Episode 9: Steve Cannane

Karen#1

Karen#1

Well-known member
Really a good show.

I did not know all about Rupert Murdoch as a media baron and their plot to get his son in through James Packer, Australian Billionaire.

Now I understand Rupert Murdoch's tweets more
RupertTweet.jpg
 
ILove2Lurk

ILove2Lurk

Lisbeth Salander Redux
Steve Cannane was a great interview. So knowledgeable and literate.
Very enjoyable. They finally got into some topics that might make
@Karakorum very happy. :whistle:
 
Karakorum

Karakorum

Ron is the source that will lead you to grief
Listening to it right now. It is an interesting episode.


One thing that annoyed me a bit was at timestamp 34:10 when Leah again exaggerates by saying that "all scientologists believe that and all scientologists raise their children as old being in little bodies".
Its true that many, maybe even most, do that. But certainly not all, my mom did it, but my gramps did not. Both were scientologists.

I know I may be nitpicking, but I believe that overblown overstatement like this are doing a disservice to an otherwise great podcast. If under the radar scientologists or people who are on the fence will listen to this podcast, they might likley fall into a mindset of: "If she's exaggerating about X, then she's exaggerating about everything and thus the whole podcast is just false data".

Scientology instills paranoia into its members as part of a wider self-control mechanism. I think we should go the extra mile and avoid giving people the ammo that fuels their paranoia.


Point 2:
I entirely agree with Mike taht the history of Australia was pivotal to the development of many of Hubbard's policies. I think much of the way the SO deals with the "enemies of scn" is up till this day a fallout of the Victoria ban.
 
Last edited:
marra

marra

Well-known member
Karakorum said:
Listening to it right now. It is an interesting episode.


One thing that annoyed me a bit was at timestamp 34:10 when Leah again exaggerates by saying that "all scientologists believe that and all scientologists raise their children as old being in little bodies".
Its true that many, maybe even most, do that. But certainly not all, my mom did it, but my gramps did not. Both were scientologists.

I know I may be nitpicking, but I believe that overblown overstatement like this are doing a disservice to an otherwise great podcast. If under the radar scientologists or people who are on the fence will listen to this podcast, they might likley fall into a mindset of: "If she's exaggerating about X, then she's exaggerating about everything and thus the whole podcast is just false data".

Scientology instills paranoia into its members as part of a wider self-control mechanism. I think we should go the extra mile and avoid giving people the ammo that fuels their paranoia.


Point 2:
I entirely agree with Mike taht the history of Australia was pivotal to the development of many of Hubbard's policies. I think much of the way the SO deals with the "enemies of scn" is up till this day a fallout of the Victoria ban.
Click to expand...
I agree that the way Leah exaggerates about some things is annoying. I think she's doing a great job overall, obviously, but it does irritate me when she says things like that. I remember in one interview she said: "All scientologists have to study for two and a half hours every day". Well, that just isn't true. There is some truth about staff members having to do that but not "all scientologists". However, when looking at the bigger picture of what she's doing I think this is just a minor criticism.
 
Karakorum

Karakorum

Ron is the source that will lead you to grief
EDIT 2:
Steve mentions the story of Philip Warren's feud with Hubbard over him trying to get back his money for scn courses. I was not familiar with this one, so it is something new to me. At timestamp 50:40, Steven says: "So Hubbard, who is living in St.Hill manor England, sets up what is called the Investigations unit of scientology"

Wow, this is big news to me. I always was under the impression that the GO predates Inv and that Inv was created only as a result of Mary Sue's 1970s B2 flop. Yet if what Steve states is correct, then it would mean Inv actually predates not just OSA but the GO itself.

Wow, just wow. Nobody, outside or inside, ever told me that. I need to go chew on this for a while.:ohmy:

marra said:
I agree that the way Leah exaggerates about some things is annoying. I think she's doing a great job overall, obviously, but it does irritate me when she says things like that. I remember in one interview she said: "All scientologists have to study for two and a half hours every day". Well, that just isn't true. There is some truth about staff members having to do that but not "all scientologists". However, when looking at the bigger picture of what she's doing I think this is just a minor criticism.
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree. In the sum of all things, what Leah did with the aftermath foundation has been imho the best ex-scn initiative of all. That was the big thing, the exaggerations are very minor in comparison.

Which doesn't mean we should pretend they aren't there. Leah said something very similar in one of the early episodes, roughly: "No scientologist raises their own kids. They all leave them to be raised by scientology". I then left a comment saying: "Well no, there are good scientology parents and bad scientology parents. We shouldn't put all of them in one box becuase not everyone behaves like that." under the podcast website (which it seems got deleted) and also a on Mike's blog. Mike was kind enough to reply to it on his blog saying "yeah you are right".

So I've again left a comment under the podcast episode on the website. I'm not trying to bust the podcast, which is otherwise great, just offer constructive criticism.

Maybe the exaggerations are just a New York cultural thing and Leah does them in auto mode like Trump does? I've seen other New Yorkers do it. :confused:


Final note: I think this podcast is probably the best piece of media released so far. Maybe its less emotional and "fluffy" than the aftermath, but it hits harder and gets into more facts and goes after things that are potentially criminal acts that are "prosecutable".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top