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

[Auditor's Toad]

The Americans have polluted me with coffee I'm now off tea . . . . tho my Sweet Virginia is trying to get me back to the healthy green tea variety. I'm kicking and screaming on that one . . . it tastes like shit, you know? (to quote that internationally known, famous to all, other Ozzie, Crocodile Dundee )

I find my coffee gives me that early morning boost that keeps me civil. Without it I can frazzle, and it also on occasion helps unsettling encounters during the day. Better than booze and nicotine, no?

Tho for sophisticated genteels, tea is a good way to go

R

But for appearances can I not eat shit and smile ?

And as long as wine is not booze, I'd agree.

And I'm still on a no alcohol kick for another couple of months.

I do like having my wine !

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Rodger is one of the people I'd like one day to be able to sit down and have a chat with as he seems like one of those rare people I'd treasure be able to say " I got to know him !". ...

I, for one, hope you get that opportunity. I hope even more to be there when it occurs.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Auditor's Toad]

I, for one, hope you get that opportunity. I hope even more to be there when it occurs.


Mark A. Baker

You'd like to watch me listen?

Well. I get your point.

THAT would be on hell of a feat on my part - LOL !

 

[Mark A. Baker]

How could someone get all the way to OTV and do the L's without any case gain? How would they ever get advanced to those levels without making the gain on each level getting there? I don't understand. :confused2:

At a small party I was attending last evening at the Thomas' household this very question was discussed. In particular one highly placed old timer remarked with rather sardonic humor how so many 'ots' would remark on 'how they got by the examiner was ...' and would then relate their own particular 'fool the examiner technique'.

Obviously, less time spent 'fooling the examiner' and more time spent honestly processing as per the auditor's code would have produced far more in the way of individual benefit. Unfortunately increasingly over the years, and especially although not exclusively during the Miscavige years, 'getting by the examiner' has been perceived to be a necessary 'survival trait' for those who have remained with the Co$.


Mark A. Baker

 

[FoTi]

Olska,
Your post that seems to be being objected to - and imaginary things attributed to - was, IMHO, one of the most accurate posts I have ever seen.

I'm no idea what ( well I'm not going to post ) what is currently going on with that poster but I've decided to just give that one a ' Thank you for telling me that " and letting it dance alone until its music stops.

'jus sayin'

Oh, I wonder if being cross posts are now being routinely made between this Apollo '73 thread and the Candy Swanson about Hubbard thread that the time has come to merge them - someone seems to be wanting them merged.

It's very confusing to have stuff being posted here about a complaint from something going on, on another thread. It seems to me like the complaints should be made on the thread that they apply to, so that one can follow the conversation. But I guess people can pee wherever they want on ESMB.

 

[lkwdblds]

I am assuming the Freezoners are not fools.

Not necessarily true, Lakey. One could as well argue, and perhaps with better reason, that in some cases the agreement to address a group is for the purpose of correcting obvious outpoints in the group as it is currently constituted. Not so much an 'endorsement' of the group as it is as it might be an attempt at 'redress' of present mispractice.

Of course, I certainly don't intend to put words in Roger's mouth as to exactly why he originally agreed to address the convention. I am merely pointing out that your conclusion is not necessarily a correct one.


Mark A. Baker

MAB, as I said in the first part of my post which you are replying to, the Freezone management would not hire Roger to speak if they knew that there was any likelyhood of his speaking negatively about their organization. There must have been a Commitee or some leadership for putting on the convention. They paid to rent the hall, probably to provide some refreshments and to promote the event. Certainly they would not be so foolish as to not know in advance what Roger was going to speak about. Certainly, when a speaker is retained, a convention committee would review with the speaker what is okay for him to say and what isn't.

You were there, are you saying that the commitee gave Roger a total carte blanche as to what he could say and how far he could go in speaking negatively about LRH? If you say it is so, then I will accept that. If it is so, it doesn't reflect very well on Freezone leadership.

Even so, for the 90+ percent of Freezoner's who did not go, it is very likely most assumed that Roger's being there showed that he supported the group or at least that he was not overly critical of them.
Lakey

 

[FoTi]

 

[lkwdblds]

I agree wholeheartedly!

It's very confusing to have stuff being posted here about a complaint from something going on, on another thread. It seems to me like the complaints should be made on the thread that they apply to, so that one can follow the conversation. But I guess people can pee wherever they want on ESMB.

I made two posts which appeared on both threads and the error of my ways was pointed out to me and I quit doing that.

Note: Toad's post directly above on butthurt was also posted first on the Sharone thread.

