So it came out in the news that the Church of Scientology published an issue of its Freedom magazine, dedicated to “expose” Anderson Cooper, certainly in response to Anderson Cooper’s earlier exposure of the Church of Scientology, in Scientology: A history of violence, which aired on CNN end of March, early April.

This was to be expected. In a policy letter (which is Scientology scripture) of February 1966, Hubbard wrote:

… Don’t ever tamely submit to an investigation of us. Make it rough, rough on attackers all the way. You can get “reasonable about it” and lose. Sure we break no laws. Sure we have nothing to hide. BUT attackers are simply an anti-Scientology propaganda agency so far as we are concerned. They have proven they want no facts and will only lie no matter what they discover. So BANISH all ideas that any fair hearing is intended and start our attack with their first breath. Never wait. Never talk about us – only them. Use their blood, sex, crime to get headlines. Don’t use us. I speak from 15 years of experience in this. There has never yet been an attacker who was not reeking with crime. All we had to do was look for it and murder would come out.

As per its prophet Hubbard, this is the only way the Church of Scientology is allowed to react to exposure, regardless of the truth behind the allegations. Hubbard made it simply impossible for Scientology to reform, as long as all of his writings are held as incontrovertible and absolute truth.

This is why the Church of Scientology published an issue of Freedom magazine “exposing” the St. Petersburg Times, following the St. Petersburg Times‘ landmark series of 2009 exposing the Church of Scientology and its top leader, David Miscavige.

This is why the Church of Scientology published an issue of Freedom magazine “exposing” BBC’s Panorama, following its Scientology and me episode, which exposed the creepiness of the Church of Scientology.

So for those who keep a close watch on Scientology, the latest issue of Freedom magazine “exposing” Anderson Cooper is nothing to be surprised: It’s expected, since it’s mandated by Scientology scriptures.

But let’s go back even farther in time.

Australia, 1965: A thorough inquiry into Scientology resulted in a scathing report, possibly one of the best and most accurate when it comes to understand why Scientology is dangerous. This was the Anderson Report. In its prefatory notes, the Report stated:

Scientology is evil; its techniques evil; its practice a serious threat to the community, medically, morally and socially … Scientology is a grave threat to family and home life. As well as causing financial hardship, it engenders dissension, suspicion and mistrust amongst members of the family. Scientology has caused many family estrangements.

All of the above has always held true, nowadays included, and this shows the excellent quality of the analysis of Scientology by the Australian inquiry of 1965. Mike Rinder, one of the top officials who recently defected, is currently suffering from the same disconnection practices which were exposed by the Anderson Report, 45 years ago.

What was Hubbard’s response to the Anderson Report back then? Here is an excerpt:

The foundation of Victoria consists of the riff-raff of London’s slums … Robbers, murderers, prostitutes, fences, thieves. …

The insane attack on Scientology can best be understood if Victoria is seen for what it is—a very primitive community, somewhat barbaric, with a rudimentary knowledge of the physical sciences.

In fact, it is a scientific barbarism so bigoted that they know not and do not know they are ignorant …

[Ref.: Scientology: Sex, hypnotism and security checks | Sunday Mirror (UK) | 28 July 1968]

United Kingdom, July 1968, in the House of Commons: Regarding Scientology, Minister of Health Kenneth Robinson said:

The Government are satisfied, having reviewed all the available evidence, that scientology is socially harmful. It alienates members of families from one another and attributes squalid and disgraceful motives to all who oppose it. Its authoritarian principles and practices are a potential menace to the personality and well-being of those so deluded as to become its followers; above all, its methods can be a serious danger to the health of those who submit to them. There is evidence that children are now being indoctrinated.

[Ref.: House of Commons // Official report // Parliamentary debates (Hansard)]

What was the Church of Scientology response? In the fall of 1968 published an issue of its Freedom magazine, with “extravagant allegations … which were of a gravely defamatory nature”:

Put shortly, it was alleged that Mr Robinson had instigated or approved of the creation of what were called “death camps”, likened to Belsen and Auschwitz, to which persons (including mental patients) could be forcibly abducted and there killed or maimed with impunity. It was further alleged that Mr Robinson had abused his position as a minister in relation to government grants made to the National Association of Mental Health.The broadsheets containing these grave allegations were each distributed to about 100,000 persons, including people in public life (such as MPs) and editors of newspapers and journals.

[Ref.: Church of Scientology to pay libel damages to former Minister | The Times (UK) | 6 June 1973]

Mr. Kenneth Robinson successfully sued the Church of Scientology for libel.

Just goes to show: Scientology today, just the same as Scientology 45 years ago.

Scientology: Sex, hypnotism and security checks

Advertisements