Plagiarism

Veda

Sponsor
Oh, he certainly did. No reason to prattle on about it unless you believe it, though. :)

It's communication not "prattle," and the reason for mentioning it is that it's part of describing what the overt/covert subject of Scientology actually is.

And that's something that's you'd prefer not happen.

The "unless you believe it" line, that you use, is a lie. Once again you're attempting to trick others with sneaky and manipulative tactics. How friendly and charming do you think you have to be for others not to notice?
 

Neo

Silver Meritorious Patron
Oh, he certainly did. No reason to prattle on about it unless you believe it, though. :)


Mark A. Baker

The reason I "prattle" on about it, as you so compassionately put it, is because I actually care about those who are still trapped by this lie. Those still trapped by the cult, and the hold it has over people. Your attitude is as disgusting as the cults. Why do so many of the pro-techies get so hostile (overtly or covertly) when they are challenged? If your tech works why do you need me, or any one else, to be on side?

Neo
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
Hello Wonderful Twin,

I feel so close to you right now. I see Hubtoad the way you do. Someone who snatched innocent kids and hid them away in a "Trueman world". He built the sets and barriers with lies about the real world ( it's evil, full of SPs, everyone is PTS and they are confused and living in a fog etc) while he enjoyed the full variety of life thanks to the money we generated with our free work. He bought ships and sailed the world, he was wined and dined all over the world while we were eating beans and rice and being separated fom our loved ones for the "good of mankind." He fullfilled his ambitions and whims, exploring in Africa, archeological trips, puttingon congresseses and fanning his enormous ego and meglomania while we gave up our education, listed our dreams and life purposes as "fish" and slaved on for him.

He sat, like an airtight filter, above our minds, leaking through what he saw fit to pass on to us, labeling it as Hubbard's wisdom, which we accepted with gratitude and without question "Let us not speculate how I came to rise above the bank..." He plagiarised without remorse, he twisted and edited, cut and paste with the intent to divert our natural loyaties to ourselves and ourfamilies to his manufactured and artificial cause.

He was the very worst of men, and we could not see it, not because we were stupid or blind, but because of the filter of the world we had stepped into because we cared about our fellow man.

We did not know that the man who preached about how to have a sane relationship had three ex wives, all of whom were abused by him in many ways. Children who were so suppressed (a real world term too) that they either had to push themselves out of his life to survive or who took their own life or were murdered on his order, or who lived within his "trueman" world trying to do good despite the restrictions they faced.

Within 6 months of leaving the SO I was at filmschool. I never made it to Gold, for which I am fully grateful - but I had always had a secret desire to learn cine tech, which of course no one else was allowed to see - what a bastard. Joseph Cambell was probably my first "alternative source" for valuable views on how things were. And I love Robert McKee's Story seminar -oh joys!

Since then, little by little guilty inch by guilty inch I read and discoevred other people's views. For fifteen years however, I was still so indoctrinated that wisdom had to come from someone else, that I could not hear my own truth, let alone speak it. I joined a business franchise because I had been brought up to need someone else saying, Yes that is how to do it. (And I figured I'd been running programs in franchises for all my adult life right?) When the franchise leaders became more and more money focussed and a league away from my own values I finally had to quit. I took on another franchise. Same thing happened, and still I had the pattern in my mind that the people at the top would be benevolent and care about me. (Ha! Blubbard never ever did care)
Well, really the franchise of the church is the same - the guy at the top makes money the ones at the bottom work like slaves and the public are treated as well or as badly as there is pressure from above on the franchisors. Okay, after that experience no franchises.

I had moved out from under Hubbard's "I am source" enough to say I wanted to run seminars. This took me fifteen years! But I still couldn't accept my own wisdom. I bought a licence with Bob Proctor. I'd run his material.

It was okay, I had to add my own stuff to make it work for my clients. But all his promises about the business, all the marketing , material, all the support that the license purchased - poof! blew away int eh first breeze - Doh! Duped again. Another thirty thousand into someone else's pocket for a few repackaged words. :duh: And of course he was unreachable to discuss a refund, although he had been very charming during the sales process.

Then I was introduced to an MLM.:melodramatic: Needless to say it took 3 years to extricate myself from the false promises, ongoing costs etc.

"I speak my own truth...I speak my own truth..." It is my mantra that I am still working on living up to."

The last time I paid someone for their authority was 2004. And today I am are careful as the worst cynic.

