Well, I'm out now.

[Alanzo]

Back on to the topic of this thread, I just had a "disconnection" email from someone I got on well with while on staff. This person had tried to talk to me when I said I was leaving, and I explained my reasons to him. I now find that he's written them all up in a KR he attached to the email. How f*****g pathetic!! And typical!! You have an honest conversation with someone who's acting as a friend to you, and they end up writing the whole damn thing up and sending it around. And not only has he included the usual channels, Ethics Officer, etc., but also to the CJC, the IJC and RTC. You can't believe how fucking pissed off that makes me. I hate this fucking organization!!

I had a lot of "friends" contact me too, and try to pump me for info.

Some were sent in directly by OSA, others were by "concerned Scientologists" who wanted to make sure that their area was in ethics.

At least you got a copy of a KR - I never ever received one.

And all Scientologists somehow knew to disconnect from me - even though I have never received my declare.

I WANT MY DECLARE!!!
​

 

[Vinaire]

Thank you, Bea. I expected the disconnection garbage. But for him to have betrayed a private conversation he initiated (and thus must have known the kinds of things it would contain) is a sick breach of simple human decency. I so hope to see this organization go down in my lifetime.

You have nothing to be afraid of if you are honest with yourself. That is how I have survived.

.

 

[Mick Wenlock]

Thank you, Bea. I expected the disconnection garbage. But for him to have betrayed a private conversation he initiated (and thus must have known the kinds of things it would contain) is a sick breach of simple human decency. I so hope to see this organization go down in my lifetime.

We excuse bad behavior by Scientologists too often. We have the inbuilt excuse that it is the "org" or "DM" that is doing it.

Of course there are levels to all this but there is one thing I know to be true - any time we accept and excuse unsociable behavior from Scientologists merely because they ARE a scientologist - we are enabling them and the organization.

If the person in question ganed personal information out of you under false pretenses and then spread discreditable information in written form they may have strayed into Libel terroritory.

I would suggest writing them a "knowledge report" stating that you are looking at the possibility of bring a legal action against them (not the cofs) for slander. Be very specific that you are not holding the cofs responsible for this stupid individual's action.

We have, IMHO, fgot to teach scientologists that they have to behave in a socially acceptable way.

 

[Terril park]

Thank you, Bea. I expected the disconnection garbage. But for him to have betrayed a private conversation he initiated (and thus must have known the kinds of things it would contain) is a sick breach of simple human decency. I so hope to see this organization go down in my lifetime.

I'm with Bea on this. he is to be pitied. The karma he is weaving hurts him
more than you. And I'm with Mick on society putting in ethics on the guy.

Who knows, he may be here next month.

 

[Alan]

We excuse bad behavior by Scientologists too often. We have the inbuilt excuse that it is the "org" or "DM" that is doing it.

Of course there are levels to all this but there is one thing I know to be true - any time we accept and excuse unsociable behavior from Scientologists merely because they ARE a scientologist - we are enabling them and the organization.

If the person in question ganed personal information out of you under false pretenses and then spread discreditable information in written form they may have strayed into Libel terroritory.

I would suggest writing them a "knowledge report" stating that you are looking at the possibility of bring a legal action against them (not the cofs) for slander. Be very specific that you are not holding the cofs responsible for this stupid individual's action.

We have, IMHO, forgot to teach scientologists that they have to behave in a socially acceptable way.

WTG Mick!

Great advice!

Alan

 

[Alanzo]

We excuse bad behavior by Scientologists too often. We have the inbuilt excuse that it is the "org" or "DM" that is doing it.

Of course there are levels to all this but there is one thing I know to be true - any time we accept and excuse unsociable behavior from Scientologists merely because they ARE a scientologist - we are enabling them and the organization.

If the person in question ganed personal information out of you under false pretenses and then spread discreditable information in written form they may have strayed into Libel terroritory.

I would suggest writing them a "knowledge report" stating that you are looking at the possibility of bring a legal action against them (not the cofs) for slander. Be very specific that you are not holding the cofs responsible for this stupid individual's action.

We have, IMHO, fgot to teach scientologists that they have to behave in a socially acceptable way.

Very good point, Mick.

