Page 1 of 34 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 336

Thread: Jason Seems To Think You're Deluded

  1. #1
    Patron Meritorious Escalus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    984

    Default Jason Seems To Think You're Deluded

    I'm wondering, freezoners, recidivists, over-complicated significance experts, people still enamored with the tech, people who think L Ron Hubbard was smarter than the average bear;

    If you've looked at Jason Beghe's interview, where he pretty much says the tech is "insidious", a "con", and a few other choice words... how do you feel about that? I mean since he got so far along the Bridge and all?

    Should you run out his O/W's? Is he the victim of poorly applied tech? He got some mu's? What?

    He seems to think it's bullshit. Some of you folks are holding onto it like it's your private gold. How do you reconcile this?
    “…Never discuss Scientology with the critic. Just discuss his or her crimes, known and unknown. And act completely confident that those crimes exist….” ~L. Ron Hubbard, “Critics of Scientology”, November 5, 1967

    The Truth About The Freezone

  2. #2
    Gold Meritorious Patron gomorrhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    virtual reality
    Posts
    2,614

    Default

    My own reconciliation is that there are parts of the tech that I consider worthwhile and valuable. These don't include the current OT Levels. Primarily, they would be the grades, including NED (Dianetics, R3RA), and the endwords technique of R6EW.

    What he got from it is what he got from it. If people went in seeking Jedi abilities, then I think they leave disappointed and angry at being conned. If they go in seeking the ability to help themselves and others to improve the conditions of their lives, then I think they will be satisfied, until they hit the OT Levels, or until the Church decides they are an enemy or have no more resources to give them (same thing).

    BTW: what is Jason's tech training level? Has he taken others in session? Or was he a "professional pc"?
    going somewhere?

    Scientologists: do you think you can confront the truth? http://www.carolineletkeman.org/sp/ <==== duplicate that

    Kevin G. Brady gomorrhan@hotmail.com
    44 Phillips Street, Apartment 2L
    Wickford, RI 02852
    (401) 626-6776

    "I'm Kevin Brady, and I approved this message" - Kevin Brady

  3. #3
    Squirrel Extraordinaire Dulloldfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North-East England
    Posts
    20,184
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Escalus View Post
    I'm wondering, freezoners, recidivists, over-complicated significance experts, people still enamored with the tech, people who think L Ron Hubbard was smarter than the average bear;

    If you've looked at Jason Beghe's interview, where he pretty much says the tech is "insidious", a "con", and a few other choice words... how do you feel about that? I mean since he got so far along the Bridge and all?

    Should you run out his O/W's? Is he the victim of poorly applied tech? He got some mu's? What?

    He seems to think it's bullshit. Some of you folks are holding onto it like it's your private gold. How do you reconcile this?
    I wouldn't include myself in that first paragraph, but you might, so I will respond to your question anyway.

    I think he got royally fucked over. I don't know how much of this was the same fucking-over that anyone gets, and how much of it was personal to him alone. For instance, he talks about getting tromped on hard for using "My God!" as an acknowledgment on TRs and being told he could only say "Good, fine, OK and thank you, with this only being remedied four years later. I recall this being a problem, but it was certainly remedied by 1986, and he got into Scn in when, 1994? So I don't know how he encountered that particular problem--was it at some backwater somewhere? Getting overrun on sec checks was pretty common to everyone, but it wouldn't have happened in the Freezone.

    I don't think he would have made such a tape if he had received his auditing in the Freezone. It might not have all been perfect, but the financial excesses and routing-form idiocies and so forth don't happen like that in the FZ (not to say everyone in the FZ is perfect re money but at least you can sue them if they rip you off!).

    I'm not a FZer but it is a better place to get unbranded Scn than the CofS. Especially if someone told him that some processes work great but Hubbard's definition of "Clear" in DMSMH is PR and bullshit and most of the EPs are overstated, so don't expect the moon, but if he gets it anyway (like his OT TR-0 win) it's a bonus.

    Paul

  4. #4
    Patron Meritorious Escalus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    984

    Default

    gomorrhan - Class V auditor. Because training is "half the wins". What?

    Dull - So it's a tech "outness"?
    “…Never discuss Scientology with the critic. Just discuss his or her crimes, known and unknown. And act completely confident that those crimes exist….” ~L. Ron Hubbard, “Critics of Scientology”, November 5, 1967

    The Truth About The Freezone

  5. #5
    Gold Meritorious Patron gomorrhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    virtual reality
    Posts
    2,614

    Default

    The reason auditor classification is important at all to me is that it shows the person wanted to understand scientology, and to use it to help the people he knows. This, to me, is the definition of a scientologist, per the ideas I had when I was on staff. Either you are an auditor, or you are training to become one, or you are a "professional pc", which means you can't take responsibility for yourself or others. Staff got my respect, as long as they were studying to become auditors, or moreso if they WERE auditing as Staff Auditors in the HGC or Qual. Other staffers, to me, were a grey area. I could value them for their contribution to "the cause", but I couldn't understand a person who had been on staff 20 years and wasn't clear or trained as an auditor... why bother? How can you want to clear the planet, but not be clear or capable of clearing someone else, yourself, after twenty years [or much less].
    going somewhere?

