The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[lkwdblds]

Re: The banality of evil

Hearsay everywhere....and yes, the biggest testament to the failure of 'tech', their sad version of that word, is that so many of those they let float through F/N checks were then later 'declared'.

Hilarious.

Tonight I watched Going Clear. I'll review it in the next day or two once I get a sense of what I want to say in response.

and yes....popcorn time on all the madness.

Talk about the failure of their "tech". Look at Hubbard himself. He was supposed to be full OT, the biggest OT in the Universe. Also, he originated the terms SP and PTS and all the "tech" having to do with how to spot and handle them. Thinking along the lines that Hubbard's tech worked perfectly as he claimed, one would figure that Hubbard, using his own SP and PTS tech, would easily spot ANY and ALL SP's in his own vicinity and would quickly and effectively handle them or failing that, he would simply disconnect from each and every one of them.

Following this path, how did David Mayo, for years Hubbard's most trusted and top technical aid and the number 2 technical expert in Scientology, second only to Hubbard, go undetected as an SP all those years he worked side by side with Hubbard? How would so many of the top exec's of CoS go undetected by Hubbard and later by DM for years. Take Debbie Cook for example, how was she able to avoid detection for so many years, ditto for 97% of the Staff at the Old St. Hill in the early and mid 1960's who worked side by side with Hubbard for years. BTW, how did all these SP's produce such high stats for extended periods lasting many years for Hubbard and later DM if all these people were undetected SP's??? After all, SP tech states that SP's do not produce ethical products, rather they produce overt products.

Almost no Security Checks would have beeh necessary to find out who the real SP's in a Scientology group or staff were! All that was really necessary, using Hubbard's own scriptures, was to look at people's stats and also look for overt products. For example, take the Mission Holders of the early 1980's who had enormous production stats for years, literally flooding people from their missions into CoS churches and FLAG. No need to sec check them for hours on end. Their stats did their talking for them. LRH, as his last remaining major act before he went off the control lines of CoS management, seized the money and properties created by those mission holders. Hubbard was willing to seize all their money, property and facilities simply to gain control of those assets. He dismissed the fact that they were flooding large numbers of new scientologists into CoS. The missions themselves were gutted and then either disappeared or were mismanagedinto closure. How were the SP former missions holders able to do so well while the new team of "more ethical and on policy management" failed miserably at running those missions.

Clearly, with no real need for endless sec checking, except to obtain much more money from CoS parishioners, and force them to come to the Flag Land Base, so as to keeps it's stats high, DM created endless Sec Checking, most notably for those on OT VII, Solo NOTS.

Sec Checking itself, has some viability or reason for existing in CoS, but instead of being used effectively in spot situations, where indicators were that it was truly needed, it was used instead for a huge money grab to get more money out of those who were already doing well and who were already contributing heavily. Here again we have more examples of CoS going for immediate income stats, for the coming week, on a continual weekly basis without ever examining what long term effects this might produce on CoS, as regards their staffs and public.

That horrible, infantile method of running an organization may amass a lot of money for the Organization and its leader, but ultimately the exchange between CoS and its staffs and public goes awry and becomes no exchange or criminal exchange and when this happens the size of CoS shrinks!

Their response of investing in posh five star type buildings and furnishings is almost completely irrelevant in reducing or even abating their decline. The only value to all these empty luxury facilities is a limited PR value at best and in no way actually addresses what is wrong with CoS! To actually address the problem head on, their top management would have to confront the situation, see the outpoints and do what is necessary to correct them. Their scriptures tell them to do this but those same scriptures also dictate also that CofS's top management is never wrong. Thus a Catch 22 exists as a GPM for CoS, it is not being confronted and handled in any way. Instead, the same solutions which caused the damage and shrinkage are being repeated over and over hoping for a better result.

When no better result is forthcoming, more people are declared suppressive and so it goes and so it will go until finally CofS as an entity either reforms or expires.
Lakey

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The banality of evil

Talk about the failure of their "tech". Look at Hubbard himself. He was supposed to be full OT, the biggest OT in the Universe. Also, he originated the terms SP and PTS and all the "tech" having to do with how to spot and handle them. Thinking along the lines that Hubbard's tech worked perfectly as he claimed, one would figure that Hubbard, using his own SP and PTS tech, would easily spot ANY and ALL SP's in his own vicinity and would quickly and effectively handle them or failing that, he would simply disconnect from each and every one of them.

Following this path, how did David Mayo, for years Hubbard's most trusted and top technical aid and the number 2 technical expert in Scientology, second only to Hubbard, go undetected as an SP all those years he worked side by side with Hubbard? How would so many of the top exec's of CoS go undetected by Hubbard and later by DM for years. Take Debbie Cook for example, how was she able to avoid detection for so many years, ditto for 97% of the Staff at the Old St. Hill in the early and mid 1960's who worked side by side with Hubbard for years. BTW, how did all these SP's produce such high stats for extended periods lasting many years for Hubbard and later DM if all these people were undetected SP's??? After all, SP tech states that SP's do not produce ethical products, rather they produce overt products.

