Is DM really a "true believer?"

scooter

Gold Meritorious Patron
I think you've hit it on the head with this, Larry - it's certainly answered my questions that I originally posed here. Thanks mate.:thumbsup:
 

Lulu Belle

Moonbat
Where did LRH write something about the IAS?


He didn't.

Actually, I heard about this, believe it or not, from a Missionaire when I was still in the SO.

This was the missions that were sent out after LRH did the "leave the body" thing. :eyeroll:

Kenny Lipton did the one I was at. Poor guy. Left the church and has since died himself.

LRH (when he was in hiding in San Louis Obisbo) saw an event on TV where they talked about the IAS.

His response was along the lines of "WTF is that?"

This was explained to him as what was being done for the protection of Scn, etc.

He was on drugs and just interested in the money, etc. so he was fine and didn't give a fuck.

But he didn't know.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
I didn't (read the entire post) ... I glanced at it and thought 'thank goodness I no longer have to read this scientology drivel'

You have done me a huge favour reminding me though ... how lucky I am to be FREE!!!


:)

Well, it's just discussion. Nobody has to read anyone's posts if they don't want to do so. This is a scn forum (critical, that is, of course) so some discussion of that is inevitable.
 

Winston Smith

Flunked Scientology
true believer?

No ofcourse DM hasn't the first clue about Scn...not that I care. You want to read about a true believer? Book called "True Believer, the story of Ana Montes" My peabrain cannot remember the author now other than he was a CIA officer. Montes was a quite attractive woman who sold this country out to Fidel Castro as a DIA analyst...fed him info that resulted in at least 6 deaths of US servicemen in central america. She is now in prison and will never work in intelligence again. Book made me barf.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
Wasn't feeling bad in the first place. I just thought I wanted to make that point, given the exchange I read.

Well Fluffy, I think you dragged up this old post (that you were not a part of) to make yourself right ... again and perhaps to 'let me know' that you are 'watching' me ... :omg:

We are all here for different reasons and those reasons can change.

I personally, did not come here to spend my time arguing with bolshy scientologists, (though there are some lovely ones here and I am happy to spend time with them). I have already spent enough of my life with scientologists and I feel that I know the 'script' and its variations and I know the 'tools' that are available and I have dumped them, or at least I am in the process of dumping them as most of us here are (including some lurkers that would possibly prefer to join an ESMB that is safer to post in ... at least when they are new).

:happydance:

I am an Ex scientologist ... that is uncomplicated and simple to understand.

You Fluffy, seem to have a (self appointed) role to be the one to 'handle' some of us that dare to differ with you or like minded people (to you).

I replied to you on a different thread a few days ago ...

Originally posted by fluffy
My friend's friend also told her that Nicole Kidman was a raving bitch. Hopefully, she's chilled out some since then but being a celeb and being catered to all the time- I doubt it. Ever read any of the books written by "assistants" to producers and other famous/powerful Hollywood types? Ick!


ITYIWT ... my response to the above.

I think from the moment she separated from Tom Cruise ... she visibly relaxed even though she was very upset (and had virtually lost her children).

She has been (and remains) the epitome of restraint, and as far as I know has never said a bad word about Cruise or scientology (possibly due to Marty's handling ... I wouldn't know).



Living in a stressful situation, in the public eye and with nanny's etc listening to every word and being 'run' by scientology and DM ... could make anyone a 'raving bitch' on occasion.

I think she is one of the more dignified 'Hollywood types' I have ever seen (perhaps because she isn't a 'Hollywood type')

... and my reply to you was more to do with what I felt was your bullying of 2 other posters that had a differing viewpoint to yours than about the actual issue (Nicole Kidman).

I knew what would ensue (and it did) and so did others apparently.

I am never quite sure what you have 'come as' (to this fancy dress party called ESMB where most of us wear a mask) and when you become a (sometimes ranting) scientologist (often mid thread) it is very tiring to respond to ... so I normally don't unless I have a positive to add.

You are a chameleon IMHO and are therefore effectively, more anonymous than most others here, despite your protestations on another thread.

You are also a 'straight speaker', so I know you will not object to being on the receipt end of some here at ESMB ... you have your TRs in (no doubt) and can handle it.

That is all.

Do feel free to have the last word.

:tobed:
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Well Fluffy, I think you dragged up this old post (that you were not a part of) to make yourself right ... again and perhaps to 'let me know' that you are 'watching' me ...

Ummm...noooo. The post was about two weeks old when I answered it. Sorry if that seems a bit late. Perhaps it was.

I'm not watching you. I read the thread and had some stuff to say.


I personally, did not come here to spend my time arguing with bolshy scientologists, (though there are some lovely ones here and I am happy to spend time with them). I have already spent enough of my life with scientologists and I feel that I know the 'script' and its variations and I know the 'tools' that are available and I have dumped them, or at least I am in the process of dumping them as most of us here are (including some lurkers that would possibly prefer to join an ESMB that is safer to post in ... at least when they are new).

I think the bolshy term is interesting, but as it precedes that particular noun, I think it contradicts what you later say. I do like the idea of being a bolshy Scn'ist rather than being the sort I was when I was in CofS.


I am an Ex scientologist ... that is uncomplicated and simple to understand.

It's not like I doubted it or wondered about it or worried about it. I mean, yeah, ok, have at it. Not a concern for me. Some of my best friends are, etc.


You Fluffy, seem to have a (self appointed) role to be the one to 'handle' some of us that dare to differ with you or like minded people (to you).

Nope. It's just posts on a public forum. And some debate. I always figured it was ok to debate on forums of this sort. Plenty of others do so.

There is someone in this exchange who is writing personalized commentary but that isn't I. You've speculated that I'm watching you and want to let you know that (wrong) and you've commented that I seem to have a "self appointed role to be the one to "handle" some of us that dare to differ with your or like minded people (to you).

... and my reply to you was more to do with what I felt was your bullying of 2 other posters that had a differing viewpoint to yours than about the actual issue (Nicole Kidman).

I replied to some posts, yes. I didn't call any forum contributor any names or anything of the sort.

I am never quite sure what you have 'come as' (to this fancy dress party called ESMB where most of us wear a mask) and when you become a (sometimes ranting) scientologist (often mid thread) it is very tiring to respond to ... so I normally don't unless I have a positive to add.

I'm sure we can either discuss the problems of the cult or something of the sort. That would be preferable to being psychoanalyzed by you.

You are a chameleon IMHO and are therefore effectively, more anonymous than most others here, despite your protestations on another thread.

Everyone's a chameleon. We all have different moods,external influences etc. I'm amazed that anyone would represent that as negative. I'm quite well known, critics have met me (many), my address and name, etc are known and so forth. I get the rhetoric- that somehow being a "chameleon" makes a person an unknown quantity- and by implication, an object of trepidation. Were that the case, however, everyone who wasn't a total robot, zombie or coma patient would be such. That does not follow.

You are also a 'straight speaker', so I know you will not object to being on the receipt end of some here at ESMB ... you have your TRs in (no doubt) and can handle it.

I do object to ad homs, though. Straight speaking isn't an excuse.

I have the right to post where and when I like and to have different ideas and moods at different times. I'm not perfect and never said I was. What I don't need is some cyberstranger whapping me in the face with it.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
Cool.

:)

Originally posted by Fluffy

I have the right to post where and when I like and to have different ideas and moods at different times. I'm not perfect and never said I was. What I don't need is some cyberstranger whapping me in the face with it.

Hopefully that can work both ways and others can have their rights also ... without being whapped in the face by a fluffycyberstranger.

:happydance:
 

Winston Smith

Flunked Scientology
Lighten up already! The last several posts sound like you take everything so seriously...don't worry, be happy and just remember each of us has to live with ourself. Clean living wins in the end.
 

Anonycat

Crusader
I don't think he is a true believer. He was supposed to be in elementary school when he went to SO.

I think he's seriously messed up.
 

KnightVision

Gold Meritorious Patron
DM is a 'believer' in the true LconH fashion... get customers to come in and enjoy an adequate amount of self satisfaction... just so that they will then pay to get down on their knees and suck for it.
 
Top