$cn gains related to belief in the Bridge
Bernie
Roland Rashleigh-Berry <Rola...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>There must be some ex-C/Ses out there. Your comments on this would be
>greatly appreciated.
>
>From your own experience of auditing and C/Sing, would it be the case
>that the people who got the most "gains" out of auditing would be the
>ones that believed the most in the Bridge? I mean some people out there
>must have attested to various levels, written gushing success stories and
>told the rest of people how marvellous was LRH and his precious gift to
>mankind, $cn. Would it be fair to say that these gains seemed real?
>Then would it be fair to say that when you saw the Bridge and Scientology
>for what it truly was these same gains would vanish?
In both cases, I believe, the ~interpretation~ of one's gain is
partly dependent of one's own agenda. A convinced Scientology
would have a tendency to enhance his gain further than what they
are, and a convinced ex-member may have the tendency to play
them down. The truth may lay somewhere in between. The gain
weren't that marvelous, OTOH they weren't either "nothing" or
"damageable".
Another fact you should take into account as well, is the time
factor. A success story is made right after the gain, an
anti-success story is made sometimes many years after the gain.
Things change, people change, memory fades away, the flame dies
off...
>I am curious about this. You see, I believe the free-zoners get these
>gains because they really believe they will have OT powers etc. when the
>truth is not one OT on this planet could move a piece of screwed up
>cigarette paper one centimeter across a table using mind power, beams
>(whether Emerald(tm) or not) thetan hands, a thetan squash racket an
>activated ridge, a tractor beam, a pressor beam etc..
You are mixing both things here. You equate gains with OT
telekinetic powers. It is also possible to have gains that have
less potent effects, but are still gains.
>Would you agree that Hubbard was nuts when he talked about suppressive
>persons invalidating a persons gains in processing? Is it not the case
>that if a person talked some sense into a Scientologist, saying something
>like "OTs can do that can they? Can you arrange for me to see a
>demonstration? Did you know the Randi Foundation will give one of your
>OTs $1,000,000 just for demonstrating what you were talking about etc"
>then when the Scientologist faces reality the wins magically disappear
>because it was all hope based on self-delusion that was giving a person
>their "gains". Am I right in this? Looking forward to an interesting
>thread.
Both assertions can be true. A subjective gain can be "lost" if
one isn't strong enough in it. View it like a baby who tries to
walk. If he is constantly thrown back to the ground, it may be
difficult for him to have enough assurance to walk.
OTOH, in his totalitarian frame of mind, Elrong did abuse this
precept to mean that the ~only~ reason one loses one's gain is
because of suppression. He discarded this way the fact that the
gain may not be there in the first place, or that they may not
be real gains, and therefore that his tech wasn't has perfect
has he wanted it to be.
You can't really make a definitive assertion one way or the
other. You have to keep both possibilities in mind, and see on a
case by case what applies.
---------
Bernie
If I were married to you and we had only one bed, would you try
to throw me out of the bed during sleep, only because I might
have a different dream than you?
(Heidrun Beer)
Roland Rashleigh-Berry
There must be some ex-C/Ses out there. Your comments on this would be
greatly appreciated.
From your own experience of auditing and C/Sing, would it be the case
that the people who got the most "gains" out of auditing would be the
ones that believed the most in the Bridge? I mean some people out there
must have attested to various levels, written gushing success stories and
told the rest of people how marvellous was LRH and his precious gift to
mankind, $cn. Would it be fair to say that these gains seemed real?
Then would it be fair to say that when you saw the Bridge and Scientology
for what it truly was these same gains would vanish?
I am curious about this. You see, I believe the free-zoners get these
gains because they really believe they will have OT powers etc. when the
truth is not one OT on this planet could move a piece of screwed up
cigarette paper one centimeter across a table using mind power, beams
(whether Emerald(tm) or not) thetan hands, a thetan squash racket an
activated ridge, a tractor beam, a pressor beam etc..
Would you agree that Hubbard was nuts when he talked about suppressive
persons invalidating a persons gains in processing? Is it not the case
that if a person talked some sense into a Scientologist, saying something
like "OTs can do that can they? Can you arrange for me to see a
demonstration? Did you know the Randi Foundation will give one of your
OTs $1,000,000 just for demonstrating what you were talking about etc"
then when the Scientologist faces reality the wins magically disappear
because it was all hope based on self-delusion that was giving a person
their "gains". Am I right in this? Looking forward to an interesting
thread.