Almost no Security Checks would have beeh necessary to find out who the real SP's in a Scientology group or staff were! All that was really necessary, using Hubbard's own scriptures, was to look at people's stats and also look for overt products. For example, take the Mission Holders of the early 1980's who had enormous production stats for years, literally flooding people from their missions into CoS churches and FLAG. No need to sec check them for hours on end. Their stats did their talking for them. LRH, as his last remaining major act before he went off the control lines of CoS management, seized the money and properties created by those mission holders. Hubbard was willing to seize all their money, property and facilities simply to gain control of those assets. He dismissed the fact that they were flooding large numbers of new scientologists into CoS. The missions themselves were gutted and then either disappeared or were mismanagedinto closure. How were the SP former missions holders able to do so well while the new team of "more ethical and on policy management" failed miserably at running those missions.

Clearly, with no real need for endless sec checking, except to obtain much more money from CoS parishioners, and force them to come to the Flag Land Base, so as to keeps it's stats high, DM created endless Sec Checking, most notably for those on OT VII, Solo NOTS.

Sec Checking itself, has some viability or reason for existing in CoS, but instead of being used effectively in spot situations, where indicators were that it was truly needed, it was used instead for a huge money grab to get more money out of those who were already doing well and who were already contributing heavily. Here again we have more examples of CoS going for immediate income stats, for the coming week, on a continual weekly basis without ever examining what long term effects this might produce on CoS, as regards their staffs and public.

That horrible, infantile method of running an organization may amass a lot of money for the Organization and its leader, but ultimately the exchange between CoS and its staffs and public goes awry and becomes no exchange or criminal exchange and when this happens the size of CoS shrinks!

Their response of investing in posh five star type buildings and furnishings is almost completely irrelevant in reducing or even abating their decline. The only value to all these empty luxury facilities is a limited PR value at best and in no way actually addresses what is wrong with CoS! To actually address the problem head on, their top management would have to confront the situation, see the outpoints and do what is necessary to correct them. Their scriptures tell them to do this but those same scriptures also dictate also that CofS's top management is never wrong. Thus a Catch 22 exists as a GPM for CoS, it is not being confronted and handled in any way. Instead, the same solutions which caused the damage and shrinkage are being repeated over and over hoping for a better result.

When no better result is forthcoming, more people are declared suppressive and so it goes and so it will go until finally CofS as an entity either reforms or expires.
Lakey

If 50 thousands psychophant lemmings want to believe in Xenu and endlessly guilt-ridden want to run sec-checks on each other, why would it bother anyone as long as they keep to themselves and don't impose on everyone else a gag order contra the first amendment right of all to speak their own minds and experiences? The alpha dog, remember, is so secure it yawns and doesn't even bark, has no need to harass its fellows since it is secure. The beta is the one that is neurotic and makes a big fuss. If one is strong, one doesn't need to enforce that and constantly prove one is strong. Just be strong and go about your business. That is what I find perplexing. They have tons of money and also a small but loyal following. Why they want to shoot themselves in the foot by chasing after every shadow is really confusing to me.

I noticed in the film that DM looked very good in the early days, around the time Hubbard died. The film showed a clip of him. In more recent clips he looks so thin or else unhealthy. He could stand to gain about 10 pounds and hopefully can afford non-GMO, organic food. He does not look as well in more recent clips as he did in the older ones....

 

[ILove2Lurk]

Re: The banality of evil

. . . He does not look as well in more recent clips as he did in the older ones....

In the first glimpse of DM at the podium in Going Clear, an odd right-side facial characteristic when he first spoke makes me think he's had a small stroke recently.
I could be wrong. Wonderin'.

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The banality of evil

In the first glimpse of DM at the podium in Going Clear, an odd right-side facial characteristic when he first spoke makes me think he's had a small stroke recently.
I could be wrong. Wonderin'.

Hopefully he goes to see a regular doctor now and again even if one who also happens to be a Scientologist.....

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The banality of evil

If 50 thousands psychophant lemmings want to believe in Xenu and endlessly guilt-ridden want to run sec-checks on each other, why would it bother anyone as long as they keep to themselves and don't impose on everyone else a gag order contra the first amendment right of all to speak their own minds and experiences? The alpha dog, remember, is so secure it yawns and doesn't even bark, has no need to harass its fellows since it is secure. The beta is the one that is neurotic and makes a big fuss. If one is strong, one doesn't need to enforce that and constantly prove one is strong. Just be strong and go about your business. That is what I find perplexing. They have tons of money and also a small but loyal following. Why they want to shoot themselves in the foot by chasing after every shadow is really confusing to me.

I noticed in the film that DM looked very good in the early days, around the time Hubbard died. The film showed a clip of him. In more recent clips he looks so thin or else unhealthy. He could stand to gain about 10 pounds and hopefully can afford non-GMO, organic food. He does not look as well in more recent clips as he did in the older ones....

