What authors first exposed Scientology?
Paulettec
Scientology. Not exactly. I wrote the first critical *book,* but while I was
trying to sell it, a negative magazine article came out in Life Magazine
(written by Alan Levy), and another in Parents Magazine, written by Arlene and
Howard Eisenberg.
I think the next major article after those two in America, was mine, which
appeared in England in Harper/Queen magazine in December of 69. (I doubt that
it was a coincidence that that was also the month of my first death threat).
My book "Scandal of Scientology" came out in 1970. I think George Malko's book
"The Now Religion" came out slightly before mine, but I never considered his to
be an expose.
As I was completing my book go to to my publisher, I met Bob Kaufman, who had a
manuscript he was planning to develop into a book (or perhaps he had completed
his book but I don't think he had sold it yet. So he may have actually written,
if not published, the first expose of Scientology, although his was a first
person account and mine was an investigative reporting job.)
So, I wasn't the first to expose Scientology in print, but mine was probably
the first book to come out against them, and I was also the only author to turn
activist as concerned them.
(I might have some minor detail wrong on the dates above since this comes from
memory, not notes.)
Paulette Cooper
Diane Richardson
>Someone wrote here a short while ago that I wrote the first expose on
>Scientology. Not exactly. I wrote the first critical *book,* but while I was
>trying to sell it, a negative magazine article came out in Life Magazine
>(written by Alan Levy), and another in Parents Magazine, written by Arlene and
>Howard Eisenberg.
>
>I think the next major article after those two in America, was mine, which
>appeared in England in Harper/Queen magazine in December of 69. (I doubt that
>it was a coincidence that that was also the month of my first death threat).
>
>My book "Scandal of Scientology" came out in 1970. I think George Malko's book
>"The Now Religion" came out slightly before mine, but I never considered his to
>be an expose.
It came out a year before yours, in 1970, and it most certainly was an
expose. Your book was copyrighted in 1971.
>As I was completing my book go to to my publisher, I met Bob Kaufman, who had a
>manuscript he was planning to develop into a book (or perhaps he had completed
>his book but I don't think he had sold it yet. So he may have actually written,
>if not published, the first expose of Scientology, although his was a first
>person account and mine was an investigative reporting job.)
>
>So, I wasn't the first to expose Scientology in print, but mine was probably
>the first book to come out against them, and I was also the only author to turn
>activist as concerned them.
No, your book was the second book to expose Scientology in print. It
followed George Malko's book "Scientology: The Now Religion" by one
year.
>(I might have some minor detail wrong on the dates above since this comes from
>memory, not notes.)
Yes, you do indeed.
Author Cooper, Paulette
Title The scandal of scientology
Publish info [New York, Tower Publications, c1971]
Descript'n 220 p. 18 cm
Bibliography: p. 213-220
Subjects Scientology
LC NO BP605.S2 C65
Author Malko, George
Title Scientology: the now religion
Publish info New York, Delacorte Press [c1970]
Descript'n xv, 205 p. 22 cm
Subjects Scientology
LC NO BP605.S2 M3
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
ptsc
Here, I'll jump on a couple details.
>Someone wrote here a short while ago that I wrote the first expose on
>Scientology. Not exactly. I wrote the first critical *book,* but while I was
>trying to sell it, a negative magazine article came out in Life Magazine
>(written by Alan Levy), and another in Parents Magazine, written by Arlene and
>Howard Eisenberg.
From the Bibliography of your own book, in the cross-referenced
hypertext version at
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/cooper/sos-b07.html
Life, "Scientology" by Alan Levy, November 13, 1968
Parents, "The Dangerous New Cult of Scientology" by Arlene and Howard Eisenberg,
June, 1969
>I think the next major article after those two in America, was mine, which
>appeared in England in Harper/Queen magazine in December of 69. (I doubt that
>it was a coincidence that that was also the month of my first death threat).
>My book "Scandal of Scientology" came out in 1970. I think George Malko's book
>"The Now Religion" came out slightly before mine, but I never considered his to
>be an expose.
It says 1970. I can't find any data more accurate than that.
>As I was completing my book go to to my publisher, I met Bob Kaufman, who had a
>manuscript he was planning to develop into a book (or perhaps he had completed
>his book but I don't think he had sold it yet. So he may have actually written,
>if not published, the first expose of Scientology, although his was a first
>person account and mine was an investigative reporting job.)
Robert Kaufman, Inside Scientology. Olympia Press, London & NYC, 1972
(The notorious Olympia Press of Maurice Girodias.)
>So, I wasn't the first to expose Scientology in print, but mine was probably
>the first book to come out against them, and I was also the only author to turn
>activist as concerned them.
>(I might have some minor detail wrong on the dates above since this comes from
>memory, not notes.)
So far as I can tell it's all accurate, except I can't figure out exactly
when Malko was published other than that it was also in 1970.
ptsc
Tilman Hausherr
<20020505105805...@mb-bk.aol.com>:
>Someone wrote here a short while ago that I wrote the first expose on
>Scientology. Not exactly. I wrote the first critical *book,* but while I was
>trying to sell it, a negative magazine article came out in Life Magazine
>(written by Alan Levy), and another in Parents Magazine, written by Arlene and
>Howard Eisenberg.
