« Father catches son smoking pot, puts ‘Guitar Hero 3’ on eBay
Will Ferrell to yuck it up with college kids on tour »

Beck has only positive things to say about Scientology

December 10, 2007 3:42 p.m. by Jeff Skruck
In a new article in Vanity Fair this month, musician/Scientologist Beck denies that he once tried to get away from the cult and that he told this to a filmmaker who claimed he wanted to be part of her movie project, according to The Playlist. Filmmaker Theresa Duncan, who died from an overdose that’s believed to be a suicide, claimed that Beck had told her that he had plans to leave the church. She also claimed that he wanted to take part in her film project, “Alice Underground,” back in 2003, but that he backed out because he feared that the Church of Scientology wouldn’t like it.
"[Beck] really, really tried to get away…[by] using going to NY to be in 'Alice Underground,' " Duncan e-mailed a friend in late 2006, published in the VF article."He told me he wanted to leave the cult desperately, and this [is] what they do when someone knows that."

Beck tells Vanity Fair that couldn’t be further from the truth. 

"That's ridiculous. Totally false. We never met to discuss the film," Beck said. "I did explain to her I wasn't looking to act right then, and with the album, tour schedule, and a baby on the way, it wouldn't be feasible."

He’s also quoted in Vanity Fair saying, “Had we been closer and discussed anything as personal as religion, I would have had only positive things to say about Scientology.”
 
After years of speculation, Beck admitted a couple of years ago that he was a Scientologist. Here’s an excerpt on his explanation of the religion to Irish Sunday Tribune in 2005, which might take you aback because Beck’s usually quite an astute fellow:

"What it actually is is just sort of, uh, you know, I think it's about philosophy and sort of, uh, all these kinds of, you know, ideals that are common to a lot of religions." 
“There's nothing fantastical. . . just a real deep grassroots concerted effort for humanitarian causes. I don't know if you know the stuff they have. It's unbelievable the stuff they are doing. Education . . . they have free centres all over the place for poor kids. They have the number one drug rehabilitation programme in the entire world (called Narconon). It has a 90-something % success rate. . . When you look at the actual facts and not what's conjured in people's minds that's all bullshit to me because I've actually seen stuff first hand." 

I’d give you my thoughts on the religion here if the church’s paranoid security wing didn’t scare the crap out of me. [Playlist]

Posted in: BECK
Stumble It!
Beck »
Artist Page

 More features, reviews, photos, mp3s, and video

Beck works with Charlotte Gainsbourg on her new album
Gamma Ray ft. Jay Reatard (Live in L.A.) (Video)
Youthless (Video)
Gamma Ray (Video)
Modern Guilt (Video)
 
More news »

42 Responses

December 10, 2007 at 5:18 p.m.

Any good sense look at Scientology shows you how they help individuals and communities. What is amazing is the amount of idiotic information complied by critics. Narconon shows a high success rate for people who finish the program. But critics quote a government study from years ago where only a small percent of the starters finished, and claim Narconon has a low success rate. Critics present evaluated information about the Church; you have to do a little exploration to understand the actual situation.
December 10, 2007 at 6 p.m.

Scientologists discard any information given by critics. The sheeple involved in Scientology are happy to follow the "church's" policies whether right or wrong. The members have been brainwashed into accepting any view given to them through repeated phrases and suggestive questioning. They literally have no other choice than to proclaim that L. Ron Hubbard knew everything, was never wrong, and that there could never be a perfect world without Scientology. L Ron, by the way, was a compulsive liar who wrote all of his books high on whatever drugs he could locate. His research is nonexistant and has never been reviewed by the scientific community. Scientology is a scam and a lie, paid for by US taxpayers tax dollars. They are for profit and should be taxed as though they are.
December 10, 2007 at 6:08 p.m.

my operating thetan level is off the charts. l. ron hubbard aint got sh!t on me.
December 10, 2007 at 6:23 p.m.

Scientology has helped so many people, but how many stories have you seen in the media that follow that theme? I think making something incredible or sensational or controversial is a very common thing in the media and, it is unfortunate see something as helpful as Scientology be on the receipt point of the same type of treatment. The most incredible thing about scientology, actually, is how effective it is at helping people resolve their problems and achieve their goals.
December 10, 2007 at 8:18 p.m.

If your goal is to go into debt with nothing to show for it then $cientology is what you're looking for. They'll also alienate, and separate you from all your friends and family as an add bonus.

L Ron Hubbard was a douche bag of the highest order. I'll laugh in the face of anyone that says they follow $cientology.
December 10, 2007 at 8:34 p.m.

actually GM Omnis thinks the most incredible thing about scientology is that crazy compound they got in southern california with mad gunz, and bitches, and swimming pools. I wonder if there's a room for A-list members to make it rain copies of dianetics.
December 10, 2007 at 10:04 p.m.

Scientology is the fastest growing religion on earth today and I've personally seen the research and discoveries of Hubbard get hundreds of kids off of drugs and become productive members of the community. The misinformation and misconceptions about Scientology are spread by people that have either been thrown out for unethical behavior or simply are ignorant of what Scientology actually is.
December 11, 2007 at 12:38 a.m.

You want to know the truth?

I've lived it for over 20 years now and these have been the aims of Scientology-
December 11, 2007 at 2:21 a.m.

these comments are scarier than the mystery about theresa duncan's last few months - the cult programming - repeated jargon, etc - exhibited in these posts is ALARMING
December 11, 2007 at 2:53 a.m.

Scientology(TM) is a registered trademarked logo Church of Spiritual Technology. All religious texts are owned and copyrighted by Church of Spiritual Technology. Don't bother reading the legal disclaimers on our bible "Dianetics", or our e-meter. We promise we can fix all your problems but just in case you'll be required to sign our legal waivers so you can't sue us, and if necessary allow us to hold you against your will. Oh, we also can't tell you anything about Scientology, the only way to learn is to join. Then you can pay as you go. We do promise you TOTAL FREEDOM.

We're the fastest growing religion on this planet, Teegeeack, cough, I mean Earth. I can't show you the data that proves what I say, but trust me it WORKS. After eight hours doing training routines you won't know what hit you. I mean you'll feel great. I know I did, it's scienterrific.! Don't be fooled by those critics like Consumer Reports for example. Or those ex member that we've ripped off. They'll say anything, they're just mad because we won't let them see their families anymore. L Ron Hubbard made it very clear on how we're supposed to treat our enemies (suppressive persons) he said "always attack, never defend" and "never treat a war like a skirmish, always treat a skirmish like a war". As you can tell we're just like every other main stream religion out there. So join us for eternal time. OR ELSE...
December 11, 2007 at 9:07 a.m.

Actually, Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world today. Even if $cientology grew by 10% a year, it's coming off such a small base that the numbers are extremely small. In the UK, census results showed fewer than 300 $cientologists even though the
December 11, 2007 at 9:47 a.m.

When I was a scientologist, I had, like Beck the guy who believes he was inhabited by thousands of alien space cooties, almost only good things to say about the cult. Now, I've a very different experience:that cult is sinister, fraudulous, and brainwasheds its clientele to the point of ruining most of them.
December 11, 2007 at 9:48 a.m.

Some of you have demonstrated in your comments here that the years of religious hatred and intolerance did not end in the 40's when Hitler died as most of us had hoped. Scientology is a religion that supports social betterment groups like Narconon which helps drug addicts, Criminon which helps criminals, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights which helps patients who have been exploited in the medical industry, Applied Scholastics which helps people learn how to learn and read and write, as well as many other betterment groups. Some of us will continue to try to do our best to make the world a better place and you "haters" can find something else to do, like attack social betterment groups with your free time.
December 11, 2007 at 10:34 a.m.

I was a Scientologist for almost 30 years. I worked in their dirty trick department (Office of Special Affairs) and
assisted the "Church" in trying to destroy those people that
spoke out against Scientology or attempted to expose them.

Most Scientologists have no idea what goes on behind the scenes. They pay their money and get "services" but have no clue as they are fed loads of PR and outright lies.

There is currently an Ex Scientologist message board where
many ex's that were posted in the upper management levels are now coming out and telling the truth.

The C of S hates it that people are now talking and forbids
their members to read about it.
December 11, 2007 at 10:40 a.m.

ChewyandBert
The misinformation and misconceptions about Scientology are spread by people that have either been thrown out for unethical behavior or simply are ignorant of what Scientology actually is.

The misconceptions and misinformation provided by people like you about Scientology,are either deluded and or brainwashed.Did you know L. Ron Hubbard?Were you in the Sea Org?
Check your facts!
Look on the internet,Operation Clambake,Lermanet.com.
Then we'll talk about ignorance
December 11, 2007 at 11:01 a.m.

Scientology's "social betterment" groups are recruitment fronts, or as the cult calls them, "feeder lines" into the "religion."

http://preview.tinyurl.com/2x3jps
December 11, 2007 at 11:26 a.m.

Would the Scientologists like to enlighten us on Lisa McPherson? Yeah, what a fantastic way to take care of people. Humanitarian religion of the century, here, folks.
December 11, 2007 at 1:24 p.m.

If Scientology, (or Dianetics, or Narconon,) is so effective, then where is the scientific research to support it?

If Scientology/Dianetics is as complete a science of the soul/mind as it seems to be claimed, then wouldn't it be theoretically possible to control someone with it? If you're being trained in the 'science', then how would you know you yourself weren't being controlled in the process?

When Hubbard describes the first trait of "antisocial personalities" as: "He or she speaks only in very broad generalities", isn't he himself speaking in very broad generalities? Doesn't he do it again, earlier, when he says "Crime and criminal acts are perpetrated by antisocial personalities"? (http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH11_1.HTM) Wouldn't that make him an antisocial personality? Wouldn't he be perpetrating crimes, by his own admission? (I know this last bit is a logical fallacy, but as long as we're indulging...)

How can an organization that claims to care about human rights have a forced labor camp? It's called Rehabilitation Project Force, and it's essentially a gulag. Ask your local Sea Org member.
December 11, 2007 at 3:51 p.m.

I don't expect to turn the anti Scientology posters here.

But check your head. The lives of many Scientolgist are dedicated to improving conditions and yhry work hard at that each day. If you have the same credentials but differences in approach or method we can talk about working together to solve the problems we all share.

Otherwise you seem like a bunch of ranting malcontents looking to have some fun bashing on someone or something could be blacks, muslims, gays whatever. Makes you feel important like Bill O'reily or any other blowhole. Your only impressing yourselves.

The talk deriding beliefs means very little. Who can argue, that's why it's called belief.

Some of you zealots sound like Islamic Fundamentalist and honestly, you are dramatizing the same abberations whether you know it or not. Read or re-read the book (Dianetics) and make sure you look up any words that you don't understand.

Let's talk about actions first if you can pass muster there.

Write back.
December 11, 2007 at 4:09 p.m.

Scientology is not based on science, only on classic pseudo-science. There are hundreds of therapies out there that claim to be able to cure diseases of both a medical and psychiatric nature that also claim to be based on scientific fact. I myself have experienced a couple of them. Many of them, like Narconon, claim to have efficacy rates exceeding 90%. That alone is a warning that all is not what it seems. The term scientology was originally coined by an author using it to refer to pseudo-science. If Scientology methodologies are so effective, and in saying this I refer to the methods of the Study Tech, Purification Rundown, etc, then why haven't they been adopted by mainstream institutions? Why aren't psychiatrists using e-meters? Why aren't most teachers using the Study Tech? Sure, there are a few here and there. There always are teachers, psychologists, medical doctors, etc, practicing crackpot therapies. So, if you want legitimacy, then submit yourself to scientific inquiry. This is how we do it in western society. If you're not willing to do this, then stop bitching about the fact that people aren't taking you seriously enough, or that people are criticizing you. We will take you seriously when you give us reason to.
December 11, 2007 at 9:20 p.m.

Perhaps Scientologists aren't worried about establishing legitimacy, but rather are much more concerned with making a difference when societal values, ethics, and morals are progressively worsening and nuclear holocaust is only one push of a button away. Fortunately for us, those of you that have been brave enough to post your ignorance here for the world to view haven't yet figured out atomic fission. Beck and the noble Scientologists named above will continue to do what we can to help save our planet despite what obstacles stand in our way including petty efforts to discredit all progress we have made so far and the leaps and bounds of future progress we will make. The rest of you, please continue to stay on your computers and dream up conspiracy theories, just as long as you stay out of our way.
December 11, 2007 at 11:20 p.m.

to everything guy just said...

no.
December 12, 2007 at 12:26 a.m.

whoa. it's almost like people are getting paid to post on this topic...
December 12, 2007 at 1:27 a.m.

The "Guy" post HAS to be sarcasm... doesn't it?

As for "making a difference when societal values, ethics, and morals are progressively worsening...," doesn't Scientology's stance as a rabidly profit-oriented organization lend some doubts as to the group's legitimacy as humble do-gooders?

Scientology blog posts on Prefix are the fastest growing Scientology blog posts on the internet.
December 12, 2007 at 3:39 a.m.

Guy is dead serious. He's a true believer. Guy, do you work for the Office of Special Affairs? Do they ever let you leave, Guy? Do you know what happened to Mike Rinder? Your commanding officer split. No one knows where he is now, but one things for sure he escaped the Co$.

Obscurity is part of the $cientology business model. Their organization can't stand up to scrutiny, so the only way they can draw new victims into their cult is by keeping their doctrine--if you can call it that--secret. Which is what they've always fought to do.

Most people don't know what $cientology is because they've copyrighted all their texts, and they sue to keep it a secret. What other religions do you know of that hides their doctrine? It's a very weird stance for a "church" to take.

Guy, I can't discredit $cientology. You have to have credibility first for me to discredit you. L Ron Hubbard, Dianetics, and $cientology has never gotten past the quack label, that they so rightly deserve. It's you my friend that must sit and dream up stories in order to defend they indefensible.
December 12, 2007 at 9:12 p.m.

Don't you people have anything better to do? Why do you care? What's true for you is what you have observed for yourself. Get over it.
December 13, 2007 at 1:16 a.m.

hey Night Watchmen, you're "attacking, never defending" just like L Ron Hubbard ordered.

"Attackers are simply an anti-Scientology propaganda agency so far as we are concerned. They have proven they want no facts and will only lie no matter what they discover. So BANISH all ideas that any fair hearing is intended and start our attack with their first breath. Never wait. Never talk about us - only them. Use their blood, sex, crime to get headlines. Don't use us.

I speak from 15 years of experience in this There has never yet been an attacker who was not reeking with crime. All we had to do was look for it and murder would come out.

They fear our Meter. They fear freedom. They fear the way we are growing. Why?

Because they have too much to hide."

[Hubbard, "Attacks on Scientology", HCO Policy Letter of 15 Feb 1966]"

I hope your scieno-sitter software did'nt block you from reading that.
December 13, 2007 at 1:35 a.m.

yes, night watchmen, exactly. and what i have observed is a twisted, secretive, profiteering, manipulative, totalitarian, vicious, occult organization with cheesy graphics assert itself over southern californian life with power-hungry, quasi-military tactics. that's what's true to me.
and i will take the time to post on a blog to offset the creepy, mindless, defensive, reactionary attacks of the lost souls who have found a home inside this dark organization.
i'll get over it when you sleazebags - and your blank-eyed, talent free, closet case 'celebrities' - are exposed (further) for what they are. white magick vs. black magick, a**hole.
December 13, 2007 at 2:49 a.m.

religion is fun.
December 13, 2007 at 3:09 a.m.

