Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 69

Thread: If critics look "nutty" "frumpy" or "moonstruck" does it distract from the message?

  1. #1
    Patron with Honors Pitbull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    441

    Default If critics look "nutty" "frumpy" or "moonstruck" does it distract from the message?

    In light of all the new critical activity over the last year, it seems
    a useful topic of discussion.

    Most folks who have a bone to pick with the Church of Scientology seem
    to relish any and all activities that express a disgruntled view of the organizaton. No matter who, what, when or where: If it slams Scientology then its good.

    But is it really good? Or does it just express a disgruntled view without
    really communicating the issues or effecting real change?

    We forget that the average Joe (or Jane) who are not familiar with the Scientology issue may also respond to the antics of critics in a negative way.

    Why do you think the News Broadcasts hire attractive well spoken people?
    Or advertisers use specific "types" of people in their commercials to communicate a message?

    We might get a certain buzz or thrill when we see someone talk about Scientology, but all too often the vehicle for delivery is a total embarrassment.

    All the public sees is a well established "church" with nice buildings, well dressed individuals, celebrities, etc. on one side,

    And then a bunch of rebellious teens (not to be taken all that seriously) or damaged frumpy people talking about how bad it all is.

    My guess is that many people DO leave scientology and just go on the get their act together and live happy (or reasonably happy) and successfull lives.
    We rarely hear from THOSE people. Seems like we generally here or see from the fringy elements when it comes to the Internet and Public events.

    I'm just not sure how much that is helping.

  2. #2

    Default

    I get what you're saying Pitbull and you have a good point. I, myself, would rather see just regular people like WBM, Chuck, Arnie, etc. That's real to me.
    I think a lot of younger people, the one's more likely to get into a cult, see anons as people like themselves.

    If we were to get some Barbie and Ken types to speak for the movement I think it would look more like an infomercial then just real people speaking the truth. If people are turned off by our critics and anon then I think it just means they are a little on the shallow side maybe?

    The newscasters I watch are older. They may not be wiser but I relate to them.

    I fit in the frumpy catagory. I think there's only one or two critics who fit in the nutty (kinda) catagory. Don't know who you mean on the moonstruck one.

  3. #3
    Patron Meritorious asagai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    817

    Default

    Tommy Davis with his fresh-from-the-RPF look on CBS and Tom Cruise with his manic stare and sofa-bouncing must put thousands off the CofS.

    So yes, I agree Pitbull, nutty looks, tired haggered RPF looks and the like distract terribly from the CofS message! :D

    I remember a few years ago when Heber was still in good standing, him being verbally destroyed by David Mellor (UK cabinet minister) on the BBC for his smarmy smile and weasly words. His look and manner totally destroyed his message when he was trying to get the CofS to be recognised as a charity.

  4. Likes Cat's Squirrel liked this post
  5. #4
    Patron Meritorious Escalus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    984

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pitbull View Post

    I'm just not sure how much that is helping.
    Watch.
    “…Never discuss Scientology with the critic. Just discuss his or her crimes, known and unknown. And act completely confident that those crimes exist….” ~L. Ron Hubbard, “Critics of Scientology”, November 5, 1967

    The Truth About The Freezone

  6. Thanks SweetnessandLight says "thank you" for this post
    Likes SweetnessandLight, Sautez liked this post
  7. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    14,232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pitbull View Post
    In light of all the new critical activity over the last year, it seems
    a useful topic of discussion.

    Most folks who have a bone to pick with the Church of Scientology seem
    to relish any and all activities that express a disgruntled view of the organizaton. No matter who, what, when or where: If it slams Scientology then its good.

    But is it really good? Or does it just express a disgruntled view without
    really communicating the issues or effecting real change?

    We forget that the average Joe (or Jane) who are not familiar with the Scientology issue may also respond to the antics of critics in a negative way.

    Why do you think the News Broadcasts hire attractive well spoken people?
    Or advertisers use specific "types" of people in their commercials to communicate a message?

    We might get a certain buzz or thrill when we see someone talk about Scientology, but all too often the vehicle for delivery is a total embarrassment.

    All the public sees is a well established "church" with nice buildings, well dressed individuals, celebrities, etc. on one side,

    And then a bunch of rebellious teens (not to be taken all that seriously) or damaged frumpy people talking about how bad it all is.

    My guess is that many people DO leave scientology and just go on the get their act together and live happy (or reasonably happy) and successfull lives.
    We rarely hear from THOSE people. Seems like we generally here or see from the fringy elements when it comes to the Internet and Public events.

    I'm just not sure how much that is helping.
    Let's see, who are some other "nutty", "frumpy" or "moonstruck" spokespeople in other areas, and how did they do, based on their looks:

    Henry Kissinger
    Madelyn Albright
    Noam Chomski
    Winston Churchill

    Now, let's look at some good looking people, and see how they did as speakers for a cause:

    Dan Quayle
    Milli Vanilli
    Tom Cruise
    Any given Miss America

    Sorry - looks like your criteria for "making critics and anon more effective" is full of shit, pitbull.

    Once again.
    Last edited by Alanzo; 1st August 2008 at 09:24 PM.

  8. Thanks SweetnessandLight says "thank you" for this post
    Likes Ogsonofgroo liked this post
  9. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alanzo View Post
    Let's see, who are some other "nutty", "frumpy" or "moonstruck" spokespeople in other areas, and how did they do, based on their looks:

    Henry Kissinger
    Madelyn Albright
    Noam Chomski
    Adolph Hitler

    Now, let's look at some good looking people, and see how they did as speakers for a cause:

    Dan Quayle
    Milli Vanilli
    Tom Cruise
    Any given Miss America

    Sorry - looks like your criteria for "making critics and anon more effective" is full of shit, pitbull.

    Once again.

  10. #7
    Silver Meritorious Patron Neo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,779

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alanzo View Post
    Let's see, who are some other "nutty", "frumpy" or "moonstruck" spokespeople in other areas, and how did they do, based on their looks:

    Henry Kissinger
    Madelyn Albright
    Noam Chomski
    Adolph Hitler

    Now, let's look at some good looking people, and see how they did as speakers for a cause:

    Dan Quayle
    Milli Vanilli
    Tom Cruise
    Any given Miss America

    Sorry - looks like your criteria for "making critics and anon more effective" is full of shit, pitbull.

    Once again.
    Very well said Alanzo

    (Milli Vanilli, LOL - now there's an act I haven't thought of in a while)

    Neo

  11. #8
    Gold Meritorious Patron gomorrhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    virtual reality
    Posts
    2,614

    Default

    Guess you didn't see Jason Beghe's video, or meet him at the protests. Rather than picking at the people who do oppose human rights violators and RICO statute bait, why not point out the people who ARE good spokespersons? There's ugly on both sides, trust me, you should meet the old HAS at Boston Day, Mitra Ghobadi. That was one frumpy lady.
    going somewhere?

    Scientologists: do you think you can confront the truth? http://www.carolineletkeman.org/sp/ <==== duplicate that

    Kevin G. Brady gomorrhan@hotmail.com
    44 Phillips Street, Apartment 2L
    Wickford, RI 02852
    (401) 626-6776

    "I'm Kevin Brady, and I approved this message" - Kevin Brady

  12. Thanks SweetnessandLight says "thank you" for this post
    Likes SweetnessandLight liked this post
  13. #9

    Default

    I can think of certain ex-members that, to outsiders like me, seem a little un-hinged. I don't know how it goes with the press but I can't imagine someone looking the very picture of PTSD with a thousand-yard stare talking about their time in Scientology sends a good message about what they do to people's heads.

    (Of course I've met totally functional human beings who adjusted to the real world after they got out and did so admirably. It's nice to have them around to give an eloquent word or two about what Scientology is really all about when the "recovering crazy person" angle doesn't play well.

  14. Thanks SweetnessandLight says "thank you" for this post
    Likes SweetnessandLight liked this post
  15. #10
    Silver Meritorious Patron klidov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pitbull View Post
    In light of all the new critical activity over the last year, it seems
    a useful topic of discussion.

    Most folks who have a bone to pick with the Church of Scientology seem
    to relish any and all activities that express a disgruntled view of the organization. No matter who, what, when or where: If it slams Scientology then its good.

    But is it really good? Or does it just express a disgruntled view without
    really communicating the issues or effecting real change?

    We forget that the average Joe (or Jane) who are not familiar with the Scientology issue may also respond to the antics of critics in a negative way.

    Why do you think the News Broadcasts hire attractive well spoken people?
    Or advertisers use specific "types" of people in their commercials to communicate a message?

    We might get a certain buzz or thrill when we see someone talk about Scientology, but all too often the vehicle for delivery is a total embarrassment.

    All the public sees is a well established "church" with nice buildings, well dressed individuals, celebrities, etc. on one side,

    And then a bunch of rebellious teens (not to be taken all that seriously) or damaged frumpy people talking about how bad it all is.

    My guess is that many people DO leave scientology and just go on the get their act together and live happy (or reasonably happy) and successfull lives.
    We rarely hear from THOSE people. Seems like we generally here or see from the fringy elements when it comes to the Internet and Public events.

    I'm just not sure how much that is helping.
    Hmmmm.....

    Very Psych 101 (Freshman Year Collage). Place a seed of doubt & pick at it.

    The only problem is, there are people like me who are not "nutty", "frumpy", or "moonstruck". I am no where NEAR a teenager either.

    But you know what I DO have in common with former members & Anons?

    I get it. When it comes to the Co$, I get it. And you know what? This is a cause I am more than willing to throw myself behind.

    What you forget Pitbull?

    There are a LOT of people like me. We are paying attention. We are not put off by Anons demonstrations. And, maybe because the Cult is so judgemental, you don't realize that "out here", yeah, we have some that will look at a former Scientologist's hair, or clothes....but I am going to bet that a good 87% of the people that hear the message, are going to really HEAR it.

    And remember it. And tell their friends about it. The "real" danger to the Cult, is not Anon & Former Members, it is the people like me.

    Those "Average" Joes & Janes.

    You under estimate us.
    I HAVE LOVED THE STARS TOO FONDLY TO BE FEARFUL OF THE NIGHT-SARAH WILLIAMS

    I WOULD RATHER AN HONEST ENEMY, THAN A FALSE FRIEND-author unknown



    You yourself, as much as anybody in the entire universe, deserve your love and affection.



    Hindu Prince Gautama Siddharta, the founder of Buddhism, 563-483 B.C.


  16. Thanks SweetnessandLight says "thank you" for this post
    Likes SweetnessandLight liked this post
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. "Upstat" vs. "Downstat"
    By grundy in forum Grundy's Guide to Scientology
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 6th February 2013, 08:08 PM
  2. Message to "Anonymous"
    By Emma in forum ESMB Public Announcements
    Replies: 210
    Last Post: 17th May 2009, 07:59 AM
  3. Youtube removes "Message to Scientology"
    By namaste in forum Miscellaneous Reports from Newspapers, Blogs, and TV
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 18th February 2008, 09:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •