another delurker
MORRIGAN
of finding out what ARS was all about.
I am posting my observations, as it is my understanding that this is
supposed to be an open forum on the discussion of Scientology.
I expect to be attacked for my views as it seems that any Scientologist
that posts here gets their communication twisted to suit certain
people’s needs.
OK so here goes.
I have been in Scientology for almost 30 years. I am not an OSA Shill,
but be will be accused of being one anyway because any Scientologist
that post here is. A = A. If you are a Scientologist then you are OSA.
Ludicrous thinking but so be it. Plus there is no way to prove or
disprove it here on ARS so why bother.
I see that there are a few basic types of posters here. I apologize up
front for not naming specific names of posters here when I discuss the
ARS crowd. There are only a few names that stick out in my mind
that I might refer to. I would need some sort of file system to keep
everyone straight and which posters are on what side but I am too busy
to invest time and energy in that .
SCIENTOLOGISTS
Even the Scienolgists have “types”
DEBATERS:
You have the Claire Swayze types, that include Enzo and a couple of
others, who seem to try to actually communication their views. They
are viciously attacked as being OSA shills and horrible people, but
personally, I think they are just Scientologists defending their religion.
And they do a pretty good job.
ANTI PSYCH CROWD
Then you have the anti psych Scio’s who post the crimes of
Psychiatry and the drug companies. That is their schtick.
ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS
Then you have the Scientologist who attack back. Sometimes they are
funny and sometimes they get the critics hooting and howling by
pushing their buttons. There are not a lot of them so when I read one I
usually find them amusing. McGoo for example has had me rolling on
the floor laughing. I see many of you have killfiled him. It seems to
me that you don’t want to hear his viewpoint because it is too close to
the truth.
So you ask, which group am I? I could be in any one of these groups
at any time. I would like to be in the debaters group, but I could see
myself posting anti psych stuff if I had it and I could also see me
replying in a not nice way if you attacked me for my beliefs.
THE CRITICS
THE NEVER A SCIENTOLOGIST
One group of critics seem to have never been in Scientology and they
just rant and rave like they know what they are talking about but most
of the time they haven’t got a clue. These guys generally bore me
because they are more stupid than mean. I think they found a good
news group to vent in and have read a bunch of web sites so they now
consider themselves experts. This group thinks they are very cool, hip,
witty and very superior but in fact they only know what they have read
on the entheta sites and have no real experience. If ARS didn’t exist
this group would find another issue to get involved with just so they
could spew their hate and think of themselves as very cool.
DEBATERS
One group of critics seem to want to discuss issues without all the
attacks and mean spirited stuff. Most of these people have a good
sense of humor and are truly funny. Plus they have interesting
questions and try to debate the issues in a sane fashion. Some are Ex
Scio and some are not.
THE FOAMERS
The last group are the FOAMERS. These are the ex- Scientologists
that tend to foam at the mouth. They alter and twist communication.
They make up stuff and downright lie. All with the justification that
they “have to destroy Scientology”, so anything goes. But then they
criticize Scientology for doing the exact same thing. They are not
interested in debate but just attack and make up facts to suit them.
The FOAMERS are not much fun to read. I feel like I am reading the
posts of people going over the edge. I actually worry about this bunch
as over the past few months a couple of them seem to be really losing
it.
I can see the response to this post. One or more will respond by
making up their own
“types” of posters. Something like, Clams, Extra Large Clams, and
Clam smothered in Tartar Sauce.
While on the subject, I do not know if other Scientologists have stated
this but too me
a Scientologist being a clam is like a:
Jew being a kike a
Hindu being a dot an
black being a nigger a
Mexican being a spic
and so on and so on. It is a term of hatred. And these terms are not
tolerated in society.
Those of you who use it, dead agent yourselves. Anyone who reads
your posts knows instantly that you are a bigot.
I would also like to give my opinion to the Ex Scio debater group.
You know who you are so all others need not reply.
You guys were in Scientology and left. Instead of having the courage
to stay and fight and make things Right-- you left. You now stand on
the sidelines and boo.
You guys whine! You act like victims. “Look what they did to me!!!
I am a victim. Poor me.” Whine, Whine, Whine.
You left! You lack the courage to stand and fight and make it right
from within. Anybody can stand outside and throw stones and say
“ya, well I am now outside and I have the courage to throw stones and
take that big bad church down because I think they are evil and I am
going to handle it right here from my computer and pass out 53 flyers
to people who walk by the local church. What I am doing takes
courage. “
I realize that you think that, but you guys went from running away
from what you saw was wrong, to attacking what was wrong, to trying
to completely destroy what was wrong and get rid of what is good. Of
course, here you will state that nothing in Scientology is good. That
makes no sense. If Scientology did not produce results then people
would be leaving in droves. Many of you have been to Clearwater or
LA. You see what it looks like. There are many people doing services
in Scientology and their lives are better for it.
Some of you post that Scientology is not expanding but shrinking.
This is just not true. I see the expansion with my own eyes. I believe
this is just wishful thinking on your part and you just make up stuff
like that to try to convince yourself and others that it is so.
Just cause it didn’t work for you doesn’t mean it won’t work for
others.
And your response to this is: . “Ah, but they are brainwashed idiots
and I have to save them from themselves”
Who asked you? You guys must all be registered as liberal democrats.
They have the same viewpoint on people i.e. people are stupid so we
have to tell the what to do and pass a bunch of laws to stop them from
harming themselves. You think, “We know what is best for everyone
else, because we are smarter then everyone else.”
Being in Scientology for almost 30 years has allowed me to see things
that were wrong. But I personally found that it wasn’t “Scientology”
that was wrong. It was creeps misapplying Scientology and then
calling it Scientology that was wrong. You Ex Scio’s saw it too. But
instead of finding the correct SP who got himself in a position of
power in an organization and then misused Scientology to harm others,
you blamed the entire religion. Your lack of courage came when you
failed to handle the creep in front of you who was misapplying
Scientology on you and others and you left. You did not stay and try
to help your friends who were also getting harmed by someone who
should have been removed from post. YOU LEFT and then you sit on
the side lines and WHINE because you failed to help yourself and
others that were getting screwed over by some SP.
YOU ABANDONED YOUR COURAGE, YOUR FRIENDS AND
YOUR HONOR.
Or, more accurately, maybe YOU were the creep that deliberately
misapplied Scientology so it would not work and then cried, “it
doesn’t work”
And the response is “ Well, we are now trying to take out the evil
Miscavige”
Sorry guys, wrong target. Contrary to your opinions, Scientology has
only expanded with Mr. Miscavige. This comes from an active
Scientologist and sees the results on a daily basis.
Scientology is set up to handle any exec who gets into a position of
power and misuses it.
They don’t last long. Stats are what the job is based on. Stats don’t
lie. The numbers are going up or down. Scientologists will not stand
for all the things you accuse management of doing. So even if you
were correct ( which you are not) then let the Church handle it. Let
Scientology go through the process of applying their codes to
themselves to make thing right. Who the hell do you think you are
standing on the outside trying to fix things. You want to fix it then
join the group and fix it from within.
But you gave up that chance when you left.
Who the hell asked you to “reform” my church. How many active
Scientologist have come to you and asked you to do this? ( I am sure I
will be told that you receive thousands of letters to do this, and if you
do you will be lying)
Yes I have taken on a few bad guys, and fought to expose them for
what they were doing. It was sometimes horrendous and very
stressful, because facing evil and getting others to do the same is not
an easy task.
But I did not run away and leave my friends to deal with them. I took
responsibility and got it handled. Who said life was easy? Who said it
was fair? What did you do to make it fair?
Life if a continuous process of confronting and handling situations.
NOT RUNNING FROM THEM.
When I hear you Whine and say “ Well what were my crimes?” I will
tell you what they are. You abandoned your friends when things got
too rough for you. You chickened out and didn’t stay and make it
right for yourself and others. You gave up. So as far as I amyourself. You no
longer count as someone who matters. YOU LEFT.
So now we will hear from the peanut gallery.
concerned your anger, upset, and rage is all misplaced. Look at
Here are the responses I will get
1. Out right attack on me personally when you don’t even know me.
Including that I am an OSA shill and a brainwashed idiot.
2. All your justifications on why you left and how evil Scientology is.
3. Jokes, one liners. Finding a misspelled word or incorrect grammar
and pointing it out
4. Possibly a actual sane discussion of what I have said, but highly
unlikely.
Of course because it is an open forum you can post whatever you
want. But FOAMERS need not respond.
Morrigan
tommy...@webtv.net
Up front, I will tell you that I would fit squarely
into your imagined category of FOAMER!
I would highly recommend that you step back
and do some more observing or lurking / delurking as you refer to. Your
attempts
to compartmentalize various types of posters
to this NG, is interesting, but only interesting
as it lacks any real clinical-type approach to a
very complex subject -- a mental health sect
wanting to be a religion. I've wrestled with
this for years now. Though I consider myself
very intelligent, I recognize I can not, nor could
not begin to dissect the motives and/or behavior
for the pros and cons here without the assistance of well-trained
professionals and experts to sort through the vast complexities
of the various positions within this news group.
I can not speak for those in your other "interesting" niches you have
created, however
I can speak for the FOAMERS, as a matter of
fact I could be a "poster child" for this group of
yours. I have taken the time to read and digest
your thoughts and interesting concepts. So please take the time and
review parts of my life from 1978 to current at:
http://www.b-org.demon.nl/scn/deaths/childabuse/padgett/index.html
I would encourage you to take your time reviewing this web page
thoroughly. Then get
back to me in a couple of days, and tell me it's
wrong or inappropriate to get "foam" up about this kind of conduct and
behavior! Be certain
though, if I or this NG does not hear back from
you, we will seek you out for a response.
OK Morrigan? Thank you.
Sincerely,
Tom Padgett, Foamer
MORRIGAN
>
>
>So please do remain a participant in a.r.s, if you would. >
Thank you so much for this welcome. It is greatly appreciated.
Morrigan
Virginia McClaughry
>I expect to be attacked for my views as it seems that any Scientologist
>that posts here gets their communication twisted to suit certain
>people’s needs.
I have not had this problem myself, just stick to the truth and you will be
fine.
>You left! You lack the courage to stand and fight and make it right
>from within.
I am interested in what you are doing to stand and fight the destruction of
LRH's technology through alterations such as those I, and Safe have posted.
On this newsgroup the only scientologists that have been standing and fighting,
have been Safe and I. If you are going to have the courage to stand and fight
also, that is great! Be prepared to get declared though, but don't worry it's a
squirrel group that is declaring you, something to be proud of.
>Being in Scientology for almost 30 years has allowed me to see things
>that were wrong. But I personally found that it wasn’t “Scientology”
>that was wrong. It was creeps misapplying Scientology and then
>calling it Scientology that was wrong.
Exactly, and now even worse, altering LRH issues, and representing it and
selling them as if they are LRH.
>And the response is “ Well, we are now trying to take out the evil
>Miscavige”
>
>Sorry guys, wrong target. Contrary to your opinions, Scientology has
>only expanded with Mr. Miscavige. This comes from an active
>Scientologist and sees the results on a daily basis.
On this point, you have some reading to do. Exactly who do you think approves
all of these changes to LRH's tech?
Please read David Miscaviage's own affidavit where he essentially says he is the
final word.
It's a public record.
This is covered in the Criminal Time Track, have you studied this?
>Scientology is set up to handle any exec who gets into a position of
>power and misuses it.
This is correct, IF, and that's a big if, it is APPLIED, and it would take a
higher exec to do this. Whose responsibility is it if it is all the way to the
top? YOURS, MINE AND EVERY SCIENTOLOGISTS, per KSW.
>Yes I have taken on a few bad guys, and fought to expose them for
>what they were doing. It was sometimes horrendous and very
>stressful, because facing evil and getting others to do the same is not
>an easy task.
>But I did not run away and leave my friends to deal with them. I took
>responsibility and got it handled. Who said life was easy? Who said it
>was fair? What did you do to make it fair?
Exactly what I am doing, I have not gone anywhere, I am still a scientologist,
and I will get it handled, one way or another.
I hope you will continue to not run away, and take responsibility and handle
what is happening to our, and LRH's religion, Scientology.
Thanks for posting.
Virginia
MORRIGAN
says...
>
>
>Well, guess what? It's flunking that test, and dying of it's own *overts
>and withholds*. The church -- like a suppressive person, according to
>hubbard -- can NEVER admit when it is wrong. By the simple laws of cause
>and effect in the universe, and abysmal, vicious management, it has
>fallen to its knees and will behead itself shortly.
>
>I await your debate.
Thank you for your very impressive resume.
I guess time will tell which way this whole thing will turn out.
MORRIGAN
>
>
>
>
>In article <8jbarq$u...@edrn.newsguy.com>,
> MORRIGAN <MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> I have been “lurking” here for a couple of months, with the intention
>> of finding out what ARS was all about.
>
>expressing your viewpoint.
>
>>
>>Thanks Rosie.
MORRIGAN
>
>>
>>Is this what you call ARC?
Well at least it is C and a start.
>snip
>Do you have something to say about Scientology? How it
>helped, how it is worthwhile, or anything at all?
Sure, 30 years ago, I was heavily on drugs, I dropped out of college, wouldn't
talk to my family and my future looked pretty bleak. I got involved in
Scientology through a good friend and my life just got better and better. I now
own my own successful business, been married many years with children, and get
along great with my family ( none of whom are Scio's).
>
>>
>I don't know, maybe you want me to start. OK. I'll start by saying the
>huffle ruffle here isn't about religion. It's about abuse of people and
>the law. And I believe Scientology can survive. It only needs to drop a
>few of the teachings of Mr. Hubbard, a few policies. The abuse of
>people, the abuse of the law can be dropped from Scientology, and it
>would survive, gain respect, and thrive. Is that what you thought I'd
>say?
>
Nope, but thank you for your viewpoint. I don't know that this viewpoint is
shared by all the critics here. Many have said that they want to destory
Scientology completely. I apologize for not naming names. I haven't got a
who's who list to figure it out. But I don't want Scientology destroyed. Scn
has helped me and own family very much. Based on what was going on with me
before Scientology, I would probably be dead or in jail right now. Instead I am
a contributing member of society that is trying to make things better for myself
and the people I care about. That is not a bad thing. That does not seem like
something that needs destroying.
Morrigan
MORRIGAN
>
>>>
>Perhaps I should ask you the question:
>Why isn't the CoS doing more to help people like the mentally ill?
>Why are people who are or have taken SSRIs or MAOIs considered illegal PCs and
>not >worthy of any help?
>These questions are not meant to be degrading.. I am curious. It doesn't make
>sense>to me at all, logic wise.
I will try to answer. First off let me say that I didn't realize how time
consuming it was going to be to answer all the questions. Next I am going to
give you my viewpoint on the answers. I am not going to Quote policy as it
would be too time consuming to go digging around looking for the exact LRH quote
for you. So realize that you are getting my viewpoint on things.
I have no idea what SSRI's or MAOI's are ( are these drugs?)
It is not that illegal PC's are not worthy of help at all. Everyone is worthy
of help if they truly want it. The problem is that psych drugs effect the mind
in such a way as to hinder or downright stop people from making gains in
auditing. Therefore it is a waste of time and money for people to try to audit
while on them or even if they have taken them.
However people who are illegal pc's are still able to train. After they have
trained and done well and have a good record of getting others to make gains,
they can then request to have the auditing themselves. I hope this answers your
question.
>
>>
>>
.
>
>It's hard to not to reply when your CoS wishes to take the only medication that
>stops my panic attacks off the market. I've asked several times what do you have
>in >replacement for it. So far, no one CoS Scientologist at all has come up with
>an >answer. What do you expect me to do?
I am sorry to hear you have panic attacks. I am not a trained c/s and could
personally not advise you. >>
>>
>> >something I love... the Internet.
>
>>Me too!
>>
I try honestly not to judge all scientologists the
>same.. however, could you Scientologists please not judge all critics the same?
>We're not all evil.
OK, I promise to take each critic as I seem them. Sorry for the generalities.
>>
>>
>I disagree with much of your post Morrigan. A lot of ex-Scns were forced out.
>Some
>didn't want to even leave, by the way. And I will not stoop down to calling you
>names like OSA shill or troll here. You're free to email me directly if you wish
>wnot agree with many aspects of LRH's point of views. Let's leave it at that,
>ok?ith the questions I asked earlier.
>If you don't consider what I've written as a sane discussion, that's fine.
>However
>I've not called you an OSA shill, have not called you a brainwashed idiot, it's
>not
>my job to correct your grammar or spelling, and as far as calling Scn evil... I
>do
>
>However I'm willing to discuss, if you're willing. It's entirely up to you now.
I'm game.
Morrigan
>
>Ka...@klis.com
>
MORRIGAN
"Starshadow" says...
>
>
>It's Usenet, deal with it.
I'll give it my best shot.
>
>> Morrigan
>
>One of my fav Goddesses.
Mine too!
If it's a nym, be careful. She is worshipped again
>and is stronger, and doesn't take kindly to Her name being used in
>vain....not that you'll pay attention, but I felt duty bound to warn you
>just in case.
I am quite aware of Morrigan. She and I get along just fine. She likes me big
time.
Morrigan
MORRIGAN
says...
>
><< DEBATERS: >>
><< ANTI PSYCH CROWD >>
><< ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS >>
><< THE NEVER A SCIENTOLOGIST >>
><< DEBATERS >>
><< THE FOAMERS >>
>
>Maybe you shouldn't try to categorize people, and realize that folks are
>different.
You are right. Just making an observation on what I have seen in the limited
time that I have been lurking
>
>.
>
>We don't care what people believe, but we hate fraud...
Well I would think that you are not speaking for all of ARS as it seems there
are some here who do care what I believe.
>
>>
>So do you see how us critics can laugh at folks like Mistmagoo55. You think
>his posting is helpful, but it only shows people that Scientology doesn't work.
Oh come on. I have heard people say here ( sorry I don't keep track of names)
that Scientologists don't have a sense of humor. Magoo, is just busting your
chops. It is only fair. After all Scio's on this group constantly get treated
in a demeaning manner. It don't know if you are one of the ones that do that.
But you have to admit that it happens.
Morrigan
>
MORRIGAN
tommy...@webtv.net says...
>
So please take the time and
>review parts of my life from 1978 to current at:
>http://www.b-org.demon.nl/scn/deaths/childabuse/padgett/index.html
>I would encourage you to take your time reviewing this web page
>thoroughly. Then get
>back to me in a couple of days, and tell me it's
>wrong or inappropriate to get "foam" up about this kind of conduct and
>behavior! Be certain
>though, if I or this NG does not hear back from
>you, we will seek you out for a response.
>
>OK Morrigan? Thank you.
Ugh, this is alot to read. I am very sorry, It will take more than a few days
to get thru all this stuff. How about a synopsis. I do not mean to offend you
but I have a business to run and then I have to answer other comm's and didn't
realize how much time it takes to wade thru all of this. So If you could send
me a synopsis I will respond.
Morrigan
>
,
>
>Tom Padgett, Foamer
>
realpch
[snip]
> Oh come on. I have heard people say here ( sorry I don't keep track of names)
> that Scientologists don't have a sense of humor. Magoo, is just busting your
> chops. It is only fair. After all Scio's on this group constantly get treated
> in a demeaning manner. It don't know if you are one of the ones that do that.
> But you have to admit that it happens.
>
> Morrigan
My guess is that most people reading here who hadn't killfiled Mr. Magoo
*before* he spammed the newsgroup with a ton of empty posts, did so
thereafter. I think a few people are jousting with him for their own
amusement. The posts of Mr. Magoo that I have read were NOT witty,
entertaining, germane, helpful, interesting, et cetera.
Peach
MORRIGAN
says...
>
. Yes, some critics are twits. So are
>some Scientologists. As long as you make an effort to distinguish between
>"Some" critics and "All" critics, I'll do the same for "Some" Scientologists
>and "All" Scientologists. Deal?
>
Deal
>Put the word "alleged" up there. It would be more accurate. Also note that the
>psych-spammers rarely, if ever, respond to any of the posts directed at them.
>This, to me, indicates that they're not really interested in communication.
True, but some do.
>
>
>>So you ask, which group am I? I could be in any one of these groups
>>at any time. I would like to be in the debaters group,
>
> Welcome, then. As long as you actually _debate_, I look forward to it.
>
>>
Thank you very much.
>
>
>I don't recall personally having ever attacked anyone for their beliefs. I may
>well mock them from time to time, but that's only a sideline, and I only do
>_that_ to posters who have annoyed me by posting irrelevencies or behaving in
>an otherwise asinine manner. As long as you don't do that, I won't mock your
>beliefs. Deal?
>
Absolutely.
Morrigan
>
ptsc
>Dennis Erlich, Jesse Prince, Andre Tabayoyon among others were all
>intensly disliked by many or outright reviled as the bullies they are.
So why did L. Ron Hubbard himself appoint Dennis Erlich chief
cramming officer?
And why was Jesse Prince by your cult lawyer's admission
second-in-command of the cult?
And why was Andre Tabayoyon in charge of construction for the
murder-factory at Gold?
Obviously, it was because your insane, fucked-up loser of a
cult leader L. Ron Hubbard WANTED people to be deranged bullies,
because he was one himself.
Incidentally, WTF do you think you're doing talking about
Dennis Erlich anyway? If Dennis Erlich is so bad, then why
did your shithead cult of morons pay him so much money?
Is that where you want your course money going, to buy new
houses and cars for Dennis Erlich? What do you think about that?
Do you squeal when you take it up the ass, emptying your wallet
to buy Dennis a nice new house?
What exactly is it like to be such a pathetic, shafted,
bleating loser?
ptsc
Fredric L. Rice
> I expect to be attacked for my views as it seems that any Scientologist
> that posts here gets their communication twisted to suit certain
> people’s needs.
No, we've had several Scientologists come through that were
granted provisional respect and managed to keep it. And we've
also had "Mr. Safe," a Scientologist who _earned_ the respect
of many of this forum's regular participants.
The unfortunate Scientologists that you see getting called to
task in this forum have been ordered to "handle" a.r.s -- and if
you're interested, I can forward to you copies of the letters that
the cult's leaders wrote covering these unfortunate people's
reasons for being ordered to post here.
The individual Scientologists that we meet on the street are
good people. OSA/GO/Department 20 nuts that the cult's
leaders order out to "handle" the good guys are only following
orders untinkingly. We don't hate them. We pity them. The
_leaders_ of this criminal organization are the real bad guys.
I don't pitty those bastards; I want them in prison for what
they do to Scientologists as well as non-Scientologists.
So please do remain a participant in a.r.s, if you would. The
forum -- and the cult -- needs sane followers to counterballance
the unfortunate behavior of the followers stupid enough to obey
orders to post. It's better to have _real_ participants rather
than unthinking robots who have been ordered to "handle" a.r.s.
--
The Skeptic Tank http://www.skeptictank.org/ http://www.xenu.net/
http://www.nots.org fr...@skeptictank.org
The Skipster
>The last group are the FOAMERS. These are the ex- Scientologists
>that tend to foam at the mouth. They alter and twist communication.
>They make up stuff and downright lie. All with the justification that
>they “have to destroy Scientology”, so anything goes. But then they
>criticize Scientology for doing the exact same thing. They are not
>interested in debate but just attack and make up facts to suit them.
>The FOAMERS are not much fun to read. I feel like I am reading the
>posts of people going over the edge.
OK, punky, I'm a former. My name is Skip Press. I'm an internationally
recognized author. I hear from people around the world on a weekly if
not daily basis thanking me for my books. Look me up on Amazon.com --
that's only a part of it. I appear before large crowds as a speaker
across the country. I just returned from Aspen, Colorado where a number
of my attendees were millionaires.
I personally know or have met most of the *top dogs* of scientology and
I mean that literally in some cases. I have friends who govern states. I
can pick up the phone and get most people in Hollywood to call me back
because they know me and my work.
I have personally seen the rapid attack methods of OSA. I have
personally seen god-awful injustices in the name of the delusions
dreamed up by ron hubbard. I met every one of his children except Katie
Hubbard Gillespie, whom I exchanged letters with, and Nibs. I've met and
talked with Forrest Ackerman, Hubbard's former agent. And I personally
had a former girlfriend who was *OT3* commit suicide over scientology
issues and her unhandled alcoholism, despite the fact that she had
*completed* a Narconon rehab program only a week or so before.
My bad feelings about scientology are based purely on logic. Unlike you,
I don't see the need to compare people with whom I disagree with rapid
dogs, as you've done with your "Foamers" bit. You remind me of hubbard,
who sneeringly regarded anyone not in scientology as a "wog", the Indian
subcontinent equivalent of the word "nigger" in the U.S. Scientologists,
in an effort to boost their morale, I suppose, use that word all the
time. I rarely used it in 20 years of involvement in scientology because
I thought it derogatory and pointless. But hubbard loved the word.
I'm not trying to destroy scientology. I don't have *overts and
withholds* on scientology. I was two courses away from being a
scientology Magistrate, the top level of training for ethics officers in
your organization. I wrote articles for Freedom magazine, including one
about abuses of the IRS. Been there, done it all, buddy.
So where's the foam on my mouth? Where's the made up stuff or downright
lies? Where's the made up facts? Hint: there aren't any. I know exactly
what I'm talking about any time I post here, and this is one fascinating
newsgroup.
In 1976, a doctor in Florida named Roy LeMoine told me via letter (after
I sold him Hymn of Asia via correspondence from Celebrity Centre) that
the test of scientology would be if it survived after hubbard died.
Well, guess what? It's flunking that test, and dying of it's own *overts
and withholds*. The church -- like a suppressive person, according to
hubbard -- can NEVER admit when it is wrong. By the simple laws of cause
and effect in the universe, and abysmal, vicious management, it has
fallen to its knees and will behead itself shortly.
I await your debate.
--
"If I were in this business only for the business, I wouldn't be in this
business."
-- Sam Goldwyn
rosali...@my-deja.com
In article <8jbarq$u...@edrn.newsguy.com>,
MORRIGAN <MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> I have been “lurking” here for a couple of months, with the intention
> of finding out what ARS was all about.
Hey there Morrigan! Welcome and thank you for taking the time for
expressing your viewpoint.
>
Dennis Erlich, Jesse Prince, Andre Tabayoyon among others were all
intensly disliked by many or outright reviled as the bullies they are.
>
And now get ready for the foaming response .....
Rosie
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Mike O'Connor
>I have been “lurking” here for a couple of months, with the intention
>of finding out what ARS was all about.
>
>I am posting my observations, as it is my understanding that this is
>supposed to be an open forum on the discussion of Scientology.
>
>I expect to
[...]
Well, you seem to have everybody and everything figured out in advance.
Not much to talk about, all your ducks are in a row, and all your
conclusions are solidly determined. And you already know all the
responses you will get about everything. And you are very busy, very
very busy.
Is this what you call ARC?
Let's talk about Scientology. You forgot to do that. All we got was some
amateur psychoanalysis. OK. You start. I will read your message
carefully. Do you have something to say about Scientology? How it
helped, how it is worthwhile, or anything at all?
Or are you just going to go away now, having all possible discussions
already prefigured out in your head?
I don't know, maybe you want me to start. OK. I'll start by saying the
huffle ruffle here isn't about religion. It's about abuse of people and
the law. And I believe Scientology can survive. It only needs to drop a
few of the teachings of Mr. Hubbard, a few policies. The abuse of
people, the abuse of the law can be dropped from Scientology, and it
would survive, gain respect, and thrive. Is that what you thought I'd
say?
--
SCIENTOLOGY IS SECRETLY A UFO CULT
ASK THEM ABOUT XENU
Mike O'Connor <mi...@leptonicsystems.com>
<http://www.leptonicsystems.com>
Kaeli
MORRIGAN wrote:
>
>
> ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS
> Then you have the Scientologist who attack back. Sometimes they are
> funny and sometimes they get the critics hooting and howling by
> pushing their buttons. There are not a lot of them so when I read one I
> usually find them amusing. McGoo for example has had me rolling on
> the floor laughing. I see many of you have killfiled him. It seems to
> me that you don’t want to hear his viewpoint because it is too close to
> the truth.
My reason for killfiling him is that I was asking some questions but it will take me
awhile to trust someone. He wasn't taking them seriously so I gave up even trying.
If I have any questions about the Scn tech, I'll ask a FreeZone Scientologist
instead.
As for his viewpoint being too close to the truth.. he doesn't know who I am or what
my intentions are. So why bother explaining to a person who won't even listen?
I'm sure you did find him funny. I was being serious by asking him some of the
questions I did regarding illegal PCs. Perhaps I should ask you the question:
Why isn't the CoS doing more to help people like the mentally ill?
Why are people who are or have taken SSRIs or MAOIs considered illegal PCs and not
worthy of any help?
These questions are not meant to be degrading.. I am curious. It doesn't make sense
to me at all, logic wise.
>
>
> So you ask, which group am I? I could be in any one of these groups
> at any time. I would like to be in the debaters group, but I could see
> myself posting anti psych stuff if I had it and I could also see me
> replying in a not nice way if you attacked me for my beliefs.
It's hard to not to reply when your CoS wishes to take the only medication that
stops my panic attacks off the market. I've asked several times what do you have in
replacement for it. So far, no one CoS Scientologist at all has come up with an
answer. What do you expect me to do?
>
>
> THE CRITICS
>
> THE NEVER A SCIENTOLOGIST
>
> One group of critics seem to have never been in Scientology and they
> just rant and rave like they know what they are talking about but most
> of the time they haven’t got a clue. These guys generally bore me
> because they are more stupid than mean. I think they found a good
> news group to vent in and have read a bunch of web sites so they now
> consider themselves experts. This group thinks they are very cool, hip,
> witty and very superior but in fact they only know what they have read
> on the entheta sites and have no real experience. If ARS didn’t exist
> this group would find another issue to get involved with just so they
> could spew their hate and think of themselves as very cool.
You are incorrect about the "never have been a Scientologist". I personally began
posting to A.R.S. for two reasons: One, the rmgroup Helena Kobrin asked for from ISP
system administrators. Why do it, and raise the ire from the EFF (Electronic
Frontier Foundation)?
By the way: I'm not known as a person who gets involved with causes as such. I'm a
computer technician by trade, and yes, my hobbies are with the computer as well. My
main hobby is maintaining an IRC network, maintaining my server, and doing my
voluntary duties as an IRC network admin.
Why am I here, then? It's because of the rmgroup Ms. Kobrin asked sys admins to
remove from their NNTP servers. Why? Why remove this newsgroup, if they don't mean
much to the CoS?
It goes against everything the Internet represents. And that's why I'm here. I've
been a net user for 7 years, and the CoS, from what I can see, is trying to subvert
something I love... the Internet.
>
>
You are incorrect again. You haven't even tried to ask why some ex-Scn left. Some
were declared SP and forced out. It took them years to even let go. Could you
explain that, Morrigan? Honestly? If it were me, I'd be angry to be told I could
never see my friends again, that I am such an evil person. It is natural to want to
get back at the ones who hurt you.
The problem is, you're rubbing salt in their wounds. You're calling them cowards,
you're in judgment of them. I try honestly not to judge all scientologists the
same.. however, could you Scientologists please not judge all critics the same?
We're not all evil.
And we're posting for different reasons, and we criticize for different reasons. I'm
sure you find my reasons not good enough, but they're good enough for me, and that's
what important.
ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS
Then you have the Scientologist who attack back. Sometimes they are
funny and sometimes they get the critics hooting and howling by
pushing their buttons. There are not a lot of them so when I read one
I
usually find them amusing. McGoo for example has had me rolling on
the floor laughing. I see many of you have killfiled him. It seems to
me that you don’t want to hear his viewpoint because it is too close to
the truth.
MORRIGAN wrote:
I disagree with much of your post Morrigan. A lot of ex-Scns were forced out. Some
didn't want to even leave, by the way. And I will not stoop down to calling you
names like OSA shill or troll here. You're free to email me directly if you wish
with the questions I asked earlier.
If you don't consider what I've written as a sane discussion, that's fine. However
I've not called you an OSA shill, have not called you a brainwashed idiot, it's not
my job to correct your grammar or spelling, and as far as calling Scn evil... I do
not agree with many aspects of LRH's point of views. Let's leave it at that, ok?
However I'm willing to discuss, if you're willing. It's entirely up to you now.
Captain Nerd
Hash: SHA1
In article <8jbarq$u...@edrn.newsguy.com>, MORRIGAN
<MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
> concerned your anger, upset, and rage is all misplaced. Look at
> Here are the responses I will get
>
> 1. Out right attack on me personally when you don’t even know me.
> Including that I am an OSA shill and a brainwashed idiot.
> 2. All your justifications on why you left and how evil Scientology is.
> 3. Jokes, one liners. Finding a misspelled word or incorrect grammar
> and pointing it out
> 4. Possibly a actual sane discussion of what I have said, but highly
> unlikely.
5. You call us liars, and tell us we "make up" documents about
your dead scifi guru. So, pray tell, what documents have been
made up? What HCOBs are not really HCOBs? What part of the
Xenu story did we critics make up? Are you claiming that you
aren't made up of Body Thetans? That thetans aren't dead space
alien spirits?
> Of course because it is an open forum you can post whatever you
> want. But FOAMERS need not respond.
Too late, you FOAMED first.
Cap.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.2
iQA/AwUBOVlWQLztfgpKlX7qEQKOBACgiD/b5/eRO/ZJfazFKRVdyOw497wAn1ex
3/TqPK4CIKljv0BsPbi62lfO
=5YzF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Operation: Nerdwatch - http://www.nerdwatch.com
Captain Nerd can be reached at: cpt...@nerdwatch.com
"By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes."
Starshadow
> supposed to be an open forum on the discussion of Scientology.
It's Usenet. Nobody moderates it, if that's your drift.
> I expect to be attacked for my views as it seems that any Scientologist
> that posts here gets their communication twisted to suit certain
> people's needs.
You don't quite get it, do you? Yeah, people get attacked. But just as
often viewpoints get attacked, and many of your fellow scn members and the
official OSA shills can't seem to understand the difference. I read through
your whole post and it's pretty clear YOU don't understand the difference.
And for sure your whole organisation doesn't. But most of you are stuck in
the valence of "attack, never defend" and that was Hubbard all over. He
never could stand being contradicted even when he knew he was full of it.
> OK so here goes.
>
> I have been in Scientology for almost 30 years. I am not an OSA Shill,
> but be will be accused of being one anyway because any Scientologist
> that post here is. A = A. If you are a Scientologist then you are OSA.
> Ludicrous thinking but so be it. Plus there is no way to prove or
> disprove it here on ARS so why bother.
Not every critic thinks every scn is an OSA shill. I don't think that Claire
or John or Enzo or some of our late lamented like Russ were, myself, but I
have myself been accused once or twice of being an scn sympathiser because I
took the side of someone who happened to be scn in a post. So has almost
every long term critic who doesn't automatically judge the content of a post
by who is posting it. Usenet is like that. Get over it.
> I see that there are a few basic types of posters here. I apologize up
> front for not naming specific names of posters here when I discuss the
> ARS crowd. There are only a few names that stick out in my mind
> that I might refer to. I would need some sort of file system to keep
> everyone straight and which posters are on what side but I am too busy
> to invest time and energy in that .
There's always color coding 'em if you use OE. So far I haven't decided what
color to make you. You should be glad.
> SCIENTOLOGISTS
>
> Even the Scienolgists have "types"
>
> DEBATERS:
>
> You have the Claire Swayze types, that include Enzo and a couple of
> others, who seem to try to actually communication their views. They
> are viciously attacked as being OSA shills and horrible people, but
> personally, I think they are just Scientologists defending their religion.
> And they do a pretty good job.
Some people attack them. It's Usenet. They deal with it, I suggest you do
the same. You're already painting with a broad brush, but I suggest your scn
tek pretty much makes that inevitable.
> ANTI PSYCH CROWD
>
> Then you have the anti psych Scio's who post the crimes of
> Psychiatry and the drug companies. That is their schtick.
Because they are "hatted" for it by your organisation. Their "schtick" is to
disrupt the ng by any means possible, something your org has tried many
times in the past and will fail again and again, but you folks are rather
stuck in one valence--at least your "official" shills are. I dunno yet if
you are one, but remains to be seen.
> ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS
> Then you have the Scientologist who attack back. Sometimes they are
> funny and sometimes they get the critics hooting and howling by
> pushing their buttons. There are not a lot of them so when I read one I
> usually find them amusing. McGoo for example has had me rolling on
> the floor laughing. I see many of you have killfiled him. It seems to
> me that you don't want to hear his viewpoint because it is too close to
> the truth.
Many of us are sick of the noise and we too have lives outside of scn and
the fight against the abuse of the cult. Has nothing to do with any
"truths", it has to do with his childish stupid games and wanting to filter
out the noise. If you think he's funny, then you have the same low sense of
humor your dead guru did at his worst, and you may wind up in my killfile
yet. Just an fyi, critics have landed in it, too, when I've not wanted to
deal with the noise level that contributes nothing.
> So you ask, which group am I? I could be in any one of these groups
> at any time. I would like to be in the debaters group, but I could see
> myself posting anti psych stuff if I had it and I could also see me
> replying in a not nice way if you attacked me for my beliefs.
Why not think for yourself and be outside of any of those "groups"? Or can't
scientology help you with that?
> THE CRITICS
>
> THE NEVER A SCIENTOLOGIST
>
> One group of critics seem to have never been in Scientology and they
> just rant and rave like they know what they are talking about but most
> of the time they haven't got a clue. These guys generally bore me
> because they are more stupid than mean. I think they found a good
> news group to vent in and have read a bunch of web sites so they now
> consider themselves experts. This group thinks they are very cool, hip,
> witty and very superior but in fact they only know what they have read
> on the entheta sites and have no real experience. If ARS didn't exist
> this group would find another issue to get involved with just so they
> could spew their hate and think of themselves as very cool.
Many "never scientologists" are like me. I met your guru. He was fun to
drink and party with. He bragged about scamming you suckers, and taking your
money and how you ate up the stuff he spewed out even though he made most of
it up off the top of his head. In those days I didn't particularly care
about you fools, "caveat emptor" was my motto.
But then I learned about the abuses. As I've gotten deeper and talked to a
great many ex-scns, and some current members, I've learned the differences
between OSA, fake Navy, staph, and public members. The public members know
little about what goes on with the rest of it, and don't believe it happens
to the extent it happens, or they close their eyes to it, thinking that
reform from within is possible, or that it's a passing thing and will go
away as soon as they "clear the planet" or somesuch. The rest of you know
DAMN well what is happening, but figure "greatest good for greatest numbers
of dynamics" or whatever your stupid lingo says, though only the top few
really knows the whole iceberg.
It became personal for me when your group tried to take the one
psychotropic med that I can tolerate, the med that saved my life, literally,
off the market. It became my fight when I as a mother became outraged by the
appalling conditions some of your fake Navy's peoples' kids are kept in. It
became personal when I became aware of just how many bizarre ways people
have died in your cult's care, and when Lisa McPherson died and your group
started covering its tracks as poorly as my elderly cat covers up her poo.
When I saw the evil in Rinder's eyes. And now as deaths mount up and your
cult still tries to spin them in best possible light, all the time lying
through its collective teeth, as stories just don't match up with what
eventually comes out, and your cult's spokespeople still go on the attack,
never defend valence they are stuck in , with not one coming out and saying
they are sorry this happened, not one (of the official ones). It's staying
personal.
> DEBATERS
>
> One group of critics seem to want to discuss issues without all the
> attacks and mean spirited stuff. Most of these people have a good
> sense of humor and are truly funny. Plus they have interesting
> questions and try to debate the issues in a sane fashion. Some are Ex
> Scio and some are not.
>
> THE FOAMERS
>
> The last group are the FOAMERS. These are the ex- Scientologists
> that tend to foam at the mouth. They alter and twist communication.
> They make up stuff and downright lie. All with the justification that
> they "have to destroy Scientology", so anything goes. But then they
> criticize Scientology for doing the exact same thing. They are not
> interested in debate but just attack and make up facts to suit them.
> The FOAMERS are not much fun to read. I feel like I am reading the
> posts of people going over the edge. I actually worry about this bunch
> as over the past few months a couple of them seem to be really losing
> it.
Actually I'd classify them less as foamers than as paranoid conspiricists. I
think following Hubbard brought out the worst in them, as he was a paranoid
conspiricist to the max. (I was talking to a friend the other day and she
mentioned that he showed up at Norwescon 4 or 5, talking about hiding
because he had "enemies who wanted to kill him"...which was about the time
the FBI was looking for him around the Operation Snow White saga. I'd
forgotten seeing him there then as I didn't have a lot of contact with him,
had small kids with me and didn't stay up late at room parties like I did
the years before and after.)
So when they left your group, the paranoia followed them. Can you blame
them? Can any sane person not affected by your group's valence, actually,
since I doubt you can see past your own prejudices?
> I can see the response to this post. One or more will respond by
> making up their own
> "types" of posters. Something like, Clams, Extra Large Clams, and
> Clam smothered in Tartar Sauce.
>
> While on the subject, I do not know if other Scientologists have stated
> this but too me
> a Scientologist being a clam is like a:
> Jew being a kike a
> Hindu being a dot an
> black being a nigger a
> Mexican being a spic
> and so on and so on. It is a term of hatred. And these terms are not
> tolerated in society.
I use it against the shriller clam shills. But you shouldn't be surprised.
Hubbard called Chinese "chinks" and the only reason he didn't use the
"nigger" word was it was already disreputable in public while he was alive.
He did say black men couldn't be audited. Of course your group considers
money colorblind, and you'll take any "raw meat" of whichever color or
gender as long as they aren't gay, lesbian or ts, or mentally ill. And drop
'em just as fast when they aren't useful anymore, then send dunning letters
to their nursing homes.
But if you don't like clams consider how "raw meat" and "wogs" sound.
> Those of you who use it, dead agent yourselves. Anyone who reads
> your posts knows instantly that you are a bigot.
Tough. It's Usenet. Prejudge if you want to but then don't complain too hard
when one of us critics doesn't quite fit your boxes.
> I would also like to give my opinion to the Ex Scio debater group.
> You know who you are so all others need not reply.
Again, this is Usenet, so I'm gonna snip your whine about them and comment
on it, for brevity's sake.
Many of these people left because things were intolerable for them inside
your group. Many were confined against their will. Kept isolated. Made to
run around poles--or were chained to them. Many were screamed at, and after
they left and spoke out for all the people in the org who are still
confined, still kept on running and punished and isolated, your group has
sued them to try to silence them, it's harassed them, killed their pets,
forged bomb threats, picketed their homes--because your people cannot
understand the difference between picketing the business of scn and
individuals, just as you cannot understand the difference between attacking
your views and attacking you personally.
If one were to take your rant against this, you'd have no whistleblowers
anywhere. The only way to end this corruption which is at the root of your
group is to make outsiders who can step in to change things aware the abuses
are happening. And it is taking place. Mark my words. The more your
criminals hide, the more the outside world looks on in horror, and with each
wrongful death, the news travels instantly now, You people can't hide
anymore behind your mask of "religion".
If you want to have it be a real religion, you better change the abuses,
and fast. You can't do it by yourself, but I"m tellin' you the time is
coming that your group will either address them and change them or be pulled
down. If the latter all of you complicant in its abuses will be called on by
the courts of the world for your sins. Trust me on this; it will happen.
(snip)
> I realize that you think that, but you guys went from running away
> from what you saw was wrong, to attacking what was wrong, to trying
> to completely destroy what was wrong and get rid of what is good. Of
> course, here you will state that nothing in Scientology is good. That
> makes no sense. If Scientology did not produce results then people
> would be leaving in droves.
They are, darlin', they are.
Many of you have been to Clearwater or
> LA. You see what it looks like. There are many people doing services
> in Scientology and their lives are better for it.
> Some of you post that Scientology is not expanding but shrinking.
> This is just not true. I see the expansion with my own eyes. I believe
> this is just wishful thinking on your part and you just make up stuff
> like that to try to convince yourself and others that it is so.
>
Numbers don't lie except when your group tries to make them lie. Six million
indeed. Suuure. Just like AOHell.
> Just cause it didn't work for you doesn't mean it won't work for
> others.
I have Ron's word that he scammed y'all. He thought it was hilarious.
> Who asked you? You guys must all be registered as liberal democrats.
Your tek is failing again. Are you supposed to be an OT, at cause over MEST?
Clue, you aren't much of a psychic. Keep your day job.
>> have to tell the what to do and pass a bunch of laws to stop them from
> harming themselves. You think, "We know what is best for everyone
> else, because we are smarter then everyone else."
>
The laws are in place to stop the abuses. I personally don't care if you
grap cans till you die. Stop the abuses, stop the wrongful deaths and the
coverups and the harassments and all, and I quit criticising Scn. I promise.
Even if I think the "tech" is drek. Which I do. But that is a whole other
thing.
> Being in Scientology for almost 30 years has allowed me to see things
> that were wrong. But I personally found that it wasn't "Scientology"
> that was wrong.
Wrong-o, but feel free to stay deluded.
> Sorry guys, wrong target. Contrary to your opinions, Scientology has
> only expanded with Mr. Miscavige. This comes from an active
> Scientologist and sees the results on a daily basis.
Did you see Lisa McPherson's results? What about Quentin Hubbard?
> Scientology is set up to handle any exec who gets into a position of
> power and misuses it.
Miscavige is still there. Hubbard stayed until Miscavige deposed him.
> They don't last long. Stats are what the job is based on. Stats don't
> lie. The numbers are going up or down.
Stats are stats. Humans are humans. W/C the difference.
Scientologists will not stand
> for all the things you accuse management of doing. So even if you
> were correct ( which you are not) then let the Church handle it. Let
> Scientology go through the process of applying their codes to
> themselves to make thing right.
Right, let someone sweep the wrongful deaths under the rug. Let scn
management handle the creeps that sexually abuse their stepchildren. If we'd
let that happen, Strawn wouldn't be in prison and the kids would have been
even more devestated.
More. Let the newest deaths be handled by scn management. Let them spin
doctor the facts that at the least, they were woefully negligent in safety
standards. At the least, and I personally think the three changing stories
of what happened indicate there is a monster iceberg under that sea level
too.
Who the hell do you think you are
> standing on the outside trying to fix things. You want to fix it then
> join the group and fix it from within.
No, dear, it doesn't work that way in the Real World. If one were to take
that tack, no business, no organisation in the world would ever change. And
just because you wish it were so doesn't mean it will be so.
> But you gave up that chance when you left.
>
> Who the hell asked you to "reform" my church. How many active
> Scientologist have come to you and asked you to do this? ( I am sure I
> will be told that you receive thousands of letters to do this, and if you
> do you will be lying)
More of those OT powerz? Keep yer day job, sis.
(more snipped.)(your predictions)
> 1. Out right attack on me personally when you don't even know me.
Just like you've already attacked when you don't know people.
> Including that I am an OSA shill and a brainwashed idiot.
Possible. If you do know the abuses and choose to look the other way, it
will come out in the wash. It always does.
> 2. All your justifications on why you left and how evil Scientology is.
Never was in. Heard from Ron hisself what a scam it was.
> 3. Jokes, one liners. Finding a misspelled word or incorrect grammar
> and pointing it out
Might, some do. Usually when the poster claims to be some "superior human
being with super OT powerz" and then misspells every other word.
> 4. Possibly a actual sane discussion of what I have said, but highly
> unlikely.
Okay, fine.
> Of course because it is an open forum you can post whatever you
> want. But FOAMERS need not respond.
It's Usenet, deal with it.
> Morrigan
One of my fav Goddesses. If it's a nym, be careful. She is worshipped again
and is stronger, and doesn't take kindly to Her name being used in
vain....not that you'll pay attention, but I felt duty bound to warn you
just in case. Starshadow is not a nym. It's my real name.
--
Bright Blessings,
Starshadow (SP4, KoX) (remove lovesxenu to reply)
"Feminism--the radical notion that women are people, too"
Captain Nerd
Hash: SHA1
In article <8jbitr$9iq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, rosali...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <8jbarq$u...@edrn.newsguy.com>,
> MORRIGAN <MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >
> > Or, more accurately, maybe YOU were the creep that deliberately
> > misapplied Scientology so it would not work and then cried, “it
> > doesn’t work”
>
> Dennis Erlich, Jesse Prince, Andre Tabayoyon among others were all
> intensly disliked by many or outright reviled as the bullies they are.
Your overts are hanging out.
Cap.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.2
iQA/AwUBOVlW37ztfgpKlX7qEQLS+QCfZe2+iVutknVLNWvmHY8TB7gxMzwAoNW+
PTLzbserFL2Id90BQqxktvrJ
=xwmC
Tampawog
<< ANTI PSYCH CROWD >>
<< ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS >>
<< THE NEVER A SCIENTOLOGIST >>
<< DEBATERS >>
<< THE FOAMERS >>
Maybe you shouldn't try to categorize people, and realize that folks are
different.
I suggest you read, with an open mind, A Piece Of Blue Sky, by Jon Atack, for
the truth on L. Ron Hubbard. And then take an honest look at why you hold the
words of Hubbard with such esteem.
I personally would LOVE to see a world without insanity, without war...but
realistically, it will never happen. And I don't see where you need to pay
tons of money for auditing, books, tapes, sec checks, etc., when the upper
management of your church, and it's attorneys are the only beneficiaries. This
is what we protest.
Recently, your church has been responsible for the deaths of some of it's
parishioners. This is also what we protest.
We don't care what people believe, but we hate fraud and we hate to see people
murdered, in the name of religion. Any religion.
<< McGoo for example has had me rolling on
the floor laughing. I see many of you have killfiled him. It seems to me that
you don't want to hear his viewpoint because it is too close to
the truth. >>
This is the truth? (Actual MaGoo post):
Subject: Re: Magooafrica spam
From: <A HREF="mailto:mistm...@aol.com ">mistm...@aol.com </A>
(Mistmagoo55)
Date: Sat, Jun 24, 2000 12:41 AM
Message-id: <20000624004108...@ng-cv1.aol.com>
plonk
-end post
Do they teach plonk the first year of Scientology, or do you have to wait 30
years?
We have found the truth, it is: plonk
So do you see how us critics can laugh at folks like Mistmagoo55. You think
his posting is helpful, but it only shows people that Scientology doesn't work.
TW
BamBam
"MORRIGAN" <MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:8jbarq$u...@edrn.newsguy.com...
Interesting post.spoken like a true public.
BamBam Freedom From ?
Byll23
>I am not an OSA Shill,
>but be will be accused of being one anyway because any Scientologist
>that post here is. A = A.
But A DOES equal A. It's hardly "reactive" to assume that. If A didn't equal A,
then it wouldn't be A, would it? Perhaps it would make more sense to say that
"Reactive" thinking is "Similiar to A"="A". Ron wasn't very good at
communication, by the Wog world's standards...
BTW, don't take it personally if you get accused of being a plant. Some of the
critics here accused _me_ of being a plant. Yes, some critics are twits. So are
some Scientologists. As long as you make an effort to distinguish between
"Some" critics and "All" critics, I'll do the same for "Some" Scientologists
and "All" Scientologists. Deal?
>SCIENTOLOGISTS
>
>DEBATERS:
>They
>are viciously attacked as being OSA shills and horrible people, but
>personally, I think they are just Scientologists defending their religion.
>And they do a pretty good job.
I agree. If _all_ Scientologists here were like Claire, it would do wonders for
the COS' PR.
>ANTI PSYCH CROWD
>
>Then you have the anti psych Scio’s who post the crimes of
>Psychiatry and the drug companies.
Put the word "alleged" up there. It would be more accurate. Also note that the
psych-spammers rarely, if ever, respond to any of the posts directed at them.
This, to me, indicates that they're not really interested in communication.
>ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS
>...
> I see many of you have killfiled him. It seems to
>me that you don’t want to hear his viewpoint because it is too close to
>the truth.
No, I killfiled him because A) He was annoying as hell and B) He hasn't said
anything that hasn't been said a hundred times before.
>So you ask, which group am I? I could be in any one of these groups
>at any time. I would like to be in the debaters group,
Welcome, then. As long as you actually _debate_, I look forward to it.
>but I could see
>myself posting anti psych stuff if I had it
Groan... Word of warning: Generally, it's not considered polite to announce to
a newsgroup that you're going to spam them.
>and I could also see me
>replying in a not nice way if you attacked me for my beliefs.
>
I don't recall personally having ever attacked anyone for their beliefs. I may
RUPROSE
You have all your categories and thoughts, but what about the manipulation
tactics. Do you condone "allowing" one person to recieve all the posts or
information about current topics, and another is not "allowed."
How does that figure in your version of what ARS is all about?
The reason for asking this is the only way my response to you was possible was
someone sent me a copy of your original post. Only when going to one of the
alternative versions of ARS I found this thread. However, the original post of
yours was not included in the thread. Now this is convenient if one does not
want a particular person to participate.
So how do you categorize that? And that is just the most recent --
manipulation.
RUproSE
Lord High Commissioner
MORRIGAN <MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <8jbitr$9iq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, rosali...@my-deja.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >In article <8jbarq$u...@edrn.newsguy.com>,
> > MORRIGAN <MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >> I have been “lurking” here for a couple of months, with the
intention
> >> of finding out what ARS was all about.
> >
> >Hey there Morrigan! Welcome and thank you for taking the time for
> >expressing your viewpoint.
> >
> >>
>
Since you and Rosie are of the same creed - why not mention to her that
spamming newgroups is bad netiquette. Maybe she'll get the picture if
you tell it to her.
mimus
>I have been “lurking” here for a couple of months, with the intention
>of finding out what ARS was all about.
>
>I am posting my observations, as it is my understanding that this is
>supposed to be an open forum on the discussion of Scientology.
>
>I expect to be attacked for my views as it seems that any Scientologist
>that posts here gets their communication twisted to suit certain
>people’s needs.
>
>OK so here goes.
<snip>
No it doesn't.
>So now we will hear from the peanut gallery.
Show us * one * disease-free genius "clear" with perfect recall.
One "Operating Thetan" "at cause" over this "MEST universe".
Dianetics and Scientology claim that these desirable states can be
achieved, and that those who undertake Dianetics and Scientology
achieve them--have done so, for fifty and forty years, respectively.
And if you demonstrate their existence, you will "clear the planet"
quickly and automatically.
You do want to "clear the planet", don't you?
So where are they?
All that's not a lie, is it?
I saw
many people
reduced to
incoherent babbling,
stripping off clothes,
crawling around on the ground,
banging heads, limbs and other body parts
against furniture and walls,
barking,
losing all sense of one's identity
and intense and persistent suicidal ideation.
--Declaration of Andre Tabayoyon
I'm an OT.--Lisa McPherson
If you imagine 40-50 Scientologists
posting on the Internet every few days,
we'll just run the SP's right off the system.
It will be quite simple, actually.
--Elaine Siegel, OSA INT (1996)
Case 5/BTLA/SP1
Mike O'Connor
<MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote:
[...]
>>I'll start by saying the huffle ruffle here isn't about religion.
>>It's about abuse of people and the law. And I believe Scientology can
>>survive. It only needs to drop a few of the teachings of Mr. Hubbard,
>>a few policies. The abuse of people, the abuse of the law can be
>>dropped from Scientology, and it would survive, gain respect, and
>>thrive. Is that what you thought I'd say?
>Nope, but thank you for your viewpoint. I don't know that this
>viewpoint is shared by all the critics here.
Of course not. I've discussed it here before, and I know that. Everyone
is different. There aren't four or five types of people here, there are
thousands of types of people here.
>Many have said that they want to destory Scientology completely.
And "many" have said they do not. And many have not said either way. And
many more than that have not even posted, they just lurk. For every
person that posts, there are a hundred that just lurk. Let's not forget
them.
>I apologize for not naming names. I haven't got a who's who list to
>figure it out. But I don't want Scientology destroyed.
[...]
Many do. Many do not. And many haven't said either way. Let's both keep
reading.
Bruce Pettycrew
>
> You guys must all be registered as liberal democrats.
>They have the same viewpoint on people i.e. people are stupid so we
>have to tell the what to do and pass a bunch of laws to stop them from
>harming themselves. You think, “We know what is best for everyone
>else, because we are smarter then everyone else.”
>
You mean like making abortion illegal, or laws against gays, or
forcing everyone to pray in school, or all the other instances
where liberal democrats are trying to force people to do what they
want? If you can't even get politics straight why should anyone
pay attention to your views on the Co$?
Starshadow
>
> >
> >
> >One of my fav Goddesses.
>
>
>
> If it's a nym, be careful. She is worshipped again
> >and is stronger, and doesn't take kindly to Her name being used in
> >vain....not that you'll pay attention, but I felt duty bound to warn you
> >just in case.
>
me big
> time.
>
Good. She likes me, too.
I hope when you get time you will answer the rest of my post.
Take care.
Secret Squirrel
wrote:
>I have been “lurking” here for a couple of months, with the intention
>of finding out what ARS was all about.
Good enough truth.
>I am posting my observations, as it is my understanding that this is
>supposed to be an open forum on the discussion of Scientology.
Maybe too open for scientologists. I would like to discuss some
questionable practices but cannot due to copywrite protection.
>I expect to be attacked for my views as it seems that any Scientologist
>that posts here gets their communication twisted to suit certain
>people’s needs.
I'll try very hard to comm with you. I'll even ack your statements.
>OK so here goes.
I'm ready.
>I have been in Scientology for almost 30 years. I am not an OSA Shill,
>but be will be accused of being one anyway because any Scientologist
>that post here is. A = A. If you are a Scientologist then you are OSA.
>Ludicrous thinking but so be it. Plus there is no way to prove or
>disprove it here on ARS so why bother.
- people who think scientologists, who post in ars are OSA shills, are
guilty of ludicrous thinking
- this can't be proven anyway so don't accuse scientologists of being OSA
shill's
>I see that there are a few basic types of posters here. I apologize up
>front for not naming specific names of posters here when I discuss the
>ARS crowd. There are only a few names that stick out in my mind
>that I might refer to. I would need some sort of file system to keep
>everyone straight and which posters are on what side but I am too busy
>to invest time and energy in that .
- you can categorize the posters in ars but you can only remember a few
names
- you are not OSA so you don't have access to their extensive files
>SCIENTOLOGISTS
>
>Even the Scienolgists have “types”
- even scientologists can be "typed"
>DEBATERS:
> You have the Claire Swayze types, that include Enzo and a couple of
>others, who seem to try to actually communication their views. They
>are viciously attacked as being OSA shills and horrible people, but
>personally, I think they are just Scientologists defending their religion.
>And they do a pretty good job.
SCIENTOLOGISTS - DEBATERS:
- viciously attacked as OSA shills and as horrible people
- communicate and do a good job of defending
>ANTI PSYCH CROWD
>
>Then you have the anti psych Scio’s who post the crimes of
>Psychiatry and the drug companies. That is their schtick.
SCIENTOLOGISTS - ANTI PSYCH CROWD:
- post the crimes of psychiatry and drug companies
- it is their duty
>ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS
>Then you have the Scientologist who attack back. Sometimes they are
>funny and sometimes they get the critics hooting and howling by
>pushing their buttons. There are not a lot of them so when I read one I
>usually find them amusing. McGoo for example has had me rolling on
>the floor laughing. I see many of you have killfiled him. It seems to
>me that you don’t want to hear his viewpoint because it is too close to
>the truth.
SCIENTOLOGISTS - ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS:
- scientologists who attack back are funny and amusing
- make critics hoot and holler by pushing their buttons
- McGoo's hundreds of posts have you rolling on the floor
- killfiled because they are revealing the truth
>So you ask, which group am I? I could be in any one of these groups
>at any time. I would like to be in the debaters group, but I could see
>myself posting anti psych stuff if I had it and I could also see me
>replying in a not nice way if you attacked me for my beliefs.
- you will wear any hat because all are valid and OK
- threaten to reply in a not nice way if attacked for beliefs
>THE CRITICS
>
>THE NEVER A SCIENTOLOGIST
>
>One group of critics seem to have never been in Scientology and they
>just rant and rave like they know what they are talking about but most
>of the time they haven’t got a clue. These guys generally bore me
>because they are more stupid than mean. I think they found a good
>news group to vent in and have read a bunch of web sites so they now
>consider themselves experts. This group thinks they are very cool, hip,
>witty and very superior but in fact they only know what they have read
>on the entheta sites and have no real experience. If ARS didn’t exist
>this group would find another issue to get involved with just so they
>could spew their hate and think of themselves as very cool.
CRITIC - NEVER A SCIENTOLOGIST:
- rant and rave
- don't have a clue
- more stupid than mean
- falsely consider themselves experts
- think they are cool, hip, witty and superior
- have false information
- spew their hate
>DEBATERS
>
>One group of critics seem to want to discuss issues without all the
>attacks and mean spirited stuff. Most of these people have a good
>sense of humor and are truly funny. Plus they have interesting
>questions and try to debate the issues in a sane fashion. Some are Ex
>Scio and some are not.
CRITIC - DEBATERS:
- don't attack
- not mean spirited
- good sense of humor and truly funny
- have interesting questions and debate in sane fashion
>THE FOAMERS
>
>...ex- Scientologists
>that tend to foam at the mouth. They alter and twist communication.
>They make up stuff and downright lie. All with the justification that
>they “have to destroy Scientology”, so anything goes. But then they
>criticize Scientology for doing the exact same thing. They are not
>interested in debate but just attack and make up facts to suit them.
>The FOAMERS are not much fun to read. I feel like I am reading the
>posts of people going over the edge. I actually worry about this bunch
>as over the past few months a couple of them seem to be really losing
>it.
CRITIC - FOAMER - ex-scientologists:
- alter and twist communication
- make up stuff
- downright lie
- justify anything goes
- want to destroy scientology
- no debate
- attack and make up facts
- not fun to read
- going over the edge
- losing it
>I can see the response to this post. One or more will respond by
>making up their own
>“types” of posters. Something like, Clams, Extra Large Clams, and
>Clam smothered in Tartar Sauce.
- mind reading
- predicting respondents will add some clam recipe like clam chowder
>While on the subject, I do not know if other Scientologists have stated
>this but too me
>a Scientologist being a clam is like a:
>Jew being a kike a
>Hindu being a dot an
>black being a nigger a
>Mexican being a spic
>and so on and so on. It is a term of hatred. And these terms are not
>tolerated in society.
>Those of you who use it, dead agent yourselves. Anyone who reads
>your posts knows instantly that you are a bigot.
people who use degrogatory terms dead-agent themselves:
- non-scientologist is a wog
- Chinese is a "chink" who "smells"
- black person is "boy" or "nigger"
- gay is "perverted"
- lot of women is to "be fornicated"
- a psychiatrist is a "psych(lo)"
- mentally ill are "psychos"
- anyone who criticizes scientology is a "bigot"
- embarrassment to scientology is "Potential Trouble Source"
- disagreement with scientology is "Suppressive Person"
(L Ron Hubbard in $cio books, documents and tapes)
>I would also like to give my opinion to the Ex Scio debater group.
>You know who you are so all others need not reply.
- the following is your opinion of ex-scientologists.
>You guys were in Scientology and left. Instead of having the courage
>to stay and fight and make things Right-- you left. You now stand on
>the sidelines and boo.
- ex-scientologists have no courage
>You guys whine! You act like victims. “Look what they did to me!!!
>I am a victim. Poor me.” Whine, Whine, Whine.
ex-scientologists:
- are whiners
- act like victims
- whine, whine, whine
>You left! You lack the courage to stand and fight and make it right
>from within. Anybody can stand outside and throw stones and say
>“ya, well I am now outside and I have the courage to throw stones and
>take that big bad church down because I think they are evil and I am
>going to handle it right here from my computer and pass out 53 flyers
>to people who walk by the local church. What I am doing takes
>courage. “
ex-scientologists:
- lack courage to stand and fight
> I realize that you think that, but you guys went from running away
>from what you saw was wrong, to attacking what was wrong, to trying
>to completely destroy what was wrong and get rid of what is good. Of
>course, here you will state that nothing in Scientology is good. That
>makes no sense. If Scientology did not produce results then people
>would be leaving in droves. Many of you have been to Clearwater or
>LA. You see what it looks like. There are many people doing services
>in Scientology and their lives are better for it.
>Some of you post that Scientology is not expanding but shrinking.
>This is just not true. I see the expansion with my own eyes. I believe
>this is just wishful thinking on your part and you just make up stuff
>like that to try to convince yourself and others that it is so.
- doing scientology have better lives
- scientology expanding
- false it is shrinking
>Just cause it didn’t work for you doesn’t mean it won’t work for
>others.
>
>And your response to this is: . “Ah, but they are brainwashed idiots
>and I have to save them from themselves”
(Mind reads and generalizes ex-scientologist's thoughts)
>Who asked you? You guys must all be registered as liberal democrats.
>They have the same viewpoint on people i.e. people are stupid so we
>have to tell the what to do and pass a bunch of laws to stop them from
>harming themselves. You think, “We know what is best for everyone
>else, because we are smarter then everyone else.”
(Generalizes ex-scientologists and liberal democrats as people who think
others are less intelligent than themselves and need protection)
>Being in Scientology for almost 30 years has allowed me to see things
>that were wrong. But I personally found that it wasn’t “Scientology”
>that was wrong. It was creeps misapplying Scientology and then
>calling it Scientology that was wrong. You Ex Scio’s saw it too. But
>instead of finding the correct SP who got himself in a position of
>power in an organization and then misused Scientology to harm others,
>you blamed the entire religion. Your lack of courage came when you
>failed to handle the creep in front of you who was misapplying
>Scientology on you and others and you left. You did not stay and try
>to help your friends who were also getting harmed by someone who
>should have been removed from post. YOU LEFT and then you sit on
>the side lines and WHINE because you failed to help yourself and
>others that were getting screwed over by some SP.
>YOU ABANDONED YOUR COURAGE, YOUR FRIENDS AND
>YOUR HONOR.
- scientology has not been wrong for 30 years
- wrong was caused by creeps in power misapplying scientology
ex-scientologist:
- at fault for failing to handle creeps in power
- coward for not handling creeps in power
- failed to help friends getting harmed by creeps in power
- abandoned friends
- is dis-honorable
>Or, more accurately, maybe YOU were the creep that deliberately
>misapplied Scientology so it would not work and then cried, “it
>doesn’t work”
ex-scientologist:
- possibly THE creep who misapplied scientology deliberately so it wouldn't
work
>And the response is “ Well, we are now trying to take out the evil
>Miscavige”
(Brings in straw-dog, Miscavige.)
>Sorry guys, wrong target. Contrary to your opinions, Scientology has
>only expanded with Mr. Miscavige. This comes from an active
>Scientologist and sees the results on a daily basis.
- scientology expanding under Miscavige
- active scientology staff member sees expansion daily
>Scientology is set up to handle any exec who gets into a position of
>power and misuses it.
- scientology set up to handle creeps in power
>They don’t last long. Stats are what the job is based on. Stats don’t
>lie. The numbers are going up or down.
- stats are most important thing
- stats don't lie
- numbers go up or down - don't stay the same
(the average American has one testicle and one breast and has 1.2 children)
> Scientologists will not stand
>for all the things you accuse management of doing. So even if you
>were correct ( which you are not) then let the Church handle it.
- ex-scientologists were wrong in accusing "creeps in power" of being wrong
so let those in power handle things
> Let
>Scientology go through the process of applying their codes to
>themselves to make thing right. Who the hell do you think you are
>standing on the outside trying to fix things. You want to fix it then
>join the group and fix it from within.
- scientology must be allowed to make things right (nothing was wrong)
using their own codes (such as ethics)
>But you gave up that chance when you left.
- one someone leaves they give up all chances
>Who the hell asked you to “reform” my church. How many active
>Scientologist have come to you and asked you to do this? ( I am sure I
>will be told that you receive thousands of letters to do this, and if you
>do you will be lying)
- questioning how many "active" (non "church") scientologists want reform
- people who want to see scientology reformed are liars
>Yes I have taken on a few bad guys, and fought to expose them for
>what they were doing. It was sometimes horrendous and very
>stressful, because facing evil and getting others to do the same is not
>an easy task.
- will take on bad guys and expose them
- people who want reform in scientology are evil
- exposing was horrendous and very stressful (for who?)
- hard to show others evil of bad guys
>But I did not run away and leave my friends to deal with them. I took
>responsibility and got it handled. Who said life was easy? Who said it
>was fair? What did you do to make it fair?
>
>Life if a continuous process of confronting and handling situations.
>NOT RUNNING FROM THEM.
- ex-scientologists posting here are running away from their problems
>When I hear you Whine and say “ Well what were my crimes?” I will
>tell you what they are. You abandoned your friends when things got
>too rough for you. You chickened out and didn’t stay and make it
>right for yourself and others. You gave up. So as far as I amyourself.
>You no
>longer count as someone who matters. YOU LEFT.
- ex-scientologists are whiners
- ex-scientologists have crimes
- ex-scientologists abandon friends
- ex-scientologists are chickens
- people who have left scientology do not matter
>So now we will hear from the peanut gallery.
- people who criticize this post are monkeys
>concerned your anger, upset, and rage is all misplaced. Look at
>Here are the responses I will get
- proceeding to mind read and generalize
>1. Out right attack on me personally when you don’t even know me.
>Including that I am an OSA shill and a brainwashed idiot.
>2. All your justifications on why you left and how evil Scientology is.
>3. Jokes, one liners. Finding a misspelled word or incorrect grammar
>and pointing it out
>4. Possibly a actual sane discussion of what I have said, but highly
>unlikely.
>
>Of course because it is an open forum you can post whatever you
>want. But FOAMERS need not respond.
- people can post what they want except for "FOAMERS"
>Morrigan
Tilman Hausherr
wrote in <8jbqid$1u...@edrn.newsguy.com>:
>Sure, 30 years ago, I was heavily on drugs, I dropped out of college, wouldn't
>talk to my family and my future looked pretty bleak. I got involved in
>Scientology through a good friend and my life just got better and better. I now
>own my own successful business, been married many years with children, and get
>along great with my family ( none of whom are Scio's).
And, have you done college, anonymous person?
--
Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP5] Entheta * Enturbulation * Entertainment
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.xenu.de
Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
Find broken links on your web site: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/xenulink.html
The Xenu bookstore: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/bookstore.html
Tommy
>
> I have been “lurking” here for a couple of months, with the intention
> of finding out what ARS was all about.
>
> supposed to be an open forum on the discussion of Scientology.
>
> that posts here gets their communication twisted to suit certain
> people’s needs.
From the TNX mailing list:
It is no longer necessary to KR a.r.s. This group has been KR-ed
enough and is monitored by OSA INT on a daily basis. It is also a waste
of time and actually AGAINST policy to be in contact with them. I was
given a short hat on this at the Flag Ethics office, prompted by OSA
Int. The reference is DEAD FILE, Entheta Letters.... As the proper
terminals from the Church are now taking (legal) action, our work and
concern of the past has been very fruitful and a.r.s has full attention
of Int Management. We can and should ignore a.r.s.
>
> OK so here goes.
>
> I have been in Scientology for almost 30 years. I am not an OSA Shill,
> but be will be accused of being one anyway because any Scientologist
> that post here is. A = A. If you are a Scientologist then you are OSA.
See above.
> Ludicrous thinking but so be it. Plus there is no way to prove or
> disprove it here on ARS so why bother.
>
> I see that there are a few basic types of posters here. I apologize up
> front for not naming specific names of posters here when I discuss the
> ARS crowd. There are only a few names that stick out in my mind
> that I might refer to. I would need some sort of file system
You must not have attained "clear yet". I ( a mere wog ) have no trouble
at all remembering the handles of critics and $cn posters alike (even
the multiple-account AOL sock-puppets).
