A Must Watch: Reporter Ted Koppel Treated As Suppressive Person By Scientology Leader David Miscavige
1 of 9
In 1992, Ted Koppel conducted a landmark interview with David Miscavige (this is the ONLY interview he’s ever done), leader of the Church of Scientology, for ABC’s Nightline where they discuss Dianetics, L. Ron Hubbard’s teachings and the inner machinations of the COS. The interview reveals an antagonistic, aggressive and fervent leader who has clearly “bought into” what the Church of Scientology is selling, “The Way to Happiness.”
This is a multi-part archived series Ted Koppel did for ABC’s Nightline, and while Ted Koppel admits he is skeptical and even goes so far as to say L.Ron Hubbards claims are “ridiculous” the most telling aspect of this interview is what we can glean about David Miscavige. (This is not new, and XenuTV also has excellent information on this amazing interview, including a transcript.)
Miscavige comes across as paranoid, angry and confrontational. He uses body language I have heard commonly described as part of the intimidation techniques used by COS members when dealing with the so-called “suppressive persons.” Miscavige leans into Koppels space, constantly interrupts, points his finger, misdirects from any topic he is not comfortable with, raises his voice and shows a great deal of sarcasm when responding to Koppel’s questions. This is not a comfortable interview to watch. I felt anxious, threatened and fearful as I observed Miscavige use persuasive, but overtly flawed logic to define why Scientology is the only way to improve one’s life.
I encourage anyone who is still on the fence as to what COS is all about with David Miscavige at its helm, to watch this interview. I am certainly not a trained psychologist or even an expert at body language, but my overall instinctual response to this was, “This man is not telling the truth, I feel misled, intimidated, condescended to, provoked, agitated and very uncomfortable.”
If this is what walking into a COS center, advertised as the “Way To Happiness” is like, no thanks. It felt more akin to how an encounter with the Dementors from the Harry Potter series must feel like, or as the author JK Rowling describes “that absence of being able to envisage that you will ever be cheerful again. The absence of hope. That very deadened feeling, which is so very different from feeling sad.”
Is this what faith should feel like? Is this what religion means? Or is this the layer of a powerful cult being stripped of its glossy facade?
For the rest of the interview, look for the videos after the jump.
2 of 9
3 of 9
4 of 9
5 of 9
6 of 9
7 of 9
8 of 9
9 of 9
Pink Stripe WordPress Theme Designed by Joni Mueller &
Excellent collection. Check out what wikiped had to say about it on david miscavige’s page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Miscavige#The_Nightline_interview
Comment by nonny mouse — February 8, 2008 @ 4:09 pm
What I cannot understand is how this would be a good representation for the CoS for people who were learning of it for the first time. How does he figure that attacking the reporter help their reputation?
It’s worse than flipping off a photographer and having that photo plastered on the front of a magazine making it look like you are flipping off the public.
Terryeo, can we have your insight to what this angry little leprechaun is thinking?
Comment by Nonya — February 8, 2008 @ 4:18 pm
Sorry, None of your damn business, I’m not conversant in psychobabble, media doublespeak, nor 1984 doublegood talk. Your stated question, “can we have your insight (not your bigoted opinion, but your insight) into angry leprechaun thinking” is a full stop. It is lulz, it makes me rofl. I can’t process any more data until I’m through laughing. Its sewer reek lies parallel, alongside Tomato Sweeney’s, “Can you tell me why people attack your cult”. Get polite or go unanswered.
Comment by Terryeo — February 8, 2008 @ 6:09 pm
Oh my, Terryeo! I’m gonna call you “buttons” - cuz you are just so easy to push! Way to keep your cool, man - great example you are setting for the CoS there buddy.
I’ll try asking nicely then. Why do you think Mr. Miscavige would feel that such an aggressive approach would be best for this interview? Isn’t the idea to promote your beliefs as welcoming to the uninformed?
You guys take many, many communication training courses. Show us what they are good for. Please ;^)
Comment by Nonya — February 8, 2008 @ 6:29 pm
Terryeo, why do you suck so much?
