Independent Scientology Milestone Two encroaching on SBIC South African turf?

prosecco

Patron Meritorious
LANA REPLIES AGAIN TO KEEP IN KSW.

https://milestonetwo.wordpress.com/2015/02/13/south-africa-anyone/comment-page-1/#comment-7516

* * * * * BEGIN QUOTATION * * * * *

Lana M. says:
February 14, 2015 at 10:51 pm

Thank you BIC Admin. I did not receive an email yet.

And can you please confirm that if people contact you for Bridge progress that you will put them through to persons delivering LRH’s Bridge and not to a Ron’s Org?
Reply


* * * * * END QUOTATION * * * * *



Oh god, it's a car crash... I don't want to look, but can't help myself...
 

Sidney18511

Patron with Honors
I think the situation happing on BIC has to do with the fact that the big disconnect-explosion that occurred there is kind of recent. It's sort of like reading Marty's blog years ago.

Their just not ready to admit to themselves that they were conned by the master.

But seeing that they let "boggle" post there is surprising. It makes me think that someone's brain is starting to click in. It gives me hope.
 

Veda

Sponsor
I think the situation happing on BIC has to do with the fact that the big disconnect-explosion that occurred there is kind of recent. It's sort of like reading Marty's blog years ago.

Their just not ready to admit to themselves that they were conned by the master.

But seeing that they let "boggle" post there is surprising. It makes me think that someone's brain is starting to click in. It gives me hope.

Scnafrica - who, I guess, is the Admin there - has recently explained why "boggle" has been tolerated:

"Thank you Ronnie [Bell] . There has been a reason for allowing Boggle on this thread. The demonstration here is that 97.5% of the BIC family see Boggle for what he is..."

In other words, Boggle is the token SP - one of the 2.5% - and kept around to demonstrate how an SP acts.
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Scnafrica - who, I guess, is the Admin there - has recently explained why "boggle" has been tolerated:

"Thank you Ronnie [Bell] . There has been a reason for allowing Boggle on this thread. The demonstration here is that 97.5% of the BIC family see Boggle for what he is..."

In other words, Boggle is the token SP - one of the 2.5% - and kept around to demonstrate how an SP acts.
The reference to the 2.5% number for alleged "SPs" is very disappointing.

I really thought they were better than that.

There is a difference between Scientologists Back in Comm and Milestone Two, but it appears it may not be as large as I thought it was.
 

AnonyMary

Formerly Fooled - Finally Free
The reference to the 2.5% number for alleged "SPs" is very disappointing.

I really thought they were better than that.

There is a difference between Scientologists Back in Comm and Milestone Two, but it appears it may not be as large as I thought it was.

Well, it takes time to sort out where a group stands.

We need a check list of positions taken by and for each Indy group to fill out. It would make it easier for others to understand each group and where it stands on it's own terms

I can't even get a comment in on some of these sites so I think you are the man ( or woman ) to do this project and get a response.

( just joking :biggrin: but it would sure be nice to have it get done. )
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Well, it takes time to sort out where a group stands.)
BIC may not have settled on a position yet. Or it may never have a single "one" -- which may be what is driving Lana nuts.

As I said in the OP, while MS2 is consistently fundamentalist, I've seen BIC go back and forth -- or at least have a much wider range of posts. A good example of a liberal or moderate BIC post is their October 23, 2014 re-posting of Christ Shelton's essay "A Change Will Do You Good," and posting Chris's follow-up comment "I will never be undergoing any auditing again." That would never happen on MS2.

It is one one of the reasons I was disappointed by th3 2.5% reference.
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Here's a quote from one of the thoughtful moderates at BIC:
"Were I to meet him [Hubbard] again, I would thoroughly sec check him and FPRD [False Purpose RunDown] him. And I would have a fully rehabilitated great leader with me."


Well, I guess that's a kind of progress and, at least, better than what one would find on Milestone Two.

For some, tech worship has replaced Hubbard worship.

That's a step in the right direction, but the steps are....s_o..... v_e_r_y.......... s___l___o___w.
Scnafrica - who, I guess, is the Admin there - has recently explained why "boggle" has been tolerated:

"Thank you Ronnie [Bell] . There has been a reason for allowing Boggle on this thread. The demonstration here is that 97.5% of the BIC family see Boggle for what he is..."

In other words, Boggle is the token SP - one of the 2.5% - and kept around to demonstrate how an SP acts.


As I said in the OP, while MS2 is consistently fundamentalist, I've seen BIC go back and forth -- or at least have a much wider range of posts. As a result, it is obviously trivial to cherry pick fundamentalist posts and represent those as accurately reflecting the whole.

A good example of a liberal or moderate BIC post is their October 23, 2014 re-posting of Christ Shelton's essay "A Change Will Do You Good," and posting Chris's follow-up comment "I will never be undergoing any auditing again." That would never happen on MS2.
 

Veda

Sponsor
As I said in the OP, while MS2 is consistently fundamentalist, I've seen BIC go back and forth -- or at least have a much wider range of posts. As a result, it is obviously trivial to cherry pick fundamentalist posts and represent those as accurately reflecting the whole.

A good example of a liberal or moderate BIC post is their October 23, 2014 re-posting of Christ Shelton's essay "A Change Will Do You Good," and posting Chris's follow-up comment "I will never be undergoing any auditing again." That would never happen on MS2.

I'm not very familiar with the politics over at BIC. I do know - or it seems - that "Scnafrica" is the Admin.

Yes, it does go back and forth - kind of a two steps forward, two steps back, two steps forward, etc. arrangement.

Right now, I see that (enlightened moderate) Shelley - who seems to be an influential participant on BIC - is having a disagreement with MS2. "Shelley" defends the posting of the Chris Shelton videos (which is good), and also expresses support for the Israeli group that uses both "LRH tech" and "CBR (Ron's Orgs) tech."

Both Lana (I think it's Lana) of MS2 and Shelley see themselves as the true Scientologists, and Shelley is mentioning 'ARC', 'What is Greatness?', etc., and the usual things that well meaning but, basically, clueless, Scientologists think Scientology is about.

The drama continues, the back and forth continues. After a while, it's a bit like watching a metronome. I'm glad you're watching it, and you can keep us updated. :)
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Well, it takes time to sort out where a group stands.

We need a check list of positions taken by and for each Indy group to fill out. It would make it easier for others to understand each group and where it stands on it's own terms

I worked out a 191-item checklist back in 2004, entitled Basic Elements of Standard Tech. Including numerical weighting for each point.

http://fzglobal.org/comparison.htm

The first 20 items and 10 from the middle, with their weighting, are:

1 Are source materials pre-1982 (books, issues, tapes) generally upheld? 8
2 Are the works of a recognized authority in the field generally upheld? 3
3 Are materials issued by Authority(ies) in the field since 1982 (i.e. CofS Int Mgmt) generally upheld? 1
4 Is the Auditor's Code used, especially no inval/eval in session? 8
5 Is there no hypnotism? 3
6 Are TRs OT-TR0 to TR4 used? 8
7 Are TRs 6-9 used? 2
8 Are Assessment TRs used? 3
9 Is the Communication Cycle used? 6
10 Is the Auditing Communication Cycle used? 6

11 Is the Repetitive Auditing Comm Cycle used? 6
12 Is Model Session per 1978 HCOB used, including Hav where needed? 6
13 Is a consistent and recognizable Model Session used? 6
14 Is Hav run in session where indicated? 6
15 Is a full Dn/Scn CS-1 done on a new Dn/Scn pc? 6
16 Is the pc indoctrinated into what is required of him/her in session? 8
17 Is full clearing of commands done per HCOB Clearing Commands? 3
18 Is clearing of commands done routinely, at least to the point that pc seems to get it? 6
19 Is full clearing of word lists done per HCOB Clearing Commands? 1
20 Are words cleared up as shown to be needed, as least? 6

141 Is [False] SP defined as big annoyance to Management? 8
142 Is SP declared and broadly published? 3
143 Is someone intimately connected to a real SP allowed general auditing? 3
144 Is disconnection from a False SP enforced? 6
145 Are actions normally audited by another (e.g. grades) accepted to be done Solo? 3
146 Is Clear adjudication only done by a very qualified C/S? 8
147 Is monitored Solo Auditing done under a competent C/S? 6
148 Are actions considered complete even when student/pc is dissatisfied? 6
149 Auditor studies/drills any action before running it? 8
150 Is there adequate theory behind any auditing action? 3

-----

There is also a far simpler 20-item auditor assessment checklist at http://fzglobal.org/auditorassessment.htm, and 20-item course sup checklist at http://fzglobal.org/supassessment.htm.

Paul
 
Last edited:

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
I'm not very familiar with the politics over at BIC. I do know - or it seems - that "Scnafrica" is the Admin.

Yes, it does go back and forth - kind of a two steps forward, two steps back, two steps forward, etc. arrangement.

Right now, I see that (enlightened moderate) Shelley - who seems to be an influential participant on BIC - is having a disagreement with MS2. "Shelley" defends the posting of the Chris Shelton videos (which is good), and also expresses support for the Israeli group that uses both "LRH tech" and "CBR (Ron's Orgs) tech."

Both Lana (I think it's Lana) of MS2 and Shelley see themselves as the true Scientologists, and Shelley is mentioning 'ARC', 'What is Greatness?', etc., and the usual things that well meaning but, basically, clueless, Scientologists think Scientology is about.

The drama continues, the back and forth continues. After a while, it's a bit like watching a metronome. I'm glad you're watching it, and you can keep us updated. :)
Which Israeli group are you referring to? Certainly not the Dror Center?

As to the rest of your post, I largely (and perhaps entirely) agree. Indeed, that was largely my point. Whereas MS2 is (or believes itself to be) pure KSW -- and they believe they have defined the "S" -- the BIC crowd seems to be still figuring things out or debating things amongst themselves.
 

Terril park

Sponsor
It is one one of the reasons I was disappointed by th3 2.5% reference.

That per se is not necessarily wrong or bad. Think sociopath as
opposed to SP. This is a mainstream as opposed to Scn concept.
What would be more important is WHY someone is referred to as a
2 and a half percenter. If its that say they had and benefited from
mainstream psychotherapy thats probably a wrong indication. If
its because they are miserable living with someone that may be a correct indication. I don't know what percentage the mainstream consider
sociopaths to be.

I do know that whatever they are called I'm very good at not
assocoiating with them. If they're not fun they're not worth
associating with.:coolwink:
 

Veda

Sponsor
Which Israeli group are you referring to? Certainly not the Dror Center?

Sorry, I must have been mistaken about that one. It's some other group. Hellen Chen's group is one, and BIC has hosted the current leader of Ron's Orgs. To MS2 that looks like squirrelling or condoning squirelling, but the Ron's Orgers believe that Capt. Bill (Astar) had a direct line to Ron (Elron) so, for them, it isn't squirrelling, although they're pretty tight lipped about discussing it with outsiders and "meatballs."

As to the rest of your post, I largely (and perhaps entirely) agree. Indeed, that was largely my point. Whereas MS2 is (or believes itself to be) pure KSW -- and they believe they have defined the "S" -- the BIC crowd seems to be still figuring things out or debating things amongst themselves.

:)
 

Terril park

Sponsor
Which Israeli group are you referring to? Certainly not the Dror Center?

As to the rest of your post, I largely (and perhaps entirely) agree. Indeed, that was largely my point. Whereas MS2 is (or believes itself to be) pure KSW -- and they believe they have defined the "S" -- the BIC crowd seems to be still figuring things out or debating things amongst themselves.

Probably was Dror. If you havn't read this academic paperyou might find it interesting as is Prof Lewis#s talk at Dror

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIAf6Fa4myY

http://www.academia.edu/4517890/The..._Letter_and_Scientology_s_Legitimation_Crisis



" The Lembergers also continued to explore theindependent movement, sometimes referred to as the Free Zone. For example, Dani Lemberger
phoned Max Hauri, head of Ron‘s Org, an independent Scientology organization that had left the
official Church
back in the 1980s. They had a long conversation; he liked Hauri‘s frankness and self deprecating humor. "
 

Veda

Sponsor
Probably was Dror.

-snip-

I knew I saw it some place.

" The Lembergers also continued to explore theindependent movement, sometimes referred to as the Free Zone. For example, Dani Lemberger
phoned Max Hauri, head of Ron‘s Org, an independent Scientology organization that had left the
official Church
back in the 1980s. They had a long conversation; he liked Hauri‘s frankness and self deprecating humor. "

Plus Ron's Orgs has lots and lots more OT levels, which Scientologists, naturally, desire:

rons_org_bridge.jpg
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
I knew I saw it some place.
" The Lembergers also continued to explore the independent movement, sometimes referred to as the Free Zone. For example, Dani Lemberger
phoned Max Hauri, head of Ron‘s Org, an independent Scientology organization that had left the
official Church
back in the 1980s. They had a long conversation; he liked Hauri‘s frankness and self deprecating humor. "
Plus Ron's Orgs has lots and lots more OT levels, which Scientologists, naturally, desire:

rons_org_bridge.jpg
That is different than saying that the Dror Center offers Ron's Org "tech" or the RO OT levels 9 -48. Personally I doubt it. I suspect Dani did just, and only, what was described -- i.e., "explore[d] the independent movement" and a talked to Hauri, who had a LOT of experience navigating the Indie (ok, Freezone) world. I could be wrong.
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Shelley at the South African Independent Scientology blog Scientologists Back In Comm is not well-pleased:

https://backincomm.wordpress.com/2015/02/12/the-great-divide/comment-page-1/#comment-15331

* * * * * BEGIN QUOTATION * * * * *

Shelley on February 15, 2015 at 2:21 am said:

Racingtheblood: I totally agree that Dror is an incredible group. I had the pleasure of meeting Dani & Tami at the Indy/Sp event last weekend, and they are wonderful people indeed. Despite the fact that there were a wide diversity of Indies (including Ron’s Org) in attendance, Dani and Tami granted total beingness to everyone – whatever their viewpoint and no matter their Indy affiliation.

I cannot however say the same about MS2.

I was somewhat taken aback at the most recent article on MS2 headed “South Africa anyone?”. The article stated they had reaches for auditing in South Africa and that these people want “the LRH bridge”. (An earlier version of the same article made a Freudian slip of saying “they are NOT wanting the LRH bridge” – but this was later corrected).

The immediate outpoint I noted was this: Why was this article put out on a public forum in the first place? The heading alone set the tone of what was to come, and I cannot help feeling that this article was a snide bullbait and swipe at the Indy scene in South Africa and the BIC blog. Lana has been in contact with people in South Africa – she knows very well that Mark Shreffler has just been here and she has clearly been in comm with BIC before, so how come she didn’t address this issue privately with her South African comm lines? Why throw this out there for people to have a “BIC and SA bashing” party?

Even after BIC responded, (which comment interestingly was held back and only published much later) they continued to allow comments denigrating the Indy scene in South Africa and the BIC blog.

As far as I am aware, BIC has never made or allowed any comments against MS2 – in fact they even used one of Lana’s articles with her permission some time ago, and earlier on in this discussion thread the author of this article validated MS2. Furthermore, BIC has made it clear that they do not take a stand nor are they a mouthpiece for or against any “Indy” group. Their “no man’s land” policy is an admirable one as far as I am concerned.

This is clearly not the stance of MS2 who seem to have appointed themselves as the universal Qual Division of every Independent Scientology activity across the planet and they alone have the right to approve or disapprove of what is LRH Tech and what isn’t.

Imagine my reaction and disappointment when I came across an MS2 article in which they all had a jolly good time bashing BIC and Chris Shelton after BIC had posted those brilliant videos of Chris’ explaining HIS VIEWPOINT of what had gone wrong in the Church. Personally, I really enjoyed these videos, and I feel that Chris made a valuable contribution in terms of explaining the complex labyrinth of Corporate Scientology (or RCS as it’s commonly known). I don’t care that Chris no longer considers himself a Scientologist – does this make him less of a human being and therefore not worthy to communicate his viewpoint? I think not. That man gave up something like 37 years of his life for a cause he truly believed in, and he has EVERY right to speak his mind and more importantly be heard and acknowledged.

MS2 engaging in a bashing of BIC and Chris Shelton melee and further knocking BIC for having the nerve to give Chris airtime was, in my opinion, unacceptable and conduct unbecoming of people purporting to be “real” Scientologists. Reading further on their blog, I came across an article in which they positioned themselves and “the ONLY true Scientologists” on the planet. If that is the case, then granting beingness to others, embracing the ARC triangle, The Creed & Aims of Scientology should be their mantra. So how come they see fit to engage in disparaging and denigrating remarks about good people on their blog? I have read a number of their articles and comments and it is amazing to see the atmosphere of sanctimonious “we are right and others are wrong” attitude being communicated on that blog.

MS2 claims to apply “100% LRH”. Which part of LRH are they applying by publicly denigrating fellow Scn’s and other blogs which are trying to expose Church crimes and generally HELP? How come they skipped all the early steps of the ethics gradients and went straight onto “public statements made against……”. At the very least don’t you think they should have taken this issue up with the BIC admins privately? What part of the ARC tech were they applying by allowing a public lashing of BIC and Chris Shelton? What about the Two Rules for Happy Living? And more importantly, how abut the Creed which states “all men have inalienable rights to speak freely……..”.

MS2’s reaction to BIC giving Chris Shelton airtime and acknowledgement was indicative of the same type of knee-jerk reaction of the Church. Who exactly appointed or put MS2 in charge of qualling what is ok and not ok to discuss or publish on other blogs and who gave them the right to put their “seal of approval” on other Independent auditors and groups applying LRH Tech?

I think it’s very clear that BIC is NOT an anti-SCN and anti-LRH blog – and I appreciate that they try to give everyone the right to their own viewpoint (within reason of course).

But for some reason this has got up MS2’s nose and they have made no secret how they feel about the South African Indy field and the BIC blog. So who is granting who beingness here and who is truly applying “What is Greatness”?

For me, that answer is very clear.

* * * * * END QUOTATION * * * * *

It appears racingintheblood39 at BIC agrees:

https://backincomm.wordpress.com/2015/02/12/the-great-divide/comment-page-1/#comment-15342

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

The stoney silence factor I began to experience, made it clear I was no longer welcome at MS2. That’s okay by me, since today, we are all free to associate with whom we choose. I still wish her well with her endeavors, never-the-less. as long as they continue to help people with the tech.

BUT, Shelley, they would do well to take heed of your criticisms of “appointing themselves as the only ones” Granting of beingness, and showing a respect for the clear mandate of your moderation policy, is about as middle of the road as one can get.

In short, Shelley, i really get you, so thanks. Chin up! :)

Best, Calvin.

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

As does FG at BIC:

https://backincomm.wordpress.com/2015/02/12/the-great-divide/comment-page-1/#comment-15349

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

Thanks Racingintheblood39.

To also react on the position of MS2. I like their essays always interesting and they have a very good vintage taste of old scientology before Miscavige. But when they take the position to tell who is a standard auditor or not, they take a position none invited them to take.

They become I would say a kind of “independant RTC”.


* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *

Lana at Milestone Two really doesn't apprecaite the "nattery response" at BIC, but tries to quash any public beef:

https://milestonetwo.wordpress.com/2015/02/13/south-africa-anyone/comment-page-1/#comment-7529

* * * * * BEGIN QUOTATION * * * * *

Lana M. says:

February 15, 2015 at 11:17 pm

Notice to all persons that comment on MS 2 blog, a nattery negative comment about MS 2 has been placed on BIC in the last few hours, inviting debate and more negative comments.

Please do NOT sink into a low toned games condition with that individual or the person who is in her ear. Drop it. Not feeding the entheta is the best solution. It is not the MS 2 game.

Any comments that engage in a games condition relating to the BIC commentary will be deleted from this thread.

* * * * * END QUOTATION * * * * *
 
Last edited:

lotus

stubborn rebel sheep!
Lana M. says:

February 15, 2015 at 11:17 pm

Notice to all persons that comment on MS 2 blog, a nattery negative comment about MS 2 has been placed on BIC in the last few hours, inviting debate and more negative comments.

Please do NOT sink into a low toned games condition with that individual or the person who is in her ear. Drop it. Not feeding the entheta is the best solution. It is not the MS 2 game.


* * * * * END QUOTATION * * * * *


Entheta is dangerous an can enturbulate, listen to us don't listen and talk to them!
100% KSW - in follower's mind and behavior control, as well as corporate image control!

:no:
 
Last edited:

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
And now BIC has taken notice of Lana's MS2 Notice:

https://backincomm.wordpress.com/2015/02/12/the-great-divide/comment-page-1/#comment-15361

* * * * * BEGIN QUOTATION * * * * *

SC on February 15, 2015 at 4:55 pm said:

Milestonetwo notice on their blog

Lana M. says:
February 15, 2015 at 11:17 pm
Notice to all persons that comment on MS 2 blog, a nattery negative comment about MS 2 has been placed on BIC in the last few hours, inviting debate and more negative comments.
Please do NOT sink into a low toned games condition with that individual or the person who is in her ear. Drop it. Not feeding the entheta is the best solution. It is not the MS 2 game.
Do not engage on BIC or on this platform. Any comments that engage in a games condition will be deleted from this thread.
Reply
Reply ?

******************************************

scnafrica on February 15, 2015 at 11:16 pm said:

Thank you for the alert SC.


* * * * * END QUOTATION * * * * *
 
Top