If you are a Scientologist in good standing then you should not be reading this newsgroup. Your Church has forbidden it and although you have set out on the "Bridge to Total Freedom(tm)" your "Freedom" does NOT include disobeying the dictates of your Church. The reason your are warned not to read the posts here is because there are SPs here trying to enturbulate you. One type of post you should never read is the ones where they use the phrase "I am mocking up my own reactive mind" in it somewhere. You must not read this phrase if you are a preclear. That is because it is the "Clear Cognition" and reading it and knowing that it is the Clear Cognition could stall your progress on the Bridge to Total Freedom. So be warned.
> In article > <1134655311.167368.136...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > "RolandRB" <rolandbe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> If you are a Scientologist in good standing then you should >> not be >> reading this newsgroup. Your Church has forbidden it and >> although you >> have set out on the "Bridge to Total Freedom(tm)" your >> "Freedom" does >> NOT include disobeying the dictates of your Church. The >> reason your are >> warned not to read the posts here is because there are SPs >> here trying >> to enturbulate you. One type of post you should never read >> is the ones >> where they use the phrase "I am mocking up my own reactive >> mind" in it >> somewhere. You must not read this phrase if you are a >> preclear. That is >> because it is the "Clear Cognition" and reading it and >> knowing that it >> is the Clear Cognition could stall your progress on the >> Bridge to Total >> Freedom. So be warned.
> Sir.
> I am not aware of the Church of Scientology forbiding its > members from > reading this newsgroup.
> Do you have any reference to such? (Other than anecdotal?)
> There are SP's out in the world. This, though, is not a > reason to hide > from life.
> The solution as provided by LRH is to "Decide to flourish > and prosper!"
> Additionally he says: "There is no more deadly way to get > even with a > suppressive or an antagonistic person...."
> Your attempt to introvert people by your "warning" is simply > that, an > attempt to stop or diminish peoples reach for information.
> My humble opinion.
> Alex.
Alex of course you are correct, with an IQ like yours you see like a laser through lies and bullshit and SUPPRESSIVE spin no matter how covertly disguised. Congratulations.
Of course scientology inc wants you to read ARS...thats why they have sent out the thugs, tried to remove the group from USENET, sued and tried to ruin its participants for 15 years now in state and federal courts world wide. It is only because of your stunning intellectual achievements in scientology that you have been able to recognise this.
Alex wrote: > In article <1134655311.167368.136...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > "RolandRB" <rolandbe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>If you are a Scientologist in good standing then you should not be >>reading this newsgroup. Your Church has forbidden it and although you >>have set out on the "Bridge to Total Freedom(tm)" your "Freedom" does >>NOT include disobeying the dictates of your Church. The reason your are >>warned not to read the posts here is because there are SPs here trying >>to enturbulate you. One type of post you should never read is the ones >>where they use the phrase "I am mocking up my own reactive mind" in it >>somewhere. You must not read this phrase if you are a preclear. That is >>because it is the "Clear Cognition" and reading it and knowing that it >>is the Clear Cognition could stall your progress on the Bridge to Total >>Freedom. So be warned.
> Sir.
> I am not aware of the Church of Scientology forbiding its members from > reading this newsgroup.
> Do you have any reference to such? (Other than anecdotal?)
You might want to just call your local OSA Rep and ask if they have any guidance for you regarding this. I'm sure they will have a few things to say.
> There are SP's out in the world. This, though, is not a reason to hide > from life.
Damned skippy. Although I think SPs is an over-simplification. There are definitely people who have adopted the strategy of overwhelming those they meet who they find a possible threat to them. Sometimes the overwhelm attempts are violent, sometimes they are covertly hostile (apparently helpful if not viewed closely).
> The solution as provided by LRH is to "Decide to flourish and prosper!"
Doesn't hurt to know how the mind works, either.
> Additionally he says: "There is no more deadly way to get even with a > suppressive or an antagonistic person...."
Yep, just going about your business and doing well is perfectly acceptable.
> Your attempt to introvert people by your "warning" is simply that, an > attempt to stop or diminish peoples reach for information.
Well, he's also right: The Church of Scientology has an enemies list, and that list includes many of the posters to this forum. I believe the Church's policy on this is still to handle or disconnect (and only do the handle step if you are trained and authorized to do so).
Alex wrote: > I am not aware of the Church of Scientology forbiding its members from > reading this newsgroup.
> Do you have any reference to such? (Other than anecdotal?)
Several years ago, a scientologist posted on this newsgroup. OSA contacted them (I think through email) and asked them NOT to post to ARS, and also said that OSA had several operatives already handling the newsgroup.
That's the general details. Someone that knows what to google could maybe find the specific post regarding it.
> > I am not aware of the Church of Scientology forbiding its members from > > reading this newsgroup.
> > Do you have any reference to such? (Other than anecdotal?)
> Several years ago, a scientologist posted on this newsgroup. OSA > contacted them (I think through email) and asked them NOT to post to > ARS, and also said that OSA had several operatives already handling the > newsgroup.
> That's the general details. Someone that knows what to google could > maybe find the specific post regarding it.
> Mad Kow
Notes re. two types of "suitable guises" long used by the C of S:
1) The fake "ex-Scientologist"-type "reasonable critic," who vaguely would express disagreement with the C of S, and even Miscavige, yet would express consternation at "unreasonable critics" also called "anti-cult cultists."
Many years ago I used (god forbid, may have originated) the term "anti-cult cultist" to describe what I occasionally perceived as a cult-like anti-cultism. (It can happen.) Unfortunately, Scientology PR/Intell picked up on it (from whatever source) and began to use the term in their "ex-Scientologist" and "reasonable critic" ("Bernie-type") PR ploy.
Since then I abandoned the use of the term "anti-cult cultist" as it had been co-opted by the cult, and was now useless. Any critic using the term nowadays is either naive, a dupe, or a "sleeper" deep-Operative. Of course, it's wise to give the person the benefit of the doubt. I'm particularly inclined to recommend this amount of tolerance since I was one of the earlier users (1980s) of the term, "anti-cult cultist."
2) The "flip side" of the "reasonable coin" PR Op is the "reasonable C of S member."
This person will demonstrate a sense of humor (sometimes), by being able to mention the name "Xenu," and make sure that, as a C of S member, it's known that he has no difficulty with being on ARS. This is to "prove" that the CofS is not a fanatical cult, after all.
Of course, as already noted, it's wise to give anyone the benefit of the doubt; however, on occasion, a kick in the cyberspace butt, of someone obviously lying and manipulating on behalf of the C of S, can be therapeutic for the person, provided, sometime later, an attempt at communication is made. (Tough love.)
To put it in Scientologese, don't let anyone "drive in your anchor points" (reduce your space or reach), or inhibit your communication; at the same time try to think before responding.
I've always been amazed at the amount of time the C of S will spend on "007"-type covert PR and Intell activities. It will invest a lot, over a long period of time, always along multiple channels, and through multiple methods, to get a barely significant result.
It's so built in to what they do - and are - that I don't think they can stop doing it. They have a case of Hubbardian "sneak-o-phrenia" and there is no cure in sight.
Fortunately, it really doesn't interfere in any major way with the purpose of ARS.
Probably, should also note that there are others in the "guise" of "kooks" or "extremists," etc. and, of course, there are people who simply are that way naturally.
> In article <1134655311.167368.136...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > "RolandRB" <rolandbe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> If you are a Scientologist in good standing then you should not be >> reading this newsgroup. Your Church has forbidden it and although you >> have set out on the "Bridge to Total Freedom(tm)" your "Freedom" does >> NOT include disobeying the dictates of your Church. The reason your are >> warned not to read the posts here is because there are SPs here trying >> to enturbulate you. One type of post you should never read is the ones >> where they use the phrase "I am mocking up my own reactive mind" in it >> somewhere. You must not read this phrase if you are a preclear. That is >> because it is the "Clear Cognition" and reading it and knowing that it >> is the Clear Cognition could stall your progress on the Bridge to Total >> Freedom. So be warned.
> Sir.
> I am not aware of the Church of Scientology forbiding its members from > reading this newsgroup.
> Do you have any reference to such? (Other than anecdotal?)
If you are a member of the CoS, mention that you've been reading a.r.s next time you are in session. See what happens. For something more concrete, have a look at; http://www.xenu.net/archive/events/censorship/ Also, talk to FluffyGirl from this newsgroup concerning what happened to her as a member when the CoS found out she was reading and posting here.
> There are SP's out in the world. This, though, is not a reason to hide > from life.
> The solution as provided by LRH is to "Decide to flourish and prosper!"
This is as deep as "Don't worry, be happy!".
> Additionally he says: "There is no more deadly way to get even with a > suppressive or an antagonistic person...."
than to?
> Your attempt to introvert people by your "warning" is simply that, an > attempt to stop or diminish peoples reach for information.
> My humble opinion.
> Alex.
