Your conscience or your family
tomlanedesign
It cost me three children.
"537. Thomas M. Lane
The IRS agreement required that W.I.S.E. be disbanded.
W.I.S.E. still exists.
In a scientology world, no one who openly disagrees with church
management will be allowed to own property or have a job."
Does anyone disagree with this statement?
Does anyone not find such totalitarian domination of our world, by any
group, harmful to mankind?
Will someone from from the church please explain how this view of the future
you are working to create is untrue?
In order to communicate with my children I must to A-E.
Step E requires me to rejoin the church.
How can I have honor and join a group which works to create such a future?
Pts 2
Dear Thomas:
I totally disagree with the sick $cn philosophy in that statement. And
I 100% agree with your protest here. And THANK YOU VERY MUCH for
refocusing this news group back to issues of $cn.
Speaking of the WISE directory, here's a guy
in Clearwater on their list who was stalking me;
http://www.madvillelaw.net/padgett/thompson.html This was in March
1995. In May 1995, I lost my work (job) and eventually I lost my
property there. And re: children, a Ms. Betty Vannoy had a Kentucky
court write in a Report
and Recommendation Order: "The Commissioner clarifies that during the
upcoming holiday visitation, the Respondent (me) shall refrain from
discussions of Scientology, inquiring about the Petitioner's religious
beliefs and actions, and from discussions of this action." They had no
right to
stop my family's right to be together, but were trying to CONTROL what
can or can't be talked about - information control. How cultic and
totalitarian!
Tom
---------------------------------------------
www.xenutv.com Scientology tears families apart!
Kelly Martin
wrote:
>And re: children, a Ms. Betty Vannoy had a Kentucky
>court write in a Report
>and Recommendation Order: "The Commissioner clarifies that during the
>upcoming holiday visitation, the Respondent (me) shall refrain from
>discussions of Scientology, inquiring about the Petitioner's religious
>beliefs and actions, and from discussions of this action." They had no
>right to
>stop my family's right to be together, but were trying to CONTROL what
>can or can't be talked about - information control. How cultic and
>totalitarian!
This is a typical order issued when it appears that the noncustodial
parent has developed an unhealthy obsession about some topic and the
court is concerned that that parent's obsession might do harm to the
children. I've seen similiar orders issued (although the forbidden
topic is generally not Scientology) in several other cases.
The purpose of NCP visits is so that the NCP can visit with the
children, not pass along his or her mental illnesses.
Kelly
Kelly Martin
wrote:
>Thomas Lane wrote: "Does anybody disagree with this statement?"
>
>Dear Thomas:
>I totally disagree with the sick $cn philosophy in that statement. And
>I 100% agree with your protest here. And THANK YOU VERY MUCH for
>refocusing this news group back to issues of $cn.
And then you proceed to steal that "focus" and bring it back to
yourself, even though there is no credible evidence whatsoever that
you were the victim of any of Scientology's policies.
Not only are you a liar, but you are also a hypocrit.
Kelly
tomlanedesign
That's it on the distactions.
Would people please respond to the question posed in my original post?
"tomlanedesign" <tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:NtZca.127435$qi4.62186@rwcrnsc54...
Kelly Martin
<tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote:
>How can I have honor and join a group which works to create such a future?
Obviously, you don't believe that you can, or you would not be asking
this question.
Kelly
tomlanedesign
"Kelly Martin" <kma...@pyrzqxgl.org> wrote in message
news:08n97vkmc2r7um31u...@4ax.com...
Kelly Martin
<tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote:
>Kelly I wont to know how you can.
Why do you assume that I do?
Kelly
Fluffygirl
Well, there is such a thing as getting an expulsion overturned. I did that
once.
Of course, you can't always do that. And my guess is it's harder to do that
than it used to be.
I think the church has no business interfering in families.
And that they micromanage member's lives way way too much.
I think such practices are extremely harmful.
C
tomlanedesign
So I don't assume anyone is evil.
So I am curious how someone reaons out helping a group wich would deny
personal space, personal income, family love, ability to work, and ability
to enjoy good reputation honestly earned, merely because of asking questions
authorities don't want to answer. Am I to understand that you want such a
future for all of us?
"Kelly Martin" <kma...@pyrzqxgl.org> wrote in message
news:2qs97vshra0rojbeu...@4ax.com...
Kelly Martin
<tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote:
>Because I believe man is basically good.
You assume man is basically good, and from that conclude that I want
to impose a totalitarian theocracy upon the entire world?
