a full adult's workloadd.

4) We will not be truthful about our company's objectives, and we will hide the truth from you until you've become an executive.

5) You will be expected to take training courses that can be upwards of $5000 dollars. If you cannot afford this fee, you will be required to work even more hours for the corporation.

6) Should a department not be up to snuff, they will only be allowed to eat beans and rice until they become productive again.

7) Regardless of position, if you fail to perform as expected by your superiors, you will be demoted to the lowest possible form of work we can find.

8) If you do something wrong in the corporation, it's because you are not working correctly. If you do something right, it's because of our wonderful management system.

9) I am the leader of the corporation and I will physically abuse you if I'm upset with you.

Sound like a good and moral organization? No?

Well that's what Scientology does. Educate yourself. It's not a self-help group. It's a dangerous cult bent on world domination.

www.xenu.net
www.enturbulation.org
www.exscientologykids.com

Gary, your entire argument is based on your belief of other peoples motives. Thus, your entire argument is fundamentally void.

You assume critics are low level ex scientologists. That upon not reaching enlightenment, they quit and are bitter.

Explain then how some leading scientology critics and people who are openly criticizing the church have not only gone clear (the initial spiritual carrot in scientology) they have reached OT5 like Jason Beghe or OT 7 like Tory Christman. Some are even OT8, the highest level a scientologist can currently attain. How can these people be critics? How could anyone turn their back on scientology after going clear, let alone OT8. How is it possible. These are named people. Facts. Not speculative guesses.

Anyone who is clear is supposed to be able to recall with perfect clarity, every single thing they have ever experienced. Can a single clear do that? Just one? No. Its so sad to see how scientology treats its members. In a video on youtube the head of the manchester org had no idea the freewinds has asbestos on it. The head of one of your 'churches' told it was simply a refit. And all the people in his 'flock' then are still totally unaware their lives may have been placed at risk.

Its sad. Because you could see on this guys face, he really did not know. I can only hope, he can muster up enough courage to doubt his superiors and do the research, so that he can inform the people he is supposed to be helping, even if it means a trip to a work camp as a result.

Said blogger Patrick Trench -

A German journalist went undercover doing Scientology courses for five months. His experiences will be published ...

Read up on the CoS experience of investigative journalists

1. Richard Behar of Time Magazine

2. John Sweeney of BBC UK

Claire,

If you were did all this research, and wondered at being followed yourself, how does that jive with seeing them as harmless. You say you are talking about their entry level doctrine. Don't you realize that the cults always have something "harmless" to get you into the door. Do you think they tell you right off that you are going to being drinking poison kool aid, or believing in space aliens? The problem with what you wrote is that you only wrote about the harmless. You gave no warning not even to provide the "other" side. Your article to some unsuspecting or uninformed person would make it seem like they were just some harmless organization and they aren't. You are wrong Claire and you are trying to justify yourself. It just doesn't make sense what you are saying. It should say something to you...the reaction that you received last week. The fact that it didn't shows that you are really out of touch, or are as many here already think some pansie for Scientology. Either way I think you have still done your readers a disservice again this week by not really providing the real story. Geesh. I am so not surprised.

Disgusted in Canada

Gary,

Do those who depart from any religion and speak hatefully of their experience within do so out of bitterness? Some do, but it is as not as commonplace as you may suppose. I think it's very presumptuous to assume otherwise. These people who are speaking out against the COS are not doing so out of bitterness; they are speaking out against numerous, reprehensible abuses that have all been perpetrated by an extremely secretive and litigious group.

From what I have read, there has been MORE than enough people speaking intelligently in regards to the COS. Many people have even gone to the trouble of providing information and links to numerous sources. Ms. Hoffman however, has willfully chosen, for whatever reason, to brush aside concerns that she could be mistaken in her assumptions that there's a far more sinister agenda to the COS than what their entry level doctrine will let on. After that, it's too late; the poor, unwitting soul has invested so much of their life, time and finances into this cunningly guised scheme that the mere idea of ever leaving is unimaginable.

And speaking of information, for all reading, I hope these recent news articles prove enlightening.

