PDA

View Full Version : Tom Cruise says He knows the history of Psychiatry



Pages : [1] 2

Vinnie Velvet
06-24-2005, 02:30 PM
Tom Cruise: Let the cynics talk
NEW YORK (AP) — Let the cynics talk. Tom Cruise is in love — and he just can't restrain himself.


"You know what? There's always cynics. There always has been. There always will be," said Cruise, who hasn't been shy about displaying his affection for Batman Begins actress Katie Holmes. "I have never worried ... about what other people think and what other people say."

Cruise, 42, and Holmes, 26, went public with their romance in April, smooching and posing for photographers in Rome. They recently became engaged.

Many have doubted the romance — the words "publicity stunt" have rained down on the couple like an alien invasion as Cruise has been busy promoting his new film, War of the Worlds, directed by Steven Spielberg, which opens on June 29.

"I have to tell you. It's just a great time in my life," Cruise said in an interview that aired Friday on NBC's Today show. "I'm really happy. And, you know, I'm engaged. I'm going to be married. I can't restrain myself. It's like you've got two little cords on your mouth and you can't stop smiling."

The 42-year-old actor, whose marriages to Mimi Rogers and Nicole Kidman ended in divorce, declined to say what the 26-year-old Holmes has brought to his life that wasn't there in the past.

"I don't want to compare things," Cruise said. "It's that thing where you just — in life when it just happens. ... You meet someone. And it's — I can't even describe it."

When asked if he could be with someone at this stage in his life who doesn't have an interest in the Church of Scientology — Holmes has said she's embracing the religion — Cruise told interviewer Matt Lauer: "Scientology is something that you don't understand. It's like you could be a Christian and be a Scientologist.

"It is a religion. Because it's dealing with the spirit. You as a spiritual being. It gives you tools you can use to apply to your life."

When Lauer mentioned Cruise's earlier criticism of Brooke Shields for taking anti-depressants, Cruise told the Today show co-host he didn't know what he was talking about.

"You don't know the history of psychiatry. I do," Cruise said.

The interview became more heated when Lauer, who said he knew people who had been helped by the attention-deficit disorder drug Ritalin, asked Cruise about the effects of the drug.

"Matt, Matt, you don't even — you're glib," Cruise responded. "You don't even know what Ritalin is. If you start talking about chemical imbalance, you have to evaluate and read the research papers on how they came up with these theories, Matt, OK. That's what I've done."


----------------------------------------------

What a fucking dickhead.

Bill Lumbergh
06-24-2005, 02:34 PM
Fuck Cruise and his self important bullshit. I have next to no interest in WOTW BECAUSE Cruise is in it.

POJO_Risin
06-24-2005, 02:41 PM
I'll be honest here...if ANYONE fucking acted the way this idiot is acting...they'd be hauled away for drug abuse...

he's on fucking crack...

Mezro
06-24-2005, 02:43 PM
They opened a huge Church of Scientology in the North Beach section of the city.

Mezro...I should go in and ask for Tomkat...I will wear my Risky Business underwear and gyrate while chanting L Ron Hubbard...

academic punk
06-24-2005, 02:44 PM
Originally posted by POJO_Risin
I'll be honest here...if ANYONE fucking acted the way this idiot is acting...they'd be hauled away for drug abuse...

he's on fucking crack...

I second this.

Is it me, or it only recently that Cruise has become REALLY annoying?

Mezro
06-24-2005, 02:46 PM
Between dipping Holmes and spouting shit Tom is cruising towards the end of his salad days.

Mezro...the public will turn on this shit monkey if he doesn't stop dry humping the Scientology tire swing...

Northern Girl
06-24-2005, 02:53 PM
Originally posted by Vinnie Velvet
When Lauer mentioned Cruise's earlier criticism of Brooke Shields for taking anti-depressants

I'm not one for pushing drugs either, but did you see any interviews with Brooke Shields about her postpartum depression. Holy shit! Scary. She seriously wanted her baby to die and was afraid she might just not feed it and let it die. There is a time when drugs are necessary, and this was definitely one of them. One of the most extreme cases I've ever heard.

As for Tom, yes, he has become quite the pompous self-righteous asshole these days. I think he found a little chickie he can control, and she's too googlie-eyed to know better. "He just the most amazing, perfect man." GAK!

POJO_Risin
06-24-2005, 02:58 PM
Well...I sure wouldn't kick her out of bed...can't stand her fucking smile though...crooked ass ugly mouth of hers...

http://www.beerandshots.com/celebrities/katie-holmes/katie-holmes-nude.jpg

POJO_Risin
06-24-2005, 03:02 PM
I'm not one to preach drugs for kids...I hate them to be honest...but you see it all the time in my profession...

does it help some kids? Sure it does...absolutely it does...AND THERE IS SCIENTIFIC proof that they work.

Of course there are other ways to do it...of course there are...

but let me ask you all this? Why is it easy for Oprah and Cruise and all the others to stay fit...and to eat healthy...and to take care of themselves? Money...plain and simple...

diet and other things can cure the types of disorders that keep kids from focusing...absolutely...but tell me how a middle of the road parent can afford the health counseling that would be needed to do it? and no...it sure the fuck wouldn't be convered under your health insurance...

Tom Cruise is a fucking idiot...plain and simple...

Vinnie Velvet
06-24-2005, 03:13 PM
Originally posted by POJO_Risin
I'll be honest here...if ANYONE fucking acted the way this idiot is acting...they'd be hauled away for drug abuse...

he's on fucking crack...

I totally agree.

Him and his fucking cult, science fiction so-called religion.

He even tried to convert Scarlett Johannson!! She was slated for the female lead role in Mission Impossible III.

Cruise started to talk about his Scientology BS and then (without her knowing) opened a door which revealed a group of Scientologists. At which time, Scarlett said "fuck this" and took off.

Her "official" word for dropping out of the role in Mission Impossible III was 'scheduling difficulties' between herself and Cruise.

Yeah, right.

Too bad Katie had only half a brain to not see through the BS.

Keeyth
06-24-2005, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by academic punk
I second this.

Is it me, or it only recently that Cruise has become REALLY annoying?

Cruise recently fired his long time fiercely protective agent, and let his sister take over the position. I just read an article on how the old agent would have reined Cruis in and stopped him from making such a fool of himself, but sis is happy to let him be himself and shoot his mouth off about anything. Remember how you never used to hear the guy speak out on much of anything? Now you can't shut him up...

Nickdfresh
06-24-2005, 09:08 PM
#

Ally_Kat
06-24-2005, 10:28 PM
I wonder if he's learned about Xenu or the clams yet

rustoffa
06-24-2005, 10:41 PM
I wouldn't discount his enthusiasm if I was y'all.

Did you know that Travolta's personal jumbo jet is actually a stairway to the stars? Not like it lands in LA....I'm talkin' the fucking Van Allen Belt!

Nickdfresh
06-25-2005, 12:10 AM
How dare you heretics question the wisdom and enlightenment achieved through commune with technology? L. RON HUBBARD will fart lightening bolts out of his dead ass at you all!

Mr. G
06-25-2005, 02:28 AM
If someone wants to be Pro Psychiatry be my guest. but back it up. There has never once been a scientific study to prove thier claims. The FDA recently decided to put homicide and suicide warnings on Psych drugs. They don't do this easily, it is going to cost the drug companies a lot of money. I mean they make Prozac for dogs and infants for gods sake.

Panamark
06-25-2005, 03:31 AM
Tom Cruise was always a nasty little prick.
But he's an actor, and bouncing on Oprah's couch
has the world thinking he is Mr Wonderful..
(One of his better performances)

Control Freak, egomaniac small man.

Those dudes squirting water at him was classic !
Thats when you saw the true "Tom" come out..

MAX
06-25-2005, 03:47 AM
I normally don't pay too much attention to what celebrities have to say whatsoeva. Howeva, I caught the Matt Lauer interview with Cruise. WTF is up with that guy? Heck, ripping on psychiatrists and Riddalin (sp?) all whilst being some Scientologist nut? What is that "religion" all about anyway? Self importance or what?

Back in the early 90's I had the pleasure of meeting Brooke Shields for about two weeks. She was filming something here, studied her scripts and hung out in the bar where I tended during her entire tenure in SLC. I was never a fan of hers prior but I must say that she was one of the nicest and most down to Earth celebs I've evaa come across. So, if she thinks that little punk Cruise is an ass then tis' good enough for me.

Seriously, that guy needs a good old fashioned ass kicking. That little water incident needs to be a prelude of things to come for that self-important prick.

Panamark
06-25-2005, 03:54 AM
Ive seen "off camera" footage of Tom when he was with Nicole Kidman in Australia. I tell you what, his entourage must be paid very well....
If you are going to eat that much shit from your boss,
you better be paid well...

I really believe he thinks he is above the rest of the world.

MAX
06-25-2005, 03:59 AM
G'Day Mark!!! :)

What kind of shit did he do while in Oz?

Panamark
06-25-2005, 04:12 AM
Oh, he was "Mr Wonderfully Nice" when he knew the cameras
were rolling. Many Australians wanted to adopt him as an
honary Australian. Off Camera he was a total control freak who
orders people around like a real prick.. Im sure he is not
the only celeb like that. Not much more to tell except I think
the "Mr Nice Guy" facade is total bullshit.

I think he has been letting his guard drop a bit lately and
letting more of the real Tom show..

Nitro Express
06-25-2005, 06:18 AM
My home town is Sun Valley, Idaho. Brooke Shields and her mom had a place there. Brooke seemed nice enough. I was in a bar called Slavey's and Brooke was squeezing through the crowd trying to get to a table with some of her friends and my hand smacked her on the ass. Nice and firm I must add. She's very tall too.

Nitro Express
06-25-2005, 06:28 AM
All I know about Tom Cruise is eversince he was in Top Gun, all the girls wanted to fuck him badly. Just the mention of his name made pussies wet in the 1980's.

The guy should keep his dumb mouth shut and just act.

Sure the pharmacutical companies are sharks and certain doctors are taking advantage of people. Maybe Tom should watch The Aviator and see what a very intelligent person with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder goes without any proper clinical treatment. I suffered from obsessive Compulsive Disorder my whole life and it wasn't diagnosed until I was in my 30's. Howard Hughes wasn't as lucky. He lived in an age where they didn't know what caused it.

Cruise might as well say he knows all about heart surgery too.

flappo
06-25-2005, 07:04 AM
Max: "Seriously, that guy needs a good old fashioned ass kicking. That little water incident needs to be a prelude of things to come for that self-important prick."

ain't that the truth !

imo the guy's a total asshole , shit actor , big fucking nose , not even that good looking , capped teeth , short arse and did i mention he's a terrible actor as well as being a total fucking shithead closeted faggot cunt

and that his good points

DrMaddVibe
06-25-2005, 03:37 PM
Originally posted by flappo and that his good points [/B]

http://www.wavsite.com/sounds/9458/bfast21.wav

bueno bob
06-25-2005, 09:01 PM
Cruise is a tool.

SweetSecrets
06-25-2005, 09:29 PM
The history of psychiatry is simple. It begins with a man named Sigmund Freud. Of all developmental theorists, let me tell you, this one is full of some really crazy hypothetical ideas. The simple fact is...Freud himself spent most of life inspired by cocaine, which he encouraged one of his collegues to try, and ultimately ended up killing him as a result. Although Freud felt haunted by this for the rest of his life, he still supported the cocaine campaign for inspiration and the unraveling of the unconsious psychosexual conflict arising within his patients.

I find it humourous that the Scientologists claim their religion is the source for disaddiction, yet much of their therapy sessions are strongly linked to the work of Sigmund cocaine addictie himself.

Not to mention Freud believed we all have secret fantasies that hide away in our unconsious ID, to have incest with our mothers and fathers.

What a nice theory to base a religion on! (sarcasm!)

bueno bob
06-25-2005, 09:33 PM
L. Ron Hubbard was a fucking tool - and a bad writer to boot.

I read one of those scientology bullshit books he wrote - well, the first two chapters was as far as I could get with that horseshit...

superdave
06-25-2005, 09:34 PM
In my honest opinion, he is acting just like Jesterstar

Terry
06-25-2005, 11:12 PM
Originally posted by academic punk
I second this.

Is it me, or it only recently that Cruise has become REALLY annoying?

Can't really recall Cruise being so compelled or driven to push such a big media-blitz in the past. The guy was content to make, IMO, mostly bad movies and get grossly overpaid for his efforts.

Now, it seems like he can't seem to stop telling the press how he doesn't care about what anyone thinks about him. Guess if he really felt that way, he wouldn't even feel the need to say it.

He just sounds like another goofball Hollywood actor/actress who wants everyone to know how smart/politically oriented he/she/they are. All of them end up coming of more dumbassed than I thought they were in the first place.

Will probably go to see War Of The Worlds, mostly because I enjoy going the movies and there really hasn't been much worth seeing lately. What with the Dukes of Hazzard, Bewitched and Herbie The Love Bug coming out, may be a while before I get a chance to see something that looks decent. I mean, you know a movie is in trouble of it can't even produce an alluring preview. Will Ferrell seems to think yelling is a comedic device...the dude is way too smug for me, considering his lack of talent. Linsey Lohan is lame. Far as the Dukes goes, if Jessica wants to show me her titties, bring it on. Otherwise, can't be bothered.

A decent movie to rent is the Machinist. That Bale might actually not suck...there may be something to offer there, even though just losing weight in-and-of itself isn't necessarily a sign of talent......

Mr. G
06-25-2005, 11:26 PM
Ther are 0 links between Sientology and Psychiatry. You could almost say they are opposites. The first makes people more able and happier the second pushes people into apathy with drugs and electroshock, yes they still do electroshock. Have you ever met someone that recieved electroshock?

rustoffa
06-26-2005, 01:15 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Ther are 0 links between Sientology and Psychiatry.

They both accept monetary cuntributions.

Larger and larger scales.

Wonder why the dipshit didn't call Psychology out?

Those high-falutin' fuckers 'ell take a check too.

Mr. G
06-26-2005, 03:05 AM
Grecery stores accept money also. what is your point exactly? And yes Psychology is also included.

Northern Girl
06-26-2005, 08:08 AM
Originally posted by POJO_Risin
I'm not one to preach drugs for kids...I hate them to be honest...but you see it all the time in my profession...


I was just thinking - What if Dave was given Ritalin for his "monkey hour" hyperactivity? Would he have had the same career? Would we be here talking about him today?

Hmmm...

SweetSecrets
06-26-2005, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Ther are 0 links between Sientology and Psychiatry. You could almost say they are opposites. The first makes people more able and happier the second pushes people into apathy with drugs and electroshock, yes they still do electroshock. Have you ever met someone that recieved electroshock?

Psychoanalysis has nothing to do with elecroshock. The psychiatrist taps into the patient's unconsious through hypnosis to try and help them settle psychosexual conflicts they faced in earlier stages, but never settled.

This is very similar to what the Scientologists do.

Nitro Express
06-26-2005, 03:12 PM
They have learned more about how the human brain works in the last ten years than ever before. My whole life, I always felt the urge to repeat things. I always felt something bad would happen if I didn't repeat something until I got it right. I lived with that for years.

In my 30's I just became tottaly exhausted from all the shit going on inside my head. My sister's daughter was having problems with depression and the analyses was it was Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. My sis flat out told me, I showed all the symptoms of it. I went to a specialist and yup, I had it.

The Dr. tottaly showed me what causes Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. I have a hyperactive part of my brain that won't shut down basically so I'm getting these messages non stop. They have found people who are exceptionaly brilliant at mathmetics, that their brain can focus on those tasks more than the average people. A brain runs on an electro-chemical system and a lot of what we are and how we behave is dependant on how our brains function electro-chemically.

I was not offered any medication. We worked on some excercises on how to deal with it. It never goes away, but by recognizing it, and knowing how to deal with it, I can tell those feeling to go fuck themselves.

Some of these forms of depression that go unchecked can ruin lives and even result in sucide. Religion with it's guilt trips and high expectations actually can make the situation worse. Some religions require that their ministers get lots of pyscological training while becoming a priest. Some church's provide access to counceling.

If psycology is bunk how come every major police agency uses it as a tool to solve criminal cases? How come employers use it trying to find the right employee? How come huge, expensive marketing campaigns are based on it? How come casinos hire psycologists and socialologist to do detailed studies on human behavior?

Cruise and his cult are full of shit. I guess Tom Cruise and his Scientology buddies are right and the rest of the world is wrong.

superdave
06-26-2005, 04:17 PM
If Tom Cruise were only as important as he thinks he is...

Mr. G
06-26-2005, 05:36 PM
The key word is hypnosis. Hypnosis is never used in Scientology because it is dangerous. It is never a good idea to put "another" determinism below the control of the person. It makes them into a "puppet". In Scientology the person is fully awake and in control. Also in Scientology the person is never evaluated or invalidated as in Psychiatry and Psychology.

Vinnie Velvet
06-27-2005, 12:56 PM
STOP THE PRESSES!!!

The Army has a Scientologist on its hands----MR. G.

Go fuck off and watch a Tom Cruise movie already.

rustoffa
06-27-2005, 07:25 PM
Cruise is out of cuntrol!!!!

Click here for Cruise carnage!!! (http://tcruiseko.ytmnd.com/)

Mr. G
06-27-2005, 11:12 PM
Just the response I expected from Vinnie.

rustoffa
06-27-2005, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Also in Scientology the person is never evaluated or invalidated as in Psychiatry and Psychology.

Psychology isn't about validation bro.

Mr. G
06-27-2005, 11:31 PM
Exaxctly.

rustoffa
06-27-2005, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Exaxctly.

Go on.....gimme more.

Invalidations?

Science?

Doctorates?

Mr. G
06-28-2005, 12:08 AM
I will put it this way. No one knows you better than you do. Psychiatrists and Psychologists evaluate and invalidate people. Have you ever been evaluated? Didn't it kind of piss you off? They are at BEST rank amatures.

hollywood5150
06-28-2005, 01:21 AM
weird or ironic all the movies Terry mentioned are/were once TV shows ??????????? new HOLLYWOOD trend.......

I would like to see cruise and DLR intellectually throw down.........DLR would win..........

I aggree with 99% of all the Cruise comments above.............he is fucked.........

Hardrock69
06-28-2005, 01:54 AM
The REALITY is that Scientology is just like any other religion.

It was conceived, brought into being, and is now operated and staffed by...

PEEEPUL!!!!!

Therefore, no matter how many rules they have, people are going to break them, and there will be the same amount of corruption and politicial bullshit in that org as in any other.

They claim to be exempt somehow from the "Humans Being Imperfect" notion....as if they seem to think of themselves as somehow god-like...

One of their cardinal rules is that you can determine the problems any organization is having by looking at the rules that govern it.

They have 2 MASSIVE sets of books that look like a set of Encylopedias on Steroids....seems that they must be having a helluva lot of problems....

However, their programs are designed to do one thing...generate huge sums of KASH!!!!

GIMME DA KASH!!!!!

The great 'hook' is their personality profile.....

It is FREE (a $40.00 value).

Just take it, and they can tell you what areas of your life you are having trouble with...

And then they will offer you a whole entire program that MIGHT solve all your problems, but will DEFINITELY solve ONE of your problems....that of having to bear the terrible burden of owning any money....

They will want to sell you all kinds of books and tapes so you can achieve levels of clarity and "power".

I was once involved with them in an oblique kind of way....I soon realized I was way beyond any of them in power and spiritual awareness.....

My Alan, if you value your life, and you do NOT want to be hassled to give your entire life savings away to them, stay as far away from them as you can.

And yes...they value celebrity zealots, as the publicity value is immense...

Tom Cruise is a fucking brainwashed dumbass. If he thinks he owes his success to them, it is because that is what he believes...not necessarily what the truth is..

:D

In all actuality, it is like all other religions in that it has a placebo effect.

If it solves your problems for ya, fine, but it will either be because you BELIEVE it has solved your troubles, or simply because it is sheer luck your lot in life has improved....

But for some great hilarity, listen to Frank Zappa's take on it on one of his Joe's Garage albums...

Mr. G
06-28-2005, 02:46 PM
Hardrock69, Do you have any evidence of coruption and political leanings?

rustoffa
06-28-2005, 08:54 PM
The Hubbard Is Bare

copyright 1992 by Jeff Jacobsen

INTRODUCTION

In June of 1989 I was in Chicago at a large used book sale, one of the largest in the country. I stumbled upon Physical Control of the Mind, by Jose Delgado. Delgado had experimented with various animals by placing electrodes in certain parts of the brain, then passing an electrical signal to those electrodes. By this process he could induce behavior in the animal. Delgado became a notorious figure to me when I had read some of his experiments while researching mind control for a college paper.

In discussing the brain's development, Delgado made the following statement about the writings of psychoanalyst Robert Sadger;

Sadger reported that when he could not relate some patients' neuroses to their embryonic periods, he induced them to recall what happened to their original spermatazoa and ova, or even to remember possible parental attitudes which could have produced a trauma in their delicate germinal cells before conception. Sadger maintained that these cells have a psychic life of their own with the capacity to learn and to remember.

This sounded strikingly like some theories I had read in Dianetics, the Modern Science of Mental Health, by L. Ron Hubbard. I had been reading and studying Hubbard's works, and had even written a tract critical of his Church of Scientology after studying the church's doctrine and history. Dianetics seemed to be full of new and unique theories and ideas, but Delgado's statement caused me to wonder whether perhaps Hubbard had not actually ripped off some of his ideas instead of discovering them. Sure enough, the reference date on Sadger's article was 1941 - eight years before Dianetics was published!

That was the beginning of the booklet you are about to read. I had studied Hubbard's works since 1986, and had taken an introductory course in about 1983 (which included some "Book one" auditing). By the time of the Chicago book sale, Hubbard's writing style, wacky theories and smugness were wearing on me, and I hoped to begin a study on electrical brain stimulation - hence the interest in Delgado. But since the revelation hit that Hubbard borrowed rather than invented his theories, it seemed to be a ripe and exciting subject to pursue.

The reason I thought this was an exciting topic was Hubbard's insistence that he came up with his ideas by himself and that they were as monumental a breakthrough from what came before as was the discovery of fire to the cavemen. If it could be shown that dianetics was simply a synthesis of previous ideas, then Hubbard would be exposed as a huckster and fraud. And I don't like hucksters and frauds.

Generally speaking, it is my contention that Hubbard did no credible research of his own. Instead he distilled ideas from books he had read, the few college courses he took, his own experiences, and his very fertile and disturbed mind, and came up with a mish-mash of bizarre theories which he wrote down in scientific-sounding phrases and words.

The ideas Hubbard borrowed were generally bizarre ideas to begin with, and his fertile, twisted mind altered and embelished them to produce an even worse hodge-podge.

It is a mammoth task to try to piece where Hubbard took ideas, since there is no definitive list of works he had read. He did in the early years of dianetics credit some people such as Korzybski, Freud, and some others, but Sadger, for example, never shows up in any credit by Hubbard. Thus, one has to pick an idea (from dianetics or some writing) and practice a little detective work to see whether the idea originated elsewhere. Of course, this bares me to criticism that I am simply reading dianetics back into some work that just happens to sound like dianetics, but in fact what I am trying to show is that almost none of the ideas in Dianetics is new or unique, as Hubbard claims. My goal is not so much to trace back to the definite source where Hubbard took ideas, but to demonstrate that his "new" and "unique" ideas are neither. But I think it is possible to show that Hubbard absolutely stole ideas from some definite sources, such as Sadger and some others without ever crediting their works. The examples I have been able to uncover I am convinced are just the tip of the iceberg. There are ideas, for example, from William L. Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (which coincidentally was first published in 1950) that I find markedly reflected in the organization of Scientology. Were it possible to get a list of what Hubbard read, I am certain that a very large volume could be written comparing what he read to what he wrote. It is most certainly clear that Hubbard was first and foremost a synthesizer of ideas, not a creator.

Some of the sections in this booklet are the culmination and conclusion of about 5 years' part-time research into Hubbard's teachings. I wanted to put down what I had learned in order to move on to other topics.

Actually, there should be no need to write about Hubbard's ideas at all, since most of them are so absurd and indefensible. Hubbard's writing style is grandiose, difficult, exasperating, and just plain wacky. But despite all this, there are still around 70,000 Scientologists today who consider Hubbard a genius and live their lives according to his dictates. Scientology still actively advertises and recruits the unwary, and so long as this is happening, those of us who know better must speak out and expose the lies and deceits. The way scoundrels win is by having no opposition. One of Hitler's first official acts when he became chancellor was to silence his critics. If we as critics remain silent, Scientology can go a long way, and Hubbard knew this - hence the constant attacks by Scientology on its perceived enemies.

Phil theStalker
06-28-2005, 10:32 PM
Originally posted by academic punk
I second this.

Is it me, or it only recently that Cruise has become REALLY annoying?
He's always been annoying.

It's because he's short and comes from a broken family.


:spank:

Mr. G
06-28-2005, 11:53 PM
That was really funny. So this insane guy uses a sort of electroshock and say's he got it from Scientology? That was really funny. Now back to my question. You had stated that you knew of some coruption and political leanings. How about posting that.

rustoffa
06-29-2005, 12:18 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
You had stated that you knew of some coruption and political leanings. How about posting that.


I never stated anything regarding corruption or political leanings.

That would've been a waste of my time.

Can ya smell the irony?

Mr. G
06-29-2005, 12:28 AM
Sorry, I was talking to Hardrock69. He had stated that there was coruption and political leanings ( paraphrase) so if that is true let's see it.

Hardrock69
06-29-2005, 02:09 AM
ANY operation run by humans will suffer some form of corruption. Humans are not perfect.

To claim otherwise is a good demonstration of one's ignorance.

Political leanings? I said nothing about political leanings...

I said political bullshit...meaning there are people in any organization who create little fiefdoms amongst themselves, some crave power more than others, and in the end all humans have to deal with each other.

I meant nothing about politics as in Republican/Democrat or any of that crap.

Everyone who reads this has to deal with politics in one form or another.

Are you going to walk up to your boss and tell him/her/it that he/she/it is a worthless fuck??

Many people would not, for what ever reason. It is beneficial to 'get along' with everyone in the group.

Therefore one must be politically correct in dealing with others one encounters daily (in theory anyway).

I am wasting my time on this crap. This is for Tom Cruise to flap his gums about.

He and Scientology are beneath me.....

Mr. G
06-29-2005, 02:29 AM
So your whole argument is based on how you "feel" about it? You are free to have any opinion you want, it's OK with me, I just thought you had some evidence. No?

Nitro Express
06-29-2005, 02:31 AM
Playing politics is basically diplomacy. You may not like the people your dealing with, but you want something from them or you need them to achieve an objective. So you play politics.

If you don't want to play politics, another option is to just kill the fuckers. Eliminate them and take their place.

So you can either take a Dale Carnegie course and sharpen you social and political skills or you can read numerouse books on Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussain, and Joseph Stalin. As Chairman Mao once said,"Power grows out of a barrel of a gun."

Hardrock69
06-29-2005, 09:30 AM
Mr. G, yes I have direct evidence. But that is irrelevant.

I am not interested in discussing this with you, as no matter what I say, it is not a requirement that you believe any of it, and of course in the public arena, no matter what I say there will be sheeple who deny it could be possible..

It is enough to know that Scientology is no different from any other organization on the planet.

Common sense dictates that. If you are unable to comprehend it, too bad.

Live with it.

I am done discussing this.

Vinnie Velvet
06-29-2005, 09:38 AM
APA responds to Tom Cruise's anti-psychiatry remarks
28 Jun 2005


The American Psychiatric Association (APA) released the following statement in response to Tom Cruise's anti-psychiatry remarks. While the APA respects the right of individuals to express their own points of view, science has proven that mental illnesses are real medical conditions that affect millions of Americans.

“It is irresponsible for Mr. Cruise to use his movie publicity tour to promote his own ideological views and deter people with mental illness from getting the care they need,” said APA President Dr. Steven S. Sharfstein.

Over the past five years, the nation has more than doubled its investment in the study of the human brain and behavior, leading to a vastly expanded understanding of postpartum depression, bipolar disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Much of this research has been conducted by the National Institutes of Health and the nation's leading academic institutions.

Safe and effective treatments are available and may include talk therapy, medication or a combination of the two. Rigorous, published, peer-reviewed research clearly demonstrates that treatment works.

Medications can be an important and even life-saving part of a comprehensive and individualized treatment plan. As in other areas of medicine, medications are a safe and effective way to improve the quality of life for millions of Americans who have mental health concerns.

Mental health is a critical ingredient of overall health. It is unfortunate that in the face of this remarkable scientific and clinical progress that a small number of individuals and groups persist in questioning its legitimacy.

The diagnosis of a mental illness no longer carries the fear or shame it once did, according to a recent APA consumer survey. Nearly 90 percent of Americans surveyed correctly believe that people with mental illness can live healthy lives and an overwhelming majority (80 percent) feels confident that mental health treatment works. Study findings also show that nearly 70 percent of people surveyed view going to a psychiatrist as a sign of strength.

“We know that treatment works,” said APA Medical Director James H. Scully Jr., M.D. “And since safe, effective treatments are available, Americans can have what everyone wants - healthy minds and healthy lives.”

Vinnie Velvet
06-29-2005, 01:19 PM
Brooke Shields responds to Cruise's comments:

"Tom should stick to saving the world from aliens and let women decide what treatment is best."

Big Fat Sammy
06-29-2005, 06:05 PM
Originally posted by POJO_Risin
I'm not one to preach drugs for kids...I hate them to be honest...but you see it all the time in my profession...

does it help some kids? Sure it does...absolutely it does...AND THERE IS SCIENTIFIC proof that they work.

Of course there are other ways to do it...of course there are...

but let me ask you all this? Why is it easy for Oprah and Cruise and all the others to stay fit...and to eat healthy...and to take care of themselves? Money...plain and simple...

diet and other things can cure the types of disorders that keep kids from focusing...absolutely...but tell me how a middle of the road parent can afford the health counseling that would be needed to do it? and no...it sure the fuck wouldn't be convered under your health insurance...

Tom Cruise is a fucking idiot...plain and simple...


Yes...and their kids won't ever see the ghetto, much less grow up in it.

DLRDUDE
06-29-2005, 08:35 PM
Ole Tom cruise is gay

Tom Cruise and Rob Thomas caught in bed
Permalink | Tuesday - June 28, 2005
If there's one thing I know, it's that random gossip from total strangers based on absolutely no facts is true about 100% of the time. That said, here's an email that reader Rob decided to forward in.

So, I work with this girl who has a family friend that works in PR in Hollywood, and she always has fun little scoops about celeb stuff. Well, if this is true, this is just ridiculous! So, the whole Tom Cruise/Katie Holmes thing - apparently, it is, like we all thought anyway, a ridiculous PR thing. Tom Cruise was supposedly caught in bed with Rob Thomas (the lead singer of Matchbox 20) by Rob Thomas's wife, Marisol. Rob Thomas is also a Scientologist. Obviously, nobody wanted this to get out, and Marisol was going nuts threatening to expose them. I think that she might be getting paid off, but to preempt any rumors about Tom, the Scientology people as well as Tom's PR people basically recruited Katie Holmes to play this part of Tom's super-excited girlfriend, and they are just paying her a b*ttload of money. I guess they also woo'd her with promises of what this would do for her career, since she's at best a B-lister. But I guess now Marisol is so annoyed at all of the press Tom and Katie's relationship is getting, she's threatening to go public, spill the beans, and file for divorce.
Sure, why not.

Mr. G
06-29-2005, 10:55 PM
So Hardrock69 say's he has evidence but he won't post it. Gee I wonder what that means. Of course the APA doesn't mention that the FDA is putting homicide and suicide warnings on Psych drugs now. Gee I wonder what that means. So far all the Pro Psych people go out of thier way to ignore that fact.

BOMBER
06-30-2005, 02:44 AM
Originally posted by MAX
G'Day Mark!!! :)

What kind of shit did he do while in Oz?
Just a couple of weeks ago Cruise did an interview whilst out here to promote his new flick with 60 minutes,here in Australia.
The journalist who did the interview was told he had to go to a couple of hours lecture on scientology if he wanted the interview.
Anyhow the journalist went along to the lecture so he could do the interview.
The 1st question asked of Cruise was why did I have to go to the scientology lecture to have this interview?
Cruise told him that he didn't have to go.
Then the journalist asked him how Cruise felt about people who thought the religion was for freaks,Cruise got angry as with the journalist and said nobody has ever said that to him before.
Then the journalist asked Cruise about Niciole,Cruise told him to put his manners back in and that he was stepping way out of bounds here.
The journalist then told Tom that these are questions people want to know about,Tom's reply was that only he wanted to know about them.
It was pretty funny,and then at the end Cruise thanked him on the interview,patted him on the back and said great interview.
People here think his a dick more than ever now.

Nickdfresh
06-30-2005, 03:36 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
So Hardrock69 say's he has evidence but he won't post it. Gee I wonder what that means. Of course the APA doesn't mention that the FDA is putting homicide and suicide warnings on Psych drugs now. Gee I wonder what that means. So far all the Pro Psych people go out of thier way to ignore that fact.

I believe that's for on anti-depressants for kids for example. Let's not make sweeping generalizations.

Nickdfresh
06-30-2005, 03:41 AM
I wonder if Scientologists are now "investigating" MATT LAUER like they tend to do to intimidate any critics or questioners?

Vinnie Velvet
06-30-2005, 09:21 AM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I wonder if Scientologists are now "investigating" MATT LAUER like they tend to do to intimidate any critics or questioners?

With these freaks, you just never know.

Vinnie Velvet
06-30-2005, 09:23 AM
Originally posted by BOMBER
Just a couple of weeks ago Cruise did an interview whilst out here to promote his new flick with 60 minutes,here in Australia.
The journalist who did the interview was told he had to go to a couple of hours lecture on scientology if he wanted the interview.
Anyhow the journalist went along to the lecture so he could do the interview.
The 1st question asked of Cruise was why did I have to go to the scientology lecture to have this interview?
Cruise told him that he didn't have to go.
Then the journalist asked him how Cruise felt about people who thought the religion was for freaks,Cruise got angry as with the journalist and said nobody has ever said that to him before.
Then the journalist asked Cruise about Niciole,Cruise told him to put his manners back in and that he was stepping way out of bounds here.
The journalist then told Tom that these are questions people want to know about,Tom's reply was that only he wanted to know about them.
It was pretty funny,and then at the end Cruise thanked him on the interview,patted him on the back and said great interview.
People here think his a dick more than ever now.

Cruise is off his rocker.

What an idiot.

The more he opens his mouth, the more people hate him.

Northern Girl
07-01-2005, 08:00 PM
Shields Rips Cruise's 'Ridiculous Rant'

Jul 1, 7:29 AM EST

The Associated Press

NEW YORK -- Brooke Shields took aim at Tom Cruise's "Today" show diatribe against antidepressants, saying the drugs helped her survive feelings of hopelessness after the birth of her first child. In an op-ed piece published Friday in The New York Times, Shields criticized what she called Cruise's "ridiculous rant."

Cruise had criticized the actress for taking the drugs, and became particularly passionate about the issue in an interview on "Today" last week.

"You don't know the history of psychiatry. I do," Cruise told Matt Lauer.
He went on to say there was no such thing as chemical imbalances that need to be corrected with drugs, and that depression could be treated with exercise and vitamins.

"I'm going to take a wild guess and say that Mr. Cruise has never suffered from postpartum depression," Shields wrote.

She added that Cruise's comments "are a disservice to mothers everywhere. To suggest that I was wrong to take drugs to deal with my depression, and that instead I should have taken vitamins and exercised shows an utter lack of understanding about postpartum depression and childbirth in general."

Shields said she considered swallowing a bottle of pills or jumping out the window at the lowest point of her depression following the birth of her daughter, Rowan Francis, in 2003. A doctor later attributed her feelings to a plunge in her estrogen and progesterone levels and prescribed the antidepressant Paxil.

"If any good can come of Mr. Cruise's ridiculous rant, let's hope that it gives much-needed attention to a serious disease," she wrote.

Shields described her post-childbirth experiences in the book "Down Came the Rain: My Journey Through Postpartum Depression."

Cruise is a follower of Scientology, a religion that teaches that psychiatry is a destructive pseudo-science.

In an interview with AP Radio Wednesday night, Kelly Preston, who is also a Scientologist, defended the actor's "Today" show comments about Shields.

"If you're going to be advocating drugs, which she does in her book, you need to be responsible for also telling the people of the potential risks."

Preston also said Cruise's heated debate with Lauer was "very helpful because it's just raised awareness. People are talking about it now, and that's what they should be."

"Whatever your political, social or religious background, this is an issue that affects all of us," she said. "It is not just a Scientology issue."

diamondsgirl
07-01-2005, 08:29 PM
That shit can be quite serious. Sometimes more like a psychosis than a depression.

Yeah...give the ol' gal some vitamins...she'll be fine. :rolleyes:

He'd probably just divorce her ass.

BITEYOASS
07-01-2005, 09:49 PM
I think Brooke can take Tom out in a fight. She's freakin twice his height and the Napoleon complex ain't gonna scare her one bit.

rustoffa
07-01-2005, 09:57 PM
Maybe those dudes that squirted him with water threw some prozac in and it got in his eyes?

Now he's trippin' on liquid eye acid!

Mr. G
07-02-2005, 09:29 PM
The FDA Making Treatment Safe for “Chemical Imbalances” That Don’t Exist By Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD Fellow, American Academy of Neurology June 28, 2005
1. Expressing concern about “psychiatric risks”, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) intends to change the warnings for drugs used to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The drugs they refer to are amphetamine-like, Schedule II products: Concerta, Ritalin, Adderall (an amphetamine banned in Canada but not the US) and Strattera. The psychiatric side effects mentioned in the FDA’s release, “FDA: Concerned With Psychiatric Risks With ADHD Drugs,” are “visual hallucinations, suicidal ideation, psychotic behavior, as well as aggression or violent behavior.” But these are not psychiatric side effects at all—they are signs of intoxication, poisoning and brain abnormality because they appear following the administration of a drug, in subjects who were medically normal prior to taking the drug.
How can I say they were medically normal prior to taking the drug? They had ADHD, didn’t they? Psychiatry tells everyone that ADHD is a “disease” and a “chemical imbalance” of the brain, don’t they?
This brings us to the Tom Cruise-Matt Lauer debate on the Today Show, Friday, June 24, 2005, in which Mr. Cruise charged, most importantly, that, “psychiatry is a pseudoscience.”
In a follow-up Today Show on Monday, June 27, 2005, Harvard psychiatrist, Dr. Joseph Glenmullen—one of their own—made clear that psychiatric disorders are not something abnormal within the brain. While pharmaceutical ads and psychiatrist/physician disclosures to patients for purposes of informed consent, routinely portray psychiatric disorders as chemical imbalances/diseases, they are not—not a single one! Not schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, ADHD, post-traumatic stress disorder, oppositional-defiant disorder (ODD), conduct disorder (CD), nor any kind of depression.
Knowing these were the indisputable facts of the matter, psychiatrist Steven Sharfstein of the American Psychiatric Association had no rebuttal. Their “disease” lie was out of the bag. He lamely stated that insurance doesn’t pay for anything but drugs as though this is justification for drugging 20% of the nation’s entirely normal schoolchildren.
Mr. Cruise has done incalculable good for the American people, who are drugged to the gills in the name of “treatment” for invented, fictitious “chemical imbalances.” He has shed the light of day on a fraud.
This brings us back to the FDA and their professed efforts to learn the true “risk vs. benefit balance” for the drugs listed above when used for the fictitious “chemical imbalance” ADHD. This is no light matter considering that 6-7 million U.S. children have been diagnosed/branded with this disorder. Virtually all of them are taking one or more of these drugs which concern the FDA and which will be the subject of a pediatric advisory committee meeting this Wednesday and Thursday.
Now we know the child diagnosed with ADHD is a normal child, and that the only potential for physical harm to them comes from the drugs/chemicals/compounds/poisons, the FDA states are safe, effective and necessary. When did the FDA cease to be a protector of the people? When did they become a part of the industry they were to help regulate?
Through the years of the invented ADD and ADHD epidemics, the FDA has joined psychiatry in speaking of these and all psychiatric “disorders” as if they were actual physical abnormalities/diseases, and drugging children with these addictive, dangerous, deadly drugs, as if they were. But thanks now to Mr. Cruise and to Dr. Glenmullen, we have had our eyes and minds opened to the reality that psychiatry is a pseudoscience, a fraud and a “pusher” of drugs and that there is no such thing as a “chemical imbalance.”

rustoffa
07-02-2005, 10:29 PM
People have been bitching about ritalin for YEARS.

Guess what? Malpractice accusations are through the roof. What about a good ol' fashion LOBOTOMY? You know, a spike to the cerebellum through the eye socket. It's no small wonder the shit comes in pill form now, eh?

Carl Sagan's
Baloney Detection Kit


Based on the book "The Demon Haunted World: Science as a candle in the dark" published by Headline 1996.

The following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments:


* Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts
* Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
* Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities").
* Spin more than one hypothesis - don't simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
* Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours.
* Quantify, wherever possible.
* If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work.
* "Occam's razor" - if there are two hypothesis that explain the data equally well choose the simpler.
* Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, it is testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result?


Additional issues are

* Conduct control experiments - especially "double blind" experiments where the person taking measurements is not aware of the test and control subjects.
* Check for confounding factors - separate the variables.


Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric

* Ad hominem - attacking the arguer and not the argument.
* Argument from "authority".
* Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an "unfavourable" decision).
* Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).
* Special pleading (typically referring to god's will).
* Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased).
* Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses).
* Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).
* Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!)
* Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not "proved").
* Non sequitur - "it does not follow" - the logic falls down.
* Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - "it happened after so it was caused by" - confusion of cause and effect.
* Meaningless question ("what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?).
* Excluded middle - considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the "other side" look worse than it really is).
* Short-term v. long-term - a subset of excluded middle ("why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?").
* Slippery slope - a subset of excluded middle - unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile).
* Confusion of correlation and causation.
* Straw man - caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack..
* Suppressed evidence or half-truths.
* Weasel words - for example, use of euphemisms for war such as "police action" to get around limitations on Presidential powers. "An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public"

Above all - read the book!

Cathedral
07-03-2005, 01:41 AM
I am on Zoloft now, and the sky always looks great to me. :)

Tom Cruise is a dick and needs to shut up, Zoloft saved my ass from seriously going crazy, just ask Ford, or anyone who was around the last couple of years reading my shit on this board.

The problem with Antidepressants is that people don't take them like they should. I would take them for awhile and then stop, and that was bad ju ju for the Catster.
I have fixed that problem and i was then able to cope with all the shit i have to deal with on a daily basis.

It's like clockwork now and i feel great, and believe me, that is at the very least a 95% improvement for me.

I do however agree that they are not for everyone.
Different people have different needs and what works for one person may not work for another.

Northern Girl
07-03-2005, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by Cathedral
It's like clockwork now and i feel great, and believe me, that is at the very least a 95% improvement for me.


That's great to hear, Cat. :)

Take care!

Vinnie Velvet
07-04-2005, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by Cathedral
I am on Zoloft now, and the sky always looks great to me. :)

Tom Cruise is a dick and needs to shut up, Zoloft saved my ass from seriously going crazy, just ask Ford, or anyone who was around the last couple of years reading my shit on this board.

The problem with Antidepressants is that people don't take them like they should. I would take them for awhile and then stop, and that was bad ju ju for the Catster.
I have fixed that problem and i was then able to cope with all the shit i have to deal with on a daily basis.

It's like clockwork now and i feel great, and believe me, that is at the very least a 95% improvement for me.

I do however agree that they are not for everyone.
Different people have different needs and what works for one person may not work for another.


That's great, man.

Take care.

Fuck Cruise and his Scientology Bullshit!:mad:

Seshmeister
07-04-2005, 12:10 PM
July 03, 2005

The trouble with Tom Cruise
Brooke Shields explains why a film star’s advice on her essential medication is uninformed meddling


I was hoping it wouldn’t come to this, but after Tom Cruise’s interview with Matt Lauer on the NBC show Today, I feel compelled to speak not just for myself but also for the hundreds of thousands of women who have suffered from postpartum depression.

While Cruise says that Lauer and I do not “understand the history of psychiatryâ€, I’m going to take a wild guess and say that Cruise has never suffered from postpartum depression.



Postpartum depression is caused by the hormonal shifts that occur after childbirth. During pregnancy a woman’s level of oestrogen and progesterone greatly increases; then, in the first 24 hours after childbirth, the amount of these hormones rapidly drops to normal, non-pregnant levels. This change in hormone levels can lead to reactions that range from restlessness and irritability to feelings of sadness and hopelessness.

I never thought that I would have postpartum depression. After two years of trying to conceive and several attempts at in vitro fertilisation, I thought that I would be overjoyed when my daughter, Rowan Francis, was born in the spring of 2003. But instead I felt completely overwhelmed.

This baby was a stranger to me. I didn’t know what to do with her. I didn’t feel at all joyful. I attributed feelings of doom to simple fatigue and figured that they would eventually go away. But they didn’t; in fact, they got worse.

I couldn’t bear the sound of Rowan crying, and I dreaded the moments when my husband would bring her to me. I wanted her to disappear. I wanted to disappear. At my lowest points, I thought of swallowing a bottle of pills or jumping out of the window of my apartment.

I couldn’t believe it when my doctor told me that I was suffering from postpartum depression and gave me a prescription for the anti-depressant Paxil. I wasn’t thrilled to be taking drugs. In fact, I prematurely stopped taking them and had a relapse that almost led me to drive my car into a wall with Rowan in the back seat. But the drugs, along with weekly therapy sessions, are what saved me — and my family.

Since writing about my experiences, I have been approached by many women who have told me their stories and thanked me for opening up about a topic that is often not discussed because of fear, shame or lack of support and information.

Experts estimate that one in 10 women suffers, usually in silence, with this treatable disease. We are living in an era of so-called family values, yet because almost all of the postnatal focus is on the baby, mothers are overlooked and left behind to endure what can be very dark times.

Comments like those made by Cruise are a disservice to mothers everywhere. To suggest that I was wrong to take drugs to deal with my depression and that instead I should have taken vitamins and exercised shows an utter lack of understanding about postpartum depression and childbirth in general.

If any good can come of Cruise’s ridiculous rant, let’s hope that it gives much-needed attention to a serious condition. Perhaps now is the time to call on doctors, particularly obstetricians and paediatricians, to screen for postpartum depression. After all, during the first three months after childbirth you see a paediatrician at least three times.

While paediatricians are trained to take care of children, it would make sense for them to talk to new mothers, ask questions and inform them of the symptoms and treatment should they show signs of postpartum depression.

In a strange way, it was comforting to me when my obstetrician told me that my feelings of extreme despair and my suicidal thoughts were directly tied to a biochemical shift in my body. Once we admit that postpartum is a serious medical condition, then the treatment becomes more available and socially acceptable. With a doctor’s care I have since tapered off the medication, but without it I wouldn’t have become the loving parent that I am today.

So there you have it. It’s not the history of psychiatry but it is my history, personal and real.

Brooke Shields is starring in the musical Chicago in London and is author of Down Came the Rain: My Journey Through Postpartum Depression. This article first appeared in The New York Times

Seshmeister
07-04-2005, 12:18 PM
"MAKE MONEY. MAKE MORE MONEY. MAKE OTHER PEOPLE PRODUCE SO AS TO MAKE MORE MONEY."

- L. Ron Hubbard, HCOPL 9 March 1972, MS OEC 384

"Having viewed slum clearance projects in most major cities of the world may I state that you have conceived and created in the Johannesburg townships what is probably the most impressive and adequate resettlement activity in existence."

- L. Ron Hubbard, Letter to South African Apartheid Government, 1960

"THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN CONTROL PEOPLE IS TO LIE TO THEM. You can write that down in your book in great big letters. The only way you can control anybody is to lie to them."

- L. Ron Hubbard, Technique 88


Never discuss Scientology with the critic. Just discuss his or her crimes, known and unknown.

- L. Ron Hubbard




"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.'"

Vinnie Velvet
07-04-2005, 01:51 PM
Thanks Sesh!

There you go, Mr. G.

Scientology = BS

Seshmeister
07-04-2005, 10:29 PM
I didn't even get started...:)

To join you need to sign a non disclosure contract and to confirm that you are not a journalist or writer otherwise they sue your ass off.

That and the fact you have to pay money to get each bit of further information of the Truth means that there isn't as much info about these crooks around as you would expect.

I think the core of the religion has something to do with a big alien dragon that lives on a volcano(honestly...:D ) but I cunt be bothered looking it up at the moment.

Cheers!

:gulp:

Mr. G
07-05-2005, 01:22 AM
Fell free to post as much BS as you want, but I have noticed you have changed the subject. Does this mean you are giving up? Come on now don't give up so easily it's just getting fun.

ashstralia
07-05-2005, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Feel free to post as much BS as you want, but I have noticed you have changed the subject. Does this mean you are giving up? Come on now don't give up so easily it's just getting fun.

how much has your 'enlightenment' cost?

(i fixed your spelling for free).

Seshmeister
07-05-2005, 08:05 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Fell free to post as much BS as you want, but I have noticed you have changed the subject. Does this mean you are giving up? Come on now don't give up so easily it's just getting fun.

What part of that was BS?

Are you a scientologist?

Vinnie Velvet
07-05-2005, 09:08 AM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
What part of that was BS?

Are you a scientologist?

Methinks he is.

Mr. G worships the alien dragon on top of a mountain.

I think he's been listening to too much Dio.:D

Seshmeister
07-05-2005, 09:31 AM
Ha this scientology stuff is funny shit..

Who is Xenu?
I'm going to tell you a story. Are you sitting comfortably? Right, then I'll begin.

Once upon a time (75 million years ago to be more precise) there was an alien galactic ruler named Xenu. Xenu was in charge of all the planets in this part of the galaxy including our own planet Earth, except in those days it was called Teegeeack.

Now Xenu had a problem. All of the 76 planets he controlled were overpopulated. Each planet had on average 178 billion people. He wanted to get rid of all the overpopulation so he had a plan.

Xenu took over complete control with the help of renegades to defeat the good people and the Loyal Officers. Then with the help of psychiatrists he called in billions of people for income tax inspections where they were instead given injections of alcohol and glycol mixed to paralyse them. Then they were put into space planes that looked exactly like DC8s (except they had rocket motors instead of propellers).


These DC8 space planes then flew to planet Earth where the paralysed people were stacked around the bases of volcanoes in their hundreds of billions. When they had finished stacking them around then H-bombs were lowered into the volcanoes. Xenu then detonated all the H-bombs at the same time and everyone was killed.

The story doesn't end there though. Since everyone has a soul (called a "thetan" in this story) then you have to trick souls into not coming back again. So while the hundreds of billions of souls were being blown around by the nuclear winds he had special electronic traps that caught all the souls in electronic beams (the electronic beams were sticky like fly-paper).

After he had captured all these souls he had them packed into boxes and taken to a few huge cinemas. There all the souls had to spend days watching special 3D motion pictures that told them what life should be like and many confusing things. In this film they were shown false pictures and told they were God, The Devil and Christ. In the story this process is called "implanting".

When the films ended and the souls left the cinema these souls started to stick together because since they had all seen the same film they thought they were the same people. They clustered in groups of a few thousand. Now because there were only a few living bodies left they stayed as clusters and inhabited these bodies.

As for Xenu, the Loyal Officers finally overthrew him and they locked him away in a mountain on one of the planets. He is kept in by a force-field powered by an eternal battery and Xenu is still alive today.

That is the end of the story. And so today everyone is full of these clusters of souls called "body thetans". And if we are to be a free soul then we have to remove all these "body thetans" and pay lots of money to do so. And the only reason people believe in God and Christ was because it was in the film their body thetans saw 75 million years ago.

Well what did you think of that story?

What? You thought it was a stupid story?

Well so do we. However, this story is the core belief in the religion known as Scientology.* If people knew about this story then most people would never get involved in it. This story is told to you when you reach one of their secret levels called OT III. After that you are supposed to telepathically communicate with these body thetans to make them go away. You have to pay a lot of money to get to this level and do this (or you have to work very hard for the organisation on extremely low pay for many years).

We are telling you this story as a warning. If you become involved with Scientology then we would like you to do so with your eyes open and fully aware of the sort of material it contains.

Most of the Scientologists who work in their Dianetics* centres and so called "Churches" of Scientology do not know this story since they are not allowed to hear it until they reach the secret "upper" levels of Scientology. It may take them many years before they reach this level if they ever do. The ones who do know it are forced to keep it a secret and not tell it to those people who are joining Scientology.

http://www.xenu.net/archive/leaflet/ot3.gif
Part of the first page of the secret OT III document in L. Ron Hubbard's own handwriting

Now you have read this you know their big secret. Don't let us put you off joining though.

Vinnie Velvet
07-05-2005, 09:46 AM
Xenu is still alive today???

Holy crap! Let's go find him and kick his bitchy little ass!! :D

Seriously though, (and thanks Sesh for the Scientology story) , its too bad Katie Holmes can't see through the BS. She's totally brainwashed at this point.

Or maybe she's getting a big payoff from Cruise?

Hardrock69
07-05-2005, 10:16 AM
One point....yes if ya wanna find out about Xenu, ya haveta get to the upper "OT" levels.

It used to be that advanced therapy sessions required to reach those levels could cost you up to 12,000 bucks an HOUR.

So Ashtralia's question about how much the "enlightenment" costs is pretty relevant.

This is why MANY peeps refer to the "Liar" who founded this bullshit as "L. Ron Hoover", as the ultimate goal of Scientology is to suck all of your money out of your bank account, despite their claims to the contrary.

Seshmeister
07-05-2005, 10:57 AM
http://www.scientology-lies.com/whatswrong.html

WHY DO PEOPLE PROTEST SCIENTOLOGY?

Scientology locks people up.

There are over two dozen allegations that Scientology has held individuals against their will.These illegal acts were not committed by rogue Scientologists - they were in accordance with Scientology policy.

Scientology held Lisa McPherson against her will for 17 days, according to Scientology's own logs. She died in their custody. The state of Florida decided not to prosecute the two felony charges filed against Scientology in her death after Scientology used relentless pressure to get the medical examiner to make a partial change in the cause of death. Her estate sued Scientology for wrongful death and false imprisonment; the suit was settled in May 2004, with all details kept confidential..

Scientology lies.

Lying to people to get their money isn't just unethical - it's illegal. It's called fraud.

Scientology claims there is a scientific basis for all their processes. There isn't. Scientology claims it's compatible with other belief systems, like Christianity. It's not. Scientology claims to be the fastest-growing religion in the world, with 8 million members, utilizing infallible technology developed by a physicist and war hero. They're lying.

Scientology is breaking the law.

In addition to false imprisonment and fraud, Scientology engages in the illegal practice of medicine by prescribing auditing and vitamins to replace legally-prescribed medical treatment.

Scientology also extorts money from its members, telling them it's scientifically proven that their lives will become worse if they don't pay for expensive auditing.

Scientology has a long, well-documented history of criminal activities.
High-ranking Scientology executives were convicted of extremely serious crimes in the United States for breaking into government offices and stealing documents. Founder L. Ron Hubbard was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in that case, and the defendants stated in their stipulation of evidence that, at all times, he acted as supervisor of the illegal activities.

Scientology itself was convicted of similar crimes in Canada. When Scientology then tried to destroy the reputation of the prosecutor in the case, they were hit with the biggest libel fine in Canadian history.

L. Ron Hubbard was convicted of fraud in France.

Scientology attacks free speech.

Scientology says that "public statements against Scientology or Scientologists," "writing anti-Scientology letters to the press," and "testifying as a hostile witness against Scientology in public" are all "Suppressive Acts" - high crimes, according to "Introduction to Scientology Ethics." The book goes on to say that people who do such things "cannot be granted the rights and beingness ordinarily accorded rational beings."

In accordance with this policy (and others like it), Scientology has tried to silence all criticism:

Scientology framed journalist Paulette Cooper for sending bomb threats after she wrote a book critical of Scientology.

Scientology sued book and magazine publishers - including Time magazine - in an attempt to prevent any future criticism by scaring publishers with the prospect of enormous court costs.

Scientology sued critics for copyright infringement, even though the copyrights to some of the documents in question may have been lost to the public domain years ago.

Scientology tried to unilaterally shut down the alt.religion.scientology newsgroup - unintentionally bringing Scientology to the attention of hundreds of free-speech advocates.

Scientology imposes gag orders in settlement agreements, preventing those who have suffered most from telling the world what they know.

Scientology routinely threatens legal action against critics, alleging copyright infringement, trademark dilution, and dissemination of trade secrets - often in situations in which its allegations are baseless.

Scientology hurts people.

Scientology routinely pressures members into spending more money than they can afford on expensive courses.

Scientology's disconnection policy destroys families.

Scientology betrays the trust of well-intentioned people by falsely claiming to have a scientifically-proven technology to save the world.

Scientology ruthlessly attacks its critics with everything from frame-ups to unannounced visits to the homes of family members to libellous fliers distributed to their neighbors and business associates.

And sometimes, Scientologists die under suspicious circumstances

Seshmeister
07-05-2005, 11:00 AM
It does give you special powers though...:)

http://stonedlogic.com/adlerfloyd/crazycruise.gif

Vinnie Velvet
07-05-2005, 01:18 PM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
It does give you special powers though...:)

http://stonedlogic.com/adlerfloyd/crazycruise.gif

UNLIMITED POWWWWWEERRRR!!!! :D

Vinnie Velvet
07-05-2005, 01:18 PM
Here's a good website.

www.tomcruiseisnuts.com

:D

Matt White
07-05-2005, 01:43 PM
I just wanna know when Tom decided to stop working under the Bridge collecting tolls! Fucking Troll!!!

Vinnie Velvet
07-05-2005, 02:54 PM
Well, we've read the BS that Sesh gladly posted about Scientology.

But there is another interesting story relating to Tom's sci-fi religion.

Scientology kills??

In the case of a 37 year old woman in 1995, yes.

Check out this site about Lisa MacPherson http://www.lisamcpherson.org/

It tells the story how in the care of Scientologists, she died, after been taken away from psyciatric doctors who felt she obviously needed some drug therapy.

Matt White
07-05-2005, 03:01 PM
I remember that one! SAd situation! Money talks!!!!

Mr. G
07-05-2005, 03:47 PM
Yes I am a Scientologist. Have been for about 16 years. So it is safe to say I know a bit about it. As far as what is BS, the whole post is BS. No offence but there is not a bit of truth in it, take it or leave it. I know some of you guys have already made up your mind which is fine as people have a right to believe what they want. But Scientology helps people and where I see it being libeled I am going to set the record straight. I am sure you have noticed that all of a sudden it is all over the news as is Psychiatry. Well the one thing Psychiatry can't stand is to have any light shone on it. The solution is to just get enough people taking about Psychiatry and enough of them will see it for what it is and we will all be better off for it. You see people are basically good. And getting the whole civilization educated on the subject is more important than just my point of view or yours for that matter. That is the big picture.

Vinnie Velvet
07-05-2005, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Yes I am a Scientologist. Have been for about 16 years. So it is safe to say I know a bit about it. As far as what is BS, the whole post is BS. No offence but there is not a bit of truth in it, take it or leave it. I know some of you guys have already made up your mind which is fine as people have a right to believe what they want. But Scientology helps people and where I see it being libeled I am going to set the record straight. I am sure you have noticed that all of a sudden it is all over the news as is Psychiatry. Well the one thing Psychiatry can't stand is to have any light shone on it. The solution is to just get enough people taking about Psychiatry and enough of them will see it for what it is and we will all be better off for it. You see people are basically good. And getting the whole civilization educated on the subject is more important than just my point of view or yours for that matter. That is the big picture.

Whatever you say, man.

But I think there is a bigger picture here to look at, and that's not through some religion based on some sci-fi writings.

Take a step back my friend and re-evaluate this whole thing.

Mr. G
07-05-2005, 04:27 PM
It is not based on sci-fi writings. I have studied it for 16 years you have not. The religion that most resembles Scientology is Buddhism. They do have some basic differences but of all the religions Buddhism is the closest.

Vinnie Velvet
07-05-2005, 04:56 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
It is not based on sci-fi writings. I have studied it for 16 years you have not. The religion that most resembles Scientology is Buddhism. They do have some basic differences but of all the religions Buddhism is the closest.

Why is it that Scientologists get all offesive when they are questioned about their so-called faith and belief system??

Your response seems Cruise-like when he told NBC Today's Matt Lauer that "you don't know psychiatry, I do" --- You said "I have studied it for 16 years you have not."

Fine by me then.

I still call the whole thing a buch of shit.

And I will still say that you are truly brainwashed and afraid to admit it.

Come back to reality, dude.

Vinnie Velvet
07-05-2005, 05:01 PM
Mr. G, I have a question:

What's your take on the Lisa MacPherson story???

I'm interested in reading your comments on this.

Seshmeister
07-05-2005, 07:18 PM
Mr G I have a few questions

1) What are the powers of an operating Thetan?

2) How does this �having to have before you can do� thing work and have what are you told you need to do to before management releases the next �O.T.� levels?

3) Why were Hubbards writings revised 15 years after he died?

4) Have you ever looked at independant sources about the facts about Hubbards life and the circumstances of his death?

Seriously the more I look into this the more interesting it gets.

Nickdfresh
07-05-2005, 07:49 PM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
Mr G I have a few questions

1) What are the powers of an operating Thetan?

2) How does this �having to have before you can do� thing work and have what are you told you need to do to before management releases the next �O.T.� levels?

3) Why were Hubbards writings revised 15 years after he died?

4) Have you ever looked at independant sources about the facts about Hubbards life and the circumstances of his death?

Seriously the more I look into this the more interesting it gets.

Outside critics are unacceptable

Scientology, the definitive web site.

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20050202/1064176.asp

SPECIAL REPORT: CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY LAST OF FOUR PARTS

Subject: Outside critics are unacceptable

Family members who question Scientology have found loved ones severing all contact

By MARK SOMMER
News Staff Reporter
2/2/2005



Sharon Cantillon/Buffalo News

Tanya Durni and Jeff Lennox are concerned the Church of Scientology has taken advantage of their brother, Fred Lennox, who wrote his sister a disturbing letter.


Derek Gee/Buffalo News

The Church of Scientology moved into its downtown Buffalo location in November 2003. Among its policies are orders to resolve differences with family members critical of Scientology - and if that fails to sever contact.



Two years ago, Tanya Durni received a letter from her brother.

But it wasn't a friendly note. In the letter, Fred Lennox told his sister that he was "disconnecting" completely from her.

Her offense?

Criticizing Scientology - especially on an Internet news group.

The letter jolted Durni, a golf shop manager at Oak Hill Country Club in Rochester.

"It was like someone writing to say my brother was dead," she said.

But what happened to Durni that day wasn't unusual.

Family members and friends of Scientologists - including parents, spouses and children - who are critical of the church can be declared "suppressive." That means the church sees them as intent on harming or destroying Scientology.

Under strict directives set by Scientology's late founder, L. Ron Hubbard, church members must persuade them to check their criticism - or sever all contact.

Critics say they have witnessed that scenario happen repeatedly with Scientology.

"(The policy) is very destructive to family relationships - it's like an iron door that keeps people from any kind of dialogue," said the Rev. Robert W. Thornburg, dean emeritus of Marsh Chapel at Boston University and an expert on destructive religious practices.

"Scientology's biggest threat - how they get control of you - is that you will be labeled a "suppressive person,' " said Rich Dunning of Niagara Falls, who was deputy executive director of the Buffalo church from October 2001 to May 2003.

Because Hubbard wrote that suppressive people inhibit spiritual growth, their influence with Scientologists must be minimized or removed entirely.

Joseph Sgroi, a Buffalo church member and its largest benefactor, said the practice of cutting off families is a last resort, undertaken only when someone remains hostile to the religion.

If a family member has "an incredibly negative effect" and refuses to change, he said, "it might make sense to not deal with that person."

"The concept isn't to destroy families, but to put families together," he added.

Al Buttnor, the church's Canadian spokesman, said Scientologists highly value marriage, raising children and families.

Durni was not alone among her family in being accused of spreading anti-Scientology views by the Buffalo church.

The church accused Fred Lennox's older brother, Jeff Lennox, of spreading "black propaganda" because he told Fred the Church of Scientology was a cult.

"They sent Fred a letter with a threatening bent, saying I had said things untrue about Scientology," Jeff Lennox said.

Ultimately, Fred Lennox was told by the church to face its Board of Investigations. He also was told to undergo a "security check." That's a practice in which Scientologists can be interrogated about moral transgressions with the use of a lie detector-like device called an E-meter.

His family members said his involvement with Scientology deeply affected other family members.

"For years, I never said anything about Scientology," Durni recalled. "You couldn't. It was like we were controlled by it."





Blasdell man's account

Frank Green, a Blasdell resident, posted some anti-Scientology comments on the Internet.

And like Durni, he said the church tried to destroy his relationship with a family member - in Green's case, his niece, Heather Barvian, a Scientologist.

The actions of the church led Green, a retired steelworker, to stage a one-man picket outside the Buffalo church in September. He carred a sign that read, "Scientology Destroys Families" - with the "S" in Scientology sporting a dollar sign.

"It's torn my niece and great-nephews and nieces away from us. Over the last couple of years, it's been nothing but a nightmare," Green said. "I just know it's not the Heather I knew doing all this. She's being led."

Barvian, who now lives in Colorado, denied that being a Scientologist had anything to do with the estrangement.

She said her uncle posted messages on the Internet threatening to kidnap her family from the clutches of Scientology and return them to Western New York. She said he also opposed her decision to escape a marriage she felt was abusive.

Green said neither charge was true.

Critics of Scientology say church tenets function as highly effective instruments of control over members.

Hubbard's "Introduction to Scientology Ethics" lists more than 100 "misdemeanors," "crimes" and "high crimes" that are part of the church's code of discipline.

"It's a system of extreme control that keeps you in a bubble," said Dunning, the ex-deputy director. "You don't dare talk to anyone or read anything (critical of Scientology), because Hubbard wrote that it could make you an accomplice."

High crimes include interacting with Scientology critics and holding Scientology policies up to scorn.

Stephen Kent, a professor of sociology at the University of Alberta who has written extensively on the church, said Scientology's aggressive attitude toward critics, including family members, is ingrained.

"Part of becoming a Scientologist involves learning an alternative ethics system," Kent said, "which places Scientology's survival as vital and attacking critics as necessary."

The Buffalo News obtained a copy of an "Ethics Order" from the church concerning Fred Lennox, dated March 1, 2002. The order tells Lennox to "handle or disconnect" from his sister.

"It has come to the Church's attention that Fred's sister has been on the Internet spreading entheta (a made-up word from Hubbard meaning "lies and confusions') about Scientology," the order reads. "This is the second situation that has come up with Fred's sister in the last eight months . . . Fred was warned that if he does not handle or disconnect from her, he would be declared PTS (Potential Trouble Source) Type A."

Such a declaration prevents an offender from taking courses and counseling, or "auditing" sessions, required for spiritual advancement.

Arnold Markowitz, director of the Cult Hotline and Clinic operated by the Jewish Board of Family and Children's Services in New York City, said the agency has seen clients anguished by Scientology disconnection orders.

"If a parent complains - we usually see this with adult children - the member tries to handle it," Markowitz said. "But if the criticism persists, there is a continuum of a distancing of the relationship down to the disconnection letter."

That was Durni's experience roughly two years ago with her brother, Fred Lennox. She said she had warned him that when she posted her views about Scientology on the Internet, the church would pressure him to stop talking to her.

He insisted that would never happen, Durni recalled.





Short-lived inheritance

Lennox, 46, has spent half his life in Scientology.

Older sister Tracy Kane said her brother was a "very sensitive child" who had a particular affection for children and animals. Family members suspect he had learning disabilities undetected in school. Kane said he was recruited by Scientology during a particularly vulnerable period in his life.

That would fit a pattern of the Church of Scientology's preying on susceptible people, said Thornburg, the expert on destructive religious practices who considers the church a cult.

"For folks who do not feel they belong anywhere, there's a sense of instant belonging," he said. "Their control of persons who get involved is as complete as any of the destructive groups I've ever studied."

Lennox became involved in 1980, went on staff at the Buffalo church in 1984 and in 1986 joined the church's elite Sea Organization based in Clearwater, Fla., according to Durni. The church believes in reincarnation and, before joining the "Sea Org," Lennox was required to sign a billion-year contract.

Lennox eventually left and resumed Scientology classes in Buffalo.

He was living at home with his parents in 2001 and making $7 an hour when he inherited cash and stocks with a total value of $25,000, Durni said.

Soon after telling a Scientologist official of his inheritance, she said, his family's house began receiving mail with new credit card accounts for Fred, including expensive charges to the Church.

"You would have to know Fred to realize he didn't know how to apply for credit cards on his own," Durni said. "We had to literally take him down and show him how to open up a checking account. They would have had to make the calls and have the applications all ready for him to sign on the dotted line."

A short time later, Lennox went on Scientology's 500-passenger cruise ship based in the Caribbean Sea, where members take expensive, high-level courses.

Durni believes the church enticed her brother to go on the cruise in order to isolate him and make him more susceptible to part with his inheritance.

On the cruise ship, Lennox was supposed to take one week, then two.

After 41/2 weeks, Durni reached her brother by phone and coaxed him back with the promise of more inheritance money. After the call, he was home in less than 48 hours, Durni said.

From a short time before he went on the ship until he returned, Durni said, Lennox went through all of his inheritance and was more than $40,000 in debt. He had gone through $65,000, she said, on courses, tapes and books, travel expenses and repaying a "freeloader debt" from the church.

The "freeloader debt" was for leaving the Sea Org and breaking his billion-year contract to remain in the group. The church says the debt is repayment for courses taken for free while in the Sea Org.

Teresa Reger, president of the Buffalo church, defended the length of a Sea Org contract and the penalty for breaking it.

"It's the policy they know they go into when they sign the contract," she said.

Kane, a children's book illustrator in Durham, N.H., believes Scientology took advantage of her brother in an unconscionable way.

"When he inherited the money, I saw the way they sucked him in and ran up credit cards for money he didn't have," Kane said. "Then they seemed to drop him again, because he's not the kind of person who can excel and move up in their world. He's not important to them unless he has money."





Changed personality

The Lennox family has hoped Fred Lennox, who works part time in a supermarket bakery, will leave Scientology.

They tried an unsuccessful family intervention several years ago, led by someone who counsels mind control victims.

"I saw a side of Fred that was scary, because you could see he was controlled by something," Kane recalled of the attempt.

Although The News previously attempted to reach Lennox and he refused, Scientologists told The News they would try to get in touch with him.

On Tuesday, a statement signed by Fred Lennox was faxed to The Buffalo News, saying he should be free to do what he wanted with his money and life.

"I have no regrets about donating money to my church and did so freely," the letter said. "I live my own life, not one dictated by my sister or family members."

The letter added: "I have dreams and goals and my Church helps me with that. The problem is with people stopping me from achieving my dreams and goals . . . If my sister would stop making my life miserable over my church and my choices in life, I would be happy to speak with her. There was a time when we were very close and I miss that."

Fred Lennox's brother, Jeff, said The News received the letter because Buttnor contacted Fred and asked for a statement regarding this article. Fred told his brother he hadn't done anything with the church for "a long time" until he was contacted and asked to write a statement, which he did Monday with the help of Scientology officials.

On Tuesday morning, over breakfast in a diner, Jeff Lennox said his brother seemed at times proud of the church and at other times intimidated by it.

"He compared Scientology to the Mafia as a metaphor three or four times. I had never heard him do that before," Jeff Lennox said.

There was also an air of futility, Jeff Lennox observed.

"Tanya's efforts against Scientology," Jeff Lennox quoted Fred as saying, "was like throwing a stone at the Empire State Building."

e-mail: msommer@buffnews.com

From: http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/buffalo-outside-critics.htm

Nickdfresh
07-05-2005, 07:52 PM
Some more info. on "The History of (Scientology)."

http://www.holysmoke.org/theta.htm

classicdude
07-05-2005, 08:27 PM
Okay folks, let's deal with reality here. Tom Cruise is a talking head - he is PAID to look pretty and read words other people more clever than him thought up. You should not be surprised that anything coming out of his pie hole that is not on the big screen is utter spewage.

As far as L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology....Mr. Hubbard got his start crafting and creating sci-fi stories years ago (40s or 50s). There is a book out, I believe by his son, that goes into great detail about the workings of Scientology and from his account it sounds very much like a cult.

Don't believe me or anyone else on this board. Take a break from the web and go to a library and do your own research on it.

Seshmeister
07-05-2005, 10:47 PM
http://www.peghole.com/mare/vis/cartoons/heavens.jpg

Mr. G
07-06-2005, 01:11 AM
Vinnie Velvet, First off there is no "belief system". Scientology is not something to believe, it is something to do. The bottom line in any endever is it either works or it doesn't. I for one never just go along and believe in something just because someone tells me to, I think you would agree with that. In fact one of the early things I read was that if it is true for you then it is true and if it is not true for you it is not true. There is no sense really in going along believing in something if it doesn't actually work. Fair enough? As far as Lisa MacPherson I don't know anything about that so I wouldn't have a legitimate opinion on that.

Vinnie Velvet
07-06-2005, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Vinnie Velvet, First off there is no "belief system". Scientology is not something to believe, it is something to do. The bottom line in any endever is it either works or it doesn't. I for one never just go along and believe in something just because someone tells me to, I think you would agree with that. In fact one of the early things I read was that if it is true for you then it is true and if it is not true for you it is not true. There is no sense really in going along believing in something if it doesn't actually work. Fair enough? As far as Lisa MacPherson I don't know anything about that so I wouldn't have a legitimate opinion on that.

You said you've been a Scientologist for 16 years.

I'm sure you heard of the case of Lisa MacPherson (died in 1995) since it certainly didn't put your 'Church' in a good light.

Maybe you're afraid to touch that issue.

Curious: what level are you actually at with Scientology??

Vinnie Velvet
07-06-2005, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
http://www.peghole.com/mare/vis/cartoons/heavens.jpg

Good one, Sesh.

That's about sums it up.

:)

Vinnie Velvet
07-06-2005, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Some more info. on "The History of (Scientology)."

http://www.holysmoke.org/theta.htm

Excellent site, Nick.

Read the Scientology logs in regards to Lisa MacPherson's last days.

This person clearly needed expert medical assistance and all she was given was vitamins!!!

She of course died.

Such a horrific story.

Scientology kills.

Hardrock69
07-06-2005, 10:32 AM
.

Hardrock69
07-06-2005, 10:33 AM
Wow...so L. Ron Hoover was against psychiatry?

Why was he begging them for help and for further medication??

Hardrock69
07-06-2005, 10:41 AM
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." --- L. Ron Hubbard Jr.



The biography of L. Ron Hubbard shows a man who was incapable of telling the truth: a pathological liar who hated and despise humanity; a sociopath caught between the conflicting desires to earn the admiration of humanity, and his desire to inflict great pain and misery upon those who ignored him and refused him his self-perceived due measure of honor and reverie (which was and is 99.999% of his fellow human beings).

As such, Mister Hubbard was constantly trying to purchase glory and recognition when he had the funds to make the attempt, or stole that recognition by lying and deceiving when money wasn't enough. Mister Hubbard was driven by greed and megalomania. He was a devout racist who wrote in praise of South African Apartheid; he was a crazed misogynist who insisted women were inferior intellectually--- later in life his venereal disease (caught from a whore while on leave from the Navy) instilled within him a fear and dread of womankind that expressed itself in insanity and impotency.

The life of Hubbard was that of one long series of pathetic failures, punctuated with a few greed-driven successes once he developed what he called "The religion angle" for the worthless "self-help" sham he fabricated called "Dianetics® / Scientology®."

Hubbard was a petty thief; a wife beater; and sociopath; a drug-addicted, rum besotted schizophrenic who once begged the United States government for psychiatric help but was ignored, to the detriment of his many victims. One FBI agent wrote of Hubbard, "appears mental," which is a short and accurate summation of Mr. Hubbard.


Here is a collection of documents and info that show L. Ron Hoover for what he was.....a Con Artist of the highest order....

So why did he not take credit for that? He tried to take credit for many other things....all untrue.....

http://www.clambake.org/archive/ronthenut/

Vinnie Velvet
07-06-2005, 10:54 AM
Wow.

Amazing how this Scientology crap is still around.

No doubt, it continually gets funded through the deep pockets of such actors as Lunatic Cruise and even former Sweathog, John Travolta.

I applaude those whose efforts are to bring down this cult.

Great find, Hardrock!

Hardrock69
07-06-2005, 11:47 AM
It is truly amazing how paranoid L. Ron Hoover was.

Enough so that they even hatched a plan to infiltrate government agencies with Scientologists that he thought were out to "get him".

"In the 1970's, under Mary Sue Hubbard's direction (L. Ron Hoover's wife), the Church of Scientology devised a plan to place clandestine Church members as employees in various U.S. government agencies that Hubbard considered "suppressive". This was a highly-secret operation, known only to the elite staff in the Guardian Office. Extrordinary steps were taken to conceal Hubbard's actual control of the overall operation.

In 1976 Hubbard sold off his fleet and went ashore in Florida. Numerous dummy corporations were set up to conceal any connection with Hubbard or Scientology. Hubbard set up elaborate precautions to conceal his actual whereabouts. Federal Law Enforcement agencies caught on to the Church plot to steal government records and Mary Sue Hubbard and several other Church leaders in the Guardian Office were indicted and convicted on Federal charges. Hubbard continued to elude detection or the serving of subpoeneas."


http://www.clambake.org/archive/ronthenut/conspire.htm

Hardrock69
07-06-2005, 11:54 AM
Here is an episode of ABC's 20/20 where they interview L. Ron Hoover's own son, as well as other Scientology officials who got tired of the bullshit...


Download - 56k (http://www.xenutv.com/us/2020.rm)

Download - Broadband (http://www.xenutv.com/us/hi-2020.rm)

Transcript is here:
http://www.xenutv.com/us/2020-1.htm

ashstralia
07-06-2005, 12:23 PM
^^^^

hahahahah!!!!!!

Terry
07-06-2005, 12:30 PM
The idea of Tom Cruise and Brooke Shields being the persons to spark a serious debate about post-partum depression.....wait, amend that to ANYTHING...is utterly laughable. As is Tom Cruise and Matt Lauer engaging in earnest discussions about the benefits of psychiatry.

Somebody needs to sit those three down, tell them to stick to their bullshit entertainment fluff, and leave the serious questions to those of us who live on planet earth.

Mr. G
07-06-2005, 02:05 PM
Vinnie Velvelt and HardRock69 I have answered many of your questions and you have not answered not one of mine. HardRock finally just went away for a while went I pushed him for an answer and now he is back. Good. Lets do this one at a time. He said he had proof of the workability of Psychiatry but that it is irrelevant. How is having proof irrelevant? Come on guys if you are going to ask questions you are going to have to answer some. Your reply will be one of three: 1.You either know it's bs and are afraid to admit it. 2. You actually don't know but don't really care. 3. You will tell me to go screw myself because I am asking pointed questions and you have no answer.

Vinnie Velvet
07-06-2005, 02:14 PM
Hey, who said we were experts in Psychiatry??

Not me.

However, what we have been doing arguing against the basis of this thing called Scientology and its merits.

You obviously have no rebuttle against the proof and documents either Sesh and HardRock have been posting here, slaging them off and saying its 'BS'.

Yeah, okay.

Seshmeister
07-06-2005, 02:39 PM
I think a lot of psychiatry is bullshit especially the therapists listening to people whine all day. Extreme inbalances can be helped though and people at least stablised and I would rather it was done using drugs than by a cult using simple mind control/hypnosis tricks and taking all their money off them.

Cheers!

:gulp:

Seshmeister
07-06-2005, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Vinnie Velvet, First off there is no "belief system". Scientology is not something to believe, it is something to do. The bottom line in any endever is it either works or it doesn't. I for one never just go along and believe in something just because someone tells me to, I think you would agree with that. In fact one of the early things I read was that if it is true for you then it is true and if it is not true for you it is not true. There is no sense really in going along believing in something if it doesn't actually work. Fair enough? As far as Lisa MacPherson I don't know anything about that so I wouldn't have a legitimate opinion on that.


http://www.seshmeister.com/pics/fab.jpg

Vinnie Velvet
07-06-2005, 04:05 PM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
I think a lot of psychiatry is bullshit especially the therapists listening to people whine all day. Extreme inbalances can be helped though and people at least stablised and I would rather it was done using drugs than by a cult using simple mind control/hypnosis tricks and taking all their money off them.

Cheers!

:gulp:

Exactly.

Not only by mind control crap but by just even giving vitamins and protein shakes!!

That Lisa MacPherson became so delirious that he began throwing herself across the room, hurting herself and all the Scientologists did was give her vitamins and protein shakes!!! Unfuckingbelievable.

The sad thing is that Scientology was the impetus of MacPherson for going loopy in the first place. Liike every good Scientologist, she was giving "thousands" of dollars to the Church and when her publishing business went down, she started to lose it --- mostly because the 'Church' kept asking for more money and she didn't have any.

And when she went a bit crazy, they took her to the Scientology headquarters and were against any form of pyschiatric assistance or drugs, when she really did need them.

She was even kept there against her will --- she wanted to leave Scientology and leave them entirely.

When she became more sick, finally the idiots decided to take her to a hospital --- but get this ---- they drove 45 minutes to a hospital where she could be treated by some "Scientologist Doctor"!! Instead of just going to the nearest county hospital.

Before then it was too late.

Fucking assholes.

BenJammin
07-06-2005, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
I think a lot of psychiatry is bullshit especially the therapists listening to people whine all day. Extreme inbalances can be helped though and people at least stablised and I would rather it was done using drugs than by a cult using simple mind control/hypnosis tricks and taking all their money off them.

Cheers!

:gulp:



I think psychiatry is good medicine in theory.