The picture I have in my head of Hubbard is not the one we see in the orgs, it's the one of him with dirty scraggly hair and nails, sitting brokena nd disgusting on an old bed.

Perhaps I should get some copies and blow them up giant sized and paste them as bill posters around the orgs. It might help someone else see the real man instead of the PR bullshit that "source" extruded.

I usually have my attention in the real world now, and the wonderful knowledge given freely or for the price of a book or a course, with no strings attached and with an open invitation and encouragement to take what I have learned and extend the knowledge for the good of mankind. Sorting wheat from chaff is a joy, there is no compulsion to accept everything and if I still feel a little tense when questioning someone's claims- well at least I can do that now.

I echo "wow". :)
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Said that sure. But always implied that he had taken it that one step further, had made it better, had explained it better, had done something to improve it, and made it something only he could have brought us. In speaking about something, no we don't always give credit. But in writing, actually, especially in policy or important work, or scientific - citing the source for an idea or concept or process is absolutely expected.

And yet, despite a word for word copy, as TA discovers, he doesn't.


I do agree with some of what you've said here.

I also think some ideas become public domain, in a way. Any student of religious history (amateur or otherwise) can see that. But yes, LRH definitely puffed himself up. Since his stuff isn't scientific and pertains to spirituality, I really don't look for footnotes. But I think he screwed up when he didn't disclose his OTO background, for sure.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Except that Hubbard said he was Source. And he alone was Source.

Neo


He said he was "Source" of Scn. I know of no other philosophies or philosophical methodologies or ideologies, etc etc etc with M3 wordclearing, R3RA, the Academy Levels, Key To Life, Xenu, A- J checks, TRs, etc. Not those exact things. Yes, he was "source" of all that. And "source" of the cult, as well.

He did say he based Scn on many other ideas. He then claimed that he improved them, effectively culled them, ascertained where they went wrong and he went right, etc. Whether he did or not, of course, is a matter of one's own opinion.

I do think he didn't give enough credit where it was due, however. I also think he left out things (see my other comment about OTO) that he shouldn't have and that he derided other ologies and practices that he should not have or should not have the way and extent he did and that in a number of cases, he had fixed ideas of his own- and I always will think that no matter how many critics tell me I shouldn't or don't really criticize Scn or LRH.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
The basic tennet that Hubbard gave out was that he was the SOURCE of all this information.


Well, nobody else out there has Dianetic auditing or the Grades or KTL. And from the first month I got into Scn, I always heard tons about how he studied and culled all this stuff, Scn had all these other influences. Of course I have disagreements- see my post in response to Neo.

From the perspective of someone who had no access to outside influences he goes out of his way to make it appear he was the sole source for wisdom. - Surely you don't deny this Fluffy? I mean he couldn't even quote Buddah without then claiming he WAS Buddah in an earlier life.

Actually, he indicated he did have outside influences. Did he indicate it enough? I don't think so. Was he always responsible and punctilious in his depictions of other ologies which influenced him (and some which may not have)? No, I don't think that either.

Someday you guys will learn that life isn't an either/or proposition. Shitheads sometimes do good things, dumb people sometimes do smart things, smart people do dumb things, good people do shitty things, etc. Good methodologies can have bad stuff in them, really crappy methodologies can have good stuff in them.

My husband has a saying "people are a mixed bag." I wholeheartedly agree and if I didn't, I'd never have stayed on a.r.s. when I found it or bothered getting to know or listen to anyone else whose viewpoint on Scn was not the same as mine. Hell, not even all NON Scn (people with ZERO liking/interest in/for the tech) critics agree on everything.
 

byte301

Crusader
He took credit for everything. He took credit for the study tech which he had nothing to do with. He took credit for Mayo's work and dozens of other people's work. But his name was on the bottom of all those HCOB's and PL's.

How do we even know what he really authored? I think he came up with a lot of the Xenu crap and the lies on his bio. I don't know for sure about any of the rest of it.

Bad science fiction is about all I believe came from him and he probably had help with that too.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
I doubt it. There's no indication that he didn't write those pulps himself. I read a number of them- some are really pretty good. I can't say the same for BE and the ME decology, though. I don't think those were good at all. Some people like 'em- I don't.
 
The reason I "prattle" on about it, as you so compassionately put it, is because I actually care about those who are still trapped by this lie. Those still trapped by the cult, and the hold it has over people.


IF you really care about those still in then the smart tactic is not to CHALLENGE their beliefs but to ENCOURAGE them to LOOK for themselves.

Establish communication with them in a non-antagonistic fashion and refer them to actual source materials instead. Such an approach is much more effective.

Continuous prattle about the same old arguments doesn't encourage critical thought, it stifles it.


Mark A. Baker
 

Twin A

Patron with Honors
Hello Wonderful Twin,

I feel so close to you right now. I see Hubtoad the way you do. Someone who snatched innocent kids and hid them away in a "Trueman world". He built the sets and barriers with lies about the real world ( it's evil, full of SPs, everyone is PTS and they are confused and living in a fog etc) while he enjoyed the full variety of life thanks to the money we generated with our free work. He bought ships and sailed the world, he was wined and dined all over the world while we were eating beans and rice and being separated fom our loved ones for the "good of mankind." He fullfilled his ambitions and whims, exploring in Africa, archeological trips, puttingon congresseses and fanning his enormous ego and meglomania while we gave up our education, listed our dreams and life purposes as "fish" and slaved on for him.

He sat, like an airtight filter, above our minds, leaking through what he saw fit to pass on to us, labeling it as Hubbard's wisdom, which we accepted with gratitude and without question "Let us not speculate how I came to rise above the bank..." He plagiarised without remorse, he twisted and edited, cut and paste with the intent to divert our natural loyaties to ourselves and ourfamilies to his manufactured and artificial cause.

He was the very worst of men, and we could not see it, not because we were stupid or blind, but because of the filter of the world we had stepped into because we cared about our fellow man.

We did not know that the man who preached about how to have a sane relationship had three ex wives, all of whom were abused by him in many ways. Children who were so suppressed (a real world term too) that they either had to push themselves out of his life to survive or who took their own life or were murdered on his order, or who lived within his "trueman" world trying to do good despite the restrictions they faced.

Within 6 months of leaving the SO I was at filmschool. I never made it to Gold, for which I am fully grateful - but I had always had a secret desire to learn cine tech, which of course no one else was allowed to see - what a bastard. Joseph Cambell was probably my first "alternative source" for valuable views on how things were. And I love Robert McKee's Story seminar -oh joys!

Since then, little by little guilty inch by guilty inch I read and discoevred other people's views. For fifteen years however, I was still so indoctrinated that wisdom had to come from someone else, that I could not hear my own truth, let alone speak it. I joined a business franchise because I had been brought up to need someone else saying, Yes that is how to do it. (And I figured I'd been running programs in franchises for all my adult life right?) When the franchise leaders became more and more money focussed and a league away from my own values I finally had to quit. I took on another franchise. Same thing happened, and still I had the pattern in my mind that the people at the top would be benevolent and care about me. (Ha! Blubbard never ever did care)
Well, really the franchise of the church is the same - the guy at the top makes money the ones at the bottom work like slaves and the public are treated as well or as badly as there is pressure from above on the franchisors. Okay, after that experience no franchises.

I had moved out from under Hubbard's "I am source" enough to say I wanted to run seminars. This took me fifteen years! But I still couldn't accept my own wisdom. I bought a licence with Bob Proctor. I'd run his material.

It was okay, I had to add my own stuff to make it work for my clients. But all his promises about the business, all the marketing , material, all the support that the license purchased - poof! blew away int eh first breeze - Doh! Duped again. Another thirty thousand into someone else's pocket for a few repackaged words. :duh: And of course he was unreachable to discuss a refund, although he had been very charming during the sales process.

Then I was introduced to an MLM.:melodramatic: Needless to say it took 3 years to extricate myself from the false promises, ongoing costs etc.

"I speak my own truth...I speak my own truth..." It is my mantra that I am still working on living up to."

The last time I paid someone for their authority was 2004. And today I am are careful as the worst cynic.

The picture I have in my head of Hubbard is not the one we see in the orgs, it's the one of him with dirty scraggly hair and nails, sitting brokena nd disgusting on an old bed.

Perhaps I should get some copies and blow them up giant sized and paste them as bill posters around the orgs. It might help someone else see the real man instead of the PR bullshit that "source" extruded.

I usually have my attention in the real world now, and the wonderful knowledge given freely or for the price of a book or a course, with no strings attached and with an open invitation and encouragement to take what I have learned and extend the knowledge for the good of mankind. Sorting wheat from chaff is a joy, there is no compulsion to accept everything and if I still feel a little tense when questioning someone's claims- well at least I can do that now.


Wow... this really is a great post, thank you. Kind of brought tears to my eyes :bigcry: Thanks for writing this, that is the image of Hubbard I have in my head too, the guy who went nuts, it's almost like he let himself go like that in the end so that we could know... that he screwed up. I kind of take it as somewhat of an apology and can start to forgive eventually ya know.

Ever see that movie Angels with Dirty Faces? In the end of it James Cagney has a breakdown and it helps the kids that idolizing him, as a famous gangster, to maybe rethink the idea of getting into a life of crime.

Probably a key thing for me to grow up and re think what daddy hubbard said or did around me, was that he was fighting with his own morality, he had things he felt guilty about andhe never got them handled, and so if you see him like how he really ended up, he makes a lot more sense, his own case that he was trying to get handled in others, but never resolved it on himself. He was riddled with guilt, even if he didn't show it, he still felt it and didn't know what it was.

You know, it's not HONEST to say an idea as your own, if you did in fact, really JUST read it from someone else. I can tell a friend of mine, what I know about the structure of a script now, but I would also tell them that I learned it in college. I wouldn't take credit for what someone else, who wrote and read many script successfully, did. I certainly wouldn't tell them to listen to me and NOT go to school because I could tell them everything that they needed to know! Which is what happened to me in the SO.

I read what some of what fluffy posted earlier too, I know that when people are relaying their own knowledge and wisdom to others, they dont' always quote others or cite sources, they can simply be speaking from experience too....

but the Art Series from Hubbard and the Cine ED's from Hubbard were different. Hubbard was not a great artist, all his films had to be re-done, they were so badly done, his photo shoots were just a joke. He put himself forth as this MASTER artist, but he never walked the walk, he was just blowing stuff out of his ass. And I PERSONALLY would have rather have gone to film school! This was one of the things used to trick me into getting into the Sea Org, the idea that there was a Sea Org film school! I would have rather have just stayed in school and done film school when I was 18, instead of Hubbard's laundry you know? Gold eventually HIRED a film school grad to work on their tech films, they could not TRAIN anyone with Hubbard's materials to be a decent director. Because it was limiting, Hubbard gave the Art Series and the Cine ED's and Audio EDs as THE 1,2,3 and no one was really allowed to do anything else, when in the REAL professional world, artists are actually allowed to interact with other successful artists and study their work and figure things out on their own, see what's popular, get marketing info, etc.

Now, as a staff member, working on the film crew, I was forced to study Hubtoad and that is what makes me mad too. And the lack of footnotes and quotes and citations for his bulletins, well that is arrogance on his part and communistic mind control when it comes to being on staff, when you dont' have access to regular libraries and are not allowed to study anything else, everything else was considered "squirrel texts" and if we got caught reading them, you know some other art book, well we got assigned a condition or worse.

I read a book a couple of years ago called THE WHITE HAIRED GIRL, and there is a chapter in this book about the writer, it's an autobiography, who had grown up in Communist China and she'd been taught in school that Chairman Mao was a god and the greatest philosopher in the world, she had been banned from reading other philosophers. Every course she was brought up on was a Chairman Mao course and she had to clap to chairman Mao and thank him for everything good in her life, and if somethign went wrong, it was her fault. When Chairman Mao died, tours were given of his large estate, there was a study/office that was part of the tour, and in this room were all the books that Chairman Mao had banned from China, he was reading them himself and spoon feeding the information to the children of China through the school system, making these poor kids mentally dependent on Chairman Mao for everything, not learning to think from themselves or be able to process information from other sources and authors. It's a very moving paragraph in the book The White Haired Girl and I guess sometimes I have felt like that, in getting out of the Sea Org and finding out that there are so many really great smart people who are "wogs" that I could have been in communication with and wasn't, and that I had been mislead to believe that Hubbard had invented most of what he'd written.

He was using these references to dictate my activities at Gold and I had to study them, cram on them, get the info shouted at me by other staff, it was like the Cine staff's "tech" bible so to speak, it certainly wasn't someone relaying informaton to me without caring to say that they had learned it through experience, education or citing things they had studied. It was more like Hubbard was dictating my thoughts on the subject, rather than teaching me anything.

In a real classroom, the students are allowed to argue and discuss everything they read, they are allowed to have opinions, ask questions, give examples how it is otherwise,or how it is etc. It's such a better learning atmosphere. Ok, so someone says that a "good" work of art creates an emotional impact, I can accept it or not accept it. I can think with it, I know the person is human, that they could have made a mistake and I am allowed that thought. I could think of maybe times when I don't think it is that way, I can find other authors who have said similar things.... etc. But when Hubbard wrote it in an HCOB, it became part of KSW and were I to say, "Hey, I don't think that it matters if this particular shot has a whole lot of emotional impact... because....." well I'd get sent to cramming, rudiments, do I have any overts? Misunderstoods? Why don't I agree with HUBBARD? so for me to find out it wasn't Hubbard who said it....Oh man... or that it wasn't Hubbard who came up with these ideas in the first place, what damn business does Hubbard have making these ideas into HCOB's? If they weren't his to begin with? As far as I'm concerned it's illegal and when I have some time in my life, I'm going to go through the Art Course, which is a $2,000 course by the way, I believe that is the cost nowadays, and I'm going to go through what CIne ED's I read and I'm going to mark each one he's copyrighted that has copied another author and I'm going to send a report to the copyrights office or whoever else should know, the other authors or their estates involved, Because it's bullshit and it's not RIGHT.

I also got tortured with Word Clearing Correction Lists after every Method 9 on an ARt Series that I didn't have a floating needle after at the examiner. I wasn't happy with what I read, there was something that was wrong and it wasn't because I had something wrong with me or my case!!!! So, you know what I can still say Fuck Hubtoad and I still feel that way, I hated those correction lists :grouch: oh and sometimes they'd branch off othe correction lists, it was almost all the auditing I got, I didn't do much of the grade chart proper.

I do enjoy , when I get a spare moment, being able to log onto this message baord and reading like views AND contrary views, I'm sure there are always going to be people with fond thoughts of hubtoad, and who would never say "fuck Flubbard or Hubtoad" or other angry statement. I meet them in real life, there is such a wide variety of ex members and what their views are.

I have friends who have gotten mad at me and sworn and called me names, we made up afterwards :) It's not the end of the world to get mad at Hubbard about something. It's tough when I was in the SO and I was mad but I couldn't say it or express it. I wasn't allowed to think this way. If you said "Fuck Hubtoad", as a staff member, that was an INSTANT RPF assignment.

So you know it's great to be able to discuss this, on an open message board like this, and not have some RTC staff busting into my room afterwards to take me away..... and stick me into a black t shirt and make me run everywhere I go and speak only when spoken too...

yeh it is a relief to bang on the keys and see what other amazing posts come back on this subject too. I don't expect everyone, like fluffy, to agree with me or empathize with me, but at least I can write and fluffy can UNDERSTAND why I might have a personal beef with Hubbard on certain subjects, even if fluffy doesn't have that same beef.

In the real world, understanding doesn't have to mean that we agree or have the same view. The R in ARC hasn't been shifted to Reality/Agreement. It can just be I've got my reality, with my experiences, and you have yours and we all have a right to it. We can UNDERSTAND each other without having to agree. We can agree to disagree.

I am really glad everyone on this board is around when I get mad, because you know I REALLY did get so mad on Saturday that I was sick to my stomach, and I threw up, and I didn't know why and it helped for me to bang out a message about it and get some responses and then I can read them, and see what others say, are they mad too? Or not, it's helps to see why maybe the people who AREn't mad don't know about why I'm mad, you know because then I can look at what it is and explain it to them and that helps me understand too.

At first, it is like WHY? WHO CARES if someone didn't cite their sources? Right? BIG DEAL, so what?

And to answer that "so what?" question, I can figure it out, why so what? Well, that helps me out, so I like it when people challenge me and I certainly like the long eloquent posts that seem to really get what it is I'm feeling, and other kind comments and encouragement.

so now, I have to be good and get back to my homework for my other class tonight :)

Mo
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Hi,

I do get where you're coming from and I definitely think Hubbard didn't give enough credit where it was due. I've thought that for a while. Plus, like I said, he didn't really fess up to the OTO stuff. Hey, that would be a good book for Bridge, right? Ron The Occultist.

But re the ideas stuff- well, religions and philosophies have always been particularly prone to having ideas borrowed, appropriated, with and without permission and provenance.
 

Free to shine

Shiny & Free
Wow... this really is a great post, thank you. Kind of brought tears to my eyes :bigcry: Thanks for writing this, that is the image of Hubbard I have in my head too, the guy who went nuts, it's almost like he let himself go like that in the end so that we could know... that he screwed up. I kind of take it as somewhat of an apology and can start to forgive eventually ya know.

Ever see that movie Angels with Dirty Faces? In the end of it James Cagney has a breakdown and it helps the kids that idolizing him, as a famous gangster, to maybe rethink the idea of getting into a life of crime.

Probably a key thing for me to grow up and re think what daddy hubbard said or did around me, was that he was fighting with his own morality, he had things he felt guilty about andhe never got them handled, and so if you see him like how he really ended up, he makes a lot more sense, his own case that he was trying to get handled in others, but never resolved it on himself. He was riddled with guilt, even if he didn't show it, he still felt it and didn't know what it was.

You know, it's not HONEST to say an idea as your own, if you did in fact, really JUST read it from someone else. I can tell a friend of mine, what I know about the structure of a script now, but I would also tell them that I learned it in college. I wouldn't take credit for what someone else, who wrote and read many script successfully, did. I certainly wouldn't tell them to listen to me and NOT go to school because I could tell them everything that they needed to know! Which is what happened to me in the SO.

I read what some of what fluffy posted earlier too, I know that when people are relaying their own knowledge and wisdom to others, they dont' always quote others or cite sources, they can simply be speaking from experience too....

but the Art Series from Hubbard and the Cine ED's from Hubbard were different. Hubbard was not a great artist, all his films had to be re-done, they were so badly done, his photo shoots were just a joke. He put himself forth as this MASTER artist, but he never walked the walk, he was just blowing stuff out of his ass. And I PERSONALLY would have rather have gone to film school! This was one of the things used to trick me into getting into the Sea Org, the idea that there was a Sea Org film school! I would have rather have just stayed in school and done film school when I was 18, instead of Hubbard's laundry you know? Gold eventually HIRED a film school grad to work on their tech films, they could not TRAIN anyone with Hubbard's materials to be a decent director. Because it was limiting, Hubbard gave the Art Series and the Cine ED's and Audio EDs as THE 1,2,3 and no one was really allowed to do anything else, when in the REAL professional world, artists are actually allowed to interact with other successful artists and study their work and figure things out on their own, see what's popular, get marketing info, etc.

Now, as a staff member, working on the film crew, I was forced to study Hubtoad and that is what makes me mad too. And the lack of footnotes and quotes and citations for his bulletins, well that is arrogance on his part and communistic mind control when it comes to being on staff, when you dont' have access to regular libraries and are not allowed to study anything else, everything else was considered "squirrel texts" and if we got caught reading them, you know some other art book, well we got assigned a condition or worse.

I read a book a couple of years ago called THE WHITE HAIRED GIRL, and there is a chapter in this book about the writer, it's an autobiography, who had grown up in Communist China and she'd been taught in school that Chairman Mao was a god and the greatest philosopher in the world, she had been banned from reading other philosophers. Every course she was brought up on was a Chairman Mao course and she had to clap to chairman Mao and thank him for everything good in her life, and if somethign went wrong, it was her fault. When Chairman Mao died, tours were given of his large estate, there was a study/office that was part of the tour, and in this room were all the books that Chairman Mao had banned from China, he was reading them himself and spoon feeding the information to the children of China through the school system, making these poor kids mentally dependent on Chairman Mao for everything, not learning to think from themselves or be able to process information from other sources and authors. It's a very moving paragraph in the book The White Haired Girl and I guess sometimes I have felt like that, in getting out of the Sea Org and finding out that there are so many really great smart people who are "wogs" that I could have been in communication with and wasn't, and that I had been mislead to believe that Hubbard had invented most of what he'd written.

He was using these references to dictate my activities at Gold and I had to study them, cram on them, get the info shouted at me by other staff, it was like the Cine staff's "tech" bible so to speak, it certainly wasn't someone relaying informaton to me without caring to say that they had learned it through experience, education or citing things they had studied. It was more like Hubbard was dictating my thoughts on the subject, rather than teaching me anything.

In a real classroom, the students are allowed to argue and discuss everything they read, they are allowed to have opinions, ask questions, give examples how it is otherwise,or how it is etc. It's such a better learning atmosphere. Ok, so someone says that a "good" work of art creates an emotional impact, I can accept it or not accept it. I can think with it, I know the person is human, that they could have made a mistake and I am allowed that thought. I could think of maybe times when I don't think it is that way, I can find other authors who have said similar things.... etc. But when Hubbard wrote it in an HCOB, it became part of KSW and were I to say, "Hey, I don't think that it matters if this particular shot has a whole lot of emotional impact... because....." well I'd get sent to cramming, rudiments, do I have any overts? Misunderstoods? Why don't I agree with HUBBARD? so for me to find out it wasn't Hubbard who said it....Oh man... or that it wasn't Hubbard who came up with these ideas in the first place, what damn business does Hubbard have making these ideas into HCOB's? If they weren't his to begin with? As far as I'm concerned it's illegal and when I have some time in my life, I'm going to go through the Art Course, which is a $2,000 course by the way, I believe that is the cost nowadays, and I'm going to go through what CIne ED's I read and I'm going to mark each one he's copyrighted that has copied another author and I'm going to send a report to the copyrights office or whoever else should know, the other authors or their estates involved, Because it's bullshit and it's not RIGHT.

I also got tortured with Word Clearing Correction Lists after every Method 9 on an ARt Series that I didn't have a floating needle after at the examiner. I wasn't happy with what I read, there was something that was wrong and it wasn't because I had something wrong with me or my case!!!! So, you know what I can still say Fuck Hubtoad and I still feel that way, I hated those correction lists :grouch: oh and sometimes they'd branch off othe correction lists, it was almost all the auditing I got, I didn't do much of the grade chart proper.

I do enjoy , when I get a spare moment, being able to log onto this message baord and reading like views AND contrary views, I'm sure there are always going to be people with fond thoughts of hubtoad, and who would never say "fuck Flubbard or Hubtoad" or other angry statement. I meet them in real life, there is such a wide variety of ex members and what their views are.

I have friends who have gotten mad at me and sworn and called me names, we made up afterwards :) It's not the end of the world to get mad at Hubbard about something. It's tough when I was in the SO and I was mad but I couldn't say it or express it. I wasn't allowed to think this way. If you said "Fuck Hubtoad", as a staff member, that was an INSTANT RPF assignment.

So you know it's great to be able to discuss this, on an open message board like this, and not have some RTC staff busting into my room afterwards to take me away..... and stick me into a black t shirt and make me run everywhere I go and speak only when spoken too...

yeh it is a relief to bang on the keys and see what other amazing posts come back on this subject too. I don't expect everyone, like fluffy, to agree with me or empathize with me, but at least I can write and fluffy can UNDERSTAND why I might have a personal beef with Hubbard on certain subjects, even if fluffy doesn't have that same beef.

In the real world, understanding doesn't have to mean that we agree or have the same view. The R in ARC hasn't been shifted to Reality/Agreement. It can just be I've got my reality, with my experiences, and you have yours and we all have a right to it. We can UNDERSTAND each other without having to agree. We can agree to disagree.

I am really glad everyone on this board is around when I get mad, because you know I REALLY did get so mad on Saturday that I was sick to my stomach, and I threw up, and I didn't know why and it helped for me to bang out a message about it and get some responses and then I can read them, and see what others say, are they mad too? Or not, it's helps to see why maybe the people who AREn't mad don't know about why I'm mad, you know because then I can look at what it is and explain it to them and that helps me understand too.

At first, it is like WHY? WHO CARES if someone didn't cite their sources? Right? BIG DEAL, so what?

And to answer that "so what?" question, I can figure it out, why so what? Well, that helps me out, so I like it when people challenge me and I certainly like the long eloquent posts that seem to really get what it is I'm feeling, and other kind comments and encouragement.

so now, I have to be good and get back to my homework for my other class tonight :)

Mo

Dear Mo,

Of all the stories and posts I have read, yours have always been the most thought provoking and inspiring to me. I think it's because you write as I imagine you talk - just as it is and was. By describing your feelings as you went through events, and how you took so many conflicting ideas and made sense of them enough to escape the horror of Gold is just the most wonderful thing and has helped me tremendously.

A theme for you is that reaching for knowledge and understanding of what inspired you, such as film making. I am sure if we think about it we can all name that goal that got us hooked into scio as the PR machine presented us with the 'certainty' that Hubbtoad had the answers we needed.

I think the point is not that he did or didn't, it's that once on the treadmill there are no other options, and that's what makes me mad too. No allowance for discussion or disagreement, of referencing outside sources for comparison and growth of understanding. This is where the plagiarism comes in too. Your story is such an excellent example of the extremes taken to shut down critical thinking and keep the vision tunnelled, and Hubbtoad venerated as the Source Of All Technology. Those who don't think that, IMO, have not read widely enough to see how much has been stolen, and the true extent of the con, or perhaps understood the real impact of that. The indoctrination to 'accept and not look' is extensive, extreme and yet sometimes subtle as well as being in your face. The RTC coming to take you away is the extreme, the subtle is such dismissive statements as "if it's true for you...blah blah" which is a sign of a well entrenched unwillingness to really look at other viewpoints.

