$12,601.93 worth of Scientology materials

[Anonycat]

Silly Charmain and Gareth. They could have saved $12,061.93 by clicking on this link: http://www.mediafire.com/?2inr2ipumq2vku9

 

[The Great Zorg]

SNIP

Silly Charmain and Gareth. They could have saved $12,061.93 by clicking on this link: http://www.mediafire.com/?2inr2ipumq2vku9

I snipped the following from one of hubbard's courses regarding "Keeping Scientology Working (or "KSW")). I hope it is allowed to do so here using Fair Use to illustrate the core programming of scientology; the snip shows the continuous pounding of the "dangerous" consequences when every word of hubbard's spew is not followed:

"I recall one student who was squirreling on an Academy course and running a lot of off-beat whole track on other students after course hours. The academy students were in a state of electrification on all these new experiences and weren’t quickly brought under control and the student himself never was given the works on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten so they stuck. Subsequently, this student prevented another squirrel from being straightened out and his wife died of cancer resulting from physical abuse. A hard, tough instructor at that moment could have salvaged two squirrels and saved the life of a girl. But no, students had a right to do whatever they pleased.
Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology) only comes about from non-comprehension. Usually the non-comprehension is not of Scientology but some earlier contact with an off-beat humanoid practice which in its turn was not understood.
When people can’t get results from what they think is standard practice, they can be counted upon to squirrel to some degree. The most trouble in the past two years came from orgs where an executive in each could not assimilate straight Scientology under instruction in Scientology they were unable to define terms or demonstrate examples of principles. And the
orgs where they were got into plenty of trouble. And worse, it could not be straightened out easily because neither one of these people could or would duplicate instructions. hence, a debacle resulted in two places, directly traced to failures of instruction earlier. So proper instruction is vital. The D of T and his Instructors and all Scientology Instructors must be merciless in getting Four, Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten into effective action. That one student, dumb and impossible though he may seem and of no use to anyone, may yet some day be the cause of untold upset because nobody was interested enough to make sure Scientology got home to him.
With what we know now, there is no student we enrol who cannot be properly trained. As an instructor, one should be very alert to slow progress and should turn the sluggards inside out personally. No system will do it, only you or me with our sleeve rolled up can crack the back of bad studenting and we can only do it on an individual student, never on a whole class only. He’s slow = something is awful wrong. Take fast action to correct it. Don’t wait until next week. By then he’s got other messes stuck to him. If you can’t graduate them with their good sense appealed to and wisdom shining graduate them in such a state of shock they’ll have nightmares if they contemplate squirreling. Then experience will gradually bring about Three in them and they’ll know better than to chase butterflies when they should be auditing.
When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe- never permit an “open-minded” approach. If they’re going to quit let then quit fast. If they enroled, they’re aboard, and if they’re aboard, they’re here on the same terms as the rest of us- win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have been tough dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It’s a tough universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers survive-and even they have a hard time. We’ll survive because we are tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend, scared to enforce, we don’t make students into good Scientologists and that let’s everybody down.
When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in he eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she’ll win and we’ll all win. Humour her and we all die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, “You’re here so you’re a Scientologist Now we’re going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens. We’d rather have you dead than incapable.”
Fitting that into the economics of the situation and lack of adequate time and you see the cross we have to bear.

bold emphasis added

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

I snipped the following from one of hubbard's courses regarding "Keeping Scientology Working (or "KSW")). I hope it is allowed to do so here using Fair Use to illustrate the core programming of scientology; the snip shows the continuous pounding of the "dangerous" consequences when every word of hubbard's spew is not followed:

"I recall one student who was squirreling on an Academy course and running a lot of off-beat whole track on other students after course hours. The academy students were in a state of electrification on all these new experiences and weren’t quickly brought under control and the student himself never was given the works on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten so they stuck. Subsequently, this student prevented another squirrel from being straightened out and his wife died of cancer resulting from physical abuse. A hard, tough instructor at that moment could have salvaged two squirrels and saved the life of a girl. But no, students had a right to do whatever they pleased.
Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology) only comes about from non-comprehension. Usually the non-comprehension is not of Scientology but some earlier contact with an off-beat humanoid practice which in its turn was not understood.
When people can’t get results from what they think is standard practice, they can be counted upon to squirrel to some degree. The most trouble in the past two years came from orgs where an executive in each could not assimilate straight Scientology under instruction in Scientology they were unable to define terms or demonstrate examples of principles. And the
orgs where they were got into plenty of trouble. And worse, it could not be straightened out easily because neither one of these people could or would duplicate instructions. hence, a debacle resulted in two places, directly traced to failures of instruction earlier. So proper instruction is vital. The D of T and his Instructors and all Scientology Instructors must be merciless in getting Four, Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten into effective action. That one student, dumb and impossible though he may seem and of no use to anyone, may yet some day be the cause of untold upset because nobody was interested enough to make sure Scientology got home to him.
With what we know now, there is no student we enrol who cannot be properly trained. As an instructor, one should be very alert to slow progress and should turn the sluggards inside out personally. No system will do it, only you or me with our sleeve rolled up can crack the back of bad studenting and we can only do it on an individual student, never on a whole class only. He’s slow = something is awful wrong. Take fast action to correct it. Don’t wait until next week. By then he’s got other messes stuck to him. If you can’t graduate them with their good sense appealed to and wisdom shining graduate them in such a state of shock they’ll have nightmares if they contemplate squirreling. Then experience will gradually bring about Three in them and they’ll know better than to chase butterflies when they should be auditing.
When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe- never permit an “open-minded” approach. If they’re going to quit let then quit fast. If they enroled, they’re aboard, and if they’re aboard, they’re here on the same terms as the rest of us- win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have been tough dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It’s a tough universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers survive-and even they have a hard time. We’ll survive because we are tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend, scared to enforce, we don’t make students into good Scientologists and that let’s everybody down.
When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in he eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she’ll win and we’ll all win. Humour her and we all die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, “You’re here so you’re a Scientologist Now we’re going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens. We’d rather have you dead than incapable.”
Fitting that into the economics of the situation and lack of adequate time and you see the cross we have to bear.

bold emphasis added

Z, that is a really valuable post with the bolded sections as you have highlighted.

It reveals a lot.

Thanks!

 

[Royal Prince Xenu]

Thanks. Now I can go chasing butterflies.

 

[AlphOhm]

Me? I have other fish to fry.

 

[Truth&Honesty]

Thanks Zorg,

It does reveal a lot about what a 2 faced pathological liar Hubbard was.

I especially like the highlighted part "never permit an “open-minded” approach." - when it he had previously spouted "what's true for you, is true for you".

Has anyone ever listed out these cognitive dissonances before? It might make a very entertaining and eye-opening list!

 

[GreyWolf]

And what was Ron's problem with fried fish? I love fried fish.

 

[Out-Ethics]

Good post Zork. It's kinda like reading code or reading between the lines.

We should also add What was true for Scientology then is true for Scientology now and will always be true. Translation - it destroyed and made robots back then, it still does and if allowed to will do so in the future.

 

[AnonyMary]

Silly Charmain and Gareth. They could have saved $12,061.93 by clicking on this link: http://www.mediafire.com/?2inr2ipumq2vku9

Silly anonycat, The cost was for the training, not the materials.

Never the less, they was ripped off........

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

Now, the amount of tone arm action you would get doing this would make you blink, because it’s none. And you could run some hot process on you that had been run by some auditor and which gave him good TA—this process that has been run, give you good TA, you see, whenthe auditor was auditing it—then you sit down there with a one-hand electrode while the process is still hot and run the commands on yourself, you’re going to get for a moment the residual of the auditing. That is to say, the auditor will have stirred up enough so that you’ll see a little bit of charge go off, and then your tone arm is going to go dead—and it’s going to stay dead.


Now, the reason for this has to do with the thetan in this universe. Now, he has begun to consider himself MEST, and he’s begun to consider himself mass. And the being who considers himself mass, of course, responds to the laws of electronics and the laws of Newton, and is actually incapable of generating very much, you see, or—which is what we’re interested in—arising very much. There’s not very much going to disappear there in the way of mass. And this is a very discouraging sort of an activity.

Now, I have had to explore this particular field of auditing—self-auditing, because most anybody does it, and so forth—and what was this all about. And I have even gotten ambitious enough to run an actual GPM, bangity-bangity, bangity-bang, on a one-hand electrode. That makes your hair stand on end. Well, it made my hair stand on end. And my auditor fished me out. It didn’t kill me, I was able to breathe afterwards—that is, if I didn’t move much. But the same GPM, run with the same items and so forth, would produce upwards to 175 TA divisions, down. And the GPM, self-audited, produced 2.

He could have reduced all of that into just one sentence

You just got fucked out of $12,601.93, son.

 

[Freeminds]

He could have reduced all of that into just one sentence

You just got fucked out of $12,601.93, son.

The Hubbardspew makes a lot more sense if you consider it statistically.

Like all Hubbardspew, it is worthless and meaningless, but you might want to keep in mind that the most frequently occurring word... is run.

 

[In present time]

Re: SNIP

I snipped the following from one of hubbard's courses regarding "Keeping Scientology Working (or "KSW")). I hope it is allowed to do so here using Fair Use to illustrate the core programming of scientology; the snip shows the continuous pounding of the "dangerous" consequences when every word of hubbard's spew is not followed:

"I recall one student who was squirreling on an Academy course and running a lot of off-beat whole track on other students after course hours. The academy students were in a state of electrification on all these new experiences and weren’t quickly brought under control and the student himself never was given the works on Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten so they stuck. Subsequently, this student prevented another squirrel from being straightened out and his wife died of cancer resulting from physical abuse. A hard, tough instructor at that moment could have salvaged two squirrels and saved the life of a girl. But no, students had a right to do whatever they pleased.
Squirreling (going off into weird practices or altering Scientology) only comes about from non-comprehension. Usually the non-comprehension is not of Scientology but some earlier contact with an off-beat humanoid practice which in its turn was not understood.
When people can’t get results from what they think is standard practice, they can be counted upon to squirrel to some degree. The most trouble in the past two years came from orgs where an executive in each could not assimilate straight Scientology under instruction in Scientology they were unable to define terms or demonstrate examples of principles. And the
orgs where they were got into plenty of trouble. And worse, it could not be straightened out easily because neither one of these people could or would duplicate instructions. hence, a debacle resulted in two places, directly traced to failures of instruction earlier. So proper instruction is vital. The D of T and his Instructors and all Scientology Instructors must be merciless in getting Four, Seven, Eight, Nine and Ten into effective action. That one student, dumb and impossible though he may seem and of no use to anyone, may yet some day be the cause of untold upset because nobody was interested enough to make sure Scientology got home to him.
With what we know now, there is no student we enrol who cannot be properly trained. As an instructor, one should be very alert to slow progress and should turn the sluggards inside out personally. No system will do it, only you or me with our sleeve rolled up can crack the back of bad studenting and we can only do it on an individual student, never on a whole class only. He’s slow = something is awful wrong. Take fast action to correct it. Don’t wait until next week. By then he’s got other messes stuck to him. If you can’t graduate them with their good sense appealed to and wisdom shining graduate them in such a state of shock they’ll have nightmares if they contemplate squirreling. Then experience will gradually bring about Three in them and they’ll know better than to chase butterflies when they should be auditing.
When somebody enrols, consider he or she has joined up for the duration of the universe- never permit an “open-minded” approach. If they’re going to quit let then quit fast. If they enroled, they’re aboard, and if they’re aboard, they’re here on the same terms as the rest of us- win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists. The finest organizations in history have been tough dedicated organizations. Not one namby-pamby bunch of panty-waist dilettantes have ever made anything. It’s a tough universe. The social veneer makes it seem mild. But only the tigers survive-and even they have a hard time. We’ll survive because we are tough and are dedicated. When we do instruct somebody properly he becomes more and more tiger. When we instruct half-mindedly and are afraid to offend, scared to enforce, we don’t make students into good Scientologists and that let’s everybody down.
When Mrs. Pattycake comes to us to be taught, turn that wandering doubt in he eye into a fixed, dedicated glare and she’ll win and we’ll all win. Humour her and we all die a little. The proper instruction attitude is, “You’re here so you’re a Scientologist Now we’re going to make you into an expert auditor no matter what happens. We’d rather have you dead than incapable.”
Fitting that into the economics of the situation and lack of adequate time and you see the cross we have to bear.

bold emphasis added

wow, that cancer command was built right in. goodbye again to all my scn friends who died of cancer, well and above the "wog" statistics. perhaps "he" was already noticing the lopsided cancer stats? or did "he" put them there? I won't wait for the day for a proper study to be done, but so many of my friends died in their 20's and 30's on scn. I am in my 50's now and have not seen any drop off like that at any age since. cancer resulting from physical abuse? somehow I don't think "he" is talking about a black eye, he might be talking about stress, malnourishment and lack of sleep over long periods?dead dead death dead. scn=WIN.

 

[Loohan]

If they enroled, they’re aboard, and if they’re aboard, they’re here on the same terms as the rest of us- win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists.

I think it was Hoaxie who pointed out the absurdity of this "recruitment" method.
Nobody looks the newbie in the eye and asks them to become a hard-core Scientologist. They don't tell you that if you buy that first course, maybe the HQS Course or SRD or whatever, that BAM! you will then be expected to be there on the same terms as the rest of the scios even if it kills you.

No, they sell a course as something to get the cool benefits of Scn.
So you sit down and start the course. First thing is KSW Series 1.
If they enroled, they’re aboard, and if they’re aboard, they’re here on the same terms as the rest of us- win or die in the attempt. Never let them be half-minded about being Scientologists.

Kind of skipped a gradient in the contract. At that point, virtually no one will walk out and say This is nuts! Nobody asked me! Nobody told me of the level of commitment expected before i can do this course.
No, because they see all these cultists around them radiating certainty that Scn is IT! and they can't help but grudgingly respect the dedication, especially if they've already had key-outs on some intro service. Besides, they paid a bunch of money for this course, they are interested and curious and looking forward to learning the Great Truths and becoming more able.
So we kinda got sucked into having to agree with this piece of paper because we have to star-rate it before we can get to the good stuff. Besides, who wants to look like a namby-pamby candy-ass wussy paintywaist dilettante.
But no-one ever procured our agreement in a straightforward manner. Nobody said it would be forbidden to be half-minded about being a Scientologist. Or forbidden to not identify yourself as a Scientologist. Nobody made us sign a billion year contract, before enrolling us.