my scientology paper

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Tom in Denver

unread,
Sep 7, 2006, 11:20:05 PM9/7/06
to
check out my scientology paper. It is long, but there are several small
sections. I am an ex Sea Org member and Scientologist and former
Scientologist who want to know why Scientology feels good might be
interested in my ideas.

http://fire.prohosting.com/tomweeks/

thorazine shuffle

unread,
Sep 7, 2006, 11:38:29 PM9/7/06
to

"Tom in Denver" <tomandsu...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1157685605.8...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Thank you for writing/sharing this. You've done an outstanding job of it.


formerlyfooled

unread,
Sep 7, 2006, 11:52:00 PM9/7/06
to

I am only partially through your paper and must finish it tomorrow.
Before I leave, I just want you to know that from all that I have read
of it thus far, I am certain that 'Feeling Good and Certainty in
Scientology' is a major important piece of criticism. I am very
grateful for it and your efforts.

Feeling Good and Certainty in Scientology
>From an ex-Sea Org member who never got auditing
Verson 1.2 By Thomas Weeks

"In effect, Scientologists feel all the right feelings for all the
wrong reasons."
http://fire.prohosting.com/tomweeks/


Thanks

zeeorger

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 12:02:51 AM9/8/06
to


You might want to check the following:

http://www.lermanet.com/cos/8steps.html

I don't agree with everything Arnie (otherwise I would be
another Arnie and OSA staff would shit their pants), but
he does have a good outline for those who have fallen
of the ship of scientology and made shore for the first
time in a long time.

http://www.xenu.net
http://www.lermanet.com
http://www.truthaboutscientology.com

Z

Out_Of_The_Dark

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 12:13:38 AM9/8/06
to

zeeorger wrote:
> Tom in Denver wrote:
> > check out my scientology paper. It is long, but there are several small
> > sections. I am an ex Sea Org member and Scientologist and former
> > Scientologist who want to know why Scientology feels good might be
> > interested in my ideas.
> >
> > http://fire.prohosting.com/tomweeks/
>
>
> You might want to check the following:
>
> http://www.lermanet.com/cos/8steps.html
>
> I don't agree with everything Arnie (otherwise I would be
> another Arnie and OSA staff would shit their pants), but
> he does have a good outline for those who have fallen
> of the ship of scientology and made shore for the first
FYI> time in a long time.


The Lermanet links are terrific reading for anyone, thank you .
FYI: In his paper, Tom states he left the S.O. some 15 years ago.

Larry T.

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 12:21:41 AM9/8/06
to
"Out_Of_The_Dark" <xscilen...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1157688815....@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...


|
Arnie is a good guy because he brought the Church of Scientology out into
the open by revealing what the truth is behind their secret religious
scriptures.

When a person compares what the Church of Scientology has to offer the
public to the actions of Scientologists making the actual offers to the
public, it is not very hard to draw a great many conclusions regarding what
is really going on in the Church of Scientology. EVEN if you have been a
long time member or someone that never got involved.

--
http://mysite.verizon.net/toomajan
Lawrence

The Diary of a Scientologist


Over the Hill

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 4:59:46 AM9/8/06
to
A nice article.

I am relatively new to Scientology, so there is much I have not read.

Until now, though, your article is the only one which pays due
attention to the value of "purpose" in people.

Purpose drives and motivates us, gives our life meaning. As you so
rightly pointed out, the purpose in Scientology is a dead end street.

That is why so many OT level memers are bailing. They have reached the
end of the street and found it has taken them no-where. Their time and
money has been wasted.


Thank you for posting this.

realpch

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 9:14:45 AM9/8/06
to

I liked this conclusion a lot:

"One possibility is the way in which Scientology appeals to the
intellect by providing long winded and involved explanations for simple
concepts. Then those explanations were fit into a comprehensive,
cohesive philosophy/world view. Right or wrong, such comprehensive
explanations would appeal to the analytically minded. Common sense ideas
became brilliant revelations via involved explanations."

And this one:

"At the time, genuinely impressed by Hubbard's prolific writings, I was
in awe that he had established an organization with policies for
everything. In my youth it seemed the policies were so genius that I had
problems grasping them. Now I realize that I was quite intelligent and
that the writings were difficult to wrap my head around as they were
filled with arbitrary rambling, irrelevant information and their
connection to each other was disjointed and random."

It's a good article. I liked the end where you considered the happiness
produced by belief. Great read, thanks!

Peach
--
Extra! Extra! Read All About It!
Save some dough, save some grief:
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.scientology-lies.com

Lermanet.com

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 1:05:34 PM9/8/06
to
On 7 Sep 2006 21:02:51 -0700, "zeeorger" <zeeo...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Tom in Denver wrote:
>> check out my scientology paper. It is long, but there are several small
>> sections. I am an ex Sea Org member and Scientologist and former
>> Scientologist who want to know why Scientology feels good might be
>> interested in my ideas.

