Not all the way "out" yet. My views and introduction

[Vinaire]

To Vinaire,
Yes I can see your viewpoint and agree!
Nic

Nic,

When you respond to another poster, click the "QUOTE" button under their post. A "Reply" window will appear. Then you can reply to their post with their post also quoted. This way one can see what you are replying to.

Let me know if this is not clear.

.

 

[EP - Ethics Particle]

"Acks" are always good...

Hi "Ethics Particle",
Thanks fer the welcome.
I hope I'm answering this the right way so you see it...I'm not used to doing things like this online.
...snip...
Scientologists are people who want to do Scientology...and it's a free country (at least for the moment) so they can do so, right? And they can like, love or admire LRH too if they want to. I suppose they can hate him or think he's a con too. I don't happen to.
Hope I've answered your questions.
Best,
Nic

Nic, you are very thoughtful to reply in such a nice way - and the welcome I extended is most sincere. For whatever reasons, I like you a lot and your flow is very clean feeling to me.

Just FYI, I have read all of Hubbard's books and "Red on White" numerous times - less so, the "admin" stuff. I have listened-to/studied hundreds of his recorded lectures multiple times, including the SHSBC. For about 15 years it was virtually my sole pursuit and interest.

PM me anytime, OK?

Love,

EP

 

[Vinaire]

YAY!!!

A real Scientologist!!!

Recall the time you were a real Scientologist.

 

[Dulloldfart]

For whatever reasons, I like you a lot and your flow is very clean feeling to me.

You like anything in a skirt, EP.

Paul

 

[Vinaire]

I like the bolded statement above.

The biggest outpoint that I find in the Church is that the idea of "granting beingness" (love, compassion, tolerance) is not practiced officially, while it is the key point expected from all the promotion that the Church puts out.

The next biggest outpoint that I see is the effort by the Church to put blinders on Scientologists, as if they will easily be manipulated by the information on Internet. This to me is "lack of trust" not only in the Scientologists ability to make up their own mind, but also a "lack of confidence" in their own tech to help Scientologists develop the discrimination they need.

Effort to put blinders even on veteran Scientologists is practicing a "non-Scientology process" and it is a technical degrade per policy.

But the current Church seem to have been operating at odds with LRH materials. They are even making efforts to revise LRH materials.

GAT has been an effort to push a certain interpretation of LRH materials, rather than letting a person get the understanding directly from LRH materials. It makes LRH look ineffective. Of course, the Church puts out its own spin. But I hope you can see it from my viewpoint.

.

To Vinaire,
Yes I can see your viewpoint and agree!
Nic

Nic, what do think of the following observation:

In Scientology organizations the following ethical principles have gotten altered, and that alteration is sanctioned officially:

(1) Not granting beingness - Any being, whether staff, public or wog is treated with contempt. Tolerance is in very short supply. Only tolerance is exhibited is when the other person has money, and there is a possibility of extracting that money from that person.

(2) Replacing Ethical principles by a narrow-minded morality - True ethics does not really exist in Scientology. How can it when personal beingness itself is not tolerated to begin with. Ethics is a personal thing. When no beingness is granted there cannot be any ethics. All effort to implement what somebody thinks as proper behavior, simply reduces to morality.

(3) Assignment of unreal targets - This obviously results in a personal failure and induces low self-esteem. A person who has low self-esteem has low morale and is easy to control. Scientology blames this as manipulation by psychology, but it is standard practice in Scientology organizations.

(4) Violating confidentiality agreements - Scientology organizations use confidential data from pc folders in their "investigation" and "handling" of staff and public who do not tow the party line.

(5) Violating proper investigatory procedures - There is preponderance of instances in Scientology orgs where a person is assumed guilty and assigned punishment because somebody in power determines that. Any subsequent "investigation" is just perfunctory.

.

 

[GreyLensman]

Hello.
I'm new. At the risk of being unpopular here... I'm not really anti, not into attacking and I don't feel hateful - but maybe betrayed and hope to see the real SPs in the church exposed one day soon.
I am relieved to find others who share some of my discoveries and views...It validates my own observation - that we were "not in Kansas anymore."
I am actually not an ex, but still a Scientologist...soon to be ex-member of the church with a few loose ends to tie up, before heading into the freezone, I guess.
I thought I'd tell you a little about myself and current viewpoint.
After discovering many unpleasant things about the group I've belonged to for almost 35 years. The betrayal became apparent to me when GAT was released. I hated it! I have 5 incomplete training cycles since that time. Prior to GAT, I actually enjoyed and completed courses..and could apply the data! I did get through OT 3, no problems, but on Solo...I loudly protested the GAT drills and especially that damn simulator! Surprised I didn't get thrown out then.
There were other things even prior to GAT,that I won't get into now.
As I've been separating myself from the church, I realized that the "church" also consists of thousands of Scientologists who are good people and just want to go up the bridge or help themselves or mankind in some way, but still blind or just not confronting, the actual situation...like I was and like some of you were.
So for me "the church" is too general a term when I look at what I'm "against".
My eyes opened up when I decided finally to look at the internet to find out what the fuss was all about in trying to keep Scientologists (church goin') off of the net.
Am I angry? Yes...but do I have to stop caring about people who subcribe to the religion in earnest and who love LRH and Scientology for what it really is? No. It's their choice.
Sure there is some entheta out there...but one can pick and choose what they want to subscribe too.
As far as I am concerned , the subject of Scientology can't hurt anyone, but individuals - on either side of the fence - who use it to wrongfully harm or control other people's lives...that's another story.
I'm interested in finding out what people know about what sinister crap is going on in the church that could be useful on my way out...I've seen some of that data here...and appreciate it...but I'm not really on the rabid attack bandwagon. LRH has been a friend to me and I like the tech...I don't feel that he was the one who tried to pull something over on me.
There's all kinds of shit that happens in life - who ever promised that there'd never be any shit in a group of people that tried to practice Scientology.
We are on earth aren't we?
Best,
Nicki

Welcome.

Actually, I'm pretty sure I was promised there was no shit inside Scientology.
Good luck on your journey.

 

[Nicki]

To Kha Khan,
Again to quote myself "As far as I am concerned , the subject of Scientology can't hurt anyone, but individuals - on either side of the fence - who use it to wrongfully harm or control other people's lives...that's another story." with emphisis on Individuals who use it wrongly to harm or control other people's lives.

People who have been harmed by others who call themslves Scientologists...or staff who are directed (and comply) to abuse others are not the subject of Scientology . The Mcpherson situation...and all terrible and isolated incidents of members of the group
doing wrong, or being somehow victimized.
In every group, society, club, etc...you'll find the evil and the good.
There are also many. many people who have benifited...
It's an easy job to find the wrongs and the deaths, and the wrongdoers, etc.
It's more of a challenge to recognize...there was some good sometimes.
Scientologists...in or out of the church are not saints or devils...they are people...with the afflictions of being people.
But the subject of Scientology...is a subject...in books, on tapes, etc.
That's not gonna harm anyone...
But if I take the book and hit someone in the head with it...I can't blame the subject.
People are the problem.
I understand your opinion based on all of that bad news and those unfortunate experiences.
There are, some bad apples in Scientology....there are bad apples in America...does that justify the world hating all Americans?
guess it's important to try to spot who they are and expose them..not a whole subject or all the people who are involved.
But your reality is what it is...and mine is mine. That's what this site is all about isn't it?
Best,
Nic

 

[Nicki]

Vinaire

Like this?
Nic

Nic,

When you respond to another poster, click the "QUOTE" button under their post. A "Reply" window will appear. Then you can reply to their post with their post also quoted. This way one can see what you are replying to.

Let me know if this is not clear.

.

 

[Nicki]

Ha hahha!!
nic

Recall the time you were a real Scientologist.

 

[Nicki]

Thanks for the reply...and I get what you are saying...
we do agree however that the isolation does exist and fear talking with people who disagree because they'll "get in trouble"..
When I stoped caring about that...I was free.
I am a Scientologist, but I don't feel that everyone has to be one or agree with it.
Best,
Nic

Nikki, I completely fundamentally disagree with everything you believe in and I think it's silly, a scam, and harmful. But, since I don't belong to an oppresive cult that loves censorship, I get to talk to people who disagree with me and believe different things all the time and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I know that Scientologists in the Church are isolated and threatened with the "dangerous SPs" outside, but out here in reality, people who get along and believe in different things is the norm. We don't delcare people for disagreeing.

 

[Nicki]

Here's what I think:
They are not applying actual Scientology.
Actual Scientology helps people. This other stuff is people not getting it, dramatizing their own crap, or being robotic and wreaking havoc on others who aren't tough enough to set them straight or simply get out of the dramo.
Nic

Nic, what do think of the following observation:

In Scientology organizations the ethical principles have gotten altered, and are sanctioned officially:

(1) Not granting beingness - Any being, whether staff, public or wog is treated with contempt. Tolerance is in very short supply. Only tolerance is exhibited is when the other person has money, and there is a possibility of extracting that money from that person.

(2) Replacing Ethical principles by a narrow-minded morality - True ethics does not really exist in Scientology. How can it when personal beingness itself is not tolerated to begin with. Ethics is a personal thing. When no beingness is granted there cannot be any ethics. All effort to implement what somebody thinks as proper behavior, simply reduces to morality.

(3) Assignment of unreal targets - This obviously results in a personal failure and induces low self-esteem. A person who has low self-esteem has low morale and is easy to control. Scientology blames this as manipulation by psychology, but it is standard practice in Scientology organizations.

(4) Violating confidentiality agreements - Scientology organizations use confidential data from pc folders in their "investigation" and "handling" of staff and public who do not tow the party line.

(5) Violating proper investigatory procedures - There is preponderance of instances in Scientology orgs where a person is assumed guilty and assigned punishment because somebody in power determines that. Any subsequent "investigation" is just perfunctory.

.

 

[Nicki]

Nope ...not Kansas...and closer to youthan you think!! Tee hee!
Where's my email?
Nic

Welcome Nicki. Glad you made it to this board. And glad your not in Kansas.

 

[Nicki]

Think I just learned how to respond correctly.
Thanks for the data.
When did Rinder leave?
Do you know why we don't hear anything from Leserve currently?
Nic

Hi Nicki, I share your viewpoint and you will be welcomed in the Freezone when you're ready to go there.

Not sure what you're up to speed on and what not. It would be usefull
to search out posts by or quoted by:-

Little Bear Victor

Jeff Hawkins

Marc Headly [ aka Blownforgood]

Who all spent a lot of time at the int base.

Mike Rinder has left COS, Marty Rathbun has too and is basically
a Freezoner now.

You have such things as program chiefs, and the IJC spending more time trying to sell basics than do their posts.

The regular anonymous demonstrations are now into there second year.

Most current news gets to this board.

How many people on courses and auditing lines compared to before?
Note that if you still need to be in good standing don't write anything that
will give away who you are.

 

[Dulloldfart]

Here's what I think:
They are not applying actual Scientology.
Actual Scientology helps people. This other stuff is people not getting it, dramatizing their own crap, or being robotic and wreaking havoc on others who aren't tough enough to set them straight or simply get out of the dramo.
Nic

Love it! I used to think exactly like that.

Then, gradually over several years, I joined the dark side.

Paul

 

[Nicki]

Thanks..I replied, but I just figured out how to reply correctly.
Did you see my reply?
Nic

...starts with a single step, Nicki.



Dear Nicki,

I have snipped some things, bolded some things and commented a bit, in your original post. There are things you state; that, in my opinion based upon experience, you might want to look at more carefully as you travel the paths of life.

Love,

EP

 

[Iknowtoomuch]

Here's what I think:
They are not applying actual Scientology.
Actual Scientology helps people. This other stuff is people not getting it, dramatizing their own crap, or being robotic and wreaking havoc on others who aren't tough enough to set them straight or simply get out of the dramo.
Nic

Disconnection isn't Scientology? Fairgame (no it wasn't really cancelled) isn't Scientology?

Have you read about Hubbards past? His military record? His biography (not scientology's version of it)?

 

[Nicki]

Thanks.
Well entheta means what it means...enturbulated theta.
Some people just want to call anything that doesn't seem right to them "entheta"...
You are correct. One should be able to look at entheta too.
How else are ya going to recognize whetrher it really is or not, eh?
nic

Hi Nicki and welcome!

I commend your courage in posting and simply being willing to look at the data that is available.

There is such an instant read to "entheta" in the church. They train us to shut down and walk away from the slightest whiff of it.

The theta/entheta dichotomy is another way of saying good/evil. I learned after leaving to not fear entheta. Ironically by transitioning from scientologist to wog my confront shot through the roof.

Anyway, you'll find this board to be surprisingly civil. There is a gamut of views from super-anti to freezoners to those of us who would drift back into the fold if the current regine *were* was lead off in handcuffs.

I never could flow the unadulterated admiration to LRH. I find him an amazingly brilliant and unique man. But he was also complex and flawed. I can accept the tech coming from a mere mortal and not a demigod. In fact his humanity make his achievements even more spectacular. Just my 2 cents.

Enjoy your time here!

And remember, you are as free as you can communicate!

 

[Been Done Had]

Here's what I think:
They are not applying actual Scientology.
Actual Scientology helps people. This other stuff is people not getting it, dramatizing their own crap, or being robotic and wreaking havoc on others who aren't tough enough to set them straight or simply get out of the dramo.
Nic

Hi Nicki,

First off, I'm not anti at all and still enjoy LRH materials, haven't been active in a while and still have family in.

I get what you are saying, but organizational Scientology (in its current for) is a top down organization, INT Management is deeply involved in the management of EVERY church, and non church entity (Applied Scholastics, SOCO, Able, Wise, etc.)

It is much deeper than individual org terminals being casey or dramatizing. The tone, tenor, methodology are all pushed down hard from above. The problems with how the church is run today are total and systemic. It is a highly abusive culture. Much more so than even the US Marine Corps! Marines treat each other with decency and respect.

There is something almost mean spirited in how staff are treated these days. (Some here would say sine the Apollo.)

I get the need for toughtness and gung ho groups. But not abusive groups. That is not okay. Have you heard of SRAs or face ripping?

You asked what happened to Leserve. This link explains where the Exec Strata has been vanishing to...

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=7188&highlight=SP+Hall/Hole

Again, I commend you for being here and communicating. The freedom here is exhilarating.

BDH



http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=7188&highlight=SP+Hall/Hole

 

[Been Done Had]

Thanks.
Well entheta means what it means...enturbulated theta.
Some people just want to call anything that doesn't seem right to them "entheta"...
You are correct. One should be able to look at entheta too.
How else are ya going to recognize whetrher it really is or not, eh?
nic

Got it re: the definition.

ANY material critical of Scientology is entheta. (Per church terminals)

My question is this; what if what we are TOLD is entheta is not really entheta?

I think the church uses the label to stop us from looking.

If I simply ask the question, "How could LRH as a professional writer, not ensure the basic books said what he wanted them to." Am I creating enturbulated theta by simply asking the question?:confused2:

Is it entheta to ask how do the senior tech terminals revise PLs and HCOBs? Why can't public Scientologists have a full accounting of those decision?

Are the bible, koran or other religious book entheta because they contain other practices and are dramatizations of bank material?

Some of these questions are rhetorical, I simply enjoy looking, thinking (I know "figure-figure") and asking. That is who I am. It must already be pretty clear why I ran into trouble in organized Scientology.

Maybe I have an M/U on entheta even after clearing the tech dict definition.

EDIT:

Per the Tech Dictionary...

ENTHETA 1. Means enturbulated theta (thought or life); especially refers to communications, which, based on lies and confusions, are slanderous, choppy or destructive in an attempt to overwhelm or suppress a person or a group.

The mistake Scientologists make is assuming ANY critical statement is a lie. By the above definition if a communication is truthful, it thereby cannot be entheta.

 

[cantsay]

Something that took me quite a bit of effort to come to terms with, was that when someone "took a book and hit someone in the head with it", it was usually an action endorsed by LRH.

I always thought the problem with my org was simply some people with bad ethics running around ruining it for others. Unfortunately some of these horrid actions are the same as every other org Ive visited, the SO, and the same as it was on the ship. LRH himself put a lot of these nasty practises in action, and since then the SO and DM have amplified it to another level.

Another thing that bugged me - although I thought LRH was great, and did wonderful things (and there is no question he did), but he was in no way, shape or form HUMBLE. He certainly tried hard to get a lot of admiration, didnt he?

I understand your viewpoint, and I hope you have a great time in this forum, its always enlightening to hear other peoples opinions