Topic: Religion and Government
Scientology members have to defend themselves against Anonymous harassment Law enforcement's successes against Anonymous trigger off a strange propaganda machine.by Louanne Lee
(centrist libertarian)
Friday, October 31, 2008
News had it less than two weeks ago that Anonymous member Dmitryi Guzner agreed to charges of computer sabotage and attacks on the Church of Scientology websites as well as to pay $37,500 in restitution.
This was a starting point of a series of legal losses for Anonymous and following irate reactions of their propagandists. On Guzner, the Anonymous propaganda machine reacted with a press release issued the same day and stating that Scientology would not support same-sex marriage, an issue the Church of Scientology is not caring about much due to its lack of spiritual background.
The next in this series of bad news for Anonymous was Gregg Housh. Housh admitted at the Boston Municipal Court that there is enough evidence to warrant a finding of guilt that he was disturbing the peace and religious services of the Church of Scientology in Boston. Housh had been leading a group of people, all masked with "V for Vendetta" masks (somewhat resembling the appearance of the KKK, as a Boston citizen would put it later) at an "international protest" of Anonymous in Boston.
To be more precise, the Assistant District Attorney, Mr. Devlin, read out the charges as follows:
"Docket # 0086676. Date of offense: February 10th, 2008. On this date the defendant, Gregg Housh, willfully disturbed and interrupted religious worship taking place inside the Church of Scientology located at that location. He also caused disturbance of the peace with the same conduct."
To which Housh says:
JUDGE: Alright, a few moments ago sir the Assistant DA, Mr. Devlin, recited the facts of the case. Did you hear what he said the facts were? HOUSH: Yes. JUDGE: Do you admit those facts as being true? HOUSH: Yes. JUDGE: You admit to sufficient facts willingly, freely and voluntarily? HOUSH: Yes.
To circumvent a sentence of up to one year of jail he agreed with a 12-month probation ending 21 Oct 2009. The court clerk information Housh at the end of the hearing that he "Please see probation, sir, before you leave the courthouse today.".
A disaster for the Anonymous, whose propagandists struggle to keep their personal army going. On 23 October 2008 several new online identities are born to start a justification spree on the internet, trying to explain that Anonymous should celebrate now that "the Judge was effectively dismissing the charges" against Housh - an obvious lie spread to keep the troop moral up. In the case of Mr. Guzner they explain to the technically illiterate why it is not harmful to try to destroy computers one does not own, a claim that might be apparent only to those who do not own a computer or website.
The Anonymous propaganda machine however was speechless on the third of last weeks' Anonymous bad news, Donald Myers. Mr. Myers, also known as "Angry Gay Pope", was given a restraining order that requires him to stay at least 50 yards away from a female Scientologist he stalked and harassed. The order also requires Myers to stay away from the L. Ron Hubbard Life Exhibition at the Church of Scientology International building in Hollywood where the victim works, and stay 50 yards away from the woman's home. The restraining order lasts for 3 years unless renewed.
Myers was found to have engaged in acts of harassment against the young woman, after video evidence was submitted to the court showing Myers stalking her, taunting her with sexual slurs, and refusing repeated requests to leave her alone. Myers was also ordered by the court to turn over any firearms in his possession to the police.
Bad news accumulated further when Francois, known as "AnonOrange" (like "Agent Orange"), was arrested on 26 October 2008 for trespassing. He and three other Anonymous members had gathered for another "international protest" when he stepped inside the Church grounds and refused to leave. He was arrested and later "hauled off to jail" (per "AnonforPres" on Youtube).
The case is open to a lot of speculation, as it is not sure what he wanted to achieve. It can be safely assumed however that he is trying to create an incident for the Anonymous propaganda department to exploit.
October is almost over. We can be curious what November brings for "Anonymous". Remember remember, the 5th of November, the rhyme going along with Guy Fawkes day - whose face is depicted on the masks of Anonymous members - is used by Anonymous members who use paid promotion since weeks on internal Anonymous boards to spread that on 5th November 2008 "at midnight London time" a severe virus will be spread to "systematically dismantle the Church of Scientology".
Well, be shall be curious.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 27 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Louanne Lee only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Louanne Lee is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Wow, it's amazing how Scientologists have an innate inability to tell the truth. Why don't you tell the whole story about how AnonOrange was actually baited and jumped? Oh that's right, you can't, you have to convince yourself that whatever is true for you is true for the rest of us. Wake up sweetie, your lies are more transparent than saran wrap.
i present you: the church of Scientology. As Louanne so eloquently describes, a litigation machine in full motion. Stay tuned for more action from these fine individuals, who are only here to help mankind (as long as you belong to the part of mankind that donates to the church).
You can write until your blue in the face, it does nothing to slow down the flood of Scientologists leaving the cult. So if you don't mind, i'll go see what Paul 'Scooter' Scofield has to say about Narconon down under.He left your precious fake church last week and promised some juicy stories. And he would know:
"I've been on Narconon lines for most of the last 6 years (and many are the tales to come from that, boys and girls!) so I haven't been too familiar with what the current mindsets are, but the events are getting smaller and smaller and the courserooms looking mighty empty."
So much for growth in your 'fastest growing religion'
This is an example of the information I read from Scientology websites, Louanne. It's partial. There isn't enough here to call it unbiased.
Compare what you've written about Dmitriy Guzner to what I've written about him. There was so much more to the story. You've added in something about "a series of legal losses", and then another about "press releases" and a "propaganda machine" which is unfounded. How do these people have the ability to create their own press (let alone offer press releases)? You admitted yourself that the media ignores them.
Your article about Donald Myers is closer to what happened, except you still lean towards the idea that this was some sort of sexual harrassment even though Myers is a homosexual. You've also ignore the antiSLAPP ruling from the secondary lawsuit filed.
The story about Francois is the most subversive, both he and a female friend were assaulted (badly) by your church's security guards; Francois was lured into bushes and beaten while a female witness fought for her life while being pinned against their vehicle. You didnt think that was important enough to add?
That case being open to speculation doesn't merit that it's an ongoing investigation against the security guards and the arresting officer.
Finally the speculation about November 5th ... The planned protests in November are quite evident and it won't be on the 5th as I've read. The link you've provided talks about a Cult of Xenu and something called the Xenu Virus, but it didn't seem to be in english.
Posted By: Linda Weiland
Date: 2008-10-31 07:14:05
"Hacking Scientology" / the "Xenu Virus" is just a stunt. Nothing bad or illegal is going to happen. They're just trying to freak out those who don't get the joke.
LOL, some moron gets himself busted for a DDOS. His problem.
Gregg and Anon Orange get it for what, tresspass and a not very serious one at that. Anon was entrapped, which our videos will show. Gregg should not have gone into the org, which we warned against doing. Angry Gay Pope went too far and now he has to pay for it as well. What he did was more stupid than criminal and honestly he didn't mean the lady harm but he was too pushy. You see we can admit when people in Anon screw up. We don't try to hide it like Scientology does. Like when Scientology tried to cover up the rape of Tommy Gorman's wife. Or the wrongful death of Lisa McPherson who died locked in a room againt her will and covered in roach bites. Or that woman who got decapitated when her car hit a piece of equipment that Scientology workers were moving at night with NO LIGHTS. Your response is to either deny it or pay someone money to make it go away.
Is our morale broken? Of course not. We continue to protest and we will fight on. Most of those guys above did something dumb and it serves as a lesson to protesters to keep their nose clean during protests and not to go over the line and be overzealous when protesting.
Anon Orange was set up and stepping over a line in the ground was not a warrant for Scientologists to form a mob and beat him. He was lured back there by a flare thrown at his car. A flare thrown during a level 5 fire emergency in that area no less. Anon Orange has become in a way, a martyr for the cause rather than an embarassment. The Scientology luring of him into a mob beating is having the opposite effect and now more people are talking about rejoining the protests who had grown weary months ago. In fact there is even talk of a massive protest that will happen early next year. Be interesting to see how Scientology reacts this time? More speakers playing that noise that is bothering people in Hemet? Are they going to try to set more fires around people's cars? Throw more punches? It certainly will be an interesting spectacle, that is for sure.
I know from working with you guys in the past months that you are no moral and no loyalty. You been saying it all along:
“We are the face of chaos and the harbingers of judgment. We'll laugh in the face of tragedy. We'll mock those who are in pain. We ruin the lives of other people simply because we can. Hundreds die in a plane crash. We laugh. The nation mourns over a school shooting, we laugh. We're the embodiment of humanity with no remorse, no caring, no love, or no sense of morality.”
Ref: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFjU8bZR19A (29 July 2007)
I didn't complain. I simply pointed out you are an idiot who believes whatever the LHR machine tellls you to. LOL at that quote too. That's awesome that you would fall for old spiel from Encyclopedia Dramatica. I think scilons are the only people who take ED seriously.
I'm not complaining, nor anyone else I think. I'm just trying to say, "So what?" to your article. It doesn't matter, or affect Anonymous. See Anons aren't a cult of greed, like the CoS (Time Magazine said this not me).
Plus, all I hear from CoS is come on down into your local org, see for yourself what we are all about. So why is it tresspassing when an Anon actually does this? Didn't CoS tell them to?
The following is a bloodcurtling piece of horror from some poor hang glider who ended up in the wrong place in Hemet by accident and was kidnapped by Scientology. Thankfully his friends went to the sherriff who rescued him. AO was lucky he didn't end up in a metal box in the desert heat either. Or murdered behind the compound.
This was posted in a hang gliding forum in 2001: I don't know when it was originally written.
This is all pretty funny in a way. At the moment I am completing a Ph.D. in Geology at the University of California, Riverside. My field area is the San Jacinto Valley in Riverside County...just east of Riverside California. `Ron Hubbard' has a `compound' smack in the middle of my field area. Perhaps you will find what I know about this compound to be interesting.
The compound has a very `nice' sounding name like `Golden Studios' or something like that....I'll catch the offical sign next time I am down there. It is heavily gated and the guards are armed (semi-automatic rifles). It is also heavily barbed in places. Additionally there are signs extending for a couple of miles around the compound that say STAY OUT! etc. etc.. Now this is no big deal because there are a lot of places with no tresspassing signs...but wait til you hear this... The compound is flanked to the norteast by very high and steep mountains.
Actually the compound is located smack on top of the San Jacinto Fault (another story, another time). To the southwest the compound opens into the San Jacinto Basin. The mountains to the northeast also include public property...as such hang gliders use this area as a launch to some pretty spectacular rides over the valley. My brother lived in Hemet for a while and a friend of his was up on the mountains to catch a draft. The lines for the Hubbard compound are not marked in many of the most trecherous areas (were talking STEEP terrain). My brothers friend apparently stepped over the line a few 10's of yards.
There is one small road (accessable by 4x4) which these people use to haul their gear to the summit. Within a few minutes 2 Hubbard `cops' and a truck drove to the top (semi automatics and everything) and told my brothers friend that he was tresspassing. My brother's friend (half clad in hang gliding gear) apologized and told the guards he would immediately leave the area. Rather than escorting him off the property, theyu told him he would be comming with them and that he would ride in the 3x3 foot tin `box' mounted in the back of their truck. To say the least my brothers friend refused and started to walk away from the compound...leaving his glider and everything. They fired in the air once and told him not to move or they would shoot him. He got in the truck. They kept him over night in the box.
In the morning the sheriff came looking for my brothers friend as two of his gliding companions reported him missing (fearing he ditched somewhere and was hurt). The Sheriff then got a call from the compound and said they had my brothers friend. He was released to the Sheriff. He filed a complaint (I don't know the outcome) and he was told by the Sheriff's department to be careful in that area as `they have reason to believe hikers have been murdered behind the compound'. This is all too scary for me. To say the least I give a wide bearth to the compound. THese Scientologists are crazy screwed up people.
Oh, the reason they knew my brothers friend was up their...They said that he tripped their `alarms'?????
ONN, I guess you will have to behave and be civil to be welcome anywhere, including a Church of Scientology. But gate crashing the place won't do you any good.
Louanne, as stated above, he was told not to go inside. One person making a bad decision doesn't paint all anon with the same brush. Nor do we blame all Scientologists for the crimes of others. Why do you think we have helped so many of them who wanted to leave? Hundreds if not thousands of left Scientology because of our protests and I've yet to hear one person say they were worse off for it.
ONN, no, he lead a whole group of people inside instead. The Youtube clip (by Anonymous) shows that clearly. They look like a gang of masked robbers who are going to loot the place.
As for "hundreds if not thousands" leaving: I must have missed that. Could you name one, only one of them?
Kate Noelle wrote: "Finally the speculation about November 5th ... The planned protests in November are quite evident and it won't be on the 5th as I've read."
There's evidence that suggests the church might be planning to stage an attack on it's own organization on the 5th and attribute it to the critics of the church.
Grumble, I take it you are doing a preventive statement, just in case the Hacking Scientology guys are actually serious about their threat against the Church of Scientology?
This is such a pile of lies there's just no place to even begin.
So Gregg admitted he walked into a building, a kid did some ddosing (which Scientology INVENTED) another chased saboteurs away from his car, and one taped a few people on a public street just like Scientology does every day. Only one has retired from Scientology protest...so, one down, 9, 999 to go. (And some seven or eight hundred people already signed on to picket Gold, plus a Rico case, plus and SECinvestigation, and yeah, DOZENS of Scientologists convicted and jailed over the past three years for crimes ranging from fraud to kidnap to murder-for-hire. Never anything as bad as walking into a building, though- that's incredibly criminal!
I wonder now what would happen if all those pychiatrists "harassed"{ by Scientologists could afford the same multi-million dollar lawyers Scientology has?
Louanne wrote: "Grumble, I take it you are doing a preventive statement, just in case the Hacking Scientology guys are actually serious about their threat against the Church of Scientology?"
I was simply stating a verifable fact the is pertinent to this discussion.
You and I both know full well that in the past the church has attempted to discredit it's critics by staging hoax attacks in accordance with official church policy.
Louanne wrote: As for "hundreds if not thousands" leaving: I must have missed that. Could you name one, only one of them?
Only one? OK
Paul 'Scooter' Scofield.
It's mentioned in a previous comment.
Louanne wrote: I know from working with you guys in the past months that you are no moral and no loyalty.
Loyalty? To whom?
If someone commits a crime or is accused of a crime it's your bloody duty help or atleast not hinder any investigation. So Our morals and Our loyalty may not be on the same tonescale as yours.
We stand by Anon Orange and AGP. Pope has recieved his "punishement" (limp wristed slap amirite?) and hopefully the investigation about the beating of Orange will stirr up a real shitstorm for the "church". Even if Orage loses in any way (unlikely) we'll stand by him.
Loyalty should NEVER make you blind. That's how you know you got morals.
Louanne wrote: "Grumble, I take it you are doing a preventive statement, just in case the Hacking Scientology guys are actually serious about their threat against the Church of Scientology?"
You didn't get that banner, did you? lol
Do you acctually think that they have a real virus available that is called "Xenu"?
Take a look at one of their Youtube vids sometime.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2r_VYdLWO2Q&eurl=http://www.hackingscientology.com/
Not really that bad..eh..well, bad in the way that spreading a biological virus would be.
Do you get it now?
You'll be able to enjoy this and much more on the outside 'Louanne'. You should atleast think about it.
"As for "hundreds if not thousands" leaving since Anonymous is actively trying to disaffect members on the Church: I must have missed that. Could you name one, only one of them?"
On "Hacking Scientology", all I know is that someone is running a campaign that says a) it is ok to destroy a church and b) that they plan to do so specifically on the 5 November. It's propaganda. If it would be the announcement of clearly criminal activity WWP would have been raided already by the FBI. I am sure they are watching closely every move you guys do. But if something happens on 5 November you can be sure that they will do more than just lurking.
Jason Beghe left years ago. The anti-Scientology war of Anonymous did not exist before January 2008.
Apply minimum logic to that.
As for "hundreds if not thousands" leaving since Anonymous is actively trying to disaffect members on the Church: I must have missed that. Could you name one, only one of them?
LOL, actually he left this year. Are they re-writing the history of Jason already in there? Wow! His leaving must have been majorly damaging. And as for names, go read th ex-scientology boards or ex-sci kids. You can go there and meet with a lot of those who left this year and because of us. You can tell they were inside because they know the goofy lingo you guys use inside and out.
I've seen some of the Anonymous protests on youtube. If scientologists are so afraid of them, why are the scientologists always out there harrassing the protesters?
I've seen videos of the scientologist at protests hit protesters, tear up and steal protest signs, hit protesters cameras, ask silly questions, threaten protesters,etc,etc.
The last video I saw someone titled catch me if you can, I believe, was so weird I couldn't even believe it when I saw it.
Also, I found a website by ex scientologist, blownforgood.com. It estimated there are currently 5,000 sea org members and 25,000 ex sea org members. Everything I read from the church always says it is expanding and is the fastest growing religion. I wonder if they still claim 8 million member? Most of the ex scientology sites say 50,000 or 100,000 at the most. And where does alllll that tax exempt money go?
That is a great site. Looks like they are just getting started and said they won't post anything except samples until they get 500 stories. I wonder how long it will take them to get 500 stories from ex-scientologists? Should be interesting to see.
I was also shocked to see that a contract was required when leaving saying you won't talk about what you saw inside. That is sick. I did some googling and found links to some the other contracts that you MUST sign just to get "relgious services".
It's a real eye popper. I talked to an ex-sci I know and he said that even though it says to read it carefully, when he was joining and he started to read before signing, they got really aggressive to him and turned on the sales pitch to "oh just sign it, it's just a bunch of stuff the government says we have to have people sign for to cover us in case of an accident". He was similarily pressured to make sure people signed without reading when he was "body routing", which is what they call recruiting. I won't give his name here as he is still frightened of the cult and won't make his story public yet because he is still going through a lot of post tramatic stress over what he saw and did while inside. But if you google around online, you can find other stories about this kind of thing.
Pretty shocking that you would have to sign something like this. Read it, it's pretty amazing how much of your rights you have to give up to join. I thought Scientology was about freeing people, not locking up their rights in a contract.
I must say, you do have a clumsy, yet amusing ability to spin a story so that it reflects negatively on Anonymous.
For example, Gregg Housh. Yes, he got slapped with a TRO and has to stay a certain distance away from your houses of business. However, charges that he trespassed and "interfered with a religious service," as you put it, were dropped. Therein lies the win. Scientology's lies were dismissed as being false. The charges Scientology so dearly wanted to stick were tossed in the round file. Who knows if Scientology will even be around when his year is up? We call that a win.
Second, the Church of Scientology San Diego is named on a list of organizations that are in favor of Prop 8, a proposition that would effectively dictate to an entire segment of the population the way they live their lives by denying them the right to marry. It's not just Gregg's assertion. It's fact. If you were really a journalist, you'd make an effort to verify it. But you don't let little things like facts get in your way, do you?
Scientology's aim was to get Angry Gay Pope barred from being outside any Scientology building in Los Angeles. As it is, he is only barred from that whiny woman's workplace and residence. Which means the Celebrity Center, the Complex, the CCHR "Museum of Death" and other properties are still, pardon the expression, fair game. Again, overall, Scientology lost and Anonymous won.
The incident you inaccurately describe regarding Francois...why didn't you mention it occurred at Gold Base, Scientology's "secret" armed compound in Gilman Hot Springs?
(Anyone can visit Scientology's "secret" base by going to Google Maps, typing in Gilman Hot Springs, California, and selecting 'street view.' You can even see the Sea Org slaves clearing brush by the side of the road!)
When you see a security guard messing about with your vehicle repeatedly before retreating to a safe place behind some trees allegedly on Scientology property, you might be curious enough to approach that guard and ask him what the hell he is doing with your car, particularly when he sets off a road flare behind it during a Stage 5 fire alert. It is reasonable to assume that anyone would be likely to wish to inquire as to the guard's unneccessary behavior. It is not reasonable to be assaulted and dogpiled by three thugs hired by Scientology. He was not given an opportunity to leave the property, he was charged by Scientology goons and thrown to the ground. Get it right.
It is not reasonable for them to refuse to hand over the property of the man being assaulted to a person he authorized to take custody of the property.
In this case, the guards assaulted me when I tried to retrieve the camera. The police arrived before they were able to tamper with it and delete evidence. And, by all reports, that evidence is going to be very, very useful to us in court.
So, Louanne, or Gavino, or whatever your name is, don't worry about Anonymous. Our morale is high. Desperate attempts like yours only prove what we suspect, that Scientology is going down. Kicking, punching and screaming, but going down nonetheless.
Every time they assault someone for exercising their right to speak out, every trap laid, every call to the police that wastes time, it's all good. Anonymous is kicking cult butt, and we're not gonna stop until Scientology is only read about in history books. Time and public opinion is on our side, and nothing you can do will change that.
Ok, ONN, you can't answer the question. Because nobody left because of Anonymous. Their actions had NO RESULTS at all for their agenda. But they did have effects, like more support from the human rights community for the Church of Scientology. More support by even the most loosely connected members. More interest in the public websites of the Church. I won't go so far as to thank Anonymous and yes, some security people of the Church might be pissed about you, but us normal members have learned a lot about recognizing slimy propaganda and fluff brains.
More interest in the public websites of the Church? Eh,i think that the public are less interested by this graph which tells site traffic each day on websites such as yours.
Louanne, there is nothing normal about the Scientology cult. There are videos on youtube that proves incriminating to your organization. Scientologists running around through back doors, climbing over fences, and walking very fast around protestors like the poligamists. Its a shame that you lie everytime when there are bonified facts that prove you wrong.
Ironic that you talk about slimy propaganda and fluff brains... That\'s a statement that totally describes what you are doing online!!!
LOL Louanne. I'm not revealing names of people on this board because you want them. Nice try. As I have said, you can go to http://www.exscn.net/ and http://exscientologykids.com and read the stories for yourself. There are tons of new stories there and stories of people leaving because of anonymous. If the ex-scientologists want to reveal their names in their stories they will. Or you can go there and ask them for the names themselves, assuming they are willing to give them out. Some will, some won't. You'll have to deal with it.
Very interesting statistics BJ. I added the critics and anonymous sites and it would appear that their traffic is hardly any more than ours is. Ouch! You can see the big fall started in May and there were two more big falls in Aug and Sept. We are having impact. Scientology would call this "at cause". Anonymous is "at cause" here. Our protests have driven an ever larger number of people away from these sites. More evidence comes pouring in that Scientology is a sinking ship. Thanks for posting that!
Sorry if I'm posting a lot of comments here but I had a little more to say. I find it interesting reading the stories of ex-sci people and seeing how whenever something bad happened in their life, they were told they "pulled it in" and to go over any "overts" and "withholds" they have. Pulled it in is kind of like "got what you asked for". A form of Karma in Scientology as I understand it.
Right now bad things are happening to Scientology itself. Protests, people leaving, bad press. The works! Yet there is no provision to ever suggest that Scientology "pulled it in". No one is allowed to say that maybe Scientology management are the ones with overts and withholds. That the way Scientology has handled critisicm and members asking questions and wanting to leave has "pulled in" the protests. Why is this? Why can one not suggest this inside without punishment? There seems to be no evaluation for the material as well as actions of the management of Scientology. Why is this? Those in charge are quick to blame the people for their own failings and their own problems. But they can't recognize their own.
In fairness to Louanne, I think many of this new wave of protesters underestimated the efficacy of Hubbard's thought reform tech and also the extent to which Sea Org members are isolated from the wog world.
As for her claim that the protestors actions "actions had NO RESULTS at all for their agenda" - does she even have access to all the data that would support that claim?
Eg. How many copies of Dianetics were sold this year compared to last? How many people have joined the church this year compared to last? How many existing scientologists have donated for new courses this year compared to last? How much alcohol has Little Davey consumed this year compared to last? Etc.
Louanne wrote: On "Hacking Scientology", all I know is that someone is running a campaign that says
a) it is ok to destroy a church
and
b) that they plan to do so specifically on the 5 November. It's propaganda. If it would be the announcement of clearly criminal activity WWP would have been raided already by the FBI. I am sure they are watching closely every move you guys do. But if something happens on 5 November you can be sure that they will do more than just lurking.
If you don't know that much about them maybe you should look into it before bringing it up.
About propaganda; 'Propaganda is a concerted set of messages aimed at influencing the opinions or behaviors of large numbers of people. As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda in its most basic sense presents information in order to influence its audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the cognitive narrative of the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda.
Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist.'
Hmm... Church or Propaganda... has a nice ring to it. You may use that in your next note to the suggestion box. Seriously, CoS have been using it against any and all who oppose them in any way and especially against Psychiatry. Why wouldn't everyone want you to taste your own medecine....
About the ceiling-FBI watching us. I sure hope so! NAY! I DEMAND it. They've been recieveing documents, videos and photos from us for a good while now. I don't think they realized how many C&D letters you acctually send out untill now. It's so much now that it's looking more like harassment. Infact, when the C&D proves nugatory and you send your fake "Anonymous are *GASP* terrorists"-DVD to them or their familly instead, it looks even worse.
Not to mention the Private Investigators you pay to trace and follow people from the protests to their homes so you acctually CAN send the Cease & Desist letters.
Louanne, we know that many people are leaving the church. It also seems that this trend is on the increase, as many of the recent defections are in ever-increasing numbers. While it may be difficult to pinpoint the exact cause (certainly, the abusive practices of COS must loom large as a reason), Anonymous certainly is somewhat responsible, as they have worked to provide much of the information that helps undo the cult's programming.
As much as you work to obfusciate the truth about this, Anonymous' primary tool has been peaceful protesting. The church has worked diligently to prosecute every minor infraction to the nth degree; the real story here is that most of the charges brought against Housh and AGP were dropped and will not keep either one of them from protesting in the future. That translates as fail for you. Additionally, the guards reacted with disproportionate force to AO's "tresspass" (which they baited him into) and I would expect the charges will be dropped against him.
Meanwhile, your anti-Anonymous articles never have (and never will, I predict) discussed why there are international protests against the church. There's plenty of other churches (real ones, actually) out there. Why do people protest yours?
Is it your polices of disconnection? Fair Game? Forced abortions of Sea Org members? Physical abuse by the head of your church? Squelching free speech? Any and all of the above?
Members leaving, recruiting down. Sounds like the end is at hand. Maybe it's a good time for you to stage a fake assault on yourselves . . .
Posted By: Not anonymous
Date: 2008-11-01 21:29:44
After doing my own research into this cult in the past week or two, i am UTTERLY DISCUSTED with everything to do with this conman named Hubbard. From his blatant lies of his "heroic" military record, to what his Henchmen have done to Agent Orange. And before any of you brain washed scientologists tell me that Im uninformed, I entered my research without bias and probably know about your cult than you do.
Not anonymous - Apparently you are errr, ummm, well, I'll just copy and paste you, then you'll understand.
i am UTTERLY DISCUSTED
Whew, I hope you are sitting down or something, I hope you are breathing or something. A condition like that, hey, if you let it build up real big? It might mean a brain fart or something, whew. Here is a link (not to Scientology though) that might be helpful to you: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/discusted
Marc Abian - First of all, I disagree strongly with your hypothesis. When you state your opinion, as if it were fact, you lose credibility in the eyes of your audience. You hypothesis various things about the Church of Scientology's growth are directly opposite Affluence. The Church is buying up million dollar (and million pound) properties and donating 50,000 pounds to charity. http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/3807996.Scientologists_hand_Sussex_air_medics___50k/
Does this sound like a shrinking Church to you? You've been reading too much Xenu, get a life, quit stating your opinions as if they were fact, quit manufacturing opinion with so little information, quit over-generalizing single instances of long-ago failure into current news, find ways to party and drink more water.
Hey Anonymous, I just happened onto this article and read this thread. Are you guys kidding? How can you live with yourself? Like really? How do you get anything done in life? Listen, few people (that I know of) have actually heard about you guys (anonymous, or whatever) The three people I am talking about were long time friends of mine who read something about you google bombing or something and then kept tabs on your actions and youtube videos and whatnot. The end result is that all three independent of each other and within the last 2 months have requested books and/or other materials with regard to what Scientology is and at least one is doing a course from their home. I checked with another friend in Minneapolis and she related a similar story of a friend of hers who is now involved with one of the community based programs there. Apparently, your activities are bringing interest and not disaffection as you claim. Spreading lies and dishonest fabricated stories and spin as you do in this thread, only creates interest. The more interest and the more people will dig and they will find that though a few people have had a bad experience, the absolute vast majority of individuals participating in anything to do with Scientology, have a good experience.
Based on what you're saying, you think you have some over reaching and tremendous influence, but I hate to break it to you, it's all in your head.
Scientology expands and continues to do well and help people because it is good. The results are real and measurable.
You may provide a few examples of ex-SCNists and what they're saying and so what. I was a member of the Sea Org twice. I worked at the highest echelons of the Church. After a few years both times, I decided to leave and left. My friends were disappointed but it was just a matter of paperwork and basically turning in keys, etc...
I wanted to pursue a degree in Computers and that is what I am doing.
I am still a Scientologist and I still take courses and so forth.
Anyway, I am familiar, directly, with a few of the examples you are providing to further your own general hostility in your own mind, but you have it wrong. If you read only what a few hundred people over the last 58 years have to say about their particular situation (which may have been bad to them) then of course, that is your own choice. It's unfortunate that anyone have a bad experience, but some types people will have a bad experience no matter where they go and what they do.
Anyway, I hope you actually check out the real scoop and not all this propaganda.
Terryeo, of course you disagree with my hypothesis. It runs counter to your agenda of “clearing the planet,” so it must be disregarded, whether it’s true or not.
Buying property has nothing to do whatsoever recruiting new members, a fact so obvious it shouldn’t have to be stated.
Sources inside the Church say that these new orgs are largely empty and represent the efforts of COS to impress their members with pretty pictures of their latest “acquisitions” (and give them an opportunity to reg members for more money).
Interesting that you refer to the “affluence” of an institution that’s supposed to be a non-profit to support your argument . . .
Posted By: Not anonymous
Date: 2008-11-02 22:08:43
Terreyo, authorities of spelling too huh? My appologies. I prefer to place more importance to conceptual understanding and critical thinking than spelling (but not saying spelling is unimportant). Im sure i can find more than a few examples of you improperly misspelling words, stop being such a douche.
Another person who left, and made a book!. (that\'S the 2nd book i saw come out recently).
Even better, here\'s another one, Jean-Paul Dubreuil. Guess what, he also made a book.
if you are ever permited, try to get a hand on these book and read them. You wouldn\'t be afaid to read those I hope. Also, If you have a comment, I\'d suggest you say nothing unless you have read these books. Because you can\'t claim any piece of litterature is bad without having read it first. Dismissing it without having read it is clearly biaised.
I\'ve been reading these Nolan topics for a while and saw all the fighting in the comments, I went to the links. I chose my side. mainly because I read from BOTH side. I have not accepted any speculation whatsoever. you saying you are the fastest growing religion is dismissed because of lack of proof (and no, buying buildings don\'t count, that only say you got lot of money, and we all know why). Anonymous claims of people leaving Is verifiable.
like David\'s Niece. she even passed on a news channel.
so, I named three more person who left. and please, saying they haven\'t left this year is not an argument. in fact, it give even more credit to anonymous, since they left before what you call \'anonymous propaganda\'.
Back-scene lurker - says: so, I named three more person who left.
Oh yeah, Lurk, oh yeah, this article is about YOU. See where the article says: Law enforcement's successes against Anonymous trigger off a strange propaganda machine.You are part of that propaganda machine. You are giving examples of Anonymous' strange propaganda machine. Oh yeah Lurk, Right on, beanhead, that's precisely an example. Louanne noticed and created an article, and you come along with examples of what she is talking about, you come along with the very propaganda she points out. Oh yeah Lurch, (opps, did I mispell Lunk) good example, hey you!
Terryeo, the examples that Back-scene lurker gives of former Scientologists leaving the Church are not Anonymous; their identities are well-known.
What Anonymous has accomplished is to allow for former members to come out and speak the truth about the abusive practices of COS. Cult is crumbling. Hopefully you can get out before Davey makes you drink the Kool-aid . . .
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-03 10:29:14
Anonymous has also helped provide information to those who escape the cult, as in exscientologists.org to help make the transition from enslavement to the real world easier. Anonymous has provided funds and help to several people who have exited the cult.
The main thing Anonymous has done was to inform the unknowing of the cult's deceptive practices, in order to avoid losing their life savings and being taken advantage of.
Why lose your life savings (and in some cases MORE than you can pay) when all the levels, teachings of LRH are on the internet FOR FREE? IN HIS OWN WORDS.
back-scene lurker, it's really funny how you guys are completely incapable to present any results. I was asking for people who left the church because of Anonymous action since January 2008. And the answer still is: ZERO.
William Johnson- It is such a tickle. Here is how it really works. People walk into and out of 7000+ Churches every day, often 2 times a day, often 4 times a day, sometimes more. That is actually what goes on and has gone on for 50 years, although the quantities have increased considerably. The reason for this has to do with Scientology being a study, where people study from 2 to12 hours a day. Every day, not just Sunday. :)
Now -a- then Mr. Johnson, you and your propaganda machine want to hold up a certain element these carpet sweepings you are so fond of gathering. You use the word "escape". You don't use the word "quit" or even "stopped study" or "slowed in progess", oh no. For you and your carpet sweeping friends it has to be "Escaped". You're too far removed from reality, Mr. Critic. Here's another one, far and gone from reality; "cult is crumbling". Neither of these situations are as you characterize them. Who else said, ".. as you characterize it"? Why, it was Tommy, wasn't it? Let me put it this way. Critics characterization has move further and further and further from its mark. You gather you tiny pile of carpet sweepings up and try to characterize it, you try to understand what it means. And you miss your mark. The more pile you have, the further you miss your mark. I'm trying to tell you as a brother here, your characterization is further and further from real. You stare at the dirt and don't understand why it formed and stomp around and try to get the reason but you haven't a glimmer. I'm not trying to mislead you.
Medias alone now dare touch the subject of the CoS, and more than ever is it depicting it for what it is.
And like your usual coment, you only try to find a tiny bit in a critical coment, and try to invalidate it as a whole, or just ignore it.
I won't debate with you about people who left since they arrived, since although we these kids has a huge amount of testimonies left on their sites, they usually won't go as far as to say details like their real name, since they know what happen to those who dare opose Scientology. And I understand them. I would be afraid too in their place. I read the 'cancelation' of fair game, if you read it carefully, you see they only canceled the use of the word, not the practice.
And terryeo, don't act like an idiot, I said I read on both side, And that also mean I had to understand some of their lingo at one point, wich mean 'lurker'.
I don't see why you got a fixation on 'after-anonymous', well, after they started to put their eyes on your group.
The main problem is all the abuses the Church does, this is not a competition between who's the most evil. it's about the church's practices.
out of the two, Anonymous does not deny what some did in their name. Anonymous members did DDoS the site in retaliation to Scientology pulling Tom Video down, and they are not denying it. Your Church has heavily enforced your fair game policy, but continue to denies it.
At least if you could stop lying by ommision of all the facts in your articles, people wouldn'T be bashing at you all the time, but you are not open to constructive argumentation.
at the very least, say all the facts from BOTH sides. then give your opinion. omiting one side makes it propaganda, and the commenters here told what you ommited, as well as any other of your articles.
7000 churches, can you give me a list of all of them. I think 7000 is an over statement, just like the 8 million members you claim.
By the way, you are the only church that puts celebrities on a higher eschelon than other members with your celebrity centers.
I think Scientology is very horrible from what I hear former scientologists states that you keep private files on them and if they get out of line then you use that so you can harass and embrass them. What kind of church keeps private files of personal information for the purpose of future harassment.
Its ironic that you talk about propaganda machines because you place the same statements in free press release sites over and over again. Isnt that what propaganda is, stating the same stuff over and over making the reader of sites thinking its true. Plus some of these statements I see is purely speculation. Its a shame that a religion, which you claim that you are, loves to spread false propaganda.
In addition to that, I have read about the Proposition 8, and saw that Scientology is supporting it. There is no denying that. I saw the Anon Orange video and if he was trespassing you have no right to do a Rodney King on him. .
prop·a·gan·da [prop-uh-gan-duh] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun 1. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc. 2. the deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc. 3. the particular doctrines or principles propagated by an organization or movement.
I support Anonymous because in this day and age, because people have the right to fight an oppressive organization like Scientology. It started as a censorship thing which Scientology has brought in. This kids who are fighting tryanny in the subtext of religion are going to a bright future in store for them and I wish them well. GO ANONYMOUS
I denounce "Anonymous" because while it claims to be fighting some of the Church of Scientology's policies, it is really attempting to attack, insult and destroy the religion of Scientology.
The majority of articles and videos posted by "Anonymous" over the last nine months have targetted the "beliefs" of Scientologists. They rarely mention the church or its policies.
"Anonymous" cannot differentiate between a church and a religion. They blend the two together. They harrass Scientologists that have already left the church only because of the religion of those Scientologists.
"Anonymous" is a crusade. It is a loosely organized group of anti-religious fanatics that target anyone who dares to think or believe differently than they do. This isn't the Dark Ages. The Roman Catholic Church is no longer permitted to threaten non-believers with death if they refuse to convert.
Guy Fawkes was a Catholic extremist who targetted both the British government and the Protestants. "Anonymous" is more of the same. "Anonymous" wants a return to the Dark Ages where the masses are kept illiterate and ignorant. "Anonymous" wants a society where only priests and bishops are allowed to have access to knowledge. "Anonymous" is opposed to free speech and the freedom of religion.
Robert M. - It is sooo like Anonies to demand proof, insist on personal demonstration of the least concept. In this case, here is what you do. Go to Google Maps and type in "Scientology", you get 7000+ hits. But to argue quantity, such as number of mapable establishments, or quantity of active members, isn't the point, anyway. You got an organization, it is doing its thing. When is says the sky is blue, Anonies argue. Scientology says, "It is our position that indivudals are free to worship the supreme being however they wish" -- And Anonies argue that such a statement does not make a religion, argue that Scientologists don't believe in God, argue that the organzation is at fault. Isn't the direction of Anonymous obvious, even to you?
Terryeo only provides one example (buying property) that the Church is expanding. As mentioned previously, that is not a true reference. How about some objective piece of data? Org stats being up? Sales of "Dianetics" up?
These won't be provided because they don't exist.
Here's another thought for you.
You're right. Anonymous protests are fail. No possible recruit has been discouraged from joining. No Scientologist has left the Church.
Great!! Then call off the PI's and stop trying to follow protestors home!! Stop calling their places of work and stop handing out "black PR" flyers!!
Oh, and by the way, is this what you call "protecting yourselves?":
"Oh, and by the way, is this what you call "protecting yourselves?""
Did you read the article? Here, it says:
Francois
Bad news accumulated further when Francois, known as "AnonOrange" (like "Agent Orange"), was arrested on 26 October 2008 for trespassing. He and three other Anonymous members had gathered for another "international protest" when he stepped inside the Church grounds and refused to leave. He was arrested and later "hauled off to jail" (per "AnonforPres" on Youtube).
The case is open to a lot of speculation, as it is not sure what he wanted to achieve. It can be safely assumed however that he is trying to create an incident for the Anonymous propaganda department to exploit.
Obvious vandalism? What are you talking about? Even the Church didn\'t say that! They claimed he was trespassing (though he was far away from the fence and there were no visibile trespassing signs, not to to mention the security guard was repeated messing with his vehicle). Now you\'re just manufacturing stuff? Oh right, Hubbard said all who oppose Scientology are criminals, so if you can\'t find a criminal act, just make it up.
There it is, the usual Scientology ad hominem attack. That's what your "church" teaches you? And you wonder why you're having trouble recruiting people?
Can't forget, the Scientologists lured him out there by lighting a flare behind his vehicle. A flare. During a level 5 fire emergency. That's Arson. Nice job Scientology. It would have been sweet irony if they had burned their own compound down with this stunt. But the sad thing is it probably would have cost hundreds more their homes in town. Not worth losing even one home of a normal person so I'm glad that didn't happen. Also not to mention some people who I'm told are held against their will in Hemet because they know too much to let go. I imagine they would have burned horribly to death. Miscaivage would not have shed a tear for their suffering and death. Would you?
Slight correction, the letter is from 1968. I saw the 1972 stamp in the top but that is from the court that was looking into this saucy letter calling for mayhem and murder. Doesn't matter when it was written, it shows Hubbard was a criminal and an evil man. This is why we protest.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-04 06:02:32
Virginia Downsborough, a Scientologist who was with Hubbard while OT III was being written summed up her experience: "When I went in to his room there were drugs of all kinds everywhere. He seemed to be taking about sixty thousand different pills. I was appalled, particularly after listening to all his tirades against drugs and the medical profession. There was something very wrong with him, but I didn't know what it was except that he was in a state of deep depression; he told me he didn't have any more gains and he wanted to die. That's what he said: 'I want to die'."
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-04 12:21:14
"Xenu's plan involved setting up electronic traps in Teegeeack's atmosphere which were designed to trap the souls or spirits of the dead space aliens. When the 13.5 trillion spirits were being blown around on the nuclear winds, the electronic traps worked like a charm and captured all the souls in the electronic, sticky fly-paper like traps. "The spirits of the aliens were then taken to huge multiplex cinemas that Xenu had previously instructed his forces to build on Teegeeack. In these movie theaters the spirits had to spend many days watching special 3-D movies, the purpose of which was twofold: 1) to implant into these spirits a false reality, i.e. the reality that WOGS (Hubbard's derisory term for anyone not a Scientologists) know on Earth today; and, 2) to control these spirits for all eternity so that they could never cause trouble for Xenu in this sector of the Galaxy. During these films, many false pictures and stories were implanted into these spirits, which resulted in the spirits believing in all the things that control mankind on Earth today, including religion. The concept of religion, including God, Christ, Mohammed, Moses etc., were all an implanted false reality that to this very minute are used to control WOGS on Earth. "When the films ended and the souls left the cinema, they started to stick together in clusters of a few thousand..."
And no response on that actual document. You can read about R2-45 here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R2-45
There it is kids, proof. Hubbard himself ordering his personal SS to commit murder. This is why we protest. Not the whacky beliefs, but the ruthless management which as not changed since Hubbards death. Sadly Hubbard was not the last death in Scientology and there will be more before this is all over.
Exactly. Proof that Wikipedia is a piece of shit. Where liars of all anonymous colors can spread their venom without anyone reviewing it or correcting obvious propaganda articles.
NomNom, just tuck that R2-45 sucker into your bag of "I don't understand" Ha, Ha, Ha. It is such a joke but you don't get it. That's all right, no one says you gotta. BTW have you heard of R3-38 and R4-95? Ha, Ha, Ha.
When I looked at Google Maps a second time, I found 5000+ hits for Scientology, instead of the 7000+ hits I got earlier. So, I took one at random.
Playing with Google Maps I found this nifty link: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msa=0&msid=107470321038877501493.000447c8ab2963b834914&ie=UTF8&z=10
I found some Anonie had gone through a bunch of Google links to write a cute little "I hate this link", which led to a link for all the Churches on that particular Google Map. Woot! A map with hundreds of Church locations. U Anonies are more fun than a Southern Hoe-Down!
If it was a joke, why put it on such a serious document? The original doc is shown here, among many other places:
http://888chan.org/xenu/src/1225549832827.jpg
It was used as evidence in court as well. Hubbard spent a lot of time on the run for the stuff he did and died in hiding in '86. This was just a small part of his criminal acts.
This is the sad remains of him just before his death:
http://impiousdigest.com/old-L-Ron-Hubbard.jpg
Decades of heavy drug use will leave you screwed up like that ya know.
Posted By: Not anonymous
Date: 2008-11-05 09:38:31
Om Nom Nom Its obviously a joke:
"1. Having stolen or illegally procured these dangerous materials (at the instigation of a Psychiatrist) these persons did plot to misuse them to cause Insanity and Death. "
Comon, do you think that by reading "Upper Level Materials" can cause insanity and death? lol.. oh wait, Scilons DO belive that crap.
Louanne wrote: "Wikipedia is a piece of shit. Where liars of all anonymous colors can spread their venom without anyone reviewing it or correcting obvious propaganda articles."
Huh? One of the defining features of Wikipedia is the fact that anyone can review it or correct obvious propaganda articles.
Besides, that ethics order Om Nom Nom linked to is clear evidence of how nasty and messed up organized Scientology is, even without taking into account the R2-45 reference.
Wikipedia has its ugly moments and its average moments. The thing that strikes me most strongly is how many of the same lines are used today by Anonies as were used 20 years ago by critics. Take, for example the 1985 Portland court case, where a critic was (temporarily) awarded millions. Here's a critic's site about why Scientology was losing. http://www.lermanet.com/scientologynews/portland-titchbourne-1983.htm Amuses me incredibly! Same word-for-word critical phrases, delivered in the same dull-to-dull tone.
And here the same Court Case on YouTube, the Church's cheerful side of the story presented in song. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRj_RaBhdTA
You know Terry, maybe it's because nothing in Scientology has changed in 20 years.
"Oh there were a few crimes but that was long ago." You and Louanne have admitted to that.
And there are ex-scis who have gotten a lot of money back from the cult. The not one thin dime guy? He got a pile of them. What was his name... Wollersheim? Ah yes. There he is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Wollersheim
This is the trial where Scientology claimed that fair game was a religious practice. LOL. Thanks for reminding us Terry.
Sure NomNom, happy to remind you, no problem. Heck, I do little else but provide minor entertainment, anyway. I begin replying to critics because I foolishly felt there was some misinformation rolling around in the mind of various critics. And so attempted to resolve the confusion, leading such critics to a broader understanding. But I've found this let you know the whole story doesn't help a critic evaluate information. I've found critics to be dogmatic, like a bloodhound with nose stuck to a particular scent, who sniff out bits of negative information to examine, rumor about, and add into a pile. While the driving information, the basic reasons for failures or mistakes are ignored. The basic being, Scientology intends to be helpful for people. And generally is helpful for people. As witnessed by millions (critics say hundreds), as witnessed by newly purchased, renovated buildings (critics ignore), as witnessed by won court cases (critics focus on 2 or 3 countries refusing religious freedom), as witnessed by those helped by volunteer ministers who have remarkable success stories (which critics ignore), as witnessed by successful drug rehab (which critics belittle), as witnessed by New York Rescue Worker successes (to which critics cry no scientific proof), as witnessed by thousands of attested wins (critics say you can't believe it from the mouth of a believer). The list gows on and on. When about 50,000 Clears were reached and the Church quit making a big deal of how many Clears, critics found small exceptions and made big issue of the rare failure. Here on NolanChart, when Fair Game was clearly defined as an internal justice practice, long ago discontinued, critics (meaning you, NoNo) continue to use Fair Game as meaning something it never meant. You ask to be convinced of things that never existed, for reasons you are unable to specifiy, because you are unable to understand the significance of datum in the context of its data field. The Wollersheim case happened years ago. The more recent case was only about that lawyer obtaining his fee from his client. It hammered away with a term long ago cancelled, misused to begin with, and was about a guy who had enormous psychological problems when he started in Scientology. What has the Church's reaction been? The Church is more careful, now a days, when attempting to help a person with huge psychological problems. But that isn't what critics see. Take care of yourself, Mr. NoNo. -- Was that a threat? No, NoNo, it was merely a common, everyday, take care of yourself.
You mention that 50,000 Scientologists have reached the state of "Clear." I have another number for you Terryeo. How about none? In the entire 50 plus year history of the Church, not a single "Clear" has been produced, much less a single "Operating Thetan."
The truth is, if COS was able to produce a single individual with the abilities that Hubbard ascribed to Clears, there would be no critics and certainly no protests. People would happily stand in line for hours to get auditing from their local orgs and Scientology would quickly become the dominant religion (or self-improvement mechanism, whatever you'd like to call it) on the planet.
Unfortunately, there are no "Clears" and no "OTs." There can only be two logical reasons for this, as far as I can figure; either misapplied tech or the whole thing's a load of bollacks.
I'll let you draw your own conclusion as to which of these I favor.
Posted By: el ron flubtard
Date: 2008-11-06 10:33:45
weak-minded followers of feeble sci-fi hack writers -- do not deserve a tax exempt status. in fact, they deserve all the abuse they ask for along with forfeiting their last dimes for the priveledge of excorcising their bodies of 'aliens'. hopefully peaceful social activists like the members of anonamous will bring about the end of this totalitarian alien CULT.
Thanks Terry, lets analyze a few points you mention:
"Heck, I do little else but provide minor entertainment, anyway."
I completely agree. You do add very little besides entertainment.
"I've found critics to be ...like a bloodhound with nose stuck to a particular scent, who sniff out bits of negative information to examine, ... and add into a pile."
Again I agree! You know that a bloodhound is still the single best tracker in the world! They never lose their target staying on track and accomplishing their goals no matter what gets in their way.
You do point out what CoS says and what non-CoS says is happening. No arguement, lets get all the info out there.
"The Church is more careful, now a days, when attempting to help a person with huge psychological problems."
Oh good, so they realize the tech was bad and that they are inferior for treating psychological issues compared to psychiatrists, whom Mr Wollersheim should have just gone to in the first place?
Yep, a workable system, not a perfect system. Yep. A system of free choice, you persue it or not, up to you. And if you don't like it that way, you'll have to move to country that disallows freedom of religion. Or, I guess you could do as a few anonies have done. Sacrifice your personal freedom by committing criminal acts in an attempt to "save" us all. But I don't recommend that. I would say, when you consort with a group that includes proven criminals, you are risking your personal freedom. And personal freedom is the issue, whether you study or fish, choose Islam or Scienotology's way of saying it; The Supreme Being. You have to actually walk in the door, you have to make personal effort, to gain the benefits Scientologists say they gain. You don't want that? Hey, the planet is large, the sun shines for all, and the O2 is free.
Strange that Marc Abian, or anyone, would argue that no person has ever become completely responsible for their mind's pictures as regards their personal survival. I used to think such an argument comes about because the word clear had been misunderstood.
Just want to point out. If you ever do choose, reader, to walk in those doors, and you don't get brainwashed, and you decide rapidly, hey this isn't for me....CoS will spam mail you a lot of junk mail trying to get you back in. They will constantly call you asking you to come in and pay more. Think of the most annoying persistant business that ever tried to get you to buy something....then multiply that by 100. That is what its like if you do try out Scientology and decide it doesn't stick. You get annoyed for years. So, as a regular Joe out there, in regards to CoS here are your options:
A) Never go near it. Never take a free stress test. Never go to Narconon or any other front. Safest option.
B) Check it out, decide its not for you, and have yourself and family pestered for years to please come back and buy more of their product in mail, phones, and home visits! Yes, for YEARS!
C) Check it out, decide it makes sense, spend years dumping money into it (hundred of thousands of dollars), stop being friends with your current friends, have the chance to stop talking to family members, and maybe if you so choose at some point sell your life to them and join the Sea Org. Maybe one day you realize its a scam and have wasted years of your life to them.
D) Protest CoS. Not safe by any means, but for evil to triump good men need do nothing. So stand up for human rights and stand against the organization.
I personally recommend option A, but if you take option D, well you did your country a favor.
Posted By: David Miscavige
Date: 2008-11-06 14:40:53
Hello, my name is David Miscavige.
I am the Eckleasiastikal head of Scientology. People say that I am a hothead. Absaloot nonsense!! Any one who says such a thing needs to spend a week in my RPF and that'll learn `em. That Marc Headley and Larry Brennan don't know wot they is tarking about. I never punched them. I only smacked them about a bit. You would too of someone was always looking down on you all the time! Anyway, they wouldn't keep still so I had to smack them harder. It's not easy being a dwarf you know! Especially one struggling with a 10th grad edumacation. Don't ever read their stories because they are all lies and lies and lies. I want to sue them but Moxon says I can't. I hate him. I think I'll leave the lid off the transformer vault again like the time we did that thing with his dead daughter Stacey. I don't think the squirrels excuse will work this time though.
Anyway, operative "Louanne Lee", cease and desist from these PR flap postings on this interweb thing. They are making us look very bad. You are just pulling in a cartload of entheta around with you and causing us much enturbulation. Report to my office for the gangbang sec.check some of that auditing thing that we are supposed to do.
I can't believe I've had to do this and now you've made me late for my night out with the Cruiser! He's coming round soon and I don't know how to get this godamn gay porn off the screen. Blarghhhh.
I denounce "Scientology" because while it claims to be fighting some of Anonymous's policies, it is really attempting to attack, insult and destroy the rights of peaceful protestors.
The majority of articles and videos posted by "Scientology" over the last nine months have targetted the identities of Anonymous. They rarely mention the reasons why they protest or their peaceful protests. "Scientology" cannot distinguish between a cult and science fiction. They blend the two together. They harrass Anonymous that have been to peaceful protests only because of the masks that those people wear.
"Scientology" is a crusade. It is a tightly-structured organized group of anti-free-speech fanatics that target anyone who dares to disagree with them or believe differently than they do.
L Ron Hubbard was a science fiction author and anti-Phyciatry extremist who targetted both the APA and the IRS. "Scientology" is more of the same. "Scientology" wants a return to the 1950s where the masses are kept uninformed about its abuses. "Scientology" wants a society where only Scientologists who spend lots of $ are allowed to have access to knowledge. "Scientology" is opposed to free speech and the freedom from religion.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-06 16:22:50
TG has it right...I took one of their 'stress tests' (which actually makes a medical diagnosis) 12 YEARS ago, and I still get crap from them every week in the mail. Good thing I heat with wood, I figure over the years that I have heated my house for about 3 days with the mail I have recieved from them. Try telling them you are not interested, that is one of the reasons I protest today....THEY WON'T QUIT with the junk mail. And I bet they consider me one of thir 80,000,000 members!! HAHA
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-07 08:56:49
RE: the RPF:
"stumbled into the RPF's RPF one time in the tunnels below the Cedars complex in L.A. There w[ere] about a dozen people who apparently had been sleeping in these tiny rooms. (There were a couple of blankets on the floor.) Both men and women [were down there]. A man was cutting a woman's pant leg with a knife while she was wearing the pants, and he had sliced her foot. Blood was running down her ankle onto her foot and was puddling on the floor. She looked up at me and gave me... what I would consider to be an insane smile and said, 'I caused my foot to be in the way of his knife.' Two or three of the people who were crouching and laying about on the floor looked up at me as if it were some kind of wonderful joke. I backed out the way I came in. One of Scientology's big promotion schemes is to tell people that they need to be 'at cause.' These people weren't at cause over anything[. T]hey had degenerated back to the Middle Ages.
That's what I knew about the RPF when the Scientology ethics officer told me to report down there for indefinite duty. I told her [that] they could get me down there, but I'd put several of them in the hospital first, and reminded her that I was a Viet Nam veteran. I was one of the few Sea Org members who had managed to hang onto [his or her] car, and I left that night (Cisar, 1997: 3)."
Foolish, you critics are simply being foolish. Wheat is a food and Scientology is about help. Clothing covers your body and Scientology is about help. Writing conveys ideas and Scientology is about help. When TG or anyone doesn't grasp this idea, then TG, and anyone, is talking hot air. Scientology is about help. Anyone in Scientology will tell you so. Personal help, 1st dynamic help, and help on all flows, all dynamics. Get a clue, U beanbrains.
Can't compare Scientology to Wheat. What a dumbass argument. Although, would it make a nice tasting beer if you put it in? Scientology brew! Anyone in Scientology will tell you its about help. Wow, cult speaking for the cult. Why doesn't anyone outside it say the same? Why did I hear Dr. Drew saying its dangerous? Why did Secret Lives of Women and Nightline say its dangerous?? As far as the hot air thing all I have to say is "NO, U!!!"
Your arguement is and always has been faulty, and your attacks on me amuse me to no end.
I do like however, that in my last post I pointed out (what I think) are the four options concerning people and CoS. Never go near (like most people now here in Clearwater, the word is out.); Try it a few times and get junk mail and calls from them forever; Protest it if you feel they are a criminal organization; or join the ranks and if you are to achieve its highest levels, yes, spend hundreds of thousands of dollars. Its on the price plan Terry, I'm not being biased here or hurtfull. It literally and factually costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to get up in the higher OT levels.
Now more of my opinion, CoS is a cult of greed, just like Time Magazine said. It should be compared to Warren Jeffs "church" that the Feds just raided. It shold be compared to the Jim Jone's "church".
In sum: Jim Jones == Warren Jeffs == L Ron Hubbard in terms of dangerous teachings. The difference I think though is at least L Ron knew it was all bull, the other 2 believed what they preached. Oh, and in that equation David Miscaviage is still a piece of dog poo.
Until you understand that Hubbard created Dianetics to be helpful to people, that its extension, Scientology, was likewise created to be helpful, that the Church of Scientology is attempting to help individual people, your criticsm will carry little weight. Scientologists repeatedly say, "it has helped me", while critics who have quit say, "It is trying to be helpful but it didn't help me". Its reason for creation, its persistence, its expansion, is: It is attempting to be helpful. Until you get the idea it is attempting to be helpful, you won't be addressing the subject it is addressing, the subject that appeals to people, the subject that makes it popular. That is the subject - Help. Sure, you can repeat Time Magazine without understanding what is being talked about. Or, you can understand the subject.
Actually Scientology is about money. Namely taking yours and spending it on celebrities and David Miscaivages luxuries. It is also about power. Power to make people do the bidding of the leaders. Power to infiltrate governments and try to seize power or abuse the power of government against percieved enemies.
You can get help in Scientology. If only you fork over your money and your freedom. Signing contracts that take away your rights? What kind of church does that?
Good TG. Refuse to think for yourself, good. Instead, accept and gobble up wholesale the word of Time Magazine, good TG. And good luck with that.
NoNo - Nono, a human right, by definition, can not be taken away by less than the creator himself. A human right can not be taken away, not by signed contract or by the hand of man. It would be possible for a human right to become somewhat limited. You know, you could sign over you rights to the book you wrote, so your publisher can, in turn, sell your book. You can limit your rights. But mankind can not take a human right from man. Not really.
Terry, go down to the SP hall and the RPF and tell those people. They will be glad to hear of that fact.
Go get a copy of the contract that new Scientologists have to sign and read it since you obviously didn't when you signed up. Anyone with more than 2 brain cells to rub together would get up and walk out the door after reading what they have to sign away to join.
And TG, oh man he's right. It's a vast conspiracy out there. The media is totally in on this and CNN and Fox and Time are all trying to crush poor innocent Scientology along with the psychs, the aliens and the CIA. Better get a shiny hat like Terry's TG. It's the only way to protect yourself from brainwashing.
This time it's a book you can get. While the cult has managed to convince Amazon to pull the book, you can still get it directly from Merlin Publishing Ireland. In the book an ex-Scientology security executive goes into what he saw and did while inside. It is one hell of a chilling read and it corroberates everything Anonymous has been protesting and those before Anonymous protested for decades.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-09 17:18:17
scientology was never designed to HELP. It was designed as a way to fleese unsuspecting people from their savings...per ron hubbard.
(not a science nor a religion etc.) (way to make money..form a religion)
It was designed as a way for lrh to \'get even\' with the entire psyche industry because he resented that he was not treated by them while in the navy. (written while he was taking Vistaril)
The only person that scientology was ever designed to help was lrh, and then dwarf took over when lrh died.
Again I ask where are the scientology soup kitchens? Why have they NEVER helped anyone who was down on their luck or needed a meal? BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO MONEY, AND THEREFORE ARE \'DOWNSTAT\'.
I have a question I would be grateful for both of your views on.
Terry has suggested that people try Scientology for themselves, and make up their own minds.
I presume that you would agree that such people are free to form their own conclusions, including the conclusion, eventually reached by a number of Scientologists it seems, that Scientology is, on balance, not a good thing.
I understand that, according to LRH, it would be a High Crime for you to publicly leave Scientology should you ever come to the conclusion that Scientology is not the good thing you thought it was and you are now ready to leave.
It has to be hard to leave Scientology when you have become reliant on it, devoted years of work to it, and gained true and lifelong friendships in it, but do you think it should continue to be a High Crime when you leave and publicly tell people you changed your views?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-10 10:49:36
""There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the tone scale, neither of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the Tone Scale by unenturbulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes. The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow."
"Good TG. Refuse to think for yourself, good. Instead, accept and gobble up wholesale the word of Time Magazine, good TG. And good luck with that."
Well, I'd trust more a reputable news source that has to research its background and present facts of an article through checking and cross checking its sources and what it says. And its been around much longer than the cult of Scientology. I believe too its allowed as a resource when a studen thas to write any kind of research paper as a good source. I mean, thats not me, thats the world that thinks that.
So yes, if I had to choose between a news source, and a cult with no other outside influence I would choose the news source over the cult....even a cult like CoS. However, since I actually do have a reasonable mind and can view all angles objectively, and I have come to my conclusions after my own research and personal experience with CoS. I have studied the whole situation and come to the conclusion that yes its a cult, and Time Magazine was one of countless sources that led me to that conclusion.
You see Terry, in the real world a person doesn't have to gobble up wholesale the word of anything or anyone. Unlike you, that must gobble up wholesale the word of a failed Scifi writer, named L Ron Hubbard, and his replacement stooge David Miscarriage.
So many more voices speaking out against the criminal business scam that hides itself shamefully under the name of the "Church" of Scientology, and all its hydra-headed front groups and corporate structures.
It heartens me every time I look at this site to see the growing juggernaut of protest, clear-headed and incisive response and relentless countering of the few cult apologists who remain. I know that many of you have not even personally had the devastating experiences the ex-Scientologists tell of and I thank you for doing your part. It's really not hard, is it? It has the comforting feel of a rising wave.
The day that I can walk down the street and know that my town is free of this insidious scam I will feel that much better about my country. Maybe I will even don a mask and show up to support these brave folks. And it is just done by the patient, insistent presentation of the facts. Truly wonderful. Fifty years in the making, this comeuppance for the cruel-minded and twisted regime of mind-rape put in place only to satisfy the power and money lust of Lafayette "Ron" Hubbard.
Good, good Louanne. The more you talk like us the more you start to become one of us. As our pulse merges with that of Scientology... well you know the rest.
TG, it means that whoever did the "IAS Event 2008" smear and fake piece on Youtube does not even know how a real one looks like. Plain dumb.
Gregory, yes, I missed that!
"I presume that you would agree that such people are free to form their own conclusions, including the conclusion, eventually reached by a number of Scientologists it seems, that Scientology is, on balance, not a good thing."
"Not for them" is what I would understand and agree to. Scientology is too tough for some. It requires to stop being criminal for example.
"I understand that, according to LRH, it would be a High Crime for you to publicly leave Scientology should you ever come to the conclusion that Scientology is not the good thing you thought it was and you are now ready to leave."
"Publicly" is the crucial term. Anyone is free to leave anytime. People do. Some also come back. No big deal. But with "leaving publicly" is meant to start or support a campaign with the purpose to destroy your former group. And this is deemed a "High Crime" internally, yes.
"It has to be hard to leave Scientology when you have become reliant on it, devoted years of work to it, and gained true and lifelong friendships in it, but do you think it should continue to be a High Crime when you leave and publicly tell people you changed your views?"
I personally agree that is must be hard to leave a group with which you share some great years of your life and a lot of friendships. It must be even harder to betray all these friends, spread bullshit about them, as some of those former members do, and support those whose purpose is to destroy a religion. I can't even remotely imagine how these guys can even stand themselves.
Objectively I would say that "High Crime" is group justice term that denotes activities that are highly destructive for the group. The maximum penalty for any high crime is to be expelled from the group. That can't be much of a threat for those who are leaving the group anyway.
First, we know it takes place in a tent. A big photoshopped tent to make it look bigger than it really is. The piece is to ridicule David Miscaviage and his cult, of which they were a success. Oh noes, no tent.
Secondly: "That can't be much of a threat for those who are leaving the group anyway. " What about Disconnection from their families and friends?
TG, you mean: What about the family deciding to severe the contact to that a**hole who now calls them brainless zombies and supports groups that deliberately discriminate and ridicule them? First they intentionally piss off their family and then they expect happy relations and if that does not happen it is all the Church's fault. Somebody left his brain at home here.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-11 15:30:54
So a person 'joins' scientology. After they have been in a while, the 'church' tells them that if they have any family, friends who don't wholeheartedly support scientology then they must 'disconnect' from them. Don't try to turn this around to something it isn't. I thought that scientology supported free speech, and if I don't support a family member joining the cult and speak out about it, our family has to suffer? $cientology is a cult, pure and simple. It IS all the 'church's" fault.
Actually I am at home with my brain. Ever since The psychiatrists started paying me to comment on your articles I don't have to work anymore. First of all, Disconnection has been happening way longer than Anonymous. Anonymous' outcry and zombie calling is in response to actions of the cult like Disconnection. Don't try to put the buggy in front of the horse. And lets try not to be so rude, jeez Louanne. Disconnection happens to people who never associate with critics. However, for some reason, once they are disconnected, or the threat is looming, they find us. We don't seek them out. They come to the community for the support CoS does not give them. The cult is fail.
In all the disconnection stories I have never heard of a person intentionally pissing off their family. All I have seen are people trying to be themselves and being punished by the cult for it.
Also, why is it when a person is declared, and is disconnected, that that person tries to find old friends of theirs who were declared before them, that they haven't spoken to in ages. If that person was such an a##hole as you say, then the newly disconnected still wouldn't want to talk with them....but they do. Your arguement is faulty. If I told my parents (Catholics) that I am atheist and the idea that Jesus is real is a bunch of bull, they would still love me and have me in their life. Just like a CoS parent would still have a person who speaks ill of the cult in their lives. It is the outside pressure from the cult that forces the disconnection. It is not the parent acting alone. Your cult is evil and it breaks up families. You cannot hide it or try to push the choice of disconnection on the family Louanne. Fear rules the cult, and when that happens in history, it always inevitably will fall.
Unfortunately for most of U guys, you don't get it, don't want to get, and disparage those who do get it. So I'll just spell a tiny portion of it out plain and simple for you. It is for those who are able -- to become more able. It requires some insight, do you follow? Oh, right, you don't. All right then. Nice chatting with you, enjoy your rumor-mongering.
How would I know if I'm able enough, before I commit myself to spending big money and risking my family? No one has been able to tell me this.
I don't want to be one of those people who go through the OT levels, and then find out I'm not able enough, and that I'm an SP. If I bring my family and one of them is found out to be an SP, I don't know what I'd do then. Around 1 in 40 people are SP's. In a big family that's a significant risk.
I know that any Scientologists can become SP after being in the Church, even at OT level, for years. No one around them knows it until it happens and they are declared SP. Dozens of the people who worked directly with LRH were discovered to be SPs and were expelled from the Church.
If it could happen to those people, or the Wisemans or the Woodcrafts, or the Hills, I'm not so vain as to think it couldn't happen to me or my family. If I sincerely think something's wrong I'll criticise it. But, if my family joins Scientology, and one of us comes to the sincere belief that Scientology is seriously wrong, and tells other people, that alone will make them SP. That puts them in the same class as Hitler.
I'm someone's already able, and loves their family, should they take that risk? Are the new abilities worth it?
A place for able people to become more able. There is already a place for that Terry, it's called School. Not the scilon schools where people get substandard educations and routed into the sea org at 11 to scrub floors but real schools. Colleges, trade schools, places that will teach you more than the bare basics you get in the public school system. There is a real world out there outside of the LRH claptrap. LRH junk is supposed to help your life outside, not draw you into some bizarre inner world of 50's style thinking and things like the RPF, ethics (which is punishment in scilon speak) and disconnection from family. None of these things further a person. The only thing I've seen Scientologists able to achieve of note is to become washed up actors. Other than that, they make no serious contribution to society. You want to be more able, learn new things, go back to school, educate yourself online. Get a hobby and build it into something special. It's a lot more rewarding than screaming at an ashtray for hours on end.
"TG, you mean: What about the family deciding to severe the contact to that a**hole who now calls them brainless zombies and supports groups that deliberately discriminate and ridicule them? First they intentionally piss off their family and then they expect happy relations and if that does not happen it is all the Church's fault. Somebody left his brain at home here."
You're making generalizations again, Lou.
I know of Atheists who have Christian parents, and Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist friends. They all get along fine. Why? Because there is no passage in any of those religions' works that force their adherants to 'disconnect' from those who they disagree with. Because every legitimate religion does not force people to separate because of differing views. Scientology does this, because of its Homo Novis views. Homo Novis sounds errily familiar to the term "Aryan" that is used by Nazis to justify the killing of the Jews (and other people that they didn't agree with)
Generalization (all critics of Scientology are _____)
Symbolization (Scientology critics are called "WOGs/SPs")
Dehumanization (LRH said that all SPs have crimes)
Organization (see pg.100 - Hubbard's "Science of Survival")
Polarization (DISCONNECTION - Keep the WOGs away from Sci)
Preparation (individuals are targeted by Sci on websites such as religiousfreedomwatch.org)
Extermination (hopefully Sci will never get this far)
Denial
Scientology can't deal with criticism because LRH told Scientologists NOT to deal with criticism. LRH said "Always attack, never defend" and that, Nolan Charters, is what you have seen in these articles and on these comments time and time again.
Posted By: William Johnson Date: 2008-11-11 15:30:54
So a person 'joins' scientology. After they have been in a while, the 'church' tells them that if they have any family, friends who don't wholeheartedly support scientology then they must 'disconnect' from them.
That is a lie, plain and simple. One of those to agitate well meaning people against member of the Church of Scientology. In short: propaganda shit.
"The Church" does not exist anyway, but only real life people, individuals creating a group, who take their own decisions or not. But neither some imaginary "Church" nor any Church policy tells anyone to disconnect from others who do not support scientology.
So I just read on the internet that "A Very Unauthorized Scientology Christmas Pageant" is being put on in Chicago. Its a children's play making fun of CoS. Parent's of the children have posted questions online because they are being stalked/harrassed/followed/threatened now. Cult doesn't learn.
live life. It's an adventure. If you can't, don't become a Scientologist.
Start with going to your calm, safe public library and read a couple of scientology books. Grab a Scientology Ethics Book, find out what an SP is and if you fit the bill. Or read this:
"sanity", well done for pushing an agenda. Your post is so far off reality though that I won't respond to it. You might want to break it down though and add some facts to the mix - if you are able to, which I highly doubt.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-12 13:23:19
http://www.scientologydisconnection.com/
There are literally dozens and perhaps hundreds of examples of scientology's disconnection policy, as well as quotes from lron concerning disconnection. The fact that you deny this is very telling.
Google "Scientology Disconnection" for hundreds more examples.
(Google is your friend).
That is a lie, plain and simple." IS a lie.
"The Church" does not exist anyway," --Tell that to little crazy Davy Miscavage and his tax-free income.
A few years ago, you could get away with saying things like that, but today with almost all of scientology's policies online, it is too easy for ANYONE to check and see for themselves what the policies are, and make their own decision.
You are probably going to get a Sec Check for that post.
Religion has to do with recognition of the supreme being, although several (perhaps thousands) of names are used for "God". Religions are based on the idea there might be some intelligence, some supreme being. God, Allah, the Devine, the Eighth Dynamic; whatever phrase is used, religions encourage like minded people toward a community of like-minded people. If you don't think so, fine, no problem.
In addition religions address the idea that you and I might be something more than a meat body that is born, lives and, like all material things, decays into dust. Christianity, for example, suggests that a belief in the supreme being, combined with certain other thoughts, leads one to an eternal life.
Third, religions present the idea that a community of people who dedicate themselves to their religious precepts, can, through their own efforts together, create a better life for themselves and other, like minded people.
These elements, combined together, create a driving force, both in history and in present day. In fact, there is no major religion that suggests you should remain ignorant of its teachings Scientology's need for study is only emphacized here by the several critics who continually post about how to misunderstand, how to backbite and disparage those who do study. I've said, several times, in several ways, the critics are not getting it, and attempted to point out misunderstandings. But of course you can't argue with a critic, can you? :)
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-12 13:50:09
Exactly how does that address the scientology policy of disconnection?
I agree with you in one regard, in order to understand scientology one must 'study' it. It has recently become much easier, with most of their beliefs now available online. These beliefs have been proven to be true and the actual beliefs of scientology, as evidenced by various court cases.
Now, one can study the 'tech' and make an informed decision BEFORE spending their life savings! Isn't the internet great?
You of all people should be proud of this. Just think of all the people who are now drawn to scientology who wouldn't have even heard of it without the internet?
(My guess is that if 1000 people do a comprehensive search on the internet, and spend an evening researching it, 999 will reject it, but hey, that's just me).
re: Posted By: William Johnson Date: 2008-11-12 13:23:19
I know this website, why it is there and some of those "anonymous" writers including their real background story. That's creative writing but not observeable reality nor courtproof facts. You will have to come up with a real life, factual example. Otherwise this is just propaganda pushed by a fake name using fake "facts" to push an agenda.
"That's creative writing but not observeable reality nor courtproof facts. You will have to come up with a real life, factual example. Otherwise this is just propaganda pushed by a fake name using fake "facts" to push an agenda. "
Wow Louanne! Thats a great description for scientologymyths.info
A bunch of fluff, no facts, and a ton of propoganda to push an agenda!
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-12 16:01:01
You obviously didn\'t actually go to the website, there are a few who are not afraid of the other incidious $cientology policy FAIR GAME, and give their real names. DOZENS of examples, and you refuse to read them. Hmmm. Are you allowed to go to that site?
Does the term "You mocked up your own past lives" mean anything to you?
Why on earth would a religion prevent someone from going to a website? There are examples of the software that $cientology uses to prevent members from looking at critical websites. also on the internet..are you using that now, or is someone \'looking over your shoulder\', offering suggestions?
- Using "attack the attacker" policy to conduct ad hominum attacks against the critics
- Nit pick at every minute detail of all critical postings
- Denounce any posting as a lie
- Producing fake "success" stories to push their side of the story
- Denounce any website with critical information
- Demand that critics read Scientology literature (do I need to read Mein Kampf to know hoe evil Hitler was?)
- Claim that the only way to learn a subject is to go to the source (Do I need to be a Nazi to know that they hate Jewish people?)
- Call any critics "criminals"
- Try to steer the conversation off topic through rambling posts
- Ignore comments once confronted with substantial facts from the critic side
- Demand facts, even when facts have already been posted
- Completely ignore posts which are hard to dispute using any of the above tactics: See TG's post about the child actor being stalked by OSA agents
Hey NolanCharters, see what Louanne says after I post this link showing that not only does Disconnection exist, but that it is recommended by Scientology:
Thank you for your link. I have read the information there and I have already read the LRH books in the library.
I want to make rational decisions based on good information from authoritative sources. I want to make good choices. I don’t want to stake the wellbeing of my family on a lottery, before I know the odds and the stakes.