There were many earlier articles in the 50ies on Dianetics, by
Martin Gumpert and Erich Fromm and Isaac Rabi.
http://www.xenu.net/archive/fifties/
--
Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP5.55] Entheta * Enturbulation * Entertainment
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.xenu.de
Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
Find broken links on your web site: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/xenulink.html
The Xenu bookstore: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/bookstore.html
Baba ROM DOS
news:3c5ea251...@news.giganews.com...
> On 05 May 2002 14:58:05 GMT, paul...@aol.com (Paulettec) wrote:
> >So, I wasn't the first to expose Scientology in print, but mine was
probably
> >the first book to come out against them, and I was also the only author
to turn
> >activist as concerned them.
>
> No, your book was the second book to expose Scientology in print. It
> followed George Malko's book "Scientology: The Now Religion" by one
> year.
Having a copyright date of 1971 vs 1970 does not, of course,
mean that a year elapsed between the publication of the two titles.
Regardless, it was thanks to Paulette's book, of which my family
somehow had a copy around the house when I was a teenager,
that I became aware a Scientology critic and a "Suppressive Person"
before it became fashionable.
ptsc
wrote:
>Having a copyright date of 1971 vs 1970 does not, of course,
>mean that a year elapsed between the publication of the two titles.
>Regardless, it was thanks to Paulette's book, of which my family
>somehow had a copy around the house when I was a teenager,
>that I became aware a Scientology critic and a "Suppressive Person"
>before it became fashionable.
Well, they both got sued the same year, anyway. (Though she was
sued, I think, for the magazine article.) Malko was sued for his book,
and Paulette (and Queen magazine) were sued for "The Tragi-Farce
of Scientology."
ptsc
phil scott
Thanks again Paulette, you were the likely the first and certainly the
most high profile, and with the expose of the cults frame up job on
you, you became one of the most effective critics of all time. that
frame up exposed the cult for what it is. a very very valuable
contribution to say the least.
And thank you again for your almost unimaginable courage and strength
in survive such an onslaught. It demonstrates how truth, presented by
just one person, can stand against an army of thugs and millions of
dollars spent on hit men, a male whore, bogus lawyers, PI's and thugs.
Phil Scott
(415) 927 7573
PS: My ISP's news server is down so Im posting from google for the
time being.
Elizabeth Ann Cox
did a good job. Just that bitterness...
--
Elizabeth Ann Cox
aka, Bunnyann
FOLO ED ("Flukenet" Online Liaison Office)
ARS Chic with attitude!
Doubt is not a crime; simply a reasonable response to tyranny!
"Diane Richardson" <ref...@bway.net> wrote in message
news:3c5ea251...@news.giganews.com...
Andrew Wilson
Andrew
paul...@aol.com (Paulettec) wrote in message news:<20020505105805...@mb-bk.aol.com>...
Tom Padgett
Agree. It's almost as though Diane sees herself
above ALL here. She's a chilly one indeed.
But, for certain Paulette deserves HUGE amounts of thanks for her
pioneering expose, perseverance and courage to fend of all the attacks.
She should be a primary feature on
www.FairGamed.Org
Tom
------------------------------
http://www.FairGamed.Org
Christopher Wood
that I know of from Canada would be John Saunders' series from 1974 in the
Globe and Mail. The one before your book is from Macleans, a weekly
Canadian news magazine.
The interesting question this article brings to my mind is - where are the
Scientologists mentioned in this article? Certainly I don't think that any
of the current picket-handlers at the local org have been in the cult for
36 years.
Here's that article:
Macleans, 1966-08-22
Title: Is this the happiest man in the world?
Subtitle: His name is John McMaster. Once he was a mess like the rest of
us. Now he's a "clear", one of the saints of a new cult called Scientology
- without a single "engram" left to bug him.
Author(s): Wendy Michener
Something very odd is going on in Toronto. People are leaving the country,
changing their occupations, giving up their children, leaving their
husbands, wives, or lovers, changing their whole lives. All in the name of
something called Scientology.
The whole thing got started quite by chance. A couple of years ago,
someone left a book by former science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard in the
studio of Toronto artist Richard Gorman. Like many of his friends, Gorman
had been experimenting with drugs. Hubbard's book, a mystical mishmash
entitled Dianetics, promised greater self-awareness and Gorman wanted to
find out more. He wrote away to Washington to the Hubbard Guidance Centre
and soon became a missionizing enthusiast for Hubbard's about how everyone
can get smart, happy, healthy and nice, quickly.
Av Isaacs, his former dealer, says that when Gorman was converted he
"seemed to glow with a love for all mankind."
Gorman talked of nothing else and soon spread the word to Peter Munk, the
millionaire president of Clairtone Sound Corporation, his wife Linda and
about a dozen artists. A few months later John and Tuc Farrell arrived
from the Washington centre, complete with Hubbard guidebooks, Hubbard
"Electropsychometers," and set up shop.
Today Toronto has Canada's first Scientology "org," one of more than 20
offices of HASI (Hubbard Association of Scientologists International)
established throughout the English-speaking world. its membership is small
- at most 100 in Toronto and 100,000 in the whole world - but devoted,
and, as Scientologists like to point out, most of the world's movements
started out in a small way. Certainly, if the devotion of its members is
any guide, Scientology is a potent force. And it is a growing one.
Scientology is not exactly a religion, a science or a business, but a
triple-threat combination of all three. Its converts are as convinced as
any religious zealot that their way is the only way and ought to be
adopted by the whole world. Its system of conditioning the human psyche
can be as convincing or as devastating as brainwashing. And it extracts
fees from its followers as aggressively as any dance studio.
Just what Scientologists believe is hard to pin down. Hubbard has written
literally millions of words about it, and regularly makes new discoveries
as to just what his philosophy really means. Over the years he has worked
in notions taken from electronics, behavioral psychology, Buddhism,
Protestantism, and Madison Avenue. Put them all together and they spell
happiness, for people who truly believe. "It's the best thing in my life,"
one enthusiast told me. "It's even better than sex."
Basically, what Scientology offers is that long-standing best seller:
self-improvement, or in Hubbard's terminology, a superior state of
"beingness." First, of course, you have to understand just what's wrong
with the way you are now (quite a stumbling block for some people), and
that is, you are suffering from "engrams." Engrams are unpleasant
experiences you have had but probably don't remember, especially the ones
that took place before you were born, or in some previous existence. These
engrams bother you because they are recorded in your "reactive bank" (a
kind of subconscious mind) and sit there causing you to feel sick, or
depressed, or to be mean to other people.
How can you get rid of them? Scientology discovered them, and Scientology
has also discovered the only way of dealing with them. You "erase" them by
means of "auditing" - a process something like going to confession or
getting psychotherapy. Once you have located the bothersome things on your
"time track," you can be released from their influence. If you succeed in
breaking your whole reactive bank you are known to your fellow
Scientologists as "a release." And when you've erased the lot, you are
looked up to as "a clear."
Starting point: Dianetics
"Boy, you sure know it when you're around clears," Linda Munk told me.
"They're such beautiful people."
There are now about 20 "clears" in the world. The first one, John
McMaster, graduated last March 21 from the clearing course at Saint Hill,
the Vatican of Scientology. Since this breakthrough, people at Saint Hill
are reaching clear at the rate of about four a week.
If any of this sounds familiar, it may be because you heard about it back
when Scientology was known as Dianetics, and there were dozens of clears
who turned out not to be really clear after all.
Dianetics first made its appearance 16 years ago in an article by L. Ron
Hubbard in a science-fiction magazine. (Many scientologists, predictably
enough, turn out to have been avid science-fiction fans, although some
serious-minded fans such as Kingsley Amis find Hubbard an embarrassment.)
Hubbard followed this up with a fat book on Dianetics: The Modern
Scientology of Mental health. It was snapped up in six editions by
thousands of eager converts. The cult caught on in Hollywood in 1950, and
for one heady year Hubbard was a hero. Dianetic auditing was as popular as
winning friends and influencing people, applying the power of positive
thinking, dieting the macrobiotic way, or hypnotizing your party guests.
But the mental strain of do-it-yourself therapy proved too much for some
of Hubbard's followers. Several ended up in mental institutions. Hubbard
was denounced by members of the medical profession, among others, and he
retired from the spotlight to build himself a better scientific platform.
Rejected as a healer, he reappeared as a kind of savior. Where Dianetics
was supposed to effect mental healing, Scientology promises to make mere
men into superior spiritual beings - "thetans" - who are not only free
from the world's ills, but can change their environment at will. (One of
the many stories about Hubbard's superior powers has it that when a
microphone broke down at one of his public speeches, he simply keyed in
extra power to his own voice and got along nicely without it.)
Now Hubbard has managed what almost amounts to a second coming. After
establishing Scinetology as a church in the United States (tax deductible
and free from interference), he moved his worldwide headquarters in 1959
to a stately Sussex Manor called Saint Hill. Today he lives on his own
estate in Rhodesia and commutes to Saint Hill to oversee operations, and
keep a check on his "technology." By now most of his teachings are either
in books or on tape. He rarely lectures, even to the most advanced
students.
To date, at least eight Canadians have been to Saint Hill and some are
still there, working. Richard Gorman is in charge of designing everything
for worldwide distribution: posters, throwaways, pamphlets, books,
inserts; and John Okeefe, a former Toronto free-lance journalist, has
become a Scientology staff writer. Somehow, by the time ordinary people
have been audited into superior states of existence, they naturally find
that they want to dedicate themselves to helping others join the club.
Linda Munk came back to Toronto in July after a year's study there, which
took her almost all the way to clear. "I love it at Saint Hill," she told
me. "Ron is such a beautiful man, such a marvelous person, and so is Mary
Sue [his third wife]."
Back in Toronto, things are not quite so beautiful. Until recently, the
org operated out of a grubby third-story suite above a midtown drugstore.
The office walls were covered with signs, slogans, posters, charts, and a
big board bearing such titles as Director of Success, Director of
Communications, Director of Qualifications. Some of the titles had
people's names after them, and all of the names were followed by In-group
initials - HAS, HVA, HRS, and HAA, among others. The only beautiful thing
there was a "Well, we done it" poster by Gorman, announcing the graduation
of the first clear.
The goal: Operating Thetan
When I arrived at the office Mrs. Tuc Farrell wasted no time in giving me
a huge chart (Scientologists love charts) showing just what higher states
of existence were available through processing, training, and courses. The
chart indicated seven levels of intensive processing through to the state
of clear with a small arrow pointing upward to the newly defined goal of
"O.T." or Operating Thetan. There were 12 levels of training, beginning
with the elements of Scientology and ending with the clearing course.
