Golden Quotes from ESMB

[HelluvaHoax!]

...

Read this great post carefully.

There are some real gems in it!

This guy considered you to be a broken straw and came up with countless corrections, repairs and crammings to "fix" you...all that stuff is the Scientology holocaust because at the end of all that you find out you were fair gamed all along when you thought you were in good standing!

How is that? Well, in a 1967 policy titled Penalties for Lower Conditions, Hubbard wrote that opponents who are "fair game" may be "deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed."

But that is exactly what the holocaust of Scientology does to its members in good standing! It deprives them of property...tricks them...lies to them...destroys them...you get the picture.

If you DON'T get the picture...well, here it is...and it IS stupid!!



Fabian...you broken straws, you...

[SweetnessandLight]

First a quote from Leon:

"Originally Posted by Leon ~
I find TROM to be very illuminating in this regard. What Carmelo posted aligns exactly with what is described there, except only that Carmelo's unknown author is a lot more verbose and hard to access."

To which Carmelo replied:

"It's a word doc that I found on an old old old hard drive (probably early 1990s). for all I know the author is me. I think I try to save authors signatures on purloined writings. There wasn't a reference. I don't think this is Ted, Alan, John Mace, John McMaster, Jack Horner. I can't think who else would have written it, that I would save it with no attribution.

It led me to reconsider the discussion I had with Trouble the other day.

see (starting here)

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthrea...l=1#post694133

Synthetic valence is another word for "FAKE."

I have to say, I wasn't a dilettante Scientologist. I was a fake Scientologist. I personally never bought the full package. It (Scientology) was better in many regards than my own observations and abilities, but it asked for compromises in my perceptions and integrity that I only grudgingly made, and only in not rocking the boat. I held onto my versions of truth. I always saw myself as an outsider, not a real Scientologist. I held critical opinions of LRH and the tech and ethics stuff from day one.

Prior to Scientology a friend and I sat most days of the week for years, just looking at one another, without speaking. We got huge off that. We returned daily to a oneness with each other.

(It is nearly 2 AM, I wish I wouldn't have these dumb cognitions in the middle of the night)

TR0 was always confronting for me, never oneness. Always individuated. I knew it to be completely inferior to what my friend(s) and I did before Scientology.

When my friend, pictured above, decided to join the Sea Org, I offered to pay for her auditing and training if only she wouldn't join. It was quite important to me that she didn't join. She did anyway, and it was OK, she left several years later. We're still close friends and buddies.

When I was 15, I hit the truth **for myself** that love was the most important thing.

I never accepted survival as the basic principle of existence. It just wasn't true. Still isn't. It belongs on a scale, but so do death and taxes. BFD

The first time I saw / read goldenrod, I was appalled. I never got over my complete disagreement with that. I was a child of Stranger in a Strange Land. "Thou art god," was my mantra, not, "you are an SP and I'm OK."

I loved and continue to love auditing, but not all the auditing I saw was beneficial. OT 3 was, and remains to this day harmful at best.

Then there were the retaliatory actions taken on people when an auditor found something from a PC that bugged them. I had a girl friend, who got sent to ethics after she criticized an auditor's daughter. It was totally malicious.

This picture is my wife with a granddaughter.

When I had been "in" Scientology for about two years. I wasn't Clear yet. There was a girl about 5 or 6 (like the girl above), sparkly and nice, living with friends, because her parents were divorced. She used to sit on my knee, and I read to her. Then her dad took her away to the Apollo. She became a Commodore's Messenger. One night at 2 AM, she fell asleep outside Ron's room. he found her, and had her put in the chain lockers for several days. There is now and never was any way I could reconcile that action. The anger it triggers in me as I type this hasn't dissipated in 40 years.

So I got terrific gains, of a permanent nature from Scientology, but the best I could do was remain aloof, and be a fake. It is not good to go through life faking it.

[SweetnessandLight]

Originally Posted by Cowboy ~

"First and foremost, Scientology was a marketing effort.

I remember once discussing what the next "released" level should deal with. Hubbard said go out and do a survey as to what people's wants were, what was the ruin, most pressing on their minds? Whatever that was is what the next level's result would be. And just tell them, he explained, through his marketing genius, if they pc didn't achieve that result, advise the staff to tell them that the next level would achieve that result.

I left when I realized that even Hubbard himself was a far cry from any of the results promised through clearing and OT. It took me years to separate the promises from the reality. I saw him in his daily activities, through his own ups and downs, illnesses, losses, frustrations, rages. I twisted my mind trying to make the facts fit into the promises. It didn't work.

NED was developed because Dianetics didn't work. NOTS was developed because NED didn't work.

None of it worked. Not one bit. Not on him. Not on others. Sure, it made some people feel good for a while. But did any of the avowed results ever come to fruition? Of course not."

Editorial comment by Sweetness: Scientology is still primarily a marketing effort. That's how the Con works! Selling you a piece of your own personal "blue sky".

[SweetnessandLight]

Gadfly replied to Cowboy's above post:

"This is such a great post!

I read the PR Series a few times and it was obvious to me that there was NEVER any concern for "truth". Like you say, Hubbard would find out WHAT PEOPLE WANTED - just as is done with a listing question (discover what the PC's item is) - and then he would TELL THEM that Scientology could GIVE THEM THAT.

The Ruin-Finding Drill is THAT in a nutshell.

The reg sits the prospect down, and with two-way communication, finds what is really bothering or "ruining" the person. Everybody has something, especially when they are younger, so a good reg can find it. Then the reg really smashes your face into this ruin, and asks you, "what would happen if THAT got worse"? Their aim is to get you wallowing in the hopelessness of this ruin or troubling area.

Then the reg looks at you, and with well-practiced Tone 40 and feigned affinity says, "Scientology can handle THAT"!

Of course, the registrar has no idea whether Scientology can actually handle that (and probably it can't), BUT the reg learns the drill and the patter, and MANIPULATES PEOPLE into accepting and believing that Scientology will address and handle THAT.

It is ALL PR. It is about finding out what a person wants and desires. It aims at discovering what any person needs. And then, TELLING THEM WITH TOTAL CERTAINTY THAT Scientology can handle that! Of course, that is a lie, but some people fall for the mocked-up "certainty".

That is why surveys (in the PR & Marketing Series) were so key to Hubbard & Scientology.

It is all deceit and trickery.

I was put on a reg post for awhile. I learned all of this crap, but I could never do it comfortably. I felt like I was deceiving and tricking people. I got yelled at, and so forth, and eventually was taken off the post. My stats sucked!

I wanted to appeal to people's understanding, but boy would I get blasted when I said that. I was shown a few references from a tape where Hubbard says that people are "dramatizing circuits", that they have "no rights", and that they needed to be controlled and 8C'ed onto the srevice they need, because in their sorry banky low-toned state they were unable to make a sane responsible decision about anything.



Manipulation Tech 101:

1. Find out what a person (or many people) REALLY needs and wants (Non-Existence Formula)

2. Convince them that YOU can provide it for them (even if you really can't).

3. Get them BELIEVING in the promise that you can give them what they want.

4. Hook them with their own HOPE that you hold the key to their dreams and salvation.

Like I quote below from Hoffer, "They must know how to kindle and fan an extravagent hope". "

[SweetnessandLight]

Regarding "The Way To Happiness"

Originally Posted by Thought Provoking:

"One of the best tools that LRH wrote was quite simplistic and was applicable in many of the religions you mentioned above...the Way to Happiness. I know many found it hokey but it really was a great booklet. Unfortunately it was very misapplied in the church.
I think that it was never MEANT to be "applied in the Church". It was PR pablum - that is all. It was designed by Hubbard to help further the illusion that Scientology was/is the "good guys"."

To which Gadfly responded:

"Hubbard was VERY specific in his instructions on how to use PR Tech.

First, find what the people like, identify that, and then associate Scientology with those things.

Second, find out what people don't like, link (associate) enemies with THAT, and associate Scientology as being against such things.

It is ALL PR. It is all a matter of manipulating viewpoints.

With TWTH it was the first one above. The aim was to release something that had been surveyed from here 'til Sunday and back, where the surveys showed exactly what the general public LIKED and ADMIRED. Then Hubbard spit those list items back out at the general public in the form of TWTH. Hubbard finds things that many people can agree with. It is impossible NOT to agree with such things.

THEN, having gotten people to agree with the trite innocuous stuff, the aim is to then IDENTIFY that good stuff with Scientology & Hubbard. It is manipulation by creating associations in the minds of people.

It is the same with the Aims Of Scientology, where the claim is, the statement is, that the aim of Scientology is to "create a world without war, crime and insanity".

First, Scientology doesn't possess any knowledge, data, or "tech" that when applied could realize those goals.

Second, these aims are also more smoke and mirrors. These aims are something they can wave up in the sky like a flag, and say "hey look at this", and cause diversion and distraction from what they are REALLY doing. It is ALL TALK. They can't and don't do ANYTHING to reach those aims. It is all pretense. It is all a big mock-up; it is just another ILLUSION that people get tricked into looking at and misassociating with the general subject & practices of Scientology & Hubbard.

In a similar way, that is the only use that TWTH was ever meant to have - to be a tool with which "positive things" could be associated and identied with Scientology & Hubbard.

It was just more "bait" - to help lure & ensnare unsuspecting folks into the larger scam.

Also, it confuses people. It is difficult for people to look at and read TWTH, and then imagine or make sense of the idea that the same group of people who published THAT, and who claim that they are all for the ideas in TWTH, then go out and cheat, lie, manipulate scenarios, attack innocent people, exaggerate with PR, Hard Sell, crush reg, bully people, and so forth.

TWTH acts as a distraction to the real aims and purposes of Scientology - to make money, and then, to make more money."

[Gadfly]

For you S & L:





Is that a bumble bee (tee) in the rose?

[SweetnessandLight]

Hurray!!! I get to be included in the fun!

BEE TEE is right!

My comment: DARN! Rose blight beetle!!! ()

[HelluvaHoax!]

...


Virtually every part of these two short videos are comprised of GOLDEN QUOTES about Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard and the thinly veiled fraud & terrorism that tries to pass itself off as the world's most ethical people/religion.

Thanks so much Gerry and Caroline. It is well worth anyone's time to listen, if real clarity is valued.

Gerry talked with me about what's wrong with Marty Rathbun on the SP doctrine:



Gerry also discussed the SP doctrine and the Indies' application of it at the Dublin Conference:

[SweetnessandLight]

TAJ said in answer to this by renegade:

Originally Posted by renegade~
"Only now do I realize that when I was in scn, I was given a hell of a lot of Out-Lists and Wrong whys about myself or my behavior. Even though eval and inval is frowned upon and supposedly not ok in scn, it is still done and the excuse is "I'm not auditing you right now." Such bull shit.

There seems to be truth about giving wrong reasons to someone will create a lot of anger, misery and REAL destruction in a person's life. I used to feel like I was going crazy!

I especially dislike the fact that I was told that I need to go past track to fix something that was easily handled by simple looking at how I was treated as a child.

If you had trouble with this, how did you handle it after you got out?"

TAJ wrote:

"I had the same problem. I had enough out-lists and wrong whys to kill a duck.

I finally got over what Scientology calls by-passed charge and all that other crap.

I realized, first of all, that out-lists, wrong whys, etc etc, only exist only in the context of Scientology.

So whenever I found my self bugged by these apparent demons I realized that I must still be thinking to some degree with a Scientology Mindset.

My first advice would be to stop using any Scientogy terms or even thinking in Scientology terms.

Don't just use another word for an ARCX--abandon the concept of ARC in the first place.

What's glue for you is glue for you. And Scientology concepts have a nasty habit of sticking into people's views of life.

Scientology concepts get in people's minds and they have a tendency to format other ideas a person has.

So you don't just think you're pissed-off at something--you think there has been a break in ARC. You think that is the phenomenon.

That is why it is so hard for some people to abandon Scientology and for others to still think there is some value in it.

If you have mental paradigms that you use to view the world that are based on Scientology concepts, you will never be rid of the adverse effects of it.

We all have concepts that we use to format what we experience--paradigms like cause and effect and space and time. This is the basis of Immanuel Kant's philosophy.

But when those concepts are Scientology concepts the person can drive themselves mad.

Some people consider seeing things through these concepts as wins. You hear this in success stories all the time. "I now know I am a powerful Thetan" or "I now understand the tech of PTSness" etc.

This person is formatting what he experiences in the world through a Scientology paradigm.

And once they finally blow or get kicked out they may still view the world through that paradigm, "My friend is so PTS"; "The trouble in the Middle East is because the people are so down-tone."

So if you find yourself evaluating yourself or your life or a friend or another or the world through a Scientology paradigm, just press the reset button on your ideas about it."

The Anabaptist Jacques

[DagwoodGum]

Re: Wrong Whys, Out-Lists and sanity

Originally Posted by The Anabaptist Jacques
... Granted, there are many factors that can break up a marriage, but a marriage built on a Scientology paradigm, that is 2D Terminal, the greatest good of moving up the Bridge, etc, is bound to unwind faster than most.

The Anabaptist Jacques



That does not reflect an accurate interpretation of marriage from the perspective of the subject of scientology, although it is reasonable to argue that it reflects the role of marriage from the perspective of the Co$.

The difference being that the church equates its own interest with that of 'the greatest good'. There is actually nothing about the subject of scientology which would inherently support such a limited view of 'the greatest good'.


A slight, yet substantive, digression: what I see to be both particularly perverse about service facsimiles is how they often closely, but not exactly, mirror a truth.

That quality makes them both effective as behavioral tools for making one's self right as well as pernicious for being difficult for an individual to spot for himself and to eliminate as a repeated pattern of behavior. In a sense " it must be right because it's true", and therefore "it can't be stopped because that would be agreeing to a lie".

The scientology concept of ethics reflecting behavior directed towards the 'the greatest good', is a very reasonable (and therefore true) consideration in itself. To the degree the Co$ succeeds in implanting in its individual members with the consideration that 'the greatest good is that which promotes the interests of the church' (or l. ron hubbard), it will have succeeded in implanting a new serfac within that member; one which is quite difficult to spot as a serfac due to the constant reinforcement it gets from the church community.

This serfac can only be eliminated by spotting the false consideration (i.e. in scientologese false data) of equality between the Co$'s interests and 'the greatest good'.

The reason for the digression: your argument appears to be based on accepting that church implanted serfac as if it were a fundamental truth of the subject of scientology. It isn't. It is The Fundamental Truth of the Church of Scientology. That is an important and significant distinction.

I see a marriage based on establishing conditions for actually promoting the greatest good (and not simply some 'good' as defined by some social institution, e.g. the Co$) as a very valid thing.

In fact, I would go so far as to claim that such a marriage is inherently loved-based in a way that common love marriages are not in that it reflects a concern for all others in its fundamental inception, not simply the parties immediately involved. That is an expansive view of love and is a good thing in itself, however the marriage may actually work out.

Mark A. Baker

"Because nothing has the be true forever. Just for long enough, to tell you the truth."

- T. Pratchett, The Truth