Comments on: Scientology.TV: Hit or Miss?

By: jere Lull (39 years recovering)

jere Lull (39 years recovering) — Thu, 17 Oct 2019 10:18:40 +0000

In reply to Kyle. Fastest growing NEGATIVE public perception, that is. Scientology; it's always about negatives, isn't it?

By: SPeaking my Truth

SPeaking my Truth — Tue, 15 Oct 2019 20:34:26 +0000

Cheap click factories and ordering staff and OT Committees to go in the streets to annoy people, to have them click on a QR code to open Scientology TV, this is the current state of Scientology.
How far is this from reaching Total Freedom and making people become their better self? After some decades of dedicated service it hurts me to finally open the eyes on this shitty Public Relations machine.

By: Robert King

Robert King — Tue, 15 Oct 2019 06:33:26 +0000

Even when I was in the cult I COULD stand listening to those terrible videos the want you to watch even when your just sitting there waiting to see some one. (((((((( GOD AUFFUL BORING!!! And they always turn up the damn volume!!
Thank God I’m done there!

By: Balletlady

Balletlady — Mon, 14 Oct 2019 15:00:06 +0000

In reply to River Curtis-Stanley.

AMEN my friend! May you continue to enjoy every moment! A GIFT of an extended LIFE is a remarkable accomplishment & every family who has been a donor or donor recipient….BLESS all of you.

We KNOW that no one will receive a new “meat body”…but for 100% clarity…please please please register to be an organ donor no matter what your age is….thank you!

By: Annie Oakley

Annie Oakley — Mon, 14 Oct 2019 14:38:20 +0000

Wow. Really interesting Mike, thanks. Not surprising I guess that the STV stats are so poor, but encouraging.Obviously the whole venture is all for show. (pardon my pun) And gee whiz, whadyaknow…all that new traffic coming from India and Turkey…!

By: Annie Oakley

Annie Oakley — Mon, 14 Oct 2019 14:27:13 +0000

In reply to Balletlady. Thank you for sharing what was the best possible outcome of a tragedy...and allowed someone to continue living life on this earth. Glad to know your BFF will be around a lot longer, Balletlady.

By: Annie Oakley

Annie Oakley — Mon, 14 Oct 2019 14:18:04 +0000

In reply to Todd Cray. Snort! LOL!

By: Roger Larsson

Roger Larsson — Mon, 14 Oct 2019 12:43:56 +0000

In purpose to watch scientologists people need a microscope.

In purpose to watch critics people need a macroscope.

We have all arrived to the the world through a mother a father entered and we are all the owner of a planet together to do the best of in our common interest.

By: Abby Ration

Abby Ration — Mon, 14 Oct 2019 09:27:17 +0000

In reply to Ryan Kelly. One reason we stick with Dish Network is that we won’t bump into it there either.

By: River Curtis-Stanley

River Curtis-Stanley — Mon, 14 Oct 2019 09:25:52 +0000

In reply to Balletlady. It’d s a true fact. Then again, with the new rules on who gets organs, those “old” organs (also known as Extended Donor Criteria organs) May be the ones we are likely to qualify for as we get older. I’m a recipient myself, with a kidney I received 8 1/2 years ago from a deceased donor who was a few years older than I and only a 1 out of 6 HLA antigen match to boot. I know a lot more than most people want to know or ought to know about organs, transplants, the list, and everything to do with it. I was 51 when I got Bimaaji (which means “who gives life” in Ashinaabe; my Native sister is responsible for the name.) I’m now nearing 60. Chances that I’ll need another kidney sometime are pretty good, and extended donor criteria kidneys are likely to be my only chance at an organ, since who’s going to waste a 35 year old’s kidney in a 65 year old or older woman? Don’t take your organs with you when you leave this plane of existence; we need them here, no matter how old you are.