They do have tons of money and a small BUT SHRINKING cadre of loyal followers but that was never good enough for Hubbard, who wanted to smash his name into history to last 1,000 years and more (sound familiar, the 1000 year Third reich?). What is the term?, Meglomaniac I believe. Hitler put Germany back on top in Europe, leaders in science, physics, chemistry, music, freeways, a people's car, rocketry, jet planes, etc.. There was even a strong possibility of getting back their colonies in Africa and Samoa, which were taken from them at the end of WWI. How about it Hitler? You have restored Germany to greatness, made the people proud to be Germans again so why not start writing your memoirs and live out your life in wealth and glory>

Nein, nein, says Hitler, my destiny is much greater than that! I must do more and bring the world to order. He he makes a pact with Russia, rips off part of Czechoslovakia, takes over Austria, conquers Poland, takes over Norway, Denmark and France. What a Reich, he had, from the Pyranees mountains all the way to Russia, his ally. He is master of this huge empire, he's on top of the world, the greatest leader since Alexander the Great but does he hunker down and enjoy his life, no he violates his treaty with Russia and makes a huge bid to conquer that country which was many times larger than Germany. Russia turns out to be much tougher than he expected, bad weather stops him at the gates of Moscow and then the USA enters the war. His huge and powerful Reich is reduced to rubble in the relatively short time of 3 1/2 years. He had it all, possibly the most powerful country in the world, adored by his people, for the most part, and even assured a place in history as a winner. He pissed it all away and risked everything on some meglamaniacal gamble to take over the world.

Hubbard's attack on psychiatry reminds me of Hitler's attack on Russia. There was really not much reason for Hubbard to attack Psychiatry and to a much lesser extent the field of medicine. He had a loyal and expanding group. Some form of exchange was taking place where his group perceived that he was exchanging with them in abundance. Probably that was not the case but his public conceived that to be true and I believe Hubbard also perceived that to be true. It was true for both he and his public and so his movement grew, even in the face of attacks from governments and the psychiatric and medical professions.

Hubbard could have done what you say above, Maria but his make up was that he wasn't content only with major wins in a game. rather he wanted to control the entire game!! Like so many dictators and leaders his greed sealed his own doom as regards how history has judged him..

As to DM's phsyical appearance, I refer everyone to read the book, "The Picture of Dorian Gray", the book written in 1890 by the Welsh literary genius, Oscar Wilde. Actually, it is pretty much a science fiction story even though there was not yet very much science fiction back in the day (well they did have Jules Verne's "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea"). In the book, Dorian Gray has a painting done of him as a young man in his early 20's. He stores the painting in a closet and in the course of living his life, he starts to do evil things to people. Oddly enough, his looks don't change at all but his personality does deteriorate. In his 40's he still looks like the 20 year old in his old painting. I don't remember all the details but when Gray is in his 40's and is doing horrible things to people, someone finds about about the existence of the painting and goes to track it down. He finds it in storage and to his dismay, the painting looks like the devil incarnate. The handsome, clean cut young lad on the canvas has morphed, on the canvas, into a grotesques apparition resembling total evil and the devil.

Here is a link to the 1945 version of the move, Dorian Gray. There was a new remake released in the 1990's as well.:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Picture_of_Dorian_Gray_(1945_film)

So it must be with DM, the more he tortures and degrades people, the more prone he is to having those actions show up in his physical appearance. He doesn't look real upbeat in person as he once did, but then he now has thousands of defectors, many of them quite powerful and expressive. The Internet is the one device which neither LRH or DM ever anticipated. Indeed hardly anyone anticipated it. You look back at all your Popular Science and Popular Mechanics magazines when they predicted the future. Literally, no one predicted an invention anything like the internet and to think that for a small amount of money nearly everyone can gain access to the internet from their cell phone.

I would go so far as to say that without the internet, people would still believe that LRH was a nuclear physicist and that he was wounded and blinded in WWII and that he had only two wives and not 3. Actually, the public did gain access to the OT III materials back in the 80's when the L.A. Times ran a big expose' on CoS and revealed the Xenu story to its readers. Maybe CofS's secrets would have been exposed without the internet. maybe not, but one thing is certain, the internet has been the kiss of death for LRH, DM and CoS!
Lakey

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The banality of evil

They do have tons of money and a small BUT SHRINKING cadre of loyal followers but that was never good enough for Hubbard, who wanted to smash his name into history to last 1,000 years and more (sound familiar, the 1000 year Third reich?). What is the term?, Meglomaniac I believe. Hitler put Germany back on top in Europe, leaders in science, physics, chemistry, music, freeways, a people's car, rocketry, jet planes, etc.. There was even a strong possibility of getting back their colonies in Africa and Samoa, which were taken from them at the end of WWI. How about it Hitler? You have restored Germany to greatness, made the people proud to be Germans again so why not start writing your memoirs and live out your life in wealth and glory>

Nein, nein, says Hitler, my destiny is much greater than that! I must do more and bring the world to order. He he makes a pact with Russia, rips off part of Czechoslovakia, takes over Austria, conquers Poland, takes over Norway, Denmark and France. What a Reich, he had, from the Pyranees mountains all the way to Russia, his ally. He is master of this huge empire, he's on top of the world, the greatest leader since Alexander the Great but does he hunker down and enjoy his life, no he violates his treaty with Russia and makes a huge bid to conquer that country which was many times larger than Germany. Russia turns out to be much tougher than he expected, bad weather stops him at the gates of Moscow and then the USA enters the war. His huge and powerful Reich is reduced to rubble in the relatively short time of 3 1/2 years. He had it all, possibly the most powerful country in the world, adored by his people, for the most part, and even assured a place in history as a winner. He pissed it all away and risked everything on some meglamaniacal gamble to take over the world.

Hubbard's attack on psychiatry reminds me of Hitler's attack on Russia. There was really not much reason for Hubbard to attack Psychiatry and to a much lesser extent the field of medicine. He had a loyal and expanding group. Some form of exchange was taking place where his group perceived that he was exchanging with them in abundance. Probably that was not the case but his public conceived that to be true and I believe Hubbard also perceived that to be true. It was true for both he and his public and so his movement grew, even in the face of attacks from governments and the psychiatric and medical professions.

Hubbard could have done what you say above, Maria but his make up was that he wasn't content only with major wins in a game. rather he wanted to control the entire game!! Like so many dictators and leaders his greed sealed his own doom as regards how history has judged him..

As to DM's physical appearance, I refer everyone to read the book, "The Picture of Dorian Gray", the book written in 1890 by the Welsh literary genius, Oscar Wilde. Actually, it is pretty much a science fiction story even though there was not yet very much science fiction back in the day (well they did have Jules Verne's "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea"). In the book, Dorian Gray has a painting done of him as a young man in his early 20's. He stores the painting in a closet and in the course of living his life, he starts to do evil things to people. Oddly enough, his looks don't change at all but his personality does deteriorate. In his 40's he still looks like the 20 year old in his old painting. I don't remember all the details but when Gray is in his 40's and is doing horrible things to people, someone finds about about the existence of the painting and goes to track it down. He finds it in storage and to his dismay, the painting looks like the devil incarnate. The handsome, clean cut young lad on the canvas has morphed, on the canvas, into a grotesques apparition resembling total evil and the devil.

Here is a link to the 1945 version of the move, Dorian Gray. There was a new remake released in the 1990's as well.:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Picture_of_Dorian_Gray_(1945_film)

So it must be with DM, the more he tortures and degrades people, the more prone he is to having those actions show up in his physical appearance. He doesn't look real upbeat in person as he once did, but then he now has thousands of defectors, many of them quite powerful and expressive. The Internet is the one device which neither LRH or DM ever anticipated. Indeed hardly anyone anticipated it. You look back at all your Popular Science and Popular Mechanics magazines when they predicted the future. Literally, no one predicted an invention anything like the internet and to think that for a small amount of money nearly everyone can gain access to the internet from their cell phone.

I would go so far as to say that without the internet, people would still believe that LRH was a nuclear physicist and that he was wounded and blinded in WWII and that he had only two wives and not 3. Actually, the public did gain access to the OT III materials back in the 80's when the L.A. Times ran a big expose' on CoS and revealed the Xenu story to its readers. Maybe CofS's secrets would have been exposed without the internet. maybe not, but one thing is certain, the internet has been the kiss of death for LRH, DM and CoS!
Lakey

Thanks for the Dorian Gray analogy. What happens in the soul certainly can appear in the body.... What struck me watching the film Going Clear was the triumphalism of the non-profit status event. It truly resembled a Nuremburg Nazi rally, down to the art and the dance and everything else. This 'triumphalism' appears in all philosophies of consciousness....of enlightenment. The I becomes a center of reality, and it's joy as Cruise refers to it, is not based in love but in the euphoria of a false spirit, perhaps the giddiness of self-love. True joy cannot happen when there are slaves, when the i feels constantly battered and seeks out enemies everywhere and when its joy is only based on its own aggrandizement, it's own 'causativeness'. Causativeness in this sense is just solipsism of the i, the self-absorption into oneself as the center of all reality.

I did cringe when Cruise referred to Miscavage as the leader of leaders, as a leader greater than other world leaders. That even one prisoner is kept in the hole tarnishes that crown. Cruise is so blind he has no idea what he has lost: his own child, and his previous children, and family, destroyed more than once in the name of lies.

 

[Hatshepsut]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Originally posted by Maria Cuervo

Thanks for the Dorian Gray analogy. What happens in the soul certainly can appear in the body.... What struck me watching the film Going Clear was the triumphalism of the non-profit status event. It truly resembled a Nuremburg Nazi rally, down to the art and the dance and everything else. This 'triumphalism' appears in all philosophies of consciousness....of enlightenment.

Hi Lakey, hi Maria!!

I stumbled on these interesting vids last night. I notice you brought up Hitler once again as I was browsing around the board.

Hitler's Hidden Drug Habit: Secret History: https://youtu.be/8DJr5q4Bf_s

BBC New Documentary -The Investigation of Adolf Hitler's Death or Disapp...: https://youtu.be/vkoPVf-rqyA

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Hi Lakey, hi Maria!!

I stumbled on these interesting vids last night. I notice you brought up Hitler once again as I was browsing around the board.

Hitler's Hidden Drug Habit: Secret History: https://youtu.be/8DJr5q4Bf_s

BBC New Documentary -The Investigation of Adolf Hitler's Death or Disapp...: https://youtu.be/vkoPVf-rqyA

Hey "Hats", we got you back, at least for today, it must be at least 3 or 4 years since you posted here! You are one of the best posters on ESMB, it's is really nice to hear from you again!! I noticed you started reading this thread again after Maria showed up but it is really nice to have you post here again. What an unexpected treat!!

That picture of Hitler on the first video which you put up looks like it has been photo shopped. As far as a know, Hitler didn't pump iron, He may have ordered his juniors to pump it into peoples bodies with rifle fire at their executions but as far a having a build with a six pack for his abs, a sculpted chest and muscle bound arms, that sure doesn't seem to be how I visualize Hitler's body to look like, especially in his later years.

One of our posters sent me some new material on the 3rd Reich which I have never seen before. We have Martin Borman escaping from the Reich in its dying days with enriched uranium made in the Third Reich in the early years of the war. Borman cuts a deal with the USA to turn the uranium over to them via a transcation which occurred at sea. Being no fool, Borman also cut a deal with the Soviet Union to release some of the spoils of war to them as well. The theory is that the survivors of the Reich wanted both the USA and the USSR to be strong and oppose each other indefinitely while the remaining leaders of the Reich reorganized so as to get back into the game at a later date.
Lakey

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The banality of evil

In the first glimpse of DM at the podium in Going Clear, an odd right-side facial characteristic when he first spoke makes me think he's had a small stroke recently.
I could be wrong. Wonderin'.

Ya know, I felt a bit bad seeing him frail and wanted to feed him some sprouts and avocado or something non-gmo, just anything to bring back that cheeky look from the early-DM excerpt. LOL.

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Hey "Hats", we got you back, at least for today, it must be at least 3 or 4 years since you posted here! You are one of the best posters on ESMB, it's is really nice to hear from you again!!
I noticed you started reading this thread again after Maria showed up but it is really nice to have you post here again. What an unexpected treat!!

That picture of Hitler on the first video which you put up looks like it has been photo shopped. As far as a know, Hitler didn't pump iron, He may have ordered his juniors to pump it into peoples bodies with rifle fire at their executions but as far a having a build with a six pack for his abs, a sculpted chest and muscle bound arms, that sure doesn't seem to be how I visualize Hitler's body to look like, especially in his later years.

One of our posters sent me some new material on the 3rd Reich which I have never seen before. We have Martin Borman escaping from the Reich in its dying days with enriched uranium made in the Third Reich in the early years of the war. Borman cuts a deal with the USA to turn the uranium over to them via a transcation which occurred at sea. Being no fool, Borman also cut a deal with the Soviet Union to release some of the spoils of war to them as well. The theory is that the survivors of the Reich wanted both the USA and the USSR to be strong and oppose each other indefinitely while the remaining leaders of the Reich reorganized so as to get back into the game at a later date.
Lakey

Hats is cool. Super cool awesome being. She knows stuff I have only glimmered at. I hope she posts some of it.

 

[Gib]

Re: The banality of evil

If 50 thousands psychophant lemmings want to believe in Xenu and endlessly guilt-ridden want to run sec-checks on each other, why would it bother anyone as long as they keep to themselves and don't impose on everyone else a gag order contra the first amendment right of all to speak their own minds and experiences?

The alpha dog, remember, is so secure it yawns and doesn't even bark, has no need to harass its fellows since it is secure. The beta is the one that is neurotic and makes a big fuss. If one is strong, one doesn't need to enforce that and constantly prove one is strong. Just be strong and go about your business. That is what I find perplexing. They have tons of money and also a small but loyal following. Why they want to shoot themselves in the foot by chasing after every shadow is really confusing to me.

I noticed in the film that DM looked very good in the early days, around the time Hubbard died. The film showed a clip of him. In more recent clips he looks so thin or else unhealthy. He could stand to gain about 10 pounds and hopefully can afford non-GMO, organic food. He does not look as well in more recent clips as he did in the older ones....

Well, how do you think that came about?

Was it because of Hubbard's use of Rhetoric to persuade?

Didn't all religions do the same?

And what are but your 3 appeals of using Rhetoric?

1. You were a C/S, studied under David Mayo. That gives you Ethos. Credibility.

2. you use loigic in your posts.

3. I believe you have mentioned pathos, emotions, in your past posts.

All this is good, and appears to be a natural law, for which Hubbard used for nefarious reasons?

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: More Wisdom from Mama

From Mama:

"I'm reading a book that I heard about on NPR

Get What's Yours: The Secrets to Maxing Out Your Social Security

I'm reading the Kindle version on my iPhone. It cost $11.

These guys know Social Security inside and out.

They have lots of strategies for maximizing your take.

Everybody, whose last name isn't Buffett, needs to be reading this yesterday."

Lakey, for Mama

 

[SPsince83]

Re: The banality of evil

Hopefully he goes to see a regular doctor now and again even if one who also happens to be a Scientologist.....

Well, not to be mean about it (oh, ok, I DO want to be mean about it) I hope the fucker gets metastazing cancer and doesn't seek treatment and dies a slow painful death. Fuck that midget.

 

[Little David]

Re: The banality of evil

Well, not to be mean about it (oh, ok, I DO want to be mean about it) I hope the fucker gets metastazing cancer and doesn't seek treatment and dies a slow painful death. Fuck that midget.

If he does get cancer I recommend he goes to this Scientology Dr. for treatment with vitamins and Prolotherapy:

G. Megan Shields, M.D.

Dr. G. Megan Shields, M.D. graduated with honors from the College of William and Mary. She earned her medical degree from the Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University. She did her residency in family practice at the University of California Irvine.

Dr. Shields has received numerous awards for her contributions as an educator. She has also researched and published papers on the subject of chemical detoxification. Dr. Shields is now using Prolotherapy to treat patients with chronic pain.

She has been in private family practice since 1980.

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The banality of evil

Well, how do you think that came about?

Was it because of Hubbard's use of Rhetoric to persuade?

Didn't all religions do the same?

And what are but your 3 appeals of using Rhetoric?

1. You were a C/S, studied under David Mayo. That gives you Ethos. Credibility.

2. you use loigic in your posts.

3. I believe you have mentioned pathos, emotions, in your past posts.

All this is good, and appears to be a natural law, for which Hubbard used for nefarious reasons?

1. In my opinion, Hubbard did not use rhetoric, he used Crowleyian subtle communication, which I talked about in my blog post on Magick and the tech.

There are only two ways to sway others according to Plato. One is force, the other persuasion. Persuasion involves rhetoric....however the lines can blur between persuasion and force....so when does something cease to be rhetoric and persuasion and become control, force, hypnosis?


I don't appeal to any ethos acquired by association with David Mayo and my training under him since I have not talked to him since I was over the rainbow studying under him. For all I know he wants nothing to do with me, and therefore that appeal to authority would fail since he would discredit me. At least, we have had no connection in decades and I have no idea what he now believes about beings, souls, technology, or anything else, including CoS. I hope that any credibility I have is based on what I say and not who I was although I realize it all somehow ends up factoring in. Since I don't use any of their tech and find it all spurious, I would probably fail to be a poster child for the FZ or indies. On one hand I think they are in their rights to pursue their religious freedom as codified in U.S. law and I think that even the CoS has no authority there.

A question then arises for me of religious freedom for those departing, who are told they are SPs even though in my opinion they are asserting their own religious freedom, that is the freedom to believe different spiritual concepts than those officially sanctioned by CoS. Since I am closer in thinking to those who reject all of it, not just the CoS but all LRH "tech", I am baffled at all those who having left still think there is something to save there. However, I respect anyone's right to do what is best for themselves, which is more than CoS grants to each of those departing its ranks.

2. I use logic, which the way I define it is simply a way of organizing thought. Scientology has a logic, CoS has a bureaucratic logic, FZ has a logic, Islam has a logic, carpentry has a logic, there are countless logics and countless philosophies and countless systems, existing now and historically. The question then is to understand what logics are in play, what are the stakes. The logic I have used here is a non-Scilon logic, a sort of wog Western philosophy logic coupled with my admitted Christian beliefs which I generally don't talk about since I find those off-topic to the forum. They come into play only as an admission of my bias, i.e., that my logic is colored by a Christian ethos....

When using logic, I admit I have a large toolkit of logics to employ, not always apparent. I try to avoid attack and ad hominem, which generally the Church uses. The reason is that ad hominems are historically understood to be last resort arguments made when there are no substantive issues to pursue. That is, if you really have no case, try to discredit a person. This form of logic should never be used if at all possible to avoid since it has such a bad backfire effect. So much so that legal dictionaries make this very point. Only discredit a witness if you have no case.

Generally a lot of other tools can be used so why bother with that form of logic, the weakest type really, which borders on force and has little to do with rhetoric or persuasion.

There is very little logical in CoS and its techs so it is easy to find lines on which to deconstruct the assertions of being scientific and so on. Keep in mind that an ad hominem has to do with attacking specific persons. Criticizing a philosophy on specific grounds is completely different. Appalling actions taken by CoS add to the problems with their system because it reveals a purpose and effect which are not helpful to human advancement, their largest claim.

3. Pathos and emotions. Even though I use logic, I am much more interested in the consequences of pathos, the negative effects caused by certain beliefs and values. Logic always has a limit. Logics can be evil. The Nazis were logical and scientific in some of their endeavors and yet they were evil and their logical system of values harmed human beings. Their ultimate fate was to be understood as a malevolent force in history, a force to be studied for the purpose of avoiding those mistakes in future.

Logic often serves practical purposes. Its an ability human beings have to 'make sense of' things. This gift becomes scientific or becomes practical and has its basis in our ability to find reasons, to be reasoning beings.

But logic needs to have a benevolent loving master, logic must be at the service of doing good and being good, not at the service of being the strongest will, of doing what thou wilt or, to use the Scilon lingo, of being the 'total cause'.

What makes us human is a mixture of being logical / understanding of reasons and our vulnerability / authenticity /heart in relation to life and others. Our logic is fine in the context of heart. When logic becomes its own end and when it wants to control, be cause of others, of things, and when logic wants to rule itself and be in command of reality, then logic has gone off the rails. This is one reason why I think all the tech is flawed, it's a set of already confused logics mixed together with a form of selfish self-advancement. Proof of this is seen in the view of family taken by CoS. In all fascist systems, the family is the biggest impediment since it qualifies the control that the fascistic system would have over its herd.

Hubbard's nefarious 'reason' and reasoning was 'Do as thou wilt', another way to say 'be total cause'.

This topic of total cause and consciousness has been hashed over endlessly before LRH was born by philosophers, using other words. I won't repeat the stakes, the issues, the side paths and by ways of that complicated discussion. Only will close in stating that philosophy found that path to be a dead end for too many reasons to list. And that it was a path that had its birth in the death of god, that is, that at some point in the history of philosophy, during the Enlightenment period, the view of God as being at the center of philosophy faded. The new center became the I or consciousness. Hubbard's system is but another flavor at the baskin-robbins case, one of many iterations of paths consciousness, if it were a god, could take. Anyway, this is just a bit of my thinking. It's also possible I misunderstood what you were asking me, but I tried to answer anyway on some level.

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The banality of evil

If he does get cancer I recommend he goes to this Scientology Dr. for treatment with vitamins and Prolotherapy:

G. Megan Shields, M.D.

Dr. G. Megan Shields, M.D. graduated with honors from the College of William and Mary. She earned her medical degree from the Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University. She did her residency in family practice at the University of California Irvine.

Dr. Shields has received numerous awards for her contributions as an educator. She has also researched and published papers on the subject of chemical detoxification. Dr. Shields is now using Prolotherapy to treat patients with chronic pain.

She has been in private family practice since 1980.

As a former C/S I'd lay out a plan for DM but since I'm an SP I doubt it would be well-received!! LOLOL.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The banality of evil

1. In my opinion, Hubbard did not use rhetoric, he used Crowleyian subtle communication, which I talked about in my blog post on Magick and the tech.

There are only two ways to sway others according to Plato. One is force, the other persuasion. Persuasion involves rhetoric....however the lines can blur between persuasion and force....so when does something cease to be rhetoric and persuasion and become control, force, hypnosis?


I don't appeal to any ethos acquired by association with David Mayo and my training under him since I have not talked to him since I was over the rainbow studying under him. For all I know he wants nothing to do with me, and therefore that appeal to authority would fail since he would discredit me. At least, we have had no connection in decades and I have no idea what he now believes about beings, souls, technology, or anything else, including CoS. I hope that any credibility I have is based on what I say and not who I was although I realize it all somehow ends up factoring in. Since I don't use any of their tech and find it all spurious, I would probably fail to be a poster child for the FZ or indies. On one hand I think they are in their rights to pursue their religious freedom as codified in U.S. law and I think that even the CoS has no authority there.

A question then arises for me of religious freedom for those departing, who are told they are SPs even though in my opinion they are asserting their own religious freedom, that is the freedom to believe different spiritual concepts than those officially sanctioned by CoS. Since I am closer in thinking to those who reject all of it, not just the CoS but all LRH "tech", I am baffled at all those who having left still think there is something to save there. However, I respect anyone's right to do what is best for themselves, which is more than CoS grants to each of those departing its ranks.

2. I use logic, which the way I define it is simply a way of organizing thought. Scientology has a logic, CoS has a bureaucratic logic, FZ has a logic, Islam has a logic, carpentry has a logic, there are countless logics and countless philosophies and countless systems, existing now and historically. The question then is to understand what logics are in play, what are the stakes. The logic I have used here is a non-Scilon logic, a sort of wog Western philosophy logic coupled with my admitted Christian beliefs which I generally don't talk about since I find those off-topic to the forum. They come into play only as an admission of my bias, i.e., that my logic is colored by a Christian ethos....

When using logic, I admit I have a large toolkit of logics to employ, not always apparent. I try to avoid attack and ad hominem, which generally the Church uses. The reason is that ad hominems are historically understood to be last resort arguments made when there are no substantive issues to pursue. That is, if you really have no case, try to discredit a person. This form of logic should never be used if at all possible to avoid since it has such a bad backfire effect. So much so that legal dictionaries make this very point. Only discredit a witness if you have no case.

Generally a lot of other tools can be used so why bother with that form of logic, the weakest type really, which borders on force and has little to do with rhetoric or persuasion.

There is very little logical in CoS and its techs so it is easy to find lines on which to deconstruct the assertions of being scientific and so on. Keep in mind that an ad hominem has to do with attacking specific persons. Criticizing a philosophy on specific grounds is completely different. Appalling actions taken by CoS add to the problems with their system because it reveals a purpose and effect which are not helpful to human advancement, their largest claim.

3. Pathos and emotions. Even though I use logic, I am much more interested in the consequences of pathos, the negative effects caused by certain beliefs and values. Logic always has a limit. Logics can be evil. The Nazis were logical and scientific in some of their endeavors and yet they were evil and their logical system of values harmed human beings. Their ultimate fate was to be understood as a malevolent force in history, a force to be studied for the purpose of avoiding those mistakes in future.

Logic often serves practical purposes. Its an ability human beings have to 'make sense of' things. This gift becomes scientific or becomes practical and has its basis in our ability to find reasons, to be reasoning beings.

But logic needs to have a benevolent loving master, logic must be at the service of doing good and being good, not at the service of being the strongest will, of doing what thou wilt or, to use the Scilon lingo, of being the 'total cause'.

What makes us human is a mixture of being logical / understanding of reasons and our vulnerability / authenticity /heart in relation to life and others. Our logic is fine in the context of heart. When logic becomes its own end and when it wants to control, be cause of others, of things, and when logic wants to rule itself and be in command of reality, then logic has gone off the rails. This is one reason why I think all the tech is flawed, it's a set of already confused logics mixed together with a form of selfish self-advancement. Proof of this is seen in the view of family taken by CoS. In all fascist systems, the family is the biggest impediment since it qualifies the control that the fascistic system would have over its herd.

Hubbard's nefarious 'reason' and reasoning was 'Do as thou wilt', another way to say 'be total cause'.

This topic of total cause and consciousness has been hashed over endlessly before LRH was born by philosophers, using other words. I won't repeat the stakes, the issues, the side paths and by ways of that complicated discussion. Only will close in stating that philosophy found that path to be a dead end for too many reasons to list. And that it was a path that had its birth in the death of god, that is, that at some point in the history of philosophy, during the Enlightenment period, the view of God as being at the center of philosophy faded. The new center became the I or consciousness. Hubbard's system is but another flavor at the baskin-robbins case, one of many iterations of paths consciousness, if it were a god, could take. Anyway, this is just a bit of my thinking. It's also possible I misunderstood what you were asking me, but I tried to answer anyway on some level.

Thank you for this post, Maria!! I'm not sure what Gib was asking you but I am sure glad that he asked you what he did because it led you to answer him as you did. I learned a lot from reading your post and plan to reread it again to pick up some more insights. I don't want to detract from your post with a long winded reply so instead I will ask two short questions.

Question #1 - Do you have anything to say about "common sense"? If you have something to say about it, I'd be very interested and would like to dialogue with you and perhaps some others on this topic.

Question #2 - Are you familiar with Hubbard's Data Series? Among all Hubbard's writings, the Data Series is undoubtedly his singular effort to attempt to find answers to situations using a particular form of logic. I thought there was some merit in some of the "plus points" and "out points" as laid out in the Data Series and the Data Series Evaluator Course.
Lakey

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The banality of evil

Thank you for this post, Maria!! I'm not sure what Gib was asking you but I am sure glad that he asked you what he did because it led you to answer him as you did. I learned a lot from reading your post and plan to reread it again to pick up some more insights. I don't want to detract from your post with a long winded reply so instead I will ask two short questions.

Question #1 - Do you have anything to say about "common sense"? If you have something to say about it, I'd be very interested and would like to dialogue with you and perhaps some others on this topic.

Question #2 - Are you familiar with Hubbard's Data Series? Among all Hubbard's writings, the Data Series is undoubtedly his singular effort to attempt to find answers to situations using a particular form of logic. I thought there was some merit in some of the "plus points" and "out points" as laid out in the Data Series and the Data Series Evaluator Course.
Lakey

Question #2 - logic used in the data series
If you have specific quotes/positions from the data series I could comment on those. It's hard to comment in general since the answer would be so broad. If you have quotes at hand, please feel free to send them and I could 'analyze' them in response. Otherwise, I don't have a copy of those texts and have not seen them in years so I probably could not comment at the moment.

I CAN comment on the word outpoint as a concept but better to wait for a specific quote on the subject.

Question #1 - Common sense.
I think of common sense as a place where belief and reason sort of join in everyday experience. If we compared the common sense used by me or you or someone else, the three would vary considerably, yet each version could give satisfactory results, none would have to carry the burden of falsifiability insofar as the bar is lower for every day decisions than for scientific inquiries.

I think that common sense is an intersection of reason and belief in a Humean fashion...that is, the philosopher Hume's statement that even to posit the sun will rise the next day requires 'belief'. Science generally is not knowing what it knows but rather being acutely aware of what it does not know and that is what makes it science and not dogmatic religion.

So the sun coming out is axiomatic, and while to a degree science can predict the sun's daily arrival, it also cannot state this absolutely. There is a level at which experience is axiomatic and we have to believe and have faith in things like the floor will be there under my feet, my friends will pick up the phone, the sun will shine, I will have enough success as a lawyer or whatever profession such that I can afford to have this child etc. We make lots of choices in life based on the faith in certain assumptions which oftentimes are upended, not for nefarious reasons but simply because life has a way of always turning out a bit differently.

We use our reason and logic together with our faith and belief in existence, this is perhaps my existentialist side speaking. And for me, reason and logic should not take over or be the final arbiter, since they are cold and lacking heart and their only perspective is a form of neutral, autonomous distribution of facts. Humans are never neutral however and so we combine in our rational choices a mix of feelings and concerns. If one does not have faith in God they at least have faith in the solidity of experience, of the authenticity of certain aspects of their life. If one does have faith in God, this centers the human side. The heart softens the reasoning side, regardless of if one's beliefs are in God or simply in human existence and experience.

In the end, all human experience is axiomatic, cannot be falsified to a 100% degree of certainty, even the sciences. This is a wonderful thing since such lack of absoluteness of truth, this ambiguity in which one is not sure, allows for individual choices and actions and the uniqueness of each person. In the end each person takes a leap and takes a position, takes a stand. Even knowing a choice is not perfect yet it remains authentic since it was taken in good faith. (And this previous explains why the concept of MU is flawed, since it implies the natural state of not knowing is in error, which is opposite of the case.)

I saw some comments you made somewhere about the Old Testament God and I want to comment on them (possibly also in connection with common sense) but maybe by PM since I don't want to be off topic. (Unless you give the go ahead here.)

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Ironically, I would rather be ruled on the idiosyncratic basis of love and authentic living than on the 'standardness' of any tech....for the former could be heartfelt whereas the latter will never care about human beings whatsoever. The other version, standardness, is what is spoofed in the movie Brazil, the way in which bureaucracy and law end up becoming fascist heartless rulers of men.

 

[ILove2Lurk]

Re: The banality of evil

I don't appeal to any ethos acquired by association with David Mayo . . . .

At least, we have had no connection in decades and I have no idea what he now believes about beings, souls, technology, or anything else, including CoS.

For your reading pleasure:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...own-past-lives&p=766432&viewfull=1#post766432