The web site you linked to provided a list of attributes, stating that
“The antisocial personality has the following attributes”
And then goes on to state
“However, the list given above consists of things which such a personality cannot detect in himself or herself. This is so true that if you thought you found yourself in one of the above, you most certainly are not antisocial. Self-criticism is a luxury the antisocial cannot afford. They must be right because they are in continual danger in their own estimation. If you proved one wrong, you might even send him or her into a severe illness.”
So, if I think I do not have those listed attributes, I’m not an SP.
However, if I think I do have those attributes, I am also not an SP.
So, no one can possibly determine if they are an SP or not, according to that site, can they?
The site goes on to say
“As majority rule is the political manner of the day, so should majority sanity express itself in our daily lives without the interference and destruction of the socially unwell. “
I don’t really like the tone of that. I don’t think that sanity is anything to do with ‘majority’. People used to think the world was flat and that people who thought otherwise were insane. People thought Galileo was insane, but that didn’t make him insane. If you thought that ‘majority sanity’ was valid you would have to believe that Scientology is socially unwell just because it’s a small minority that is increasingly scorned, and currently scorned by more people than any other religion. (According to the Gallup Panel survey.) And I don't believe that's a good reason.
So, I don’t think that site is of much help.
It’s difficult to get any helpful information on this, so thank you, but I respectfully suggest you may be mistaken. It is actually not possible for me to determine if I am an SP using the Scientology resources on that site, is it?
Haha, Terry. The parent of the child on reddit didn't even know about Anonymous, or Scientology's evil ways till scientology fair gamed the and their kid. Another family harrassed...another nail in the coffin.
"Start with going to your calm, safe public library and read a couple of scientology books. Grab a Scientology Ethics Book, find out what an SP is and if you fit the bill. Or read this:
http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH11_1.HTM "
This chapter in the Scientology handbook is about the "Antisocial Personality" (AP) and not about the "Suppressive Person" (SP). Or do you want to tell me that APs and SPs are the same?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-13 05:55:25
I was right! Louanne/Terryeo etc. is actually a GROUP of PR people at the Boston Org! It was pretty obvious that someone was 'looking over their shoulder' as each post was a product of the group (and yet still rife with spelling/grammer/technical errors).
Their job is to flood the internet with PR fluff to enhance $cientology's presence.
So fellow posters, when you see the errors and blatant lies posted here, rest assured that this is the best that $cientology has to offer in it's defense!
Posted By: Not anonymous
Date: 2008-11-13 06:03:44
Louanne, you said:
"Publicly" is the crucial term. Anyone is free to leave anytime. People do. Some also come back. No big deal. But with "leaving publicly" is meant to start or support a campaign with the purpose to destroy your former group. And this is deemed a "High Crime" internally, yes."
People leave or change religions all the time. I was raised Catholic, but now Im a Christian. My best friend was Morman, and now an atheist. I personally know more than 10 people whove changed religions in the past 5 years or so. NONE of them had felt the need to speak out against their former religion.
For some strange reason, only people who blow the Cult of Scientology seem to have this need to fight back against the cult. Why is that Louanne?
Considering the millions of "main stream" religion parishoners, you NEVER hear of anybody protesting against their former church. Scientology has what, MAYBE 100k members (REAL numbers Louanne, not scino-fluffed crap numbers), and more ex members protesting against that cult than all the other religions combined.
Why on earth do so many people that blow your cult feel this need to "to start or support a campaign with the purpose to destroy your former group"? Perhaps because theyve realized what a scam artist LRH was.
Posted By: Not anonymous
Date: 2008-11-13 06:11:17
You know, I came to these boards with an open mind, but these past few weeks of reading about this heinous CULT CALLED SCIENTOLOGY is making me want to join anonymous in their protests.
New article out of Poland. Looks like someone else wants to sue CoS because of its dangers, this time a direct danger to health!
240 Polish shipyard workers may bring the American Church of Scientology to court. Why? During a general overhaul of the ship, belonging to the Church, the Poles had to remove deadly dangerous carcinogenic blue asbestos - learned tvp.info [a Polish news tv station]
The employer has concealed the fact that the "Freewinds" contained mortally dangerous and carcinogenic blue asbestos. We were alarmed about this by the workers themselves - says Witold Maliński from the Polish branch of the company Nordica Engineering.
Persons who have direct contact with blue asbestos, are usually taken in with mesothelioma. This rapidly progressing disease is a very malicious - and always lethal - form of lung cancer.
Nordica stopped the renovation and brought their workers back to Poland. However, the shipyard workers had already removed more than 70 tons of the carcinogenic material from the ship. What is worse, they had been accommodated aboard the "Freewinds" for one month and a half. We are considering the possibility of demanding compensation for the exposure to health and life risks on behalf of our workers. At this moment, the company's owners are consulting the workers about a possible lawsuit - Witold Maliński from Nordica Engineering admits.
During talks with Nordica, the leaders of the Church of Scientology denied the presence of blue asbestos on the ship. But - as discovered by tvp.info - the cult was perfectly aware of the amount of asbestos on board.
"My father supervised the repair works on the" Freewinds" in 1987 and saw blue asbestos" - Astra Woodcraft, an ex-member of the cult, wrote on her blog. She is currently occupied with revealing the truth about this mysterious organization. Lawrence Woodcraft even produced an official affidavit about this case.
Astra Woodcraft also revealed that, according to the beliefs of the Church of Scientology, asbestos is not harmful and cannot cause lung cancer. Such healt problems may only be caused by... opponents of the sect, who do not agree with Scientology's beliefs.
"I was right! Louanne/Terryeo etc. is actually a GROUP of PR people at the Boston Org! It was pretty obvious that someone was 'looking over their shoulder' as each post was a product of the group (and yet still rife with spelling/grammer/technical errors).
Their job is to flood the internet with PR fluff to enhance $cientology's presence.
So fellow posters, when you see the errors and blatant lies posted here, rest assured that this is the best that $cientology has to offer in it's defense!"
I would like to see it. If terryeo and Louanne are indeed "hired" commenters here, then that is an interesting turn of events.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-13 09:46:00
Go to 888 chan in the /xenu/ section. Louanne is Ingo Lehmann, who's been IDed as working at the Boston Org. Originally from Munich, according to attendance records.
The dox made it clear that Louanne Lee is a shared pseudonym. We know of at least two people who write under it: Gloria Idda and Lehmann. (paraphrased from another website)
William, you have been positively identified - as troll. Contrary to your fake ID my name is real. But your interest in me personally is interesting to me too. Are you planning to threaten me personally?
TG, this is not a new article. Freewinds Asbesto is very old news. Are you running out of mud to throw into this thread? You see, here is what happened to the Freewinds:
non anonymous, your numbers are really off. There are far more critics of other religions that of the Church of Scientology. The main difference - I think - is that the noise level is much higher and some true fanatics and psychopaths are somewhat drawn to attack the most successful minority religion in the 21th Century.
Anonymous has not managed to convince anyone to leave the Church of Scientology after 10 months of yelling and crying wolf. Now, why is that? Because they are using lies, bias and obviously fluffed up "stories" as their arguments. You had better chances if you worked with truth but then there would be nothing left to support your destructive intentions.
I recently read the transcript of the Nighline 1992 show of David Miscavige (the current leader of the church). He says it better than I ever could:
"The attacks on us, though, I will say, in the last 40 years, are unprecedented and unrelenting, not even rivaled by any other group during that time period. And yet the Church of Scientology has survived throughout that entire time period, and grown and continue to grown, to grow. That is the real story of Scientology. And the only way that can occur is if you have something beneficial to offer people, and Scientology does. "
hax0r, an SP is always an antisocial personality. Having some anti-social traits does not make you an SP though. There is no stiff rule but documented and factual suppressive behavior (in this sense: http://www.scientologymyths.info/definitions/pts-sp.php) makes the difference.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-13 11:38:50
"Freewinds Asbestos is very old news." This is good to see in print here, since the Polish workers didn't know about it, and were exposed. It is good to see $cientology finally admit that they knew about it years ago. This should be helpful to them in their upcoming lawsuit against the cult.
Are you planning to threaten me personally? "-- Leave it to a $cientologist to think that everything is an 'attack'. I never mentioned such a thing.
I use my real name on here, the least you could do is use yours (Idda or Gloria or whoever's shift it is right now).
And yet the Church of Scientology has survived throughout that entire time period, and grown and continue to grown, to grow."
And yet by your very own leaked documents it has been proven that attendance is down, building have sat idle and unused for YEARS in some cases (clearwater for example), hardly examples of growing. I guess if your very own COB can lie to the press, we shouldnt expect much veracity here.
To be called a troll by a $cientologist is quite an honor, since you (guys and gals) get PAID to spread your 'message' all over the internet. (Professional Trolls) I have noticed a recent change, however, you have found a few more venues where response to your propoganda is not allowed. Good luck with that.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-13 11:45:15
OH, I almost forgot....when COB finds out that you posted about the Freewinds/asbestos thingy, and the fact that it is OLD NEWS, you will be DOWNSTAT today!!!
Posted By: Not anonymous
Date: 2008-11-13 12:34:16
Louanne:
"There are far more critics of other religions that of the Church of Scientology."
Documentation to prove your statement? Can you name me 10 people from all other religions combined? I can give you twice that number off the top of my head from you cult alone.
Posted By: Not anonymous
Date: 2008-11-13 12:38:00
Louanne:
"he main difference - I think - is that the noise level is much higher and some true fanatics and psychopaths are somewhat drawn to attack the most successful minority religion in the 21th Century."
So what youre saying is that those that leave your cult and "attack" scientology are fanatics and psychopaths? Then tell me why does your cult attract so many fanatics and psychopaths in the first place?
You truely are failing in your feeble attempt to justify your cult.
"So what youre saying is that those that leave your cult and "attack" scientology are fanatics and psychopaths? Then tell me why does your cult attract so many fanatics and psychopaths in the first place?"
No, what I am saying is "The main difference - I think - is that the noise level is much higher and some true fanatics and psychopaths are somewhat drawn to attack the most successful minority religion in the 21th Century."
Posted By: Not anonymous
Date: 2008-11-13 13:02:09
Louanne:
Again, youre dancing around a direct question. Instead of clarifying my question, you quote yourself to the response I referred to. You really need to re-assess your communication skills.
Yea, thanks Louanne, I forwarded Scientology knowing about the asbestos to the company in Poland. Thanks for your link on the page plus your admission of it. I hope it helps all those workers sue your cult. See Freewinds having blue asbestos is old news.....the workers who were exposed to it without their knowledge about to sue CoS is new news. The CoS flagship has the potential to cost them the most.
I am very outgoing and not anti-social, so by your deffinition I am not an SP! Good to know.
Oh, and Anonymous has convinced people to leave. Look at the stats, they are way down. And not only that but we keep people away. And we keep CoS out of as much as possible. For instance, the guy that runs Bridge Pub was going to do a webinar training course partnered with HP. A few people on the internet let HP know what he represented....and all of a sudden, he was not in the presentation. Just a small example, but nice proof how much we are impeeding CoS's advancement.
You know, Davey boy knows, Anonymous is the worst thing that has ever happened to the CoS. Because we keep the money away.
TG, you leave me speechless. What do I have to say to wake you up? "Great, continue!"? Anyway, you have your way of thinking, I got mine. Let's do something more creative.
What am I waking up from exactly? Me being asleep or awake doesn't change the fact that Polish workers are looking into legal action against CoS. It doesnt change a parent in Chicago being followed by CoS because their daughter is in a play. It doesn't stop a FBI informant being punched to the ground in front of her kid. It doesn't stop child labor (THAT TERRYEO ADMITS AND DEFENDS). It doesn't change CoS's attack on mental health.
I don't get why you put great, continue in there either. Please explain. I do have my way of thinking, its called thinking for oneself. I agree we obviously differ, but I never intended to get you or Terryeo to see my side. Just to keep you blathering the insanity that is CoS. I'll do something creative soon, I'll put flier's in Hubbard's books at the library so people stay away! I also am working on some nice photoshops of David Miscaviage, thats creative!
When I stated that I had already read the LRH books in the library I meant that I had already read them, before you suggested I read them. The books I have read, from memory, include "What is Scientology" (a huge book), "The Truth about Radiation", "Problems of work", "Scientology: A History of Man", "Self-Analysis" "Scientology 0-8", "Dianetics", "Creation of Human Ability".
But, I am sure you can appreciate that the question I have doesn't turn on what books I have or have not read. I don't want to distract you from what I am seeking your views on.
This is my question:
Considering that
the top-level Guardians office had been filled with SPs who had been Scientologists for many years and
certified OT's have later been discovered to be SPs and
there is no way they could have been allowed to have these acheivements had anyone known they were SPs,
do you know of any way I can tell if I am an SP before I join Scientology?
You pointed me to a website to help me to find out.
Any reader reading it must invariably come to the conclusion that he or she is definitely not an SP, and is therefore free to become a Scientologist.
That information on that website is useless for me to determe if I am an SP, isn't it?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-13 18:39:59
From another website, gives some insight into $cientology:
The principle vehicle for imposing doublethink is control over language, a dramatic example here being the Church of Scientology, a pseudo- religious cult oriented around the writings of L. Ron Hubbard. Hubbard created a dialect that rivals Orwell's Newspeak in its complexity and capacity for indoctrination. As journalist Stewart Lamont writes in Religion Inc: The Church of Scientology, "This org-speak is a feature of Scientology in which all terms are defined strictly and processes given technical names by Ron. Like the Red Queen, a word means what Ron says it means." Lamont further explains that this "org-speak is an alphabet soup of initials, jargon, and pseudo-technical expressions. This heightens the impression that a science is being taught and that it is esoteric and unavailable to the bungling ignoramuses in the outside world."
In Scientology courses, students are made to use a Hubbard-written dictionary to look up every unknown word in their texts. The dictionaries, according to Lamont, "define words the Hubbard way." In addition to the technical words, they include English words Hubbard wishes to redefine; he defines "having," for example, as "to be able to touch or permeate or to direct the disposition of." No other reference material is permitted to be used in reading Hubbard's texts. In other words, not only does the church control its source texts, it controls the tools with which the members process them. By its own definition, the Church has (directs the disposition of) the English language and thereby has its adherents' thoughts.
Political as well as religious cults can be distinguished from legitimate organizations by their use of doublethink. Though political cults espouse extremist ideologies, not extremist theologies, operationally they are virtually identical to religious cults, and they also go to great lengths to control the vocabularies of their members.
On one side Scientology claims that "man is basically good":
Scientology believes man to be basically good, not evil. It is his experiences that have led him to commit evil deeds, not his nature. Often, he mistakenly solves his problems by considering only his own interests, which then causes trouble for both himself and others. Scientology believes that man advances to the degree he preserves his spiritual integrity and values, and remains honest and decent. Indeed, he deteriorates to the degree he abandons these qualities.
http://training.scientology.org/wis1_1.htm
Now please explain to me, how can Scientology on one side claim that "man is basically good" , but on the other side say that about 20 % of all men are "Antisocial Personalities" that can not in any way be treated for betterment.
There are certain characteristics and mental attitudes which cause about 20 percent of a race to oppose violently any betterment activity or group.
A characteristic, and one of the sad things about an antisocial personality, is that it does not respond to treatment or reform. http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH11_1.HTM
Gregory, I'll stick to what I said earlier: "Live life. It's an adventure. If you can't, don't become a Scientologist."
It's really futile to introvert on the possibility that you could once decide to be a bad and destructive person that commits enough suppressive acts to be called a suppressive person. Maybe you will, so what? It's unlikely, but not utterly impossible. Character and behavior are not monitored by your genes but by you. You decide.
I was asking about the books because I wanted to see if we are talking about the same thing when we say "Scientology". Some people have the most absurd ideas about that. Well, you read a good mix there. If you are especially interested in SPs grap "Science of Survival" and "Introduction into Scientology Ethics", both available in most libraries on Earth...
hax0r - You raise an excellent question. Clearly, you have taken information that Scientology presents. Without actually going into all of (or quoting all of) either. On one hand we have, "man is basically good". On the other, "about 20% of people are anti-social". How can both of these statements be true?
This, like other Scientology data, requires an understanding of the whole section, to understand the other section. "Man is basically good". An anti-social person is, therefore, basically good. And the question you raise (I think) might be stated:
If man is basically good, how can 20% of mankind be anti-social AND basically good? This happens because the 20% do things against the common good because their past, learned behaviour tells them it is the best thing to do. A guy finds that if he misleads, lies just a little, and cheats his customers, he grows wealthy. He sells snake-oil, for example. Snake-oil doesn't actually have any curative powers, but his customers think it does. He has learned to mislead or to lie, in order to live better. He finds that if he causes some problems, he tends to get what he wants, even when it hurts other people. This is anti-social. Yet, given opportunity to examine his past misdeads, he might realize what is good and what is harmful. I hope this simplistic explanation helps separate the two statemetns for you. Better would be to read and understand the whole of each of Scientology's data sections.
Indeed, William Johnson. If you wish to never understand what Ron Hubbard intended to communciate, you can do as you suggest and never read what he meant when he used a word. Such as MEST - and acronymn for Matter, Energy, Space and Time (the physical universe). Or Thetan - that which is aware of being aware, you yourself without any of the accruterments, such as name or hair color. If you want to understand what Hubbard communicates, you understand the words he used as he defined them.
Now if you really want to go off the deep end, use a Chemistry book to understand your words while you study Physics. Impossible!
I had the understanding that LRH came to the conclusion that people were born SP or not. I might well be wrong on that. I didn't think that being SP or not was something you could choose by your actions.
Ok...this is too perfect...if I replace "snake oil" with "Scientology"
This happens because the 20% do things against the common good because their past, learned behaviour tells them it is the best thing to do. A guy finds that if he misleads, lies just a little, and cheats his customers, he grows wealthy. He sells Scientology, for example. Scientology doesn't actually have any curative powers, but his customers think it does. He has learned to mislead or to lie, in order to live better. He finds that if he causes some problems, he tends to get what he wants, even when it hurts other people. This is anti-social. Yet, given opportunity to examine his past misdeads, he might realize what is good and what is harmful. I hope this simplistic explanation helps separate the two statemetns for you.
Also, Louanne I called around, Science of Survival is not very available in libraries. Very few Hubbard books even at all. Didn't CoS just send em out too? Wonder where they all went.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-14 13:56:34
Terreyo, I HAVE read quite a few of lrh\"s missives (know thine enemy) and also HAVE downloaded the $cientology dictionary from wikileaks, and this is what definetely made me decide that $cientology is a cult, pure and simple.
From another website:
The quickest way to detect a cult is to sniff for doublethink. The cult seeks control over its membership not by providing a coherent theological system but by providing the opposite: an unstable theology infinitely malleable to the needs of the cult\'s top echelon and uninterpretable at all times to anyone below that level. Specifically, the cult destabilizes its theology by controlling its religious language-through ambiguity, definitional reversals, and deliberate imprecision. What ultimately separates religions from cults is not that cults seek to control the minds of adherents but that they employ Orwellian doublethink to do so and use the cover of language to effect the far more outrageous means of control set forth by CAN.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-14 14:33:22
OK you guys at the Boston org....lets try this.
You keep saying that $cientology 'is there to help'.
All I am asking is for incontrovertible, absolute proof that ONE $cientologist has been helped. Just one.
Since you won't even accept sworn testimony in court from ex-sea org members, or articles/ pictures from newspapers, that sets the bar pretty high. Obviously $cientology propaganda won't suffice.
So no anecdotal crap...'$cientology made me a better person--that won't wash.
Giving someone a massage doesn't count either.
Proof, scientific proof, verifiable proof, that ONE $cientologist has been helped by it.
Example..someone tries to get into MENSA, can't and then goes to $cientology, takes a few courses and BINGO, their IQ is now high enough to be a MENSA member. (Both test scores would be proof enough).
You get the idea, in the words of a famous ex-$cientologist Jason Beghe, "Show me a M$#%^(*&^%$#g clear!
I am reminded of the story of one of lrh's first 'clears', who supposedly had total recall as a result of $cientology, and yet couldn't remember what color tie he was wearing that she had seen 30 seconds before! (I know, by your standards, doesn't count)
Gregory, I'll stick to what I said earlier: "Live life. It's an adventure. If you can't, don't become a Scientologist."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
What and adventure! Scream at ashtrays! Stare at the person across from you. Go serve as a galley slave on board the Freewinds and come back with cancer from all the blue asbestos aboard! Rough it in the RPF! Smoke your head off outside an org and glower at all the wogs who are protesting the scam you fell for! You've not lived till you've been disconnected from your family, raped of your livelihood and money and then cast aside like a bag of old tangerines when you can no longer pay for auditing or slave away in the RPF!
Now if you really want to go off the deep end, use a Chemistry book to understand your words while you study Physics. Impossible!
And now you see why you fail. Your world is so simple and you are so uneducated you can't even conceive of a link between these two fields. A lot of Chemistry was known about but not understood for a long time. They knew that mixing A + B would create C but they didn't understand the fundamental reasons why until Physics explained what was happening at the atomic level. So in a way it is possible to involve a chemistry book while learning physics because the two sciences are intricately linked. It helps to have a background in chemistry if you are going to be involved in physics research and you need physics to understand the underlying process involved in chemical reactions.
This is how real science works. Ideas and study build upon each other. While in scientology, you have just LHR and his word and nothing else. But hey, if you want to buy into that fine. But don't screw around with my government and harm people in the process. If scientology's only crime was believing in goofy nonsense, we wouldn't even BE here right now.
Scientology was laid down by Ron Hubbard on Dianetics' earlier success. Dianetics was founded on the simple and frequently used idea that two people might talk about a problem one of them had. And the problem might reduce or even be resolved. This, you see, is Help. And that is surely the foundation of Dianetics. And that is surely the foundation of Scientology.
Hubbard did codify, he did draw boundries and establish ways to communicate that work better than other ways. Methods of talking that work better than other methods. Educational precedences, before talking, that work better. All, before and after, all is aimed only toward one thing. A well and happy person, an indivudal who is better off afterwards that before, a person who has been helped and who can apply the same, to help other people, too.
Critics (who posted earlier) who will post and deny this datum, are mistaken. Efficacity of help is the how and why of Scientology, of Scientology's Basics, of Scientology's Grade Chart, and of the Scientology Organization.
And 12 year olds can bark orders at 30 years old to facilitate this help. Help comes from a child who should be in school, not at work at an Org.
I think the why is make money, the how is sell a bunch of bull. Terry, you are a broken record and you are the only person that believes what you say. You say its about help, but that CoS can defend itself by suing anyone that ridicules it. You say its about help, but say its ok they try to destroy mental health. You say its about help, but say child labor is a-okay. Your arguement is empty, and no one is buying your snake oil.
TG, I am not going to participate in your pissing contest with terryeo but I want to note for the record that there are no "12 year olds barking orders at 30 years old" in orgs. 12 year old Scientologists are in school.
If people are helped by Dianetics, Dianetics is a valuable therapy. Dianetics is distinct from other sciences, because it is a closed field. The Science is completed. The studies it is based on need not be replicated.
Mr Hubbard concluded that 22% of people feel they are helped by any sort of attention that calls itself a therapy or claims to help - crystals, magnets, placebos, prayer. LRH cured himself of debilitating psychosomatic illnesses by using techniques he developed. These things are not for everyone, and neither is Dianetics. Dianetics only helps a proportion of the population, so most people who try Dianetics drop out of it.
Dianetics was discovered to not cure all personal problems, so Scientology was developed. Dianetics is the foundation of Scientology, but Scientology is not a science like Dianetics. LRH discoverd he had more than one soul in his body and invented a process to gradually get rid of some of the extra ones. He also discovered he had been given memory implants on a space station. Scientology is a field beyond science and Dianetics.
People can continue up the gradient from Dianetics to Scientology, until they feel their problems have been resolved. At that stage they need no more therapy. The final stage might not have been reached by anyone yet and has not been released. LRH continued to find extra souls that had not been audited out. LRH left his body in 1986 to carry on more research that he could not carry out in his body. This research has not yet been released.
Scientology sometimes doesn't work properly for people because some people are suppresive. These suppressive persons can be identified by a number of characteristics, but they cannot idenitify themselves. These are people like Hitler. In a practical sense, most suppresive persons are identified by their to their attitude to the Church of Scientology or their inability to be helped by Scientology. If a Church member were to lessen the faith of another person helped by Scientology, they risk being identified as a Suppressive Person. Just like a person who has been helped by a placebo will no longer be helped when they know it is a placebo, Suppresive Persons negate the gains made by others in Scientology, because they can't get gains themselves. Accordingly, a person will sometimes need to be declared suppressive, as a practical measure. There seems to be now way of knowing in advance just who will turn out to be suppressive.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-16 19:09:31
GREGORY:
"Dianetics is distinct from other sciences". FAIL. DIanetics is NOT science, and NOTHING contained within dianetics has EVER been scientifically verified.
"LRH cured himself of debilitating psychosomatic illnesses by using techniques he developed." FAIL AGAIN. No proof of any kind.
Letters exist that lrh did have psychological problems, but there is NO EVIDENCE that they were treated in any way, and upon reading his ramblings, one would tend to believe that he never received adequate treatment.
TERRYEO: I guess if the PR team from the Boston Org cannot produce any proof whatsoever that $cientology works, then that is that. Why even continue this discussion, or continue in $cientology?
A CHURCH is a place of worship....WHAT DO $CIENTOLOGISTS WORSHIP?
Sorry Louanne, I was just saying what Terryeo has said he has seen for himself in an org. He said he personally saw a 12 year old ordering around 30 year olds and it was amazing. If he is lying about this should we now discount everything he says since it can't be trusted? He said 12 year olds work there not me. I won't argue sematics, if you believe your a thetan good on ya mate. But RPF, Disconnection and Terryeo's already admitted child labor, those I will argue. I think its funny too, the only word on Hubbard leaving his body is from David Miscarriage, who still is in power today and has changed Hubbard's word. Sounds like he just wants money and power to me.
Posted By: Willliam Johnson
Date: 2008-11-17 07:23:45
Quote from Terryeo:
"Until you have seen a 12 year old walk into an org an begin to cause his orders to be obeyed, immediately and fully obeyed, you would have no idea how throughly trained those young, capable people are". Obviously Terryeo speaks from first-hand experience.
Not in school..Hmmmmm
Quote from Gregory:
Dianetics is the foundation of Scientology, but Scientology is not a science like Dianetics." FAIL. NO WHERE in the history of mankind or lron has ANYTHING in dianetics been proven to be correct. Not science, not even real.
. Another:
"He also discovered he had been given memory implants on a space station." Almost too batshit crazy to be commented on...almost.
Again:
"A church is a place of worship, WHAT DO $cientologists worship?"
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-17 07:33:06
Sound like someone who 'cured himself' of psychological problems?
Quote from lrh:
"And well, it starts like this -- it starts like this: I was up in the Van Allen belt -- this is factual, and I don't know why they're scared of the Van Allen belt, because it's simply hot. You'd be surprised how warm space is. Get down amongst the clouds and so forth, it can get pretty cold and damp. But you get well up and sunlight shining around and that sort of thing, it's quite hot. And the Van Allen belt was radioactively hot. A lot of photons get trapped in that area and so forth. And I was up there watching the sunrise. Well, that was very interesting. And my perception was very good, and I was taking a look at Norway and Essex and the places around, you know, and getting myself sort of oriented. And then something happened to me that I didn't know quite what had happened to me. I thought some facsimiles must have appeared in front of me, but they didn't look like facsimiles. And some other things happened and I had a feeling like I might possibly go into the sun. And a few other little uncomfortablenesses there where... That wasn't what awed me. But I got confused. I got confused because the sun was suddenly larger and then it was smaller and somehow or another I was doing a change of space process that I myself was not familiar with. And it made me sort of bite off my thetan fingernails just a little bit, you know?"
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-17 08:59:03
Did the great God THROGMAGOG cause Anonymous?
From the $cientology Administrative Dictionary:
THROGMAGOG, the Great God Throg- magog. He doesn't exist. He's everywhere at once. He's in all drinking water. If we say the Great God Throgmagog caused it the condition can never be erased. People get very upset with it because they can never penetrate to the causation. Never being able to penetrate to causation they cannot eradi- cate the condition so the condition goes on forever. (5611C15)
WJ, I understand now. You have no personal experience with Scientology and no other "information" than the crap one finds on the internet. Be advised that you have been thoroughly brainwashed and should do something about it.
"I invented this great god Throgmagog for one single and solitary purpose: to find out if the conscious mind could be removed from the individual and be made to think and give orders to the individual thereafter. ” - L. Ron Hubbard, 1952
But Louanne, you use the internet, so you are part of the crap.
Unfortunately, I like most educated people these days, think the internet is actually THE BEST resource that has ever been created. Whereas, crap, usually comes from a single person with an agenda. Internet does not brainwash, because you can find anything you want on it. All sides to an issue....which you cannot find in cults that restrict internet access for its members, like the cult of Scientology.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-17 13:33:38
The tradition of Gog and Magog (Hebrew גוג ומגוג; Arabic يأجوج و مأجوج) begins in the Hebrew Bible with the reference to Magog, son of Japheth, in the Book of Genesis and continues in cryptic prophecies in the Book of Ezekiel (see War of Ezekiel 38-39), which are echoed in the Book of Revelation and in the Qur'an. The tradition is very ambiguous with even the very nature of the entities differing between sources. They are variously presented as men, supernatural beings (giants or demons), national groups, or lands. Gog and Magog occur widely in mythology and folklore.
So lrh 'Invented' this. From the Old Testament? Hmmmmm
So you as a $cientologist can remove your mind and still make it think and give orders?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-17 14:25:07
Ron the Mathematician Ron had an acute mind for mathematical accuracy. While auditing he was able to place things in time to the nearest second even though the event could have occured millions, billions, or even trillions of years ago. For example, in his researches of his distant past, he recalled when he had previously gone to heaven (HCOB 11 May 1963). "The first time I arrived and the moment of the implant To Forget was dated at 43,891,832,611,177 years, 344 days, 10 hours, 20 minutes and 40 seconds from 10:02½ PM Daylight Greenwich Time May 9, 1963. The second series was dated to the moment of the implant To Forget as 42,681,459,477,315 years, 132 days, 18 hours, 20 minutes and 15 seconds from 11:02½ PM Daylight Greenwich Time May 9, 1963".
Another:
" This society belongs nominally to the Espinol United Stars. This is Sun 12, and it is one little tiny pinpoint. Their whole title is "Espinol United Stars..", pardon me, "Espinol United Moons, Planets and Asteroids, this part of the Universe is ours, Hup!"
But this, yeah, "This quarter of the Universe is ours," it translates better.
"This quarter of the Universe is ours." And it's so much quarter of the universe, and this is so lost in the middle of it that there's been no command post occupied for this system now since 1150 A.D., at the time when a group on Mars was finally abolished and vanished, and so forth, and nobody took any interest in this system. This system has been running wild since that time.
--- "The Free Being", SHSBC #309. 9 July 1963. (1:02)
"But there's the incident called "The Obscene Dog" with it's just a little bit later than Incident One. And sometimes actually by running it, why you can get the PC into Incident One. The Obscene Dog was a sort of a brass dog in a sitting position and anybody who got around to the front of the dog got caught in some electronic current and passed through the dog to the dogs rear end and spat out. Thetans didn't like this."
A man who could write things like this, who could plagiarize names, verses, ideas from the Bible, and yet state that Jesus was a pedophile, and no one was crucified, doesn't that at least MAKE YOU THINK?
Just sit and THINK for a few minutes, does all this sound normal to you, or the ramblings of someone in need of help? JUST THINK.
TG, true, so are you. To be more precise, the internet increases the necessity to tell biased crap from solid information. "Information" put out by those anti-scientology propagandists about Scientology usually has no source or has been altered from the source (e.g. incomplete quotes, leaving out the time of a story etc). So additionally to some sane filtering process it might be recommendable to increase one's ability to recognize missing information. Reading the hateful eruptions WJ presents as his "information" I am slowly forming the opinion that either those two abilities are not taught in school anymore or that the percentage of people with mental deficiencies is considerably higher amongst anti-scientology "protesters" than any control group. So yes, there is nothing wrong with the internet. It's what we make out of it.
Yes, I agree my handle "TG" is, however, I never called the internet crap. It is what we make out of it. A hivemind if you will. Kindo of like something else I've heard of before. You mention one's ability to recognize missing information, why is it then some Scientologists fail to recognize the missing information when it is thrown at them, like Hubbard himself giving OT3, like on Gawker. I haven't read Hubbard like WJ evidently has, but what he says sure sounds like the norm for him. How is him posting what Hubbard said hateful? Its the man's words I assume unless you are saying it is not his words.
People frequently dispute what is science or not. In fact, that dispute is the essence of the scientific process as far as I know. 99 people out of 100 might think that something is not a science, but that doesn't make it wrong.
If any person "sane" or "crazy" could do what LRH did, I think you'd have to acknowledge they were on to something. Maybe not what they said they were on to, but something powerful in a social, if not a strictly scientific sense.
WG, I don't think Hubbard was totally insane, at least not at first. What he is describing there sounds very much like a trip on acid or mescaline or some other psychoactive compound. From what we have been told by some who were on his ship in the 60's and 70's, the man was on a galaxy of drugs both legal and illegal during his days sailing around on the Apollo.
Before that he was criminally insane and he was said to be paranoid, but not totally raving insane until he bent his brain on drug use. Even the Navy psychs that he BEGGED for help from in the 1940's did not think he was totally nuts. He was just looking for attention and they knew that. (http://www.ronthenut.org/beg.htm)
He had it enough together to create the worlds best scam. But like so many criminals, he become a victim of his own success and spent his last years hiding from several governments and then dying in a pool of his own drool in a safe house.
There is a lot more stuff debunking the "great" L. Ron Hubbard here http://www.ronthenut.org/
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-18 09:52:14
Quoting L. Ron Hubbard:
In 1942 - December 17th or thereabouts - while training in Miami, Florida, I met a girl named Ginger who excited me. She was a very loose person but pretended a great love for me. From her I received an infection of gonnohorea (sp?). I was terrified by it, the consequences of being discovered by my wife, the navy, my friends. I went to a private doctor who treated me with sulfa-thiazole and so forth. I thought I was cured but on a plane headed to Portland, Ore. I found I was not. I took to dosing myself with sulfa in such quantities that I was afraid I had affected my brain."
TG, from thousands of pages available for quoting WJ - almost as a rule - a) pulls out those that have no relevance in Scientology doctrine and b) posts them without showing the context or where the full source can be found (I assume so prevent the discovery that he is a dirty propagandist who only can "survive" by leaving out relevant information like dates, circumstances, sources etc). At least he is open about his agenda, destroying a religion by using dirty tricks.
I'm sorry Louanne, but you seem to agree that yes Hubbard did say those things, that read, bats$it insane. Even if, lets take it for granted, they are out of context and no relevance to CoS doctrine. CoS still has giant painted pics of this man, and broze busts, and praise him as the best human ever. I'd say a background of saying things that are completely nuts matter greatly to what he said in regards to Scientology. It gives a while view of the man. And if he said that crazy stuff, what else did he say that was equally crazy?? Hint: the answer is a money making scheme disguised as a religion.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-18 13:14:31
I am not the one who has a fully-equipped office in every org on the planet for lron. When $cientologists are asked 'what do you worship", the answer is lron hubbard. To salute his picture, leave cigarettes in his office for his return, this is all obvious.
With that said, in order for you Louann et al to see that lron was not the 'saint' you think he is, I have assembled a few quotes for your enjoyment.
For example:
I carried this fear of the disease [gonnohorea] to sea with me. I was reprimanded in San Diego in mid-43 for firing on the Mexican coast and was removed from command of my ship.
In what context is having Gonorrhea a 'good' thing? (These are quotes from his diary, by the way).
When I do provide you with citations, court documents etc, you ignore them, so I figured this way is easier on my typing fingers. You provide no such documentation in attempting to prove your points, so why should I?
The more I research $cientology the more I realize how corrupt and criminal the cult really is. Showing lron for the psychopath he really was surely will enable those who might be considering $cientology a 'second opinion.'
William Johnson Date: 2008-11-18 13:14:31 I am not the one who has a fully-equipped office in every org on the planet for lron. When $cientologists are asked 'what do you worship", the answer is lron hubbard.
You know, William Johnson, It is simpleminded folk like you, who give those with curiosity, a bad name. You have NEVER asked anyone "what do you worship" because no Scientologist would ever say that, not ever. You've made up a total lie and fabrication and then posted it as if it were real and a fact.
People like to learn about what they don't know, Ii is completely natural and normal to want to learn about those things you don't know. Give people an opportunity, don't make up complete lies and fabricate stories, okay? And just to let you know, you type that name like this: L. Ron Hubbard.
I thought you typed it L. Con Flubbtard. Giving people with curiousity a bad name? I don't get it, but I do agree ya prolly don't worship him in the sense of a god....if I had to make an equation to a religion, which I hate to do with this business we debate, is it fair to say Flubby is more like a prophet other than a diety?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-19 05:38:24
Lets see:
Every org has an office set up for lrh ready for him to 'come back'
Every org has BIG pictures, busts etc of him etc.
He is referred to as "Source" (capital S)
$cientology members are only allowed to use his 'dictionary'.
He actually changed English words to suit him
His words are like 'gospel' and must be followed without question
His picture is saluted at 'events'
Yea I'd say that was a fair assessment, $cientologists worship lrh.
The few publics that I have talked to say that is what turned them off to the whole deal. It is not normal to worship someone like that, especially someone with his background.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-19 09:36:09
"Make money. Make more money. Make others produce so as to make money . . . However you get them in or why, just do it." and "Make sure that lots of bodies move through the shop,"
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-19 12:17:46
"The South African native is probably the one impossible person to train in the entire world — he is probably impossible by any human standard." - - L Ron Hubbard
Sure enough William Johnson, you don't understand what Ron Hubbard was saying and are willing to use his words to prove you don't understand what he was saying. Much the same as other Anonies, no suprise. Meantime we have the Church of Scientology buying a modern castle in South Africa, after buying a Church in the city there, etc. How does this add up? Millions of (your currency of choice) spent, vs William Johnson's misunderstood quotations.
You know the Nazis has a big fascination with using castles as well and did that somehow make them good people?
I'm sure you will hang the face of Hubbard on the walls up there as if it was a swastika and salute it just the same. Who cares what kind of buildings you own. It doesn't matter at all. If the organization is evil then it is evil no matter what kind of buildings it may have.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-19 18:10:27
Every time Terryeo that someone sees the real lrh, that is one less $cientologist to take advantage of.
Google is your friend.
The more your cult spends, the less available to catch unsuspecting publics.
(Sorry that you were banned from Wikipedia for false posts, too bad about that).
Surely you 'homo novis' can come up with something better than buying property? Are the land prices better here than in the Marcabian Confederacy? Are prices on Venus as low as here on Teegeeack?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-19 18:40:38
Hey, TG it appears that we think alike!
They still haven't answered my question as to why the spikes on the poles at gold base point in instead of out! They were meant to keep people IN instead of keep people OUT. Imagine that!
If someone high up in the cult told terryeo it was time to 'end cycle' he would be in the kitchen mixing up kool-aid as we speak!
Posted By: Not anonymous
Date: 2008-11-19 22:42:45
Unreal!! People quote the cult leader, then the culty replies that youre taking his quotes out of context and instead tries to justify how good they are by the number of buildings and castles theyve bought?! Unfreakin real. Just shows their twisted mentality, eh?
The nazis built concentration camps in flossenburg, germany. (scilon-esque reply): You just dont understand what those buildings REALLY were!!! Some officer rooms had real hardwood floors and mohogony desks! So see? You just dont "get it".
lol
PS. Terreyo, just how do you think your cult had enough (your currency of choice) to buy all those buildings? Hmm.. perhaps through some sort of scam called Scientology?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-20 08:54:07
Hubbard Center closed up in Samara
Samara, November 20, Interfax – The Samara city court has banned work of Dianetics Center as its staff-members worked without license and practiced hypnotherapy and Ron Hubbard teaching.
The Samara Region Prosecutor’s Office reported that staff-members of the Dianetics Center lectured at seminars and courses on dianetics and scientology without having special licenses.
“These educational courses allegedly aimed at forming world outlook and life style based on priority of human values. They tried to reach it by applying philosophy of improving people worked out by Hubbard. Besides, they practiced programs of “catharsis” and “auditing” based on hypnotherapy used in psychiatric medicine,” the message says.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-20 11:41:29
Ever wonder what was going on with the E-meter? You know, hours of having electric current passing through your body?
An interesting read at:
http://www.lermanet.com/e-metershort.htm
A quote:
The magnitude of charge provided to a human body in a 2.5 hour exposure to the E-meter is approximately 1 coulomb.
The magnitude of charge provided to the human body by a set of three shocks used in a single treatment of Electro Convulsive Shock therapy, ECT, is only 1.2 coulombs.
Ironic isn't it, that Scientology's pet arch demonic enemy, psychiatrists, in shock treatment, give people essentially the same dose of electric charge that Scientology will give the unsuspecting public in one session?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-20 11:58:03
Christians vs $cientologists (you can't be both)
"For those of you whose Christian toes I may have stepped on, let me take the opportunity to disabuse you of some lovely myths. For instance, the historic Jesus was not nearly the sainted figure (he) has been made out to be. In addition to being a lover of young boys and men, he was given to uncontrollable bursts of temper and hatred.... You have only to look at the history his teachings inspired to see where it all inevitably leads. It is historic fact and yet man still clings to the ideal, so deep and insidious is the biologic implanting....
No doubt you are familiar with the Revelations section of the Bible where various events are predicted. Also mentioned is a brief period of time in which the arch-enemy of Christ, referred to as the anti-Christ, will reign and his opinions will have sway ... this anti-Christ represents the forces of Lucifer (literally, the "light-bearer" or "light-bringer"), Lucifer being a mythical representation of the forces of enlightenment.... My mission could be said to fulfill the Biblical promise represented by this brief anti-Christ period".
-- L. Ron Hubbard, Student Briefing, OT VIII Series I
Scientology is not and never was about memorized knowledge. Scientology is not the knowledge which critics are criticizing, The subject you criticize? That is not the subject of Scientology. Don't you cirtics ever wonder why, for all of your effort and criticsm, you get little result? The reason that you get little result is because you are constantly misdirected BY YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING. You think you are criticizing a subject, and you are criticizing, but the subject you are criticizing is not Scientology, but is another subject. You are battering your heads against a wall of your own manufacture. A wall that was never erected and doesn't exist. And you hammer away at that again and again and again, but never recognize the subject that does exist. There, I've tried to tell you again. Oh hum.
This battery thing, the E-meter thing? Take up a fullly charged flashlight, normal flashlight battery and touch both ends with a hand. Isn't that exciting, though? You don't feel anything, no one feels anything. That battery experience would be very similar to holding an Emeter's cans. Twiddle Di Dee, Sillly Bee.
Found this on an Amazon review thread. Seemed relevant:
"Hello, customers of Amazon. We are Anonymous.
A conspiracy to censor access to an important new book has been brought to our attention. This conspiracy is part of an ongoing campaign by the cult of Scientology to suppress information about its business activities and international operations.
Author John Duignan is a highly placed Scientology defector. His book called 'The Complex' is already making news around the world. It contains everything from first-hand accounts of the brainwashing tactics used by Scientology to control its members, an eyewitness report of the harsh treatments used in Scientology's private punitive labor facilities known as the "Rehabilitation Project Force", among many other examples of the brutal and vile treatment the cult extends to its members.
Scientology does not want you to hear John Duignan's story. Scientology wants you to remain blind to the damning information it contains. Scientology does not want you to buy this book.
By putting pressure on companies like Amazon, Scientology hopes to wipe this book from history. Following a meeting between Tom Cruise and senior Amazon executives on November Fifth in Seattle, Washington, Amazon has decided to make John Duignan's book unavailable to customers in the United Kingdom at this time.
Amazon's preferential treatment of the Church of Scientology is not unknown to us. We have also noticed that any unfavorable reviews of pro-Scientology books, including, but not limited to, Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health, are commonly deleted with no valid reason. The reasons Amazon gives for deleting these are vague, and are usually for Terms of Service violations that are rarely, if ever, consistent with the actual content in the review.
Scientology is well known for its aggressive, vindictive behaviour and its sinister attempts spanning decades to suppress factual records contributed by journalists and cult victims alike. Scientology recognizes the role of media corporations in the control of public information and actively targets celebrity recruitment in order to leverage and influence. Where soft methods are ineffective, Scientology uses legal threats and other terror tactics to coerce companies and individuals who would speak out.
This latest conspiracy to bury yet another detailed account of Scientology's inner workings is a mistake that Anonymous will bring to the public eye.
The sale of “The Complex” has been blocked to Amazon customers in the UK, but it may be bought online from Eason & Son in Ireland, who will ship worldwide, or directly through the book’s publisher, Merlin Publishing. Instructions for purchase are shown at the end of this video.
To the agents of Scientology behind this latest attempt at censorship, we say this. Your ceaseless, blatant attempts to defy free speech will not succeed. We observe you have failed to learn that knowledge is free. Expect your censorship and unswerving hypocrisy to be combated. By continuing to hide the plain truth about Scientology from the public, you achieve nothing but an escalation in demand for freely available information that exposes the facts about your abusive and obsessively secretive organization.
Anonymous is watching. Anonymous will continue to alert the public whenever you attempt to hide information that belongs in the public domain. You cannot hide from the internet.
Knowledge is free. We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us"
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-22 13:42:15
"WJ, fake OT VIII, created to get the Christians to attack Scientologists. They turned out to be smarter. And you?"
Smart enough to get the REAL OTVIII from court documents that your cult has tried to prevent being on the internet! No reason for Christians to attack $cientology, just they need to be forewarned of what it is all about! (I guess you don't have the $300,000.00 necessary to get to that level).
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-23 04:07:37
After you get that nasty taste out of your mouth....folks need to know that almost ALL of your so-called "scriptures' are easily available on the internet. Example wikileaks. Also that there have been several court cases where your cult has filed suit in an attempt to remove 'scriptures' from public view, also available online. Google is your friend. Sorry about however much money you ALREADY spent, but you can get to OT III at least by simply reading this stuff online (Complete with lrh dictionary), or contact folks in the FREEZONE if you feel the need for electric current through your body. It appears that I am not the one uninformed.
Anyone who wants to practice Scientology as a religion can do so without the orgs and without paying a dime. We have made the information free and accessible to anyone who wants to find out about it. They say religion is free. We have made Scientology free.
William Johnson .. no that isn't quite the claim, but eventually that might become the claim. And yes, by all means, simply check out books at your local library, explore online at bonofide sites, and so on. Read to understand and retain your own judgement.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-24 10:42:42
That is a great idea.
Any normal person can read a few pages of dianetics and see it for the scam it really is. No science, just undocumented claims by a science fiction writer.
While at the library, use their computer and look at sites like
Wikileaks (where all the $cientology documents are)
Xenu.net
exscientologykids.com
scientology-lies.com
scientology-kills.com
truthaboutscientology.com
whyaretheydead.net
and don't forget to see the Tom Cruise video for some laughs.
I agree that someone shouldn't dismiss $cientology outright, they should make an informed decision. Why give money to the cult when all their info is readily available on the internet!
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-24 12:59:47
It appears that the 'swordsman' who was killed by $cientologists in the LA Celebrity Center parking lot was Mario Majorski, who's last completions were in 2004. It appears that $cientology is not all the mental heath 'helping' cult it's practitioners make it out to be.
There is some debate as to whether the shooter was a private security guard hired by $cientology, or a sea org member moonlighting as a security guard.
Another good reason to stay away from the cult. If your auditing etc. goes wrong, you stand a good chance of being shot!
May God have mercy on his family, as it appears that $cientology certainly didn't..
WJ, fake OT VIII, created to get the Christians to attack Scientologists. They turned out to be smarter. And you?
How do you know it is fake? You would have to be OT VIII yourself to know.
OT VIII US District Court, Central District of California Fishman Case No 91-6426 HLH (Tx) HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor. East Grinstead, Sussex HCO BULLETIN OF 5 MAY 1980 LIMITED DISTRIBUTION ISSUE I OT VIII Course Students OT OT VIII Auditors OT VIII C/Ses AO Review Auditors AO C/Ses OT VIII Series I C O N F I D E N T I A L STUDENT BRIEFING By the time you read this I will no longer be occupying the body and identity that you have known as Ron. That identity continues to live in the hearts and minds of many as well as in on-Source tech and admin centers around the planet, and will inspire for years to come Scientologists and lovers of truth everywhere. What follows is a story that has been withheld, for reasons which will soon be obvious, until such time as there were enough OTs that something could be done about it. That time is now. It is not a nice or a pretty story, but I trust that having arrived on the OT VIII Course you are ready to hear it. You have undoubtedly heard pieces of data over the years that hinted at the greater untold reality of my mission here on Earth, but the story was never written, nor spoken, in its entirety due to security problems that have unfortunately always plagued the organization. It is only now that I feel it safe to release the information, although the time is rapidly approaching when I will have no choice in the matter, the hour draws that near. I am not going to delve too deeply into specifics as people have a tendency to bog themselves down in significance, which would only serve to delay the immediacy of the task at hand. Therefore I will be brief. Some eighty-odd million years ago Earth time (it actually dates at 78, 395, 042 but dates are a bit superfluous with this material) plans were drawn by a group outside the MEST universe for the eventual takeover of a good portion of this universe. Not a particularly large nor imaginative crew, their exterior perspective, however, gives them considerable advantage over tho time-bound beings of the MEST universe. Borrowing from earlier operations such as Helatrobus, they conceived an ongoing implant, some portions of which have been fairly faithfully rendered in parts of the Bible. This implant, laid in by carefully controlled genetic mutation at Incident Two of OT III and periodically reinforced by controlled historic events since then, makes it effectively impossible for beings on the more heavily affected planets such as Earth to become free. It causes progressive genetic "evolution" that gives the subject population greater and greater susceptibility to the telepathic impingement and direction of the controllers. In its final stage the progression becomes almost geometric, and it is this final stage that we are rapidly approaching. (0129) Another aspect of this GE-line implant is that the body becomes in effect a sort of theta trap that kicks in heavily on the being should he attempt to expand his horizons beyond that of pure physical universe reality. There can be temporary key-outs which we have all experienced in varying degrees, but until this area is handled it can honestly be said that there is no hope for continued expansion. The good news is that once this is run out. Expansion becomes rather effortless and almost automatic. No doubt you are familiar with the Revelations section of the Bible where various events are predicted. Also mentioned is a brief period of time in which an arch-enemy of Christ, referred to as the anti-Christ, will reign and his opinions will have sway. All this makes for very fantastic, entertaining reading but there is truth in it. This anti-Christ represents the forces of Lucifer (literally, the "light bearers" or "light bringer"), Lucifer being a mythical representation of the forces of enlightenment, the Galactic Confederacy. My mission could be said to fulfill the Biblical promise represented by this brief anti-Christ period. During this period there is a fleeting opportunity for the whole scenario to be effectively derailed, which would make it impossible for the mass Marcabian landing (Second Coming) to take place. The Second Coming is designed, among other things, to trigger a rapid series of destructive events. With the exception of the original Buddhism, virtually all religions of any consequence on this planet, mono- and pantheistic alike, have been instruments to speed the progress of this "evolution of consciousness" and bring about the eventual enslavement of mankind. As you know, Siddhartha Gautama never claimed to be anything more than a man. Having caught on to this operation, he postulated his own return as Metteyya, part of which prophecy will have been fulfilled upon the passing of L. Ron Hubbard. For those of you whose Christian toes I may have stepped on, let me take the opportunity to disabuse you of some lovely myths. For instance, the historic Jesus was not nearly the sainted figure has been made out to be. In addition to being a lover of young boys and men, he was given to uncontrollable bursts of temper and hatred that belied the general message of love, understanding and other typical Marcab PR. You have only to look at the history his teachings inspired to see where it all inevitably leads. It is historic fact and yet man still clings to the ideal, so deep and insidious is the biologic implanting. It is a good joke that the Galactic Confederacy is associated with the Serpent in the Garden, the beast and other emissaries of the "Prince of Darkness". Yet in certain passages and esoteric interpretations of the Bible (much of which has been taken out and effectively suppressed for centuries) as well as the Cabbalah, the truth reveals itself quite nicely for the clever and the ungullible. So it really is a race against time and one that we happen to be losing at the moment, as the implant drama inexorably plays itself out in spite of the breakneck pace I've managed to keep up these last thirty-five years. I had an inkling, but only that, of the insidiousness of this material as far back as 1945. Later, in charcteristic over-optimism, I thought that R6 would be the end of it. But that was followed by NOTs and the Purification Rundown and still the string continued to unwind with the ball at the end of it just out of sight. It makes ons wonder about such things as fate and destiny, such (0130) was the resolve with which I managed to cling to that string, not often knowing how close I was to falling into the abyss myself, but destiny is merely the rationalization of feeble minds. Things don't just happen, they are caused. And causative beings can undo the plans of madmen and would-be enslavers, no matter how long those plans may have been in the making. I will soon leave this world only to return and complete my mission with another identity. Although I long to stretch my arms back in repose on some distant star in some distant galaxy, it appears that is one dream that will have to wait. But my return depends on people like you doing these materials thoroughly and completely so that there will be a genetically uncontaminated body for me to pick up and resume where I left off. A body free of religious mania, right/wrong dichotomy and synthetic karma. The job ahead is far too tough to even contemplate doing with your standard -- courtesy of certain other-dimensional players and their Marcab pieces, many of whom are right here in the general populace -- genetically altered body. Without the biogenetic meddling of those who stand outside time (who cannot yet directly influence our world and must work through others) the dwindling spiral is not nearly as automatic and self-perpetuating as it appears. There are regions even in isolated parts of the Milky Way where poets are free to poet and magicians can paint reality with their magic wands and exteriorize without body kickback. But these areas unfortunately are fewer and fewer. I will return not as a religious leader but a political one. That happens to be the requisite beingness for the task at hand. I will not be known to most of you, my activities misunderstood by many, yet along with your constant effort in the theta band I will effectively postpone and then halt a series of events designed to make happy slaves of us all. So there you have it. The secret that I have kept close to my chest all these years. Now you too are part of this secret and I no longer have to shoulder the burden alone or live with the possibility of body death before all the data could be released. And with this briefing I entrust to each of you the responsibility for this material until such time as I am able to return. For we have no help from any other quarter in this matter. The handful of secret societies throughout history that have caught on to this game have long since fallen by the wayside or been taken over and become instruments of the very menace they were set up to combat. The rundown is long and can be arduous, but it must be done thoroughly if there is to be any effect not only on the body of the pre-OT but the body of his or her progeny as well. There is some danger, but with OT VII thoroughly complete it is not nearly so great as the danger witnessed by assorted unfortunates who happened to stumble into this area in their sleep or in moments of reverie or anaten, experiencing an hitherto mysterious phenomenon known as "spontaneous combustion". CAUTION: DO NOT BE PTS WHILE TRAVERSING THIS THIRD AND FINAL WALL OF FIRE But the area is well charted, the rundown many years in secret development, and by the time you read this undoubtedly completed on myself. The wins awaiting you are like none that you have ever experienced, not just for you, but for your children, your children's children and the whole of mankind, if we succeed. And we will. If we had time we should pity the many poor souls, from (0131) 1950 to PT, who chose such an exactly inopportune moment to drop off the road to truth and disconnect from reality, the full burst and glory of OT practically within their grasp. But we haven't the time to "wax philosophic" or ponder might have beens. The rundown follows. Again I say, do it thoroughly and completely, for it is your ticket to the stars. And beyond! L. RON HUBBARD FOUNDER LRH:lrh Copyright (c) 1980 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Ok, i just asked Michael Pattinson, who is actually an OT8 ex scientologist, if this is part of OT8 and he said none of this was part of the OT8 that he made. The OT8 that Ariane Jackson posted on the internet is the real OT8.
TG, "Lou or Terry, did you know Mr. Majorski? Sorry for your loss if you did."
He was not a Scientologist. Known as a public threat to the courts and not because of Scientology. but you can do your own public document research. You will find that it is this kind of people who is very open ears for the "DO IT FAGGOT" yelling Anonymous-crowd. Their support for such actions pushes such people over the edge and then they go an try to chop other people's head off. Or kill a couple, like Auvinen did. I am welcoming the investigation very much and I am very curious to read some time in the future which user name he used on whyweprotest.net or maybe here? Haven't read anything from Ghostbear for a while.
LOL, and I thought anons were bad at speculation sometimes Louanne. Actually this guy sued a "psych" back in the 1990's with the help of Ken Moxon. It's not surprising that he did this. We've already seen a lot of violence from scientologists at our protests. Like for example the guy who ran up and hit an anon in LA and then ran down the street like mad, among many others. You start with people who are vulnerable, then you add scientology "tech" and then you get people in a broken mental state. Most just shamble off once they have had enough. Some protest. And a few snap completely like this guy, who should have been on his medication from some reports I am reading. Hubbard's "tech" is an abject failure and this is yet more proof. Medication kept his problems under control, but scientology didn't do a damn thing for him. It's just sad that now you have to come up here and smear a dead guy because he is making you guys look bad. That's some ethics there isn't it Louanne?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-25 06:12:14
"You will find that it is this kind of people who is very open ears for the "DO IT FAGGOT" yelling Anonymous-crowd. Their support for such actions pushes such people over the edge and then they go an try to chop other people's head off."
This guy had advanced as far as the L-11 rundown at Flag! By your own records, he either was 'clear' or very close to it. And yet you say he could be easily led by Anonymous. SHAME ON YOU for forsaking your 'religion'.(control of MEST and all that)
The guy was a $cientologist. FACT, easily verifiable on the internet, having taken courses as late as 2004.
The guy was mentally unstable. FACT, his actions demonstrate that.
So, not only did the cult FAIL to provide him with the help he desperately needed, they shot him.
Bottom line, both figuratively and literally, the cult of $cientology Killed Mario Majorski.
Louanne, even Tommy Davis said he was a Scientologist. (Readers please search "Tommy Davis" on youtube, its great stuff.) Tommy debates how recently he was a member, saying something like 15 years when the completions show 4 years, but at least he admits he was a Scientologist at one time. It is fact that this man was in kahoots with Moxon in the 90's.
Why is it people associated with Ken Moxon end up dead? Thats hypothetical.
Seriously, he was at one point in the CoS in California, I asked if you knew him and if so I sincerely give you my condolences. Life is too precious. I wait too to see what is revealed when the officials are finished with their investigation.
Also, low blow on Ghost Bear, that's like me saying, "Where's Terry been, is he Mario really?"
Dream on. Mario Majorsky left the Church many years ago and was not a Scientologist. Obviously. you guy's incompetence even in interpreting internet "facts" is stunning. "I will come to an event" = completion?
And the following probably happened because a man from Mars ordered him, right?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-25 10:50:21
From the Wollersheim affadavit:
"Level 2 is the area of confidential mind domination techniques: Power and Power Plus processes, R6EW, the Clearing Course, OT 1, OT 2, OT 3, OT 3X, OT 4, OT 5, OT 6, OT 7, (OT 8-29 are claimed to exist but are not released), L-10, L-11, L-12, NED for OT's, and Super Power. All the preceding are names of confidential highly guarded secret materials.
These techniques, if ever examined by qualified professionals outside the cult, will be found to be dangerous, sophisticated methods of brainwashing and mental domination. Hubbard said that if a foreign government ever got these processes they would throw the population into a super controlled slave society. The cult itself, in secret materials you study when you start Level 2, warns about unauthorized exposure to these materials. You are told, in no uncertain terms, that these procedures can cause illness, death, insanity, personality splits, and schizophrenia (but only to outsiders, not to cult members)."
WJ, between his contact and scientology are 18 years, a lot of mind altering drugs and several times he spent in jail for threats and violence though I understand that you want to smear this on the Church, considering your usual ejaculations and personal attacks in this forum.
And yet more hypocracy form the "church" of scientology. A man dies tragically and instead of sympathy for him and his family, all they can do is smear him online and say he was on drugs, a criminal, etc.
This folks is what you can expect when you decide to leave. Smear campaigns. It happens to people who don't die too. Look at what they have done to ex member Arnie Lerma and many others.
"Mario Majorsky left the Church many years ago and was not a Scientologist."
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but for one to leave a group, mustn't one be part of said group?
It's funny that you say people are trying to smear this on the church when in your opening statement on the subject you stated "is this kind of people who is very open ears for the "DO IT FAGGOT" yelling Anonymous-crowd". Whos smearing who you hypocritical, double speaking, back tracking PR grunt?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-25 12:46:08
The man last appeared (SO FAR) in a $cientology publication in 2004. Why would that be if he left 18 years ago? Hmmmm.
Your math is a little off (to be expected). Lots more info to come.
This thing is only in the beginning stages. You can deny his being a $cientologist all you want (after all that IS your job) but the facts will speak for themselves. Good thing about the Internet (wayback machine etc.) is that $cientology can't remove him from the internet like they are obviously doing to their files.
Doomguy, your viewpoint is rather shocking. It's ok that scientologists get their head chopped off, yes?
I am happy that this security managed to avert the dangers for himself and several others, not to mention several hundreds who were at lunch just some yards away. I am not an advocate for lethal weapons but I doubt that pepper spray would have stopped this lunatic.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-25 18:18:31
Louanne, (whomever's shift it is, you seem to have lost your grasp of the English language) Doomguy is simply pointing out your 'official' point of view, that the death of this person is of no consequence to you or your cult. As an official spokesperson, you could have worded your reply much better.
Also, to refer to a fellow $cientologist as a 'lunatic' is disgraceful as well. There will be sec checks to pay for that.
More information is coming to light about the fellow $cientologist that your cult killed, I think it would be a fair wager that wherever he called home, there is mail waiting on the poor man from the cult, soliciting funds for whatever the current money-laundering scheme is.
You may attempt to ridicule Anonymous, but they are the only ones so far who have expressed any concern or condolence for this man's family. Your cult failed him in several ways, the least you could do as a paid spokesperson is express remorse over killing him, and wish the best for his family. SHAME ON YOU AND YOUR CULT.
Hmmm, how is an official response one line from Footbullet Man, aka Tommy Davis? Wheres the full response? In another AP article Footbullet Man talks about how he's been uninvolved for years with CoS, but stats show 2004. And his wacko behavior started up in 2005. Not a big difference in time.
Now, I understand if CoS realized he was crazy and cut him loose in 2004, but no Scientologist has said as such. Also you ignore that the same man you reference for an official statement, Footbullet Man, also said this man was in CoS at one point, yet you have denied it outright. Again, please explain and do not ignore me. Oh, and for the casual viewer, if you want to see Footbullet Man in all his glory, he is the creapy Scientologist in these videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gE3Y4JwJ0jM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwTDvfjcUJU
THIS ABSOLUTELY CRAZY MAN is the offical response Louanne is referring too.
Louanne, I will repeat what I said. What I said is why is there no sympathy for the dead man and his family? He is dead and no one else got hurt. So why are you bothering to smear him? Can't you imagine what kind of hurt that must cause to his grieving relatives? It would seem there is no sympathy or empathy to be found in scientology. Only accusastions and smear and rubbing salt into the wounds of his family by spreading what he did wrong, be it real or imagined by you or your cult.
Lol, no one is more extensive knowledge than a critic, from what is said here. Still, when it comes to trusting someone's evaluation, a safe place to start is; can they add 2 +2, do they know the subject at all. And the critics have failed my most basic, foundational questions. Such as "Does the Church consider itself helpful"? If you don't understand 2+2, how can you be trusted with more complex questions? The Critics here misunderstand, mis-evaluate, misconstrue, mis-state, misquote and overgeneralize. Now slow down before you froth at the mouth guys, take a deep breath and blow it out.
Scientologists do aim to be helpful. There is no need to be overly critical. Rest assured that no one can be happy that, in this instance, the Church took the Mr Majorsky's money, couldn't help him, ended up having to kill him and now seek to disown him.
I hope there is an honest lesson that can be learned from this. Rest his soul.
Thanks for chiming it Terry with....nothing to add and nonsense ramblings. I hope someday you can blow. Also "Does the Church consider itself helpful"? My answer, of course the people working for CoS considered itself helpful. But help is not measured by those giving it, but rather by those receiving the help. I consider myself the smartest best looking man in the world, but does that make it true?
Gregory, the lesson to be learned is don't go near Scientology.
Pointless rambling seems to be what these scientologist defenders fall back on when they are out of excuses.
And also, back on the subject of the guy who got shot, the cult does seem to instill a mean spiritedness in it's members doesn't it? I mean a man dies and all they can do is drag his reputation through the mud in front of his family. Poor guy. Pity they guards didn't have tasers instead of guns and maybe we could have found out what his beef was.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-26 14:25:17
That is one of the most disgusting aspects of this cult of late. You are a member of a real church, you have problems, they will find a way to help you. Everything from pastoral counseling to food banks, to finding you a place to live/work, clothing, all these are the marks of REAL religions.
$cientology, on the other hand, takes your money, and when they see you still have problems, they 'kick you to the curb', deny your membership, and fire up their PR against you. (and in this case, they KILL you). Here is the difference.
The cult has done more to destroy their credibility with this event than I could have done in a lifetime. This will haunt them (the internet never forgets) forever.
When I first started researching $cientology, I actually felt sorry for those $cientologist who in my mind were 'weak minded' and vulnerable to the brainwashing the cult provides. After today, however, anyone who remains a member of the cult receives from me nothing more than contempt. Kinda like the guy who 'only loads ammo' for Al-Quaeda.....he is STILL Al-Quaeda and is guilty as all the rest.
Huh... You know they are kinda like Al Qaida aren't they? I mean they poke their faces into govt an try to take it over like in afghanistan and terrorize anyone who speaks out against them. You would think that the American government would take more notice of the activities of Scientology.
Damn man, I never thought about it from that angle before. Awesome comparison! And they think we are the terrorists? Sounds like these people need to go look in a mirror.
This is not my story, I saw this posted on one of the many anti Scientology websites out there. Here we have a girl and her brother who barely escape the clutches of the cult. Their father remains inside and disconnected. This story includes violent acts by Scientologists. You have been warned.
----
About a year ago, I had returned back home after a close relative of mine had passed away. I was expecting to see my father, and his new wife and my now 13 year old brother to be at the funeral but unfortunately, they were not.
A year ago, my father had married his new wife, and I was not allowed at the wedding, which I found to be odd. I later found out that it was because it was arranged to be a ceremony held at the Church Of Scientology in Boston.
I knew the basics of Scientology, but I didn't know how deep it really went. I did research and started getting concerned--especially after seeing how many people actually DIED.
"Okay, so it's a cult."
A few weeks later, I learn that they are back home. I go to visit my mother's and my brother was there. He had been begging my mother to let him stay because he claimed that there was more to what was going on at their house than what met the eye.
During his stay in Boston, he had been "audited" and been taken off of his medications (he's bi-polar). He was worried that he would start to have an episode without his medication.
I decided to go talk with my dad about his involvement with the cult and on the way, my brother had mentioned to me that he had been "punished" for sneaking his medication at night and had been locked in his room for 16 hours. This rattled me because I could never imagine my own father doing something like this.
When I had walked into the living room, I had noticed there were no photos on the walls, and decor was very minimalistic. I waited for my dad, and when he had come into the room he was put off at the fact that I had came over. He wasn't the same. He was very stand-offish at my questions, always replying with "Things have changed," or "Now that I've been enlightened."
I asked him about him revoking my brother his medications and he replied "There is nothing wrong with [your brother], he needs to be flushed from the toxins that your mother and I mistakenly put into him."
Before I could ask him about locking his own child in a room, my step mother walked in. She folded her arms, refusing to look or speak to me, and referring to me as a stranger. She had directed my brother to his room, and thus we sat there.
After a brief second of silence I asked, "Tell me more about Scientology."
For once, she had looked at me. She started out saying "It is the study of truth" and from then on began droning on in a trance-like state on about the Church she grew up in, and how it had changed her life. She talked the 'dynamics of existence' and L. Ron Hubbard. She talked about how her Mother and Father knew him while he was alive. She talked about how she had enlightened my father and brother while they were in Boston, and planned on starting anew here, in Wichita-- even homeschooling my brother until they could find him a proper school that taught Scientology.
Unfortunately, I had inherited my mother's attitude and wit and asked, "It sounds more like a real life science fiction novel than it does a religion."
Oops.
She cleared her throat and told me that I was a 'suppressor' and I needed to leave.
So my father walked me to my car and asked me to call ahead of time if I'm going to stop by.
A few months go by and I hadn't heard from any of my family. I called, no one answered. It wasn't until back in June when I had logged onto my Facebook and noticed that my brother's status message changed to "somebody please call Child Services. I don't want to be brainwashed."
I visit once more, and there are members of the church with my family. My brother was once again, sent to his room. I was not allowed into the house, and instead I was met by everyone screaming that I was a suppressor and toxic. My father came out with a gun and told me to never visit again, as he and the five others continued to come after me until I was in the car and down the street.
I immediately called my mother, who then immediately called the police and child services. That night, I had done extensive research on the cult, and seeing what I could do to help save my family (which is how I ended up coming across this website, and many many astounding Youtube videos).
It is now November, and my brother has been in my mother's custody for three months. Unfortunately, we couldn't save my father. We have suffered death threats, pickets at our houses, tires slashed and windows broken. After numerous attempts to communicate with him, his wife (and most likely the church) convinced him to put a restraining order on BOTH my mother and I and even my brother.
I wanted to get this out, because I needed to let this out Anonymously. My father is lost to his cult and I don't know what I can really do to bring him back. He's stopped contact with everyone, his family and friends and has changed jobs.
It makes me sick. I drive by the church everyday to work and it makes me even sicker to know that there are more and more people out there who are being trapped into this kind of brainwashing "religion."
I know that my story is nowhere near as intense in comparison to those who have actually been inside CoS, and have lived through it many years. I could never imagine how hard it is, but seeing my brother and hearing his stories has just been devastating for me to just hear about.
I'm thankful for Anonymous. I am thankful for its mission. I am thankful for it's people and those who support it. Most of all, I am thankful for those who are willing to share their experiences with the CoS.
It's hard knowing that my father is involved with this, and I don't want to think lesser of him, but I can't help it. I miss my dad so much. I miss going on trips to Sweden with him and my sister to visit my grandparents. I miss the man who helped raise me, the man who bought me my first camera and taught me how to use it. Most of all, I miss the man who was once also my friend.
He's gone and it kills me to say that I am twenty-two years old and my father is involved with a brainwashing cult.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-27 18:47:46
There are too many stories like this out there for all of them to be fake. If even ONE is real then the cult must be stopped from destroying families, both mentally and financially.
I love this. It doesn't matter how many faggy articles they put up or how many they keep bumping up to the top. We turn the comments in to a poison pit for them every time and people can read the truth once they are done with the spin and lies in the article.
Doomguy, per statistics I get as the author of this page, those comments are not read by anyone but you guys. But thanks for keeping the article afloat.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-28 16:07:14
"He didn't even get the lingo right this time"
EXACTLY. The way to tell a real church from a cult is their use of 'doublespeak". When a cult goes so far as to need their own dictionary, well, you get the idea.
Tell us about the Anonymous 'bullshit' story of a guy who was a $cientologist as late as 2004, then gets killed by the cult, and then the cult tries to even deny he was a $cientologist.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-11-28 16:34:58
From the $cientology dictionary:
(a) AS-IS-NESS is the condition of immediate creation persistence, and is the condition of existence which exists at the moment of creation and the moment of destruction, and is different from other considerations in that it does not contain survival.
(b) ALTER-IS-NESS is the consideration which introduces change and therefore time and persistence, into an AS-IS-NESS to obtain persistency.
(c) IS-NESS is an apparency of existence brought about by the continuous alteration of an AS-IS-NESS. This is called, when agreed upon, Reality.
(d) NOT-IS-NESS is the effort to handle IS-NESS by reducing its condition through the use of force. It is an apparency and cannot entirely vanquish an IS-NESS.
Coming up with gobbldygook speak for the cult followers. Kinda like an insane person. Psychiatrists all around! On the house! Or well on Procter and Gamble anyway.
So what's good about Scientology? I've never read from a Scientologist or someone else something concrete that is good about Scientology. Only reports about volunteer ministers, narconon and other supposedly secular front groups but never anything concrete about how the "religion" itself has anything of value to offer humanity. Can you tell me what is good about Scientology, without simply telling me to read a book about Scientology, go to the scientology homepage and find out myself?
I mean, when someone believes in a god,. as the ultimate supreme being that regulates everything in this world, then he doesn't need to justify his beliefs, because he truly has faith in the existence of god, whether it's good or not. You can't really argue about some metaphysical concept like god, because there is no way to prove its existence nor is there really a way to refute it. You either belief it or you don't. Those theistic religions don't want to sell me anything, they just tell me "that's the way how it is, believe it or not". They believe in a certain truth, the existence of god, and want to tell other people of their truth.
But i couldn't find anything in Scientology that resembles this kind of faith and as Scientologists claim themselves it is more of a "tech" and scientifical in nature. So it isn't based on any faith, it is supposed to help you in some way and in my impression Scientology doesn't want to tell us about a certain metaphysical truth that they believe in, but they just want to sell us their "tech" and therefore they need to justify it and explain in detail how it is supposed to help me and how it works.
hax0r -- I've never read from a Scientologist or someone else something concrete that is good about Scientology.
I saved a woman's life with a Scientology assist. Now you have read something good about Scientology. I increased my income 2x after some study of Scientology. Now you have read something good about Scientology. My enjoyment of life increased 50x after several years of study and auditing. Now you have read something good about Scientology. How could you ignore Tom Cruise saying "I cured my learning disability" or several Hollywood stars saying things like "made my career", "saved my career", "saved my life"? Now you have read something good about Scientology. It is not that these things will be etched into your mind. Instead, you may understand these things if you wish to. Do you see the difference? Understood knowledge, not undisputable knowledge. Personally useable knowledge, not scientifically demonstrable - by untrained persons knowledge. See the difference?
No Terry. We need real demonstratable evidence that touch assists can save lives. That a persons income will increase and by what average amount and that a career has a percent chance to be saved. This means real scientific testing with control groups and everything, not just testimonial from you or others who are told to say these things.
There needs to be real independant testing of Scientology. I have yet to ever see this done. Scientology won't allow it. Why? Because they see independant testers as outsiders for one. For another because I believe that the leaders know for a fact it is all horse crap and does not achieve these glowing results you keep spitting at us.
Without independant testing and verification of the claims, that is all they are. Claims. Hell I can invent the Vogon Poetry tech and say that using this will guarentee a date with a woman twice as hot as any you have ever dated. I can then sell this and even pay people to claim they got these results. But does that make it true? Without independant studies, someone other than me making the claims producing the numbers, what I would be claiming may or may not be true. You cannot tell until someone actually does a controlled experiment to test my claims out.
Now if I knew it was BS, I would not allow such a test to happen if I could help it because it would destroy my marketing ploy and ruin me. Now if it was just some method I was selling to people I had no other control over, someone could turn over this method to researchers who could then do the testing. But if I had enough money, I could find out about the research and sue them and tie them up in court to the point they used all their funding trying to defend against me instead of doing the research. If I formed a "religion" around the technique, I could even forbid my members from taking part in any such research or they would face sanctions or even be expelled from the "church".
This is the whole problem here. Scientology makes vast claims here, but goes out of it's way to prevent anyone from writing a book, doing research or independant study of the "tech" because they do not want the world to know the truth. So I have to say, you either have to put up or shut up here. Either Scientology needs to allow independant testing without trying to game the results or harass the project to extinction, or they will continue to face skepticism and scrutiny from the majority of people that are being marketed to.
Maybe it is time that some university out there with enough clout to stave off the lawsuits of scientology do a study on this. Then we can settle this stuff once and for all hmm?
...Now you have read something good about Scientology. Yes, ok. But what i hoped for was more of an explanation of how Scientology helped with that. What did you do to save the womans life for example and what has it to do with Scientology?
It is not that these things will be etched into your mind. Instead, you may understand these things if you wish to.
I don't know what you mean. What "things" are you talking about?
Do you see the difference? Understood knowledge, not undisputable knowledge. Personally useable knowledge, not scientifically demonstrable - by untrained persons knowledge. See the difference?
I see a difference, but don't know what you are referring to in this context. I don't get the point you are trying to make with this talk about knowledge.
hax0r - It makes sense that you would like to have a more full, a better explanation. And I am willing to give a detailed account of what I did. And other people witnessed my action. But this is the area that makes no sense, unless you have understood the theory. What I actually did, I placed a nearby object into her hand and told her (even though she was observably unconcious) to feel that (object's name). Several repititions with several objects. Now that makes no sense to you, right? I directed her attention by voice command to objects I placed into her hand. NomNom will call that a "claim". William Johnson will call that a defilement of science. I'm telling you what I actually did. And you could argue that I only facilitated her waking up, that she would have been fine, anyway. Maybe so. She was unconcious when I begin and concious when I quit. It is the kind of thing Volunteer Minsters do pretty often. There is theory of why it works, too. But how can you possibly run laboratory tests on something like this?
Oooookay. I hate to break it to your Terry, but assuming this story is even true at all, there are other reasons the woman might have woken up. If someone gets knocked out and I dance the hubba bubba next to them, chances are they will wake up at some point. Did my dancing wake them up or did they just regain consiousness on their own?
Terry! I did something similar! Here's my story.....
What I actually did, I placed a their hand into a cup of warm water Several dunks with several warm waters. Now that makes no sense to you, right? I directed her attention by voice command to imagining waterfalls, and babbling brooks. NomNom will call that a "claim". William Johnson will call that a defilement of science. I'm telling you what I actually did. And you could argue that I only facilitated her peeing in bed, that she would have peed, anyway. Maybe so. She was unconcious when I begin and unconcious when I quit, but had soiled the bed. There is theory of why it works, too. But how can you possibly run laboratory tests on something like this?
Test easily: Take people in similar condition. Under observation do what you did over and over. Write down results. Basic science here. Btw, DoX or didn't happen. For something so special as what you did I'm sure some local publication covered it.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-12-01 08:03:52
Some questions come to mind.
Under what circumstances did Terryeo come upon this unconscious person?
Was she drunk, drugged, recently in a vehicle accident, in a mental ward in a catatonic state, what?
If he 'saved her' meaning she had recently been in an accident for example, did he place her in the 'recovery position' (since she was unconscious) so she could breathe properly? If not, he could easily have killed her by not giving her proper medical attention.
I'd say a physician's statement that she was unconscious before and awake after, and that Terryeo's 'ministrations' are what woke her, would suffice.
There are certain indicators of consciousness, as well as levels of consciousness, that unless Terryeo is a physician, well, like they say Pics/docs or it didn't happen.
Next time you come across an unconscious person, I would at least make sure they are breathing first! (Not to mention checking for bleeding, compound fractures, that sort of thing.)
For a Vulture minister to find an unconscious person and place something in their hand and talk to them, instead of rendering REAL first aid, in most States is considered Negiglence.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-12-02 06:09:56
Ten warning signs of a potentially unsafe group/leader.
1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.
2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.
3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.
4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.
5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.
6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.
7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.
8. Followers feel they can never be "good enough".
9. The group/leader is always right.
10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.
Terryeo wrote: "Now you have read something good about Scientology."
As you know Terry, many critics simply refuse to acknowledge that there is anything good in Scn - but really it's no different to your refusal to (at least publicly) acknowledge that there is anything bad in Scn.
And when we look at all the bad stuff that you and I both know that goes on in the church, we have to ask ourselves: is the good in Scn enough to justify the bad?
Maybe so..I don't know, but Is it really OK to just turn a blind eye to the bad stuff as long as it doesn't effect us personally? Do you even have a choice? Or is your personal freedom restricted by your loyalty to Scn and your fear of what might happen if you speak out?
It baffles me to see critics hammer away at the same points again and again. You all refuse to recognize what I'll call facts, to recognize certain situations as real and extant.
There are critics who rub their heads together on several newsgroups and critical sites. Some have experience with Scientology and some do not. And there are a few blogs espousing critical views from people who say they have tried Scientology and found it "didn't work" (for them).
Then there is this additional information about Scientology, if you follow. The successes. Observe the obvious, make your own decision. And those are things anyone can look at.
As I assimilate information, I consider quality and quantity. I evaluate both. And I do one other thing that critics don't seem to do. I consider how cheerfully it is written. Are the writers winning in Life, are they smiling, are they talking about a nice world? Or does gloom and doom, threat and antagonism come across? Do they suggest I'm blind, that what I find helpful is merely a figment of my imaginiation, that the effort thousands of successful people are but a dark plot against my happiness? Do I feel a little more cheerful? Or have they created a message saying that mankind should roll over and whimper itself to death?
Scientology is a workable system. This means you got to work at it. I've found it extremely helpful. And many who try it do find it so. If it were NOT helpful, people would not contribute, it would not grow, it could not afford to go to court, to purchase historical buildings, to renovate buildings, to sponser Volunteer Ministers, nor to contribute to other charities.
But the thing you're missing guys might be this. Some might tell you what you must do. I don't think so. There is nothing about it that will do you the slightest bit of good if you are told what to believe, if you memorize without understanding. If you "accept" without understanding. It therefore requires some reach and some effort. What I'm do by replying here is to provide you with some corn, not tech, not the actual stuff, but simply corn for your amusement. Happy Ho Ho's.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-12-05 06:13:03
It's hard to stay in the "nice sweet wonderful world" when you are on the RPF, eating beans and rice!
It's hard to stay in the "nice sweet wonderful world" when $cientology has maxed out your credit cards, and taken out a second mortgage on your home.
It's hard to stay in the "nice sweet wonderful world" when your cult either directly or indirectly is killing people.
It's hard to stay in the "nice sweet wonderful world" when you see a dozen or so brainwashed sea org members in their neo-nazi uniforms walking in step to the org.
And I bet it's hard to stay in the "nice sweet wonderful world" when the cult you are in can't provide even ONE verifiable incident where it helped someone over several DECADES.
"You all refuse to recognize what I'll call facts, to recognize certain situations as real and extant." ----- That's because they are NOT facts, simply because you call them such does not make it so.
You know, if Louanne or Terry ever even once questioned anything the cult tells them I may actually think they can be objective and reason for themselves. Saying you can, is not truly having the ability to decide for yourself. As a Catholic I disagree with the church's stance on birth control. I was disgusted that Bishops were hiding and shuffling pedo-priests. I question my own faith when alternate ideas are brought up (like the whole Mary Magdelin being Jesus' wife thing). I do not have the answers to my faith, but I can tell you if I sat down with the pope today and he asked me to explain what I thought, he would not be pleased with how much my views differ from the institution's doctrine.
I have yet to see Louanne or Terry differ in any way shape or form from the strict doctrine of Miscaviage. That, to me is an indication of a cult. You say you think for yourself, yet I have yet to see you actually doing that action Terry. In fact, the ONLY Scientologists I have ever seen or heard (I do live in Clearwater and talk with them often enough) say anything that differs from the regimented instructed party line are people who got out, or as they put it "escaped Scientology". Strong words they use.
Also, a whole other question I have to raise:
If CoS is spreading as fast as it claims, and has millions of members, why is it that only 2 (maybe 3) defend it in an open forum like this? Shouldn't there be more? As an experiment, I bet if I set up an article on nolanchart talking about, let's say, Methodists, that the comments would be clogged with hundreds of Methodists defending their faith. So where are all the Scientologists? Why aren't they reading this?
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-12-05 09:06:12
The difference is that real religions don't need PAID PR people! That is what terryeo and Louanne (et al) are, this is their JOB to go out and do this, although I have noticed lately that the Boston PR bunch (Louanne) has started posting in forums where comments are not allowed. So much for freedom of speech eh?
Also the big difference is that once a cult member is programmed, to question ANYTHING the cult says WILL come up in a sec check, and COST THEM MONEY! (somebody has to pay for those sec checks, you can bet it isn't the cult). So for them even to consider something detrimental to their programming, could cost them thousands of dollars. No wonder they toe the 'company line'.
Average staff and sea org $cientologists are NOT ALLOWED to read these websites. It is FORBIDDEN for all but their PR or OSA people to be here, that is why there are so few $cientologists responding.
One would think that only their best PR people would be assigned to defending the cult, as more people get access to information, and make their own decisions, the quality of their defense is obvious.
Posted By: Not Anonymous
Date: 2008-12-05 15:51:16
Its amazing how the critics present documented sources, quotes from the cult leader himself and other varifiable evidence against this cult and the cult members (looking at you Terreyo), rebutt with Happy HO HOs and Twiddle Di Dee, Silly Bee's.
You push your opinion that critics fail to see the whole picture, that theyre turning a blind eye to the 'good' deeds that scientology claims it achieves. Yet you absolutely FAIL to provide any documented facts (other than telling eveyone to reference an article that YOU wrote as irrefutalbe evidence) to support your claims. I can say that my positive thinking has helped millions in Asia by thinking that their crops will be abundant. I cant back it up, so if anyone challenges my claim, Ill just tell them that they just 'dont understand', hi ho hi ho, off to work i go... see how silly your MO sounds?
This act is getting old Terreyo. Youve put your foot in your mouth a few too many times on this board and youre still chasing your tail.
Oh btw, you said:
If it were NOT helpful, people would not contribute, it would not grow, it could not afford to go to court, to purchase historical buildings, to renovate buildings, to sponser Volunteer Ministers, nor to contribute to other charities.
What charities do they contribute to? Please dont tell me Narcanonon or other scientology front groups. Taking money from one pocket and putting it in the other is far from charitable.
Story about a man who actually did try to make a difference while in Scientology.
Sea Org base Saint Hill and Crowborough East Sussex period in question: 2002 till March 2005
I had moved to a job looking after the transport system following my ‘resignation’ from an executive level duty, I set up my work shop and base of operations at Walsh Manor, Crowborough, a little village just on the border of Kent and East Sussex, some fourteen miles from Saint Hill and a mere five minutes from the Ashdown forest, idyllic setting really. I had transferred my riding to an excellent centre right on the forest, due in the main to the extensive hacking trails that wind up and down over the hills and woodlands, there are stretches there that, if the going is fair, you can get up to a superb canter and gallop, really letting the horses go. This allowed me to clear my mind of the mad goings on at the base and my frustration with the cult leader’s – David Miscavitch - ever increasing attempts to control my very soul. I got away with it because I did my job well, I was no pushover, and I was not afraid to get mad at anybody who tried to make my job untenable, contrary to expectations; this bought me an awful lot respect. There was a balance obviously, a touch of Machiavellian manoeuvring; favours granted, being available 24/7 for select executives in the upper echelons, who, being on important high demand duties at very unsociable hours, would call me from my slumbers to rescue them from Saint Hill, this I did with good cheer and it bought me some pretty serious air cover.
I had inherited a fleet of depilated Ford Transit mini buses, half of them were off the road, and cult’s transport was suffering, badly, well I got it sorted out over a period of several months, I began to really enjoy this work, and being off the cult’s main base weakened the invisible control mechanisms – group lectures, events, briefings, military style drills, not unlike ‘square bashing’ indoctrination and all those factors that work to keep a person subservient and cowed to the great – apparent - authority of the organisation and its symbology.
My executive experience had allowed me to pierce the veil of mystique surrounding corporate Scientology, I knew it was a crock, and the management echelons knew that I was willing to walk off out of there without so much as a thank you, they had pushed me too far, but I think the policing and intelligence arm were particularly afraid of what I knew, what I had been involved in with working on major legal case, so they cut me an awful lot of slack. All these factors worked together to give me a very strong position, and I had some fun, I genuinely cared about the people I worked with, so I did put effort into helping them out. I knew what was going on.
I had a troubled childhood thanks to the death of both parents when I was nine. One effect of this is that I remain highly sensitised or attuned to the needs of children, and I have always had a lot of time for kids. In Scientology’s fanatical inner core, called ‘The Sea Org’ kids are actually treated with quite some cruelty, and I could never come to terms with this. I bought time on my job, and I began working with the school, taking kids out on day trips and so on.
Some of these children had been separated from their parents for as much as two years, parents doing 'more important duties' and training in Flag Land Base, one couple saw their child for maybe two days every month.
There was this beautiful June Sunday morning, I was on my official ‘cleaning or hygiene time as it was known – essentially four hours out of an 105 hour working week, when you get to do your laundry - I noticed that all the children looked unusually down and upset, and were dejectedly mopping floors and dusting around inside the Manor, outside the grass was green, the sun shone and world looked beautiful. I asked the kids what was going on, I found that they all were doing a punishment detail, were under 'Ethics' 'lower conditions' this a system that punishes both physically and mentally, includes the withdrawal of any small privileges that they may have, kids as young as eight, and no older that twelve, who should be running around outside having fun were being subjected to a system of mental oppression and physical confinement that I would not wish on Serbian general convicted of war crimes, well maybe, but not anyone else. I did this stuff as an adult and it nearly drove me nuts, it breaks you while installing further pavlovian conditioning.
I got really angry, I mean furious. These were really lovely children, but actually traumatised, often due to long months, and one case two years, of enforced separation from their parents. Not natural at all is it?
Anyway, I marched up to the school where Angela – the school in charge and 'legal gaurdian' to many of thenow 'de-parented' kids -, looking rather apathetic herself, was browbeating a child into some kind of acquiescence to Hubbard’s dictates, I told her in no uncertain terms that I was taking all these kids with me to my riding centre, I actually paid for a guided hack for all ten of them, and thus began a very fulfilling twenty four months as big brother and protector of these kids. Not all the kids could sustain the discipline required to advance in riding, some did not have enough interest, but I worked intensively with four of them, and wept one day after months of work, when they preformed a perfect canter in the arena, really working with and listening to their ponies - just how I taught ‘em - with two of the parents looking on.
I actually gained the necessary qualifications to be an officially recognised teacher with all the necessary clearances required for working with children. I have this certificate with me to this day. I am proud of it.
We were surrounded with wild life, I would often find wounded or ill wild animals on the road or in the forest, badgers, rabbits, even a baby deer, having established a very proactive relationship with a local wildlife rescue centre, I used this as a tool to broaden the children’s worldview, I would have small groups help to deliver ‘first aid’ to the animals I rescued before delivering them to the wildlife centre, in the case of the baby deer, this took a little longer, as a special box had to be found to transport the animal, trying to keep excited children quiet around such a creature was big job, but they did very well. We got dogs, and I would load kids and dogs into one of my buses and take them to Bangor Stand, and let them run wild, I don’t know if I was a good teacher, but the kids had fun, and the parents were actually very appreciative.
The Hubbard Personnel Dept. was not appreciative however. The Senior Personnel officer was aiming to get these kids on almost full time training and indoctrination to turn them in fanatical sycophants of Hubbard and his Scientology cult, a state that would allow them to work at the highest, most secret top level of the organisation, known as Religious Technology Centre. They were supposed to finish the legal minimum of schooling each day and then all go to Saint Hill – cult HQ in UK - and partake in very intensive indoctrination, or if not partaking that day, then on cleaning and other work details. Being the transport main operator, I would often pick up stressed out, almost psychotic, pale faced exhausted children from the base, as we called it, they having done up to five hours in these indoctrination sessions and such like. I had two physical fights with personnel people over this, but eventually worked out a compromise where I would get a batch of kids one day, and they the same batch the next.
One of the saddest experiences I had was when I had ‘my’ kids join a barbeque at the riding centre, where parents and schools who had children doing lessons all joined up at an open day, my batch of kids refused to join the other children, they hung around me, the little ones actually clung to me. They were frightened of these ‘wog’ kids, (wog is a word that Hubbard used extensively to describe anybody not in Scientology, it was made into common parlance, meaning we were superior to these backwards savages outside of our cult, the children were particularly susceptible to this form of asocialisation) they were actually scared and intimidated, having never actually spent any time outside the confines of the weird world of Scientology. I don’t like to think what the ‘wog’ parents thought.
I look back now on this time with mixed feelings of the sense of joy I got out of providing something special for a really lovely bunch of kids, and sadness that no one else took this up after I was promoted out to an external posting. I hope that my action will have broadened their minds, made them see that there is something out side of Scientology, that maybe there is another way to do things aside from Hubbard’s mad ramblings and Miscavich’s insane rages and dictates, maybe...
Posted By: International Post OTIII Day
Date: 2008-12-05 16:07:07
The following is the sacred document in Scientology known as OTIII. Scientologists deny it exists as part of their Operating Thetan literature. It was written by L. Ron Hubbard in 1967. Hubbard wrote that if you read this document before you have achieved a level of scholarship, you will get pneumonia and die. The cost to get to that level: $360,000.
“The head of the Galactic Confederation (76 planets around larger stars visible from here) (founded 95,000,000 yrs ago, very space opera) solved overpopulation (250 billion or so per planet -- 178 billion on average) by mass implanting. He caused people to be brought to Teegeeack (Earth) and put an H Bomb on the principal volcanoes (Incident 2) and then the Pacific area ones were taken in boxes to Hawaii and the Atlantic Area ones to Las Palmas and there "packaged." His name was Xenu. He used renegades. Various misleading data by means of circuits etc. was placed in the implants. When through with his crime (R/)Loyal Officers (to the people) captured him after 6 years of battle and put him in an electronic mountain trap where he still is. "They" are gone. The place (Confed.)has since been a desert.” - Hubbard
See it in his original handwriting at xenu.net. Learn more about the fight against the criminal cult of Scientology on whyweprotest.net. Make a difference by copy-pasting this and posting it somewhere else as part of International Post OTIII Day and in honor of Lisa McPherson, who died on Dec 5 1995 after being starved to death by Scientologists.
I can't wait for international post OT8 day. Course one can always go to wikileaks and 9000+ other sites to get them now too. LOL. Why pay at all when you can eat up all the Hubbard BS for free?
Wow, is it just me or did the posting of OT III really shut their mouths or what?
Here is some more comedy gold, from scilons other than L. Fraud Hubbard. This was printed in their "Advance!" magazine.
More lulz here: http://members.chello.nl/mgormez/fun/
"There was this guy called Klaus who used to come into our office once a month to pay rent. He was a tall, surly German with a blackness under his complexion. He never smiled, and could only be described as 'grisly'. My boss hated him.
Well, this one day he walked into the office and as I stood in front of him, writing out his receipt, I suddenly got the thought, "What *is* it with this guy?" and I just gave him a total confront and suddenly there before my eyes stood a hairy, grisly, sad, and rather pathetic looking werewolf with teeth just like you see in the movies. He was in fact a good deal bigger than Klaus and towered over me. Well, Wolfy and I stared at each other for a long, hard second, and then he disappeared. I was left with Klaus gazing at me in bewilderment and in his eyes I read, "*What happened?*"
I gave him his receipt and the body walked out of the office but the thetan stayed behind for a good five minutes. In fact, the presence was so strong that my boss popped his head out of his office to see if there was anybody there because he could feel it too. I said, "Don't worry, it's only Klaus. I've just used a bit of Scientology on him."
Next month, Klaus came in to pay his rent. His complexion was clear and pink and he gave us a big hello and a broad smile. He had a few words with my boss and after he had gone my boss came to me and said, "Well, I don't know what you did to him, but he's quite a nice guy after all." "
Noelle Levin South Africa [Advance!, issue 41, p. 18]
I'm glad you quoted it exactly because it makes sense as quoted, but woudn't if the words were misused. Yep, that's the sort of success story I've seen myself. Woot!
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-12-08 10:36:13
(From Advance! issue 16, "OT Phenomena, page 17)
"I was walking past the big tree of Ron's outside the front of the Manor, and I said to it "How old are you?" and got an answer from a thetan somewhere in it. It didn't quite fit with the age of the Manor and the surroundings, and then I suddenly realized or found out that he'd come from Lebanon or somewhere as a young sapling. Then the thetan up and left."
You know, someone brought that up and they are like "Oh they have too much to do and don't have time to deal with you anonies". Well, now we know what they are so busy doing. Talking to trees and clearing the world of furries werewolves.
Proof, you await proof before you risk a move. Fine, Mr. Johnson, you'll be safer, have a nice day. Enjoy.
Just to let you know, I'll explain my reasoning once again because I really do mean it as I say it.
Scientology requires understanding. If you want proof, you're going to have to seek it out yourself. If you want to understand you'll not depend on anyone else for "proof", you'll seek it out for yourself. Do you sense a sort of threshold here? Do you sense a gate held closed against you depending on someone else for your "proof"? Do you sense step, a reach, that you must necessarily do for yourself? Do you? If you do not, then I applaud Ron's design and his manner of masking the obvious from lower tone levels while stating the obvious with those very same words, to higher tone levels. LOL, Mr Doom & Gloom, lol.
Posted By: William Johnson
Date: 2008-12-09 10:30:41
Again, ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF that $cientology works and this from a paid PR team! FAIL!
If the cult had ANY proof after all these years that it worked, they would have every scientist in the world verifying it! Nothing=FAIL.
I don't await proof before I risk a move, I HAVE investigated the cult, for years actually, and the more I check into it, the more I find it to be a criminal organization, that takes advantage of people who are mentally vulnerable.
Talking to trees, scaring away imaginary werewolves, is that all you got?
I once used my sekret powerz when I came up to a traffic light. I concentrated real hard, and PRESTO, the light changed to green! Right in front of my eyes!
(I am sure that this will appear in some altered form in a $cientology publication as a 'win')!
If the 'tech' worked AT ALL, there would be no need for the unwashed multitudes of $cientology to be out with their 'stress test' scams. Just by using their sooper powerz as an OT they should have taken over the world by now.
What a load of crap. You must come up with better arguments in order to at least keep this entertaining.
Yea Terry, I have seeked it out for myself in regards to CoS. I've done my research on my own. Which leads me to the conclusion that it is a greedy, brainwashing, dangerous, CULT!
I want "proof" from you that is not. I cannot find anything on my own that would make me think it is not a cult. Same with others here. This is why we turn to you, an outspoken Scientologist for the proof we cannot find on our own. I've been in the Ft Harrison (4th of July weekend open house, check the camera's OSA and you'll see me, hehe.) I've spoken with Scientologists at length at stress tents or VM booths. So don't question my research. I have done it and come to a conclusion based on it. However, should any Scientologist be it you, or the masses CoS claims to have that do not post online.....ever, have some proof to prove their point, then I can change my conclusion accordingly. See Terry, heres the flaw with your arguement. In a debate forum as this, you make a point. When asked for proof to the point, you fail to give it. That, in a debate, is terrible and you would lose against a high schooler debate team. I can link to many articles or contexts to Scientology being a lying cult, but you cannot give one reference to an outside source to back you up. As other Anon's like to say so often: FAIL.
Posted By: Win of the Scientologist
Date: 2008-12-09 20:00:52
I had all these problems, but then I auditied them up, mongled them around and blew them all out. Now I feel much better and more sane! Bubidabubidabubidabubidabubidabubida.
This is an open letter from Mac Stevens to fellow Scientologists. I thought it might interest you, terryeo, louanne and the other Scientologists, who still lurk here. I am bit worried about louanne, though because she doesn't seem to be so active anymore. Haven't seen a new article from here for quite a time. Louanne, i hope you are ok.
Mac Stevens 415 NE 6th Street Newport, Oregon 97365-2805 United States of America stevensm@earthlink.net 5 December 2008
Dear fellow Scientologist,
I have been pretending to believe some things which I do not. I wish to clarify this. I am stating this now, carefully, and at length because I believe that this statement will cause me to be declared as a Suppressive Person and you may be ordered to not communicate with me. So this might be my last chance to say this directly. I had hoped to avoid this penalty by remaining silent about certain opinions, but this silence is ruining my life. It is now preferable to suffer the consequences of free speech.
I believe some data and laws are more important than other data and laws. Any law or guideline for behaviour is only a generality and must be used with judgement and the awareness of its importance and the fact that there may be an exception.
I believe that purpose is senior to policy. That is, the end result is more important than how you achieve it. And no, this is not a license to cause whatever damage to get what you want, because the damage is also part of the end result.
I believe it is not just the right of an individual to think and speak freely, it is a fact. People just do. But as a right, it is supreme.
I agree with United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, except where it contradicts itself. The main contradiction that comes to mind is the conflict between one's right to property and freedom versus another's right to receive various services. I tend to favor the property owner, except in cases of corruption or extreme need.
I agree with the precepts of The Way To Happiness, with a qualification ("Try to") on precept 9.
I agree with the Code of Honor, with the understanding that its guidelines are used on a self-determined basis and are not enforceable.
I agree with the Creed of the Church of Scientology, except for the last four words of point 10.
I reject The Way To Happiness precept 9 "Don't do anything illegal."
This statement is too absolute. However, we should try not to do anything illegal. I do try. The consequences of breaking the law include the penalties defined by law, the fear of being found out, and the degradation of the system of laws. Breaking the law is almost always incorrect. Almost.
The law is vast. You may be doing something illegal and never know it. Not even the most knowledgeable law expert could confirm that he spent a day without doing anything illegal.
Sometimes the law contradicts itself.
Sometimes you must choose between what is legal and what is right. It might be correct to flout the draft, to avoid fighting an unjust war.
I know I'm setting myself up. But I'm favoring accuracy over safety.
I reject Creed Of The Church, point 10, last four words, "That the study of the mind and the healing of mentally caused ills should not be ... condoned in non-religious fields;"
This contradicts the freedom to one's own life. I believe anyone may study the mind in any field whatsoever, so long as basic decency is observed.
I reject the strict prohibition of altering Scientology (squirreling).
KSW 1: "I once had the idea that a group could evolve truth. A third of a century has thoroughly disabused me of that idea. ... As we could have gotten along without suggestions, then, we had better steel ourselves to continue to do so now that we have made it. ... Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology) only comes about from noncomprehension. ... If you can't graduate them with their good sense appealed to and their wisdom shining, graduate them in such a state of shock they'll have nightmares if they contemplate squirreling."
This contradicts one's right to one's own life.
This contradicts the recommendation to judge for oneself.
The intention of KSW is to keep Scientology working, that is, to keep producing good results - happier, more capable people. I agree that many Scientology processes and technologies do produce good results. I agree that altering a standard procedure often produces poor or bad results. I accept that squirreling has led to abuses. But these reasons and all the other reasons given are not nearly sufficient to prove the incapacity of man, of you and me, to propose new ideas, test new ideas in an ethical manner, and judge the result. If man cannot be trusted to judge truth, to judge a good result from a bad result, he cannot be trusted to perform a standard procedure.
I agree it is correct to follow standard procedure, normally. But when one sees an opportunity to improve a procedure, or make a new and better procedure, it is proper to pursue it. This is called research. It should be done with knowledge of existing procedures. It should be done carefully and ethically, with due regard for possible danger. Everyone involved should be properly informed that it is experimental, it is not standard, and should know the expected risks. It should be recorded accurately. But, it should be done. Research should not be prohibited.
The criteria of whether a procedure is valid is the result. That includes all the side effects. Harmful practices must be identified explicitly.
If an auditor has produced good results for many years, he knows how to get good results. This is true authority.
I reject the notion that students cannot/should not discuss the meanings of words. Sometimes it is difficult to guess the correct meaning of a word in a given context, even when looking in the dictionary. It is helpful to have the combined knowledge of others to help identify it. Furthermore, during a checkout, the student may flunk if he does not agree with the one giving the checkout. He may take it up with the supervisor, or even the D of T. But the whole matter depends on the opinion of just a few people, under pressure to make progress. There may be others who are well qualified to judge the meaning of this word in this context. But they are expressly prohibited from collaborating.
I reject, from Introduction To Scientology Ethics, "Such Suppressive Acts include: ... Unauthorized use of the materials of Dianetics and Scientology. "
This contradicts the freedom to one's own life.
I reject, from Introduction To Scientology Ethics, "Such Suppressive Acts include: ... Developing and/or using squirrel processes and checksheets. "
This contradicts the freedom to one's own life.
I reject, from Introduction To Scientology Ethics, "Such Suppressive Acts include: ... Public disavowal of Scientology or Scientologists in good standing with Scientology Organizations. "
This contradicts the freedom of speech.
This contradicts the right to choose one's own group.
I reject, from Introduction To Scientology Ethics, "Such Suppressive Acts include: ... Public statements against Scientology or Scientologists but not to Committees of Evidence, duly convened. "
This contradicts the freedom of speech.
I reject, from Introduction To Scientology Ethics, "Such Suppressive Acts include: ... Writing anti-Scientology letters to the press or giving anti-Scientologist data to the press."
This contradicts the freedom of speech.
This, as a measure to keep a good public image, is fully counter-productive. It's hard to think of a worse PR move than to blatantly prohibit statements against one's group. You might as well say, "don't trust us."
There is nothing wrong with telling the truth and stating one's opinions and observations, even when the truth is not pleasant. If one knows about an abuse occurring within a Scientology Organization, one should be free to speak of it. This would be considered anti-Scientology. In fact, it is not harmful at all, in the long run. Eventually, those who slander and maliciously twist the truth show themselves for what they are, as do those who are just telling it like it is. After a reported abuse is resolved, this resolution eventually becomes known as well. Allowing free communication speeds the whole process. Strict suppression of bad news causes anxiety, and produces a stilted, affected utopian image. It creates a withhold among Scientologists, cutting their communication with non-Scientologists.
Phillip Gale committed suicide (apparently) on L. Ron Hubbard's birthday, March 13, 1998. It happened. It's bad news. It's anti-Scientology news. Lisa McPherson died under the care of Scientologists, according to many sources. All is not well. It just makes it worse to try to suppress communication about such things. Though difficult, it is better to suffer the humiliation and deal with it as openly and straightforwardly as possible.
I reject from Introduction To Scientology Ethics, "Such Suppressive Acts include: ... Continued Membership in a divergent group."
This contradicts the right to choose or assist one's organizations.
I reject from Introduction To Scientology Ethics, "Such Suppressive Acts include: ... Continued adherence to a person or group pronounced a Suppressive Person or Group by HCO."
This contradicts the right to choose or assist one's organizations.
I reject from Introduction To Scientology Ethics, "Such Suppressive Acts include: ... Failure to handle or disavow and disconnect from a person demonstrably guilty of Suppressive Acts."
Besides being a needless interference in one's life, it is not consistently enforced. Pharmacists, hospital staff, and school nurses regularly dispense various harmful psychiatric drugs. Such drugging is one of the main suppressive acts against which Scientologists are rallied. But those people are not declared Suppressive. Any Scientologist can go to the hospital or talk to a pharmacist. This enforced cutting of communication is impractical. It's a double standard. It's cornball.
I reject unverified and unverifiable claims of superiority, such as "Scientologists are the most ethical", "Scientology is the fastest growing religion", "Scientology is the only hope for man", "Scientologists are the elite of planet Earth". For one thing, there should be some objective basis for making such claims. If you're going to make a ranking, then you'd have to be doing comparisons. If we're #1, then who are #2 and #3? Such comparisons are not only not scientifically done by the Church (as far as I know), the Scientologist is explicitly prohibited from engaging in "other practices" to find out for himself. Secondly, even if such claims could be proven, does it really help to state them? Finally, how can you say you are better than any other group because nobody else does what you do, and at the same time, attempt to enforce a monopoly, prohibiting anyone else from doing what you do?
I reject hard sell. High pressure sales make sense to me when 1) the situation is urgent and 2) the person being sold to is incapable of grasping the situation or too evil or stupid to take the right action. It could be argued that both of these are true in the case of a new Scientologist. I don't think so, but you could make the argument. But after twenty years in the group, why does he still need hard sell? The urgency becomes crying wolf. If the person is still not with the program well enough to just be presented with the facts and left on his own to decide, then he really is too stupid or evil. Or, you're selling him the wrong item. So I reject hard sell and all its variations, such as yelling orders to staff.
Withholds cause isolation and hurt relationships, right? What about the withholds a Scientologist builds up against non-Scientologists? That's enormous. Example withholds: -- How much money you've paid to Scientology, and how much debt you've accumulated in the process. -- Scientologists are subject to hard sell. -- How often you are called by staff, harangued to help out or study, or pay, or go up the Bridge. -- Policy on disconnection. -- You or someone you know hasn't really achieved and maintained the ability promised for a given level. -- You receive promotion with fantastic-sounding phrases, such as "Super Power" and "2 billion megawatt OT POWER NOW". -- You have been trained to talk to new people in a certain way. -- You are afraid to look at an internet site or TV show because you might be exposed to secret materials. -- What became of certain leading Scientologists, such as Mary Sue Hubbard, Reg Sharpe, Mike Rinder, Ron Miscavige, Marty Rathbun, Jesse Prince, David Mayo, Martin Samuels, the first Clear, the first OT 7. Do you feel free to say any of these things to non-Scientologists? To other Scientologists? Do you have to hide your mail? Are you withholding because you think it's right to not say, or because you are embarrassed? LRH said to answer people's questions. Can you freely answer people's questions? They want to know this stuff. Can you say it?
Why don't I disseminate Scientology? I talk about Ron Paul to anyone who wants to listen (and some who don't). I think he's the greatest patriot since Thomas Jefferson. I bought a hand tool called Root Jack for $120 that was more effective at pulling out small trees then a backhoe at $250/day. Ask me about Root Jack, and you'd think I was a Root Jack salesman, the way I go on about it. So why don't I talk with everyone about Scientology? Why don't I bring new people in? Don't I want others to have the same gains I have had? You bet I do. There are real gains available in Scientology. But I don't talk because I'm ashamed. I don't want others to be subject to hard sell, to censored communication, to authoritarian control.
To honestly disseminate, the conversation would go like this: Me: "I think the Communication Course would help you. You can do it at the Church of Scientology." Public: "Isn't Scientology a cult?" Me: "Technically, any religion is a cult, so yes. Could you be more specific?" Public: "Isn't it like the mafia?" Me: "Well, Scientologists are put under extreme pressure to pay money and/or work long hours for almost nothing. And anyone criticizing Scientology or leaving Scientology is considered to be a Suppressive Person. Suppressive Persons used to be subject to various types of harassment. Some people say it still happens sometimes. But people who say that are also Suppressive Persons, and therefore not reliable, in the eyes of the Church. In any case, Scientologists are not supposed to have any contact with a declared Suppressive Person, even if they are family. This is ensured by required confessionals. I've never been in a mafia, but I suppose there are some similarities ... Wait! Where are you going?" Public: (running) "Stay away from me." Me: "The Comm Course is really a good course! I wasn't supposed to tell you that other stuff right away! I was just trying to answer your questions! Scientologists are great people!!" Me: (to myself) "I liked doing the Comm Course, anyways."
That's how it would go, if I wanted to be fully straightforward. Seriously, when you are in doubt, you want to know the good and the bad. When you buy a house, you want to know if crime is high in the neighborhood. If you're hiring a babysitter, you want to know if she slaps kids and so forth. You want to know the bad stuff, as soon as possible. Don't you? What's wrong with being out front with this? No one would join, that's what.
So I reject the policies and practices that set up the Scientologist to needlessly withhold communication with non-Scientologists, in some misguided attempt at good PR. No. This hogties and introverts the Scientologist, alienates the other guy, and just plain stifles normal conversation. Thumbs down on that. No go.
How can I be responsible for the Church when I have little knowledge or control of its management? How can we correct a serious wrong if we can't talk to the only people who are talking about it?
How am I supposed to be responsible when someone asks me about Lisa McPherson? The Church provides me no details. Do I say that I don't know and I don't want to know? Is that responsibility? Do I say that it's all lies, an attack on the Church, totally fabricated by evil men? There is too much evidence that she died needlessly, in the care of the Church. Whatever lies added to that are relatively minor. Can I send my condolences to her family? No. It's a safe bet that her family is anti-Scientology, for obvious reasons. So to talk to them at all, would be to associate with "Suppressive Persons". Why is it that the only information I've gotten from the Church is that we've won a legal victory? The criminal case was dropped, the Church's image is much improved. Hip, hip, hurray! But, you know, she's still dead. This is not good PR. This is cold. Will there be no public apology? Will there be no public statement that the Church goofed, and has taken great measures to ensure it never happens again? How can I stand tall and say, "I am a Scientologist"? I consider the facts that 1) Lisa died, 2) we're only told about a legal victory, and 3) any Scientologist who seriously tries to investigate this, risks being declared Suppressive. The more I consider these, the more I have to say that something is very wrong. Something is NOT OK. It's irresponsible for me to do nothing about this. It's a cover-up, maybe not for the world, but it's out of the knowledge of Scientologists. Or, I don't have my facts straight at all, which is very possible. So I'm going to get my facts straight, which involves communication with "Suppressives". So be it.
Learning opposing ideas, hearing critics, is only harmful to a person who cannot evaluate data. For a person who can evaluate data, who can observe whether some data is true, hearing false information causes only a temporary setback. Soon after the false data is recognized, the truth is strengthened, and the source of the false data loses credibility. To censor, to cut someone else's communication, is to imply that the listener has a weak ability to discern true and helpful information from false and harmful information. It is insulting and degrading. It is appropriate to censor information for young children. But, it sends the clear message, "you are no more intelligent than a child -- I am qualified to control what you can hear, you are not."
There is a story going around that Sea Org staff are not supposed to have children and SO women who do become pregnant are often pressured to abort their pregnancies. What a vicious rumor! Can you imagine being ordered to murder your healthy, wanted baby, your future family? This is unbelievable! Outrageous! Sounds like black PR. Who is saying this? Ex-SO staff are saying this. Here's a situation that needs to be stopped. Either all the stories are false and the stories need to stop, or the stories have some truth and the coercion needs to stop. It's not ok to ignore. But you, the Scientologist, are not permitted to communicate with those people telling these stories to get enough data to verify them. This is where censorship becomes evil.
So, again, I reject attempts to censor what I hear.
I reject the assumed authority of giving me permission to disagree. This is inherent in everyone and not for LRH to grant or deny. It's nice that such freedom of thought is stated many places in Scientology. But it's a mistake to say, "Hey, LRH says it's ok to disagree, therefore it's ok to disagree." No. Just say, "It's ok to disagree." And mean it.
The subject of secrets is tricky. It's pretty clear that sensitive personal information, given to another in confidence, should be kept secret. You might break the agreement for a greater good, such as exposing a severe crime. But keeping personal secrets is proper, in general.
There are other secrets which are appropriate. For example, I know the End Phenomena of some processes on the Key To Life Course. These are secret. But I also believe that the reason they are secret is so that someone doing the process wouldn't be tempted to fake it. I also know that it's not the end of the world if someone finds out too soon. It just means that he has to be more honest if he wants to reach the End Phenomena. And if it were appropriate to tell someone, I would. I have the judgement to go along with the secret.
But Scientology has needlessly multiplied the secrets to be kept, and set unjustifiable penalties for revealing them. Why is it a crime to feed someone the Clear cognition? I don't know what the Clear cognition is, but if I found out before I originated it myself, would I forever be damned? Clear is a state of being, not a cognition, right? It doesn't make sense that so much could be riding on a few words. If anyone is a Clear, there must be a more robust way to determine the fact and a more robust way of achieving it.
Also, I have been set up for failure because some secrets have become broad public knowledge. We can argue whether or not they should have been exposed. But they are out. And they are broadcast on TV, the radio, and the internet. I tried to avoid them at first, but I gave up. I don't think it's possible to close my ears and eyes at the appropriate times. It's absurd to try. It gives a tool to anyone who wants to introvert me.
I am reminded of the United States atomic bomb project during World War II. That seems like a technology you'd really want to protect. And Soviet spies were right in the middle of it. So much for secrecy. The exact people you don't want to find out, are some of the first people to find out. LRH should have known this. Secrets get out. You have to take this into consideration before producing something that the bad guys aren't supposed to know about.
Anyways, secrets are a hassle because you have to keep straight what you can say to whom. I really don't appreciate having to keep secrets needlessly. So, I reject the duty to keep secrets which are already public knowledge. And I reject penalties of revealing secrets that are out of proportion to the damage caused.
The following is a generality, but it's true. Some Scientologists consider that the fact that they will be sec-checked is a motivation for not committing overts. The main consideration is financial -- it costs too much to spend the extra time in session. At first, this seems like an advantage of sec-checking. The advantage is temporary. This is wrong motivation. This means that one's behaviour depends on who knows about what one is doing -- a very bad way to be trained. One should make decisions based on the greatest good, not based on who will find out.
The following is another generality, but still true. When one brings up a critical comment about Scientology, the response from a Scientologist would be to question the validity of the source of the comment. Similarly, the test of whether a datum is dependable is often totally settled once it can be found in an LRH bulletin or book. If Ron wrote it, then it's taken as true. If someone disagrees with it, it will be assumed that he has misunderstood words or some fixed false data preventing him from grasping the truth. Though this contradicts LRH essays on integrity, this is the principle in use. The fallacy of this is made more obvious considering the 2007 re-release of the basic Scientology books, and also considering the earlier/ongoing project to store Scientology materials in a durable form. This project involved creating stainless steel plates and books made of a special paper, then storing these in titanium vaults. The idea is that the materials will be preserved in case of catastrophe. But now, assuming the latest releases to be the best representation of LRH, the project would need to be re-done. And the existing materials would need to be destroyed, or somehow marked that they are the wrong version, etc. This leads me to several conclusions. One, storing the materials in a durable form is little guarantee that they will last, unless numerous people are doing so. Two, if RTC were really interested in preserving and disseminating pure LRH materials, it would also publish all the raw data, unedited. Three, we Scientologists cannot identify genuine LRH materials from altered materials. Four, anyone who did point out confusions in the books, would have been stopped and sent to find their misunderstood word, preventing correction of the material itself. So stifling argument in the effort to Keep Scientology Working resulted in keeping Scientology from working. Five, we should therefore de-emphasize the importance of the source of information, and emphasize more reliable methods of ascertaining truth, i.e., observation.
I reject "He pulled it in", when it means "He caused the abuse he got". If you realize you are being a victim or causing destruction, and you are therefore "pulling" bad things in, OK. You realize it, you take better control of your life, great. But for anyone else to proclaim that "you pulled it in" is just an opinion, and often not helpful in any way.
I reject fixing the price of services. I believe a free market is a better guarantee of quality. Furthermore, arbitrary (i.e., decided by someone other than the persons giving and receiving) fixed prices and commissions result in less services being done, just as income tax squashes trade and production.
I reject the authority of the Church to control me. I'm talking about situations where the C/S or Ethics Officer says I need to such-and-such action, regardless of my opinion or whether I can afford it. I'm talking about when I would like to get some time off course, and I have to get approval and "make up the time", as though I owed my time. I usually don't mind being controlled for a few hours, or maybe more sometimes. But it's totally my decision, and not a blank check from here on out.
I reject the notion that, though I have the ability to make money, I don't have the intelligence or can't be trusted to spend it exactly as I choose and find out how it is used.
I reject the concept of buying status.
I reject the concept of buying status at 20% off.
I reject the concept of buying status at 20% off until November 7, after which time, status will cost full price.
I reject the extension of the 20% discount on status until December 31. I'm beating a dead horse here. But seriously, I'm happy to contribute to worthy projects. But I try not to care about a status, a pin, a certificate, a plaque or a trophy that says I paid so much money? Who really cares about that stuff and why should we be encouraging such vanity?
I reject most required attestations to states of being and abilities. It's ok to gain abilities and achieve new states and attest that you've done so. But if it's a required step and the ability gained is very general, there's trouble. To make a TRs graduate attest to "ability to handle any situation in life with communication alone", is to set him up for failure. The next time he ends up in an overwhelming situation, say he gets mugged by a street gang, or even a gang of 2-year olds, and he can't handle it, he becomes a failure. He has to admit it and re-do the course. Or he has to bend his mind around and somehow qualify this ability he attested to and say, "well, there's no such thing as an absolute," and water it down in some way. In any case, from there on, it's tough to talk to others in a straightforward way about this, because he's supposed to have that broadly-worded ability and the course just doesn't produce it. It's less introverting to attest to something more specific and demonstrable, say "done: 2hrs flawless TR0; 1/2 hour each flawless TR1, TR2, TR3, TR4." In the case of professional auditing, there is the additional pressure of completing for financial reasons. Take a Grade I completion, who is supposed to be able to recognize the source of problems and make them vanish. This is great, until a problem comes along that won't vanish. It doesn't necessarily mean she needs to re-do Grade I. It means that the stated result of the process needs to be brought into alignment with what the process really does do. Another example, why would a flubless interned Class XII auditor ever need cramming? She's perfect, right? Wrong. Mistakes happen. She may be outstanding. She may be worth her weight in gold. But there's no need to label her "perfect" or "flubless." There should not be mismatch between what is advertised and what is actually delivered. And there should not be pressure on students and pcs to attest to the advertised state, thereby shifting the blame to them when they discover a difference.
I reject the statement that Scientology works 100% of the time when applied 100% correctly. I've heard various versions of this many times. Anyone who claims this needs to define what phenomena is meant by "works", a detailed description of what is meant by correct application, and the records of a repeated experiment. And after that, it could only be claimed that it worked in 100% of the repetitions of that experiment. It is also important to test whether applying it differently produces a same, better, or worse result. But, with limited knowledge of everything in Scientology, having experienced success with what one has tried, to then extrapolate that all Scientology works 100% of the time for 100% of the people from here to eternity, is not justified. This in no way degrades your success. It just means don't be blinded by it.
The only times I hear this "100%" stuff is when a service is being advertised or when a less than ideal result is achieved. In the latter case, it is the trigger to investigate what was done non-standardly. Fair enough. But what about when a good result is achieved? You could still find something non-standard done. My opinion there.
I reject that Scientology is a science. It is a science in the sense that it is an organized body of knowledge. But in other subjects commonly known as sciences, such as chemistry or mathematics, the scientific method is continuously employed. This means posing new hypotheses and trying new experiments to more accurately confirm or deny the hypotheses. Testing and questioning is ongoing. No law is sacred. Anything is open for revision if new observation warrants it. In Scientology, this is not allowed. So it's misleading to call Scientology a science. If you corrupted a math book or a chemistry book that was in use, sooner or later, the corruption would lead to a failure in practice and the corruption would be traced down and corrected. And anyone competent in the field could do that. Applied mathematics and chemistry, by the way, can be very dangerous. But this does not warrant the existence of a central authority to keep math and chemistry pure, to own the trademarks on the square root symbol, the periodic table of the elements, "Mathematics(TM)", "Chemistry(TM)", or "Chemist(TM)".
In 1966, Tony Hitchman interviewed L. Ron Hubbard on Rhodesian television. This is available from the Church as a video entitled "An Introduction to Scientology". It is claimed to be the only filmed interview with Ron. This is false. There is another. Charlie Nairn with Granada Television produced a half-hour documentary on Scientology in 1967, as part of the World in Action series. Despite the mostly negative spin, this documentary has some favorable coverage of Saint Hill. "Saint Hill is a nice place. Scientologists are very friendly and honestly believe they can help whoever goes there. Usually, they can." In the documentary, Janet Lundy is announced as a Clear. She speaks briefly and really looks happy. It also includes an interview with Ron, but he doesn't come off altogether favorably. The interviewer asks Ron about his (three) wives. Smiling widely, Ron says his first wife is dead. Then Ron says he never had a second wife. Despite all of Scientology's truths, this documentary, and the Church's effective claim that it doesn't exist, is evidence that neither the Church nor Ron is 100% reliable. There is other evidence, but this is some of the most blatant.
Here are a few questions to consider.
What kind of friend would leave you because someone else told them they had to?
Why is there not an early-detection system for Suppressive Persons? Why does it take ten or twenty years sometimes to discover them?
Are your statistics more important than you? When you're upset, who is there for you, free of charge? When you succeed at something you really wanted to do yourself, who cares?
When watching a Scientology event video alone or in a small group, do you give a standing ovation? Do you clap? What about when watching the same video in a large group?
What are the local or international 1-, 5-, 10-, 20-year statistics for training and auditing completions? Do you care? Are you curious? Where can you find out? Is it ok to ask?
Who are the top executives? What do they do? Have you ever met with them in person? Have you met their families? Do they have individual hopes and dreams? Hobbies? Problems? Are they happy or frustrated? Where are they now? Who were the top executives the past 40 years? Is it ok to ask? Who records our Church history?
If all you cared about was doing the right thing, you didn't care who was looking, what would you be doing? How much of what you are doing is based on following orders or going with the flow, and how much is based on what you truly believe to be right? Why do you need so many orders?
How many bulk mail items do you receive? How many phone calls? How many e-mails? Do you want them?
How many HCOBs do you know of that you seriously doubt that LRH wrote? Did you verify he did? How did you verify it?
What are your crimes? Hmmmm? Think about it. What are your crimes, really? Ok, scratch that. Answer this. How do your crimes stack up against your contributions?