Those were only the steps I noted, for me. Contrary to hubbard's
assertion that we each have an identical reactive mind... I believe
that each of us is totally and completely unique, we are as different
from one another as snow flakes are each and every one, completely
unique.

>>
>> http://fire.prohosting.com/tomweeks/
>
>
>You might want to check the following:
>
> http://www.lermanet.com/cos/8steps.html
>
>I don't agree with everything Arnie (otherwise I would be
>another Arnie and OSA staff would shit their pants), but
>he does have a good outline for those who have fallen
>of the ship of scientology and made shore for the first
>time in a long time.
>
>http://www.xenu.net
>http://www.lermanet.com
>http://www.truthaboutscientology.com
>
>Z

Arnaldo Lerma
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON

I'd prefer to die speaking my mind than live fearing to speake

If the Borg were to breed with the Ferengi you'd get Scientology!

29 November 1995 - Memorandum Opinion Judge Leonie Brinkema
"the Court is now convinced that the primary motivation of RTC in suing Lerma, DGS and The Post is to stifle criticism of Scientology in general and to harass its critics. "

The internet is the Liberty Tree

http://theunfunnytruth.ytmnd.com
http://www.lermanet.com/idacamburn/cultsandkids.htm
http://www.lermanet.com/faqs.html#psychiatry
http://www.lermanet.com/exit/hubbard-the-hypnotist4.htm
http://www.lermanet.com/scientology-and-occult/
http://theunfunnytruth.ytmnd.com/
both with IMAGES!!

"Scientologists believe that most human problems
can be traced to lingering spirits of an extraterrestrial
people massacred by their ruler, Xenu, over 75 million
years ago. These spirits attach themselves by "clusters"
to individuals in the contemporary world, causing
spiritual harm and negatively influencing the lives
of their hosts"
[Judge Leonie Brinkema 4 Oct 96 Memorandum Opinion]

What do we get from getting people out of scientology?
We create an individual who has become a Houdini of
all mind traps.. folks who won't be fooled again.
People who can DE-program, People who can spring mental
traps..

We create, by freeing someone of scientology, a being
who has the ability to break the strongest slave chains
of all.

Those forged of lies. (c) Arnaldo Lerma

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities
Voltaire (1694 - 1778)

Tom in Denver

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 7:29:36 PM9/8/06
to

Arnaldo,

I don't know if I agree with you 100% on your quote:

"What do we get from getting people out of scientology?
We create an individual who has become a Houdini of
all mind traps.. folks who won't be fooled again.
People who can DE-program, People who can spring mental
traps.. "

Turns out a few years ago I bought an "abtronic," one of those
electronic devices which claims to strenghten stomach muscles via a
mild electrical current. Turns out the whole thing was a scam. They
only took me for about a hundred bucks and they did get sued by some
other people later on. Still it goes to show that even after my
Scientology experience, I am not immune to being fooled. I don't mind
though... it keeps me on my toes. For the most part your right. Perhaps
my paper is an example of me DE-programming and springing mental traps.


Tom

vinny

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 7:51:58 PM9/8/06
to

Lermanet.con wrote:

> Those were only the steps I noted, for me. Contrary to hubbard's
> assertion that we each have an identical reactive mind... I believe
> that each of us is totally and completely unique, we are as different
> from one another as snow flakes are each and every one, completely
> unique.
>

Such an expert you are...and you can't even get the basics right. Lame
by design or lame by trying?

Who cares?

Vinny

Tom in Denver

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 11:33:10 PM9/8/06
to
bump! - there sure is a lot of spam in this chat room.

Zinj

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 11:52:20 PM9/8/06
to
In article <1157772790.704334.15320
@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>, tomandsu...@msn.com says...

> bump! - there sure is a lot of spam in this chat room.

It's not a chat room

Zinj
--
You Can Lead a Clam to Reason; but You Can't Make Him Think

Jommy Cross

unread,
Sep 8, 2006, 11:55:51 PM9/8/06
to
On 7 Sep 2006 20:20:05 -0700, "Tom in Denver" <tomandsu...@msn.com>
wrote in msg <1157685605.8...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>:

>http://fire.prohosting.com/tomweeks/

This is an interesting essay. You've thought critically about what happened
to you and how it happened.

I think it would benefit from a comparison between $cientology and
Utilitarianism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism
You nearly get to this in The Humanitarian Movement, but I think you need
to think understand Utilitarianism better.

Please try and get it proof read by a human. Things I noticed:

"Grammer" grammar.
"Foreward" foreword.
"Antidotal evidence" anecdotal evidence.
"Super natural" supernatural.
"rigueur" rigor.
"congeal" congenial.
"similar favor" similar fervor.
"dilatants" dilettantes.
"rational" rationale.
"glace" glance.
"Mechants of Coas" merchants of chaos.
"Enviorment" environment.
"Catagorize" categorize.
"Firs" first.
"Johny" Johnny.
"Anti-semetic" anti-semitic.
"Trilled" thrilled.
"Afterwards" afterword.
"Tele-kenetically" telekinetically.

Please call Hubbard by his name, not the adoring "LRH". Nor do you need to
call him a "dork", He was, but the rest of the essay makes this obvious,
and such abuse makes you look cheap.

The formatting could be improved, it's currently too open. What is the gray
blob in the middle of the Afterword?

Incident zero: Ron trolled you, but he don't no more

Ever yours in fandom,
Jommy Cross

---------------------------------------------------
This message brought to you by Radio Free Albemuth:
before you hallucinate
--------------------------------------------------


Out_Of_The_Dark

unread,
Sep 9, 2006, 1:47:32 AM9/9/06
to

yes but sometimes it can feel like a chat room :)

formerlyfooled

unread,
Sep 9, 2006, 2:42:51 AM9/9/06
to

Terrific job on this! I linked to it via a blurb in my blob. er. I
mean... blog ;)

"Former Scientologist Tom Weeks On What Was So Good About Something So
Bad"
http://free-from-scientology.blogspot.com/

Hartley Patterson

unread,
Sep 9, 2006, 6:22:40 AM9/9/06
to
Tom in Denver tomandsu...@msn.com:

> bump! - there sure is a lot of spam in this chat room.

It's there most of the time, and bumping is depreciated as it adds to
the noise. Regulars have learnt to killfile spammers and tools exist to
do this on Google Groups, see links in the sig below.

--
ARS Frequently Asked Questions
Please read before posting
http://www.daisy.freeserve.co.uk/faq.htm

Tom in Denver

unread,
Sep 9, 2006, 7:27:55 PM9/9/06
to

Jommy Cross wrote

> I think it would benefit from a comparison between $cientology and
> Utilitarianism.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism
> You nearly get to this in The Humanitarian Movement, but I think you need
> to think understand Utilitarianism better.
>

Thanks for you comments. I do know about Utilitarianism and I remember
having mentioned it in a previous draft - but I guess I took out the
reference later for some reason. That reason might have been that I
didn't want to distract the reader by getting off the subject of the
humanitarian aims of Scientology and get on the subject of Ron the
plagiarist. I'm sure you know, as it is no secret, that Ron ripped off
nearly everything in Scientology. Jon Atack wrote some stuff on that
and he would be a better source for that kind of anaylsis. But I
understand it might be distracting to someone versed in philosophy,
such as yourself, that the mention isn't there. Perhaps I'll put the
information in endnotes in a future version.

> Please try and get it proof read by a human. Things I noticed:

Thanks for that. I just ran it though MS word spell check.

> Please call Hubbard by his name, not the adoring "LRH". Nor do you need to
> call him a "dork", He was, but the rest of the essay makes this obvious,
> and such abuse makes you look cheap.
>

I spent some time considering what to call Ron. Runners up were Ron,
Hubbard and LRH. Ron is what Scientologist call Ron, Hubbard is what
wogs call Hubbard so LRH seemed to be more consistant with my ex-Sea
Org status. And I know that I'm going out on a academic limb calling
Ron a dork, but it is my opinion of him for one. Also, he wouldn't
hesitate to call me an SP and go out of his way to destroy my life, so
making a personal attack on him seems appropiate; a personal attack on
someone who makes personal attacks. Like Al Franken calling Rush
Limbugh a big fat idiot. Lets not forget who Ron really... a dork, a
big sociopathic lying dork (that sounds like material for version 2).

> The formatting could be improved, it's currently too open. What is the gray
> blob in the middle of the Afterword?

I promise better formatting next version. I just let MS Word convert
the text file to HTML and you know what that means. I'll have to redo
the whole thing in Dreamweaver.

Tom in Denver

unread,
Sep 10, 2006, 12:52:28 PM9/10/06
to

formerlyfooled wrote:
> > http://fire.prohosting.com/tomweeks/ <
>
> Terrific job on this! I linked to it via a blurb in my blob. er. I
> mean... blog ;)
>
> "Former Scientologist Tom Weeks On What Was So Good About Something So
> Bad"
> http://free-from-scientology.blogspot.com/

Wow, thanks. You made my day! I'm going to be updating the paper
sometime soon; to correct the spelling and formatting and some other
things. It won't effect your link. But I'll keep you up to date. Great
job on the blog by the way.

formerlyfooled

unread,
Sep 10, 2006, 5:54:16 PM9/10/06
to

:) Thanks! I am glad to help spread the news of any valuable
information about the true nature and effects of ther cult of
Scientology.

Tom. when you are done with the update, post a note here and also post
a new thread with your title as the subject, using a couple of quotes
from it, so others who have not read this post will see what you have
contributed to understanding scientology.

Again, thanks for the great work!

ff

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages