AO IS AT IT AGAIN. DROPS DOX ON FEMALE ANON

bluewiggirl

Patron Meritorious
I disagree that it's religious bigotry to say that the tech does not work as advertised. That some people are satisfied with what is delivered is not sufficient proof at all for the outrageous claims made by Hubbard and later Miscavidge or even some of the groups in the Free Zone. To say the tech never works for anyone is a very narrow and inaccurate view, but the subject is still one of debate even amongst the ex-sci community, so you can't really blame people for choosing a side.
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
I disagree that it's religious bigotry to say that the tech does not work as advertised.

Has anybody actually argued this point, that it is religious bigotry to say that "the tech does not work as advertised"??? :confused2:

In my view for someone to claim that the tech does work as advertised
is absolutely fraudulent (or delusional). I believe an overwhelming majority of people practicing scientology in the freezone would acknowledge that while they get gains, that they are not as was originally advertised by Hubbard. And starting your own religion as Hubbard did shouldn't protect the CoS from using fraudulent bait and switch marketing techniques. As Senator X pointed out in Australia, this isn't about their
beliefs or limiting their beliefs, it is about their behavior. It is about the law, and no one is above it, even the CoS. And pointing out the fraud of it all certainly doesn't make one a religious bigot.
 

Smurf

Gold Meritorious SP
Good shore story, Smurf. Just not good enough. You kind of showed your whole hand on this one.

snip of bawwww....

You've burned some more bridges on this one, Smurf. Someday you may become human again. But it's not looking real good for you so far.

Living proof that critics are like assholes... everyone has one. Have a nice day.
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
Has anybody actually argued this point, that it is religious bigotry to say that "the tech does not work as advertised"??? :confused2:

In my view for someone to claim that the tech does work as advertised
is absolutely fraudulent (or delusional). I believe an overwhelming majority of people practicing scientology in the freezone would acknowledge that while they get gains, that they are not as was originally advertised by Hubbard. And starting your own religion as Hubbard did shouldn't protect the CoS from using fraudulent bait and switch marketing techniques. As Senator X pointed out in Australia, this isn't about their
beliefs or limiting their beliefs, it is about their behavior. It is about the law, and no one is above it, even the CoS. And pointing out the fraud of it all certainly doesn't make one a religious bigot.

This has nothing to do with so-called religious bigotry. Scientology (Hubbard) claimed that Scientology is a science. Science is not supposed to be religion. Scientific inquiry is supposed to be open for peer review and criticism.

The religious bigotry accusation is bogus.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
PTStype4--there's a lot of good criticism out there. A lot of valid criticism. Most is, in fact. And there are many good effective critics.

But there are critics who are bigots much of the time and there are criticisms that are bigoted. I've seen it. This type is in the minority but not so small a minority that it's difficult to perceive. It would not be at all difficult to locate and point out bigotry amongst critics, past and present.
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
PTStype4--there's a lot of good criticism out there. A lot of valid criticism. Most is, in fact. And there are many good effective critics.

But there are critics who are bigots much of the time and there are criticisms that are bigoted. I've seen it. This type is in the minority but not so small a minority that it's difficult to perceive. It would not be at all difficult to locate and point out bigotry amongst critics, past and present.


Hmmmmm.....I actually agree with all that you said here, and when I went back and read what I posted I can see why someone would think otherwise. I do know people who are religious bigots and have a problem not with just scientology but religion in general. So to call them religious bigots would be correct. However, if the CoS doesn't distinguish between these people and others who are critics (but not religious bigots) and publicly mislabels some as bigots, they could be guilty of defamation, which is a criminal offense in some jurisdictions.

In my opinion the CoS, per their own policy has to respond to charges against them (such as the ones in Australia currently) by deception, including by painting their critics in the most negative way possible, whether it's true or not. And one of the ways is by playing this "religious bigot" card. The people who got placed on the RFW page for "attacking religious freedom" are not chosen based upon their views toward religion.
They are the enemies of the CoS and are put on there to discredit them because of that, but their religious views have nothing to do with the real reason they are put onto RFW.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
In every walk of life there are all sorts of people. There are earnest fervent political activists who are good people and who are fuckheads and who want to hurt others. Same with the Scn critic scene. Same with any activism, any criticism. Some critics are fuckheads. Most are not. DO NOT make the mistake of always assuming that the enemy of your enemy is your friend.
 

supafreak

Patron Meritorious
AO, AGP - *mega eyeroll* Nuff said.

Every cell has its token arsehole that won't go away, even though that person knows that the other Anons dislike him/her. AGP and AO keep crossing the line, though. I hope the Anon who was doxxed presses charges against AO.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
In every walk of life there are all sorts of people. There are earnest fervent political activists who are good people and who are fuckheads and who want to hurt others. Same with the Scn critic scene. Same with any activism, any criticism. Some critics are fuckheads. Most are not. DO NOT make the mistake of always assuming that the enemy of your enemy is your friend.
So very true VC :thumbsup:
 

Smurf

Gold Meritorious SP
AO, AGP - *mega eyeroll* Nuff said.

Every cell has its token arsehole that won't go away, even though that person knows that the other Anons dislike him/her. AGP and AO keep crossing the line, though. I hope the Anon who was doxxed presses charges against AO.

That's not going to happen. I spoke to the lady who was doxed and she is a wonderful, down-to-earth lady with steel balls who just rolls her eyes at AO's menacing behavior.

She also recognizes that the video AGP made showing him & AO shmoozing with Scientology hander Patty Baber (which Patty also filmed for OSA) will come back to haunt him when his civil lawsuit against Scientology picks up speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ICFx1wDucs&feature=player_embedded
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
It IS bogus, and when the CoS plays this religious bigotry card in attempt to discredit their critics I am hoping that some will take legal action (civil and/or criminal) against them for defamation.

I was agreeing with you.
I reread my post and realize that I didn't make that clear.
 

apple

Patron Meritorious
In watching these protest clips, seems to me that Scn. has changed their way of handling the protesters. Instead of confronting and belittling them they are ignoring them. Maybe this is what sets off some people when they are ignored.

Maybe this is a strategic move of the cult. To ignore someone into boredom where they feel they are no longer having an effect. Then they leave. Or to ignore so the protester may become agitated enough to make an ass out of themselves and to be filmed in doing so.
 

SchwimmelPuckel

Genuine Meatball
Hmm.. Not having read this whole thread about infighting.. And realizing that I probably wouldn't understand WTF it's about even if I did..

However, I do get the impression that Anon Orange and Angry Gay Pope is picking these silly infights and creating a shitstorm of bevildering confusion that would make OSA jealouz!

We don't need that!

I think even AO and AGP can agree.. Unless they're OSA fools on the Hill 10.. In which case the they do what Hubbards policies says.. But I don't think they are.

:grouch:
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
Hmm.. Not having read this whole thread about infighting.. And realizing that I probably wouldn't understand WTF it's about even if I did..

However, I do get the impression that Anon Orange and Angry Gay Pope is picking these silly infights and creating a shitstorm of bevildering confusion that would make OSA jealouz!

We don't need that!

I think even AO and AGP can agree.. Unless they're OSA fools on the Hill 10.. In which case the they do what Hubbards policies says.. But I don't think they are.

:grouch:
They are really tedious.
 
Top