Kill with a Thought
SirLurksAlot
Have you been David Riced today?
SirLurksAlot wrote:
> http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/felos
What is the matter with you, Randall? Why do you constantly post killer
postings?
Something tells me if you could kill with a thought that I would be
dead already. :)
Barbara Schwarz
http://www.thunderstar.net/~Schwarz/
More about Dave Touretzky:
http://urlsnip.com/254524
http://urlsnip.com/402460
Other interesting websites:
http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/extremists/
http://www.alarmgermany.org/
http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/sitemap.htm
http://www.cchr.org
http://www.datafilter.com/mc
http://www.freespeechstore.com
SirLurksAlot
Bill
posts something bad about Scientology. Here's a quote from it:
"George Felos' "kill with a thought" ability is shared by high-level
Scientologists. Scientologists who have acquired enough demons to
achieve the level of Operating Thetan VIII also claim to have the
ability to "kill with a thought":
An OT VIII (the highest OT level released so far) can purportedly kill
with a thought.
(Quote source: Scientology Jargon:
OT)http://www.shipbrook.com/jeff/CoS/scijarg.html#ot
"Kill with a thought" really means that demons are sent on assignment to
accomplish a killing."
This is why you object Barbara. Because people see the crazy thing that
people are actually willing to believe in.
Ball of Fluff
"Bill" <tryto...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4X8kf.2781$rq3....@newssvr19.news.prodigy.com...
>
> (Quote source: Scientology Jargon:
> OT)http://www.shipbrook.com/jeff/CoS/scijarg.html#ot
>
> "Kill with a thought" really means that demons are sent on assignment to
> accomplish a killing."
No, it doesn't, actually.
C
Zinj
says...
Right. In Christian cosmology, all curses or 'supernatural' effects are
'caused' by supernatural entities, such as angels or demons.
In Scientology's cosmology, the demons or angels are dispensed with, and
the Scientologist Himself is 'at cause'.
What need demons or angels if Hubbard's wondrous 'Tech' has granted
supernatural powerz to formerly garden variety humanoids?
Zinj
--
Villains! I say to you now! Knock off all that Evil!
- The Tick
Bill
that Barbara chose to respond to the subject line of the post rather
than actually reading what was said.
Ball of Fluff
Ah. I see. Well, don't look for that to change anytime soon!
C
BarbaraSc...@excite.com
Of course I read it. It is garbage. An OT is ethically. Any true
Scientologist and OT knows that missing ethics made them lLOSE their OT
abilities in the first place. Can you follow?
These guys are no Scientologists if then indeed made the remarks.
People who say such stuff about SCN are infiltrators.
>
> An OT VIII (the highest OT level released so far) can purportedly kill
> with a thought.
>
> (Quote source: Scientology Jargon:
> OT)http://www.shipbrook.com/jeff/CoS/scijarg.html#ot
>
> "Kill with a thought" really means that demons are sent on assignment to
> accomplish a killing."
It is NOT Scientology.
>
> This is why you object Barbara. Because people see the crazy thing that
> people are actually willing to believe in.
They see something else than Scientology. Psychiatric infiltrator crap.
You don't see it because you have no clue about the real SCN, Bill
Bruised Ego.
Randall is known to post postings about how to kill Scientologists,
destroy SCN, he is posting swastikas and so on. You maybe like and
accept that but, I don't. He is odd and destructive. He just fishes for
material that fits his hate style.
Barbara Schwarz
BarbaraSc...@excite.com
Read what I posted about OTs and infiltrators.
Barbara Schwarz
Bill
how Scientologists think they can kill with a thought and the bottom
part was from a court transcript. Twisting again, aren't you? Bruised
Ego? Not sure how you came up with that.
Zinj
BarbaraSc...@excite.com says...
<snip>
> Read what I posted about OTs and infiltrators.
>
> Barbara Schwarz
Why can't 'OTs' keep 'infiltrators' out?
Are they chewing gum at the same time?
wbarwell
>
http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/felos_scientology_ot_viii_kill_with_a_thought.html
THE ANATOMY OF CAUSE (16th ACC) - PART 08 OF 31
POSTULATES OF ACTION-REACTION
A lecture given on 11 January 1957
....