However, not all these stages of instruction can be obtained in Toronto,
Mrs. Farrell explained, "because we don't have enough staff to back-stop
this technology." In plain English, this means that anybody who wants to
go all the way to the top of Scientology's chart must eventually raise
enough money to study at Saint Hill. Nobody has yet reached O.T.
It was hard to connect this office with the ecstatic testimonials I heard
from the converted. Why are artists who don't know where their next tube
of Cadmium Red is coming from, prepared to spend $25 for one hour with a
Scientology auditor? What is it that appeals to people? And what is it
that keeps them coming back for more?
To find out, Maclean's sent a research girl to sign up on her own. Jean
(as I'll call her) was not known to anyone in the HASI office, and had no
more idea what to expect than any other "wog," i.e., outsider. She simply
phoned up for an appointment and showed up as arranged the next day. Mr.
Farrell was ready for her, and within five minutes Jean was writing a
cheque for $25 for an "assist" - the simplest kind of service, which in
her case called for five hours of auditing.
Once signed up, Jean was passed on to her auditor, a nice young woman
named Judy, who wore bell-bottom pants, a turtleneck sweater and a winning
smile. During the sessions - two hours before lunch, three hours afterward
- Judy and Jean sat opposite each other in a small room, with a Hubbard
"E-Meter" between. Jean was required to hold on to two tin cans connected
by wires to the machine, while Judy asked questions and watched the dial
of the meter. Depending on the reading, Judy would either repeat the
question or pass on to a new one on a long list in front of her. As the
sessions went on she made very few notes and speeded up the questions.
Most of them were quite personal. Jean had no control over the direction
they took or subjects discussed. Apparently as a matter of normal routine
Jean was asked if she were gathering facts for anyone, if she had told any
lies, and if she were holding anything back. There were questions Jean was
expecting, and she was able to answer them without apparently arousing
Judy's suspicions. Judy reported no reading. Jean had no idea how the
meter worked, but was astonished and impressed to find that it seemed on
the whole to reflect her state of mind quite accurately.
There's nothing more impressive than a little technological wizardry, but
in fact there's nothing magical about Hubbard's E-Meter. it works by
measuring the salt and moisture on the subject's palms and is,
psychiatrists tell me, a crude form of lie detector which can indicate the
degree of a subject's pleasure or discomfort. But Scientologists often
credit the E-Meter with spectacular powers: one girl told me the meter had
helped her pin down the fact that she'd been alive in a previous
incarnation, in the year 1392.
After a while Judy's intense manner and the fierce repetition of certain
questions began to make Jean edgy. She wanted to smoke but was not allowed
to. She wanted to call it quits at lunch, but was ordered to come back
again. She did, and by the end of the day was really shaken up. "It was
one of the most grueling days I ever put in," she says, "more grueling
even than childbirth."
The worst part of the session came when Judy asked, "What did someone
almost find out about you?" Once would have been bad enough, but Judy
repeated this question again and again and again, for a full hour. Judy
found out a lot of things in the course of that hour, but Jean still
managed to hide three key things, three very personal things.
"By the end my hands were shaking. I could hardly hold the tin cans," Jean
recalls. "I was confused - almost a blubbering idiot."
The next day, Mrs. Farrell told her what was wrong with her. Jean, she
explained, was a "potential trouble source" who suffered from associating
with "suppressive people." To free herself, Mrs. Farrell said, Jean would
have to sit down and write a letter to one of her "suppressive" friends,
in which she "disconnected" herself.
Jean was also informed that what she really needed was another 25 hours of
intensive processing, which would cost her $500. When Jean protested that
she couldn't afford it, she was offered a job in the Scientology office to
help pay for it.
"For three days," Jean told me later, "I was actually considering it.
After a few hours of that brainwashing routine, nobody can think
straight."
The contract Jean was being urged to sign is more sinister than a mere
agreement to pay a large sum of money. One clause in it requires you to
disconnect from associates, friends or family if the Hubbard Guidance
Centre decides such people are "enturbulative." Whatever else that may
mean, it certainly includes anyone who is critical of Scientology. Another
clause prohibits you from having "any other practice" used on you
(apparently to stave off intervention by a doctor or a clergyman), and a
third provides for the number of auditing hours to be extended at the
centre's discretion. The contract also stipulates that if you leave before
they say you are ready to do so, the operators of the centre will not be
responsible for your condition. (This provision seems more meaningful to
anyone who recalls the cases of insanity arising out of Dianetics
auditing. More recently, Scientology ran into trouble in Melbourne, where
it is now banned by the Psychological Practices Act of December 1965.)
Scientology has many facets - virtually something for almost everybody
willing to pay. There are prayers for those who want to pray. There is
"touch assist healing" for those who believe in that kind of magic. There
are courses in how to communicate, how to run a business, how to control
your environment and how to be an executive. From your nearest org you can
buy lapel pins, certificates, a self-portrait of Hubbard ($10 U.S.) and
dozens of Scientology books - The Problems Of Work, The Science Of
Survival, The Creation of Human Ability, The History Of Man, All About
Radiation and, among others, Brainwashing.
Scientology's hard-sell tactics were never plainer than at the Road to
Freedom Congress, held in Toronto last May to coincide with the visit of
the very first clear, John McMaster. The written instructions issued to
the staff make it perfectly clear that the main orientation of the
congress was, well, pretty commercial: " . . . Wear very bright colors and
big smiles and be very safe to talk to . . . We want to establish an
atmosphere like a country fair - friendly as hell, noisy, crowded,
colorful and sell-sell-sell." The congress was no country fair, but John
McMaster's performance was a shrewd piece of oratory. In about 90 minutes
he told the 70 people who turned up just what to think about Pavlov,
Freud, psychiatrists, atomic energy, politicians, his own life story, and
- most of all - his six-year achievements in becoming "clar." Throughout
his talk he would snap his fingers and repeat a slogn for emphasis. "In
the places where Scientology operates you will see people coming out bette
for it (snap), you will see people coming out bette for it (snap), you
will see people coming out bette for it (snap)."
I was reminded that Hubbard once wrote, "By pounding the same drum and
doing the same thing one is finally heard. There's an old rule: 'what I
tell you three times is true.' If people don't hear the same thing being
said at least three times, they believe it is impermanent."
After the lecture there was a standing ovation and several people
approached him reverently for a private word of inspiration. Not
surprisingly, the girl who first mentioned Scientology to me thought he
was wonderful, but she was quite disillusioned to see that he had a big
pimple on one cheek. In the higher states of existence people are supposed
to be above such things. The reason, she'd been told, was that his mind
had gone clear so suddenly that his body hadn't had time to catch up.
"We need more orgs"
After the congress, 24 of us attended a farewell service in a Chinese
restaurant for a member who was resting in a funeral chapel in another
part of town. After dinner, the Rev. Mrs. Beth Fordyce, of Detroit, took
off her pearls, put on a cross and read a poem from the book of ceremonies
of the Founding Church of Scientology, published in Washington in 1959.
Most of the ceremonies read like folksy parodies of the United Church, but
the funeral service is built around the idea of reincarnation.
"We thank you for coming to us.
We do not contest your
Right to go away.
Your debts are paid
This chapter of they life is shut.
Go now, dear Josephine and live
once more in happier time
and place."
Everyone chorused a "Good-by, Josephine," and the last of the Sunday-night
diners paused sheepishly over their garlic spareribs.
The shoptalk resumed. "We need more orgs," said the clear, reaching for
the inevitable fortune cookie. Everyone waited to see what chance would
bring this totally happy, totally good man. It was as though Saint Peter
were playing bingo in a church basement. He read it out: "A dark woman is
about to enter your life." Everyone laughed and speculated. Someone gave
him a second fortune cookie. Inside was a hand-written fortune: "We all
love you."
"It's true," said the Rev. Fordyce and McMaster fairly beamed with
appreciation.
I asked why he smoked. "I like it," he said. "I would stop if I thought it
was harmful."
Suddenly the lady minister seized my right hand in both of her warm hands,
fingers reaching up lightly to my pulse. "You're the one person I can't
figure out here," she said, fixing me with the full wattage of her
attention. I stared back, an eye for an eye. "What has impressed you most
about us?" she asked, a human lie detector.
"The way you are all so nice to each other."
She released me. "Yes, that was a marvelous moment for me, when I realized
that as a Scientologist I could travel anywhere and always have friends."
Mrs. Farrell couldn't help enthusing over the success of the congress. "We
did really well," she said. "We made our expenses yesterday. Everything
today was pure gravy."
"Toronto should expand quickly now," said Ron Tree, a new staff member
just arrived from training at Saint Hill.
"Yes, Toronto is ready," said the clear.
--
** Scientology's gate is down. **
Canadian Scientology information is now at:
http://xenu.ca
Keith Henson
>Someone wrote here a short while ago that I wrote the first expose on
>Scientology. Not exactly. I wrote the first critical *book,* but while I was
Snip (neat history)
Good to see you here Paulette!
Keith Henson
Diane Richardson
JimDBB
>From: "Elizabeth Ann Cox" eliza...@chesapeake.net
>Typical Diane, never a kind word, never a word of appreciation, never a you
>did a good job. Just that bitterness...
Could it be that Diane Richardson is hiding some things regarding Paulette
Cooper?
JImdbb
JimDBB
>From: paul...@aol.com (Paulettec)
I was in Scientology and read these books and articles as they came out. They
helped lead me out of Scientology. The two books that were the strongest and
made the most impact on me were Paulette Coopers book and Bob Kaufman's book.
These were tough hard hitting exposes. Malko's book was much softer.
Paulette's book, I believe, only came out in paperback whereas Kaufman's was a
hard back and that fact alone gives the book much more impact.
I believe that Paulette's book was the first to expose some OT course material
but Kaufman's book went into great detail with OT stuff. Kaufman's book spoke
of Xenn rather than the correct, Xenu, on the OT III course. I wondered if he
ever explained that...was it a printing error, was it deliberate to avoid
copyright hassles', or what.
Paulette Cooper certainly deserves a lot of credit for her courageous book and
for the hell that the Scientology cult put her through.
JImdbb
Diane Richardson
I am not hiding anything about Paulette Cooper, Mr. Beebe. What could
you possibly be attempting to imply with such an idiotic comment?
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Elizabeth Ann Cox
--
Elizabeth Ann Cox
aka, Bunnyann
FOLO ED ("Flukenet" Online Liaison Office)
ARS Chic with attitude!
Doubt is not a crime; simply a reasonable response to tyranny!
"Diane Richardson" <ref...@bway.net> wrote in message
news:3c5f3915...@news.giganews.com...
Diane Richardson
Susan
Great to hear from you. Thanks so much for all you
have done and endured in the fight for the truth
about this horrendous cult.
Susan
paul...@aol.com (Paulettec) wrote in message news:<20020505105805...@mb-bk.aol.com>...
Daniel B. Millette
<eliza...@chesapeake.net> wrote:
> That perhaps you are a royal raging bitch who hates Paulette?
It's very predictable when Paulette Cooper is brought up. Diane tries
to pretend to be an objective source, but the green of jealousy comes
through loud and clear.
That is what is at the heart of the matter for Diane when it comes to
PC....PC is a successful author, and Diane pushes carts of books
around. (Not to mention PC is a very attractive woman, and from what I
hear, Diane is not.)
It's very obvious and always has been - Diane wishes she could be
beautiful and successful like Paulette instead of a woman who slings
books and spends Saturday night on the internet.
roger gonnet
roger
"Paulettec" <paul...@aol.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
20020505105805...@mb-bk.aol.com...
arnie lerma - www.lermanet.com
>Someone wrote here a short while ago that I wrote the first expose on
>Scientology. Not exactly. I wrote the first critical *book,* but while I was
>trying to sell it, a negative magazine article came out in Life Magazine
>(written by Alan Levy), and another in Parents Magazine, written by Arlene and
>Howard Eisenberg.
and the world has never been the same since,
How i wish I had the opportunity to have read your work back in
1971....
Thank you for having the courage to do what you did
arnie
Ferengi + Borg = Scientology
I'd prefer to die speaking my mind than live fearing to speak.
The only thing that always works in scientology are its lawyers
The internet is the liberty tree of the new millennium
Secrets are the mortar binding lies as bricks together into prisons for the mind
http://www.lermanet.com/grifters.htm - mentioned 4 January 2000 in
The Washington Post's - 'Reliable Source' column re "Scientologist with no HEAD"
You want Bigots? http://members.cox.net/bwarr2/Movie2.html
Monica Pignotti
honeymoon stage in 1971, Paulette's book came out. My father
travelled from Michigan to Salt Lake City, where I was on staff at the
mission, to bring it to me, along with several other magazine articles
exposing Scientology, which I unfortunately rejected as the work of
SPs and merchants of chaos. I was right that they were SPs, but what
I didn't realize at the time is that the SPs were the good guys! If I
had taken the material in her book seriously, I could have saved
myself many wasted years, but unfortunately the Scientologists
denigrated the source and I bought their black PR. This is not much
different from what goes on currently, when hard core Scientologists
are exposed to material on the internet and reject it as the work of
evil SPs, if they can get past the net nanny. It's just a higher tech
version of the denial. In Scientology, the more things change, the
more they stay the same.
I can personally attest to the fact, that regardless of the dates of
publication and who was first, Paulette Cooper was definitely
Scientology's #1 SP and target at the time. When I brought the
material to people in the CofS, she was the one they ranted about the
most. Someone said that the people in the GO were taking care of her,
but I had no idea of the extent to which they had gone. That kind of
information was not given out to anyone outside that particular
division of the GO. I also remember Malko's book, but that was
considered to be softer criticism. About a year later, I heard about
Bob Kaufman's book, but didn't read it. He was also considered to be
a major SP because he was the first person to expose the OT III
materials. I didn't read his book until years after leaving.
I'd have to say that from the point of view of an insider at the time,
Paulette was the leader of the small band of courageous (although we
wouldn't have exactly described it this way) SPs who were going up
against Scientology.
Monica
Monica Pignotti
<snip>
> I believe that Paulette's book was the first to expose some OT course material
> but Kaufman's book went into great detail with OT stuff. Kaufman's book spoke
> of Xenn rather than the correct, Xenu, on the OT III course. I wondered if he
> ever explained that...was it a printing error, was it deliberate to avoid
> copyright hassles', or what.
Paulette's book did not contain any confidential OT material. Bob
Kaufman's was the first to do that. I didn't read the original
edition of Bob's book -- I read a later, updated version years later
and the error about Xenu wasn't in that one.
> Paulette Cooper certainly deserves a lot of credit for her courageous book and
> for the hell that the Scientology cult put her through.
Definitely agreed! I consider her to have been the leader of the SPs
at the time, regardless of dates of publication.
Monica
ptsc
>I believe that Paulette's book was the first to expose some OT course material
>but Kaufman's book went into great detail with OT stuff. Kaufman's book spoke
>of Xenn rather than the correct, Xenu, on the OT III course. I wondered if he
>ever explained that...was it a printing error, was it deliberate to avoid
>copyright hassles', or what.
If you look at the handwritten OT III, it looks a lot like it could be "Xenn" or
"Xemu" or something like that.
Other than that, Kaufman's recollections of the materials he had used were
so accurate that Scientology accused him of having stolen materials from
an org. In fact, he merely had a near-photographic memory, one of his
many talents.
Kaufman was a brilliant if somewhat mentally troubled man (which he
also details).
I met him very briefly shortly before he died. (I only actually read
his book recently, though, and it is very funny in addition to being
very informative.)
ptsc
Dave Bird
>On 06 May 2002 01:18:37 GMT, jim...@aol.com (JimDBB) wrote:
>>
>>I believe that Paulette's book was the first to expose some OT course material
>>but Kaufman's book went into great detail with OT stuff. Kaufman's book spoke
>>of Xenn rather than the correct, Xenu, on the OT III course. I wondered if he
>>ever explained that...was it a printing error, was it deliberate to avoid
>>copyright hassles', or what.
>
>If you look at the handwritten OT III, it looks a lot like it could be "Xenn" or
>"Xemu" or something like that.
The problem arose because people were not allowed to discuss OT3
with others, only read the original handwritten text; variant
readings were almost bound to arise.
--
FUCK THE SKULL OF HUBBARD, AND BUGGER THE DWARF HE RODE IN ON!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
8====3 (O 0) GROETEN --- PRINTZ XEMU EXTRAWL no real OT has
|n| (COMMANDER, FIFTH INVADER FORCE) ever existed
Scientology's inquisition loses points every time Ron, Davey, or
the tech are malinged: hence this sig.Whoops, that's another -25!
William Barwell
Paulettec <paul...@aol.com> wrote:
>Someone wrote here a short while ago that I wrote the first expose on
>Scientology. Not exactly. I wrote the first critical *book,* but while I was
>trying to sell it, a negative magazine article came out in Life Magazine
>(written by Alan Levy), and another in Parents Magazine, written by Arlene and
>Howard Eisenberg.
>
>appeared in England in Harper/Queen magazine in December of 69. (I doubt that
>it was a coincidence that that was also the month of my first death threat).
>
>My book "Scandal of Scientology" came out in 1970. I think George Malko's book
>"The Now Religion" came out slightly before mine, but I never considered his to
>be an expose.
I think Martin Gardener's book Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science
came out in the mid 60's. Gardner was the Scientific American
puzzles editor at the time.
He devoted a whole chapter to Hubbard and Dianetics and it was this book
that made me a confirmed Scientology watcher.
Gardner mentioned clams and boohoos and aircraft door goals.
Before that Dr. Joseph Winter wrote a book on his days in Scientology, as
did Helen O'Brien. I still have not read either of these yet.
>As I was completing my book go to to my publisher, I met Bob Kaufman, who had a
>manuscript he was planning to develop into a book (or perhaps he had completed
>his book but I don't think he had sold it yet. So he may have actually written,
>if not published, the first expose of Scientology, although his was a first
>person account and mine was an investigative reporting job.)
>
>So, I wasn't the first to expose Scientology in print, but mine was probably
>the first book to come out against them, and I was also the only author to turn
>activist as concerned them.
Gardner was one of the founders of CSICOP, which was problem
enough for Co$ that they have harrassed CSICOP from time to time.
James Randi has also written harshly of Scientology as concerns
Scientology's impingement on subjects such as parapsycology where
Scientologists like Targ and Puthoff were instrumental in trying
to give parapsychology scientific standing.
So you may have been the author who specifically targetted
Scientology, but CSICOP authors have given 'em a few shots
from time to time.
>(I might have some minor detail wrong on the dates above since this comes from
>memory, not notes.)
>
>Paulette Cooper
I recall finding your book not long after it was published,
and buying it because I was interested thanks to Gardner.
At that time, except for the Scientology for the Millions
book, it was the only book devoted to Scientology I knew
of.
Pope Charles
SubGenius Pope of Houston
Slack!
William Barwell
>did a good job. Just that bitterness...
of rancor.
William Barwell
JimDBB <jim...@aol.com> wrote:
>>Subject: What authors first exposed Scientology?
>>From: paul...@aol.com (Paulettec)
>
>>Someone wrote here a short while ago that I wrote the first expose on
>>Scientology. Not exactly. I wrote the first critical *book,* but while I
>>was
>
>I believe that Paulette's book was the first to expose some OT course material
>but Kaufman's book went into great detail with OT stuff.
The first would have been Martin Gardner's Fads and Fallacies
in the Name of Science.
Gardner spilled the beans about the clams and boo-hoos and
airplane door goals.
Mid 60's sometime, my books are partially packed up so I cannot
check copyright date.
Wheeeeeeeee!
Tell us about the airpane door goals again Uncle Elron!
Martin's book was quite popular and was reprinted several times
well into the early 80s at least.
William Barwell
Dave Bird <da...@xemu.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article<o79ddugrcjsljaad5...@4ax.com>, ptsc writes:
>>On 06 May 2002 01:18:37 GMT, jim...@aol.com (JimDBB) wrote:
>>>
>>>I believe that Paulette's book was the first to expose some OT course material
>>>but Kaufman's book went into great detail with OT stuff. Kaufman's book spoke
>>>of Xenn rather than the correct, Xenu, on the OT III course. I wondered if he
>>>ever explained that...was it a printing error, was it deliberate to avoid
>>>copyright hassles', or what.
>>
>>If you look at the handwritten OT III, it looks a lot like it could be "Xenn" or
>>"Xemu" or something like that.
>
> The problem arose because people were not allowed to discuss OT3
> with others, only read the original handwritten text; variant
> readings were almost bound to arise.
>
"He said "Blessed are the cheesemakers!".
Paulettec
Scientology, but CSICOP authors have given 'em a few shots
from time to time.
Yes, the earlier ones targeted Dianetics. In fact, I read Martin Gardner's
wonderful "Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science" when I was young and
thought the description of Dianetics was very funny. When I encountered
Scientology in the late '60's, I realized it was the same organization with a
different name, and my recollection of the earlier material intensified my
desire to learn more about the transformed organization.
