blonde poker forum

On BBC 1 at 9pm. Looking forward to this, this is a follow up to another one where the reporter absolutely lost his rag with the Scientologists, Doubt he'll do it again but who knows........ ;D

Is Kin in it?

Well they do like to argue with people, so there is a better than reasonable chance :)

deffo watching this too

Recorded it.  Not only are scientologists mad, they're also extremely dangerous.

How exactly are they dangerous?

if I was running a religion with all that money I`d have a secret ninja training school so I`d guess that travolta has one

as dangerous as trying to express a different opinion to you?

didn't think it added much to the last documentary tbh, and found myself getting bored halfway through.

like dis?

(http://i333.photobucket.com/albums/m389/_gatso_/john-travolta1783.jpg?t=1285764677)

change it to 'speeding killz' and i reckon it's a winner

one thing that was vaguely interesting in last night's programme actually.  we all know that scientologists that have paid there way up to the higher echelons of the religion have always publicly denied the ideas of Xenu and incident II.  I often wondered to myself why people, when faced with that 'knowledge' didn't finally realise what a crock of shit the whole thing is and continued to support scientology whilst keeping the 'secret'.  Presumed it was mainly down to embarrassment, but the guy they were talking to last night said that those trusted with the knowledge believed that if it was imparted to people before they had completed the necessary steps to be ready for it that it would send them crazy or kill them.  I've known about it for in excess of ten years, and I can't say it's petrified me yet.

Sadly, yes.

Got a lot more respect back for Sweeney after this: lolz

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1WBnaXUCkI

you could start here and follow the links forever. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deaths_related_to_Scientology

Erm. Can't exactly say that's got me running for the hills.

A few suicides, a few fairly standard murders and what appears to be an electrocution caused by lack of H&S signs hardly constitute dangerous.

I'd say Christianity has caused far more deaths than this lot. Obviously there's more of them but I'm going to hazard a guess that it's proportionally more.

So when I go out, not only do I have to worry about guns and knives and gangs and drugs etc but I now have scientology to watch out for. ffs

what`s that list supposed to show? that 10 people with some link to scientology have died in the last 28 years? presumably there`s more to it but I`m missing it

denying people that clearly need it psychiatric help because it's considered 'dangerous' is surely dangerous in itself?  Of course there have been far more deaths in the name of Christianity, but that's not what's under discussion here. There are plenty of other stories about suspicious deaths of people whilst within the confines of properties belonging to scientology if you do a quick google, and that's not to mention all of the other crazy stuff.  Getting involved with scientology is dangerous on a personal level in so many ways, but I guess that also depends on your definition of dangerous.  I doubt you, personally, have got anything to run for the hills about.

Someone wrote a book about the scientolgist ninjas but it was banned in the UK:
http://counterknowledge.com/2008/11/church-of-scientology-forces-amazon-uk-to-withdraw-expose-from-sale/

What's under discussion from my point of view is Dan's statement that Scientologists are "extremely dangerous".

It's such a sweeping statement and I'll be honest I really don't like it without some backing up.

Obviously some of them have attributes which make them dangerous to some people whilst at the same time being totally harmless to everybody else. This could be said for pretty much the entire population of the planet.

Are Christians dangerous because of the wars that have happened in the name of Christianity?

Are catholics dangerous because of a few who have done terrible things to children?

Are scientists dangerous because of how many have been killed by nuclear explosions?

Saying "scientologists are dangerous" (assuming he genuinely means it) is ridiculous imo.

fair point.  I skimmed and presumed he'd said 'scientology is dangerous' - don't think you can say all scientologists are dangerous in their own right - a lot of them are victims.  so i don't have a clue what he meant by it.

That wasn't my point Claire. I wasn't just trying to pick on Dan's wording where he states that scientologists are dangerous. You can't really say scientology as a religion / cult / whatever it is is dangerous either can you?

I accept it may be dangerous for some people with mental problems but I'm pretty certain it wasn't dangerous for L. Ron Hubbard. It's probably not too dangerous for Tom Cruise or John Travolta either.

We read about the extremes of scientology in the same way that we read about the extremes of pretty much everything else. It's these extremes which make things appear dangerous when they are probably no more dangerous than anything else.

I can quite happily say nuclear fallout is dangerous. I can't say that scientology is though.

I guess once they accept the basic premise, they'll accept any embellishment.
It's a bit like Christianity, once they accept the whole snake/apple/garden scenario (foundational to Christianity), sneaking the odd Ascension/Tongues of Fire/Bleeding Statue story past them ain't gonna be too hard.

I'm sure there are some things that nuclear fallout is good for so I think you should retract your statement ;)

I thought the programme was a reasonable watch tbh............