Scientology's End - less wishful thinking please

afaceinthecrowd

Gold Meritorious Patron
Look, I'm sorry if you have this impression of me. I have never claimed anywhere to have any specialist knowledge, sociological or not. In fact, I clarified that I did not claim to be highly educated. I merely stated that I've lurked for a while and read most of the blogs each day.

It is intimidating being a noob on a forum where most people know the torturous lingo back to front and have been posting for years. Humour can go very badly online, so I haven't attempted it, mistakenly thinking I'll avoid alienating myself right off the bat.

I am looking to learn and I have some questions that haven't been asked or phrased the same (that I have found), so I dove in. I am not looking for a fight or to troll. I'm really just a normal chap with an interest, but not a life-consuming interest, in this particular subject. If I've come across badly then I'll try harder, but I still want to ask things I feel may be relevant to my understanding. If anyone feels it is beneath them then by all means don't give me the time of day.

As I say, I just meant well.

Thank you, FNI. :yes:

And, welcome to this here Rodeo. :clap:

Contained in the body of work in the Threads of this Board there is more solid, accurate and insightful information than anywhere else re: El Ron (from Folks that actually interacted with Hisself) and Scn (from Folks that have done parts, or pretty much all, of everything comprising the entire "Bridge"--"Admin" & "Tech" Training and Processing). Every era, echelon and experiential scenario of El Ron and Scn has been detailed, delineated and dialogued about by Folks that saw it, were part of it, did it, left it and are now here...from the '50's to the '00's, from St. Hill to IHQ, from FCDC to Flagship Apollo. :ohmy:

You're most welcome to join this here big conversation. But, please understand that thousands of Folks have written millions of words in gut wrenching, explicit, honest and brilliant narratives, dialogues and analysis for nearly a decade here re: El Ron and Scn, and many of Us have read and participated in a lot of it, a buncha Us in much of it and some of Us in most all of it. :melodramatic:

What is it you want to ask that you feel would be relevant to your understanding. :coolwink:

Face:)

PS: Unfortunately, the "tortuous lingo" is an essential essence of Scn and the Scn experience...For some reason, for the most part, a fool progresses well in "understanding" Scn but stupid people have a hard time "getting 'It'". :no::hysterical:
 
Last edited:

JBWriter

Happy Sapien
Excellent!

And I am pretty sure that a US spokesperson (Pouw, I think) issued one or two letters of DENIAL, claiming that the COS had NOTHING to do with squirrel busters!

Gaslight tech!

Now they are falling all over themselves in court, trying to PROVE that the COS had EVERYTHING to do with squirrel busters! (not RTC)

Scientology. Crazy people saying crazy things to make you feel crazy enough to stop asking them for facts.

To clarify, the reporter, Guy Adams, contacted the Co$ spokesrep (probably Pouw, just as you've indicated) for comment while he was in Texas interviewing Mr. Rathbun.
The Co$ spokesrep refused to respond verbally and demanded Mr. Adams' questions in writing. <---Paper trail tek hard @ work.:thumbsup:
He sent them the written questions and the written responses were sent to the reporter AND The Independent's office in the UK.
(British attorneys for Co$ were somehow involved in this back-and-forth period, but it's not a detail shared in the published article.)

The article was published April 7, 2012.
(^^^ Per David Miscavige's own court-submitted declaration, he had NO ties to the State of Texas on/anywhere near that date. The spokesrep flew solo. Again. Uh-huh.)

If anyone has a picture of the RTC-approved map of the US -- the one where Louisiana shares a border with New Mexico -- would you kindly post in on any of the multiple Rathbun v Miscavige threads, please?

/2nd derail.

JB <---wishful thinker.
 

Queenmab321

Patron Meritorious
I can read about two lines of this kind of thing before I start wriggling. 'Many people' find Scientology beneficial and meaningful because from day 1 they are hoodwinked and manipulated. Within a few days it can already be too late. There is no distinction between the set of fascistic techniques of mind control devised by Lafayette and the fascistic organisation he created which applies them to the raw meat.

I doubt if the workers would have any idea how to keep anything running if the doors suddenly opened and someone said, 'Come out or stay in; it's up to you, you're free'. I suspect many of them would be unhappy and would not know what to do. If anyone stays in now this is not because Hubbard's tech is beneficial but because for months and years they have been brainwashed into using his garbage rather than their own brains.

But I don't believe there is a core of self-motivated active sincere workers; I just do not believe this.

People can be persuaded to believe almost anything, no matter how nonsensical, when they are brainwashed to do so and when they are surrounded by other victims who believe the same.

What might happen when the framework of the con is removed? Who knows? It could be very good or very bad or just a non-event. Maybe it has gone already.

I appreciate what you're saying, SOF, and I certainly never intended to suggest that I believe Scientology dogma or tech to be either beneficial or meaningful in fact. But, after all, the Freezone does exist. What's more, there are numerous members of this board (some, if I'm not mistaken, involved in this very thread) who persist in holding on to a belief in the value and efficacy of Hubbard's tech and still others on ESMB who parrot Hubbard's outlandish sci-fi cosmology. Are all these people still brainwashed? Are they surrounded by fellow victims? caught up in the "framework of the con"?
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
In the world of Scientology, in terms of the Scientology philosophy, based on ARC, TRUTH is whatever any person "agrees with".

ARC has NOTHING at all to do with truth. "R" is "reality", and that hinges ONLY on "agreement". To Hubbard, and most Scientologists (if they duplicate and apply the data fully), "truth" results from agreements that have become "solid" or are shared by many "thetans".

"Truth" is a word one rarely encounters within the subject materials of Scientology.

The ARC game is to manipulate an "understanding" in others, and "truth" factors in not at all! It took me awhile to grasp that when involved with the Church of Scientology. But, that is what the data states, and that is how it plays out in real Scio life.

"Truth" has been and will always remain irrelevant in Scientology.

I was told it was "the exact time, place, form and event?"
 

FascinatedNeverIn

Patron with Honors
What is it you want to ask that you feel would be relevant to your understanding. :coolwink:

Cheers.

I have a range of things knocking about in my head, but I'm now not sure if they'd be set upon by the wolves as too banal. :biggrin:

A lot of people seem to have first hand knowledge of 'regging', but hardly anyone goes into much detail about what the regges say or do - they just say they were regged for $5 grand. How do the regges not get pushed away by the crowd when they obstruct public from leaving an event?

Others say they were called 30-40 times a day (to donate or attend an event or get them onto a course), but how did they stay polite after the 4th call? What did they say when the 6th different arm of Scientology called them that day to ask for a donation? How did their employers overlook the amount of personal calls? Who has time to take 40 long calls a day alongside working and living their life? Many people get irate after receiving just a few calls from a company, and I can't get my head around how the average Joe could remain calm after being disturbed so many times, for so long.

As someone with a casual fascination, I find information is spread higgledy-piggledy about the web, much on sites that don't look like they've been updated since 1995. It's difficult, when you have a query, to find a clear answer. Much of the best and most up-to-date information is buried deep within Disqus comments on blogs, which are not very searchable. This board has so many exes and experts that I thought it was a perfect place to make a few observations and ask a few questions. I also look at Why We Protest, but that seems far too harsh an environment if you're not actively protesting.

What I think people who have lived and breathed this subject for a long time perhaps forget is that not everyone has the same angles of interest as them, nor to the same degree. I'm not a lawyer or psychologist, and I've never walked into one of the buildings or had someone setting up credit I can't afford. Some perhaps forget what it's like to not have an instant grasp of all the terminology, nor the timeline of events in their head and how the cult is structured.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Here's the link to a very informative article and I encourage you (and all) to read the part when the reporter, Guy Adams, describes the e-mail responses he received from the Co$: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...henemy-of-l-ron-hubbard-devotees-7618944.html

Fun Excerpt:



Excerpt which partially relates to your query, HH:



It seems reasonable to think that Guy Adams and/or The Independent kept a copy of the emails from Co$/Co$ attorneys, Carter-Ruck.

As for digging up the actual quote(s) from the Co$ spokesrep? IIRC, Tony Ortega wrote something about this very issue some weeks back, but I'm not sure if he provided a copy of a written statement or not.

/derail.

JB (I posted the Tom Cruise/Bert Fields bit just to crack myself up. It worked!)



Good stuff!

In the link you provided there was this snippet:

"When newspapers asked the Church what was going on,
they denied any affiliation with the squirrel busters."



And also Tony Ortega once reported on his Blog the following:


"Church of Scientology International lawyer Les Strieber said in court
that the Squirrel Busters were not “sent” by the church.
He said they were merely church members exercising their religious rights."
 

Helena Handbasket

Gold Meritorious Patron
A lot of people seem to have first hand knowledge of 'regging', but hardly anyone goes into much detail about what the regges say or do - they just say they were regged for $5 grand. How do the regges not get pushed away by the crowd when they obstruct public from leaving an event?
The reges have a number of tricks to get people to pay, and they use them all. Some of these are what all salespeople do, and some are unique to scientology.

