List Of Former Members Who Have Spoken Out

A place to post and debate the Church of Scientology.
User avatar
Mewba
Posts: 315
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:56 pm
Location: The Golden State

Post by Mewba » Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:37 am

I'm not sure...what is the purpose of this list?
Ron Hubbard's the kind of person that would just as soon tell a lie as tell the truth.
--Me

User avatar
Sponge
Posts: 14692
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:23 am
Location: U.K.

Post by Sponge » Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:41 am

Mewba wrote:I'm not sure...what is the purpose of this list?
Sounds like the meme: "I am 12, what is this?".
It would be easier if you made specific points.

User avatar
Sponge
Posts: 14692
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:23 am
Location: U.K.

Post by Sponge » Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:44 am

Someone has blogged it up: http://www.blogcatalog.com/blog/ex-scie ... spoken-out
And there is a wiki being maintained for it: http://wiki.whyweprotest.net/List_of_ex ... spoken_out
which is part of the new Project Chanology Research Wiki: http://wiki.whyweprotest.net/

freeway
Posts: 606
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 10:49 pm

Post by freeway » Mon Jul 27, 2009 11:36 pm

This is a great list, Sponge.
Makes it easier to read people's stories again. Thanks for posting.

User avatar
Tigger
Posts: 9148
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2000 7:06 pm

Post by Tigger » Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:26 am

Terrific idea. Great job.


I don't see Lisa Halverson here. Has she been added over there?

Quote:

In a little while, we'll meet Lisa Halverson, a 15-year member of Scientology, who resigned six weeks ago. End of Quote

Larry King Live, 5/28/91--The Church of Scientology: Religion or Business?
http://www.lermanet.com/scientology/tra ... /larry.htm

User avatar
Tigger
Posts: 9148
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2000 7:06 pm

Post by Tigger » Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:39 am

SuzanneMarie wrote:Since when was Cynthia Kisser ever a Scientologist?
Cynthia NEVER was a Scientologist. She was a critic of Scientology and spoke out a lot as the executive director of the OLD Cult Awareness Network, but she was never a Scientologist....

So if this is a list of EX's who have left and/or who have spoken out, Cynthia shouldn't be on it.

One purpose for the list IMO would be to let those trapped in Scientology (especially those who may be wanting to leave) see how many have left and how many have spoken out about what Scientology did "for" and to them.

I hope Rinder and Rathbun speaking out encourages others to leave and to speak out.

Tigger

User avatar
Tigger
Posts: 9148
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2000 7:06 pm

Post by Tigger » Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:02 am

To be accurate....

Tom Padgett wasn't in the Sea Org, was he?
Wasn't he just a public.

Claire isn't an ex-Scientologist, is she? She's ex-CO$.

SuzanneMarie
Posts: 2995
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 6:24 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest

Post by SuzanneMarie » Tue Jul 28, 2009 10:11 am

Tigger wrote:
SuzanneMarie wrote:Since when was Cynthia Kisser ever a Scientologist?
Cynthia NEVER was a Scientologist. She was a critic of Scientology and spoke out a lot as the executive director of the OLD Cult Awareness Network, but she was never a Scientologist....
Thank you, Tigger.

I wonder if anyone will bother to delete Kisser, even though you have vouched for her 'non-ex/never was' status.

User avatar
ZenuEtrawl
Posts: 674
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:12 pm

Post by ZenuEtrawl » Tue Jul 28, 2009 10:25 am

Dave Sweetland = Eugene David Sweetland Jr., but the loss of a name could be compensated with that of William S. Burroughs.
Image

User avatar
Tigger
Posts: 9148
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2000 7:06 pm

Post by Tigger » Wed Jul 29, 2009 2:43 pm

Someone on a.r.s. (a Scientologist of course) is pointing out that the list is not credible
and the title is not accurate because the list contains some who are not ex-Scientologists.

He does have a point. So should those ex-Co$ who still claim to be Scientologists
be removed or should the title be changed to
include both ex-SCN and ex-COS?

Is there an e-mail addy available for questions, corrections, additions and/or deletions?

Tigger

User avatar
Dorothy
Posts: 1957
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 9:03 pm
Location: Kansas

Post by Dorothy » Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:29 pm

Someone on a.r.s. (a Scientologist of course) is pointing out that the list is not credible
and the title is not accurate because the list contains some who are not ex-Scientologists.

He does have a point. So should those ex-Co$ who still claim to be Scientologists
be removed or should the title be changed to
include both ex-SCN and ex-COS?

Is there an e-mail addy available for questions, corrections, additions and/or deletions?

Tigger
LOL! I don't see that this person has any "point" at all. Whether or not you consider yourself a scientologist or not is subjective. You would have to survey everyone on the list in order to implement your distinction. The list deals with names of people who have left CofS, obviously.

Logically a person cannot be an ex-scientologist, and a scientologist at the same time. They can only be an ex-CofS member and some of those ex-members might still consider themselves scientologists. So what?! Do Scinos want to capitalize and use an ex-member list for their own PR purposes?- So they can say-"Look! these people still practice scientology! So it must be good, right?" LOL!

The point of the list is to show who has left C of S and has spoken out about it.

If they have openly left C of S, meaning they give their real name and if it is obvious that they are no longer a member of C of S, then they go on the list.

This is a perfectly good example of the "logic" of a scientologist! LOL! :

If you openly leave C of S, you have committed a High Crime per C of S, and you are a Suppressive Person. It may or may not be on Goldenrod. If that person then continues to use some of what they learned in scientology in their life, or still consider themselves a scientologist in some way, completely outside the influence of CofS, AKA SCINO-CORP, then this person is saying that CofS would still consider them a Scientologist even though they are an SP and may even have been declared or expelled! LOL! In other words, once you have been a member of CofS, then the CofS owns you forever and ever, ie, you can never leave, even though you have publicly disavowed yourself from it! Yep- you're right about one thing, this person is a scientologist! Sounds to me like they want to have their cake and eat it too. You're an SP, but we still consider you a scientologist. LOL!! That explains the SP Hall at Int very well!

Though some people on both sides will try and equate C of S with FreeZone, they are not the same. If the person who is creating the list has FreeZone info and wants to add it they can, next to the person's name, put *FZ or something. But again, that would require a survey. And I don't see the point in that at all. What I care about is who has left CofS. The majority of the people on the list are not FreeZone. All of them have openly left C of S or have spoken out against C of S in one way or another. So, in terms of the purpose of the list, it appears to be perfectly accurate.

Tigger, do you know of one person who has openly left CofS and/or openly spoken up against it and still remains a member of CofS? LOL! Oh wait, there are a few exceptions. There is a very small group of flakes who left C of S and then waffled and then changed their mind and decided that mind control wasn't so bad after all and want to go back, and so they are working on their A to E or their ethics program or whatever. But you'll never know who they are because they lie about their situation. You know the kind of person I'm talking about, right Tigger? LOL! If it were up to me I'd send these people right back and make sure they get the "Make Up Your Stupid Ass Mind" Rundown.

These people, these gutless flakes, give CofS the impression that even those who leave openly and become critics, can be recovered. Why do you think CofS continues to call, sends mailings to, even allows onto the "Basics", declared SPS! LOL! Think about it.

And considering that we already know how scientologists "think" and we are familiar with their "logic" and we already have our resident scientologist here, who is so willing to spew her scient-illogical "logic" on a daily basis, who cares what some scino on ARS thinks?

How about you, Tigger. You are agreeing with a scino and calling for this detailed info, right? Well.... Are you on the list? What's your story? Have you openly left C of S? Are you a Declared SP? Are you working on your A to E or ethics program? Are you Freezone? Do you still consider yourself a scientologist? If you are "in the closet" as a critic, do you have a legitimate reason for doing so, such as not wanting to be disconnected from family and friends?

My point is- a real detailed survey of the ex community is a whole other matter. How many people do you think would be willing to participate? Do you think CofS would take part and give names or even accurate totals of all blown and off-lines scientologists? There are so many people who have just walked away from scientology, who don't don't join mbs or become critics. Only CofS has that info. I'd be willing to say for every current scino, hundreds that have participated have left. They speak to their friends and family about it, maybe, but their name will never appear on any list. Why don't you tell the scino over on ARS, if he's so interested, to ask his church to make that info public, eh? IE, where's their list? LOL!

Good day to you, Tigggeerrrrrr :lol:
Last edited by Dorothy on Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“The sad truth is that most evil is done by people who never make up their minds to be good or evil.”
― Hannah Arendt

User avatar
I'mglib
Posts: 5745
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:17 pm

Post by I'mglib » Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:54 pm

This list is great, and kudos to the person/people maintaining it.

It shows how people aren't frightened anymore to speak the truth.

Some can twist and turn and convolute all they want, it doesn't change the fact that people who saw abuse, and experienced abuse, are speaking out about it.

You're right about Scn logic, again Dorothy, where some people want to discuss every leaf on one tree, and don't want to acknowledge that there is a FORREST out there. I have experienced this over and over. It's a corollary to the "That's not my experience" so-called logic. If you squint your eyes and look sideways this one tree might look like a bush. Let's just focus on this leaf here, don't look at the forrest.

And apparently Cynthia Kisser has been taken off the list, because each entry is being considered very carefully by people who ARE concerned about accuracy.

And the list is still growing.

edit:spelling
Last edited by I'mglib on Thu Jul 30, 2009 3:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
"A man may build himself a throne of bayonets, but he cannot sit on it." -William Ralph Inge

Watch the Los Angeles press conference here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/ScilonTV#p/

User avatar
Tigger
Posts: 9148
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2000 7:06 pm

Post by Tigger » Wed Jul 29, 2009 7:49 pm

Dorothy wrote:
Someone on a.r.s. (a Scientologist of course) is pointing out that the list is not credible
and the title is not accurate because the list contains some who are not ex-Scientologists.

He does have a point. So should those ex-Co$ who still claim to be Scientologists
be removed or should the title be changed to
include both ex-SCN and ex-COS?

Is there an e-mail addy available for questions, corrections, additions and/or deletions?

Tigger
LOL! I don't see that this person has any "point" at all. Whether or not you consider yourself a scientologist or not is subjective. You would have to survey everyone on the list in order to implement your distinction. The list deals with names of people who have left CofS, obviously.

Logically a person cannot be an ex-scientologist, and a scientologist at the same time. They can only be an ex-CofS member and some of those ex-members might still consider themselves scientologists. So what?! Do Scinos want to capitalize and use an ex-member list for their own PR purposes?- So they can say-"Look! these people still practice scientology! So it must be good, right?" LOL!

The point of the list is to show who has left C of S and has spoken out about it.

If they have openly left C of S, meaning they give their real name and if it is obvious that they are no longer a member of C of S, then they go on the list.

This is a perfectly good example of the "logic" of a scientologist! LOL! :

If you openly leave C of S, you have committed a High Crime per C of S, and you are a Suppressive Person. It may or may not be on Goldenrod. If that person then continues to use some of what they learned in scientology in their life, or still consider themselves a scientologist in some way, completely outside the influence of CofS, AKA SCINO-CORP, then this person is saying that CofS would still consider them a Scientologist even though they are an SP and may even have been declared or expelled! LOL! In other words, once you have been a member of CofS, then the CofS owns you forever and ever, ie, you can never leave, even though you have publicly disavowed yourself from it! Yep- you're right about one thing, this person is a scientologist! Sounds to me like they want to have their cake and eat it too. You're an SP, but we still consider you a scientologist. LOL!! That explains the SP Hall at Int very well!

Though some people on both sides will try and equate C of S with FreeZone, they are not the same. If the person who is creating the list has FreeZone info and wants to add it they can, next to the person's name, put *FZ or something. But again, that would require a survey. And I don't see the point in that at all. What I care about is who has left CofS. The majority of the people on the list are not FreeZone. All of them have openly left C of S or have spoken out against C of S in one way or another. So, in terms of the purpose of the list, it appears to be perfectly accurate.

Tigger, do you know of one person who has openly left CofS and/or openly spoken up against it and still remains a member of CofS? LOL! Oh wait, there are a few exceptions. There is a very small group of flakes who left C of S and then waffled and then changed their mind and decided that mind control wasn't so bad after all and want to go back, and so they are working on their A to E or their ethics program or whatever. But you'll never know who they are because they lie about their situation. You know the kind of person I'm talking about, right Tigger? LOL! If it were up to me I'd send these people right back and make sure they get the "Make Up Your Stupid Ass Mind" Rundown.

These people, these gutless flakes, give CofS the impression that even those who leave openly and become critics, can be recovered. Why do you think CofS continues to call, sends mailings to, even allows onto the "Basics", declared SPS! LOL! Think about it.

And considering that we already know how scientologists "think" and we are familiar with their "logic" and we already have our resident scientologist here, who is so willing to spew her scient-illogical "logic" on a daily basis, who cares what some scino on ARS thinks?

How about you, Tigger. You are agreeing with a scino and calling for this detailed info, right? Well.... Are you on the list? What's your story? Have you openly left C of S? Are you a Declared SP? Are you working on your A to E or ethics program? Are you Freezone? Do you still consider yourself a scientologist? If you are "in the closet" as a critic, do you have a legitimate reason for doing so, such as not wanting to be disconnected from family and friends?