Comment by Terryeo — February 8, 2008 @ 6:30 pm
So, if people ask the $cientology jerk questions he doesn’t like, will he just go away?
Comment by Narcissus — February 8, 2008 @ 7:30 pm
In part 2, I think Miscarriage meant to say “In $cientology you don’t do anything for somebody else FOR FREE.” It’s a commercial enterprise (or, more accurately, a criminal enterprise), not a church.
Comment by Narcissus — February 8, 2008 @ 7:39 pm
Response from the Church of Scientology regarding Sunday’s protest:
This weekend we do anticipate that some members of this group “Anonymous” will turn up, as they have announced.
We take this seriously because of the nature of the threats this group has made publicly. We will take every step necessary to protect our parishioners and staff as well as members of the community, in coordination with the local authorities.
As to our knowledge of the organizers of the event, they are cyberterrorists who hide their identities behind masks and computer anonymity.
Long before selecting Scientology as its latest target, “Anonymous” hackers crashed the Fox Web site and issued a perverse manifesto in a July 2007 video message on the Internet:
We are the face of chaos… We ruin the lives of other people simply because we can … Hundreds die in a plane crash. We laugh. The nation mourns over school shooting, we laugh. We’re the embodiment of humanity with no remorse, no caring, no love, or no sense of morality.
“Anonymous” is perpetrating religious hate crimes against churches of Scientology and individual Scientologists for no reason other than religious bigotry. “Anonymous” initially justified its attacks by claiming that the church’s requests to some Web sites to remove a stolen video of an internal church event somehow constituted an affront to free speech. In fact, the church, as would any copyright owner, had simply sent notices that the video constituted a copyright violation. Similar notices are sent daily by the television and recording industries, as well as the media to those who display pirated, copyrighted works.
“Anonymous” alleged “free speech” justification is belied by the fact that the video in question has been seen by millions. It is “Anonymous” that has repeatedly attempted to suppress free speech through illegal assaults on church Web sites so as to prevent Internet users from obtaining information from the church. They have also engaged in other harassment, including threats of violence in telephone calls, fax transmissions and e-mails, not to mention the Anonymous mailing of white powder to dozens of our churches, requiring the services of law enforcement.
“Anonymous” claims of altruistic purposes are no different than those heard from any terrorist or hate group. We are not the first to be targeted. Using Scientology’s prominence, “Anonymous” hopes to garner more attention. “Anonymous” has publicly proclaimed its guiding materials to be the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf. Quite obviously, this group is not just anti-Scientology, it is anti-freedom of religion, anti-free speech and anti-American.
Religious bigotry of any nature is deplorable and profoundly affects the entire community. The hate crimes of “Anonymous” should be condemned.
Anyone desiring information about the church of Scientology or the context of the pirated video should visit the church Web site at http://www.scientology.org to form their own opinions.
Comment by Steve — February 8, 2008 @ 7:45 pm
Steve - That is so laughably crappy propaganda. Thank you for confirming that you are fully in the Sci-mafia’s pocket. Mwah
Comment by LRonHubbub — February 8, 2008 @ 8:13 pm
Hilarious $ci statement. Thanks for posting it, Steve.
A comment on the allegation of religious bigotry: The Feb. 10 Project Chanology protests were spurred by $cientology’s continual suppression of others’ free speech. The church has bullied and threatened critics for a very long time, and people’s dismay with that reached critical mass last month. That’s what the protests are about, not bigotry of any sort but rather $cientology’s disrespect for others’ free speech.
Comment by Narcissus — February 8, 2008 @ 8:26 pm
I’m hoping to see D’s take on Scientology’s official response as printed in the SP Times (Ironic, I know) and reproduced here by Steve.
Comment by Anonymous — February 8, 2008 @ 8:47 pm
I watched this last night, coincidentally.
You can tell Miscavige is a guy who is not used to be questioned.
Koppel made him look like a tiny little biting ferret man.
Comment by Dave — February 8, 2008 @ 11:58 pm
By the way, I can’t find the Video Glosslip posted that had Miscavige talking about destroying Psychiatry, and the extent they have used US corporations and third world governments to trojan horse Hubbards crap. Looks like YouTube caved in again. Fortunatley, not before the LA Times got ahold of it. Looks like these corporations did a “WTF?!” and are investigating the allegations.
