Grandma refuses to disconnect from family.. declared

Discussion in 'Fair Game Reports and Personal Experiences' started by Smurf, Dec 30, 2011.

  1. Smurf Member

    The exodus continues.. this from ex-Scilon Meshell Little, who has a blog calling attention to her son, Jeremy, who disconnected from her. Most of her family, however, have fled the cult and are happy.

    Meshell wrote today..

    "Yesterday the Director of Special Affairs, (Ellen Forney) and Jill James from the Saint Louis Scientology organization showed up at our front door. According to Heather, they knocked and rang the bell for about 5 mins until my mom, Edie M. Fields, finally heard them from her room.

    My mother, 71 years old, was greeted by a stone-faced and hollow eyed Jill James with a sheet of paper, goldenrod in color, declaring her an "evil person" (they call it "suppressive person" or SP for short) - (Because she refused to disassociate with me, her granddaughter and son-in-law when we resigned from supporting that organization?).

    These officials were at our home to ensure that she knew her status with them. Their stated purpose was for her to read the lies they published about her on that goldenrod and to sign a piece of paper stating she knew. --- She did NOT read the garbage piece of shit, as it's always full of lies and deception, and she knew it would greatly hurt her! My mom is a very tender person and her feelings are on her sleeves.

    They came to our home exclusively to UPSET her. It was evil-intentioned entirely as there was no other reason for their action. And because they were at our home to upset our family, they didn't come alone. My daughter believes they had "back-up" with them in a separate van because it was outside our home until they left as well.

    It amazes me, looking back, how many things that organization does that they publicly and loudly accuse others of doing!! Hindsight is 20/20. I suppose it took them this long to issue the goldenrod on her because they had to comb over every single error or mistake she's ever made and figure out how to stick it in writing with twists making her look evil.

    I'm laughing my ass off, because my mom was known to all public in this area as one of the most caring, loving, giving and unselfishly dedicated people - even at her age! She had been on staff for over 10 years!!! When the Saint Louis public read that "declare" about her, I hope their common sense kicks in!

    Sadly, I don't count on it. My family have been most suppressed by this organization (since we decided to leave it) than by anything in our lives!"
    • Like Like x 14
  2. amaX Member

    why do they answer the door?
    • Like Like x 1
  3. It may be like a ringing telephone, AMA2.

    Some people just can't resist picking up the phone receiver following the ring(s) or opening a door after a knock/buzzer/bell from the front/back door.
  4. Anonymous Member

    tick tock.

    • Like Like x 3
  5. Triumph Member

    from the Tampa St Pete Times article on Forced and Coerced abortions In the Sea Org

    Director of Special Affairs, (Ellen Forney) gave one of the Canned Legal statements
    defending the cult

    Hear no evil,See no evil.speak on evil
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Sponge Member

    I'm impressed at how DM has simultaneously honed and reamed his own organziation into a high prescision stick so much that, when it really comes to the crunch, it's about as effective at beating someone into line as a rolled up sheet of tin foil.
    • Like Like x 3
  7. BLiP Member


    Here's something positive you can say about Scientology - it doesn't matter if you are a 10 year old locked into a cattle ship chain locker or a 71 year old grandmother who's family has been wrenched apart - KSW Standard L Ron Hubbard Scientology tech will be applied regardless of your sex/age/race.
    • Like Like x 7
  8. Anonymous Member

    Ha! Look what happened to David Miscavige's wife's elddrly mom - Scientology kills the elderly!
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Anonymous Member

    Nope. If you are giving the company all the money it wants you can pretty much do whatever you want, including raping children, litterally.
    • Like Like x 4
  10. Anonymous Member

    Maybe David Miscavige hates old people because his dad was a rapist??
  11. Quentinanon Member

    Correction: A 5 year old locked into a cattle ship chain locker. "Never fear to hurt another in a just cause."
    • Like Like x 4
  12. Smurf Member

    It's a huge PR blunder the cult has yet to wake up to. Whenever the cult becomes aware that a media source is going to be writing an article or airing a piece on the cult, especially if it involves an interview with an ex-Scilon, the cult releases a voluminous DA pack full of these canned declarations. It's contrived nonsense, media that is well informed on the cult sees it as nonsense, but the cult continues the nonsensical exercise.
    • Like Like x 3
  13. Quentinanon Member

    My experience is that OSA coerces affidavits. They did from me a couple times. Those were never used for anything and today I would renounce those docs.
  14. Smurf Member

    If you're a mindfucked Scilon, you don't need to be coerced to sign an affidavit.
    • Like Like x 1
  15. RightOn Member

    didn't Hanna Whitfield say he was 4 years old?
  16. Quentinanon Member

    That could be. I thought the child's age was 5. In any case, Hubbard brutally abused that child.
  17. RightOn Member

    indeed he did.
    he was punished for either chewing or putting teeth marks (while he was holding it in his mouth) some sort of paper of whatever that he was supposed to deliver to Hubbard? I think that is how the story went?
    And yes I believe Hanna said he was 4
    • Like Like x 1
  18. ThetanBait Member

    Jim gave us an interview at a prot earlier this year:

    • Like Like x 4
  19. Quentinanon Member

    It was a telex and the child was a sea org "cadet" (Hubbardspeak for thetans in little bodies). The child chewed the telex. In the Hubbardian world, chewing telexes is punished with torture.
    • Like Like x 2
  20. telomere Member

    There are plenty of anecdotes from witnesses, with ages all over the place,
    but it's not clear if those are different victims or the same person- and which ages are correct.

    Mark Pope (7 years old) is the youngest I've found with verifiable detail:
    "Tony" might well be someone else's recollection of the same incident.
    Or it might be Derek Greene, or a composite of multiple incidents of child abuse on the Apollo.

    Normally, first person narrative is the "gold standard" but Mark has a funny history

    ~ 1994-2001, Mark was actively "handling" a.r.s.
    Before that, infiltrating IRL critic groups.
    Before that, some sort of admin posting at Flag(?)
  21. Herro Member

    You know, for someone so concerned with image and perception, you'd think that Ronny boy could have written his followers something telling them that harassing old ladies rarely wins hearts and minds. I guess he was too busy figuring out that whole transcendence thing.
    • Like Like x 4

  22. Scientology degrades people by policy, it's so theta........
  23. Meshell, SS for what Scientology has put your family through, especially your grandmother who has a lot of courage standing up to these abusive cowards.
  24. Gottabrain Member

    Meshell should contact Social Services and report the person and organization for elder abuse.
    Or a lawyer. Elder abuse lawyers often work together with social services. This is quite serious harassment. It could have given her a heart attack and killed her.
    Some of the social workers on elder abuse cases are just stunning. Very no-nonsense
    • Like Like x 3
  25. Herro Member

    You know, there is a bit of space between being a prick and elder abuse. Just sayin.
    • Like Like x 2
  26. And you being a prick who's been abused by an elder would certainly know..... Jus say'n yo....
    • Like Like x 2
  27. Gottabrain Member

    My specialty is care of the elderly, Herro. Going to a 71 year old woman's door with a couple of thugs to hand her a libelous piece of crap that states she cannot associate with her loved ones is an obvious attempt to intimidate and upset her. It is elder abuse, plain and simple. Only a few months ago I saw a case in the US where social services came down hard on a situation far, far less than this - and with a lawyer, too. I am very pleased with social services, the social worker was tough and knew his stuff.

    This is hardly a "volunteer church service" that the woman went to on her own for spiritual uplifting, for godsakes. These people were not invited to her home to do this.
    • Like Like x 7
  28. Triumph Member

    Shes 71 years old there Isn't that much SPACE left....

    at that age She has the protection of Elderly Abuse Laws...

    who chooses to act like a PRICK towards a woman who Is 71 years of age?

    for future reference... you'd be wise by Not acting like PRICK towards someone of retirement age

    even a Prick can find himself behind bars
    Scientology knows it can blur the lines... and when it can obliterate it...

    when the individual steps up and says NO...I refuse to go along with this...
    they have rights under the law....

    Scientology dosen't have rights over an individual
    it only exerts control on those that chose to comply

    when this 71 year old woman stepped up and says.... NO I will not
    she was representing Her right as free citizen...

    it dosen't matter one fucking bit if She was or IS a Scientologist...
    No gaggle of schlubs with a deceleration..without any real legal backing
    can demand you do anything...or accuse you of any transgressions that will hold weight in a Court of Law... if you freely choose otherwise....

    NO is the best fucking word in any language...and one of the most powerful..sadly it is often ignored..

    it's still one that can keep an individual free..and afford protection under most laws

    especially from a psudo-uber-litigious religion run amok
    • Like Like x 1
  29. xenubarb Member

    Best to err on the side of caution, faggot.
  30. Herro Member

    Ok, you realize that what you're saying is the equivalent of the Scientologists saying that protesters are infringing on their rights by terrorizing them, right?
  31. xenubarb Member

    We don't come to their homes in the middle of the night. But you know that, you're just being boring again.
    • Like Like x 1
  32. Anonymous Member

    Ok, you realize that what he's saying is what he believes, regardless of the inference you make. At least, he's honest & straightforward his his opines versus the nonsense trolls and distractions you're known for.
  33. Herro Member


    Poor form to end a sentence with a preposition.
  34. Anonymous Member

    You're distorting people's posts don't change the fact you're a clown.
  35. Herro Member


    Improper use of your / you're.
  36. Anonymous Member

    Fixed. Improper use of "your/you're."
    • Like Like x 1
  37. Triumph Member

    #1 Protesters are NOT going to the homes of Scientologists..... are they.
    Protesters are not trying to coerce families to break apart. ( they were In the context above)
    Protesters are Not stopping them from entering a building...or blocking an easement (my reference was about private property)
    Protesters are not preventing them from conversing with others.
    Protester aren't making legal threats..armed with documents..or acting as process servers

    they are not disrupting services. by legally assembling on public sidewalks

    All Citizens have a right to descent and Peaceably Gather including Protest on public property..on private property.. not so much...

    terrorizing them imply there Is criminal behavior taking place...anyone who wants to make the claim ... that a person or persons are "terrorizing them" have proof

    and call Law enforcement file a police report...they have the same rights as any citizen.. and the same protection under the law...
    if laws are broken they have the burden proof..

    accusations without proof ...are just accusations..and claims..

    the person who Is making the allegation dosen't all of the sudden get to define what Is or Isn't Terrorism....not as far as the Law is concerned.
    a person or group knocks on my door on my private property...and I ask rhem to leave..they better leave...
    if they don't leave they are trespassing.
    people don't have the right to demonstrate on someones front lawn.
    People do have the peaceably assemble on public property..and they do have the right to speak freely
    as long as its NOT in anyway criminal behavior..

    just because they are Saying it... dosen't make it true..or factual or a breach of any Laws..

    an inability to deal with criticism..Is where the Terrorist claims come from...

    not from activity directed at their Organization while Protesting...

    Scientologists Have Held Plenty Protest and no person or Group has impeded their peaceably assemble
    while others might find their message disagreeable...they are not being prevented to assemble.and demonstrate...
    and they don't seem to engage terrorist activity....

    I realize In context what I said ABOVE and was CLEARLY addressing the private property concerns of a 71 woman
    and the rights refuse..entry...resist coercion ..or just not want to associate (if anyone bothered to read even some of the OP)
    and the absolute Right as a PRIVATE Property owner to say ...NO U GTFO! its that simple
    to label a public demonstration on a public sidewalk...where people can speak freely without breaking the law....

    NOT right to label someone AS TERRORIST BECAUSE THEY FIND what was said as something they find DISAGREEABLE...

    you don't have alot of rights.. on someones else's private property...

    that where NO GTFO Rules...
    • Like Like x 1

  38. Damn twistin and turnin internet is at it again.............

    Where's our fearless leader Tommy Davis when wogs need clarification on non-existent LRH policies like disconnection?
  39. Anonymous Member

    The post about the forced wedding made me sick. That the mother was mad that the COS opposed sex between a 18 year old girl and 15 year old boy and its PR effects (read: she was okay with that) shows how far down the kool aid trail that lady was. Oh, the roommate MUST have been third partied because they objected to the situation, as well. You know what, so would a lot of people. In that case, I don't care if it was natter, third party, wrong lines, off policy. Completely disgusting on the part of the mom not to see the point. I now know of a similar situation (statute of limitations passed more than 15 years ago), young teenager and a man in his thirties. Both were the logical extension of the "kids are adults, just in little bodies, they should be able to choose" approach. To the extreme, you see why the Jennifer Gorman situation was foreseeable in that atmosphere. Kids are very easily sexualized and subject to sex at a young age.

    My vote is with COS on that situation (telling them to cut it out), because the mother was fucking WRONG to think it was okay. "He had to get married because he wanted to be with the woman he loved." Kids are not little adults. If they are going to have sex, they are going to have sex, but the parent should not be surprised that the violation of the law was a valid thing to point out by the COS which would have been in trouble if one of its employees slept with a minor child. Last time I checked, age of consent in MO was 17.

    If mom was not going to step in, and granted, many would/do not, she can't complain that COS covered its butt by requiring marriage.
  40. Gottabrain Member

    ^^ Just read it. Yeh, the mom has some strange viewpoints toward her son that are all too cult-typical, but Smurf, it seems you've missed the gist of what went on here. Not that I blame you, the mom really does ramble on.

    The mom doesn't appear to have any control over her (now 16) year old son, nor does anyone else. She didn't want him to get married. When the church separated them claiming their relationship was illegal (which it wasn't, in that state) they had two choices - get married or separate. So they were forced to get married for legal reasons but the whole legal thing was a lie in the first place. Mom very upset about that.

    The Flag Rep was far more concerned about Travis smoking than about him carrying on sexual relationships with a 20 year old staff member there. Travis began doing the ethics actions because of the relationship with the 20 year old and apparently did a good job and it was accepted, then the Flag Rep refused it because of the smoking.

    Weird sense of priorities.

    The entire heavy handed Scientology ethics forced the two to marry. If they'd been left alone, they probably would have gone their separate ways by now.
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins