What's new
By:
Filters

ESMB and The Freezone - let's have it out!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Alanzo said:
I say it's good to have freezoners, and even Churchies, on the board.

The thinking can be examined, and their behavior can be discussed and questioned.

That's something we could never do inside the cult.

And, some freezoners welcome this examination and questioning.

It's good to see that, too.
Click to expand...

I agree, Alanzo. I should have said some of the freezoners and tech pushers. I was talking about the ones who seem to have an agenda other than discussing, examining and questioning.

I was still a scientologist when I got on the Internet, and after reading the truth about Hubbard and where he really got the "tech" he plagiarized and polluted and having the opportunity to discuss, examine and question scientology with other people (which as you say we could never do in the cult) I finally had enough information to make up my own mind.

In scientology you didn't have all the facts, so could not really evaluate anything.

I highly recommend going back to school, even if just part time at a community college or whatever. It becomes very obvious why LRH did not want any psychs or reporters or any of the other "A to J" types in scientology, people would figure out where he plagiarized his ideas from, and how he mixed them up with hypnotism and satanism and all his other insanity to create a mind trapping, soul raping bridge to insanity.

All it takes to get Hubbard out of your head is to unravel his lies. I will never again believe everything I read, but at least I know now that the world is a lot bigger and better than Hubbard made it seem. Hubbard did not have all the answers. Nobody does. But we can have a lot of fun discovering things and appreciating the world around us.

We don't have to save the world or "clear the planet" or audit BTs or the 4th dynamic engram anymore. We just get to live our own lives and find our own way, not Hubbards way.
 
Ladybird said:
I agree, Alanzo. I should have said some of the freezoners and tech pushers. I was talking about the ones who seem to have an agenda other than discussing, examining and questioning.

I was still a scientologist when I got on the Internet, and after reading the truth about Hubbard and where he really got the "tech" he plagiarized and polluted and having the opportunity to discuss, examine and question scientology with other people (which as you say we could never do in the cult) I finally had enough information to make up my own mind.

In scientology you didn't have all the facts, so could not really evaluate anything.

I highly recommend going back to school, even if just part time at a community college or whatever. It becomes very obvious why LRH did not want any psychs or reporters or any of the other "A to J" types in scientology, people would figure out where he plagiarized his ideas from, and how he mixed them up with hypnotism and satanism and all his other insanity to create a mind trapping, soul raping bridge to insanity.

All it takes to get Hubbard out of your head is to unravel his lies. I will never again believe everything I read, but at least I know now that the world is a lot bigger and better than Hubbard made it seem. Hubbard did not have all the answers. Nobody does. But we can have a lot of fun discovering things and appreciating the world around us.

We don't have to save the world or "clear the planet" or audit BTs or the 4th dynamic engram anymore. We just get to live our own lives and find our own way, not Hubbards way.
Click to expand...

What really angers me the most is how entheta and unenlightened Hubbard really was. In his lectures he knocks philosophers, alters what they said, then says what they really said as though he thought of it.
I don't know many non-Scientologists who have a more negative view of the world than most Scientologists that I know. and this includes the Freezoners that I personally know. They are generally bigoted, conspiratorial, know besty, arrongant, lacking in compassion--Hey wait! Maybe the tech does work!

The Anabaptist Jacques
 
acertainratio said:
This thread is just so totally funny.

Cof$ and FZ yatter yatter yatter about 'freedom', but as soon as someone says something they don't like, they grab for a rule book and start calling for censure.

"Be willing to experience anything".

So funny - totally lulzy.

Me - I'm just a happy little Troll - you can call me anything you like.

:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I didn't see that this happened. I think that the rules of conduct are the rules of conduct. I don't find ANYTHING threatening or daunting- if I did, I'd have been scared off the internet YEARS ago - by OSA, by some other folks- etc.
 
The Anabaptist Jacques said:
What really angers me the most is how entheta and unenlightened Hubbard really was. In his lectures he knocks philosophers, alters what they said, then says what they really said as though he thought of it.

The Anabaptist Jacques
Click to expand...
Hubbard was clearly a man with a severe personality disorder, unable to accept responsibility for his own failings. Every time he screwed up, somebody else had to pay, and pay dearly. His own wife was discarded when it suited him. Rather than take the rap for his own criminal behaviour re 'snow white', he tossed her aside. When she was desperate to be in contact with him again, he ignored her.

Personality disordered people like Hubbard, do not see others as human beings with rights and needs, but see them instead as an extension of themselves.

I'm sure that he honestly believed that he did no wrong.

In fact, he was one of the 20th century's biggest gangsters - just like Capone, but using other weapons than guns to destroy his enemies.
 
I'm going to say something that's long overdue--

People who say they like the tech or Scn or whatever one wants to call it- aren't all tech pushers and proselytizers. Some are, some aren't.

And the thing is, with all the conspiracy think and various speculations that this or that person's OSA or a shill or whatever, believe me, if a person DOESN'T correctly identify his or her stance, the conspiracy theorists and accusations of OSA affiliations come out of the freaking woodwork, so one wonders if some aren't trying to have it both ways. Perhaps the honesty that some say they want- well, they don't want it.

The act of 'fessing up to one's own stance and/or affiliation (eg: Hi, I'm Claire. I like plain M and Ms) does not in and of itself constitute pushing the thing named (in this case plain M and Ms). For "tech pushing" or "M and M pushing" to be the situation, the post would likely read something like this:

Hi, I'm Claire. I happen to be someone who likes Scn stuff/"tech"/plain M and Ms/stale red twizzlers. I think YOU should go out and buy those things too. In fact, I have some I can sell you and if I don't I can sure hook you up because I really really want you to do what I'm doing."

I'm tired of the demonization of people who aren't proselytizing, who, all they did was say what they liked and who did not tell others to do it. Yes, there is proselytization here and on other Scn/critical forums sometimes. And there are people who "dissem" or proselytize consistently or in some cases, occasionally. But saying one likes something is NOT a "push". It's just not.

It's a big fat freakin' pc clintonesque global village out there with diversity, yadda yadda, and all that liberal stuff. So let's live side by side and act like it.
 
acertainratio said:
These OT's are like glass spiders - it's hard to see how you can touch one without breaking him/her.

'Wogs' are much more robust, as far as I can see.

'These 'tech people' are sly - playing the big OT 'tech terminal' one minute and switching to supervictim the next.

The fact that some people frequent this board and recruit people here and elsewhere, and charge them for services is a big problem that isn't going to go away.

They are not ex - scientologists, they are 'tech wannabes' fishing for followers.

Most of them did not leave the Church voluntarily, under protest, but were booted out for being in the churches view, 'trouble makers', so they are Cof$ rejects.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, you can be sure it's a duck.

If it's using an e-meter and talks scinospeak, you can be sure it's a scientologist.

"But it's the church that's out - ethics, the tech works"

Sorry - you haven't got a clear to show anybody.

"It all went bad because they didn't follow LRH policy."

Who wrote the fair game policy?

Who set up the RPF?

You haven't got a leg to stand on, and deep inside you know it.

Cof$ rejects:lol:

But I think you should be allowed to post your nonsense here, as long as others have a right to laugh at you and troll you.

:omg:
Click to expand...


Some Freezoners feel the way you indicate but not all do. I know a LOT of Freezoners and non CofS Scn'ists who criticize Hubbard for all those things, who don't feel it's just CofS that's at fault. But some critics go on perpetuating this myth that all non CofS Scn'ists are the same and think these ridiculous things.

Speaking for myself. I like Scn - much of it. Not all. I'm a non CofS Scn'ist. I think Hubbard acted like a complete dick and died utterly bugfuck crazy. He's the one who wanted an RPF and an RPF's RPF as if the RPF wasn't enough.

CofS is fucked. Hubbard set the stage for that. There is policy he wrote that's utter crap.

And you know what? I've had emails, posts and PMs from other non CofS Scn'ists saying THE SAME THINGS that I just said.

So one size does NOT fit all.
 
acertainratio said:
These OT's are like glass spiders - it's hard to see how you can touch one without breaking him/her.

'Wogs' are much more robust, as far as I can see.

'These 'tech people' are sly - playing the big OT 'tech terminal' one minute and switching to supervictim the next.

The fact that some people frequent this board and recruit people here and elsewhere, and charge them for services is a big problem that isn't going to go away.

They are not ex - scientologists, they are 'tech wannabes' fishing for followers.

Most of them did not leave the Church voluntarily, under protest, but were booted out for being in the churches view, 'trouble makers', so they are Cof$ rejects.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, you can be sure it's a duck.

If it's using an e-meter and talks scinospeak, you can be sure it's a scientologist.

"But it's the church that's out - ethics, the tech works"

Sorry - you haven't got a clear to show anybody.

"It all went bad because they didn't follow LRH policy."

Who wrote the fair game policy?

Who set up the RPF?

You haven't got a leg to stand on, and deep inside you know it.

Cof$ rejects:lol:

But I think you should be allowed to post your nonsense here, as long as others have a right to laugh at you and troll you.

:omg:
Click to expand...

This is excellently written Acertainratio!! I couldn't have put it better myself..:no: I mean really, I couldn't, well at least not without a few profanities here and there. :whistling:

I do agree with Nexus100 in that one of the reasons profanities are used could be put down to a lack of intelligent vocabulaire, however, I can only speak for myself here, and I have become aware, that when I get angry with someone on this forum, and in fact I seldom do, the emotion overwhelms me to such an extent, that the 'cusses' as Alanzo so beautifully puts it just pour out. :whistling: :confused2:

It is sometimes very difficult to respond to arrogance and rudeness without becoming angry, anger is a human emotion is it not?? I feel that it's all about self control, we are all human, that at least is something we can 'all' agree on here right?

However, most of us here are 'Exes', and when faced with more $cientology, and some being unable to take any critiscism whatsoever or be questioned even in a mild tone, it can become impossible not to feel one is back inside the cult particularly when the personality of 'victim' is being so pompously displayed.

Let them have their own threads, allow people to have their say and get on with it. If however the 'cussing' continues for days on end, and on other threads, then perhaps a warning, but this thread has brought up a lot of emotion in general, and this was to be expected, therefore it's possiblly one subject that could have allowed for a little 'less' moderation in this particular case.
 
Last edited:
Although I am as critical of the Freezone as I am of the Church of Scientology, I whave to say that Fluffy's point is correct. I think it is clearly possible that the nuance differences between the Freezoners, as far as their actions, competence, and motivations go, are as vast as those of all the exes. Someone who likes to audit, is happy with their auditing, does not have an agenda to push and is only using Scientology for the benefit of those around them are not the same as the fanatics.
My only problem with those individuals is not their intentions or sincerity, or their integrity; I just think that the tech itself sooner than later gets the person less aware, and lessens their capacity for life. This is not to say they don't feel a subjective benefit--I believe they do. That's why they continue with it. But I have concluded that for the individual, Scientology is one step forward and two steps back. This is not to say I occlude for myself the possibility that I am wrong to any degree. But until I see it differently I am suspicious.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 
I have to say, about the voluminous use of profanity under some circumstances, that such usage is not solely because of the lack of adequate understanding. Nor is it an inability to communicate effectively because one lacks sufficient alternate words.

At times, profanity, having emotional connotations that other words do not necessarily have, is the only appropriate vehicle to delineate the emotional content instrinsic to the intended communication.

Now, I know that my verbosity may label me as a pedant, or an erudite that only uses uncommon language to impress. Such is not the case.

I only seek to make a point, and although the perspicuity of my message may suffer, I hope that your perspicacity is sufficient to understand.

And if it is not, the let me restate it in simplistic terms:

I cuss sometimes. If you don't like it, f$#k you.

:D
 
Ladybird said:
Apparently some of them pretend to be when it suites their agenda. Those same ones can sure dish it out when they want to though.

I am a bit torn about the freezoners and other tech pushers posting here. On the one hand their silly "wins" and "success stories" are useful in observing scientology at work, but if you try to point out the flaws in their logic they get all huffy about you "attacking' their personal beliefs, and you get in to an endless twisted discussion about what they really meant, etc...:banghead:

It's like you always have to walk on eggshells around a scientologist. They seem to want only "Good Roads, Fair Weather" communication. They don't seem to find any thing funny about their funny ideas and don't tolerate critisism. Hubbard couldn't either, and the tech is laced with that humourless intolerant attitude.

Scientologists are well known for their humorectomies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN0RWIR_91g
Click to expand...


OH GAWD !!! YES YES YES! It is EXACTLY like dealing with a scientologist. I am sorry but this board is not 'good roads,fair weather' crap, this board is here for us to say what we feel and not to be 'nice' to the people who continue to want to spread scn poison to all of us.

I gotta run but I will catch up later- oh my god this thread got HUGE in hours! I am SO behind !!!! AHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Why would someone, who still practices "auditing" in some form, cease calling himself or herself a "Scientologist"?

Why would someone, who still practices "auditing" in some form, cease calling himself or herself a Freezoner?

Why?

Is it because words have meanings?
 
grundy said:
I have to say, about the voluminous use of profanity under some circumstances, that such usage is not solely because of the lack of adequate understanding. Nor is it an inability to communicate effectively because one lacks sufficient alternate words.

At times, profanity, having emotional connotations that other words do not necessarily have, is the only appropriate vehicle to delineate the emotional content instrinsic to the intended communication.

Now, I know that my verbosity may label me as a pedant, or an erudite that only uses uncommon language to impress. Such is not the case.

I only seek to make a point, and although the perspicuity of my message may suffer, I hope that your perspicacity is sufficient to understand.

And if it is not, the let me restate it in simplistic terms:

I cuss sometimes. If you don't like it, f$#k you.

:D
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about profanity so much as personal insults such as your last. :)

I guess we'll just have to swing free and see what the moderators do about it. My hope is for a board that doesn't degenerate into pure fracas. Or I will, as Escalus has, vote with my feet.
 
Veda said:
Why would someone, who still practices "auditing" in some form, cease calling himself or herself a "Scientologist"?

Why would someone, who still practices "auditing" in some form, cease calling himself or herself a Freezoner?

Why?

Is it because words have meanings?
Click to expand...

Well, there's TIR and Idenics and stuff like that where the methods are based on some Dn and Scn stuff but the people don't consider themselves to be Scn'ists. With that, you'd have to ask those individuals.

As far as being called a Freezoner, some of us consider ourselves to be such and some of us (like me) don't. It's whatever we want to be known as. Ideology-wise, the affiliation is whatever the subject says it is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top