Olska posted her psychiatric analysis of me on both threads simultaneously as well.
Lakey

 

[Auditor's Toad]

It's very confusing to have stuff being posted here about a complaint from something going on, on another thread. It seems to me like the complaints should be made on the thread that they apply to, so that one can follow the conversation. But I guess people can pee wherever they want on ESMB.

Well, I think the person who started cross posting wants to have merged his mighty Apollo 73 thread with the Candy Swanson about Hubbard thread. Why is he moving that way? Ask him

That is the only thing that makes sense - and I hope it happens !

 

[Mark A. Baker]

MAB, as I said in the first part of my post which you are replying to, the Freezone management would not hire Roger to speak if they knew that there was any likelyhood of his speaking negatively about their organization. There must have been a Commitee or some leadership for putting on the convention. They paid to rent the hall, probably to provide some refreshments and to promote the event. Certainly they would not be so foolish as to not know in advance what Roger was going to speak about. Certainly, when a speaker is retained, a convention committee would review with the speaker what is okay for him to say and what isn't.

You are making way too many & mostly inaccurate assumptions about the way the convention was organized. There is no such thing as a 'Freezone Management'. Aida was the primary organizer of the event. She received some assistance from others, but made all final decisions and most of the necessary arrangements.

When Roger agreed to speak not only was he given carte blanche as to his topic but he was in fact designated the keynote speaker. He was a bit surprised by this, but rose to the occasion beautifully.

I am not in a position to discuss Roger's normal reimbursement or fee schedules but he did not receive any reimbursement of which I am aware. Certainly he did not receive anything sufficient to cover all the expenses which he incurred as a result of his trip. He was incredibly generous with his time, knowledge, and spirit. I for one am immensely grateful for all that he contributed to the occasion. I know I am not alone in my gratitude to him.


Helpful hint: you really do tend to make far too many assumptions in the body of many of your posts, as in this to which I reply. As here, such assumptions are often inaccurate or inappropriate to state. You would do well to closely examine the content for your posts in the future so as to identify where exactly you are 'jumping to a conclusion' and where the facts on which you rely are exactly known to you to be true.


Mark A. Baker

 

[RogerB]

But for appearances can I not eat shit and smile ?

And as long as wine is not booze, I'd agree.

And I'm still on a no alcohol kick for another couple of months.

I do like having my wine !

Life without wine is not only miserable, but bloody silly!

(Says he enjoying a magnificent Zin!)

R

 

[paradox]

:confused2: Sure hope the OP didn't derail this thread.

Surely you don't mean the good ole' days aboard the Apollo '73 ....

 

[FoTi]

The Americans have polluted me with coffee I'm now off tea . . . . tho my Sweet Virginia is trying to get me back to the healthy green tea variety. I'm kicking and screaming on that one . . . it tastes like shit, you know? (to quote that internationally known, famous to all, other Ozzie, Crocodile Dundee )

I find my coffee gives me that early morning boost that keeps me civil. Without it I can frazzle, and it also on occasion helps unsettling encounters during the day. Better than booze and nicotine, no?

Tho for sophisticated genteels, tea is a good way to go

R

Did you ever try olive leaf tea?

Fill a big crock pot with water. Take a hand full of olive leaves broken up very fine, put it in the water and let it brew for 12-18 hrs. Let it cool, bottle and refrigerate. Heat up again as needed. It's very alkaline. I drink it every morning, before breakfast, instead of coffee. It's kind of soothing to me. Although I love the taste of coffee, it jangles my nerves. Olive leaf tea has a similar sort of taste.....not the same, just similar. It's a nice substitute, and has more health benefits than coffee.

You can read about it here.... http://www.the-color-of-tea.com/benefits-of-olive-leaf-tea.html

I wouldn't buy it at the above link....it's too expensive. I buy mine, by the pound, either from Pacific Botanicals in Oregon http://www.pacificbotanicals.com/ , or from Mountain Rose Herbs http://www.mountainroseherbs.com/ , depending on who has the best price at the time when I order......it's a lot less expensive from these sources.

 

[Ted]

My stuff, what was addressed did seem to erase. It's gone, I don't even know what it was and it hasn't ever come back again, in 37 years. But in blowing the charge, I did not retain the memory, but without the harmful charge, as LRH said it would be. Everything left and there ain't no memory there about anything. It seemed to me like it totally as-ised, just like it was supposed to. If it didn't erase or as-is, where did it go?

Scn theory: Every valence has a bank of its own. Blow the valence, blow the bank, nothing left to retain except perhaps the memory of the session.