That is the frame of mind -- that exact frame of mind is the
unknowing frame of mind of every preclear you have difficulty
with. He's waiting for you to make the wall postulate. He's
waiting for you to kick him out.
Therefore, you can always boot somebody out of his head if you
insist on it. You got that? But you actually have to practically
knock him over between the ears in some cases. You see, you
practically have to take a club to him in some cases. But the
funny part of it is, you could. You actually could.
You could walk up to a person who was under ether and you could
say, "Get out of your head. Go to Arcturus. Don't ever come
back." He'd die right there on the operating table.
That is the basic mechanism which is used in this universe when
exteriorization is employed politically -- in any way. That is
attention and then boot him out. In other words, they substitute
for the second postulate, boot him out and send him on his way.
And the fellow has no choice but to go. He is therefore and
thereon and thereafter under orders from that particular source.
Do you know that you can call back, to any dead body, the thetan
departed from it? This is something fascinating. And there's many
a Scientologist here and there around the world -- but much more
so in Europe and North Africa than here -- who has just stood a
small community, you see, right on its ear with this particular
one.
A guy is hit in the street accident, he's lying there, he's not
breathing. The doctor says, "Cover him up." The Scientologist
says to the guy, "What the hell's the matter with you! Pick that
mock-up up!"
See? Get the idea? The fellow says, "Oh, wait a minute. I don't
have permission to depart."
He thought the body had said, "You can leave." The blow was
orders to leave. And so he died. That's why people die.
That's why one person with the same injuries will linger on for
years, and another person with the same injury will die
instantly. It's the idea each one of them has, different gradient
of the idea, that they have had permission to leave. Something
else has made the postulate they can go.
.............
--
"There is a word in Newspeak," said Syme. "I don't
know whether you know it: duckspeak, to quack like
a duck. It is one of those interesting words that
have two contradictory meanings. Applied to an
opponent, it is abuse; applied to someone you agree
with, it is praise."
-George Orwell "Nineteen Eighty-Four"
Cheerful Charlie
wbarwell
>
Scientology: My Story
by Patrick Jost
This is my "insider's account" of the time I spent in Scientology. I
wrote it because it has been suggested that since I have had no
formal training (not true!) that I should not comment on it.
Background: My father was in advertising, and had HEAVY "show
business"
connections. I dabbled in the music business when I was doing some
graduate work at UCLA. A "celebrity" friend of the family had
mentioned
Scientology to me several times; I had never been interested in the
talk of engrams and so on, but I WAS interested in claims of increased
intelligence and so on. I read the "standard" bio of Hubbard, and
decided someone with that background might actually have some
useful ideas.
As a result, I was "sponsored" (which means I didn't pay for it) for
some courses and auditing at the Los Angeles Celebrity Centre.
Initially, I found it all very strange and very interesting. I was
very popular with the instructors, as I could do "Dear Alice" and
some of the other procedures in several foreign languages (I'm
a linguist by training and profession).
I was declared a "natural clear" and people started to talk to me
about a possible "position" in the Guardian's (or is it just
Guardian?)
Office. To "qualify" for this position, I was given what can best
be described (and I'm fudging this a little to avoid any legal
hassles) as a "crash course" covering New Era Dianetics through
OTIII. I did some solo work, but most of it was with a "tutor"
who, I determined later, was also gently probing me on various
things to determine my suitability for the GO and probably the
Sea Org.
Well, I kept "advancing" but nothing happened. I mentioned this
several times, and was told that by the time I made OT, that
I'd have an IQ of 200 (whatever that means!), perfect recall,
and so on. Yes, on occasion I "believed" I was getting some
results, but would always decide that I wasn't. I was also
hearing stories of "powers" but when I asked for details
or demonstrations ("you can fly!?" "show me!") they
remained stories.
OTIII and events surrounding it were just too much for me. Most
readers of this group will know that OTIII describes events
in the distant past involving alien beings, space travel,
exploding volcanos and so on. I started to object to this
on scientific grounds. I also have a good background in
archaeology, and was asking some VERY pointed questions
about geology, biology, linguistics, and so on.
Initially, I was told that I needed more processing, that
I had some implants that prevented me from "accepting"
the truth; I'd have to do this before my "capabilities"
were "released" or some such thing.
At about this point, my "sponsor" started to hint that
it was time for me to start to pay for my own auditing;
it seems that my "complaining" was reaching some of the
higher levels and someone who had initially been perceived
as a hot recruit was not working out.
I found out the cost; I didn't have that sort of money,
so I approached my father. We had a long talk...he said,
"Let's investigate...what do you know about this man
Hubbard?" I showed him the bio, and he found it incredible;
he (my father) served with distinction in the Pacific, and
just did not accept it. We got copies of Navy records, and
sure enough, no command of a corvette squadron, no long
list of citations, no mention of serious injuries.
The next step was a PI, who checked with George Washington
University and Princeton. Hubbard flunked out of GWU (or
dropped out...) and never attended Princeton. We found
a reference to a Ph.D. from Sequoia University, which was
a degree mill.
I then allowed an electrical engineer to open my E-Meter and
take a look. He explained the Wheatstone Bridge circuit to me,
and I accepted that there is no correlation between resistance
and "mental mass" (whatever that means).
I returned to the Celebrity Centre and had a long talk with
my course supervisor. I told her that I had seen no results...
not personally, not with anyone else. I told her that I now
had serious doubts about Hubbard's background as well as
the effectiveness of the E-Meter. I also repeated my list
of questions about OTIII.
She told me (quite sternly) that I should not investigate
Scientology. She told me that a "high level OT" could
wipe me out with a thought, and that the Church did not
tolerate "snooping around" and the like.
She said that I needed to do "an ethics course" and that
it would not cost me anything. She said that if I didn't
do the course, that I'd be declared an SP and kicked out
of Scientology.
OK, off to ethics. My first encounter was with the "Director
of Communications" of the Celebrity Centre, who also seemed
to be the receptionist. She told me that she had gained the
ability to speak fluent Spanish through auditing. Well,
let me tell you, she could not speak fluent Spanish, in
fact, apart from a few expressions, she knew nothing about
Spanish. She told me that such accusations were "going
to get me into trouble" with the Ethics Officer, who was
a "powerful" person.
Finally...into the inner sanctum of the ethics officer. The
guy was a little runt who wore glasses, squinted and chain
smoked. He told me that I had to stop asking questions, stop
investigating, stop challenging people's claims of abilities,
and so on. He wanted me to sign some forms. I refused. He
produced some paperwork, and said that he'd process me for
"declaration". I said I didn't care. He then told me that
he'd "take care of me" if I kept asking questions. I asked
him what that meant. He said that he would certainly hurt
me, maybe kill me "with his OT powers" if I did not comply
with his demands.
At this point, I had a "cognition": Scientology is RUBBISH. I
told him about my cognition, wished him well, and got up
to leave. He said "you'll never get home...I'll stop you!".
I walked out, he followed me, making all sorts of threats.
I got to my car, and got out my key. He grabbed me. I turned
around, he hit me (not very hard). I said "try that again,
and you'd better be Superman". He did, I blocked it, and
hit him myself. He picked up a board and swung it at me;
I knocked it out of his hands, and hit him a few times
until he fell down.
This altercation had attracted some attention, and someone
had called the police. Within (it seemed) minutes, the parking
lot was full of Scientologists, and two police cars and an had
ambulance had arrived.
I told my version of the story. The EO said I was "a troublemaker
who needed to learn some manners". The police asked if I wanted
to press charges. I said no, I just need to get home. The EO
was taken to the hospital for stitches-he cut his face on
the pavement when he fell (I didn't mean to hurt him, but
hey...a board?!).
A few nights later, I had dinner with my "sposor"; I didn't
know it when I set up the dinner, but two "representatives"
from the CoS came along as well.
My sponsor didn't get to say more than "hello"; the two
CoS reps told me that I had betrayed my sponsor, the
Church, Hubbard, my fellow Scientologists, and
that I was a criminal. They said I had committed a
"high crime" by attacking the Ethics Officer.