> to keep
> everyone straight and which posters are on what side but I am too busy
> to invest time and energy in that .
>
> SCIENTOLOGISTS
>
> Even the Scienolgists have “types”
>
> DEBATERS:
>
> You have the Claire Swayze types, that include Enzo and a couple of
> others, who seem to try to actually communication their views. They
> are viciously attacked as being OSA shills and horrible people, but
> personally, I think they are just Scientologists defending their religion.
> And they do a pretty good job.
They are much smoother that the Wgerts and McGoos, that's for sure. It
is an asset to not appear barking mad.
>
> ANTI PSYCH CROWD
>
> Then you have the anti psych Scio’s who post the crimes of
> Psychiatry and the drug companies. That is their schtick.
"schtick"? Isn't that something that comedians do?
>
> ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS
> Then you have the Scientologist who attack back. Sometimes they are
> funny and sometimes they get the critics hooting and howling by
> pushing their buttons. There are not a lot of them so when I read one I
> usually find them amusing. McGoo for example has had me rolling on
> the floor laughing. I see many of you have killfiled him. It seems to
> me that you don’t want to hear his viewpoint because it is too close to
> the truth.
I would be embarrassed if looney-tunes like McGoo were making something
I believed in look bad.
YMMV.
> THE CRITICS
>
> THE NEVER A SCIENTOLOGIST
>
> One group of critics seem to have never been in Scientology and they
I have never been in the Mafia either, but I know a good deal about it.
They don't think they're doing anything wrong either, just trying to
make a living.
> just rant and rave like they know what they are talking about but most
> of the time they haven’t got a clue. These guys generally bore me
Please feel fre to point out any lies or inaccuracies that you see here.
Don't generalize - someone once said that this is the mark of an SP.
> because they are more stupid than mean. I think they found a good
> news group to vent in and have read a bunch of web sites so they now
> consider themselves experts. This group thinks they are very cool, hip,
> witty and very superior but in fact they only know what they have read
> on the entheta sites and have no real experience.
I haven't had any real experience with Ebola virus. Have you? Do you
have any opinions about it?
> If ARS didn’t exist
Ah, but it does.
> this group would find another issue to get involved with just so they
> could spew their hate and think of themselves as very cool.
I have never been "very cool" (thank god). How nice of you to think for
me.
>
> DEBATERS
>
> One group of critics seem to want to discuss issues without all the
> attacks and mean spirited stuff. Most of these people have a good
> sense of humor and are truly funny. Plus they have interesting
> questions and try to debate the issues in a sane fashion. Some are Ex
> Scio and some are not.
Then you admit there are issues? Good. perception that there are abuses
in $cn comes next. You're halfway to the SP cognition.
>
> THE FOAMERS
>
> The last group are the FOAMERS. These are the ex- Scientologists
> that tend to foam at the mouth. They alter and twist communication.
> They make up stuff and downright lie. All with the justification that
> they “have to destroy Scientology”, so anything goes. But then they
> criticize Scientology for doing the exact same thing. They are not
> interested in debate but just attack and make up facts to suit them.
> The FOAMERS are not much fun to read. I feel like I am reading the
> posts of people going over the edge. I actually worry about this bunch
> as over the past few months a couple of them seem to be really losing
> it.
>
> I can see the response to this post. One or more will respond by
> making up their own
> “types” of posters. Something like, Clams, Extra Large Clams, and
> Clam smothered in Tartar Sauce.
>
> While on the subject, I do not know if other Scientologists have stated
> this but too me
> a Scientologist being a clam is like a:
> Jew being a kike a
> Hindu being a dot an
> black being a nigger a
Didn't hubbard say something about cleaning floors being what "niggers"
are for?
> Mexican being a spic
Non-scn being "raw meat" and "Wogs"?
> and so on and so on. It is a term of hatred. And these terms are not
> tolerated in society.
> Those of you who use it, dead agent yourselves. Anyone who reads
> your posts knows instantly that you are a bigot.
>
> I would also like to give my opinion to the Ex Scio debater group.
> You know who you are so all others need not reply.
>
> You guys were in Scientology and left. Instead of having the courage
> to stay and fight and make things Right-- you left. You now stand on
> the sidelines and boo.
>
> You guys whine! You act like victims. “Look what they did to me!!!
> I am a victim. Poor me.” Whine, Whine, Whine.
>
> You left! You lack the courage to stand and fight and make it right
> from within. Anybody can stand outside and throw stones and say
> “ya, well I am now outside and I have the courage to throw stones and
> take that big bad church down because I think they are evil and I am
> going to handle it right here from my computer and pass out 53 flyers
> to people who walk by the local church. What I am doing takes
> courage. “
>
> I realize that you think that, but you guys went from running away
> from what you saw was wrong, to attacking what was wrong, to trying
> to completely destroy what was wrong and get rid of what is good. Of
> course, here you will state that nothing in Scientology is good. That
> makes no sense. If Scientology did not produce results then people
> would be leaving in droves. Many of you have been to Clearwater or
> LA. You see what it looks like. There are many people doing services
> in Scientology and their lives are better for it.
> Some of you post that Scientology is not expanding but shrinking.
> This is just not true. I see the expansion with my own eyes. I believe
> this is just wishful thinking on your part and you just make up stuff
> like that to try to convince yourself and others that it is so.
>
> Just cause it didn’t work for you doesn’t mean it won’t work for
> others.
>
> And your response to this is: . “Ah, but they are brainwashed idiots
> and I have to save them from themselves”
>
> Who asked you? You guys must all be registered as liberal democrats.
You are Rush Limbaugh and I claim my $5.
> They have the same viewpoint on people i.e. people are stupid so we
> have to tell the what to do and pass a bunch of laws to stop them from
> harming themselves. You think, “We know what is best for everyone
> else, because we are smarter then everyone else.”
Isn't that what Managment has been telling everyone for years? If you
disagree, the next time you see a Flag Order that is a pile of monkey
droppings, walk right up to Mr. Ethics Officer and tell him so.
Show the courage of your convictions.
>
> Being in Scientology for almost 30 years has allowed me to see things
After 30 years, I doubt you are able to see anything in $cn with any
objectivity at all.
Forest for the trees, fish can't see water, (insert your own metaphor
here).
> that were wrong. But I personally found that it wasn’t “Scientology”
> that was wrong. It was creeps misapplying Scientology and then
> calling it Scientology that was wrong. You Ex Scio’s saw it too. But
> instead of finding the correct SP who got himself in a position of
> power in an organization and then misused Scientology to harm others,
> you blamed the entire religion. Your lack of courage came when you
> failed to handle the creep in front of you who was misapplying
Even if he was a Kha-Khan?
> Scientology on you and others and you left. You did not stay and try
> to help your friends who were also getting harmed by someone who
> should have been removed from post. YOU LEFT and then you sit on
> the side lines and WHINE because you failed to help yourself and
> others that were getting screwed over by some SP.
> YOU ABANDONED YOUR COURAGE, YOUR FRIENDS AND
> YOUR HONOR.
>
> Or, more accurately, maybe YOU were the creep that deliberately
> misapplied Scientology so it would not work and then cried, “it
> doesn’t work”
>
> And the response is “ Well, we are now trying to take out the evil
> Miscavige”
>
> Sorry guys, wrong target. Contrary to your opinions, Scientology has
> only expanded with Mr. Miscavige. This comes from an active
> Scientologist and sees the results on a daily basis.
You mean it doesn't come from tracking Clear Completions? Probably not.
>
> Scientology is set up to handle any exec who gets into a position of
> power and misuses it.
Even if he's the chairman of RTC? Who exactly files KRs on Miscavige and
who would he send the KR to?
Enlighten me.
> They don’t last long. Stats are what the job is based on. Stats don’t
> lie. The numbers are going up or down. Scientologists will not stand
> for all the things you accuse management of doing.
They don't have much of a choice.
> So even if you
> were correct ( which you are not) then let the Church handle it.
Sorry but the so-called church doesn't seem to be able to 'handle' much
of anything.
> Let Scientology go through the process of applying their codes to
> themselves to make thing right. Who the hell do you think you are
> standing on the outside trying to fix things. You want to fix it then
> join the group and fix it from within.
>
> But you gave up that chance when you left.
>
> Who the hell asked you to “reform” my church. How many active
> Scientologist have come to you and asked you to do this? ( I am sure I
> will be told that you receive thousands of letters to do this, and if you
> do you will be lying)
>
> Yes I have taken on a few bad guys, and fought to expose them for
> what they were doing. It was sometimes horrendous and very
> stressful, because facing evil and getting others to do the same is not
> an easy task.
I think you should have a talk with Stacy Brooks.
>
> But I did not run away and leave my friends to deal with them. I took
> responsibility and got it handled. Who said life was easy? Who said it
> was fair? What did you do to make it fair?
>
> Life if a continuous process of confronting and handling situations.
> NOT RUNNING FROM THEM.
Thanks for the advice. I will continue to handle the Co$ by
disseminating information about it.
>
> When I hear you Whine and say “ Well what were my crimes?” I will
> tell you what they are. You abandoned your friends when things got
> too rough for you. You chickened out and didn’t stay and make it
> right for yourself and others. You gave up. So as far as I amyourself. You no
> longer count as someone who matters. YOU LEFT.
>
> So now we will hear from the peanut gallery.
>
> concerned your anger, upset, and rage is all misplaced. Look at
> Here are the responses I will get
>
> 1. Out right attack on me personally when you don’t even know me.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
> Including that I am an OSA shill and a brainwashed idiot.
I don't believe that you are brainwashed. :-)
> 2. All your justifications on why you left and how evil Scientology is.
> 3. Jokes, one liners. Finding a misspelled word or incorrect grammar
> and pointing it out
> 4. Possibly a actual sane discussion of what I have said, but highly
> unlikely.
>
> Of course because it is an open forum you can post whatever you
> want. But FOAMERS need not respond.
You can say what you want and Ex-$cns "need not respond"?
Well, la-de-da!
So much for communication.
Tommy
--
L.Ron Hubbard on trying to get $cientology declared a religion for tax
purposes:
"I await your reaction on the religion angle. In my opinion,
we couldn't get worse public opinion than we have had or have less
customers with what we've got to sell. A religious charter would be
necessary in Pennsylvania or NJ to make it stick. But I sure could
make it stick."
Best Regards,
Ron
Rebecca Jo McLaughlin
Kaeli
SSRI's stands for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Serotonin is a
neurotransmitter that is naturally spread throughout the body. In a depressed or
person like me who suffers general anxiety and panic attacks, there is a lower level
of serotonin than what is normal. The SSRI closes off the sending nerve cell to the
re-uptake of serotonin, forcing the serotonin to the next nerve cell. So what the
SSRI is doing is doing something that the body has forgotten to do. SSRI's are
medications like Paxil, Prozac, Zoloft.
A MAOI stands for Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitor. Again, it acts on a pure body
function. This is medication like Nardil or Marplan. All of the psych drugs are just
that.. medications, that interact and react on bodily functions, on something the
body has forgotten to do or is lacking the capability of doing anymore.
Your answers answered the questions I did ask as I was asking what exactly does the
CoS do with illegal PCs.
However medications alone do not help. Usually there should be some form of
counselling or therapy.
I haven't found my mind is affected by the paxil, except I do not suffer panic
attacks anymore, which is a relief in itself. I haven't forgotten how to do my trade
(computer technician). However now my question is, how does auditing affect the mind?
Is there any bodily consequences to it? On its own, it appears that it does some good
in the way of counselling, and I'm entirely willing to call auditing counselling.
If it is the case that the CoS does not like people being on such a medication,
wouldn't be best for it to help people who are on them, to wean themselves from it by
using counselling? (I am including auditing in this bracket.) I've found some of the
ones who post anti-psychiatric articles are of no benefit to these questions, except
to say how bad it is and how I may grow to be violent. There has to be ways of having
the CoS improve on its application of LRH tech, and perhaps, improve its image as
well in the eyes of the public.
LRH is a man, and he was not perfect. However, there are ways of applying the
technology to truly help others who are seeking it. Since you are in the CoS, is
there a way of suggesting ways to help people who need it?
MORRIGAN wrote:
> In article <39595603...@klis.com>, Kaeli says...
> >
> >>>
> >Perhaps I should ask you the question:
> >Why isn't the CoS doing more to help people like the mentally ill?
> >Why are people who are or have taken SSRIs or MAOIs considered illegal PCs and
> >not >worthy of any help?
> >These questions are not meant to be degrading.. I am curious. It doesn't make
> >sense>to me at all, logic wise.
>
> I will try to answer. First off let me say that I didn't realize how time
> consuming it was going to be to answer all the questions. Next I am going to
> give you my viewpoint on the answers. I am not going to Quote policy as it
> would be too time consuming to go digging around looking for the exact LRH quote
> for you. So realize that you are getting my viewpoint on things.
>
> I have no idea what SSRI's or MAOI's are ( are these drugs?)
>
> It is not that illegal PC's are not worthy of help at all. Everyone is worthy
> of help if they truly want it. The problem is that psych drugs effect the mind
> in such a way as to hinder or downright stop people from making gains in
> auditing. Therefore it is a waste of time and money for people to try to audit
> while on them or even if they have taken them.
>
> However people who are illegal pc's are still able to train. After they have
> trained and done well and have a good record of getting others to make gains,
> they can then request to have the auditing themselves. I hope this answers your
> question.
> >
> >>
> >>
> .
> >
> >It's hard to not to reply when your CoS wishes to take the only medication that
> >stops my panic attacks off the market. I've asked several times what do you have
> >in >replacement for it. So far, no one CoS Scientologist at all has come up with
> >an >answer. What do you expect me to do?
>
> I am sorry to hear you have panic attacks. I am not a trained c/s and could
> personally not advise you. >>
> >>
> >> >something I love... the Internet.
> >
> >>Me too!
> >>
> I try honestly not to judge all scientologists the
> >same.. however, could you Scientologists please not judge all critics the same?
> >We're not all evil.
>
> OK, I promise to take each critic as I seem them. Sorry for the generalities.
>
> >>
> >>
> >I disagree with much of your post Morrigan. A lot of ex-Scns were forced out.
> >Some
> >didn't want to even leave, by the way. And I will not stoop down to calling you
> >names like OSA shill or troll here. You're free to email me directly if you wish
> >wnot agree with many aspects of LRH's point of views. Let's leave it at that,
> >ok?ith the questions I asked earlier.
> >If you don't consider what I've written as a sane discussion, that's fine.
