David Mayo is not a Scientologist.
David Mayo was never in the Freezone. ...
Although, your statements are true they are also misleading as written.
David is no longer a scientologist, having specifically recanted membership in that group or advocacy of its specific form of mental/spiritual technology. However, David was at one time the de facto leader of independent scientology, a movement which has continued to survive for many years under the generic name of 'freezone'.
During David's brief involvement with independent scientology the 'freezone' term was restricted to CBR's people. After David left the term developed a more catholic usage and was extended to refer to all who practice some aspects of scientology independently of the church.
David left scientology and ended all association with independent scientology many years ago. He has publicly disavowed further interest in the entire body of work labeled under the heading of 'scientology'. Nonetheless, David's interests continue to include many of the issues which were sought to be addressed by the subject of scientology.
No doubt this knowledge acquired in the past coupled with the academic work he pursued after leaving the church continues to influence his present interests.
You are correct that David does not publicly endorse participation with any form of independent scientology. However you have neglected to point out that he is also precluded by his settlement with the church from making any statement which might be interpreted as such.
Personally, I doubt very much that David would be interested in making such an endorsement if he could, but as things stand he is unable to do so without incurring severe legal repercussions.
There's no reason to believe that such a temporary upstat exists.
Actually there is every reason to believe it. New people continue to become involved in freezone & independent scientology. You can relax however as the numbers involved remain very modest. There is no evidence of thousands flooding into the freezone. Still, an uptick is an uptick.
It's funny that the 'Freezone' is lately making strenuous efforts to co-opt, or associate itself with David Mayo - a person with whom they have no connection whatsoever. ...
First, you are extreme in your view of the presence of strenuous efforts. Terril's posts hardly constitute strenuous efforts on the part of the freezone.
Second, you are quite wrong concerning the 'no connection whatsoever'. Apart from David's own prior involvement, several leading members of the freezone are former close associates & friends of David. A few were also closely involved in working with David during the days in which he was, as head of the AACs, the de facto leader of independent scientology. Some of these individuals I know to be in continued communication with David.
Now, I doubt very much that David has any interest whatsoever in discussing 'tech issues' with his old friends, but they do share relationships & interests and in some cases have maintained their relationships over a period of several decades. None of that can legitimately characterized as 'no connection whatsoever'.
In your passionate assertions of your beliefs & hopes, you have over-stated your facts and made misleading statements concerning others.
It is very fair to say that David has no interest in promoting independent scientology in any of its guises and were he completely free to speak would so say. As it is, he has in the past disavowed further interest in scientology and has asserted that he is not a scientologist. That is more than sufficient to distance himself from any consideration as an active promoter of the freezone or independent scientology.
With that regard, Terril reasonably should point out that those comments he routinely cites by David in promotion of the freezone generally represent earlier statements by David. And that whereas those views are often shared by many freezoners, that does not mean that David endorses independent scientology. In not making that clear in his posts, Terril is being somewhat disingenuous.
Although, from what I know of Terril I consider that reflects a failure to perceive on his part rather than an intention to mislead.
[Nonetheless, I'd be willing to bet that David would still consider as preferable involvement with the freezone & independent scientology (and no, not Independent Scientology, aka MR's 'church') to that of the lrh established official church. Fortunately, he has no need to choose. ]
Mark A. Baker