Scientology's Plan for Genocide

A place to post and debate the Church of Scientology.
Post Reply
User avatar
pitbull
Posts: 4430
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 4:51 am
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1266: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Post by pitbull » Fri Dec 16, 2005 12:15 am

Then if, in the scientology philosophy, genocide and do-whatever-you-need-to-do to get on top is the way,
then why not just forcefully remove those in Management who are in the way?

Does not the bible say: "If thine eye offend the, pluck it out"...
There's an old saying: when the going gets tough - pit bulls call a Scientologist."
-David Miscavige- 8 October, 1993
http://www.earthstation1.com/ThemeSongs/Branded.wav

User avatar
Ladybird
Posts: 5630
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:22 pm
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1266: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Post by Ladybird » Fri Dec 16, 2005 12:40 am

Tikk, I think it is you who is expanding the definition of Genocide. It does not say that there must be evidence that Scientology plans the systematic killing of whole group of people. Nor does it say that all 5 points must be present, or that a planned earth-wiping exercise in suppressivecleansing be intended.

In the most horrific genocides of recent times, such as the Holocaust, the wholesale slaughter of the American Natives, Idi Amin in Uganda, and many others, there was in fact a wholesale planned extermination of an entire group, and tens of thousands were killed. I agree that DM is not of that calibre, and the misery and death in scientology is not as wide reaching. But it is just as catastrophic to each of the individuals involved.

You seem to be saying that just because David Miscavige has only ordered a few thousand abortions, and broken apart hundreds of families, condoned the deaths of and has in whole or in part destroyed the lives of many members and ex-members of scientology, he hasn't caused enough damage to qualify as a genocidal maniac?


How many dead bodies and victims do you have to have?

I don't think it is Scientology or [/i]scientologists[/i] who are intentionally hurting people, I think it is that little control freak DM and a few of his goons who intentionally get rid of anyone that stands in the way of lining their own pockets or dare to question or threaten their power.

DM does plan on "clearing the planet" and infiltrating governments, etc. He is not a benevolent person trying to make the world a better place. He is planning to take over!

Ladybird

tikk
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 12:54 am
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1266: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Post by tikk » Fri Dec 16, 2005 1:47 am

Ladybird wrote:Tikk, I think it is you who is expanding the definition of Genocide.
How am I expanding the definition of genocide when I would include less incidents and you would include more? You don't make sense. While there is some debate in Int'l law as to where the genocide line lies, Scientology's actions comes nowhere near it. And 99.9% of international law lawyers would agree with me.
Ladybird wrote:It does not say that there must be evidence that Scientology plans the systematic killing of whole group of people. Nor does it say that all 5 points must be present, or that a planned earth-wiping exercise in suppressivecleansing be intended.
Well, it doesn't say that all 5 prongs must be present, but it it does require action aimed at a group. Prior to the 5 prongs, you might have noticed that Genocide is defined as:
"any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.." (followed by 5 prongs)

So yes, the definition requires acts (any of the 5) aimed at a group. The law is fairly settled on this; this isn't just my reading of it. In fact, as I mentioned in a prior post, there is a huge question in int'l law as to whether the killing that occurs in Darfur is genocide by definition (this matters a great deal because the UN and signatories to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide are obligated if it is genocide by definition). The fact that the killing is occasionally indiscriminate (as opposed obvious ethnic targeting, like say, the Tsutsis in Rwanda) removes it from the definition, since a 'group' is not targeted, some argue. I believe the definition should be enlarged or the Convention reworked to include indiscriminate mass killing.

But even a definition such as that would not include Scientology. Who is the group? SPs aren't being killed en masse. And Scientologists themselves freely submitted to whatever state of victimhood they find themselves in.
Ladybird wrote:In the most horrific genocides of recent times, such as the Holocaust, the wholesale slaughter of the American Natives, Idi Amin in Uganda, and many others, there was in fact a wholesale planned extermination of an entire group, and tens of thousands were killed. I agree that DM is not of that calibre, and the misery and death in scientology is not as wide reaching. But it is just as catastrophic to each of the individuals involved.
No it's not actually. And I've read just as many horror stories as you. Scientologists start out by having a choice to join, for one thing. And they can always leave. While the pressures to stay might seem so enormous as to preclude choice, it is still a vast difference from victims who never had a choice to begin with. There is an interesting implied consent question, since Scientology is not exactly up front about what you got yourself into, but people need some degree of autonomy to make mistakes. The alternative is a regulatory scheme that defines what groups you may or may not join and that is a constitutionally repugnant notion. If the government can make Scientology illegal, it can also make, say, Alcoholics Anonymous illegal.
Ladybird wrote:You seem to be saying that just because David Miscavige has only ordered a few thousand abortions, and broken apart hundreds of families, condoned the deaths of and has in whole or in part destroyed the lives of many members and ex-members of scientology, he hasn't caused enough damage to qualify as a genocidal maniac?
Breaking apart families is not evidence of genocide; nor is 'condoning the deaths of members and ex-members' since there is no act targeting a group but rather individuals. And as nasty as Scientology can get, I am not aware of any instance where they intentionally killed someone. Negligent homicide? Yes, certainly. And even if they had, it's not genocide for the lack of a targeted group.
Ladybird wrote:How many dead bodies and victims do you have to have?


You'll have to point me to them, because I really don't know what you're talking about here. Scientology is a mindfuck for a good many people. Some people like it until the day they die. But Scientologists joined. The Jews didn't join the German army, which then subsequently decided to kill them. If you can't see this distinction, I'm sorry for you.
Ladybird wrote:I don't think it is Scientology or scientologists who are intentionally hurting people, I think it is that little control freak DM and a few of his goons who intentionally get rid of anyone that stands in the way of lining their own pockets or dare to question or threaten their power.

DM does plan on "clearing the planet" and infiltrating governments, etc. He is not a benevolent person trying to make the world a better place. He is planning to take over!


I didn't suggest he was trying to make the world a better place. But I did suggest that even if he did have genocidal aspirations, it'd be moot because it conflicts very directly with the economic constraints of Scientology's business model. I also suggested that it is unlikely to the point of laughable the idea that he could gain any real power in any government. Scientology is a big joke and is held in check by derision and their own tendency to
kook out at the drop of a hat. Worry more about them slinking into school districts under the cover of Narconon and ASI and less about them taking over the world. The former is quite possible (write letters!) while the latter is not.

User avatar
J. Swift
Posts: 10215
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:09 pm
Location: Los Feliz, California
Contact:

Post by J. Swift » Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:20 am

I know Scientology lies. That does not make them advocates of genocide, however.
Hubbard advocated genocide. I quoted his remarks. Scientology does not have the means to conduct genocide, but the intent is embodied within the scripture: It would be best if the 2.5% below 2.0, "were disposed of quietly and without sorrow." according to Hubbard.
Person A: Scientology stole the batteries from my wireless keyboard!
Person B: That sounds ridiculous, do you have any proof?
Person A: I don't need proof. Scientology lies, so their denial is proof that they stole my batteries.
That example is a logical fallacy called reducing to the absurd. Tikk, you have avoided accounting for or explaining Hubbard's genocidal remarks by using an obvious absurdity. You have attempted to minimize the atrocity contemplated in Hubbard's words by focusing attention on batteries for a wireless keyboard, as if such misdirection would actually fool anyone.

Scientology is running scared. When South Park can ridicule Scientology and when Andy Dick can ridicule Tom Cruise, this tells us that Scientology's days in the sun are over. All that is left now is for Scientology to somehow slow its rapid descent into further ridicule and cultural irrelevance.

The NYFD denounced the Purification Rundown and that dashed any hopes that DM had of making this pieces of CoS pseudoscience mainstream. Face it: Scientology has now been exposed as a minority fringe cult with a space alien story. That is all it can trade on. Well, that and fifty year old LRH Congress Lectures.

.

User avatar
lermanet_com
Posts: 4149
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 11:00 am
Location: Hop-Skip Away from Scientology TODAY!
Contact:

Post by lermanet_com » Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:31 am

tikk wrote: Scientologists start out by having a choice to join, for one thing.

THERE IS NO FREE WILL WHEN A DECISION IS BASED UPON LIES
Do you THINK scientology works?
Then read [url=http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?t=20255&start=285]THIS PAGE[/url] here on XENU.NET

User avatar
programmer_guy
Posts: 8877
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:55 am
Location: Somewhere far beyond the land of Oz.
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1266: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Post by programmer_guy » Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:21 am

Arnie,
THERE IS NO FREE WILL WHEN A DECISION IS BASED UPON LIES
There are lies (e.g deliberate misrepresentations) all over the place in society about many things. I wouldn't regard that this is the only criterion that one should use to determine if someone is acting on "free will". (But it can be one of them.)

(That's my two cents.)

