Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
The Village Voice has a powerful article by Tony Ortega, an article that was originally written six years ago but was never published because the newspaper he worked for folded. It's the story of a long legal battle between Scientology and a former adherent, Lawrence Wollersheim, who sued them for a whole range of abuses. Scientology lost an eventually had to pay Wollersheim almost $9 million.
The article contains a lot of information, including details about Scientology's "OT III", the secret things that only a select few Scientologists get to learn (only after spending a fortune on earlier "auditing" sessions). In OT III they learn that their body is inhabited by the soul of an alien banished to Earth by Xenu, the galactic overlord. Well worth reading.
Politics
Comments
http://www.villagevoice.com/2008-06-24/news/Scientologys-Crushing-Defeat/
Your link didn't work for me, but I poked around and I think the link above is the story you're referencing.
Posted by: kodiak | July 9, 2008 9:51 AM
You'd be appalled to find out all of the abuse the scilons like to heap on ex adherents and critics of the church. Google "fair game" or "operation freakout". Or just visit xenu.net.
Posted by: stevogvsu | July 9, 2008 10:25 AM
For all you computer nerds out there, just remember
Xenu is not Unex
Posted by: Jim Ramsey | July 9, 2008 10:26 AM
You'd be appalled to find out all of the abuse the scilons like to heap on ex adherents and critics of the church. Google "fair game" or "operation freakout". Or just visit xenu.net.
Posted by: stevogvsu | July 9, 2008 10:26 AM
Jim, I don't get your joke... did you mean Unix??
Posted by: kate | July 9, 2008 10:33 AM
See also Janet Reitman's excellent article in Rolling Stone
Posted by: Ginger Yellow | July 9, 2008 10:33 AM
Kate,
It's a computer nerds pun.
It started with the GNU (www.gnu.org). That was a cyclical pun on Gnu is Not Unix.
There is a Xinu. Look it up at Amazon and you'll find a series of books on operating system design by Douglas Comer.
So seeing Xenu (with an "e" instead of an "i"), the obvious pun is
Xenu is not Unex
(Note the "e").
OK, it was a bad joke and it doesn't get any better when it's explained.
Posted by: Jim Ramsey | July 9, 2008 10:42 AM
Jim,
You've been in Michigan too long-and your brain has officially frozen;-)
I'm looking forward to reading this article when I have a few spare moments (have a funeral in an hour). As I mentioned in an earlier post, Jim Jones was from my hometown-so since I was a little kid I've been interested in studying the cult mentality.
Posted by: Rev. AJB | July 9, 2008 10:57 AM
Ed,
Kudos for posting this link. It's great to see well-written and well-read blogs helping keep this issue on the agenda.
Posted by: Ron Brown | July 9, 2008 11:18 AM
Not your own I hope Rev, hate you to miss that number. :D DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | July 9, 2008 11:22 AM
Link is dead... anywhere else to read?
Posted by: Phaedrus | July 9, 2008 11:25 AM
It's hard to find (thanks to Scientology Inc's dislike of it), but get a copy of "Inside Scientology" by Robert Kaufman if you can. Kaufman was fully sucked into Scientology and haven't losing a lot of money and spending time essentially locked up by them, eventually leaves. His therapist told him to write about his experiences and that is the book.
It's especially interesting because he clearly hasn't broken all connections and says things like "it wasn't right for me, but perhaps you'd have a different experience."
If you want to know how a cult recruits and retains a person, this is the book to read.
Posted by: bsci | July 9, 2008 11:31 AM
Posted by: llewelly | July 9, 2008 12:30 PM
I liked the Xenu joke, but I'm an old Unix hand. I think it is funny only for people like us.
Posted by: Bill Poser | July 9, 2008 1:24 PM
Is the nonsense that scientology claims as "gospel" any more delusional than the holy books and superstitious nonsense that all other religions espouse?
I would believe that all our ills were caused by banished alien souls before I would swallow the story that our "sins" originated when an evil being disguised as a talking snake conned our progenitors into eating bad fruit.
There must be something really wrong with human brains that we are compelled to believe this bullshit in such overwhelming numbers.
Posted by: Lance | July 9, 2008 1:48 PM
"Is the nonsense that scientology claims as "gospel" any more delusional than the holy books and superstitious nonsense that all other religions espouse?"
The difference is that mainstream religion lets you know their bullshit up front. (The main difference between a religion and a cult) Unfortunately its generally proposed to minds that haven't developed enough to be critical of it.
Posted by: Freeman74 | July 9, 2008 2:05 PM
Lance, I think that while the nonsense itself isn't any more or less 'delusional' than some interpretations of mainstream religion, the problem is the way the group is organized and deals with its membership.
The way they parcel out "the truth that will save humanity" and charge for every little piece is dishonest on its face. How many Christians charge you to hear Leviticus, Genesis, or Romans? (actually, I'd love to get those crazies that like to shout cherry picked passages to just shut up!) Are those who leave the sect often in posession of information on how the church is run that would assist in convicting members of fraud or perjury, or even cause the organization to lose its tax exempt status?
I think that the real issue is that people, being social, like to feel that they belong to a group. And if that group is doing something as noble and secretive as saving all of humanity, well all the better then! It's a search for meaning and belonging that lead people to organizations (some of them religious, many not... red hatters come to mind as one strange group that is not religious). If we could re-engineer our society so that people have greater contact and interactions on a daily basis with their friends and neighbours, building real communities instead of bedroom communities, then at least some of this behaviour might change.
Posted by: kodiak | July 9, 2008 2:09 PM
Bill Poser, et al,
I too am an old Unix hand. I've been using it and programming it since 1983 or so. My spinal column does "vi".
Posted by: Jim Ramsey | July 9, 2008 3:31 PM
If ya haven't seen it, watch Craig Ferguson's hilarious take on Scientology Star Shill Tom Cruise's wacky video...
Posted by: marnk | July 9, 2008 3:54 PM
Lance-The other difference is that when people choose to leave my church I don't hunt them down and harrass them. Am I pissed at times when some people leave-sure. But they have their reasons. I mean like I'm upset with one of my leaders right now who is dropping out of our church because he's mad at his mom-and she's also a member here. Neither side wants to budge so he's decided that the best thing for his mental health is to "divorce" himself from everything his mom belongs to.
But am I gonna hunt him down and kill him because he knows the "secret Lutheran handshake?" No.
Posted by: Rev. AJB | July 9, 2008 4:09 PM
While the Church of Scientology has done some reprehensible things to its ex-members and dissenters they are hardly alone in persecuting apostates.
Need I remind the faithful of other religions about the various atrocities perpetrated against their own dissenters and apostates? I haven't heard of any ex-Scientologists being burned at the stake or beheaded.
Ask Salman Rushdie if he thinks the Scientologists represent the greatest danger to dissenters in the modern world.
Just because you Christians haven't been allowed to publicly torture, maim and execute anyone recently doesn't change the fact that when they held sufficient official power your brethren did much worse than the creepy Scientologist ever could hope to.
Rev AJB, you are no doubt a reasonable and loving man of the cloth and I'm sure you wouldn't "hunt down and kill" an apostate for revealing the "secret Lutheran handshake", but here are the words of Mr. Martin Luther from his book On the Jews and Their Lies.
"They [rulers] must act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set in proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone, and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work, and deal harshly with them, as Moses did...
If this does not help we must drive them out like mad dogs."
I assume you don't quote this little ditty in your sermons about Marty.
Posted by: Lance | July 9, 2008 4:55 PM
I haven't heard of any ex-Scientologists being burned at the stake or beheaded.
HAve you heard of any ex-Catholics being burned at the stake or beheaded in your lifetime?
Why are you so eager to pretend $cientologists are no different from other religions, when their actions clearly prove they are? Are you trying to excuse their actions? If so, for what purpose? Are you trying to say that because some other church does something bad, we therefore can't hold $scientology accountable for what they do? That's a bit like saying we can't punish murderers in the US because people get murdered in other countries as well.
Posted by: Raging Bee | July 9, 2008 5:17 PM
Hello Bee,
Have you heard of any ex-Catholics being burned at the stake or beheaded in your lifetime?
Well Catholics killed plenty of Protestants in Northern Ireland in my lifetime, and of course vice versa.
You, as usual, cruise right past my point. As even you point out the only difference between the violent actions of Scientologists and some other religions is that they have been caught persecuting people recently.
Of course there are plenty of "main stream" religious people killing apostates today. Islamic zealots are killing innocents and even their own family members for evil activities like cartoon making and naked headedness on a routine basis.
Christians in Nigeria take revenge on their Muslim neighbors for their earlier reciprocal actions as do Muslims and Hindus in India.
Why are you so eager to pretend $scientologists are no different from other religions, when their actions clearly prove they are?
Where did I say that Scientologists were "no different" than other religions? I merely pointed out that they are hardly alone in their persecution and retribution against apostates and heretics.
Are you trying to excuse their actions? Well since my first sentence condemned their actions as "reprehensible" I would wonder how you could ask that question.
Are you trying to say that because some other church does something bad, we therefore can't hold $scientology accountable for what they do? Again I think those are words you are trying to put in my mouth since you can't refute my actual argument.
I am pointing out that as bizarre and destructive as Scientology is, people of "faith" are all too quick to ignore the violent irrational actions of their own religious brethren.
Of course religious groups don't have a monopoly on violent retribution but they are unique in justifying it with appeals to mysticism and revelation.
Posted by: Lance | July 9, 2008 7:15 PM
I am pointing out that as bizarre and destructive as Scientology is, people of "faith" are all too quick to ignore the violent irrational actions of their own religious brethren.
First, that's exactly how $cientologists respond to criticism.
Second, who here, theist or atheist, is ignoring the violent irrational actions of any other organized religion? Certainly not Ed, and certainly not me, so who are you talking about? The mere fact that someone is criticizing only one religion at a given time, does not mean he's ignoring anything.
Posted by: Raging Bee | July 9, 2008 7:47 PM
That's a pretty damn important difference, if you ask me. Saying "Well, you were no better four hundred years ago" as a defense is, well, unconvincing to say the least. It wasn't a defense for apartheid in South Africa, and they didn't have to stretch back nearly as far in time--it's not a defense of "fair game" and the other underhanded practices of Scientology now. If the best a religion can do is bring itself up to Middle Ages morality, then maybe it should pack it up and call it a day.
Posted by: Shygetz | July 9, 2008 7:56 PM
Bee,
Please stop putting words in my mouth. My points were a continuation of the discussion of Ed's original post.
My points were my own and were not an indictment of anyone else's.
My first point was that the beliefs that Ed pointed out in his link about Xenu and the idiotic revelations of L. Ron Hubbard were no less bizarre than the underpinnings of all "main stream" religions.
Then people responded to my point by saying that Scientology was different because of its use of violence against apostates and heretics. I made the point that all the "main stream" religions have persecuted people in the past and indeed some continue to do so today in the name of their religion.
I was making the point that adherence to irrational religious beliefs leads to irrational actions.
Posted by: Lance | July 9, 2008 8:36 PM
Shygetz,
I pointed out that there are many instances of "main stream" religious people engaging in violent retributions in the name of their religions today, or are just the sects you personally count as Christian, Muslim and Hindu to be held accountable?
Posted by: Lance | July 9, 2008 8:38 PM
Lance:
There are several things that could be meant by this, so I hope that "irrational" is meant to qualify a specific type of religious belief as opposed to religious belief in general (i.e. broadly saying that all religious belief is irrational). If so, then your claim is much less contentious; however, I still am hard-pressed to agree given that the irrationality of a religious belief (or the degree of such) is likely to be in the eyes of the beholder, as it were.
Posted by: The Christian Cynic | July 9, 2008 9:18 PM
To clarify, what I was getting at there is the question of how "irrational" a belief has to be before it leads to irrational actions, and there are more questions from there (what kind of irrational actions? etc.).
Posted by: The Christian Cynic | July 9, 2008 9:23 PM
Scientology is not a religon and shouldn't be called a religion. We know its tenets and creation myth were invented by a specific man at a recent time and place. He tried to craft something sufficiently like other myths to cash in, and he has succeeded. But with everything we know about this cult, so long as the word "religion" means one thing and "cult" means something else, we should not call it anything but a cult.
Posted by: Doyle | July 9, 2008 9:46 PM
Rev AJB wrote:
I know you were being a bit tongue-in-cheek here, but the truth of the matter is that this is not how most cults would operate either, including Scientology. Ostracism and/or petty harassment are far more likely outcomes, in both cults and mainstream religions, than is murder. This is undoubtedly particularly true for small, close knit groups.
Aside from that, the overriding point here is that there is a continuum of possibilities, with cults being at one extreme end. There isn't always an easy dividing line between cult and religion, and one thing that makes them difficult to distinguish is the fact that they do share many of the beliefs and practices of "non-cult" religion.
(I will not equate "mainstream" with "non-cult".)
ChristianCynic wrote:
Things are either rational or not. There really aren't gradients.
However, there are gradients of credible or believable. And certainly the Jesus resurrection story is no more credible than the Xenu soul parasite one.
I'm not sure which is more likely to lead to irrational behavior, but I'm inclined to say something along the lines of "the most socially acceptable one" for sheer statistical reasons.
Posted by: Leni | July 10, 2008 12:07 AM
Interesting how he left one religion for various reasons, but is now happy in his work as a "minister"!
Replacing one mans written doctrines for anothers (well a group of men).
Posted by: PostHaste | July 10, 2008 12:17 AM
I've always wanted to see The Profit, but I doubt that's ever going to happen.
Posted by: tincture | July 10, 2008 12:45 AM
Actually, where Scientology differs from mainstream religion is in its lack of woo when it deals with people who leave. If someone leaves the Xtian church, they're going to hell, they're in league with the devil, some years ago they might have to be burnt - but when people leave the Church of Scientology the Church is afraid they'll talk.
You know, that might be a quick-and-dirty way of differentiating "cult" from "religion", now that I think of it.
Also, check out thesmokinggun.com. (they have a search engine, type in scientology.) L. Ron Hubbard was a diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic, and there are copies of letters that he wrote to the FBI that put him pretty firmly in that camp as far as I can tell. I'm not sure he *was* a con man, and *that* is scary.
Posted by: mandrake | July 10, 2008 1:17 AM
For those who wish to fight Scientology in Michigan, here is our local Anonymous cell: http://michanon.endoftheinternet.org/
For everyone else, check out enturbulation.org for your local cell.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 10, 2008 5:44 AM
Actually, the bit I find fascinating about Scientology is just how easy it is to get people to believe patently ridiculous things.
I assume many of them are quite sincere in their beliefs that we are inhabited by exiled alien souls and all that stuff, and although there's no qualitative difference between that any any other religious mythology, the big difference for me is the lack of mystery.
With most religions they at least have the Argument from Antiquity on their side, and the advantages of massive numbers, popular acceptance and the opportunity to brainwash from an early age, no matter how silly the magic that they are preaching. With Scientology grown adults accept as true a series of stories that are not only obvious garbage but are well know to have been invented by a second-rate science fiction writer about fifty or sixty years ago.
How can we, as a species, be so desperate to believe in woo that we are capable of convincing our supposedly rational brains that this kind of slightly childish fantasy is even close to reality?
I suppose it ties into the secular West's increasing fanaticism about idiotic forms of alternative medicine and anti-vaccination lunacy and things like that - we just seem to have an inner need to believe in some sort of magical agency and are collectively prepared to project it onto almost any variety of foolishness you can imagine.
Posted by: Matthew | July 10, 2008 6:33 AM
Is Xenu supposed to be secret? that story is the first thing I heard when I asked people what Scientologists believe.
The debate about rational/irrational beliefs is fascinating, though I can't help thinking you may be using different definitions of rational. Not that I have my own definition to offer or anything like that.
Posted by: Matt | July 10, 2008 8:37 AM
However you define rational, I think I can confidently state that a belief in volcano imprisonments, disembodied alien souls and space monsters is not it.
How do you get to the stage where you can convince yourself that this stuff isn't just silly? How desperate do you have to be? Or alternatively is it really quite so worryingly easy to persuade people of the veracity of things that they would generally consider to be ludicrous?
Posted by: Matthew | July 10, 2008 9:13 AM
Pretty interesting three part series on $cientology here:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d9f_1179318473 Part 1
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cf8_1179318889 Part 2
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d09_1179319269 Part 3
Posted by: Deepsix | July 10, 2008 10:19 AM
I think, despite the mass media, that the Xenu bit is still not that well known (I had a teacher friend ask me about Scientology and she had not heard of it). So many normal people are unaware of it, unless they hear these stories or watch South Park. When you add in the indoctrination and exclusion (no TV - so the adherents are isolated from the world, like other cults)...it makes the idea that this obvious fiction can be accepted a little more believeable. Put anyone under enough pressure and they will crack, as shown by this story, and the stories of other ex-Scientologists.
Posted by: Badger3k | July 10, 2008 10:41 AM
Yeah, I'm very aware of those words written by good old Martin. The last decade in our larger church has been a time of taking a hard look at our history and apologizing for the wrong. This is one area where our church has sought out the forgiveness of the Jewish community-and received it. Another area has been the joint condemnations between the Lutheran and Roman Catholic Church. I think this is also what is going on with our sexuality talks, too. Many of us leaders see the hurt the church has caused in the LGBT community and want to correct that wrong.
And yes, Leni, I was being "tongue in cheek" with the killing part. Although Jim Jones did choose to make the kool-aid rather than lose a large number of followers who wanted to go home with Rep. Ryan.
And as far as ostracism goes-I keep all doors open. When I run into former members in the grocery store, I still ask them how their life is going, etc. Now I've had a few who have been mad at me who choose to ignore me on their own. But I don't purposely close doors on other people.
Guess you'd have to be a pastor with either a large ego or extremely low self-esteem to do so. I must be in neither category;-)
Posted by: Rev. AJB | July 10, 2008 11:00 AM
"The Profit" is out there on torrent. I saw it. (Not earth-shattering, but a good window on these freaks.)
Posted by: Kristine | July 10, 2008 12:13 PM
Oops - I meant "The Bridge"! Sorry.
Posted by: Kristine | July 10, 2008 12:15 PM
And certainly the Jesus resurrection story is no more credible than the Xenu soul parasite one.
I'm sorry- even though I find both stories extremely unlikely, that statement is simply absurd.
I know that equivocation is something of a pastime in modern discourse. But pretending that the a paticular god-man's fairly non-specific and historically and institutionally supported claims are equivalently absurd to the assertion that we are all haunted by the souls of beings an extra terrestrial loaded into 747s against the sides of a volcano, and blew up with an atom bomb, based on the rambling notes of a failed pulp fiction writer- That's pushing the postmodernist sensibility a bit too far.
And that's not even delving into the incoherent nonsense that you learn after OT III. The xenu stuff is just the tip of the iceberg, crazy-wise.
Posted by: uriel | July 12, 2008 4:13 AM
Sorry- the " And certainly the Jesus resurrection story is no more credible than the Xenu soul parasite one," part there should have been in quote tags- should have hit the preview button first.
Posted by: uriel | July 12, 2008 4:17 AM
Something interesting happened in Battle Creek, MI, last saturday:
http://forums.enturbulation.org/150-usa-east-coast/battle-creek-mi-21984/
Scilon assaults anonymous, takes his signs and rips. Its all on tape. Sadly, the police doesn't want to waste time on the issue.
Posted by: Anonymous | July 14, 2008 2:48 AM