It's time to get off the fence

[Emma]

There has never been a time like this.

From early January until present time, there has never been this much pressure on Scientology. Things are coming to a head. You can see it and feel it. It's tangible.

In past times it has been kind of ok to have a foot in more than one camp. I know of people who have tried to occupy several position at once i.e. critic, scientologist, freezoner etc and done a kind of juggling act to keep it all together.

While it has clearly never been easy to perform the mental gymnastics necessary to maintain these opposing positions simuntaneously, it is now bordering on impossible.

The CoS is being attacked. Let's not make light of it. It IS being attacked legally, peacefully and legitimately. And it is being attacked HARD.

So where do you stand?

If you truly believe in the tech and don't want to see your churches demolished then I think it's time to get of the fence. I don't see how it is possible anymore to simultaneously be a critic and a Scientology supporter. I think it is time to make your position clear.

If you want your churches to survive then the time to fight is now! Tell us why they should survive. Tell us what changes need to happen. Tell us why you feel this way.

I'm not suggesting that it has to be a "you're either for us or against us" proposition, but in these times, at least it seems to me, one needs to clarify their own position, not only for others, but mainly for themselves.

[Alanzo]

I don't want to see the Church of Scientology destroyed.

I want to see it evolve from an abusive cult into a sustainable religion that helps people way more than it hurts them.

I want to see them get their ethics in, for real this time.

And for good.

[Mojo]

There has never been a time like this...



Excellent post.

Contrary to my normal method of operation being a knee-jerk response to what I have read, and posting that immediate response, this one requires a good deal of thought. A sorting out of sorts. A long thorough soul-searching contemplative silent engagement.

I'll be back with the answer in 7 minutes.

Mojo

[Lovesnightsky]

LOL Mojo

I believe that religions are a necessary evil, as are schools of thought and cults. They provide a service to those humans who get sucked into them.

With regard CofS, it would be nice to see it evolve into a real and helpful religion, but to tell the truth I couldn't care less if it does or gets destroyed, or stays the same actually.

We as a society created it, we, as scientologists, partook in it's survival at one point and for our own reasons. Yes, I do believe it is time it evolved into something else or get destroyed, but I also know that something else will take its place as it now exists.
This is not different to what I feel about humanity in general.

[Bea Kiddo]

I just want to have a normal family. I dont give a fuck what the church does. They can stay or go, for all I care. I just dont want to ever be part of it again. That is for sure.

I am over the fence, but still have people to help over the fence before I can walk away.

[Giuseppe]

I am over the fence, but still have people to help over the fence before I can walk away.

Giuseppe is over the fence, but Giuseppe pretend to be on the side of the Co$, and Giuseppes babies are having coat stuck to the fence!:bigcry:

[loiepoo]

The cult movement is over. We are on the cusp of the Aquarian Age, where independent, free thinking rules. More and more we recognize our inner teacher as our true guide. Our AUTHORITY is INSIDE. We are being guided moment by moment by our own true Authority. All we have to do is pay attention. We no longer need a "Priest, Cult leader, Teacher" to tell us what to believe, what to think. We are our own Guru, Teacher.

[The Oracle]

Alanzo speaks for me as well.

I don't care to see the Church destroyed and I don't care to harm people of good will. And I know there are people there of good will.

On the other hand I don't care to cover up the witholds of certain people in the the Church and I am glad people are coming out and teling the truth of the matter.

I am not sitting on the fence.

It's every man for himself.

I jumped ship and made my way up the bridge by myself, I'm almost done with it.

I took my matters in to my own hands.

Everyone here has taken their matters in to their own hands, maybe they didn't make the same choices, but that's O.K..

If I thought someone was going to burn down a Church would I stop them?

Yes. I would do that for my neighbor too.

Will I stand with the Church in a war?

No, I will not inherit their enemies. I didn't do it when I was involved and I will not do it now.

Will I go in protest marches against the Church or court trials or law suits?

No. I haven't inherited the Church as my enemy either.

I will only fight for Scotland.

T.O.

[nowout]

I'm out. However, I don't believe in thowing out the baby with the bathwater. There are some good - we all got in because there were some wins gotten. Still use data series, tone scale etc. as it is useful.

Don't want to keep the lies and destructive doo doo. So, any restructuring or perhaps starting from scratch would be the way to go.

[duddins]

Great Post Emma......

I have to agree with Alanzo as well....

I want to see the hatred for anything non-Scientology cease.

I would never want anything that is good in the church go down. But all this is good is deeply imbedded in the muck.

I want to see my friends united with their family again.

I am not on the fence.......

I never was an enemy to the church. They proclaimed me as such because I was tired of being hurt by the way our lives were being managed in the SO, and chose to leave.

I just want exposure of the truth behind the crimes of the church against their own people.

[anondc7777]

I realize I'm not the one you're addressing Emma, and I appreciate what you're doing for the ex-scis here, so I hope this can be taken in stride.

First, the church will never, ever, ever be "reformed." It is set up in such a way as to make any kind of change from within, except for from the top, utterly impossible. The mistrust, checks, counterchecks, audits (with a crude lie detector no less!) and general fear of the adherents absolutely prevents anything like this from happening, ever. EVER. Understand that. Ever.

Even thinking such a thing might cause someone in a middle-management position to fail their sec check and have to pay thousands of dollars for more sec check "auditing"? I am getting the impression that 99% of the time these folks, if they saw muscaviage himself shoot a child in the face, would manage to convince themselves they hadn't seen a thing.

Second, you've done the hard part, you've ...blown...I believe you call it. Now realize what the tech is, what the bridge is. It's a con. Plain and simple. It "works" because you think it works. Its silly and counterproductive. Take some yoga or tai-chi. You'll get the same benefits and a little exercise to boot. And get some counseling.

With respect,
anon

[Fancy]

I made my choice even thought I am out here fighting for the tech and some of the churchies metnal and spiritual health.

I am freezone and I always will be freezone. I guess I hope to free my friends from this cult that has altered the tech.

I think the anon is right and unless the church changes some of the policies it will not reform.

So the tech is the freezone now and not in the church and that is the future. If the church could change some of the policies and truly reform then I say it should survive but I doubt I will go back because of how I have been threated there. I am so use to abuse in my life I did not know I was being abused at times in the church but now I do know that I got some more abuse in my life there.

It is sad for me to say that the church should end as it is but it is the unvarnished truth no matter how I feel. I know Alanzo and some feel that and I understand that but unless they change policy for real then it is not going to happen. So postulate that truly will change policies.

Barb

[Good twin]

:goodorbad:

[Emma]

I realize I'm not the one you're addressing Emma, and I appreciate what you're doing for the ex-scis here, so I hope this can be taken in stride.

First, the church will never, ever, ever be "reformed." It is set up in such a way as to make any kind of change from within, except for from the top, utterly impossible. The mistrust, checks, counterchecks, audits (with a crude lie detector no less!) and general fear of the adherents absolutely prevents anything like this from happening, ever. EVER. Understand that. Ever.

Even thinking such a thing might cause someone in a middle-management position to fail their sec check and have to pay thousands of dollars for more sec check "auditing"? I am getting the impression that 99% of the time these folks, if they saw muscaviage himself shoot a child in the face, would manage to convince themselves they hadn't seen a thing.

Second, you've done the hard part, you've ...blown...I believe you call it. Now realize what the tech is, what the bridge is. It's a con. Plain and simple. It "works" because you think it works. Its silly and counterproductive. Take some yoga or tai-chi. You'll get the same benefits and a little exercise to boot. And get some counseling.

With respect,
anon

Hey anon,

I realise you're new around here and don't know me from Adam.

If you did you wouldn't have made that post.

My post was directed to those who, until right now, have not really decided where they sit in regards to Scientology. It was a warning I guess that if you want to fight for your so called "church", now is the time to do it.

As for me, I realised a long time ago what the "tech" really is.

And I prefer racquetball. :D

[Alanzo]

I realize I'm not the one you're addressing Emma, and I appreciate what you're doing for the ex-scis here, so I hope this can be taken in stride.

First, the church will never, ever, ever be "reformed." It is set up in such a way as to make any kind of change from within, except for from the top, utterly impossible. The mistrust, checks, counterchecks, audits (with a crude lie detector no less!) and general fear of the adherents absolutely prevents anything like this from happening, ever. EVER. Understand that. Ever.

How do you know?

Have you ever met a Scientology staff member?

You probably would be shocked to know that they believe in just about the same ideals as you do.

You aren't the only one who believes in freedom of speech and the rights of man. Most all Scientologists do, too, and they work for free and devote their whole lives to that ideal.

They put their actual lives on the line for it.

And you?

You write some posts and march in a protest or two?

You need to know who, exactly, you are fighting here.

That attitude you displayed above clearly shows you do not.


Even thinking such a thing might cause someone in a middle-management position to fail their sec check and have to pay thousands of dollars for more sec check "auditing"? I am getting the impression that 99% of the time these folks, if they saw muscaviage himself shoot a child in the face, would manage to convince themselves they hadn't seen a thing. Maybe, if they were under enough pressure.

So would you, in the right situation and under the right circumstances.

These people are no different than you.

They are not animals.


Second, you've done the hard part, you've ...blown...I believe you call it. Now realize what the tech is, what the bridge is. It's a con. Plain and simple. It "works" because you think it works. Its silly and counterproductive. Take some yoga or tai-chi. You'll get the same benefits and a little exercise to boot. And get some counseling.

With respect,
anonNice respect, anon.

Actual respect would be knowing what the fuck you are talking about before you come in here and tell us all how it is.

So why don't you go back to where you came from and get a little?

[anondc7777]

And I prefer racquetball. :D
haha, fair enough.

I read a little too much into your conciliatory tone. Also, I wasn't addressing you specifically except for in the disclaimer. I try not to enturbulate the fzers too much but the more I read the more I just don't understand the people that realize that Scn is a con, but still think there's something to the "tech". That's not baby and bathwater; that's bathwater and bathwater. :wink2:

[anondc7777]

Have you ever met a Scientology staff member?
I shook arnie's hand on the 10th. That count?

Hey, I see that maybe I hit a little too close to home with that post, so I'll enturbulate elsewhere for the night.

[Voltaire's Child]

Take some yoga or tai-chi. You'll get the same benefits and a little exercise to boot. And get some counseling.

With respect,
anon


I do yoga.It's great but it does not do what Scn tech does. Not the same thing. It's not aimed at the same things and it works differently.

And tai chi?Not even close. It's a good thing but it's good in other ways.

I think there are lots of things that help people and some of those things have somewhat similar effects,but it's not exactly the same at all. Scn and Dianetics purport to help people locate and confront past traumas. The processes have the objective in mind that the person will have one or more major realizations about himself and life. This isn't something you will find in every other ology, ism, self help thing,spiritual discipline, though it certainly isn't only found in Scn.

Scn processeshave specific questions designed to do the above. Now, whether or not this actually works or doesn't, is a matter of opinion. But my point is they aren't designed the same and aren't trying to do the same things and do not have the same effects all the time. But I think psychotherapy, yoga, spiritual disciplines, various things are terrific and people should probably do a lot more of these things.

[Free to shine]

Disclaimer - this is my personal opinion only.

Having been around since relatively early days, and experienced many, many aspects of the whole thing, I think the only way for Scientology to continue to exist is as what it really is - a business.

A business that is accountable, crystal clean and open in it's dealings from the top to the bottom.

You buy a service, (as you do now) and expect to receive exactly what you paid for. Money back guarantee.

All the other bullshit would have to go.

I was there when it was turned into a religion for tax and legal reasons. There was more honesty before that.

I have no interest in the Tech as I have found alternatives that allow me to be who I am. My reason for being here is to find healing and to understand the hidden indoctrination, which I continue to do every day, and to help others emerging from the consequences of the despicable crimes committed against them.


(Ducks for cover). :hide:

[Alanzo]

I shook arnie's hand on the 10th. That count?

No, it doesn't.


Hey, I see that maybe I hit a little too close to home with that post, so I'll enturbulate elsewhere for the night.

Go meet a Scientologist in a non-threatening environment. Find out if they eat their babies. Or rip the ears off kittens.

Then come back and let us know.

[Kathy (ImOut)]

Over the past week I've really been looking at this topic. All the various posts here that have gotten me to see things that were hidden from my consciousness. From my experiences in the CofS and my experiences in Ron's Org, I think I finally figured this out last summer. But not having this message board until recently, I couldn't formulate all of my thoughts and considerations.

Sure, there are valid workable points of Scientology. But at this time the CofS is a complete betrayal (in my opinion) of what was/is promised, and I think it should be stopped.

I am very thankful that Anonymous is doing what it is doing. I and a few others have had similar ideas, but with so few of us and the fear of going up against the big Church, we have not followed thru on those ideas. Ten people just can't take down the Church. Sure we can upset them and be an annoyance, but we didn't have the manpower or the resources to pull off what Anonymous is currently doing.

The Church is full of lies, crimes and betrayals. When I decided to search the internet a little over two years ago, I knew I was off the fence. But I still wanted my "bridge", so by hooking up with Ron's Org, I was able to "have" that. But after a year with Ron's Org, I'd pretty much decided I didn't want what I was being "sold" there either.

I want to live my life. I want to think for myself. I want to handle life's problems with common sense and with my own resourcefulness. I don't need a session. I don't need a book. I just need my mind to function the way that it does, unencumbered by other's ideas of what does and doesn't work.

I know what my abilities are and I know what my weaknesses are - I do pretty damn well with life and livingness. And I'm not walking around with rose colored glasses on. I see what is out there and I deal with the messed up planet - pollution, crime, war, etc., the best I can. By experiencing what life has to given me or taken from me. I am able and willing to exist on planet earth as a human being that is fully aware of the fact that I am also a spiritual being with unlimited possibilities.:happydance:

And I don't care for anyone or anything (religion, cult, etc.) to tell me otherwise.

[Emma]

I think what Alanzo is getting at is that Anonymous, while having the same (or similar) goals in mind as a lot of us, don't fully understand us or know what we know.

You are the new kids on the block and can sometimes have the tendancy to make us feel that we haven't done "enough" or "anything" to fight Scientology in the past. There is also a "flavour" of condescension that comes across in a newbie post, telling the administrator of ESMB to "get some couselling" without having a clue of my actually stand in this matter.

While we appreciate the involvement of Anonymous, you guys are not REALLY going to do anything more than we have been doing for decades. You are just louder in your numbers and probably more computer savvy, but that's all. If you can manage to generate enough public interest to get our LONG HELD concerns heard then we will be forever grateful. But bear in mind...you didn't start this war.

I do hope you can help finish it though.

[Good twin]

What she said (ImOut)

[Voltaire's Child]

I made my choice even thought I am out here fighting for the tech and some of the churchies metnal and spiritual health.

I am freezone and I always will be freezone. I guess I hope to free my friends from this cult that has altered the tech.

I think the anon is right and unless the church changes some of the policies it will not reform.

So the tech is the freezone now and not in the church and that is the future. If the church could change some of the policies and truly reform then I say it should survive but I doubt I will go back because of how I have been threated there. I am so use to abuse in my life I did not know I was being abused at times in the church but now I do know that I got some more abuse in my life there.

It is sad for me to say that the church should end as it is but it is the unvarnished truth no matter how I feel. I know Alanzo and some feel that and I understand that but unless they change policy for real then it is not going to happen. So postulate that truly will change policies.

Barb

I agree.I don't think it will reform and I wouldn't trust it to, even if it got taken over by the Freezone. (No offense to my FZ friends.)

Unlike some, though, I'm in favor of CofS being taken down. Or at least having the shit really hit the fan so that people can see what goes on there.

I don't believe the government should regulate religion, so I wouldn't want to see, say, the US government outlaw CofS. But to see it implode, to see the top (and some others, I suppose) CofS officials sent to prison because of dishonesty and abuse of staff, to see the lid really blown off the Sea Org, the RPF, and all the criminal regging and recruiting practices...that would be fine with me. If the government went full tilt boogie against CofS' practices, it wouldn't NEED to shut down CofS. Top and some middle and lower echelon CofS staff would go to prison. Some would go into hiding. CofS' name would be even worse than it is now.They could not withstand that.

I don't want to see any more people being tricked into signing staff contracts or cashing in IRAs and inheritances or imprisoned in RPF camps. And if a full scale series of raids and investigations would reveal that, then, great. Because, honestly, if that were to take place, CofS would be GONE. I really think so.

[Kathy (ImOut)]

What she said (ImOut)

What who said?

[duddins]

My reason for being here is to find healing and to understand the hidden indoctrination, which I continue to do every day, and to help others emerging from the consequences of the despicable crimes committed against them.


(Ducks for cover). :hide:

What she said!

[Alanzo]

I agree.I don't think it will reform and I wouldn't trust it to, even if it got taken over by the Freezone. (No offense to my FZ friends.)

Unlike some, though, I'm in favor of CofS being taken down. Or at least having the shit really hit the fan so that people can see what goes on there.

I don't believe the government should regulate religion, so I wouldn't want to see, say, the US government outlaw CofS. But to see it implode, to see the top (and some others, I suppose) CofS officials sent to prison because of dishonesty and abuse of staff, to see the lid really blown off the Sea Org, the RPF, and all the criminal regging and recruiting practices...that would be fine with me. If the government went full tilt boogie against CofS' practices, it wouldn't NEED to shut down CofS. Top and some middle and lower echelon CofS staff would go to prison. Some would go into hiding. CofS' name would be even worse than it is now.They could not withstand that.

I don't want to see any more people being tricked into signing staff contracts or cashing in IRAs and inheritances or imprisoned in RPF camps. And if a full scale series of raids and investigations would reveal that, then, great. Because, honestly, if that were to take place, CofS would be GONE. I really think so.

We totally agree here Fluffy.

I just don't think that the CofS would be gone after all the corruption was exposed and prosecuted.

I think that good staff would learn and take over.

At least, that's what I hope.

[Good twin]

...And what Emma said too. I remember all too well what it felt like being "in" the church and being attacked. We take it real personally. Scientologists believe the worst identity you can assume is that of a victim. Being victimized by your own group is humiliating and disturbing, but if you have some small hope to hold on to that it will all come out all right, even if it's off in the distance toward some eternity, you somehow can carry on with your head high. We know not just how we feel, we really know how the churchies feel and their motives are understandable to us. Anon will never understand that.

[Good twin]

"Hold on it's going to be a bumpy ride."

[Voltaire's Child]

The worst thing, or one of the really bad things,is being preyed on by the very church that tells you that you'll be safe there, that the outside world is aberrated. So they tell you they'll protect you from all that, make you more "able" to deal with all that, then they prey on you. Then if you say anything, then YOU'RE the bad guy.

[Voltaire's Child]

Addendum to what I said earlier:

Not only do I think that CofS would not reform, but also, the reason I said I wouldn't trust it to even if taken over by Freezoners is that there are abusive policies (and some HCOBs, too) by Hubbard that, til those are culled, you've got a ticking timebomb.As far as I'm concerned, THAT is a pitfall with some FZ practices. My impression is that too few Freezoners and other Independents are willing to admit Hubbard could ever be wrong or to take issue (no pun intended) with certain Hubbard writings and utterances.

I truly believe that til people are willing to do that- even if they won't all agree on the same stuff- that reform would not get anywhere.

I support the Freezone but cannot willingly consider myself an actual part of it because I do not see enough willingness do disagree with "Ron". Yes, there is some, there is--but not enough.

Really, I think that Paul should be in charge of all of that.:coolwink: :thumbsup: Never seen him shy away from admitting problems with bits of Scn or Hubbard. Or at least, anyway, that there could be such things.

I vote Paul for C.O.B.!

[barky]

I'm clearly against the CoS. People can believe what they want to believe, practice what they want to practice. But the CoS, as an organization, abuses its members, its staffers, and its most devout S.O. members. It must be taken down.

As I see it, Scn is best left in the public domain, with individual and independent groups forming up and delivering it as they see fit. If a loose collective of these groups forms up and calls itself Freezone or something else, well that's fine, too.

But the totalitarian leadership has got to go.


I vote Paul for C.O.B.!

I'm with others on this board who have stated that no one should be in charge of Scn. LRH is dead, his replacement has turned criminal, and there's no reason to believe that anyone should be in charge. So with all due respect, neither Paul nor anyone else should ever be COB.

[Fancy]

I am a freezoner as well as Roland and we know Ron did a lot of wrong and I think I got the why of it too. I admit he made a mess of things as well as did a lot of good. Almost like there were two people there.

[duddins]

The worst thing, or one of the really bad things,is being preyed on by the very church that tells you that you'll be safe there, that the outside world is aberrated. So they tell you they'll protect you from all that, make you more "able" to deal with all that, then they prey on you. Then if you say anything, then YOU'RE the bad guy.

WOW ! Well said!

[Alanzo]

I saw something from that anon guy in this thread which disturbs me.

In order for someone to destroy someone else, they must first demonize them. They must make them less than human. They certainly must grant them fewer rights than they would grant themselves.

Anonymous may very well be taking kids, just like our military does, and dehumanizing all existing Scientologists so that the mobilization is easier and the crowds are larger.

This process tends to snowball with humans. They become more and more blinded, and more and more fervent, and more and more hateful. Until finally even Scientology children are the enemy to them.

Anon is great. What has been achieved so far by them is absolutely fantastic.

But the same power which corrupted LRH, and David Miscavige, and many of us, can corrupt anon in the same way.

With the right ingredients, Anon can very well become the same, or even worse, than the Church of Scientology ever was.

We all can.

Anon should be watched.

[barky]

But the same power which corrupted LRH, and David Miscavige, and many of us, can corrupt anon in the same way.

With the right ingredients, Anon can very well become the same, or even worse, than the Church of Scientology ever was.

Although I share the concern that all Anon activities must be above board, I don't share the fear they can become worse than Scn.

-- no profit motive
-- no cohesive, organized movement
-- generic short attention span of the internet population

Anon is a collection of individuals, some will be nutty, it's inevitable. Don't condemn the whole idea because of that.

[Terril park]

I've sort of nailed my colours to the mast. I protested at London with anon.

The churches are just buildings. I support scientology. Also the people in the buildings are for the most part my spiritual team mates, to borrow a phrase. :)
So My protest signs let them know they can do scientology outside those
buildings.

I protest the abuses of COS. It seems unlikely reform would be possible. If there is no good reform the COS will then just slowly wither away by virtue of people just walking away.

[lionheart]

We totally agree here Fluffy.

I just don't think that the CofS would be gone after all the corruption was exposed and prosecuted.

I think that good staff would learn and take over.

At least, that's what I hope.

I don't see that happening Alanzo.

I think the "good staff" (whatever they are - because in my experience almost all staff were "good", even the most evil dramatisers like MSH and Kember, et al.) would simply argue over what LRH "really" meant, just like those who try to hold onto some of Hubbardology do on here. There would be a power play over who was most "on-source" and the most ruthless Hubbard dramatisers would gain control just like RTC did.

LRH set up his "church" that way. Laced with contradictions, open policies and tech and layers of hidden policies and techs. He wanted people to be confused over what he really meant. This is how he made himself the "stable datum" for people to latch onto to keep their confusion at bay. So he was "source" and could make up any order he wanted, that would be complied with, despite any other earlier pronouncement from him. His followers followed whatever he said currently, to hold back the confusion that LRH had already implanted in them.

The new management would however be unable to hold onto the Hubbardologists in the new reformed church because they will have ditched some LRH stuff to make them "legal, decent and honest". Once a hubbardologist drops some of the LRH policies and techs, it is like a house of cards and slowly it all comes tumbling down.

They would not be able to enforce their interpretation of Hubbardology because they will have dropped the parts that enabled Hubbard to enforce his command intention.

DM has "succeeded" to hold it together because he has not disavowed any LRH commands and has behaved as if he were LRH. Any new, uncorrupt management will be ignoring the commainds of corruption that Hubbard laced Scientology with.

His church was set up to support his evil purposes: "Material things are yours for the asking. Men are your slaves. Elemental spirits are your slaves". The church can't exist without all of his duplicitous orders.

The Church of Scientology is an all or nothing church.

[Dulloldfart]

Really, I think that Paul should be in charge of all of that.:coolwink: :thumbsup: Never seen him shy away from admitting problems with bits of Scn or Hubbard. Or at least, anyway, that there could be such things.