We should burn him at the stake! Burn him!

For Jesus, ya know?
December 14, 2007 at 3:35 p.m.

-If you wanted to leave the Church, would they let you go unharassed? Or would they declare you a Suppressive Person?

-Why do you have software installed that blocks entheta material? If Scientology was so obviously correct, wouldn't it stand up to criticism? Don't they trust you to make up your own mind about it?

-Since your involvement with Scientology has started, has the amount of time you've spent devoted to the Church increased? Have you ever been encouraged to drop other activities in favor of Scientology activities? Have you ever lived with other Scientologists? Have you ever worked for Scientology? Are you paid less than minimum wage, do they garner your paycheck because of the high costs of Scientology courses, books, tapes, etc? If you're "downstat", are you punished?

--For the non-Scientologists that might think Scientology should be left alone on grounds of religious freedom, consider that none of the critics here have attacked the belief system of Scientology, only the practices of the Church. Anyone is free to believe whatever they want, but they are not free to DO whatever they want. Scientology engages in coercive thought reform tactics, abuses its members and convinces them that it's their own fault (see Ethics violations), extracts exorbitant amounts of money from its members, and sues and harasses anyone they deem to be an enemy of the church-- and that's a big list that includes ANYONE who has ANY critical thoughts about them. They are a criminal organization in the business of selling mental health, masquerading as a religion. It is their ACTIONS that are under scrutiny, not their beliefs.

-That said, most Scientologists are probably genuinely good people that want to do good in this world. Those that perpetrate the crimes of Scientology are also its victims. Fighting for human rights is a noble cause, but when the only way they know how to do that is to promote Scientology, you have to wonder about the actual roots of their fervor.
December 14, 2007 at 4:27 p.m.

this is HILARIOUS. Daba should make this site an all-scientology site. You'd get mad hits.
December 14, 2007 at 6:18 p.m.

L. Ron is awesome. He can do it all. Wikipedia says he performed an abortion on his wife with a coat hanger, and lived off a diet of narcotic pills for three weeks.

I'm pretty sure none of us can do that, which is why we should follow the man's beliefs!
December 14, 2007 at 11:29 p.m.

"Come out of the closet, Tom." "I'm not in here." "Then how are you talking to me, Tom..."
December 16, 2007 at 12:19 a.m.

clearly the scientology wave has shoved aside what is important here - learning the specifics of jeremy blake's and theresa duncan's last months in los angeles.
beck may not be responsible for the deaths of these two kick ass artists, but if they were harrassed as they say they were - even if they exaggerated the threat and became paranoid as a result - then somebody IS.
and stalking, midnight phone calls, leaving dead cats on porches, etc is what scientologists call 'fair game' - it is not out of the question.
CONTINUE THE INVESTIGATION BLOGERATI
December 19, 2007 at 1:54 p.m.

Narconon has a 90% success rate in curing drug addicts who complete the program....... And what of all the people who do not complete the program? How successfull was the program for them? Do they not count in the statistics?

Don't drink the Cool Aid!
December 19, 2007 at 3:15 p.m.

CCHR, Narcanon, Crimanon, Applied Scholastics......these are all businesses, whose primary goal is to feed troubled minds into the grasp of scientology and secondary goal is to make money while doing it. If the primary goal of Scientology is to "clear" the planet, then for the goal of any service, offshoot, program or other affiliated organization cannot exist in vacuum

Not one of these programs is offered free to the downtrodden, the poor, the impoverished, the starving, the sick, the homeless. Where is the charity? Do Scientology ethics dictate that only those who can pay should be cured from addiction? If the "Technology" truly worked as it is claimed what a great tool, provide every addict a cure for free to demonstrate the power of LRH "tech" and COS would surely have a flood of new members. But in reality the Church is only truly interested in those people susceptible enough to believe their hocus pocus who also have the ability to pay top dollar.......what a surprise?
December 20, 2007 at 4:43 p.m.

