Cult Expert perplexed at NYTs writers blandishing article on The Church of Scientology…

FACTNet news blog editor:
Leading expert and well known cult exit counselor Steve Hassan, was quite taken aback when he read Ariel Kaminer’s article on the Church of Scientology in downtown Manhattan. He interpreted the article as almost a soft sell piece or a somewhat kit glove handling of a dangerous, powerful and influential cult. I will leave that to the readers to form their own opinions. My opinion? I think the NewYorkTimes doesn’t want to offend Hollywood’s affluent readers and Ms. Kaminer’s LA Entertainment/Arts&Leisure constituents. Here is the story followed by Mr. Hassan’s response…

City Critic: In Scientology’s Door, but Not Much Farther
By ARIEL KAMINER NewYorkTimes
Published: November 6, 2009

For all the rumors that swirl around the Church of Scientology — the accusations that it is a cult, the hints about its supernatural teachings, the means by which it attracts so many celebrities — its center on West 46th Street, tucked between the soignée Paramount Hotel and the workaday Edison, is a rather straightforward presence.

The building looks more like a modern corporate headquarters than a religious outpost, with shiny black granite and a display of the founder’s books. A large stained glass panel is the only visual clue to the group’s religious claims.

Down a half-flight of stairs, placards celebrate the accomplishments of Scientologists working with drug addicts or performing missionary functions around the world. Every few feet, videos scored with triumphal music explain things like the relationship of the spirit to the body.

A woman welcomed me with a warm grin. When I said I was a writer — I did not say what kind — she asked if I had written any books. Alas, no. “Well, maybe we’ll find out why not,” she said. “Scientology makes able people more able.”

The first step was a personality test with 200 sometimes puzzling questions. Many addressed my interactions with others. Some asked about depression and suicide. A few were out of the blue: “Do you consider the modern ‘prisons without bars’ system to be doomed to failure?”

I tried to answer honestly: Yes, past failures sometimes trouble me. Though even as I filled in the oval, I thought: Tom Cruise would never admit such weakness.

The results were plotted along 10 axes, like stable/unstable, happy/nervous. I scored in the top 25 percent for most categories, and I saw a few eyebrows rise approvingly. But the test said I had only average communication skills and was overly critical: Interesting, given my job.

When I returned the next morning, everyone seemed very happy to see me. A platinum-haired woman sat me down and asked a big question: What had I heard about Scientology?

This summer, the latest in a series of defectors went public with accusations of intimidation by the group’s leaders. Last month a French court fined the group nearly $900,000 for fraud. Other European countries have further curtailed its activities.

I said that I knew some were critical of the church (“a few groups of people,” she said, “mostly manipulators, like bankers”), but that I wanted to learn more.

The test, for example: Was it sound? If I’m asked, say, whether people enjoy my company, does my response show how well I know myself, or how little? Could the test just be a survey of the lies we tell ourselves?

She did not see it that way. She felt that an introduction to Scientology course ($84 for 10 hours of personal instruction) could help an “upstat” — high scoring — person like me achieve my long-term goals.

As our discussion neared 90 minutes, I started to think, celebrity nonsense notwithstanding, what if Scientology’s basic method really does produce clarity of mind? I pictured my friends’ faces if I were to start preaching my new gospel. The improbability of it all made it that much more appealing.

I agreed to take the course. Just one thing: would I fill out this card for a six-month church membership?

Well, no. I was game to learn more, but not about to join. I was reluctant even to give my last name.

That didn’t sit well, with her or her supervisor, who talked to me for quite some time. Eventually I coughed up a last name — my husband’s.

Two pro forma questions: Am I wanted by the law? Am I in psychiatric care? Good. Then all that remained was to sign the waiver:

“By signing this agreement I recognize, acknowledge and agree that: A. Scientology is a religion and all the services and activities of the Scientology religion are exclusively religious in nature and intended for the betterment and well-being of mankind,” it read in part. “B. The Founder of Scientology is L. Ron Hubbard. The writings and the recorded spoken words of Mr. Hubbard on the subject of Scientology present a guide intended to…” etc.

What?

I had not read a single word of Hubbard, and wasn’t about to attest to things just because someone said they were true. But no waiver, no course.

I could, however, take a correspondence course — and to be nice, they let me start right there in the library. To reciprocate, I gave my real last name. And then I got down to studying.

The introduction to Mr. Hubbard’s “A New Slant on Life” tells readers to look up any words they don’t know. After I’d read a few chapters, a friendly young instructor quizzed me on some of the words they contained: Did I know what esoteric meant? Nobility? Critical? He seemed really impressed that I did.

