iScientology.org - A new home for Independent Scientology?

[Bill]

My original post is an example of beliefs that had/have real consequences. As such, beliefs should be investigated, in this case Scientology. A person is entitled to believe in the most irrational subjective fallacies they choose, yet those beliefs still have consequences, such as the mental/emotional manipulation inherent within Scientology.

I never said I want to regulate or control peoples beliefs/thoughts. I said, "Beliefs should be challenged, examined, and analyzed." It's ironic you state that cults and governments practicing thought control are the worst organizations on earth and accuse me of doing the same while you defend a cult. Considering how indignant you are regarding challenging beliefs, twisting my words to fit a nonexistent agenda, your motivation is suspect and deemed irrelevant.

No, you said:

The post I made is a general offering countering the fall back offered on the board that people, in particular Scientologists, are entitled to their own beliefs.

You were arguing that Scientologists are not "entitled to their own beliefs".

Even all those Scientologists who have never harmed another? Just because they might, someday, maybe harm others? Because the Church of Scientology harms people?

You claim that those beliefs "have consequences", even when the believer has done no harm? Not "might have" but "have".

And I only said:

No, Scientologists are entitled to their own beliefs. Always have been, always should be.

Would you care to explain how that statement is "defending the cult"? I was defending the right of people, including you, to have their own thoughts, even if you or I don't like those thoughts.

Understand that I will argue with True Believers when I disagree with what they've said, but I will never attack them because they believe. That is their right.

I'm very proud of my position, but I did not and do not defend the fucking cult and I find your putting words into my mouth to be insulting.

Bill

 

[Goodbye]

One point of clarification, and I might be demonstrating my own ignorance.

Definitions of Confessionals in the Tech Dictionary will clarify all that.

 

[Infinite]

One point of clarification, and I might be demonstrating my own ignorance.

My understanding is that, while the distinction has as a practical matter largely been lost within the corporate Church of Scientology:

Confessional =/= Sec Check

While Grade II contains Confessionals, it does not contain Sec Checks.

Therefore, Independent Scientology could deliver Grade II containing Confessionals without having Sec Checks.

Am I incorrect?

I'll also note in passing that one thing Marty posted on his blog that impressed me was that he did not write down any of the PCs overts during Confessionals. That he made a conscious decision that there was not a written record of overts. I also seem to recall him saying that he didn't care whether people thought that was Standard Tech or not.

Marty made a public announcement that Xenu was a metaphor and that he didn't believe anyting.

 

[Infinite]

It's an accurate view, held by somone (me) who was active in the scene and still knows people in it.

Rather than an accurate view, its actually a contradiction in terms.

 

[MissWog]

One point of clarification, and I might be demonstrating my own ignorance.

My understanding is that, while the distinction has as a practical matter largely been lost within the corporate Church of Scientology:

Confessional =/= Sec Check

While Grade II contains Confessionals, it does not contain Sec Checks.

Therefore, Independent Scientology could deliver Grade II containing Confessionals without having Sec Checks.

Am I incorrect?

I'll also note in passing that one thing Marty posted on his blog that impressed me was that he did not write down any of the PCs overts during Confessionals. That he made a conscious decision that there was not a written record of overts. I also seem to recall him saying that he didn't care whether people thought that was Standard Tech or not.

I think a "confessional" is a stolen word they use to call a PC folder in the press. A Sec Check is in layman's terms, an interrogation. So, your Sec Check documents can end up in your PC folder, and then someone could call the entire lot a "confessional" to prevent anyone from seeing it. They may also claim they own it, and not even you have a right to it.

Definitions of Confessionals in the Tech Dictionary will clarify all that.

Goodbye,
Please read the quotes above yours I have included in this post.
I am trying to figure your point out (I come from a place of compassion) and I have done well to keep my mouth and fingers shut until now! .. but as a person raised with a Jewish Father, Catholic Dad and Protestant Mother..I gotta tell ya.. the religions I was raised around were never about a dictionary or policy or any other kind new fangeled book..in the end..God/Christ/Allah <insert your deity here> In the end your deity is omnipotent and knows your thoughts and your heart.. so no matter how Scn uses the word confession..what are you saying confession is?? Are you really telling me to look at a dictionary?? (where is this dictionary)? What is your HCOB? Policy? Do you have a lecture?

Deep Breathe Missy!!! Whewwww!! Whhhoooosssshh...

Confession.. I'd love to hear what a Scientologist feels, thinks and understands confession to be. Certainly a Catholic does it one way while a Protestant does slightly different as do the Muslims and the Jews! ..but how does a Scientologist feel, think, understand and do confession? Why is this important? I thought you could stay of the Christian, Jewish, Muslim faith and still be a Scion? So why is confession relevant?

Please blow my mind and answer what I am asking.. if you don't understand my question let me know and I will try to rephrase it!!!

Smiles!
Missy

 

[Panda Termint]

Confessional = Sec Check = Overt/Withhold handling.

Confessional is a polite, politically correct word and doesn't really ping people's buttons like Security Check does. The procedure is identical, supposedly Confessionals are for the PC's benefit and Sec Checks are to ensure the security of scientology but the distinction is moot.

It's the same thing with the False Purpose Rundown, the Evil and/or Destructive Purpose Rundown just doesn't quite have the same social acceptability, right? It's all about perception from a PR and Public acceptance viewpoint. Scientology has done this sort of thing since forever.

One of the earliest examples I can personally recall is when the Guardian Office Intelligence Bureau (B1) was renamed "Information" but I bet Veda can tell us about other examples of Hubbardian word-shift.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

Posted by MissWog

snipped

Confession.. I'd love to hear what a Scientologist feels, thinks and understands confession to be. Certainly a Catholic does it one way while a Protestant does slightly different as do the Muslims and the Jews! ..but how does a Scientologist feel, think, understand and do confession? Why is this important? I thought you could stay of the Christian, Jewish, Muslim faith and still be a Scion? So why is confession relevant?

A scientologist gets told that sec checking is the next action, there's no choice and certainly no discussion about it and it's automatic before and after certain things in the SO (like prior to and returning from a 'mission') and done every 6 months on some of the upper levels, its done on the cans (with an e-meter) using a pre written list of questions and any other's that are deemed to be relevant. There are really nasty sec checks where you are told 'I'm not auditing you' prior to starting and they can be terrifying because you know you can't just get up and walk out, you need to come up with something and then appear to be relieved after disclosing it and the needle on the meter has to play along too.

Lol, its complete madness.

It's a constant thing that scientologists tolerate and have to pay for, they are supposedly the most 'ethical people on the planet' (lol) but they have to be sec checked constantly because they are apparently not to be trusted.

​

 

[Infinite]

Goodbye,
Please read the quotes above yours I have included in this post.
I am trying to figure your point out (I come from a place of compassion) and I have done well to keep my mouth and fingers shut until now! .. but as a person raised with a Jewish Father, Catholic Dad and Protestant Mother..I gotta tell ya.. the religions I was raised around were never about a dictionary or policy or any other kind new fangeled book..in the end..God/Christ/Allah <insert your deity here> In the end your deity is omnipotent and knows your thoughts and your heart.. so no matter how Scn uses the word confession..what are you saying confession is?? Are you really telling me to look at a dictionary?? (where is this dictionary)? What is your HCOB? Policy? Do you have a lecture?

Deep Breathe Missy!!! Whewwww!! Whhhoooosssshh...

Confession.. I'd love to hear what a Scientologist feels, thinks and understands confession to be. Certainly a Catholic does it one way while a Protestant does slightly different as do the Muslims and the Jews! ..but how does a Scientologist feel, think, understand and do confession? Why is this important? I thought you could stay of the Christian, Jewish, Muslim faith and still be a Scion? So why is confession relevant?

Please blow my mind and answer what I am asking.. if you don't understand my question let me know and I will try to rephrase it!!!

