My story: staff 2004-2011 at Jo'burg and Flag

Disinfected

Patron Meritorious
Absolutely! Sorry - I didn't mean to sound like I thought otherwise ... I was just voicing my agreement, and being more specific as to how I see it. I feel the same. I would be lost without what Scn did for me - no-one else had been able to help. I guess I'm just pissed at those who won't see that their behaviour is very un-scn. Most of the people I met were good, and wanted to spread that goodness. It's those that brought bad into it, especially when they claim it's for the good, that just get my goat! scn wasn't something LRH created, as much as he wished he was that influential. scn was created by good people, getting together to do more good, and it just sucks that some have managed to ruin it for the rest.

We pretty much are on the same page :)

I just give LRH more credit than you do. I think he created much, if not most, of the good we see in Scientology. That does not mean that he did not borrow from or build upon prior work. Nothing wrong there.

However, I also feel that much, if not most, of the bad we see in Scientology is a creation of LRH also. That is where I part ways with many "Independents". IMO, the bad is aspects of LRH's vicious side (and anyone that takes an honest look at the man and his history has to acknowledge a vicious side - not as physical as Miscavige but just as vicious) immortalized in policy along with his desire to vest ultimate control in himself as Source. I think Hubbard also had a very good and compassionate side that moderated the bad while he was alive. Once Miscavige took over, that moderating factor gradually diminished to the micro-managed oppressive environment we have today in Scientology. Miscavige has done nothing more than to vest ultimate control in himself as Source. Covert Source giving lip service to Hubbard, but Source, none-the-less. Only apparently without Hubbard's civilizing aspects. Hubbard was a complex individual, Miscavige is not.

I still think Scientology could be good, fun, and useful if people could just do it freely without the oversight and control of an oppressive bureaucracy. I think we are moving in that direction. I would love to see the local orgs cut free of the Sea Org, or any outside "management".

disinfected
 
Last edited:

lkwdblds

Crusader
We pretty much are on the same page :)

I just give LRH more credit than you do. I think he created much, if not most, of the good we see in Scientology. That does not mean that he did not borrow from or build upon prior work. Nothing wrong there.

However, I also feel that much, if not most, of the bad we see in Scientology is a creation of LRH also. That is where I part ways with many "Independents". IMO, the bad is aspects of LRH's vicious side (and anyone that takes an honest look at the man and his history has to acknowledge a vicious side - not as physical as Miscavige but just as vicious) immortalized in policy along with his desire to vest ultimate control in himself as Source. I think Hubbard also had a very good and compassionate side that moderated the bad while he was alive. Once Miscavige took over, that moderating factor gradually diminished to the micro-managed oppressive environment we have today in Scientology. Miscavige has done nothing more than to vest ultimate control in himself as Source. Covert Source giving lip service to Hubbard, but Source, none-the-less. Only apparently without Hubbard's civilizing aspects. Hubbard was a complex individual, Miscavige is not.

I still think Scientology could be good, fun, and useful if people could just do it freely without the oversight and control of an oppressive bureaucracy. I think we are moving in that direction. I would love to see the local orgs cut free of the Sea Org, or any outside "management".

disinfected

Nice post, disinfected! I agree with all you have to say and that is a rare event for me nowadays. Also, you have a nice way with words, and are able to convey complex ideas using few words.

THE CODE OF A SCIENTOLOGIST HAS BEEN DRASTICALLY CHANGED!
To illustrate how DM has made himself source, I bring up the "Code of a Scientologist" written by LRH in 1954 with revisions in 1969 and 1973. DM has come out with his own new version which is presented on a new HQS Course he has developed. LRH's Code has 20 items. DM has left items 1-3 the same, has totally rewritten items 7 to 10 and totally deleted items 11-20. I wrote this up on another thread as follows:

Originally Posted by lkwdblds
I just visited Claire Swazey's Scientology Forum message board and learned that "THE CODE OF A SCIENTOLOGIST" his been completely rewritten and is now being introduced to people on the latest version of the HQS Course.

#4 I pledge to decry and do all I can to aboliish any and all abuses against life and Mankind. changed to "I pledge to deter to the fullest extent of my power anyone misusing or degrading Scientology to harmful ends."

#5 I pledge to expose and help abolish any and all physically damaging practices in the field of mental health. changed to "I pledge to prevent the use of Scientology advertisements to promote other products "

#6 I pledge to help clean up and keep clean the field of mental health. changed to "I promise to discourage the abuse of Scientology in the Press."

#7 I pledge to bring about an atmosphere of safety and security in the field of mental health by eradicating its abuses and brutatlity. changed to "I pledge to employ Scientology in the greatest good of the greatest humber of dynamics."

In this set, numbers 4 thru 7, LRH was more expansive, seeming to shoot for bringing up world standards or standards of all groups worldwide in the items being addressed. DM, on the other hand, focusses only on the Church of Scientology and omits references to any other group or the world at large.

Items 8 thru 10, DM seems directly opposed to LRH's approach. LRH is emphasizing the words "for all" and "humanitarian endeavors". This concepts seems to be repulsive to DM and he seems to go out of his way to totally eliminate them and redirects the new 8 thru 10 to only apply to a course room or auditing room or a dispute with the "uninformed".

#8 I pledge to support humanitarian endeavors in the fields of human rights. changed to "I pledge to render good processing, sound training and good disicpline to those students or peoples entrusted to my care."

#9 I pledge to embrace the policy of equal justice for all. changed to"I pledge to refuse to impart the person secrets of my preclear's

#10 I pledge to work for freedom of speech in the world. changed to "I pledge to engage in no unseemly disputes with the uninformed on the subject of my profession.

THE TEN DELETED ITEMS
#11 To actively decry the suppression of knowledge, wisdom, philosophy or data which would help mankind.
#12 To Support the Freedom of Religion. (interesting that DM deleted this one)
#13 To help Scio orgs and groups ally themselves with public groups.
#14 To teach Scio at a level it can be understood and used by the recipients
#15 To stress the freedom to use Scio as a philosophy in all its applications and variations in the humanities.
#16 To insist upon standard and unvaried Scio as an applied activity in ethics, processing and admin in Scio organizations.
#17 To take my share of responsibility for the impact of Scio upon the world.
#18 To increase the numbers and strength of Scio over the world.
#19 To set an example of the effectiveness and wisdom of Scio.
#20 To make the world a saner, better place.

Hows that for making oneself source? At least it is done with a right in your face attitude and is not covert.
Lakey
P.S. Note that the comments on Items 4 to 7 and Items 8 to 10 are mine.
 

Disinfected

Patron Meritorious
Nice post, disinfected! I agree with all you have to say and that is a rare event for me nowadays. Also, you have a nice way with words, and are able to convey complex ideas using few words.

THE CODE OF A SCIENTOLOGIST HAS BEEN DRASTICALLY CHANGED!

<snip>

Hows that for making oneself source? At least it is done with a right in your face attitude and is not covert.
Lakey
P.S. Note that the comments on Items 4 to 7 and Items 8 to 10 are mine.

Thank you.

If you like that post, you might enjoy something I wrote on Scientology a few years back:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Justanother&oldid=130663210#What_about_Scientology

Your information about the Code is disturbing or should I say that I am as disturbed as could be expected from someone that does not really much care about what happens inside David Miscavige's Church of Scientology except where it degrades to torture and abuse :omg:

If that change is true (and, no offense to Claire, but that is something I would have to see for myself), if it is true, that is so blatant that it fairly screams "someone stop me, please!" I sometimes think Miscavige is exhibiting the classic (subconscious?) criminal behavior of trying to leave enough clues around or make enough mistakes that he gets caught and stopped.

disinfected
 

Ladybird

Silver Meritorious Patron
Thanks, Kutta! Got myself some tomatoes, butternut, peppers and chives in the garden as we speak. Got a problem keeping the animals away from my lettuce - they get chomped as soon as those baby green leaves see the sun, but I'm working on a solution.

