Hubbard on sex with little boys

Gib

Crusader
Makes sense to me. The COS is off the rails to say the least. What did LRH say about cutting theta comm lines?
fooled again by Hubbard. Theta comm lines means actually only except Hubbard words, entheta comm lines actually mean no critical thinking allowed and no actual truthful evaluation of the supposed called state of clear and then OT, for if you said no clear or no OT, why that's entheta comm line. And after careful research why one finds out no clears or OT's are to had, never have been, never will. Now, if you are still in Hubbard's persuasion, why you'd say I am an SP for stating what I just wrote, don't you see?

Remember, I was once involved heavy.
 

Gib

Crusader
Has anyone actually read the entire PR Series?

It's all over the map.

Hubbard mentions "PR of PR," "nicey nicey PR," and the "Sunday school version" of PR, and then starts changing the definition of PR.

It turns out that there are many definitions of PR and many types of PR according to Hubbard.

The same PR Series that Scientologists insist demands truthfulness of Scientologists, when explaining to "wogs" that Scientology PR is "the first truly honest Public Relations," also advocates "curving," exaggeration, misrepresentation, and selective omission of information.

"Gimmicks" and "capers," to be used by Scientology, are mentioned.

Also authorized for use is "Black PR."

This deceptively "nicey nicey"-coated topic has been covered before, but I guess hardly anyone has seriously studied Hubbard's writings on this and related topics. (Understandably, who would want to?)

So, when some goofy Scientologist stands up and proclaims that L. Ron Hubbard demanded truthfulness in PR (barf!), we "wogs" are poorly equipped to respond.
"Has anyone actually read the entire PR Series?"

yah, I have. Has anyone actually read about classic rhetoric of ethos, pathos and ethos?

The PR series is rhetoric in that sense and not the glib definition found online google search of the word rhetoric. PR and marketing are derived from classical rhetoric, but refined you might say.

But, Hubbard used bad classical rhetoric in the sense that he never created a clear or OT, but he kept trying.

In the end he only told one person, Sarge, that he failed. What an asshole, Hubbard, to not issue a Policy letter stating he failed, everybody go home, scientology does not work.
 

phenomanon

Canyon
Worthy of examination but hardly an indictment. Lots of hearsay surrounds this book that has no Hubbard on it. Just accusations from others.

well Terril,

yes it's true green on white says never tell lies in PR. Unfortunately your leader, LR Hubbard told a lie from the get go, namely he said he cleared 270 people in his book dianetics, DMSMH. Maybe that book was a lie, aye, or a violation of "never tell lies in PR"?

As your case supervisor, or C/S, lets begin an auditing session with an E-Meter. Here are the questions:

Auditor: Did L Ron Hubbard ever tell a lie?

Terril: (awaiting response)
don't do that, Gib
The Brainwashing book maybe doesn't have Hubbard on it, but it has Hubbard IN it.
Can you, after reading many many Hubbard writings , actually believe that Hubbard did not write it??!
 

phenomanon

Canyon
don't do that, Gib
The Brainwashing book maybe doesn't have Hubbard on it, but it has Hubbard IN it.
Can you, after reading many many Hubbard writings , actually believe that Hubbard did not write it??!
Anyways, I don't believe that Hubbard diddled little boys.
From what I know, he was quite busy diddling females by the dozen.
 

guanoloco

As-Wased
On the contrary, an honest account could only contain what a person experienced. No words were spoken. The young woman was given no prior explanation or introduction.

A fabrication would have positively identified Hubbard.


Read the entire affidavit - not thirty years ago, but now - then express an opinion.

Well...like I say...I go back and forth on it. Mainly because it is so fantastic, so incredible, so outlandish as to escape rational thought so I find myself rejecting it.

But what's interesting is that she was a redhead...like Marjory Cameron...Parson's "Scarlet Woman"...the chosen one to bear the anti-Christ.

Hubbard was a delinquent psycho.
 

Jim Dandy

Patron with Honors
Speaking of child sex....or <ahem> "underage sex workers" and "teenage/child prostitutes" as someone calls it...the world of both adult and child sex trafficking took a major blow yesterday with the FBI's seizure of none other than...

Backpage.com!

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ge-shut-down-by-u-s-authorities-idUSKCN1HD2QP

This was a long time coming. Took many years of effort to finally shit this down. In the meantime it made a LOT of money for <ahem> certain publications, which is why beneficiaries of said publications fought so hard for and denied the horrors caused by backpage.com.

:whistling:
 

F.Bullbait

Oh, a wise guy,eh?
Well...like I say...I go back and forth on it. Mainly because it is so fantastic, so incredible, so outlandish as to escape rational thought so I find myself rejecting it.

But what's interesting is that she was a redhead...like Marjory Cameron...Parson's "Scarlet Woman"...the chosen one to bear the anti-Christ.

Hubbard was a delinquent psycho.
I found the Ann Bailey affidavit: http://www.xenu-directory.net/news/library-item.php?iid=6128

I haven't read the whole thing as of yet. Very busy time for me.

Good point about the Scarlet Woman. Was he trying to resurrect that old 1940's magick?
 

phenomanon

Canyon
well, Koot, you are spouting l ron hubbard to explain l ron hubbard. Doncha see the brainwashed mind there? Please get outside that bubble.
It is so annoying on this board of ex's. here are FZ boards where you will get total agreement on your views of the tech and of hisself. I. too, have studied the PR series, and interned on it on the Flagship. You don't realize who you are talking to on this MB.
 

George Layton

Silver Meritorious Patron
Okay, I'm going to show you:

Last November he was replying to someone with this tweet:

Tony Ortega‏Verified account @TonyOrtega94FollowFollow @TonyOrtega94 17Nov2017

Fun question. How's this: 1. Why don't you allow your wife to see her family. 2. Why did you stop getting auditing. 3. Why do you continue to print Hubbard's statement endorsing pedophilia in new editions of Dianetics.


And...

Tony Ortega‏Verified account @TonyOrtega94FollowFollow @TonyOrtega94 8Sep2017

Why did no one in Scientology notice Hubbard's endorsement of pedophilia on page 336? Because no one reads that far into Dianetics. No one.*

*This is ridiculous stating that, "No one reads that far into Dianetics". I read it. You probably read it, and everyone now has to read it due to the Basics Course on every book by Hubbard. I'm trying to find where even Tony admits that this passage didn't stand out to him when he first read Dianetics all the way through. That's because in context it doesn't stand out. It certainly doesn't say, "Hey pedophilia is just a-okay!"

And...


@TonyOrtega94
Follow Follow @TonyOrtega94 8Sep2017


Troll score: Read 'Dianetics' 5X. Never noticed Hubbard endorsement of pedophilia on p. 336. Offended that we accurately quote it. Winning!

And here is the post in which he essentially made it sound like Scientologists have been hiding the "vile secret" that....well you read it....

https://tonyortega.org/2017/10/14/c...-vile-secret-which-was-hiding-in-plain-sight/

In my opinion he is way overblowing this passage out of Dianetics and essentially making the claim that THIS is why the church turns a blind eye to pedophilia. Which is nonsense. Pedophilia goes on everywhere, unfortunately. Whenever the church has helped to cover up a molestation case it is because they cover up everything that can make them look bad. Everything. You know that. Tony knows that. I know that. It's not because pedophilia is "endorsed" for crying out loud.
What was the context of that passage he pointed out?
 

Jim Dandy

Patron with Honors
What was the context of that passage he pointed out?
Well George that is like asking what the context of the entire book of Dianetics is. Are you a never-in?

It's about engrams, reactive mind, restimulating engrams both from this lifetime and prior life times, etc... You know, garden variety horseshit.

Regarding the young girl passage, the context was a restimuation from a past life experience, or experiences. Creepy? Well of course it is. The whole damn book is creepy.
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
Regarding the young girl passage, the context was a restimuation from a past life experience, or experiences. Creepy? Well of course it is. The whole damn book is creepy.
Personally I find the young girl passage pretty disturbing. :omg:

He could have used many other examples to illustrate the point he was trying to make. Yet he chose that one. And to me it was a bad example even if there was no creepy aspect to it. There certainly could have been other reasons ( other than engrams) that caused the girl to see something wrong with the kiss.

Her parents may have informed her about pedophiles for one thing, educating her on what type of behavior was wrong. :faceslap:

While the passage isn't an endorsement of pedophilia, I do see it (and some other of Hubbard's writings) as indicative of some personal issues he had. Of course that is all speculative without any strong evidence.
 

Leland

Crusader
Coming at this from another angle, IMO, EXs will agree that if a Cult Member was found to be sexually molesting another....even if underage or even a young child....that person would not be reported to the Police or any Authorities......
 

Jim Dandy

Patron with Honors
Personally I find the young girl passage pretty disturbing. :omg:

He could have used many other examples to illustrate the point he was trying to make. Yet he chose that one. And to me it was a bad example even if there was no creepy aspect to it. There certainly could have been other reasons ( other than engrams) that caused the girl to see something wrong with the kiss.

Her parents may have informed her about pedophiles for one thing, educating her on what type of behavior was wrong. :faceslap:

While the passage isn't an endorsement of pedophilia, I do see it (and some other of Hubbard's writings) as indicative of some personal issues he had. Of course that is all speculative without any strong evidence.

Yes Hubbard was a creep and often his creepiness would come through his pen and his mouth. Like I said Dianetics is a creepy book.
 

George Layton

Silver Meritorious Patron
Well George that is like asking what the context of the entire book of Dianetics is. Are you a never-in?

It's about engrams, reactive mind, restimulating engrams both from this lifetime and prior life times, etc... You know, garden variety horseshit.

Regarding the young girl passage, the context was a restimuation from a past life experience, or experiences. Creepy? Well of course it is. The whole damn book is creepy.
He's talking about the First Axiom being a benefit to the auditor because it can be used to establish whether or not a rational reaction is being confronted. He is saying the seven-year-old girl's reaction is not rational, that she should rationally find nothing with being kissed by a man even if it is a passionate kiss. He is saying that instead the reaction the girl has, a shudder, is caused by an engram, possibly prenatal.
Now, with all the light that has been shed on hubbard and Dianetics, the literal context needs to be set aside and the question asked, "why did he write that particular passage when giving an example of the benefit of the First Axiom to the auditor?"
All of the stories about PC's and auditors came out of his imagination. There were no auditors before he discovered Dianetics and yet he writes about all these auditor/PC examples. Knowing it is fiction the understanding gained from the book is going to be those windows hubbard opened up to look into what was going on in his mind.
 

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
He's talking about the First Axiom being a benefit to the auditor because it can be used to establish whether or not a rational reaction is being confronted. He is saying the seven-year-old girl's reaction is not rational, that she should rationally find nothing with being kissed by a man even if it is a passionate kiss. He is saying that instead the reaction the girl has, a shudder, is caused by an engram, possibly prenatal.
Now, with all the light that has been shed on hubbard and Dianetics, the literal context needs to be set aside and the question asked, "why did he write that particular passage when giving an example of the benefit of the First Axiom to the auditor?"
All of the stories about PC's and auditors came out of his imagination. There were no auditors before he discovered Dianetics and yet he writes about all these auditor/PC examples. Knowing it is fiction the understanding gained from the book is going to be those windows hubbard opened up to look into what was going on in his mind.
I distinctly remember listening to a tape where Hubbard talks about a PC shagging her dog and how the w/h was missed when a man told her 'You like dogs don't you?'

What are we to make of that?
 

F.Bullbait

Oh, a wise guy,eh?
He's talking about the First Axiom being a benefit to the auditor because it can be used to establish whether or not a rational reaction is being confronted. He is saying the seven-year-old girl's reaction is not rational, that she should rationally find nothing with being kissed by a man even if it is a passionate kiss. He is saying that instead the reaction the girl has, a shudder, is caused by an engram, possibly prenatal.
Now, with all the light that has been shed on hubbard and Dianetics, the literal context needs to be set aside and the question asked, "why did he write that particular passage when giving an example of the benefit of the First Axiom to the auditor?"
All of the stories about PC's and auditors came out of his imagination. There were no auditors before he discovered Dianetics and yet he writes about all these auditor/PC examples. Knowing it is fiction the understanding gained from the book is going to be those windows hubbard opened up to look into what was going on in his mind.
Didn't Axioms come significantly after the publication of DMSMH?
 

phenomanon

Canyon
Coming at this from another angle, IMO, EXs will agree that if a Cult Member was found to be sexually molesting another....even if underage or even a young child....that person would not be reported to the Police or any Authorities......
This is a true fact.
It would be "written up" and sent "uplines".
If divulged in session, it would be written up in quadruple and copies left in the PCs folder.
 
Top