<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Scientology</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/scientology/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 06:12:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>My Scientology excommunication</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/05/my_scientology_excommunication/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/05/my_scientology_excommunication/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12914453</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was one of the world's top 50 church members -- then one mistake changed my life]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They made a lovely couple, my parents. Mildred was as gracious as she was elegant and beautiful. Paul was as gallant as he was rugged and handsome. My mom thought she was the luckiest girl in the world. My dad never got it, how a class act like Mildred could fall for a palooka like him.</p><p>Around the time that my teenaged mom-to-be was making googly eyes at my dad-to-be, L. Ron Hubbard — like my father — was in his early twenties. While my father was setting up a medical practice on the Jersey Shore, Ron Hubbard was reportedly off tramping through Asia, learning Eastern religions and customs. All of us in Scientology believed this about Ron. He was an explorer, an intrepid researcher into the darkest depths and starry heights of the human soul. He engineered and built the Bridge to Total Freedom.</p><p>Lafayette Ronald Hubbard was a rugged guy, just like my dad.</p><p>He was born on March 13, 1911, in Tilden, Nebraska. My dad was born just a few months later, on May 19. If you believe the authorized biography, Ron grew up out by a tribe of Blackfoot peoples. By the time he was four, he’d already learned all the Blackfoot lore there was to learn, so tribal elders made him a full-fledged blood brother. What’s more, at thirteen years old, Ron became the youngest Eagle Scout in the history of Scouting. So goes the authorized biography, and as Scientologists, we believed it.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/05/my_scientology_excommunication/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/05/my_scientology_excommunication/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>115</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Did Anonymous hack Colbert?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/03/01/colbert_report_anonymous_attack/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/03/01/colbert_report_anonymous_attack/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 14:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hacking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Morning Clip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stephen Colbert]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Colbert Report]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2011/03/01/colbert_report_anonymous_attack</guid>
		<description><![CDATA["Suddenly I'm wearing  a mask? I don't understand. It wasn't even 'Eyes Wide Shut' Wednesday"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stephen Colbert dedicated the first portion of his show last night to a nefarious breach of security at the Report -- when an image of Guy Fawkes (i.e., the masked dude from "V for Vendetta") was super-imposed over his face during a broadcast last week. Colbert blamed the intrusion on the hacker collective <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2011/02/25/westboro_baptist_church_anonymous_website">Anonymous</a>, a shadowy organization that also targeted Americans for Prosperity, the political action group headed by the Koch brothers. To Anonymous, Stephen said:</p><blockquote>
<p>Lay off Americans for Prosperity. If you've got a problem with the Koch brothers, go after them the democratic way -- by funneling millions of dollars into a front organization to launch attack ads against teachers.</p>
</blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/03/01/colbert_report_anonymous_attack/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/03/01/colbert_report_anonymous_attack/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Church of Scientology&#8217;s friends in Washington</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/02/10/scientology_friends_dc/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/02/10/scientology_friends_dc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2011 13:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/02/10/scientology_friends_dc</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The embattled religious organization has allies in Congress, though it lobbies quietly]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did you read that New Yorker piece on the Church of Scientology? You <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/14/110214fa_fact_wright">really have to.</a> I know it's long, but it's worth it. If you're short on time, <a href="http://theweek.com/article/index/211894/the-new-yorkers-scientology-expose-7-key-revelations">there are a lot of summaries.</a></p><p>Along with some incredible new details, there are the previously reported stories of rampant physical abuse of underlings by church head David Miscavige, the church's "Sea Org" full of underage workers signed to "billion-year contracts" performing manual labor for little to no money, and the tales of the church separating families and milking its members for thousands of dollars. The church is even under investigation by the FBI for what could amount to human trafficking.</p><p>And, of course, like any other moneymaking American enterprise, it has good friends in Washington.</p><p>As far as I know, the only Scientologist to ever actually serve in Congress was the late Sonny Bono. His widow, Mary Bono Mack, who inherited his seat, attended courses, but never took to the religion.