I'll probably never have a "normal" life - it's just not in my nature - but I do have those wonderful weekends and holidays, and enjoy them wholeheartedly! I've dropped the slave-driving mentality (it did take a while), and have promised myself to only do what I love, for as long as I love it, and not a moment longer. Thanks for the wishes - I promise to use them well :coolwink:

Mich, what is "normal"? LOL! I am a gardener too, it is so much fun to have the time to tend plants and animals and loved ones after scientology took all that away and demanded every minute of our lives and attention.

Thank you also for the information on how Kyalami Castle was financed.

I did some research on Kyalami Castle, here is what I found:

I did some googling around about the Kyalami Castle in South Africa. The Castle itself was buildt in 1990 by an eccentric architect as a private home. It is not a real castle. It was later converted to a "Boutique Hotel" that has 24 guest rooms. Doesn't seem like much room for a flood of scientology customers! There are no quarters for the staff that would be needed to service the castle, DM and his entourage, and the customers. Incidentally, Michael Jackson tried to buy it a few years ago, when he was under seige for pedophilia at Neverland ranch in CA. It is all show and no substance, just like scientology.

It is located in the richest suburb of Johannesburg, about 20 miles from the airport. The area has a very active preservation committee that seems to be quite adamantly opposed to any developement of the area that would not enhance the gentile "horse country" atmosphere. Building permits would be hard to come by. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Kyalami

http://www.castlekyalami.com/

Nearby, within a mile of the "castle" down bucolic winding country roads, there is an international race track, a huge gambling casino (Montecasino), golfcourses, all manner of entertainments for the wealthy and ironically, a huge prison. I wonder if DM will have to look at that prison every day from his own private "Bulgravia"? Or even better, I hope he will be looking up the hill at his pretend castle from his cell in Lonehill and Leeukop Prison!


http://www.religionnewsblog.com/20942/scientology-kyalami-castle

It does appear that Kyalami Castle is still operating as a specialty hotel and Wedding Venue. There must be some laws they are breaking using tax free parishioner donations to run a for profit hotel?

http://www.castlekyalami.com/
 
Last edited:

lkwdblds

Crusader
Thank you.

If you like that post, you might enjoy something I wrote on Scientology a few years back:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Justanother&oldid=130663210#What_about_Scientology

Your information about the Code is disturbing or should I say that I am as disturbed as could be expected from someone that does not really much care about what happens inside David Miscavige's Church of Scientology except where it degrades to torture and abuse :omg:

If that change is true (and, no offense to Claire, but that is something I would have to see for myself), if it is true, that is so blatant that it fairly screams "someone stop me, please!" I sometimes think Miscavige is exhibiting the classic (subconscious?) criminal behavior of trying to leave enough clues around or make enough mistakes that he gets caught and stopped.

disinfected

Terril Park checked out the Code revisions a bit on another thread and came up with the following:

Well this is astonishingly revealing of who the evil transcriptionist is!

From the new basics book "Scn 0-8", the Code is quoted as from 1954 in " The Creation Of Human Ability". No indication of any "updates" etc.

And lo! The new "basics" COHA has the code altered to match and is as Lakey states.


So in one of two new basic books, "The Creation of Human Ability", the drastically revised Code is published while in Scn 0-8, the original 1954 version appears.

I read the Wikipedia article you recommeded and thought it was excellent. You made a comment about where Hubbard's greatest talent lies. I thought what you said was valid and also liked very much what you said about Science vis a vis religion.

Whenever I mention his greatest talents, I always state that he was able to cull immense bodies of information and isolate out the key principles and sort them as to orders of importance. He was then able to package these in a manner that attracted interest from large numbers of people and then market them, mainly in the cultures of the Western world.

BTW, had he stuck to doing this, I believe he would have been quite successful, become fairly well known, especially when this was added to his reputation as a pulp writer and he could have become fairly wealthy doing only these things. Of course he wanted much more than that out of life; wanting his name to be etched in history as one of the greatest men who ever lived.
Lakey
 

Disinfected

Patron Meritorious
Terril Park checked out the Code revisions a bit on another thread and came up with the following:

Well this is astonishingly revealing of who the evil transcriptionist is!

From the new basics book "Scn 0-8", the Code is quoted as from 1954 in " The Creation Of Human Ability". No indication of any "updates" etc.

And lo! The new "basics" COHA has the code altered to match and is as Lakey states.


So in one of two new basic books, "The Creation of Human Ability", the drastically revised Code is published while in Scn 0-8, the original 1954 version appears.

I read the Wikipedia article you recommeded and thought it was excellent. You made a comment about where Hubbard's greatest talent lies. I thought what you said was valid and also liked very much what you said about Science vis a vis religion.

Whenever I mention his greatest talents, I always state that he was able to cull immense bodies of information and isolate out the key principles and sort them as to orders of importance. He was then able to package these in a manner that attracted interest from large numbers of people and then market them, mainly in the cultures of the Western world.

BTW, had he stuck to doing this, I believe he would have been quite successful, become fairly well known, especially when this was added to his reputation as a pulp writer and he could have become fairly wealthy doing only these things. Of course he wanted much more than that out of life; wanting his name to be etched in history as one of the greatest men who ever lived.
Lakey

Thanks. I have a set of the new books (still in shipping boxes, of course) and will check that out.

The official website has the 20-point Code:

http://www.scientology.org/what-is-...ds-and-codes/the-code-of-a-scientologist.html

Glad you enjoyed the article and I agree that things could have gone another way if LRH were a different person. But then perhaps he would have stuck to writing fiction (inb4buthedid). Anyway, I have hopes that the internet will help to kill CofS suppression and insanity just as it is helping to kill so much suppression and insanity in the Middle East and elsewhere. And it may be a fight in our arena also. I am sure Miscavige is watching Bashar al-Assad's scorched-earth resistance to change with great interest (and great approval??)

disinfected
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
The fact that the Code Of A Scientologist has been altered is really only "disturbing" to Scientologists, Ex-Scientologists not-so-much! :duh:

Just as a point of order though, it might be wiser to compare the actual concepts of each point one to the other rather than numbered concepts one to the other. (ie #5-old compares with #?-new)

Meanwhile... :)
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
From a CofS site, for peeps who would rather have a root canal than click on a CofS link:
CODE OF A SCIENTOLOGIST

The Code of a Scientologist was first issued as Professional Auditor’s Bulletin 41 in 1954. In this code, L. Ron Hubbard provides a Scientologist with guidelines for fighting for human rights and justice through social reform. It is a vital code for any Scientologist active in the community. The code was reissued in 1956 in the book, The Creation of Human Ability. Revised in 1969 and again in 1973, the code is given here in its final version.

<snip>
(I see no point in listing out these points as there is no conflict with them.)

-----

The 2007 "Basics" Scn 0-8 gives a July 1954 Code in full (it only has 10 points there); and a Feb 1969 Code of 20 points which matches the above word for word.

I looked in a 1976 version of Scn 0-8, and the Code it gave is identical to the current one, apart from a few capital letters, one abbreviation, and a missing final "s," none of which change the meaning at all.

I don't know who is ranting about what, but they are full of shit.
EDIT: Sorry, just re-read Lakey's post. The "changed" points he quotes are word-for-word the original 1954 (or 1956) points, namely:


As a Scientologist, I pledge myself to the Code of Scientology for the good of all.

1. To hear or speak no word of disparagement to the press, public
or preclears concerning any of my fellow Scientologists, our
professional organization or those whose names are closely
connected to this science.

2 To use the best I know of Scientology, to the best of my ability, to
better my preclears, groups and the world.

3 To refuse to accept for processing and to refuse to accept money
from any preclear or group I feel I cannot honestly help.