My point is- a real detailed survey of the ex community is a whole other matter. How many people do you think would be willing to participate? Do you think CofS would take part and give names or even accurate totals of all blown and off-lines scientologists? There are so many people who have just walked away from scientology, who don't don't join mbs or become critics. Only CofS has that info. I'd be willing to say for every current scino, hundreds that have participated have left. They speak to their friends and family about it, maybe, but their name will never appear on any list. Why don't you tell the scino over on ARS, if he's so interested, to ask his church to make that info public, eh? LOL!

Good day to you, Tigggeerrrrrr :lol:
LOL....you do carry on, don't you, Dorothy?
You sound a lot like the "Scientologist".

FYI one moe time:

I am not and never have been a Scientologist.

I was married to a Scientologist.

I have been a critic of Scientology for over 30 years.

I knew Cynthia was never a Scientologist because I was an officer in OKC CAN and a member of OLD CAN National.

All I said was he had a point, which he did.
AIR, Claire (Ball of Fluff) always insists she is a Scientologist who left COS. I guess it's a matter of perspective. and ACCURACY..... say a Christian leaves a "destructive cult" called The Church of Christian Americans, Would you say he/she is an EX-Christian American?
Of course not.

Just because you and I think Scientology courses are a congame doesn't mean that some people have not found something of value in them. IMO critics should not be like "church" members and make up bullshit or promote information which is not accurate.

Tigger
COUNT YOUR BLESSINGS

"If you have never experienced the danger of battle, the loneliness of imprisonment, the agony of torture, or the pangs of starvation, you are ahead of 500 million people in the world."

User avatar
Sponge
Posts: 14692
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 12:23 am
Location: U.K.

Post by Sponge » Wed Jul 29, 2009 8:40 pm

Tigger wrote:Someone on a.r.s. (a Scientologist of course) is pointing out that the list is not credible
and the title is not accurate because the list contains some who are not ex-Scientologists.

He does have a point. So should those ex-Co$ who still claim to be Scientologists
be removed or should the title be changed to
include both ex-SCN and ex-COS?

Is there an e-mail addy available for questions, corrections, additions and/or deletions?

Tigger
Yeah, It figures that some won't be happy.

Of course the list won't always be perfect all of the time and there are people who are just tossing the odd name in without too much thought. The odd inaccuracy does not condemn the whole list as the person you quoted on ARS suggests. It's not a big problem, except for pedants. This is a project in progress, not the finished article, and there is an honest drive for accuracy (given that maintaining this list is not anyone's full time job). All the the links have been provided for anyone to have names considered for justifiable removal/addition.

Since chanology is about "removing the church of Scientology in it's present form" I think it is perfectly OK to have on the list ex-church members who still practice unofficially outside the church and have of course spoken out against the practices of their former church. Maybe there is justification to indicate with an asterisk and a general footnote pertaining to those particular names. That will be left for the hive to decide and anyone who still doesn't like it can talk to the claw.

Also, I understand that there is no desire to piss people off and if someone who's name is on the list doesn't want to be on that list, for whatever personal reasons, can ask to have it removed. Of course I expect that dox will need to be provided to verify that it is not some cult operative trying to supress critical information.

The person bleating on ARS should perhaps voice their concerns to the source if they think they can genuinely help with the project. (See previous links in thread). Barking at the sky doesn't help.

User avatar
Dorothy
Posts: 1957
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 9:03 pm
Location: Kansas

Post by Dorothy » Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:21 pm

The person bleating on ARS should perhaps voice their concerns to the source if they think they can genuinely help with the project. (See previous links in thread). Barking at the sky doesn't help.
The person bleating on ARS only buys his info from the One Source, and that would be LRon. All other sources would be invalid. The person bleating along with them apparently did not bother to read the thread before bleating.

And apparently, finding two errors on a list of over 400 people, then saying because of a margin of error of .005%, the entire list is "invalid" and passing that opinion around, is not "carrying on" at all. But pointing out the illogic of that, is? He-He.
IMO critics should not be like "church" members and make up bullshit or promote information which is not accurate. -Tigger
This Ad Hom attack against critics in general is getting so overused, cliché and is getting soooooooo old, its like that old chewed up rag doll that my dog has dragged through the dirt for so long you can't even tell what the original thing was any more. And calling a critic, someone who lost 20 years of their life to it, who suffered from that, a "scientologist" just to be vindictive, WTF? Why do you even bother? What good are you? You serve no purpose that I can see, other than to expel your own inflated sense of yourself.
“The sad truth is that most evil is done by people who never make up their minds to be good or evil.”
― Hannah Arendt

Post Reply

Return to “Opinions & Debate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests