The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[purple haze]

Dox?


Mark A. Baker

what does Dox mean, Mark?

 

[Hatshepsut]

what does Dox mean, Mark?

Usually means proof. As in do you have the evidence or documents to prove it.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

what does Dox mean, Mark?

As Hattie says. In this instance I'm sure the participants on the thread will be happily satisfied with any photographs you might choose to submit to substantiate your claims.




Mark A. Baker

 

[Sharone Stainforth]

Tell me why?

I can't think of a better place to post this.

1973 aboard the Apollo. This whole thread is way off of track. I wasn't there then. I had left, so I can't really comment.

I have read a lot, I am an avid reader, always have been, fortunately for me.If it wasn't for my reading and a little help I would never have gotten off of Hubbards floating lunatic asylum.

So tell me, why is Gerry Armstrong a bullshitter? I would really like to know. I have read and listened to a lot by Gerry Armstrong and I don't see it the same way.

You don't believe Jesse Prince either, is it because he is black, a wog? Is it because he was part of the Lisa Mcpherson trust? Is it because your beliefs in L. Ron Hubbard are so strong, you cannot and will not see the truth? What is it? Is it because you were raised for most of your life in L. Ron Hubbards thinking? Is it because, just like me, you do not want to let your children down and think badly of you? Have you lied to them, an acceptable truth? Jesus, I was out of scientology for the same amount of time you were in it and I still told acceptable truths because I was so afraid. Think about that!

I know it is hard, it is so god damned hard. This man, this very sick man, L Ron Hubbard stole our lives, our childhoods, we did not have a child hood. It was denied US. Can't you see that. He stole our parents from us. He denied us our basic Human Rights. The same basic human rights that every living human being is entitled to on earth, do they get it ? NO.

Scientology as founded by L. Ron Hubbard supports and has websites and foundations that suposedly upholds human rights. It is a farce, you know it, I know it and every rational thinking human being knows it. Please don't make me the one wrong, here.

I will defend you to the hilt here, because I know it was not easy, I know it was bloody difficult to have nowhere else to turn to. As I have already said and I will reiterate, I was out as long as you were in and I still told acceptable truths because I was so afraid. Is that brainwashing? Your'e damned right it was.

L. Ron Hubbard lied to us all, you are no exception, you know who you are and I know who I am, and I will fight for the right to be right.

As a side note.Men will, and have denigrated women since time in immoreal (spelling)and will do so for as long as they think they are the superior beings upon this earth. L. Ron Hubbard was one of the hardest task masters of these men and if you can survive him, you can survive anything.

What my children think of me, pales into insignificance when I remember what L. Ron Hubbard did to me and my family.

It may have made me what I am today, but think of what I might have been had it not been for the interference of Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard on my life and yours. too.

The sea org, L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology was NO different in 1973 than it was in 1968. It was NO different in the 1970s. or the 1980s or the 1990s or in the 2000s.

It does not matter whether L. Ron Hubbard was in charge or David Miscavige, they are or were both Psychopaths with intent of full domination of the world, and justifying this with both money and power. It's not what you know, but who you know? I don't care who I know, what I know is what matters to me. What I know is, don't ever look into Scientology with an open mind, and NEVER, EVER trust a fully fledged Scientologist. Ever.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

I can't think of a better place to post this. ...

Sharone, what is this post in response to? What you've written appears to be a response to someone denying the veracity of either Gerry Armstrong or Jesse Prince, but it seems to be non-sequitur on this thread. :confused2:


Mark A. Baker

 

[purple haze]

As Hattie says. In this instance I'm sure the participants on the thread will be happily satisfied with any photographs you might choose to submit to substantiate your claims.




Mark A. Baker

I guess I asked for that, didn't I? LOL

 

[Sharone Stainforth]

It belongs in this thread, whether you choose to answer here, is another matter entirely.

He (L. Ron Hubbard) was not any better in 1973, than he was in 1968, in fact, he was progressively worse until he died. Wasn't he?

I'm sorry, I really am, but I will not play games, especially where other peoples lives are concerned. It's not just your family, there are hundreds of others.Please try and understand that...... I know you do, deep down.

 

[FoTi]

I can't think of a better place to post this.

So tell me, why is Gerry Armstrong a bullshitter? I would really like to know. I have read and listened to a lot by Gerry Armstrong and I don't see it the same way.

You don't believe Jesse Prince either, is it because he is black, a wog? Is it because he was part of the Lisa Mcpherson trust? Is it because your beliefs in L. Ron Hubbard are so strong, you cannot and will not see the truth? What is it? Is it because you were raised for most of your life in L. Ron Hubbards thinking? Is it because, just like me, you do not want to let your children down and think badly of you? Have you lied to them, an acceptable truth? Jesus, I was out of scientology for the same amount of time you were in it and I still told acceptable truths because I was so afraid. Think about that!
.

Sharone, who are you talking to here? I cannot make any sense out of your post.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

It belongs in this thread, whether you choose to answer here, is another matter entirely.

He (L. Ron Hubbard) was not any better in 1973, than he was in 1968, in fact, he was progressively worse until he died. Wasn't he?

I'm sorry, I really am, but I will not play games, especially where other peoples lives are concerned. It's not just your family, there are hundreds of others.Please try and understand that...... I know you do, deep down.

Actually Sharone those of us who post regularly on this thread DO UNDERSTAND and largely agree with you as regards Hubbard. I merely commented on your post appearing to be a response to something other than those which appear earlier on the thread, hence the confusion.


Mark A. Baker

 

[afaceinthecrowd]

I find of interest to me the story of Staff Sergeant Giunta and his press interviews.

There was a NY Times Op Ed today regarding Staff Sergeant Giunta’s CMH ceremony at the White House. In the online “Comments” section a person going by the moniker of “Charles A. Tiffany” excoriated Mr. Giunta and US Armed Forces personnel as "mindless killers that turn kids into useless fodder willing to be ground into the sand."

Here, for those that have interest, is my response to "Mr. Tiffany":

I am the direct descendant of a man that lost his right leg, fighting for the founding of a nation in which only white male property owners would have the right to vote. I am also the direct descendant of a man that died, fighting for the preservation of nation that, at the time of his death, did not allow Native and African Americans to vote. And, I am the direct descendant of a man with a disfigured face, from wounds fighting for a nation that did not allow women to vote.

Mr. Tiffany, I suggest that you study the arc of history regarding just what has happened and what is happening that allows the both of us to openly speak our minds regarding the “News” of today. We know not what follows but one thing is fact; without SSG Giunta, his fallen brothers and the legions upon legions of brave souls before them tyranny, terror and peril would most probably rule our individual days.

These wonderful “kids” are grown from our “sand” by the sweat and blood of our ancestors dreams and hopes and your freedom. If you cannot honor the moment or the man then I suggest you reflect on my first paragraph.

Face

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

this from: http://www.kitco.com/ind/katz/nov152010.html

The One-handed Economist took a new position in its letter of Sept. 17, 2010 shifting its commodity holdings from gold to silver. Another change of position is in a special bulletin issued Nov. 10, 2010. However, since this is so recent, in order to learn the contents a subscriber must cross my palm with silver. (See below.)

Today I would like to continue my discussion of the (so-called) Great Depression as this is the giant lie which is behind most of the other economic lies which have deceived so many people and cost them so much money.

What is a depression? It is a period in a country’s economic history where the large majority of the people become poorer. It is alleged that such a period occurred in the early 1930s. I have pointed out previously that Economic Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, reports that during this period Americans shifted from margarine to butter. They increased their per capita meat consumption (from 129 lb to 144 lb.). And they gave (substantially) more to charity. Further, real wages rose during this period, and the savings of the average American increased in value (buying power) by 30%. This does not sound like a getting poorer to me.

Let us examine the increase in buying power of the average American’s savings. In the early 1930s, the average American saved and had been saving since interest was legalized (by Noah Webster) in the 1780s. Given an average interest rate of 5% (normal through the 19th century and up until 1933) the average person’s savings would multiply by 4.25 times over the course of his working lifetime.

Average annual wages in manufacturing in America for 1933 were $1,086. At first glance, this sounds like a small amount of money, but one must bear in mind that in early 1933 the country was on the gold standard, and prices were much lower than they are today. In 1933, a new car could be purchased for $400. A two bedroom apartment (San Francisco) could be rented for $25/mo. And a gallon of gas cost a dime. (That dime, by the way, was .075 oz. of silver, which exchanges today for $1.95.)

But I have not found that the careful recitation of statistics has much effect on believers in the Great Depression. The more dispassionate and factual I become the more emotional they become. “But, Mr. Katz, what about the bread lines? What about 25% unemployment? Have you no heart, Mr. Katz.

Actually, I do have a heart. It is the defenders of the Great Depression who lack common humanity because the lies of the Great Depression are carefully calculated to defend the interests of the rich and powerful and injure the common man. Let us examine a little history.

There was a phenomenon very similar to the “depression” of the 1930s in the period 1873-79. Prominent businessmen (e.g., Jay Cooke) went bankrupt. Unemployment was high, and prices declined.

And yet, the party in power (the Republicans) were not kicked out of office in the 1876 election. Nobody seemed to know that America was in a depression. The unemployment was absorbed fairly rapidly by the free economy, and America went on to have the greatest economy in the world for the last 3rd of the 19th century. At the same time, millions of immigrants flooded into America because, in America, the streets were paved with gold.

The correct name for such a phenomenon is a credit contraction. You have heard the expression, “Neither a borrower nor a lender be.” Well, a credit contraction is a period when many people seem to heed that advice. It may be good for some people in the country and bad for others, but there is no clear cut harm or benefit to the country as a whole.

What caused the money/credit contraction of the 1870s was the money/credit expansion of the Civil War. The two periods were directly opposite. During the Civil War prices rose rapidly. During the 1870s prices fell. During the Civil War stocks went up. During the 1870s stocks went down. During the Civil War both real wages and unemployment fell. During the 1870s both real wages and unemployment rose.

Well after these events there was another war (World War I) and the Civil War scenario repeated itself. During the war prices rose and both real wages and unemployment fell. Notice the role that unemployment plays in this. Unemployment goes down precisely when real wages go down. For this reason, if someone wants to lie to you, then unemployment makes a very good statistic. A decline in unemployment makes it easy to feign sympathy for the working man, while you are lowering his wages. It is a perfect statistic if you have an intent to deceive because it takes a complex of data and oversimplifies it. If we take a credit expansion, such as the Civil War or World War I, then this benefits the unsympathetic characters of our society (the banks and Wall Street). By replacing this complex (and correct) analysis with the oversimplified statistic of unemployment, this allows one to pose as the friend of the working man even as one is trying to lower his wages.

For example, I mentioned that average annual earnings in manufacturing in 1933 were $1086. (See, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, Series D, 740.) But since at that time the dollar was approximately 1/20 ounce of gold (25.8 grains of gold, 9/10 fine as defined by the Gold Standard Act of 1900), $1086 was 54 ounces of gold. But of course you all know that this past Tuesday 54 ounces of gold had a value of $1400 x 54 = $75,600. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that average wages in the U.S. for October of this year were $47,216, about 5/8 of wages in the Great “depression.” In words of one syllable, in the middle of The Depression the average working man was making almost double what he makes today.

In early 1933, the average American worker was receiving 54 ounces of gold per year. If he saved 15% of this, he was saving a bit over 8 ounces of gold per year. Assume that the average worker had accumulated 25 years of savings (half of an average working lifetime) or 200 oz. of gold, and this would have approximately doubled due to accumulated interest at 5% over 25 years. Thus the average American working man had savings of 400 ounces of gold (in 1933).

But remember that these savings increased in value (due to the appreciation of the currency by 30% from 1930-33. That is, the average American worker received an additional 120 ounces of gold (almost 2½ years income) over these 3 years without doing any extra work. This was, of course, money which had been stolen from him during World War I (when prices doubled) and given to the paper aristocracy (courtesy of the Democrats). In words of one syllable, the Democrats were the party of the banks and Wall Street (despite their loud protestations to the contrary).

The Republicans, on the other hand, were the party of the common man. These idiots who pretend to be economists today do not even know that what they call “The Great Depression” was a deliberately planned event. It was planned by the Republican Party of 1919. At that time, prices had just doubled (from 1914 to 1919). Both the savings and the buying power of the average working man had fallen in half over these 5 years and given to the bankers (principally J.P. Morgan, who had fomented U.S. entry into World War I) and Wall Street. (The DJI approximately doubled from 1914 to 1919.) The Republicans saw that this stolen wealth had to be returned to its rightful owners, the working people of America. And they devised a policy to do this. Increase the value of the U.S. dollar back to its level of 1914. In other words, reduce prices in the country from their 1919 level to their 1914 level. Since cigars had risen in price from 5¢ to 10¢ from 1914 to 1919 and since the smoke-filled room was an institution of the day (the dangers of smoking being unknown), this was referred to as the policy of “a good 5¢ cigar.”

In other words, what the idiot Bernanke refers to as a mistake was a deliberate, conscious policy. It was humane policy (designed to help the working man), and it worked. By 1933, prices in the U.S. had returned to their 1914 level. (This, by the way, was the same price level, according to the Wholesale Price Index, as had obtained in 1793 – 140 years of price stability.) This was hard on Wall Street, but it was for the good of the American working man. (Stocks lost 90% of their value from 1929 to 1932.)

The Republicans were confident that their policy would be politically popular because it had been politically popular in the 1870s. The Republicans were reelected in 1876, right in the middle of the “depression,” and remained the dominant political party by standing against rising prices and for the gold standard (Tea Party members take note).

What happened in 1932 was that the media of the U.S. swallowed a giant pack of lies (taken mostly from Marxism) and perpetrated this on the American people. The media of that day played both sides of the fence. They represented the interests of the paper aristocracy and then portrayed themselves as supporters of the working class. To this day, people do not know that Franklin D. Roosevelt was a Wall Streeter who ran a vulture fund in the 1920s. A vulture fund is a (mutual) fund which swoops down on dying companies and gobbles them up. A “traitor to his class?” That was a deliberate and conscious lie.

Stories of bread lines and soup kitchens were part of the propaganda of the day. Remember, this was the era which saw Adolf Hitler get elected in Germany. It was not a proud moment in the history of the world. You have all been taught that Wall Streeters were jumping off buildings after the crash of 1929. What a bunch of malarkey. First, the 1929 crash was caused by Herbert Hoover (who hated free enterprise). He had the Fed choke off brokers’ loans, thus forcing stock speculators to dump their holdings. Second, I have researched the supposed wave of suicides in the wake of the crash. IT NEVER HAPPENED. There was no increase in suicides in late 1929 for New York State and no increase for the nation as a whole. There are always some suicides, of course. In a nation this big, you can find a few of anything, but there was no wave of suicides out of the ordinary. IT WAS A CONSCIOUS AND DELIBERATE LIE.

We can see the same kind of media lies today. You all know that in every village and hamlet today there are pharmacies telling you to get your flu shot. First, the government is involved because it pays the vaccine companies (an outrageous sum) for the vaccine. Second, in 2009 there was a campaign of lies in which the predicted swine flu for 2010 was wildly exaggerated and called a pandemic (a made up word). Not only did the pandemic fail to happen, flu deaths for 2010 are running one-third normal. That is, there was no problem, but instead of investigating the waste of money we are simply getting more lies to get rid of the last batch of flu shots which the public refused to take. Third, the vaccine itself is dangerous, containing mercury and aluminum, and it is far more likely that more people were killed by the vaccine than were ever saved by it. (My mother was killed by an earlier-day flu campaign and shot, which gave her a heart attack and led to her death.) I call this to your attention to illustrate just how naïve and gullible the average person is and how incapable of acting in their own self interest.

America was not this way for the period 1776-1929, but it is now. This is the world into which you were born. Those who see reality as it is have a chance, but this is a small minority.

Now what is Ben Bernanke, the apostle of the “Great Depression,” going to do? He is going to serve the interest of the paper aristocracy. He is going to print money as never before in American history. (Note, the Coinage Act of 1792 carries the death penalty for debasement of the currency.) From mid-2008 to the projected end of QE2, the U.S. money supply will have approximately tripled, and, after a lag, I expect average prices to do the same. You know what this will do to the price of gold. At this writing, commodity prices (as given by the [real] CRB index) are close to a new all-time high. This is an end to another lie, the New York Times’ fabrication that we are on the verge of a “deflation.” One after another, like the layers of an onion, these lies dominate our age, and if one does not wish to be destroyed by them, one must see reality as it is.

Thank you for your interest.

Howard S. Katz
Nov. 15, 2010

I don't think that this is entirely correct. Statistics are a funny thing, benchmarks for comparison are difficult to find because each man and woman's stress and fortitude versus ability to eat and play and have a roof over their heads is close to impossible to assess when immigrants are flooding the country, the "dust bowl" migration occurs, war is begun.

for me, too many variables to discern a true mean or true baseline in his statistics.

It seems to me, that if there is mass unemployment, then people are hurting. on the other hand, if the "work" that people are doing is that of being a non productive bureaucracy enforcing arbitrary codes, doing paperwork for the sake of paperwork, then that is paid for, but not work by my definition.

my father told me a lot about the depression. He was born in 1912, and due to circumstances, was man of the house at a young age. The ranch, farm, and orchards that he ran required workers. He told me of men, who had lost their farms in Oklahoma coming to California, but not being willing to work. They were defeated. He told me of trading the use of the family car to the forest service for new tires for it. Times were hard for everyone.

On the face of that, I don't think that times being hard is bad. it tends to weed out the non producers.

The author talks about suicides. There were suicides due to the stock market crash. I know of people, whose father(s) did just that. Ronnie Reagan talked about the difficulties his father faced in the depression in some book I read along time ago.

My father used to say, "It's a great life, if you don't weaken." I think that is true. Whatever one's circumstances, life is a game. If you are winning, it's fun. if you are losing, it is a good time to figure out what you're lacking. either way it is all in the game. better to be playing than sitting on the sidelines.

 

[lkwdblds]

Some of your statements are non sequitor

I can't think of a better place to post this.

1973 aboard the Apollo. This whole thread is way off of track. I wasn't there then. I had left, so I can't really comment.

Your statement in blue is just bullshit. The whole thread includes pages 1 through 5 which are totally on topic. In addition, much of what Face in the Crowd has posted here concerns the Apollo plus many other posts do as well. I you weren't there then and can't really comment then why did you comment and say this whole thread is way off track.

I have read a lot, I am an avid reader, always have been, fortunately for me.If it wasn't for my reading and a little help I would never have gotten off of Hubbards floating lunatic asylum.

So tell me, why is Gerry Armstrong a bullshitter? I would really like to know. I have read and listened to a lot by Gerry Armstrong and I don't see it the same way.

Who the hell are you addressing your question at? No one here who I know of has ever accused Gerry Armstrong of being a bullshitter.

You don't believe Jesse Prince either, is it because he is black, a wog? Is it because he was part of the Lisa Mcpherson trust? Is it because your beliefs in L. Ron Hubbard are so strong, you cannot and will not see the truth? What is it? Is it because you were raised for most of your life in L. Ron Hubbards thinking? Is it because, just like me, you do not want to let your children down and think badly of you? Have you lied to them, an acceptable truth? Jesus, I was out of scientology for the same amount of time you were in it and I still told acceptable truths because I was so afraid. Think about that!

I know it is hard, it is so god damned hard. This man, this very sick man, L Ron Hubbard stole our lives, our childhoods, we did not have a child hood. It was denied US. Can't you see that. He stole our parents from us. He denied us our basic Human Rights. The same basic human rights that every living human being is entitled to on earth, do they get it ? NO.

Scientology as founded by L. Ron Hubbard supports and has websites and foundations that suposedly upholds human rights. It is a farce, you know it, I know it and every rational thinking human being knows it. Please don't make me the one wrong, here.

I will defend you to the hilt here, because I know it was not easy, I know it was bloody difficult to have nowhere else to turn to. As I have already said and I will reiterate, I was out as long as you were in and I still told acceptable truths because I was so afraid. Is that brainwashing? Your'e damned right it was.

L. Ron Hubbard lied to us all, you are no exception, you know who you are and I know who I am, and I will fight for the right to be right.

As a side note.Men will, and have denigrated women since time in immoreal (spelling)and will do so for as long as they think they are the superior beings upon this earth. L. Ron Hubbard was one of the hardest task masters of these men and if you can survive him, you can survive anything.

What my children think of me, pales into insignificance when I remember what L. Ron Hubbard did to me and my family.

It may have made me what I am today, but think of what I might have been had it not been for the interference of Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard on my life and yours. too.

The sea org, L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology was NO different in 1973 than it was in 1968. It was NO different in the 1970s. or the 1980s or the 1990s or in the 2000s.

It does not matter whether L. Ron Hubbard was in charge or David Miscavige, they are or were both Psychopaths with intent of full domination of the world, and justifying this with both money and power. It's not what you know, but who you know? I don't care who I know, what I know is what matters to me. What I know is, don't ever look into Scientology with an open mind, and NEVER, EVER trust a fully fledged Scientologist. Ever.

I would sure like to know to whom you are addressing your questions and comments. This would be real helpful in helping you get the answers which you seek.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Please come up to present time!

It belongs in this thread, whether you choose to answer here, is another matter entirely.

He (L. Ron Hubbard) was not any better in 1973, than he was in 1968, in fact, he was progressively worse until he died. Wasn't he?

I'm sorry, I really am, but I will not play games, especially where other peoples lives are concerned. It's not just your family, there are hundreds of others.Please try and understand that...... I know you do, deep down.

Please come to present time. Please let us know to whom you are addressing your comments.
Lakey

 

[CarmeloOrchards]

Please come to present time. Please let us know to whom you are addressing your comments.
Lakey

Lakey,

she is addressing someone (who is not named) but will understand that she is talking to them. she is using this thread as a bulletin board. She could have just started with "To Whom It May Concern:" but she didn't.

Watch this video, after you have seen it, everything will make sense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwYw2i2icNg

 

[Ted]

Semper Fi

I find of interest to me the story of Staff Sergeant Giunta and his press interviews.

There was a NY Times Op Ed today regarding Staff Sergeant Giunta’s CMH ceremony at the White House. In the online “Comments” section a person going by the moniker of “Charles A. Tiffany” excoriated Mr. Giunta and US Armed Forces personnel as "mindless killers that turn kids into useless fodder willing to be ground into the sand."

Here, for those that have interest, is my response to "Mr. Tiffany":

I am the direct descendant of a man that lost his right leg, fighting for the founding of a nation in which only white male property owners would have the right to vote. I am also the direct descendant of a man that died, fighting for the preservation of nation that, at the time of his death, did not allow Native and African Americans to vote. And, I am the direct descendant of a man with a disfigured face, from wounds fighting for a nation that did not allow women to vote.

Mr. Tiffany, I suggest that you study the arc of history regarding just what has happened and what is happening that allows the both of us to openly speak our minds regarding the “News” of today. We know not what follows but one thing is fact; without SSG Giunta, his fallen brothers and the legions upon legions of brave souls before them tyranny, terror and peril would most probably rule our individual days.

These wonderful “kids” are grown from our “sand” by the sweat and blood of our ancestors dreams and hopes and your freedom. If you cannot honor the moment or the man then I suggest you reflect on my first paragraph.

Face

Oorah!

 

[Terril park]

What I know is, don't ever look into Scientology with an open mind, and NEVER, EVER trust a fully fledged Scientologist. Ever.

Hi Sharon and welcome to the party.

As you know threads take on a life of their own and move
in mysterious ways. This thread has become a party celebrating life in all its diversity.

Few, if indeed any, who post here regularly have anything good to say about Hubbard the man, and in fact many have written very caustic comments re his character. However these same people use his ideas, or extensions of them.

Whoever invented the wheel may have been a complete prick, but everyone uses his idea in a multiplicity of ways.

Your statement I quoted above is prejudicial and a generalization.

For example we've had good times together and I've always been supportive of you. Then you no longer wished to be a friend and have
several times attacked me personally here. Presumably your quoted statement is the reason for this

If its helpful for you to use me as a punching bag then thats fine by me.

Your statement is one of hate and the person most adversely affected by this is yourself. I hope you can find some other frame of reference to live with, and you can still be an activist against COS.

For those who haven't read Sharone's story, she was put in a hold on the Apollo along with Janis Grady as punishment for chatting with some greek boys. She was around 11 years old at the time. She only joined the SO so
as to stay with her father and was never a scientologist. Her father left
the SO in circumstances not really known, probably declared, and so badly
affected by whatever happened that he has never been the same since,
and Sharone has only just recently got in touch again. She hadn't seen him since he left the Apollo on a mission, and Sharon after leaving the SO was brought up in care without iether parent.

 

[lkwdblds]

I watched it and it made no sense to me.

Lakey,

she is addressing someone (who is not named) but will understand that she is talking to them. she is using this thread as a bulletin board. She could have just started with "To Whom It May Concern:" but she didn't.

Watch this video, after you have seen it, everything will make sense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwYw2i2icNg

Why didn't Sharone just PM his anonymous correspondent? Why did she have to say that our thread "way off track" after admitting that she does not read it?

I got no understanding from watching the Newhart video, whatever message I was supposed to get sailed over my head.

To me, Sharone's actions make no sense whatsoever. Well, its no big deal, no one was actually hurt.
Lakey

 

[lkwdblds]

Very nice rebuttal Terril!

Hi Sharon and welcome to the party.

As you know threads take on a life of their own and move
in mysterious ways. This thread has become a party celebrating life in all its diversity.

Few, if indeed any, who post here regularly have anything good to say about Hubbard the man, and in fact many have written very caustic comments re his character. However these same people use his ideas, or extensions of them.

Whoever invented the wheel may have been a complete prick, but everyone uses his idea in a multiplicity of ways.

Your statement I quoted above is prejudicial and a generalization.

For example we've had good times together and I've always been supportive of you. Then you no longer wished to be a friend and have
several times attacked me personally here. Presumably your quoted statement is the reason for this

If its helpful for you to use me as a punching bag then thats fine by me.

Your statement is one of hate and the person most adversely affected by this is yourself. I hope you can find some other frame of reference to live with, and you can still be an activist against COS.

For those who haven't read Sharone's story, she was put in a hold on the Apollo along with Janis Grady as punishment for chatting with some greek boys. She was around 11 years old at the time. She only joined the SO so
as to stay with her father and was never a scientologist. Her father left
the SO in circumstances not really known, probably declared, and so badly
affected by whatever happened that he has never been the same since,
and Sharone has only just recently got in touch again. She hadn't seen him since he left the Apollo on a mission, and Sharon after leaving the SO was brought up in care without iether parent.

I guess that if our brilliant and super successful thread can serve as a clearing house for someone who got a raw deal in Scientology, as nearly all of us posting here have, then that is a valid purpose, among many others for the existence of the thread.

The thread has given hope to dozens of distraught people who had very little to live for and found new friends, incisive articles, help and hope here. Some people participated on the thread and by doing so regained their zeal for living. To others who were researching why people stayed in Scientology so long, doled out nearly all heir money and all their labor virtually for free, this thread, through the straight talk it dispenses, was able to codify and explain the phenomena for which they could not find a straight answer anywhere else.

Lakey

 

[RogerB]

I don't think that this is entirely correct. Statistics are a funny thing, benchmarks for comparison are difficult to find because each man and woman's stress and fortitude versus ability to eat and play and have a roof over their heads is close to impossible to assess when immigrants are flooding the country, the "dust bowl" migration occurs, war is begun.

for me, too many variables to discern a true mean or true baseline in his statistics.

It seems to me, that if there is mass unemployment, then people are hurting. on the other hand, if the "work" that people are doing is that of being a non productive bureaucracy enforcing arbitrary codes, doing paperwork for the sake of paperwork, then that is paid for, but not work by my definition.

my father told me a lot about the depression. He was born in 1912, and due to circumstances, was man of the house at a young age. The ranch, farm, and orchards that he ran required workers. He told me of men, who had lost their farms in Oklahoma coming to California, but not being willing to work. They were defeated. He told me of trading the use of the family car to the forest service for new tires for it. Times were hard for everyone.

On the face of that, I don't think that times being hard is bad. it tends to weed out the non producers.

The author talks about suicides. There were suicides due to the stock market crash. I know of people, whose father(s) did just that. Ronnie Reagan talked about the difficulties his father faced in the depression in some book I read along time ago.

My father used to say, "It's a great life, if you don't weaken." I think that is true. Whatever one's circumstances, life is a game. If you are winning, it's fun. if you are losing, it is a good time to figure out what you're lacking. either way it is all in the game. better to be playing than sitting on the sidelines.

Yes . . . .

The real message our "One Handed Economist" is conveying is the manipilation of perspective and of perception of the public by the "media" and those who control/influence it to their advantage.

In present time, the example would be that "all of the media yap" in the papers of record (WSJ and NY Times, both of which I subscribe to) is on the "bad scene in Europe" . . . Ireland, Greece, and also the threat of Italy, Portugal and Spain going bust.

Yet, they do not talk of nor mention the truth of the US scenario that is actually as bad if not worse. The City of Harrisburg has appointed a bankruptcy lawyer, this among many municipalities going or gone under. The state of California is a basket case financially, limping from financial crisis to financial crisis. The entirety of the US Municipal Bond market has caved in as the leading insurer AMBAC is now in bankruptcy, and the several hundred billions of munie bonds it insured to give them their AAA investment grade rating has gone. The result of this is that all those pension funds that are constrained by law to only hold AAA stuff are now in strife.

I could go on, and on, on what the US public are not being fully and honestly informed of . . . this for the reason of MOPE (management of perspective) so as to give the society a feel good, all is going to be OK perspective.

I saw stats last week of the vast amount of insiders in corporate America who are cashing out their company share positions: they see what's coming . . . yet all we see on the evening news is how "wonderful the stock market is" it's "up" . . . but the truth is not being told.

The truth is that the government, via the Fed, has an operation that supports the DOW and S&P Indexes. The last thing the government wants is for the public to be unnerved by the stock market collapse.

And so it goes.

I was born in early '36, so saw the end of the Ozzie version of the "Great Depression" . . . in actuality, I would say there is more unemployment in the US now than was the case in the '20's-'30's event.

I saw a horrific figure recently, from memory 70 million people now on food stamps.

Here's a stat I just pulled from comments on an article in the NY Times of Feb, 2010, here:
http://blog.ethicalmusings.com/2010/02/reflecting-on-food-stamp-statistics.html

"The number of food stamp recipients has climbed by about 10 million over the past two years, resulting in a program that now feeds 1 in 8 Americans"

If you want the actual true figures on "unemployment" and CPI "inflation" go to http://www.shadowstats.com/

It's an eye-opener.

Don't believe "conventional wisdom"

Rog

 

[lkwdblds]

I agree 100% with what our Founding Fathers created

I find of interest to me the story of Staff Sergeant Giunta and his press interviews.

There was a NY Times Op Ed today regarding Staff Sergeant Giunta’s CMH ceremony at the White House. In the online “Comments” section a person going by the moniker of “Charles A. Tiffany” excoriated Mr. Giunta and US Armed Forces personnel as "mindless killers that turn kids into useless fodder willing to be ground into the sand."

Here, for those that have interest, is my response to "Mr. Tiffany":

I am the direct descendant of a man that lost his right leg, fighting for the founding of a nation in which only white male property owners would have the right to vote. I am also the direct descendant of a man that died, fighting for the preservation of nation that, at the time of his death, did not allow Native and African Americans to vote. And, I am the direct descendant of a man with a disfigured face, from wounds fighting for a nation that did not allow women to vote.

I feel that it was proper to allow only white male property owners to vote at the point in time when our nation was founded. The reasons for this are twofold. First, to get a nation created, the laws had to be paletible to a diverse group of men. Had these provisions not been part of the original policies of the country, the country could not have come into existence. Second, only white males had sufficient education and free time to ponder the candidates and issues and make learned decisions as to what persons should be in ofice and what issues should be enacted into law.

Mr. Tiffany, I suggest that you study the arc of history regarding just what has happened and what is happening that allows the both of us to openly speak our minds regarding the “News” of today. We know not what follows but one thing is fact; without SSG Giunta, his fallen brothers and the legions upon legions of brave souls before them tyranny, terror and peril would most probably rule our individual days.

Yes, just little minor things such as Nazism taking over Europe and eventually having a face off against the United States with a good chance of it taking over here as well. How about the USA becomming a communist satellite state such as North Korea is today or perhpas more realistically, in the same manner as Cuba is today?

These wonderful “kids” are grown from our “sand” by the sweat and blood of our ancestors dreams and hopes and your freedom. If you cannot honor the moment or the man then I suggest you reflect on my first paragraph.

Face

The important thing is not what freedoms and restrictions constitued the country at its inception but rather, what elements for potential change were contained within the Constitution which was accepted as law at inception.

To me, the United States began operating under its present Constitution in 1781 and by 1865, slavery, an institution which was rampant in much of the world and which held sway when our country was founded and had been in place for nearly 400 years during our colonial perild, was outlawed.

There was enough decency and truth in our Constitution that this powerful and evil instittution that had been entrenched here for nearly 400 years was eliminated in just 84 years, just one lifetime, due to the brilliance of our founding Fathers. To eliminate an entrenched evil in just one lifetime is very quick action for a country to change such an abhorrent practice.

The white males who worked on the constitution and the forming of our nation where the best people for the job at that time. It was not because they were inately of superior intellect or stock but rather because of the fact that women and minority people did not have the opportunity for education and leisure to devote their equally keen intellects to the project of creating the country.

As soon as women and minorities had attained equal educational opportunities, they were given equal rights to white men. The key is that for something such as a new country to get off the ground and get up and running, compromises had to be made at the beginning but the apparatus to remove unfair compromises was placed within our constitution so that mean spirited and arbitrary restrictions could be removed quickly and effectively when the opportunities presented themselves.
Lakey