4 To deter to the fullest extent of my power anyone misusing or
degrading Scientology to harmful ends.

5 To prevent the use of Scientology in advertisements of other
products.

6 To discourage the abuse of Scientology in the press.

7 To employ Scientology to the greatest good of the greatest number
of dynamics.

8 To render good processing, sound training and good discipline
to those students or peoples entrusted to my care.

9 To refuse to impart the personal secrets of my preclears.

10 To engage in no unseemly disputes with the uninformed on the
subject of my profession.

Paul
 
Last edited:

Disinfected

Patron Meritorious
The fact that the Code Of A Scientologist has been altered is really only "disturbing" to Scientologists, Ex-Scientologists not-so-much! :duh:

Just as a point of order though, it might be wiser to compare the actual concepts of each point one to the other rather than numbered concepts one to the other. (ie #5-old compares with #?-new)

Meanwhile... :)

My point, exactly, on the first and I was thinking the same thing as you on the other :thumbsup:

I guess the next logical progression would be:

The Code of a Scientologist

# 1: Thou shalt follow COMMAND INTENTION
# 2: See # 1

disinfected
 

Kookaburra

Gold Meritorious Patron
Panda, I just checked the Scn site link and the code is the old one. :confused2:

Also, did anyone find the thread on the Scn forum? I was unable to find it.

The Code of a Scientologist is one of those documents which should be creating vast amounts of cognitive dissonance in every Scientologist. I can certainly understand DM wanting to deep 6 it.
 

Terril park

Sponsor
Panda, I just checked the Scn site link and the code is the old one. :confused2:

Also, did anyone find the thread on the Scn forum? I was unable to find it.

The Code of a Scientologist is one of those documents which should be creating vast amounts of cognitive dissonance in every Scientologist. I can certainly understand DM wanting to deep 6 it.

Thanks Paul. I too am interested in the thread on Scn forum
 

Disinfected

Patron Meritorious
Panda, I just checked the Scn site link and the code is the old one. :confused2:

Also, did anyone find the thread on the Scn forum? I was unable to find it.

The Code of a Scientologist is one of those documents which should be creating vast amounts of cognitive dissonance in every Scientologist. I can certainly understand DM wanting to deep 6 it.

Home » Scientology » Church of Scientology » Scientology and Other Religions (How does Scientology deal with the other, outsider, or stranger?)

http://www.scnforum.org/index.php?t=msg&th=905&start=0&S=3b274d4ca9ed676fe70e766eff29935f

disinfected
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
Panda, I just checked the Scn site link and the code is the old one. :confused2:

Also, did anyone find the thread on the Scn forum? I was unable to find it.

The Code of a Scientologist is one of those documents which should be creating vast amounts of cognitive dissonance in every Scientologist. I can certainly understand DM wanting to deep 6 it.
Huh? Why ask me?

I'm simply saying that this Code "complaint" which is "disturbing to some" is a whole lotta nothing. I don't think it's really been altered much, if at all.

End of story.
 

Kookaburra

Gold Meritorious Patron
Huh? Why ask me?

I'm simply saying that this Code "complaint" which is "disturbing to some" is a whole lotta nothing. I don't think it's really been altered much, if at all.

End of story.

The one quoted on the Scn forum is hugely different. The code of a Scientologist was one of those things that could keep Scientologists on track and behaving sanely if they actually used it.

Obviously there are not many left in the CoS that use it. :no:

I'm running low on sympathy for the poor sods still stuck inside. They have to be actively working at remaining ignorant, or pretending they don't know.

Sorry Mich, for the derail. :sorry:
 

mich

Patron
Nice post, disinfected! I agree with all you have to say and that is a rare event for me nowadays. Also, you have a nice way with words, and are able to convey complex ideas using few words.

THE CODE OF A SCIENTOLOGIST HAS BEEN DRASTICALLY CHANGED!
To illustrate how DM has made himself source, I bring up the "Code of a Scientologist" written by LRH in 1954 with revisions in 1969 and 1973. DM has come out with his own new version which is presented on a new HQS Course he has developed. LRH's Code has 20 items. DM has left items 1-3 the same, has totally rewritten items 7 to 10 and totally deleted items 11-20. I wrote this up on another thread as follows:

Originally Posted by lkwdblds
I just visited Claire Swazey's Scientology Forum message board and learned that "THE CODE OF A SCIENTOLOGIST" his been completely rewritten and is now being introduced to people on the latest version of the HQS Course.

