Demented LRH wrote:
I do not care what CoS say in response to an article, but I am curious why they are responding. Back in the good old days they were trying to pretend that only a handful of SPs are criticizing the Church. Now it seems they are going to a great length trying to disprove the article. I think they are not hiding the fact that the cult is under attack from the lay members because ostrich policy is not working for them. New world, new rules, and they must adapt.
The Tech says nothing about adaptation because it was assumed that by this time CoS will win. Now they have to improvise, which does not look good for them.
The thing is, they aren't as you say "going to great length trying to disprove the article". Emphasis on disprove
. They've gone to great lengths to produce a shed load of adjective strewn rehetoric, childish character asassinations and shiny scientology video-brochures but nowhere do they get down to the the nitty-gritty with any of the actual "dead wrong" facts that they claim in their neat little pie chart.
The target audience is their own members, you know, the kind of true believers who are willing to accept OT-III on its face and that they are riddled with nasty alien body-raisins. Those people aren't going to care about the truth and are mostly happy to have it fed to them through the scientology filter.
I think the footbullet is not just the fact that they've done yet another typically stupid freedumb article but that they've done it 6 months late and hence they stand to revitalise interest in the original New Yorker article which they so desperately didn't want people to see. The danger for DM is that some of those people will be those publics on the edges of scientology who he has no real control over and who are going to look and find out for themselves what all the fuss is about. Whether he wants a much smaller but more insanely batshit core with even less grip on reality, I don't know, but that's what he's heading for everytime he does this.
Also, I think they are playing a dangerous game when they attack hollywood figures. I don't know whether it registers, even just slightly, with Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Kirstie Alley, Nancy Cartwright, Anne Archer etc that this is the fate which awaits them should they ever express serious doubts.
Btw, at this rate we should be expecting freedumb article on Janet Reitman by about December/January.