Chuck, I meant to specify that no active member has even won an Oscar for acting. If you look at their IMDB entries, there’s a pretty clear trajectory where even nominations for acting awards drop off after they get heavily involved in Scientology – Cruise for instance has only gotten 2 nominations and no wins for major acting awards since 2000, while he had 7 nominations (including 3 for Oscars) and 2 Golden Globe wins in the decade before.

And just yesterday I heard something on the radio about new accolades for Nicole Cruise, mentioning her Oscar, which she of course won after she got free of Scientology….

The omitted parts of life one never gets around to thinking about, to me, are what have blotted out Scientology the most.

There is just so much other content, to life, that drowns out Hubbard’s Scientology content.

The “strategies” of Scientology, haven’t been given any papers nor writings even in media.

But the WDC members, and the Exec Strata members, one of their first primary chores was to do up the initial or updated “strategic plan” for their positions, and Hubbard have the permanent longterm guidelines for their zones in the Scientology “top management” bureaucracy.

The “strategic plans”, history of, of the long spread out succession of WDC members and Exec Strata members, and who those “strategic plans” eventually came to nothing, and individually their focused upon points, doesn’t get any credit one way or another for anything in Scientology’s history.

The Hubbard writings, and the administrative “strategic planning” writings of his final years, is just an omitted framework and “power” that guided, for better or worse, also, behind the scenes in the 1980s era of “top management.”

The way I always felt is hugely omitted in judging Scientology, is against Hubbard’s final years of “strategic” and how he “turned over” his “hats” to the WDC, Exec Strata, and the almost operating “top management” of the final 10 years of the movement, as he aged and passed finally.

“Scientology Top Management History” book still needs be written.

It is wholly out of consideration when thinking of the movement.

Hubbard put a lot of thought and orders, and policies, over the years, and to wrap one’s wits around the framework that did exist in the 1980s, which gets no discussion, the “omitted top management history” which did have some influence back then, up to the 1990s, also needs mentioning.

The decimation of “top management” for all the reasons, the quick obvious biggest reason for the decline, is not keeping it manned and trained and built up.

Of course this in one outside overviewing way is a good thing that “top management” failed and even Hubbard wrote such a variety of scathing condemnations of “management”, the one private despatch the INCOMM, computer branch private “INCOMM advices” study, is the “management has failed for the millionth time” comment in one of the late 1970s or early 1980s despatches which I “Method 9 word cleared” when I became INCOMM staff and “word cleared” all the private INCOMM computer branch “advices” of LRH’s.

Miscavige, is the one who has taken all the negative Hubbard comments to heart, and those unfortunate but logical to the personality of Hubbard comments, sprinkled behind the scenes in the private orders/advices, add up to justifying Miscaviges letting “top management” atrophy.

And even, then, on top of that, the subject, Scientology, it isn’t just a celebrity supported human subject which can be hyped (“hype” is an order in the Author Services Inc advices, one advice in particular to Gregy Wilhere when Greg as the Fiction sub section boss, was that Greg’s submitted plan to Hubbard didn’t have enough “hype” and believe me, since then, “hype” was policy at ASI and that to me is why in Miscavige’s head from that moment til now, “hype” is still king, it’s Hubbard ASI policy) anyways Greg’s fiction plan didn’t have enough “hype”; my objection which Hubbard omits to consider, is that salesman “hype” fails, when the product is NOT as promised.

“OTs” never were made in sCientology history.

The Scientology product fails not only for lack of “hype” or celebrity glitz, or for lack of “top management” strategies getting all the staffs and members in line hyping and glamouring the product.

The product is Hubbard’s “million dollar baby” (to steal Oscar winning Paul Haggis’ movie title), and Hubbard’s product is a lie in human history.

The Scientology Hubbard stepladder massive laid out “soul improvement” and “soul powers” achievement operation does not produce supernaturally improved humans.

The Scientology and Hubbard product in the end, is a fraud.

News catches up with fraud subjects, despite all the other backlash for the totalitarian rules of the movement, or the harsh dictatorial events of a bully leader like Miscavige.

Chuck Beatty

Paul Haggis got several Oscars in the early 2000s, before quitting 2009.

Which brings to mind his unfortunate legal cases are still ongoing, I hope he beats them.

“While I have gained some benefits from the practices of scientology, my conscience can not allow me to remain a member of an organization that has a proven track record of human rights abuses. I ask forgiveness from anyone that was influenced by me to become a member of scientology, and for anyone that was hurt by my membership.”

Then write your tell-all book, and rake in some cash.

OMG

Yea, you hit it. This explains why people with all of that money just fade out. It is Hubbard’s misconceptions.

Good job, Gregory Broderick! Thank you getting that intel to Mike Rinder and all of us!

New York “Ideal” M’org is located half a block from Time Square, “The Crossroads of The World”, with roughly half a million people trooping thru every single day, for one reason or another. That bears repeating: HALF A MILLION people in the immediate area EVERY DAY. So, what would THIS m’org’s excuse be for not training auditors or making Clears? Why isn’t their Div 6 TEAMING with new faces eager for Scientology? Their Facebook page flat out shows these statistic to be in dismal Non E. Why? “Not enough foot traffic” as a reason can certainly be ruled out! I wonder what staff there tell themselves when they hear their voices echoing in the halls.

Great questions for her that she would probably never answer, Peggy. And, yes, Leah would have fought for her, I’m sure. They were friends back in the day.

I was thinking about what I wrote above this morning. WHY do I dislike her so much, REALLY? Because, frankly, she’s no more or less smug obnoxious than many other Still Ins. So while taking my morning shower I did some soul searching about what it is about her that raises the hackles so much. Without getting political its similar to what raises the hackles about Donald Trump.

Analytically, and in fairness, there ARE things she does that I like and admire; she advocates for abused animals, circus animals; she’s against rodeos and she’s for the preservation of vanishing wildlife.

Just like, analytically, and in fairness, there actually IS 1 single solitary thing I admire about Donald Trump, namely, that he had the nerve to RUN for president. That he can act out of his own postulates very single-mindedly. This doesn’t cancel out what I can’t stand about him but of itself I do admire this quality – “persistence on a given course” in someone even if it is misdirected and misapplied.

George, it looks to me like virtually all Scientology celebs’ careers, and art, decline with their involvement. Cruise got some major acting accolades including an Oscar nomination early on, but none since his involvement deepened, though he’s managed to promote himself in a way that has lead to large box office earnings for his action character franchise – I see that as a phenomenon similar to how so many members are involved in businesses that are based on hype rather than providing superior products and services.

No active member has ever won an Oscar, or an Emmy for TV work. I suspect that auditing does something like reducing the emotional range and depth necessary for good acting, plus Scientology takes away actors’ time and focus from the sort of craft-building work like theater productions that are not very remunerative, but is just what has helped Nicole Kidman go onto success including an Oscar, while TC molders as an actor and flops in films outside of the one-dimensional character role he has down pat. It may also be that Hubbard’s bizarre philosophies about art, its origins and purpose may cause followers to conceive of their work in a way that hampers true creativity.