#4 I pledge to decry and do all I can to aboliish any and all abuses against life and Mankind. changed to "I pledge to deter to the fullest extent of my power anyone misusing or degrading Scientology to harmful ends."

#5 I pledge to expose and help abolish any and all physically damaging practices in the field of mental health. changed to "I pledge to prevent the use of Scientology advertisements to promote other products "

#6 I pledge to help clean up and keep clean the field of mental health. changed to "I promise to discourage the abuse of Scientology in the Press."

#7 I pledge to bring about an atmosphere of safety and security in the field of mental health by eradicating its abuses and brutatlity. changed to "I pledge to employ Scientology in the greatest good of the greatest humber of dynamics."

In this set, numbers 4 thru 7, LRH was more expansive, seeming to shoot for bringing up world standards or standards of all groups worldwide in the items being addressed. DM, on the other hand, focusses only on the Church of Scientology and omits references to any other group or the world at large.

Items 8 thru 10, DM seems directly opposed to LRH's approach. LRH is emphasizing the words "for all" and "humanitarian endeavors". This concepts seems to be repulsive to DM and he seems to go out of his way to totally eliminate them and redirects the new 8 thru 10 to only apply to a course room or auditing room or a dispute with the "uninformed".

#8 I pledge to support humanitarian endeavors in the fields of human rights. changed to "I pledge to render good processing, sound training and good disicpline to those students or peoples entrusted to my care."

#9 I pledge to embrace the policy of equal justice for all. changed to"I pledge to refuse to impart the person secrets of my preclear's

#10 I pledge to work for freedom of speech in the world. changed to "I pledge to engage in no unseemly disputes with the uninformed on the subject of my profession.

THE TEN DELETED ITEMS
#11 To actively decry the suppression of knowledge, wisdom, philosophy or data which would help mankind.
#12 To Support the Freedom of Religion. (interesting that DM deleted this one)
#13 To help Scio orgs and groups ally themselves with public groups.
#14 To teach Scio at a level it can be understood and used by the recipients
#15 To stress the freedom to use Scio as a philosophy in all its applications and variations in the humanities.
#16 To insist upon standard and unvaried Scio as an applied activity in ethics, processing and admin in Scio organizations.
#17 To take my share of responsibility for the impact of Scio upon the world.
#18 To increase the numbers and strength of Scio over the world.
#19 To set an example of the effectiveness and wisdom of Scio.
#20 To make the world a saner, better place.

Hows that for making oneself source? At least it is done with a right in your face attitude and is not covert.
Lakey
P.S. Note that the comments on Items 4 to 7 and Items 8 to 10 are mine.

Hey Lakey, just thought you would want some confirmation on the code... what you've gotten from Claire is spot-on - I have the course pack in my hands, and have checked each one.

I am ashamed to admit that when I did the course as part of my training to deliver it, I noticed there was a difference, but as usual I had a "this is for new public" attitude, and didn't think of it again. Now that I really look at it I realise what a total alteration it really is, and like you say, for the purpose of protecting DM's magic slot-machine (he never has to put any coins in to coin it).

Are we too trusting or just too stupid? It makes me sick when I realise how many times I let the wool be pulled over my eyes. What's worse is it has become increasingly difficult to trust myself to make right decisions because I can't trust myself to really see what's right in front of me... I don't think I will ever be cynical, but I could use a little more critical thinking.

It might seem "in your face and not covert" like you say, but then how come no-one notices? Again - are we too trusting or just plain stupid?
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
What's the big deal? It's the word-for-word 1954/6 version of the Code as I said in post #68, presumably considered to be more suitable for newbies.

Mountains and molehills.

Paul
 

mich

Patron
Thank you.