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/02/10/scientology_friends_dc/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/02/10/scientology_friends_dc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>54</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why do so many people dislike Katie Holmes?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/02/04/katie_holmes_kennedys_hate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/02/04/katie_holmes_kennedys_hate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 20:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Celebrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sundance Film Festival]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Cruise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life//feature/2011/02/04/katie_holmes_kennedys_hate</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The star inspires vitriol -- and fascination -- because she's the perfect mom we all know]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is Katie Holmes truly so terrible? Well, she's probably not all that great. In recent weeks, she's been the subject of toxic rumors that her new thriller, "Son of No One," was <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/25/us-sundance-bomb-idUSTRE70O0M620110125">such a bomb</a> at Sundance that audience members stormed out -- a tale eagerly lapped up by legitimate news organizations like Reuters. The Hollywood Reporter observed, "When Katie showed up on screen, there was <a href="http://www.celebrity-gossip.net/katie-holmes/katie-holmes%E2%80%99-sundance-bomb-464170">a collective groan.</a> She plays the wife of a Queens cop and she was completely miscast. They have her cursing a lot. And when she swore, there were chuckles."&#160; And even though other critics who attended the screening have since <a href="http://omg.yahoo.com/blogs/thefamous/katie-holmes-victim-of-smear-campaign/506">offered differing accounts</a> of what really went on, the fact that such a rumor started -- and took off with such vigor -- gives an indication of how little Holmes is regarded by audiences and the press.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/02/04/katie_holmes_kennedys_hate/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/02/04/katie_holmes_kennedys_hate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>114</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sharron Angle hides from reporters, defends Scientology to conservative press</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/06/16/angle_hiding/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/06/16/angle_hiding/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2010 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harry Reid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2010/06/16/angle_hiding</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nevada's great Tea Party hope ducks the D.C. media, tells right-wing press that Scientologists are victims of bias]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nevada Republican nominee for Senate Sharron Angle <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/06/15/angle_ensign">was in DC yesterday</a> to lunch with the Senate GOP and meet the Republican campaign committee. She did not have time to answer any questions about anything from the press. The mainstream press, anyway. She did sit down with the National Review.</p><p>Angle's <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/15/AR2010061505895_2.html?hpid=topnews">one comment to the assembled members of the mainstream press was "yes,"</a> in response to basically being asked whether she enjoyed lunch.</p><p>The reason Angle is unable to answer questions is because she is an Outsider. Also, she only has two full-time staffers. She needs a couple weeks with the campaign pros behind Scott Brown's victory before she's qualified to say what she believes to reporters. Once she owns a truck, you can ask all the question you want, lame stream media.</p><p>Texas Republican John Cornyn explained:</p><blockquote>
<p>And Cornyn acknowledged that Angle is not yet prepared for what he considers to be a coming onslaught of attention. "I don't think anybody would be prepared for a race. where 20 or 30 million dollars is going to be spent in negative advertising," he said. "It's going to take a few weeks, I would think, but, you know, it's really up to her."</p>
</blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/06/16/angle_hiding/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/06/16/angle_hiding/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Scientology and coerced abortions</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/06/15/scientology_forced_abortions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/06/15/scientology_forced_abortions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 00:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadsheet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pregnancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet//2010/06/14/scientology_forced_abortions</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Former members say they were interrogated, isolated and forced to perform manual labor until they gave in]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Church of Scientology coerces women working for its central management organization into getting abortions, a disturbing new <a href="http://www.tampabay.com/news/scientology/no-kids-allowed/1101759">investigation</a> from the St. Petersburg Times alleges. The two-part story profiles several former members of Scientology's highest religious order, Sea Org, who tell stories of intimidation, isolation and forced manual labor for pregnant women who decided to continue their pregnancies. Scientology has no official position on abortion, but if these alarming allegations are true, they place the organization firmly in the anti-choice camp.