 

[MarkWI]

Back on to the topic of this thread, I just had a "disconnection" email from someone I got on well with while on staff. This person had tried to talk to me when I said I was leaving, and I explained my reasons to him. I now find that he's written them all up in a KR he attached to the email. How f*****g pathetic!! And typical!! You have an honest conversation with someone who's acting as a friend to you, and they end up writing the whole damn thing up and sending it around. And not only has he included the usual channels, Ethics Officer, etc., but also to the CJC, the IJC and RTC. You can't believe how fucking pissed off that makes me. I hate this fucking organization!!

How lucky, you got a copy of that report!

I think you got your copy because your friend wasn’t very hatted. That you should get a copy is what LRH policy leads you to believe, but normally they hide such reports from you, for the reasons Mick wrote earlier. I was not able to look at my ethics folder with the MAA present. When I complained about few reports written on my back, without a copy to me, the MAA said 'They didn't had copy paper, nor know where to reach you' - but still refused to let me read them in full, only a few paragraphs on them!

You can find the same happened to Michael Pattinson, and certaintly many others:

"Unknown to me at the time (April and May 1991) Sarit Rosenberg had gone to the effort of having some of her other staff members write ethics violation reports on me, even though they had no personal knowledge of what had transpired as they had not been present at the meeting between myself and Sarit Rosenberg. These reports were sent to the Freewinds ethics office, all containing erroneous and negatively alarming falsehoods on me. No copies were sent to me so I did not know of their existence..."
"I only learned about the existence of these false reports from a friend in Copenhagen who had seen copies of them sent on internal C. of S. lines"

Everything you tell to a good standing scientologist (unknown, friend or family member) is apt to be written into a KR, or end up in a KR of a security check. And realize they do it with their best intentions (to help you) or for their best ethical purpose (help scientology).

No privacy exists in scientology.

And Personal integrity is a luxury scientologists cannot afford.
(Paraphrasing "God is a luxury I cannot afford." --Judah Rosenthal in ‘Crimes and Misdemeanors’)

M

 

[Roadrunner]

How lucky, you got a copy of that report!

I think you got your copy because your friend wasn’t very hatted. That you should get a copy is what LRH policy leads you to believe, but normally they hide such reports from you, for the reasons Mick wrote earlier. I was not able to look at my ethics folder with the MAA present. When I complained about few reports written on my back, without a copy to me, the MAA said 'They didn't had copy paper, nor know where to reach you' - but still refused to let me read them in full, only a few paragraphs on them!

Why tolerating that? Write a Cramming Order on that MAA, and demand copies.

You can find the same happened to Michael Pattinson, and certaintly many others:

Everything you tell to a good standing scientologist (unknown, friend or family member) is apt to be written into a KR, or end up in a KR of a security check. And realize they do it with their best intentions (to help you) or for their best ethical purpose (help scientology).

No privacy exists in scientology.

Privacy does exist in Scientology, but you have to see to it that it is maintained. As staff in SO however this may be hard to do. At Hacienda Gardens at Flag for example they were doing these random berthing checks.

And Personal integrity is a luxury scientologists cannot afford.
(Paraphrasing "God is a luxury I cannot afford." --Judah Rosenthal in ‘Crimes and Misdemeanors’)

M

I find that too many are playing effect about these things.

RR

 

[Alan]

I find that too many are playing effect about these things.

RR

Not really! 9,900,000 have walked away in disgust!

50,000 have gone into hiding.

35,000 wished they could hide. (Some of these get dragged or extorted to attend events.)

15,000 can't hide. (They are either on staff, RPFed or doing services.)

Alan

 

[Roadrunner]

Not really! 9,900,000 have walked away in disgust!

50,000 have gone into hiding.

35,000 wished they could hide. (Some of these get dragged or extorted to attend events.)

15,000 can't hide. (They are either on staff, RPFed or doing services.)

Alan

These things only then happen if one does not stand up for one's rights...

RR

 

[Mick Wenlock]

Originally Posted by MarkWI View Post
How lucky, you got a copy of that report!

I think you got your copy because your friend wasn’t very hatted. That you should get a copy is what LRH policy leads you to believe, but normally they hide such reports from you, for the reasons Mick wrote earlier. I was not able to look at my ethics folder with the MAA present. When I complained about few reports written on my back, without a copy to me, the MAA said 'They didn't had copy paper, nor know where to reach you' - but still refused to let me read them in full, only a few paragraphs on them!

Why tolerating that? Write a Cramming Order on that MAA, and demand copies.