I vote Paul for C.O.B.!

:lol:

Thank you for the vote, Fluff.

No interest right now.

Maybe after the first hundred million people have benefited from Paul's Robot Auditor.

Paul

[Free to shine]

I agree with you LH. That's the reality of it.

[lionheart]

Although I share the concern that all Anon activities must be above board, I don't share the fear they can become worse than Scn.

-- no profit motive
-- no cohesive, organized movement
-- generic short attention span of the internet population

Anon is a collection of individuals, some will be nutty, it's inevitable. Don't condemn the whole idea because of that.

I agree. The anons I met at my picket were fantastically perceptive and understanding.

They asked me why I ever got into Scn and they understood my answer. One guy actually said he hoped I had helped people. I asked them why they were there and was impressed by their simple, but perceptive idealism.

LRH taught us to mistrust people, part of the deprogramming is learning to trust people again. Sure the anonymous guy who posted on this thread was naive and somewhat clumsy. So what? That doesn't mean we should read hubbard-type hidden evil inclinations into any mistake he made.

The common thing I see in most anons is their ability to cut to the heart of the matter so much more directly than we exes, with our still-confused, conflicting Hubbard thoughts and beliefs.

For example, I was telling the anons about the fantastic things that happened in my auditing. They didn't scorn or denigrate in any way. Then as I do on here, I simply said that despite what happened to me you have to step back and look at the bigger picture of what might have been happening and how much suggestion might have played a part.

Instantly they said "like Derren Brown" and we achieved understanding immediately. I couldn't help but compare that simplicity with the complexity voiced on here when I introduced the idea of suggestion.

I'm not wishing to cause any offence, just trying to say what I observe.

LRH gave us so many conflicting ideas, deliberately so to establish himself as "source" and us as "slaves". As we contemplate his Church being taken apart by anonymous, it is inevitable that we will feel confused and uncertain. That is the Hubbard implant blowing off. :thumbsup:

[anondc7777]

I saw something from that anon guy in this thread which disturbs me.
You are reading WAAAAAY too much into one exaggeration. I understand you guys are touchy, but seriously, I withdraw the comment, okay? Stand down.

Anon has been INCREDIBLY careful not to demonize individual scientologists, as that is who we are here to help. My comment was directed at the strength of the brainwashing only, not a personal attack on scientologists as people. If you want to continue to interpret it that way, I can't stop you; but it's not what I said at all.

I'm not here to make friends with you. I'm here for intel.

[Kerry]

Emma, great thread starter, and Claire, Free, Anondc7777, and Lionheart, thank you so much for your input to this thread; I'm sure there are others I'm forgetting now without going back to read the whole thread. I agree with what you especially have said. I have never been in Scientology, but I think that doesn't make me incapable of understanding anything I read here and elsewhere.

It Is time to get off the fence in my opinion.

Hope to see you all on March 15th. The present scare tactics of the Scientology corporation aside. I will also be marching with the same Anons I was with on the Feb. 10th protest, and this time there will be the memory of the brave freedom fighter, Shawn Lonsdale. I will be carrying a torch for him.

Scientology will never be an honest and transparent organization, whoever is in charge of it, imo.

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

I just want to have a normal family. I dont give a fuck what the church does. They can stay or go, for all I care. I just dont want to ever be part of it again. That is for sure.

I am over the fence, but still have people to help over the fence before I can walk away.

I don't want my grandchildren (or anyone else) thinking that the CofS has THE ANSWER to spiritual evolvement/awareness, and giving up their lives to it.

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

I realize I'm not the one you're addressing Emma, and I appreciate what you're doing for the ex-scis here, so I hope this can be taken in stride.

First, the church will never, ever, ever be "reformed." It is set up in such a way as to make any kind of change from within, except for from the top, utterly impossible. The mistrust, checks, counterchecks, audits (with a crude lie detector no less!) and general fear of the adherents absolutely prevents anything like this from happening, ever. EVER. Understand that. Ever.

Even thinking such a thing might cause someone in a middle-management position to fail their sec check and have to pay thousands of dollars for more sec check "auditing"? I am getting the impression that 99% of the time these folks, if they saw muscaviage himself shoot a child in the face, would manage to convince themselves they hadn't seen a thing.

Second, you've done the hard part, you've ...blown...I believe you call it. Now realize what the tech is, what the bridge is. It's a con. Plain and simple. It "works" because you think it works. Its silly and counterproductive. Take some yoga or tai-chi. You'll get the same benefits and a little exercise to boot. And get some counseling.

With respect,
anon


Well said, thank you.

[Alanzo]

You are reading WAAAAAY too much into one exaggeration. I understand you guys are touchy, but seriously, I withdraw the comment, okay? Stand down.

Anon has been INCREDIBLY careful not to demonize individual scientologists, as that is who we are here to help. My comment was directed at the strength of the brainwashing only, not a personal attack on scientologists as people. If you want to continue to interpret it that way, I can't stop you; but it's not what I said at all.

All right, I accept your answer.

Sorry for any misinterpretation.


I'm not here to make friends with you. I'm here for intel.

I was serious about going and meeting, and getting to know a Scientologist in a non-threatening environment. You should be getting to know at least one actual, on-lines, Church of Scientologist. He shouldn't know that you are anon. Somehow get to know one. Meet his family. See how he actually lives. That is the best intel you can do.

This? This is just a message board. Until you know what it's really like to be a Scientologist, and what these people - these rank and file staff and public - are actually trying to do - you don't have any "intel".

The Internet is no substitute for real life.

And your actions have real life consequences for real life people.

Without good intel, you are going to destroy way more than you are going to help.

And don't tell me to "stand down".

It didn't happen when the Church told me to, and it sure as fuck isn't going to happen when you tell me to.

Anon is not bound by, nor are they following, any legal restrictions, rules, laws or requirements. There are no checks and balances on their actions, or on any power they may generate.

They can easily become a roving pack of wolves who does not forgive and who does not forget, as they repeat, over and over, like militant Nazi brownshirts, or Sea Org missionaires.

They can easily become just as fanatical as those groups, fervently convinced and believing in the rightness of their ends, no matter the means.

I've supported them in many different ways.

But, as I said, they must be watched.

[anondc7777]

you're a bit of a bore, alonzo

[Alanzo]

I agree. The anons I met at my picket were fantastically perceptive and understanding.

They asked me why I ever got into Scn and they understood my answer. One guy actually said he hoped I had helped people. I asked them why they were there and was impressed by their simple, but perceptive idealism.

LRH taught us to mistrust people, part of the deprogramming is learning to trust people again. Sure the anonymous guy who posted on this thread was naive and somewhat clumsy. So what? That doesn't mean we should read hubbard-type hidden evil inclinations into any mistake he made.

The common thing I see in most anons is their ability to cut to the heart of the matter so much more directly than we exes, with our still-confused, conflicting Hubbard thoughts and beliefs.

For example, I was telling the anons about the fantastic things that happened in my auditing. They didn't scorn or denigrate in any way. Then as I do on here, I simply said that despite what happened to me you have to step back and look at the bigger picture of what might have been happening and how much suggestion might have played a part.

Instantly they said "like Derren Brown" and we achieved understanding immediately. I couldn't help but compare that simplicity with the complexity voiced on here when I introduced the idea of suggestion.

I'm not wishing to cause any offence, just trying to say what I observe.

LRH gave us so many conflicting ideas, deliberately so to establish himself as "source" and us as "slaves". As we contemplate his Church being taken apart by anonymous, it is inevitable that we will feel confused and uncertain. That is the Hubbard implant blowing off. :thumbsup:

One of the ideals that originally got me into Scientology was the freedom of religion. Living in an oppressive middle class, middle western town, surrounded by corn, Scientology was my way of expressing that freedom of religion and freedom of thought in my own life.

I would often tell people that freedom means the freedom to make mistakes. So if my religion is a mistaken religion, then I am still just as free to have that religion and make that mistake as any Episcopalian, Methodist or Jew.

The fact is that if I had listened to those same milque-toast people with their milgue-toast ideals back then, and done what they told me, it would have been disastrous for me. I was helping myself with Scientology in very deep and fundamental ways for the first few years that I was involved and they were totally incapable of understanding that.

I needed Scientology very badly at that time of my life. And if someone else was given the power to take Scientology away from me, at that time of my life, it would have destroyed me.

We do not have the right to destroy someone else's religion. No one is given that right any more. And for good reason.

Whenever men have been given that right in the past, they have always used it. But never on their own religion - always on someone else's.

It doesn't matter if you think that Scientology can not be reformed.

You do not have the right to destroy it.

[Tanstaafl]

you're a bit of a bore, alonzo

Yeah, well intelligent, responsible and forward-looking people often are.

Reckless, ignorant and irresponsible people are rarely bores, but they are other things.

[Alanzo]

you're a bit of a bore, alonzo

Don't look now, but you're a bit of a nazi, anon.

You have the same ideals that the original brownshirts had in the early 1930's in Germany.

Do you know about the brownshirts of Germany, anon?

[Zinjifar]

I was serious about going and meeting, and getting to know a Scientologist in a non-threatening environment. You should be getting to know at least one actual, on-lines, Church of Scientologist. He shouldn't know that you are anon. Somehow get to know one. Meet his family. See how he actually lives. That is the best intel you can do.

This begs the question of where someone not in the 'Church' of Scientology is supposed to 'meet' this hypothetical 'free-range Church Scientologist' and 'get to know him'.

Advertise on Craig's List? Ask at the Org?

Which Scientology 'public', operating on his own will be willing to meet an 'anon', get to know him and his concerns? Or, should he ask the 'Church' that one be 'assigned' to him?

How 'revealing' of actual Scientology do you suppose *that* would be?

Sometimes it's hard to tell when you're kidding Alanzo, but, in this case, if a joke, it's too implausible to be particularly funny.

Zinj

[anondc7777]

Don't look now, but you're a bit of a nazi, anon.

You have the same ideals that the original brownshirts had in the early 1930's in Germany.

Do you know about the brownshirts of Germany, anon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

p.s. welcome to my ignore list

[Alanzo]

This begs the question of where someone not in the 'Church' of Scientology is supposed to 'meet' this hypothetical 'free-range Church Scientologist' and 'get to know him'.

Advertise on Craig's List? Ask at the Org?

Which Scientology 'public', operating on his own will be willing to meet an 'anon', get to know him and his concerns? Or, should he ask the 'Church' that one be 'assigned' to him?

How 'revealing' of actual Scientology do you suppose *that* would be?

Sometimes it's hard to tell when you're kidding Alanzo, but, in this case, if a joke, it's too implausible to be particularly funny.

Zinj

Intel is intel, Zinj. No one said it was supposed to be easy.

I agree. It's much easier to not have this intel. That way, by staying ignorant of what Scientology really is, and who real Scientologists really are - not David Miscavige - it will be easier to destroy them.

Right?

Not kidding, Zinj.

Very serious.

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

One of the ideals that originally got me into Scientology was the freedom of religion. Living in an oppressive middle class, middle western town, surrounded by corn, Scientology was my way of expressing that freedom of religion and freedom of thought in my own life.

I would often tell people that freedom means the freedom to make mistakes. So if my religion is a mistaken religion, then I am still just as free to have that religion and make that mistake as any Episcopalian, Methodist or Jew.

The fact is that if I had listened to those same milque-toast people with their milgue-toast ideals back then, and done what they told me, it would have been disastrous for me. I was helping myself with Scientology in very deep and fundamental ways for the first few years that I was involved and they were totally incapable of understanding that.

I needed Scientology very badly at that time of my life. And if someone else was given the power to take Scientology away from me, at that time of my life, it would have destroyed me.

We do not have the right to destroy someone else's religion. No one is given that right any more. And for good reason.

Whenever men have been given that right in the past, they have always used it. But never on their own religion - always on someone else's.

It doesn't matter if you think that Scientology can not be reformed.

You do not have the right to destroy it.


The only overt here is to not let the CofS destroy itself. Which it will, simply by doing what Anon is doing, exposing the lies and tragedies, just as we are doing in a small way on this board. That is the definition of "destroy" we are all operating off of, including Anonymous.

We are not like the Chinese, destroying a religion by killing monks and raping nuns.

The Church of Scientology leadership will prove to itself that it cannot be reformed. It will destroy itself, like it or not, either slowly or dramatically. We, who are not anonymous, and Anonymous, are the precipitators of the self-destruction of the CofS leaders. I know, because I've seen this happen to another Scientological organization on the wholetrack. This is not the first one that self-destructed.

Shed some tears, wash the dust out of your eyes and go and reform yourself.

[Alanzo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law)

p.s. welcome to my ignore list

Well would you look at that?

Thought-stopping techniques and everything.

[Alanzo]

The only overt here is to not let the CofS destroy itself. Which it will, simply by doing what Anon is doing, exposing the lies and tragedies, just as we are doing in a small way on this board. That is the definition of "destroy" we are all operating off of, including Anonymous.

We are not like the Chinese, destroying a religion by killing monks and raping nuns.

The Church of Scientology leadership will prove to itself that it cannot be reformed. It will destroy itself, like it or not, either slowly or dramatically. We, who are not anonymous, and Anonymous, are the precipitators of the self-destruction of the CofS leaders. I know, because I've seen this happen to another Scientological organization on the wholetrack. This is not the first one that self-destructed.

Shed some tears, wash the dust out of your eyes and go and reform yourself.

I'm pretty sure that I have a done a lot more of the exposing of the lies and tragedies of Scientology than you have, Colleen.

I know what I am doing. I've been doing it now for almost 8 years.

But I am not trying to destroy someone else's religion.

I am trying to turn a cult that harms people into a religion that helps people.

There is a huge difference here. It has happened before throughout history.

There is no reason that it can't happen here.

Did you read what I wrote about the freedom of religion meaning the freedom to make mistakes?

What did you think of that?

[Zinjifar]

Intel is intel, Zinj. No one said it was supposed to be easy.

I agree. It's much easier to not have this intel. That way, by staying ignorant of what Scientology really is, and who real Scientologists really are - not David Miscavige - it will be easier to destroy them.

Right?

Not kidding, Zinj.

Very serious.

If serious, you're being disingenuous. 'Meeting and getting to know a Scientology Family' is something that could happen to someone living in an area where they actually exist; very few areas, in the course of normal life. However, to do so deliberately is absurd. Assuming one could find and *identify* such a family to 'meet', the chances of that family willingly allowing an opponent of Scientology near enough into their lives as to actually learn something is silly. It isn't going to happen. *Unless* the family is directed to do so by the 'Church' , which would be useless if it happened because of the 'acceptable truth', 'gradient', 'Verbal Tech' and general KSW mandates and highly unlikely; since the 'Church' would forbid any such 'meeting' or 'getting to know you' scenario *except* on its own, deliberately manipulative, terms.

Not to mention, it would seem to be standard wog 'honesty' to let the Scn 'family' *know* why you want to meet them.

Zinj

[Wisened One]

I don't want the CoS to exist in the way it does now, I DO know that. And I and Spouse are permanently OUT of that!

No more abuses, kidnapping, held against your will when you leave or mess up, no children AT ALL allowed to work for CoS till age 18....

No more full-time Staff or Sea Org (and/or if there is, it's run with 'normal' rules and everyone works normal 8 hr shifts no matter what, and mandatory vacations,etc..for Staff and Sea Org)....Everyone either volunteers only a few scant hours in between their normal jobs and lives, or is paid well if they do work f/t.....

And I loved most of the people I worked with while on Staff and the Public, so that's good.....My fellow Staff and I were sincerely trying to 'Clear The Planet' and LOVED people on this deep level....I STILL love to help people and sometimes feel soo, so....LOST now, and not sure WHAT to do to help people anymore. I mean, Scn was SO PRECISE and you rested in that, and it gave me confidence in what to do for a lot of issues in my and others' lives. and it's been a long, slow road to finding my OWN way to help others now, but I'm finding it.

Sometimes, I flit between wanting to see Scientology reform into a sincerely helpful religion and prices are VERY low (to free, even, if that's possible?)...

Then many times, I flit to NO MORE Scientology or CoS AT ALL! But then what? I mean EVERY SINGLE piece of TECH (mainly the basic stuff) wasn't wrong, bad or unworkable/unusable, you know?

Idk: Maybe I'm still brainwashed....I mean, I spent half my life thinking and living Scientologically, it's kinda all I know, you know?

And I know that many of the basic concepts are cobbled together from OTHER authors, anyways....

I do like the freedom and flexibility to pick, choose, MIX whatever concepts I want of Tech, too.

Ethcis Tech has DEFINITELY gotta go (the way it is!).

Oh god, LISTEN to me, will ya? I sound like I'm WAVERING (and I'm not)....there is NO way we'd EVER go back!

Maybe what I'm trying to say is something like FZ should still be around? (And don't think I'll ever look into that either...but gee, don't I sound like I might?)

Arrgh!

The shit you go through to extricate yourself from all of this crap!!!!

Wisened One
PS: I reserve the right to completely change my mind on some posts...one day I'll be completely ANTI-EVERYTHING Scn, next day, I'll sound like above. So shoot me!?

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

I'm pretty sure that I have a done a lot more of the exposing of the lies and tragedies of Scientology than you have, Colleen.

I know what I am doing. I've been doing it now for almost 8 years.

But I am not trying to destroy someone else's religion.

I am trying to turn a cult that harms people into a religion that helps people.

There is a huge difference here. It has happened before throughout history.

There is no reason that it can't happen here.

Did you read what I wrote about the freedom of religion meaning the freedom to make mistakes?

What did you think of that?

Alanzo, nothing was addressed to you personally, sorry if I offended you. I appreciate you for 8 years of dedication to exposing the lies.

"Turning it into a religion that helps people" -- isn't that happening now in the Freezone?

Anon is not attacking the Freezone, nor the tech, although they might heartily disdain the tech, and for some good reasons too, IMHO.

Forget about the beautiful buildings and choice real estate and the billions in the banks, and the work potential of all those dedicated staff members, it all secretly belongs to Alan :giggle:

[Alanzo]

If serious, you're being disingenuous. 'Meeting and getting to know a Scientology Family' is something that could happen to someone living in an area where they actually exist; very few areas, in the course of normal life. However, to do so deliberately is absurd. Assuming one could find and *identify* such a family to 'meet', the chances of that family willingly allowing an opponent of Scientology near enough into their lives as to actually learn something is silly. It isn't going to happen. *Unless* the family is directed to do so by the 'Church' , which would be useless if it happened because of the 'acceptable truth', 'gradient', 'Verbal Tech' and general KSW mandates and highly unlikely; since the 'Church' would forbid any such 'meeting' or 'getting to know you' scenario *except* on its own, deliberately manipulative, terms.

Not to mention, it would seem to be standard wog 'honesty' to let the Scn 'family' *know* why you want to meet them.

Zinj

Do you have a substitute, Zinj?

Is ignorance of Scientologists not a problem for you?

Do you know what I am talking about when I warn against ignorance and how it leads to dehumanization? And then what that leads to in situations such as this?

Is dehumanization of Scientologists not a problem for you?

I said to get to know them in a non-threatening environment.

And since it is intel, it most definitely can be covert. It can be done.

It must be done.

Unless you have a better suggestion to defuse this powderkeg.

What might that be?

[Alanzo]

Wisened One -

I understand!

[Alanzo]

Alanzo, nothing was addressed to you personally, sorry if I offended you. I appreciate you for 8 years of dedication to exposing the lies.

"Turning it into a religion that helps people" -- isn't that happening now in the Freezone?

Anon is not attacking the Freezone, nor the tech, although they might heartily disdain the tech, and for some good reasons too, IMHO.

Forget about the beautiful buildings and choice real estate and the billions in the banks, and the work potential of all those dedicated staff members, it all secretly belongs to Alan :giggle:

Maybe you're right.

It might be happening in the Freezone.

And the Freezone might be the answer to this.

Like Terril says - Scientology doesn't need buildings at all.

[lionheart]

One of the ideals that originally got me into Scientology was the freedom of religion. Living in an oppressive middle class, middle western town, surrounded by corn, Scientology was my way of expressing that freedom of religion and freedom of thought in my own life.

I would often tell people that freedom means the freedom to make mistakes. So if my religion is a mistaken religion, then I am still just as free to have that religion and make that mistake as any Episcopalian, Methodist or Jew.

The fact is that if I had listened to those same milque-toast people with their milgue-toast ideals back then, and done what they told me, it would have been disastrous for me. I was helping myself with Scientology in very deep and fundamental ways for the first few years that I was involved and they were totally incapable of understanding that.

I needed Scientology very badly at that time of my life. And if someone else was given the power to take Scientology away from me, at that time of my life, it would have destroyed me.

We do not have the right to destroy someone else's religion. No one is given that right any more. And for good reason.

Whenever men have been given that right in the past, they have always used it. But never on their own religion - always on someone else's.

It doesn't matter if you think that Scientology can not be reformed.

You do not have the right to destroy it.

With respect, my friend, I think you are confusing Scientology and the Church of Scientology. My post referred to the "Church being taken apart" by anonymous - not the religion of Scientology.

The Church is a corrupt, thuggish, money laundering, intimidatory organisation and always has been since Hubbard set it up that way in the 60's. We both know that. It is not a religion. Bringing down the CofS has nothing to do with freedom of religion in my opinion.

In my experience of them, Anonymous seem to understand the difference. You are correct that there are inherent dangers in the power wielded by anonymous and those dangers are comparable in magnitude to the danger that the CofS poses. I posted to that effect the very first moments that anonymous appeared.

But in practice, so far, I see no signs that they are going to misuse that potential. And I do not see "freedom of religion" as being threatened by them or any evidence that that is even an issue in the current campaign.

Like you, I desperately needed the religion of Scientology when I found it. I too ignored the people who warned me against it and am delighted I didn't listen and followed my own path. I was very quickly disappointed in the "Church" which bore little resemblance to the religion, even back then. I put up with the church's nutty failings because Hubbard had set it up so that there was no other way to follow the religion of scientology.

What would we have done if the "church" hadn't existed? What would have happened to us? Would there have been a religion of scientology? Who knows? But life is always as it should be, I think you would have been allright! :wink2:

Now too, life is as it should be and the corrupt "church" is dying, just as it should. Let anonymous insert the fatal dagger if that is what they want to do! I will celebrate the fact!

The CofS is one of the most potent adversaries of freedom of religion, may it die as soon as possible! :thumbsup:

[Zinjifar]

Do you have a substitute, Zinj?

Is ignorance of Scientologists not a problem for you?

Do you know what I am talking about when I warn against ignorance and how it leads to dehumanization? And then what that leads to in situations such as this?

Is dehumanization of Scientologists not a problem for you?

I said to get to know them in a non-threatening environment.

And since it is intel, it most definitely can be covert. It can be done.

It must be done.

Unless you have a better suggestion to defuse this powderkeg.

What might that be?


As it happens, I've met a number of Scientologists and their families, one way or another, not because I have sought them out to spy on them, but because it just happened. When that happens I have not tried to insinuate myself into their lives or delve into their beliefs because, to do so as part of an 'intel' operation would violate my own 'ethics' as to 'false flag' operations.

Contact with a known and public opponent of Scientology would *drastically* impair their own standing with the 'Church', as I'm sure you're aware. However, I also know a number of 'still in' Scientologists who are aware of my position and take their own steps to avoid confrontation with the 'Church'. Mostly by being 'veddy veddy quiet'. Like most Scientologists unwilling to get into 'Ethics' trouble.

It's understandable.

I also know *many* ex-scientologists of one flavor or another and share what I consider cordial and communicative relations with them.

The 'Intel Op' you describe is not something someone can initiate on his own, and, would be generally offensive if pursued. Meeting a Scientology Family is not the same as meeting a 'Mormon Family', who might well invite the heathen in for dinner. Not if the heathen already knows enough about Scientology to ask questions and see beyond the charade presented to wogs.

What you're presenting as a necessity for 'understanding' is not only not necessary, but certainly not something available to more than 1 to 2 % of people interested in 'finding out about Scientology'.

Not to attempt it is *not* a sign or guarantee of 'religious bigotry'. No more than not joining the 'Church' in order to 'test its workability' is evidence of intellectual dishonesty.

Zinj

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

Bless your big lion heart!

[lrnobs]

I STILL love to help people and sometimes feel soo, so....LOST now, and not sure WHAT to do to help people anymore.


Some options:

http://www.volunteermatch.org/
http://www.idealist.org
http://www.networkforgood.org

[Zinjifar]

With respect, my friend, I think you are confusing Scientology and the Church of Scientology. My post referred to the "Church being taken apart" by anonymous - not the religion of Scientology.

The 'Church' of Scientology is an organization. It's an abusive and corrupt and corrupting organization. It should be dismantled.

The 'religion' or 'philosophy' of Scientology is books, tapes, videos, concepts and the people who carry and practice them.

Nobody is suggesting doing away with them, although some of the people guilty of 'applying' the more criminal mandates of the 'Applied Religious Philosophy' should be prosecuted and punished. That won't stop them from keeping their 'beliefs'; just limit their ability to 'apply' them to others.

Zinj

[Alanzo]

The ultimate answer is not Anonymous.

The ultimate answer is moderated government intervention with checks and balances, the respect and recognition of everyones' rights, due process of law, and prosecutions for criminal acts, and civil suits for abuse of rights.

The only reason Anonymous now exists in this situation is because of the failure of government to intervene earlier.

If Anonymous can bring government to bear in this situation, then anonymous is one of the most civilizing forces ever to enter the fray.

But if Anonymous can not do that, or doesn't care to do that, then the calls for unchecked justice to be taken into one's own hands will almost certainly overtake reason. And then we'll have the vigilante street justice that produced the Kristallnacht (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht) in 1930's Germany.

I may sound alarmist.

But someone has to.

[Alanzo]

As it happens, I've met a number of Scientologists and their families, one way or another, not because I have sought them out to spy on them, but because it just happened. When that happens I have not tried to insinuate myself into their lives or delve into their beliefs because, to do so as part of an 'intel' operation would violate my own 'ethics' as to 'false flag' operations.

Contact with a known and public opponent of Scientology would *drastically* impair their own standing with the 'Church', as I'm sure you're aware. However, I also know a number of 'still in' Scientologists who are aware of my position and take their own steps to avoid confrontation with the 'Church'. Mostly by being 'veddy veddy quiet'. Like most Scientologists unwilling to get into 'Ethics' trouble.

It's understandable.

I also know *many* ex-scientologists of one flavor or another and share what I consider cordial and communicative relations with them.

The 'Intel Op' you describe is not something someone can initiate on his own, and, would be generally offensive if pursued. Meeting a Scientology Family is not the same as meeting a 'Mormon Family', who might well invite the heathen in for dinner. Not if the heathen already knows enough about Scientology to ask questions and see beyond the charade presented to wogs.

What you're presenting as a necessity for 'understanding' is not only not necessary, but certainly not something available to more than 1 to 2 % of people interested in 'finding out about Scientology'.

Not to attempt it is *not* a sign or guarantee of 'religious bigotry'. No more than not joining the 'Church' in order to 'test its workability' is evidence of intellectual dishonesty.

Zinj

All right.

You don't like my solution.

What's yours?

[Wisened One]

Some options:

http://www.volunteermatch.org/
http://www.idealist.org
http://www.networkforgood.org


That's sweet of you, and I'll look into those, thank you, Irnobs:)

I've already helped some people in 'big' ways so far in my life since I got out...but I will look into those options:)

I agree with some other posters here: That we're talking about the institution that is CoS and We definitely want THAT, GONE.

Wisened One

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

The ultimate answer is not Anonymous.

The ultimate answer is moderated government intervention with checks and balances, due process of law, and prosecutions for criminal acts, and civil suits for abuse of rights.

The only reason Anonymous now exists in this situation is because of the failure of government to intervene earlier.

If Anonymous can bring government to bear in this situation, then anonymous is one of the most civilizing forces ever to enter the fray.

But if Anonymous can not do that, or doesn't care to do that, then calls for justice to be taken into one's own hands will overtake reason. And then we'll have the vigilante street justice that produced the Kristallnacht (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht) in 1930's Germany.

I may sound alarmist.

But someone has to.

Some of us carry alarming pictures from our past track, but that's not a good reason to sound an alarm.

Who do you think Anonymous is bypassing?

Since when is peacefully protesting with placards considered "vigilante street justice"?

You are being wayyyyyyy tooooo general.

If or when Anonymous becomes too swelled with their perceived powers of conquest, then they will overstep themselves and take on an enemy that will be their undoing.

Your mission, Alanzo dear, is to get yourself (and a few of your friends and loved ones) to a state of awareness where none of that matters anymore in the bigger picture.

[Zinjifar]

All right.

You don't like my solution.

What's yours?

Solution? What's the problem? Is it your specious assertion that only personally 'knowing' Scientology Families can prevent Scientology Criticism from being religious bigotry?

Is it your fallacious and unsupported by evidence warning against 'rough street justice' and 'vigilantism'? Has 'anonymous' stopped beating its wife yet?

The purpose of demonstrating against Scientology (not Scientologists, except as they are directly pseudopods of the 'Church') is to demonstrate disapproval of Scientology; its 'Church'; its activities; its methods; its goals.

There's nothing illegal or even discreditable about that.

Hopefully such expression of public disapproval will result in wide public recognition of Scientology for what it is and both limit recruiting *and* force public officials to enforce already existing public laws and policies.

That's my solution. Admittedly, that solution would mean the end of the 'Church' of Scientology, but, that's no great or even minor loss.

Zinj

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

Is there a smilie that represents line-charging? ROFLC (rolling on floor line charging)

[Alanzo]

Some of us carry alarming pictures from our past track, but that's not a good reason to sound an alarm.

Are you dismissing what I am saying as my "case"?

Why not see if you can duplicate and understand what I am saying, instead.


Who do you think Anonymous is bypassing?

The government.

As I wrote.


Since when is peacefully protesting with placards considered "vigilante street justice"?

You are being wayyyyyyy tooooo general.

Being pretty specific, really.

Never said that placards and peaceful protest was vigilante street justice.

I said that the anondc7777 dude has traits of ignorance that are potentially dangerous.

And I've said that you don't have the right to destroy anyone's religion.

I've given examples and reasoned arguments why that is.

Did you read those?


If or when Anonymous becomes too swelled with their perceived powers of conquest, then they will overstep themselves and take on an enemy that will be their undoing.

Then it will be too late.

Lots of things would have happened by then that even you would not be proud of.


Your mission, Alanzo dear, is to get yourself (and a few of your friends and loved ones) to a state of awareness where none of that matters anymore in the bigger picture.

Hmmmm.

I'm performing my mission right here and right now.

With these words.

Are you reading them?

Or are you passing over them and dismissing them as "my case"?

[Zinjifar]

And I've said that you don't have the right to destroy anyone's religion.


Please specify what would constitute 'destroying a religion'.

Would it be prosecuting the organization; jailing some of its management following conviction; legally seizing its assets for restitution and punitive damages?

Would it be exposing its tenets, methods, goals and actual behavior to enough people that informed consent would cause it to die of attrition?

Would it be truthfully revealing its activities to the point where public support for the Religious Organization would be seen as socially repugnant?

Or, are you on about something else we don't know about?

Zinj

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

Are you dismissing what I am saying as my "case"?

Why not see if you can duplicate and understand what I am saying, instead.



The government.

As I wrote.



Being pretty specific, really.

Never said that placards and peaceful protest was vigilante street justice.

I said that the anondc7777 dude has traits of ignorance that are potentially dangerous.

And I've said that you don't have the right to destroy anyone's religion.

I've given examples and reasoned arguments why that is.

Did you read those?



Then it will be too late.

Lots of things would have happened by then that even you would not be proud of.



Hmmmm.

I'm performing my mission right here and right now.

With these words.

Are you reading them?

Or are you passing over them and dismissing them as "my case"?



I give up, surrender, white flag, peace.

[The Oracle]

I saw something from that anon guy in this thread which disturbs me.

In order for someone to destroy someone else, they must first demonize them. They must make them less than human. They certainly must grant them fewer rights than they would grant themselves.

Anonymous may very well be taking kids, just like our military does, and dehumanizing all existing Scientologists so that the mobilization is easier and the crowds are larger.

This process tends to snowball with humans. They become more and more blinded, and more and more fervent, and more and more hateful. Until finally even Scientology children are the enemy to them.

Anon is great. What has been achieved so far by them is absolutely fantastic.

But the same power which corrupted LRH, and David Miscavige, and many of us, can corrupt anon in the same way.

With the right ingredients, Anon can very well become the same, or even worse, than the Church of Scientology ever was.

We all can.

Anon should be watched.

This wide view is my definition of intelligence Alanzo.

I call it "Seeing the big picture."


T.O.

[Alanzo]

Please specify what would constitute 'destroying a religion'.

Would it be prosecuting the organization; jailing some of its management following conviction; legally seizing its assets for restitution and punitive damages?

Would it be exposing its tenets, methods, goals and actual behavior to enough people that informed consent would cause it to die of attrition?

Would it be truthfully revealing its activities to the point where public support for the Religious Organization would be seen as socially repugnant?

Or, are you on about something else we don't know about?

Zinj

None of those would be destroying someone's religion.

That would be doing what I've been doing almost every day for the last 8 years.

But I've never seen anonymous list those out like you just did.

Have you?

How do you think they would define "destroying a religion"?

Do you know?

Do they think they have the right to destroy someone else's religion?

I think many do. In fact, I think that many haven't even considered the question, don't want to consider it, and are just in it for the "LULZ".

That's why I'm quite the bore and "LULZ-killer".

What are you going to do about that kind of active apathy and ignorance, Zinj?

[Hanover Fist]

The ultimate answer is not Anonymous.

The ultimate answer is moderated government intervention with checks and balances, the respect and recognition of everyones' rights, due process of law, and prosecutions for criminal acts, and civil suits for abuse of rights.

The only reason Anonymous now exists in this situation is because of the failure of government to intervene earlier.

If Anonymous can bring government to bear in this situation, then anonymous is one of the most civilizing forces ever to enter the fray.

I would have to disagree that the government is the solution to this problem. As a matter of fact the government in the United States is fairly restricted (due to the First Amendment) in what intervention it can bring to bear against a religion. Fortunately no such restriction is in place for citizens. Of course that presupposes that scientology even is a religion. I do not believe it is.


But if Anonymous can not do that, or doesn't care to do that, then the calls for unchecked justice to be taken into one's own hands will almost certainly overtake reason. And then we'll have the vigilante street justice that produced the Kristallnacht (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht) in 1930's Germany.

This argument does not even pass the smell test. It is also an egregious example of the Slippery Slope fallacy. There is no reason whatsoever to assume that if Anonymous is not overseen that it will result in what you claim. Even your example of Kristallnacht is faulty. The mobs that committed the atrocities of that night were Nazi youth who were directed by Goebbles:

The assassination (of Third Secretary Ernst vom Rath by Grynszpan-a Jewish man) provided Goebbels, Hitler's Chief of Propaganda, with the excuse he needed to launch a pogrom against German Jews. Grynszpan's attack was interpreted by Goebbels as a conspiratorial attack by "International Jewry" against the Reich and, symbolically, against the Fuehrer himself. This pogrom has come to be called Kristallnacht, "the Night of Broken Glass."

On the nights of November 9 and 10, gangs of Nazi youth roamed through Jewish neighborhoods breaking windows of Jewish businesses and homes, burning synagogues and looting. In all 101 synagogues were destroyed and almost 7,500 Jewish businesses were destroyed. 26,000 Jews were arrested and sent to concentration camps, Jews were physically attacked and beaten and 91 died (Snyder, Louis L. Encyclopedia of the Third Reich. New York: Paragon House, 1989:201). (from http://www.mtsu.edu/~baustin/knacht.html)



I may sound alarmist.

But someone has to.

No, no one needs to be alarmist. May I also point out that by Godwinning yet another thread you are commiting the very act you are warning against- demonizing a group of individuals by essentially equating them with Nazis.

Hanover Fist

[Alanzo]

HF:

Do you think that Germans in the 1920s and 1930's were some kind of different human being that no longer exists today?

During WWII, Americans took away all the possessions and rights of innocent Japanese people, despite everything in the constitution that forbid it, and put them in internment camps.

Today, Bush illegally tortures and wiretaps people and very few even notice.

Why are the lessons from Nazi Germany somehow unavailable to us now that someone named Godwin wrote a "law"?

Invoking "Godwin's Law" is a thought stopping technique which blocks a very important discussion about our own history and our own basic nature as human beings.

Invoking "Godwin's Law" is like a Scientologist telling you that you are just "dramatizing your reactive mind" so they don't have to listen to you.

No human groups operate without leaders. It is a complete falsehood that Anonymous has no leaders. So far, after screwing up completely in the beginning, they have done a good job.

But I saw them in their formative stages calling for all kinds of illegal acts - for the LULZ. I was called a LULZ-killer then, when I warned them that illegal acts would make them vulnerable.

What happens when they don't think they can be vulnerable any more?

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

That is the only reason I am raising the alarm now, before anything goes off the rails. And when I see more and more ignorant anons, hating scientologists and only in it for the LULZ, then I am going to continue to raise the alarm louder and louder.

This is certainly enough reason to raise the alarm, given the vital lessons of history that we must not avoid.

[Voltaire's Child]

I don't see that happening Alanzo.

I think the "good staff" (whatever they are - because in my experience almost all staff were "good", even the most evil dramatisers like MSH and Kember, et al.) would simply argue over what LRH "really" meant, just like those who try to hold onto some of Hubbardology do on here. There would be a power play over who was most "on-source" and the most ruthless Hubbard dramatisers would gain control just like RTC did.

LRH set up his "church" that way. Laced with contradictions, open policies and tech and layers of hidden policies and techs. He wanted people to be confused over what he really meant. This is how he made himself the "stable datum" for people to latch onto to keep their confusion at bay. So he was "source" and could make up any order he wanted, that would be complied with, despite any other earlier pronouncement from him. His followers followed whatever he said currently, to hold back the confusion that LRH had already implanted in them.

The new management would however be unable to hold onto the Hubbardologists in the new reformed church because they will have ditched some LRH stuff to make them "legal, decent and honest". Once a hubbardologist drops some of the LRH policies and techs, it is like a house of cards and slowly it all comes tumbling down.

They would not be able to enforce their interpretation of Hubbardology because they will have dropped the parts that enabled Hubbard to enforce his command intention.

DM has "succeeded" to hold it together because he has not disavowed any LRH commands and has behaved as if he were LRH. Any new, uncorrupt management will be ignoring the commainds of corruption that Hubbard laced Scientology with.

His church was set up to support his evil purposes: "Material things are yours for the asking. Men are your slaves. Elemental spirits are your slaves". The church can't exist without all of his duplicitous orders.

The Church of Scientology is an all or nothing church.

I agree with much of what you've said. There is no hope for a new improved CofS unless people are willing to disagree not just with DM & crew but with LRH himself.

[Hanover Fist]

HF:

Do you think that Germans in the 1920s and 1930's were some kind of different human being that no longer exists today?

During WWII, Americans took away all the possessions and rights of innocent Japanese people, despite everything in the constitution that forbid it, and put them in internment camps.

Today, Bush illegally tortures and wiretaps people and very few even notice.


These are all incredibly Weak Analogies. Especially because in one breath you propose bringing government in to manage things, yet all of your examples are of governmental abuses. (Make no mistake, the internment of Americans who happened to be Japanese is one of the most shameful acts in the history of my country, and I make no excuses for it.)

BTW, no, I do not believe that human nature has changed in the last 70-80 years. However the current socio-political climate now and in the Weimar Republic are worlds apart.


Why are the lessons from Nazi Germany somehow unavailable to us now that someone named Godwin wrote a "law"?

Invoking "Godwin's Law" is a thought stopping technique which blocks a very important discussion about our own history and our own basic nature as human beings.

Invoking "Godwin's Law" is like a Scientologist telling you that you are just "dramatizing your reactive mind" so they don't have to listen to you.

Oh come on. You are being a bit dramatic here. No one is trying to 'stop thoughts'. Invoking Godwin's Law is simply a way of pointing out that a poster may be getting a bit histrionic. As a matter of fact you called someone a Nazi in another thread. That is straight-out name-calling. And I pointed out why your comparison of the potential actions of Anonymous to the events of Kristallnacht is a faulty and inflammatory comparison at best.



No human groups operate without leaders. It is a complete falsehood that Anonymous has no leaders. (emphasis added) So far, after screwing up completely in the beginning, they have done a good job.

For you to make a flat-out statement like this requires some proof to back it up. Please provide.


But I saw them in their formative stages calling for all kinds of illegal acts - for the LULZ. I was called a LULZ-killer then, when I warned them that illegal acts would make them vulnerable.

What happens when they don't think they can be vulnerable any more?

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

That is the only reason I am raising the alarm now, before anything goes off the rails. And when I see more and more ignorant anons, hating scientologists and only in it for the LULZ, then I am going to continue to raise the alarm louder and louder.

This is certainly enough reason to raise the alarm, given the vital lessons of history that we must not avoid.

Again, so far the examples you have given are inflammatory at best, destructive to discourse at worst. And it has become a well-accepted principle that civil disobedience is an acceptable form of protest even if it breaks laws.

You are also again proposing a Slippery Slope with consequences that are simply not supported by the facts 'on the ground'.

Hanover Fist

[anondc7777]

You will never get a person like that to see reason; best not to try, for that way lies madness HF. Ignore lists were made for that kind of drivel.

[Zinjifar]

None of those would be destroying someone's religion.

That would be doing what I've been doing almost every day for the last 8 years.

But I've never seen anonymous list those out like you just did.

Have you?

How do you think they would define "destroying a religion"?

Do you know?

Do they think they have the right to destroy someone else's religion?

I think many do. In fact, I think that many haven't even considered the question, don't want to consider it, and are just in it for the "LULZ".

That's why I'm quite the bore and "LULZ-killer".

What are you going to do about that kind of active apathy and ignorance, Zinj?

I'm not sure what bug crawled up your ass Alanzo, but, I'll try to address your 'position' reasonably.

First off, I haven't heard any discussion of 'destroying somebody-else's' religion from 'anonymous', certainly not from the ungroup as a whole, but also not from individuals operating as 'anon'. Have you?

The only discussion of 'destroying a religion' I've heard have been from the 'Church' of Scientology, which naturally sees *any* opposition to its own nefarious activities as 'religious bigotry'.

Please point me to specifics calls for 'destroying a religion' so we can get away from these deliberately distracting generalities.

Maybe if you can show me such a specific 'call' for 'destroying a religion' so I can try to interpret it for you; or, maybe I'll even agree that it's worthy of condemning.

From my viewpoint, the kind of 'destroying somebody-else's religion' would involve persecution, isolation, destruction of the adherents; eradication of any information about or from the 'religion'; making the discussion of the religion or its tenets 'illegal' etc.

Is that what you're thinking of? If so, I'll march shoulder-to-shoulder with you to protest it; assuming you can find someone promoting it.

Have I heard calls to 'Destroy Scientology'? Sure. It's open to interpretation, but, the only interpretation I've seen as serious would fit in exactly the kind of list we both agree with; harsh as the words may be.

No calls for concentration camps for Scientologists. No calls for 'burning of the books and tapes'. Admittedly, some of the original 'war on Scientology' promoted by 'anonymous' was ill-conceived, illegal and childish. As well as being ultimately stupid and inconsequential.

Thankfully the past month has shown a welcome evolution of comprehension of exactly *what* the 'Church' of Scientology is; and the futility of trying to deal with it in stupid, childish and illegal ways.

So, come on Alanzo; put up. Show me the calls to 'Destroy the religion of Scientology', so I can decide if I need to join you in your portentious fear-mongering or not.

Zinj

[anondc7777]

ugh you guys are all enturbulated by the most basic of retarded trolls. guys like that are banned from all decent boards. I'll be off now.

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

ugh you guys are all enturbulated by the most basic of retarded trolls. guys like that are banned from all decent boards. I'll be off now.

Yes, but he's OUR -- whatever you said --. Normally he's not like this.

[Hanover Fist]

I agree. Alonzo usually has a more level-head than it seems today. That is why I am giving him the benefit of the doubt.


Hanover Fist

[Zinjifar]

ugh you guys are all enturbulated by the most basic of retarded trolls. guys like that are banned from all decent boards. I'll be off now.

Speak for yourself :) I'm not enturbulated, and, maybe Alanzo is being a troll, or maybe he got up on the wrong side of the pedestal or maybe not.

Trolls, however, can be *valuable* in playing 'straight man' to make salient arguments and offering the opportunity to deal with or refute their sophistry in a rational way.

Zinj

[Alanzo]

These are all incredibly Weak Analogies. Especially because in one breath you propose bringing government in to manage things, yet all of your examples are of governmental abuses. (Make no mistake, the internment of Americans who happened to be Japanese is one of the most shameful acts in the history of my country, and I make no excuses for it.)

All right. Here are some more.

Were you alive in the 1960's?

Have you ever been involved in, or seen, a riot?

How about LA during the Rodney King riots?

These riots were not the first riots that human beings have engaged in. Riots are a very good reason to have governments in the first place, don't you agree?

My point is that human beings with unchecked power go crazy.

We have to watch for that.


BTW, no, I do not believe that human nature has changed in the last 70-80 years. However the current socio-political climate now and in the Weimar Republic are worlds apart.But we have the same human beings now that we had then, don't we?


Oh come on. You are being a bit dramatic here. No one is trying to 'stop thoughts'. Invoking Godwin's Law is simply a way of pointing out that a poster may be getting a bit histrionic. As a matter of fact you called someone a Nazi in another thread. That is straight-out name-calling. And I pointed out why your comparison of the potential actions of Anonymous to the events of Kristallnacht is a faulty and inflammatory comparison at best.Again, it was to illustrate my point that human beings can be counted on to act in certain ways. And we have a right to use history lessons to instruct us in those ways.

Kritallnacht is an important lesson for all of us, especially when groups of people with unchecked powers and popular ignorance and support for the destruction of a religion exist in our society.

It is apt. It is appropriate to invoke that lesson when these ingredients start to get stirred up, as they are being stirred right now.


For you to make a flat-out statement like this requires some proof to back it up. Please provide.EVIDENCE for my statement is every "approved" message from Anonymous, beginning with the very first submission to youtube.

Mobs don't have "approved" messages, or an approval process.

The first boards I was on had posts where people said they had sent on the second message from anonymous to Scn for "editing" and then, later, it was released.

What is an approval process if not leadership?

And, it must be noted, that like Goebbels, that approval process oversaw PR statements for followers to obey.

Human nature forms groups with leaders. It's in our ape-nature. We have alpha males and beta males, leaders and followers. It's what we do.

The idea that Anonymous has no leaders is completely false.


Again, so far the examples you have given are inflammatory at best, destructive to discourse at worst. And it has become a well-accepted principle that civil disobedience is an acceptable form of protest even if it breaks laws.Which acceptable form of civil disobedience calls for breaking laws?

Are you calling for breaking laws by anonymous?


You are also again proposing a Slippery Slope with consequences that are simply not supported by the facts 'on the ground'.

Hanover FistBut consequences have occurred in similar situations in history with the similar ingredients I outlined above, when I broke GODWIN'S LAW (God forbid) and invoked the example of Kristallnacht.

You are being quite naive to think that religious hatred, and its consequences, is not a real and present danger in this situation.

And it's that same naivety that makes us repeat history, over and over again.

Anon must be watched.

The ingredients are here in this situation for an explosion that you would not be proud of.

So far, everything is going well.

But with every ignorance-loving, intolerant and superior-sounding Anon I see, who calls for destroying Scientology, and hatred of Scientology, I'm gonna keep saying it real loud, over and over.

Anon must be watched.

[Alanzo]

Speak for yourself :) I'm not enturbulated, and, maybe Alanzo is being a troll, or maybe he got up on the wrong side of the pedestal or maybe not.

Trolls, however, can be *valuable* in playing 'straight man' to make salient arguments and offering the opportunity to deal with or refute their sophistry in a rational way.

Zinj

Thanks.

If that's the kind of troll I am today, then I accept.

[Colleen K. Peltomaa]

Thanks.

If that's the kind of troll I am today, then I accept.


Love bomb, Alanzo! :party: :bighug: :biglove: :love2: :hug:

[Terril park]

I'm pretty sure that I have a done a lot more of the exposing of the lies and tragedies of Scientology than you have, Colleen.

I know what I am doing. I've been doing it now for almost 8 years.

But I am not trying to destroy someone else's religion.

I am trying to turn a cult that harms people into a religion that helps people.

There is a huge difference here. It has happened before throughout history.

There is no reason that it can't happen here.

Did you read what I wrote about the freedom of religion meaning the freedom to make mistakes?

What did you think of that?

This is a good direction Alanzo. If you havn't already I'd suggest joining enturbulation.org and put your point of view. I have and will.

[Terril park]

Do you have a substitute, Zinj?

Is ignorance of Scientologists not a problem for you?

Do you know what I am talking about when I warn against ignorance and how it leads to dehumanization? And then what that leads to in situations such as this?

Is dehumanization of Scientologists not a problem for you?

I said to get to know them in a non-threatening environment.

And since it is intel, it most definitely can be covert. It can be done.

It must be done.

Unless you have a better suggestion to defuse this powderkeg.

What might that be?

Not sure if it is a powderkeg.

I have volunteered on enturb.org to connect someone to a Freezoner.

Connecting to COS members is perhaps even more valuable.

[Hanover Fist]

My point is that human beings with unchecked power go crazy.


Nope. I am a (legal) gun owner. There is nothing (external to me) stopping me from going to the local mall and shooting it up. In that sense my power to cause death and grievous injury is unchecked. Yet I have not gone crazy and done it. Why not? That example alone disproves your claim.


But we have the same human beings now that we had then, don't we?

Again, it was to illustrate my point that human beings can be counted on to act in certain ways. And we have a right to use history lessons to instruct us in those ways.

Unless you are privy to some new understanding of human nature, this is incredibly arrogant of you. So I am to understand that you can reliably predict human behavior based on historical accounts? That would make you perhaps the most brilliant man to have ever lived. What are you doing on this board? Run for President of the World!


Kritallnacht is an important lesson for all of us, especially when groups of people with unchecked powers and popular ignorance and support for the destruction of a religion exist in our society.

But it has nothing to do with Anonymous. At all. And you have failed repeatedly to show how it is similar, except in extraordinarily broad generalizations.


It is apt. It is appropriate to invoke that lesson when these ingredients start to get stirred up, as they are being stirred right now.

EVIDENCE for my statement is every "approved" message from Anonymous, beginning with the very first submission to youtube.

Mobs don't have "approved" messages, or an approval process.

The first boards I was on had posts where people said they had sent on the second message from anonymous to Scn for "editing" and then, later, it was released.

What is an approval process if not leadership?

And, it must be noted, that like Goebbels, that approval process oversaw PR statements for followers to obey.

Human nature forms groups with leaders. It's in our ape-nature. We have alpha males and beta males, leaders and followers. It's what we do.

The idea that Anonymous has no leaders is completely false.

Perhaps, but your conclusion is still nothing other than speculation based on some posts you read on the Internet.


Which acceptable form of civil disobedience calls for breaking laws?

Rosa Parks comes to mind.


Are you calling for breaking laws by anonymous?

No.


But consequences have occurred in similar situations in history with the similar ingredients I outlined above, when I broke GODWIN'S LAW (God forbid) and invoked the example of Kristallnacht.

Actually you confirmed Godwin's Law. Had you avoided the 'Nazi card' you would have broken it.


You are being quite naive to think that religious hatred, and its consequences, is not a real and present danger in this situation.

Only from the CoS, my friend.


And it's that same naivety that makes us repeat history, over and over again.

Anon must be watched.

The ingredients are here in this situation for an explosion that you would not be proud of.

So far, everything is going well.

But with every ignorance-loving, intolerant and superior-sounding Anon I see, who calls for destroying Scientology, and hatred of Scientology, I'm gonna keep saying it real loud, over and over.

Anon must be watched.

Again with the insults, Alonzo. I had you figured different. Guess I was wrong.

Hanover Fist

[Dulloldfart]

Connecting to COS members is perhaps even more valuable.

There's always LaserClam. :)

Paul

[Terril park]

You will never get a person like that to see reason; best not to try, for that way lies madness HF. Ignore lists were made for that kind of drivel.

Alanzo may be over reacting, but his intentions are very pure. Also
he can see reason. He is communicating.

You are being ad hominem here.

[Zinjifar]

I was involved in numerous 'demonstrations' as either a participant or observer numerous times in the 60s and early 70s. I survived by *not* being attracted to such idiots as SDS, the 'White Panthers', the 'Black Panthers', the 'weathermen' or others. Same reasons being why I wasn't attracted to Scientology, the Krishnas, Moonies and on and on.

I've been a participant or observer in 'demonstrations' in Germany, France and Holland; some of which became violent; sometimes because of police overreaction; sometimes because of idiot 'activists'.

I moved to Los Angeles in time for the Watts Riots of '65, which I saw on TV and had no idea where 'Watts' was. I was in LA for both Rodney King riots. Lesson for protestors to learn; don't burn down buildings or throw bricks on people's heads. Don't loot stores. Fairly simple and common-sensical stuff.

I've participated in dozens of pickets or other 'actions' against Scientology sites (some actions being merely present to let the 'Church' demonstrate its own bug-shit brand of craziness.) In that time I have never witnessed violence or promotion of violence by the Scientology opponents.

I have taken away from those experiences a valuable lesson; protesting Scientology is *not* like demonstrating against other things; like the gummint, and not even like picketing as part of a labor dispute.

The 'Church' is so bug-shit crazy that it can do *anything*. It's wise to be prepared for it. Also, the number of picketers is smaller than any of the larger demonstrations I've been at, which has both advantages (in knowing whom you're with, and disadvantages, in being more exposed to 'retaliation'.) I'll take it either way.

Scientology protesting is *not* like other protesting. It's far less protected and the tactics are *different*. Whether you're a pacifist or *not*, you must be one for protesting Scientology or you lose the only advantage you have; the moral high ground. Even when defense is *legal*, the 'Church' has the lock on 'legal', so, it's both silly and counterproductive to demand your 'rights' in the face of injustice. Some people are better at picketing Scientology than others; people who scream and heckle and intimidate may be perfectly fine at an anti-war or anti-gummint rally or as part of a 'labor' demonstration, but, they've got no place in Scientology Protest, even when they *are* acting legally.

So, what's *your* experience Alanzo? Done any 'postulating' peace and freedom to protect the 'orgs' from the crazy wogs?

Zinj

[Terril park]

There's always LaserClam. :)

Paul

This a covert op to induce rioting in the street? :)

[Dulloldfart]

This a covert op to induce rioting in the street? :)

:)

Paul

[Alanzo]

Nope. I am a (legal) gun owner. There is nothing (external to me) stopping me from going to the local mall and shooting it up. In that sense my power to cause death and grievous injury is unchecked. Yet I have not gone crazy and done it. Why not? That example alone disproves your claim.

But have you ever been in a riot?

Ever seen one?

Why do you avoid speaking to the examples you asked me to give?

Because they support a point you do not want to acknowledge?


Unless you are privy to some new understanding of human nature, this is incredibly arrogant of you. So I am to understand that you can reliably predict human behavior based on historical accounts? That would make you perhaps the most brilliant man to have ever lived. What are you doing on this board? Run for President of the World!This is a non-sequitur response to my argument.

To say that humans have acted one way in the past, and to warn against the possibility that they may act that way again, is not arrogant. It is quite reasonable.

To look away from this possibility is naive, and in this situation, dangerous.


But it has nothing to do with Anonymous. At all. And you have failed repeatedly to show how it is similar, except in extraordinarily broad generalizations.This started with anondc7777's post earlier in this thread. I said that I saw a disturbing trait in his willful ignorance of Scientology and his vehemence in telling us that it must be destroyed as it can NEVER change.

No one has answered: How does he know?

Plenty of religions have changed over the centuries from way more abusive ones than the Church of Scientology.

So how does he know?

He doesn't. He's ignorant, and intolerant, and he likes it.

I'll keep documenting every instance I see of this kind of behavior in Anon from now on for you.

How's that?

Because Anon should be watched, and I'll be watching them.


Perhaps, but your conclusion is still nothing other than speculation based on some posts you read on the Internet. Nice try.

I did not respond with just "posts I read on the internet". It was what I witnessed as I saw the second message from anon to Scientology get developed and hit the internet. And, the data from anthropology I gave, about alpha males and human groups, came from my studying it in college.

Wonder why you resort to reducing my response to "some posts I read on the internet" when that was not my response at all?

Maybe my warning is sinking in to you?


Rosa Parks comes to mind.Good example. If we follow the examples of Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, and the teachings of the Southern Leadership Conference and Ghandi, while avoiding Goebbels and General Sherman, I'll be very happy.

Are you sure Anon can do that?


Only from the CoS, my friend.NOT only from CofS. But from Anon, too.


Again with the insults, Alonzo. I had you figured different. Guess I was wrong.

Hanover FistI wasn't insulting you. If anyone I insulted the insulting AnonDC7777 entity who was here.

Your responses in this post are mostly dodges, except for the Rosa Parks one, which I accept as reasonable and with which I agree.

I'm glad that you place so much trust in Anonymous to dismantle the Church in its present form, and to do it in a just and peaceful manner.

I don't, because while they do learn, there are more and more of them that are ignorant and intolerant, and do not give a shit about the rights of Scientologists.

For me, that's a problem.

For you, not so much?

What do you think about the rights of Scientologists, Hanover Fist?

[Voltaire's Child]

I do not appreciate Anon's attempt to doubleteam Alanzo and try to get a dogpile going. There's too much of that on forums as it is. I suggest that Anon do his homework before making such assessments about long-time contributors.

[duddins]

It sounds to me like Alanzo is pointing out what can possibly be interpreted as signs of fanaticism in what Anon is saying in many of their posts and videos.

IMO Fanaticism in any way shape or form should be addressed with caution and watched, even if with peripheral vision.

Being aware of every aspect, (potentially good and potentially bad) in one's environment is a survival trait.

[Div6]

There has never been a time like this.

From early January until present time, there has never been this much pressure on Scientology. Things are coming to a head. You can see it and feel it. It's tangible.

In past times it has been kind of ok to have a foot in more than one camp. I know of people who have tried to occupy several position at once i.e. critic, scientologist, freezoner etc and done a kind of juggling act to keep it all together.

While it has clearly never been easy to perform the mental gymnastics necessary to maintain these opposing positions simuntaneously, it is now bordering on impossible.

The CoS is being attacked. Let's not make light of it. It IS being attacked legally, peacefully and legitimately. And it is being attacked HARD.

So where do you stand?

If you truly believe in the tech and don't want to see your churches demolished then I think it's time to get of the fence. I don't see how it is possible anymore to simultaneously be a critic and a Scientology supporter. I think it is time to make your position clear.

If you want your churches to survive then the time to fight is now! Tell us why they should survive. Tell us what changes need to happen. Tell us why you feel this way.

I'm not suggesting that it has to be a "you're either for us or against us" proposition, but in these times, at least it seems to me, one needs to clarify their own position, not only for others, but mainly for themselves.


*Sigh*


And so it goes. As one comes uptone, they go into action.
Frankly I could give a rats ass about DM's money operation. The only people left are PTS'es and SP's.

ESMB used to be about healing. Now its about activism. Thats Ok, they are just different purposes.

If any one wants to talk, I'll be around. Otherwise, enjoy the show....

[Emma]

*Sigh*


And so it goes. As one comes uptone, they go into action.
Frankly I could give a rats ass about DM's money operation. The only people left are PTS'es and SP's.

ESMB used to be about healing. Now its about activism. Thats Ok, they are just different purposes.

If any one wants to talk, I'll be around. Otherwise, enjoy the show....

Maybe I shouldn't have written that post - I dunno.

These days "activism" seems a little hard to escape. We could all pretend it isn't happening and that the pendulum isn't swinging, but it is.

My post was an attempt to rouse those among us who still haven't really decided where they sit with regards to Scientology. I see people teetering between critic & Scientologist on a daily basis. I know how that is because I did it for years myself.

It's just that right now I don't believe there is too much time for that luxury. It might not be fair to those newly out but there is nothing anyone can do about it.

Things are moving forward at a fast pace and if people want to have a say in the way things unfold, I'm just suggesting that they should speak up and have their say.

I for one, do not want to see ANYONE lose their ability to practice their religion whether I believe in it or not. I've always fought for the rights of individuals to practice their religion. (I thought that would have been obvious by now given the history of this board and it's main participants).

[Good twin]

Emma, I for one appreciate the post. It did stir up some old wounds for some. But as you said this is why you are here. You are allowing people to be what they are and allowing them to change their minds. From the research I've done and from my own observation the church doesn't stand a chance with or without any activism. It is the church's own ineffective activism that led them and us and all concerned to this point. I never participated in a protest actively on the street when I was in the church. I did support them and finance others so they could participate and I also helped on organizational lines for several. So I will help to support putting the truth out there and hope it is effective.
The truth is everyone on this board has some interest in what is happening. We all "tried to make it right" at some point and most of us are hoping against hope that it will all come out right in the end. What that "right" is is hard to define.

[shader]

Alanzo,

I understand what you fear, but I don't see much evidence of your fears being realized at this point. The trend is entirely in the opposite direction.

Calling for the destruction of the CoS doesn't mean people don't care about the rights of Scientologists. Look at fluffy's posts - I've been reading her posts for years, you certainly couldn't say that she doesn't care about the rights of Scientologists.

But she said she doesn't believe the Church can be reformed, and should be "taken down".

For someone who has probably only been learning about Scientology for a few weeks (the anon who set you off) to say the same is pretty understandable.

It's a rational assessment of the history of the Church. I don't see any evidence that the CoS can reform. Is there any evidence of it having done so in the past?

I don't want to stop anyone practicing what they believe, but I think preserving the rights of Scientologists _requires_ the destruction of the CoS in its present form.

Those who want to continue with the subject will build their own organization. If they are open to questioning LRH they may even succeed in building one that helps people.

[Royal Prince Xenu]

There has never been a time like this.

From early January until present time, there has never been this much pressure on Scientology. Things are coming to a head. You can see it and feel it. It's tangible.

In past times it has been kind of ok to have a foot in more than one camp. I know of people who have tried to occupy several position at once i.e. critic, scientologist, freezoner etc and done a kind of juggling act to keep it all together.

While it has clearly never been easy to perform the mental gymnastics necessary to maintain these opposing positions simuntaneously, it is now bordering on impossible.

The CoS is being attacked. Let's not make light of it. It IS being attacked legally, peacefully and legitimately. And it is being attacked HARD.

So where do you stand?

If you truly believe in the tech and don't want to see your churches demolished then I think it's time to get of the fence. I don't see how it is possible anymore to simultaneously be a critic and a Scientology supporter. I think it is time to make your position clear.

If you want your churches to survive then the time to fight is now! Tell us why they should survive. Tell us what changes need to happen. Tell us why you feel this way.

I'm not suggesting that it has to be a "you're either for us or against us" proposition, but in these times, at least it seems to me, one needs to clarify their own position, not only for others, but mainly for themselves.

Time to get off the fence? Is that why my bum is so sore?

I think there are many people who want the 'church' gone, but still want bits of the tech that they find useful. Throw away the Green Vols, de-DM the Red Vols then heavily cull them until you're left with one volume of useful stuff.

The CoS and any of its upper and lower orgs (RTC, CST, Narconon etc.) need to be completely disbanded, deregistered and banned as a "business practice". What people do in their private homes is up to them, but the 'church' has to go.

[ExScnDude]

Scientology had a huge effect on most of us as individuals. It has been really great to visit this blog and hear about the similar experiences of other EXes. This is truly the best board that covers why we got in, why we hung around for so long, what happened while we were there, and why we got out.

But on a planetary scale, Scientology has about the same magnitude of effect as a fart in a blizzard.

If a group wants to get together and publicly engage in a peaceful protest, then more power to 'em.

But "getting off the fence"? What fence?

I don't really live on either side of the fence.

If this were a sporting event, I'd be in the stands.

[Terril park]

Alanzo,

I understand what you fear, but I don't see much evidence of your fears being realized at this point. The trend is entirely in the opposite direction.

Calling for the destruction of the CoS doesn't mean people don't care about the rights of Scientologists. Look at fluffy's posts - I've been reading her posts for years, you certainly couldn't say that she doesn't care about the rights of Scientologists.

But she said she doesn't believe the Church can be reformed, and should be "taken down".

For someone who has probably only been learning about Scientology for a few weeks (the anon who set you off) to say the same is pretty understandable.

It's a rational assessment of the history of the Church. I don't see any evidence that the CoS can reform. Is there any evidence of it having done so in the past?

I don't want to stop anyone practicing what they believe, but I think preserving the rights of Scientologists _requires_ the destruction of the CoS in its present form.

Those who want to continue with the subject will build their own organization. If they are open to questioning LRH they may even succeed in building one that helps people.

I'm inclined to agree with you. You been reading Fluffy et al for years
you are well educated on the subject.

[Mojo]

*Sigh*


And so it goes. As one comes uptone, they go into action.
Frankly I could give a rats ass about DM's money operation. The only people left are PTS'es and SP's.

ESMB used to be about healing. Now its about activism. Thats Ok, they are just different purposes.

If any one wants to talk, I'll be around. Otherwise, enjoy the show....

Come on Div, that's a bit unfair. ESMB is still about healing and healing and activism are not mutually exclusive eperiences.

Especially given EMMA's physically benign type activism called :

Tell us why they should survive. Tell us what changes need to happen. Tell us why you feel this way...

...but in these times, at least it seems to me, one needs to clarify their own position,....

That's called good old fashioned communication Div. that's all. Clarification. Communication. Presentation. Expression. The stuff healing is made of.

Heck yesterday I posted that I would be back with a response in 7 minutes. And I'm still not complete with how I feel about the entire thing. But I'm looking and looking again.

If you don't care for the subject of the thread, well, you know, don't engage with it (but don't take your marbles and go home).

Lol.

Mojo

[Emma]

Scientology had a huge effect on most of us as individuals. It has been really great to visit this blog and hear about the similar experiences of other EXes. This is truly the best board that covers why we got in, why we hung around for so long, what happened while we were there, and why we got out.

But on a planetary scale, Scientology has about the same magnitude of effect as a fart in a blizzard.

If a group wants to get together and publicly engage in a peaceful protest, then more power to 'em.

But "getting off the fence"? What fence?

I don't really live on either side of the fence.

If this were a sporting event, I'd be in the stands.

There probably is no fence if you don't give a shit. :p

[ExScnDude]

There probably is no fence if you don't give a shit. :p

So true.

But I would help an individual leave Scientology; and have. So, I think I'm somewhere to the North of "don't give a shit".

Besides, boards like this and the innumerable number of critic sites have done more to harm Scientology than any three hour protest. Today, it's nearly impossible to watch the news without hearing some negative reference to Scientology.

But don't let me rain on anyone's parade. I'm not sitting in judgment of anyone who is having a good time playing the game of bringing the C of S down.

[OHTEEATE]

I am off the fence. I want the Disconnection policy renounced, and permanently cancelled. I want DMs resignation, followed by his comm ev and if found guilty, declare and expulsion, and incarceration for any actionable crimes. I want my family to reach out to me and my wife for reconciliation. I want the CofS reformed, freed from excessive management and resulting rip off, and left to get on with it , without being ripped off for their money which staff deserves as pay. The CofS needs to get their head out of the sand and realize they are hated in their present form under DM.

[TheSneakster]

not important

[nw2394]

If you truly believe in the tech and don't want to see your churches demolished then I think it's time to get of the fence. I don't see how it is possible anymore to simultaneously be a critic and a Scientology supporter. I think it is time to make your position clear.

If you want your churches to survive then the time to fight is now! Tell us why they should survive. Tell us what changes need to happen. Tell us why you feel this way.


With some qualification, I am a tech believer - but they are not my churches anymore - not in their present form anyway. As I support Scn the subject, even if not the CoS, I think it would be better if some organised vestige of it could survive. But I doubt that is realistic - even without Anon they seem to have been slowly crumbling. There is really nobody there who could lead it out of its current mess - maybe a freezoner could - but that is pie in the sky.

CoS = R.I.P.

Nick

[TheSneakster]

not important

[Emma]

There is a misconception out there.

I've heard it more than a few times that the majority of "exes" are just waiting for Miscavige to be overthown, die or step aside and a whole bunch of exes will run straight back to the church.

From this thread it seems this is just not true.

[Bea Kiddo]

I ain't runnin' nowhere!!! No way will I ever go back. I have no faith in that fucking place anymore.

I cant stand the idea of ever running an overt again. No way. Ever. I cant do it. That FPRD really messed with me. I would probably go to confession perfectly willingly. But never back to that church. They have lost all my faith.

[nw2394]

There is a misconception out there.

I've heard it more than a few times that the majority of "exes" are just waiting for Miscavige to be overthown, die or step aside and a whole bunch of exes will run straight back to the church.

From this thread it seems this is just not true.

On the standard tech type lists, you do find plenty of people newly arrived in the FZ who would like to be able to go back. However they either a) find a new home in the FZ and find that they don't need to go back or b) just seem to fade away from Scn altogether. Either way it seems to be a passing phase.

Nick

[Terril park]

There is a misconception out there.

I've heard it more than a few times that the majority of "exes" are just waiting for Miscavige to be overthown, die or step aside and a whole bunch of exes will run straight back to the church.

From this thread it seems this is just not true.

I've never heard that sentiment in the FZ.

[PirateAndBum]

Wow, hot thread! I understand Alanzo's concern. I think however that it more useful to take a corrective approach than to demonize in the other direction. I have seen Anon's adapt and learn as new information is presented. When one is making noises that are over the line - call them on it. But calling a person a Nazi or of that ilk, isn't the best way to get someone to come around to your way of thinking. Don't just watch, inform and educate as it unfolds (Alanzo has been doing that too - seems a hornet flew up his butt today :whistling: ). The ex's played a major role in shaping Anon's method of attack - we need to continue that.

As I read the thread the thought came to mind: Why don't the Scientologists themselves do anything about their own church. I guess the answer is they do not know anything of what really goes on and the small stuff they tolerate for fear of losing their bridge to total freedom. Only when the out-points compound too large do they begin to look. And when that happens - they are out. Makes me want to go to the March 13th event and stand up and tell them all "You've been lied to. You must find out the truth!"

Having only a a few short months ago been a living breathing "In Scientology" scio, I still have trouble with "It's all a con". Lionheart's argument that Ron had evil intentions from the get-go is still hard for me to fully accept. All part of the sorting out process of getting out. I know there is value in Scn. But in today's CofS that value is soon overwhelmed - thus the FZ is a safer place to be serviced.

Terrill says it's just buildings. Well it isn't just buildings. CofS was constructed by Ron and DM is a product of Ron. He's totally in Ron's later-years valence. CofS is built on POLICY and Tradition. Both of those must be delt with and I'm not sure how that can be done. FZ was like a Protestant Reformation (not that I know that much about it) but has gone unnoticed. I can say that having been in the last 20 years and never once heard of it on the inside. They know zip about it. The PR area control that CofS has with its members is almost total. Our actions and those of Anon are the pin to burst that bubble.

I don't think the government should have any involvement in correcting the church on policy matters except perhaps to insist and demand fair-game be abolished. Prosecute crimes yes - but a "church" doesn't commit crimes individual justice is needed.

I'd like to think Scientology as a religion could be reformed. I'm not sure that is possible. It would certainly be contentious as all hell what should stay & what should go. This would require that the existing Scios all become informed of the facts about their church and founder. The spell must be broken to have any effective reform happen.

I think Anon helps to break that spell. The more people in the streets the less it can be ignored.

Perhaps the Scientolgists in the church will continue to ignore it all - shield their eyes, cover their ears. The world outside is not doing that. Gaining new members becomes more & more difficult, thus the orgs do not expand, the church will die of attrition. If they will not look then that will be their fate - slow death. At some point even the most fervent will have to see that expansion just isn't happening.

I guess I can sum up my position: Do I want the chance that my daughter might some day be recruited into the SO to exist? No, sorry. I will not defend the CofS in its present form. Nor will I approve of a destruction of Scientology as a religious philosophy. The two are definately not the same.

Ramble done.

Next!

[nw2394]

I've never heard that sentiment in the FZ.

Yeah you have. Loadsa people chatter on and on, initially, about how great it would be if DM was gone or if such and such was handled. Clearly their attention is on fixing things. After a while they don't give a toss. Takes on average about a year.

Nick

[nw2394]

Having only a a few short months ago been a living breathing "In Scientology" scio, I still have trouble with "It's all a con". Lionheart's argument that Ron had evil intentions from the get-go is still hard for me to fully accept.

I don't accept it either. And I've been out and reading critical stuff longer. I accept that the man had his flaws and that there is evidence of this that goes way back. That doesn't mean the guy was evil 24/7.


I don't think the government should have any involvement in correcting the church on policy matters except perhaps to insist and demand fair-game be abolished. Prosecute crimes yes - but a "church" doesn't commit crimes individual justice is needed.


Laws differ from one place to another. For example there is such a thing as corporate manslaughter in the UK for example - very difficult to prove - but in theory, at least, the whole shooting match could be put on trial.

Nick

[Mojo]

I don't accept it either. And I've been out and reading critical stuff longer. I accept that the man had his flaws and that there is evidence of this that goes way back. That doesn't mean the guy was evil 24/7.

Nick

Absolutes are unobtainable (because they can't exist and be observed at the same time).

Lol.

Mojo

[PirateAndBum]

Absolutes are unobtainable (because they can't exist and be observed at the same time).

Lol.

Mojo

Mojo, YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT! Oops, I mean almost absolutely :eyeroll:

LOL

[lionheart]

The ultimate answer is not Anonymous.

The ultimate answer is moderated government intervention with checks and balances, the respect and recognition of everyones' rights, due process of law, and prosecutions for criminal acts, and civil suits for abuse of rights.

The only reason Anonymous now exists in this situation is because of the failure of government to intervene earlier.

If Anonymous can bring government to bear in this situation, then anonymous is one of the most civilizing forces ever to enter the fray.

But if Anonymous can not do that, or doesn't care to do that, then the calls for unchecked justice to be taken into one's own hands will almost certainly overtake reason. And then we'll have the vigilante street justice that produced the Kristallnacht (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht) in 1930's Germany.

I may sound alarmist.

But someone has to.


I haven't read the rest of this fast growing thread yet, Alanzo, but I wanted to say:

You are right, the ultimate answer is for government and justice to sort out the cult. They have shown a remarkable unwillingness to do so since I have been watching the CofS since the mid-sixties. Hubbard set up a duplicitous, corrupt organisation to evade justice, so that he could amass wealth and power and make men his slaves.

Public opinion led by exes and anonymous will be what forces the governments to apply justice to the CofS and that justice will kill an already dying cult.

The solution is to continue talking to anonymous. They are not in my experience anything like the nazis that you fear they may be or become.

Of course there is inherent danger in mob opinion - all the more reason for us who understand Hubbard and his cult to inform opinion as best as we can.

I think governments are closer now to applying justice to the CofS and to those abused by the CofS. This is thanks to long-time critics and the catalyst is anonymous. Now is not the time to be faint-hearted, to be so is playing Hubbard's implanted game, which frightened us into inaction.

Informed opinion will win the day! :thumbsup:

[lionheart]

You will never get a person like that to see reason; best not to try, for that way lies madness HF. Ignore lists were made for that kind of drivel.

I think there is misunderstanding on both sides. Alanzo is a friend of mine, but I believe he read more into your messages than was there.

You need to understand that an off-the-cuff joke or remark by anonymous is capable of touching subjects that are very sensitive to those of us who were abused by the cult. We are not like you, you are not like us. Thank goodness! :thumbsup:

We can both learn from each other. I have loved my experience with anonymous. It has been the best thing to happen in the critics movement in forty years, in my experience! I love anonymous' clarity and simplicity of vision. I hope anonymous are getting a better understanding of how cults and mass-movements operate.

We all have a lot to learn about human nature by observing cults. We can always check for any cultic traits in our thinking and actions.

I would advise you to not put Alanzo on your ignore list. I would advise checking with yourself in case you are misusing your anonymous power in any way. It can't do any harm for all of us to do a self-check every now and then! :D

[lionheart]

Maybe I shouldn't have written that post - I dunno.

These days "activism" seems a little hard to escape. We could all pretend it isn't happening and that the pendulum isn't swinging, but it is.

My post was an attempt to rouse those among us who still haven't really decided where they sit with regards to Scientology. I see people teetering between critic & Scientologist on a daily basis. I know how that is because I did it for years myself.

It's just that right now I don't believe there is too much time for that luxury. It might not be fair to those newly out but there is nothing anyone can do about it.

Things are moving forward at a fast pace and if people want to have a say in the way things unfold, I'm just suggesting that they should speak up and have their say.

I for one, do not want to see ANYONE lose their ability to practice their religion whether I believe in it or not. I've always fought for the rights of individuals to practice their religion. (I thought that would have been obvious by now given the history of this board and it's main participants).

The reactions on this thread show the wisdom in your starting of it! :thumbsup:

Personally, I am lucky. I am a long time out. Those recently out, could maybe benefit from switching off the internet for a while while they sort out their feelings that were scrambled by the cult.

We talked a while ago Emma about the vortex an ex finds himself in. It must be very painful for new exes to have the vortex constantly spun around them on the internet. I was lucky, I had more than ten years to recover without being reminded of Scn, apart from the occasional TV program.

Given the huge publicity and the speeding up of the death of the cult, I suppose exes have to speed up their de-programming as well. So sad, there is so little time to heal. :bigcry:

[Free to shine]

Lionheart, you always speak such wonderful sense! :)

[lionheart]

Having only a a few short months ago been a living breathing "In Scientology" scio, I still have trouble with "It's all a con". Lionheart's argument that Ron had evil intentions from the get-go is still hard for me to fully accept. All part of the sorting out process of getting out. I know there is value in Scn. But in today's CofS that value is soon overwhelmed - thus the FZ is a safer place to be serviced.


Take your time and come to your own decision. Sometimes I post deliberately provocatively to prod people to think for themselves because old Ronnie discouraged us to! :D

To clarify, yes, I believe Ron had evil intentions, the evidence is there in his "admissions" and his secret GO policies.

As to "it's all a con" I would say it is all a con based upon "truth" or "workability". That is what is so insideous about it.

I even think there is the possibility that Ron's evil intentions were suppressed or under control from the mid-fifties to mid-sixties. Maybe MSH was an influence in this period before she was overwhelmed by his evil and became the implementor of his psychosis (The Controller).

Maybe his evil was never under control and he was just pretending, I don't think we will ever know. During the period up to KSW, Scn definitely developed techniques that appeared to have benefit. That is why it takes so long to de-program ourselves.

Good luck in your exit from the cult and take your time. :)

[Div6]

I haven't read the rest of this fast growing thread yet, Alanzo, but I wanted to say:

You are right, the ultimate answer is for government and justice to sort out the cult. They have shown a remarkable unwillingness to do so since I have been watching the CofS since the mid-sixties. Hubbard set up a duplicitous, corrupt organisation to evade justice, so that he could amass wealth and power and make men his slaves.

Public opinion led by exes and anonymous will be what forces the governments to apply justice to the CofS and that justice will kill an already dying cult.

The solution is to continue talking to anonymous. They are not in my experience anything like the nazis that you fear they may be or become.

Of course there is inherent danger in mob opinion - all the more reason for us who understand Hubbard and his cult to inform opinion as best as we can.

I think governments are closer now to applying justice to the CofS and to those abused by the CofS. This is thanks to long-time critics and the catalyst is anonymous. Now is not the time to be faint-hearted, to be so is playing Hubbard's implanted game, which frightened us into inaction.

Informed opinion will win the day! :thumbsup:

LH,

I respectfully disagree with "You are right, the ultimate answer is for government and justice to sort out the cult."


In the US at least, the Establishment clause precludes any "sorting out" of religious doctrine. So that leaves justice. But at least here, the Govt is so "Justifier Hungry" that it appears that they take lessons from each other.
And they have similars of their own.
IE: The CIA is the "crime-factory" for the US Govt. The "covert intel ops".
The parallel in the CoS is OSA.

We have seen them blackmail each other (ie: Fred Goldberg being balckmailed re the IRS decisions) so why should we expect ANY "ethics change" from either of them. They will just go into mutual defense mode to protect each others overts.

No, I really think it comes down to this: The CoS is not the only entity out there that can pull O's. And the more we pull, the saner ultimately things will get. But the PC is psycho, so expect to take some lumps...

[Hanover Fist]

I think this is a great thread Emma!

As far as the warnings of riots in the streets or rampant vigilante justice, I just don't see that happening. More to the point, I don't even think it is close to necessary (violence and vigilantism, that is). The historical examples cited all seem to involve groups that were the victims of injustice (even if only perceived) for quite some time prior to the violent acts. The riots of the Civil Rights Era had much to do with the black population in the US having had to deal with >400 years of slavery, oppression, and bullshit from the establishment. Kristallnacht was the result of Goebbles preying upon over 1,000 years of anti-semitism in Europe.

I simply do not see the same dynamic with Anon (of which I am not a part). They have not been directly victimized by the CoS. Only their sense of justice and 'right' has been violated. They are fighting for an idea, not because they have been personally victimized by the CoS. And unless the CoS starts gunning protesters down in the streets, (which I do not believe will happen) I just don't see this being a powderkeg scenario.

I think what Anon is doing is bringing the equivalent of homeostasis to the situation. Scientology contains the seeds of its own demise, and I believe Anon is simply the catalyst. When scientology is dead and gone Anon (or their equivalent) will move on to something else.


Hanover Fist

[Alanzo]

I think this is a great thread Emma!

As far as the warnings of riots in the streets or rampant vigilante justice, I just don't see that happening. More to the point, I don't even think it is close to necessary (violence and vigilantism, that is). The historical examples cited all seem to involve groups that were the victims of injustice (even if only perceived) for quite some time prior to the violent acts. The riots of the Civil Rights Era had much to do with the black population in the US having had to deal with >400 years of slavery, oppression, and bullshit from the establishment. Kristallnacht was the result of Goebbles preying upon over 1,000 years of anti-semitism in Europe.

I simply do not see the same dynamic with Anon (of which I am not a part). They have not been directly victimized by the CoS. Only their sense of justice and 'right' has been violated. They are fighting for an idea, not because they have been personally victimized by the CoS. And unless the CoS starts gunning protesters down in the streets, (which I do not believe will happen) I just don't see this being a powderkeg scenario.

You have a very good point there, HF.

I hope you are right.


I think what Anon is doing is bringing the equivalent of homeostasis to the situation. Scientology contains the seeds of its own demise, and I believe Anon is simply the catalyst. When scientology is dead and gone Anon (or their equivalent) will move on to something else.

The Jews?

JUST KIDDING!!!!! :)

[Escalus]

I was a gung-ho staffer many moons ago. Now I don't care what happens to Scientology; grow, die, survive... don't care. People have a right to follow their conscience, but they don't have a right to break the law. And if someone is doing fraud they should be busted.

I don't care about whether they're doing "Ron's tech" or not. Freezone, shmeezone, miscavige, miscarriage, it's like a self-contained, self-defined universe.

Big news to me is that absinthe is finally legal in the US. Now that's progress!:coolwink:

[Royal Prince Xenu]

There is a misconception out there.

I've heard it more than a few times that the majority of "exes" are just waiting for Miscavige to be overthown, die or step aside and a whole bunch of exes will run straight back to the church.

From this thread it seems this is just not true.

The problem with finding someone to replace DM, is that anyone who wants to do it has, by wanting it, disqualified himself from holding the position.

We know from history that he who overthrows a despot turns out to be no better.

As the general population wakes up, the church will die its own death.

Those useful bits of 'tech' will live on in those who use them wisely.

[SomeGuy]

Howdy,

Being as this is my first post here and since I am not an ex-scientologist nor a part of the anonymous movement I figured I'd give some background as to my motivation for posting.

We all have motivations don't we? So i'll try to keep it brief so this doesn't seem like a 10 page essay, bare with me.

About a month ago an aquaintance in another message board posted a link to some youtube videos with a bit of an explantion as to it's origins. I've been doing IT work for going on 20+ years, so I'm pretty familiar with the internet "dens" around.

My thought was, why are these kids messing with Scientologist? I'm a pretty big libertarian so my "quit being asses and screwing with good people" flag went up. Until a month ago I had no idea who the CoS was and a pretty vague inclination that Hubbard was a nutjob.

That was the extent of my knowledge. What I found odd was that this usual group of apathetic and usually pedantic set of people had been mobilized. Some one had screwed with their perceived first ammendment. They wanted to have their fun at Tom Cruise's expense and they were being denied.

The DDoS attacks and an actual protest? After seeing videos of it and noting that it was basically a global prank (rickrolls, internet memes) I figured no harm no foul. The CoS should be able to laught this off. But as the discussion grew on that forum I saw statements, opinions really and I asked for coraboration of all these opinion posts.

I was pointed to xenu and xenutv and whytheyaredead and torimagoo. Now I'm a natural cynic, I looked and read and thought, my god these are the influence makers here? In an instant I semi surmised the reason why athe CoS existed and continued to exist was because the "opposition" for the past 30 years to the CoS was just badly represented.

In PR terms I thought (and still do) these people are nutjobs and have alterior agendas. I don't want any one to take that as insult, that is my raw opinion of this.

I went out and sought independent sources, things that would have less built in bias. The last person I would trust was some one who had been a volunteer in the covert ops of the thing they were trying to bring down (in your terms this would mean OSA).

The time magazing article was powerful as was the rollingstones magazine article. They gave me a good foundation for why although the anonymous crowd while greatly misguided was doing a decent thing.

Which is what led me to a few new places, I wanted to place a "face" with these things. Call me overly curious to a fault I guess. So I lurked the enturbulation forums and these forums.

I guess I'll break down my reaction to each individually.

I've read about 10 of the stories from inside scientology on these boards. I do not think I can express in words that it is rare that I read something and I am moved. Prior to this my thought of Scios (can I use abbreviations, my god you all have so many, most of which I have no idea what they mean, maybe another thread). It brought into my consciousness that these people are not complete and total whackjobs who are weak minded and fell into an easily avoidable trap.

They are just like me, they chose a path to better them selves and some times you sell your soul to obtain a goal. People do it everyday in all sorts of different facets of life. All these people just chose this path, most of them for a more noble cause than most. Instead of selling junkbonds to old ladies so they could put in a new swimming pool, they chose to try to "better them selves to save humanity". I won't editorialize what I thought of the intentions, these are just my impressions.

That they all in the end turn into a tragedy is a shame, that you are all "healing, living and moving" on is something which I find wonderful.

Which leads me to what I'll call the "new anonymous". Which seems to have mutated from a bunch of kids making fun of scientology to an overt movement drawing in a rather strange cast of characters. I'll call it the enemy of my enemy syndrome for lack of a better term. I read the enturbulation boards, seeing most of the stickies being about OSA and Fair game and protect your self! I thought my god there is some serious mind games going on here. Creating motivation with fear is all I could think and I still think that.

The addition of freezoners (can you tell I've been doing alot of reading?) mixed in with staunch anti-scientology and the channers is defnitely interesting. I don't think it's something that will last beyond the next protest. You are talking about goals being completely misalligned and once the initial rush is gone, this will be a piranha pool or wost. It's hard to sum up my feelings on this since I think the opinion makers of this "new anonymous" haven't been defined but if history teaches us anything they will come eventually and then judgement can be passed.

This leads me to believe that alot of people are now "puppets" in game way over their heads.

So holy cow that's alot of "intro" to make what will probably be a controversial statement.

It is my opinion that the very foundation of scientology, while it might get you some "wins" is flawed. It preys on basically implanting a set of ideologies that have extremely short term gains and possible long term harmful effects. I think it opens up people to suggestion (more than they naturally are). I don't know if LRH worked it out to be this way (I'm guessing he knew exactly what he was doing as did those helping him even if inadvertenly). The Church of Scientology is another matter all together. From every account I've read it is nothing less than a criminal organization.

That has nothing to do with their tax exempt status, and everything to do with the operation based on extortionary sale methods and application of corporal punishment. Should the day ever come that the correct government agencies (and I'm pretty sure in the US this is going to fall under RICCO) any of your friends still in are going to need your help. I know that I don't want to picket a church but you can bet your ass your stories have motivated me to talk to agencies who should be, if they aren't, looking into this.

To close this novel, I want to thank all of you, I don't think there is another site that deals with the subject of the Church of Scientology that is more powerful and makes a case for action than what you all have shared with here.

*Edit: I had to to edit some glaring typos and such, it was just bothering me :)

[lrnobs]

I've read about 10 of the stories from inside scientology. I do not think I can express in words that it is rare that I read something and I am moved. Prior to this my thought of Scios (can I use abbreviations, my god you all have so many, most of which I have no idea what they mean, maybe another thread). It brought into my consciousness that these people are not complete and total whackjobs who are weak minded and fell into an easily avoidable trap.

They are just like me, they chose a path to better them selves and some times you sell your soul to obtain a goal. People do it everyday in all sorts of different facets of life. All these people just chose this path, most of them for a more noble cause than most. Instead of selling junkbonds to old ladies so they could put in a new swimming pool, they chose to try to "better them selves to save humanity". The intentions wont editorilize on it but that's the impression from reading all those stories that I got.



If I had not joined at the impressionable age of thirteen and bought the "world will be destroyed by nuclear war if I don't help" line, I would probably be sitting in your chair. There are thousands of stories still to be posted. Some of those may be even more outrageous, but still true. Good hearted souls have been misled throughout history by clever tricks. Hopefully we can prevent the next group from being misled.

[namaste]

Welcome SomeGuy.

Of all the good points you made in your post do you know the words that struck me the most?

Right here:

The CoS should be able to laugh this off.

In my opinion, that's what they should have done.

And it's what they should have done when the recent Tom Cruise biography was published.

And when BBC Panaroma did a segment on them.

Etc., etc.

Just give it a chuckle, even acknowledge that it was a bit funny but that it isn't anything to give much time or attention to, and go about their business.

People would likely respect that and leave them alone.

But they just can't do that. They have to react like Hitler's SS and try to beat in peoples' ethics with a hammer and that just creates a war.

It is a lesson that they seem totally unable to learn.

Now I'm beginning to wonder if the collective people of the Church aren't somehow trying to put ethics in on themselves.
I have not only heard about this phenomenon but have experienced it myself as an individual.

I've not mentioned it here before but I developed a drug habit many years ago and used to steal to get money for drugs.
Natutally, I got caught a few times and the funny thing was that each time I wound up in the back of a cop car I felt relief that a stop was being put to it.

The last time it happened (several years ago now) I remember that I made a pretty deliberate effort to get caught. I set out and violated certain rules of burglary tech in such a way that I was almost certain to get busted.
And I sort of watched myself do it from a detached viewpoint.
And I finally knew that this was the end of it all.
It has never happened again and I have no fear now that it ever will.

I believe that no criminal wants to be a criminal and I don't think that scientologists inside the Church at any level want the crimes and overts to continue either.
It's just human nature.
I hope that they will be relieved of the whole mess soon and I don't mean that sarcastically either.

Just thinking out loud. :)

Thanks again for the post.

[Mary]

Howdy,

Being as this is my first post here and since I am not an ex-scientologist nor a part of the anonymous movement I figures I'd give some background as to my motivation for posting.

We all have motivations don't we? So i'll try to keep it brief so this doesn't seem like a 10 page essay, bare with me.

About a month ago an aquaintance in another message board posted a link to some youtube videos with a bit of an explantion as to it's origins. I've been doing IT work for going on 20+ years, so I'm pretty familiar with the internet "dens" around.

My thought was, why are these kids messing with Scientologist. I'm a pretty big libertarian so my "quit being asses and screwing with good people" flag went up. Until a month ago I had no idea who the CoS was and a pretty vague inclination that Hubbard was a nutjob.

That was the extent of my knowledge. What I found odd was that this usual group of apathetic and usually pedantic set of people had been mobilized. Some one had screwed with their perceived first ammendment. They wanted to have their fun at Tom Cruises expense and they were being denied.

The DDoS attacks and an actual protest? After seeing videos of it and noting that it was basically a global prank (rickrolls, internet memes) I figured no harm no foul. The CoS should be able to laught this off. But as the discussion grew on that forum I saw statements, opinions really and I asked for colaboration.

I was pointed to xenu and xenutv and whytheyaredead and torimagoo. Now I'm a natural cynic, I looked and read and thought my god these are the influence makers here? In an instant I semi surmised the reason why any of these happened was because the "opposition" for the past 30 years to the CoS was just badly represented.

In PR terms I thought (and still do) these people are nutjobs and have alerior agendas. I don't want any one to take that as insult, that is my raw opinion of this.

I went out and sought independent sources, things that would have less built in bias. The last person I would trust was some one who had been a volunteer in the covert ops of the thing they were trying to bring down (in your terms this would mean OSA).

The time magazing article was powerful as was the rollingstones magazine article. They gave me a good foundation for why although I think the anonymous crowd while greatly misguided was doing a decent thing.

Which is what led me to a few new places, I wanted to place a "face" with these things. Call me overly curious to a fault I guess. So I lurked the enturbulation forums and these forums.

I guess I'll break down my reaction to each individually.

I've read about 10 of the stories from inside scientology. I do not think I can express in words that it is rare that I read something and I am moved. Prior to this my thought of Scios (can I use abbreviations, my god you all have so many, most of which I have no idea what they mean, maybe another thread). It brought into my consciousness that these people are not complete and total whackjobs who are weak minded and fell into an easily avoidable trap.

They are just like me, they chose a path to better them selves and some times you sell your soul to obtain a goal. People do it everyday in all sorts of different facets of life. All these people just chose this path, most of them for a more noble cause than most. Instead of selling junkbonds to old ladies so they could put in a new swimming pool, they chose to try to "better them selves to save humanity". The intentions wont editorilize on it but that's the impression from reading all those stories that I got.

That they all turn into a tragedy is a shame, that you are all "healing, living and moving" on is something which I find wonderful.

Which leads me to what I'll call the "new anonymous". Which seems to have mutated from a bunch of kids making fun of scientology to an over movement drawing in a rather strange cast of characters. I'll call it the enemy of my enemy syndrome for lack of a better term. I read the enturbulation boards, seeing most of the stickies being about OSA and Fair game and protect your self! I thought my god there is some serious mind games going on here. Creating motivation with fear is all I could think and I still think that.

The addition of freezoners (can you tell I've been doing alot of reading?) mixed in with staunch anti-scientology and the channers is defnitely interesting. I don't think it's something that will last beyond the next protest. You are talking about goals being completely misalligned and once the initial rush is gone, this will be a piranha pool or wost. It's hard to sum up my feelings on this since I think the opinion makers of this "new anonymous" haven't been defined but if history teaches us anything they will come eventually and then judgement can be passed.

This leads me to believe that alot of people are now "puppets" in game way over their heads.

So holy cow that's alot of "intro" to make what will probably be a controvertial statement.

It is my opinion that the very foundation of scientology, while it might get you some "wins" is flawed. It preys on basically implanting a set of ideologies that have extremely short term gains and possible long term harmful effects. I think it opens up people to suggestion (more than they naturally are). I don't know if LRH worked it out to be this way (I'm guessing he knew exactly what he was doing as did those helping him even if inadvertenly). The Church of Scientology it self is another matter all together. From every account I've read it is nothing less than a criminal organization.

That has nothing to do with their tax excempt status, and everything to do with the operation based on extortionary sale methods and application of corporal punishment. Should the day ever come that the correct government agencies (and I'm pretty sure in the US this is going to fall under RICCO) any of your friends still in are going to need your help. I know that I don't want to picket a church but you can bet your ass your stories have motivated me to talk to agencies who should be, if they aren't, looking at this.

To close this novel, I want to thank all of you, I don't think there is another site that deal with the subject of the Church of Scientology that is more powerful and makes a case for action than what you all have shared with here.


Very interesting post!

I've heard many ex-scientologists say that they've been surprised to find so many wogs (people outside of the Church) that are really friendly, decent and willing to talk openly and sincerely.

Many, myself included, had somehow come to believe that the world outside the Church was barbaric, unintelligent, low toned and bank (reactive mind) motivated. I used to think "My God, how can you ever really communicate to someone who hasn't even done a Comm Course?" :duh:

Since leaving the Church it feels wonderful to join the human race.