I fear your logic is faulty.
Kelly
tomlanedesign
a group? Do you think I am wrong about the Cos? In what way?
"Kelly Martin" <kma...@pyrzqxgl.org> wrote in message
news:f50a7v0eud7hruouu...@4ax.com...
Fluffygirl
> Kelly I wont to know how you can.
>
>
How she can ~what~?
Are you assuming Kelly's in CofS?
C
Kelly Martin
<tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote:
>No. I don't assume such. That is why I am asking.
Your questions quite clearly assumed that I do support the evil you
have described in your past messages.
Kelly
tomlanedesign
form of answers to the three question at the beginning of this thread.
"tomlanedesign" <tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:NtZca.127435$qi4.62186@rwcrnsc54...
arnie lerma - www.lermanet.com
<tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote:
Dear Mr. Lane,
Feel free to give me a call at 703 241 1498
(weekdays preferred ), I would like to discuss
the possiblity of turning this into a print media story
for a newspaper
Sincerely
Arnie Lerma
>
Ferengi + Borg = Scientology
I'd prefer to die speaking my mind than live fearing to speak.
The only thing that always works in scientology are its lawyers
The internet is the liberty tree of the new millennium
Secrets are the mortar binding lies as bricks together into prisons for the mind
http://www.lermanet.com - mentioned 4 January 2000 in
The Washington Post's - 'Reliable Source' column re "Scientologist with no HEAD"
Jesse Kap
Kelly >>
Its not, i back him up 1000%
Jesse
Watching for Pigs on the Wing.
Kelly Martin
wrote:
>Its not, i back him up 1000%
It's statements like this that make me despair for the
anti-Scientologist movement.
Kelly
tomlanedesign
I am not trying to attach the church. It may be that I have it wrong.
If I have made a mistake I will do what is necessary to correct it.
I am so saddened by the loss any future with my boy and my two girls, and
any future grandchildren that I would bear most anything to share love with
them again
I have no desire to disrespect their faith. I accept that they feel deeply
about the value of their beliefs.
When I was on staff, I felt so strongly about it that I was trying to create
a scientology world, where no one who openly disagreed with church
management would be allowed to own property. engage in commence, or have a
family. I believed this was a good future to work for because the tech was
so valuable to mankind.
If I was alone in this goal, or if I got this goal wrong I NEED SOMEONE TO
LET ME KNOW. Because if I was wrong about this then I am willing to do A-E
so I can have life with my kids again.
"arnie lerma - www.lermanet.com" <ale...@nospam.bellatlantic.net> wrote in
message news:3e750bad....@news.verizon.net...
tomlanedesign
world was when I was on staff. WISE was the arm that gave pragmatic reality
to the economic disenfranchisement of those who questioned management. I
thought this was a good thing.
When I heard that the IRS closing agreement required that WISE be disbanded
as part of the deal for religion status, I felt that the IRS was saying yes
to faith and no to economic disenfranchisement of non believers.
That is why I wanted congress to look into it. Just to get the facts
straight and make sure the agreement was being followed as designed.
"tomlanedesign" <tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:HYada.109829$L1.16441@sccrnsc02...
arnie lerma - www.lermanet.com
<tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote:
>Mr Lerma,
>
>I am not trying to attach the church. It may be that I have it wrong.
>If I have made a mistake I will do what is necessary to correct it.
I have heard this many times before, and I wish you the best of luck
in your endeavor...
>
>I am so saddened by the loss any future with my boy and my two girls, and
>any future grandchildren that I would bear most anything to share love with
>them again
>
Now this it heart wrenching... Mind control style totalitarian
regimes all attack the bonds of family as the family bond is a
competitor to the tenet that the organization or movement comes first
before everything else.
This one tactic of Scientology is reponsible for percentage of the
opposition to Scientology.
>I have no desire to disrespect their faith. I accept that they feel deeply
>about the value of their beliefs.
>
I too, have 'been there' based upon my own acceptance as true of the
false claims and promises of the organization. see:
http://www.lermanet.com/LRonHubbard.htm
>When I was on staff, I felt so strongly about it that I was trying to create
>a scientology world, where no one who openly disagreed with church
>management would be allowed to own property. engage in commence, or have a
>family. I believed this was a good future to work for because the tech was
>so valuable to mankind.
Yeah, those mere "wogs" really are painted as vermin... I do recall
vividly...
