<snip>
For myself, what I would like is something like this: in the same way that you believe you understand Marty's group, they I'm sure feel they understand you - dramatizing, stuck in an incident with lots of "bypassed charge" so most anything you say can be ignored with impunity.
Hey, I used the term "Marty's Group" to quote you. I actually don't understand Marty's group at all, as I've said on many other posts prior to now. I also don't put all in that 'group' in the same box - I read what they post on his blog, and it's clear that there is diversity among them, just as there is here on ESMB.
For the record, when the St Pete's Times articles came out, I was giving Marty the benefit of the doubt, and waiting for more. It wasn't until after that when he started posting lots on his blog, that my 'hope' in regard to what he could do, went down the girgler.....I was 'hoping' for other things, but besides that, I didn't expect what he started coming up with. Since that time, it seems to have gone from bad to worse, and seeing people rally behind Marty, has been quite disturbing.
I wasn't in the SO. I don't have "BPC" on any INT Execs for anything they've done in the past. I don't 'hate' anybody, and as strange as it seems to some, I don't regret my time in Scn. It would probably be different if I was in the SO, but besides a bit here and there, I didn't cop too much 'personally'....well, at least not as much as many did and not as much as many still
are.
My "charge" is on what's happening now, and in Scn terms, it's a "flow 3" thing. What has gone down within the Scn ranks, is still being permitted to happen now, and watching someone promote and/or protect an organization (based on a lie), which has caused and is causing so much harm to so many, creates new "charge" - it's not about "BPC" at all!
It would be nice if they were able to look at criticism of the CofS and Scientology and at least ponder the validity of it with the possibility of correcting it. And it would be nice if critics could allow the possibility that what Marty is doing could if nothing else be a step towards making CofS less abusive. Baby steps, maybe, but still.
He's in a position where he doesn't need to use baby steps. He's in a position where he could blow it out of the water. By doing so, thousands of people could start to get their lives back, and those who'd want to pursue Scn tech as a self help thing would be free to do so.
It's not just Marty you know. There are other people like Dan Koon involved, who I've never heard anyone say anything bad about.
Dan Koon isn't putting himself in the limelight giving a false picture (not that I've seen anyway), nor promoting an organization that he knows to be as one which is destructive.
I suspect both groups could have greater understanding, and while I don't think total acceptance could ever happen, I think that at least enough understanding to avoid major conflicts could eventually go a long ways towards some positive changes made in CofS, like the demise of DM, maybe even the dissolution of CofS as an entity in favor of a grass roots system, which would make it much more difficult for an abusive horror to group up around Scientology again.
This is where we couldn't/wouldn't agree - There should never have been a CofS. The CofS was and has always been a cloak to hide behind and one which protects a machine that is a con and is harmful. While the CofS and the SO exists, so will the abuses.
)