Even better, to find out that now the human race is joining us it seems.

[SomeGuy]

Very interesting post!

I've heard many ex-scientologists say that they've been surprised to find so many wogs (people outside of the Church) that are really friendly, decent and willing to talk openly and sincerely.

Many, myself included, had somehow come to believe that the world outside the Church was barbaric, unintelligent, low toned and bank (reactive mind) motivated. I used to think "My God, how can you ever really communicate to someone who hasn't even done a Comm Course?" :duh:

Since leaving the Church it feels wonderful to join the human race.

Even better, to find out that now the human race is joining us it seems.


It might be true! Seriously though, rereading my post after I post it and seeing as many gramatical and typo errors shows me I have a bad habit of shooting with out aiming. :duh:

I don't think you "guys"(and I really hate generalities) ever left the human race.

[Wisened One]

Welcome SomeGuy, and WHAT a fascinating, contributing intro and post!

Wisened One

[duddins]

It might be true! Seriously though, rereading my post after I post it and seeing as many gramatical and typo errors shows me I have a bad habit of shooting with out aiming. :duh:

I don't think you "guys"(and I really hate generalities) ever left the human race.



No, Someguy...we really did not leave the human race. But our perception of the human race was changed by indocrination from inside the C of S.
The ideas sank in over time....we thought we were different.
Like we were above the "wogs" in knowledge of everything...education, mental health, physical health, the spirit.

As an example, how could Scientology staff justify to themselves why they did not take Lisa M. to the hospital sooner? Why did they not seek help for her?

Listening to his rants, it hit home to me hard. Tom Cruise really thinks that he is the authority on how to handle the scene of an accident because he has been indocrinated with the idea that he knows things that "WOGS" do not. He is now beyond the human race....better prepared to handle life than others.

The appearance of this video shows that his indocrination is complete.

If anyone wants to know fundimentally why people like Lisa are allowed to die, it was stated clearly by Tom Cruise.

They know that they know better than everyone else.

Those of us that have left are pulling out the threads of this indocrination from our minds and spirits.

It is hard to express in words...but I hope I am coming close.

I really loved your post, by the way. I have been proud to be a "wog" again for many years now. It took a long time to be back among the living and I love it.

I know that what you say is true.....some are biting off more than they can chew....but it is great to have people like yourself learning more and more of the truth about Scientology every day!

I see it in a very positive light.:)

[Wisened One]

Oh duddins: Your post really hit nerves for me. You say what I've been trying to say so well!

Yep: We are STILL trying to get over that 'feeling of superiority over wogs' thing.

We're still hermits as a result of it, too.

Wisened One

[duddins]

Oh duddins: Your post really hit nerves for me. You say what I've been trying to say so well!

Yep: We are STILL trying to get over that 'feeling of superiority over wogs' thing.

We're still hermits as a result of it, too.

Wisened One

Thanks Wisened one!:) :) :) :)

I've felt so strongly about this single point for many years. When my eyes were opened, I was pretty pissed off at the C of S and then ultimatly myself for buying into it.

But....as Someguy brought up...we were trying to do good things...trying to make a good impact on the world........

While we were being indocrinated and indocrinating each other.

[duddins]

We're still hermits as a result of it, too.

Wisened One

I feel your words!

[SomeGuy]

No, Someguy...we really did not leave the human race. But our perception of the human race was changed by indocrination from inside the C of S.
The ideas sank in over time....we thought we were different.
Like we were above the "wogs" in knowledge of everything...education, mental health, physical health, the spirit.

As an example, how could Scientology staff justify to themselves why they did not take Lisa M. to the hospital sooner? Why did they not seek help for her?

Listening to his rants, it hit home to me hard. Tom Cruise really thinks that he is the authority on how to handle the scene of an accident because he has been indocrinated with the idea that he knows things that "WOGS" do not. He is now beyond the human race....better prepared to handle life than others.

The appearance of this video shows that his indocrination is complete.

If anyone wants to know fundimentally why people like Lisa are allowed to die, it was stated clearly by Tom Cruise.

They know that they know better than everyone else.

Those of us that have left are pulling out the threads of this indocrination from our minds and spirits.

It is hard to express in words...but I hope I am coming close.

I really loved your post, by the way. I have been proud to be a "wog" again for many years now. It took a long time to be back among the living and I love it.

I know that what you say is true.....some are biting off more than they can chew....but it is great to have people like yourself learning more and more of the truth about Scientology every day!

I see it in a very positive light.:)

I agree with your final sentiment, even if it's just a small new segment of people "learning" and engaging in conversation something good comes out of it.

As to the superiority thing, it cuts both ways. Prior to reading the stories (and one in particular is beyond moving, and I hate that it's not a story but something that actually occured.) I held "all of you" in great disdain. Part of the human condition to ridicule that which you don't understand. I'm sure most people if asked with having only a tiny bit of information feel the same way. I think this is why I believe most people on the subject are indifferent on it and it wasn't until I actually decided to read how this all came to pass by those who have shared their stories here that that veil of fog lifted.

My opinion has done a 180 on the subject (this is rare trust me, once my mind is set it's usually for life). It has gone from disdain to admiration in some cases, I don't know if I would have had the strength to have survived if I were in the same situation.

[everfree]

I've shared Alanzo's qualms that Anon could degenerate into... something nasty. Some Anon can be pretty denigrating in their opinion of Scnists, and such dehumanization IS a first step towards some dark places, especially when coupled with their initial illegal tactics and some of the antics that occur on the chans which to me show immaturity and a lack of responisibility and/or wisdom.

I'd hate to see any Scnists -- or Anon, for that matter -- get hurt.

Happily, however, it seems like the majority of Anon try to make a distinction between fighting the "CofS and abuse" and fighting "scnists" and continually point out that distinction amongst themselves, in their videos and on their boards. Moreover, they seem to have corrected themselves on the illegalities and I applaud them for it. I also appreciate the enthusiasm they have brought to "the cause".

So although I do think that some aspects of Anon bear watching, I think overall they're doing a great job so far.

For those of you who think that Alanzo is overreacting, do remember that he and I and others here come from a background that started out with the highest ideals possible yet ended in abuse and degradation, so vigilance in watching out for abuse even in something with the best of intentions is based in actual life experience hard won.

[duddins]

I agree with your final sentiment, even if it's just a small new segment of people "learning" and engaging in conversation something good comes out of it.

As to the superiority thing, it cuts both ways. Prior to reading the stories (and one in particular is beyond moving, and I hate that it's not a story but something that actually occured.) I held "all of you" in great disdain. Part of the human condition to ridicule that which you don't understand. I'm sure most people if asked with having only a tiny bit of information feel the same way. I think this is why I believe most people on the subject are indifferent on it and it wasn't until I actually decided to read how this all came to pass by those who have shared their stories here that that veil of fog lifted.

My opinion has done a 180 on the subject (this is rare trust me, once my mind is set it's usually for life). It has gone from disdain to admiration in some cases, I don't know if I would have had the strength to have survived if I were in the same situation.

Got you there!..part of my growth in recovery was in studying how Nazism could engulf a people....I was almost obsessed on the topic of the holocaust for a time. People can learn to hate what they do not understand.

But in Scientology....we were not taught to hate "WOGS" but that we were above them, beyond them in awareness. That is a cult specialty. It is the old...."we are the only way out" idea on steriods. Fanaticism.

It is refreshing to read your point of view and I am glad to know that us folks here at ESMB have been influential.

I cannot speak for others, but after I blew, it took compassion, patience and the kindness of Ex Scn friends to help bring me back to where I could stand on my own two feet.

I know that there will be many needing that kind of love when the C of S goes belly up...there are most likely many out there now ready..that do not know how to leave...where to go.

I know that there are many who will be ready to recieve them.

[duddins]

I've shared Alanzo's qualms that Anon could degenerate into... something nasty. Some Anon can be pretty denigrating in their opinion of Scnists, and such dehumanization IS a first step towards some dark places, especially when coupled with their initial illegal tactics and some of the antics that occur on the chans which to me show immaturity and a lack of responisibility and/or wisdom.

I'd hate to see any Scnists -- or Anon, for that matter -- get hurt.

Happily, however, it seems like the majority of Anon try to make a distinction between fighting the "CofS and abuse" and fighting "scnists" and continually point out that distinction amongst themselves, in their videos and on their boards. Moreover, they seem to have corrected themselves on the illegalities and I applaud them for it. I also appreciate the enthusiasm they have brought to "the cause".

So although I do think that some aspects of Anon bear watching, I think overall they're doing a great job so far.

For those of you who think that Alanzo is overreacting, do remember that he and I and others here come from a background that started out with the highest ideals possible yet ended in abuse and degradation, so vigilance in watching out for abuse even in something with the best of intentions is based in actual life experience hard won.


Thanks for posting this Everfree......I agree with you. Any sign of fanaticism should be watched for. Some are overly sensitive to it for good reason!

[SomeGuy]

Got you there!..part of my growth in recovery was in studying how Nazism could engulf a people....I was almost obsessed on the topic of the holocaust for a time. People can learn to hate what they do not understand.

But in Scientology....we were not taught to hate "WOGS" but that we were above them, beyond them in awareness. That is a cult specialty. It is the old...."we are the only way out" idea on steriods. Fanaticism.

It is refreshing to read your point of view and I am glad to know that us folks here at ESMB have been influential.

I cannot speak for others, but after I blew, it took compassion, patience and the kindness of Ex Scn friends to help bring me back to where I could stand on my own two feet.

I know that there will be many needing that kind of love when the C of S goes belly up...there are most likely many out there now ready..that do not know how to leave...where to go.

I know that there are many who will be ready to recieve them.

Well I think you touch at the heart of my motivation for even posting. On most subjects I would have usually nodded and walked away. It's the contrast of what this thread is about and what is currently happening.

My belief that most of the "anonymous" crowd is so way in over their heads. Should the CoS fall tomorrow (in what ever that means) there are going to be alot of people who need help these kids have no idea how to provide. You are talking emotional, financial, living, reconnecting with families.

Granted I think it takes some major legal rangling to actually take down the church but that's neither here nor there. I could be completely wrong on that but anything which has people with vested interest requiring it continues, protest might weaken it but to truely "hurt" it you need pressures above and beyond. My opinion on the matter.

Should I be wrong and in the next few months a natural dismantelling occurs. You guys (as a group) are best equiped to assist those coming out with the very things they will need. I have not lived in yours or their shoes and no amount of empathy can replace having lived it. It's what made me say, "you know these are good people, I need to voice that". In the end it's a meaningless token but it means something to me.

[Alanzo]

For those of you who think that Alanzo is overreacting, do remember that he and I and others here come from a background that started out with the highest ideals possible yet ended in abuse and degradation, so vigilance in watching out for abuse even in something with the best of intentions is based in actual life experience hard won.

This is the second time since I've known you that you have said something that completely understood what was going on with me - even more than I was aware of myself.

That is it.

You've got it, spot on.

Thank you very much, Everfree.

[duddins]

Well I think you touch at the heart of my motivation for even posting. On most subjects I would have usually nodded and walked away. It's the contrast of what this thread is about and what is currently happening.

My belief that most of the "anonymous" crowd is so way in over their heads. Should the CoS fall tomorrow (in what ever that means) there are going to be alot of people who need help these kids have no idea how to provide. You are talking emotional, financial, living, reconnecting with families.

Granted I think it takes some major legal rangling to actually take down the church but that's neither here nor there. I could be completely wrong on that but anything which has people with vested interest requiring it continues, protest might weaken it but to truely "hurt" it you need pressures above and beyond. My opinion on the matter.

Should I be wrong and in the next few months a natural dismantelling occurs. You guys (as a group) are best equiped to assist those coming out with the very things they will need. I have not lived in yours or their shoes and no amount of empathy can replace having lived it. It's what made me say, "you know these are good people, I need to voice that". In the end it's a meaningless token but it means something to me.

Wow...and thank you. I deeply appreciate your posts because I see that means something to you. It is not just a CHURCH but people, individuals that are in the dark right now.

I think that because when one is so deeply indocrinated, when the veil is finally lifted and the ideas of greatness demolished, it is that much more devistating. I was in deep pain when I left.

I don't pretend to think that Anon is aware of all aspects of this...I think that some of them are becoming more aware as they read our stories.

Many will need a hand. On this board there are many incredible people. Many who are now doing very well in life and who are willing to be there for them. I am among them.

Welcome to our Board by the way!

[everfree]

This is the second time since I've known you that you have said something that completely understood what was going on with me - even more than I was aware of myself.

That is it.

You've got it, spot on.

Thank you very much, Everfree.

Haha, I'm glad. I'm curious - what was the other time?

[Alanzo]

Haha, I'm glad. I'm curious - what was the other time?

It was on Beliefnet. You said that it was clear that I felt that my life had been derailed, and that I was working out exactly what happened to me.

Am I wearing a card on my forehead like we're playing Indian Poker, or what? :)

[ChaoticPsychotic]

I tried to read through all of the posts but frankly don't have the patience to get through everyone's opinion here. Opinions are like assholes and everyone most certainly seems to have one here so I am just going to throw mine in for the hell of it.

I want to see CoS systematically dismantled. I want to see all of the sufferers and victims given some sort of reparation. I want families and friends reconnected. I want Hubbard exposed for the bastard he was. I want to see the "Tech" burned, destroyed and obliterated off the face of this earth.

Having been the lucky recipient of 13 PC folders worth of brainwashing and torture (nope, I didn't even make it thru the Grades in case you are wondering) in the form of list repairs, corrections, out-int handlings, sec checks etc. I can proudly declare that I am in fact an SP since I never received even a lick of case gain for all of my troubles. Although I would like to add here that I have had a total of 3 sessions of therapy with my Psychologist for a cost of $240 for 3 hours and got all the relief I could have ever hoped for in my endless hours of Scientological "auditing".

Freezoners, while you puzzle me, I have no problem with you doing your thing. If it works for you then whatever, who am I to judge?

Anonymous, I cannot tell you how much it means to me what you are doing. I hope that our government gets a clue and puts a stop to the cult sooner rather than later and I think that that is actually possible now. You guys have brought a hell of a lot of heat on the cult and I think you rock for doing so. I say keep up the good work!

And that's my asshole... err... opinion. :yes:

[duddins]

It was on Beliefnet. You said that it was clear that I felt that my life had been derailed, and that I was working out exactly what happened to me.

Am I wearing a card on my forehead like we're playing Indian Poker, or what? :)

It does feel good to be understood....doesnt it? :happydance: :happydance:

[SomeGuy]

Welcome to our Board by the way!

Thanks, most likely I'll go back to my lurker ways perhaps down the road if some one springs up a discussion on philosophy or relegion or politics or my favorite MMOs (and the psychology behind creating the chase the carrot syndrome) I'll jump in most likely f13 is a better place for that any way.

I've been tempted to post in a few other threads but I'm way too much of an opinionated bastard to start out in the big leagues of this board, nothing good would come of it. :D

[ExCMO]

I truly believe that the church should get its act straight. I think it is time a whole reorganization takes place and it should really become a matter of choice to do scientology. It should not negate or invalidate other religions or spiritual studies as it currently does.

It should recognize that a person is free to search for answers, and said person could find some answers in Scn, but also in Buddhism or Christianism, or elsewhere, for that matter.

I think it should stop its criminal practices. It should stop trying to cash on everyone's bank accounts and become a true religion. One in which people donate according to their personal wishes and possibilities. One where someone can turn to for help and not get his butt kicked around in bogus and weird ethics actions, but that instead helps a person resolve his/her moral issues with care and attention.

There is stuff in Scn that works, but its current structure and management are not part of those working things. Much to the contrary: whatever benefits one could get from Scn are immediately trashed by the church's insane wrongdoings. It should become a guide, not a threatening master.

If the church can get itself straight, get rid of all the crazy stuff and become ethical, then fine. If it can't (or won't), then the world will be better off without it. Unfortunately, I think it will opt for the latter.

[Alanzo]

Thanks, most likely I'll go back to my lurker ways perhaps down the road if some one springs up a discussion on philosophy or relegion or politics or my favorite MMOs (and the psychology behind creating the chase the carrot syndrome) I'll jump in most likely f13 is a better place for that any way.

I've been tempted to post in a few other threads but I'm way too much of an opinionated bastard to start out in the big leagues of this board, nothing good would come of it. :D

Oh really?

So, basically you're a pussy.

Is that what you're saying? :)

[Björkist]

Don't look now, but you're a bit of a nazi, anon.

You have the same ideals that the original brownshirts had in the early 1930's in Germany.

Do you know about the brownshirts of Germany, anon?


Honk if you hate Scientology!

[shader]

Thanks, most likely I'll go back to my lurker ways perhaps down the road if some one springs up a discussion on philosophy or relegion or politics or my favorite MMOs (and the psychology behind creating the chase the carrot syndrome) I'll jump in most likely f13 is a better place for that any way.

I've been tempted to post in a few other threads but I'm way too much of an opinionated bastard to start out in the big leagues of this board, nothing good would come of it. :D

Don't hold back, go ahead and post.

I was very wary about posting here, as I recognize this board serves a really important function for people recovering from their experiences in Scientology, and I really didn't want to mess with that.

But it has been made clear to me that sometimes a "wog"s opinions about religion and philosophy are helpful to ex-Scns trying to make sense of their experiences. Especially if your opinions are insightful and well-researched, as that isn't what LRH taught people to expect from us "wogs".

I would say also be respectful, but you seem to have got the hang of that bit already.

As for talking about MMOs, I don't know. Scientology is maybe like World of Warcrack in that what keeps many playing is the promise of the super-duper stuff available when you reach high levels. But Scientology is like a WoW where the epic high level gear is expensive, looks great, and gets you lots of respect within the game - but has the same stats as the greys you started with at Level 1. And if you complained about it the GameOps would ban you.

[SomeGuy]

Oh really?

So, basically you're a pussy.

Is that what you're saying? :)

Nah, it comes down to this site and most of the perspectives and threads are about scientology. I could in theory reasonably argue based on logic and my own background (raised jesuit catholic and out for 30+ years as an agnostic :thumbsup: ) but I am no where near educated enough to not eventually put a foot in my mouth. One innocuous statement can seem calous to some one reading it.

There is not enough variety for me to feel comfortable in posting an opinion that might turn into a flame thread. I can do that else where (and do). You can think of this that currently I spent most of the time reading your out stories, I feel I know you (a royal you here) much better than you know me, even if it's in a very superficial way. It's why I went and made a long ass introductory post before posting it. It doesn't really give you any insight into who I am and that level of trust is one of those things that are earned and can only be freely given.

You can bait me though, I will always respond, it might take me a week to find it if I'm actually working though. Perhaps in time and if I see something which looks like a discussion where my input and perhaps any insight I could share would be good I'll jump in. Till then I'm just some guy who has posted on this thread.

I also tend to be overly verbose, when I should really just post a "NO U" answer. :coolwink:

[SomeGuy]

As for talking about MMOs, I don't know. Scientology is maybe like World of Warcrack in that what keeps many playing is the promise of the super-duper stuff available when you reach high levels. But Scientology is like a WoW where the epic high level gear is expensive, looks great, and gets you lots of respect within the game - but has the same stats as the greys you started with at Level 1. And if you complained about it the GameOps would ban you.

You know it's funny you say that (I haven't played WoW in about a year) but there are startling similarities about the portion of the brain that is tickled.

So OT for this thread though and by that I mean off topic.

[Alanzo]

Nah, it comes down to this site and most of the perspectives and threads are about scientology. I could in theory reasonably argue based on logic and my own background (raised jesuit catholic and out for 30+ years as an agnostic :thumbsup: ) but I am no where near educated enough to not eventually put a foot in my mouth. One innocuous statement can seem calous to some one reading it.

There is not enough variety for me to feel comfortable in posting an opinion that might turn into a flame thread. I can do that else where (and do). You can think of this that currently I spent most of the time reading your out stories, I feel I know you (a royal you here) much better than you know me, even if it's in a very superficial way. It's why I went and made a long ass introductory post before posting it. It doesn't really give you any insight into who I am and that level of trust is one of those things that are earned and can only be freely given.

You can bait me though, I will always respond, it might take me a week to find it if I'm actually working though. Perhaps in time and if I see something which looks like a discussion where my input and perhaps any insight I could share would be good I'll jump in. Till then I'm just some guy who has posted on this thread.

I also tend to be overly verbose, when I should really just post a "NO U" answer. :coolwink:

Well, I was trying to bait you into posting here.

Shader's right, different perspectives from outside the cult mindset can often be helpful.

Plus, I like to beat up on Ex-Jesuits. It's like shooting fish in a barrel for me.

But anyway. Thanks for posting. You are welcome here any time.

I look forward to you stopping by again. :)

[Björkist]

If you truly believe in the tech and don't want to see your churches demolished then I think it's time to get of the fence. I don't see how it is possible anymore to simultaneously be a critic and a Scientology supporter. I think it is time to make your position clear.

If you want your churches to survive then the time to fight is now! Tell us why they should survive. Tell us what changes need to happen. Tell us why you feel this way.

I'm not suggesting that it has to be a "you're either for us or against us" proposition, but in these times, at least it seems to me, one needs to clarify their own position, not only for others, but mainly for themselves.


Being both a critic and "Scientology supporter" comes from an ability to see both the good and bad in something.

EVERY organization that is composed of human beings (thetans with bodies?) has issues. Governments, churches, Rotary clubs, fast food restaurants, etc.

Not so long ago, some of the people who called themselves Christians used to rape, torture and burn "innocent" people if they didn't agree with Christian tenets and practices.

Throughout history, millions of people have been tortured and/or murdered for not "believing" like the next guy or girl.

And the Christian church has somehow survived. So has the Catholic church...and a sizeable percentage of the current adherents, imho, would do many of those same things if they could get away with it. Like bombing abortion clinics, "fag bashing", waging wars/crusades against non-believers, etc.

Amazing, eh?

What if the Church of Scientology engaged in similar things?

I think Scientology technology is fascinating and valuable. I think L. Ron Hubbard was brilliant.

When I was on ARC S/W and Grade 0, I handled some things that really needed handling in my life. I think other people could similarly benefit from this technology and I think Earth would be much more fun and beautiful if more people got auditing (and/or smoked weed and ate mushrooms occasionally).

But, like some, do I fully and blindly support the CofS? Of course not.

Or like others, do I fully and blindly rail against the CofS? Of course not.

Additionally, I think anon is simply a fashion trend. And many of the "newfags" are being played. They don't even know what they are out there protesting. Just "going along for the ride"...

When the CofS covers it's windows to block out protestors....it's, "Oh, look at that!! Where is hiding on the Tone Scale?"

When a group of people wear masks and protest something which they claim they really believe in, it's "We are protecting ourselves from the evil and nasty CofS."

Or is it just for the "lulz" (as many anon have claimed) and a toying with Axiom 10?

Clearly a double standard going on in some camps.

The CofS does do some good. And does some bad as well.

Absolutes are unobtainable and nothing and no one is perfect.

But some of us think we are.

[Emma]

I never thought of you as a critic Bjorkist.

[PirateAndBum]

Take your time and come to your own decision. Sometimes I post deliberately provocatively to prod people to think for themselves because old Ronnie discouraged us to! :D

To clarify, yes, I believe Ron had evil intentions, the evidence is there in his "admissions" and his secret GO policies.

As to "it's all a con" I would say it is all a con based upon "truth" or "workability". That is what is so insideous about it.

I even think there is the possibility that Ron's evil intentions were suppressed or under control from the mid-fifties to mid-sixties. Maybe MSH was an influence in this period before she was overwhelmed by his evil and became the implementor of his psychosis (The Controller).

Maybe his evil was never under control and he was just pretending, I don't think we will ever know. During the period up to KSW, Scn definitely developed techniques that appeared to have benefit. That is why it takes so long to de-program ourselves.

Good luck in your exit from the cult and take your time. :)

I appreciate your posts LH. They have been very helpful. As have the posts of many others here. This board's purpose is being well-fulfilled. The discussion that goes on here can be found nowhere else on the net.

