"
Leaving out Nelson Mandela and Mother Teresa for a moment, do you mean that you doubt he received recognitions such as this? You seem to be making the point that because you cannot find these recognitions in the press that they are somehow forgeries or myths? Hey, they ain't the Nobel Peace Prize but they are not fake. You seem to be mixing up three issues; 1) whether Hubbard led an extraordinary life and 2) whether he received extraordinary recognition as a humanitarian and 3) how Scientologists generally regard Hubbard. Those issues are not related. I think that even critics will agree that Hubbard led an extraordinary life. And neither 1) nor 2) are really related to his ""personality"" either. I mean, was/is Mandela a bad husband? Did/does he have a temper? Who knows, you certainly won't find out in our article on him. But if someone decided to write a smear piece on him I am sure that they can find as many people that will say something bad about his ""personality"" as we see in our Hubbard pieces. Re 3) This is not about my having some ""faith"" or other, this is about how I have view Hubbard after intimate experience with his creations, Dianetics and Scientology and reading, IDK, millions of his words, and listening to hundreds of hours of lectures. I think that entitles me to have an opinion without getting all mystical and talking ""faith"". I am sorry that you are getting frustrated but the simple point is that so long as the ""truth"" about Hubbard as I see it (which, incidentally, factors in the criticisms) does not seem to be in the press then I will feel that what is there is undoubtedly one-sided. You want me to somehow persuade how that what I have come to feel based on a LOT of experience (and extensive research into the criticisms) is ""truer"" than what some journalist wrote after talking to some few critics? You know that I cannot do that. That is why I am left with ""Meh"".  "