No Politics! ESMB is about Scientology!

[tr8theta]

I have got the Politics forum on ignore and I think my life has improved as a result.

Good for you! I'd like to invite you to my new thread "Just whatever you wanna" where you can share and talk about pretty much anything but absolutely NO: LRH, SCN, Sea Org, Politics, Religion, Bad News nor any doom and gloom. rather a place to have fun, get away from the same old same old stuff, share a pleasant experience, about the great movie you just saw, got a great recipe? Where you're next vacation is gonna be...maybe even make some new friends here. If you don't like my thread...it's okay, I mean well by inviting you. Tom R

 

[I told you I was trouble]

Do we have to behave on your new thread Tom R?

I think I may have forgotten how to do that ...

 

[tr8theta]

Do we have to behave on your new thread Tom R?

I think I may have forgotten how to do that ...

LOL...I'd like to hope that folks who come to my thread will be nice to and respectful of one another. There are plenty of other threads for behaving otherwise. So are you coming?

 

[I told you I was trouble]

LOL...I'd like to hope that folks who come to my thread will be nice to and respectful of one another. There are plenty of other threads for behaving otherwise. So are you coming?

Hmmmm, I might ... and I might not.

 

[strativarius]

LOL...I'd like to hope that folks who come to my thread will be nice to and respectful of one another. There are plenty of other threads for behaving otherwise. So are you coming?

Well, what a fucking hypocrite you are. You go on about 'folks being nice and respectful' and yet, when I merely pointed out that I was unhappy at you quoting Hubbard here on esmb, you told me to go and fuck myself, something no one has done in all my years of chatting on this message board.

I wouldn't trust you further than I could spit, and hell will freeze over before I post on your theety-weety fucking thread.

 

[ILove2Lurk]

There is a lot of useful information on ESMB not available anywhere else. There is no other site quite like it.

Yes, absolutely. Available nowhere else.

Where else could you find former stars of Sci David Mayo and Bill Franks, along with many
behind the scenes "inner circle" folks like face and cowboy, and a former WDC? The list of
who's who on this board is actually endless. I won't mention others as I'd leave out so many.

I've been hanging around since the month this site went live. It saved my life and sanity.
It's been a central part of my daily life, checking in and all that. The most knowledgeable
people in the world about what went on in Scientology and with Hubbard are/were here.

It's been my numero uno website for over a decade. I've cut and pasted many threads
into PDFs for my reading offline or in case the site ever goes away for some reason.
The project got out of hand though. My local printer said no more.

Some of my very best online and back channel new-found friends have passed through here.

I've posted many memorable shoops, memorable to me, and really loved creating them.

No argument about "not available anywhere else" from me.

I guess I'm just not personally interested in posting recipes, tips from my various hobbies,
my dialogues about Thomas Sowell or Victor Davis Hanson, or other topics, since I'm not
really a participant in any other topical message boards anywhere else. I'm also not willing
to reveal too much more about my personal life or interests because of potential COS
terrorism, which I don't need, and family connections. I'm a bit hamstrung like others.

###

 

[DagwoodGum]

And we old timers need a drawing room to retire to to talk among ourselves, from time to time.
Not advocating exclusion, but maybe a couple more cautionary gates to pass through, so the newbies have a more complete idea just what to expect when they enter...

Personally, I like new voices in the Members Only section and I don't want them scared away, but they should be advised to have their "big boy/girl" pants on.

Jack

As I've said before, it's only when things descend to LRH styled character assassinations through ill fitting labels, name calling, demeaning/belittling categorizations of others according to generalizations and antiquated definitions that are no longer appropriate or kind that I have to bail.
But I've always just walked away and come back at a later date when things had calmed down with a "no harm, no foul" attitude about it.
I know that I can't change anyone else.
Tried that more times than I care to admit to.

 

[guanoloco]

As I've said before, it's only when things descend to LRH styled character assassinations through ill fitting labels, name calling, demeaning/belittling categorizations of others according to generalizations and antiquated definitions that are no longer appropriate or kind that I have to bail.
But I've always just walked away and come back at a later date when things had calmed down with a "no harm, no fowl" attitude about it.
I know that I can't change anyone else.
Tried that more times than I care to admit to.

 

[strativarius]

As I've said before, it's only when things descend to LRH styled character assassinations through ill fitting labels, name calling, demeaning/belittling categorizations of others according to generalizations and antiquated definitions that are no longer appropriate or kind that I have to bail.
But I've always just walked away and come back at a later date when things had calmed down with a "no harm, no fowl" attitude about it.
I know that I can't change anyone else.
Tried that more times than I care to admit to.

I don't want to seem pedantic Dagwood, but I was puzzled by your phrase 'no harm, no fowl' so, not having come across it before and being vaguely interested in the English language, I looked it up. Apparently there is a similar phrase, but it's 'no harm, no foul'. Just thought you might like to know for future reference.

 

[DagwoodGum]

I don't want to seem pedantic Dagwood, but I was puzzled about your phrase 'no harm, no fowl' so, not having come across it before and being vaguely interested in the English language, I looked it up. Apparently there is a similar phrase, but it's 'no harm, no foul'. Just thought you might like to know for future reference.

I know, Jr. course sups everywhere with their Merriam Websters blazing. You only find that among people with Scientology backgrounds, not even those with advanced degrees in English nit pick others over grammar, my half brother being one as a College English professor with his Masters.

 

[DagwoodGum]

I know, Jr. course sups everywhere with their Merriam Websters blazing. You only find that among people with Scientology backgrounds, not even those with advanced degrees in English nit pick others over grammar, my half brother being one as a College English professor with his Masters.
That's where spell check fails a person.

 

[strativarius]

I know, Jr. course sups everywhere with their Merriam Websters blazing. You only find that among people with Scientology backgrounds, not even those with advanced degrees in English nit pick others over grammar, my half brother being one as a College English professor with his Masters.

I wasn't nit picking your grammar, I was genuinely interested to know what the phrase meant because I'd never heard it before. And when I looked, all I could find was 'no harm, no foul'. I'm sorry if that has upset you, but if I was in your shoes I'd actually be delighted that someone had pointed out where I was going wrong, but it takes all sorts I guess.

 

[DagwoodGum]

I wasn't nit picking your grammar, I was genuinely interested to know what the phrase meant because I'd never heard it before. And when I looked, all I could find was 'no harm, no foul'. I'm sorry if that has upset you, but if I was in your shoes I'd actually be delighted that someone had pointed out where I was going wrong, but it takes all sorts I guess.

Didn't upset me, cmon? It just triggered a counterpoint. Am I restricted from having one when I get a little L. Ron slopped on me? I see that here all the time and you do too. One does not shed one's programmed responses just by making the decision that he is no longer a Scientologist. It takes decades, if that how long it took to acquire them, to slay them one by one. I like coming here, knowing full well I'll get a little holdover Scientology to deal with.
I was thinking that I'll bet my sister in law had to come down on my half brother more than a time or two about correcting people in public as though he was still in class teaching English when they went out with friends. He's pretty direct and forces his opinions on people generally, but for some reason doesn't correct their grammar and I'll just bet it has something to do with her chewing him out repeatedly because that's how she is.

 

[TheOriginalBigBlue]

Scientology is the American version of Sharia. As a subject it is inseparable from politics because KSW Fundamentalism and Hubbard's stated goals taken together are a judicial and governmental system attempting to infiltrate and replace national sovereign systems under the cloak of religion and Scientology manipulates and exploits both the left and the right depending on their self interests. Scientology hides behind front groups and agendas with political crossover that constantly need to be exposed and defined.

From the comments section on the Bunker and in general on ESMB my sense is that most ex-Scientologists lean left or Democratish and the Trump thread is a small enclave where the minority of exes who lean right or Republicanish congregate. I don't think I have ever seen anyone converted there from either side and there is nothing keeping anyone from starting a Hillary Thread or some equivalent.

Regardless, this isn't Facebook or Twitter. It is Emma's gig and I think she should do whatever she wants.

 

[DagwoodGum]

Scientology is the American version of Sharia. As a subject it is inseparable from politics because KSW Fundamentalism and Hubbard's stated goals taken together are a judicial and governmental system attempting to infiltrate and replace national sovereign systems under the cloak of religion and Scientology manipulates and exploits both the left and the right depending on their self interests. Scientology hides behind front groups and agendas with political crossover that constantly need to be exposed and defined.

From the comments section on the Bunker and in general on ESMB my sense is that most ex-Scientologists lean left or Democratish and the Trump thread is a small enclave where the minority of exes who lean right or Republicanish congregate. I don't think I have ever seen anyone converted there from either side and there is nothing keeping anyone from starting a Hillary Thread or some equivalent.

Regardless, this isn't Facebook or Twitter. It is Emma's gig and I think she should do whatever she wants.

All excellent points and as true as true gets.

 

[guanoloco]

I know, Jr. course sups everywhere with their Merriam Websters blazing. You only find that among people with Scientology backgrounds, not even those with advanced degrees in English nit pick others over grammar, my half brother being one as a College English professor with his Masters.

Well mine has nothing to do with Scientology as a background but rather a personal joke on using "fowl" language.

 

[lotus]

... and there is nothing keeping anyone from starting a Hillary Thread or some equivalent.

Please noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

 

[strativarius]

<snip>
...there is nothing keeping anyone from starting a Hillary Thread or some equivalent.

The thing is, Hillary is just a straight ahead corrupt politician and in that respect is totally predictable and boring. Trump is a complete one-off and the loosest of loose cannons; ya never know what he's going to do or say next. That's what makes him so fascinating.

 

[DagwoodGum]

Well mine has nothing to do with Scientology as a background but rather a personal joke on using "fowl" language.

Oh, I'll take your word for it.
It's just that I remember that it's not been so many years since I saw threads deteriorate into dictionary wars where people were actually firing dictionary definitions back and forth at one another and I would wonder, even aloud in posts, "in what way is this EX Scientologist behavior?"

 

[pineapple]

Scientology is the American version of Sharia. As a subject it is inseparable from politics because KSW Fundamentalism and Hubbard's stated goals taken together are a judicial and governmental system attempting to infiltrate and replace national sovereign systems under the cloak of religion and Scientology manipulates and exploits both the left and the right depending on their self interests. Scientology hides behind front groups and agendas with political crossover that constantly need to be exposed and defined.

From the comments section on the Bunker and in general on ESMB my sense is that most ex-Scientologists lean left or Democratish and the Trump thread is a small enclave where the minority of exes who lean right or Republicanish congregate. I don't think I have ever seen anyone converted there from either side and there is nothing keeping anyone from starting a Hillary Thread or some equivalent.

Regardless, this isn't Facebook or Twitter. It is Emma's gig and I think she should do whatever she wants.

First paragraph, agree strongly.

Second paragraph: Funny, I'd have said the majority of ex-scios were righty. But maybe that's because the righties are more vocal about their views. The Trump thread (which I admit I've only lightly sampled) seems mainly about how Trump is doing great things or is being unjustly attacked and how awful Obama and Hillary are.

No, there is nothing stopping anyone from starting a Hillary thread; but please, no!