    Scientologists: do you think you can confront the truth? http://www.carolineletkeman.org/sp/ <==== duplicate that

    Kevin G. Brady gomorrhan@hotmail.com
    44 Phillips Street, Apartment 2L
    Wickford, RI 02852
    (401) 626-6776

    "I'm Kevin Brady, and I approved this message" - Kevin Brady

  6. #6
    Patron Meritorious Escalus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    984

    Default

    Class V. Not too shabby that then.
    “…Never discuss Scientology with the critic. Just discuss his or her crimes, known and unknown. And act completely confident that those crimes exist….” ~L. Ron Hubbard, “Critics of Scientology”, November 5, 1967

    The Truth About The Freezone

  7. #7
    Gold Meritorious Patron alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,955

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Escalus View Post
    I'm wondering, freezoners, recidivists, over-complicated significance experts, people still enamored with the tech, people who think L Ron Hubbard was smarter than the average bear;

    If you've looked at Jason Beghe's interview, where he pretty much says the tech is "insidious", a "con", and a few other choice words... how do you feel about that? I mean since he got so far along the Bridge and all?

    Should you run out his O/W's? Is he the victim of poorly applied tech? He got some mu's? What?

    He seems to think it's bullshit. Some of you folks are holding onto it like it's your private gold. How do you reconcile this?
    I think there is a time when the bullshit of the church overcomes the memory of the gains one had, and of the sense some of the philosophy made.

    Clearly he is fed up and not taking it.

    There is much in the church today that is completely arbitrary.

    Most of it in the realm of enforced group agreement.

    No one needs to agree to be able to get along, just respect others and act accordingly. Yet the church insists that people think in agreement with even yet unexamined parts of the religion.

    Personally I reconcile it by knowing that a viewpoint is not the only truth.

    I think only good can come of the guy holding his position.

    I think a lot could be accomplished by dm brushing up on his class 4 provisional skills and taking jason into session and asking "is there a protest?"

    alex (in the spirit of church reform)
    thoughts are real, its the things you think that are the illusion

  8. #8
    Gold Meritorious Patron Kathy (ImOut)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    4,686

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Escalus View Post
    gomorrhan - Class V auditor. Because training is "half the wins". What?
    You never heard that line before? - "training is half the wins" or "training stabilizes your wins from session". Very common statements when being reg'd for training.


    To answer the original question of this post. I personally think Jason is spot on with his observations with the Tech and CofS. In watching the video(s), at times it felt as if he'd been in my head getting all of my EXACT thoughts and stating them for me.
    Nothing lasts forever, so live it up, drink it down, laugh it off, avoid the bullshit, take chances, & never have regrets, because at one point, everything you did was exactly what you wanted.
    "There is no freedom like seeing myself as I am and not losing heart."~Elizabeth J. Canham from Dark Phoenix

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Escalus View Post
    If you've looked at Jason Beghe's interview, where he pretty much says the tech is "insidious", a "con", and a few other choice words... how do you feel about that? I mean since he got so far along the Bridge and all?
    His perspective reflects his experiences.


    Should you run out his O/W's? Is he the victim of poorly applied tech? He got some mu's? What?

    What he should do depends on what HE wants to do. Although, clearly from his description he was the victim of BADLY applied tech. His comments in re L-12 in particular are quite telling. By all reputes that is NOT a good rundown on which to be hassling pcs.

    The bad tech difficulties could certainly be addressed by competent freezone auditors if that were HIS choice.

    Also, clearly he has been victimized by the management of the Co$ as have so many others before him. No news there.

    Personally, I never put much faith in "policy" and since the 80s have had NO trust in the ability of the Co$ to deliver scientology technology to a good result.

    That is not an attempt to invalidate any personal gains of anyone who may have experienced wins in auditing while in the church since that time. It merely reflects my view that tech within the Co$ "came a cropper" when, Miscavige took over, Mayo left, Mithof was put in charge of tech lines, and the old timers left by the thousands.



    He seems to think it's bullshit. Some of you folks are holding onto it like it's your private gold. How do you reconcile this?
    Easy to understand his perspective, I've heard many similar stories over the years.

    If you paid thousands of dollars, spent over a decade of involvement, and felt betrayed by having any gains you may have experienced undone by constant attempts to control you enacted by silly (and often untrained or poorly trained) people in sailor suits spouting "source" that would certainly seem to validate his perspective.

    For myself, I never bought into the "Hubbard is Source" equation. I did NOT go into auditing with overblown expectations. I always had good/excellent gains from auditing, both while in the Co$ & in the freezone. And, I frequently have had results that far exceed my own expectations.

    And most importantly, the first time I was told to choose between my own sense of "values" and those of the Co$ group, I chose to leave that group. The latter is a "policy" I STRONGLY recommend.


    Mark A. Baker

  10. #10
    Patron with Honors ThisFenceHurts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    329

    Default

    His "win" on OT-TR 0 is pretty awesome. Scientology tech being applied literally answered the most important question that he ever had. After it did that, really, he had EP'd the subject, IMHO.

    I did notice that he mentioned that his wife had pointed out some inconsistencies to him a few times. That, coupled with his description of her as being able to drop Scientology so fast (maybe being open-minded?) will make a lot of Scns who see the film (and plenty will at one point or another) decide that she must be the "SP" who is responsible for him blowing. Some Scns apparently said its David Duchovny or the gays but the SP is not supposed to be obvious. If only the Church E/Os were as brilliant as I...:D

    I personally think he is a kick-ass fellow who says what he thinks, got something cool out of it at the beginning, got f-ed over in a similar way to most other Scientologists and will be on to living his life happily before long without much thought about this whole thing. His video is more than enough to make up for any damage he feels he has caused by getting people into Scientology.

    Jason, buddy - you're off the hook!
    I've got nuthin

Page 1 of 34 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •