Free to shine
Shiny & Free
It makes you a Crusader for Truth Sharone. 
I have a new opinion about Freezoners
- Thread starter Emma
- Start date
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
The thread in question is locked by Emma but I intend to post a reply regardless:
here seems as good a place as any:
You can promote success stories for the next 11 years for all I care Terril, if you had "wins" auditing off Body Thetans in OT111 then that is obviously "true for you". I do not and never will think it is true for most. Sorry for the generality but I know you scientologists do not like generalities, and I would so hate to upset a scientologist. Especially one who sees these "body thetans" as entities, which they are not.
If you do not want to be accused of being OSA, then might I suggest, you stop acting like a member of the GO(Guardians Office).
You twist things to suit your purpose and that to my mind is very typical of LRH tech, you know it, and I know it.
You have gone out of your way to make me your enemy, and that is a success story, no doubt about it.
As for the kiss, it was a peck on the cheek, you know that and yet try to make a big deal out of it. I greet a lot of people that way, or say goodbye, usually to friends, let there be NO doubt, we are not friends and are very unlikely to be ever. Your doing, not mine.
Keep promoting standard tech used in and out of scientology and you are only going to beget enemies. From what I have seen and heard from you, it would not matter whether you were a scientologist or not, you are a very unenlightened person, and it doesn't matter what ology or ism you aspire to.
Just a little pointer to those who run this board, there are many people (ex scientologists) who will not join this community and it is nothing I have said or done, mostly they would like to say the same as I do, but feel they cannot, I wonder why that is?
Freedom of expression, because it might hurt or insult someone, hurt their feelings. I have had my feelings hurt and being insulted in more ways than I care to think about, but is it upfront, no, it's done in an underhanded manner because people are cowards to add their real name to their insults and lunacy.At least my insults and lunacy comes from me and everyone knows it.
Speaking of which, Why would I want to meet this man?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAfrWfnxx2E
Just because he had his 60 minutes of fame, don't mean jack shit, in my eyes.
What does that make me
And you were answered on that thread, Sharone. If Terril were OSA, many people would have been betrayed by now. And they haven't been. He's also helped people leave the cult. That ain't small potatoes.
I think that if anyone didn't want to join a discussion forum because not everyone had the same opinions, then those people would have some problems IRL. It's a wide world out there with a lot of different opinions and ways of doing things.
You know, if it weren't for open forums where Scientologists could talk to critics, people like Pooks, Tory, myself and others would still be in the cult.
Sharone, not everyone has the same thoughts about "tech" outside CofS. And I really think that the reason that some people (like most Freezoners- since some FZers were never in CofS though most were) still pursue it after leaving CofS is that they consider they had some results and are unwilling to ditch those ideas and methods. I know that's how it was for me. I ended up eventually kind of moving beyond that (the "tech", I mean) and ditching labels and so on. But others may make different choices. We don't all have the same thoughts and ways of going about things. It would be a dull world if we did. In fact, I think there were a couple Twilight Zone episodes about worlds like that.
Emma had, in the past, actually invited some Free Zoners and Indies here, and she created some FZ sub forums that are still here.
Again, I want to point out that Terril has helped people leave the cult. I would recommend focusing on what we all are against rather than slamming contributors to the forum. If that does not seem like enough to address your concerns, I would suggest taking things like this back channel to forum admin.
Terril park
Sponsor
Apologies. It was a peck on the cheek to say goodbye as we left for separate destinations. My statements could have been misinterpreted.
Its a valid, and agreed upon by you, event.
And one might assume we were then friends from your statement.
The truth is that you are now antagonistic to me because I'm a
scientologist.
I have no antagonism to you. I really like you and wish we could be good friends again.
I have always supported you and your posts on your experience.
You ever need another friend you know how to reach me.
I'd really like that.
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
It makes you a Crusader for Truth Sharone.
No a 'Crusader for Truth' simply reports facts without the use of emotional 'coloring' to sway an audience. The goal is to have the truth known. There is no other agenda. They do not strike out at all & sundry who disagree with them out of some sense of 'righteous anger'.
Some people 'get it'. Others don't.
Mark A. Baker
Free to shine
Shiny & Free
Ok Crusader for her own truth. It pisses me off to see her called an annoying bitch. Some sanctimonious bastards around here have NO FUCKING IDEA what it is like to survive what she has and if Sharone calls it like she sees it, well good on her.
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
Personally I agree that U's statement was excessively rude. However I know U. He's prone to angry outbursts as are many others on the board; no more so, and as no less so. Like Sharon, he's had his own Co$ traumas. Nor does he always keep a temperate tongue when speaking to or of others.
The problem with encouraging anyone's bad behavior is that in effect what happens is to encourage everyone's bad behavior. Hence, the recent discussions with regard a greater need for general civility & respect on the board.
Rather than 'cheering on the home team', how about encouraging a bit more 'ecumenical fellowship' and generally civil conduct?
Mark A. Baker
themadhair
Patron Meritorious
Or, even better, how about people grow thicker skin and recognise that ‘being offended’ is a shallow contrivance of society? Civility only stifles free expression, and I’d rather have someone insulting me honestly than insulting me covertly.
Free to shine
Shiny & Free
"Knowing U" does not have any relevance.
What "home team"?
What "bad behaviour"?
Sharone Stainforth
Silver Meritorious Patron
Right, points taken, you want to know why I have such a problem with regards promoting the tech. Here is why.
When I was on the Apollo, sometime in 1968, some man was locked up in a cabin on the upper deck. He was in there for days, and he was shouting and holloring and banging on the cabin door to be let out. I do not know who it was, as I did not see him go in or come out, but it happened and we were told to ignore it as he was crazy and it was for his own good.
Does this sound familiar?
Also in 1968, I saw a little girl locked in the chain locker, was she crazy too?
Also in 1968, I saw three men locked in what were old cattle stalls, a bit like a prison cell.
These things all happened under the direct order of Hubbard, In the words of Steven Manning this all happened while GOD himself was aboard, do you get my drift.
In the autumn of 1969, my Father was locked in a cupboard under the stairs at Abellund in Denmark.
Many years later I read of people being locked up repeatedly. Lisa McPherson is probably one of the worse documented cases. Only a short time after I left the Sea Org, a year or so later there is the well documented case of Susan Meister whom apparently thought Scientology was the best thing since sliced bread and yet just a couple of months later she is dead. Shortly before her death, Lisa McPherson became clear, she was radiant and yet, just a couple of months later she's running around without her clothes because crying for help.
I'm at a loss, is it only me who sees a discrepancy here. Standard bloody tech being delivered by Source and everyone is PTS. Come on, what's wrong with you? Seriously?
And, You wonder why I go Off on one.
My friend PTS TypeH(whatever that means) is in charge of a "babywach" on a girl in a caravan in a secluded spot on a farm, this is quite recent compared to my own experiences,and it is perfectly fucking normal?
Let's all focus on the abuses?
Scientology IS abuse, it has been since day one. LRH was an abusive son of a bitch. He was above the law, and what's more he damned well got away with it, he did so by using standard "TECH", whatever that means.
Those he didn't kill, he made them loose their minds, and those that did not loose their minds, should consider themselves bloody lucky, if they have even half their sanity left.
I consider myself one of them.
Yesterday was the anniversary of Lisa McPherson's life, let us remember her with the respect that she should have had, had she not fallen victim to LRHs standard "tech".
What's not working, Scientology IS not working!
Tommorrow in London there will be a protest against the organization known as Scientology, in Lisa's memory, we'll be there.
I refuse to discuss this any more.
When I was on the Apollo, sometime in 1968, some man was locked up in a cabin on the upper deck. He was in there for days, and he was shouting and holloring and banging on the cabin door to be let out. I do not know who it was, as I did not see him go in or come out, but it happened and we were told to ignore it as he was crazy and it was for his own good.
Does this sound familiar?
Also in 1968, I saw a little girl locked in the chain locker, was she crazy too?
Also in 1968, I saw three men locked in what were old cattle stalls, a bit like a prison cell.
These things all happened under the direct order of Hubbard, In the words of Steven Manning this all happened while GOD himself was aboard, do you get my drift.
In the autumn of 1969, my Father was locked in a cupboard under the stairs at Abellund in Denmark.
Many years later I read of people being locked up repeatedly. Lisa McPherson is probably one of the worse documented cases. Only a short time after I left the Sea Org, a year or so later there is the well documented case of Susan Meister whom apparently thought Scientology was the best thing since sliced bread and yet just a couple of months later she is dead. Shortly before her death, Lisa McPherson became clear, she was radiant and yet, just a couple of months later she's running around without her clothes because crying for help.
I'm at a loss, is it only me who sees a discrepancy here. Standard bloody tech being delivered by Source and everyone is PTS. Come on, what's wrong with you? Seriously?
And, You wonder why I go Off on one.
My friend PTS TypeH(whatever that means) is in charge of a "babywach" on a girl in a caravan in a secluded spot on a farm, this is quite recent compared to my own experiences,and it is perfectly fucking normal?
Let's all focus on the abuses?
Scientology IS abuse, it has been since day one. LRH was an abusive son of a bitch. He was above the law, and what's more he damned well got away with it, he did so by using standard "TECH", whatever that means.
Those he didn't kill, he made them loose their minds, and those that did not loose their minds, should consider themselves bloody lucky, if they have even half their sanity left.
I consider myself one of them.
Yesterday was the anniversary of Lisa McPherson's life, let us remember her with the respect that she should have had, had she not fallen victim to LRHs standard "tech".
What's not working, Scientology IS not working!
Tommorrow in London there will be a protest against the organization known as Scientology, in Lisa's memory, we'll be there.
I refuse to discuss this any more.
Terril park
Sponsor
Most, well at least some her know his real name. Kevin Brady.
Been known for more or less a decade.
Really nice guy and good friend. Shame you couldn't have beers with us when he was here last year.
One might consider he has Tourettes syndrom. Not the case. He's merely
one that COS declared SP, disconnected him from wife and children etc.
He shoots from the hip via his keyboard. IMO sometimes nonsense, but
befitting the iconoclast he is. He has studied the offshoot of scn, Metapsychology, in various places and colleges. Best I recall don't believe in
past lives etc. Probably now a qualified therapist.
He REALLY likes cute girls. And thus a leap of faith on my part ..... a solid
citizen.
[ ie not creepy]Apparently now has a significant other.
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
Not that I imagine you care, S, but this is exactly the kind of personal post I like to see you make. It is damning and difficult to refute in its details. Nor is there much in the way of invective to distract or allow for the ready dismissal of its author as simply 'another of the disaffected".
Your story is a powerful one and I have referenced it on several occasions in discussions with more 'hidebound' freezoner loyalists. Facts are hard to ignore, although some do try and make a valiant effort.
Mark A. Baker
uniquemand
Unbeliever
Sorry, I was short on time and don't appreciate the tone you were taking with a friend of mine.
dianaclass8
Silver Meritorious Patron
The thread in question is locked by Emma but I intend to post a reply regardless:
here seems as good a place as any:
You can promote success stories for the next 11 years for all I care Terril, if you had "wins" auditing off Body Thetans in OT111 then that is obviously "true for you". I do not and never will think it is true for most. Sorry for the generality but I know you scientologists do not like generalities, and I would so hate to upset a scientologist. Especially one who sees these "body thetans" as entities, which they are not.
If you do not want to be accused of being OSA, then might I suggest, you stop acting like a member of the GO(Guardians Office).
You twist things to suit your purpose and that to my mind is very typical of LRH tech, you know it, and I know it.
You have gone out of your way to make me your enemy, and that is a success story, no doubt about it.
As for the kiss, it was a peck on the cheek, you know that and yet try to make a big deal out of it. I greet a lot of people that way, or say goodbye, usually to friends, let there be NO doubt, we are not friends and are very unlikely to be ever. Your doing, not mine.
Keep promoting standard tech used in and out of scientology and you are only going to beget enemies. From what I have seen and heard from you, it would not matter whether you were a scientologist or not, you are a very unenlightened person, and it doesn't matter what ology or ism you aspire to.
Just a little pointer to those who run this board, there are many people (ex scientologists) who will not join this community and it is nothing I have said or done, mostly they would like to say the same as I do, but feel they cannot, I wonder why that is?
Freedom of expression, because it might hurt or insult someone, hurt their feelings. I have had my feelings hurt and being insulted in more ways than I care to think about, but is it upfront, no, it's done in an underhanded manner because people are cowards to add their real name to their insults and lunacy.At least my insults and lunacy comes from me and everyone knows it.
Speaking of which, Why would I want to meet this man?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAfrWfnxx2E
Just because he had his 60 minutes of fame, don't mean jack shit, in my eyes.
What does that make me
Well said! I really like you, because you are frank and speak your mind...nothing wrong with that...
Diana
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
Uniquemand's not anonymous. He has a posting nick but he's never been anonymous. As Terril as said, his name's Kevin Brady. And point of fact, quite a few people here ARE anonymous.
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
Kevvy (Uniquemand) has suffered, too. He's written about it on this forum.
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
You did refer to the terrible things Sharone has suffered. So knowing Sharone has relevance. Well, then, knowing U has relevance, too, as he has his own experiences that come into play and his viewpoint reflects them. The concept applies to everyone in the mix,not one.
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
Tory posts here. She posts on OCMB. She posted on a.r.s. for years. She even came onto my forum.
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
Sharone,
You related some of your horrific experiences here in this thread, showing where you're coming from on this issue. Ok, but thing is, not everyone comes to the conclusions about the tech that you do.
And I'll reiterate: Terril has helped people leave the cult. That should be the bottom line. That should be enough to make you happy.
You related some of your horrific experiences here in this thread, showing where you're coming from on this issue. Ok, but thing is, not everyone comes to the conclusions about the tech that you do.
And I'll reiterate: Terril has helped people leave the cult. That should be the bottom line. That should be enough to make you happy.
Clueless Morgan
Patron with Honors
I haven't read through any of the posts between page two and this one, or this one itself in fact, but (at the risk of sounding like Tommy Davis), I have to say I respectfully disagree with your assessment, Emma. No, I may not have been a scientologist but I have at least read a lot about the abuses within Scientology and the relative insanity of Hubbard. I absolutely don't like Hubbard, let me be clear on that (no pun intended), but I don't think that is a valid reason to just say the tech is stupid and doesn't work. After all, it is up to the individuum in question what they think works or does not work for them, and calling their observations and beliefs stupid is quite ignorant.
I mean, let's face it. A lot of historical figures who made some major contributions to their fields were eccentric. Isaac Newton was a chronic drunkard and was said to consider himself as superior to everyone else. Friedrich Schiller had sex with every second woman he met. Shakespeare is said to have been exceedingly violent and ill-tempered, particularly in his later life. Just because someone has a completely horrid personality does not mean they can not come up with something that works, and evidently for some people it has worked.
Again don't get me wrong, I'm not in any way idolising Hubbard, but if people follow a set of beliefs and dont harm others in the process then I dont see what gives you the right to judge it as stupid. You may disagree with it, you may even think it is a bad idea, but that does not give you the right to call people stupid for what they believe in. If I want to believe that the recitation of certain mantras such as the Usnisa Vijaya Dharani can have profound impacts on the status quo (which, being in part a Mahayana buddhist, I do), then that is my choice and it is not for you to say that I am stupid. You can think it's a wrong belief, yes, but not that it's stupid. You just can't judge people by their personal beliefs.
Now I'm not talking about an etiquette or legal kind of "you can't", I'm talking about the ethical implications (actual ethics, not Scn). If we listen to René Descartes and his principle of the tabula rasa we know that everything we assume is just speculation anyway, so from a purely "common sense" standpoint, any assumption is as good as the next. This is because our senses and our mind are fallible. Your senses and mind, I'm afraid, are exactly as fallible as mine, Terril's, and those of the guy who owns your local grocery store. We can neither assess other people's assumptions as stupid or intelligent because our own assumptions have an equal chance of being either.
Yes, I know this is a rant, but I am personally sick of people going "Lol, you believe in reincarnation, you're such an idiot" and, frankly, what you are doing here is no better than that.
I mean, let's face it. A lot of historical figures who made some major contributions to their fields were eccentric. Isaac Newton was a chronic drunkard and was said to consider himself as superior to everyone else. Friedrich Schiller had sex with every second woman he met. Shakespeare is said to have been exceedingly violent and ill-tempered, particularly in his later life. Just because someone has a completely horrid personality does not mean they can not come up with something that works, and evidently for some people it has worked.
Again don't get me wrong, I'm not in any way idolising Hubbard, but if people follow a set of beliefs and dont harm others in the process then I dont see what gives you the right to judge it as stupid. You may disagree with it, you may even think it is a bad idea, but that does not give you the right to call people stupid for what they believe in. If I want to believe that the recitation of certain mantras such as the Usnisa Vijaya Dharani can have profound impacts on the status quo (which, being in part a Mahayana buddhist, I do), then that is my choice and it is not for you to say that I am stupid. You can think it's a wrong belief, yes, but not that it's stupid. You just can't judge people by their personal beliefs.
Now I'm not talking about an etiquette or legal kind of "you can't", I'm talking about the ethical implications (actual ethics, not Scn). If we listen to René Descartes and his principle of the tabula rasa we know that everything we assume is just speculation anyway, so from a purely "common sense" standpoint, any assumption is as good as the next. This is because our senses and our mind are fallible. Your senses and mind, I'm afraid, are exactly as fallible as mine, Terril's, and those of the guy who owns your local grocery store. We can neither assess other people's assumptions as stupid or intelligent because our own assumptions have an equal chance of being either.
Yes, I know this is a rant, but I am personally sick of people going "Lol, you believe in reincarnation, you're such an idiot" and, frankly, what you are doing here is no better than that.