All ESMB Members Invited to Clearwater Event

[Clay Pigeon]

Hi Pitsy!

No, I don't especially care to be thought of as an "apologist". A while ago I did demur saying could be viewed as "apologia".

No.

En.

Oh.

NO!!!

I do not now and have never had an agenda on ESMB. I like hanging out and conversing with people who have done a study I have done. I'm not an "independent scientologist". I rarely ever speak of Ron or Co$, I don't look at situations and ask "what would Ron do?" although on several occaisions I have made good use of good advice he gave. And sometimes Ron has come to mind and I've thought "Hubbard would do yada-yada but I'm not that kind of guy.


And NO! NO!! NO!!!

The goddam chain locker ain't real child abuse Pitsy. You get your ass in gear and go to the ER of any big city hospital ER and watch the parade of bruised, battered, burned, boiled, broiled babies passing through and maybe you might take an interest in the benefits dianetics might have provided for their parents.

 

[Bill]

And NO! NO!! NO!!!

The goddam chain locker ain't real child abuse Pitsy. You get your ass in gear and go to the ER of any big city hospital ER and watch the parade of bruised, battered, burned, boiled, broiled babies passing through and maybe you might take an interest in the benefits dianetics might have provided for their parents.

I would invite you to reconsider this idea that, because there are no visible marks, mental abuse doesn't count or isn't "bad". Those who have experienced such abuse would like you to not belittle the long lasting and severe damage such abuse engenders.

Some would contend that mental abuse can be much, much, much more damaging than physical abuse.

 

[Clay Pigeon]

I would invite you to reconsider this idea that, because there are no visible marks, mental abuse doesn't count or isn't "bad". Those who have experienced such abuse would like you to not belittle the long lasting and severe damage such abuse engenders.

Some would contend that mental abuse can be much, much, much more damaging than physical abuse.

No one has stood up and claimed to have suffered enduring damage from the chain locker.

 

[Bill]

No one has stood up and claimed to have suffered enduring damage from the chain locker.

Just because YOU don't see something (or choose not to see something) doesn't mean it doesn't exist. How many people who were locked in the chain locker have you talked to about it?

 

[FoTi]

No one has stood up and claimed to have suffered enduring damage from the chain locker.

I do not understand how you can say putting the children in the chain locker was not child abuse.

As far as parents having Dianetics keeping their kids out of the ER...maybe you ought to take a look at the kids who grew up in the SO and what they had to put up with. Do you know about Ivan Obelinsky - the CO of AOLA and what happened to his son.....that child had two parents in the SO who had lots of Dianetic auditing, but did they take care of their children? No and the son got in big trouble and ended up in the ER and then his parents disowned him. Hi parents having Dianetic auditing didn't help that kid one bit. And there are a lot of other Scientologists who's kids have suffered because their parents had Dianetics and were involved in Scientology....some committed suicide, one killed his mother, another killed his landlady and many of the children got thrown out of the family and were disconnected from if they didn't tow the line in Scientology and had thoughts and opinions of their own.

I understand you had benefits from Dianetics and Scientology....so did I, but that doesn't make Dianetics the panacea for child abuse nor does it make the chain locker punishments that LRH used on the kids on the ship any less child abuse. Terrifying a child and putting them in danger of dying does have a lasting effect on them. You walked away from the COS when you wanted to. Children of Scientologists don't have the same freedom unless they want to lose contact with their friends and family and be left alone in the world, homeless with nowhere to go and no one to turn to.

I would suggest that you really look into the negative side for children who's parents have gotten involved in Dianetics and Scientology. Maybe some have gained, but some have lost big time. Take a look at Karen De La Claire and Heber Jentzch....they were big time Scientologists in the SO and they had a son who was raised in the SO....Couldn't get any closer to Dianetics than that and look where their son is now....dead. He was required to disconnect from his mother, so she couldn't help him when he was sick. No....Dianetics is no panacea for chidren...it doesn't end child abuse at all. The COS and the SO is Dianetics and Scientology and they have no heart for any children who don't tow the line in their beliefs. Look at Tom Cruise...he doesn't have anythng to do with his daughter because she isn't a Scientologist and her mother left Scientology so is considered an SP. It appears that this is where Dianetics leads people these days.

Please...look outside of your own positive experiences of Dianetics in the old days and look at the facts of how Dianetics and Scientology have effected a lot of lives in a very negative and long lasting way. If it wasn't long lasting, people wouldn't still be bothered by it.

 

[Clay Pigeon]

Ahhh FoTi...

No.

I did NOT say the chain locker was not child abuse. I said it was not serious child abuse. Moreover, this was something new on Hubbard's part starting when he went to sea to form the Sea Org, a para military formation of a religious order as are the Jesuits et. al. Discipline of this nature is certainly not unfamiliar. Read up on how children were treated in Sparta for instance. I (and our great nation) are of Athenian temperment and inclination but we still honor Sparta and her valiant King for the Battle of Thermopolae and always will. The chain locker was a distinctly Spartacist action by a highly respected and thus privileged researcher. The opinions of those who condemn the act and the man are respected and heard and are particularly respected when those who express them are, as are you, willing to engage in 2WC with those who have a divergent perspective.

Something which doesn't seem to sink in is that I have from my initial OP stated that my own son suffered a wrongful death and Scientology Disconnection policy, Heavy "Ethics" and the old Guardian's Office were significantly involved with the wrongfullness of it.

I pay close attention to all those things you mention and I am frequently moved to tears and/or rage by them.

However...

I am an AUDITOR!!!

And I will not condone a call to throw Hubbard and his body of work on the trash heap of History.

 

[Bill]

However...

I am an AUDITOR!!!

And I will not condone a call to throw Hubbard and his body of work on the trash heap of History.

You won't condone it? You have no say in the matter. History will consign both Hubbard and his "body of work" to the trash heap. Already has. If it produced any results better than placebo, you might have a tiny point -- it doesn't and you don't.

Your objection is noted.

 

[Bill]

I did NOT say the chain locker was not child abuse. I said it was not serious child abuse.

And how would you know it wasn't serious? What is your training? What is your direct experience with children who went through this ordeal? What do you base this opinion on other than a desire to protect your image of Hubbard?

 

[Clay Pigeon]

You won't condone it? You have no say in the matter. History will consign both Hubbard and his "body of work" to the trash heap. Already has. If it produced any results better than placebo, you might have a tiny point -- it doesn't and you don't.

Your objection is noted.

Hey!

Nice shot Bill!

One of the things I love about this board is that if I post anything weak you or someone will jump right on it.

Yeah...

"I will not condone..." is a bit of a bloviation

Keep up the good work!

 

[Clay Pigeon]

And how would you know it wasn't serious? What is your training? What is your direct experience with children who went through this ordeal? What do you base this opinion on other than a desire to protect your image of Hubbard?

I've been reading accounts of it on this board for years Bill and I have given many accounts of my far ranging experiences and studies over the course my 68 reasonably interesting years on Blito 3. If you read the post on this thread you will find my opinion is partly based on a knowledge of history among so many other things none of which involve protecting an image of one of the most interesting and enigmatic characters to make appearance on the stage of history.

 

[Clay Pigeon]

I do not understand how you can say putting the children in the chain locker was not child abuse.

As far as parents having Dianetics keeping their kids out of the ER...maybe you ought to take a look at the kids who grew up in the SO and what they had to put up with. Do you know about Ivan Obelinsky - the CO of AOLA and what happened to his son.....that child had two parents in the SO who had lots of Dianetic auditing, but did they take care of their children? No and the son got in big trouble and ended up in the ER and then his parents disowned him. Hi parents having Dianetic auditing didn't help that kid one bit. And there are a lot of other Scientologists who's kids have suffered because their parents had Dianetics and were involved in Scientology....some committed suicide, one killed his mother, another killed his landlady and many of the children got thrown out of the family and were disconnected from if they didn't tow the line in Scientology and had thoughts and opinions of their own.

I understand you had benefits from Dianetics and Scientology....so did I, but that doesn't make Dianetics the panacea for child abuse nor does it make the chain locker punishments that LRH used on the kids on the ship any less child abuse. Terrifying a child and putting them in danger of dying does have a lasting effect on them. You walked away from the COS when you wanted to. Children of Scientologists don't have the same freedom unless they want to lose contact with their friends and family and be left alone in the world, homeless with nowhere to go and no one to turn to.

