Geir Isene has a new Natterboard!

[Veda]

Then let's leave Marty out of it:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=337189&postcount=520

-snip-

[Do] you agree or disagree whether [ re. 'Keeping Scientology Working']:

*** Include it in every course as is, first checksheet item, per LRH?
*** Eliminate it from courses, but keep it as a policy.
*** Leave it up to the individual whether to read, understand and follow it?
*** Revise it?
*** Cancel it?

-snip-

What would YOU do if an Independent Bridge student or pc was in your charge?

Is that clearer?

P.S. Forgive me, HelluvaHoax!, for butting in.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

Then let's leave Marty out of it:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=337189&postcount=520

Is that clearer?

P.S. Forgive me, HelluvaHoax!, for butting in.

Ciao Veda....No apologies needed, I quite enjoy your participation in this discussion.

There is a part of Geir I do understand. But, a lot is quite blurry. For example, I am assuming from his previous post that he would leave HCOPL KSW in the mix but I am unable to find any way to connect that to his later answer when I asked him "what if Ron fair gamed you?" to which he answered:

posted by Geir: I would not care whether LRH would label me a squirrel or SP. I do as I see fit.

I don't know why anyone would want to promote the philosophy of another man who would want to destroy them utterly.

Doesn't make any sense.

 

[degraded being]

Don't assume Geir would leave KSW in the mix, if he didn't say that explicitly. Because if you asume it, you yourself may have to be corrected at sometime, with a statement that Geir did not say that. It's a game of what you don't say and won't say, which will make people assume things which can then be denied, not on the basis that they are not true, but on the basis that something was not said. Closet games.

 

[Veda]

Ciao Veda....No apologies needed, I quite enjoy your participation in this discussion.

There is a part of Geir I do understand. But, a lot is quite blurry. For example, I am assuming from his previous post that he would leave HCOPL KSW in the mix but I am unable to find any way to connect that to his later answer when I asked him "what if Ron fair gamed you?" to which he answered:



I don't know why anyone would want to promote the philosophy of another man who would want to destroy them utterly.

Doesn't make any sense.

First, "Think for yourself":

http://www.solitarytrees.net/pickets/mesa128.jpg

http://europe.scientology.org/publi/think/index.htm

http://www.aboutlronhubbard.org/eng/wis3_4.htm

Then, from 'Keeping Scientology Working':

"Anyone is certainly entitled to have his opinions and idea and cognitions - so long as these do not bar the route out for self or others."

More excerpts from 'KSW':

http://suppressiveperson.org/spdl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=460&Itemid=30

The 'Scientology Bridge Grade Chart':

http://img2.scientology.org/pics/std/religion/bridge/grdchart.gif

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

Don't assume Geir would leave KSW in the mix, if he didn't say that explicitly. Because if you asume it, you yourself may have to be corrected at sometime, with a statement that Geir did not say that. It's a game of what you don't say and won't say, which will make people assume things which can then be denied, not on the basis that they are not true, but on the basis that something was not said. Closet games.

Interesting, degraded being!

You are right. In fact, Geir said he would give priority to another (earlier) policy over Keeping Scientology Working. He doesn't explicitly say WHAT he would do with KSW. Which is why Veda asked him again.

KSW doesn't allow Scientologists to put KSW behind other issues. It is clear on that subject. So if Geir is disagreeing with Hubbard then, one supposes, he considers himself a better source of Scientology than it's founder?

Unless Geir has an explanation for all this unusual alteration of Hubbard's work, I would have to conclude that he is bumping into an intellectual blind spot. It is just not making any sense and it feels like he is dancing around on substantive issues.

Othewise, how does one support and promote a man like Hubbard who would (if alive) have you destroyed under his Fair Game policies? That would be suicidal.

Maybe there IS an element of self-destruction that has not yet been confronted in Scientologist's unreasoning adherence to the tech and hubbard. One would never suspect that with the flood of "wins" and "success stories" that Scientology forces out of its parishioners. Maybe that is why success stories are mandatory instead of naturally occurring. Misdirection.

 

[TalleyWhacker]

When you all speak about what HCOB or policy trumps what, I think you could go on ad infinitum on that track and hardly get anywhere. Shifting back and forth like a pendulum as to which is workable for who and when.
I trained and completed internships as an auditor, which is fabulous for dealing with nuts and bolts but I've always gotten the really big answers from absorbing faith or the 8th dynamic.
One must rise to that level to get truly "plugged in" or he's just dealing with mechanics.
That's why, soley within the realm of faith, the better parts (not the crimes committed in the name of) of some religions can trump or equal Scientology with one outdated book vs Scientology's 40,000,0000 some odd words.
It's the ultimate undercut (or overcut as the case may be)--the eight dynamic. But it has to that person's own 8th dynamic, it can't be a group's reality of it jammed down one's throat.
At the point wherein a person recognizes this, he can't any longer buy into dogma.

...hope all that made some sense

 

[Isene]

What would YOU do if an Independent Bridge student or pc was in your charge?

Is that clearer?

I would ask her to make up her own mind about it.

 

[Isene]

Don't assume Geir would leave KSW in the mix, if he didn't say that explicitly. Because if you asume it, you yourself may have to be corrected at sometime, with a statement that Geir did not say that. It's a game of what you don't say and won't say, which will make people assume things which can then be denied, not on the basis that they are not true, but on the basis that something was not said. Closet games.

I answer what I feel I can answer. That's all.

And no assumptions needed.

 

[nozeno]

I dunno, not an ex, so not really in a position to make an informed comment, but I could see a non abusive CofS Mk2, if it was run and organised by former public. Just for the simple fact that their perceptions and experiences of the organisation and it's goals, are so different from former SO.

If the senior policies really were the Creed, and all of what's currently just PR schtick, then I'd say that there's a more than even chance that the really vicious policies that presently define the way the organisation's run, would likely be resigned to the history books.

At least if it was all done, openly, honestly, and truthfully.

Either way, the initial foundation will set the tone for what's to come.

Yeah, and if ifs and ands were pots and pans the whole world would be a frickin' kitchen.

 

[Veda]

I would ask her to make up her own mind about it.

Alright, so let's see.

The new Independent Scientology Org, with its Hubbard Guidance Center, and its Scientology Academy, opens its doors, and proceeds to deliver training and processing per the Scientology Bridge Grade Chart: http://img2.scientology.org/pics/std/religion/bridge/grdchart.gif

And, any item, on any checksheet on any course, or any action on any part of the Grade Chart, would be optional.

So a new person, who never read 'Keeping Scientology Working', and has no idea what that is, says, "Ya know, I'm only interested in doing this Wall of Fire level that I've heard about, OT 3. Give me those materials and one of those e-meters and I'll have a go at it."

And you'd say, "Sure, here ya are."

And this is a place where people would go for an alternative to "Miscavology," a place where they could get Standard Tech per LRH?

I'm in favor of tossing "KSW' aside, in fact, I'm in favor of tossing much of Scientology aside, so I don't care - but, realistically, what you're proposing - here - would no longer be Scientology per LRH, but your own re-worked and re-edited version.

Have you thought up a name for it?

 

[nozeno]

I thought of a name..... Bullshitology.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Don't assume Geir would leave KSW in the mix, if he didn't say that explicitly. Because if you asume it, you yourself may have to be corrected at sometime, with a statement that Geir did not say that. It's a game of what you don't say and won't say, which will make people assume things which can then be denied, not on the basis that they are not true, but on the basis that something was not said. Closet games.

Speaking as one who has had extensive experience with that accusation-- I will say that if one calls someone to account then one should not be surprised if that person rebuts accusations and clarifies what he or she did or did not say.

 

[Isene]

Alright, so let's see.

The new Independent Scientology Org, with its Hubbard Guidance Center, and its Scientology Academy, opens its doors, and proceeds to deliver training and processing per the Scientology Bridge Grade Chart: http://img2.scientology.org/pics/std/religion/bridge/grdchart.gif

And, any item, on any checksheet on any course, or any action on any part of the Grade Chart, would be optional.

So a new person, who never read 'Keeping Scientology Working', and has no idea what that is, says, "Ya know, I'm only interested in doing this Wall of Fire level that I've heard about, OT 3. Give me those materials and one of those e-meters and I'll have a go at it."

And you'd say, "Sure, here ya are."

And this is a place where people would go for an alternative to "Miscavology," a place where they could get Standard Tech per LRH?

I'm in favor of tossing "KSW' aside, in fact, I'm in favor of tossing much of Scientology aside, so I don't care - but, realistically, what you're proposing - here - would no longer be Scientology per LRH, but your own re-worked and re-edited version.

Have you thought up a name for it?

Oh my, I must have put a quarter in that slot of yours.

You need no answer from me. Keep on making up what my intentions are.

 

[SomeGuy]

Oh my, I must have put a quarter in that slot of yours.

You need no answer from me. Keep on making up what my intentions are.

Sounds like a non answer

 

[Zinjifar]

Oh my, I must have put a quarter in that slot of yours.

You need no answer from me. Keep on making up what my intentions are.

Well Geir, it might help if you *told* us your intentions. After all, Ron did, (although he tried to bury some of the early/core aspirations in the Affirmations.)

Do you think that Ron would approve of 'downgrading' Keeping Scientology Working? Or, are you saying that you don't care what Ron would approve?

Zinj

 

[Isene]

Well Geir, it might help if you *told* us your intentions. After all, Ron did, (although he tried to bury some of the early/core aspirations in the Affirmations.)

Do you think that Ron would approve of 'downgrading' Keeping Scientology Working? Or, are you saying that you don't care what Ron would approve?

Zinj

I don't care what Ron would approve.

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Well Geir, it might help if you *told* us your intentions. After all, Ron did, (although he tried to bury some of the early/core aspirations in the Affirmations.)

Do you think that Ron would approve of 'downgrading' Keeping Scientology Working? Or, are you saying that you don't care what Ron would approve?

Zinj

Zinj,

Geir is discovering that if you are going to defend Scientology then you will eventually, out of necessity, have to apply a version of Keeping Scientology Working.

Sadly, his own board is going that way already. I just pointed out to someone the snide dismissive comment that was made to me and my statement was deleted and replaced with this "[snipped some slightly discourteous/ad homcommentary--MOD]"

You cannot defend and maintain the pretentious value of Scientology in an honest dialogue.

I had hoped his board could do that, but already I can see that it is going to evolve just like the Church of Scientology.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Man, this brings back memories!! People asking ex CofS Scn'ists their intentions. Like the internet is somebody's virgin daughter or somethin'.

Geir still finds use in Scn tech. Geir is highly trained in Scn tech and is, at this point, uninterested in throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Geir has a forum wherein Scn tech is discussed. Critical posts are allowed. I think Geir's intentions toward yer virgin daughter are quite plain. Her cherry remains unpopped.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

Oh my, I must have put a quarter in that slot of yours.
You need no answer from me. Keep on making up what my intentions are.

Geir, it is a slippery slope once impatience begins to slide into annoyance because that ultimately ends in defiant arrogance. (see Tom Cruise with Matt Lauer)

As a free individual, you may not feel you "owe" an answer to anyone.

But, when you adopted a cause to enlighten CoS Scientologists to a newly configured independent bridge, there is an expectation of leadership and scholarship.

It includes near-infinite patience. And direct, clear answers to questions of all kinds.

Whatever your message, it's badly tarnished by such exchanges as the one above with Veda. You may wish to rethink this approach to others who do not agree with everything you say if you truly want to be a leader in a new spiritual movement.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

IMO, part of the situation is that no matter how many times Geir or anyone else in a similar position posts his intentions, some people are going to keep asking/demanding to know what they are and in many cases, are going to make stuff up. I've seen this before.