> >However
> >I've not called you an OSA shill, have not called you a brainwashed idiot, it's
> >not
> >my job to correct your grammar or spelling, and as far as calling Scn evil... I
> >do
> >
> >However I'm willing to discuss, if you're willing. It's entirely up to you now.
>
> I'm game.
>
> Morrigan
> >
> >Ka...@klis.com
> >
Goodboy
<MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote:
=>I have been “lurking” here for a couple of months, with the intention
=>of finding out what ARS was all about.
It's hardly worth responding since you're sure you're right and
everyone else is wrong. I believe it is certain that your posting
was 1) preapproved by OSA, making you an agent or a shill or 2)
will be scrutinized by OSA subsequently. If you return and post
again under Morrigan or some other name, then you will have
proven that you are an agent or a shill.
Hopefully, you'll bloom into a new travis or mike mckean, someone
to have fun with. OTOH, if you just go away that'll be good, too.
Goodboy
Judge Paul Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court:
"The court record is replete with evidence that
Scientology is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise
to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts
by pseudo scientific theories... and to exercise a kind
of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue
with their sect...The organization clearly is schizophrenic
and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be
a reflection of its founder, L.Ron Hubbard."
Anti Magoo
minions just a shill'n away! See their pictures
at: www.upc-online.org
A G
barb
together, you will wind up misunderstanding the critic community. Many
different things motivate us but ARS has been likened to a herd of cats,
and you'd do well to remember it.
MORRIGAN wrote:
>
> In article <mike-1B9F98.2...@news-server.optonline.net>, Mike says...
> >
> >>
> >>Is this what you call ARC?
>
> Well at least it is C and a start.
>
> >snip
>
> >Do you have something to say about Scientology? How it
> >helped, how it is worthwhile, or anything at all?
>
> Sure, 30 years ago, I was heavily on drugs, I dropped out of college, wouldn't
> talk to my family and my future looked pretty bleak. I got involved in
> Scientology through a good friend and my life just got better and better. I now
> own my own successful business, been married many years with children, and get
> along great with my family ( none of whom are Scio's).
>
> >
> >>
> >I don't know, maybe you want me to start. OK. I'll start by saying the
> >huffle ruffle here isn't about religion. It's about abuse of people and
> >the law. And I believe Scientology can survive. It only needs to drop a
> >few of the teachings of Mr. Hubbard, a few policies. The abuse of
> >people, the abuse of the law can be dropped from Scientology, and it
> >would survive, gain respect, and thrive. Is that what you thought I'd
> >say?
>
> >
> Nope, but thank you for your viewpoint. I don't know that this viewpoint is
> shared by all the critics here. Many have said that they want to destory
> Scientology completely. I apologize for not naming names. I haven't got a
> who's who list to figure it out. But I don't want Scientology destroyed. Scn
> has helped me and own family very much. Based on what was going on with me
> before Scientology, I would probably be dead or in jail right now. Instead I am
> a contributing member of society that is trying to make things better for myself
> and the people I care about. That is not a bad thing. That does not seem like
> something that needs destroying.
>
> Morrigan
--
barb
"Must be the mind that goes first.
If the body goes first, the mind notices.
If the mind goes first, the body just goes
diddling along in its own oblivious
way."
-Albin
"Every week, every month, every year, every decade and now
every century, Scientology does wierd and stupid things
to damage its own reputation."
-Steve Zadarnowski
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.xenutv.com (see live Scientologists in their natural state!)
barb
ARS into a constructed framework as per Elron's teachings. We wogs know
that pigeonholing can lead to misunderstandings, faulty estimations, and
lack of communication.
Then it has the gall to tell us how we think and what we'll post in
response to its own post. Arrogant, flagrant stupidity, that!
Finally it rails about 'attacks on its religion.'
Buddy, I don't give a bats barf whether you believe in Xenu, BTs, the
whole Elron cosmology! I do give a damn about the criminal behavior your
artificially religious-flavored cult repeatedly indulges in. See if you
can get your mind around that concept, as it's not exactly what you are
told by your "superiors" about us.
This poster is already beginning to give me deja vu, as if I'd read his
very words before...oh, wait. I have. From some past scieno poster.
Yawn.
--
eldonbraun
<snip>
YOU LEFT and then you sit on
> the side lines and WHINE because you failed to help yourself and
> others that were getting screwed over by some SP.
> YOU ABANDONED YOUR COURAGE, YOUR FRIENDS AND
> YOUR HONOR.
>
Sure I left. I went and did some more "squirrel" scientology at David
Mayo's place before the GO harassed it out of existence. However, I did
not abandon my courage and my friend to do that. It courage, and my
friends abandoned ME with disconnection notices. My honor? I would say
Mary Sue and crew abandoned that for me. There has been no honor in
Scientology since that period in my opinion. There were people who tried
to salvage it and failed. Then left. What's left is what you've got. A
sham and a mess.
> Or, more accurately, maybe YOU were the creep that deliberately
> misapplied Scientology so it would not work and then cried, “it
> doesn’t work”
>
> And the response is “ Well, we are now trying to take out the evil
> Miscavige”
>
> Sorry guys, wrong target. Contrary to your opinions, Scientology has
> only expanded with Mr. Miscavige. This comes from an active
> Scientologist and sees the results on a daily basis.
>
> Scientology is set up to handle any exec who gets into a position of
> power and misuses it.
> They don’t last long. Stats are what the job is based on. Stats
don’t
> lie. The numbers are going up or down. Scientologists will not stand
> for all the things you accuse management of doing.
Excuse me if you think it impolite, but I consider the above statements
to be blatant lies or at best, brainwashed ramblings you may have been
fed. For starters, do you have verified figures on Scientology's
expansion over that past decade? Can you get them? Why not?
> Yes I have taken on a few bad guys, and fought to expose them for
> what they were doing. It was sometimes horrendous and very
> stressful, because facing evil and getting others to do the same is
not
> an easy task.
>
> But I did not run away and leave my friends to deal with them. I took
> responsibility and got it handled. Who said life was easy? Who said
it
> was fair? What did you do to make it fair?
>
> Life if a continuous process of confronting and handling situations.
> NOT RUNNING FROM THEM.
>
> When I hear you Whine and say “ Well what were my crimes?” I will
> tell you what they are. You abandoned your friends when things got
> too rough for you. You chickened out and didn’t stay and make it
> right for yourself and others. You gave up. So as far as I
amyourself. You no
> longer count as someone who matters. YOU LEFT.
>
> So now we will hear from the peanut gallery.
>
> concerned your anger, upset, and rage is all misplaced. Look at
> Here are the responses I will get
>
> 1. Out right attack on me personally when you don’t even know me.
> Including that I am an OSA shill and a brainwashed idiot.
> 2. All your justifications on why you left and how evil Scientology
is.
> 3. Jokes, one liners. Finding a misspelled word or incorrect grammar
> and pointing it out
> 4. Possibly a actual sane discussion of what I have said, but highly
> unlikely.
>
5. A requsst for more information. Can you supply it? Or refute what I
said about the lies?
> Of course because it is an open forum you can post whatever you
> want. But FOAMERS need not respond.
>
I'm not foaming. I'm trying to stop the evil that Scientology represents
as best I can.
©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
In Message-ID: <8jbarq$u...@edrn.newsguy.com>
From: MORRIGAN <MORRIGA...@newsguy.com>.
Organization: Extra Newsguy News Service [http://extra.newsguy.com].
Wrote on the subject: another delurker:
>I have been “lurking” here for a couple of months, with the intention
>of finding out what ARS was all about.
>
>I am posting my observations, as it is my understanding that this is
>supposed to be an open forum on the discussion of Scientology.
>
>I expect to be attacked for my views as it seems that any Scientologist
>that posts here gets their communication twisted to suit certain
>people’s needs.
>
>OK so here goes.
>
>I have been in Scientology for almost 30 years. I am not an OSA Shill,
>but be will be accused of being one anyway because any Scientologist
>that post here is. A = A. If you are a Scientologist then you are OSA.
>Ludicrous thinking but so be it. Plus there is no way to prove or
>disprove it here on ARS so why bother.
>
>
>I see that there are a few basic types of posters here. I apologize up
>front for not naming specific names of posters here when I discuss the
>ARS crowd. There are only a few names that stick out in my mind
>that I might refer to. I would need some sort of file system to keep
>everyone straight and which posters are on what side but I am too busy
>to invest time and energy in that .
>
>SCIENTOLOGISTS
>
>Even the Scienolgists have “types”
>
>DEBATERS:
>
> You have the Claire Swayze types, that include Enzo and a couple of
>others, who seem to try to actually communication their views. They
>are viciously attacked as being OSA shills and horrible people, but
>personally, I think they are just Scientologists defending their religion.
>And they do a pretty good job.
>
>ANTI PSYCH CROWD
>
>Then you have the anti psych Scio’s who post the crimes of
>Psychiatry and the drug companies. That is their schtick.
>
>
>ATTACKERS/DEFENDERS
>Then you have the Scientologist who attack back. Sometimes they are
>funny and sometimes they get the critics hooting and howling by
>pushing their buttons. There are not a lot of them so when I read one I
>usually find them amusing. McGoo for example has had me rolling on
>the floor laughing. I see many of you have killfiled him. It seems to
>me that you don’t want to hear his viewpoint because it is too close to
>the truth.
>
>
>So you ask, which group am I? I could be in any one of these groups
>at any time. I would like to be in the debaters group, but I could see
>myself posting anti psych stuff if I had it and I could also see me
>replying in a not nice way if you attacked me for my beliefs.
>
>THE CRITICS
>
>THE NEVER A SCIENTOLOGIST
>
>One group of critics seem to have never been in Scientology and they
>just rant and rave like they know what they are talking about but most
>of the time they haven’t got a clue. These guys generally bore me
>because they are more stupid than mean. I think they found a good
>news group to vent in and have read a bunch of web sites so they now
>consider themselves experts. This group thinks they are very cool, hip,
>witty and very superior but in fact they only know what they have read
>on the entheta sites and have no real experience. If ARS didn’t exist
>this group would find another issue to get involved with just so they
>could spew their hate and think of themselves as very cool.
>
>DEBATERS
>
>One group of critics seem to want to discuss issues without all the
>attacks and mean spirited stuff. Most of these people have a good
>sense of humor and are truly funny. Plus they have interesting
>questions and try to debate the issues in a sane fashion. Some are Ex
>Scio and some are not.
>
>THE FOAMERS
>
>The last group are the FOAMERS. These are the ex- Scientologists
>that tend to foam at the mouth. They alter and twist communication.
>They make up stuff and downright lie. All with the justification that
>they “have to destroy Scientology”, so anything goes. But then they
>criticize Scientology for doing the exact same thing. They are not
>interested in debate but just attack and make up facts to suit them.
>The FOAMERS are not much fun to read. I feel like I am reading the
>posts of people going over the edge. I actually worry about this bunch
>as over the past few months a couple of them seem to be really losing
>it.
>
>I can see the response to this post. One or more will respond by
>making up their own
>“types” of posters. Something like, Clams, Extra Large Clams, and
>Clam smothered in Tartar Sauce.
>
>While on the subject, I do not know if other Scientologists have stated
>this but too me
>a Scientologist being a clam is like a:
>Jew being a kike a
>Hindu being a dot an
>black being a nigger a
>Mexican being a spic
>They have the same viewpoint on people i.e. people are stupid so we
>have to tell the what to do and pass a bunch of laws to stop them from
>harming themselves. You think, “We know what is best for everyone
>else, because we are smarter then everyone else.”
>
>Being in Scientology for almost 30 years has allowed me to see things
>that were wrong. But I personally found that it wasn’t “Scientology”
>that was wrong. It was creeps misapplying Scientology and then
>calling it Scientology that was wrong. You Ex Scio’s saw it too. But
>instead of finding the correct SP who got himself in a position of
>power in an organization and then misused Scientology to harm others,
>you blamed the entire religion. Your lack of courage came when you
>failed to handle the creep in front of you who was misapplying
>Scientology on you and others and you left. You did not stay and try
>to help your friends who were also getting harmed by someone who
>should have been removed from post. YOU LEFT and then you sit on
>the side lines and WHINE because you failed to help yourself and
>others that were getting screwed over by some SP.
>YOU ABANDONED YOUR COURAGE, YOUR FRIENDS AND
>YOUR HONOR.
>
>Or, more accurately, maybe YOU were the creep that deliberately
>misapplied Scientology so it would not work and then cried, “it
>doesn’t work”
>
>And the response is “ Well, we are now trying to take out the evil
>Miscavige”
>
>Sorry guys, wrong target. Contrary to your opinions, Scientology has
>only expanded with Mr. Miscavige. This comes from an active
>Scientologist and sees the results on a daily basis.
>
>Scientology is set up to handle any exec who gets into a position of
>power and misuses it.
>They don’t last long. Stats are what the job is based on. Stats don’t
>lie. The numbers are going up or down. Scientologists will not stand
>for all the things you accuse management of doing. So even if you
>were correct ( which you are not) then let the Church handle it. Let
>Scientology go through the process of applying their codes to
>themselves to make thing right. Who the hell do you think you are
>standing on the outside trying to fix things. You want to fix it then
>join the group and fix it from within.
>
>But you gave up that chance when you left.
>
>Who the hell asked you to “reform” my church. How many active
>Scientologist have come to you and asked you to do this? ( I am sure I
>will be told that you receive thousands of letters to do this, and if you
>do you will be lying)
>
>Yes I have taken on a few bad guys, and fought to expose them for
>what they were doing. It was sometimes horrendous and very
>stressful, because facing evil and getting others to do the same is not
>an easy task.
>
>But I did not run away and leave my friends to deal with them. I took
>responsibility and got it handled. Who said life was easy? Who said it
>was fair? What did you do to make it fair?
>
>Life if a continuous process of confronting and handling situations.
>NOT RUNNING FROM THEM.
>
>When I hear you Whine and say “ Well what were my crimes?” I will
>tell you what they are. You abandoned your friends when things got
>too rough for you. You chickened out and didn’t stay and make it
>right for yourself and others. You gave up. So as far as I amyourself. You no
>longer count as someone who matters. YOU LEFT.
>
>So now we will hear from the peanut gallery.
>
>
>concerned your anger, upset, and rage is all misplaced. Look at
>Here are the responses I will get
>
>1. Out right attack on me personally when you don’t even know me.
>Including that I am an OSA shill and a brainwashed idiot.
>2. All your justifications on why you left and how evil Scientology is.
>3. Jokes, one liners. Finding a misspelled word or incorrect grammar
>and pointing it out
>4. Possibly a actual sane discussion of what I have said, but highly
>unlikely.
