Scientology Crime Syndicate

From heldal@online.no Wed Dec 16 11:52:46 1998
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: My e-mail reply to an OT VII / Class V auditor
From: heldal@online.no (Andreas Heldal-Lund - www.xenu.net)
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 19:52:46 GMT

This is my second e-mail respons to an OT VII. The first e-mail basically just told me I was a fool and included two quotes from Hubbard.

Any comments or impressions you want to share with me after you've read this? Appreciate anything I get. :)


At 07:46 16.12.98 -0800, you wrote:
>I have read enough of you vendetta web site to know there
>is more than just an objective view point going on, it's
>personal with you.

You've grossly misunderstood me and Operation Clambake. And as I suspected you've not investigated even close to enough to make any of the assumptions you have made about both.

I don't state anywhere that I'm objective. On the contrary, I'm human and I have my opinions. I set out to investigate Scientology, Dianetics, CoS and Hubbard, and came back with some opinions. I made a private web page (which evolved to a whole site) which can only reflect my opinions. That's not unbiased or objective, and it never claimed it was! Why should I strive to be objective? In the eyes of most Scientologists that means only repeating what's already well documented and said on official CoS sites.

Why should I use my time and effort to duplicate anything I do not agree with? Please tell me where the logic is buried here. Being of a different opinion than you, does _NOT_ mean I did a less honest search for truth. It doesn't even have to mean I know less than you. You reveal your ignorance by arguing like that has to be the fact, while you not even bothered to investigate enough to even make a slightly logical argument. Sorry pal, very poor job!

I spell it out pretty clear, even a fool like me is able enough to understand it, that these are my opinions and here are all the documentation which I base my current opinions on. Welcome visitor, you read and make up your own mind! But I go even further; I urge visitors to my site to also visit sites of people and organizations that represent views and opinions opposite to mine. I link to www.scientology.org (the official Scientology site), the freezoners and for example Russ Shaws bigot page. I tell visitors not to take my word for anything, but check out even those who claim I'm a bigot, a fool, mad and a criminal.

Would you claim the official web pages of CoS are more objective than mine? I trust my fellow man, I don't want to trick anybody into agreeing with me by limiting their right to investigate only to my version. I don't want others to base their opinion on only censored or biased information. This is how cults operate and contradicts everything I stand for. I'm not afraid of neither lies or the truth. CoS might come after me and spread lies to try to silence me, we have proof they have done this many times before, but I trust truth about me will win. I can only live my life as best I can, I have no chance against the black pr machinery of CoS, their millions of dollars or their unmoral methods. But enough critics like me will finally bring any monster to their knees. Along the way many may very well be crushed, but all will be crushed if nobody dare.

Your're the fool here, if any of us are, since you seem to be totally unwilling to acknowledge or respect that people like me disagree with you. I see no links from _ANY_ pro-Scientology sites to a critical page asking the reader to make up their own mind. Nowhere! The paradox is that CoS only have links to approved pro sites and even tell their members to install software on their computer which will blindly _censor_ all critical texts (and a lot more) when they connect to the 'Net.

For over 2 years I've even, on top of all the rest, invited all Scientologists in the world to point out where there are errors on my pages. If they can prove I'm wrong, then I'll change it. If they only have a different opinion I offer to host their opinions wherever they want on my pages so that visitors to Operation Clambake easily can access their comments too. I've also added a separate page where Scientologists can send me their texts to explain their general view, the subject is up to them. There is also a open guest book where Scientologists can post, have never censored a Scientologist from there. Have you read these page and noticed how many Scientologists who dared to take my challenge? If all my attempts to offer the opposite view isn't enough for you, then what, for crying out loud, would be?

It is a fact worthy of serious thought that no Scientologist so far have been able to do this. And there is no excuse for them, since I of course use their silence as my best argument when asked for the validity of my claims or defend against stupid claims that I am the bigot etc. I know exactly what you will say to this, please, at least try to surprise me with some real communication skills and reason.

And please think before you mail any more poorly thought claims about me hating you because you are a Scientologist or have anything against Scientology on bigoted grounds. It's just stupid and lacks any valid argument. Try instead to figure out why I do go after CoS, and not the Freezoners for example. Try to understand what really is going on, and allow yourself to at least be open for the possibility that even SPs like me can be rather nice people without any wish to harm you personally. Maybe I have no secret agenda, and even no hidden "blood sex crimes". Maybe I just see something that scares me in an organization that you view differently. Maybe one of us is wrong, maybe both of us have some things right. I'm not going to bite and I'm not going to willfully misunderstand your arguments. I might misunderstand, but I'll allow you to correct me. That's what a discussion is about.