Smiles!
Missy

I suspect the source of your confusion is that you might be unaware of the huge effort L Ron Hubbard put into the religious cloaking of his criminal conspiracy to defraud. He started calling Scientology a religion back in 1953 after losing the rights to the term "Dianetics" (which he subsequently retrieved) and was attracting attention from medical authorites concerned about the health benefits he was promoting. At the same time he also realised the tax benefits afforded to religions.

Over the years there were all sorts of on-going tweaks and tricks to reinforce the religiosity lie. It was in 1969 when the US Food And Drug Administration was sniffing around taking another look at Scientology when, overnight, the "PRE-CLEAR FOLDER ADMINISTRATION" was changed to "CONFESSIONAL FORMULARY". Nothing else in this regard changed, just the labels. The major effort to create the religion cover came in 1977 when Operation Snow White was uncovered. Among those chiefly involved in this PR exercise in make-believe was Larry (now Denise) Brennan:

[video]http://youtu.be/3bn90lUh8g4[/video]​

To prevent any further confusion on your part, may I be so bold as to suggest that you consider the that Scientology is not a religion, nor is it a kooky but harmless UFO cult, rather it is an ongoing criminal conspiracy to defraud and has been since 1950 when L Ron Hubbard said he used Dianetics to cure his war injuries. I also find it helpful to keep in mind the maxim that there are only two absolutes when it comes to Scientology: it is never as it first appears and it is always worse than you think.

(PS: Have I said "welcome"? Nice to have you here MissWog.)

 

[Jquepublic]

One point of clarification, and I might be demonstrating my own ignorance.

My understanding is that, while the distinction has as a practical matter largely been lost within the corporate Church of Scientology:

Confessional =/= Sec Check

While Grade II contains Confessionals, it does not contain Sec Checks.

Therefore, Independent Scientology could deliver Grade II containing Confessionals without having Sec Checks.

Am I incorrect?

I'll also note in passing that one thing Marty posted on his blog that impressed me was that he did not write down any of the PCs overts during Confessionals. That he made a conscious decision that there was not a written record of overts. I also seem to recall him saying that he didn't care whether people thought that was Standard Tech or not.

Short answer: yes, HCO sec checks are not a requirement per se. Confessional tech includes the statement of forgiveness when all questions have been completed and has no ethics interview or action following confession. Any sec check form that exists can be done either as confessional style or HCO style.

 

[Gadfly]

I also find it helpful to keep in mind the maxim that there are only two absolutes when it comes to Scientology:

it is never as it first appears and it is always worse than you think.

I would add this as an absolute about Scientology:

Everything ever written or done since the beginning of Scientology was written or done to HELP and ASSIST the organization known as the Church of Scientology. This comes down to whatever assists and helps the expansion, income and image of Hubbard & Scientology. If you examine and research Scientology with THAT akways in mind, it is easy to understand every machination at every point.

THAT is the Top Senior Datum and always has been. All else, everything Hubbard ever wrote, anything ever done by any staff at any level, was to realize the expansion, income and image of Hubbard & Scientology (at any and all cost, and truth be damned).

 

[Jquepublic]

Goodbye,
Please read the quotes above yours I have included in this post.
I am trying to figure your point out (I come from a place of compassion) and I have done well to keep my mouth and fingers shut until now! .. but as a person raised with a Jewish Father, Catholic Dad and Protestant Mother..I gotta tell ya.. the religions I was raised around were never about a dictionary or policy or any other kind new fangeled book..in the end..God/Christ/Allah <insert your deity here> In the end your deity is omnipotent and knows your thoughts and your heart.. so no matter how Scn uses the word confession..what are you saying confession is?? Are you really telling me to look at a dictionary?? (where is this dictionary)? What is your HCOB? Policy? Do you have a lecture?

Deep Breathe Missy!!! Whewwww!! Whhhoooosssshh...

Confession.. I'd love to hear what a Scientologist feels, thinks and understands confession to be. Certainly a Catholic does it one way while a Protestant does slightly different as do the Muslims and the Jews! ..but how does a Scientologist feel, think, understand and do confession? Why is this important? I thought you could stay of the Christian, Jewish, Muslim faith and still be a Scion? So why is confession relevant?

Please blow my mind and answer what I am asking.. if you don't understand my question let me know and I will try to rephrase it!!!

Smiles!
Missy

I doubt I'll blow your mind but I'll try to answer.

Scientologists believe that the accumulation of transgressions - i.e. overts/withholds - trap a being and keep him from going free spiritually. A confessional is a list of questions designed to ferret out those things a person has done or failed to do that he is ashamed of and doesn't want found out. Some confessionals are pre-written, like the Joburg confessional or the children's sec check, and some are tailor made, drawing from data in the preclear's folder.

There are two ways to deliver a confessional in Scientology. One contains a statement of forgiveness for everything revealed in session to the auditor and does not have an ethics action or handling following it. The other and more prevelant method is called an HCO Confessional and begins with the statement "I am not auditing you" prior to start of session, and includes an ethics handling at the end of the confessional, sometimes multiple handlings are done as the confessional is underway, based on knowledge reports that the auditor writes up after session of the things the preclear has told him.

 

[Infinite]

I doubt I'll blow your mind but I'll try to answer.

Scientologists believe that the accumulation of transgressions - i.e. overts/withholds - trap a being and keep him from going free spiritually. A confessional is a list of questions designed to ferret out those things a person has done or failed to do that he is ashamed of and doesn't want found out. Some confessionals are pre-written, like the Joburg confessional or the children's sec check, and some are tailor made, drawing from data in the preclear's folder.

There are two ways to deliver a confessional in Scientology. One contains a statement of forgiveness for everything revealed in session to the auditor and does not have an ethics action or handling following it. The other and more prevelant method is called an HCO Confessional and begins with the statement "I am not auditing you" prior to start of session, and includes an ethics handling at the end of the confessional, sometimes multiple handlings are done as the confessional is underway, based on knowledge reports that the auditor writes up after session of the things the preclear has told him.

And lets not forget: the information gleaned from the confessionals is carefully recorded for subsequent use against the person and their contacts should the need arise. Ostensibly, confessionals are for the benefit of the PC; in effect, they are for the benefit of Scientology.

 

[Smilla]

1. Demand for Purity. The world is viewed as black and white and the members are constantly exhorted to conform to the ideology of the group and strive for perfection. The induction of guilt and/or shame is a powerful control device used here.
2. Confession. Sins, as defined by the group, are to be confessed either to a personal monitor or publicly to the group. There is no confidentiality; members' "sins," "attitudes," and "faults" are discussed and exploited by the leaders.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism

 

[Jquepublic]

And lets not forget: the information gleaned from the confessionals is carefully recorded for subsequent use against the person and their contacts should the need arise. Ostensibly, confessionals are for the benefit of the PC; in effect, they are for the benefit of Scientology.

Indeed. From what I know about the lines at FSO, RTC culls all session data for overts/withholds regardless of whether they come up in regular sessions or sec checks, regardless of statements of forgiveness, when a person is ready to move onto the advanced levels, and a person may have to answer up to the EO no matter what.

How they'd go about all this in the Indieverse, I don't know. It IS possible they would dismiss HCO Confessionals but I can't see that tech going away altogether because recent events show that ethics tech is held in high regard to this day, and it's part of ethics tech. So I can't say what the Indies do or don't do because I don't know. All I do know is that having been on the receiving end of umteen sec checks I personally would eat my own arm before I'd endure another.

 

[Infinite]

Indeed. From what I know about the lines at FSO, RTC culls all session data for overts/withholds regardless of whether they come up in regular sessions or sec checks, regardless of statements of forgiveness, when a person is ready to move onto the advanced levels, and a person may have to answer up to the EO no matter what.

How they'd go about all this in the Indieverse, I don't know. It IS possible they would dismiss HCO Confessionals but I can't see that tech going away altogether because recent events show that ethics tech is held in high regard to this day, and it's part of ethics tech. So I can't say what the Indies do or don't do because I don't know. All I do know is that having been on the receiving end of umteen sec checks I personally would eat my own arm before I'd endure another.

Well, the iScientology site informs its readers that "KSW is king" so, unless that is a lie, then the tech is in full force and will include such vital instructions as:

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 10 MARCH 1982 - CONFESSIONALS -ETHICS REPORTS REQUIRED​

It has recently been noticed that there was an omission on the part of ministers
doing Confessionals: They were not writing reports to Ethics on matters
relating to the offenses of others that were revealed during a Confessional. Doing
so is required per HCO PL 17 June 65, STAFF AUDITOR ADVICES and is
implicit in HCO PL 2 Apr. 65, FALSE REPORTS and in HCO PL 1 May 65,
STAFF MEMBER REPORTS.

Apparently this was due to· a failure to differentiate between a pc "getting
off" only other people's withholds and a pc revealing knowledge of another's
overt or crime against Scientology, its organizations or Scientologists.
A person who only talks about others' overts or withholds is often withholding
an overt of his own or engaging in a black PR campaign.

But a person who has knowledge of another's overts or crimes against Scientology
should have made out an ethics report himself and having failed to do so,
would have a withhold of knowing about another's offense and not having reported
it, even if it were only suspected . . . <snip> . . .

 

[Jquepublic]

Well, the iScientology site informs its readers that "KSW is king" so, unless that is a lie, then the tech is in full force and will include such vital instructions as:

Yes, but that's not quite the same thing as we're talking about with sec checks because it's dealing with knowledge of someone other than the PC's actions- for example, if a person tells an auditor in session that he and Joe went out drinking and Joe slept with a woman who is not his wife, no KR would be written on the PC for the boozing, but a KR would be written on Joe for messing around on his wife. And maybe for drinking if it was the night before course, or Joe had a session the next day, etc. Or if the auditor feels the drinking was so excessive that Joe put himself at risk somehow.

I did notice that Steve qualified his own position on KSW as being red on white, or technical bulletins. That may or may not be a load of crap, and it won't necessarily reflect the notion of all of the Indies, but he seemed to be stating it as if it were a basis of agreement for their group.

Thing is, KSW says exactly what it says and it doesn't specify red on white. It's an HCO PL in and of itself. Having the correct technology doesn't mean only technical bulletins. Admin TECH, Ethics TECH, Management TECH, Invest TECH, PR TECH...all fall under that same umbrella.

Slippery slope.

 

[Gadfly]

1. Demand for Purity. The world is viewed as black and white and the members are constantly exhorted to conform to the ideology of the group and strive for perfection. The induction of guilt and/or shame is a powerful control device used here.
2. Confession. Sins, as defined by the group, are to be confessed either to a personal monitor or publicly to the group. There is no confidentiality; members' "sins," "attitudes," and "faults" are discussed and exploited by the leaders.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism

That is such a great book!

I read it in late 1980s, and I couldn't help but take an honest look around and notice that mind control and severe indoctrination were happening right there in the world of organized Scientology. I lived in Clearwater and knew many SO staff and public.

If you read the book, are affiliated with Scientology, and DON'T SEE IT, then you are either blind, in denial, really dumb or experiencing the effects of major cognitive dissonace.

The notion of "purity" is a very abstract IDEA. It functions ONLY as an analogy with related concepts such as "standard technology". People who think in such abstract, vague and general terms are disconnected from the details of honest observation. Their own nutty ideas block them off from benefitting from the fruits of their own observations. In truth, while Hubbard often heralds the value of lookingness over thinkingness, involvement with Sceintology creates and causes the exact opposite - thinkingness superceding honest lookingness. Such is life in a mind control cult like Scientology.

Interestingly, a guy who talks about all of this, Alfred Korzybski, was a major source for many of Hubbard's ideas. He, in his writings on General Semantics, often discusses the difference between the 1) DETAILS and SPECIFICS (time, place, form and event) of observations of actual reality, and the 2) vagueness and generalized nature of abstract IDEAS which always omit relevant details and specifics to arise to their level of being able to embrace and explain ALL so easily. This involves the difference between actual things, which are ALL exact detailed things, and mental constructs involving categories that embrace many specifics below them.

It is the difference between 1) basing what you know on accurate honest observations, either by yourself or others, and at the other extreme, 2) on whatever imaginative ideas can meander through your MIND (as ideas, as concepts, as notions). Ideas can (and should) connect to and accurately relate to the things they claim to define and describe, but in many areas of life, and especially with cults, this is NOT so. The gulf between the realm of thought (as IDEAS and concepts) and observable reality is wide indeed. All forms of mind control take advantage of that and aim to replace honest observations of details with over-generalized abstract ideas. The subject of Scientology is an endless parade of such abstract ideas that fail to connect well to actual reality.

We are salvagig this sector.

Scientology is the only way out of the trap.

Anyone who is against us MUST be an SP.

Scientology is winning.

Do what Ron would do.

Ron is your best friend.

Scientology is a vital mission and the ONLY chance Mankind has.

And so forth, ad nauseum.

Hubbard' subject is overflowing with claims, statements and assertions about all sorts of things that are simply of the nature of IDEAS, and that very often do NOT accurately describe or define what they pretend to define and describe in the real world of life and behavior. It is really largely a case of fiction pretending to be non-fiction. But then, Hubbard WAS a fiction writer! The subject of Scientology is largely a natural extension and continuation of Hubbard's earlier career as a science fiction writer.

Why people choose to accept the fiction, and deny honest observation in self and others, is another topic.

 

[Smilla]

Yes, but that's not quite the same thing as we're talking about with sec checks because it's dealing with knowledge of someone other than the PC's actions- for example, if a person tells an auditor in session that he and Joe went out drinking and Joe slept with a woman who is not his wife, no KR would be written on the PC for the boozing, but a KR would be written on Joe for messing around on his wife. And maybe for drinking if it was the night before course, or Joe had a session the next day, etc. Or if the auditor feels the drinking was so excessive that Joe put himself at risk somehow.

I did notice that Steve qualified his own position on KSW as being red on white, or technical bulletins. That may or may not be a load of crap, and it won't necessarily reflect the notion of all of the Indies, but he seemed to be stating it as if it were a basis of agreement for their group.

Thing is, KSW says exactly what it says and it doesn't specify red on white. It's an HCO PL in and of itself. Having the correct technology doesn't mean only technical bulletins. Admin TECH, Ethics TECH, Management TECH, Invest TECH, PR TECH...all fall under that same umbrella.

Slippery slope.

As regards that slippery slope, I think are going to have to be seen to enforce KSW, which has already started with Steve Hall's Fabulous Facebook Freakout and which will require the use of 'Ethics Tech' and ultimately sec checks. It's inevitable.

 

[MissWog]

I suspect the source of your confusion is that you might be unaware of the huge effort L Ron Hubbard put into the religious cloaking of his criminal conspiracy to defraud.
(PS: Have I said "welcome"? Nice to have you here MissWog.)

Nope but I like what you said^^^ for those who are not aware!
I'm just hoping that Goodbye answers me. We shall see

Infinite,
I am humbled that you found my post worthy of "quoting" you just mad me sit up proud and straight .. for real I pulled my chair up ...shhh I could go on and on..but
GOODBYE, I ASKED YOU A COUPLE QUESTIONS.. no self-jackin' my post hahaha!

 

[MissWog]

Even all those Scientologists who have never harmed [STRIKE]another[/STRIKE]PEOPLE? by being a Scientologist you harm people. Just because they might, someday, maybe harm others? I hope we all realize that everyday being a Scientologist hurts others (so much that these "others" do not have the luxery of being on the internet..let alone this forum! Because the Church of Scientology harms people? YES it does..and while I sit here in all my happy MEST there is a person cleaning a toilet they do not own!

You claim that those beliefs "have consequences", even when the believer has done no harm? Not "might have" but "have". Everything is EVIL is Scientology!

Bill

Purple is from me!!! just bc y'all seem to like disclaimers