Serious said:

Cerebus said:

Ehhh.... what? It's well known she signed an air tight prenup (which gave her nothing) and Cruise wouldn't settle the divorce preceedings until he got firm visitation rights with Suri. So, kind of exactly the opposite of her having "real dirt" on him.

Also, Scientology doesn't care what ANYBODY thinks about it. To assume that Cruise settled his divorce any particular way because of Scientology's image is ludicrous. Tom Cruise settled his legal matter quietly, quickly and out of the public eye just like he's always done. Y'all some weird, hateful type of folk.

I don't believe that at all. Here in Europe in the last days they have been in the media (newspapers, but also TV specials about them) non-stop as a totally insane cult that is extremely dangerous. Revealing stories of prominent members possibly being held hostage for years or murdered by them and children being treated like terrorists in their bootcamps. And stating how crazy the USA are to acknowledge such an organsiation as a religion. I am sure they care about that .

Nope. ALL OF THAT is old news. It's all over the internet and has been for many, many years. There's long, documentary like videos about it on YouTube. People, including former members, have written books about it. NONE of it is new information. Scientology doesn't care what people think about it any more than Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism or Muslinism cares. All the stuff you're seeing is simply a product of modern sensationalist "journalism". There's nothing more to report because Cruise and Holmes won't give them anything, so they'll dig up whatever they can to make it interesting for the simple minded, celebrity worshiping sheep.

Cerebus said:

Serious said:

I don't believe that at all. Here in Europe in the last days they have been in the media (newspapers, but also TV specials about them) non-stop as a totally insane cult that is extremely dangerous. Revealing stories of prominent members possibly being held hostage for years or murdered by them and children being treated like terrorists in their bootcamps. And stating how crazy the USA are to acknowledge such an organsiation as a religion. I am sure they care about that .

Nope. ALL OF THAT is old news. It's all over the internet and has been for many, many years. There's long, documentary like videos about it on YouTube. People, including former members, have written books about it. NONE of it is new information. Scientology doesn't care what people think about it any more than Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism or Muslinism cares. All the stuff you're seeing is simply a product of modern sensationalist "journalism". There's nothing more to report because Cruise and Holmes won't give them anything, so they'll dig up whatever they can to make it interesting for the simple minded, celebrity worshiping sheep.

lazycrockett said:

You cant pre nup kids.

Nice that you didn't actually quote what I said. It says in the article, in pretty much every article about it, and I commented on it myself; the reason Cruise settled so quickly is because he was given the visitation rights to Suri that he wanted. What HE wanted. Not what SHE wanted. There is no "dirt" on Cruise beyond the fact that he's a Scientologist. And judging by the way he rolls through wives who apparently aren't bothered by it at the beginning, but leave him because of it in the end, he obviously doesn't care what people think about that.

Cerebus said:

Serious said:

I don't believe that at all. Here in Europe in the last days they have been in the media (newspapers, but also TV specials about them) non-stop as a totally insane cult that is extremely dangerous. Revealing stories of prominent members possibly being held hostage for years or murdered by them and children being treated like terrorists in their bootcamps. And stating how crazy the USA are to acknowledge such an organsiation as a religion. I am sure they care about that .

Nope. ALL OF THAT is old news. It's all over the internet and has been for many, many years. There's long, documentary like videos about it on YouTube. People, including former members, have written books about it. NONE of it is new information. Scientology doesn't care what people think about it any more than Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism or Muslinism cares. All the stuff you're seeing is simply a product of modern sensationalist "journalism". There's nothing more to report because Cruise and Holmes won't give them anything, so they'll dig up whatever they can to make it interesting for the simple minded, celebrity worshiping sheep.

It may not be new, but it is making huge headlines now everywhere every day and I am sure Scientolgy does not like that. And it would be the same for other religions if they had such bad press.

Cerebus said:

Serious said:

I don't believe that at all. Here in Europe in the last days they have been in the media (newspapers, but also TV specials about them) non-stop as a totally insane cult that is extremely dangerous. Revealing stories of prominent members possibly being held hostage for years or murdered by them and children being treated like terrorists in their bootcamps. And stating how crazy the USA are to acknowledge such an organsiation as a religion. I am sure they care about that .

Nope. ALL OF THAT is old news. It's all over the internet and has been for many, many years. There's long, documentary like videos about it on YouTube. People, including former members, have written books about it. NONE of it is new information. Scientology doesn't care what people think about it any more than Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism or Muslinism cares. All the stuff you're seeing is simply a product of modern sensationalist "journalism". There's nothing more to report because Cruise and Holmes won't give them anything, so they'll dig up whatever they can to make it interesting for the simple minded, celebrity worshiping sheep.

Thread started 07/06/12 6:49pm

Serious said:

Cerebus said:

Nope. ALL OF THAT is old news. It's all over the internet and has been for many, many years. There's long, documentary like videos about it on YouTube. People, including former members, have written books about it. NONE of it is new information. Scientology doesn't care what people think about it any more than Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism or Muslinism cares. All the stuff you're seeing is simply a product of modern sensationalist "journalism". There's nothing more to report because Cruise and Holmes won't give them anything, so they'll dig up whatever they can to make it interesting for the simple minded, celebrity worshiping sheep.

It may not be new, but it is making huge headlines now everywhere every day and I am sure Scientolgy does not like that. And it would be the same for other religions if they had such bad press.

What world do you live in where religions don't get controversial, bad press regularly? Its pretty much a constant in the world we live in.

XxAxX said:

Cerebus said:

Nope. ALL OF THAT is old news. It's all over the internet and has been for many, many years. There's long, documentary like videos about it on YouTube. People, including former members, have written books about it. NONE of it is new information. Scientology doesn't care what people think about it any more than Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism or Muslinism cares. All the stuff you're seeing is simply a product of modern sensationalist "journalism". There's nothing more to report because Cruise and Holmes won't give them anything, so they'll dig up whatever they can to make it interesting for the simple minded, celebrity worshiping sheep.

Thread started 07/06/12 6:49pm

luv4u Moderator moderator

Blogger: Scientology group asks followers to censor Web comments In the wake of the impending Holmes/Cruise divorce....... http://ca.news.yahoo.com/...04800.html

Did you actually read the article? That person is AGAINST the main body of the "Church of Scientology". In the article, it states...

"Church of Scientology spokeswoman Karin Pouw rejected Rathbun comments. In an email sent to Yahoo!, she said the email he cited was not from the church.

"This did not come from the Church or anyone associated with the Church, nor is it a Church plan," Pouw wrote. "The Church of Scientology International Office of Special Affairs is responsible for public affairs and calling it a 'dirty tricks' and 'propaganda arm' is offensive."

She goes on to write that "Marty Rathbun is a defrocked apostate removed from any position in the Church for malfeasance nearly eight years ago and has no firsthand knowledge of its activities."

I repeat, Scientology DOES NOT CARE what anybody thinks about the Cruise/Holmes divorce.

Edit: Why is luv's picture showing up in your post and the quote? I thought it was her who posted it at first, but after I posted I saw her pic in the body of the post. Weird.

[Edited 7/10/12 9:28am]

Cerebus said:

Serious said:

It may not be new, but it is making huge headlines now everywhere every day and I am sure Scientolgy does not like that. And it would be the same for other religions if they had such bad press.

What world do you live in where religions don't get controversial, bad press regularly? Its pretty much a constant in the world we live in.

And if they do they care about it and don't like to make headlines like that....

Cerebus said:

XxAxX said:

Thread started 07/06/12 6:49pm

luv4u Moderator moderator

Blogger: Scientology group asks followers to censor Web comments In the wake of the impending Holmes/Cruise divorce....... http://ca.news.yahoo.com/...04800.html

Did you actually read the article? That person is AGAINST the main body of the "Church of Scientology". In the article, it states...

"Church of Scientology spokeswoman Karin Pouw rejected Rathbun comments. In an email sent to Yahoo!, she said the email he cited was not from the church.

"This did not come from the Church or anyone associated with the Church, nor is it a Church plan," Pouw wrote. "The Church of Scientology International Office of Special Affairs is responsible for public affairs and calling it a 'dirty tricks' and 'propaganda arm' is offensive."

She goes on to write that "Marty Rathbun is a defrocked apostate removed from any position in the Church for malfeasance nearly eight years ago and has no firsthand knowledge of its activities."

I repeat, Scientology DOES NOT CARE what anybody thinks about the Cruise/Holmes divorce.

Edit: Why is luv's picture showing up in your post and the quote? I thought it was her who posted it at first, but after I posted I saw her pic in the body of the post. Weird.

[Edited 7/10/12 9:28am]

The Katie Holmes-Tom Cruise split apparently has had a negative effect on the Church of Scientology, and a faction of the church is calling for members to take action and silence naysayers.

^from the article above, which i did read.

yeah scientology cares what folks say about it. even if there are factions within the sect, there are real efforts being made to keep the overall scientology image shiny. don't think for a second there aren't

Serious said:

Cerebus said:

What world do you live in where religions don't get controversial, bad press regularly? Its pretty much a constant in the world we live in.

And if they do they care about it and don't like to make headlines like that....

OK. You can believe that if you like. In the end, all they care about are what the members of their congregations/faiths think. That's the way organized religion works. You're in or you're out.

No Cerebus is right, they only care about themselves, not Tom and Katie. Clearly the couple have decided to settle things and with a tight ass prenup I'm no longer shocked the marriage ended as fast as it did.

Cerebus said:

XxAxX said:

Thread started 07/06/12 6:49pm

luv4u Moderator moderator

Blogger: Scientology group asks followers to censor Web comments In the wake of the impending Holmes/Cruise divorce....... http://ca.news.yahoo.com/...04800.html

Did you actually read the article? That person is AGAINST the main body of the "Church of Scientology". In the article, it states...

"Church of Scientology spokeswoman Karin Pouw rejected Rathbun comments. In an email sent to Yahoo!, she said the email he cited was not from the church.

"This did not come from the Church or anyone associated with the Church, nor is it a Church plan," Pouw wrote. "The Church of Scientology International Office of Special Affairs is responsible for public affairs and calling it a 'dirty tricks' and 'propaganda arm' is offensive."

She goes on to write that "Marty Rathbun is a defrocked apostate removed from any position in the Church for malfeasance nearly eight years ago and has no firsthand knowledge of its activities."

I repeat, Scientology DOES NOT CARE what anybody things about the Cruise/Holmes divorce.

And of course you know the truth .

If they would not care they were extremely stupid.

XxAxX said:

Cerebus said:

Did you actually read the article? That person is AGAINST the main body of the "Church of Scientology". In the article, it states...

"Church of Scientology spokeswoman Karin Pouw rejected Rathbun comments. In an email sent to Yahoo!, she said the email he cited was not from the church.

"This did not come from the Church or anyone associated with the Church, nor is it a Church plan," Pouw wrote. "The Church of Scientology International Office of Special Affairs is responsible for public affairs and calling it a 'dirty tricks' and 'propaganda arm' is offensive."

She goes on to write that "Marty Rathbun is a defrocked apostate removed from any position in the Church for malfeasance nearly eight years ago and has no firsthand knowledge of its activities."

I repeat, Scientology DOES NOT CARE what anybody thinks about the Cruise/Holmes divorce.

Edit: Why is luv's picture showing up in your post and the quote? I thought it was her who posted it at first, but after I posted I saw her pic in the body of the post. Weird.

[Edited 7/10/12 9:28am]

The Katie Holmes-Tom Cruise split apparently has had a negative effect on the Church of Scientology, and a faction of the church is calling for members to take action and silence naysayers.

^from the article above, which i did read.

yeah scientology cares what folks say about it. even if there are factions within the sect, there are real efforts being made to keep the overall scientology image shiny. don't think for a second there aren't

OMFUUUUUCK! Read the portion I quoted! What YOU QUOTED is from a FACTION, lead by a member WHO IS NO LONGER PART OF THE CHURCH! Please, read the ENTIRE ARTICLE and PROCESS EVERYTHING. Don't pick out the one part that backs up your hateful opinion.

Ugh. Fuck it. Thank you all for so quickly showing that I'm right about the current state of the human race. We're a bunch of hateful simpletons.

Most religious folks DO care about their religion. They protect it as a shield. Scientology ain't no different despite what people claim. Guess agree to disagree.

But anyways, I guess she felt Tom was a good father to Suri. Also, like some others said, this look like the end of a business transaction. That's usually how some marriages are, they agree to stay together for several years for some reason and then when that ride is over, they'll announce a divorce.

Sound like Tom is not at all that sad Katie left him.

[Edited 7/10/12 9:34am]

Cerebus said:

XxAxX said:

The Katie Holmes-Tom Cruise split apparently has had a negative effect on the Church of Scientology, and a faction of the church is calling for members to take action and silence naysayers.

^from the article above, which i did read.

yeah scientology cares what folks say about it. even if there are factions within the sect, there are real efforts being made to keep the overall scientology image shiny. don't think for a second there aren't

OMFUUUUUCK! Read the portion I quoted! What YOU QUOTED is from a FACTION, lead by a member WHO IS NO LONGER PART OF THE CHURCH! Please, read the ENTIRE ARTICLE and PROCESS EVERYTHING. Don't pick out the one part that backs up your hateful opinion.

Ugh. Fuck it. Thank you all for so quickly showing that I'm right about the current state of the human race. We're a bunch of hateful simpletons.

i'm not hateful and i read the article. you're an arrogant toad

Serious said:

Cerebus said:

Did you actually read the article? That person is AGAINST the main body of the "Church of Scientology". In the article, it states...

"Church of Scientology spokeswoman Karin Pouw rejected Rathbun comments. In an email sent to Yahoo!, she said the email he cited was not from the church.

"This did not come from the Church or anyone associated with the Church, nor is it a Church plan," Pouw wrote. "The Church of Scientology International Office of Special Affairs is responsible for public affairs and calling it a 'dirty tricks' and 'propaganda arm' is offensive."

She goes on to write that "Marty Rathbun is a defrocked apostate removed from any position in the Church for malfeasance nearly eight years ago and has no firsthand knowledge of its activities."

I repeat, Scientology DOES NOT CARE what anybody things about the Cruise/Holmes divorce.

And of course you know the truth .

If they would not care they were extremely stupid.

OK, you're totally right. The Church who has made no public statement about it, who never makes public statements about anything, who counts as members many of the most famous and rich human beings on the planet is extremembly concerned about this. Just like they were about Cruise's last divorce. That is clearly why they're running huge campaigns to make themselves look better. Obviously, that's also why they've released reverse spin statements to the press and had spokespersons appearing live on all the major news channels/shows doing damage control. Except, they haven't done any of that, because they don't care. They don't care about the divorce. And they don't care about all the supposed "news" about how eveil they are, because NONE OF IT is current.

Cerebus said:

Serious said:

And if they do they care about it and don't like to make headlines like that....

OK. You can believe that if you like. In the end, all they care about are what the members of their congregations/faiths think. That's the way organized religion works. You're in or you're out.

Religions do care about their image. They lose members when there are scandals and it is harder for them to get new ones. In the case of Scientology it's more the latter I guess. And Scientology would want to be seen as a religion and not a cult and that's a lot harder when the general public is reminded of how they work every day when they open the newspaper.

Cerebus said:

XxAxX said:

The Katie Holmes-Tom Cruise split apparently has had a negative effect on the Church of Scientology, and a faction of the church is calling for members to take action and silence naysayers.

^from the article above, which i did read.

yeah scientology cares what folks say about it. even if there are factions within the sect, there are real efforts being made to keep the overall scientology image shiny. don't think for a second there aren't

OMFUUUUUCK! Read the portion I quoted! What YOU QUOTED is from a FACTION, lead by a member WHO IS NO LONGER PART OF THE CHURCH! Please, read the ENTIRE ARTICLE and PROCESS EVERYTHING. Don't pick out the one part that backs up your hateful opinion.

Ugh. Fuck it. Thank you all for so quickly showing that I'm right about the current state of the human race. We're a bunch of hateful simpletons.

This is getting more and more ridiculous here .

XxAxX said:

Cerebus said:

OMFUUUUUCK! Read the portion I quoted! What YOU QUOTED is from a FACTION, lead by a member WHO IS NO LONGER PART OF THE CHURCH! Please, read the ENTIRE ARTICLE and PROCESS EVERYTHING. Don't pick out the one part that backs up your hateful opinion.

Ugh. Fuck it. Thank you all for so quickly showing that I'm right about the current state of the human race. We're a bunch of hateful simpletons.

i'm not hateful and i read the article. you're an arrogant toad

OK, now you're calling me names, specifically? Why is that? I didn't call you any names. I'll one up you, switch out some letters and call you ignorant, though. Because if you HAD read and actually UNDERSTOOD the article you would know that what you quoted was out of context and just plain wrong for the point you're TRYING to make.

Serious said:

Cerebus said:

OMFUUUUUCK! Read the portion I quoted! What YOU QUOTED is from a FACTION, lead by a member WHO IS NO LONGER PART OF THE CHURCH! Please, read the ENTIRE ARTICLE and PROCESS EVERYTHING. Don't pick out the one part that backs up your hateful opinion.

Ugh. Fuck it. Thank you all for so quickly showing that I'm right about the current state of the human race. We're a bunch of hateful simpletons.

This is getting more and more ridiculous here .

There is nothing more hateful, simple and lazy than pulling a single quote from an overall article to back a damaging, one-sided OPINION. If people actually want to debate or discuss what they think about this personally, fine. That's great. But taking one side of the argument (I saw the "news" say "this"), or quoting one out of context line from an article as fact because it supports your point of view, that's not a discussion. It's hateful, and it's simple.

Cerebus said:

XxAxX said:

i'm not hateful and i read the article. you're an arrogant toad

OK, now you're calling me names, specifically? Why is that? I didn't call you any names. I'll one up you, switch out some letters and call you ignorant, though. Because if you HAD read and actually UNDERSTOOD the article you would know that what you quoted was out of context and just plain wrong for the point you're TRYING to make.

bah. i correct you because i care for you. my criticism comes with love

XxAxX said:

Cerebus said:

OK, now you're calling me names, specifically? Why is that? I didn't call you any names. I'll one up you, switch out some letters and call you ignorant, though. Because if you HAD read and actually UNDERSTOOD the article you would know that what you quoted was out of context and just plain wrong for the point you're TRYING to make.

bah. i correct you because i care for you. my criticism comes with love

Your sarcasm can take a flying leap.

http://markrathbun.wordpr...k-up-news/

Cerebus said:

XxAxX said:

bah. i correct you because i care for you. my criticism comes with love

Your sarcasm can take a flying leap.

upstart! bounder! is too!

Seeing how Nicole gave up contact with Isabella and Conner in her divorce, I'd say Katie only allowing supervised visitation rights is "winning". That Cult lost their golden child.

but you know i'm right.

luv4u said: Moderator moderator

Blogger: Scientology group asks followers to censor Web comments In the wake of the impending Holmes/Cruise divorce....... http://ca.news.yahoo.com/...04800.html

excerpt from article:

"Marty Rathbun is a defrocked apostate removed from any position in the Church for malfeasance nearly eight years ago and has no firsthand knowledge of its activities."

so i learned a new word today: "malfeasance." what a strange sounding word. i mean a person can go a lifetime and never use the wordl

i'm all thinking wtH is a malfeasance?

when i first pronouced the word, it sounds like a word someone would use for that one cousin at a family bbq. the one who is a family embarassment. the one that everyone in the family is ashamed to introduce to an invited friend.

"no, i don't want to introduce rickybubba to my friend!" "he's such a malfeasance."

 [mal-fee-zuhns]

good ole scientology.

lazycrockett said:

Seeing how Nicole gave up contact with Isabella and Conner in her divorce, I'd say Katie only allowing supervised visitation rights is "winning". That Cult lost their golden child.

Where did you see anything about supervised visitation rights? Are you just making this stuff up?

Will Smith: 'Divorce Is Not An Option'

Will Smith and Ellen DeGeneres

[img:$uid]http://pic80.picturetrail.com:80/VOL2084/9118410/23710928/397954868.jpg[/img:$uid]

KCOOLMUZIQ said:

Will Smith: 'Divorce Is Not An Option'

words of desperation