I'm sure this will cause an argument (what statements on this newsgroup don't?)
and I'm not going to waste my time arguing this point, but I do want to say
that I never considered Malko's book to be any kind of hard-hitting expose.
His was more of an exposition than an expose. He described Scientology
theories in detail, and finally, around p. 80 said something along the line
"but this is nonsense." (I'm dealing from memory here.)
There was also a book that came out afterwards that was pro-Scientology. When
I wrote my book, Scientology strongly hinted to me that if I didn't come out
with it, they would give me a book that would make me a lot of money instead of
a lot of trouble. I believe that is this pro-Scientology book that Omar
Garrison later wrote.
Paulette Cooper
barb
I was lucky enough to buy a copy of 'Scandal of Scientology' last year.
What's amusing in retrospect was your attitude about the cult's future.
This was after Operation Snow White, when they were stridently
persisting in the lie that "we don't do that any more." You expressed a
charming, if naive, hope that this was true and that the cult could
really reform. Of course, it may have seemed possible back then.
Speaking from the vantage point of several decades later, we see that
not only have they NOT changed a bit, they are incapable of it due to
the inherent nature of the organization.
I think it's time for a sequel. Not necessarily by you, only a crazy
person would go back for a second heapin' helping of Scientology
shenanigans. Indeed, it was your story as posted to xenu.net that really
got me hooked! In the past 3-4 years, however, we've seen even more
astounding tales come out of the fight to expose Scientology. The
phenomenon of the internet critic population explosion is noteworthy in
itself. Still, I can wait for the day that the final, definative volume
on Scientology's repulsive existance can be put to print, outlining the
decline and fall of the cult. I'm sure William Shirer felt the same
while writing Decline and Fall of the Third Reich. Like his, our book
should have a happy ending too.
--
Barb
Chaplain, ARSCC
http://members.cox.net/bwarr1
Bedford McIntosh
> Before that Dr. Joseph Winter wrote a book on his days in Scientology, as
> did Helen O'Brien. I still have not read either of these yet.
>
The O'Brien book, "Dianetics in Limbo" is considerably harder to find
(ABEbooks is down as I write this, but I saw two copies on Bookfinder
at $185 and $450). While Andreas hasn't added the link on his
booklist section, the complete Dianetics in Limbo (down to the text on
the dustjacket) was posted to Usenet a few years ago by Martin Hunt.
Find it at:
Or search the Google usenet archives for the words:
limbo documentary dianetics cow immortality
ptsc
>There was also a book that came out afterwards that was pro-Scientology. When
>I wrote my book, Scientology strongly hinted to me that if I didn't come out
>with it, they would give me a book that would make me a lot of money instead of
>a lot of trouble. I believe that is this pro-Scientology book that Omar
>Garrison later wrote.
Fighting Dirty, by Omar Garrison, a whitewash of their litigation history.
Additionally, there was also a book called "Scientology for the Millions"
by Walter Braddeson in 1969. I have never seen anyone describe its
contents, but from the title I believe it to have been part of a series of
books with titles ending with "for the Millions." I also do not believe the
book to have been an expose.
I think the next expose may have been Cyril Vosper's The Mind-Benders,
although it may have actually been Kaufman's Inside Scientology
(humorously subtitled How I Found Scientology and Became
Superhuman).
In any case, the floodgates certainly opened around that time.
ptsc
William Barwell
ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>On 09 May 2002 20:46:37 GMT, paul...@aol.com (Paulettec) wrote:
>
>>There was also a book that came out afterwards that was pro-Scientology. When
>>I wrote my book, Scientology strongly hinted to me that if I didn't come out
>>with it, they would give me a book that would make me a lot of money instead of
>>a lot of trouble. I believe that is this pro-Scientology book that Omar
>>Garrison later wrote.
>
>Fighting Dirty, by Omar Garrison, a whitewash of their litigation history.
>
>Additionally, there was also a book called "Scientology for the Millions"
>by Walter Braddeson in 1969. I have never seen anyone describe its
>contents, but from the title I believe it to have been part of a series of
>books with titles ending with "for the Millions." I also do not believe the
>book to have been an expose.
I remember scanning through a copy of this at a used bookstore.
It was drivel, and didn't get into the space opera or secret
teachings much. I didn't buy it. That was many years ago,
I haven't seen a copy around in a long, long time.
>
>I think the next expose may have been Cyril Vosper's The Mind-Benders,
>although it may have actually been Kaufman's Inside Scientology
>(humorously subtitled How I Found Scientology and Became
>Superhuman).
>
>In any case, the floodgates certainly opened around that time.
There was always something dribbling out about Dianetics,
later Scientology. I suppose there will be in the future.
Somebody needs to do a book on Scientology's lawsuits and
fair game nonsense.
Thomas J Best
Pope,
I'm in the middle of finding and copying the 'Truth' (Melbourne
scandal sheet) articles from 1962-63, which led to questions
being asked in the Victorian Parliament, and then the setting
up of the Anderson Inquiry.
Somebody elsewhere in the thread noted that it was one of the
earliest sustained exposes. Anyways - when I've done scanning
and/or transcribing, I'll be doing some posting. A slight
contribution to the history of Fair Game 'tek' :-)
tam
"Of the few innocent pleasures left....
the jamming of commonsense down the throats
of fools is perhaps the keenest."
Thomas Huxley