>If I was alone in this goal,
No you were not alone, but then just because Scientology's circus
tent is filled with folks who say in their minds, much like that
poster in Mulder's office at the FBI "I Want to Believe"
Scientology defines reality as agreement.
THIS IS A KEY LIE TOLD BY HUBBARD TO CONTROL YOU
That axiom, should be stated properly thus:
APPARANCY IS AGREEMENT
because if you control what people think, and control what people
read, and control what people are willing to say to each other
Then you can create the APPARANCY that there is something there in
Scientology or any movement designed to accumulate power and money or
influence, be it the Stalinists, or Saddam Hussein.
>or if I got this goal wrong I NEED SOMEONE TO
>LET ME KNOW. Because if I was wrong about this then I am willing to do A-E
>so I can have life with my kids again.
>
No, you have taken the most important step of all..
You have one foot outside of the self-defining world of L Ron Hubbard.
Your entire life is still ahead of you... at this point you can choose
...
Scientologists cannot choose.... they must obey..
To be, or not to be, that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them.
Hamlet (III.i.64-68)
http://www.lermanet.com/getinvolved.htm
Prignillius
"tomlanedesign" <tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> Oh I forgot to explain how WISE figures into what my vision of a scientology
> world was when I was on staff. WISE was the arm that gave pragmatic reality
> to the economic disenfranchisement of those who questioned management. I
> thought this was a good thing.
Congratulations on reaching a point where you no longer do. It must have
been a long, hard road.
I know lots of people here, including myself, would be interested in
your story of what happened to you along the way from staff member to
your current position.
>
> When I heard that the IRS closing agreement required that WISE be disbanded
> as part of the deal for religion status, I felt that the IRS was saying yes
> to faith and no to economic disenfranchisement of non believers.
>
> That is why I wanted congress to look into it. Just to get the facts
> straight and make sure the agreement was being followed as designed.
It almost certainly is not.
On Jan 1, 1998, Jon Noring (nor...@netcom.com -- address now defunct)
posted to a.r.s what he described as
>
> What follows is the supposed secret agreement between the Organization of
> Scientology and the Internal Revenue Service which has been reported the last
> few days in the national media. The IRS refuses to comment on whether or not
> this is the real McCoy, but an article in the New York Times today states
> they are beginning an investigation into the leak, which they say violates
> Federal law, strongly suggesting this document is the Real Thing (tm). (This
> whole affair sort of reminds me of the "Pentagon Papers".)
>
> The Wall Street Journal obtained this document recently from an unknown source
> and put it up on their Web page, as well as reporting a summary of it in their
> newspaper. Ron Newman copied this document from their public Web site and
> sent a copy to Deana Holmes, who in turn posted it to the newsgroup
> alt.religion.scientology (a.r.s.).
[Sorry, Deana, this is what popped up first on Google. ;]
On WISE, the agreement states:
> Thus, under section IV, a
> Church Tax Compliance Committee (CTCC) has been created to undertake
> certain obligations during a seven-year transition period.
[..]
> 10. The members of the CTCC shall, no later than December 31, 1995,
> effectuate the dissolution of WISE, Inc. and the transfer of all of
> its assets, including but not limited to its rights to the Scientology
> religious marks, to the Inspector General Network.
I have never seen any evidence whatsoever that this was complied with.
>
> "tomlanedesign" <tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:HYada.109829$L1.16441@sccrnsc02...
> > Mr Lerma,
> >
> > I am not trying to attach the church. It may be that I have it wrong.
> > If I have made a mistake I will do what is necessary to correct it.
I don't think you have it wrong.
> >
> > I am so saddened by the loss any future with my boy and my two girls, and
> > any future grandchildren that I would bear most anything to share love
> with
> > them again
Many people who post to this newsgroup have had to bear the sorrow
of enforced disconnection from their loved ones for many years.
Jana Moreillon and Ida Camburn are two whose names come instantly to
mind - maybe they will post here, or a Google search on their names
(use ladyla for Jana) will reveal something I think you will find
supportive.
> >
> > I have no desire to disrespect their faith. I accept that they feel
> deeply
> > about the value of their beliefs.
This is great! I'm glad you can "grant them beingness" about this.
I fear, however, that they, as active members of the Church of
Scientology, will not be able to return this most basic of human
rights to you.
> >
> > When I was on staff, I felt so strongly about it that I was trying to
> create
> > a scientology world, where no one who openly disagreed with church
> > management would be allowed to own property. engage in commence, or have a
> > family.
Scientology says they want to create a society where "honest people can
have rights."
Why the adjective? Why only "honest" people?
In my view, it is because the morally vacuous Church of Scientology is
who gets to decide who is "honest" or not, according to their self-
serving and black-hearted "Ethics" policies.
What this translates into for me is, "A society where only practicing
Scientologists can have rights." (Also, see my .sig for another Hubbard
quote concerning this.)
It seems like at least some staff Scientologists share this
interpretation with me, as you yourself say:
>
> > I believed this was a good future to work for because the tech
> was
> > so valuable to mankind.
> >
> > If I was alone in this goal, or if I got this goal wrong
I don't think you got it wrong. Maybe someone who was in the Sea
Org can verify this with more authority than I can.
>
> > I NEED SOMEONE TO
> > LET ME KNOW. Because if I was wrong about this then I am willing to do
> A-E
> > so I can have life with my kids again.
The dilemma in which you find yourself is difficult indeed, having to
choose between your children and your principles.
At least you're not alone in this -- maybe knowing that will help some.
> >
> > > On Sun, 16 Mar 2003 11:45:49 GMT, "tomlanedesign"
> > > <tomlan...@attbi.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >I signed the affidavit at
> > http://www.petitiononline.com/cofs1/petition.html.
> > > >It cost me three children.
> > > >
> > > > "537. Thomas M. Lane
> > > >
> > > > The IRS agreement required that W.I.S.E. be disbanded.
> > > > W.I.S.E. still exists.
> > > > In a scientology world, no one who openly disagrees with church
> > > >management will be allowed to own property or have a job."
> > > >
> > > >Does anyone disagree with this statement?
> > > >Does anyone not find such totalitarian domination of our world, by any
> > > >group, harmful to mankind?
I think most a.r.s posters would agree with you here. That's why I, and
I know many others, post to this newsgroup.
>
> > > >Will someone from from the church please explain how this view of the
> > future
> > > >you are working to create is untrue?
After being a Scientology staff member, surely you realize that it would
be a High Crime to tell the truth about this in a public forum.
That's why we are here on this newsgroup, to tell the truth about
Scientology that the CoS dares not tell.
As Rogue Agent used to say, "We're here to put the Church's ethics
in for it."
>
> > > >In order to communicate with my children I must to A-E.
> > > >Step E requires me to rejoin the church.
> > > >
> > > >How can I have honor and join a group which works to create such a
> > future?
I certainly can't.
[remainder snipped]
Hope you get some help and support, Tom!
Prignillius
+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
| Prignillius (no email right now) |
| |
| In any event, any person from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale should |
| not have, in any thinking society, any civil rights of any kind. |
| - L. Ron Hubbard |
+ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
celebrity...@yahoo.com
from them because if he doesn't he will also be declared and he wishes
to remain in the Scientology community. Other than that this family
had been in good communication and everyone got along. In other
words, if it had not been for Church pressure, the son would still be
in good communication with his parents.
This couple has decided not to do "A to E" because this process is one
way that the Church extorts huge sums of money from people. Security
checking is mandatory as part of the process to get into good standing
and it costs roughly $15,000 to $40,000 for this type of situation.
Multiply that by 2 people and you get a horrendous amount of money.
Then, when you are finished with the 'A to E' steps, after a year or 2
of nonsensical requirements that take a lot of time and money, you
have to petition to be readmitted to the group. It is unlikely that
they will readmit you. That is the catch. The current International
Justice Chief and the Continental Justice Chief (at least in LA) get
satisfaction from having people squirm during this process and truly
seem to enjoy the upset that the process creates. Only they know that
no matter how sincere the 'penitent' is, they will never be allowed
back in.
Richard Kipperman, a Class 8 auditor who was the Mission Holder of the
Beverly Hills Mission before he was declared suppressive in the early
1980s for no good reason -- probably because he was a good person,
tried to get back in good standing because his teenage daughter got
into Scientology and she was told to disconnect and she didn't want to
so she talked Richard into trying to get into good standing. Well, he
went through all the hoops and Richard Valle, the Continental Justice
Chief West US just tormented him, caused a tremendous amount of stress
for the family and when Richard had completed all the steps he was
still denied re-admittance to the group.
And this is only one instance of many. The Church does NOT want any
critic to regain admittance. Or that is how it seems.
Most Scientology declares of staff members are for daring to question
a psychotic order from a senioir executive. These staff members are
rarely welcomed back.
Years ago you could do A to E and get back in. Now it's much harder.
If you have lost a child to this Church do what you can to undermine
the current management. In my humble opinion you will get your child
back sooner that way. It's doubtful that they'd ever let you back in.
Did you know that the Church actively supported people who had formed
a group to protest the income tax system? This group was called
'CATS' which means something like 'citizens against the tax structure'
or something. Anyway, members of the group and other Scientology
income tax resisters were given a big committee of evidence at
Celebrity Center a few years ago and all were declared suppressive.
This was after the IRS deal. This is just one more instance of how
the Church betrays people who do what they want them to do.
A long-time staff member at ASHO by the name of Toby Cantine was
kicked out of the Sea Org after 25 years because she had some sort of
non-lethal physical condition. Just kicked out! The Sea Org shows
loyalty to some of its own but often just is as cruel as can be to
some of their own members.
Most people who are in good standing with the Church know only a part
of how the current management works. They are afraid to look on the
internet. They are afraid to gossip because they are afraid they will
be 'written up' and get into trouble. A lot of them would lose their
job or livelihood or family if they got kicked out. Many pity people
who get declared suppressive but treat them as though they had gotten
cancer or AIDs and there's nothing that they can do about it.
Anyway, if you know of people who have done 'A to E' recently and
gotten back into good standing let me know. My experience is that
once you're out, you're out. But this level of brutality only started
maybe 5 or 6 years ago. Or maybe not. But I do know that Bob Veach,
who had been a NOTS C/S at AOLA and got declared did do 'A to E' about
10 years ago and was reinstated into good standing. So I think maybe
it has changed. But, as I say, my information is limited. Do with it
what you will.
It is very helpful to me when people who have had recent experiences
with the Church post them here. Thank you to them.
Prignillius <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message news:<200303192255...@nym.alias.net>...
Michael Reuss
> I am not trying to attac[k] the church.
Oh, come on in. The water's fine.
> It may be that I have it wrong.
> If I have made a mistake I will do what is necessary to correct it.
You have made a whopper of a mistake, if you believe that a cult that is
interested in it's own money grubbing will save anything having remotely
to do with your own personal well-being, or the happiness of your
family.
Unfortunately, you and your family have already been well brainwashed by
the cult. You all need to get away from the brainwashing, and heal up
from the damage it's done to you all. Maybe then you could be a "normal"
family again.
But you can not reasonably expect the cult of Scientology to help you in
this endeavor. To them, if you got your wife and children to blow along
with you, you'd be stealing the resources they need to continue their
money-grubbing.
> I am so saddened by the loss any future with my boy and my two girls, and
> any future grandchildren that I would bear most anything to share love with
> them again
That is very sad. Scientology fucks up families.
Hey YOU LURKERS and NEWBIES out there! Are you taking notes?
> I have no desire to disrespect their faith. I accept that they feel deeply
> about the value of their beliefs.
Their faith demands that they become instruments in the fucking up of
YOUR family. Their faith is a corrupt, fascist scheme of personal
control, intended to better a corrupt, greedy cult. Fuck their faith. If
you want to be happy with your wife and child, their faith in L. Ron
Hubbard's dreknology must be dismantled.
It's a hard thing to do. You can't do it with force. You shouldn't do it
with the same kinds of lies that trapped them in Scientology in the
first place. It's hard. I'd recommend contacting Steve Hassan.
> When I was on staff, I felt so strongly about it that I was trying to create
> a scientology world, where no one who openly disagreed with church
> management would be allowed to own property.
Hubbard wanted to eliminate "quietly and without sorrow" all those below
1.1 on his stupid imaginary tone scale. Hubbard was a punk-ass
megalomaniac. He was an Adolf Hitler wannabe.
What a fucking pathetic thing to aspire to.
> engage in commence, or have a
> family. I believed this was a good future to work for because the tech was
> so valuable to mankind.
We've heard it all before. It's sad, but the fact is you were
brainwashed to believe in a Grand Lie.
> If I was alone in this goal, or if I got this goal wrong I NEED SOMEONE TO
> LET ME KNOW. Because if I was wrong about this then I am willing to do A-E
> so I can have life with my kids again.
The cult used you before, it fucked up your prior sense of right and
wrong. It redefined the words "ethics," "justice," and "crimes" in your
brain. They won't change. So YOU change. Throw off this brainwashing
you've been blindly accepting all these years, and face the big bad
world as a healthy, happy WOG!
Good luck.
Michael Reuss
Honorary Kid