RRB
Anti-Cult
On Thu, 26 Dec 1996 22:56:01 -0800.
Roland Rashleigh-Berry <Rola...@netcomuk.co.uk>.
From: NETCOM Internet Ltd..
Wrote on the subject: $cn gains related to belief in the Bridge:
>Would you agree that Hubbard was nuts when he talked about suppressive
>persons invalidating a persons gains in processing? Is it not the case
>that if a person talked some sense into a Scientologist, saying something
>like "OTs can do that can they? Can you arrange for me to see a
>demonstration? Did you know the Randi Foundation will give one of your
>OTs $1,000,000 just for demonstrating what you were talking about etc"
>then when the Scientologist faces reality the wins magically disappear
>because it was all hope based on self-delusion that was giving a person
>their "gains". Am I right in this? Looking forward to an interesting
>thread.
Of course you are right. It would be some worthless OT powers that
can't survive the invalidations from a weak poor wog like me, won't
it? It's all illusions int the minds of the poor people that gets
sucked into the criminal organisation of scn.
BTW: They haven't been able to get rid of me yet with their OT-powers.
It look as if you still are around too.
BWAHAAA.
(Anti-Cult) http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/index.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------
Search terms: OT, Hubbard, NOTS, Secret, Xenu, Xemu.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Victimized by the Co$."Deadfiled" in at least one Org.Seen too
much,heard to much,lived too much. Security Coded hard disks
too much. Have been reading NOTS too much. Having chronic
pneumonia. As Arnold said: I'll be back.......
---------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ One drop of drops in the river of life ~
~ Has not the power to float by itself ~
~ But there's this demand on every drop: ~
~ Help keep the other ones up ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
GEMMAMP1
Roland Rashleigh-Berry <Rola...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>There must be some ex-C/Ses out there. Your comments on this would be
>greatly appreciated.
>From your own experience of auditing and C/Sing, would it be the case
>that the people who got the most "gains" out of auditing would be the
>ones that believed the most in the Bridge? I mean some people out there
>must have attested to various levels, written gushing success stories and
>told the rest of people how marvellous was LRH and his precious gift to
>mankind, $cn. Would it be fair to say that these gains seemed real?
>Then would it be fair to say that when you saw the Bridge and Scientology
>for what it truly was these same gains would vanish?
That's a very interesting question. I would say that when I was in the
CofS (I got to OTIII, Flag-trained Class VI auditor) that I had the
illusion that I had gains, when what I really had was a "high" similar to
the kind of high people get on drugs. Another ex-Scientologist, Vaughn
Young in a talk he once gave, compared it to being high on marijuana and
writing something you think is totally brilliant when you're high. Then
when you come down from the high, you see that what you wrote was
ridiculous. That's kind of how it was for me with the CofS and I didn't
even have to take any drugs to do it. The hypnotic techniques gave me all
kinds of illusions of gains. I even believed I had 20/20 vision, yet when
my eyes were actually tested I flunked the eye exam. With real gains,
which I have had outside the CofS, you don't need continous association
with a group to keep the gains, whereas with illusory gains, it is another
story.
>I am curious about this. You see, I believe the free-zoners get these
>gains because they really believe they will have OT powers etc. when the
>truth is not one OT on this planet could move a piece of screwed up
>cigarette paper one centimeter across a table using mind power, beams
>(whether Emerald(tm) or not) thetan hands, a thetan squash racket an
>activated ridge, a tractor beam, a pressor beam etc..
Yes, that is an excellent point. They might believe they have OT powers,
but I have yet to see one actually demonstrate them.
>Would you agree that Hubbard was nuts when he talked about suppressive
>persons invalidating a persons gains in processing? Is it not the case
>that if a person talked some sense into a Scientologist, saying something
>like "OTs can do that can they? Can you arrange for me to see a
>demonstration? Did you know the Randi Foundation will give one of your
>OTs $1,000,000 just for demonstrating what you were talking about etc"
>then when the Scientologist faces reality the wins magically disappear
>because it was all hope based on self-delusion that was giving a person
>their "gains". Am I right in this? Looking forward to an interesting
>thread.
I think you're right, but most people stuck in the cult mindset will
rationalize it away and come up with several good reasons why OTs can't
demonstrate their powers. Let's see if we hear from anyone right here on
this newgroup.
************************************************
Monica Pignotti
"If we would be guided by the light of reason,
we must let our minds be bold."
Louis Brandeis
Future808
I'm not ex-Cos, but let's say that I am somewhere in the middle. I would
like to comment about this.
"From your own experience of auditing and C/Sing, would it be the case
>that the people who got the most "gains" out of auditing would be the
>ones that believed the most in the Bridge? I mean some people out there
>must have attested to various levels, written gushing success stories and
>told the rest of people how marvellous was LRH and his precious gift to
>mankind, $cn. Would it be fair to say that these gains seemed real?
>Then would it be fair to say that when you saw the Bridge and Scientology
>for what it truly was these same gains would vanish"
I think that as the CoS stands today, and the way they deliver the tech,
it has become something of faith. I've gotten pretty annoyed because I
have come to find that much of what is presented takes faith. Over and
over again, you are told that if you don't get the result you are looking
for, then YOU did it wrong, YOU had MUs, YOU had O/Ws, etc., etc. To me,
this equivelant to having faith. Now, if the tech REALLY worked like it
claims, then every org on the planet would be huge and expanding. And
people would not leave, ask for refunds, cause flaps, etc. From what I
have viewed myself, the Church is not expanding.So, yes, I think that the
more one had "faith" or just "believed" in LRH, the more gain they would
get.
Re: the whole OT thing. I have met many, many OTs in my life. I have yet
to find one of them that has total control over their "powers". I know one
OT 3 who could tell you who was calling before the phone even rang. He
also got mugged one night. That doesn't add up. Kirstie Alley is/was OT 5
last I checked - and she either got or is getting a divorce (which btw,
LRH says he has the tech to totally handle divorces). I know someone OT7
whose husband was OT, I don't know what level and he reverted to drugs.
Basically, I have seen OTs do some pretty cool stuff - buy they are just
as human as the rest of us. I know that the "Captain" who made AOLA St.
Hill sized was OT 5 - some months after that
he ran off with some woman. So basically he blew. And he was married at
the time, I can't remember if he had kids or not. His name was Ivan
Oblinsky, I think.
Re SPs and gains: I find it hard to believe that someone who gets declared
SP loses or never had the gains in the first place. They are alot of
"safeguards"
along the way to ensure that a PC is getting gains - i.e. floating needles
at session end, good TA, F/N at Exam - attest at end of levels, etc., etc.
For someone who got all the way up the bridge, and then one fine day was
declared-
well-you tell me. How could he get up that far and never have really made
it?
All in all - I think that somethings are very workable WITHOUT faith - and
alot are not. I think I've used up enough space now. Feel free to ask any
questions you might have.
Roland Rashleigh-Berry
Thanks for your contribution. I've done OT tricks like you describe, know who
is behind the ringing phone, intending someone to phone me and they do,
answering a person's question before they voice it. I've even done things like
go home early, sit by the phone and wait for the person to phone me and offer
me exactly what it was I wanted. I've sat in an org waiting room and willed a
balloon to rise up the floor and settle in my lap in exactly 30 seconds. It
did, the child that left it there came in, picked it up, smacked it then walked
away. It did settle in my lap in exactly 30 seconds. (It wasn't what I was
expecting though). However I have very little control of these things. Also,
if I cast my mind back, I've been doing the same things since I was a kid.
Scientology has not changed anything. Quite a few of my prayers work! I'm
only a part time atheist. Sometimes I pray and I get rewarded. Is it me? Is
it God? I don't know. I've seen this in other people. My mother, for
example, if she enters a competition where a food hamper is the prize, she gets
it. Always! I think most people have these powers to some degree but none can
control them. Sometimes they can be working for you. Sometimes they can be
working against you. I think these powers are nothing to do with Scientology.
It could be that you notice it more when it does happen when in Scn just
because you are looking for it.
I don't think The Bridge is worth a cent, quite frankly, when it comes to
controlling these powers and getting a better knowledge of ourselves. Hubbard
had no idea of how to go about his research. His Bridge is pure nonsense.
I wish freezoners would drop the Bridge and build a new one. They should
remove from their thinking all the silly ideas and false claims about OTs that
Hubbard made. It causes a problem since these delusions get passed on to new
people who are gullible. They truly believe in it. Because of this they get
"gains" in their auditing which are not real ones. They cannot stand up to
scrutiny. They are kept in a permanent state of self-delusion getting their
"gains". The freezoner C/S sees them getting gains and thinks he is seeing the
"tech" working. So the freezoners do the Bridge up to OT VIII thinking it must
be doing them some good. They make a basic C/Sing error. They should be
auditing the pc in the direction of greater self-determinism and improvement
of ability. But what they are really doing is suspending the pc in their own
illusions. They become increasing the victims of their delusions as time goes
on so yes, they eventually do feel body thetans sticking to their bones and
talking. This is wrong. It indicates the C/S is in just as bad a condition as
the pc.
Early on in Scientology Hubbard happened upon exteriorisation. I wish
freezoners would concentrate on that and then take it from there.
RRB
Paper Tiger
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In Message-ID: <19961228165...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
futu...@aol.com (Future808) wrote:
[snip]
>I think that as the CoS stands today, and the way they deliver the tech,
>it has become something of faith. I've gotten pretty annoyed because I
>have come to find that much of what is presented takes faith. Over and
>over again, you are told that if you don't get the result you are looking
>for, then YOU did it wrong, YOU had MUs, YOU had O/Ws, etc., etc. To me,
>this equivelant to having faith.
I've never been a Scientologist, but I really don't see how faith
(or Faith, as Christians would say) plays any part in Scientology.
To a Scientologist the "tech" simply works. You don't have to have
faith in it, it *WORKS*, 100% of the time, so long as you carefully
follow the instructions, don't have any critical thoughts and don't
rub up against any suppressives. As you point out above, any
failure of the "tech" to perform is YOUR fault, something YOU'VE
done (not particularly subtle as meme defense-mechinisms go, but
that's L. Ron for you).
So far as I can see, faith plays as much a part in Scientology as
it does in baking brownies - none at all. Follow the recipe and
it'll work. Screw up somewhere and it won't. Where's the faith
in that?
>Now, if the tech REALLY worked like it
>claims, then every org on the planet would be huge and expanding. And
>people would not leave, ask for refunds, cause flaps, etc.
Ah, but clever uncle L. Ron has an excuse for this as well. The
reason Scientology hasn't caught on like wildfire is because the
(10 or 12) Evil Psychs that control the world have conspired
against it. As have (at various times) Interpol, the IRS, the AMA,
the APA, the FDA and probably every other three letter acronym in
Washington D.C. And the ARSCC, of course, but that doesn't exist
(insert maniacal laughter here).
Think about it. What's one of the most frequently asked questions
by Scientologists at critical demonstrations?
"Who's paying you to do this?"
** Paper Tiger (SP3, KBM, LFDoX)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMsV0ZICmc8kif9MJAQEhQAP/caOW1MLNQpMGSc4wT4klqInTFZWICENx
6SiKekabC9mLrdlOvw88z9o/1LE3SOwZDPBTPfett+SjANkZSKKOuZvyJ+KJdb8q
g5phUoO1/uDPMTcqDhSCn1OuLNl3YG+EXqJNXd5lRlgDSTljEM7AJyTdJAl/g2OE
eMKnl/y1S5c=
=P8vf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Bev
Roy wrote:
>
> Paper Tiger <paper...@nym.alias.net> wrote:
>
> Inside the cult, they call it "certainty". They have a "certainty"
> that the E-meter is a workable technological artifact. They have a
> "certainty" that Elron was Source and infallible; the ultimate model
> of moral behavior, daring and dashing guy that he said he was.
Correct. I think this needs to be asserted, especially for new readers
to a.r.s. who may not be able to distinguish a discussion as being
from actual Co$ members, or ex-members who have decided to think for
their own selves and move on with the tech and philosophy in their
own manner and decide for their own selves what they are going to keep
or throw away.
I prefer to limit most discussions to the actual Co$ itself, as most
readers come here to find out exactly what it is the Co$ IS really all
about.
A fact that can NOT be disputed is in Co$, it is strictly the Hub and
exactly what is laid out in the books, tapes, courses and policy. No
deviation from the official Co$ stance. No member DARE walk up to any
of the staff and say about a course, "Well, it's a good starting point,
but I think maybe LRH may have erred a bit right here". :-) <and I DO
mean really BIG grin!!>
You KNOW what that action (what we WOGS call free thought or ~critical~
thought) would bring on the person making that statement. In the Co$
there is NO questioning, there is NO deviation, there is NO doubt, there
is NO verbal tech, there is only SOURCE as the Co$ lays it out to be
followed, period.
