Opinions on Tom Cruise...

Cruise is not doing anything new, his scientology thing has been around long time, he's getting trashed in the media because he made claims about 9/11, this is the way it works. You would be his fans but for this media attention which didn't exist few yrs ago, it was all 'top bloke'. he's screwed up, upset a few people in high places and now the media is gunning for him

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

is this because you have a huge crush on him ToR

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

actaully I've never liked the bloke, not for his acting or his looks. I can just see a bunch of brainwashed peeps getting rather hysterical about a celeb who has expressed a few opinions, and a few odd ones the media has allegedly reported, I still await the proof of these articles and their authenticity and truth?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

For the last time, I'm not biased against scientology. That's not what this thread is about, it's about just Cruise.

The Interviewer is asking him questions, that's how an interview works, he's getting hot headed, and trying to force his opinion on the interviewer by not leaving room for debate. He keeps correcting Lauer's remarks without addressing them directly.

And instead of you asking us for proof, why don't you give us his proof that he's actually studied psychiatry? That he has any idea what he's talking about? We know for a fact that his statement about the nonexistence of chemical imbalances is false, and all the other things he obviously professed as facts, he did not back up with evidence.

By the way, that interview is proof, that's the official site for MSNBC, who did interview him.

Cutting yourself off from the media isn't the most efficient way to protect yourself from being biased, in my opinion, because the entire media isn't biased, there's a lot of information it portrays that I would rather not be left out on.

 

He's richer than all of you, so he's better than you.

Jaybee.

 

you are hysterical over nothing, the interviewer was goading cruise on one topic, this is what I see, you see something I don't beleive even exists and nothing does cruise say in this interview is odd? Cruise doesn't need to be expert in psychiatry to be anti ritalin! I am anti Ritalin, re me being cut off from media, I don't consider reading about celeb gossip important, because ITS NOT!

Meanwhile since when do celebs go for interviews to be engaged in debate? They don't, the routine is they are treated like stars. They are asked questions and they are allowed to reply then the questioner moves onto next subject. Cruise got annoyed becuase he was being treated like political candidate and having his belief system disected, ITS NOT IMPORTANT, nothing this guy says is improtant, don't you get it? He is a celebrity nothing more. His personal views are personal until someone makes them public, making them public is media's choice! Don't expect Cruise to have to present proof, in the real world people DO NOT behave the way posters on sci forums DO, with requests for peer reviwed papers every time you express an opinion.
We all to some larger or less degree have ill informed opinions about things, he is un fortunate in that he wants to appear informed while being goaded into explaining in yet greater detail a matter he knows a good amount about but perhaps not enough to earn him a PHD. get over it. To err is human!


I still await proof re these alleged 'silent birth' claims! PROOF.

 

Tom Cruise's-> (thats how long it is, ladies)

 

Then why are you on this thread?

No, the interviewer was asking more questions so he could have a greater understanding about whatever was going on (questions are asked so they can be answered, no?), and Cruise spat in his face and corrected him constantly.

"I've studied psychiatry and have deduced that ritalin is bad." Well, why? "I know and you don't." doesn't answer the question. Lauer basically asked, "well, why do you think so when it's helped these people?" and Cruise bypassed that entire question and told him no, you're wrong, it's bad. Then he insinuated that because Lauer knew people that had benefitted from such drugs, that he was advocating it, which he wasn't. He was stating a point to try and get Cruise to ANSWER A QUESTION. That's what interviews are for, answering questions.

 

REPEATING the same line of questioning is actually NOT how celebs are customarily inertviewed, you are seeing this entirely inaccurately. Meanwhile you asked me why am I on this thread, you made a statement asking if anyone agreeed this man was a dick? I replied I don't personally know him and haven't yet (STILL) seen any proof that he admits to saying the inflamatory remarks he is accused of saying which everyone seems so upset about.

Claiming to know about psychiatry and being anti psychotic drugs does not a dick make however believing every bullshit story you read does a dick make.

you want a 100% agreement with your unsupported point of views then i suggest you don't post them in sci forums as 100% agreement is not something you can expoect. you can expect to have to demonstrate what you claim is accurate and to date you have NOT done that.

PROVE Cruise said he expects his wife to be silent during child birth.

 

What would you accept as proof, Tor?

Maybe you could browse these news articles until you find one from a reputable source.


Or are they all fabricated in the hopes of bringing down your diminuitive hero?

 

Thank you. It is reassuring to know that at least one person is willing to stand with me on this.

 

learn to read Roman, I am no fan of cruise as I have already stated, just highly bemused by the absolute hysterics of some of these postings relating to what is commonly known as media gossip and commonly known to be false.

 

I think this thread is a fine example of media brain washing, a very dangerous tool with such easily led sheep hanging on their every word.

I have not said the claims are false, just indicated that without any proof ie (For Romans benefit) recorded conversation from cruise confirming he made these comments (silent child birth ones) and they were NOT said in jest but meant.

I had thought most mature minds saw through media manipulation but apparantly not. It is the 'truth' apparantly, quite suprising though that sci forum posters who are always demaniding evidence re everything else can so easily accept what the media say with out ANY!

 

Thanks for link Roman , a reasonable article on what 'silent birth is', actually NOT so odd after all, but merely another NEW AGE method of birthing, not scientology invention.

"BETHESDA, Md.

My parents definitely thought I was a bit crazy when I mentioned a hypnobirth," Adrienne Pratt said. Ms. Pratt, eight months pregnant, and her husband, Armando Guato, gathered with two other expectant couples on Easter Sunday afternoon to learn a newly popular technique for helping women remain serene during childbirth.

For many, the word "hypnosis" conjures up an image of a swinging pendant lulling a hapless woman into a trance. But hypnobirth is not about inducing a trance; it is a combination of relaxation, breathing and visualization techniques to control labor and birthing pain, said Linette Landa, the hypnobirth teacher.

Slow, smooth breathing counteracts what Ms. Landa called "the fear-tension-pain syndrome," the notion that women fear birth, so their muscles tense up, resulting in pain.

"We're all about the subconscious mind," said Ms. Landa, a tall, tranquil woman who teaches yoga. "The conscious mind is out of the picture."

Move over, Lamaze. Today, many women are reaching out to a variety of other drug-free childbirth alternatives, including aromatherapy and birthing pools, according to experts on gynecology and obstetrics"

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/27/fashion/thursdaystyles/27hypno.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

apparantly even if he did make those comments, its actually nothing odd. So I'm still waiting for something that makes the man generate such hysterics?

 

ToR im not a motherfucking sheep you cheap rate whore

 

gosh sheep, keep calm.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_birth

"Silent birth refers to a birthing procedure advocated by Scientologists"

"particularly one where no pain or anguish is verbally expressed by the mother while experiencing labour pains or the birth itself and where no directions such as "push, push" are given by medical practitioners or the father. It entails that there be no music or talking during the birth. Scientology doctrine also bars poking or prodding of the newborn for medical tests. According to Scientology doctrine, this is because "any words spoken are recorded in the reactive mind and can have an aberrative effect on the mother and the child.""

If you haven't already I recommend that you read up on Scientology's founder. It will give you a good idea about their mindset. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Ron_Hubbard

 

..

Interesting...the complete removal of birth trauma. I wonder if we weren't already programmed with the ability to be born without either mental or physical pain...and if not, how much far could mankind advance? Will we seem like conflicted, crazed humans compared to NBT (Non birth-traumatised) society??

Jaybee.

 

You win this thread.

 

How come movie stars are so short?