More than one person has told me their parents were worried about them
getting active in all of this, from Anonymous. So I made a video for their
parents------and this is really Part 2. (If you want to see Part 1--just
swing by www.youtube.com/ToryMagoo44 )

Here ya go, re Courage to take a Stand:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2dUmgDnsPU

I hope you ALL Have a VERY Happy Easter! If you don't
celebrate it (I don't religiously, but religiously celebrate
it for FUN ).....Have a great week-end!

Lots of love,

Tory/Magoo~~~8)

Yeah, you're right.

When I was on staff my parents didn't see me much for 2 years.

I asked my Dad, a few years back, "do you worry about me spiritually?"
My Dad said to me, "No. Not since you left Scientology."

(The above "quotes" are paraphrased to the best of my recollection.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2dUmgDnsPU

Thanks, PG!

I love hearing about people's parents and their reactions to all of this.
There are some really good ones on enturbulation.org too, re parents.

HAPPY EASTER TO ALL

Tory/Magoo~~
PS: Wieber: Love it!

torymagoo's vids are always excellent.
make sure your parents watch those.

i'd also like to offer up this video for your parents to watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_F5r_SXbAk

I have been visiting this site for years and was so excited when anon joined the cause. I was following the planning for the Feb. and March pickets, and said something offhand to my kid. Come to find out my kid is anon! That makes me anon's mom!!! I am currently the guardian of my children's physical and spiritual safety until they are old enough to make their own decisions, so I am in favor of removing any dangers from them, like Scientology. Keep up the good work. I hope I get to meet you at a picket. I'll be the lady in the v mask!

To other parents, check out anon's rules for protests. As long as everybody follows the rules, everyone will be safe. If you're worried, go with them to a protest. Just remember to wear a mask! :P

Courage is about taking an independent stand. It is not about blindly joining some flock, be it the Scientology groups or the anti-Scientology groups. Joining either of these with the predescribed state of mind will just start the game all over again.

Kind regards,
RR

The problem isn't that people join Scientology blindly. The problem is that Scientology LIES to new recruits about what Scientology is. On the basis of this FALSE DATA, it's impossible for people to make an informed decision.

People at the beginning do ask questions. They do evaluate the information they've been given critically. But Scientology denies people the right to make an informed choice by concealing from them Scientology's true nature.

On the other hand, it's pretty easy to make an informed choice about Anonymous. They're entirely open and honest about what they represent. It's on the net for all to see:
http://www.enturbulation.org

Then how come that I always have been able to do that within the organization and outside of it? You see, I verify things, I don't just accept anything. I am very well aware of that recruiters have been sort of advertising being Flag staff is like being in a garden of Eden and you can lay down at the Clearwater beach and all that.

False data will demolish itself if one checks out the data one receives and differentiates. This thing about differentiating matters, well, people appear to have the greatests of problems with exactly that!


It is ALL in the published books. This right is denied by people themselves because they simply listen and fail to check out things for themselves. And thus they fail to be effectively critical about matters.

Please explain how Scientology denies people rights!


So, is it really? On 12 Feb 2008 I send this message to that site:

Hi,

I came across your site. It may not be so easy to give that overview of Scientology. It says that you are not against Scientology, only against the Church. Nonetheless it appears to go against Scientology as well, including L. Ron Hubbard.

To address him as SF writer is factually and statistically incorrect even if you focus on only the fiction material. The picture of L. Ron Hubbard on the site with the long hair is by NO means verified as actually being him! That he died in 1986 is actually shrouded in mystery and it has been seriously questioned if in fact that was L. Ron Hubbard. There is no conclusive evidence that confirms it.

Scientology dates to late 1951 not 1952. He was not alone responsibile for founding the actual Church. Mary Sue and 2 others also appear on the founding of the first 3 New Jersey Churches.

The outset never has and will not ever be a beliefsystem. It has no core belief.

The links provided for are primarily anti-Scientology sites. They offer no objectivity. If you claim to just inform the people then these will not suffice!

Regards,
...

I received no reply (which I expected). Do you really want to continue claiming that they are "entirely open and honest about what they represent"?

Kind regards,
RR

Utter rubbish. To know what Scientology is, you need access to the "sekrit scriptures", which Scientology won't let the uninitiated see, and will charge the initiated hundreds of thousands for the privilege.

RR, when you lie to protect the cult, it just shows that lying to wogs is part of the Scientology core beliefs. It doesn't win you any points, just makes you look stupid.

And the admins over at enturb aren't obliged to respond to your patent efforts to waste their time. They have other fish to fry.

You may reply to this post, or not, as you choose. This is my last word on the matter, as this discussion is off topic.

Do you actually know anything at all about the subject of Scientology?? I seriously doubt that.

Now if you are right then why was the cost for OT III till 1976 only $500? Do you care to explain that?


Interesting, I am factual and direct about everything, and you just give brush-offs and don't address or answer to anything. You are not quite honest. Let me ask you. Do you really think that you will have made an impact to those reading these discussions?

The tactic is simply to attack the opposer, and you are attacking me instead of being sensible and polite about it. I repeat you do NOT respond to my queries! Then what are we to think of you behaving aggressively like this?

Yes, you may run, we know already the deal about you.

Regards,
RR