Some Guy, I appreciate your posting. Hopefully Anon will not lose interest after Mar 15th. May 9th (anniversary of Dianetics - a major event) will follow soon thereafter. What I do know is, we, the exes will not lose interest. This board will continue to help those leaving. Most public Scientologists will deal with leaving just fine. Long-time SO members and org staffs will probably have a much more difficult time of it. But they have many friends. There are more exes than in's. We are legion :)

I continue to sift and sort.

Emma, I just want to whole-heartedly thank you again for putting this board here for us all. :arose: :heartflower:

[Alanzo]

Being both a critic and "Scientology supporter" comes from an ability to see both the good and bad in something.

EVERY organization that is composed of human beings (thetans with bodies?) has issues. Governments, churches, Rotary clubs, fast food restaurants, etc.

Not so long ago, some of the people who called themselves Christians used to rape, torture and burn "innocent" people if they didn't agree with Christian tenets and practices.

Throughout history, millions of people have been tortured and/or murdered for not "believing" like the next guy or girl.

And the Christian church has somehow survived. So has the Catholic church...and a sizeable percentage of the current adherents, imho, would do many of those same things if they could get away with it. Like bombing abortion clinics, "fag bashing", waging wars/crusades against non-believers, etc.

Amazing, eh?

What if the Church of Scientology engaged in similar things?

I think Scientology technology is fascinating and valuable. I think L. Ron Hubbard was brilliant.

When I was on ARC S/W and Grade 0, I handled some things that really needed handling in my life. I think other people could similarly benefit from this technology and I think Earth would be much more fun and beautiful if more people got auditing (and/or smoked weed and ate mushrooms occasionally).

But, like some, do I fully and blindly support the CofS? Of course not.

Or like others, do I fully and blindly rail against the CofS? Of course not.

Additionally, I think anon is simply a fashion trend. And many of the "newfags" are being played. They don't even know what they are out there protesting. Just "going along for the ride"...

When the CofS covers it's windows to block out protestors....it's, "Oh, look at that!! Where is hiding on the Tone Scale?"

When a group of people wear masks and protest something which they claim they really believe in, it's "We are protecting ourselves from the evil and nasty CofS."

Or is it just for the "lulz" (as many anon have claimed) and a toying with Axiom 10?

Clearly a double standard going on in some camps.

The CofS does do some good. And does some bad as well.

Absolutes are unobtainable and nothing and no one is perfect.

But some of us think we are.

You didn't list any specific thing you think should be changed in the CofS.

I'm curious to see what you would support in terms of specific reforms of CofS, or Scientology.

Anything?

[Zinjifar]

You didn't list any specific thing you think should be changed in the CofS.

I'm curious to see what you would support in terms of specific reforms of CofS, or Scientology.

Anything?

I think Bjorky's position is that Scientology should be left alone. People can like it or not like it, but, if they don't like it, they should just stay away and let it do it's 'thing', without opposing it or 'nattering' about it.

Unsurprisingly, this is the position of the 'Church' itself; at least until the 'Church' is in a position to *mandate* a more inclusive social control :)

Zinj

[Escalus]

Absolutes are unobtainable

Is that Absolute?

I lose patience with people who tell me that my criticisms are nothing but "nattering" and that Hubbard was brilliant in the same breath.

Somebody is still drinking the koolaid around here I'm thinkin.

[Björkist]

I never thought of you as a critic Bjorkist.

I never thought of myself as one either...I was responding partially to:


I know of people who have tried to occupy several position at once i.e. critic, scientologist, freezoner etc and done a kind of juggling act to keep it all together.

While it has clearly never been easy to perform the mental gymnastics necessary to maintain these opposing positions simuntaneously, it is now bordering on impossible.

I was making the argument that situations involving people are almost never as cut and dried as certain mathematics or philosophical styles would lead a person to believe. There are an infinity of gradients. There is good and bad to be found in everyone and everything.

Are you a Democrat or Republican? Neither? Are there any good points that those parties have? Any bad ones? Just a matter of viewpoint?


You didn't list any specific thing you think should be changed in the CofS.

I'm curious to see what you would support in terms of specific reforms of CofS, or Scientology.

Anything?

As covered earlier, I am of the "Doubting Thomas" variety. I hear these interesting stories from someone like BFG and I can choose to just accept it or take it with a grain of salt. I don't disbelieve it, but I don't do the opposite and believe it either. Anything is possible.

Personally, some of the nicest people I have met are Scientologists....and some of the rudest I have met are critics of Scientology. ???

IF those things I read about are happening (such as forced abortions, incidents like musical chairs, the SP Hall, etc.) then, those needs addressing. IF it isn't happening, that's great.

I think the truth lies somewhere in between the two extremes with occasional forays into each. But really, until I experience it...even second hand through videos, pictures, audio...I am just accepting what someone else has to tell me about things...and anyone can do that. I've known some who actually make a lifestyle of it.

Like my mother, she claimed to have had a bad incident with a person with "dark skin" and subsequently gobbled up anything that supported her serv fac about anyone of African descent. Go figure.

As I said in another post, some critics get frothing when I, and likely some others, don't just accept their stories as gospel.

They don't seem to understand that when I read a success story from someone in CofS that I don't blindly accept that either...

Why isn't that fact argument fodder as well?


Is that Absolute?

I lose patience with people who tell me that my criticisms are nothing but "nattering" and that Hubbard was brilliant in the same breath.

Somebody is still drinking the koolaid around here I'm thinkin.

It's relatively absolute. And you are the one who said your criticisms are nothing but nattering. Not I.

Escalus, you'll be right at home with a couple of others who like to imagine and claim that I say things I didn't really say.

I agree. It does indeed look like someone is drinking the hallucination/delusion inducing koolaid.

http://ipl.pipnet.com/eggs/koolaid-large.jpg

[Escalus]

It's relatively absolute.

That, dear soul, can't be done. It is either absolute or it is not. If it has to be relative to something then it includes an exception somewhere outside of what it is relative to. And if it is an exception then it is not an absolute.

If "Absolutes are unobtainable" isn't absolute, then what is it? Or are you saying the statement is true because the statement is false?

And then you wonder why people don't understand what you're saying?

[Björkist]

That, dear soul, can't be done. It is either absolute or it is not. If it has to be relative to something then it includes an exception somewhere outside of what it is relative to. And if it is an exception then it is not an absolute.

If "Absolutes are unobtainable" isn't absolute, then what is it? Or are you saying the statement is true because the statement is false?

And then you wonder why people don't understand what you're saying?

It's called a joke.

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

[Escalus]

One of the prerequisites of a joke is humor, and this is not an answer.

[Voltaire's Child]

I disagree with the idea that it is difficult or takes any mental gymnastics to be a critic, Freezoner, Scientologist, etc.

I know people who are critics and Freezoners.

I don't know that Alan Walters refers to himself as a Scientologist at all- I rather think he doesn't- but he does give props to Scn tech and he certainly has written very scathing criticisms of not just CofS, but of Hubbard himself.
Same with Paul/Dull Old Fart. In fact, some of the most scathing indictments I've seen of Hubbard and of Scn "tech" and "policy" were from Freezoners and Indie Scientologists- many of those indictments posted on EMSB. That makes those individuals critics as well. Some of the posts I've seen from non CofS independents surprised the hell out of me- though, in a positive way.

I think there's an inherent hazard in trying to fit people into neat little boxes and affixing labels to them. People tend to be more than one thing at the same time. Not even all Democrats or Republicans or Socialists agree on all issues. And so it goes in life.

[Voltaire's Child]

Bjorkist,

Fantastic post! :goodposting: :cheerleader:

[Escalus]

Until the day comes when Freezoners attempt to restrict criticism by intimidation and gestapo tactics I have no problem with them even though I think they're building a sand castle on top of swampland. Probably because they have gotten out from under the influence of Hubbard's psychotic meanderings and paranoid inheritor henchmen they will never engage in that kind of bullshit. And in that case they have every right to explore and pursue and carry on to their hearts' content under any normal protection for the sanctity of individual conscience like anybody else.

The problem is that I seem to have come upon this entire discussion at a period sometime after some have already accepted the fact that the "tech" has merit.

The "tests" that Hubbard "ran" to parse out Dianetics were nonstandard, faulty, poorly documented (if documented at all) and present the appearence of having been made out of whole cloth. I would refer you to the reaction to the ridiculous claims Hubbard made at the outset of his adventure by somewhat more credible points of view. (http://www.lermanet.com/scientific.htm)

Scientology seems to have developed after it was "discovered" that engrams from this life didn't fix enough conditions. The next logic step was to look at past lives and the engrams in them.

As a "religion" Scientology has every right to exist and should be protected as such. But from a scientific viewpoint, and the hysteria of sharing a group's imagined phenomenon notwithstanding, why haven't anyone - Scientologist or Freezoner, gone on and made their million?

It's waiting for you. (http://www.randi.org/research/index.html)

[Zinjifar]

The problem is that I seem to have come upon this entire discussion at a period sometime after some have already accepted the fact that the "tech" has merit.


Emphasis on 'some'. As of last 'poll', the answer was better than 50% ' It's all crap' to minorities of 'Some of it is good' and 'It's just the 'Church' screwing things up!'

Considering the makeup of the board, it's not surprising that even the 'It's All Crap' people don't push the issue when the 'Tech Is Good' people attempt to insinuate that their 'position' is the 'standard' one :)

This may be confusing for newcomers, especially of the 'anon' flavor, who come away with the impression that the board itself 'believes' that 'The Tech' is good.

No; ESMB believes nothing and no more 'supports' the 'Tech' than anon supports various namefags with their own agendas.

It's a forum where people can discuss anything they want, especially Scientology related; tell their stories and enjoy each others' company. For the most part, nobody finds it necessary to point out that Aunt Suzie isn't *really* the Queen of England, and, even the queen's subjects are learning to live with the jokers and degraders who call her crown a lampshade.

More than any other venue I can think of, ESMB exists as an unabashed *social* venue, where 'reconnection' is more important than 'activism'.

Zinj

[Escalus]

It's a forum where people can discuss anything they want, especially Scientology related; tell their stories and enjoy each others' company. For the most part, nobody finds it necessary to point out that Aunt Suzie isn't *really* the Queen of England, and, even the queen's subjects are learning to live with the jokers and degraders who call her crown a lampshade.


I appreciate that and thanks Zinj. I'll admit my social skills need honing but after 54 years and many many usenets and discussion boards there are things I'm just probably not going to reform. Also it seems to me that in a part of that forum nominally titled as "evaluating/criticising Scientology" I'd expect a little more intellectual rigor than "oh look at the moon, it's made of cheese" as a viable argument for claims that the evaluation leads to great things.

If the moon is made of cheese I expect to have a right to have a bite with a little wine, and not have to kowtow to the kind of group think that infests the cult in the first place.

I'll be nice and pleasant in the other parts of the board even if, yes it's true I am quite an asshole. But in this section a lampshade ought to be a lampshade.

[Good twin]

You are welcome here as a thought provoking asshole. :yes: I completely understand your arguments. Some of us are embarrassed and ashamed about what we bought and sold. This forum allows us to talk about and analyze our own motives and beliefs. Otherwise, we feel totally alone. I truly appreciate your input. Thanks.

[Escalus]

Some of us are embarrassed and ashamed about what we bought and sold.

And thanks right back - really. But, listen, I bought it too. I'm ex-staff. The anger helps me. Heh...

[duddins]

Some of us are embarrassed and ashamed about what we bought and sold. This forum allows us to talk about and analyze our own motives and beliefs. Otherwise, we feel totally alone.


Thank you Good Twin! I could not agree with you more. :thumbsup:

[Voltaire's Child]

Well, ya know...

thinking the tech has merit isn't the same thing as accepting all of it slavishly as in encouraged in CofS.

I do know I've met non CofS Scn'ists who were somewhat dogmatic but on the whole, most of the ones I've met are pretty quick to bend the rules Hubbard set forth. In some cases, just bending of policy. But in other cases, lots of what I might call "tech bending". Lots of thinking beyond the lines.

I think the sand basis would apply more to those who aren't so open minded. (yes, I know, open minded is a dirty word in CofS. Hubbard didn't like it. But I like it!) And I realy don't think there's all that much of the closed minded fanatical by the book type stuff in the FZ. This is exactly why I don't think it takes a lot of mental gymnastics to be a Scn'ist and a critic.

In fact, the people I see who are most perplexed and who seem to need to do mental gymnastics on the subject are a number of critics who have written reams of posts accusing non CofS Scn'ists of Keeping Scientology Working, having Elron as a master, or saying they find it all too confusing. I've seen posts like that. Those are the people doing the mental gymnastics.

[Escalus]

In fact, the people I see who are most perplexed and who seem to need to do mental gymnastics on the subject are a number of critics who have written reams of posts accusing non CofS Scn'ists of Keeping Scientology Working, having Elron as a master, or saying they find it all too confusing. I've seen posts like that. Those are the people doing the mental gymnastics.

Mental gymnastics are also required when someone still can't quite let go of the "tech" despite the overwhelming evidence that it does not fulfill its promise. Not only did the guy who invented it die sick and demented but he had psych drugs in his system. Not to mention the continuous stream of "OTs" who want no part of the game anymore and the fact that it is quite obvious these "powerful beings" being generated by the cult confuse temper tantrums with control.

My point is not nuanced. Before I buy into it - or any part of it - (again) I need to see evidence. So far all I've seen since back on the scene is the residue of ideas that people are unwilling to let go of lest they fly off into madness out of their own shame or something.

[Lermanet_com]

So far all I've seen since back on the scene is the residue of ideas that people are unwilling to let go of lest they fly off into madness out of their own shame or something.


well said

and from Dr joost Meerloo:

"People with too many arguments should always be approached with suspicion. Dialectic and endless reasoning are usually used as resistance against disagreeable truths." http://www.lermanet.com/exit/mass-delusion-meerloo.htm


I was very much OUT of scientology's mindset by the time I found Joost Meerloo's insights. His books helped me dispense with the last pieces of rubbish, they are enjoyable and thought provoking reading. He is describing what he learned as a doctor from his experiences with the Nazis.. In his book Rape of the Mind http://www.Lermanet.com/scientology/ he describes the techniques used in a imaginary country called Totaliitaria. His books may have been the inspiration for Orwell's 1984.. - mentally theraputic reading

I don't post here often but here are today's posts I hope you get something out of them LINK (http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=4558) LINK (http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=4559)

[Smitty]

I don't think that corporate scientology is reformable.
Smitty

[OHTEEATE]

at this point, we are not going to be invited back to reform anything, so all we can do is apply pressure. This anonymous buzz is pressure. A true PR nightmare for the CofS. Corporate Scientology on public trial. Now , where is my napalm tank? This fire ain't hot enough!

[Dulloldfart]

This anonymous buzz is pressure. A true PR nightmare for the CofS. Corporate Scientology on public trial.

And, interestingly and usefully, the trial is mainly not in the mainstream media but on the Internet, with real-life effects fuelled by the Internet.

Kinda like the Ron Paul phenomenon.

Paul

[Voltaire's Child]

Mental gymnastics are also required when someone still can't quite let go of the "tech" despite the overwhelming evidence that it does not fulfill its promise. Not only did the guy who invented it die sick and demented but he had psych drugs in his system. Not to mention the continuous stream of "OTs" who want no part of the game anymore and the fact that it is quite obvious these "powerful beings" being generated by the cult confuse temper tantrums with control.

My point is not nuanced. Before I buy into it - or any part of it - (again) I need to see evidence. So far all I've seen since back on the scene is the residue of ideas that people are unwilling to let go of lest they fly off into madness out of their own shame or something.

It might seem that way to another individual who doesn't have the same thoughts on the matter.

For me, it's not really a matter of not being able to let go. It's not at all, for me, unthinkable that the tech isn't or might not be any good. I'd be totally up to admitting that were it not for my own experiences. I have nothing emotionally invested in the subject.

I also think that maybe different things hit different people different ways.

[ExScnDude]

From Answers.com

Dictionary: faith (fāth) pronunciation
faith

n.

1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See synonyms at belief, trust.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4. often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs.

Here's the problem. If you ask someone, "How do you know past lives exist?" then you get the response, "Because I know, because I remember." This is definition 1 and 2 above.

So the science vs. Scientology "technology" (a huge misnomer because most of it depends on faith) never ever resolves.

A large percentage of people (at least 10%) of the U.S. population believe that they regularly have a comm line in with the supreme being. "Well, how do you know it's true?" "I just know, I talk to God and he talks back."

Same category of evidence - inner knowledge.

How do you measure a being who has no place in space or time? You can't.

The scientific method applied to Scientology is pointless because most of what Scientologists believe are really matters of faith.

[Alanzo]

From Answers.com

Dictionary: faith (fāth) pronunciation
faith

n.

1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See synonyms at belief, trust.
3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4. often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6. A set of principles or beliefs.

Here's the problem. If you ask someone, "How do you know past lives exist?" then you get the response, "Because I know, because I remember." This is definition 1 and 2 above.

So the science vs. Scientology "technology" (a huge misnomer because most of it depends on faith) never ever resolves.

A large percentage of people (at least 10%) of the U.S. population believe that they regularly have a comm line in with the supreme being. "Well, how do you know it's true?" "I just know, I talk to God and he talks back."

Same category of evidence - inner knowledge.

How do you measure a being who has no place in space or time? You can't.

The scientific method applied to Scientology is pointless because most of what Scientologists believe are really matters of faith.

Granted, ESD.

BUT - IF you applied the scientific method :geekon:to the results of Scientology. Like "reaction time:treadmill:" "IQ :think:" (not using the same test over and over again) drug reversion :bong:, mind-reading :mindblow: , ExTeRiOriZaTiOn :runaround:, THEN it would not be pointless.

(emphasis mine)

[ExScnDude]

Granted, ESD.

BUT - IF you applied the scientific method :geekon:to the results of Scientology. Like "reaction time:treadmill:" "IQ :think:" (not using the same test over and over again) drug reversion :bong:, mind-reading :mindblow: , ExTeRiOriZaTiOn :runaround:, THEN it would not be pointless.

(emphasis mine)

Hey! Great use of the emoticons!

OK - maybe that could be arranged for the lower bridge - but it would be extremely tough to isolate enough life variables for the results of psychometric testing to be very reliable.

Do we make sure that no one in our control group wins the lottery during the time period of the experiment?

Does everyone get the same auditor?

You see where I'm going? How would you design such an experiment?

I don't think you would be able to pull this off without heavily controlling 100s of other variables.

[Escalus]

It might seem that way to another individual who doesn't have the same thoughts on the matter.

For me, it's not really a matter of not being able to let go. It's not at all, for me, unthinkable that the tech isn't or might not be any good. I'd be totally up to admitting that were it not for my own experiences. I have nothing emotionally invested in the subject.

I also think that maybe different things hit different people different ways.

I mean no disrespect. Everyone is free to the use of their own conscience. I don't think it works, but Judaism doesn't work for me either and I don't want to shout them down.

The bone I'm picking is with the Church of Scientology. I mean no harm to anyone who is finding anything of value in what they learned or gathered while part of it. I'll also loudly defend your right to believe as you do. That isn't my issue.

I'm merely addressing the nuts and bolts. Though, I must say, it seems to me that relative value puts the "tech" on a level with any normal religion. And I'm untroubled by that.

Now if we can get the Church of Scientology to feel the same way, I crawl back in my box. Sorry if I offended.

[ExScnDude]

I mean no disrespect. Everyone is free to the use of their own conscience. I don't think it works, but Judaism doesn't work for me either and I don't want to shout them down.

No worries. No disrespect was taken at all.


The bone I'm picking is with the Church of Scientology. I mean no harm to anyone who is finding anything of value in what they learned or gathered while part of it. I'll also loudly defend your right to believe as you do. That isn't my issue.

It was already totally clear that you meant no harm. I feel the same way. Let 'em believe whatever they want. No harm in questioning anyone's beliefs. If somebody gets upset when another questions their belief that men roamed the earth with the dinosaurs, well - one can only be more circumspect around certain folks if there's an interest in keeping the peace.


I'm merely addressing the nuts and bolts. Though, I must say, it seems to me that relative value puts the "tech" on a level with any normal religion. And I'm untroubled by that.

Same here. And I know followers of other religions who are easily as fanatical as some Scientologists are.


Now if we can get the Church of Scientology to feel the same way, I crawl back in my box. Sorry if I offended.

Exactly. But it will never happen as it is the same category of fanaticism that one finds in most any religion.

And you didn't offend. Enough already! Just kidding.

[Escalus]

Gee thanks fluffy!! :nervous:

[Voltaire's Child]

I like your posts, Escalus. I truly do.

Wouldn't it be dull if we all had the same take on everything?

Anyway, have a good evening, everyone, or whatever time of day it is wherever you are.

Gotta go. This fuzzy monitor (we think it's the monitor this tme and not the video card) is quite distracting. Time to peer into some other glass screen.

[Björkist]

In fact, the people I see who are most perplexed and who seem to need to do mental gymnastics on the subject are a number of critics who have written reams of posts accusing non CofS Scn'ists of Keeping Scientology Working, having Elron as a master, or saying they find it all too confusing. I've seen posts like that. Those are the people doing the mental gymnastics.


Hear ye, hear ye...

[jeannie36832]

I am Anonymous and I am in my 30's, female, mom. What Anon started as and what it has become are 2 different things. Yes, it started as a new technology(internet) understood by mostly younger people and it reflected those immature types of shenanigans. But as the Internet grows and more and more diverse types of people ride the information highway, the dynamics of Anonymous change.
Anonymous is a collective mind that polices itself, and as it becomes larger and more diverse, it also becomes more tolerant and protective of individual freedoms. I am one of MANY moms in Anonymous and we are listened to when our advice is sound, being a mom in Anonymous does not make me "uncool" (since I am a really cool Internet Mom:happydance: ).
The dangers that you are afraid of, just cannot happen. We don't know each other and we are not influenced by any one individual vying for power, as anything of that nature would be shouted down IMMEDIATELY. If someone proposed violence and it WASN'T shouted down, most Anonymous members would disconnect from it, thereby removing the power that Anonymous currently enjoys and leaving behind a bunch of idiots asking "Where did everybody go?"
It is for this reason, that I see Anonymous as democracy in its truest form guided by the morality of the majority and not by the idiocy of a few bad apples.
I don't agree with the tone that the other anon took in his posts, but I feel that tone was due to his ignorance and he WAS looking for information that would have helped him to understand and moderate his posts a little better.

[Voltaire's Child]

I don't know that I believe in a collective mind,but I do know that people can put their efforts together and share opinions.Anon has accomplished much. This will be an interesting year.

Please do not go into politics.

Thank you.

[namaste]

Thanks jeannie.

Personally, I wasn't too worried about it.

If reason for concern were to arise in the future, and I doubt it will, then that would be the time to deal with it.

[Pliny Younger]

I have to say that this was a great thread to read.

I quietly left the church mid 80s. I was pissed. Didn't want to have anything to do with it or the tech. They church can still disappear as far as I am concerned. I walked away from the tech, but I have moved back towards it in recent months in a small way. I think that something in the early days of SCN was magic. Back at a time when regular people interacted and contributed to the processes, back when there wasn't one source, Back before there was the Sea Org or ethics. Back when there was no fear in trying something and upon success, sharing it with others without ethics getting involved.

I can't believe Hubbard baited a trap with something that just didn't work from the beginning.

And as far as Anonymous goes. From what I have seen from their actions and the interaction I have had with them, they are OK in my book. Their involvement with SCN has helped create one of the greatest times in the EX movement that there has been. Public awareness is higher than it's ever been on what the church IS. I don't know how long they'll be around, but I'd rather it be years than weeks or months.

This site has some of the most amazing contributors.

[uncle sam]

People use the words religion and church in reference to scientology - what misnomers! It's a barely sustainable cult. That makes it way by cannibalizing the poor souls unfortunate to step into it's web.
The only possible reason one still has an affinity for it lies in the few wins you got and the people you met. Otherwise why is it not a dominate part of everyday life across the globe for everybody, because it is a terrible organization run by diabolical egomaniacs enabled by non-thinking minions. I'm sorry about sugar coating my comments but growing up in the south we were raised if you can't say something nice just don't say anything at all.

[Voltaire's Child]

Well, I think CofS is a cult, too. I agree.

As for religion, well, I'm not madly in love with that word as applied to the Scn methodology/belief set myself...kinda prefer applied religious philosophy for that bit.

[Long Gone John]

There has never been a time like this.

Things are coming to a head. You can see it and feel it. It's tangible.

In past times it has been kind of ok to have a foot in more than one camp. I know of people who have tried to occupy several position at once i.e. critic, scientologist, freezoner etc and done a kind of juggling act to keep it all together.

So where do you stand?

I don't see how it is possible anymore to simultaneously be a critic and a Scientology supporter. I think it is time to make your position clear.




Worth a bump I thought.

[Voltaire's Child]

People use the words religion and church in reference to scientology - what misnomers! It's a barely sustainable cult. That makes it way by cannibalizing the poor souls unfortunate to step into it's web.
The only possible reason one still has an affinity for it lies in the few wins you got and the people you met. Otherwise why is it not a dominate part of everyday life across the globe for everybody, because it is a terrible organization run by diabolical egomaniacs enabled by non-thinking minions. I'm sorry about sugar coating my comments but growing up in the south we were raised if you can't say something nice just don't say anything at all.

CofS is a cult. And it happens to also be recognized as a church in the US. This may change, it may lose its status...I'm not sure if it will, but it would be interesting, if it did. But something can be a bad church, you know. I think there are bad churches and good churches. I think there could even be good cults and bad cults!

And religion- well, groups aren't religions. They only purvey them.

[Lucretia]

This is my second post.... I am new to this forum, but I have been in Scn for 30 years.

I joined staff in 1978. In my third week on post (no hatting!) I was put in a condition of liability because my stats were down 3 weeks running. I had to stay in the org all night and mop and polish all the floors. This was on top of working day and foundation hours, which a lot of small orgs did back then, and working on weekends to eat.

I was told in the 80's, a few years after I blew staff that things had changed, there was no more hard ethics, no more face ripping, etc, that it was all nice and cosey. I was given a leaving staff confessional and put into another condition because I was found to dramatising OT3 case phenomena on post.

In the 90's I was told that things had changed, there were no more hard ethics, no face ripping, all nice and cosey, and that I should come back on course. But, after a few months, the Academy only had 2 students and per policy, I was one of the culprits. It was my fault that the Academy was empty..... because.....oh who knows why. Another condition, plus a non-enturbulation order from a sea org missionaire...etc. This is a very very short precis.

My point is, particularly after reading about those poor bastards in the RPF, but actually all Scn staff, that the organization should dissolve. Nothing will change in Scn. Promises were made under Bill Franks, and certainly were made under Miscavaige, but green on white will prevail and will be abused because the ends always justifies the means. The organization cannot be any more than it is today or was in the 70's 80's and 90's. It is fundamentally flawed.

Besides, who is going to remake the organization. It will not be a committee of dispassionate people. If anybody, it will be another fanatic who can only see Scn as the only way out of the trap, and this person will be as bad and mad as all those who have come before.

I think that Scn has to be exposed, and destroyed. The good that is in Scn will be picked up and applied. I doubt that the workable tech will ever be lost. But the evil that is the current organization should be blasted to the four winds.






My point with this is - it does not matter however much

[Free to shine]

This is my second post.... I am new to this forum, but I have been in Scn for 30 years.

I joined staff in 1978. In my third week on post (no hatting!) I was put in a condition of liability because my stats were down 3 weeks running. I had to stay in the org all night and mop and polish all the floors. This was on top of working day and foundation hours, which a lot of small orgs did back then, and working on weekends to eat.

I was told in the 80's, a few years after I blew staff that things had changed, there was no more hard ethics, no more face ripping, etc, that it was all nice and cosey. I was given a leaving staff confessional and put into another condition because I was found to dramatising OT3 case phenomena on post.

In the 90's I was told that things had changed, there were no more hard ethics, no face ripping, all nice and cosey, and that I should come back on course. But, after a few months, the Academy only had 2 students and per policy, I was one of the culprits. It was my fault that the Academy was empty..... because.....oh who knows why. Another condition, plus a non-enturbulation order from a sea org missionaire...etc. This is a very very short precis.

My point is, particularly after reading about those poor bastards in the RPF, but actually all Scn staff, that the organization should dissolve. Nothing will change in Scn. Promises were made under Bill Franks, and certainly were made under Miscavaige, but green on white will prevail and will be abused because the ends always justifies the means. The organization cannot be any more than it is today or was in the 70's 80's and 90's. It is fundamentally flawed.

Besides, who is going to remake the organization. It will not be a committee of dispassionate people. If anybody, it will be another fanatic who can only see Scn as the only way out of the trap, and this person will be as bad and mad as all those who have come before.

I think that Scn has to be exposed, and destroyed. The good that is in Scn will be picked up and applied. I doubt that the workable tech will ever be lost. But the evil that is the current organization should be blasted to the four winds.

My point with this is - it does not matter however much

Welcome! I must say your experience sounds a lot like mine. :) Over a long span of years you hear the same bullshit over and over and OVER, when nothing has in fact changed for the better, only the worse. Each new crop of eager staff with "it's changed now" used to drive me nuts. I felt sorry for them, while still occasionally checking out if it was true....my mistake. It never was.

I would love to hear your story!

[Lucretia]

Thank you Free to Shine. My story is probably like everybody else's. I came on board because I had been helped and wanted to help others in turn. I also swallowed KSW hook, line and sinker! More fool me! I also wanted to be superman! lol.

[Free to shine]

Thank you Free to Shine. My story is probably like everybody else's. I came on board because I had been helped and wanted to help others in turn. I also swallowed KSW hook, line and sinker! More fool me! I also wanted to be superman! lol.

I think all stories are different, only the themes are constant. :) When people are undecided, it helps to find stories of people and places they have known, I know it did for me.

ps Being Supergirl would have done it for me. :duh:

[Bea Kiddo]

AMEN Lucretia!!! Well said.

Welcome to the board!!!! :thumbsup:

[Pixie]

I am a freezoner as well as Roland and we know Ron did a lot of wrong and I think I got the why of it too. I admit he made a mess of things as well as did a lot of good. Almost like there were two people there.
Two people there? Isn't that a sign of scizophrenia? With respect to you..

[Pixie]

Thank you Free to Shine. My story is probably like everybody else's. I came on board because I had been helped and wanted to help others in turn. I also swallowed KSW hook, line and sinker! More fool me! I also wanted to be superman! lol.
Hi there, welcome to you, I'm new here also. It's not that your story is 'like everyone elses', it's that it all affects us differently because after all we are all individuals and not the drones we were led to believe we were. It's the 'affect' it's had, not necesserlity what happened to you. I can still barely talk about my story because when I read other's stories I don't feel I have the right to complain as there are always others stories that sound worse, but that's not true, there's no worse or better story, all the stories are heartwrenching, and the only way we'll be able to get over what happened, how badly we were lied to, tricked, the sense of loss, is to talk and share our stories. We were all fooled Luctrecia, we all wanted to help too and there's a point where we all feel like idiots, becoming less of a robot and allowing emotions to be just that - emotions, can be overwhelming, but cleansing and healing. I wish you well and we're all here for each other.. Warmest..

[Mark A. Baker]

Two people there? Isn't that a sign of scizophrenia? With respect to you..

No, Roland is an auditor who has helped Fancy for some time. You owe her an apology for your insulting remarks.


Mark A. Baker

[lionheart]

No, Roland is an auditor who has helped Fancy for some time. You owe her an apology for your insulting remarks.


Mark A. Baker

Where is the insult? Fancy said it was almost like Ron was two people. This ties in with several observations that people have made of Ron. Our new poster Pixie asked politely if that was a "sign of scizophrenia"

Why are you saying an apology is owed? I don't get it.

[Fancy]

Look up the words and read them as I post them not by what you mind thinks what I am saying through your glasses that you were that is anti.

I was very clear. If you read this forum enough you would know Roland who is AMI posts here.

Barb

[lionheart]

I am a freezoner as well as Roland and we know Ron did a lot of wrong and I think I got the why of it too. I admit he made a mess of things as well as did a lot of good. Almost like there were two people there.


Two people there? Isn't that a sign of scizophrenia? With respect to you..


Look up the words and read them as I post them not by what you mind thinks what I am saying through your glasses that you were that is anti.

I was very clear. If you read this forum enough you would know Roland who is AMI posts here.

Barb
Sorry, I just don't get it. I'm not being critical and I did read your words. Which I've copied again, above. Where is the insult? :confused2:

You said Ron was like two people, Pixie asked if that was a sign of scizophrenia. Where's the insult? :confused2:

If I'm missing something, please somebody explain it to me, otherwise I think Mark should apologise to our new ESMB member Pixie.

[Pliny Younger]

If I'm missing something, please somebody explain it to me, otherwise I think Mark should apologise to our new ESMB member Pixie.

LH, I concur. I don't see anything insulting from Pixie has occurred. The written word, for that matter the spoken word don't always work so well amongst us humans.

[gomorrhan]

Sense of touch never fails, though.

[Voltaire's Child]

Just a misunderstanding amongst nice people.

[Mark A. Baker]

Two people there? Isn't that a sign of scizophrenia? With respect to you..

I'm not feeling especially well today and as a result I'm still unclear on Pixie's post.

If her comment was NOT directed at Fancy, she indeed has my sincere apologies for thinking it was.


Mark A. Baker

[Veda]

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=61047&postcount=19

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmziDR3f4PA

[Neo]

I'm not feeling especially well today and as a result I'm still unclear on Pixie's post.

If her comment was NOT directed at Fancy, she indeed has my sincere apologies for thinking it was.

Mark A. Baker

That's very big of you Mark. :)

My take on it, is that Pixie was referring not to Fancy. More a comment on the post, or the subject of the post. I don't believe she was meaning insult, merely just trying to communicate, in a new environment.

[Royal Prince Xenu]

Sorry, I just don't get it. I'm not being critical and I did read your words. Which I've copied again, above. Where is the insult? :confused2:

You said Ron was like two people, Pixie asked if that was a sign of scizophrenia. Where's the insult? :confused2:

If I'm missing something, please somebody explain it to me, otherwise I think Mark should apologise to our new ESMB member Pixie.

Fluffy's words of wisdom: "Just a misunderstanding amongst nice people," are how I try to deal with any argument, but I must point out that Schizophrenia is not dual or multiple personality.

When you talk to God, it's called praying.
When God talks to you, it's called schizophrenia.

This condition means that a person reacts to non-existent stimuli, and in some severe cases the data between the senses and the mind/brain gets so scrambled that they become almost autistic. (Severe withdrawal and no reach.)

[Pixie]

No, Roland is an auditor who has helped Fancy for some time. You owe her an apology for your insulting remarks.


Mark A. Baker

:omg: Oh my god! I never meant to insult anyone, I swear! You see, I'm still getting into trouble! I apologise profusely if I've hurt anyones' feelings, this is not nor ever will be my intention. I have only been on this site a couple of days although I did register last October. Perhaps I misunderstood someone somewhere along the line, I most definatly didn't mean to offend anyone and if anyone is offended, please forgive me and accept my apologies. I am not hear to hurt ANYONE, I am here to help myself heal and to talk with other's that have had similar experiences to mine, that's all. Sorry again.:bigcry:

[Pixie]

Originally Posted by lionheart
Sorry, I just don't get it. I'm not being critical and I did read your words. Which I've copied again, above. Where is the insult?

You said Ron was like two people, Pixie asked if that was a sign of scizophrenia. Where's the insult?

If I'm missing something, please somebody explain it to me, otherwise I think Mark should apologise to our new ESMB member Pixie.

Oh god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just had THE most horrendous 'restim', don't know any other words for it, but this is the way it was for me for ten years in, always getting into trouble, always, constantly in ethics for I don't know what and it's come to the stage that I am STILL just apologising instead of questioning what all that was about. Lionheart you are right, I just didn't know what scizophrenia was, I really was just under the impression that it was two people like she said about LRH, I am so glad someone picked up what I meant and I'm really so glad that you realized I was not trying to hurt anyone. Thank you again.. this is just awful, I feel terrible, getting a bad name in here too, I just don't know where to go now. This is why I didn't want my eyes open in the first place, I was always stuck in doubt until I realized that I got stuck on 'attack harm suppress or help', I decided just to leave well alone but my eyes were still tightly shut. Now I know it's a con, and I'm just trying to unravel it, not hurt anyone, thank you:bigcry:

[Neo]

:omg: Oh my god! I never meant to insult anyone, I swear! You see, I'm still getting into trouble!

Don't worry too much about it. It's the intention that counts, and I think your intention was clear. But it happens :melodramatic:

As for getting into trouble, well it can make for interesting situations. Perhaps its just the result of having tried, or had a go. Live and learn, and all that stuff :p

[lionheart]

:omg: Oh my god! I never meant to insult anyone, I swear! You see, I'm still getting into trouble! I apologise profusely if I've hurt anyones' feelings, this is not nor ever will be my intention. I have only been on this site a couple of days although I did register last October. Perhaps I misunderstood someone somewhere along the line, I most definatly didn't mean to offend anyone and if anyone is offended, please forgive me and accept my apologies. I am not hear to hurt ANYONE, I am here to help myself heal and to talk with other's that have had similar experiences to mine, that's all. Sorry again.:bigcry:

You have nothing to apologise for. I think most people see that you were simply misunderstood.

Please don't let this misunderstanding put you off being on ESMB. You should have been given more leeway to find your feet in my opinion, which is why I stepped in.

And anyway you did nothing wrong. Sometimes we ex-scns can be a little over-sensitive. This is a healing process that everyone is going through and your presence is as welcome and as vital as anybody else.

Please no apologies. Tell us more about yourself and hopefully you will find a caring supportive environment for your unique experience. :)

[Neo]

Oh god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just had THE most horrendous 'restim', don't know any other words for it, but this is the way it was for me for ten years in, always getting into trouble, always, constantly in ethics for I don't know what and it's come to the stage that I am STILL just apologising instead of questioning what all that was about. Lionheart you are right, I just didn't know what scizophrenia was, I really was just under the impression that it was two people like she said about LRH, I am so glad someone picked up what I meant and I'm really so glad that you realized I was not trying to hurt anyone.

Now this I completely get. Just be you, if others want to play their controlling games - ethics, make wrongs etc, whatever.


Thank you again.. this is just awful, I feel terrible, getting a bad name in here too, I just don't know where to go now. This is why I didn't want my eyes open in the first place, I was always stuck in doubt until I realized that I got stuck on 'attack harm suppress or help', I decided just to leave well alone but my eyes were still tightly shut. Now I know it's a con, and I'm just trying to unravel it, not hurt anyone, thank you:bigcry:

Yes, it can be confusing, unraveling all the mess. My advice - just take your time, see how you go. If an honest comment or question upsets another, its either a simple misunderstanding, or they have an issue, and its their issue.

Keep posting. It does help :)

[Pixie]

Originally Posted by Mark A. Baker
I'm not feeling especially well today and as a result I'm still unclear on Pixie's post.

If her comment was NOT directed at Fancy, she indeed has my sincere apologies for thinking it was.

Mark A. Baker

Please don't worry Mark, no I wasn't trying to direct anything at anyone, I was possibly just reading and reading all sorts and trying to navigate my way around and just asked a question, didn't mean to hurt anyone so no worries, just a misunderstanding. I don't feel anyone is here to hurt or upset anyone, I think we've all been upset enough considering what's we've been through without trying to make things worse for each other. Now worries, it's all forgotten.:)

[SchwimmelPuckel]

..but I must point out that Schizophrenia is not dual or multiple personality.

When you talk to God, it's called praying.
When God talks to you, it's called schizophrenia.

This condition means that a person reacts to non-existent stimuli, and in some severe cases the data between the senses and the mind/brain gets so scrambled that they become almost autistic. (Severe withdrawal and no reach.)Thank's for clearing that up! :) - So.. Multiple Personality Disorder.. Is that a correct term?

What with BT's then? - If Hubbard was right and they do exist then he had MPD. Did he have MPD if he 'believed' in them?

Amuses me that Psychiatry prpobably don't have any remedy for MPD with thousands of 'personalities'.

:roflmao:

[Pixie]

Now this I completely get. Just be you, if others want to play their controlling games - ethics, make wrongs etc, whatever.



Yes, it can be confusing, unraveling all the mess. My advice - just take your time, see how you go. If an honest comment or question upsets another, its either a simple misunderstanding, or they have an issue, and its their issue.

Keep posting. It does help :)

I can't stop crying, I don't think it's a good idea even to trawl over the whole thing again really. It's possibly better to just let it all go and move on with my life anyway. I can't handle it. But I really do appreciate your support. Thank you so much

[Neo]

I can't stop crying, I don't think it's a good idea even to trawl over the whole thing again really. It's possibly better to just let it all go and move on with my life anyway. I can't handle it. But I really do appreciate your support. Thank you so much

:thumbsup:

[lionheart]

You have found the place to be Pixie! :thumbsup:

Have a bad name, have a good name! Outside the Scientology brainwashing you can have whatever name you like! You are FREE!!! :happydance:

[SchwimmelPuckel]

I can't stop crying, I don't think it's a good idea even to trawl over the whole thing again really. It's possibly better to just let it all go and move on with my life anyway. I can't handle it. But I really do appreciate your support. Thank you so muchNow really! - Pixie! You did not offend anyone. I understood perfectly what you meant by your post.

Was Mark A. Baker misunderstanding you. Tell him he's an a-hole hoarding his thunderingly crashing MU's and unspeakably terrible O/W's! - And laugh at it!

:yes:

[Veda]

"The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder LRH."

Judge Paul G. Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court, 1984.

When something or someone is called schizophrenic or schizoid, in a non-medical evaluation, I think most people know what is meant, just as when someone says something or someone is "crazy."

It's a perfectly valid description and observation.

Here's an excerpt from L. Ron Hubbard's 1938 'Mission Statement'. How sane does this sound?

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=80902&postcount=43



http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3259371816247292100&q=smilentology&total=7&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

[Tanstaafl]

I can't stop crying, I don't think it's a good idea even to trawl over the whole thing again really. It's possibly better to just let it all go and move on with my life anyway. I can't handle it. But I really do appreciate your support. Thank you so much

Pixie, many of us have had little tiffs and misunderstandings and are still firm friends - it's just part of life. I was talking with Lionheart about this the other day and we agreed that if everyone was sharing a few beers around a big table this stuff would very rarely happen. It takes a while to get to know people's individual styles, buttons, etc.

We're all friends here and you are now as much a part of ESMB as any of us.
Keep posting! :yes:

[Pixie]

You have found the place to be Pixie! :thumbsup:

Have a bad name, have a good name! Outside the Scientology brainwashing you can have whatever name you like! You are FREE!!! :happydance:

LFBD! Phew!! Thank you, didn't expect it all to be like this, this is really hard, someone said earlier that ex scientologists can be a little sentitive, well I think that's very true. For me anyway I do too read into things that are sometimes not even there so I'm not blaming anyone for anything here, but it would hurt me more if I thought I'd hurt anyone as I said before we've all been so hurt already and we all for sure did our best at the time. Thank you, I'll just read and try to chill for a while.. thank you.:yes:

[lionheart]

This misunderstanding was a great lesson for all of us, to remember that we are here as part of "recovering from a cult experience" to quote Emma's strap-line.

Sometimes gentleness is definitely needed. Especially with newbies while they find their feet. Later we can rough each other up a little! :roflmao:

[Tanstaafl]

This misunderstanding was a great lesson for all of us, to remember that we are here as part of "recovering from a cult experience" to quote Emma's strap-line.

Sometimes gentleness is definitely needed. Especially with newbies while they find their feet. Later we can rough each other up a little! :roflmao:

Good post. :)

[Neo]

When something or someone is called schizophrenic or schizoid, in a non-medical evaluation, I think most people know what is meant, just as when someone says something or someone is "crazy."

It's a perfectly valid description and observation.

Yes, agreed. Quite simple, perhaps too simple, for some :p



http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3259371816247292100&q=smilentology&total=7&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1


Smilentology :dieslaughing:

Damn thats funny

[Pixie]

Pixie, many of us have had little tiffs and misunderstandings and are still firm friends - it's just part of life. I was talking with Lionheart about this the other day and we agreed that if everyone was sharing a few beers around a big table this stuff would very rarely happen. It takes a while to get to know people's individual styles, buttons, etc.

We're all friends here and you are now as much a part of ESMB as any of us.
Keep posting! :yes:


Thank you so much for your support all of you, I appreciate this more than you know.. I'm just a bit overwhelmed just now really, I guess that just hit a huge button, because I always told my own truth when I was on staff and tried to keep things right as per the 'tech and policies' etc but was still always make wrong and couldn't understand why this was so I guess this is my issue for being oversensitive and totally overrun on having a 'bad name' and being a 'trouble maker' and 'out 2D' and 'out ethics', and 'PTS' and an 'SP' and 'too noisy' and a 'downstat' and 'too woggy'. I was none of the above, and I thought my crying was over, obviously not, anyway, yes, beers around the table, sounds good to me. Thanks again, I'm sure I'll get stronger and well, maybe get myself a really bad name:whistling: and not care!!!! :D Cos now as you say, I'm FREE to BE who I AM, and if they don't like it they can lump it, right? :nervous:

[Neo]

because I always told my own truth when I was on staff and tried to keep things right as per the 'tech and policies' etc but was still always make wrong and couldn't understand why this was so I guess this is my issue for being oversensitive and totally overrun on having a 'bad name' and being a 'trouble maker' and 'out 2D' and 'out ethics', and 'PTS' and an 'SP' and 'too noisy' and a 'downstat' and 'too woggy'. I was none of the above, and I thought my crying was over, obviously not, anyway, yes, beers around the table, sounds good to me. Thanks again, I'm sure I'll get stronger and well, maybe get myself a really bad name:whistling: and not care!!!! :D Cos now as you say, I'm FREE to BE who I AM, and if they don't like it they can lump it, right? :nervous:

I don't think your allowed on this message board unless you have been accused of all these things. So, welcome :p

[Tanstaafl]

Thank you so much for your support all of you, I appreciate this more than you know.. I'm just a bit overwhelmed just now really, I guess that just hit a huge button, because I always told my own truth when I was on staff and tried to keep things right as per the 'tech and policies' etc but was still always make wrong and couldn't understand why this was so I guess this is my issue for being oversensitive and totally overrun on having a 'bad name' and being a 'trouble maker' and 'out 2D' and 'out ethics', and 'PTS' and an 'SP' and 'too noisy' and a 'downstat' and 'too woggy'. I was none of the above, and I thought my crying was over, obviously not, anyway, yes, beers around the table, sounds good to me. Thanks again, I'm sure I'll get stronger and well, maybe get myself a really bad name:whistling: and not care!!!! :D Cos now as you say, I'm FREE to BE who I AM, and if they don't like it they can lump it, right? :nervous:

:thumbsup:
Be yourself, keep posting and all will be well. :)

[Pixie]

:hysterical: :bigcry:
Now really! - Pixie! You did not offend anyone. I understood perfectly what you meant by your post.

Was Mark A. Baker misunderstanding you. Tell him he's an a-hole hoarding his thunderingly crashing MU's and unspeakably terrible O/W's! - And laugh at it!

:yes:
:bigcry:

That's so funny, thank you so much. Well he did misunderstand me but perhaps I wasn't clear enough. Thanks again.. :)

[Pixie]

I don't think your allowed on this message board unless you have been accused of all these things. So, welcome :p


:hysterical: Well in that case, I KNOW this is the right site for me! Thank you Neo, you're a star.

[Alanzo]

I don't think your allowed on this message board unless you have been accused of all these things. So, welcome :p

Neo is The One.

[Neo]

Neo is The One.

Morpheus, is that you?

:p

[Pixie]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3259371816247292100&q=smilentology&total=7&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1[/QUOTE]

Genius, absolute genius.. :dieslaughing: made my day!!

[Pixie]

This misunderstanding was a great lesson for all of us, to remember that we are here as part of "recovering from a cult experience" to quote Emma's strap-line.

Sometimes gentleness is definitely needed. Especially with newbies while they find their feet. Later we can rough each other up a little! :roflmao:

:hysterical: Yes, indeed, I look forward to a little roughing up! Roll on the day when I can handle you lot! :thumbsup:

[Tanstaafl]

Morpheus, is that you?

:p

Hah! Agent Bloody Smith, more like! :D