Hubbard also said that connection to an SP (by Hubbard's definition, anyone who is critical of the CoS) would probably deletriously effect your case and potentially get you disconnected from the CoS.
> If you are a Scientologist in good standing then you should not be > reading this newsgroup.
Scientologists can make their own decision, although most consider it entheta in here and don't want to join the ARS hate mongers.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Legal documents on the net prove that Garry Lynn Scarff conspired to commit murder; was involved in two kidnappings/deprogrammings (one with sexual abuse); stole funds of a non profit org; stole books from book stores and libraries; took the 5th on what he did while employed by a bank; committed perjury (lying under oath for 17 days); made death threats and threats of violence mainly against Barbara Schwarz but also others, and forges her and others constantly on Usenet and perhaps also elsewhere. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alex wrote: > In article <1134655311.167368.136...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > "RolandRB" <rolandbe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> If you are a Scientologist in good standing then you should not be >> reading this newsgroup. Your Church has forbidden it and although you >> have set out on the "Bridge to Total Freedom(tm)" your "Freedom" does >> NOT include disobeying the dictates of your Church. The reason your are >> warned not to read the posts here is because there are SPs here trying >> to enturbulate you. One type of post you should never read is the ones >> where they use the phrase "I am mocking up my own reactive mind" in it >> somewhere. You must not read this phrase if you are a preclear. That is >> because it is the "Clear Cognition" and reading it and knowing that it >> is the Clear Cognition could stall your progress on the Bridge to Total >> Freedom. So be warned.
> Sir.
> I am not aware of the Church of Scientology forbiding its members from > reading this newsgroup.
> Do you have any reference to such? (Other than anecdotal?)
Whether there is a policy or not is - IMHO - irrelevent, when we can observe, for instance, Claire Swazey being declared for taking part in discussions here[1]. You may conside4r that anecdotal, I suggest you ask her directly.
Anyway, since "purpose is senior policy," the victims of the criminal organisation known as the "church" <spit> of $cientology don't care whether there is a policy or not.
> Your attempt to introvert people by your "warning" is simply that, an > attempt to stop or diminish peoples reach for information.
- -- Key ID 0x09723C12, jenst...@tingleff.org Analogue filtering / 5GHz RLAN / Mdk Linux / odds and ends http://www.tingleff.org/jensting/ +44 1223 211 585 "All day at the office, micro-fishing with chips" Vivian Stanshall -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> > >> If you are a Scientologist in good standing then you should > > >> not be > > >> reading this newsgroup. Your Church has forbidden it and > > >> although you > > >> have set out on the "Bridge to Total Freedom(tm)" your > > >> "Freedom" does > > >> NOT include disobeying the dictates of your Church. The > > >> reason your are > > >> warned not to read the posts here is because there are SPs > > >> here trying > > >> to enturbulate you. One type of post you should never read > > >> is the ones > > >> where they use the phrase "I am mocking up my own reactive > > >> mind" in it > > >> somewhere. You must not read this phrase if you are a > > >> preclear. That is > > >> because it is the "Clear Cognition" and reading it and > > >> knowing that it > > >> is the Clear Cognition could stall your progress on the > > >> Bridge to Total > > >> Freedom. So be warned.
> > > Sir.
> > > I am not aware of the Church of Scientology forbiding its > > > members from > > > reading this newsgroup.
> > > Do you have any reference to such? (Other than anecdotal?)
> > > There are SP's out in the world. This, though, is not a > > > reason to hide > > > from life.
> > > The solution as provided by LRH is to "Decide to flourish > > > and prosper!"
> > > Additionally he says: "There is no more deadly way to get > > > even with a > > > suppressive or an antagonistic person...."
> > > Your attempt to introvert people by your "warning" is simply > > > that, an > > > attempt to stop or diminish peoples reach for information.
> > > My humble opinion.
> > > Alex.
> > Alex of course you are correct, with an IQ like yours you > > see like a laser through lies and bullshit and SUPPRESSIVE > > spin no matter how covertly disguised. Congratulations.
> > Of course scientology inc wants you to read ARS...thats why > > they have sent out the thugs, tried to remove the group from > > USENET, sued and tried to ruin its participants for 15 years > > now in state and federal courts world wide. It is only > > because of your stunning intellectual achievements in > > scientology that you have been able to recognise this.
> > again Alex, congratulations.... job well done.
> Mr Scott
-snip-
> My apparent naivette is a matter of choice rather than "klooelessness".
-snip-
> Alex
Inadvertently, Alex admits that his message is bogus.
And, while he may not realize it now, has just taken the first step in his recovery from the cult.