>What you say about anyone who might actually embrace a
>better way is an insult. How dare you infer what I might
>know as a hoax and that you somehow know better.

I tell you my opinion. We disagree because we have different values and priorities in life, and different experiences. There are many things I know much better than you, and vice versa. And may I remind you that I didn't chase you with my opinions, but you came to me and initiated this e-mail exchange by calling me a fool.

You are the one judging me, without even the decency to give good arguments or documentation. You call me a fool and serve only a couple of quotes from Hubbard. I can only assume what you claim I have wrong, or what is so wrong in having a different opinion than you have.

The first impression of you and your case was very poor, but I'll happily give you several chances to fix that.

>You are obviously a very bitter creature with nothing
>better to do with your

I don't agree very much with Margaret Thatcher, but I'll give you a quote from her since you shared yours with me:

"I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left."

Where is the logical connection between disagreeing with you and having to be bitter. Try to focus on the issue here, I'm not falling for your attempts to make me the cause of the idiocy and madness of L Ron Hubbard or your own religion. On my pages you find the documentations and arguments for my opinions and claims, try to address that if you dare.

>time than to attack an organization that has helped so
>many. Why don't you

You know very little about what I do with my life, for all you know I could be very effective and manage more than you and still handle my sites on the 'net. Don't make stupid assumptions about things you know close to nothing about. It only ruins your own case and makes you look like a fool. If I believe CoS is a threat against what I treasure in this society, then it should be pretty obvious why I do what I do. I have the ability to understand why you would be of your opinions, why is this so hard for you? If you need an cruel and evil enemy to justify your strange belief system, then you've come to the wrong place.

Did you honestly believe that I would change any opinions just because you sent me an e-mail claiming I am a fool? Are you such a lousy judge of character, that you thought this tactic would help your case with me? If not, why did you send such a mail to me then? Do you have the habit of doing things that has no sense or meaning?

>direct all that hate toward something that actually is
>harmful to mankind,

Same goes here; what has hate to do with being of the opinion that CoS is a dangerous organization and that Hubbard was mad? Do you hate all Christians since you disagree with them and believe the image of Jesus is an implanted image only? I'm not Christian, and I take my right to say my opinion about Christianity, still I hate no Christians. Actually some of my dearest friends are Christians. I'm an outspoken Atheist, but my goal isn't to make everybody Atheists, not even one! I know there will always be Scientologists, Christians and believers (and disbelievers) in all sorts of things. I dread the society, in fact, where everybody do and think the same.

In my opinion hate is destructive, I strive to be constructive. I have no hate for you, or any other Scientologist. I have no hate for CoS or David Miscavige. I don't hate KKK either, even though I'm as far from them in opinion as it is possible to be. Hating them does not do any good. Trying to challenge their minds and respecting them as fellow humans is what brings peace in the long run. It doesn't start anywhere else than with me. But respecting and tolerating others does not mean agreeing or not speak up when one disagree! Daring to stand up and expressing critical opinions and views is what makes human thought evolve and is the core of what I consider my moral and ethical guidelines: The Human Rights as defined by UN.

>like the big drug companies or the one world governments
>types. For this

What will you accomplish by hating them? Nothing, still hating and alienating everything and everybody they don't like is an important part of Scientology. Says a lot about L Ron Hubbard, CoS, and people who defend them no matter what. While the support of Hubbard and CoS seems to be blind and unconditional among all Scientologists I've met, neither myself or any critics I've met have the same blind opinion about any other critic. Many critics have no problems with openly debating their disagreements, still we are friends and allow ourself to say we do agree on many issues in life.

>reason I can just as easily say you are the one duped by
>a hoax, the status

And you have the right to say so if that is your opinion! I welcome yours, and CoSs, opinion on me and all my claims. Difference between us is that I have documented mine, you're just a lot of hot air so far.

>quo lies that have kept mankind living a mediocre hell all
>these millenniums. I could go on but you are obviously
>beyond help in your twisted cause.

Coward. You're just chickening out because you don't have anything that would hold water. It's your defence system acting, ignore the arguments and claims from the opposition by throwing suspicion on the person making them. That way you do not have to challenge your own. Only one with very weak arguments and proof do this. Hubbard wrote policies on how Scientologists should perfect it. If you were right and I were wrong, you (especially as a Scientologist) would have no problem ripping apart any argument or documentation I presented. What scares you? You don't have to answer me, just try to be honest to yourself for a couple of seconds.

What do I have to defend? Nothing. If anything in Scientology proves right I'll have no problem admitting it. If the documentation claiming Hubbard was a bigamist or used drugs and alcohol proves false, then I'll stop claiming it was so. But what do you have to loose? I suspect you have a long time investment, you've invested your personality and maybe most of your grownup life in Scientology. Maybe most of your friends are Scientologists and you know you will loose them if you blow. Maybe you don't have much money, no social security plan or simple things like a car and your own apartment (these are just examples, I'm not saying it has to fit you).

What would it take for you to admit you have been a victim of a hoax? Would it be possible for you at all, or would a lot of pride and shame easily come in the way for such an admittance? Wouldn't it just be easier for you to keep going along? I suspect this is one of the reasons why many have problems getting out, even though they probably know deep down something is very wrong. Cults are specialized on this, this is what makes them cults. It is not true that only fools fall for cults, anybody is a potential victim of mind control, fraud and deceit.

Is it in the cards that, for example you, would know if you were had? No. Have others in other religions and movements based their belief on just as strong and convincing personal experiences (proof) as you base yours? Yes, this is very common. Still, all of them can't be true. This only shows that we are relatively easily fooled, or directed into accepting things that don't have to be true.

Life in CoS gives you a lot, if not you wouldn't have been there. Still, do you ever wonder what might make you leave, or change your mind? If OT III didn't, or all the critical stuff on the 'Net - what then? If Hubbard _really_ was mad, would you ever find out if you only trust what CoS says?

>Oh, and by the way, I am an OT VII / Class V auditor with
>half the OEC course under my belt. I'm not telling you this
>to brag either. The kind of spiritualism and insight I have
>gained someone as solid as you probably couldn't even
>understand. Like I said, have a nice eternity.

Good! When you dare to seriously evaluate Operation Clambake and all the documentation there, we both know where the other stand and we can continue without getting stuck in misunderstandings.

But I have my doubt that you will continue. All the ones before you have stopped after two (or so) e-mail exchanges, chickening out claiming I was hopeless. Most started off like you by sending me no-good notes just to tell me I'm a fool, Clambake is full of errors or I've have misunderstood. When I asked them for explanations or documentation, they couldn't. And the replies that came seldom dared to quote my questions, they just repeated their attacks with new words and quotes by Hubbard.

This is what Scientologists call communication skills??? It should be no difficult challenge for a OT VIII / Class V auditor like yourself, to handle me. I must be a dream come true; someone really critical who you can demonstrate your communication skills and OT Powers on. Think of the Big Win if I told my CoS critic friends that I'd changed my opinion.

But since you have no OT Powers, because there are no such thing, and because the "communication skills" learned in CoS is worth zilch outside CoS environment - you have to find a way out of the tight spot by inventing something to blame on me. Listen to Lron and accept that I am among the hopeless SPs that has a secret agenda (sponsored by drug cartels or psychiatry organizations), or just call me a fool. Why should you take a criminal or a fool seriously? This way Lron got his followers to not evaluate the information and arguments that would make his house of cards crumble. Your ticket out of it is to distract yourself. So sad that we know all the tricks already. The only secrets you have now is all the new policies David Miscavige has made which has still not leaked out. I have a problem understanding why you would willingly trust your religion and your so-called church in this mans hands.

I have good reasons to take the same defence position, since I know there is no way I could change a long time Scientologist like you. But this is where you find the difference between you and me. My goal is not to change you, or convince you to leave CoS. My interest in talking to you is the same which made me investigate this subject in the first place. I would like to understand. I trust you if you say you believe in Scientology, I even trust you if you claim you have seen proof of it working. Like I believe others from other religions or convictions. I also assume, before finding proof of anything else, that you are a nice person with just as noble intentions as I have. I just happen to be of a different opinions on some basic issues. I still would like to understand you better, or at least offer you the chance to defend your case. I've never been afraid to challenge my opinions. I might be wrong, and challenging them is the only way I can find out.

PS: This reply is also posted to the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology since it could have some interest for others. I did of course remove your name and e-mail address first. Probably hard to accept, but even Scientologists can trust me.

Best wishes, SP4 & Adm. TOXE CXI
Andreas Heldal-Lund, Normannsgaten 9, N-4013 Stavanger, Norway
Pho: +47 88 00 66 66 Fax: 90 32 35 46 E-mail: heldal@online.no
home.sol.no/~spirous www.xenu.net www.hedning.no/hedning
"If anyone can show me, and prove to me, that I am wrong in
thought or deed, I will gladly change. I seek the truth, which
never yet hurt anybody. It is only persistence in self-delusion
and ignorance which does harm." -- Marcus Aurelius



The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.

This web page (and The Skeptic Tank) is in no way connected with nor part of the Scientology crime syndicate. To review the crime syndicate's absurdly idiotic web pages, check out www.scientology.org or any one of the many secret front groups the cult attempts to hide behind.

Further facts about this criminal empire may be found at Operation Clambake and FACTNet.
Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank