L Ron Hubbard's Origins. Black Magick and Aleistar Crowley

Knows

Gold Meritorious Patron
Well, I haven't really had a chance to contribute. I disagreed with your factual opinion(?) that we are being hypnotized by drug companies and I was immediately labeled an OSA bot. That might be due in part to you confusing me with Innominate Dude, but I'm not sure.

As for my personal beliefs and interests, why should I share that information with you after you've been so rude to me? I'm not going to explain myself to you and I'm not going to derail this thread any further. You have not been very pleasant to converse with and I will try to avoid you from now on. But I do wish you well.

ML

Okay - bye-bye:wave:

Score! :giggle:Another OSA bot confronted and shattered! :bow:

See how easy and fun it is !!

"ML?" No - he never did scientology:whistling:
 

Innominate Dude

No Longer Around
It does not matter whether you are "osa" - the only thing that would matter would be the inaccurate "history" that you peddled above.

Please do feel free to point out, specify, what you consider inaccurate.

I consider that I confined myself to well known points of established history using essentially public information that anyone interested in the matter would have taken note of over the decades.

I then added some conjectures to them concerning Pat Broeker that I believe reasonably reflect the probabilities. I think I am on excellent ground in pointing out that one of the popular explanations among well read followers of Miscavige's career for why Miscavige stayed in power but Broeker moved off, the alleged vulnerability Broeker had because he was channeling illicit funds to LRH, was something in fact shared by both Broeker and Miscavige, so one of the conventional accounts for how that power struggle played out doesn't make complete sense. Other probabilities should be considered.

Again, please do feel free to point out what you feel is inaccurate in the post.


 

Knows

Gold Meritorious Patron
Please do feel free to point out, specify, what you consider inaccurate.

I consider that I confined myself to well known points of established history using essentially public information that anyone interested in the matter would have taken note of over the decades.

I then added some conjectures to them concerning Pat Broeker that I believe reasonably reflect the probabilities. I think I am on excellent ground in pointing out that one of the popular explanations among well read followers of Miscavige's career for why Miscavige stayed in power but Broeker moved off, the alleged vulnerability Broeker had because he was channeling illicit funds to LRH, was something in fact shared by both Broeker and Miscavige, so one of the conventional accounts for how that power struggle played out doesn't make complete sense. Other probabilities should be considered.




Again, please do feel free to point out what you feel is inaccurate in the post.


:eyeroll: another one?

Hi Dude! I have not given you a WELCOME to the EXSMB yet - so WELCOME!! Please, tell us about yourself!!

Were you in Scientology and why did you get out?

Any family left in?

 

Innominate Dude

No Longer Around
Diane Richardson as in "Diane Richardson brings up conclusive evidence that debunks the myth of mind control." ???

That's from the Bernie 'Another Look at Scientology' site:

http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/mc3.htm


Who's Bernie? "Bernie" a fake critic who attempts to discredit real critics. He's still active, back channel.

I'll always applaud citing to Bernie's website, as he seems to be trying to reason his way through the various information and debates that swirl around Scientology rather than follow the "real critic" path of avoiding genuinely critical assessment of information and theories offered, lest one be taken for an "OSAbot". A very consistent trait of the "real" critic set has long been to resort to name calling, character assassination, and other tricks of sophistry when presented with a genuinely different view of things. I find it refreshing that Bernie tries to practice genuine criticism rather than engage in the spin-doctoring "real critics" seem to feel they are entitled to practice if not also obliged to praise most of all.

I'm not Bernie by the way, nor Ms. Richardson. Both are good examples of genuine critical inquiry into this topic in my opinion. It's a pity all my interactions with Ms. Richardson have been hostile on her side, and that she seems to rub many people the wrong way with that same hostility. She's an excellent source of information, as any reference librarian would be, but triply so because she is a reference librarian in a psychiatric library with excellent material that bears on the whole Scientology issue.

As to your bringing up Ms. Cooper, I think I've made plain that I consider Scientology to be extremely involved in both advocating and inculcating in others bad morals. I see we agree on that point. Why I'm commenting in THIS thread in particular goes to the point:
do we really need a bunch of murky and conjectural presentation of the role of "Black Magic" when we can pretty much attribute to bad morals the acts and influence the church?

Don't attribute to a magic wand what can be readily explained by sticky fingers. One thereby evades the extreme weakness of argument that requires one to first convince someone that magic wands exist and then use that to explain a theft, when a much more straightforward "sticky fingers" explanation is probably more likely to persuade and is a well grounded argument.

That's what I consider important in this thread, not diverting it into the "real critic" sport of making disagreements an occasion for "OSAbot" flamewars.
 
Last edited:

Veda

Sponsor
I'll always applaud citing to Bernie's website, as he seems to be trying to reason his way through the various information and debates that swirl around Scientology rather than follow the "real critic" path of avoiding genuinely critical assessment of information and theories offered, lest one be taken for an "OSAbot".



Here's Bernie's take on Lisa McPherson:

http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/Lisa_mcPherson.htm

And this on Tory Christman:

http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/Tory_Christman.htm
 

Innominate Dude

No Longer Around

I think Bernie's statement of the matter is factual and seeks to avoid name calling or other dirty tricks of debate. He accurately points out that the official coroner didn't do the autopsy. The young man who did got mistreated by the coroner, perhaps illegally discriminated against for following the law rather than the coroner's religiously motivated prejudices, for sticking to his examination results which didn't support the coroner's peculiar decision about the cause of death. Independent forensic experts eventually supported the young man who did do the post mortem as correct in refuting the coroner's trumped up prejudices that she tried to pass off as legitimate forensic work. I think Bernie could have touched on that subject more, but there's always a room for a difference of opinion as to how long a text will be before someone simply says "tl;dr".

Bernie also, of course, provides links to the various points of view that have arisen as a person genuinely trying to sort the matter out and help others do so is likely to.

I feel it is short sighted of him to not include information that I consider pertinent to mention at the same time, even against a "tl;dr" concern. Lisa was kept in appallingly substandard conditions for a woman experiencing her type of disability. (Sadly, transfer of her to a licensed nursing home would have only increased the probability of satisfactory care, not assured it. The disabled are often kept in appallingly bad facilities run by greedheads on a par with the Church of Scientology.) While kept by Flag she was denied her right of access to courts that a person under her variety of detention has as a fundamental human right. (A legitimate mental health care facility, which the church likes to demonize, would not have done this.) Cheesy avoidance of responsibility for its own misconduct characterized the church's response to this death, which deserved at least some kind of mention I feel. (What can one say other than "bad morals church practices bad morals"?) Nevertheless, Bernie and everyone else on the net faces a constant "tl;dr" threat, so that may have played some role in omitting what I think were very important points to include.

Thanks for pointing lurkers towards
Bernie's site

http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/Lisa_mcPherson.htm

yet again. It is well worth reading at length in my opinion.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
Jeez, Lerma. Erlich could take the condo in Palm Springs and shut-up deal. Snapped it right up. What's it going to take to bring you to the settlement table? Do you need a Ferrari as good as Broekers and a blow job to seal the deal, along with a condo in . . . well I'm guessing Sedona would be your speed?>snip<

>snip>Anyhow, Mr. Lerma decided to indulge himself in a little silly "clambaking" with me in this thread by implying I'm OSA. I'm simply falling into the spirit of things and clambaking him right back. It's just old, er, "friends" (?) doing some "breaking balls" as they say on the Sopranos. No need to get puzzled by it.

I'll always applaud citing to Bernie's website, as he seems to be trying to reason his way through the various information and debates that swirl around Scientology rather than follow the "real critic" path of avoiding genuinely critical assessment of information and theories offered, lest one be taken for an "OSAbot". A very consistent trait of the "real" critic set has long been to resort to name calling, character assassination, and other tricks of sophistry when presented with a genuinely different view of things. I find it refreshing that Bernie tries to practice genuine criticism rather than engage in the spin-doctoring "real critics" seem to feel they are entitled to practice if not also obliged to praise most of all..>snip<

Diane Richardson as in "Diane Richardson brings up conclusive evidence that debunks the myth of mind control." ???

That's from the Bernie 'Another Look at Scientology' site:

http://bernie.cncfamily.com/sc/mc3.htm


Who's Bernie? "Bernie" a fake critic who attempts to discredit real critics. He's still active, back channel.

Below is a link to a $cientology disinformation site. But not as well disguised as what Bernie does.

Amongst other things, and like the Bernie site, it lies about, and continues to attack, Paulette Cooper. The first attempt at framing Cooper for making "bomb threats," in 1972 ('Operation Dynamite'), did succeed, resulting in her indictment by a Grand Jury. It came very close to destroying her life.>snip<


Thanks Veda, this Bernie site is primarily staged to discredit Ex's, no wonder this Innonate Dude likes it with his OT posting.
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
I once spent 3 days arguing with Diane Richardsen on IRC

In the end when I finally cornered her, she LIED.. She claimed that she spoke to Jessie Prince on the phone and he said whatever it was..

I called Jessie and asked him if he did as she claimed he said "NO! I've never talked to that (expletive deleted) and I wouldn't give that (expletive deleted) (expletive deleted) the time of day."

I have found the best way to weed out psychopaths or OSA (And telling the difference is quite difficult) is DO THEY LIE -or- do they quote those who do.

Friends might tell you hard truths but they don't lie to you. Those that lie to you are your enemies.

arnie lerma

PS: And Bernie has only helped $cientology to stay a live just a little longer...
 

Veda

Sponsor
And Innom Dude, do you know why a Scn Inc. PR damage control/propaganda site would refer others to Bernie for information?

_____​


Who's Bernie? "Bernie" a fake critic who attempts to discredit real critics. He's still active, back channel.

Below is a link to a $cientology disinformation site. But not as well disguised as what Bernie does.

Amongst other things, and like the Bernie site, it lies about, and continues to attack, Paulette Cooper. The first attempt at framing Cooper for making "bomb threats," in 1972 ('Operation Dynamite'), did succeed, resulting in her indictment by a Grand Jury. It came very close to destroying her life.

The second attempt to have her put in a mental institution or jail was interrupted by complications resulting from the unraveling of the Snow White Guardian's Office program later in 1976 - an unraveling that led to the FBI raids of July 1977.

An, yet, they write:

http://anonymouse.org/cgi-bin/anon-www.cgi/http://www.scientologymyths.info/operation-freakout

It even links to the 'Bernie' site, another covert Scientology cult site, but a "perimeter defense" operation, pretending to be a "reasonable critic" site. Notice the link is at the end of the piece under "One of them is here." "Here" is in red in the above link.



scandalscientology.cov15.gif
 

Innominate Dude

No Longer Around
Please - do tell us what your purpose is here and give us a little data about your involvement in the cult? Are you out, do you have family in?

Actually, I was semi-open about my background in several posts already. As you are an ESMB member you can simply use this site's search engine to find them, but I will nevertheless state some basics. I was raised in Scientology. When I asked in 1979 why certain church actions were being done I was shown the publication which introduced The Watchdog Committee to the world, which basically marks the point at which I became completely alienated from Scientology and just dropped it utterly. The Watchdog Committee had that effect on lots of people - I was joined by plenty of good company in the next few years. My family, which has a celebrity element, are now "inactive" as a swap for my not publicly locking horns with the church overtly, under my correct name, which is a modus vivendi we've been stable with for about 15 years now. Naturally I am more familiar with the "kid glove" treatment that gets extended to celebrity circles than the rough and brutal enforcement edge many others are familiar with, but still I do comprehend what goes on because of extensive contacts and long term interest in this matter.

Your homework is to study up on the Occult, Aleistar Crowley, L Ron Hubbard association with Jack Parson's and write up what you discovered. Then study up thoroughly on Hypnosis, Trauma and mind control and cults. Then do some clay demos on how these relate to Scientology and L Ron Hubbard and report back to us on what you discovered on mind control and how it relates to Scientology.

Mr. "Knows", unless you've been to certain libraries where you must physically appear and read their materials under the watchful eye of a curator constantly, they will not photocopy or lend out material to anyone, you might not know of some of the Crowley and Hubbard material I've reviewed that is not otherwise available to most. I know Crowley and Hubbard better than you seem to think. Your extensive reading list you provided did not contain anything new and unfamiliar to me, though I suppose we probably came to radically different conclusions about what the various materials actually state and imply.

I was about to write a somewhat explanatory article in reply to you explaining why I object to the loose, and I believe wrongful, way people try to invoke the mystique around hypnotism and dress up their "mind control" conjectures in a very amateurish way. For instance, most states in the US don't even require a license to engage in hypnotherapy because it is such a feeble and innocuous technique. Yet in places like a.r.s., Clambake, and increasingly here too, you find people trying to add pseudo-scientific window dressing to their ideas of how Hubbard and Scientology contains some immensely potent and spooky technique and that is why is survives as "a KrImInAl KuLt engaged in MiNd CoNtRol". This is a pseudo-scientific approach that I feel people should not waste their time on, and furthermore tends to create a more burdensome task in informing the public of the dishonesty, brutality and callousness, and other well understood flaws of the church. The direct and simple approach is best, not the complex and pseudo-scientific roundabout approach, when confronting the collection of bad morals that is church doctrine and practices. But if you insist on making life difficult for "real critics" of Scientology, such that they must first jump through a silly and unfounded hurdle of swallowing pseudo-scientific mind control dogma (or worse, try to invoke poorly understood mystical practices or beliefs that then are to be imagined as a source of power behind Scientology) that has been made popular in anti-Scientology circles, well it's a free country.

I will not be finishing that article and posting it though in light of the following private message from a moderator, which follows:


Moderator
4goldstar.png
Join DateFeb 2008Posts1,297

[h=2]
icon1.png
You have received a warning at Ex Scientologist Message Board[/h]
Dear Innominate Dude,

You have received a warning at Ex Scientologist Message Board.

Reason:
-------
Warning

You know how ARS became a seething mess of insanity?

Posts like this.

This is your only warning.

M2
-------

Original Post:
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?p=933019





Frankly, even though I don't go around carefully giving full references, using citation formats, and footnoting my text the way I would do if communicating with genuine peers, I nevertheless feel that my contributions to a place like ESMB outweigh anything it contributes in return to me. I don't see why when some decides to clambake me I can't clambake them right back, but that is what the moderator feels.

Handle my absence in further discussion with you however you please, but understand that I won't be posting any replies to you and your like-minded pseudo-scientists in light of what constitutes unacceptable moderator practice, in my opinion.

Or *plonk" as people use to say to me all the time back in the old a.r.s. days. Yah, some real brilliant minds there to think up such profound rebuttals as "plonk".
 

Innominate Dude

No Longer Around
I once spent 3 days arguing with Diane Richardsen on IRC

In the end when I finally cornered her, she LIED.. She claimed that she spoke to Jessie Prince on the phone and he said whatever it was..

Much as I thought I'd wasted the last of my time posting to ESMB with another post in this thread, I can't resist sharing a common experience as I leave.

Interestingly enough in the 1990s, while the Cult Awareness Network was still alive, I wanted to find out some information about it and encountered, serving as an impromptu spokesperson perhaps, Diane Richardson answering (or evading and dissembling in response rather) my questions. Later on when a.r.s. was very active I asked her about her ties to CAN and what she felt about its demise, and she stated she'd never had any contact with it. So she lied to me too.

This doesn't change that as an experienced reference librarian in a library devoted to specialized literature she was an excellent source of pertinent and reliable information about issues in controversy.

Bye bye now.
 

Cat Daddy

Silver Meritorious Patron
L Ron Hubbards "Sartanic Magic" explained by himself. "Satanic Magic" = Psychological mindfuck

[video=youtube;PP376qIWyyg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PP376qIWyyg[/video]

[video=youtube;_JY1pLFIsek]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JY1pLFIsek[/video]

L Ron Hubbard talking about changing definitions of words:

[video=youtube;Sf4gHpK4HSM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf4gHpK4HSM[/video]

The effect of "Satanic Magic"or psychological mindfucking explained:

[video=youtube;QBRPMbm_OCU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBRPMbm_OCU[/video]

"I want to rape the souls of women"

-L Ron Hubbard
 

Cat Daddy

Silver Meritorious Patron
Fact remains L Ron Hubbard was a sick pervert who was swiis to dick when it came to "magic" or rather some weird perverted shit


Much as I thought I'd wasted the last of my time posting to ESMB with another post in this thread, I can't resist sharing a common experience as I leave.

Interestingly enough in the 1990s, while the Cult Awareness Network was still alive, I wanted to find out some information about it and encountered, serving as an impromptu spokesperson perhaps, Diane Richardson answering (or evading and dissembling in response rather) my questions. Later on when a.r.s. was very active I asked her about her ties to CAN and what she felt about its demise, and she stated she'd never had any contact with it. So she lied to me too.

This doesn't change that as an experienced reference librarian in a library devoted to specialized literature she was an excellent source of pertinent and reliable information about issues in controversy.

Bye bye now.
 

Knows

Gold Meritorious Patron
L Ron Hubbards "Sartanic Magic" explained by himself. "Satanic Magic" = Psychological mindfuck

[video=youtube;PP376qIWyyg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PP376qIWyyg[/video]

[video=youtube;_JY1pLFIsek]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JY1pLFIsek[/video]

L Ron Hubbard talking about changing definitions of words:

[video=youtube;Sf4gHpK4HSM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf4gHpK4HSM[/video]

The effect of "Satanic Magic"or psychological mindfucking explained:

[video=youtube;QBRPMbm_OCU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBRPMbm_OCU[/video]

"I want to rape the souls of women"

-L Ron Hubbard


Now that we got rid of the two OSA Bots - we can get back to this subject - a subject that Scientology does not want known which was evident by the OSA operatives that came here and spewed their venom to get this thread derailed! It did not work and thanks to the truth exposed about how Scientology and their OSA Operatives function - everyone here nailed them!

Good job everyone - confronting and shattering OSA!! VWD - straight up and vertical stats and it is not even 2pm on Thursday!!! :clap::clap::clap: I wonder if they will get paid this Thursday when Slappy reads what happened here? LOL

Back to the topic ~ great videos! Thanks for posting! Bring it on....

The first video where Tubbs reveals exactly how Scientology works - get their agreement on a gradient so the operator gets panned determined! THAT is Scientology! If you look at the members now, especially those who have been in a long time, they have gone DOWN the dwindling spiral to ROBOT and cannot even create a service facsimile!

Think about it - they CANNOT CREATE A SERVICE FACSIMILE~! This is the modern day died-in-the-wool Scientologist. They have no emotion, they don't care about their families and will disconnect from them if ordered to by the Operator (now Miscavige with his Command Intention). They will give all of their money to the Organization never asking for financials to see where the money goes, donating to a building fund to the point of bankruptcy and the buildings sit vacant - they persist cuz persist is at the top o the tone scale etc...

Here are your Oat Tea's still in, who can't talk freely and have to carefully stay away from others and any entheta because they are fragile and weak...afraid to get next to wogs who may break their reality that they are super novus, the dedicated staff member who does not see anyone in their Org but believes the propaganda fed to them at events - "Scientology is expanding and has millions of members" so they think there is something wrong his/her Org is not doing right and it is their fault!

THIS IS SCIENTOLOGY - by Hubbards own description in video one!

Video Two Hubbard states "What is AWAKE?" "It is the degree of participation and control" THERE YOU HAVE IT! If you are believing source at the time you hear this video - you will change your definition of awake.

The real definition of awake:

"ALERT AND VIGILENT ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON AROUND YOU" "FULLY AWARE OF SOMETHING"

Hubbard states asleep is "NO participation and control"

The real definition of asleep is:

"NOT ALERT TO FUNCTION OR OPERATE PROPERLY"

How ironic that on the subject of Hypnosis - Hubbard is telling the clubbed seals that these definitions have anything to do with PARTICIPATION. How clever....participation in WHAT? Here you have the Operator, Hubbard, twisting the truth ever so slightly so that he can get his followers to participate more - participate more in Scientology? What he also does is feeds the "doom and gloom" about the Psychs and the end of the World coming to get your attention off of him and his evil cult.

He also starts giving commands: "get up the Bridge" "become more aware" "heighten your perceptics by doing Scientology" etc...

He created some front groups to give an apparancy that Scientology is doing something about the "doom and gloom" when it is nothing but a facade! A few wealthy public Scientologists donate to the front groups and go to disaster areas so the GOLD team can video tape this to show to the clubbed seals at the next propaganda event!

The front groups make Scientology appear that they are doing something about it to help mankind...but look today at the results...no one has ever heard of these front groups because the Organization does nothing except put together propaganda it shows opinion leaders and the followers of the cult so they think the Organization is doing something...but they are only COLLECTING MONEY AND AMASSING WEALTH!

So essentially the turd is hypnotizing his subjects to thinking awareness has something to do with participating....and some will participate in Scientology more and more to prove to themselves they are AWAKE...what a clever little turd!
 
Last edited:

Knows

Gold Meritorious Patron
I believe, perhaps, that Hubbard was trying to shatter the psyche of his follows, preparing them to be proper vessels for demonic possession.(note)

And his plan was to then have an army of Demonic OTs with which to rule the world. See this thread

From Blavatsky's book
< Click image for full page, in 1888, the meaning of the OT symbol was the SAME as the swaztika!

Note: In the Huna as well as Sufi belief systems, the only handle a demon or a Jinn can have upon a human is the handle of GUILT... perhaps that is why so much effort is spent in $cientology to make scientologists feel guilty...for not being perfect, no less.

Good work Arnie - THIS IS IT!! "The only handle a demon can have upon a human is the handle of GUILT" That is the product of Scientology - the science of introversion - the "being is responsible for EVERYTHING" - it is ALWAYS their fault!!

OT symbol? Wow!! There you have it. Today, when a "being" goes up to Oat Tea Ate - they are commanded to participate in Scientology and considered completely responsible. If they don't - they are declared!

Only a few stay in - many die, leave and hide! The ones that stay in are robots and are not human! They have nothing but MIS EMOTION!
 

Mick Wenlock

Admin Emeritus (retired)
Please do feel free to point out, specify, what you consider inaccurate.

I consider that I confined myself to well known points of established history using essentially public information that anyone interested in the matter would have taken note of over the decades.


oh really?

Dennis Erlich and Mr. Lerma were some of the original big guns on a newsgroup forum called alt.religion.scientology which started being relevant right around 20 years ago. In keeping with the "anarchist lunatic terrorist" ethos of the "alt." newsgroup tier it was on, it quickly turned into an undisciplined arena for spewing juvenile nonsense, far out conspiracy theories, and generally degenerated into more of a school yard taunting exhibition that a real newsgroup. The few educated people in the arena of debate, such as librarian Diane Richardson at a psychiatric reference library, were generally the butt of hate and spewing of general venom for the psychological satisfaction of the reading public and posters alike, but for no real good reason other than that. If every last post on a.r.s. disappeared down the memory hole, nothing of value was lost. Unfortunately it was ALSO an arena that provided much conditioning, much positive feedback and sense of status, to Mr. Lerma, which I believe seriously degraded his general critical faculties and led him into spinning ever wilder scenarios about Hubbard and Scientology.

First of all - nothing factual in this - so far merely the expression of opinion given as though you knew what you were referring to - the problem is that you have omitted the point where you actually demonstrate that simple fact.

Dennis and Arnie were indeed two of the most active in the anti-Scientology world as it was back then - but there were a lot of others - perhaps you would like to take a swing at naming some of the more important ones? After the RMGroup attempt - the biggest mistake Scientology was to make on the internet and which probably - IMO - made it impossible for it ever to be taken seriously online. There were numerous people who were very active and who contribute way more than Diane for example.

You actually managed to elide over the whole sporgery attempts, the attempts at outing posters and setting up people, So much for the dismissive comment about 'alt" which, again, you seem to lack any experience of. And then there was Battlefield earth - again you missed that whole argument and campaign which is not surprising.

Like most unmoderated forums it had its wild and woolly moments. It eventually lost its usefulness especially with the demise of dejanews.

I then added some conjectures to them concerning Pat Broeker that I believe reasonably reflect the probabilities. I think I am on excellent ground in pointing out that one of the popular explanations among well read followers of Miscavige's career for why Miscavige stayed in power but Broeker moved off, the alleged vulnerability Broeker had because he was channeling illicit funds to LRH, was something in fact shared by both Broeker and Miscavige, so one of the conventional accounts for how that power struggle played out doesn't make complete sense. Other probabilities should be considered.

Again, please do feel free to point out what you feel is inaccurate in the post.

that will do for the moment because the rest of your post was done in the exact same vein or should I say vain waffly way.

If you are going to pompously post about such things - then you might actually want to learn about it first. Not that I would suggest you do that because really, it's just about scientology and if you weren't on it then it is not a very significant subject.
 

Gib

Crusader
For instance,
most states in the US don't even require a license to engage in hypnotherapy because it is such a feeble and innocuous technique
.

That statement appears to be true based on this link:

http://www.hypnotherapistsunion.org/statelaws

BTW, "Innominate" means nameless, from latin.

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

But I tend to agree with Innominate Dude, for the most part.

I think getting into Crowley, black magic, white magic,

is a road to "no data" if true or not,
for most people, and doesn't help the cause of exposing scientology.

Shoot, if Crowleys black magic and beast 666 were true,

why there would be more followers of those things. (and scientology).

Hubbard just did his usual, create a mystery, as a [STRIKE]thetan[/STRIKE] person loves a mystery sandwich (OT levels),

which is what Innominate Dude is saying, I believe.

But, it doesn't matter to me.

[STRIKE]Scientology[/STRIKE] Hubbardology is one big mystery sandwich, shore story, BS,

whatever words that explain persuasion in it's fullest sense and suits one. :laugh:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasion
 
Top