Comments on: Ruthless/SuMP

By: Hadley

Hadley — Thu, 05 May 2016 14:11:33 +0000

As far as I am concerned the Book Ruthless gives a pretty good account of Ron Miscaviage personal experience, regardless of the church, saying its lies,that’s utter bullshit.
Its all David Miscaviage’s way or else. so it seems and has been for years .

Some day will come he will be sorry for what he turned the church into and even if for now he continues to blame others, and contiune’s to degrade human beings He will at some point pay, alive or dead and it will remain with him in his grave The fact is He is on watch as His Father says and responsible for what the church its self has become But justice has to give some where down the line for many who are witness to the state the church has become and the trauma and torture many have expereinces besides Ron Miscaviage.

By: pie_face

pie_face — Wed, 04 May 2016 23:24:27 +0000

In reply to Karen Pressley. That basket of baked goods was uber ridiculous. "See, people who are abused don;t make baked goods."

By: Mike Wynski

Mike Wynski — Tue, 03 May 2016 14:37:35 +0000

In reply to Karen Pressley. Quite correct Karen. It is 100% a matter of personal integrity. Peter entered Int late in the game as it were. DM and his insanity were a regular part of life. He is NOT a victim. He CHOSE DM over not being part of that insanity.

By: Michael Mallen

Michael Mallen — Tue, 03 May 2016 14:11:19 +0000

In reply to Karen Pressley. Thanks Karen for clearing things up, and for your honesty relating the circumstances surrounding your eventual departure. Ultimately we are all responsible for our decisions.

By: Karen Pressley

Karen Pressley — Tue, 03 May 2016 13:05:08 +0000

Doug, thank you for your kind words and I truly appreciate your description of the Peter you once knew. Yes he was an awesome guy and I loved him deeply. That’s why I came back to the Int base after my first two escapes in 1990 and 1993–I didn’t want to leave without him. I stayed at Int for 5 more years, every once in a while talking with Peter about leaving and re-starting our lives. I hung into that hope until 1998, when I came to a breaking point with the Int base madness. But I also had to face the fact that Peter had lost himself. By 1998, he was already a different person than the Peter who had been my husband since 1978. He had lost himself. As a brilliant composer and musician, he could have easily walked back into his public music career.
As I said in my other two responses in this thread,
Peter had become a willing participant in Miscavige’s version of the Sea Org and Scientology. He could have left like many of us did. His voice to stay was mindboggling to me then, and still is, when I reflect on who I knew him to be as a beautiful, creative man and who he has become. He’s a very sad product of David Miscavige.

By: Karen Pressley

Karen Pressley — Tue, 03 May 2016 12:55:37 +0000

Michael Mallen: please see my response to aquamarine in this thread about Peter Schless. Is he under pressure? Yes, but he chooses to be. He chose to remain in the Sea Org after I left. He chooses to be willing participant in Miscavige’s sick game. Many people including me came to our senses and left over the years. It might feel better to think about Peter as being a victim of Miscavige rather than as a partner to Miscavige. But he has the same ability to get out as I did and as many Int base SO members did who refused to tolerate the human rights violations occurring there as a way of life. And he chose to stay. He is not a victim.

By: Karen Pressley

Karen Pressley — Tue, 03 May 2016 12:47:12 +0000

I agree with you on some points and differ on others. Yes Peter lives within inhumane circumstances. But at some point he chose to be a willing participant. While at the Int base working directly under Muscavige I experienced everything that you described, except the hole. I made two attempts to leave and came back because Peter wouldn’t leave with me. By 1998 I had enough and tried to convince Peter to leave with me. He refused. He saw things differently and I had to face the fact that I had lost him, and that he had lost himself. I knew I was losing myself but made the very difficult effort to extract myself from the madness and believed I could restore my life outside the Sea Org. Peter didn’t want to, so he stayed. So I have had to accept the fact that he is not a victim of Miscavige, but a willing participant. He will be that until he chooses to leave. I think that many Int base exes whose spouse chose to stay after they left may agree, such as Mike Rinder who lost Cathy; Marty who lost Anne Rathbun; Tom DeVocht who lost Jenny; Jeff Hawkins who lost Catherine…and the list goes on.
So while YingaLing is in her own league of serpenthood, Peter remains forces with Miscavige and it is clear what side he is on. No his motives are not like Yingaling’s, but the outcome of their actions is quite similar.

By: Mike Wynski

Mike Wynski — Tue, 03 May 2016 11:22:33 +0000

In reply to Old Surfer Dude. OSD, I hope that they picked the charred body parts out of the muffins before they served them.

By: thegman77

thegman77 — Tue, 03 May 2016 11:22:21 +0000

In reply to zemooo.

It strikes me that “sump” has a particular meaning and that DM has done it again. From my puter dictionary:

a pit or hollow in which liquid collects, in particular
• the base of an internal combustion engine, which serves as a reservoir of oil for the lubrication system.
• a depression in the floor of a mine or basement in which water collects.
• a cesspool.

I would surmise that the last one – especially – describes scio today. LOL

By: Todd Cray

Todd Cray — Tue, 03 May 2016 06:05:42 +0000

In reply to Aquamarine.

Thanks for your reply. Your final comment prompted something with me.

You wrote: So DM sends an attorney to do a verbal tap dance, which is not going to fool anyone with even half a brain. Of course, this excepts the remaining few still in koolaid drinkers, who will be fooled, because they don’t HAVE half a brain.

This reminds me of something. When Leah’s book came out, a scientology commenter kept reciting in several discussions how many people still watch the video of the last time Davey “confronted” the press, namely his Koppel interview. She kept reiterating (as does the scn propaganda web site) that this was an “award-winning” interview; of course, she “forgets” to mention that the award went to Koppel, NOT to DM.

What was totally lost on her was that (a) it is rather bizarre that one would have to go back 20 + years or so to see SOB engaging with the press. (b) that DM came off as an object of curiosity rather than convincing any thinking person of anything. If nothing else, the interview was a total embarassment for 4’13”. A particularly priceless moment was his tinfoil hat fantasy about Siberia USA and the successful fight that CoS allegedly fought to stop it (The law passed unanimously in both HR and Senate; no mention of CoS resistance can be found on record anywhere).

I for one was in total agreement with her: Everyone should watch that interview. While she was convinced that people would line up at orgs as a result to be part of such a wonderful movement, anyone with “half a brain” could clearly see that the interview achieves the absolute opposite.

Go figure!