I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation
Could someone please tell me what "<3" means ???
Marty Bloggeth & Anonymous Posteth the recording
- Thread starter scientrollogy
- Start date
SchwimmelPuckel
Genuine Meatball
It's a heart, turned on it's side.. A graphic made with text characters.
I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation
It's a heart, turned on it's side.. A graphic made with text characters.
Oh!!
(thank gawd for that ... I thought it was doggy algebra!!)
Thank-you Schwimee.
scooter
Gold Meritorious Patron
FWIW I think DM's greatest nightmare is that someone takes over the cult and is successful with it and Hubbard comes back and takes over a success that doesn't include DM.
IMO DM's recurring nightmare is Hubbard returning and DM being exposed as a failure to properly expand the cult - that's why He'll hang onto the leadership until it's either taken from Him or there's nothing left there to lead.
DM KNOWS Rathbun is a whole lot better at it than Him and that there's a lot of other people DM's burnt who'd run the place a lot better too - and they're all getting together and ganging up on the poor little man.
If you could put yourself in DM's shoes right now (personally I'd only get a toe or two in) I think you'd find Him terrified of the demonstrated competence that Marty has displayed and IMO He's totally berserk right now and I don't see that He'll last much longer before He does something soooooo stupid that the whole planet sits up and starts noticing how nuts He is.
Hopefully not something tragic like a Miscavigetown.
IMO DM's recurring nightmare is Hubbard returning and DM being exposed as a failure to properly expand the cult - that's why He'll hang onto the leadership until it's either taken from Him or there's nothing left there to lead.
DM KNOWS Rathbun is a whole lot better at it than Him and that there's a lot of other people DM's burnt who'd run the place a lot better too - and they're all getting together and ganging up on the poor little man.
If you could put yourself in DM's shoes right now (personally I'd only get a toe or two in
) I think you'd find Him terrified of the demonstrated competence that Marty has displayed and IMO He's totally berserk right now and I don't see that He'll last much longer before He does something soooooo stupid that the whole planet sits up and starts noticing how nuts He is. Hopefully not something tragic like a Miscavigetown.
lie2meiluvit
Patron with Honors
Out of ignorance...where has he been hiding? I haven't seen him in any of the events for a while? Is he hiding at sea?
ChronicEnturbulator
Patron with Honors
Texas.
lie2meiluvit
Patron with Honors
I meant the midget.
Terril park
Sponsor
Chronic Enturbulater is a troll. I'd ignore him. On WWP he admits to enjoy trolling me.
I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
I cut and pasted what you wrote, actually. Can't get any more "properly represented" than that since they're your actual words directly quoted.
And it is a fact that you've initiated all the exchange in between us. It always goes like this:
I post something- no mention of you anywhere in it.
You then come on and tell me my Scientology is showing (3 times)
Or that my husband has your sympathies. (1 time)
Then I respond. Those are the last four exchanges we had, and there are a couple potshots I got from you even before that. It would be very easy for me (or anyone else) to dig up each and every single one of these and produce them.
Now you're butthurt because you got a response or responses you did not like in response to your ad homs and you post yet even more ad homs about how it needs a TR or bulletin in it for me to understand it. (which is such a lame ass comment.)
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
Can we please NOT turn this thread into an attack on the anons.
Anons are very valuable and I for one ... love em!
'Pends on the anon and what he or she is doing or saying.
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
Can we please NOT turn this thread into an attack on the anons.
Anons are very valuable and I for one ... love em!
For the most part I think we all do. Many in the freezone frequently express viewpoints quite in admiration of Anons. However, it's like Fluff says: depends on the Anon.
I've attended protests from time to time and been well received by most of the anons present. I find them to be quite nice people being earnest, intelligent, and for the most part compassionate and well-intentioned. I'm certainly not their "enemy". Nor do I regard them to be "my army".
However, I've also encountered a few Anons, online & at protests, who consider that simply because a person such as myself finds value in scientology tech therefore he is to be targeted as an "enemy". That is presumptive in the extreme. Such seem to be very caught up in the "us vs them" game and consider all who don't conform to "us" must be considered for future attacks as "enemies". A few such have found their benighted way to ESMB and post here upon occasion.
Mark A. Baker
I would disagree with trying to get people to stop believing in 'the tech'. It's just not worth it. I don't think the people arguing against it are necessarily considering you an "enemy", but it seems to be natural for them to want to argue things they find to be questionable, much like advocates of science arguing against creationism. But unlike ancient religions, Scientology's as well as Hubbard's past is well-known, and Hubbard's intentions are questionable at best.
Now, as far as the call goes, the caller may have used some words that he thought was appropriate for what he was asking (although his reasons seemed a bit too paranoid), but to others, it seemed like an attack. IMO, it's probably best not to contact him directly if you don't know him and he doesn't know you. He's very paranoid right now, and he has reason to be. And at the same time, he still holds high his OSA mentality, despite his successful doubts and expose.
Now, as far as the call goes, the caller may have used some words that he thought was appropriate for what he was asking (although his reasons seemed a bit too paranoid), but to others, it seemed like an attack. IMO, it's probably best not to contact him directly if you don't know him and he doesn't know you. He's very paranoid right now, and he has reason to be. And at the same time, he still holds high his OSA mentality, despite his successful doubts and expose.
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
James' phrasing was pretty confrontational and presumptuous. He lectured Marty about his interest in tech and falsely stated that if someone beliefs the introspection rd works then they'd turn to fair gaming and that sort of thing. Perhaps James thought this was the way it would work given the way it is in CofS- that's likely, but the fact remains that he was still quite confrontational and unfair. He was trying to be polite (James was, I mean. Well, Marty, too) but the whole thing was ill advised.
There are people who do attack and oppose anyone who likes Scn tech. I myself have been labelled as dangerous on occasion just for that. I have been treated exactly like an enemy on some occasions by some people. So has Terril. Others on this and other boards have been addressed in that manner as well. Of course not everyone who disagrees with anyone else's interest in Scn tech is like that. I know this. But there truly are people who've gone on record saying they oppose and want to destroy the Free zone and Free Zoners. I've seen posts like that here, on WWP and certainly OCMB. I've also seen- and sometimes been subject of- a number of posts attacking non CofS Scn'ists for being non CofS Scn'ists.
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
I have upon attending public protests w/o mask been asked by masked attendees who I am. Occasionally when indicating my name and referring to myself as a "freezoner", I have been told: "we're coming for you next". I did not take that as a friendly or otherwise non-hostile representation or acknowledgement.
Fortunately such occurrences have been rare. I am also fully capable of differentiating among individuals, nor do I succumb easily to threats, whether direct or implicit. Nonetheless, such utterances do indeed reflect the mentality of at least a faction of the disparate interests which make up Anonymous. And some individuals who appear individually to profess such a viewpoint do occasionally post here on ESMB.
Mark A. Baker
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
One wonders where they would picket...non CofS Scientologists are like a herd of cats, we can't really be rounded up and put in concentration ca...ooops, I mean picketed.
I guess they could go to the FZ conventions- then they'd have a chance to join the culties who also picket. And they could compare notes and swap recipes- wouldn't that be fun!
I guess they could go to the FZ conventions- then they'd have a chance to join the culties who also picket. And they could compare notes and swap recipes- wouldn't that be fun!
Mark A. Baker
Sponsor
It's not much of a stretch to interpret Marty's experience in that light, whether or not that was actually the involved party's intent. Hence the need for discretion over enthusiasm.
Mark A. Baker
Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
It's not much of a stretch to interpret Marty's experience in that light, whether or not that was actually the involved party's intent. Hence the need for discretion over enthusiasm.
Mark A. Baker
James was obviously quite nervous during the call, given the giggling/nervous laughter. Understandably so. Not every day one phones someone one does not know.
However, it's a mistake to dictate to someone else what to believe which is, in effect, what James was doing. James is obviously very young, idealistic, and thinks he knows the deal through and through. He doesn't though I'm sure he's great with a computer or a picket sign. His intentions are good but he is exactly the sort of person for whom the saying "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" was created. Had a Scientologist phoned an anon or OG critic or outspoken ex and said exactly the same things with just a couple pronouns, etc changed, we all know that every single critical forum would be a-buzz with indignation.
And this stuff about "we're coming for you next". What people like that don't realize is that one cannot legislate belief or grass roots movements. Not in this day and age, not in modern westernized nations. N America, Europe, some other nations- they're not run by the Taliban. They're not run by Vlad the Impaler who imposed restrictions so vile and terrifying that crime was extremely low but, well, you know... These modern nations aren't run by the Salem witch hunters or the Inquisition or even the early Church of England or Renaissance Catholics who were checking to see who went to church and how they behaved when they got there, or by the Spanish Inquisition which survived well into the 19th century. We ditched people like that. Any attempt by any anon or anyone else to take down the Freezone will not work because
A) it's grass roots, non centralized and is just individuals following their dreams and desires
and
B) They'd be laughed out of existence
and
C) the ACLU would take the case in a red hot second.
and
D) they've got no abuses to protest
and
E) They wouldn't have the support of a goodly percentage of the OG
and
F) Some of us have recordings and transcripts of communiques in which Anons have claimed that they support a person's right to be in the Free Zone. It would be interesting to whip those out at the appropriate time...
bluewiggirl
Patron Meritorious
^ this is an example of you not getting Anonymous. That's cool, most people don't and you're probably better off for it.
Similar threads