In actual practice, most of those head doctors just want to throw the latest SRI and some xanax at you and send you home.

Unless you are forking over major bucks for continuous therapy with them, they aren't going to seriously try and get to the bottom of your problems.

For the majority of people, it's probably better just to have some good friends that will listen to you blow off steam.


BTW, Tom Cruise is another victim of ego inflating wealth and fame (ie. he's an idiot but people close to him will only tell him he's a genius). As someone else alluded to, he needs to stick to entertaining us with his acting skills and keep the discussion of serious subjects at his backyard barbeques.



Personally I subscribe to the science of 'Shroomology'... I like to take a sabbatical every couple of years. It realigns my belief system!

Mr. G
07-06-2005, 04:47 PM
HardRock says he has proof. I am just looking for ONE scientific study that proves the chemical imbalance. Just ONE study, blood test, lab test ect... In all the years Psychiatry has been around and all the billions spent you would think HardRock or Vinnie Velvet would have proof scince they are adamant about it. They are going to have a hard time since recently neurologists and Psychiatrists have come out saying that it has been a scam. I am asking to be proven wrong. Go ahead.

Vinnie Velvet
07-06-2005, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
HardRock says he has proof. I am just looking for ONE scientific study that proves the chemical imbalance. Just ONE study, blood test, lab test ect... In all the years Psychiatry has been around and all the billions spent you would think HardRock or Vinnie Velvet would have proof scince they are adamant about it. They are going to have a hard time since recently neurologists and Psychiatrists have come out saying that it has been a scam. I am asking to be proven wrong. Go ahead.

I'm not gonna argue over the merits of Psychiatry.

But, don't you see that people have died because they were not given the proper care and under PROPER medical attention???

Do you honestly think your Scientology can cure people of emotional distress, depression and so on????

What kinds of therapy does Scientology prescribe to?? Vitamins???

Gimmie a break.

Hardrock69
07-06-2005, 05:24 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Vinnie Velvelt and HardRock69 I have answered many of your questions and you have not answered not one of mine.

1. Ok perhaps you have answered some of "VinnieVelvelt's" questions, but I have never asked you any questions, therefore your claim that you have answered my question is a FALSEHOOD (otherwise known as a LIE).



HardRock finally just went away for a while went I pushed him for an answer and now he is back. Good. Lets do this one at a time. He said he had proof of the workability of Psychiatry but that it is irrelevant. How is having proof irrelevant?


2. I never said I have proof of the "workability of psychiatry". You have made up ANOTHER LIE. It seems you have been paying close attention to L. Ron Hoover's teachings, as you are demonstrating a fairly weak proficiency in the art of the "smear campaign".



Come on guys if you are going to ask questions you are going to have to answer some. Your reply will be one of three: 1.You either know it's bs and are afraid to admit it. 2. You actually don't know but don't really care. 3. You will tell me to go screw myself because I am asking pointed questions and you have no answer.


3. Even though I have not asked you any questions (though I am asking myself why I am bothering with your foolishness as I type this), I will lower myself extremely to get down to your level, and will speak plainly and simply so a person of your inferior intellect MIGHT be able to comprehend on the level of some dim Cro-Magnon awareness:

Psychiatry may help some people (as with Scientology), but that is primarily due to an advanced form of the Placebo Effect.

The above sentence is my answer.

Now, in the last paragraph of one of your recent posts you claimed once again that I would answer in one of 3 ways.

So if we take that as 3 individual claims, it can be readily seen that you have been proven wrong 3 times in one paragraph, as I did not answer as you claimed I would.

You obviously have severe difficulty in comprehension, and your communication is seriously offline.
You would be better off seeking therapy from a half-wit chimp than the Xenu-worshippers you place your misguided faith in.


I am way beyond any of your petty OT levels and do not usually concern myself with such trivial affairs. This is why I did not bother to further reply until now.
Your puny attempts to slander members of the David Lee Roth Army are only serving to make yourself look ever more like a spiritually-weak imbecile.

May you have no Larg, and may your chairs break when you sit on them, shoving great splinters of wood up your bungholio.

Hardrock69
07-06-2005, 05:34 PM
And one other thing....having proof is very relevant.

There is proof that L. Ron Hoover viewed himself as being mentally unsound.

There is proof that he was a liar, a thief, and a con artist, and was viewed as such by many thousands of people over the past 50 years.

That is all VERY relevant.

thome
07-06-2005, 05:48 PM
Mr.G i shouldnt pile on like this but you may have a chemical
imbalance rite now. You keep arguing a issue YOU dont really
seem to care about either way "Why am I in the middle, why cant
YOU make up MY mind FOR ME" Thats what HOCUS POCUS
does to YA.Thats what SKEEENTOLOGEE is.

Mr. G
07-06-2005, 11:35 PM
Anyone tired of this thread yet? throughout this long thread I have answered many questions but asked only one: a scientific study that proves the chemical imbalance theory. Obviously nobody can come up with it. And thome, I was asking to be proven wrong, I guess you didn't understand that, fair enough.

Seshmeister
07-07-2005, 06:46 AM
We've just proved your whole belief system is wrong is that not enough for the moment...?

Seshmeister
07-07-2005, 06:49 AM
And as far as chemical imbalances affecting mental behaviour, any man that has ever lived with a woman knows that as a fact from having to put up with their PMS once a month.

Nickdfresh
07-07-2005, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
We've just proved your whole belief system is wrong is that not enough for the moment...?

But it's not a belief system, it's a system of "doing." That 'doing' which is reaching into your wallet and sending it to the hierarchy.:p

Hardrock69
07-07-2005, 12:01 PM
Funny how some peeps "need proof" that there is such a thing as a chemical imbalance.

Claiming that there is NO scientific evidence that there is such a thing, and that there is NO scientific evidence to prove that psychiatry and/or drugs can treat such a problem.


Yet at the same time there is NO scientific evidence to prove that Dianetics works. Well, there is just as much evidence that Santa Clause is real, anyway...


Interesting also how some people when confronted with proof of Scientology's illegal and unethical activities they ignore such proof, as if ignoring it will make it all go away...as if it never happened....

Yes I am tired of this thread.

Owning someone who has no defense is, shall we say, boring.

Seshmeister
07-07-2005, 12:05 PM
True.

If his mind has been that weak for so long then it's unlikely that we're going to make him see what is directly in front of him.

It's amazing these cults can still find gulliable people now that the internet is there to expose their cons to the victims.

Vinnie Velvet
07-07-2005, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by Hardrock69
Funny how some peeps "need proof" that there is such a thing as a chemical imbalance.

Claiming that there is NO scientific evidence that there is such a thing, and that there is NO scientific evidence to prove that psychiatry and/or drugs can treat such a problem.


Yet at the same time there is NO scientific evidence to prove that Dianetics works. Well, there is just as much evidence that Santa Clause is real, anyway...


Interesting also how some people when confronted with proof of Scientology's illegal and unethical activities they ignore such proof, as if ignoring it will make it all go away...as if it never happened....

Yes I am tired of this thread.

Owning someone who has no defense is, shall we say, boring.

Exactly.

This Mr. G wouldn't even comment on the Lisa MacPherson story.

Vinnie Velvet
07-07-2005, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
True.

If his mind has been that weak for so long then it's unlikely that we're going to make him see what is directly in front of him.

It's amazing these cults can still find gulliable people now that the internet is there to expose their cons to the victims.

I'm surprised that this Scientology shit has been around this long.

Well, I guess it will when it keeps on getting thousands of dollars from celebrities like Cruise.

Mr. G
07-07-2005, 04:43 PM
I am not here trying to prove that Scientology works. I don't care what you think of Scientology at all. But I have asked for one Scientific study which really pisses you guys off. I have never seen anyone get so pissed from just one question. Amazing. HardRock keeps stating that there is such proof but he wont post it. The fact that you like to make less of people without anything other than opinion shows who you really are. Too bad.

Vinnie Velvet
07-07-2005, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
I am not here trying to prove that Scientology works. I don't care what you think of Scientology at all. But I have asked for one Scientific study which really pisses you guys off. I have never seen anyone get so pissed from just one question. Amazing. HardRock keeps stating that there is such proof but he wont post it. The fact that you like to make less of people without anything other than opinion shows who you really are. Too bad.

Yeah, but doesn't all the proof of what was presented in this thread against Scientology proof enough that anything its members state or believe in or whatever amounts to piles of CRAP???!!

I think so.

Hardrock69
07-07-2005, 05:48 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
I am not here trying to prove that Scientology works. I don't care what you think of Scientology at all. But I have asked for one Scientific study which really pisses you guys off. I have never seen anyone get so pissed from just one question. Amazing. HardRock keeps stating that there is such proof but he wont post it. The fact that you like to make less of people without anything other than opinion shows who you really are. Too bad.

A measure of one's sanity is their ability to communicate effectively, no?

Your continual yowling that I said I have proof that psychiatry works is evidence that you are delusional.

I never said that, and I actually answered you a couple of posts ago as to what I think of Psychiatry, but you obviously are unable to read English, much less comprehend it.


Some Scientologist.

:rolleyes:


You need to work on effective communication. Your skills are seriously lacking.

You obviously have not given the CoS enough money.

Go drain your bank account, and sell everything you own, and give the money to the CoS.

You have a non-existent timeline, and are stuck in a pile of shit.

:cool:

Mr. G
07-07-2005, 11:10 PM
So I guess we agree then that there is no scientific study, OK then. We agree about something after all, who would have thought.

thome
07-07-2005, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Anyone tired of this thread yet? throughout this long thread I have answered many questions but asked only one: a scientific study that proves the chemical imbalance theory. Obviously nobody can come up with it. And thome, I was asking to be proven wrong, I guess you didn't understand that, fair enough.

Why must i prove you wrong will that answer your question?
How will proving you wrong solve your quest for reality?
Why MUST you be proven wrong?
You need not be wipped to know not to leave the gate open.

Mr. G
07-07-2005, 11:53 PM
Man you missed the point completely. My point was that there is no scientific study to prove the chemical imbalance theory. Others were saying that there was, so I was asking them to post it. Does that make sense?

HELLVIS
07-08-2005, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by academic punk
I second this.

Is it me, or it only recently that Cruise has become REALLY annoying?

I think what Tommy Boy meant to say was that he knows his history of psychiatry.:D

Hardrock69
07-08-2005, 01:17 AM
Well, just go buy a fucking paperback at a news stand somewhere....

"History Of Psychiatry For Dummies"

....then you TOO can know the history of psychiatry...

:rolleyes:

Mr. G
07-08-2005, 01:34 AM
So tell me, what IS the history of Psychiatry?

Hardrock69
07-08-2005, 09:04 AM
Ask Tom Cruise...he claims to know!

:rolleyes:

Seshmeister
07-08-2005, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
So tell me, what IS the history of Psychiatry?

Before 1900
Nutcases locked up in asylums. Much gnashing of teeth and time spent as the backdrop to Victorian horror stories.

From 1900 to 1952 Freudian theory.
Basically it's all about sex and nutcases want to fuck their mothers.

1953-Now
Nutcases split into two groups.

Nutcase group A are given drugs to calm themselves and lead as normal lives as possible.

Nutcase group B go to a Scientology centre where they meet someone who uses Hubbards technique that he ripped off Freud's free association therapy. Free association is where the therapist says words that are seemingly random and asks the patient to say the first thing that comes to mind. If the therapist says kitten and the patient says Uncle Ned anal rape.... then there may be some reason to further explore the patient's kitten memories.

Freud showed that you can find and explore harmful subconscious connections this way and if they are brought out to the conscious mind they can "cure" the patient of neurosis, phobias, and even psychosomatic illness.

The trouble is that free association is a very tedious time consuming process. In fact virtually nobody does it anymore outside of the church of Scientology. It's so much easier and more effective to write a perscription.

L. Ron's primitive lie detector / e-meter is a free association tool. Some clown scientologist hooks you up and says "kitten". You respond uncle Ned with a corresponding spike in galvanic skin response.

So now the clown knows that uncle Ned is a "trigger" and he takes you through some Freudian hypnotic memory regression therapy to try to bring the memory to the surface.

The fact being this shit works. Nothing mystical or religious about it. The batshit in the catshit part comes in when all the scientologist claim these techniques sprang from L. Ron's divine prophesies. That L. Ron learned these things from memory regression but he didn't regress to last week... no he did it to the point that he remembers himself in the womb... and then he regressed himself into countless previous lives / dimensions / galaxies.

The nutcase then hands over his money.


Sound familiar Mr G?

Seshmeister
07-08-2005, 11:27 AM
http://www.radaronline.com/fresh-intelligence/tomcruise_digest_inside.jpg

Reader’s Digest on Cruise Control

Did Reader’s Digest sell its soul to the Church of Scientology to get Tom Cruise on the cover of its current issue? According to several sources inside the world’s largest-selling monthly, the magazine’s editor-in-chief, Jackie Leo, wanted Cruise as her cover boy but was impeded by the magazine’s history with the controversial group.

Back in 1991, Reader’s Digest excerpted an in-depth investigative piece from Time magazine entitled Scientology: The Cult of Greed. Among other things, the article asserted that the Church “is a highly profitable global racket that survives by intimidating members and critics in a Mafia-like manner.â€

In response, the Church filed injunctions aimed at blocking Reader’s Digest from publishing the story in its international editions. But Scientology’s lawyers ultimately lost, and the mag gained cred beyond its walker-waving readership for standing up to the cult’s bullying ways.

With so much bad blood between them, how did Reader’s Digest land a rare sit-down with Scientology’s top celebrity spokesman? By caving in to a long list of bizarre demands. According to well-placed sources at the magazine, to ensure Cruise’s cooperation, the Digest’s reporter, Meg Grant, promised to give “Scientology issues†equal play in her profile of the star, and agreed to enroll in a one-day Church “immersion course.†Before the interview took place, our sources say, the magazine also agreed to submit its questions for Cruise to his Church handlers, who weeded out any queries they deemed inappropriate. But they were still not taking any chances. When the exclusive interview finally took place, one of Cruise’s handlers asked the star the list of pre-approved questions, as Grant recorded Cruise’s responses.

Needless to say, the Church is thrilled with the resulting story, we hear. With such fawning treatment in the pages of the global magazine that denounced it only a decade ago, it’s scored a significant coup. As for the magazine? “Reader’s Digest has sold out with no turning back as far as I’m concerned,†laments one former editor. Asked about her journalistic horse-trading, Editor-in-Chief Leo explained she didn’t “know anything about [Cruise’s] ‘requests’ because I wasn’t the one who did the interview,†and suggested we talk to the writer of the piece. Reached in L.A., Grant denied providing her questions in advance or relaying them to Cruise through a third party during the interview. â€I would never do that journalistically, and the magazine wouldn’t allow it,†she claims.

But, after some prodding, Grant admitted she was indeed put through an immersion course in Scientology, but that it was a surprise. “Before the interview, I went to a lunch with [Cruise’s sister/publicist] Lee Anne DeVette, which turned out to be at the Scientology Celebrity Center, and turned out to be not a lunch but a six hour tour of the center,†she says. After the tour, Grant says she was taken to the church’s “anti-psychiatry museum†on Sunset Blvd. (at which point her guides made clear they somehow knew her husband was a practicing psychiatrist).

“I suppose I could have left at any time, but it would have been awkward,†she says. Did you hear that, celebrity journalists? If you’re looking to score an exclusive with Cruise, Beck, Kirstie Alley, Greta van Susteren, John Travolta, or Jenna Elfman, don’t forget your Paxil—and a pair of running shoes.

Nickdfresh
07-08-2005, 11:50 AM
MILESTONES

Jul. 29, 1996
...

DISMISSED. The last claim in a $416 million lawsuit against TIME MAGAZINE by the Church of Scientology over the 1991 cover "Scientology: The Cult of Greed;" by federal District Judge Peter Leisure; in New York City.

...

http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,984928,00.html

Hardrock69
07-08-2005, 11:51 AM
Of course they knew her husband was a psychiatrist. They are going to do their intel background check on any potential enemies (meaning ALL journalists) before dealing with them.

It is too bad Tom Cruise is not in control of his own life anymore.

He has "handlers" and "minders", and everything he says has to be "screened" by them.

He is a tool.

Nickdfresh
07-08-2005, 11:53 AM
Here's the "history of Scientology." Enjoy.

The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power
Ruined lives. Lost fortunes. Federal crimes. Scientology poses as a religion but is really a ruthless global scam -- and aiming for the mainstream.
By RICHARD BEHAR

May 6, 1991
By all appearances, Noah Lottick of Kingston, Pa., had been a normal, happy 24-year-old who was looking for his place in the world. On the day last June when his parents drove to New York City to claim his body, they were nearly catatonic with grief. The young Russian-studies scholar had jumped from a 10th-floor window of the Milford Plaza Hotel and bounced off the hood of a stretch limousine. When the police arrived, his fingers were still clutching $171 in cash, virtually the only money he hadn't yet turned over to the Church of Scientology, the self-help "philosophy" group he had discovered just seven months earlier.

His death inspired his father Edward, a physician, to start his own investigation of the church. "We thought Scientology was something like Dale Carnegie," Lottick says. "I now believe it's a school for psychopaths. Their so-called therapies are manipulations. They take the best and brightest people and destroy them." The Lotticks want to sue the church for contributing to their son's death, but the prospect has them frightened. For nearly 40 years, the big business of Scientology has shielded itself exquisitely behind the First Amendment as well as a battery of high-priced criminal lawyers and shady private detectives.

The Church of Scientology, started by science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard to "clear" people of unhappiness, portrays itself as a religion. In reality the church is a hugely profitable global racket that survives by intimidating members and critics in a Mafia-like manner. At times during the past decade, prosecutions against Scientology seemed to be curbing its menace. Eleven top Scientologists, including Hubbard's wife, were sent to prison in the early 1980s for infiltrating, burglarizing and wiretapping more than 100 private and government agencies in attempts to block their investigations. In recent years hundreds of longtime Scientology adherents -- many charging that they were mentally or physically abused -- have quit the church and criticized it at their own risk. Some have sued the church and won; others have settled for amounts in excess of $500,000. In various cases judges have labeled the church "schizophrenic and paranoid" and "corrupt, sinister and dangerous."

Yet the outrage and litigation have failed to squelch Scientology. The group, which boasts 700 centers in 65 countries, threatens to become more insidious and pervasive than ever. Scientology is trying to go mainstream, a strategy that has sparked a renewed law-enforcement campaign against the church. Many of the group's followers have been accused of committing financial scams, while the church is busy attracting the unwary through a wide array of front groups in such businesses as publishing, consulting, health care and even remedial education.

In Hollywood, Scientology has assembled a star-studded roster of followers by aggressively recruiting and regally pampering them at the church's "Celebrity Centers," a chain of clubhouses that offer expensive counseling and career guidance. Adherents include screen idols Tom Cruise and John Travolta, actresses Kirstie Alley, Mimi Rogers and Anne Archer, Palm Springs mayor and performer Sonny Bono, jazzman Chick Corea and even Nancy Cartwright, the voice of cartoon star Bart Simpson. Rank-and-file members, however, are dealt a less glamorous Scientology.

According to the Cult Awareness Network, whose 23 chapters monitor more than 200 "mind control" cults, no group prompts more telephone pleas for help than does Scientology. Says Cynthia Kisser, the network's Chicago-based executive director: "Scientology is quite likely the most ruthless, the most classically terroristic, the most litigious and the most lucrative cult the country has ever seen. No cult extracts more money from its members." Agrees Vicki Aznaran, who was one of Scientology's six key leaders until she bolted from the church in 1987: "This is a criminal organization, day in and day out. It makes Jim and Tammy ((Bakker)) look like kindergarten."

To explore Scientology's reach, TIME conducted more than 150 interviews and reviewed hundreds of court records and internal Scientology documents. Church officials refused to be interviewed. The investigation paints a picture of a depraved yet thriving enterprise. Most cults fail to outlast their founder, but Scientology has prospered since Hubbard's death in 1986. In a court filing, one of the cult's many entities -- the Church of Spiritual Technology -- listed $503 million in income just for 1987. High-level defectors say the parent organization has squirreled away an estimated $400 million in bank accounts in Liechtenstein, Switzerland and Cyprus. Scientology probably has about 50,000 active members, far fewer than the 8 million the group claims. But in one sense, that inflated figure rings true: millions of people have been affected in one way or another by Hubbard's bizarre creation.

Scientology is now run by David Miscavige, 31, a high school dropout and second-generation church member. Defectors describe him as cunning, ruthless and so paranoid about perceived enemies that he kept plastic wrap over his glass of water. His obsession is to attain credibility for Scientology in the 1990s. Among other tactics, the group:

-- Retains public relations powerhouse Hill and Knowlton to help shed the church's fringe-group image.

-- Joined such household names as Sony and Pepsi as a main sponsor of Ted Turner's Goodwill Games.

-- Buys massive quantities of its own books from retail stores to propel the titles onto best-seller lists.

-- Runs full-page ads in such publications as Newsweek and Business Week that call Scientology a "philosophy," along with a plethora of TV ads touting the group's books.

-- Recruits wealthy and respectable professionals through a web of consulting groups that typically hide their ties to Scientology.

The founder of this enterprise was part storyteller, part flimflam man. Born in Nebraska in 1911, Hubbard served in the Navy during World War II and soon afterward complained to the Veterans Administration about his "suicidal inclinations" and his "seriously affected" mind. Nevertheless, Hubbard was a moderately successful writer of pulp science fiction. Years later, church brochures described him falsely as an "extensively decorated" World War II hero who was crippled and blinded in action, twice pronounced dead and miraculously cured through Scientology. Hubbard's "doctorate" from "Sequoia University" was a fake mail-order degree. In a 1984 case in which the church sued a Hubbard biographical researcher, a California judge concluded that its founder was "a pathological liar."

Hubbard wrote one of Scientology's sacred texts, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, in 1950. In it he introduced a crude psychotherapeutic technique he called "auditing." He also created a simplified lie detector (called an "E-meter") that was designed to measure electrical changes in the skin while subjects discussed intimate details of their past. Hubbard argued that unhappiness sprang from mental aberrations (or "engrams") caused by early traumas. Counseling sessions with the E-meter, he claimed, could knock out the engrams, cure blindness and even improve a person's intelligence and appearance.

Hubbard kept adding steps, each more costly, for his followers to climb. In the 1960s the guru decreed that humans are made of clusters of spirits (or "thetans") who were banished to earth some 75 million years ago by a cruel galactic ruler named Xenu. Naturally, those thetans had to be audited.

An Internal Revenue Service ruling in 1967 stripped Scientology's mother church of its tax-exempt status. A federal court ruled in 1971 that Hubbard's medical claims were bogus and that E-meter auditing could no longer be called a scientific treatment. Hubbard responded by going fully religious, seeking First Amendment protection for Scientology's strange rites. His counselors started sporting clerical collars. Chapels were built, franchises became "missions," fees became "fixed donations," and Hubbard's comic-book cosmology became "sacred scriptures."

During the early 1970s, the IRS conducted its own auditing sessions and proved that Hubbard was skimming millions of dollars from the church, laundering the money through dummy corporations in Panama and stashing it in Swiss bank accounts. Moreover, church members stole IRS documents, filed false tax returns and harassed the agency's employees. By late 1985, with high-level defectors accusing Hubbard of having stolen as much as $200 million from the church, the IRS was seeking an indictment of Hubbard for tax fraud. Scientology members "worked day and night" shredding documents the IRS sought, according to defector Aznaran, who took part in the scheme. Hubbard, who had been in hiding for five years, died before the criminal case could be prosecuted.

Today the church invents costly new services with all the zeal of its founder. Scientology doctrine warns that even adherents who are "cleared" of engrams face grave spiritual dangers unless they are pushed to higher and more expensive levels. According to the church's latest price list, recruits -- "raw meat," as Hubbard called them -- take auditing sessions that cost as much as $1,000 an hour, or $12,500 for a 12 1/2-hour "intensive."

Psychiatrists say these sessions can produce a drugged-like, mind-controlled euphoria that keeps customers coming back for more. To pay their fees, newcomers can earn commissions by recruiting new members, become auditors themselves (Miscavige did so at age 12), or join the church staff and receive free counseling in exchange for what their written contracts describe as a "billion years" of labor. "Make sure that lots of bodies move through the shop," implored Hubbard in one of his bulletins to officials. "Make money. Make more money. Make others produce so as to make money . . . However you get them in or why, just do it."

Harriet Baker learned the hard way about Scientology's business of selling religion. When Baker, 73, lost her husband to cancer, a Scientologist turned up at her Los Angeles home peddling a $1,300 auditing package to cure her grief. Some $15,000 later, the Scientologists discovered that her house was debt free. They arranged a $45,000 mortgage, which they pressured her to tap for more auditing until Baker's children helped their mother snap out of her daze. Last June, Baker demanded a $27,000 refund for unused services, prompting two cult members to show up at her door unannounced with an E-meter to interrogate her. Baker never got the money and, financially strapped, was forced to sell her house in September.

Before Noah Lottick killed himself, he had paid more than $5,000 for church counseling. His behavior had also become strange. He once remarked to his parents that his Scientology mentors could actually read minds. When his father suffered a major heart attack, Noah insisted that it was purely psychosomatic. Five days before he jumped, Noah burst into his parents' home and demanded to know why they were spreading "false rumors" about him -- a delusion that finally prompted his father to call a psychiatrist.

It was too late. "From Noah's friends at Dianetics" read the card that accompanied a bouquet of flowers at Lottick's funeral. Yet no Scientology staff members bothered to show up. A week earlier, local church officials had given Lottick's parents a red-carpet tour of their center. A cult leader told Noah's parents that their son had been at the church just hours before he disappeared -- but the church denied this story as soon as the body was identified. True to form, the cult even haggled with the Lotticks over $3,000 their son had paid for services he never used, insisting that Noah had intended it as a "donation."

The church has invented hundreds of goods and services for which members are urged to give "donations." Are you having trouble "moving swiftly up the Bridge" -- that is, advancing up the stepladder of enlightenment? Then you can have your case reviewed for a mere $1,250 "donation." Want to know "why a thetan hangs on to the physical universe?" Try 52 of Hubbard's tape- recorded speeches from 1952, titled "Ron's Philadelphia Doctorate Course Lectures," for $2,525. Next: nine other series of the same sort. For the collector, gold-and-leather-bound editions of 22 of Hubbard's books (and bookends) on subjects ranging from Scientology ethics to radiation can be had for just $1,900.

To gain influence and lure richer, more sophisticated followers, Scientology has lately resorted to a wide array of front groups and financial scams. Among them:

CONSULTING. Sterling Management Systems, formed in 1983, has been ranked in recent years by Inc. magazine as one of America's fastest-growing private companies (estimated 1988 revenues: $20 million). Sterling regularly mails a free newsletter to more than 300,000 health-care professionals, mostly dentists, promising to increase their incomes dramatically. The firm offers seminars and courses that typically cost $10,000. But Sterling's true aim is to hook customers for Scientology. "The church has a rotten product, so they package it as something else," says Peter Georgiades, a Pittsburgh attorney who represents Sterling victims. "It's a kind of bait and switch." Sterling's founder, dentist Gregory Hughes, is now under investigation by California's Board of Dental Examiners for incompetence. Nine lawsuits are pending against him for malpractice (seven others have been settled), mostly for orthodontic work on children.

Many dentists who have unwittingly been drawn into the cult are filing or threatening lawsuits as well. Dentist Robert Geary of Medina, Ohio, who entered a Sterling seminar in 1988, endured "the most extreme high-pressure sales tactics I have ever faced." Sterling officials told Geary, 45, that their firm was not linked to Scientology, he says. But Geary claims they eventually convinced him that he and his wife Dorothy had personal problems that required auditing. Over five months, the Gearys say, they spent $130,000 for services, plus $50,000 for "gold-embossed, investment-grade" books signed by Hubbard. Geary contends that Scientologists not only called his bank to increase his credit-card limit but also forged his signature on a $20,000 loan application. "It was insane," he recalls. "I couldn't even get an accounting from them of what I was paying for." At one point, the Gearys claim, Scientologists held Dorothy hostage for two weeks in a mountain cabin, after which she was hospitalized for a nervous breakdown.

Last October, Sterling broke some bad news to another dentist, Glover Rowe of Gadsden, Ala., and his wife Dee. Tests showed that unless they signed up for auditing, Glover's practice would fail, and Dee would someday abuse their child. The next month the Rowes flew to Glendale, Calif., where they shuttled daily from a local hotel to a Dianetics center. "We thought they were brilliant people because they seemed to know so much about us," recalls Dee. "Then we realized our hotel room must have been bugged." After bolting from the center, $23,000 poorer, the Rowes say, they were chased repeatedly by Scientologists on foot and in cars. Dentists aren't the only ones at risk. Scientology also makes pitches to chiropractors, podiatrists and veterinarians.

PUBLIC INFLUENCE. One front, the Way to Happiness Foundation, has distributed to children in thousands of the nation's public schools more than 3.5 million copies of a booklet Hubbard wrote on morality. The church calls the scheme "the largest dissemination project in Scientology history." Applied Scholastics is the name of still another front, which is attempting to install a Hubbard tutorial program in public schools, primarily those populated by minorities. The group also plans a 1,000-acre campus, where it will train educators to teach various Hubbard methods. The disingenuously named Citizens Commission on Human Rights is a Scientology group at war with psychiatry, its primary competitor. The commission typically issues reports aimed at discrediting particular psychiatrists and the field in general. The CCHR is also behind an all-out war against Eli Lilly, the maker of Prozac, the nation's top-selling antidepression drug. Despite scant evidence, the group's members -- who call themselves "psychbusters" -- claim that Prozac drives people to murder or suicide. Through mass mailings, appearances on talk shows and heavy lobbying, CCHR has hurt drug sales and helped spark dozens of lawsuits against Lilly.

Another Scientology-linked group, the Concerned Businessmen's Association of America, holds antidrug contests and awards $5,000 grants to schools as a way to recruit students and curry favor with education officials. West Virginia Senator John D. Rockefeller IV unwittingly commended the CBAA in 1987 on the Senate floor. Last August author Alex Haley was the keynote speaker at its annual awards banquet in Los Angeles. Says Haley: "I didn't know much about that group going in. I'm a Methodist." Ignorance about Scientology can be embarrassing: two months ago, Illinois Governor Jim Edgar, noting that Scientology's founder "has solved the aberrations of the human mind," proclaimed March 13 "L. Ron Hubbard Day." He rescinded the proclamation in late March, once he learned who Hubbard really was.

HEALTH CARE. HealthMed, a chain of clinics run by Scientologists, promotes a grueling and excessive system of saunas, exercise and vitamins designed by Hubbard to purify the body. Experts denounce the regime as quackery and potentially harmful, yet HealthMed solicits unions and public agencies for contracts. The chain is plugged heavily in a new book, Diet for a Poisoned Planet, by journalist David Steinman, who concludes that scores of common foods (among them: peanuts, bluefish, peaches and cottage cheese) are dangerous.

Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop labeled the book "trash," and the Food and Drug Administration issued a paper in October that claims Steinman distorts his facts. "HealthMed is a gateway to Scientology, and Steinman's book is a sorting mechanism," says physician William Jarvis, who is head of the National Council Against Health Fraud. Steinman, who describes Hubbard favorably as a "researcher," denies any ties to the church and contends, "HealthMed has no affiliation that I know of with Scientology."

DRUG TREATMENT. Hubbard's purification treatments are the mainstay of Narconon, a Scientology-run chain of 33 alcohol and drug rehabilitation centers -- some in prisons under the name "Criminon" -- in 12 countries. Narconon, a classic vehicle for drawing addicts into the cult, now plans to open what it calls the world's largest treatment center, a 1,400-bed facility on an Indian reservation near Newkirk, Okla. (pop. 2,400). At a 1989 ceremony in Newkirk, the Association for Better Living and Education presented Narconon a check for $200,000 and a study praising its work. The association turned out to be part of Scientology itself. Today the town is battling to keep out the cult, which has fought back through such tactics as sending private detectives to snoop on the mayor and the local newspaper publisher.

FINANCIAL SCAMS. Three Florida Scientologists, including Ronald Bernstein, a big contributor to the church's international "war chest," pleaded guilty in March to using their rare-coin dealership as a money laundry. Other notorious activities by Scientologists include making the shady Vancouver stock exchange even shadier (see box) and plotting to plant operatives in the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and Export-Import Bank of the U.S. The alleged purpose of this scheme: to gain inside information on which countries are going to be denied credit so that Scientology-linked traders can make illicit profits by taking "short" positions in those countries' currencies.

In the stock market the practice of "shorting" involves borrowing shares of publicly traded companies in the hope that the price will go down before the stocks must be bought on the market and returned to the lender. The Feshbach brothers of Palo Alto, Calif. -- Kurt, Joseph and Matthew -- have become the leading short sellers in the U.S., with more than $500 million under management. The Feshbachs command a staff of about 60 employees and claim to have earned better returns than the Dow Jones industrial average for most of the 1980s. And, they say, they owe it all to the teachings of Scientology, whose "war chest" has received more than $1 million from the family.

The Feshbachs also embrace the church's tactics; the brothers are the terrors of the stock exchanges. In congressional hearings in 1989, the heads of several companies claimed that Feshbach operatives have spread false information to government agencies and posed in various guises -- such as a Securities and Exchange Commission official -- in an effort to discredit their companies and drive the stocks down. Michael Russell, who ran a chain of business journals, testified that a Feshbach employee called his bankers and interfered with his loans. Sometimes the Feshbachs send private detectives to dig up dirt on firms, which is then shared with business reporters, brokers and fund managers.

The Feshbachs, who wear jackets bearing the slogan "stock busters," insist they run a clean shop. But as part of a current probe into possible insider stock trading, federal officials are reportedly investigating whether the Feshbachs received confidential information from FDA employees. The brothers seem aligned with Scientology's war on psychiatry and medicine: many of their targets are health and biotechnology firms. "Legitimate short selling performs a public service by deflating hyped stocks," says Robert Flaherty, the editor of Equities magazine and a harsh critic of the brothers. "But the Feshbachs have damaged scores of good start-ups."

Occasionally a Scientologist's business antics land him in jail. Last August a former devotee named Steven Fishman began serving a five-year prison term in Florida. His crime: stealing blank stock-confirmation slips from his employer, a major brokerage house, to use as proof that he owned stock entitling him to join dozens of successful class-action lawsuits. Fishman made roughly $1 million this way from 1983 to 1988 and spent as much as 30% of the loot on Scientology books and tapes.

Scientology denies any tie to the Fishman scam, a claim strongly disputed by both Fishman and his longtime psychiatrist, Uwe Geertz, a prominent Florida hypnotist. Both men claim that when arrested, Fishman was ordered by the church to kill Geertz and then do an "EOC," or end of cycle, which is church jargon for suicide.

BOOK PUBLISHING. Scientology mischiefmaking has even moved to the book industry. Since 1985 at least a dozen Hubbard books, printed by a church company, have made best-seller lists. They range from a 5,000-page sci-fi decology (Black Genesis, The Enemy Within, An Alien Affair) to the 40-year-old Dianetics. In 1988 the trade publication Publishers Weekly awarded the dead author a plaque commemorating the appearance of Dianetics on its best-seller list for 100 consecutive weeks.

Critics pan most of Hubbard's books as unreadable, while defectors claim that church insiders are sometimes the real authors. Even so, Scientology has sent out armies of its followers to buy the group's books at such major chains as B. Dalton's and Waldenbooks to sustain the illusion of a best-selling author. A former Dalton's manager says that some books arrived in his store with the chain's price stickers already on them, suggesting that copies are being recycled. Scientology claims that sales of Hubbard books now top 90 million worldwide. The scheme, set up to gain converts and credibility, is coupled with a radio and TV advertising campaign virtually unparalleled in the book industry.

Scientology devotes vast resources to squelching its critics. Since 1986 Hubbard and his church have been the subject of four unfriendly books, all released by small yet courageous publishers. In each case, the writers have been badgered and heavily sued. One of Hubbard's policies was that all perceived enemies are "fair game" and subject to being "tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed." Those who criticize the church -- journalists, doctors, lawyers and even judges -- often find themselves engulfed in litigation, stalked by private eyes, framed for fictional crimes, beaten up or threatened with death. Psychologist Margaret Singer, 69, an outspoken Scientology critic and professor at the University of California, Berkeley, now travels regularly under an assumed name to avoid harassment.

After the Los Angeles Times published a negative series on the church last summer, Scientologists spent an estimated $1 million to plaster the reporters' names on hundreds of billboards and bus placards across the city. Above their names were quotations taken out of context to portray the church in a positive light.

The church's most fearsome advocates are its lawyers. Hubbard warned his followers in writing to "beware of attorneys who tell you not to sue . . . the purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than to win." Result: Scientology has brought hundreds of suits against its perceived enemies and today pays an estimated $20 million annually to more than 100 lawyers.

One legal goal of Scientology is to bankrupt the opposition or bury it under paper. The church has 71 active lawsuits against the IRS alone. One of them, Miscavige vs. IRS, has required the U.S. to produce an index of 52,000 pages of documents. Boston attorney Michael Flynn, who helped Scientology victims from 1979 to 1987, personally endured 14 frivolous lawsuits, all of them dismissed. Another lawyer, Joseph Yanny, believes the church "has so subverted justice and the judicial system that it should be barred from seeking equity in any court." He should know: Yanny represented the cult until 1987, when, he says, he was asked to help church officials steal medical records to blackmail an opposing attorney (who was allegedly beaten up instead). Since Yanny quit representing the church, he has been the target of death threats, burglaries, lawsuits and other harassment.

Scientology's critics contend that the U.S. needs to crack down on the church in a major, organized way. "I want to know, Where is our government?" demands Toby Plevin, a Los Angeles attorney who handles victims. "It shouldn't be left to private litigators, because God knows most of us are afraid to get involved." But law-enforcement agents are also wary. "Every investigator is very cautious, walking on eggshells when it comes to the church," says a Florida police detective who has tracked the cult since 1988. "It will take a federal effort with lots of money and manpower."

So far the agency giving Scientology the most grief is the IRS, whose officials have implied that Hubbard's successors may be looting the church's coffers. Since 1988, when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the revocation of the cult's tax-exempt status, a massive IRS probe of church centers across the country has been under way. An IRS agent, Marcus Owens, has estimated that thousands of IRS employees have been involved. Another agent, in an internal IRS memorandum, spoke hopefully of the "ultimate disintegration" of the church. A small but helpful beacon shone last June when a federal appeals court ruled that two cassette tapes featuring conversations between church officials and their lawyers are evidence of a plan to commit "future frauds" against the IRS.

The IRS and FBI have been debriefing Scientology defectors for the past three years, in part to gain evidence for a major racketeering case that appears to have stalled last summer. Federal agents complain that the Justice Department is unwilling to spend the money needed to endure a drawn-out war with Scientology or to fend off the cult's notorious jihads against individual agents. "In my opinion the church has one of the most effective intelligence operations in the U.S., rivaling even that of the FBI," says Ted Gunderson, a former head of the FBI's Los Angeles office.

Foreign governments have been moving even more vigorously against the organization. In Canada the church and nine of its members will be tried in June on charges of stealing government documents (many of them retrieved in an enormous police raid of the church's Toronto headquarters). Scientology proposed to give $1 million to the needy if the case was dropped, but Canada spurned the offer. Since 1986 authorities in France, Spain and Italy have raided more than 50 Scientology centers. Pending charges against more than 100 of its overseas church members include fraud, extortion, capital flight, coercion, illegally practicing medicine and taking advantage of mentally incapacitated people. In Germany last month, leading politicians accused the cult of trying to infiltrate a major party as well as launching an immense recruitment drive in the east.

Sometimes even the church's biggest zealots can use a little protection. Screen star Travolta, 37, has long served as an unofficial Scientology spokesman, even though he told a magazine in 1983 that he was opposed to the church's management. High-level defectors claim that Travolta has long feared that if he defected, details of his sexual life would be made public. "He felt pretty intimidated about this getting out and told me so," recalls William Franks, the church's former chairman of the board. "There were no outright threats made, but it was implicit. If you leave, they immediately start digging up everything." Franks was driven out in 1981 after attempting to reform the church.

The church's former head of security, Richard Aznaran, recalls Scientology ringleader Miscavige repeatedly joking to staffers about Travolta's allegedly promiscuous homosexual behavior. At this point any threat to expose Travolta seems superfluous: last May a male porn star collected $100,000 from a tabloid for an account of his alleged two-year liaison with the celebrity. Travolta refuses to comment, and in December his lawyer dismissed questions about the subject as "bizarre." Two weeks later, Travolta announced that he was getting married to actress Kelly Preston, a fellow Scientologist.

Shortly after Hubbard's death the church retained Trout & Ries, a respected, Connecticut-based firm of marketing consultants, to help boost its public image. "We were brutally honest," says Jack Trout. "We advised them to clean up their act, stop with the controversy and even to stop being a church. They didn't want to hear that." Instead, Scientology hired one of the country's largest p.r. outfits, Hill and Knowlton, whose executives refuse to discuss the lucrative relationship. "Hill and Knowlton must feel that these guys are not totally off the wall," says Trout. "Unless it's just for the money."

One of Scientology's main strategies is to keep advancing the tired argument that the church is being "persecuted" by antireligionists. It is supported in that position by the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Council of Churches. But in the end, money is what Scientology is all about. As long as the organization's opponents and victims are successfully squelched, Scientology's managers and lawyers will keep pocketing millions of dollars by helping it achieve its ends.

http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,972865,00.html

Vinnie Velvet
07-08-2005, 12:01 PM
Its amazing that after 14 years since the TIME Magazine story, Scientology is still around manipulating people into its cult.

That's sad.

Hardrock69
07-08-2005, 01:08 PM
Some highlights of the above lengthy read:


1. According to the Cult Awareness Network, whose 23 chapters monitor more than 200 "mind control" cults, no group prompts more telephone pleas for help than does Scientology. Says Cynthia Kisser, the network's Chicago-based executive director: "Scientology is quite likely the most ruthless, the most classically terroristic, the most litigious and the most lucrative cult the country has ever seen. No cult extracts more money from its members." Agrees Vicki Aznaran, who was one of Scientology's six key leaders until she bolted from the church in 1987: "This is a criminal organization, day in and day out. It makes Jim and Tammy ((Bakker)) look like kindergarten."

2. During the early 1970s, the IRS conducted its own auditing sessions and proved that Hubbard was skimming millions of dollars from the church, laundering the money through dummy corporations in Panama and stashing it in Swiss bank accounts. Moreover, church members stole IRS documents, filed false tax returns and harassed the agency's employees. By late 1985, with high-level defectors accusing Hubbard of having stolen as much as $200 million from the church, the IRS was seeking an indictment of Hubbard for tax fraud. Scientology members "worked day and night" shredding documents the IRS sought, according to defector Aznaran, who took part in the scheme. Hubbard, who had been in hiding for five years, died before the criminal case could be prosecuted.

3. Harriet Baker learned the hard way about Scientology's business of selling religion. When Baker, 73, lost her husband to cancer, a Scientologist turned up at her Los Angeles home peddling a $1,300 auditing package to cure her grief. Some $15,000 later, the Scientologists discovered that her house was debt free. They arranged a $45,000 mortgage, which they pressured her to tap for more auditing until Baker's children helped their mother snap out of her daze. Last June, Baker demanded a $27,000 refund for unused services, prompting two cult members to show up at her door unannounced with an E-meter to interrogate her. Baker never got the money and, financially strapped, was forced to sell her house in September.

4. One legal goal of Scientology is to bankrupt the opposition or bury it under paper. The church has 71 active lawsuits against the IRS alone. One of them, Miscavige vs. IRS, has required the U.S. to produce an index of 52,000 pages of documents. Boston attorney Michael Flynn, who helped Scientology victims from 1979 to 1987, personally endured 14 frivolous lawsuits, all of them dismissed. Another lawyer, Joseph Yanny, believes the church "has so subverted justice and the judicial system that it should be barred from seeking equity in any court." He should know: Yanny represented the cult until 1987, when, he says, he was asked to help church officials steal medical records to blackmail an opposing attorney (who was allegedly beaten up instead). Since Yanny quit representing the church, he has been the target of death threats, burglaries, lawsuits and other harassment.



**NOTE** paragraph #3 is no lie. I have known people who, when saying to Scientology officials that they could not afford to "buy" any services from the CoS, were asked if they had any relatives they could borrow money from, and were pressured heavily (borderline harassment) to do so.

SCIENTOLOGY IS A SCAM OF THE FIRST ORDER.

IF MR. G WERE TO ACTUALLY FOLLOW THE TECH AND TEACHINGS OF SCIENTOLOGY, HE WOULD LEAVE SCIENTOLOGY IMMEDIATELY (if not sooner) AND STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM THEM.

If he is happy being a sheeple, then that is his loss....

Vinnie Velvet
07-08-2005, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by Hardrock69

SCIENTOLOGY IS A SCAM OF THE FIRST ORDER.

IF MR. G WERE TO ACTUALLY FOLLOW THE TECH AND TEACHINGS OF SCIENTOLOGY, HE WOULD LEAVE SCIENTOLOGY IMMEDIATELY (if not sooner) AND STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM THEM.

If he is happy being a sheeple, then that is his loss....

Yeah.

I wonder what OT level Mr. G is at?

:D

Possible he hasn't been told the story of Xenu!

Vinnie Velvet
07-08-2005, 04:40 PM
If anyone wants to read up on the lives that have been lost because of Scientology, go here: www.whyaretheydead.net

Some sad and horrifying deaths include:

Josephus Havenith: he died in a Scientology training camp in Florida. At the time, Scientologist officials claimed that the "60-year old" Havenith had died in bed of a heart attack. In reality, the 45 year-old was found in his bathtub, where he had been submerged in water so hot that it boiled away his flesh.

Or...

Karen Simon was a young British woman who rather suspiciously 'hanged herself' after being refused a contract with the maritime branch of the Religion. At the time, she was preparing a damning negative report on the church's activities.

and...

Pius Keel was a 22 year old man who wrote to his mother that he was sick of the swindle of Scientology: they had taken every last cent from him and he'd taken out substantial loans on their behalf, leaving himself deeply in debt. One day, his life ruined, he threw himself under a train.

Seshmeister
07-08-2005, 08:40 PM
Maybe Mr G is just a troll pretending to be a scientologist.

Scientologists are told to keep away from the internet(for obvious reasons...)

Nickdfresh
07-09-2005, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
Maybe Mr G is just a troll pretending to be a scientologist.

Scientologists are told to keep away from the internet(for obvious reasons...)

Good point, but I figured he'd go running once I put that TIME article on. And he did. I think he maybe legit.

Mr. G
07-10-2005, 12:04 AM
Actually Time retracted thier article years ago. This original thread had to do with Psychiatry but with all the adolescent squeeling nobody has posted one scientific study. I have answered many questions and backed up my claims but there hasen't been any claim backing on the other side. So I am guessing nobody wants to have a grownup conversation. Oh well. Life goes on.

Cathedral
07-10-2005, 01:22 AM
I am a scientific study, friend.
I don't need someone elses force-fed spycho babble in a pretty article to understand how complex the mind is.
And i certainly don't give a damn what some over paid actor has to say about any of it.
If he studied it, fine, "Good For You, Tom!"
I love it when people educate themselves about stuff, it's what they study and why that seems to never make sense to me. and then they run off at the mouth basically telling people to stop taking meds that you should never just 'stop-taking'.

His opinion is appreciated, his approach is dangerous but i agree with one Tommy Boy point, Awareness is good.

And i'm against giving any drugs to any children that are designed to subdue them and "mellow" them out.
(Children with clear and severe psychosis abnormalities, that do exist in society [see Michael Myers], and are locked up, are exempt)

That said, Doctors who are quick to medicate someone without really trying to help them understand their problems need to be regulated.
There are all sorts of issues that tie into psychiatry that need to be looked into very seriously.
First, look at some of the dangerous drugs being prescribed and getting rid of the bad shit that does more harm than good.

The rest is doing shit we all should be doing, exercising and living a healthier life.
A healthier body means a healthier mind, that's a fact.
Anything that shuts us down ain't good.

People just have to choose good Doctors above all else.

Seshmeister
07-10-2005, 01:32 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Actually Time retracted thier article years ago. This original thread had to do with Psychiatry but with all the adolescent squeeling nobody has posted one scientific study. I have answered many questions and backed up my claims but there hasen't been any claim backing on the other side. So I am guessing nobody wants to have a grownup conversation. Oh well. Life goes on.

You haven't backed up shit.

I posted exactly why Time 'retracted' their article. Do you have to read this thread with your eyes half closed in case you get into trouble?

Mr. G
07-10-2005, 07:26 PM
How about ANOTHER opinion from a psychologist.

The Following Was In The ConservativeVoice.com
1. Opinion Cruising Szasz Saturday, July 09, 2005 02:01:08 PM

Actor Tom Cruise created quite a stir on June 25 when he called psychiatry a "pseudoscience," asserted a chemical basis for Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder doesn't exist, and said that anti-depressant drugs masked problems-in-living. He used the actress Brooke Shields as a case in point, citing her postpartum depression, engendering a fair amount of hostility from those who disagreed with him, including Ms. Shields. The New York Times published her rejoinder on July 1. Cruise was criticized by psychiatric apologists and sycophants as irresponsible and dangerous for speaking his mind - and the truth.
A lot of people seem to have misunderstood what Tom Cruise said. It is not necessarily the case that he's a Scientology-brainwashed whacko, or that his ideas about psychiatry even came from the Church of Scientology. Cruise learned a lot about psychiatry from the writings of psychiatric abolitionist Thomas Szasz. Many people around the world consider Szasz an intellectual heavyweight, someone whose ideas about medicine, disease, science, liberty and responsibility should be taken seriously. Cruise has read a lot of Szasz's writings and he admires Szasz a great deal. (See a photograph taken last year of Szasz with his arm around Cruise at http://www.szasz.com/szaszcruise.gif.) His words echo Szaszian ideas. Szasz has upset many psychiatrists over the years because he is a member of the psychiatry and psychoanalysis clubs criticizing its own.
In real science this is expected to occur in order to advance scientific knowledge-theories must be falsifiable. In pseudoscience, such criticism is forbidden. The American Psychiatric Association (APA), responding to Cruise's comments on NBC's Today Show, asserts in a press release dated June 27 that "science has proven that mental illnesses are real medical conditions . . . and that it is unfortunate that a small number of individuals and groups persist in questioning its [mental health's] legitimacy." Is this claim by the APA actually true, or is it political rhetoric? Why would the APA be upset with someone who questions its legitimacy, disagrees with its ideas, explanations, and policy recommendations regarding "mental illness?" Actress Brooke Shields is understandably upset. She responded to Cruise claiming she has a disease caused by changing levels of estrogen and progesterone during and after pregnancy. This disease allegedly kept her from being the "loving parent . . . [she] is today." It is difficult to argue with someone who uses her own experience to prove that something is scientifically correct. If one shows how she is wrong, one can easily be accused of lacking compassion. Compassion has nothing to do with the truth. Critics of psychiatry are frequently accused of lacking compassion. I fail to see how depriving an innocent person of liberty, forcing a person to take drugs she doesn't want to take, and shocking her brain with electricity against her will-all done in the name of treating mental illness-are indications of compassion. What of the substance of Cruise's arguments?
The truth is science has never proven that mental illnesses are "real" medical conditions, anymore than it proved homosexuality is a disease. (Homosexuality was declassified as a disease by the APA in 1973, largely due to the writings of Thomas Szasz.) The truth is standard textbooks on pathology do not list mental illnesses among real diseases like cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, and syphilis. Why? Because only the body can be sick, not behavior. Certainly people exhibit irrational, socially unacceptable and abnormal behavior for all sorts of reasons. But it is wrong to call behaviors diseases. Diseases refer to physical lesions, wounds of the body, not behaviors, conduct, or deportment. In other words, Cruise is right. The truth is there is no evidence to support the idea that anti-depressant drugs cure or restore chemical imbalances, even though they may certainly help people to feel better about themselves. Szasz pointed this out years ago. These drugs influence chemicals in the body, but then everything we do is accompanied by chemical and electrical changes in the body. This is simply not the same as saying the changes in our body make us do this or that. We cannot tell who is depressed by drawing blood, studying fluid balances, or looking at pictures of the structure and function of the brain. There is no such thing as asymptomatic "mental illness"-yet there most certainly when it comes to real diseases like cancer and heart disease.
Szasz is best known for his insistence that "mental illness" is a metaphor, and that we go astray if we take the metaphor literally. Yet belief in mental illness is not his main target. In Szasz's view, individuals should be free to devote themselves to any variety of psychiatric belief and practice. What Szasz objects to is forcing people to see (or not see) a psychiatrist, to reside or not reside in a mental hospital, to partake (or not partake) of drugs, and to believe (or not believe) in any specific set of ideas. Cruise, again echoing Szasz, rightly objected to the involuntary administration of psychiatric "treatments." One way people try to discredit both Szasz and Cruise is by playing the Scientology-is-a-cult card.
Today, it is as fashionable to criticize Scientologists and Scientology as it was to criticize Jews and Judaism in 1930s and 1940s Germany. Scientology is recognized by our federal government as a religion and demands the same respect and tolerance we show any other religion. Instead of asking why Scientology endorses Thomas Szasz's ideas, we should be asking why other religions do not. The rule of cults is "thou shalt not disagree." Break the rule and you break the spell. Cruise broke a rule: Thou shalt not criticize psychiatry. Some say psychiatry is a cult. What is most upsetting to those in the psychiatry cult? That someone who attracts a lot of attention should dare to point out that the emperor called psychiatry has no clothes. That is exactly what Mr. Cruise has done. In so doing, his head sticks out above the crowd, to be sure, speaking truth to power, but largely because he is standing on the shoulders of Thomas Szasz.
Jeffrey A. Schaler, Ph.D., a psychologist, is a professor at American University's School of Public Affairs. His latest book is "Szasz Under Fire: The Psychiatric Abolitionist Faces His Critics" (Open Court, Chicago, 2004). He lives in Ellicott City, Maryland.

Nickdfresh
07-10-2005, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Actually Time retracted thier article years ago. This original thread had to do with Psychiatry but with all the adolescent squeeling nobody has posted one scientific study. I have answered many questions and backed up my claims but there hasen't been any claim backing on the other side. So I am guessing nobody wants to have a grownup conversation. Oh well. Life goes on.

Really? Show me the retraction statement then!

TIME's story has in fact been corroborated by recent reporting in THE BUFFALO NEWS.

Nickdfresh
07-10-2005, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
How about ANOTHER opinion from a psychologist.

The Following Was In The ConservativeVoice.com


Gee...I wonder who owns "Conservative Voice?" What a major national publication that is...:rolleyes:

rustoffa
07-10-2005, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
How about ANOTHER opinion from a psychologist.


This dude's probably ostricised as well. Good for him...there is no doubt over-prescribing of psychoactive drugs takes place.

"Doctors" don't tool around in Benzo's via yohimbe recommendations. Pharmaceutical companies make these people, and themselves rich selling pills.

That's a problem.

Proper usage of said drugs is not. Tom Cruise is a fucking idiot.....his generalized, slanted, attention-seeking comments are laughable.

I tell you what, put Tom Cruise and his space worshiping buddies to the task with a violent manic-depressive. I'm talking the real deal here...not some fucking melancholy housewife. They can put aloe salve on the motherfuckers emergency-room quality gashes he/she inflicts upon he/she's self. They can use organic cleaning solvents after he/she defacates and/or urinates all over their quarters. Sing a fucking song to the person...take 'em to the fucking park. None of it will work.

You know what will work?
A hardcore sedative, followed up with proper, long-term medication.

This shit is fucking ridiculous.

Mr. G
07-10-2005, 11:39 PM
You can always tell when someone is losing an intellectual argument, they attack the messenger instead of the message. Go ahead and make my point further. Go ahead. This is fun.

Seshmeister
07-11-2005, 12:03 AM
LOL!

Dude Scientology and Intellectual arguments don't mix...:D

Or were you talking about yourself.

Mr. G
07-11-2005, 12:10 AM
Hey you made my point AGAIN. Thank you.

Vinnie Velvet
07-11-2005, 10:19 AM
Cruise goes real creepy
By Nick Papps
July 11, 2005

KATIE Holmes felt real pain when Tom Cruise took her to Spain to meet up with his ex, Penelope Cruz Living in the Cruise lane has become even weirder for Katie Holmes.

Just when she thought she'd done it all with Cruise, he's now made Holmes meet his ex, Penelope Cruz, to receive her approval.
Cruise organised the cosy get-together at the Scientology Centre in Madrid.

Not only did Holmes have to meet Cruise's girlfriend of two years there, she also had to meet all Cruz's relos, who had flown in for the night.

The evening from hell kick-started with Holmes watching Cruise give Cruz a huge hug and scream "I love her" at his ex.

According to a Cruz insider, "You could almost see the hurt in Katie's eyes as she looked across at Tom and Penelope.

"It seemed difficult for Katie to handle meeting Penelope under such strange circumstances.

"Penelope still holds a place in her heart for Tom. They had a very passionate relationship."

Cruz and Holmes were then forced to hug. Holmes then got a chance to meet the Cruz family.

It's also been revealed that the 16 days in late May when Cruise and Holmes vanished were spent at a Scientology detox centre in Canada where Cruise helps recovering addicts.

Also, that $8.8 million rock on Katie's finger was selected by a Scientology adviser, not Tom, and it's got "spiritual powers", according to our (very in) spy.



:rolleyes:

Vinnie Velvet
07-11-2005, 10:46 AM
Sick, absoultely sick.

Poor kids.:(



TOM'S CONVERTING THE KIDS, TOO

IT'S official - Tom Cruise is raising his and Nicole Kidman's children as Scientologists.

According to the May issue of Source, a magazine endorsed by the Church of Scientology, Cruise's 12-year-old daughter, Isabella, has completed the "Basic Study Manual," an introductory level course in the sci-fi-based religion that's been embraced by a swarm of Hollywood celebrities.

Isabella and her 10-year-old brother, Connor, live with Cruise in Beverly Hills, where they're being home-schooled by his Scientologist sisters Cass and Marian, according to Cultnews.com.

If Isabella and Connor follow their famous father into the L. Ron Hubbard-invented ideology, it will be a victory for Cruise over his ex-wife. When Kidman and Cruise's marriage fizzled in 2001, many close to the couple blamed Scientology.

The thorny issue of whose faith their children would adopt was cited as a major factor in the split. Kidman is a devout Catholic, while "War of the Worlds" star Cruise has been one of Scientology's most outspoken proponents.

But their divorce settlement reportedly stipulates that both parents would make joint decisions about their children's education and religious upbringing.

Cultnews.com also speculates that Scientologists may eventually turn the children against Kidman.

According to the Web site, Scientologists hook up children to their goofy "e-meter" devices, which are used to "interrogate" them. The site claims that the kids are urged to denounce "non-believers" in their own families who are branded as "suppressive persons" if they object to the child's conversion to Scientology.

Kidman, who has remained steadfastly mum throughout Cruise's ongoing public meltdown and his relationship with fiancee Katie Holmes, could be branded a "suppressive person" and shunned by her own daughter for speaking out against her ex-husband's crusading ways, the site claims.

Reps for Cruise and Kidman were unavailable for comment.

Hardrock69
07-11-2005, 01:14 PM
This was in the paper this morning:


Mag: Katie is really under Tom's Spell

W Magazine paints a chilling picture of the future Mrs. Tom Cruise in it's August issue, portraying Katie Holmes, 26, "her beautiful green eyes focused on nothing in particular," gushing incessantly about her fiance.

In an excerpt at www.style.com, writer Robert Haskell describes Holmes as answering all questions with hosannas to Cruise, 42 - "man of my dreams...most incredible man....so generous and kind..."

Hovering nearby, he writes, is the "tall, cold-eyed Jessica Rodriguez," Holmes' "Scientologist Chaperone." When Holmes is asked about rumours that Cruise made a financial arrangement with her after auditioning Scarlett Johanson, Jessica Alba and Kate Bosworth, Rodriguez jumps in, "The truth is, we don't read that stuff because it's just rude."

The magazine will be out July 22.

Vinnie Velvet
07-11-2005, 04:10 PM
Oh man.

If I were Katie's parents I'd be seriously worried for their daughter.

Maybe they're under the fucking spell too?:rolleyes:

So far, it hasn't helped Miss Holmes' career.

She reportedly dropped a high profile role to play a drug addict in a movie which would've brought her some legitimacy in her acting or some critical praise. Apparently Cruise and his Scientology goons nixed the whole thing for her because it dealt with drugs.

Also, the producers of Batman Begins have already announced that she will not be in the sequel -- whereas everyone else have already signed on.

In Yodaspeak, "The good-natured, young girl from Toledo, gone she is, consumed by Tom Cruise and Scientology".

rustoffa
07-11-2005, 10:10 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
You can always tell when someone is losing an intellectual argument, they attack the messenger instead of the message. Go ahead and make my point further. Go ahead. This is fun.


I more than laid waste to the message dude. If I attacked the messenger...like literally?

Shit, I'd just bust out a squirrel trap. That cocktail mixin' thespian is hardly bigger than a housecat.

Mr. G
07-11-2005, 10:56 PM
You can bitch and whine as much as you want but you can never post a scientific study that proves the chemical imbalance theory. I hate to beat a dead horse but nobody wants to step up to the plate. OK with me. And no I didn't mean literally.

rustoffa
07-11-2005, 11:23 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
You can bitch and whine as much as you want but you can never post a scientific study that proves the chemical imbalance theory. I hate to beat a dead horse but nobody wants to step up to the plate. OK with me. And no I didn't mean literally.

I'm not bitching.
I'm not whining.
As a matter of fact, I'm busting out comedic relief.

Maybe it isn't a chemical imbalance? Maybe violent manic depressives' and 3rd level bi-polars are the result of their mothers competing in roller derbys. Fuck, it could boil down to the freon problem in older Lincoln-Mercury products. I could give a shit less where they have their deep-seeded Freudian roots planted.

I'll tell you this much, a good-ol' fashioned Haldol/Lithium cocktail, administered properly, will replace biting with drooling.

BAM.

The world's a safer place.

Seshmeister
07-12-2005, 01:14 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
You can bitch and whine as much as you want but you can never post a scientific study that proves the chemical imbalance theory. I hate to beat a dead horse but nobody wants to step up to the plate. OK with me. And no I didn't mean literally.

Why would anyone go and try and find a scientific study for someone that has shown that they are a brainwashed

What's the point?

If you can't see what is patently obvious about your cult conning, stealing and lying then the semantics of the brains chemical balance are hardly going to affect your point of view.

And incidently if the brain doesn't work on electrical and chemical signals how does it work? Dragons or aliens?

Tell you what send me some money and I'll tell you the BIG secrets like how you are OWNED...:)

Mr. G
07-12-2005, 09:07 PM
Well here is the point. The Psychs have been saying for decades that there IS a chemical imbalance and a lot of people have decided that it is true without one study. A sheep is someone who just goes along and doesn't have thier own point of view based on reason, sound familiar? Feel free to think I am brainwashed but I am asking a simple question, I am not telling you your point of view I am asking you to back it up. Simple no?

ashstralia
07-13-2005, 05:32 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Well here is the point. The Psychs have been saying for decades that there IS a chemical imbalance and a lot of people have decided that it is true without one study. A sheep is someone who just goes along and doesn't have thier own point of view based on reason, sound familiar? Feel free to think I am brainwashed but I am asking a simple question, I am not telling you your point of view I am asking you to back it up. Simple no?

okay, say i'm curious and want to give scientology a go.

can i just rock up on sunday, and sit up the back?

are you guys in the phone book?

NATEDOG001976
07-13-2005, 05:59 AM
Tom Cruise is a moron. I wish he would go away!

Nickdfresh
07-13-2005, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Well here is the point. The Psychs have been saying for decades that there IS a chemical imbalance and a lot of people have decided that it is true without one study. A sheep is someone who just goes along and doesn't have thier own point of view based on reason, sound familiar? Feel free to think I am brainwashed but I am asking a simple question, I am not telling you your point of view I am asking you to back it up. Simple no?

Can you show me a study on the effectiveness and validity of E-Meter readings?
http://www.utb.falun.se/hbo/projekt/religion/religionht98/Scientologi/emeter.gif

Hardrock69
07-15-2005, 06:14 PM
I doubt he can. He cannot even prove that there ISN'T such a thing as a "chemical imbalance".

He is just regurgitating the Gospel of St. L. Ron Hoover.

There is such a thing though as a FINANCIAL imbalance....where a person joins the CoS and ends up broke, cause the CoS has convinced him that he is insane, and can only get better through sacrificing his income to them....

superdave
07-15-2005, 06:21 PM
The local radio station said the other day that Tom & Rob Thomas have 'something' going on

Nickdfresh
07-15-2005, 07:23 PM
Originally posted by superdave
The local radio station said the other day that Tom & Rob Thomas have 'something' going on

Well, they'd be good at blowing each other. TOM CRUISE really sucks as an actor and ROB THOMAS' music sucks almost as hard.

Mr. G
07-15-2005, 07:36 PM
I would be happy to answer the question, but first are you conceding that there is no such study?

Nickdfresh
07-15-2005, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
I would be happy to answer the question, but first are you conceding that there is no such study?

Study on what? The sex habits of TOM CRUISE and BOBIN' THOMAS?

thome
07-15-2005, 07:40 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Can you show me a study on the effectiveness and validity of E-Meter readings?
http://www.utb.falun.se/hbo/projekt/religion/religionht98/Scientologi/emeter.gif
Which end goes in the scientologists ass

Nickdfresh
07-15-2005, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by thome
Which end goes in the scientologists ass


Ha ha! THOME's funny tonight! :D

One end goes in the Scientologist's ass; the end other goes into the bank account of the modern "Church" of Scientology.

As for the notion of chemical imbalances in the brain being a myth, I could really give a shit. I don't like the drug companies, they surely invent or exaggerate mental illnesses to increase sales, or and have many questionable practices in regards to advertising. But their drugs seem to genuinely help a lot of people, some I have in fact known, while a minority are not helped, or develop other symptoms from the cure that are worse than the disease.

In fact, many drugs offered by drug companies save millions if not billions of dollars every year by preventing surgeries that would otherwise have been necessary with out these prescriptions. Just what has Scientology offered to this country? They sue the IRS, have FBI Agents followed, intimidate journalists and writers with sleaze-bag private-eyes, but how much do they donate to charities? What benevolent actions do they carry out without expecting something in return from those they helped? The Church of Scientology is almost like a dictatorship that raises orphans, to be secret police killers. I can surmise nothing that is positive about Scientology. This isn't an 'either-or' for me, what's been instilled into you my friend MR. G is the notion of "Binary Oppositions," that is: psychiatry is "a hoax," therefore, Scientology is the only "true" alternative or pathway to truth, enlightenment, well-being, and self-realization. One is false, therefore the other must be true. It's merely a pseudo-logical equation of binary dichotomies. In fact this line of thinking is widely discredited by great thinkers such as DERRIDA.

I happen to think that psychiatry is about 70% bullshit, (read a couple of books by FREUD such as On Civilization And It's Discontents (which is the guy HUBBARD ripped off anyways) or by CARL JUNG, and I think one may find the path to some self-realizations and perhaps a little piece of mind. Books are cheap, you don't have to send a portion of your yearly income to these guys, and you'll be far less deluded by pseudo-scientific hogwash.

That being said, SCIENTOLOGY has been shown to 100% bullshit. A manipulative cult that is based on fear, control, intimidation, and greed. If that is your spiritual truth, good luck my friend.

BTW, you never responded to me calling you out on the TIME magazine "retraction" lie you told. That seems to be a SCIENTOLOGY modus operandi: denial and lies. So, how is that E-Meter reading tonight?

ashstralia
07-16-2005, 05:17 AM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^



what he said!!!!

magnificent post, nick.

Nickdfresh
07-16-2005, 05:26 AM
Thanks ASH, this "debate" has grown irritating.

rustoffa
07-17-2005, 12:22 AM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Thanks ASH, this "debate" has grown irritating.

This 'ell cheer you up.

Tom Cruise explains Scientology! (http://liquidgeneration.com/games/cruise_scientology.asp)

Nickdfresh
07-17-2005, 01:22 AM
Originally posted by rustoffa
This 'ell cheer you up.

Tom Cruise explains Scientology! (http://liquidgeneration.com/games/cruise_scientology.asp)

AHahahaha! Fucking priceless!:D Five more stars to you.


<a href="http://www.liquidgeneration.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.liquidgeneration.com/games/sKookyLikeCruise.jpg" border="0"></a>

joe son of DLR
07-17-2005, 10:34 AM
watching that fucking great movie on scientology confirms my belief that tom cruise is a complete weirdo and should not be allowed near dakota fanning because he is probably converting her as we speak

i think that if Katie holmes is weird enough to be in love with a weirdo like tom they deserve each other

and if what you say nick about rob thomas maybe he can sing shit songs at their freak fest wedding

Hardrock69
07-18-2005, 02:21 PM
What I find bizarre is that while we discuss numerous aspects of this warped buncha psychiatric failures who droolingly give away their life's savings to the Cos (Church Of Stealing), Mr. G. is unable to make a single post on a subject other than "Chemical Imbalance" in humans.

Methinks he is the bastard stepchild of the General in the movie "Dr. Strangelove" who has this warped fixation on "our precious bodily fluids".

:D

Vinnie Velvet
07-18-2005, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by rustoffa
This 'ell cheer you up.

Tom Cruise explains Scientology! (http://liquidgeneration.com/games/cruise_scientology.asp)

Classic!!

:D

Hardrock69
07-18-2005, 02:53 PM
Originally posted by rustoffa
This 'ell cheer you up.

Tom Cruise explains Scientology! (http://liquidgeneration.com/games/cruise_scientology.asp)

LMFAO!!!

One thing they did not mention though....there are more OT levels than just 7. They deal with advanced butt-fucking, focusing on havingness of the Giant GodCock of Xenu, and unique methods to wring even MORE KASH out of their poor, gullible victims.

If you wish to advance to the very highest OT levels in CoS, you have to be telepathically transported to the planet Fornax, where you will be forced to work for 200,000 years in the Cosmic Slop House as the Imperial Butt-Boy for all of the visiting creatures from several different galaxies in 29 dimensions.

Once you have had your bunghole stretched by the dreaded Atomic Meat Monster of Gayus 12, then you will be judged as having fulfilled your duties as a cosmic slut-whore of the highest order....and you will be allowed to come back to Earth to work as a mentally Challenged Janitor at OT Level IX at the Slave Facility in Clearwater, Florida.

Here is a picture of these poor OT IX poster children for lobotomy being forced to clean a pool at the Clearwater facility, or else risk being fucked to death by one of the above mentioned Atomic Dick Monsters...

Hardrock69
07-18-2005, 03:12 PM
Oh and here is an investigative report by the Clearwater Police Department on the CoS.

And yes, the CoS did their damndest to make the report disappear.


Haha, stoopid fuckers, it will never go away....

http://www.lermanet.com/emmons/emmonsindex.htm

*note* it is a VERY lengthy read, though only 2 pages long.

Here is an interesting example of the ethical standards to which the CoS holds itself and it's membership:

"This investigator is currently in contact with attorneys for potential
witnesses who can provide information concerning covert operations
conducted by the Scientology at the bidding of the Scientology management
including its founder, L. Ron Hubbard. Other potential witnesses can
verify financial transactions to L. Ron Hubbard, some of which took place
in Clearwater, Florida.

Potential witnesses can provide not only verbal evidence but in some cases
documentation and tape recordings in which the management of Scientology
openly discuss fraudulent transfers of monies and discuss these operations
in these terms."

Seems the CoS was attempting to rival the Catholic Church in it's corruption, unethical behaviour, and criminal activities.

Hardrock69
07-18-2005, 03:19 PM
And here are the transcripts from the 1982 Clearwater hearings, where L. Ron Hoover's own son reveals that his dad wanted him to steal a Hydrogen Bomb.

http://www.lermanet2.com/82cwcommission/

PFTSOF
07-18-2005, 04:41 PM
http://www.tomcruiseisnuts.com/images/with_star.jpg

PFTSOF
07-18-2005, 04:43 PM
http://www.tomcruiseisnuts.com/images/CruisePeanuts.jpg

Mr. G
07-18-2005, 11:45 PM
As I have said before, I have answered many questions but have not once pushed Scientology on anyone. Not once. I don't care what you think of it, at all. No really. This thread was started with the idea that Tom Cruise doesn't know Psychiatry. So that means that some of the people here do. Fair enough? So I posed the question that they should post just ONE scientific study on the theory on chemical imbalances. Of course everyone ran from that challange because they know it doesn't exist. I even posted neurologists and Psychiatrists who said that it is a scam. This is them saying it, not me. If you want to be pro Psychiatry be my guest but know that it is based on your opinion not science.

rustoffa
07-19-2005, 12:15 AM
LMMFAO!


The Chemical Imbalance in Mental Health Problems
Joseph M. Carver, Ph.D. of www.drjoecarver.com by Joseph M. Carver, Ph.D.



Introduction

Over the years, advances in neurology and research have simplified the way psychologists, psychiatrists, and others diagnosis and treat mental health problems. In over one hundred years of mental health treatment, the symptoms and behaviors associated with certain mental health conditions have remained the same. Psychotic disorders, where the individual often can’t distinguish between reality and their fantasies, still have auditory hallucinations. Depressed individuals still can’t sleep and remain preoccupied with the past. Hyperactive children (Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder or ADHD) still exhibit uncontrollable restlessness.

When patients first began reclining on the couches of psychoanalytic psychiatrists, the depressed folks talked about their past. This led the founders of psychology and psychiatry to believe that issues that began in childhood caused many mental health problems. But questions were still not answered. Why would a bad relationship with your mother create the appetite loss found in depression, especially when eating problems only started several months prior to the session? By what strange mechanism would a childhood issue create an auditory hallucination, often years after the reported traumatic event? Many people had difficult childhoods, but they didn’t hallucinate and have a great appetite. It became clear that many mental health problems also had a physical component that involved changes in concentration, sleep, appetite, speech pattern, energy level, perceptions (hallucinations), and motivation. Studies began to determine the connection, if indeed one was present, between the condition of the patient and the physical signs/symptoms that were also present.

The picture became easier to understand when chemicals in the brain called “neurotransmitters” were discovered. The brain consists of billions of neurons or cells that must communicate with each other. The communication between neurons maintains all body functions, informs us when a fly lands on our hand, or when we have pain. The communication between neurons is controlled by the brain’s type and level of neurotransmitters. Neurotransmitters are chemical substances that control and create signals in the brain both between and within neurons. Without neurotransmitters, there would be no communication between neurons. The heart wouldn’t get a signal to beat, arms and legs wouldn’t know to move, etc.

As we discovered more about neurotransmitters, we began to identify which neurotransmitters controlled certain bodily functions or which were related to certain emotional/psychiatric difficulties. Serotonin, a neurotransmitter, was found to be related to body temperature and the onset of sleep. Research also identified Serotonin as related to depression and later to a variety of mental health conditions such as anorexia and obsessive-compulsive disorder.

As research in neurotransmitters continued, studies between neurotransmitters and mental conditions revealed a strong connection between amounts of certain neurotransmitters in the brain and the presence of specific psychiatric conditions. Using an everyday example, our automobile operates by using a variety of fluids such as engine oil, transmission fluid, brake fluid, and coolant (anti-freeze). Every automobile has a way to measure the levels or amounts of each of these needed liquids such as the dipstick for oil and transmission fluid and marked indicators for anti-freeze and brake-fluid levels. Using our dipstick to measure engine oil, for an example, we can find our engine to be found one, two, or even three quarts low. After a recent oil change, the dipstick may also tell us that we have excessive oil in the engine. To work properly, all fluid levels must be in the “normal range” as indicated by the dipstick. When we receive a blood test, values of certain blood components are given with the “normal range” also provided, indicating if a blood chemical is below or above the average range.

Neurological research has identified over fifty (50) neurotransmitters in the brain. Research also tells us that several neurotransmitters are related to mental health problems – Dopamine, Serotonin, Norepinephrine, and GABA (Gamma Aminobutyric Acid). Too much or too little of these neurotransmitters are now felt to produce psychiatric conditions such as schizophrenia, depression, bi-polar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and ADHD.

Unfortunately, the body doesn’t have a built-in dipstick for neurotransmitters, at least one that’s inexpensive enough for community mental health practice. There are advanced imaging techniques such as Positron Emission Tomography (PET Scans) that are being utilized in research and in the development of medications that directly influence changes in specific neurotransmitters. Lacking a PET Scanner, most professionals evaluate neurotransmitter levels by looking for indicators in thought, behavior, mood, perception, and/or speech that are considered related to levels of certain neurotransmitters.

This is perhaps best illustrated in individuals with depressed mood. The mental health professional is often required to separate those who would benefit from counseling and those who may require counseling and an antidepressant medication. The key is looking for those symptoms that are known to be related to chemical changes in the brain. For example, situational depression often produces sad expressions, worry, pessimistic attitude and other features but does not create prolonged changes in the physical symptoms such as changes in sexual interest, appetite, or sleep. The continued presence of physical symptoms tells us that the brain’s neurotransmitter levels have changed.

The technical aspects of neurotransmitter levels, the psychiatric symptoms they produce, and how medications have been developed to raise or lower the brain levels of these neurotransmitters can be very complicated. For this reason, the same procedure of explaining other medical conditions where medication brings symptoms back to the “normal range” is often used. Medical patients with high blood pressure, high blood sugar, or high cholesterol are informed that their body chemistry is too high, or in some cases, too low and must be corrected with medication.

For many years, mental health professionals have used the term “chemical imbalance” to explain the need for medications that are used to treat mental health conditions. This simple and commonly used explanation recognizes that the condition is a medical problem and that it can be treated with medication. The “chemical imbalance” explanation also reflects the overall theme of treatment – identifying what neurotransmitters are involved in the clinical symptom picture and with medication, attempting to return that neurotransmitter level back to the “normal range”.

Your Neurotransmitter Levels and Emotional Health

Your emotional health is a combination of attitudes, personality, support systems, and your brain’s neurotransmitter levels. Positive attitudes and a healthy personality help us through life’s difficulties and a good support system of family and friends is also valuable during times of trouble. Despite having these resources, there are times when coping with our experiences and life events changes our neurotransmitter status. Like an overheated automobile, we begin to have difficulty operating properly.

We are all at-risk for changes in our brain’s chemistry. Mostly commonly, we will experience depression, anxiety, or stress reactions. As our neurotransmitters change, they bring with them additional symptoms, behaviors, and sensations that add to our on-going difficulties. Recognizing these changes is an important part of treatment and returning your life to normal and reducing our stress.

This discussion is offered to explain how the neurotransmitter system in the brain can create psychiatric conditions and mental health problems. It is hoped the discussion will provide information that will be of value to those who suspect their neurotransmitter system is creating problems.

rustoffa
07-19-2005, 12:30 AM
Bull Terrier Neurological Disorder Resources

This site was last updated Tuesday, June 07, 2005 . Most of the pages can be accessed from the navigation menus to the left and top of this page, and from links within those main category pages. For an ordered list of all files on the site, please see our Site Map.
Welcome!

The primary focus of this site is to help owners of dogs with a neurologically based behavioral disorder such as Compulsive Tail Chasing learn more about these issues and find out where they need to go to get help. We also provide a support group hosted by Yahoo! Groups where people can share their experiences with other owners of affected dogs.

Another goal of this site is to provide details on the Bull Terrier Compulsive Tail Chasing study coordinated by Dr. Alice Moon-Fanelli at Tufts. Dr. Moon-Fanelli, who has spent over a decade studying spinning and helping affected dogs, has made available to us all the necessary forms and information for those interested in participating in the study.

Let us know what you think of this site - sign our guestbook.
Not Just for Bull Terriers...

While much of the information on this site is geared towards Bull Terriers and the neurological disorders most common to this breed, problems such as Sudden Onset Aggression and Canine Compulsive Disorders also affect many other breeds. Our Yahoo! Group--which, to the best of our knowledge, is the only resource of its' kind for any breed at this time-- is open everyone and we have quite a few members who have breeds other than Bull Terriers.
Please Help!

Dr. Alice Moon-Fanelli needs Bull Terriers to take part in the Compulsive Tail Chasing study. We implore all owners and breeders to take the time to help us find the cause of this disorder - dogs' lives depend on it.

Rebel
07-19-2005, 01:17 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Well here is the point. The Psychs have been saying for decades that there IS a chemical imbalance and a lot of people have decided that it is true without one study. A sheep is someone who just goes along and doesn't have thier own point of view based on reason, sound familiar? Feel free to think I am brainwashed but I am asking a simple question, I am not telling you your point of view I am asking you to back it up. Simple no?

I can point you to thousands of studies which show the effectiveness of SSRIs, TCAs, and MAOIs. All of these drugs alter the chemical layout of your brain, whether it's norepi, serotonin, epi, etc. People are quick to point a finger and say "There's no PROOF of a chemical imbalance." It's basically saying the same thing as "I don't believe the car is out of gas until I pull the gas tank out and look in it", at least IMO. If it works, it works, and they do work.

Are they overused? In many cases, yes, in some cases they aren't used enough IMO. Many docs like to cover up problems with benzos and narcs, and not treat the real issue, but that's a whole other arguement there.

What has me bothered is the effect things like this have (the Cruise incident). There is a small percentage of people who will see this, and believe him. Then who has to deal with them all night at the ER when they stop taking their Effexor (and don't tell me different, I see it literally every night I work). It's really sad when things like this occur. Just because they can write a song, or act in a movie, they think they are all of a sudden political experts, or can diagnose people's problems during a Matt Lauer interview.

Yes psychs have said for decades there is chemical imbalance, and I don't have to look in the gas tank to see it. I've seen it work, and I've seen it work miracles, literally. So I don't need Cruise or some scientology crackpot telling me how medicine should be practiced.

Rebel
07-19-2005, 01:34 AM
Here's a study under the recruitement phase that the NIMH is currently running. There have been studies like this previously, which do show certain imbalances, but PROOF.....is a strange word.

Pretty much, this study is just looking to prove the basis of the MOA of SSRIs and some of the other antidepressants currently used.

Just check out the purpose section to get an idea of what the study is. This stuff isn't new, of course there's never PROOF :D

------------------------------

Examination of Brain Serotonin Receptors in Patients with Mood Disorders

This study is currently recruiting patients.

Sponsored by: National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Information provided by: Warren G Magnuson Clinical Center (CC)


Purpose

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the function of certain brain chemicals and receptors in patients with mood disorders. This study will also examine how the stress hormone cortisol affects brain function.
Data suggest that serotonin 1A (5-HT1A) receptor function is abnormal in patients with mood disorders, such as major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BP). However, these data are limited because they are based on small sample sizes. In this study, PET scans will be used to compare 5-HT1A receptor binding potential between mood disorder patients and healthy volunteers.
All participants will have an initial medical and psychiatric evaluation. Depression severity, anxiety, negative thinking, level of functioning, intelligence, and cognitive functions will be measured. Urine, saliva, and blood will be collected. Women will have a pregnancy test and tests to determine menstrual phase and time of ovulation. Participants will undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and PET scans of the brain. Some participants will have other procedures such as a lumbar puncture. Participants with Cushing's disease will undergo imaging as a comparison group.
Condition Intervention
Mood Disorder
Drug: 15 O-water
Drug: FCWAY


Study Type: Observational
Study Design: Natural History

Official Title: Serotonin1A Receptor and Serotonin Transporter Imaging In Mood Disorders

Further Study Details:

Expected Total Enrollment: 286
Study start: October 4, 2001


Multiple lines of evidence suggest that serotonin1A (5-HT1A) receptor and serotonin transporter (5-HTT) function is abnormal in major depressive disorder (MDD) and that somatic antidepressant treatments effect changes the function of these systems that are relevant to their therapeutic mechanisms. The data supporting these hypotheses have been obtained by assessing neuroendocrine and temperature responses to 5-HT1A agonists in MDD subjects, measuring 5-HT1A receptor and 5-HTT binding in brain tissue acquired post mortem from small samples of MDD subjects, and examining effects on 5-HT1A receptor function in rats following antidepressant drug (AD) administration. The recent development of highly selective 5-HT1A receptor and 5-HTT radioligands for positron emission tomography (PET) imaging made direct, noninvasive exploration of the central serotonin sites binding possible. Two studies conducted using one of these, [carbonyl-11C]-WAY-100635, found reduced 5-HT1A receptor binding potential (BP) in the mesiotemporal cortex, the raphe, and the prefrontal cortex (PFC). Pilot data from these studies suggested that the abnormal reduction in 5-HT1A receptor BP is more prominent in bipolar disorder (BD) than MDD subjects (i.e., unipolar depressives) who did not have bipolar relatives, and that it exists independently of mood state.
However, these data have the limitations that the subject samples studied in these preliminary post mortem and PET series have been small, and that [carbonyl-11C]WAY-100635 uptake is difficult to quantitate in PET images. Therefore, these observations require replication in subject samples large enough to establish main effects of diagnostic subtype using a 5-HT1A receptor radioligand that can be validly quantitated. A selective 5-HT1A receptor radioligand suitable for this purpose, [18F]FC-WAY100635 ([18F]FCWAY), has recently been developed at the NIH. In addition, a recently developed selective 5-HTT ligand, [11C] DASB provides a unique opportunity to image the 5-HTT in the same depressed sample.
The proposed study will advance knowledge regarding the neurobiology of mood disorders by employing PET and [18F]FCWAY and [11C] DASB to compare 5-HT1A receptor BP between mood disordered and healthy control subjects in the mesiotemporal cortex, raphe, anterior cingulate gyrus, and left orbital cortex. The following hypotheses, based upon pilot data acquired using [carbonyl-11C]-WAY-100636, will be tested: 1) Depressives have reduced 5-HT1A receptor binding relative to healthy controls. 2) Bipolar depressives will have significantly greater reductions in 5-HT1A receptor binding than unipolar depressives with only unipolar relatives. A pilot study in which bipolar depressives are treated with lithium or divalproex and then re-imaged will test the third hypothesis, that 5-HT1A receptor binding will increase in bipolar subjects during mood stabilizer therapy.
Finally, because central 5-HT1A receptor density is down-regulated in rodents by corticosterone administration and by stress-mediated corticosterone secretion, assessments of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis activity (which is commonly elevated in MDD and BD), will be assessed to determine whether down-regulation of 5-HT1A receptors correlates with cortisol hypersecretion in mood disorders. Because this down-regulation may play a compensatory role to reduce cortisol secretion, neuroendocrine assessments of long-standing rather than acute hypercortisolism and of the pathophysiological diathesis to hypersecrete cortisol will be emphasized as providing the most sensitive correlates of reduced 5-HT1A receptor binding. A medical control group with Cushing's Disease will also be imaged to determine whether pathological elevation of glucocorticoid levels down-regulates 5-HT1A receptor expression in humans, as it does in rats.
Eligibility

Genders Eligible for Study: Both
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Criteria
INCLUSION CRITERIA:
MDD SAMPLES:
Sixty subjects (ages 18 to 60) with MDD will be selected who additionally meet criteria for one of 3 subgroups:
A) MDD, Currently depressed with FPDD, as defined by DSM-IV criteria for recurrent MDD, currently in a major depressive episode, who have a first degree relative with MDD but no first degree relatives with mania, alcoholism, or antisocial personality disorder.
B) MDD, Currently in remission with a history of FPDD, defined as a period of at least six months with no more than one clinically significant symptom, and during which time subjects were not taking an AD agent. Subjects will thus meet the historical criteria for recurrent MDD (DSM-IV). We will also require that subjects previously had a least one antidepressant drug trial, to ensure that the severity of previous episodes warranted treatment.
C) MDD, Currently depressed, non-FPDD. To assess the specificity of the findings in MDD to FPDD, a sample meeting criteria for MDD, currently in a depressive episode, but not FPDD will also be imaged.
BIPOLAR DEPRESSED SAMPLE:
Twenty subjects (ages 18 to 60) who meet DSM-IV criteria for bipolar disorder and are currently in a major depressive episode. Subjects may be inpatients or outpatients. Because effective treatment will not be discontinued for the purposes of this protocol, subjects will be identified who have never been treated or who have discontinued medication due to lack of efficacy, noncompliance, physician order or other reasons prior to study entry.
HEALTHY, LOW RISK, CONTROL SAMPLE:
Forty subjects (ages 18 to 60) who have not met criteria for any major psychiatric disorder. The control subjects will have no known first or second degree relatives with mood disorders.
CUSHINGS DISEASE CONTROL SAMPLE:
Ten subjects (ages 18 to 60) with probable Cushing's Disease will be recruited who have both clinical and biochemical evidence of hypercortisolism (including urinary free cortisol excretion higher than the upper limit of normal (greater than 248) nmole/day, and marked central adiposity, cutaneous atrophy, proximal myopathy, and large purple striae). The diagnosis of probable Cushing's Disease will also have been established prior to referral via CRH and ACTH.
MENSTRUALLY-RELATED DYSPHORIC DISORDER SAMPLE:
(n equals 30; ages 18-50). These females are recruited, screened and diagnosed by collaboration under protocol number 81-M-0126, previously approved by IRB, entitled 'The Phenomenology and Biophysiology of Menstrually Regulated Mood and Behavioral Disorders', principal investigator, David Rubinow, M.D. As described in that protocol these subjects must have a regular menstrual cycle lasting 21 - 33 days and meet the following criteria: 1) history within the last two years of at least six months with menstrually-related mood or behavioral disturbances of at least moderate severity - that is, disturbances that are distinct in appearance and associated with a notable degree of subjective distress; 2) a 30 percent increase in mean negative mood ratings (relative to the range of the scale employed) in the premenstrual week compared with the week following the end of menses in at least two of the three cycles; 3) age 18 to 50; 4) not pregnant and in good medical health; 5) regular menses.
REMITTED MDD WITH AND WITHOUT A HISTORY OF PPD:
(n=40; ages 18-40). These subjects are recruited, screened and diagnosed by collaboration under 95-M-0097, previously approved by IRB entitled An Endocrine Modal for Postpartum Mood Disorders. These subjects will have a history of DSM-IV MDD. Twenty will also have had a hypomanic/manic episode that occurred within three months of childbirth and twenty will have not had the latter within three months of childbirth. Women will have been well for a minimum of one year, have a regular menstrual cycle for at least three months, medication free (including birth control pill), have no history of puerperal suicide attempts or psychotic episodes requiring hospitalization. Any women with a current axis I psychiatric diagnosis will be excluded from participating in this protocol.
HEALTHY FEMALE CONTROLS UNDER 95-M-0097:
(n=20, age 18-40). These healthy control women are under an identical drug administration regimen as the 40 remitted MDD women above and will similarly be recruited and screened under 95-M-0097. They will meet the same criteria specified for the remitted MDD group above but will not have any past or present Axis I diagnosis or evidence of menstrually related mood disorders. This healthy sample of females will have given birth.
EXCLUSION CRITERIA:
Subjects must not have taken antidepressant or other medications likely to alter monoamine neurochemistry or cerebrovascular function for at least 3 weeks (8 weeks for fluoxetine) prior to scanning. Subjects being scanned at two points or the same point twice in their menstrual cycle must not have taken birth control pills for at least 6 months prior to scanning. However, effective medications will not be discontinued for the purposes of this study. Instead, subjects will be recruited who are not currently receiving psychotropic drugs. Subjects will also be excluded if they have:
a) serious suicidal ideation or behavior;
b) psychosis to the extent that the ability to provide informed consent is in doubt;
c) medical or neurological illnesses likely to affect physiology or anatomy;
d) a history of drug or alcohol abuse within 1 year or a lifetime history of alcohol or drug dependence (DSM IV criteria);
e) current pregnancy
f) current breast feeding;
g) general MRI exclusion criteria;
h) previous exposure to ecstasy (i.e. MDMA) which has neurotoxic effects on 5-HTT expressing neurons.
Subjects beyond age 50 are excluded from the MRMD sample due to peri-menopausal status and subjects beyond age 60 are excluded to reduce the biological heterogeneity encompassed by the MDD criteria, since depressives whose age-at MDD-onset is later than 60 have a far greater likelihood of having MRI correlates of cerebrovascular disease than age-matched, healthy controls or age-matched, early-onset depressives.
Subjects whose first major depressive episodes arose temporally after other major medical or psychiatric conditions will also be excluded.
Location and Contact Information

Please refer to this study by ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00026832


Maryland
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, Maryland, 20892, United States; Recruiting
Patient Recruitment and Public Liaison Office 1-800-411-1222 prpl@mail.cc.nih.gov
TTY 1-866-411-1010

More Information

Detailed Web Page

Publications

Drevets WC, Frank E, Price JC, Kupfer DJ, Holt D, Greer PJ, Huang Y, Gautier C, Mathis C. PET imaging of serotonin 1A receptor binding in depression. Biol Psychiatry. 1999 Nov 15;46(10):1375-87.

Gunn RN, Sargent PA, Bench CJ, Rabiner EA, Osman S, Pike VW, Hume SP, Grasby PM, Lammertsma AA. Tracer kinetic modeling of the 5-HT1A receptor ligand [carbonyl-11C]WAY-100635 for PET. Neuroimage. 1998 Nov;8(4):426-40.

Sargent PA, Kjaer KH, Bench CJ, Rabiner EA, Messa C, Meyer J, Gunn RN, Grasby PM, Cowen PJ. Brain serotonin1A receptor binding measured by positron emission tomography with [11C]WAY-100635: effects of depression and antidepressant treatment. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000 Feb;57(2):174-80.

Study ID Numbers: 020047; 02-M-0047
Record last reviewed: October 4, 2004
Last Updated: June 23, 2005
Record first received: November 14, 2001
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00026832
Health Authority: United States: Federal Government
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on 2005-07-18

U.S. National Library of Medicine, Contact NLM Customer Service
National Institutes of Health, Department of Health & Human Services
Copyright, Privacy, Accessibility, Freedom of Information Act

Rebel
07-19-2005, 01:37 AM
oops, taken from clinicaltrials.gov

sponsored by the National Institute for Mental Health

can't have anybody coming down on us lol

Mr. G
07-19-2005, 02:21 AM
Yes I am sure there are many people who feel they have been benefited by these drugs, I am not debating that. One thing I have noticed in psych drug commercials is they say the problem "might" be caused by a chemical imbalance. Key word "might". Since Cruise came out against unecessary drugging many Psychs and Neurologiests have also come out exposing the scam as you may have seen posted here. This is just one post at one website but just watch what happens as more and more people become educated in this subject. You gotta hand it to Tom for sticking his neck out about something he cares about. He didn't have to.

Rebel
07-19-2005, 02:30 AM
I'm sure Tom has studied the drug commercials very hard to gain his clinical expertise.

I've read literally thousands of studies, and I wouldn't claim to have the knowledge he CLAIMS to have in this area, thing is the general public doesn't know better.

Tom can go dive off of the damn Eiffel Tower in the name of Ewoks, Klingons, R2D2 or whatever other scientology beliefs he has for all I care. It bothers me when he on national tv trying to push this stuff on an innocent public.

It's amazing how regulated the statements a drug company can/can't make, but any yahoo can go on the news and say whatever. I saw some guy advertising that seaweed can cure cancer the other day, he should be locked up for that.

Mr. G
07-19-2005, 02:54 AM
Well I guess we agree on one thing, the general public doesn't know any better. Psychiatry is going to be brought to task. It's put up or shut up. They shot themselves in the foot years ago, as they were making progress up to around 1870 when Wundt decided that man was an animal. Before that they thought man was a spiritual being: Psych (greek word meaning spirit) ology (study of). So it used to mean the study of the spirit. Since then it has become a cash cow i.e insurance fraud, involuntary commitment ect. If it wasn't for tax money Psychiatry would wither and die as very few people would voluntarily have part of their brain cut out or electrocuted.

Rebel
07-19-2005, 02:58 AM
Electroshock therapy is very, very effective. I've seen that personally as well. I know it seems primitive, but it is still very effective and still used.

Seshmeister
07-19-2005, 08:07 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
As I have said before, I have answered many questions but have not once pushed Scientology on anyone. Not once.

You also haven't answered any of the questions asked about scientology or defended the dozens of accusations here which makes it look as though you have been completely brainwashed.

That pretty much invalidates your opinion on anything whether it's drug therapy or Sammy Hagar because we don't know if it's your thoughts you're posting or those of your controllers.

Cheers!

:gulp:

Mr. G
07-19-2005, 08:59 PM
Fine with me. How you feel about me isn't important. I have answered many questions about Scientology if you read the post. I am not here to defend Scientology as I am sure your mind is made up. All I have done is ask for one scientific study, one blood test or one lab report to validate their (psychiatry's) claims. You have completely avoided that. So lets see it. By the way I know why you are avoiding it but lets see you explain it. Start

rustoffa
07-19-2005, 09:46 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
You gotta hand it to Tom for sticking his neck out about something he cares about. He didn't have to.

Arguably, he IS the most "untouchable" of the bunch...not to mention a huge Speelburg vision looking at the clock.

The whole fucking thing screams publicity....grab a young starlet, start some cuntroversy....it's laughable.

IMO, you gotta hand it to Matt Lauer.

Go over to the NBC boards.

Lauer's sig:

"Owning Cruise like a Top-Gun Mig"

Nickdfresh
07-19-2005, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Fine with me. How you feel about me isn't important. I have answered many questions about Scientology if you read the post. I am not here to defend Scientology as I am sure your mind is made up. All I have done is ask for one scientific study, one blood test or one lab report to validate their (psychiatry's) claims. You have completely avoided that. So lets see it. By the way I know why you are avoiding it but lets see you explain it. Start

Is this a cult technique? Ask the same question over and over showing a tendency for monomania? I believe the statement has been made abundantly clear: no one cares about psychiatry being exaggerated, no one's ever denied it. There are in fact studies mapping the correlations between the differences in brain physiology using scans (i.e. CAT Scans) and the like.

Since you are arguing TOM CRUISE'S point of view, the burden is on YOU TO DISPROVE THE VALIDITY of psychiatric drugs. Not us. Again, you just completely avoid the issue and act like you're being stonewalled. It's not an either (psychiatry) or (Scientology) dilemma....What does TOM CRUISE think that BROOKE SHIELDS should do in place of taking Riddelin? What does L. Ron HUBBARD think she should do? What makes Tom CRUISE so wise that he can impart his judgment on her situation? What is his level of college education?

And do not ask for studies regarding "chemical imbalances" when you've failed to produce a study regarding the effectiveness of "E-Meters."

Hardrock69
07-20-2005, 12:59 AM
I cannot think of a single question Mr. G has answered about Scientology. All his posts contain his usual begging for proof of Chemical imbalances, claims that there are no studies, blah blah blah.

What a bunch of droolingly mindless crap.

Mr. G
07-20-2005, 02:18 AM
Obviously you haven't read the whole post. I have answered many questions about Scientology, just look. Also I don't care about scientific studys on the e-meter, I haven't made any claims whatsoever. I keep asking the question because all I get are replys on the validity of Psychiatry. I did not start this post on the validity of Scientology, why the hell would I do that. I am not trying to change your mind, I am just looking for proof which you don't have or are unwilling to post. As far as Nickdfresh let me ask you this question: Someone comes out with a "science" like Psychiatry and they say that peoples problems are caused by a "chemical imbalance". According to your logic we are supposed to just go along until someone "disproves it"?. Your kidding right. Since when is that scientific?. I am pretty sure you guys are getting as tired as I am with this post so just go ahead and post the study, blood test, lab report and we can end it all. Fair enough?

Rebel
07-20-2005, 02:42 AM
How many people with psychiatric disorders have you treated? How many has Tom Cruise treated? How much experience and knowledge do you and Tom Cruise have in this field?

Go read a a book, then get back with me. It's easy to point a finger when it doesn't affect you in your daily life.

Hardrock69
07-20-2005, 10:23 AM
True. And Mr. G is an "expert", having been a psychiatrist all his life and has treated hundreds of thouseands of patients successfully...

**turns sarcasm off**

:rolleyes:

Hardrock69
07-20-2005, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Obviously you haven't read the whole post. I have answered many questions about Scientology, just look.


Uh..no. You have not answered any questions about Scientology because nobody has asked you any questions about it.

You, on the other hand, fail to address the issues that have been brought up concerning the corruption, greed, paranoia and illegal activities the CoS has been and are involved in.

Here is something else casually mentioned that only serves to make you look foolish:


Originally posted by Mr. G
Well the one thing Psychiatry can't stand is to have any light shone on it. The solution is to just get enough people taking about Psychiatry and enough of them will see it for what it is and we will all be better off for it.

It needs to read like this:

Well the one thing Scientology can't stand is to have any light shone on it. The solution is to just get enough people taking about Scientology and enough of them will see it for what it is and we will all be better off for it.

At least Psychiatrists do not suffer from paranoidal knee-jerk reactions when they are trashed in the press by attacking (sometimes literally) their supposed "enemies".

At least Psychiatrists view journalists as "journalists" no matter what they write, whereas the CoS views journalists as "enemies".

According to the tech of the CoS, being unable to confront the true source of attack is an indicator of insanity.

Any person with common sense will tell you that when the entire world sees a blue chair, but someone comes along and says it is a purple dildo, that person is insane.

So what is to be thought when the CoS cannot differentiate between an "enemy" and a "journalist"?
Heck, they label anyone they do not like as a "suppressive person" or an "enemy", and immediately ATTACK them.

There are hundreds of cases that prove this.

To continually defend such a bunch of paranoid schizophrenic assholes is further proof that insanity reigns in the CoS.

**Note** Any questions in this post are rhetorical in nature, and do not require an answer, not that Mr. G would be capable or willing to answer or address them anyway.

This truly is fun to watch the failure of a Scientologist to confront.
:cool:
For supposedly being a Scientologist for 16 years, Mr. G demonstrates a severe lack of training, as "confronting" is one of the basic building blocks of the entire bullshit con-artist philosophy.

Mr. G
07-20-2005, 08:06 PM
Well I went back and checked the entire post and I gave data on scientology on four posts even though I am not a spokesperson for Scientology and I don't care what you think about it as I have stated many times. This post was started by Vinnie and it had to do with Tom Cruise and Psychiatry and you guys keep trying to change the topic, gee I wonder why that is. You keep trying to answer the question with a question without ever answering the question. You can go ahead and keep trying to get me to defend Scientology (which doesn't need defending) but it is going to keep coming back to your unwillingness to answer just one question. It is just ONE question, come on it can't be that hard.

Nickdfresh
07-20-2005, 08:36 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Obviously you haven't read the whole post....


No, I really did, and you could just copy and paste the same post over and over.


I have answered many questions about Scientology, just look.

No, no you didn't. Perhaps you did in the parallel dimension on Xenor, but here on Earth you failed to address anyones' concerns on Scientology, nor have you addressed the fact that SCIENTOLOGIST have absolutely no moral or logical authority to denounce psychiatry since most think it is little more than a self-serving cult spouting ridiculous propaganda.


Also I don't care about scientific studys on the e-meter, I haven't made any claims whatsoever.

Well, damnit, I do! I don't care about scientific studies regarding chemical imbalances, yet you keep asking, but I've addressed the question at least. How can one that touts the authority of TOM CRUISE to judge others' use of drugs when he shoves and E-meter up his ass nightly?



I keep asking the question because all I get are replys on the validity of Psychiatry.

You aren't even reading this post are you? I've never defended the validity of psychiatry. I just pointed out the latent hypocrisy of SCIENTOLOGISTS making any derogatory comments regarding psychology.


I did not start this post on the validity of Scientology, why the hell would I do that. I am not trying to change your mind, I am just looking for proof which you don't have or are unwilling to post.

No, you just jumped all over it with redundant replies begging for a post regarding a study on psychology. If you don't like our lack of replies, then why do you feel the need to constantly come back with the same dribble to defend TOM CRUISE'S ridiculous statements he was fed by his handlers.



As far as Nickdfresh let me ask you this question: Someone comes out with a "science" like Psychiatry and they say that peoples problems are caused by a "chemical imbalance". According to your logic we are supposed to just go along until someone "disproves it"?. Your kidding right. Since when is that scientific?.

According to moi? I never said any such thing fool. You aren't even reading my replies, are you? You have no idea what I said...

All I said was that technology such as CAT-scans has shown measurable physiological difference in brain activity which implies changes in brain chemistry. But I never claimed to be a brain surgeon, I'll leave that to HUBBARD's little minions.;)


I am pretty sure you guys are getting as tired as I am with this post so just go ahead and post the study, blood test, lab report and we can end it all. Fair enough?

Not at all, I enjoy laughing at you feeble brainwashing and canned indoctrination to bullshit. Again, post an independent study which shows the validity of the implements of SCIENTOLOGY, and then I'll shut up. I never said I was defending psychiatry, nor am I the spokesman you seem to think I should be. I was just deconstructing (as did MATT LAUER) TOM CRUISE's bullshit spewed that is in fact steeped in ignorance and the ramblings of a madman.

Nickdfresh
07-20-2005, 08:43 PM
Originally posted by Hardrock69
Uh..no. You have not answered any questions about Scientology because nobody has asked you any questions about it.

You, on the other hand, fail to address the issues that have been brought up concerning the corruption, greed, paranoia and illegal activities the CoS has been and are involved in.

Here is something else casually mentioned that only serves to make you look foolish:



It needs to read like this:

Well the one thing Scientology can't stand is to have any light shone on it. The solution is to just get enough people taking about Scientology and enough of them will see it for what it is and we will all be better off for it.

At least Psychiatrists do not suffer from paranoidal knee-jerk reactions when they are trashed in the press by attacking (sometimes literally) their supposed "enemies".

At least Psychiatrists view journalists as "journalists" no matter what they write, whereas the CoS views journalists as "enemies".

According to the tech of the CoS, being unable to confront the true source of attack is an indicator of insanity.

Any person with common sense will tell you that when the entire world sees a blue chair, but someone comes along and says it is a purple dildo, that person is insane.

So what is to be thought when the CoS cannot differentiate between an "enemy" and a "journalist"?
Heck, they label anyone they do not like as a "suppressive person" or an "enemy", and immediately ATTACK them.

There are hundreds of cases that prove this.

To continually defend such a bunch of paranoid schizophrenic assholes is further proof that insanity reigns in the CoS.

**Note** Any questions in this post are rhetorical in nature, and do not require an answer, not that Mr. G would be capable or willing to answer or address them anyway.

This truly is fun to watch the failure of a Scientologist to confront.
:cool:
For supposedly being a Scientologist for 16 years, Mr. G demonstrates a severe lack of training, as "confronting" is one of the basic building blocks of the entire bullshit con-artist philosophy.

Well said...

Mr. G
07-20-2005, 09:33 PM
I see, so you are not a proponent of Psychiatry but you are debunking Tom Cruises statements. So let me get this straight: You are not pro Psychiatry and you are not pro Tom's statements against Psychiatry. That makes sense. Which is it?

Seshmeister
07-20-2005, 09:35 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
I see, so you are not a proponent of Psychiatry but you are debunking Tom Cruises statements. So let me get this straight: You are not pro Psychiatry and you are not pro Tom's statements against Psychiatry. That makes sense. Which is it?

I hope for your sake this is a troll

Nickdfresh
07-20-2005, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
I see, so you are not a proponent of Psychiatry but you are debunking Tom Cruises statements. So let me get this straight: You are not pro Psychiatry and you are not pro Tom's statements against Psychiatry. That makes sense. Which is it?

We already covered that Mr. G(ullible) here. (http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=601783#post601783)

Mr. G
07-20-2005, 10:47 PM
I see, so you stated that you feel Psychiatry is 70% b.s. Tom Cruise hasn't hurt anybody but Psychiatry has hurt many people by electric shock, brain surgury and chemical straight jackets but you choose to get on Tom's case or anyone who questions the validity of Psychiatry at all. Odd.

Nickdfresh
07-20-2005, 11:03 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
I see, so you stated that you feel Psychiatry is 70% b.s. Tom Cruise hasn't hurt anybody but Psychiatry has hurt many people by electric shock, brain surgury and chemical straight jackets but you choose to get on Tom's case or anyone who questions the validity of Psychiatry at all. Odd.

Oh please. You could make that same statement about medical science in general. Let's see, doctors have hurt many people in the past because they put leeches on their patients in the fucking 15th century. They once had no concept of microorganisms causing infections. Therefore all medical science is invalid. What a completely absurd line oif thinking. It is the superstitions that belief systems the likes of SCIENTOLOGY breeds that has caused this sort of ignorance. Pyschiatry, like anything else, has been an evolutionary practice of trial and error. Again, one does not need to choose between one of two crutches. I don't agree with everything, nor have I ever trusted big drug companies. Again, HYBBARD ripped off one of modern Psychiatry's modern architects, then pronounces it all bonk.

I choose to make fun of TOM CRUISE because he refuses to apply any of his skepticism to SCIENTOLOGY which has hurt many people and continues to do so through a system of control and manipulation. Hardly the enlightenment many would seek.

I hear KATIE HOLMES is a wreck these days.;)

thome
07-20-2005, 11:14 PM
Mr. G is a BOT..

thome
07-20-2005, 11:15 PM
For the church

Hardrock69
07-21-2005, 01:02 AM
Yeah that is a pretty fair assumption....

Despite his claims, he has not been a Scientologist for 16 years, and is not one now. If he ever was one, he left before getting even one rung up the "ladder". In fact, it is quite obvious he fell off the ladder.

If he was an actual Scientologist, he would have been able to actually make sense.

He is actually a fucking retard who imagines that the CoS is somehow a "decent" and "upstanding" organization dedicated to "helping" mankind to be "free" of some imagined pychiatric problems.

In reality, the CoS is a corrupt organization built upon fiction created by a manipulative paranoid sociopath that is dedicated to nothing more than helping mankind to be free of their hard-earned cash.

ashstralia
07-21-2005, 09:01 AM
Originally posted by Hardrock69
In reality, the CoS is a corrupt organization built upon fiction created by a manipulative paranoid sociopath that is dedicated to nothing more than helping mankind to be free of their hard-earned cash.

and apparently mr.g has no argument against this.

while claiming to answer questions.

pr for suckers 101.

Vinnie Velvet
07-21-2005, 09:24 AM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh

I hear KATIE HOLMES is a wreck these days.;)

More like a Zombie.

support the cause: www.freekatie.net

:D

Mr. G
07-23-2005, 03:59 AM
Yes. what you stated about the medical community was true at one time, but it is not true right now, they have evolved by throwing out old methods that didn't work. Psychiatry is STILL doing electric shock and brain surgury like they did in the old days. That is the difference. Again I am not asking anyone to "choose" between the two as you stated I am just questioning a "science" that has not acted.........well very "scientific".

ashstralia
07-23-2005, 04:18 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Yes. what you stated about the medical community was true at one time, but it is not true right now, they have evolved by throwing out old methods that didn't work. Psychiatry is STILL doing electric shock and brain surgury like they did in the old days. That is the difference. Again I am not asking anyone to "choose" between the two as you stated I am just questioning a "science" that has not acted.........well very "scientific".


quote the poster you're addressing, dude;

it's not that diffiCULT.

Mr. G
07-24-2005, 02:00 AM
I was addressing Nickdfresh, if you read the post it's not that difficult. How about ANOTHER opinion from a Psychiatrist:

Dr. Peter Breggin
Sun Jul 17, 1:27 PM ET

On June 25, July 2005 Tom Cruise did the unthinkable on TV. Actually, he did several “unthinkables” in a filmed interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer for the Today Show.


First, Tom stopped smiling. He deprived us of that multi-million dollar grin and got serious. For a star to do this to the American public was unthinkable.

Second, Tom pointed out that Matt Lauer actually was very “glib” (shallow) and didn’t know what he was talking about. He also urged Matt to be “more responsible” and to learn something about psychiatry before touting it. For a star to do this to a media personality was unthinkable. Since nearly all of them are shallow, this was a threat of potentially epidemic proportions. Suppose other guests began pointing out that media hosts don’t know what they are talking about and are shallow?

Third, he got serious about one of the most important issues in our personal lives, in this case our widespread use of psychiatric drugs to solve our personal distress and anguish. Tom concluded, “I’m passionate about life.” For anyone to speak this way on television, except perhaps on the Catholic channel, is truly beyond the TV pale; and even the Catholic channel doesn’t criticize psychiatry.

Fourth, he criticized psychiatry and drew attention to its genuine flaws and failings. I suspect he’s actually read my book, Toxic Psychiatry. Tom said that psychiatry had a long history of abusing people, including electroshock. He said, “There is no such thing as a chemical imbalance.” He said that antidepressants can only “mask the problem” and that “these drugs are very dangerous.” He called psychiatry a “pseudoscience” and suggested that there are better approaches. He was right about all of this.

A few days later NBC invited me to New York City as a psychiatric expert to discuss the Tom Cruise affair on the Today Show, and when I began by saying it sounded like Tom had been doing some serious reading about psychiatry, I got cut off, again and again, throughout the show.

Why was the media both drawn into the story and shocked by it? It was too good a story to simply ignore: “Tom Cruise Gone Wild” was the theme. It should have been, “Tom Cruise gets serious.”

The media would have liked to attack Tom on the grounds that he’s a Scientologist. Scientologists seem to share a number of views about psychiatry with me, including everything Tom said. In fact, I’d go further. Modern biological psychiatry is a materialistic religion masquerading as a science.
How can I say that my profession of psychiatry is a materialistic religion? Because modern psychiatry makes believe that psychological and spiritual problems, such as anxiety and depression, are caused by mechanical failures in the physical brain, and because psychiatry then attempts to correct these psychological and spiritual problems with physical interventions such as drugs and electroshock. Modern biological psychiatry takes these views and implements these interventions on faith and it has won a lot of converts with the help of billion-dollar marketing campaigns. If you want more detailed analyses of the faith and fake science behind the claims of modern psychiatry, you’ll find them in my books such as Toxic Psychiatry (1991), Brain-Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry (1997), Talking Back to Ritalin (Revised, 2001), the Antidepressant Fact Book (2001) and the Ritalin Fact Book (2002). You can find my scientific papers on my website, www.breggin.com. In my books and on the website you’ll also find discussions of the many drug-free alternatives that are available for helping people with problems such as anxiety and depression.

The media kept hinting that the problem was Tom’s Scientology beliefs but they didn’t want to say it. To some extent it’s not politically correct to criticize someone’s religion, especially when people like Tom and John Travolta are members. But that was really not the issue. The media is afraid of Scientology because the religion has been extremely aggressive toward media critics, often charging them or threatening to charge them with libel and slander.

I was also invited on to CNBC’s the Donny Deutche talk show. This time I remained in Ithaca, New York only a few blocks from my office in a high tech TV studio. I was kept waiting in front of the live camera for almost an hour and a half to get a word in as I watched Tom get excoriated. Although I could see the show on the uplink for this entire time as I sat waiting at any moment to be called upon, they decided not to link me into the show at all and I never got to say a thing in Tom’s defense or in criticism of biological psychiatry, drugs and electroshock. Sitting upright that long without twitching in anticipation of momentarily appearing on millions of televisions was hard enough, but listening to Donny was worse.

While I sat listening to the CNBC show that I was never brought onto, I felt a mixture of outrage and sadness. Outrage that the show host Donny Deutche bragged up his work in advertising where he helped to produce the Zoloft TV ads with their clever little bouncing faces that made the antidepressant so much more “accessible,” in his words, to millions of Americans. Donny was bragging about an actual fraud—ads that falsely suggest that Zoloft corrects biochemical imbalances and that leave out the warning that the drug causes mania, not to mention psychosis, violence and suicide.

What was tragic? Donny’s guest was Jane Pauley who was flogging her new book, Out of the Blue. Jane is the epitome of a media personality, having anchored the Today Show with Tom Brokaw and Bryant Gumbel, and having earned many broadcast awards. Jane is also a promoter of psychiatry. She admitted to having developed “hypomanic” (milder than full-blown mania) symptoms on an antidepressant. At the time, she explained, her mind and thoughts were racing and she couldn’t control them. But then she added that of course the drug didn’t make her become manic; the drug just “brought out” her underlying or pre-existing bipolar disorder.

Of course, I don’t know anything about Jane Pauley except what she’s told us and she’s not really the issue. Celebrities are actively recruited by marketing departments to promote medical and psychiatric treatments. I do know that psychiatrists often lie to patients to protect themselves and their drugs. My colleagues lie by saying the antidepressant merely “brought out” their mania, psychosis, violence or depression, rather than the drug caused it in the otherwise innocent victim. Jane Pauley thinks she is a victim of bipolar disorder when she sounds to me like a victim of psychiatry.
It’s no small matter to falsely inform a person that their drug-induced mania shows they have bipolar disorder. It results in a false diagnosis and a stigmatizing label (bipolar or manic-depressive disorder) that follows people for the rest of their lives. It leads to additional medications, often including antipsychotic drugs like Zyprexa and Risperdal that can cause lethal diabetes and pancreatitis, and tardive dyskinesia, a potentially disfiguring and disabling neurological disorder characterized by bizarre-looking abnormal movements.

So the media personalities had a feast promoting their religion, psychiatry, while Tom Cruise got hammered for criticizing psychiatry, and indirectly promoting his religion, Scientology.

No, I’m not a Scientologist. Except when they occasionally say hello to me at conferences, I have hardly spoken to a Scientologist in more than thirty years. But when I saw Tom’s bravery come out from behind his marvelous smile, I wanted to help, and I made clear I wanted to defend him.

Well, Tom, you said on TV things I’ve been saying in the media and in my books and scientific articles for three decades—but boy did you generate a lot more attention to the issues. Thanks!

Nickdfresh
07-29-2005, 10:40 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
Yes. what you stated about the medical community was true at one time, but it is not true right now, they have evolved by throwing out old methods that didn't work.

Not true totally, they are also reusing and rediscovering old methods such as using maggots to clean-out infected wounds, and even using leeches to "bleed" people in order to increase circulation I believe (not to purge people of bad blood like the good ol' days.) Again, you're making generalizations that are simply not supportable.



Psychiatry is STILL doing electric shock and brain surgury like they did in the old days.

In extreme cases only, and both work in very limited circumstances. In fact, they've found that magnetism can alter and affect peoples mood and brain chemistry. Oh, I forgot, there's no such thing as brain chemistry according to Scientologists. I guess there's no such things as hormones either.:rolleyes:



That is the difference. Again I am not asking anyone to "choose" between the two as you stated I am just questioning a "science" that has not acted.........well very "scientific".

No, you're not. What You are doing is drudging up some valid criticisms of psychiatry (which I have mentioned repeatedly that I do not think is a panacea for all of our problems and I have my own problems with) without the least critical analysis of The Church of Scientology. Why don't you just apply some of your skepticism to CoS? Are E-Meters superior to Ritalin? It's just more bullshit! That's why TOM CRUISE has been flamed in the media.

The basic issue is who the fuck is he to tell anybody what to do or what is good when he himself subscribes to a greed-driven cult that is full of superstition and UNSCIENTIFIC BULLSHIT!?

Why don't you actually address that instead of turning it all into a monomaniacal scrutiny of psychiatry, a field of study in which much IS VALID?

Nickdfresh
07-29-2005, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
I was addressing Nickdfresh...

No you weren't, you were just again scrutinizing psychiatry with your typical half-truths and lies of omission. I never said I totally agreed with psychiatry...


...if you read the post it's not that difficult.

It is for you, there are several posts in which you completely skipped over...



...How about ANOTHER opinion from a Psychiatrist:

Dr. Peter Breggin
Sun Jul 17, 1:27 PM ET

On June 25, July 2005 Tom Cruise did the unthinkable on TV...Tom pointed out that Matt Lauer actually was very “glib” (shallow) and didn’t know what he was talking about. He also urged Matt to be “more responsible” and to learn something about psychiatry before touting it.

...


So what? BREGGIN probably set his cause back several years and soiled his reputation by co-opting with CRUISE.

Why won't CRUISE discuss Scientology with LAUER? Hew can recite BS about knowing (what he's been told by the Church) re. psychiatry. but never can openly discuss psychiatry.


Here's some background on BREGGIN, and what his wife thinks of the Cult...er..."Church" of Scientology.


From: http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/breggen2.htm

Dr. Peter Breggin
Scientology


Q: Anybody heard of a Dr. Peter Breggin and a connection to CoS?


A: Dr. Peter Breggin is a high-profile *non-Scientologist* critic of psychiatry. Certainly, Scientology has tried to use his writings--like _Your Drug May Be Your Problem_--to their advantage, but he is no friend of CoS. Breggin runs the Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology, and he criticizes involuntary commitment, psychiatric drug overprescription (as he considers to be much use of Ritalin and Prozac), and ECT.

So do I btw, I agree with him as stated before in this thread, but that's not the issue despite your attempts to make it so.

His website is at http://www.breggin.com/.

However, he's certainly no ally of the Church of Scientology.

His wife, Ginger Ross Breggin, is an ex-Scientologist who left with Peter's help after they met. Both of them provide endorsements for Steven Hassan's new book, Releasing the Bonds (of presentation-to-Travolta fame), on Steve's website, http://www.freedomofmind.com/. Ginger's discusses her experience in Scn:

"For sixteen hours a day and a paycheck averaging $40 a week I gave more than a decade of my youth to a cult. Although it is eighteen years since I have left the cult, Steve Hassan's book Releasing the Bonds has provided me with new insights and additional healing. His book offers fresh perspectives and tools that can lead to letting go of the shame, recognizing one's personal goodness, and appreciating one's strength and integrity. I urge every former cult member to read Releasing the Bonds, Hassan's book will also be a reassuring message for families and friends who have suffered the loss of a loved one to a cult as well as offering a basic introduction to cult issues."

Ginger Ross Breggin Executive Director of the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology "Releasing the Bonds is a compassionate and intelligent guide for anyone who has ever been caught up in a cult or cult-like organization. Hassan offers perceptive and non-coercive guidance to family and friends of those whose idealism or vulnerability has led them to become cult members. Further, the book provides valuable insights into the control and manipulation that can occur in abusive personal relationships such as those experienced by battered women. It is a vital tool for professionals and laypersons alike."

Peter R. Breggin, M.D.

Author of Your Drug May Be Your Problem: How and Why to Stop Taking Psychiatric Drugs There are plenty of non-Scn, non-CCHR connected critics of psychiatry; unfortunately, Scn/CCHR more or less tries to continually claim their mantle as their own, "take over" issues and dominate debate and discussion with "dead-agent" material and "psych-buster" spam of the type we've seen here on ARS.;)

That's because *they* perceive psychiatry as the Enemy of Scientology. There's no real concern about "psychiatric abuses"
as such; this is entirely secondary to the role of psychiatrists as eternal suppressives seeking to destroy the only way to "total freedom for humanity--Scientology. The other critics of psychiatry may be agreed or disagreed with, but they do not adopt that perspective, and quite often will have nothing to do with the Scientologists if at all possible, or once they find out who and what CCHR and other Scn organizations are fronting for.

While they are often quite controversial, the views of the Breggins and other such critics of psychiatry do not stem from a connection to Scn.






So MR. G, I've answered all or your redundant and repetitive questions, NOW ANSWER MINE!

**What do you think of the effectiveness of E-Meters?

**Show me a study which gauges the effectiveness of E-meters...

Put up or shut up! Or else you are just a nihilist, bullshiter!

Hardrock69
07-30-2005, 04:34 PM
I am amazed at this idiot, Mr. G. He must be unable to read or comprehend English.

blonddgirl777
08-01-2005, 12:53 AM
Sorry... just trying to get rid of the big ugly thread (by bumping this one)...

Mr. G
08-01-2005, 03:24 AM
Nickdfresh, I don't know how many times I have to tell you this but I don't care what you think of Scientology, no really. Your mind is already made up, isn't it? I have simply asked anyone to post ANY scientific study proving Psychiatry's claim of the chemical imbalance theory. There are many Psychiatrists and Neurologists coming out lately stating that the whole thing has been a scam as has been posted here. If you were genuinely interested you would read a book, you wouldn't take my opinion on the subject. Right? One of the more amazing things about this thread is that I haven't called anyone names but have asked ONE question to which there has been no reply specifically and it has pissed off a few people. Hardrock, Vinnie and Nickdfresh on the other hand when pressed for an answer can't stay on topic but result to sniveling like a little kid. They must feel like they are loosing the intellectual argument. Too bad.

Hardrock69
08-01-2005, 12:02 PM
Mr. G., how many times do we have to tell you:

We don't care what you fucking think about chemically imbalanced Psychiatry! No really. Your mind is already made up for you by the Xenu Worshippers you blindly follow.

I have simply asked anyone to post ANY scientific study proving Scientology's claim of the OT theory. There are many Scientologists coming out lately stating the whole thing has been a scam as has been posted here. If you were genuinely interested you would read a book, you wouldn't take my factual experience on the subject. Right? One of the more amazing things about this thread is that I and others have called you what you are: An idiot of the highest caliber. And we have provided MUCH irrefutable information to which there has been no reply specifically and it has not pissed anyone off, because myself, Vinnie & Nickdfresh have pressed YOU for answers, but you can't stay on topic and you resort to sniveling like a little kid.

You have and continue to "loose" any intellectual arguments you ever attempted. Too bad? I think not.

You continue to snivel about something nobody gives a fuck about.

How long are you going to go on about Psychiatry and chemical imbalances?

You are beating a dead horse until it is a moist stain in the ground, and then you are beating it even more until you have dug a trench!

Shut the fuck up about it already!

Simply because you have a pet peeve about this subject does not mean anyone else is interested in discussing it or trying to prove anything about it!


Oooooh so you claim it does not work....ok show us Scientific PROOF that Scientology works!

Come on...where are your studies by The Mayo Clinic, or Harvard, or Oxford, or ANY respected medical/scientific organaization?????

Come on, fool...let's see some proof.

You are very close to being banished to the Sheep Pen!

You have no mud, and you have no Larg.

Get over it already.
:rolleyes:

Nickdfresh
08-01-2005, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by Hardrock69
Mr. G., how many times do we have to tell you:

We don't care what you fucking think about chemically imbalanced Psychiatry! No really. Your mind is already made up for you by the Xenu Worshippers you blindly follow.

I have simply asked anyone to post ANY scientific study proving Scientology's claim of the OT theory. There are many Scientologists coming out lately stating the whole thing has been a scam as has been posted here. If you were genuinely interested you would read a book, you wouldn't take my factual experience on the subject. Right? One of the more amazing things about this thread is that I and others have called you what you are: An idiot of the highest caliber. And we have provided MUCH irrefutable information to which there has been no reply specifically and it has not pissed anyone off, because myself, Vinnie & Nickdfresh have pressed YOU for answers, but you can't stay on topic and you resort to sniveling like a little kid.

You have and continue to "loose" any intellectual arguments you ever attempted. Too bad? I think not.

You continue to snivel about something nobody gives a fuck about.

How long are you going to go on about Psychiatry and chemical imbalances?

You are beating a dead horse until it is a moist stain in the ground, and then you are beating it even more until you have dug a trench!

Shut the fuck up about it already!

Simply because you have a pet peeve about this subject does not mean anyone else is interested in discussing it or trying to prove anything about it!


Oooooh so you claim it does not work....ok show us Scientific PROOF that Scientology works!

Come on...where are your studies by The Mayo Clinic, or Harvard, or Oxford, or ANY respected medical/scientific organaization?????

Come on, fool...let's see some proof.

You are very close to being banished to the Sheep Pen!

You have no mud, and you have no Larg.

Get over it already.
:rolleyes:

What he said. I'm tired of MR.G, the Xioborgian level 3 assclown...:D

Hardrock69
08-01-2005, 01:34 PM
Sorry for mentioning the Sheep Pen....as gay as Spambo The Flatulent fans are, I think Mr. G would be an insult to their gayness. Perhaps we should banish him to...

DUN dun DAAAAAAHHHHH!!!

****THE HITCHWORLD DUMP!****

Mr. G
08-02-2005, 12:00 AM
OK, here is the difference: I have not made any "claims" about Scientology at all but here is what Hardrock said: "Funny how some peeps "need proof" that there is such a thing as a chemical imbalance."

"Claiming that there is NO scientific evidence that there is such a thing, and that there is NO scientific evidence to prove that psychiatry and/or drugs can treat such a problem."
So you ARE saying there is proof. So where is it, where is the lab test? YOU are making the claim so back it up. You don't seem like the type to be a sheep and just go along with an idea just because it is popular. So let's see it.

thome
08-02-2005, 12:03 AM
Domo ori gatto mr robotto

tools for the masses YES

Nickdfresh
08-02-2005, 12:21 AM
Originally posted by Mr. G
OK, here is the difference: I have not made any "claims" about Scientology at all but here is what Hardrock said: "Funny how some peeps "need proof" that there is such a thing as a chemical imbalance."

I never made any "claims" about psychiatry other than to state that it is the far lessor of two evils. You attacked psychiatry on behalf of a kooky, and discredited "religion" as TOM CRUISE did due to you affiliations to SCIENTOLOGY. And there is indirect "proof of chemical imbalances" provided indirectly via CAT SCAN.


"Claiming that there is NO scientific evidence that there is such a thing, and that there is NO scientific evidence to prove that psychiatry and/or drugs can treat such a problem."
So you ARE saying there is proof. So where is it, where is the lab test? YOU are making the claim so back it up. You don't seem like the type to be a sheep and just go along with an idea just because it is popular. So let's see it.

We have provided proof. You've provided nothing but your feeble attempts to attack psychiatry while seeking complete denial with your pseudo-alternative.

Asshole, I also made no initial claims about psychiatry and have actually criticized it, yet you keep making yourself look like a stupid zombie by asking the same question over and over. If you ask a question, then be prepared to answer them. It's called a debate fool, something you're not interested in.

Now where is my scientific study on the effectiveness of "E-meters?"

Nickdfresh
08-02-2005, 12:37 AM
See MR.G, it's not that hard::)


Pseudo Science Friday II: E-Meters

Genre: Pseudo-Science Fridays

There is a quote from Isaac Asimov that eludes me, but when paraphrased says something to the effect that pseudoscience offers us the security blanket of comfort for the inexplicable; it is science that makes us uneasy and insecure. The continued perpetuation of less-than-sound rationale marks a species still entrenched in satisfying their need for explanation to such a greedy degree they latch onto that which has yet been proven for slightly more consolation (Ed. Note: run-on sentences are not a pseudoscience). While science is inherently discomforting in it’s explanations for many people, pseudoscience is an unnecessary alternative. Again, “Pseudo-Science Friday” seeks only to expose poor scientific practices; more information on the enclosed topic can be found on the link (http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/E-Meter/) provided below. Forging ahead…

In our previous century (the twentieth for those not counting), the L. Ron Hubbard fan club, somehow reaching the level of an organized religious gang called “Scientologists,” exploited the idea of the security blanked when they introduced their own version of truth serum, or, “lie detectors,” in their use of the E-Meter. At the risk of losing The Means’ core demographic, Scientologists and random believers in Dianetics, allow me to explain the E-Meter. This machine is supposed to identify key areas within the human body that exude unwanted emotions, and allow participants to release the bad energy. Specially trained “auditors” are the only beings able to wield this ultimate tool of truth, or at least read what its gauges say.

http://www.the-means.com/archives/travolta.jpg
Travolta: Are you sure you’re not getting any readings on my vitals, Doc?

Auditor: Mr. Travolta, you’re borderline braindead according to this, and you’re career is dead according to the box office disaster “Be Cool.”

From what I can gather, the lucky subject grabs onto two metal soda cans hooked together by shoelaces in a fashion not unlike the hit childhood game “Telephone,” and proceeds to feel obligated to purge themselves of non-existent ill feelings. A well-versed auditor will pick up on what and where the pain in your body is, and your ill harmonics will be cleansed. Actors like John Travolta and Tom Cruise attest to it as being some amazing device capable of ridding oneself of the psyche’s debilitating tendencies, but this keen observer recognizes this as tomfoolery of the highest degree.

Dave Touretzky of Carnegie Mellon University has created a wonderful site dedicated to the fallacies of the E-Meter found here, which gives further information on this fun-for-the-family-(or-just-the-easily-duped) device. One interesting fact you’ll find on this device is that its actual creator, Volney Mathison, created the E-Meter for use in psychoanalysis and psychotherapy, two fields of study vehemently denounced by Scientology. That would be like me denouncing a basketball because the rims you play on are too high for me to dunk on.

While little can be done to prevent Scientologists from continuing their ridiculous charade, we can petition Campbell’s Soup and other makers of tin can products to not allow their merchandise to be used as handlebars for wild rides on the pseudoscience side. It is the hope of this most humble author that help will come in the form of reason, and that the truth shall be more glorious than L. Ron Hubbard ever created.

http://www.the-means.com/archives/hubbard.jpg
L. Ron Hubbard, dreamer and perpetuator of the pseudosciences/occult

Written by: Chris on March 25, 2005 @ 6:50 pm

So, is this why we keep the attack up on psychriatric drugs, so people can save their money for the $4000 E-Meter by not buying Ritalin?

Mr. G
08-02-2005, 01:12 AM
Hey Nickdfresh, did you read my post? I had posted what Hardrock stated earlier in the thread. I am not attacking Psychiatry on behalf of anyone, I am just asking for proof. You stated that a Cat Scan in "idirect" proof? Since when is "indirect" proof? I know you have criticized Psychiatry earlier in the thread I was asking Hardrock to back up his earlier statement but he seems to have changed his mind according to his last post. You can dance around the subject all day but until someone posts just One blood test or lab test it is all just opinion. You are perfectly entitled to your opinion just don't pretend it's scientific.

Rebel
08-02-2005, 01:21 AM
Looks like this arguement is going in circles, some people just have beliefs that aren't going to be changed. Some people don't believe in "drugs", some people do, and some people go to church on Sunday and dance with rattlesnakes, it's just the way it is.

But I will say this, there may be no "direct" proof of chemical imbalances, but there is plenty of proof on the MOA of these drugs, and their clinical effectiveness is WELL described, so that's enough for me.

That's one thing that is greatly lost in scientology's arguements, they point to lab results, any physician worth a shit will tell you lab results are just a small part of the clinical effectiveness of a treatment.

THe "direct" arguement will always be able to be used until some kinda half-assed biopsy is run on somebody's noodle, anybody wanna sign up for that?

Vinnie Velvet
08-02-2005, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by thome
Domo ori gatto mr robotto

tools for the masses YES

Kill Roy!, Kill Roy!, Kill Roy!

:D

Hardrock69
08-02-2005, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by Mr. G
OK, here is the difference: I have not made any "claims" about Scientology at all but here is what Hardrock said: "Funny how some peeps "need proof" that there is such a thing as a chemical imbalance."

"Claiming that there is NO scientific evidence that there is such a thing, and that there is NO scientific evidence to prove that psychiatry and/or drugs can treat such a problem."
So you ARE saying there is proof. So where is it, where is the lab test? YOU are making the claim so back it up. You don't seem like the type to be a sheep and just go along with an idea just because it is popular. So let's see it.


Let me guess....you are not human, you are a scratchy, fucked up, old warped vinyl LP of some kind of L. Ron Hoover lecture, endlessly repeating the same paragraph over and over and over.

You are stuck on the timeline. You require massive amounts of auditing. Of course auditing will never help you. You like to believe it will, but there is no proof that it will.

The above statement that you quoted was purposely taken by you out of context to prop up an un-provable and quite fictional theory. The context being, it is up to YOU to prove that there is no such ting as "Chemical Imbalances", or that Psychiatry "does not work".

We do not have to prove shit, motherfucker.

PROVE YOUR STATEMENTS TO BE TRUE!

Why don't you prove this to us out of your years of first-hand experience in the medical field?

You are contiually sniveling like a 2-year-old about how Psychiatry does not work.

So you have spoken with EVERY SINGLE HUMAN who has ever undergone ANY form of therapy over the past 100 years?

Boy this is fun...tormenting this fool....
:cool:


COME ON Mr. "G", you ignorant slut!

WHERE IS THE PROOF!!!!



PROVE THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CHEMICAL IMBALANCES!!!!!

You can't.

All you are doing is mindlessly repeating some lame bullshit without any proof to back it up.

COME ON PROVE IT YOU IGNORANT WOMBAT!!!!

:rolleyes:

Hardrock69
08-02-2005, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by Rebel

THe "direct" arguement will always be able to be used until some kinda half-assed biopsy is run on somebody's noodle, anybody wanna sign up for that?

Mr. G would volunteer if he only had a brain.....

Hardrock69
08-02-2005, 01:19 PM
:D