Going Clear - A call from the org

Random guy

Patron with Honors
If I have to live a double life I might as well play the double agent.

Some anon advice:

Take care to hide your identity online. OSA is reading these boards. The number of scientologists on lines is actually quite small. The number married to a wog is smaller yet. You are not untraceable. If OSA finds out who you are, your relationship will be in very rocky water.

Though you have taken steps to hide your and your partners identity, small things, even your writing style give you away (see e.g. http://www.ehow.com/info_8001121_difference-male-female-writing-styles.html ). I am fairly certain I can tell your gender, and I am no expert.

You can edit out details of your posts. OSA is understaffed and slow these days, they may not have gotten around to read this thread yet. If you can't edit yourself, ask a moderator to help you.

You can make more than one user name and use them both ("sockpuppeting"). This may help dispersing clues.

Good luck!
 

Anonycat

Crusader
Some anon advice:

Take care to hide your identity online. OSA is reading these boards. The number of scientologists on lines is actually quite small. The number married to a wog is smaller yet. You are not untraceable. If OSA finds out who you are, your relationship will be in very rocky water.

Though you have taken steps to hide your and your partners identity, small things, even your writing style give you away (see e.g. http://www.ehow.com/info_8001121_difference-male-female-writing-styles.html ). I am fairly certain I can tell your gender, and I am no expert.

You can edit out details of your posts. OSA is understaffed and slow these days, they may not have gotten around to read this thread yet. If you can't edit yourself, ask a moderator to help you.

You can make more than one user name and use them both ("sockpuppeting"). This may help dispersing clues.

Good luck!

Sockpuppetry here gets you the boot.
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
OSA is not the bugbear it once was. They only seem to take action now when people threaten their income stream directly.

Never hurts to be careful, but hiding from them is also absurd.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
OSA is not the bugbear it once was. They only seem to take action now when people threaten their income stream directly.

Never hurts to be careful, but hiding from them is also absurd.

The org has already tried to break up their marriage a few years before based on nothing more than a couple of comments.
 

Red Valiant

Patron with Honors
I'm sitting here reading EMSB (in google incognito) while my scn mate is fiddling around the kitchen. The phone rings and it's the org. We need people to respond to the NYT review of a book. They did a terrible review - just rehashing all the old lies without citing sources yada yada yada.

S/he tells me they need help. Oh dear, I say, that's terrible. Let me look up the article, is it a new book?

Well, shit, I say, it's not those things at all. It's an interview with the author. It's about his process. Other things he's written. Names some sources for this book. Talks about what he's up to next.

S/he called the org back. It's not a review, s/he says. I'm sitting here with Blanky who looked it up. NO! I didn't read it. NO! I didn't look at it. Oh, you want me to send the response where? Let me write that down.

My spouse is NOT supposed to read the article. Nor even go to the NYT site to post a response. S/he is to write the "usual" atheist, bigoted, poorly researched and send it to [email protected]. (I think, it was a fairly quick convo) I had a small hissy and insisted s/he needs to at least read what the article said before writing a response. It's completely bogus to write a response to something you haven't read and that is not what you've been told. <sigh> I even offered to read it to her. S/he nearly ran from the room.

I'm a little... no, a lot, sickened. S/he's writing a lying, bogus response right now.

Blanky

:omg: Omg, this is a bad stroll down memory lane for me. Been there in an exact same scenario but much different time. In 1991 I got a hold of Time Mag's famous article CULT OF GREED http://www.watchman.org/sci/sci-time.htm My spouse found it in my briefcase, became raving angry, ripped it up, stomped off, and I never saw it again. Weeks later she gave a slick glossy booklet contrasting every point in the Time's expose'. It was obviously a hack job by the Co$ PR spin masters. Some time in early 1992 I obtained another copy of the May 6, 1991 Time Edition. This time I kept it in my office far away from home. Mind you, this was long before the i-net as a quick handy resource. I was searching every libray in the area for books on cults. "Scientology" was popping up in almost every book I found on cults. My situation became worse and worse and worse with my spouse.

Blanky, like others are advising here, do proceed with much caution. If you have any minor children, be even more careful. Protect them from any harsh reactions of a true Hubbard devotee.
 

Red Valiant

Patron with Honors
I think he woefully short changed Scn. It is about cults generally - the first book is mostly about Moonies because he talks about himself so much. He has one sentence in one of the books about bullbaited TR's when he talks about thought stopping. If you grew up in a Christian Fundie cult, it could be something you had in your personal library to help decompress.

Steve's a good guy and a great resource. He was a guest in my home in 1998. I spent some time in his office in Boston (Somerville) back in 1999. He's highly critical of $cn w/o a doubt! He totally gets the creepy nature unique to $cn. But yes he's an educator of all different kinds of abusive sects too.
 

Intentionally Blank

Scientology Widow
Steve's a good guy and a great resource. He was a guest in my home in 1998. I spent some time in his office in Boston (Somerville) back in 1999. He's highly critical of $cn w/o a doubt! He totally gets the creepy nature unique to $cn. But yes he's an educator of all different kinds of abusive sects too.

(Trying not to sound like myself ...)

It's always interesting to see how life moves in patterns. I've recommended Hassan's work to many people over the years - in a different arena. I never owned any books but I used the website frequently.

Yes, the book. Yes, password.

Blanky
 

Intentionally Blank

Scientology Widow
The org has already tried to break up their marriage a few years before based on nothing more than a couple of comments.

Two comments, exactly. Apparently the god given right to express opinions is more of a guideline than a tenet. It was a long time ago but some of the same people are still around. I've always been certain there's a file on me somewhere.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Two comments, exactly. Apparently the god given right to express opinions is more of a guideline than a tenet. It was a long time ago but some of the same people are still around. I've always been certain there's a file on me somewhere.

Yes, probably. There might be an Ethics file but they usually don't do those for non-Scientologists. I remember getting a copy of a KR from an auditor in Sydney on this lady that one of the missionaires garrisoned there at the time had confided in, and she had advised him to leave the Sea Org. We then got a memo saying to please disregard the KR as the woman was not a Scientologist. We would have made up an ethics file and filed it otherwise, though.

Or I guess the DSA could have one.

Either way, the stuff will be in your partner's pc folders or ethics files.
 

NoName

A Girl Has No Name
Steve's a good guy and a great resource. He was a guest in my home in 1998. I spent some time in his office in Boston (Somerville) back in 1999. He's highly critical of $cn w/o a doubt! He totally gets the creepy nature unique to $cn. But yes he's an educator of all different kinds of abusive sects too.

I've been on his website, and there is a fair amount about Scn on there. Most of it is quite scathing. But yes, he is about cults generally. So his book does mention many of them in passing, including Scn.

What I like about his website is that he takes the groups that he gets questions about and analyzes them very fairly. He's careful to say, "Just because they're on here doesn't mean I think they are a cult - it just means I get lots of questions about people worried that they might be." For instance, I know a fair number of Mormons and I don't really think they're a cult in the destructive sense. So I clicked on that one to see whether or not he was able to give them a fair treatment, and I thought he did a decent job from what I know about them, especially with differentiating the sects (like how the girls with long braids and prairie dresses are not the normal mostly harmless kind that try to recruit you).
 
Top