I have an MU on Indies

[Ralph Hilton]

There is a lot of hypocrisy here - the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.
The original attack on me was covert ad hominem. Saying to someone "You would be honest if you did xyz" contains the implicit statement "You are dishonest" and is thus quite as much ad hominem as telling them that they are full of shit. The attack included the presupposition of the attacker's own viewpoint of honesty and a disclaimer which was obviously untrue. People here make a mockery of the Board Rules in their ad hominem attacks against Independent Scientologists. My very nasty post was overt and more honest than the covertness that preceded it.

Some ask why there aren't more Independent Scientologists here openly. The answer is that they are not interested in subjecting themselves to an onslaught of slimy ad hominem and low grade derogatory "wit".

I apologise for bringing pigs into the discussion. Many of them are affectionate intelligent creatures who have been horrendously abused by humanity.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

There is a lot of hypocrisy here - the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.
The original attack on me was covert ad hominem. Saying to someone "You would be honest if you did xyz" contains the implicit statement "You are dishonest" and is thus quite as much ad hominem as telling them that they are full of shit. The attack included the presupposition of the attacker's own viewpoint of honesty and a disclaimer which was obviously untrue. People here make a mockery of the Board Rules in their ad hominem attacks against Independent Scientologists. My very nasty post was overt and more honest than the covertness that preceded it.

Some ask why there aren't more Independent Scientologists here openly. The answer is that they are not interested in subjecting themselves to an onslaught of slimy ad hominem and low grade derogatory "wit".

I apologise for bringing pigs into the discussion. Many of them are affectionate intelligent creatures who have been horrendously abused by humanity.

That's undoubtedly one reason; the other is that in their view the Tech works and they see no reason to defend it.

I must express an interest here; I believe wholeheartedly in discussion. I'd love to see a good one on the question of, for example, whether there's such a thing as erasure of the charge on an item in auditing, or indeed whether there's such a thing as permanent change for the better at all, or whether the whole thing is just "keyouts", but it's very difficult to have that when people keep interjecting with quips / barbs about the "Cheapzone" etc.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

I agree with you about pigs btw, although I occasionally eat pork or bacon and am therefore arguably complicit in the "abuse." I once saw my uncle, who had a smallholding, kick a pig in the backside to get her back in the pen; "gentle persuasion" as my dad (who also saw this) called it. In hindsight maybe I should have protested.

 

[Ralph Hilton]

Coming from someone who gives thousands of hours of attention to imaginary disembodied space aliens ... Does anyone else see the irony here?

If you are unable to see disembodied beings that does not make them imaginary. Are you sure that the guy who cuts your lawn isn't an alien pretending to be Chuck Norris?

 

[TrevAnon]

I believe wholeheartedly in discussion. I'd love to see a good one on the question of, for example, whether there's such a thing as erasure of the charge on an item in auditing, or indeed whether there's such a thing as permanent change for the better at all, or whether the whole thing is just "keyouts", but it's very difficult to have that when people keep interjecting with quips / barbs about the "Cheapzone" etc.

I may not understand what kind of discussion you would like to see but there has been scientific research on Dianetics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianetics#Scientific_evaluation_and_criticisms

AFAIK there has not been any proof of erasure of charge on an item in auditing. If I am wrong, I'd love to see a peer reviewed scientific study on it.

From a more critical point of view: I guess one of the reasons Hubbard started using the religion cloak was just to not be bothered with having to give proof for his claims.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

Emphasis mine

That's making my point Trouble, not yours. If he can actually fly the plane (and land it) competently then he's a pilot in reality, whatever certification he may or may not have. If I tried to do it I would be pretending, and it would soon be obvious; the plane would crash, collide with something or never take off in the first place. That's the difference.

Happy New Year to you too!

Oh right ... I see what you mean now.

Must dash, I'm a neurosurgeon (today) and I'm about to do a surgical procedure on your Son/daughter/Mother/Father/best friend's frontal lobes ... (you choose the lucky recipient!) thanks for being so supportive ... hopefully all will go well (but if not, well ... I know you'll understand).

 

[10oriocookies]

There is a lot of hypocrisy here - the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.
The original attack on me was covert ad hominem. Saying to someone "You would be honest if you did xyz" contains the implicit statement "You are dishonest" and is thus quite as much ad hominem as telling them that they are full of shit. The attack included the presupposition of the attacker's own viewpoint of honesty and a disclaimer which was obviously untrue. People here make a mockery of the Board Rules in their ad hominem attacks against Independent Scientologists. My very nasty post was overt and more honest than the covertness that preceded it.

Some ask why there aren't more Independent Scientologists here openly. The answer is that they are not interested in subjecting themselves to an onslaught of slimy ad hominem and low grade derogatory "wit".

I apologise for bringing pigs into the discussion. Many of them are affectionate intelligent creatures who have been horrendously abused by humanity.

You are still skirting the issue Ralph. Enough martyrdom already and just talk about the issue of informing public about the lack of qualifications and education. Why wont you do this? Why is not doing it okay? I believe this is a legitimate issue that should be discussed. If its uncomfortable and perceived on your end to be an attack i aplogize. I assure you that if I were to attack, it wouldnt be via the internet. I admire that you post here given your views, I dont wish you or anyone in the FZ ill will and welcome then differing of opinions. Lets just be friends okay?

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

If you are unable to see disembodied beings that does not make them imaginary. Are you sure that the guy who cuts your lawn isn't an alien pretending to be Chuck Norris?

Well in that case I'm sure you'd have no problem with your clients paying for your services in imaginary money, since your inability to see this imaginary money wouldn't mean it doesn't exist right?

That of course is a rhetorical question since we all know the brand of insanity Hubbard is selling draws the line when it comes to money ... even disembodied space aliens aren't interested in participating is silly little role playing games unless there's money to be made off it.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Emphasis mine






Oh right ... I see what you mean now.

Must dash, I'm a neurosurgeon (today) and I'm about to do a surgical procedure on your Son/daughter/Mother/Father/best friend's frontal lobes ... (you choose the lucky recipient!) thanks for being so supportive ... hopefully all will go well (but if not, well ... I know you'll understand).

Sure, just let me know if you ever decide to become an ophthalmologist. I'm probably going to need a cataract operation sometime in the New Year and am nervous enough already

I did actually *read once of someone with no medical qualifications who somehow managed to blag his way into an operating theatre and convince the staff there he was qualified to be there, and actually took part in some operations. The scary thing was that when he was eventually uncovered after a few weeks of this, the reaction of the staff he'd worked with was that they'd known some far worse actual surgeons than him.

* I think it was in one of Dr Phil Hammond's books.

 

[Ralph Hilton]

Im not posting on here for attention nor to be funny or sarcastic. I apologize if you took it that way. I only want your future clients to have a choice based in fact. From what I understand you have no credentials, formal education or licenses to be delivering mental health type activities. You have scn, the same philosophy that also taught TR Lie or whatever the GO checksheet says. Its purpose was to teach scientology staff how to lie, skirt issues, etc. There's many more examples of this type of thing.

Thats part of the tech you are so vigorously defending. You have the right to believe that and all the rest of Ron's work, but when it comes to using that body of data to help others, I think you should be honest beforehand. If that upsets you, im sorry. Name calling, threats or whatever tech you are trying on me to bring me up the tone scale have no effect on me. Maybe just agree to be honest in the future and we can call it a day?

If you had asked what I tell my clients without the implication of existing dishonesty then you wouldn't have had a problem. I do agree that the way Narconon has conducted it's business has been dishonest. I did study Psychology at University for a year but left after passing the first year exams as I felt that I hadn't learn anything of value. Spiritual counselling does not require a license. I think Hubbard was mistaken to use the term "Mental Health". Scientology is a religious practice. I do not consider, before anyone suggests otherwise, that the CofS has a valid claim to be practicising that or any other religion. I make no claims to deliver anything but Scientology when people come to me for that. I am not going to list all the things I am not qualified in to people coming to me for Scientology. If you consider that dishonest then I disagree with you. Most of the work I do with people involves handling spiritual beings who have a compulsive attachment to an individual.

TR-L was not part of any training course that I did in Scientology. It was part of the training of the GO/OSA personnel who had their own hierarchy. It is a misapplication of Scientology, not part of its philosophy.

 

[Ralph Hilton]

You are still skirting the issue Ralph. Enough martyrdom already and just talk about the issue of informing public about the lack of qualifications and education. Why wont you do this? Why is not doing it okay? I believe this is a legitimate issue that should be discussed. If its uncomfortable and perceived on your end to be an attack i aplogize. I assure you that if I were to attack, it wouldnt be via the internet. I admire that you post here given your views, I dont wish you or anyone in the FZ ill will and welcome then differing of opinions. Lets just be friends okay?

ok. I think I've covered your points in my almost simultaneous post above.

 

[Ralph Hilton]

Well in that case I'm sure you'd have no problem with your clients paying for your services in imaginary money, since your inability to see this imaginary money wouldn't mean it doesn't exist right?

I'll have to refer you to Logic 101 on that issue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_logical_fallacies . I would be willing to accept that others may perceive imaginary money that I don't perceive. They are welcome to use it to pay others who can also see it. In similar vein, those who perceive the entities that you do not perceive are as entitled to their perception as you are.

 

[uncover]

.....
Scientology is a religious practice.
.....
Most of the work I do with people involves handling spiritual beings who have a compulsive attachment to an individual.
.....

Ok, I got it. So, seen from a technical viewpoint you are then:

Ralph Hilton - The Exorcist

​

Between commercial exorcists like you, is this then called "clusterfuck" or still a normal mindfuck ?

BTW, psychiatry has a name for this disorder:

Individuals with schizophrenia may hear voices that are not there. Some may be convinced that others are reading their minds, controlling how they think, or plotting against them.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/36942.php

 

[I told you I was trouble]

I'll have to refer you to Logic 101 on that issue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_logical_fallacies . I would be willing to accept that others may perceive imaginary money that I don't perceive. They are welcome to use it to pay others who can also see it. In similar vein, those who perceive the entities that you do not perceive are as entitled to their perception as you are.

Lol ... yeah, good point ... imaginary money isn't worth the paper it isn't printed on ... imaginary entities are quite lucrative though and amazingly are able to be 'banked'.

Argument from silence (argumentum e silentio) – where the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence.

 

[Helena Handbasket]

That's making my point Trouble, not yours. If he can actually fly the plane (and land it) competently then he's a pilot in reality, whatever certification he may or may not have. If I tried to do it I would be pretending, and it would soon be obvious; the plane would crash, collide with something or never take off in the first place. That's the difference.

Happy New Year to you too!

I knew a pilot who never sat in a cockpit and indeed was afraid of flying. His name was Ken Ogger.

Helena

 

[Boojuum]

To Dan:

Lighten up dude.

YOUR PROBLEM is that you've constructed this phoney pseudo-military world of honor around a thug and his appointed successor.

You are making Davey or LRH into something that they are not--legitimate.

You, like me and most of the people who are out, are shocked that the world isn't such a bad place. In fact, life can be enjoyable, rich, rewarding with love toward your family. SHOCKING!

The only honor in Scientology is what you imagine.

Compare Davey or LRH to real religious leaders--the ones who don't buy $5000 suits. Follow the money. Look at the Ideal Org program. Look at the covert nature of the church. Look at the broken families. Look at the broken promises. Look at the nuttiness that never goes away. Look at the coercion. Gang bang sec checks?

Thugs are unworthy of being honored.

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

I'll have to refer you to Logic 101 on that issue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_logical_fallacies . I would be willing to accept that others may perceive imaginary money that I don't perceive. They are welcome to use it to pay others who can also see it. In similar vein, those who perceive the entities that you do not perceive are as entitled to their perception as you are.

Well I guess it all comes down to W. C. Fields Law of Morality*, and Scientology is like a Swiss Army Knife when it comes to getting a sucker to part with his money. Everything from Hubbard's scientific background to Xenu's disembodied space aliens are imaginary fellas ... yep everything, except the money you use to pay me with, I do not accept Scientology Dollars

* "It's morally wrong to allow a sucker to keep his money" - W.C. Fields

 

[10oriocookies]

If you had asked what I tell my clients without the implication of existing dishonesty then you wouldn't have had a problem. I do agree that the way Narconon has conducted it's business has been dishonest. I did study Psychology at University for a year but left after passing the first year exams as I felt that I hadn't learn anything of value. Spiritual counselling does not require a license. I think Hubbard was mistaken to use the term "Mental Health". Scientology is a religious practice. I do not consider, before anyone suggests otherwise, that the CofS has a valid claim to be practicising that or any other religion. I make no claims to deliver anything but Scientology when people come to me for that. I am not going to list all the things I am not qualified in to people coming to me for Scientology. If you consider that dishonest then I disagree with you. Most of the work I do with people involves handling spiritual beings who have a compulsive attachment to an individual.

TR-L was not part of any training course that I did in Scientology. It was part of the training of the GO/OSA personnel who had their own hierarchy. It is a misapplication of Scientology, not part of its philosophy.

Its nice to heat that you believe Hubbard was mistaken, but I think you are also mistaken that what you are doing is considered a religious or spiritual practice if you are not part of the official church. You say you deal mainly with people who have a compulsive attachment to an individual. This most definitely falls under the jurisdiction of mental health professionals.

As for the GO stuff, if it was signed off by, created or condoned by LRH on official Checksheets Im sorry to say it is part of the religion. There are many other sexist, racist and off the wall parts of the tech that Hubbard founded, I was just using that particular one to show that its part of the tech to skirt issues or outright lie for the "greater good".

Maybe if you delivered your service for free or like one cent it may be different, but it seems we are talking about a thousand euros an intensive or so, is this correct? Most religions are free, why does scn have to cost so much outside of the church as well?

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Its nice to heat that you believe Hubbard was mistaken, but I think you are also mistaken that what you are doing is considered a religious or spiritual practice if you are not part of the official church. You say you deal mainly with people who have a compulsive attachment to an individual. This most definitely falls under the jurisdiction of mental health professionals.

As for the GO stuff, if it was signed off by, created or condoned by LRH on official Checksheets Im sorry to say it is part of the religion. There are many other sexist, racist and off the wall parts of the tech that Hubbard founded, I was just using that particular one to show that its part of the tech to skirt issues or outright lie for the "greater good".

Maybe if you delivered your service for free or like one cent it may be different, but it seems we are talking about a thousand euros an intensive or so, is this correct? Most religions are free, why does scn have to cost so much outside of the church as well?

I think we're all agreed that the prices charged in the CofS are extortionate, but the fact is that even people who devote their time to helping others need to live and the buildings they use must be paid for.

Religions may be nominally free, but if you attend a church service in the UK you'll be "reminded" to give money during the collection and often you'll be told that they prefer notes to coins. The good churches accept that some people nowadays are poor and can't give much, but they're offset by more affluent people who give a lot. And if you visit a cathedral in the UK (which I recommend btw; they're usually wonderful buildings), there'll generally be a notice at the back telling you how much the cathedral costs to run per hour and asking for a donation of a given size to help cover this.

In my experience, people don't get rich in the FZ anyway. I once had an argument with my course sup in the FZ about whether or not I should pay for a course I'd started and then abandoned, and her argument was that there was no point in her being there if she could earn more money cleaning floors. Way to guilt someone into paying up

We've all got to live and pay our bills.

 

[Helena Handbasket]

ALL RIGHT EVERYONE, LISTEN UP. NO MORE ARGUING. IF YOU KEEP ON ARGUING, I'M GOING TO KNOCK YOUR HEADS TOGETHER AND ASK THE MODS TO LOCK THIS THREAD. ENOUGH ALREADY!!

Helena