Another point for Anonymous.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/02/corporations-na.html
And kudos to the GlossLip for getting the info out onto the Net.
Comment by Aeros — February 9, 2008 @ 1:51 am
To All Anons. The protests tomorrow will be a great start. But just a start. If you want to cause lasting damage to the Churches leadership, we need to hit them harder. The Protests will attract public attention.
After the 10th, go to you home counties Registrar office, and find out various laws to getting signatures from registered voters to demand congressional action. A strong grass roots demand for a congressional investigation into Scientologies alledged practices and abuses following the 10 FEB Protests.
This might very well result in David Miscavige and his cronies hauled before the Senate Judiciary Committee to awnser some “Questions”. After seeing some previous interviews from David Miscavige, I can only conclude that this will result in EPIC Fail for $cientology.
Get to it people!
(BTW, If GlossLip ran an OpEd article demanding Congressional inquiery into Scientology, that would be sweet. Be warned though, that WILL get there attention. It’s one thing to fight in closed court. Quite another to face Senators in an open forum.)
Comment by Aeros — February 9, 2008 @ 2:22 am
Holy CRAP!
Your blog post is half a day old, and those Youtube videos have been yanked down already, LOL. I’m off to Xenutv to see them.
Thanks for bringing this to everyone’s attention, though.
Comment by Aberdeen Anon — February 9, 2008 @ 3:19 am
RE:Aeros
Great comments.
Comment by Anonymous — February 9, 2008 @ 4:50 am
Say hello to James Lighfield for us, Terryeo. Havent seen him around much, with his trawling through comments sections to try ‘align’ peoples ‘reality’ with “an acceptable truth”.
“MAKE MONEY. MAKE MORE MONEY. MAKE OTHER PEOPLE PRODUCE SO AS TO MAKE MORE MONEY.”
L. Ron Hubbard
HCOPL 9 March 1972
MS OEC 384
Comment by Snappy — February 9, 2008 @ 6:02 am
Correct me if I’m wrong but does anyone else find that DM’s mannerisms and pattern of speech and demeanor look strangely similar to Tom Cruise? It’s like watching and listening to twins seperated at birth. Is that part of the communication course?
Comment by Mitsu — February 9, 2008 @ 8:11 am
Hi folks, I need your help. The above statement from Scientology in comment # 8, can you tell me where you found that, I need to the link in order to respond to it?
Thank you!!
Comment by D — February 9, 2008 @ 2:04 pm
D: I’m not an anonymous, but here it is. I think.
Comment by k — February 9, 2008 @ 2:09 pm
I am positively amazed at your reactions.
The whole interview started with an intro piece showcasing critics only stating a number of falsehood on the organization and failing to disclose their personal interests (such as the woman candidly failing to disclose that she was suing for 70 million buck or the other guy who was on record advising people to kidnap scientologists).
This was known to the journalist who nevertheless failed to mention it to the audience. So the whole show was a set-up. It wasn’t done to inform the American public at all.
It was carefully calculated to make Scientology look bad…and failed, because any rational person looking at these videos is bound to realize that Scientology wasn’t treated fairly and that there is more to it than media would have you believe.
Comment by Sylver — February 9, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
No Sylver, that’s not at all how I interpreted. I found it to be extremely revealing into the personal character of David Miscavige, his aggressive nature, his appalling paranoia and anti-charismatic figure.
I felt physically ill after having to watch him squirm and gesticulate wildly about how he and the COS have been maligned by its detractors.
Comment by D — February 9, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
Excellent k, as always you never fail to deliver! Thank you
Comment by D — February 9, 2008 @ 3:10 pm
GlossLip blows as usual on this one.
Comment by Gutter — February 9, 2008 @ 5:46 pm
Sylver, if a news program were to attempt to disclose every single possible piece of information which could POSSIBLY reflect upon the content thereof, the actual content would have to be only about two minutes. Take a look at the lies that David Miscavige told during the interview itself:
* He claimed that there was a bill in 1955 which would give psychiatrists a million acres of land in Alaska on which they would build a “Siberia, U.S.A.” for the purpose of housing mental patients and that the bill would also have weakened the commitment laws to make it easier to commit people. Miscavige claimed that it was “in no small part thanks to the Church of Scientology [that] that bill was killed in Congress”.