When you're first pulled into scientology, they try to find your "ruin" -- the one thing that you would change about your life if you only could. Once they know that, they never forget it.

They are persistant. They decide what you are going to buy that day, and they don't give up. They all have a quota of how much they're supposed to get each week, but they don't easily move on to the next guy if you resist -- they want X number of simoleons, and from YOU.

Whatever reason you have to NOT pay them, they have an answer for. Too poor? Auditing will improve your earning ability. Going on vacation? Just think how much better it will be without all that CHARGE. Didn't bring your checkbook? We have your bank account number on file; just fill out one of these counter checks. Your credit card is maxed out? We'll ask for a credit limit increase; it's okay, we know what to tell them. You don't want to spend money that belongs to both you and your significant other? We'll call him/her and you can ask if it's okay.

Don't worry about that new car or TV you want to buy; this is your ETERNITY we're talking about. We KNOW you want to do this, we INTEND for you to do this, and our attitude makes it uncomfortable for you to say no. You're not a panty-waist dilletantte, are you? Of course not; you want to go up the bridge FAST!

Don't have time to talk to me right now? No problem, we can get this done right away. Sign here, then you can run up to the courseroom and not have to worry about being punished for being late to course. And every tax-deductable donation you make helps forward the expansion of scientology.

In addition to all of the above, the Thursday at 2 P.M. thing causes reges to get desperate, and they turn up the "intention" even MORE. And I'm sure you've heard about reges charging someone's credit card without the holder's knowledge or consent.

So why don't more publics just tell the reges to **** off? Ethics is why. Fight back and you'll be sent to the Ethics Officer, never a welcome encounter. Ultimately, you have to be "all the way in" or "all the way out of" scientology, and the big fear is that if you push back too hard, you'll be excommunicated and no longer allowed to do scientology services. I suppose many who didonethingafteranother would rather have did their bridge at a more leisurely pace, but that's one middle ground that's discouraged.

And unless you're ready to jump ship and go to the freezone, if you do get excommunicated, your dream of going up the bridge is destroyed.

I'm sure others can add more to this answer.

Helena
 

Balthasar

Patron Meritorious
That would be interesting, but I think my point is still valid. Even if the current corporate church went down, a new one would be created by the faithful to follow LRH policy, most likely, perhaps even by some of the same people who created RTC. Nothing could be done to stop that, really, even if the old corporate entity owed money, the new one would not, any more than Christianity would be ended if the Children of God were destroyed. It would be a victory over this incarnation of the Church, but without a change to the amendment, nothing stops the next Church of Reformed Scientology to start. Certainly, RTC's death would be entertaining, and the current Church of Scientology would be destroyed, but you can't kill an idea. I would grant that without their current money and corporate structure, they would be unable to do the harm to people that they are currently doing, though.

Why not forbid all religions per Amendment. Maybe ditch the Constitution all together because obviously, as it turns out, we are much smarter than the founding fathers!

Are we really all that stupid needing additional laws to protect us from our imbecile decisions?

The problem with Amendments and additional laws trying to regulate peoples private concern is, that they are designed decreed by people just as smart or imbecile as the one crying out for it.

You have to leave people the freedom to make their own decisions and learn from it rather than to "lawfully amend something out of existence".
 

Daisy

Patron with Honors
The reges have a number of tricks to get people to pay, and they use them all. Some of these are what all salespeople do, and some are unique to scientology.

When you're first pulled into scientology, they try to find your "ruin" -- the one thing that you would change about your life if you only could. Once they know that, they never forget it.

They are persistant. They decide what you are going to buy that day, and they don't give up. They all have a quota of how much they're supposed to get each week, but they don't easily move on to the next guy if you resist -- they want X number of simoleons, and from YOU.

Whatever reason you have to NOT pay them, they have an answer for. Too poor? Auditing will improve your earning ability. Going on vacation? Just think how much better it will be without all that CHARGE. Didn't bring your checkbook? We have your bank account number on file; just fill out one of these counter checks. Your credit card is maxed out? We'll ask for a credit limit increase; it's okay, we know what to tell them. You don't want to spend money that belongs to both you and your significant other? We'll call him/her and you can ask if it's okay.

Don't worry about that new car or TV you want to buy; this is your ETERNITY we're talking about. We KNOW you want to do this, we INTEND for you to do this, and our attitude makes it uncomfortable for you to say no. You're not a panty-waist dilletantte, are you? Of course not; you want to go up the bridge FAST!

Don't have time to talk to me right now? No problem, we can get this done right away. Sign here, then you can run up to the courseroom and not have to worry about being punished for being late to course. And every tax-deductable donation you make helps forward the expansion of scientology.

In addition to all of the above, the Thursday at 2 P.M. thing causes reges to get desperate, and they turn up the "intention" even MORE. And I'm sure you've heard about reges charging someone's credit card without the holder's knowledge or consent.

So why don't more publics just tell the reges to **** off? Ethics is why. Fight back and you'll be sent to the Ethics Officer, never a welcome encounter. Ultimately, you have to be "all the way in" or "all the way out of" scientology, and the big fear is that if you push back too hard, you'll be excommunicated and no longer allowed to do scientology services. I suppose many who didonethingafteranother would rather have did their bridge at a more leisurely pace, but that's one middle ground that's discouraged.

And unless you're ready to jump ship and go to the freezone, if you do get excommunicated, your dream of going up the bridge is destroyed.

I'm sure others can add more to this answer.

Helena

And reges constantly tell you that any back off you have for paying for a service is just the reactive mind kicking in. I'm sure the OT's get it worse along the lines of "but you're OT and you cant make it go right?"

One believes all this BS. "yeah, I can be stronger than my case. Ok I quess I can charge it. After all I will become more able and maybe the money will start flowing in.
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
Why not forbid all religions per Amendment. Maybe ditch the Constitution all together because obviously, as it turns out, we are much smarter than the founding fathers!

Are we really all that stupid needing additional laws to protect us from our imbecile decisions?

The problem with Amendments and additional laws trying to regulate peoples private concern is, that they are designed decreed by people just as smart or imbecile as the one crying out for it.

You have to leave people the freedom to make their own decisions and learn from it rather than to "lawfully amend something out of existence".

Forbidding religion without defining it would still leave the same problem.

I have no problem with the first Amendment allowing religions, so long as that is DEFINED.

Laws that cannot be enforced are pointless hand-waving.
 

SpecialFrog

Silver Meritorious Patron
Forbidding religion without defining it would still leave the same problem.

I have no problem with the first Amendment allowing religions, so long as that is DEFINED.

Laws that cannot be enforced are pointless hand-waving.

I don't think any constitutional change is needed nor any further definition. Just possibly a couple of court rulings clarifying that:

1) Religious rights of person A don't trump any other rights of person B
2) Religious rights of parents don't trump any of the other rights of their children (who are not capable of giving meaningful consent to give up any of their rights)
3) Taxing religions is not a violation of the first amendment. Clearly you can tax the press without it affecting their freedom.

If you do that and then treat religious organizations the same as any other charities or non-profits (i.e. any tax benefit is based on what they actually do) it really doesn't matter whether Scientology is or isn't a religion.
 

uniquemand

Unbeliever
I don't think any constitutional change is needed nor any further definition. Just possibly a couple of court rulings clarifying that:

1) Religious rights of person A don't trump any other rights of person B
2) Religious rights of parents don't trump any of the other rights of their children (who are not capable of giving meaningful consent to give up any of their rights)
3) Taxing religions is not a violation of the first amendment. Clearly you can tax the press without it affecting their freedom.

If you do that and then treat religious organizations the same as any other charities or non-profits (i.e. any tax benefit is based on what they actually do) it really doesn't matter whether Scientology is or isn't a religion.

I think that would work, for my purposes, as well.
 

Gadfly

Crusader
3) Taxing religions is not a violation of the first amendment.

THAT would be great. I see no reason to grant religions a blanket "tax-free" card. The aspects or parts of any "religion" that actually do charitable work might be granted limited tax-free status, but the rest of it - TAX THEM FULLY. All Christian churches, all Jewish synagogues, all Muslim groups, and ALL SCIENTOLOGY entities! :thumbsup:

This idea that "religion" is "good" and deserves tax exemptions is an out-dated and archaic concept. :yes:

The only reason that this has persisted for so long is because of powerful and influential special interests and "religious" government leaders (for example, in the USA, right-wing Christian representatives, Jewish leaders on the political left, etc.).

I would like to see a REAL "separation of Church and State", where religion of any sort gets ZERO special treatment.

Politics and religion are so horribly intertwined in the USA (and probably other places too).
 
Last edited:

FascinatedNeverIn

Patron with Honors
The reges have a number of tricks to get people to pay, and they use them all. Some of these are what all salespeople do, and some are unique to scientology.

When you're first pulled into scientology, they try to find your "ruin" -- the one thing that you would change about your life if you only could. Once they know that, they never forget it.

They are persistant. They decide what you are going to buy that day, and they don't give up. They all have a quota of how much they're supposed to get each week, but they don't easily move on to the next guy if you resist -- they want X number of simoleons, and from YOU.

Whatever reason you have to NOT pay them, they have an answer for. Too poor? Auditing will improve your earning ability. Going on vacation? Just think how much better it will be without all that CHARGE. Didn't bring your checkbook? We have your bank account number on file; just fill out one of these counter checks. Your credit card is maxed out? We'll ask for a credit limit increase; it's okay, we know what to tell them. You don't want to spend money that belongs to both you and your significant other? We'll call him/her and you can ask if it's okay.

Don't worry about that new car or TV you want to buy; this is your ETERNITY we're talking about. We KNOW you want to do this, we INTEND for you to do this, and our attitude makes it uncomfortable for you to say no. You're not a panty-waist dilletantte, are you? Of course not; you want to go up the bridge FAST!

Don't have time to talk to me right now? No problem, we can get this done right away. Sign here, then you can run up to the courseroom and not have to worry about being punished for being late to course. And every tax-deductable donation you make helps forward the expansion of scientology.

In addition to all of the above, the Thursday at 2 P.M. thing causes reges to get desperate, and they turn up the "intention" even MORE. And I'm sure you've heard about reges charging someone's credit card without the holder's knowledge or consent.

So why don't more publics just tell the reges to **** off? Ethics is why. Fight back and you'll be sent to the Ethics Officer, never a welcome encounter. Ultimately, you have to be "all the way in" or "all the way out of" scientology, and the big fear is that if you push back too hard, you'll be excommunicated and no longer allowed to do scientology services. I suppose many who didonethingafteranother would rather have did their bridge at a more leisurely pace, but that's one middle ground that's discouraged.

And unless you're ready to jump ship and go to the freezone, if you do get excommunicated, your dream of going up the bridge is destroyed.

I'm sure others can add more to this answer.

Helena

That's certainly the best and most detailed insight I've seen. Many thanks for that.

I have managed to piece together the ethics part of this, but it was the run-up that I could never quite grasp. Without experiencing it, it's difficult to imagine someone so rabidly after your money that they will pursue you until you relent.
 

FascinatedNeverIn

Patron with Honors
It would be interesting to know if many Scientologists who go bankrupt and who stay in the church ever cite Scientology as the reason, or whether they try to protect the church from bad PR.

i.e. could there be an interesting stat from bankruptcy forms
 

Sindy

Crusader
It would be interesting to know if many Scientologists who go bankrupt and who stay in the church ever cite Scientology as the reason, or whether they try to protect the church from bad PR.

i.e. could there be an interesting stat from bankruptcy forms

100% of those still in, who go bankrupt, would protect the church at all costs. You can add that to your mental stats.
 

Churchill

Gold Meritorious Patron
The term "religion" means many things to many different people.

Scientology used "legal tactics" such as "winning an argument", along with "manipulating agreement" to pass itself off as a "religion". It was simple really. Hubbard ordered his underlings to "research" and "investigate", along with using surveys, to find out what "passes as a religion". Then Hubbard made sure to add these things into Scientology so that it would "pass the test".

The term and concept of "religion" is a large bin where just about anything can be tossed that moves a bit past or beyond the "physical" and "material".

Of course, some Christians don't want things like Satanism or Paganism to be viewed as a "legitimate religion", but much like beauty, it is in the eyes of the beholder.

To me, while I care little for religions at all, anything that involves anything past the raw material reality could be tossed into the bin of religion.

It is just a label. To me it is meaningless. It ends up as a debate over agreed-upon and/or unusual definitions. What is or isn't a religion? Who gives a rat's ass? :confused2:

Of course, in Hubbard's manipulative game of agreement, it matters a great deal what is or isn't viewed as a religion in any society or country (because he uses that to his advantage).

Scientology employs the trappings of a religion, and the obscenity of it was when Fred Goldberg, the IRS Commissioner caved to them, granting extraordinary protections under the law that even legitimate religions are denied. Someday this tragic decision will be re-visited, I hope.

Until then, I'll look to the enlightened models in this regard, of France and Germany, who, unlike our Government, can discern the difference between religion and the bullshit of Scientology.

Religion as a force for good or evil is a separate discussion.
 
Top