This is a classic example of a thought process which is endemic in Scientology. Maybe Alan can help me out here because I find it difficult to quantify.

Are you blaming the person writing for not writing a "cramming order"? How can a public "demand" copies of the MAA? It is plainly obvious from the write up that you quote that the MAA is aware of the fact that copies were not sent.

So now one should send a "cramming order" to someone who already knows what they are doing is not the correct policy? Wow this is a great 'solution'

So your off the cuff remark does not even address the problem that the original poster was talking about. But it sure sounded like it should. But that is a part of the problem with Scientology organizations and Scientologists. People look for some one off observation that "handles" things without it actually having anything to do with the real world. A great example of this is some tape where Hubbard is talking about cannon balls and soldiers and about finding yourself on a battlefield getting shot at and hit by a cannon ball - Hubbard's great observation "well, why were you there in the first place?" which brought the sort of 'knowing laugh' from the sycophantic audience.

But if you examine the statement you will see that it is just BS - Hubbard proffers no way for the person he is demeaning in the example to actually avoid the situation - merely stating that he should not have been in it!

Your "advice" falls into the same category.

Privacy does exist in Scientology, but you have to see to it that it is maintained. As staff in SO however this may be hard to do. At Hacienda Gardens at Flag for example they were doing these random berthing checks.

What "privacy" exists exists by fiat, not by right.

It is impossible to trust to the confidentiality of any conversation with a Scientologist.

Any Scientologist (and just to be clear on this I don't mean FZers but Scientologists who are members of the Church of Scientology) will betray the confidences and privacy of friends or family in a heartbeat if they think it will advance them on the road to OT. This is a very very harsh lesson but most of us have learned this at great personal cost. A Scientologist will throw anyone under the bus in order to preserve their own personal status. Anyone. Spouse, child, parent friend.

I find that too many are playing effect about these things.

RR

I find that too many couldn't find their own ass with two hands and a hunting dog.

 

[Alan]

I find that too many couldn't find their own ass with two hands and a hunting dog.

Kinda sums it up pretty good!

 

[Roadrunner]

This is a classic example of a thought process which is endemic in Scientology. Maybe Alan can help me out here because I find it difficult to quantify.

Are you blaming the person writing for not writing a "cramming order"? How can a public "demand" copies of the MAA? It is plainly obvious from the write up that you quote that the MAA is aware of the fact that copies were not sent.

If you are entitled to something by policy, you can demand anything!

So now one should send a "cramming order" to someone who already knows what they are doing is not the correct policy? Wow this is a great 'solution'

So your off the cuff remark does not even address the problem that the original poster was talking about. But it sure sounded like it should. But that is a part of the problem with Scientology organizations and Scientologists. People look for some one off observation that "handles" things without it actually having anything to do with the real world. A great example of this is some tape where Hubbard is talking about cannon balls and soldiers and about finding yourself on a battlefield getting shot at and hit by a cannon ball - Hubbard's great observation "well, why were you there in the first place?" which brought the sort of 'knowing laugh' from the sycophantic audience.

But if you examine the statement you will see that it is just BS - Hubbard proffers no way for the person he is demeaning in the example to actually avoid the situation - merely stating that he should not have been in it!

Your "advice" falls into the same category.

What "privacy" exists exists by fiat, not by right.

It is impossible to trust to the confidentiality of any conversation with a Scientologist.

Any Scientologist (and just to be clear on this I don't mean FZers but Scientologists who are members of the Church of Scientology) will betray the confidences and privacy of friends or family in a heartbeat if they think it will advance them on the road to OT. This is a very very harsh lesson but most of us have learned this at great personal cost. A Scientologist will throw anyone under the bus in order to preserve their own personal status. Anyone. Spouse, child, parent friend.

I find that too many couldn't find their own ass with two hands and a hunting dog.

It is hard to imagine that once you would have been Captain AOSH EU. You were there in the organization and still not understanding basic policy. I understand though why you are 'out' today and moderate your own little Yahoo group. Just kicking out those persons that do not confirm to your wishes or demands.

RR

 

[Alanzo]

The Scientology Mindset is on full, blazing display in RoadRunner's posts.

It's awesome!

I found it therapeutic to examine the arguments of the mindset when I was getting out. See if you can spot the contradictions in its logic. See if you can articulate its problems.

Ask it questions, observe how it responds.