I was told that the ONLY way "out" was to sign up for
the Sea Org-then and there-and promise to pay not only
for all of the services I had received, but for what
I gathered was about two years of additional training
and auditing.
I said that I was not going to join the Sea Org, not
pay them anything, and not stop asking questions. One
of them said "you know, I could kill you right now...
with a thought". I said "well, you know, I've been asking
for demonstrations for a while now, why don't you just
do it and get it over with?"
The reply was something like "don't worry, we'll get
you when we have to".
I said "let me give you some incentive" and poured
a glass of water down the front of her blouse. I
got up and left the restaurant. Yes, I know it was
rude, but I did-and still do-want to see a demonstration
of all these powers that I've heard about and been
threatened with. I figured a little ice water ought
to provoke even an operating thetan into action...
And, surprisingly, that's about it. I got an
"invoice" from them about two months later,
which I ignored.
So let's look at what happened...I got no results
at all, that's important. If "the tech always works"
then something's wrong here. I asked questions, and
was accused of heresy (let's not get into the
results of my research, but I will say that I think
that CoS "history" is a bunch of lies). I was
not only threatened, but attacked.
To me, false claims, no results, and attacks are
not a good combination. The actions of the Church
of Scientology are what has set me against it.
I welcome any and all comments...
Patrick Jost
wbarwell
Lisa Ruby
> (Quote source: Scientology Jargon:
> >OT)http://www.shipbrook.com/jeff/CoS/scijarg.html#ot
> "Kill with a thought" really means
>that demons are sent on assignment to
> accomplish a killing."
>It is NOT Scientology.
Barbara, you understand Scientology to be good and to be used for good
and I understand that.
However, I believe some posters in this thread are doing damage control
by denying that demons are behind the 'kill with a thought' phenomenon.
"Kill with a thought' is Scientology's term for a death curse. Other
groups probably have their own terms for this phenomenon. Thinking
alone won't accomplish a killing but it is true that great
concentration and cooperative demons are needed to accomplish a death
curse.
Satan's followers do send demons on assignment to kill people. They
have to do vile things to get the demons to do their bidding (even
blatant, illegal, in-the-public's-face evil deeds) but they they take
the risk in order to acquire the demonic cooperation necessary to carry
out a major assignment -such as the death of a person on the top of
their hit list.
[Sure, they can send out someone to physically murder the person, but
when this is not possible, they will send a death curse.]
This is how satanists operate in whatever group they belong to. It does
not matter what cover they use--(Satanists are more effective if pose
as Christians or cult-busters) ----they have to have demonic
cooperation to accomplish supernatural feats.
Curses are what makes the world go round--in the realm of the demonic
network, I mean. That is what they use to get an advantage over their
enemies and the higher they want to get in the network, the more demons
they need to acquire (the more illegal, immoral, deadly things they
must do) in order to do more high-level cursing.
Anybody who wants to go against Satan's realm head-on had better back
up until you get right with God because if you go against them
relentlessly in the key areas they don't want you to touch, you will
not live without God's protection.
Lisa Ruby
http://www.libertytothecaptives.net
roger gonnet
"Have you been David Riced today?" <BarbaraSc...@excite.com> a écrit dans
le message de news: 1133581038....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> SirLurksAlot wrote:
>> http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/felos
>
> What is the matter with you, Randall? Why do you constantly post killer
> postings?
>
> Something tells me if you could kill with a thought that I would be
> dead already. :)
Listen "Barbie": I doubt a lot that anyone here wants you dead: but sure, I'd
bet that anybody here would like to see you sane and out of the brainwashing
machine.
IF - IF you're a real person and not a dead one whose Identity was taken by
OSAers to shit their rants here, you could be very interested to check the
veracity of all the things that can be observed when one CHECKS them oneself.
r
Ted Mayett
wrote:
>
>Ask Ted Mayett about Jim Kalergis and the dead roach.
>
Yeah, the boy claimed he was sitting there, a roach walked by, he
focused on the roach, "and that roach fried".
It was something like this. But he did say, "that roach fried" and it
was from Intention or some such thing.