> How many culties know anything about a Wheatstone bridge? And is
> watching the flicker-tick of a needle really any different from
> reading the entrails of a freshly slaughtered chicken? (Ok! It does
> go over better in suburbia!)
Excuse me, but here in Florida there is quite a bit of Santeria (sp?)
belief and practices. Let me tell you, everyone of that belief will
tell you that their "tech" works. They have seen all kinds of what
Co$ refers to as ~OT~ phenomena. They will tell you that they CAN cause
things to happen at their will with the proper ~rites~. So, you have
made an extremely valid point here. It's amazing the myriads of
phenomena people from all practices can be assured to have been completely
real in their own minds :-)
> Oh! And there's a ton of information that indicates that Elron was
> nothing but a big, fat, pathological liar!
Well now, we DON'T want to talk about that!!! <G>
> So it seems that Scieno's certainty is another religions faith; or a
> confidence trickster's dream.
Everybody has dreams, desires, needs and wants. That's why it's so
easy to be preyed upon when people are are honestly searching with
their hearts.
> > Ah, but clever uncle L. Ron has an excuse for this as well. The
> > reason Scientology hasn't caught on like wildfire is because the
> > (10 or 12) Evil Psychs that control the world have conspired
> > against it. As have (at various times) Interpol, the IRS, the AMA,
> > the APA, the FDA and probably every other three letter acronym in
> > Washington D.C. And the ARSCC, of course, but that doesn't exist
> > (insert maniacal laughter here).
Any organization that has to rely on excuses of others for it's
inability to grow or flourish should be easily spotted for the
sham that it is.
I think if Co$ wants to claim scientology as a true spiritual belief
system, they have simply GOT to relase it from being the HOSTAGE that
they have been holding it as, and free it for people to use and
practice as their own hearts desire.
Otherwise, the Co$ must admit scientology is NOT a strue spiritual
belief, or that they are guilty of withholding the right of religious
freedom from others. The Co$ is guilty of total hypocrisy.
Beverly
Bernie
Roland Rashleigh-Berry <Rola...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>Sometimes they can be working for you. Sometimes they can be
>working against you.
I followed you so far, but I don't think I follow you when you
say that sometimes the powers can be working against you. That
one has no real control over these phenomena, I would agree. But
I have never seen them working against the person. If you mean
by that the psychological association related to these power ("I
want to have them,' etc), then I may largely agree. But as for
the powers themselves, have you ever seen them happening in a
way that they are working against the person? I didn't. I always
saw their consequences as either innocuous, or beneficial. Most
of the time they are a help.
>I think these powers are nothing to do with Scientology.
> It could be that you notice it more when it does happen when in Scn just
>because you are looking for it.
Yes, or in other spiritually oriented frameworks. If you put
your attention on them, them they may happen more. If you expect
some of them, you may get what you want, but you may need to pay
the bill later...
As far as I am concerned, I don't put attention on these things
anymore. I let them happen naturally, if they have to. I make a
distinction between psychical and spiritual. Psychic powers are
just one of the consequence of spiritual development. When they
become the goal, as can happen in Scientology or anything else,
then it becomes seriously wrong. What is important, I think, is
increased awareness, understanding, freedom.
>I wish freezoners would drop the Bridge and build a new one. They should
>remove from their thinking all the silly ideas and false claims about OTs that
>Hubbard made. It causes a problem since these delusions get passed on to new
>people who are gullible. They truly believe in it. Because of this they get
>"gains" in their auditing which are not real ones. They cannot stand up to
>scrutiny. They are kept in a permanent state of self-delusion getting their
>"gains". The freezoner C/S sees them getting gains and thinks he is seeing the
>"tech" working. So the freezoners do the Bridge up to OT VIII thinking it must
>be doing them some good. They make a basic C/Sing error. They should be
>auditing the pc in the direction of greater self-determinism and improvement
>of ability. But what they are really doing is suspending the pc in their own
>illusions. They become increasing the victims of their delusions as time goes
>on so yes, they eventually do feel body thetans sticking to their bones and
>talking. This is wrong. It indicates the C/S is in just as bad a condition as
>the pc.