If you like that post, you might enjoy something I wrote on Scientology a few years back:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Justanother&oldid=130663210#What_about_Scientology

Your information about the Code is disturbing or should I say that I am as disturbed as could be expected from someone that does not really much care about what happens inside David Miscavige's Church of Scientology except where it degrades to torture and abuse :omg:

If that change is true (and, no offense to Claire, but that is something I would have to see for myself), if it is true, that is so blatant that it fairly screams "someone stop me, please!" I sometimes think Miscavige is exhibiting the classic (subconscious?) criminal behavior of trying to leave enough clues around or make enough mistakes that he gets caught and stopped.

disinfected

I can confirm Claire's accuracy - got the course pack in front of me - if you want I can scan the page and forward it to you. :thumbsup:
 

mich

Patron
Mich, what is "normal"? LOL! I am a gardener too, it is so much fun to have the time to tend plants and animals and loved ones after scientology took all that away and demanded every minute of our lives and attention.

Thank you also for the information on how Kyalami Castle was financed.

I did some research on Kyalami Castle, here is what I found:

I did some googling around about the Kyalami Castle in South Africa. The Castle itself was buildt in 1990 by an eccentric architect as a private home. It is not a real castle. It was later converted to a "Boutique Hotel" that has 24 guest rooms. Doesn't seem like much room for a flood of scientology customers! There are no quarters for the staff that would be needed to service the castle, DM and his entourage, and the customers. Incidentally, Michael Jackson tried to buy it a few years ago, when he was under seige for pedophilia at Neverland ranch in CA. It is all show and no substance, just like scientology.

It is located in the richest suburb of Johannesburg, about 20 miles from the airport. The area has a very active preservation committee that seems to be quite adamantly opposed to any developement of the area that would not enhance the gentile "horse country" atmosphere. Building permits would be hard to come by. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Kyalami

http://www.castlekyalami.com/

Nearby, within a mile of the "castle" down bucolic winding country roads, there is an international race track, a huge gambling casino (Montecasino), golfcourses, all manner of entertainments for the wealthy and ironically, a huge prison. I wonder if DM will have to look at that prison every day from his own private "Bulgravia"? Or even better, I hope he will be looking up the hill at his pretend castle from his cell in Lonehill and Leeukop Prison!


http://www.religionnewsblog.com/20942/scientology-kyalami-castle

It does appear that Kyalami Castle is still operating as a specialty hotel and Wedding Venue. There must be some laws they are breaking using tax free parishioner donations to run a for profit hotel?

http://www.castlekyalami.com/

Hehehe - the thought of DM spending any time in Leeuwkop... it's not a nice prison to be in, and I doubt he'd get much chance for admiring the scenery.

I hear you on the "normal" - but then why the hell do so many people tell me I'm "off the rails" - I mean I know I have a wicked sense of humour.... Truthfully, I think I'm perfectly normal - it's everyone else that's a little coo-coo. Having said that, I have to admit that not many people do like I do... :biggrin:

Gardening is a wonderful way to connect - especially growing your own food. I don't spend as much time as I like out in the wild, so a garden is the next best thing. :thumbsup:
 

mich

Patron
What's the big deal? It's the word-for-word 1954/6 version of the Code as I said in post #68, presumably considered to be more suitable for newbies.

Mountains and molehills.

Paul

Thanks Paul - like I said, that was my assumption when I first read it. It still bothers me that I never made sure... It also doesn't feel right that the '54 version is the one they decided on using, when you compare it to the later, more comprehensive code.
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Thanks Paul - like I said, that was my assumption when I first read it. It still bothers me that I never made sure... It also doesn't feel right that the '54 version is the one they decided on using, when you compare it to the later, more comprehensive code.

How about the Auditor's Code in the HQS Course? It's 20 years since I've seen it (it was on a new Sea Org member's basic training back in the 90s for a couple of years), but isn't that one simpler too?

Remember the HQS Course is a Div 6 course, if such things still exist after the Basics debacle dumped them all into the Academy as if they were major courses.

Paul
 
Top