 

[Alan]

I understand though why you are 'out' today and moderate your own little Yahoo group.

RR

Your handlers are going to scold you for this!

 

[MarkWI]

Why tolerating that? Write a Cramming Order on that MAA, and demand copies.
...
Privacy does exist in Scientology, but you have to see to it that it is maintained. As staff in SO however this may be hard to do. At Hacienda Gardens at Flag for example they were doing these random berthing checks.
...
I find that too many are playing effect about these things.

RR

I must admit I didn’t write him a cramm order. (A public can cram order an MAA?) But I wrote a KR on him, and nothing changed.

At the beginning I thought I was really helping Scn by writing a KR on every spotted outpoint. So that it gets corrected. After many years I found myself still writing them, but just for my own integrity, I knew nothing was going to be done about it.

In fact I never saw any of my KRs produce any real change, and I wrote many of them along the years.
And the more I was writing, the more they where looking for what’s wrong with me.

I spent many hours of (paid) sec-check explaining why I was upset with the MAA and about the authors of the hidden KRs on me. The C/S was trying to find what I did to these people to pull-in hidden reports on me. The unstated EP was ‘stops to complain about hidden reports’.

At the end of the 4 or 5 session on the stupid worthless cycle I wanted to tell to the examiner to fuck off and that I will never get another session in that org, and I told that to my auditor walking to the examiner. He told me to calm down and ‘better you dont't’. Doing it would mean 6,7,8 sessions ($$$), losing my good standing status, my scientology job and other I cannot tell. “Your needle is floating” said the examiner (?). I just hope my auditor (OT5) wrote everithing down.

Years earlier I waited 4 years for a Board of Review that never came. I did TR3 every month for 4 years (unable to get services in between). Even the ED Int wrote me he was puzzled about this “slow justice”. In the end they told me I could not have it as my ethics folder could not be found, and to simply forget it and resume my services.

Scientology does not belong to me.
I should not waste years of my life trying to correct it and being blamed for doing so.

I am not the Church and I’m not Scientology. I may find knowledge that works for me in Scientology and I take it. But the moment I take it because I buy a course or I cog in session, it is mine. I do whatever I want with it and I don’t want zombies around telling me when, why and how I should do things.

And in that, the Freezone seems to be years ahead from the Church.

I have a dream of the Church loosing its copyrights and I hope every hidden secret of the Church be exposed because I think only that way the scientology philosophy may become free, and people may freely take the good there is in it and forget the bulshit.

After learning about the GO and past and current criminal acts done on critics and squirrels I now believe the Church of Scientology is a suppressive group of unaware people, headed by a criminal con man.

And feel sad about it.

M

 

[MarkWI]

If you are entitled to something by policy, you can demand anything!
...
RR

That's not true.

You know SO members don't get paid for their work (just get $ 50(?) weekly as pocket money - if lucky to get it at all). In exchange, by policy, the org should cover for them medical expenses, uniforms, auditing, etc.

You can demand anything but no way you will receive it!

Check about the many XSO offloaded because of illness.

On the purif I had to pay vitamins myself while in the SO, the org simply didn't have money for it, I was told.

 

[Mick Wenlock]

If you are entitled to something by policy, you can demand anything!



It is hard to imagine that once you would have been Captain AOSH EU. You were there in the organization and still not understanding basic policy. I understand though why you are 'out' today and moderate your own little Yahoo group. Just kicking out those persons that do not confirm to your wishes or demands.

RR

OMG its that little plonker from Sweden!! The person who thinks he knows everything about Scientology and the SO and yet did so little of it.

ROFLMAO!!!

 

[Mick Wenlock]

If you are entitled to something by policy, you can demand anything!



It is hard to imagine that once you would have been Captain AOSH EU. You were there in the organization and still not understanding basic policy. I understand though why you are 'out' today and moderate your own little Yahoo group. Just kicking out those persons that do not confirm to your wishes or demands.

RR

That would the Yahoo group that you tried to join under a false ID? That group? Or are you referring to your trying to post on ARS as "Barbara Schwartz"?

And as you correctly point out - I have standards, the problem is that you cannot meet them.

 

[Alanzo]

That would the Yahoo group that you tried to join under a false ID? That group? Or are you referring to your trying to post on ARS as "Barbara Schwartz"?

And as you correctly point out - I have standards, the problem is that you cannot meet them.

LOL!