Just to clarify some points here:
Aida stopped me several times when I said anything the slightest bit negative about LRH and told me to phrase my comment in a more positive way. She has a very positive view of LRH, MSH and all the Hubbard family.
***No, I did not, I actually ask you to tell your impressions...if you watch at 4:35 I believe I ask you...I reviewed the interview and I didn't stop you at all.
My one disagreement. I cite below that there were 3 stoppages. It is possible that on the one you mention, I was at a loss for words and you stopped me only to tell me to give my impressions. On the other two, I believe I used some phrasing that you found in poor taste and you stopped me and asked me to alter my phrasing. I had no problem complying with your request. You did not in any way stifle my freedom to speak my mind!
I heard her story of why she left the C of S and basically it concerns the fact that C of S was not following standard Hubbard management tech.
*****Yes, that is the reason, what is so wrong with that? I was not kicked out I LEFT...unlike other Class VIIIs or XIIs who waited until the Church dispensed with them. I lost A LOT for personal integrity because I moved to this country to be an auditor as a profession, which I had been for the last 20 years. I did not like the way the SO was set up and how the staff treated each other like cannibals. I finally had enough and left, loud and clear with a bang! Not quietly trying to "save my field practice" or "afraid to lose my friends" my integrity was first. Nothing really bad happened to me while I was in.
Who said there is anything wrong with that? Certainly not me! I greatly admire you for leaving on your own. I don't know who said that you were kicked out, not me! I say right above that I heard the story of why you left, not why you were kicked out. Your integrity in leaving the way you did was exemplary. I admire you greatly for both your integrity plus the courage which you showed.
Also, there is her attractive set of videos comparing the older LRH books with the newer altered books of the DM regime and she treats the LRH books as the Gospel so to speak.
***I studied 5 years of Law before Scientology...I did the approach as if I was in a court of law that this organization was deceiving people thinking that they were getting one thing when they were getting something else. When I studied law I was taught that the Constitution was a Gospel sort of speak and that in order to resolve a legal case you have to apply the law, I saw Scientology with the same approach.
I was presenting the videos with facts, for those who were still in to look for themselves.
Yes, you did an exemplary job presenting those videos. I complimented you strongly at the start of the interview and have always admired you for the professional manner in which you created and presented those videos.
If "Aida is standard in her approach to auditing tech", and she left C of S because management tech was not being followed per LRH policy then she fits into the category which I described and you referred to as an "LRH loyalist".
****Yes, in a way I am LRH loyalist, but not blidnfolded...that doesn't take away that he was a human being who lied and did a lot of incorrect things...and here is my more inner thoughts...it took me a lot to fogive him for the lies...thanks critics of ESMB for telling it as it is...but again...I always used common sense before being a blindfolded "loyalist". Maybe that is why nothing happened to me while I was in...actually I have been more offended while in the FZ.
I share your sentiments about the tech very closely. I know you use common sense and are not a blind "loyalist" In your above sentence do you mean critics of ESMB or critics on ESMB? I believe you mean the second choice.
I like some of the tech and I still used it...as always with a lot of common sense and personal ethics....
Diana - I like some of the tech too and I also still use it...as always with a lot of common sense and personal ethics. You are more highly trained in the tech than I and I respect you for your approach in applying the tech. I made some comments in blue print to various statements of yours.
I agree with everything you say except one minor point. That point concerns the video recording being halted 3 times to ask me to rephrase what I said. I just watched the video again closely and noted the 3 times when there is a break in it and a restart.
Break #1 was at 2:19. I had just finished telling you where the ship was located. Next I talk about the Flag Case Completions receiving auditing onboard the Apollo. Between those 2 points you asked me a question and I began answering it and you stopped the recording. You hatted me in a very pleasant way just to tell me what was needed and wanted from you.
Break #2 was at 4:29 - I had just finished talking about my trip to the Mateus winery and you asked me "What was Ron like?" I began to answer and you stopped the recording to point out something. Maybe I was tongue tied or at a loss for words. Maybe you just told me to give my impressions, I really do not remember. We restarted and I continued talking.
Break #3 was at 5:08 - I said something about us lugging sides of beef right past Ron's office and made a comment of some sort that was a bit objectionable to you and you stopped the recording. We restarted and I left off whatever it was you found objectionable.
I WAS TOTALLY OK WITH ALL THREE STOPPAGES. IT WAS YOUR HOUSE AND YOUR EVENT. I HAD NO IDEA OF WHAT SORTS OF THINGS COULD BE SAID OR COULD NOT BE SAID IN THIS FORUM. You stopped me in a courteous manner and explained to me either to just give my impressions or to point out something that I said was not appropriate to the interview and suggested that I rephrase it. You did not prevent me from speaking my mind in any way but just wanted things rephrased. I was happy to comply. Based on these 3 stoppages, I got the concept that you were very fond of LRH and his family and only wanted to present the positive side of them in this particular interview meant for a certain particular public. I was happy to comply. I never felt you were censoring me or inhibiting what I could say!
Earlier, on this thread, I made an innocent statement that some people on this thread agreed with all of LRH's tech and attempted to apply it standardly. Mark Baker attacked my claim and challenged me to name even one such person. From those practitioners which I knew of that were quite loyal to LRH I selected you and a couple of others. This does not mean that you blindly followed LRH or consider he never told any lies or made any mistakes. I never intended to imply that. I stand by my choice to consider you an LRH loyalist. You have said that yourself in your quoted post. I never suggested that you were a "blind" LRH loyalist.
Gary Hart
on the Apolllllllllllllloooooooooooo.