Best regards

tikk
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 12:54 am
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1266: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Post by tikk » Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:22 am

J. Swift wrote:Hubbard advocated genocide. I quoted his remarks. Scientology does not have the means to conduct genocide, but the intent is embodied within the scripture: It would be best if the 2.5% below 2.0, "were disposed of quietly and without sorrow." according to Hubbard.
You ran an inferential obstacle course to arrive at arrived at a specious conclusion. And you ignored the dozens of practicaity argument I rasied. Even if you presume that Hubbard advocated genocide, it remains true that Scientology a) is utterly incapable of performing genocidal acts; b) has no interest in actually performing genocidal acts because the it would conflict with their economic interests.

If you read the entire section where the 'dipose of quietly' quote appears, you'd realize that Hubbard actually didn't advocate genocide, even by your loose definition.
"There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the tone scale, neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the tone scale by un-enturbulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes. The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow." (emphasis mine)
This is not an advocacy of genocide, but rather a call to raise people on the tone scale. Hubbard sees it as necessary to raise people on the tone scale because people below 2.0 are barely alive as it is. It was typical of Hubbard to construct a rhetorical straw man to the answer he obviously endorsed. And this makes sense. Raising people on the tone scale gets you into their checkbook. Killing them triggers law enforcement. Do the math as to which alternative Scientology would prefer.

If I wanted to borrow my brother's car and jokingly said to him "there are two ways we can do this: you can loan me your car, or I klll you and inherit it," he would know that I was kidding about the second alternative. Most Scientologists would read that passage not as advocacy of genocide, but as a call to separate potential members from their money by selling them crap that will enable them to raise themselves on the tone scale.

"Hmm... this poor fucker is 1.5. Do I sell him courses or kill him? What do the Green Volumes say? What a pickle!"

Look, the evidence backs me here. You have to figure that there are a good million or so slackers that Scientology would consider below 2.0 on the tone scale. Why aren't these people being identified and exterminated? By your dot connecting, there should be bodies piling up everywhere.

User avatar
J. Swift
Posts: 10215
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:09 pm
Location: Los Feliz, California
Contact:

Post by J. Swift » Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:43 am

If I wanted to borrow my brother's car and jokingly said to him "there are two ways we can do this: you can loan me your car, or I klll you and inherit it," he would know that I was kidding about the second alternative. Most Scientologists would read that passage not as advocacy of genocide, but as a call to separate potential members from their money by selling them crap that will enable them to raise themselves on the tone scale.
Tikk, a man in Hubbard's position does not joke about genocide. He was presenting his plan: Raise them above 2.0 or kill them. Of course, he did not have the power to kill them because of Wog law. Yet he saw genocide of the 2.5% as an optimal solution. He essentially said, "If the world would take my advice and vaporize these people all of the crime and bad things would end."

In any case, you are squirreling Ron with verbal tech and I need to write a KR on this.

.

User avatar
programmer_guy
Posts: 8877
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:55 am
Location: Somewhere far beyond the land of Oz.
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1266: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Post by programmer_guy » Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:43 am

tikk,

This conversation is definitely interesting.

(Speculating) If Hubbard had been able to take over the world or maybe an entire country (like Rhodesia), who knows just what extremes he (the big anti-social himself) might have implemented concerning those citizens that would have been determined to be a chronic 2.0 or below?

If he had gained this kind of power maybe he would have done more than just "overboarding" or putting children in a ship's chain-locker.

So, maybe he wasn't "genocidal" since he never gained that power. But he sure looked like he had all the "makings" of that sort of monster.

All Hail Xenu
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 10:38 pm
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1266: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Post by All Hail Xenu » Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:44 am

tikk wrote: Raising people on the tone scale gets you into their checkbook. Killing them triggers law enforcement. Do the math as to which alternative Scientology would prefer.
L. Ron Hubbard, HCOB 4 April 1965 wrote: "Somebody some day will say 'this is illegal'. By then be sure the orgs say what is legal or not."
They want both, they want money, and to say what is legal, and they are willing to do things that are illegal, if they think they can get away with it.

The problem is that L.Ron made it clear that he wanted Scientology to have outright control of the world, to make the laws, to enforce the laws.

These are the same people who bring us abductions in the form of the "Sunshine Rundown", who brought us Operation Snow White and Operation Freakout, and have their own doctrine saying that 2.5% of all human beings (150 million people worldwide, assuming a world population of 6 billion) can be killed "quietly and without sorrow". Do you really think these people would be nice about asking those below 2.0 to start paying for Scientology treatments?

"Clear the Planet" could only be done if they had total access to the entire world and had the power to make everybody either join and make their way to Clear, or to die, and try and "clear" their next incarnation.

In that scenario, it's forced conversions and paying for auditing and brainwashing, or euthenasia? Sounds an awful lot like a long-term genocide plan for me (150 million people is most certainly genocide range, it would be a second Holocaust).

tikk
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 12:54 am
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1266: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Post by tikk » Fri Dec 16, 2005 7:20 am

J. Swift wrote:Tikk, a man in Hubbard's position does not joke about genocide.
Actually, if you listen to Hubabrd tapes, you'd know that it's part of his charm to be flippant about heavy concepts. It was his way of demonstrating to the audience how much smarter, important, and enlightened he was than them. His goal as speaker is to force you to admit how brilliant he was. When he refers to galactic wars, and incidents from trillions of years ago, it's with an intentionally casual air. His tone is buoyant and conversational with no gravity whatsoever. Like a popular college professor. So I don't know what you mean by his 'position' - he was a con artist cult leader; not the CEO of IBM. He would say anything that would engender trust and likeability.

tikk
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 12:54 am
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1266: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Post by tikk » Fri Dec 16, 2005 7:26 am

J. Swift wrote:He was presenting his plan: Raise them above 2.0 or kill them.
Well, surely this has occurred then and you can provide some examples. Ex-members have leaked tons of stories, but I've yet to hear one of this sort.

User avatar
magoo1
Posts: 11036
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Burbank, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by magoo1 » Fri Dec 16, 2005 7:43 am

Hi Tikk....

Great to see you here posting :)

Sorry it's way too late for me to try to read all of this, but it sounds
interesting. Glad you're here....as well as the rest of the gang.

Happy Holidays! :rendeer: :cheers:

Tory/Magoo~~

User avatar
J. Swift
Posts: 10215
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:09 pm
Location: Los Feliz, California
Contact:

Post by J. Swift » Fri Dec 16, 2005 7:52 am

Actually, if you listen to Hubabrd tapes, you'd know that it's part of his charm to be flippant about heavy concepts. It was his way of demonstrating to the audience how much smarter, important, and enlightened he was than them. His goal as speaker is to force you to admit how brilliant he was. When he refers to galactic wars, and incidents from trillions of years ago, it's with an intentionally casual air. His tone is buoyant and conversational with no gravity whatsoever. Like a popular college professor. So I don't know what you mean by his 'position' - he was a con artist cult leader; not the CEO of IBM. He would say anything that would engender trust and likeability.
It looks like Tikk is floating a Scientology PR trial balloon: The historical revisionism of Hubbard by stating that all of his violent and pyschotic words and writings were, in context, jokes. If this is the case, was Xenu and Incidents I and II a joke? Will we now learn that LRH was merely being a comedian about BT's and Teegeegack? Are we supposed to laugh now and lighten up?

Tikk, your thesis goes against LRH's strict prohibition of joking and degrading as well as his penchant for Fair Game. Hubbard was hardly the Furby you are trying to suggest he was. LRH led the largest domestic espionage operation against the US Government in history; he approved a plan to frame Paulette Cooper for a bomb threat; he used PI's to blackmail critics; and he engaged in litigation as a way to finanically destroy his critics -- and these were activities on his good days.

LRH was a psychotic Satanist and drug user who, if he had achieved power, who knows what he would have done? He did suggest genocide as a solution. Read it in context. It was not a joke.

Scientology is not a funny cult. Everything it does is serious. Scientology plays for keeps and ruins people finanically and spiritually. Scientology destroys families by disconnection. Scientology has forced Sea Org women to have abortions. None of this is a joke and I think you are either unwilling or unable to confront the atrocities of Scientology.

.

User avatar
J. Swift
Posts: 10215
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:09 pm
Location: Los Feliz, California
Contact:

Post by J. Swift » Fri Dec 16, 2005 8:06 am

More of Hubbard's funny jokes:

LRH lied to his followers and the public about winning two Purple Hearts and 27 other combat medals for heroism in WWII when he in fact never saw a single day of combat.

LRH lied to his followers and the public about being a nuclear physicist.

LRH lied to his followers and the public about about having a Ph.D.

I guess, according to Tikk's theory, we should all realize that Hubbard was just kidding around about all of this and meant it all as a lighthearted joke. Ron was just a big comedian.

Is that it Tikk? Did I get it right?

.

Post Reply
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/vendor/twig/twig/lib/Twig/Extension/Core.php on line 1266: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable

Return to “Opinions & Debate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests