Where to put this?

A place to post and debate the Church of Scientology.
Post Reply
User avatar
heyjupiter
Posts: 171
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:58 pm
Location: UK

Re: Where to put this?

Post by heyjupiter » Mon Aug 05, 2013 9:37 pm

Wieber wrote:
heyjupiter wrote:Probably of all the things that set alarm bells ringing in my bemused head, it was the applauding of LRon's portrait at Org events. The overbearingly large ginger icon was in the main room where lectures were given and I noticed it in a few other rooms- but not in the loo or the kitchen. As everyone stood up and turned sideways to applaud the portrait, I felt myself receding from the group of people there, as though actually physically moving a safe distance from them to observe. I was amused, baffled and then chilled by seeing them do this and I too had visions of an Orwellian horror unfolding. I think I stifled a giggle but I can also remember feeling nauseous as I left the building later that evening as I recalled the adoring faces turned to that picture. It disturbed me for a long time, but it also ensured I never went back.
I didn't experience applauding L. Ron Hubbard's picture until I was well indoctrinated and signed to a staff contract. I think if it had happened on my first visit to the org it may have been my last.

Much later on I attended my first event at which a DVD video was shown with David Miscavige hosting the event and giving his unique speech. (Every speech delivered by David Miscavige is the same speech.) I found a few things a little odd . . . no, make that a lot odd.

Every time David Miscavige hit the conclusion to a part of his speech, the audience in attendance gave him a standing ovation. This happened even when the point he made was trivial. There were sea org members scattered about in the audience and they would lead the applaud-and-stand response. If that were not odd enough, when a standing ovation happened on the video, there were staff members among the viewers in the org who also led the audience in standing and applauding.

Let me go over that again just so you get it. When the recorded audience gave David Miscavige a standing ovation, the audience at the org viewing the recording also gave him a standing ovation. In both cases staff members present led the response.

I could tell from the body language that most of the people in attendance also found it very odd. Despite finding it odd we went along with it. I strongly suspect that the staff members leading the action were not doing it because they felt it was a nice gesture, but that they complied to a directive from management to do that.
Aaaaaaarghh! yes- that happened too at that same event so it must be standard practice. It was like a sped up Mexican wave reaction- applause from the telly-on-wheels was followed by obedient clapping from people in the room watching it. I had to stop my shoulders from shaking and pretend I was coughing because I wanted to guffaw. I commented to my indoctrinated friend afterwards that I found it a bit odd, and it resulted in a huge row. He tried to say that applauding a tv screen or a photo was no different to cheering at a music gig. I begged to differ and feared for his sanity.There's nothing rock and roll about $cientology.

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Mon Aug 05, 2013 9:46 pm

heyjupiter wrote:Aaaaaaarghh! yes- that happened too at that same event so it must be standard practice. It was like a sped up Mexican wave reaction- applause from the telly-on-wheels was followed by obedient clapping from people in the room watching it. I had to stop my shoulders from shaking and pretend I was coughing because I wanted to guffaw. I commented to my indoctrinated friend afterwards that I found it a bit odd, and it resulted in a huge row. He tried to say that applauding a tv screen or a photo was no different to cheering at a music gig. I begged to differ and feared for his sanity.There's nothing rock and roll about $cientology.
Exactly! How many people do you know who stand at attention for the playing of the National Anthem when they're watching the Superbowl on television?
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
SeeYaBye
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:15 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by SeeYaBye » Mon Aug 05, 2013 11:18 pm

Wieber wrote:
heyjupiter wrote:Aaaaaaarghh! yes- that happened too at that same event so it must be standard practice. It was like a sped up Mexican wave reaction- applause from the telly-on-wheels was followed by obedient clapping from people in the room watching it. I had to stop my shoulders from shaking and pretend I was coughing because I wanted to guffaw. I commented to my indoctrinated friend afterwards that I found it a bit odd, and it resulted in a huge row. He tried to say that applauding a tv screen or a photo was no different to cheering at a music gig. I begged to differ and feared for his sanity.There's nothing rock and roll about $cientology.
Exactly! How many people do you know who stand at attention for the playing of the National Anthem when they're watching the Superbowl on television?
Good analogy about the National Anthem. Yes, I do cheer at a music concert I am attending if I liked the music. But that is only for live music. If I watch music on my television, I do not clap, even if I am enjoying it. Of course, if I am not particularly fond of the music at a live concert, I will not clap and cheer -- I might politely clap. Try not cheering enthusiastically at a Scientology event, and simply sitting and clapping while everyone else is standing and cheering. You'll find yourself in Ethics and in big trouble, probably writing up your overts and withholds.
"The truth is the kindest thing we can give folks in the end." - Harriet Beecher Stowe

anondelmundial
Posts: 332
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 3:41 am

Re: Where to put this?

Post by anondelmundial » Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:03 am

Wieber wrote:
Good analogy about the National Anthem. Yes, I do cheer at a music concert I am attending if I liked the music. But that is only for live music. If I watch music on my television, I do not clap, even if I am enjoying it. Of course, if I am not particularly fond of the music at a live concert, I will not clap and cheer -- I might politely clap. Try not cheering enthusiastically at a Scientology event, and simply sitting and clapping while everyone else is standing and cheering. You'll find yourself in Ethics and in big trouble, probably writing up your overts and withholds.
The difference between a sporting event, music concert, etc, and Scientology is that one has no vested interest in the former so you can enjoy or dismiss at will; but the latter has serious personal ramifications depending on one's response.

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Wed Aug 07, 2013 11:38 pm

Scientology has a policy written by L. Ron Hubbard that lists five points that should be in a press release in order to get the attention of the news media.

Those points are:

blood
sex
money
big names
two opposing forces

I have used that with relatively unimportant press releases and the media outlets that got them published them. So score one for Scientology. (Hubbard left out kids. (omitted datum))

When you look at their statements and pieces that demean former members look for those points there. If you find something that fits and it's fabricated, make sure to note that and tell about it.

As well, you can use this against Scientology. Just make sure what you tell the press is true and can be verified.
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
bubbler
Posts: 355
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 3:54 am
Location: USA

Re: Where to put this?

Post by bubbler » Wed Aug 07, 2013 11:46 pm

Shouldn't dogs in sunglasses be on that list?

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Thu Aug 08, 2013 6:31 am

bubbler wrote:Shouldn't dogs in sunglasses be on that list?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, of course.
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Fri Aug 09, 2013 6:44 pm

This is just too good to leave in the Media Reports section.

This is an installment of Tony Ortega's Bunker in which the lead article deals with L. Ron Hubbard's A History of Man.

I found it completely entertaining. Here's the link.
http://tonyortega.org/2013/08/09/pz-mye ... evolution/
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Wed Aug 14, 2013 1:07 am

One concept taught in Scientology that is looked on in Scientology as being extremely important is exchange.

With L. Ron Hubbard's second book, Dianetics: Science of Survival he lays some groundwork for this. That book introduces Scientology's tone scale. If one were to study that book and then honestly test it they would find it to be highly erroneous (i.e., wrong.) As Hubbard goes through the emotions as he has placed them on his scale he assigns a comparative value to the people who are in those emotional states. When the average person reads that they probably think of value as in the kind of contribution such a person could make in society. I think what Hubbard had in mind was a person's monetary value.

When he talks about Scientology auditors he calls them "the most valuable beings on the planet" and he assigns a monetary value expressed in diamonds and gold.

He got into actual quid pro quo in policy and other writings. This permeates Scientology. Within Scientology nothing is ever given without something being exchanged for it. This all seems well and good but like everything else Scientology takes it to an extreme and works a bait and switch into it.

The idea that is promoted is that L. Ron Hubbard's work and the products of his work are the most valuable things in the universe. He is such an important man that everything he ever said was recorded. (I have that from a person who was on staff in the sea org aboard the Apollo. That makes it hearsay. Anyway there's something to ask questions about.)

So L. Ron Hubbard's output and his putting Scientology there with its organization, with its aims and its ostensible purpose of salvaging this sector of the galaxy (gu-lax-ee) is considered so valuable that no one can ever put in their fair exchange with Ron or with Scientology. No matter how much they give in the form of work or pay in the form of money it will never be enough to compensate Ron (or the Scientology organization) for his fantastic breakthroughs on every subject imaginable.

Now do you see the justification for Scientology's ultra high pricing and it's payment of ultra low wages?
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Thu Aug 15, 2013 2:32 am

First off, L. Ron Hubbard's books are being listed on goodreads and they're getting positive reviews, so you may want to check that out. http://www.goodreads.com

What I wanted to discuss briefly is L. Ron Hubbard's Scientology: A New Slant on Life.
Here's the latest cover for it.
Image

This is the cover it had when I read it.
Image

As an aside, I wonder why the covers from this time period were all dispensed with. As I understand it all the book covers from that time period were done strictly to L. Ron Hubbard's specifications. I guess some anti social person had something to do with getting L. Ron Hubbard's covers suppressed.

Back to Scientology: A New Slant on Life. This was the third book I read in Scientology. The first two were about a quarter of Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health and Dianetics 55. Scientology: A New Slant on Life has chapters that consist of essays on how Scientology should be applied in life and how it can thus give a person a new outlook on their life. As I recall in the version I read the first chapter deals with the fact that the individual should do what they can do to help their government.

Now that I'm writing about this book, I think Scientology could probably market Scientology: A New Slant on Life and The Way to Happiness as a companion set for raw public.

There was a chapter in my edition of Scientology: A New Slant on Life on women. In that chapter L. Ron Hubbard wrote that a woman's place was in the home as a mother and homemaker and a companion to her husband. The very next edition of that book had that particular chapter removed.

When David Miscavige released a new, revised edition of that book I wonder if he reinstated that particular chapter. I mean it was removed at a time when suppressive persons were running rampant, in large numbers and undetected in Scientology. Even L. Ron Hubbard, who wrote the technology on suppressive persons didn't detect them.

If anyone participating in this message board has a 'Basics' copy of Scientology: A New Slant on Life, please, take a look at it and see if it has a chapter on women such as I have described above.
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Sat Aug 17, 2013 8:23 pm

I've told this story before. I'm telling it again.

Scientology uses anecdotal evidence that it is the best thing in the world, even better than Snapple's ingredients. That anecdotal evidence comes largely in the form of success stories. As to success stories, we could have a whole separate thread on that subject. I'm just bringing it up here as setup for the story that is coming.

Scientology collects success stories from everyone involved in Scientology. They always get a success story from anyone who completes a course or an auditing action. The success officer will often ask for success stories from people even though they have not completed any course or auditing. They will do that because it helps them get their stat up.

You could say that Scientology has a plethora of success stories. (That's not as funny as a plethora of pinatas though.) Since everyone in Scientology writes success stories and Scientology has so many of them no one involved in Scientology would ever question ones that are published or suspect that some of the ones they read might be fabricated, which I suspect may the case with many of the OT success stories that come in advanced org publications.

Now to get to my anecdote. It's about a thief in the org. Unlike a Scientology success story that provides proof of Scientology working, this anecdote provides proof that it doesn't work.

There was a thief in the Scientology org for which I was a staff member. This person was going into places and taking money. They took money from purses left in the auditors administration room or anywhere else someone might leave their purse. They took money from desk drawers. They were a busy thief and they went everywhere in the org stealing money.

I first became aware of this when the ethics officer sec checked me about it. At that time the thefts had been going on for three weeks to a month, if not longer. At the time it surprised me that someone in the org would be doing that because, Ron said that Scientologists are the most ethical people on the planet.

I next heard about it about two months later. Someone in the Hubbard Communications Office (HCO) had come up with a brilliant plan. They recorded the serial number on a twenty dollar bill and put it in a drawer, which they then checked every five or ten minutes. When they checked and the bill wasn't there they had staff members block all the exits from the org, lined everyone up and then in turn had each person empty their pockets and purses on a table in front of three HCO staff members.

As brilliant as that plan was they did not catch the thief. If they ever did catch them I never heard about it.

So how does this story show that Scientology doesn't work? If you are or have been involved in Scientology and you have some technical or administrative training you can probably see several cases where L. Ron Hubbard's priceless tech didn't work.

The person who was stealing money got through the screening process and into a position of trust inside the org. I suspect they were a staff member because there are places in the org where unaccompanied public people would be challenged. Whoever was doing the thefts did them everywhere.

The security checks people go through when routing onto staff didn't catch the person. The many lists of suppressive person attributes didn't catch them either. The security checks specifically looking for the thief didn't catch them. (The brilliant plan that didn't catch them can't be included because, as far as I know, L. Ron Hubbard never suggested anything like that.)

The overt/withhold material didn't hold up. A person who has committed an overt against Scientology or Scientologists is supposed to blow (leave the org.) This particular person was in the org stealing money for at least three months, if not longer. According to the technology they should have left very soon after committing the first theft. There were at least two instances where this person's withhold was missed. They should have nattered and then blown. No one was detected nattering and the thefts continued, as I said, for at least three months.

To sum up, under the stated circumstances the technologies developed by L. Ron Hubbard that failed to work include, metering, security checking, suppressive person/potential trouble source, overts, withholds, missed withholds, data series and tone scale.

A heavily indoctrinated Scientologists would have reasons why the technology does work but didn't under those circumstances. I am guessing that under that circumstance a heavily indoctrinated Scientologist would expect me to be reasonable.
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:11 pm

Talk about redefining words, in Scientology the word, "game" now equates to fundraising. More specifically it means flip chart redging.

Flip chart redging works this way: The Scientology org schedules a fund raising event with an ostensibly entertaining theme. As many people as possible are made to come to the event. It's like this: Event or see Mr. Ethics Officer.

The event starts. There is then three to five minutes of themed entertainment after which the "game," sometimes called "the games" (plural), starts. The exit is, as far as possible, blocked. A flip chart is set up at the front of the room. A target dollar number is written across the top of the flip chart. This number is large, at least five digits. Then everyone in the place is expected to pledge large amounts of money, which they later must produce for the org and which is not ever refundable, nor does it purchase any services from the org. That is to say there is no exchange in the transaction for the person donating the money.

A person involved with Scientology will protest that statement saying that the exchange is whatever the money is used to buy and that a better society will result. That's debatable but the fact remains that the person donating the money gets no direct material exchange for it.

So in Scientology the word "game" has a new meaning. Game means to hand over to Scientology a large amount of your money and getting nothing back for it. This is supposed to be fun. I have participated in a few of these events and my experience was that those games are definitely not fun at all.

Look, if you really must have what Scientology offers, go get it from Marty Rathbun or someone associated with him. As far as I know, he and the other independents aren't into the kind of stupidity that Scientology Incorporated promulgates.
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:58 am

I have added some songs to my anti-cult playlist.
I don't know if anyone pickets any more, but if they do these are good songs to play.
The Brand X song is there because of the title. It's instrumental.
If this isn't enough you can add anything by Tool.
You also might want to add Lisa Marie Presley's You Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet.
Here's the list sorted two ways.

Alphabetical order by title
Church of Hype, Brand X
Comfort Eagle, Cake
Famous Blue Raincoat, Jennifer Warnes
Famous Blue Raincoat, Leonard Cohen
The God That Failed, Metallica
Hotel California, Eagles
Mother and Child Reunion, Paul Simon
Never Going Back Again, Fleetwood Mac
Never Gonna Give You Up, Rick Astley
O Lucky Man!, Alan Price
Picket Dancing, Maggie Council
Right Now, Van Halen
Sexie Sadie, The Beatles
Somebody's Watching You, Sly & the Family Stone
Subterranean Homesick Blues, Bob Dylan
Tik Tok, Ke$ha
A Token of my Extreme, Frank Zappa
You Got Out, Meaghan Smith
We Can Talk, The Band
We're Not Gonna Take It, The Who
We're Not Gonna Take It, Twisted Sister

Alphabetical order by artist
Rick Astley, Never Gonna Give You Up
The Band, We Can Talk
The Beatles, Sexie Sadie
Brand X, Church of Hype
Cake, Comfort Eagle
Leonard Cohen, Famous Blue Raincoat
Maggie Council, Picket Dancing
Bob Dylan, Subterranean Homesick Blues
Eagles, Hotel California
Fleetwood Mac, Never Going Back Again
Ke$ha, Tik Tok
Metallica, The God That Failed
Alan Price, O Lucky Man!
Paul Simon, Mother and Child Reunion
Sly & the Family Stone, Somebody's Watching You
Meaghan Smith, You Got Out
Twisted Sister, We're Not Gonna Take It
Van Halen, Right Now
Jennifer Warnes, Famous Blue Raincoat
The Who, We're Not Gonna Take It
Frank Zappa, A Token of my Extreme
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Mon Aug 19, 2013 7:00 pm

This is a very interesting installment of Tony Ortega's [img]The%20Underground%20Bunker[/img].
http://tonyortega.org/2013/08/19/how-do ... -a-theory/
In it, Jon Atack, author of A Piece of Blue Sky, talks about 'reality' as defined by L. Ron Hubbard. I have to thank Jon Atack for providing some insights that I personally found helpful.

Interestingly, Stephen Hawking has a chapter in his book, The Grand Design, titled, What is Reality? I am wondering if Stephen Hawking knows about Scientology and thumbs his nose at it. He has a concept he calls 'the uncertainty principle,' which directly flies in the face of L. Ron Hubbard's concept of 'certainty.' Perhaps I'm reading too much into Stephen Hawking's writings and what I'm reading into it in relation to Scientology is just coincidence.

That chapter in Stephen Hawking's book is some twenty pages, which is much too long to quote here. Quoting parts of it will be too far out of context to be of any use. I recommend to you that you get a copy of The Grand Design and read it. (Pssst! It has nothing in it openly critical of Scientology. Nor does it have anything in it that could be classified as 'entheta.' So if you are lurking here and involved in Scientology it is OK for you to read that book.)
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

User avatar
Wieber
Posts: 10240
Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 10:57 pm

Re: Where to put this?

Post by Wieber » Mon Aug 26, 2013 3:32 am

When I got involved in Scientology I did not have my "ruin" formally found with the promise that it would be handled. As it happened I did get involved in Scientology to get something handled so that I could do what I wanted to do with my life. Let me leave it obscure at that, if you don't mind.

When I first wanted to leave Scientology when my initial staff contract had expired, I was held against my will in a small room with the Executive Director and a staff member from the Hubbard Communications Office (HCO) until I signed an agreement to join staff, which in turn led to signing a new contract.

During that 'handling' of me one of the things the Executive Director said to me was that the thing that I got involved with Scientology to get handled would never be handled so I may as well join staff.

At another time a person who had done OT three essentially told a public person the same thing. He said to the person they would never achieve their goal in life so they should join staff.

Let me put that sentiment another way, just to be clear: You should join staff with Scientology because Scientology doesn't work. Another way to put it is, Scientology will handle anything but not that. Thanks, Meatloaf.
“Think wrongly if you please, but in all cases think for yourself.”
Doris Lessing

Image

Post Reply

Return to “Opinions & Debate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests