Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 01.00.45

Here we see famed scientology ‘Bell-End’, John Alex Wood and his trusty OSA babes ready to throw down some hot distraction tech on any comment out there critical of their beloved cult and, for some reason, tiny tommy Cruise in particular, below are just a couple of examples of how inane and pathetic they are… probably the most famed OSAbot is ‘Elle’ with her trusty companion ‘Probably’  (the truly disturbed one, ed) … there’s also a ‘Fine Fettle’ who never seems to be able post the same time as ‘Probably’, heh, heh.

What these poor souls don’t realise is that that their persecution/distraction tech hasn’t been updated since the 80’s and rather than shut-up and let the comment thread die they decide to do the only thing they know “attack”… which only compounds how batshit looney they are…

But back to Mr Bell-End; observing his activities over the years it’s pretty obvious that he’s OSA, and dumbass OSA at that!

Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 03.10.45



Screen Shot 2015-09-01 at 03.07.14 Screen Shot 2015-09-01 at 03.07.34

if there’s one thing scientologists are good at it’s stalking….Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 03.38.54

All the Pythons hate him and he was asked to take down his Facebook Python dating site by them… he refused!… he met this girl on the site and, sadly, she’s now a fully fledged scientologist… previous dealings with her on social media demonstrates that she’s already brainwashed and speaking like one of them and refuses to read anything critical about her ‘church’…. Remember, this is a guy who knows that the Pythons don’t like him and now he wants to set up a “platform” that is essentially stalking and has the stupidity to ask John Cleese’s daughter… sheesh.. BELL-END!!


Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 03.47.03

Not sure how old this is but he’s obviously a bang-up PR whiz and brilliant at getting funding!

Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 03.28.48

Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 03.23.49

UPDATE: the idiots sent me this comment here… they seem to have me confused with someone else

Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 23.25.11

John’s PR Company is bit of a sad affair

Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 03.33.23

and he’s on Wiki to set people straight….


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

My name is John Wood and I am a Scientologist living in East GrinsteadWest Sussex, UK.

Personal blogs: and

My main reason for becoming a Wikipedia editor was to correct falsehoods that have unfortunately found their way in here about Scientology, its founder, L. Ron Hubbard, its secular activities such as NarcononCriminonCCHR and Dianetics. These falsehoods were added by people who obviously have no respect for Wikipedia’s reliable sources guidlines and are using Wikipedia as a PR tool for their own ends.

I also have many other interests. In fact, I am interested in pretty much everything! My other main interest, however, is all things Monty Python, especially Terry Gilliam‘s 1985 Brazil that I am passionate about. It’s been a bit of a life project for me (well, since 1985 anyway) in that I have met half of the cast as well as its director and visited nearly all of its filming locations.

I own which offers outsourced social media management services i.e. it manages blogs, Twitter profiles, Facebook Pages, Google Plus Pages, YouTube Channels, Pinterest profiles, Flickr profiles and LinkedIn business pages on behalf of its clients. It also offers internet marketing and PR services in the form of submissions to press release, directory and forthcoming event sites.

I went to Cranleigh School and then the University of Surrey where I gained a BSc (Hon) in Hotel & Catering Management. I worked in hotels for a while, including London’s 5-star The May Fair Hotel but then progressed into the computer industry (in sales and marketing) in the late 80s when the very idea of a PC with a hard drive (as opposed to just floppy drives) was exciting! I’ve sold Novell networks, Silicon Graphics computers and web applications in my time. I am also a former staff member of Narconon UK.

if you’re wondering who John Alex Wood is check out my earlier post here (and Sally, don’t think I’ve forgotten about you… you’ll be our star story in due course)


… but what happens when the cult pays a PR company to put out total fabricated scientology crap without bothering to check that it has a Disqus comment set-up that accepts pics and links…. this!

Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 04.59.59Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 05.00.45Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 05.01.06


…sigh, it’s not as if we don’t try and reason and help them…Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 22.29.01 Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 22.30.38


It’s no wonder these poor most OSA souls behave like this when they have deeply brain-embedded indoctrine like this:

Handling Reporters

The Church of Scientology provides training drills to control interviews, including methods of evasive answering, changing the subject, and bullying the interviewer if necessary in order to present the Scientology message.

View a scanned image of page 1

B O A R D   T E C H N I C A L   B U L L E T I N


HCO Bulletin of 10 DECEMBER 1969

Not for distribution



  1. Answering non loaded questions
    To train a PRO to answer such questions with confidence and simplicity, as are often asked by reporters. EG., What is Scientology ®? What’s Clear [glossary],OT [glossary]? How does an E-Meter work?