Again, I don't think you can categorically assert this one way
or the other. Sometimes auditing, whether within the COS or in
the Freezone, is sometimes beneficial, sometimes delusional.
What is basically wrong with auditing, IMO, is to think that it
will resolve any of the fundamental problems. I believe it can
be useful in resolving some of the problems sometimes, not all
of the problems all the time. If one integrates some of the
principles or practice of auditing or Scientology in a bigger
personal and spiritual framework, fine. In this context, it
~could~ be useful both to resolve problems and to explore the
terra incognita. But to think that any technique in the world
will ever bring about a spiritual state is a serious mistake.
It's the psychological approach to the techniques that are the
real problem, not so much the techniques themselves.
>Early on in Scientology Hubbard happened upon exteriorisation. I wish
>freezoners would concentrate on that and then take it from there.
Yeah. Any freezoner should seriously sort out the material at
end. I think that it is one of its most important (and
difficult) role.
---------
Bernie
In that kind of environment, NO "tech" is workable, let alone
what Hubbard called his "tech"
(Joe Harrington)
Roy
Paper Tiger <paper...@nym.alias.net> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>In Message-ID: <19961228165...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
>futu...@aol.com (Future808) wrote:
>[snip]
>>I think that as the CoS stands today, and the way they deliver the tech,
>>it has become something of faith. I've gotten pretty annoyed because I
>>have come to find that much of what is presented takes faith. Over and
>>over again, you are told that if you don't get the result you are looking
>>for, then YOU did it wrong, YOU had MUs, YOU had O/Ws, etc., etc. To me,
>>this equivelant to having faith.
>
> I've never been a Scientologist, but I really don't see how faith
> (or Faith, as Christians would say) plays any part in Scientology.
>
> To a Scientologist the "tech" simply works. You don't have to have
> faith in it, it *WORKS*, 100% of the time, so long as you carefully
> follow the instructions, don't have any critical thoughts and don't
> rub up against any suppressives. As you point out above, any
> failure of the "tech" to perform is YOUR fault, something YOU'VE
> done (not particularly subtle as meme defense-mechinisms go, but
> that's L. Ron for you).
>
> So far as I can see, faith plays as much a part in Scientology as
> it does in baking brownies - none at all. Follow the recipe and
> it'll work. Screw up somewhere and it won't. Where's the faith
> in that?
One man's faith is another man's certainty?
Inside the cult, they call it "certainty". They have a "certainty"
that the E-meter is a workable technological artifact. They have a
"certainty" that Elron was Source and infallible; the ultimate model
of moral behavior, daring and dashing guy that he said he was.
How many culties know anything about a Wheatstone bridge? And is
watching the flicker-tick of a needle really any different from
reading the entrails of a freshly slaughtered chicken? (Ok! It does
go over better in suburbia!)
Oh! And there's a ton of information that indicates that Elron was
nothing but a big, fat, pathological liar!
So it seems that Scieno's certainty is another religions faith; or a
confidence trickster's dream.
>>Now, if the tech REALLY worked like it
>>claims, then every org on the planet would be huge and expanding. And
>>people would not leave, ask for refunds, cause flaps, etc.
>
> Ah, but clever uncle L. Ron has an excuse for this as well. The
> reason Scientology hasn't caught on like wildfire is because the
> (10 or 12) Evil Psychs that control the world have conspired
> against it. As have (at various times) Interpol, the IRS, the AMA,
> the APA, the FDA and probably every other three letter acronym in
> Washington D.C. And the ARSCC, of course, but that doesn't exist
> (insert maniacal laughter here).
>
> Think about it. What's one of the most frequently asked questions
> by Scientologists at critical demonstrations?
>
> "Who's paying you to do this?"
Those Evil Psychs! They won't give me the price of a donut and a cup
of coffee, but they'll pay me to post here!? Where do I sign up?
Do they have kewl advertising T-Shirts?
ARSCC doesn't; I've looked everywhere. They don't pay squat, either.
You have to pay big bucks to join and all you get is a souvenir book
listing Xenu's lecture and concert dates, favorite pranks and trolls,
crafts and cut-ups for stormy-weather days, and a pretty good recipe
for Chocolate Chip Cookies -- and a recipe for clam chowder that needs
more chilis. And, of course, the astonishing assertion that neither
Xenu and ARSCC exist; they're a Fig-Newton of the imagination!)
Roy