</p><p>The accounts in the story come from several women who became pregnant while they were Sea Org members during the 1990s. Sea Org provides its 6,000 members with housing, food and medical care, and in exchange they perform jobs ranging from cleaning to communications to "auditing,&#8221; or serving as spiritual counselors. Scientologists who join Sea Org sign billion-year contracts indicating their intention to serve the church throughout this and future lifetimes (commitment-phobes need not apply).</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/06/15/scientology_forced_abortions/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/06/15/scientology_forced_abortions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Thursday link dump: Stop whatever you imagine the ACLU is doing</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/28/thursday_link_dump_4/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/28/thursday_link_dump_4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2010 00:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACLU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gulf Oil Spill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2010/05/27/thursday_link_dump</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[BP's mistakes, Scientology, and restoring liberty by restricting direct democracy]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<ul>
<li>
      <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704026204575266560930780190.html?mod=wsj_share_twitter">A must-read Wall Street Journal story on the decisions BP made that led to the eruption at the Deepwater Horizon rig.</a>
    </li>
<li>Oh, good, that weird new idea to get rid of the direct election of senators <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/05/kill-the-17th-amendment/57323/">is catching on.</a></li>
<li>Former Republican Connecticut US Senate candidate Rob Simmons <a href="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODkxZmFlMmM4OTRkNTUwMjgwYzYzM2EwODkxNjc0ZjY">does not support Linda McMahon.</a></li>
<li>Another must-read! This one is about <a href="http://trueslant.com/conorfriedersdorf/2010/05/27/inside-the-information-loop/#">the right-wing misinformation loop</a> and the ACLU.</li>
<li>Sharron Angle, Tea Party favorite for Harry Reid's seat, <a href="http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/sharron-angle-attacked-for-alleged-scientology-ties.php">is under attack for some weird Scientology connections.</a></li>
</ul><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/05/28/thursday_link_dump_4/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/05/28/thursday_link_dump_4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Scientology to the rescue</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/01/26/travolta_scientology_to_haiti/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/01/26/travolta_scientology_to_haiti/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 21:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Haiti]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Shirley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life//feature/2010/01/26/travolta_scientology_to_haiti</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[John Travolta is bringing much-needed supplies to Haiti. The problem? He's also bringing L. Ron Hubbard]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the wake of the spectacular outpouring of relief to the people of Haiti, a number of generous benefactors have emerged. But few are alighting upon Port-au-Prince with quite as much baggage &#8211; for good and otherwise &#8211; as John Travolta.</p><p>Yesterday the 55-year-old actor did something extraordinary: He got off his ass and flew his own Boeing 707 from Florida down to Haiti with an astonishing four tons of ready-to-eat military rations and medical supplies. It is a gesture no one would look askance at in and of itself, particularly at a time when relief organizations like Doctors Without Borders have been having persistent <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100126/ap_on_en_mo/cb_haiti_travolta">problems getting into the beleaguered country</a>.&#160; We may raise a skeptical eyebrow at the fact that the famous movie star &#8211; and his lovely wife, Kelly Preston &#8211; just happened to arrive prepared for a camera-ready scene of unloading cargo, but it's doubtful anyone in Haiti right now is saying, "Medical supplies? We would, but you <em>really sucked</em> in 'Old Dogs.'"</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/01/26/travolta_scientology_to_haiti/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/01/26/travolta_scientology_to_haiti/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>59</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Church of Scientology convicted of fraud in France</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2009/10/27/eu_france_scientology/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2009/10/27/eu_france_scientology/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 07:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Cruise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/2009/10/27/eu_france_scientology</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Paris court convicted the Church of Scientology of fraud and fined it more than euro600,000 ($900,000) on Tuesday but stopped short of banning the group as prosecutors had demanded. The group&#8217;s French branch immediately announced it would appeal the verdict. The court convicted the Church of Scientology&#8217;s French office, its library and six of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Paris court convicted the Church of Scientology of fraud and fined it more than euro600,000 ($900,000) on Tuesday but stopped short of banning the group as prosecutors had demanded.</p><p>The group's French branch immediately announced it would appeal the verdict.</p><p>The court convicted the Church of Scientology's French office, its library and six of its leaders of organized fraud. Investigators said the group pressured members into paying large sums of money for questionable financial gain and used "commercial harassment" against recruits.</p><p>The group was fined euro400,000 ($600,000) and the library euro200,000. Four of the leaders were given suspended sentences of between 10 months and two years. The other two were given fines of euro1,000 and euro2,000.</p><p>However, the court did not order the Church of Scientology to shut down, ruling that it would be likely to continue its activities anyway "outside any legal framework."</p><p>Prosecutors had urged that the group be dissolved in France and fined euro2 million ($3 million).</p><p>The verdict is "an Inquisition of modern times," said Scientology spokeswoman Agnes Bron, referring to efforts to rout out heretics of the Roman Catholic Church in centuries past.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2009/10/27/eu_france_scientology/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2009/10/27/eu_france_scientology/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Scientology&#8217;s no good, very bad week</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2009/10/26/scientology_haggis/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2009/10/26/scientology_haggis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/entertainment/feature/2009/10/26/scientology_haggis</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oscar-winner Paul Haggis breaks with the church. Leader Tommy Davis storms off "Nightline." Whither Tom Cruise?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When Paul Haggis, the writer of <a href="http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/movies/review/2004/12/15/million_dollar/index.html">"Million Dollar Baby"</a> and <a href="http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/movies/review/2005/05/06/crash/index.html">"Crash,"</a> kicked his faith to the curb after 35 years, he did so as only an Oscar-winning scribe could: with a badass screed. His <a href="http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/">resignation letter</a>, dated Aug. 19, emerged on ex-Scientologist Mark Rathburn's blog yesterday and promptly went viral.</p><p>In his letter, Haggis explains, "for ten months now I have been writing to ask you to make a public statement denouncing the actions of the Church of Scientology of San Diego. Their public sponsorship of Proposition 8, a hate-filled legislation that succeeded in taking away the civil rights of gay and lesbian citizens of California -- rights that were granted them by the Supreme Court of our state -- shames us." Though the Church claims not to dictate personal sexual practices and has several openly gay members, it's perhaps no coincidence that Scientology also has a reputation as Hollywood's biggest closet, with gay rumors persistently dogging famous members like Tom Cruise and John Travolta.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2009/10/26/scientology_haggis/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2009/10/26/scientology_haggis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>79</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The big secret about secret societies</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2008/01/28/secret_societies/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2008/01/28/secret_societies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nonfiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/books/review/2008/01/28/secret_societies</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Step right up, folks, and read the one true guide to Western and Eastern esoteric societies from the Freemasons to the Rosicrucians. Relics, totems and secret handshakes revealed!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Why are secret societies so secretive? The automatic assumption is that they're up to no good. At the Bohemian Grove, rich and powerful men convene to hatch plots and direct world events -- or so we're told, by people infuriated at having been excluded from the California campground. But, hey, wouldn't a corporate boardroom or a private dining suite at a pricey restaurant do just as well for that sort of high-level skulduggery -- and attract much less press? On the other hand, it's probably a lot easier to sneak a van full of hookers into a campground than into 30 Rockefeller Center or the Four Seasons. </p><p> In either case, their discretion has backfired. It may well be that the activities of the world's most notorious secret societies consist of little more than grown men cavorting in drag and performing dopey ceremonies under the influence of strong drink. Whatever -- the public will never believe it's all innocuous. Secrecy turns out to be the most effective attention-getting, fantasy-inciting trick in the book. Remember how the neighbor kid's previously unimpressive playhouse became instantly and irresistibly fascinating the moment he taped a "Keep Out" sign to the door? If a cabal of evil masterminds <i>really</i> wanted to keep their fiendish plans quiet, they'd cook them up in a Christian Science Reading Room and hand out fliers on street corners. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2008/01/28/secret_societies/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2008/01/28/secret_societies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>144</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A friend is involved in Scientology. Should I interfere?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/12/04/scientology_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/12/04/scientology_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2007 11:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Since You Asked]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life/since_you_asked//2007/12/04/scientology</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I've studied fringe religious movements and I know the dangers they pose. What is my role here?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>Dear Cary,</b> </p><p><b> As an undergraduate, I picked up a hobby of reading about fringe <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/religion/">religious</a> movements. As a result, I became pretty familiar with the <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/scientology/">Church of Scientology,</a> to the extent that a layman hobbyist can be. I also casually knew a couple of folks involved, though I wouldn't call them close friends. </b> </p><p><b> Anyway, I recently developed a friendship with someone, and as it was going along, I picked up fairly quickly from the things that she was discussing that she was a Scientologist. If I wasn't as familiar with the church as I am, I probably wouldn't have figured it out, so it wasn't as if she was trying to tell me.</b> </p><p><b> I chose to ask her about it, and my worry about her involvement showed. I didn't bring up any of the really horrible facts about the actions of the church, but I did honestly express my concern about the organization. She told in general terms how she had been recruited, and that she had been involved for over a year, but not many other details. However, she gives the impression to all but her closest friends and family that she is not a Scientologist. She also believed I was invading her privacy and was pretty angry.</b> </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/12/04/scientology_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/12/04/scientology_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>124</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Girls just want to have frills (and cats)</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2006/11/15/vows_3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2006/11/15/vows_3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadsheet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Cruise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet//2006/11/15/vows</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Cruise-Holmes wedding may feature some quirky vows.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here at Broadsheet we've been planning to turn a blind eye to the upcoming nuptials between Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise. Sure, we've <a href="http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2005/11/16/klein/index.html">written</a> <a href="http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2006/05/01/cruise/index.html">about</a> TomKat <a href="http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2006/03/29/katie_silent_birth/index.html">now</a> and <a href="http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2006/05/05/kate/index.html">again,</a> but those were darker times, back before the midterm elections. Today, however, our best-laid plans were scuttled by Reuters <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/15/AR2006111500257.html" target="_blank">reporting</a> that "when Tom Cruise marries Katie Holmes this weekend, like many a devout Scientologist, he may promise to provide her with 'a pan, a comb, perhaps a cat.'" How can we overlook the fact that Operating Thetans pledge their love using language straight out of <a href="http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2005/12/06/goodnight_moon/index.html">"Goodnight Moon"</a>? </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2006/11/15/vows_3/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2006/11/15/vows_3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>It&#8217;s a Suri world, after all</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2006/09/07/suri_photos/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2006/09/07/suri_photos/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 10:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Cruise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life//feature/2006/09/07/suri_photos</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With all that pressure, could it be that Hollywood's No. 1 baby is already dieting? Can baby say "Photoshop"?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My first thought when Katie Couric revealed Suri Cruise's photo last night on "CBS Evening News" was, <i>I wonder if that baby has been Photoshopped to look like she has lost 20 pounds.</i> After all, news <a target="new" href="http://www.drkoop.com/newsdetail/93/534291.html"> reports</a> last week were actually blaming babies for being born too fat. Since Suri is the arguably the biggest baby in Hollywood -- and the pressures of beauty standards being so heavy -- it can't be too early for her to start a low-fat, high-protein diet along with a healthful regimen of lifting weighted baby books and <a target="new" href="http://www.doctorbob.com/06_6_29news1.html">toys</a> before she's even ambulatory. </p><p>Yep, Katie came through with the world's biggest get. Bigger than George Bush, who got bumped to night No. 2 to make way for Suri. The only bigger guest Katie could have booked was Osama bin Laden. He hasn't been seen, well, longer than... Dick Cheney. Where has Cheney been? I like to the think that Osama and Dick are hanging out in plain sight at a Rally's in Van Nuys. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2006/09/07/suri_photos/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2006/09/07/suri_photos/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>But, Suriously&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2006/09/07/suri_rumors/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2006/09/07/suri_rumors/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Cruise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life//feature/2006/09/07/suri_rumors</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Does Suri come from a casting agent's office, or a spaceship ... or Asia?  The blogosphere spins the rumor mill.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>"The stuff they say about Suri?!" Katie Holmes exclaims in Vanity Fair's October issue. "You shouldn't say that about us, and you can't say that about my child." </p><p> But Katie ... they <i>can</i> say that about your child. And they have been, and they will. We've all heard them -- the conspiracy theories to make tangible the vague doubt about Katie and Tom's bundle of joy. Although the mainstream press often hints at public skepticism, the best of the theories are found not in news stories -- Tom Cruise's publicist isn't <i>that</i> bad -- but on message boards and blogs all over the Internet. One only needs to press the "cached" link on a Google search to find smug declarations of what's really going on with TomKat and Suri. </p><p> Early on, the mystery of Katie's incredible shrinking/growing stomach led to fake-pregnancy rumors on Web sites, some with fun "<a target="new" href="http://www.bloggingbaby.com/2006/01/23/is-katie-holmes-faking-her-pregnancy/">Click to watch it grow and shrink"</a> links on Katie's belly. Others were wondering whether Katie was <a target="new" href="http://drinkthis.typepad.com/answer_this/katie_holmes/index.html">articifically inseminated</a> with the sperm of Scientology's founder, L. Ron Hubbard. A reporter appearing on CNN said it was a well-known fact that he had preserved his sperm. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2006/09/07/suri_rumors/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2006/09/07/suri_rumors/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Free Katie Holmes!</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2006/03/29/katie_silent_birth/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2006/03/29/katie_silent_birth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadsheet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Cruise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet//2006/03/29/katie_silent_birth</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Confirmed: Bride of Scientology expected to give birth in silence.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It appears that the rumors are true. No, not the rumors that Katie Holmes was impregnated by L. Ron Hubbard's frozen sperm, though we're still checking the Smoking Gun for that one every day. The rumors that according to the practice of Scientology -- of which her boyfriend, Dawson's Creep, is a devout follower -- Katie Holmes intends to give birth not only without drugs (as many mothers choose to do) but also in silence (to which many mothers who've given birth without drugs say, "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!"). That is, if you believe the Sun, which <a target="new" href="http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006140204,00.html">reports</a> -- with photos! -- that Scientology "elders" have brought six-foot signs into the couple's Hollywood mansion bearing admonitions such as, "Be silent and make all physical movements slow and understandable." Also somewhere in the fine print: Newborns may not receive medical testing -- <i>or be spoken to</i> -- for seven days. Why not? Because, as an <a target="new" href=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9620245/>earlier</a> MSNBC story put it, "babies go through so much pain during the birth, they shouldn't have to experience any further discomfort or sensory experience that could return later in life to haunt them." Such as getting the silent treatment from their parents? </p><p>Broadsheet's Special Forces units are currently mobilizing to infiltrate the couple's home and strategically place an additional sign reading "Run, Katie, run!" ("And whatever you do, don't talk to <a target="new" href=http://www.smh.com.au/news/people/nude-britney-sculpture-outcry/2006/03/29/1143441193205.html>this guy.</a>") </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2006/03/29/katie_silent_birth/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2006/03/29/katie_silent_birth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>38</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tom Cruise won&#8217;t come out of the closet</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2006/03/18/stone_parker/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2006/03/18/stone_parker/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Mar 2006 13:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Park]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/entertainment/video_dog/comedy/2006/03/18/stone_parker</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The "South Park" episode that is driving Tom Cruise and other Scientologists mad.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It's a little unclear exactly what's going on between Comedy Central, "South Park" creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone, and pocket-sized Uber-Thetan, Tom Cruise. <a target="new">Variety</a> claimed that Comedy Central pulled the recent "South Park" episode that skewered Scientology out of rotation, and that "blog reports" (and we know how reliable they are!) were claiming that Comedy Central buckled to the threats of Cruise, <a target="new">a famous Scientologist</a>. A Cruise spokesperson, though, denies that he made any such threat. Then, Parker and Stone issued this statement to Variety: </p><p> "So, Scientology, you may have won THIS battle, but the million-year war for earth has just begun! Temporarily anozinizing our episode will NOT stop us from keeping Thetans forever trapped in your pitiful man-bodies. Curses and drat! You have obstructed us for now, but your feeble bid to save humanity will fail! Hail Xenu!!!" </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2006/03/18/stone_parker/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2006/03/18/stone_parker/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Holy fem-bot, Batman!</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2005/07/13/katie/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2005/07/13/katie/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2005 15:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Cruise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life//feature/2005/07/13/katie</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Katie Holmes is turning into a zombie in front of our eyes. Pass the popcorn.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It will come as news to no one that there's something hinky about the Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes Relationship Extravaganza. It's a hilarious sham, so transparently ripe for satire that it -- along with a couple of shark attacks and a hurricane -- has managed to distract us from things like the Downing Street memo and how many people are dying in Iraq. </p><p> Hooray for Hollywood! Providing sweet relief from reality since World War I! </p><p> But it's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye. And if the cover story in August's <a target="new" href="http://www.style.com/w/feat_story/070505/full_page.html">W magazine</a> is any indication, <a href="/ent/movies/review/2005/06/15/batman_begins/">"Batman Begins"</a> star Holmes has had both her peepers gouged from her gamine face by a sharp Tom Cruise stick. Reading the piece, it's hard to ignore the rather awkward position we, consumers of America's cotton-candy media, have gotten ourselves into. Holmes' goring just officially stopped being fun or funny; suddenly we're not simply fans or spectators, we're accessories, standing idly by in uncomfortable paralysis as she gets her body and mind snatched on a national stage. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2005/07/13/katie/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2005/07/13/katie/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Scientology&#8217;s war on psychiatry</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2005/07/01/sci_psy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2005/07/01/sci_psy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2005 22:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Cruise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/07/01/sci_psy</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The controversial church, whose founder called shrinks "terrorists" and which labels mental illness a fraud, is closer than you think to implanting its extreme beliefs in the nation's laws and schools.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It may be easy to dismiss Tom Cruise's recent outbursts against psychiatry as the ravings of an egomaniacal celebrity. Comedians have certainly had a field day with Cruise, a fervent disciple of the Church of Scientology, ever since he scolded Brooke Shields for taking prescribed medication to treat her postpartum depression and lectured Matt Lauer, host of the "Today" show, that psychiatry was a "pseudoscience" and antidepressant drugs were worthless because there is "no such thing as a chemical imbalance." "No?" wisecracked Lewis Black on "The Daily Show," watching a video clip of Cruise berating Lauer, "Then what do you call what's happening to you right now?" </p><p>But the Church of Scientology's war on psychiatry is no joke. For decades, Scientologists have maintained that the very notion of mental illness is a fraud. They base this belief on the views of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard, who proclaimed that psychiatry was an evil enterprise, a form of terrorism, and the cause of crime. Now, they're attempting to enshrine their contempt for psychiatry in laws across the country. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2005/07/01/sci_psy/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2005/07/01/sci_psy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The press vs. Scientology</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2005/06/30/scientology_5/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2005/06/30/scientology_5/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/06/30/scientology</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After years of conflict, the church and the media seem to have reached a truce. Is it because Scientology has become less confrontational -- or because the press is scared?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For anyone interested in the <a target="new" href="http://www.scientology.org">Church of Scientology,</a> the May 6, 1991, issue of Time magazine remains a milestone in news coverage. For those who back the church, it ran an outrageously biased account that eventually led to a libel suit by the church -- later dismissed -- and prompted Scientology leaders to launch a counterspin that continues today. </p><p>But for many who have long questioned the church, founded by the late L. Ron Hubbard and embraced by a string of Hollywood stars, that article represents one of the genuinely aggressive reports on the organization. And their concern is that what subsequently happened to Time -- and to other publications that tried to peek behind the church's cheerful exterior -- explains why few investigative reports on the church have followed. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2005/06/30/scientology_5/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2005/06/30/scientology_5/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

