One thing David "(_!_)" Miscavage and I could agree on is this:

"If your theory doesn't agree with reality, believe reality and come up with a new theory."

Where we would disagree is in our definition of reality. Free world reality could be defined as "That which can be proven". $cienoWorld reality has been defined as "What two or more Thetans agree to".

If Free World people learn the claims made by $cientologists of the fabulous benefits of being "Clear", then look for the visible evidence of the results, they see that the $cientologist theory does not match the observed reality. This hopefully results in the Free World observer coming up with the new theory, "Ron is full of bullberries" and moving on to more productive pursuits.

If $cienoWorld citizens achieve the state of Clear, and notice that Rons theories don't match up with observable reality, they ignore observed reality and go with Ron Reality: It works because $cientology says that it works.

The Free World definition of insanity is misunderstood by many people. Insanity is a legal term, not a medical term. Insanity describes the condition of being so out of touch with reality that the insane person could not distinguish right from wrong at the time of their crime. Judges and juries declare a person to be insane, not medical doctors. The only medical condition which excuses an insane person from their crime is Psychosis. Psychosis is a profound loss of contact with reality. Refusal to accept reality is psychosis. Ron redefined reality, but his corruption of the word does not alter reality. Ron created a psychotic world, where one has to redefine reality to enter.

Rons definition of Insanity is the state of being aware of $cientology, and not participating in it. Ron says that if you study the OT III materials without being Clear, you will die of pneumonia or go insane. Apparently committed $cientologists are not capable of chaining these two thoughts together: If you study the OT materials without Hubbards brainwashing you will not believe in $cientology. There must be a definition missing from the $cientology dictionary: Pneumonia ( verb ) Laughing your (_!_) off. I studied OT III and the higher levels of gibberish. I certainly am insane, by Hubbards definition. That may explain why I haven't died of pneumonia, as defined above.

Ron says the Church has enemies that should be crushed by any means. Ron says that OT VIIIs can kill with a thought. Lesser OTs can exteriorize at will, travel interplanetary distances with a thought, and myriad other unprovable things. So why don't they use the incredible powers of OTs to crush the enemies of $cientology.? Because Ron reality can't stand up to Free World reality. Why does Co$ need OSA when they have OTs? And why couldn't the Sweathogs OT powers save Battlefield Earth? $cientology is the won't put up, won't shut up champion of the galaxy.

Not a chance,

You've described a part of Scientology that hasn't been discussed much here: reality is defined as agreement. When things are agreed apon they become real.

Ron said that "What is true for you is true for you." When a Scientologist doesn't agree with LRH or other Scientologists, the solution is to swing the person into the proper viewpoint so that they will agree. When they agree, it will be true for them too.

Indeed, the long-term plan of Scientology is to bring the whole world into agreement with Scientology. This a a powerful cognician for a new Scientologist. If everyone just agreed with Ron and the aims of Scientology, this would be be a perfect world.

Unfortunately, tools such as will-crushing ethics levels and RPF camps may be required to bring about this agreement.

Mike

If reality is defined as agreement, and the majority of the world agrees that reality is what's real, why can't $cientology agree to use the real definition? Can't the participants see these logic lapses? If presented with this argument, do they counter with an argument that seems reasonable from their perspective? My experience with active Rondroids is limited to young college students whose debating skills are limited to "He's lying", "Scientology is the most wonderful thing that's hapened to me" and "You must have commited horrible crimes against humanity"

Not A Chance:

The logic from the scio perspective works like this:

"It is an undisputed fact that the world outside of Scientology contains evils like drugs, murder, shock therapy and nuclear weapons.

"Therefor, the world is aberated.

"Since reality is agreement, if we all agree with Ron the Scientology is the answer to all these problems, it will be true for everyone.

"Since I am in agreement that Ron is Source, I agree with him that anyone who opposes Scientology has hidden crimes. And what is true for me is true for me.

"So WHAT ARE YOUR CRIMES?"

Faulty logic? Yes, but that is how they think.

Mike de Wolf

Not A chance is a pilot. Not A Chance has also determined, from long residence in California, that there are only two laws there: If you want to, you'd better not, and if you'd rather not you darn well better. You can't shoot someone for what you think they might do, if you could, everybody in California would be banging away at their neighbor. Which, of course, they're doing anyways.

500 feet over occupied areas is the federal legal minimum altitude, and probably too low for effective aerial photography. There's nothing that $cientology could do about one flyover, but stalking laws and noise abatement ordinances might come into play with an extended photomapping session. If $cientology has a major presence in the area, they might get protective laws passed. Is Hemet a $cientologist infested community? How big is it? Is the surrounding county rural?

This would not qualify as eavesdropping, because it's non-intrusive. Not that I'm trying to get anyone to do it, just clarifying things here. It might cause $cientology to put a camo net over the whole blinking compound.

Lt Rich A.: If this were a military op., we could drop leaflets. "This is a surrender ticket! Approach the victorious forces with your cans over your head...." Alas, it ain't. Are the operators at the implant station military, civil service or contractors?

OOPS. posted on the wrong thread. Oh, well, try again.

Apparently keeping people out is a better plan than getting people out. If that's how they reason, you can't reason with them. What happens in the cases of 20 year veterans finally wising up?

Scientology so threatens their health, their loved ones, or what's left of their conscience, that the bad outside world starts to look safer. They start to remember from the television shows of their childhood that the FBI really are the good guys and can protect them.

All,
Question, If Scientologist OT VIII's can kill with a thought. Can we expect wholesale murder from this group. OT VIII's might be able to kill but I bet it takes a gun to do so. Does anyone think that they want a war, of more than words? If so, I bet they loose BIG.

NG

"What's true for me is what's true for me"??

OK, my boss at the place where I worked that was run by Scientologists always used to say "it's true for you if it's true for you." Ohhhhh-kayyyy...

Does that only mean Scientologists, or does it mean everyone? Because frankly I can't see it as anything but an open invitation to solipsism and "because-I-said-so"ism...

Say I was picketing, and a fella came up to me and asked "what crimes have you committed??" Ok, well, after we get past not paying income tax on a freelance typesetting job and letting my sister have one of my prescription allergy pills, I wouldn't be able to think of any. But I'm a criminal because I oppose Scientology, according to this dude, and as a Scientologist he accepts that notion, and what's true for him is true (for him), therefore it's true (to him) that I am a criminal?

Am I "getting" this? Have I got it straight? Because the obvious and equal retort might then be something like "well, it's not true for me, therefore it's not true." So, all right, Dude could come back with "I'm a Scientologist, and you're aberrated." So, OK, says who? What if I say HE'S aberrated?

I'm getting a headache. Back in the world where reality really is real, I have a contract to type, because real estate is also, funnily enough, real.

great day... speedwell

$cientology has ordered people to commit Wog World crimes to benefit the Church of clams. That, according to $cientology, is no crime. Apparently, once your on board, the only laws that count are $cieno laws. Ergo, joining $cientology borders on treason. I wonder about clams in the military. If Co$ ordered a clam in the military to steal high explosives or shoot a missile at Arnie Lerma, would they? how far would a committed $cieno go?

Seriously, As a prior serverice member, Scientology and military service do not mix at all.

First: The modern military demands that soldier think for themselves, something Ronbots are clearly unable to do. A lot of what the military teaches is contrary to CO$ and a dedicated ronbot would either have to change his/her way of thinking or the army would roll over him/her like a steam roller

Second: Weapons and munitions in the Military, during peace time, are kept under very tight controls. A low-level security clearence is need to handle most munitions. Belonging to such an organization as the CO$ would block a person from such clearence.

Later
Xenu's Loyal Servant
Lt. Rich A.
Commander of Implant Station Three.

Speedwell,

"What is true for you is true for you" also means:

"If what is true for you is not what was true fro LRH, then you have a misunderstood word or False Data."

Mike

Scientology promotes a subjective truth because it believes in a subjective reality. In philosophy this is called idealism.

Most people in the real world believe that real objects and events cause perceptions of events. In other words, there is a tree out there in the world and this causes you to perceve the tree. If you could not see the tree then the tree would still exist.

Scientology holds the opposite view. The tree is created by the agreement of thetans that such things as trees exist. This is why scientologists believe they can walk through walls. All they have to do is practace mind control upon themselves so that the wall is no longer real to them. This demented process is known as the "war between theta and MEST". Scientology champions theta and we (the suppresive) champion MEST.

MEST stands for Matter Energy Space Time. In other words, reality.

Theta is thought. In particular it is "good" thought that liberates thetans from the illusion of MEST. In other words scientology.

The two universe theory is therefore an extention of Rons efforts to live within his fantasy world.

The aim of scientology is to destroy MEST and create a dictatorship of theta.

Please read this post twice if you do not fully understand it. It is the central issue of scientology.

If their theta is so great why can't they make the cockroaches go away? If they could develop mystical insecticide powers, they could make millions on termite and cockroach extermination. Instead they have to spray and stomp. How mystical is that?