Marshall Adler's Email (commented)

From: "" <>
Subject: false data
Date sent: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 20:27:54 PDT

I am a scientologist of 29 years and I go on the internet to look for sites ran by people that have nothing better to do then critize and promote false data about Scientology.

You I personally don't know, but I do know that you are ignorant and spreading a false datum.

Which false datum? Can you be specific? I've had lots of Scientologists tell me that I'm spreading "false data", but nobody can tell me specifically which of my data is false. I assume, from this pattern of conduct, that you can't do it - ie, you can't provide a specific instance of false data from my website.

However, if you do, I'll eat public crow on alt.religion.scientology and this website. :-)

You know nothing about this religion which has changed my life around.

I know plenty about Scientology. I've read "Introduction to Scientology Ethics" and "The Way To Happiness", and read bits of "Dianetics The Modern Science of Mental Health" and "The Scientology Handbook" (all by L. Ron Hubbard). I've seen Hubbard on British TV try and fail to explain the source of his wealth and the infamous reputation of Scientology. I've seen how Scientologists behave when faced with dissent and criticism, and I've read court cases describing how the Scientology organization lies about its doctrines, abuses the law and its own employees, and goes after its critics.

As I say to Scientologists, I know what Scientology does, and you know what Scientology says. Is it any wonder that our opinions differ?

It has gave me better communication skills and confront.

Your communication skills stink. Your command of English lacks many elements of the language, like grammatical sentence structure and correct spelling. You can't back up your points with objectively verifiable evidence. You've only regurgitated the Scientology party line concerning "entheta", "suppressive persons", and websites like this one. You've completely failed to confront the numerous "out-ethics" actions of the Scientology organization which you've probably come across in your wanderings around the critical sites strewn across the web.

It has made me be cause of my life and not have my life be cause of me.

So what? If Scientology has given you the confidence to take control of your life, that's great. I fail to see, however, how this is unique to Scientology. Plenty of other organizations hand out self-confidence, and many manage to do it without the infamous practices of Scientology.

It is not about believing in certain things, this religion is about LEARNING how to make your life better.

I beg to differ, Scientology is about belief. The first thing you have to believe is that L. Ron Hubbard is a trustworthy source, and it all goes downhill from there. For example, take the claim in DMSMH that scientific research underpins the principles in that book. That's a plain, bald-faced lie, courtesy of LRH. Neither he nor Scientology have ever produced the original research that Hubbard did, in all the nearly 50 years since DMSMH was published. I can't reach any conclusion but that Hubbard lied about the very existence of his research. If you think that he did in fact scientifically research Dianetics, then that can only be your belief, unencumbered by fact, because you certainly can't provide evidence to support the supposition.

Any person could be any religion they believe in and still be a scientologist.

No. False. Wrong. Could a Rastafarian, or North American Native, using marijuana and peyote in religious ceremonies, be Scientologists with the anti-drug stance of the organization? Could a Christian be a Scientologist when Hubbard said "there was no Christ", and that God and the Devil are merely alien mind implants? If you can reconcile these beliefs with Scientology, I applaud the mental gymnastics you will undergo to do so. (Incidentally, isn't it consistent how Hubbard in one lecture tells us that there was no Christ, and in another tells us how Christ was a friendly guy?)

You really need to get the book "What is Scientology" because you really know nothing about it.

As I've already said, I know plenty about Scientology. Why should I spend money to read more "Based on the Works of L. Ron Hubbard" squirrel-tech Scientology apologia?

You need to stop spreading suppressive lies to bring others down.

Go on, name a specific lie. You can't, can you?

Its people like you who make this planet so abberated.

"People like you", "people like you"... Ah, now I understand what tweaks my brain about this phrase. You're generalizing, stereotyping me as being part of a larger group, instead of approaching what I do on its own merits. Isn't your generalizing a sign of a suppressive person?

And really now... picketing Scientology and having an anti-Scientology website makes the planet aberrated? As opposed to the glaring sanity inherent in Scientology, an organization that can't even apply it's own technology and "handle" its critics?

As for the crap about Scientology is about making money and this and that. That is all false. Scientology spends tons of money just making these course for people, so that is why we charge them some money.

Oh really? Tons of money? Just where is that money going? I've seen several Scientology locations, and seen pictures of more - they're all pretty small and decrepit. The staff are poorly paid, often drive old cars and have to hold outside jobs to make ends meet. The Org bookstores hold vastly more inventory than they can conceivably sell, even to a captive Scientologist audience buying in a monopoly market. If Scientology isn't about making money, why does it squeeze its members so?

Personally, I think Scientology was just Hubbard's way of getting the money and power he couldn't get any other way. The fact that it's still ticking along its original purpose is a testament to the staying power of the scam.

And Scientology has very little profit which is used to fight the suppression of people like you and Bob Mittens in court hiring lawyers.

(I think you mean Bob Minton.)

Oh, yes, $20,000,000 per year on lawyers, according to RTC. It doesn't seem to have done much good, there's far more suppression in the world since Scientology lawyer Helena Kobrin tried to squelch a whole bunch of peoples' free speech by RMGroup'ing alt.religion.scientology.

Believe me Scientology is definetly not rich.

See what I wrote above. All the money from courses has to go somewhere, and it certainly isn't being reinvested in Scientology.

We also spend lots of money painting over graffiti and helping out the invironment and others. That is the money is for.

Well, other groups paint over graffiti (also graffiti that's not on Org walls! ;-), protest psychiatric abuses, and offer self-help courses. The difference is that many of these groups don't engage in unsavoury activities and then go after the people who criticize those activities.

Trust me, I know this because I work for one of the biggest Scientology org. in the world.

You work for AOLA or somewhere around there, right? Given that you're posting from the Pacific time zone, and that's the only really big Org that way, right?

And as to what you know, and whether or not I should trust you... How do I know you're not using TR-L (Training Routine - Lie) on me? See the credibility problem? How can I trust that you're not lying to me when you adhere to the teachings of a man who wanted his employees to be trained to lie?

Scientology is a fantastic religion and it is also the fastest growing religions in the world.

It may be fantastic to you, but fastest growing? Please. In thirty years of Scientology in Canada, the organization doesn't even have a location in each of ten provinces. The Orgs and missions it does have are small, decrepit, and certainly not bustling with new recruits. Give me a break.

I bet you wont post this letter on your site because you dont want the people to know the TRUTH.

Here it is - I consider that this means I have permission to post it. :-)

Right back to me at and give me your response