>
>Of course because it is an open forum you can post whatever you
>want. But FOAMERS need not respond.
>
>Morrigan
You're wearing an old hat Morrigan. Your article (with just minor
alterations) was posted years ago by someone else. Please try again,
with another nick, and another type of OSA hat.
Geeze, are these people desperate or not :-)
Think for yourself, obviously is just something the scientologists say
to others. They themselves however, is thinking with the brain of a long
dead cult founder.
Sten-Arne
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
++++++++++++ SACRED CULT SCRIPTURE +++++++++++++
From "Dianetics: The Mein Kampf of Scientology:
"Perhaps at some distant date only the unaberrrated person will be
granted civil rights before law. Perhaps the goal will be reached at
some future time when only the unaberrated person can attain to and
benefit from citizenship. These are desirable goals..."
(Dianetics, book 3, chapter 10)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
---------------------------------------------------------------------
******* Body thetans? We don't need no stinking Body Thetans! *******
*********** http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/index.htm ************
IRC #Scientology JavaChat http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/irc.html
* Multimedia: http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/multimed/index.htm *
******** The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (Anti-Cult) ********
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Anti Magoo
those who are angry (pissed off) at the cult,
Stacey Myer's parents, family, friends, and
loved ones will become FOAMERS like the
McPherson relatives, the Lotticks, the Padgetts,
and others who have lost loved ones by death
or other permanent forms of "isolation" and "disconnection!"
The "foamer" category of Morrigan's is becoming a HUGE group of folks
worldwide.
A G
Lord High Commissioner
Scientologists afraid of foamers? No wonder those laundry balls never
worked!
MerriSedai
>unlikely.<<
I do hope I am placed in this category, but perhaps you'll call me something
else (extra-large clam trap?).
If you've been in Scientology for 30 years you have obviously reached OT III
and read about Xenu, etc. Are you a "true believer" of this theology? Do you
accept it asfact or metaphor? If you accept it as fact, do you have any
external (non-CoS) evidence that you accept as supporting this belief?
>>I can see the response to this post. One or more will respond by
>making up their own
>“types” of posters. Something like, Clams, Extra Large Clams, and
>Clam smothered in Tartar Sauce. <<
Good one!!
Beverly Rice
> Dennis Erlich
> intensly disliked by many or outright reviled as
> the bullies they are.
Rosie, please don't go into non-confront and ~CLAM UP~
on us.
You made an accusation about Dennis Erlich.
Please, confront your statement publicly.
Do tell us about the ~evils~ of Dennis Erlich . . .
or are you simply mindlessly mouthing ignorance in typcial
Hubbardian fashion?
ARC,
Beverly
Lame_Duck
On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 00:46:38 GMT, The Skipster <NOSPAMTOs...@excite.com> wrote:
>In article <8jbarq$u...@edrn.newsguy.com>, MORRIGAN
><MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>>The last group are the FOAMERS. These are the ex- Scientologists
>>that tend to foam at the mouth. They alter and twist communication.
>>They make up stuff and downright lie. All with the justification that
>>they “have to destroy Scientology”, so anything goes. But then they
>>criticize Scientology for doing the exact same thing. They are not
>>interested in debate but just attack and make up facts to suit them.
>>The FOAMERS are not much fun to read. I feel like I am reading the
>>posts of people going over the edge.
>
>OK, punky, I'm a former. My name is Skip Press. I'm an internationally
>recognized author. I hear from people around the world on a weekly if
>not daily basis thanking me for my books. Look me up on Amazon.com --
>that's only a part of it. I appear before large crowds as a speaker
>across the country. I just returned from Aspen, Colorado where a number
>of my attendees were millionaires.
Skip Press, all sail no ballast.
SamDude
In article <8jbo91$1q...@drn.newsguy.com>,
Virginia McClaughry <Virgini...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> Welcome Morrigan!
[snip]
>
> >You left! You lack the courage to stand and fight and make it right
> >from within.
>
> I am interested in what you are doing to stand and fight the
destruction of
> LRH's technology through alterations such as those I, and Safe have
posted.
>
> On this newsgroup the only scientologists that have been standing and
fighting,
> have been Safe and I. If you are going to have the courage to stand
and fight
> also, that is great! Be prepared to get declared though, but don't
worry it's a
> squirrel group that is declaring you, something to be proud of.
>
[snip]
I have been hoping to read more of Safe but he has somehow magically
disappeared. Do you have any idea where he might be and how things are
going for Safe. I miss his posts.
.
====================
SamDude
Honorary Espee
====================
.
eldonbraun
called TRUTH.
Grok it?
In article <8jbarq$u...@edrn.newsguy.com>,
MORRIGAN <MORRIGA...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> The last group are the FOAMERS. These are the ex- Scientologists
> that tend to foam at the mouth. They alter and twist communication.
> They make up stuff and downright lie. All with the justification that
> they “have to destroy Scientology”, so anything goes. But then they
> criticize Scientology for doing the exact same thing. They are not
> interested in debate but just attack and make up facts to suit them.
> The FOAMERS are not much fun to read. I feel like I am reading the
> posts of people going over the edge. I actually worry about this
bunch
> as over the past few months a couple of them seem to be really losing
> it.
>
> I can see the response to this post. One or more will respond by
> making up their own
> “types” of posters. Something like, Clams, Extra Large Clams, and
> Clam smothered in Tartar Sauce.
>
> While on the subject, I do not know if other Scientologists have
stated
> this but too me
> a Scientologist being a clam is like a:
> Jew being a kike a
> Hindu being a dot an
> black being a nigger a
> Mexican being a spic
> and so on and so on. It is a term of hatred. And these terms are not
> tolerated in society.
> Those of you who use it, dead agent yourselves. Anyone who reads
> your posts knows instantly that you are a bigot.
>
> I would also like to give my opinion to the Ex Scio debater group.
> You know who you are so all others need not reply.
>
> You guys were in Scientology and left. Instead of having the courage
> to stay and fight and make things Right-- you left. You now stand on
> the sidelines and boo.
>
> You guys whine! You act like victims. “Look what they did to me!!!
> I am a victim. Poor me.” Whine, Whine, Whine.
>
> You left! You lack the courage to stand and fight and make it right
> 4. Possibly a actual sane discussion of what I have said, but highly
> unlikely.
>
> Of course because it is an open forum you can post whatever you
> want. But FOAMERS need not respond.
Dave Bird
Hash: SHA1
In article<8jbqid$1u...@edrn.newsguy.com>, MORRIGAN writes:
>Michael Reuss:
>>
>>I don't know, maybe you want me to start. OK. I'll start by saying the
>>huffle ruffle here isn't about religion. It's about abuse of people and
>>the law. And I believe Scientology can survive. It only needs to drop a
>>few of the teachings of Mr. Hubbard, a few policies. The abuse of
>>people, the abuse of the law can be dropped from Scientology, and it
>>would survive, gain respect, and thrive. Is that what you thought I'd
>>say?
>
>Nope, but thank you for your viewpoint. I don't know that this viewpoint is
>shared by all the critics here. Many have said that they want to destory
>Scientology completely. I apologize for not naming names. I haven't got a
>who's who list to figure it out. But I don't want Scientology destroyed.
Actually Michael's viewpoint is a fairly common one. I don't want
to wipe out palmistry, phrenology, spirit-rapping or scientology
as subjects. I think the CHURCH OF scientology must be stopped
from harming people: reform or be destroyed. I also think it may
well need to be put down altogether, as it will choose not to reform.
- -- . : : ,; . : ' ___.
uno, due, tre, FUEGO! .:. .:. .:': :' .:':' :. . : (") #oH|
' :' : :' : .::. H_ ~~~|
< > __ ,;;,. \\::// R_) |
'-|"""(") {__}::===== ....'''' ' ' ' ___..\||/....L\. ...|
____||--|_'--/__\___ '' .--''':::::::::::::::::::::
\ / /////////////S.Coronado/////
;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^
LRon Hubbard is shelled by goats in hell. www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1
iQA/AwUBOVvaYX8v/Y5zkfRPEQKYbACfSIiueBBJ01yJR+jhNG7xMT/tH/IAoOi4
pe1oW971d7Je/v6RN2dWFNb5
=wSGP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Dave Bird
Hash: SHA1
In article<8jbrtb$21...@edrn.newsguy.com>, MORRIGAN writes:
>>Perhaps I should ask you the question:
>>Why isn't the CoS doing more to help people like the mentally ill?
>>Why are people who are or have taken SSRIs or MAOIs considered illegal PCs and
>>not >worthy of any help?
>
>I will try to answer. First off let me say that I didn't realize how time
>consuming it was going to be to answer all the questions. Next I am going to
>give you my viewpoint on the answers. I am not going to Quote policy as it
>would be too time consuming to go digging around looking for the exact LRH
>quote
>for you. So realize that you are getting my viewpoint on things.
>
>I have no idea what SSRI's or MAOI's are ( are these drugs?)
Yes, they are medicines for treating depression. (Selective) Serotonin
Re-uptake Inhibitors cause a slow rise in serotonin by slowing its
re-absorption (in the particular area of the synaptic cleft).
Mono-Amine Oxidase Inhibitors slow the breakdown of a number of
neurotransmitters such as serotonin and dopamine.
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |<a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"></a>_____________|/_______| L
www.xemu.demon.co.uk 2B0D 5195 337B A3E6 DDAC BD38 7F2F FD8E 7391 F44F
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1
iQA/AwUBOVx/Sn8v/Y5zkfRPEQJsKQCeIxWyhYKxYVCrtFUJaOL2jiEdafYAoNkk
Zh+pMX+LktNhpAoBT6ra+nC/
=VLjK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
ADetwi7067
>to stay and fight and make things Right-- you left. You now stand on
>the sidelines and boo.
Yeah, I did leave because it's not for me and now these people won't leave me
the hell alone. I am being harassed. And why should I have to fight back or
justify my leaving or anything to them? My lack of response should be enough
for them to realize I'm not interested. I don't owe them an explanation. I
don't owe them jack and I'll be damned if I allow them to think I do.
I am not disrespecting you or anyone else who chooses to remain with the Church
of Scientology. I don't feel like the church is respecting my rights to not be
interested anymore.
AD
Michael Reuss
>> Morrigan:
>>> Michael [O'Conner] wrote:
Ya had a bad attribution, there, Dave. Michael O'Conner wrote this
next paragraph, not I.
>>>I don't know, maybe you want me to start. OK. I'll start by saying the
>>>huffle ruffle here isn't about religion. It's about abuse of people and
>>>the law. And I believe Scientology can survive. It only needs to drop a
>>>few of the teachings of Mr. Hubbard, a few policies. The abuse of
>>>people, the abuse of the law can be dropped from Scientology, and it
>>>would survive, gain respect, and thrive. Is that what you thought I'd
>>>say?
>>Nope, but thank you for your viewpoint. I don't know that this viewpoint is
>>shared by all the critics here.
So, you want every critic to be the same?
>> Many have said that they want to destory
>> Scientology completely. I apologize for not naming names. I haven't got a
>> who's who list to figure it out. But I don't want Scientology destroyed.
I am fully prepared to destroy it completely, if it won't reform
itself. However, when I say "destroy completely" that is misleading in
the sense you're using the phrase.
I'm only planning on destroying it by helping to persuade people not
to join. I'm only exercising my right to free speech, with which I
hope to build up a memetic "Scientology Sucks" engram in the public
eye.
I want peoples FIRST instinct, when the hear the name L. Ron Hubbard
presented to them as some sort of God-like person, to look crosswise
at the marketing hype, and say, wait a sec, I think I've heard about
this, and it wasn't all candy and roses.
That's how Scientology will be destroyed. People will learn that it's
a scam, via the mass media, and so they'll be very unlikely to join.
> Actually Michael's viewpoint is a fairly common one. I don't want
> to wipe out palmistry, phrenology, spirit-rapping or scientology
> as subjects. I think the CHURCH OF scientology must be stopped
> from harming people: reform or be destroyed. I also think it may
> well need to be put down altogether, as it will choose not to reform.
Well put, big Dave!
Reform it, and save it, Ms. Morrigan. Let the CoS keep spitting in
people's faces, and keep trying to usurp people's free speech rights,
and I predict that it will go down.
But even if the CoS does collapse onto the shitpile of history, people
like you need not worry. You'll still have Hubbardspew Brand [tm]
Dreknology with which to fuck up your brain. Only now you'll do it
without a totalitarian political organization ordering you about and
telling you what you think.
Michael Reuss
Honorary Kid
Iain Rowe Industries
immediately canceled. This is getting to be too much now. Like Sten
said, it gets overwritten.
That Malaysian news server is still spitting out cancel commands at
random? Gosh. Sten said it was hitting other newsgroups too. I don't
like that.
Dave Bird
Hash: SHA1
In article<V+JeOUmW1MFmIA...@4ax.com>, Michael Reuss writes:
>Dave Bird <da...@xemu.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>Morrigan:
>>>Michael [O'Conner] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>I don't know, maybe you want me to start. OK. I'll start by saying the
>>>>huffle ruffle here isn't about religion. It's about abuse of people and
>>>>the law. And I believe Scientology can survive. It only needs to drop a
>>>>few of the teachings of Mr. Hubbard, a few policies. The abuse of
>>>>people, the abuse of the law can be dropped from Scientology, and it
>>>>would survive, gain respect, and thrive. Is that what you thought I'd
>>>>say?
>>>
>>>Nope, but thank you for your viewpoint. I don't know that this viewpoint is
>>>shared by all the critics here.
>
>So, you want every critic to be the same?
>
>
>>> Many have said that they want to destory
>>> Scientology completely. I apologize for not naming names. I haven't got a
>>> who's who list to figure it out. But I don't want Scientology destroyed.
>
>I am fully prepared to destroy it completely, if it won't reform
>itself. However, when I say "destroy completely" that is misleading in
>the sense you're using the phrase.
Oh, I think that **if** is won't be reformed then it will need to
be destroyed completely..... meaning, as an organisation: the people
left, the money gone, the buildings put to more productive use
as Burger King outlets.
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |<a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"></a>_____________|/_______| L
www.xemu.demon.co.uk 2B0D 5195 337B A3E6 DDAC BD38 7F2F FD8E 7391 F44F
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1
iQA/AwUBOV9j4H8v/Y5zkfRPEQLSCwCeONDhCakM54Kj4a9hRZEuNFjspvQAoKDQ
7Tdc8lVWzU7ZglG3NcmhdmP+
=1TI9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----