I remember someone who had been a high level scio exec who left and went to university. He was shocked when he compared normal academia's requirements for footnotes and reference acknowledgments to Hubbtoad books lack of same. He said because of that "the tech" would never be viewed with any seriousness in the literary or research worlds and relegated to cult prattle, which is pretty much the story, no matter what the PR Machine of scio would have you believe.

I don't really care what people want to believe, that's up to them. I do care passionately about a person's right to examine other viewpoints without the familiar closed mind answers and excuses for Hubbtoad. It makes me a little sad, having walked that path and emerged into the sunlight of the vast amount of available knowledge out here, and I hope many more have the courage to look and reach as you have done.
 

Veda

Sponsor
IF you really care about those still in then the smart tactic is not to CHALLENGE their beliefs but to ENCOURAGE them to LOOK for themselves.

Establish communication with them in a non-antagonistic fashion and refer them to actual source materials instead. Such an approach is much more effective.

Continuous prattle about the same old arguments doesn't encourage critical thought, it stifles it.

Some International Freezone Association links.

Tribute to L. Ron Hubbard.

http://lronhubbard-tribute.com

So why all the controversy?

http://internationalfreezone.net/new.shtml

IFA Org Board.

http://internationalfreezone.net/OrgBoard.shtml
 

Twin A

Patron with Honors
I hope this experience will help you avoid other such traps in your life. We learn by our mistakes and hope not to re-do them.

Soon you'll be able to give your twin sister and crash course on the Hubbard scam. She will probably listen to you more than anybody else.

You'll save her 5 years of time.


Yeh, no kidding, that's a good way to look at it, it took me so many years to get my head straightened out, I pretty much can help her do it a lot faster, that's for sure.
 

Neo

Silver Meritorious Patron
IF you really care about those still in then the smart tactic is not to CHALLENGE their beliefs but to ENCOURAGE them to LOOK for themselves.

Establish communication with them in a non-antagonistic fashion and refer them to actual source materials instead. Such an approach is much more effective.

Continuous prattle about the same old arguments doesn't encourage critical thought, it stifles it.


Mark A. Baker

I did not say I care about those still in. I said I care about those still trapped by these lies. And I put emphasis on the word "trapped".

I think the truth is more helpful than a sycophantic attitude.

It was Anonymous that contributed the most to me leaving the cult. And they have "prattled" continuously for over a year now about the same old arguments. In other words - I disagree with you.

Neo
 

Out4Good

New Member
I am reassured each time I find an original quote which Ron the Plagiarist had "borrowed".

"single men and determined groups have been the only makers of space in which Man could walk free"

see

"A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has" Margaret Mead

"no 16 inch armor plate can stop an idea"

see

"Greater than the tread of mighty armies is an idea whose time has come" Victor Hugo

"the price of freedom: constant alertness, constant willingness to fight back, blah blah"

see

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance" Thomas Jefferson

Also does anyone remember the reference where Ron the plagiarist lists the levels of motivation, from money at the lowest, through personal gain, personal ambition to duty as the highest motivation?

Well that's all in a book called The Spy and his Masters chapter 3

"In ascending order of desirability and dependability, these categories of motives are money, compulsion, personal gain, ambition, political support, and duty. "

http://www.xenu.net/archive/go/felix/ch_i3.htm

Anyone found any more?
 

minnie

Patron with Honors
I would love to see the results of putting some of Hubbard's writings (perhaps from the scientology.org website etc) through an internet plagiarism detection tool such as ithenticate http://www.ithenticate.com/ These programs not only show the presence of plagiarism but also the percentage.

I can see why Ron was big on creating scn jargon to seem more original but he wouldn't fool these detection tools which compare the text against thousands of other sources, books, journals etc. and literally highlight plagiarised portions.

Gee, wouldn't it be great if a future release is of the Basics e-books! :D
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
I would love to see the results of putting some of Hubbard's writings (perhaps from the scientology.org website etc) through an internet plagiarism detection tool such as ithenticate http://www.ithenticate.com/ These programs not only show the presence of plagiarism but also the percentage.

I doubt if it would help at all. Such applications compare strings of words in text. Hubbard could talk fluently - witness his thousands of recorded lectures - and also write fluently and fast, per report, and not only his own.

No computer application is going to pluck out the concepts from his tens of millions of published words that might match to some extent earlier published concepts.

Paul
 
Top