What a wonderfully dizzy blend of COS Scientology, Indie Scientology, Squirrel Scientology and Bakerology.
The sentence bears a vague resemblance to rational thought if before reading it you don a pair of Baker's-Blinders
™ and fail to notice that he quietly tried to sneak in the word "directly".
By using a bit of
WordClown tech, Mark would have others believe that persons like Travolta and Cruise are not "
enabling or supporting" the abusive Church of Scientology, even though:
* They donate tens of millions of dollars to the CoS; money the church uses to commit human rights atrocities and crimes.
* They donate hundreds of millions of dollars in free publicity, advertising and marketing to the CoS by endorsing their product in all media.
* They personally review hard eyewitness testimony about the their church imprisoning, terrorizing and physically beating staff members and either nod their quietly passive consent or issue media statements that it didn't happen. (see Tom Cruise's public statement issued by his attorney denying that COB beats staff).
It is incontestable that Travolta and Cruise directly "enable and support" the fraudulent con game known as Scientology. They also push others to donate billions of dollars to Scientology accounts, knowing full well that their "church" will use that money to destroy its enemies, critics and whistleblowers.
The only hope of an argument that apologists like Baker might cling to is that Travolta and Cruise "didn't know".
That would be equally absurd because these media savvy movie stars are infinitely more sophisticated about what is playing across the media and internet than Mark Baker imagines himself to be. These individuals are worth hundreds of millions of dollars and they employ large teams of media savvy agents, managers, business attorneys, personal attorneys, publicists, press agents, marketing consultants and others to carefully craft the public's perception of them.
This is an army of expert professionals who literally comb thru every detail of each day's newspapers, magazines, television and internet coverage for their client.
They scour the media for anything negative that requires action.
They quickly respond to pr flaps with spin, propaganda, denial, lies and worse.
Anyone who has worked professionally in the celebrity-driven television or motion picture industry is painfully aware of how careful celebrities are with how their name and image is used, enhanced or diminished. These folks did not earn a billion dollars from being stupid and unaware. They are brilliantly aware of what is going on in the media and that is why and how they accumulated such wealth and power.
Travolta and Cruise absolutely know about the media shitstorm that has hit Scientology. Is anyone naive enough to believe that they did not read what happened to their friend, Academy Award Winning Scientologist film writer/director Paul Haggis?
Baker at least has the intelligence to not claim the Nuremberg defense favored by Nazi's on trial who "did not know" what was going on in their cult. He applies an oily bit of WordClown lubricant and tries to slip in the word "directly" but it sticks out like a grungy boilersuit-wearing RPF member at a black tie IAS fundraiser.
Travolta, for whatever reasons, of course knows, supports, and enables the cult to do what it does. Whether he justifies it or pretends it is not happening is another matter.
These people know what they are doing.
They can read.
They have computers.
They have teams of professionals advising them of these matters.
And......if they have chosen to instruct their army of advisors to not speak to them about the abuses of Scientology that appear in the media daily, they are fully corrupted.
I've met Travolta and he is a nice enough fellow. But anyone who lets their airplane be used to hunt down and re-capture escaping Sea Org members is a co-conspirator. If he "didn't know" then, he does now.
Where's Travolta's contrite apology?
Apologists like Baker need not apply again as a celebrity spokesman.
{clear the phrase if you don't understand it.} 
Or is that only for those emotions which you like? 
than it does about me knowing what i know, you know? 
Not on the top of their list (at least not for anything good).