I would suggest that you really look into the negative side for children who's parents have gotten involved in Dianetics and Scientology. Maybe some have gained, but some have lost big time. Take a look at Karen De La Claire and Heber Jentzch....they were big time Scientologists in the SO and they had a son who was raised in the SO....Couldn't get any closer to Dianetics than that and look where their son is now....dead. He was required to disconnect from his mother, so she couldn't help him when he was sick. No....Dianetics is no panacea for chidren...it doesn't end child abuse at all. The COS and the SO is Dianetics and Scientology and they have no heart for any children who don't tow the line in their beliefs. Look at Tom Cruise...he doesn't have anythng to do with his daughter because she isn't a Scientologist and her mother left Scientology so is considered an SP. It appears that this is where Dianetics leads people these days.

Please...look outside of your own positive experiences of Dianetics in the old days and look at the facts of how Dianetics and Scientology have effected a lot of lives in a very negative and long lasting way. If it wasn't long lasting, people wouldn't still be bothered by it.

There's quite a bit in this post FoTi...

YEAH!!!

The way the game of it is played sucks chancerous donkey dick!

MY son is dead at least partly because Co$$$$ SUXXX!!!!!!!

But in the specific of the chain locker, no, I don't endorse it much less practice it but I can respect it's Logos and well recognize the visitation of Ordeal upon children has always been a tribal practice among the indigenous bipeds of our local planet. Sometimes even on newborn infants. Many of the Arctic tribes have taken their newborns and quickly immersed them in Arctic waters. The ones who survive don't much bitch about the climate.

 

[Bill]

Just because YOU don't see something (or choose not to see something) doesn't mean it doesn't exist. How many people who were locked in the chain locker have you talked to about it?

I've been reading accounts of it on this board for years Bill and I have given many accounts of my far ranging experiences and studies over the course my 68 reasonably interesting years on Blito 3. If you read the post on this thread you will find my opinion is partly based on a knowledge of history among so many other things none of which involve protecting an image of one of the most interesting and enigmatic characters to make appearance on the stage of history.

Oh! Well! In other words, you have no personal knowledge or contact with any child who was locked in the chain locker by Hubbard and you are just making shit up because you are a blowhard who doesn't like that image of Hubbard.

Got it! Thanks for making this clear.

 

[FoTi]

Hi Pitsy!


The goddam chain locker ain't real child abuse Pitsy. You get your ass in gear and go to the ER of any big city hospital ER and watch the parade of bruised, battered, burned, boiled, broiled babies passing through and maybe you might take an interest in the benefits dianetics might have provided for their parents.

Ahhh FoTi...

No.

I did NOT say the chain locker was not child abuse. I said it was not serious child abuse.

I am an AUDITOR!!!

And I will not condone a call to throw Hubbard and his body of work on the trash heap of History.

Okay. So you didn't say it was child abuse and then you didn't say it was not child abuse, so was it child abuse or not child abuse?

 

[Clay Pigeon]

Okay. So you didn't say it was child abuse and then you didn't say it was not child abuse, so was it child abuse or not child abuse?

The question doesn't have a simple one-size-fits-all answer FoTi.

In Sacramento or Milwaukee or Dayton when a garden variety lout does something like a chain locker it is felony child abuse. Rack him up; big fine and 30 days in city jail or 3-6 months in county and if jerk stinks really bad 3-5 in state prison.

But...

When a religious community visits harsh discipline on children the legal question becomes very thorny.

If what is being done causes physical injury. Yes. The State is justified in claiming a compelling interest in intervention on the behalf of the young citizen, but if it's something like the chain locker...

This is something which has centuries of precedent in a vast number of forms including such horrors as making teenage boys dance with their pimply cousin.

 

[FoTi]

The question doesn't have a simple one-size-fits-all answer FoTi.

In Sacramento or Milwaukee or Dayton when a garden variety lout does something like a chain locker it is felony child abuse. Rack him up; big fine and 30 days in city jail or 3-6 months in county and if jerk stinks really bad 3-5 in state prison.

But...

When a religious community visits harsh discipline on children the legal question becomes very thorny.

If what is being done causes physical injury. Yes. The State is justified in claiming a compelling interest in intervention on the behalf of the young citizen, but if it's something like the chain locker...

This is something which has centuries of precedent in a vast number of forms including such horrors as making teenage boys dance with their pimply cousin.

I take it now, from what you've written, that you cannot, on your own, determine whether an act is abusive or not, without referring to some legal reference, or if one would go to jail for doing it, or if some other group, clan or religion in history did it and thought it was okay or not.

Do you think that LRH putting a child in the chain locker was child abuse? Yes or No?

 

[Clay Pigeon]

Yes.

As I have previously stated.

That is my SUBJECTIVE answer. If on the Apollo with my children and one of my sons were chain lockered I would, with all due respect, leave with sons in tow.

On this board giving OBJECTIVE examination and dissertation L Ron Hubbard is found to be Not Guilty of a charge of child abuse.

Next case?

 

[FoTi]

Yes.

As I have previously stated.

That is my SUBJECTIVE answer. If on the Apollo with my children and one of my sons were chain lockered I would, with all due respect, leave with sons in tow.

On this board giving OBJECTIVE examination and dissertation L Ron Hubbard is found to be Not Guilty of a charge of child abuse.

Next case?

Yes, you consider putting a child in the chain locker, child abuse....correct? So, why do you say LRH is Not Guilty of child abuse, when you do consider putting a child in the chain locker as child abuse and that's what LRH did. Why is LRH not guilty of this offense to a child?

Subjective and Objective? Why not call a spade a spade?

If LRH is not guilty of the charge of child abuse for putting a child in the chain locker, why would you leave the Apollo with your sons if he did it to your son?

 

[Clay Pigeon]

Given that I am speaking of a hypothetical situation I really can't say definitively that I would pack up and leave the Apollo. We are speaking of an offense which is in the borderland; certainly a culpable offense when committed by a scumbag, not necessarily culpable with familiar mitigating circumstances.

But as this does not seem to satisfy your bright lively inquiring mind let me put it this way...

L RON HUBBARD IS NOT FUCKING GUILTY BECAUSE HE'S L RON HUBBARD F'CRISSAKES. HE IS A BRILLIANT ALBEIT ECCENTRIC RESEARCHER WHO PRODUCED A PROFOUND BODY OF WORK AND YOU DON'T RACK HIM UP ON PICAYUNE HORSECRAP; YOU EITHER SWING WITH THE SONOFABITCH OR YOU SHUT THE FUCK UP AND GET THE FUCK OUT OF HIS WAY.

Capische?

 

[Type4_PTS]

Given that I am speaking of a hypothetical situation I really can't say definitively that I would pack up and leave the Apollo. We are speaking of an offense which is in the borderland; certainly a culpable offense when committed by a scumbag, not necessarily culpable with familiar mitigating circumstances.

But as this does not seem to satisfy your bright lively inquiring mind let me put it this way...

L RON HUBBARD IS NOT FUCKING GUILTY BECAUSE HE'S L RON HUBBARD F'CRISSAKES. HE IS A BRILLIANT ALBEIT ECCENTRIC RESEARCHER WHO PRODUCED A PROFOUND BODY OF WORK AND YOU DON'T RACK HIM UP ON PICAYUNE HORSECRAP; YOU EITHER SWING WITH THE SONOFABITCH OR YOU SHUT THE FUCK UP AND GET THE FUCK OUT OF HIS WAY.

Capische?

 

[Type4_PTS]

Yes, you consider putting a child in the chain locker, child abuse....correct? So, why do you say LRH is Not Guilty of child abuse, when you do consider putting a child in the chain locker as child abuse and that's what LRH did. Why is LRH not guilty of this offense to a child?

Subjective and Objective? Why not call a spade a spade?

If LRH is not guilty of the charge of child abuse for putting a child in the chain locker, why would you leave the Apollo with your sons if he did it to your son?

I think you succeeded in provoking Clay Pigeon into telling what he really believed. Kind of like Tom Cruise did to Jack Nicholson in "A Few Good Men"