Now, Nightline could have disclosed to the audience that in fact the bill would have increased protection against being committed. At that time, four years before Alaska even became a state, the Alaska Territorial government had almost no facilities or resources for the treatment of the mentally ill; if someone was suspected to be a danger to themselves or others, the established procedure was for them to be transported to Oregon for handling there. One of the goals of the bill was to reform the archaic commitment procedures that were already in place; the bill would have made it possible to establish in-state resources for making mental health assessments. Where would the funding for these services come from? Nightline could have disclosed that the bill proposed that it be funded the way that many proposals in Alaska had been funded previously, and would be funded subsequently. The bill proposed the establishment of a land-trust: a grant of land that could be leased or sold at the discretion of the territorial government, with all the revenues resulting from such lease or sale going to the funding of Alaska’s mental health services. That’s where the million acres of land came in; the idea that the bill called for the construction of anything on that land was simply a figment of the imagination of the groups which fought the bill.
Finally, Nightline could have disclosed the most egregious untruth David Miscavige told about the bill: namely, claiming that the Church of Scientology deserved credit for “killing” the bill when the bill passed in 1956. That’s right, the bill passed — unanimously. Did the hypothesized “Siberia U.S.A.” ever come into existence? Obviously not.
* Miscavige also claimed that the Food and Drug Administration sent an informant into Scientology’s Seattle “Org” who “murdered the head of [Scientology's] organization”.
Nightline could have disclosed that the only head of Scientology’s Seattle Org who has been murdered was William J. Fisk, who was murdered by Russell Edward Johnson, and could have disclosed that no evidence has ever been presented which suggests that Russell Edward Johnson, a carpenter and building contractor was an informant for the FDA or for any other government agency. Nightline could have disclosed what Miscavige failed to about the murder of Fisk: Fisk was not only sleeping with Johnson’s wife (who had joined Scientology to get help with her marital problems) but had bragged to Johnson about it. Nightline could certainly have disclosed this information, instead of simply letting Miscavige’s unsupported nonsense about Johnson (who served fifteen years in prison for the killing) being an informant sent in by the Food and Drug Administration go unanswered.
* Miscavige claimed that “the studies that brought about the Holocaust of the Jews, that … justified killing the Jews, they were done at the Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry in Leipzig, Germany, and that justified the killing of six million people.”
Nightline could certainly have disclosed that the Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry did not even exist until 1966.
Now, if you’re going to say Nightline was obviously biased against Scientology because it did not disclose that terminally ill Roxanne Friend was suing the Church of Scientology, and because it did not itself make the unsupported accusation against Richard Behar that Miscavige would later make anyways, that Behar had advocated kidnapping Scientologists, then you must say that Nightline was also obviously biased towards Scientology because it failed to disclose that what David Miscavige said about the Church of Scientology getting the Alaska Mental Health Bill “killed” and about the Max Planck Institute participating in a genocide that took place two decades before it existed were completely false.
Here’s a proposed alternative — David Miscavige has to take responsibility for himself. If he came across as a liar, just maybe it’s because he lied. If he came across as a paranoid, just maybe it’s because he aired his paranoid fantasies to the whole nation.
Comment by AF — February 9, 2008 @ 5:48 pm
If Glosslip blows, it has nothing to do with this story, or the writing here in general…if I ain’t being too subtle.
We’re sophisticated ladies and you “Gutter” only carry fecal matter and detritus.
Comment by d — February 9, 2008 @ 5:58 pm
Watching DM flounder through this interview is physically painful.
Comment by Anonymous — February 9, 2008 @ 7:17 pm
[...] The video at Gawker that kicked it all off: Click to open A sample of GlossLip’s stories: Click to open Some of The Defamer’s coverage: Click to [...]
Pingback by Gwangi Valley - The Lost Blog of the Gwangi » Blog Archive » And the gossip sites shall lead them — February 9, 2008 @ 7:43 pm
http://www.Scientology-lies.com/whatswrong.html
Why do people protest Scientology?
Scientology locks people up.
There are over two dozen allegations that Scientology has held individuals against their will.These illegal acts were not committed by rogue Scientologists - they were in accordance with Scientology policy.
Scientology held Lisa McPherson against her will for 17 days, according to Scientology’s own logs. She died in their custody. The state of Florida decided not to prosecute the two felony charges filed against Scientology in her death after Scientology used relentless pressure to get the medical examiner to make a partial change in the cause of death. Her estate sued Scientology for wrongful death and false imprisonment; the suit was settled in May 2004, with all details kept confidential..
Scientology lies.
Lying to people to get their money isn’t just unethical -it’s illegal. It’s called fraud.
Scientology claims there is a scientific basis for all their processes. There isn’t. Scientology claims it’s compatible with other belief systems, like Christianity. It’s not. Scientology claims to be the fastest-growing religion in the world, with 8 million members, utilizing infallible technology developed by a physicist and war hero. They’re lying.
Scientology is breaking the law.
In addition to false imprisonment and fraud, Scientology engages in the illegal practice of medicine by prescribing auditing and vitamins to replace legally-prescribed medical treatment.
Scientology also extorts money from its members, telling them it’s scientifically proven that their lives will become worse if they don’t pay for expensive auditing.
Scientology has a long, well-documented history of criminal activities.
High-ranking Scientology executives were convicted of extremely serious crimes in the United States for breaking into government offices and stealing documents. Founder L. Ron Hubbard was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in that case, and the defendants stated in their stipulation of evidence that, at all times, he acted as supervisor of the illegal activities.
Scientology itself was convicted of similar crimes in Canada. When Scientology then tried to destroy the reputation of the prosecutor in the case, they were hit with the biggest libel fine in Canadian history.
L. Ron Hubbard was convicted of fraud in France.
Scientology attacks free speech.
Scientology says that “public statements against Scientology or Scientologists,” “writing anti-Scientology letters to the press,” and “testifying as a hostile witness against Scientology in public” are all “Suppressive Acts” - high crimes, according to ” Introduction to Scientology Ethics.” The book goes on to say that people who do such things “cannot be granted the rights and beingness ordinarily accorded rational beings.”
In accordance with this policy (and others like it), Scientology has tried to silence all criticism:
Scientology framed journalist Paulette Cooper for sending bomb threats after she wrote The Scandal of Scientology.
Scientology sued book and magazine publishers - including Time magazine - in an attempt to prevent any future criticism by scaring publishers with the prospect of enormous court costs.
Scientology sued critics for copyright infringement, even though the copyrights to some of the documents in question may have been lost to the public domain years ago.
Scientology tried to unilaterally shut down the alt.religion.sciento
logy newsgroup - unintentionally bringing Scientology to the attention of hundreds of free-speech advocates.
Scientology imposes gag orders in settlement agreements, preventing those who have suffered most from telling the world what they know.
Scientology routinely threatens legal action against critics, alleging copyright infringement, trademark dilution, and dissemination of trade secrets - often in situations in which its allegations are baseless.
Scientology hurts people.
Scientology routinely pressures members into spending more money than they can afford on expensive courses.
Scientology’s disconnection policy destroys families.
Scientology betrays the trust of well-intentioned people by falsely claiming to have a scientifically-proven technology to save the world. Scientology ruthlessly attacks its critics with everything from frame-ups to unannounced visits to the homes of family members to libellous fliers distributed to their neighbors and business associates.
And sometimes, Scientologists die under suspicious circumstances. They even target their own kind.
Buddhism, Mormonism, Islamic, Judiasm, Christianity, etc., have not required bloodshed or money for Centuries. To have such draconian administration is simply morally not right today by any standard of good you want to pluck from.
Comment by Lisa McPherson — February 10, 2008 @ 5:12 pm
#25/AF, excellent research.
Sylver or any other scientologist, your response?
Comment by Nonya — February 10, 2008 @ 6:28 pm