This first one is in regards to the Blue asbestos that was recently discovered on the Freewinds, a ship owned and operated by the 'Church' of Scientology

http://www.kget.com/entertainment/story.aspx?content_id=a02471c5-bd2d-4188-b704-fb81985ebef6

This one talks about an attempt by the 'Church' to prevent the group Anonymous from protesting in Clearwater, Florida. The COS's request was denied.

(And to clarify; ALL of the businesses named on the petition to stop the protests were owned and run by members of the COS. Clearwater is a Mecca for Scientologist's. Based on several accounts from residents, downtown Clearwater is practically a ghost town; the COS practically OWN Clearwater!)

http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/article506348.ece

PS. Sorry about the downstat, Gary. But it's for your own good. I hope and pray you'll be all right.

Claire,

Anti scientologists really HATE scientology. They feel that they've been conned by the religion and they want to say "f*ck you" to scientology, and they would like to protect others from being conned by it.

There are many people who get involved with a particular religion and believe in it whole heartedly. Some of them later "lose their faith". They decide that it is all a bunch of b.s. When you talk to people who have turned against their former beliefs - say for instance in Christianity - they will often have some amount of anger about it in their hearts. However, I believe that the former scientologists (anti-scientologists) have a much higher level of hatred and a much higher level of "activism" in protesting the religion.

So the question is "why the amped up hatred"? I think there are several reasons:

With Christianity if you start ranting about "jesus and god are a lie", you won't be able to generate much sympathy or get people to agree with you. In contrast, Scientology is a minority religion - the average person on the street doesn't really have any first hand knowledge about it and relatively speaking there are few Scientologists so unlike major world religions, the average person doesn't even have one person he/she personally knows who is a Scientologist. Therefore, by pointing out the unusual aspects of scientology and calling it a cult, former members HAVE the ABILITY - the OPPORTUNITY to get people riled up and can start influencing public opinion. I believe they want to influence public opinion because they feel like they were duped into believing something that isn't true and they dedicated their time, effort, and money to it (something they now feel is b.s.)

I think another aspect of why they get SO UPSET is that unlike other religions that specifically talk about faith, Scientology talks about obtaining heightened spiritual awareness in the here and now. Disgruntled former members at one point were very interested in gaining the talked about heightened spiritual awareness abilities. They probably wanted it VERY BADLY. Many of the most vocal former members have donated much money, time and effort to the church. Once they decided that a state of heightened spiritual awareness wasn't possible, they feel betrayed and mislead. The difference is that if Christianity says "if you truly know jesus and do the work of the lord, when you die, you will go to heaven" - people don't get upset because the promise has to do with faith and an event that happens after you're dead. Other religions such as Kabbalah, and Transcendental Meditation have members experience heightened spiritual awareness, but they are not loud about it - they don't print brochures touting the promised potential benefits.

In contrast, Scientology is very "in your face" and "loud" about what it is and what is can do for you. Again, they actively promote the heightened spiritual awareness as something you can attain in the here and now. Because it's being laid out on the table as a totally attainable state of awareness, when former members don't achieve it, they feel betrayed and lied to, and lash back in a very "in your face" manner. The church of Scientology says that there are several reasons you might not be advancing spiritually, including being involved in unethical activities or continuing to harbor bad intentions. I believe that many a former member wants to take the church's viewpoints about why they are not advancing and turn it around and say "f*ck you - the reason I didn't ascend to higher awareness was not because something is wrong with me - it is because the state of awareness doesn't exist, it is because these 'abilities' don't exist, it is because the church is a fraud, I was duped, etc."

Scientology, like other religions, teaches that you need to do things that are good, and not do things that are bad. Generally, people who join a religion which teaches these kind of basics are good people. However, once they've decided that they've been betrayed and lied to, these good people decide that "destroying the lying church" will be their "good thing" - their "contribution to society".

I've seen people who have left other religions get into a mindset where they believe that their religion is b.s. They feel like the entire religious experience was a big "mind-f*ck".

The two times in my life that I have been the most upset both involved instances where I have had someone who I held in very high esteem who then "did me wrong". Boy, the infuriation. Anyway, I think that is what you have with former Scientologists. You have a group of people who once upon a time LOVED Scientology, who have now literally made it their life's mission to do everything they can to destroy it because they feel that spiritual salvation is b.s., and they feel really burned and stupid for previously having dedicated so much of their lives to it.

They certainly make a lot of noise. Every article on Tom Cruise or Scientology has hundreds of bloggers who have lots of anger and hatred to spew. As you say in your article, it's like before the article comes out, they are already crouched in a corner with a knife drawn. I also agree that you can't even have an intelligent discussion because there are so many bows and arrows whizzing around that all you can take away from it is the hate in the air.

Dear Louanne

I refer to your earlier comments.

Scientologists have been instructed by their leaders to believe that critics of scientology are agents of a paid conspiracy, as you said.

Accordingly, compliant scientologists will dismiss negative information, because they know beforehand that all bad information about scientology has been made up.

Scientology the organisation won't give you the bad information, and you won't believe it when it comes from anyone else. You are in a trap. If there is bad information about scientology, you have been primed not to ever believe it.

This is called fanaticism. For the people of Nazi Germany, failings and criticism could all be blamed on Jewish people or their paid co-conspirators. The death camps of Nazi Germany, were made-up propaganda, that could be dismissed in utter confidence as the made-up criticism of paid troublemakers or dupes, because the Nazi state was perfect, or would have been if not for the critics.

I wish you all strength.

PS: Yes, I have seen totalitarian organisations come and go.

This is hot off the press. I just read this a few minutes ago!

A German journalist went undercover doing Scientology courses for five months. His experiences will be published tomorrow! (Exclamation mark because I am excited about this)

Of course it includes a lot of pressure to donate money and promises of super-human capabilities, but the most interesting quote is (translated into English):

"The beginning of a new civilisation", says Irmi Tjarks, Executive Director Berlin at the last new-years party, "Here in Berlin and the whole of whole Germany.". Clapping ensues, after which Tharks continues: "And that's how we will convert Europe!"

Now of course, every religion (term to be used loosely in the case of the Cult of Scientology) has its missionaries. However, given the criminal nature of Scientology, this shows perfectly clear why the German government is right in wanting to ban Scientology. Right?

DCP said:

Ms. Hoffman, I was shocked by the response myself. But that was because I didn't know anything at all about Scientology except that Tom Cruise went lulu after getting a sniff. I generally don't spend my extra time researching other religions- my own but not others. But the responses were so colorful and entertaining even that I had to research this for myself. If people felt this passionate about the subject, there had to be something to it. And after doing the research, I agree that this religion is indeed toxic. However, I'm still surprised that people already knew so much about this religion which I consider to be secretive. No one in my own circle knows anything about them. And the attacks on you were hilarious I thought. I figured you're a journalist so you can handle it, right? Of course.

Thank goodness and thank you! It is good to know that those critical of Scientology were able to reach out to at least one person.

Misinformed Journo is misinformed.

Louanne said:

"It's as simple. There might be some dupes who feel for the campaign and just repeat what they've been told over and over. Those are the harmless ones and easy to distinguish from the pro-marketers. I'm sure you can detect them."

I say:

Louanne, do we have to link the readers to the leaked internal scientology LEAF emails? For the readers who don't know what I'm talking about, LEAF is Letters to the Editor Attack Force. It's a scientology program where the head of the LEAF program Doyle links them to articles and tells scientologists what to write and to email back when they've complied. If you want to see the emails just go to Wikileaks ( www.wikileaks.com ) and search for LEAF or scientology.

There's lots of interesting stuff to read there. Like their violation of US law regarding tax exempt groups telling followers who to vote for (there's an email from Karin Pouw, head of PR for Scientology telling scientologists who to vote for in a mayoral election).

One of my favourite parts of LEAF, in a lot of the emails they tell Scientology followers to NOT read all or parts of the article. Just comment and report. Take that to mean what you will in regards to this and the previous article.

Dear Ms Hoffman,

In the comments below and in the