John Travolta Ready to Blow?

[uniquemand]

Yes, I've read my McKenna. The problem is, IMO, that if you justify regulating one, you set a precedent for regulating the others, and while I see a connection between certain drugs and certain behaviors, establishing such as a positivist fact is extraordinarily difficult. My point is that if there are enemies extant of a given nation, pacifism is unrealistic.

[Björkist]

Yes, I've read my McKenna. The problem is, IMO, that if you justify regulating one, you set a precedent for regulating the others, and while I see a connection between certain drugs and certain behaviors, establishing such as a positivist fact is extraordinarily difficult. My point is that if there are enemies extant of a given nation, pacifism is unrealistic.

The key isn't only regulation.

IMO, it's blanket legalization, coupled with real education...none of that "Just Say No" garbage.

Legalization and education (not scare tactics and propaganda) would raise the bar considerably and destroy organized crime...or at least cripple it.

I agree that pacifism isn't the answer for every situation. Sometimes it's necessary to fight and use force...especially if it's for a just cause and to assert one's rights if they are being abused.

And while I find the Tibetan Buddhist culture amazing and beautiful, they risk being annihilated because others (such as the Chinese government) don't share their viewpoints.

[Björkist]

And something on topic for ya: Research LSD's use in treating Autism. It's truly fascinating, but some can't even look at it because "Drugs are bad."

http://www.neurodiversity.com/main.html

Sadly, though, there is a 30 year gap in legitimate scientific research of this fascinating substance...and others like it.

Now, if you'll excuse me...I'm gonna go get drunk, smoke a pack of cigarettes, have some clumsy and unsatisfying sex (partly due to my hot and steamy alcohol/tobacco breath), pass out and wake up with a hangover and rotted liver.

Then I will drink a gallon of black coffee to get myself going. And smoke more cigarettes.



From the link above:

"With regard to her major group of young autistic children, Bender reported significant improvement in speech and verbal communication:

"...the vocabularies of several of the children increased after LSD or UML; several seemed to be attempting to form words or watched adults carefully as they spoke; many seemed to comprehend speech for the first time or were able to communicate their needs... Very few of these changes in communication had been noted previously in such a large number of children, and at such a relatively rapid rate".

"They appeared flushed, bright eyed, and unusually interested in the environment... They participated with increasing eagerness in motility play with adults and other children. . . They seek positive contacts with adults, approaching them with face uplifted and bright eyes, and responding to fondling, affection, etc."

"There is less stereotyped whirling and rhythmic behavior. . . They became gay, happy, laughing frequently... Some showed changes in facial expression in appropriate reactions to situations for the first time"

"6. The most consistent effects of psychedelic therapy reported in these studies included: (a) improved speech behavior in otherwise mute children; (b) increased emotional responsiveness to other children and adults; (c) an elevation in positive mood including frequent laughter; and (d) decreases in compulsive ritualistic behavior."

These studies were done in the early 1960s before LSD was criminalized.

[uniquemand]

I think that methamphetamine ("exstacy") would be more effective than LSD, or in conjunction with LSD, as a treatment for Autism. Like any other drug therapy, it is my view that these are INTERVENTIONS, not suited for a lifetime of use, but rather, as a method of changing a condition which prevents the person from addressing psychological factors. In my experience as a witness and as a subject of trials of methamphetamine, willingness to both listen to others and to communicate to others improves while these medications are in effect. LSD can have this effect, as well, but my experience has been that this is largely because the person is overwhelmed by something, either positive, negative, or simply incomprehensible to them, rather than out of a social impulse, whereas the methamphetamine use seemed to have a primarily social effect, whilst frequently also improving affect, energy level and extroversion.

[FinallyFree]

I guess you are taking the "bad part" of what Hubbard wrote and did while promoting Scientology in a hostile world.

I mean, you can read Scientology in a thousand different ways: you can see it as a mission to free mankind, a personal agenda to become rich, a scheme to get power and money to an institution to engage its own "wars", and many many more.

I believe that the Scientology "tech" and the running of Scientology organizations, and even Hubbard the man, have to be kept separate. As well as, when taking Scientology writings and lectures, much work has to be done to separate the good and working data from the bad and false data: Scientology has been under development for 30-40 years, Hubbard contraddicts himself or evolves his understanding and explanation of things many many times during all those years. All the while, having to manage a growing organization and defend from unjust as well as sometimes valid attacks.

To me Hubbard was a very ambitious guy who was at times driven by passion and care for the human being as well as sometimes being enMESTed by the reactions of the environment. I believe he was also human, and I guess that the bad stuff you quote above is how a human, in a world of uncertainties and faced with attacks which need a quick response, develops his "best, quick solution". Which sometimes you cannot judge even fifty years past the day the solution was announced, so you can't rework it before a hell of a lot of people can deeply criticize it.

My quite deep living of Scientology has told me that the philosophy, when correctly understood, can teach a lot of good tenets. ARC, KRC, the tone scale and many other concepts as well as some technologies are good assets for a normal person.

What isn't good instead, is the prices currently charged and the way organizations are run, which in fact many times is aberrated. The fact is Orgs and the people running them are the problem: while I was an active Scientologist, I liked the courses and drills, they taught me something. What I didn't like, was the feeling you perceived while being at the org: any free time was a chance to be regged, asked to sign contracts with the Sea Org, fund IAS campaigns and the like; if you attended the courses, you had to take it fucking seriously, if you had some free time you HAD to be in class... even if your house was a mess or one day you really would ENJOY do something else... and the fix to any "open speaking" or "reasonable thinking" was PUNITIVE ETHICS!

I want to tell you this guys: THIS IS NOT SCIENTOLOGY!!! This is what aberrated, badly paid, not-very-smart staff make it become!!! If the orgs hadn't the objective of spilling every single cent from parishioners and were quiet, peaceful, not-for-profit organization with fairly-paid staff, SCIENTOLOGY WOULD BE GOOD!!!

And I can tell you I'm one of those guys who doesn't really believe past lives are real or that something actually happened 75 trillion years ago... It can be real as it can be just part of immagination or the result of artificial programs created by evolution which is riddling our minds... To me, if putting cans in my hands and shout implants to get reads on the meter can get me to have a brighter life, I will forego the need of having an explanation that would try to make sense of the bad things we have in our mind...

This was to say, don't go A=A=A=A when using the word Scientology. It has many aspects. Hubbard put it down clearly: what is true, is what is true for you. This sentence must be put in the right perspective and understood to its greater extent: Scientology as well must be personally questioned to be understood and to get the most out of it; and NOTHING must be taken as dogma, if something doesn't sound right to you, discard it, don't listen to "authorities", the only authority IS YOU; and be enough of a free-thinker to be able to change sometimes your past ideas and beliefs: something you discarded earlier, might prove right later when you get some more data!

To me, Scientology has got some good tech and some good tenets. It can help one become more free-hearted, passionate, upscale about his life while expanding the abilities to feel more thoroughly all the emotions a thetan can have. And even if one doesn't get immortality, this might be enough to enhance one's life and make Scn worthy.

I hope we can all get to this state of mind. I guess too many people in this society read life (and Scientology) with a 2.0, literal attitude. It's not the best way to get the most out of one's life.

Hope we'll get some debate, even though this post has nothing to do with Travolta. I can say I really feel for him... maybe Jett now has dropped the body and is free, but John wouldn't be a thetan if he didn't feel for such a loss, he would be a rock! Maybe John had projects for him, maybe he liked to play with him, to talk to him, to teach things... and that all is lost now. I believe what Scientology wants to achieve is to free you from past events so that when something bad happens you don't dramatize a full life of losses; you can feel instead the value of that moment and experience it at the right level of the tone scale, while being able not to dump your mind with bad mental images.

And about him leaving Scientology, he shouldn't do it for his son. He should do it if things can change and we can get a better Scientology. The last 5-years top management dropouts are doing a good work, teaming with the St. Peterburg Times.

I really hope one day I'll be able to get back to an Org and enjoy the experience. While taking what is good in Scientology and mixing it with all the other good teachings you got from other sources and life.

My God, who let this scientologist in here?

(joke for those who don't know me) Dude READ Bare Faced Messiah, Please?

[Blue Spirit]

Lambear, I agree totally with you. The worst thing is that the Church doesn't want non-official churches to give services as they would be "squirrels" and alter the tech. Fact is the Church itself, with the focus it has on money, is "squirreling" and making Orgs a bad place to "get clean".
So the situation we get right now is that, for getting tech, you can do by yourself. But if you want to put it into practice, as far as processing goes, you basically are fucked: good auditors must get training and Academies are difficult to be replicated away from an org.
I don't know much about the free zone, so maybe there is a network which has source materials in "profit-free" organizations. And profit-free doesn't mean you get in and you get your audit free: I just mean that THE STAFF must earn a fair salary (which in many orgs doesn't happen now); and no donation is asked without then giving accountability of how my money was spent.

I guess if SCN had fair prices, it shouldn't need all the money it is raising to face legal causes.

And what furthermore I don't understand is why they just go on and on collecting money, while apart from Miscavige and a few more, most Sea Org staff live in total poverty... and Miscavige as well, say he went to an ordinary corporation, he could probably still get the same or even ten times the money he is making now... without getting psycho because of personal fuckups and legal causes... this is really Aberration, you can't call it any other way...

I've read three of your posts in this thread and have about 98% agreement.


There are some Academies in the Freezone, and some I'm still trying to find.