 

[RogerB]

My stuff, what was addressed did seem to erase. It's gone, I don't even know what it was and it hasn't ever come back again, in 37 years. But in blowing the charge, I did not retain the memory, but without the harmful charge, as LRH said it would be. Everything left and there ain't no memory there about anything. It seemed to me like it totally as-ised, just like it was supposed to. If it didn't erase or as-is, where did it go?

FoTi,

Well, OK.

I'm not in a position to, and nor would I, counter or invalidate your perception on this.

Later when I get to addressing this subject in full, I'll be addressing the point that (in my view) we retain knowledge of our experiences . . . now, it may get variously, forgotten, occluded or buried . . . but knowledge is knowledge, and it can be recovered.

Processing changes the condition of the record of our experiences . . . it changes such from negative life-force to positive-life force . . . . you do not lose the life-force

And knowledge is positive life-force.

Rog

 

[FoTi]

FoTi,

OK

Not Fair !

You just made me PIMP

Now I have to go change.

Damn it !

Is that what PIMP means? I always thought it meant something else. My vocabulary seems to be increasing here on ESMB.

 

[paradox]

Yes Foti, I could do as you suggest ... or I could ignore your advice completely and continue to post to the lurkers and newly out and I think I'll probably do that, because it matters more (to me) than you or your new guru matter.

Your bashing people here, might be fun for you and something that you enjoy doing, but is not going to help the lurkers or the newly out.

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=559579&postcount=1

Exactly. It isn't about bashing people but is about what they post here on ESMB. The above link you posted to ethicsbait's powerful post is a prime example.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Fantastic post! Yes, Sharone has been severely hurt. So has Markus. These are two very fine people. I have compassion for them and if they lash out a bit they have good reason to do so. Making them wrong for doing so is not a proper response by any means.

I actually got into so very productive dialogue with Markus and of course Gottabrain. ItoldyouIwastrouble may also be added to that list.

VC, I can't tell you how much i appreciate your repudiation of the attacks on Terril and Olsa's amateurish psychanalysis of me. She suggests I probably have a heavy drug case but my total street drug history is very short. I smoked 3 joints of marijuana in 1969, one year before joining Scn and 1 joint in 1974, just after leaving the S.O. and returning home. These instances all occured at parties I attended where I accepted joints offered by others.

The rest of Olska's analysis is equally far afield except for her suggesting an addiction to posting on the internet. There may be an element of truth there. The rest of the analysis is pretty close to 180 degrees wrong.

Your clarity and objectivity unfortunately seems to be rare on Sharone's thread. I commend you for it and ask you for more posts. Thank you for coming to this thread to clear things up.
Lakey

My pleasure, darlin'. No one should be psychoanalyzing other contributors. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Surely points of disagreement should be able to be expressed without telling people what they are like. Time and time again I've seen things like this. I've seen people who do it get royally pissed off when the recipient of their "advice", such as it was, responded with anything smacking of either self defense or agreement.

It's really no different from the mugger I once confronted. I caught him with his hand in my purse and I raised HELL. I was not low key. And he was absolutely furious with me. "No need to make a federal case out of it", quoth he. And when I continued to berate him, telling the crowd around me what he had done, he threatened to beat me up. But if he hadn't initiated things by committing a criminal act, that exchange that was so distasteful to him would never have taken place.

This is something a lot of people don't get.

 

[Ted]

FoTi,

Well, OK.

I'm not in a position to, and nor would I, counter or invalidate your perception on this.

Later when I get to addressing this subject in full, I'll be addressing the point that (in my view) we retain knowledge of our experiences . . . now, it may get variously, forgotten, occluded or buried . . . but knowledge is knowledge, and it can be recovered.

Processing changes the condition of the record of our experiences . . . it changes such from negative life-force to positive-life force . . . . you do not lose the life-force

And knowledge is positive life-force.

Rog

Hubbard gave "charge" a bad connotation.

But, life cannot be lived without charge. Charge is life force--sometimes mismanaged, but life force nevertheless.

Charge as Scios know it is to be gotten rid of.

By examination, by review, a being is able to (re)evaluate its relationship to an experience or terminal, and bring the life force known as charge into a useful, desirable state.

It doesn't take much shift in perception to step out of the Hubbardian box. Such a step opens up a while new world of relationships and understandings.

 

[Auditor's Toad]

Is that what PIMP means? I always thought it meant something else. My vocabulary seems to be increasing here on ESMB.

Piss In My P nts