One of the book’s main ideas is that people can learn only by questioning. Many pages are spent explaining the folly of believing something just because an authority figure said it was true. So then what about that waiver?

While I pondered this paradox, the instructors exchanged a few whispers, then asked everyone to leave for a short break. As they exited, a man in a tan suit entered, and extended his hand to me. He was the president of the New York chapter. Apparently while I had been studying, someone had been Googling. He complimented me on my articles in The New York Times. And my adventure in the press-shy Church of Scientology came to a halt.

He was very polite, even inviting me back for a tour. But after a few minutes, he escorted me out.

He said that location attracted 700 to 800 visitors a week. That would be more than 100 a day. I did not see anything close to that, but who knows. I would have liked to stick around longer and learn on my own what the group so often in the headlines was all about.

Perhaps the very nice people I met along the way will now dismiss me as one of the manipulators, in league with price-fixing bankers. Or perhaps they still view me as a potential member. For anyone who’s curious, the doors are open 9 a.m. to 10 p.m., seven days a week. Just be careful what you sign.

Email: citycritic@nytimes.com

and here is Mr Hassan’s response to the article and it’s writer…

From: freedomofmind@verizon.net
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 09:35:39 -0500
Subject: scientology 11/8/09 (permission to post or print)
To: citycritic@nytimes.com

Dear Ariel Kaminer,

I was very disappointed by your story this morning. Especially disappointed with your ending and your invitation to readers to go check out the group. Your piece did little to warn a person who hasn’t read the facts about why this group is a mind control cult. Admittedly, the group is in the spotlight again, and therefore they are probably on their best behavior. Making sure that objections are minimal (as was evidenced by your story).

However, in my opinion, the subtlety of your story does not serve the public.

I would like to propose that you do another piece that actually tells facts. Or perhaps you ask some real questions and try to get a comment from a scientology representative? For example, with the group’s strict negative opinions and rules about psychiatry and medication, why was psychiatric medication found in L. Ron Hubbard’s bloodstream according to the autopsy and in the police report and a matter of public record?

Or something even less confrontative, like what scientific validation can they provide for the personality test that you took?

Or how about bringing up Douglas Franz’s two part New York Times series on how Scientology managed to get tax exemption (and religious status) after 25 years of not having it? To give you the summary, Frantz reported that Scientology hired P.I.’s to dig up dirt on the IRS commissioners, and then had a private, secret meeting and they got status as a religion?

As a mental health professional who has been counseling members and ex-members of Scientology for more than twenty years, I am obviously a person who strongly believe they are a cult and that the group should be stripped of its tax-exempt status. As a taxpayer I am fed up subsidizing groups like Scientology who systematically defrauds the public and according to former high level and long time employees, does not respect their member’s human rights.

I sincerely hope that no one gets suckered into Scientology because they thought, “she didn’t get pressured and didn’t report any high pressure, deceptive tactics, so I can check it out too.”

Sincerely,

Steven Hassan

Steven Alan Hassan M.Ed. LMHC, NCC
Freedom of Mind Resource Center Inc.
57 Adams Street Suite Two
Somerville, MA. 02145
U.S.A.

617 628-9918 fax: 617 628-8153
—————————————————————————
Steven Alan Hassan M.Ed. LMHC center@freedomofmind.com
Freedom of Mind Resource Center Inc. http://www.freedomofmind.com

“I know but one freedom & that is the freedom of the mind”
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

IMHO
FACTNet

This editorial/opinion/news alert has been provided or distributed by FACTNet, Inc. (Fight Against Coercive Tactics Network.) Please visit our web site at http://www.factnet.org if you would like to comment on this editorial/opinion/news alert or to share your personal experiences. Re-distribution and re-posting of this document using proper net etiquette when doing so, is appreciated! If you have something you would like Factnet to consider posting in our editorial/opinion/news story email it to manage@factnet.org . Be sure to put Factnet Story Submission in the subject line so it gets to the proper editors.
Factnet’s mission is to be the largest online news and referral service as well as research archive for defending freedom of thought and mind from all forms of unethical influence tactics, mind control and mental coercion/torture used in destructive cults and fundamentalist groups. Since 1993 millions have been helped. FACTNet is a tax deductible, IRS Approved 501(c)(3) non profit organization. For breaking news, personal stories, recovery information, support groups, and expert referrals relating to our mission please visit our web site at http://www.factnet.org If you would like to view over 350,000 postings on various cults, comment on this editorial/opinion/news or to share your personal experiences, go to one of our many various message boards at http://www.factnet.org/vbforum
F.A.C.T.Net, Inc. PO Box 1315 , Ignacio, CO. 81137 USA, E-mail: manage@factnet.org

Posted by David Pike on November 9, 2009.
Filed under: News