Excellent point, Boomer, but don't make the mistake of using the word "ethics" in relation to Scientology though. Besides the fact that Scientology's practices are highly UNethical (see "Fair Game", the fact that separate standards are applied to members than to non-members), "ethics" means something very specific in Scientology-speak. It essentially boils down to a way of punishment system to enforce proper behavior. Proper behavior, of course, does not include independent thought.
December 30, 2007 at 4:40 p.m.

Beck is not being truthful. Read this:
"Kate at Fishbowl L.A.
( http://tinyurl.com/23a5mj )
jumps today in the "controversy" around (formidable) singer Beck and the double suicide of refined blogger and muse Theresa Duncan and her artist companion Jeremy Blake."

"Before their tragic end, the couple had accused Beck of derailing their film in project "Alice Underground," in which the singer was supposed to make his movie debut in 2003 or 2004. The film was never made and Theresa Duncan was convinced that Scientology had intimidated Beck (an adept of the sect) to renounce participating in the movie.[..]
A January Vanity Fair article quoted in yesterday's New York Post, asks Beck for reaction: he says that he was never supposed to play in the film and says that the couple's version of the events is "totally false."

"But Kate dug up ... my 2003 blog archive, which has a mention of a Beck interview for the Italian daily Corriere Della Sera, in which he says that he's about to shoot a movie inspired by Alice in Wonderland. It sounds a lot like the Theresa Duncan movie that he doesn't remember today as an advanced project. Is Beck's memory a tad scrambled? Thanks to the very same Beck fan who had mentioned the article to me back then, I just recovered the original piece in the CdS archive. Here is the excerpt about the movie, which may interest experts in "Beckology" and "Duncanology," followed by my rough translation (I only took 3 years of Italian in high school, so any correction is very welcome)."
Beck: August 5, 2003 interview with Sandra Cesarale in Corriere della Sera

The 33 year-old Californian singer-songwriter is preparing his debut in cinema – but not until he's wrapped up his European tour [...]

Why are you going to act?
“I’ve always been tempted by cinema. There was a time, 7 years ago, when I tried to do something for the big screen. John Waters even tried to cast me once."

How did it go?
"I would have loved to accept, since Waters makes the kind of movies I love: they're free, intelligent, surreal. But I had to decline because of touring. Other offers turned out to be too Hollywoodian."

And Wim Wenders?
"I adore him. I don't know how many times I've watched Wings of Desire."

What about [your debut] movie?
“It will be full of energy and full of characters: some kind of Alice in Wonderland set in the 70s. It still doesn’t have a title. The director is a friend of mine and it will be her directorial debut. But I trust her. We will begin shooting in the Fall.”
http://tinyurl.com/ys7ude
http://www.emmanuelle.net/2007/12/a_propos_de_beck_et_alice_unde.html

As one commenter proved:"Beck doesn't have an entirely monogamous relationship with the truth, especially when it comes to his church."
http://www.pagesix.com/celebrities/Dennis+Dennehy
http://archive.salon.com/people/col/reit/2001/05/03/npthurs/index.html
http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?t=24267&postorder=asc
February 11, 2008 at 1:54 p.m.

Why am I dead? Google me and see.
July 25, 2008 at 3:40 p.m.

http://www.krqe.com/Global/story.asp?S=8710783

WHAT IS THAT? WOW!
August 20, 2008 at 11:51 p.m.

All of you guys & gals...get a life ! ! ! ! Life is short , make the most of it. Do something good for someone today that you don't know, & say something kind. Also- if all you have is hate in your heart then you are already in hell.-Hotep

Add a comment


 

Prefix Logo

   Site Index RSS