Bonnie Woods is an ex-scientologist from the UK who sued the CoS and individual CoS staff members for libel, and in 1999, after six years of legal battle, got a settlement that included
- a public apology from the CoS
- 55,000 pounds in damages, plus another 100,000 pounds for costs paid by the CoS
- an injuction that prevents the CoS from repeating the libels

Now a book is being released:
http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=17XSMBLL99&mscssid=198SXHV9H9XE8LURCW0T6FE45K4SFLFE&isbn=0340785675

As always when the CoS is involved, one can expect attempts to stop the book. According to an ARS post, the original title was "DECEIVED; One woman's stand against the Church of Scientology.", but now it seems to have been changed to "The Bonnie Woods Story". And the story of this book has probably just begun...

Well, let's see if E.J. jumps to this thread and tries to rationalize THIS.

Lies, all lies!!!!

-E.J.

The last post was a joke, it case that wasn't clear.

But I do have a question for anyone who has read the book...

Court Records: "Bonnie Woods does not hate any religion and would not take
any step to force people away from their chosen religion or encourage others
to do so."


Uh, what's this book about anyway?

-E.J.

Yeah, yeah:

All Scientology critics are evil. Ho hum

All Scientology critics are guilty of hate crimes.
Yawn.

All Scientology detractors are WOGS. And unredeemable SPs. ZZZZZ. Wake me up when you change the broken record.

Catarina put a link to Bonnie Woods in the first post above, E.J.

E.J.: "What's the book about, anyway?"

Just because she might put FACTS in a book, does not mean she HATES a religion or FORCES people away from their "religion." Chronicling TRUTH is not the same thing as hating.

It seems the book has not yet been delivered, so I have not heard from anyone who has read it. What it is about, I think is pretty obvious: the story of Bonnie Woods.

I will buy a copy and when I am finished, I will donate it to the public library.

Judith: Good for you!

Judith Anderson: "Wake me up when you change the broken record."

That's a little hostile don't you think? I mean it's not as if you guys have been expressing new ideas and opinions around here lately. Who's broken record is this exactly?


My point was just that she said she "would not take any step to force people away from their chosen religion or encourage others to do so", and then she sells her story to the nearest publisher.

My question about what the book was about was honest. I mean, maybe it's just her autobiography, or something. I don't know. But if it's a 'Scientology is evil', 'I was attacked for being a critic' book then isn't she doing the very thing she said she had no interest in?

I mean it's not like she's 'forcing' anyone to do anything, I know. But what gives? I got the impression from the propaganda I read that she was just an innocent Christian who wasn't acting against Scientology in any way. Then a book comes out and I begin to get skeptical of her true motives.

But I guess until we get the book, we really don't know, huh?

-E.J.

Here is a dumb question -

Why hasn't someone in Scientology, (Dave M. maybe)
written a well thought out and researched book
DISPROVING all critics claims?

Just ONE such book could blow away all the
critical books out there. Think of the WINS for
the COS!

I realize that some people would say that Hubbard
has already done this, but his books do not refute
the more modern claims maid against him and his
chuch.

Just remember to document your evidence for your
refutations! And try not to let what you find
drive you out of the cult.

Jubal

E.J. - How is writing a book *forcing* anybody away from his or her religion? How is writing a book cause for suspicion of her motives? You haven't read the book, have you? So why do you automatically assume that it's a religious hate book?

You seem to me to be saying one thing and meaning another as I read your posts. You say that you can admit there are valid points of criticism, but you *seem* to be inclined to tell the rest of us to butt out and leave the cleaning up to church members. We had an example of internal attempts to clean up the church back in the 80's -how many people were declared? I've lost count. Unless you're DM, you aren't likely to change any policies. But I wish you luck in trying.

If that's not what you mean, then please accept my apologies. But if it *is* what you mean, you're wasting your time. The only way to shut me up is to shoot me in the head. And if you're right that we come back...well, I'd recommend moving to red alert about 20 years after I'm put in the grave.

No, I haven't read the book. I tried to make it clear earlier that I wanted to hear from anyone who had.

Here's the historical background of Mrs. Woods activities regarding the Church:

"Beginning in the 1990s, Bonnie Woods made information about Scientology
available and ran a public information campaign. In doing that, Mrs. Woods
used criticism toward the Scientology Organization, and spoke to the media
about her experiences as a member of the organization. She also took part in
warning watches in front of SO book stores in East Grinstead and distributed
documents in which Scientology was strongly criticized."


I am suspicious because it would seem the statement here attorney made on her behalf in court is not entirely truthful.

The statement: "Bonnie Woods does not hate any religion and would not take
any step to force people away from their chosen religion or encourage others
to do so."

I'll admit that technically, the statement might not represent an outright lie. But, as with Bill Clinton's word games over what the word "IS" means and all that, I think there is an inferred meaning. And, while it could be debated I suppose, but looking at the evidence available - I think painting her as a total innocent is naive.

I guess I got the impression she was just a happy Christian who wanted to be left alone. And who would never take any action against another's religious beliefs. She is painted as a victim. But it would seem she is not. She undertook specific actions against the Church and then testified in court that it was a big misunderstanding.

Now, does this give the Church the right to act as they did. I don't believe it does. Although, distributing leaflets that put forward an alternative view of Mrs. Woods is not much different that what she is engaged in with both her book and her earlier acts.

-E.J.

I still don't see how publicly criticizing the *organization* is the same as attacking your religious beliefs. From what I've read from you, I can't believe that you have actually looked at it yourself, because you do not strike me as the sort of person who can't recognize a fact when it's right in front of you. I see a clear and definite distinction between those aspects of Scientology which are religious in nature and those which are not. Can't you?

If I criticize the policy on attacking Suppressives, for example, am I attacking your religious beliefs? Handling PTSness is one thing -stating that an "SP" has no rights and should be attacked is quite another. How is that religious in nature? How does that have anything at all to do with safeguarding your personal spiritual freedom? Don't you see how that sort of mentality holds the potential for enormous harm? Read your history books - look in particular at the Holocaust, the Burning Times, the current war with bin Laden et al, for examples of a fixed idea of precisely this nature turning the world into chaos.