    The PRO and ‘reporter’ sit across a table facing each other. The ‘reporter’ asks the questions and the PRO must answer, without a long communication lag and in a way which readily communicates to the reporter. The drill is coached as in the TRs.

    The drill is passed when the PRO is confident he can answer the basic questions asked about Scientology.

  2. No Answer
    To train a PRO to give a ‘no answer’ to questions he has no wish to answer directly.

    To begin with the reporter reading the questions asked LRH by ‘The Sun’ reporter Victor Chapple—and the PRO reads LRH’s answers. This is just to accustom him to the idea of ‘no answer’.

    Then using different questions, the PRO gives ‘no answers’. The trick is to appear to answer the question by giving generalized statements in simple terms so that the reporter doesn’t realize his question hasn’t been answered.

    The PRO should be completely causative  [glossary] over the communication and end it with certainty, so that the reporter gets this and goes on to the next question.

  3. Non-sequitur events
    To enable a PRO to practice getting his “message” across and tag it on to any current event. Also a preparation for the day when our PROs will be asked to comment on current events.

    One person has a newspaper in front of him and reads out a headline (and perhaps a line or two of the story if necessary for the PRO’s understanding of it). Ask the PRO what comment he would like to make on it. The PRO should comment briefly and lead from this into his message.

    The drill is passed when the PRO can tack a message on to virtually any event, smoothly and with reality.

    View a scanned image of page 2

  4. Handling a suppressive T.V. Interviewer
    To train a PRO to get his message across in spite of the ‘interviewer’, in the few short minutes usually available on television. This is so that … million people have no doubts after the programme what the Scientologist stands for and what he is against.

    The PRO and interviewer face each other and the interviewer asks questions. The PRO attaches his message in varying forms to as many answers as possible. If the interviewer is SP he must be introverted [glossary] as in the hat [glossary] write up, and then the PRO has his “say”. The interview has been successful when the PRO has got his message across to his satisfaction.

  5. Handling an SP
    1. By overwhelm
      To train a PRO to be able to establish Ethics [glossary] presence over an SP reporter if the occasion arises, by such things as shouting, banging, pointing, swearing. To do this completely causatively until the poor reporter is ‘caved in [glossary]‘.

      The reporter and PRO sit across a table facing each other and the reporter asks SP questions. The PRO overwhelms without judgement in answer to the SP question until he does it with reality, causativeness and the overwhelm really reaches the reporter. TR 1 is a part of this drill — there is no point saying the words if they don’t reach the other guy.

    2. By being knowingly covertly hostile
      To train the PRO to handle an SP reporter by word alone without the use of force as in (a). He uses the word as a rapier and plunges it at the reporter, so that the reporter introverts and drops the question.

      The PRO and reporter sit across a table and the reporter asks SP type questions.

      The PRO observes what would be a button in relation to the question asked and throws this back with good TR 1 so that it reaches home. If the reporter is introverted the PRO is successful. If the reporter persists with the same question the PRO should not re-press the same button — it obviously didn’t work. He should drop it and use another one. If the PRO cannot think of a snide reply the reporter should just say “flunk, you haven’t handled me. Start — ” or some such remark — but should not tell the PRO what to say. When the confusion has come off the PRO will be able to handle and have a big win.

      The drill is completed when the PRO is willing to create a cave in with an accurate snide remark, question or statement.

    3. By stalling for time
      To train a PRO to maintain his confront and composure when given some SP sensational news by a reporter, of which he has no prior knowledge.

      The reporter asks the PRO for his comments on an entheta [glossary] situation involving a Scientologist.

      View a scanned image of page 3

      The PRO maintains his ethics presence and duplicates the reporter’s nasty angle to his satisfaction. He then stalls for time and gets the reporter to wait a few minutes or hours or so (whatever is necessary) while he checks his facts.

      The drill is passed when the PRO is confident that he could not be taken off guard by a reporter by being presented by an unknown situation.

    4. By handling the reporter in front of you (verbal Karate)
      To train a PRO to handle the reporter in front of him, with judgement in present time.

      The PRO and the reporter sit across a table facing each other. The PRO is asked a miscellany of questions [sic] If it is a genuine question, he can answer it, if possible tacking his message on to the reply. If the question puts him the least bit at effect [glossary], he takes this flow [glossary] and turns it towards the reporter with an even greater velocity. He does this either by a snide remark, question or comment, or by physical overwhelm, whichever seems the right action to establish ethics presence.

      He should never allow himself to be put at effect, and should not tolerate it even for an instant, but immediately attack back.

      The drill is passed when the PRO no longer uses a machine or method to handle the reporter — but he is totally there, confident and handling.

Comment If your student experiences difficulty on these Trs one of two things are out: a) Scientology TRs 0–IV are not flat [glossary] or b) he slipped through a previous Reporter TR without a weakness or button [glossary] on him being found and flattened.

History These drills have been evolved by PRO WW to train anyone on a gradient scale to handle any situation a reporter could pose. They are based on theHCOP/L 3.2.69 Public Image which states “Don’t defend Scn, attack bad conditions and bad hats!”

By Sheila Gaiman

From the hat write up of
David Gaiman
PR Chief WW

Reissued as BTB by
Flag Mission 1234 I/C
CPO Andrea Lewis

for the

Copyright (c) 1969, 1975
by L. Ron Hubbard


Screen Shot 2015-08-31 at 01.41.02


Top 10 Movies Inspired by Scientology! A quick introduction: Scientology, in case their beliefs are still insanely confusing to you, teaches that humans are immortal creatures who have been brainwashed by the souls of alien creatures known as “thetans.” In order to free oneself from their influence, they must undergo a series of counseling sessions which are made available after a number of fees are paid. Seems pretty straight-forward.

… shame this one didn’t make the list….


  • Midget

    Dear Mark Parry Maddocks.. I have your address and my client is in the process of suing you. I also have a crime reference number and the police will be sent anything you post as further examples of harassment. At the moment because your hosting companies are so cheap.. – They are slow at processing. Once libelous and defamatory statements have been put online, this is enough evidence to take you to court. Anything else posted to harrass my client (as your hosting company has already sent you a warning) will also be used as evidence in your case.

    Please take this as a formal and legal warning.

    • noseinabk


      I hope the real Mr. Maddocks sues you for harassment for posting his name here and publicly threatening to sue him.

    • Mark Parry-Maddocks


      Your preposterous “warning” is neither formal nor legal, merely an empty threat directed at entirely the wrong person. Pretending to be some sort of legal eagle cuts no ice with me (or the proprietor of this website): you are self-evidently just a contemptibly ignorant Scientology troll.

      If I were a spiteful person, I would tell you to go and stick your head back up either David Miscavige’s or Peter Hodkin’s backsides—where it so evidently belongs—but as I am not a spiteful person, I shan’t do that. Instead, I refer you to the answer given in “Arkell v. Pressdram” (1971).

  • Nevermore

    Does John Cleese know that weirdo is stalking his daughter? Worse, trying to use her to get business from her father? Mind you, I’m sure Eric Idle has told the Pythons all about him…

  • GrandEclectus

    I tweeted to Camilla about uptone, that she should talk to Eric Idle about him.
    She favorited my tweet.

    You can also see her exasperation with him as he continues to hound her. I’m sure she’ll be fine. I hope the whole Python troupe is informed about him. Eric Idle was speaking for them all when he said JAW’s dating site was NOT supported in any way by Python,

    His company has 6 clients in 10 years, no one of any fame, none. He has nothing to offer either her or John Cleese. He can’t even handle his own public relations, let alone that of a millionaire international celebrity with a decades long career like Cleese. The fact that he’s approaching and hounding people shows insanely poor judgment on his part. Like LRH, Wood is attempting to pass himself off as something he is not.

    The “bucket loads” phrase is funny. One of John’s cronies told Eric Idle that he had alienated “bucket loads” of his fans. Unreal. They were trolling Idle so bad, he told them to all to eff off.

    I feel deeply sorry for Gemma Harris. She is sadly delusional. She may have converted to Scientology after meeting John through his “date and switch” FB page.

    Reminds me of another beautiful young lady who did that for a guy. Ended in disaster; her career was derailed, her life ripped apart by the cult. That woman doing well now that she’s healing from the cult, but she went through hell. Sadly Gemma won’t listen to any warnings. Scientology has her brain.

    Anyway, thanks again for a great collection of articles Danny! You rock!

  • …. come on Sally Eason [Western, Spangler and all those other names you have]… have another go at us so I have an excuse to post my next bellend post