Tony O asks why we believe in Xenu

Free Being Me

Crusader
Yah. I wonder if some of those people who scream the loudest about anyone posting (what amounts to) a minority view re Scn- weren't nice little DM style martinets gaily fucking everyone over when they were in CofS. Then they kept the attitude after leaving CofS.

I've seen it. People are identified as "dangerous" "trouble makers" and so on and they go after them just the way they did when they were still sucking DM's cock.

People post in accordance with their respective frames of reference. That's all it is. Someone may believe something you don't think is true- and maybe they truly are wrong- and discuss it, but that does not make it spin.

There are billions of people in the world who lead responsible lives, pay taxes, etc, but who also believe some very odd things.

I'm not saying these things can't or shouldn't be debated. IMO, anyone who comes to a critical forum, even a nice one like this, can expect to have their views challenged and discussed. (though that applies to those of critical inclination, too) But the personalized commentary doesn't contribute to any debate.

One can be pretty scathing and indicate great disagreement with matters Scientological without the negative personalization. Truefax.

Interesting quotes of yours Fluffy. Call people cocksuckers yet a plea for the opposite type of expression. Your hypocrisy as the Nanny Board Monitor And Protector For The Friends Of The Tech is quit funny. Very contrary posts that display a total lack of consistency and rife with a double standard. If that's the new modus operandi here of discussing, I can accommodate with similar language.
:footbullet:
 

SpecialFrog

Silver Meritorious Patron
Torah was written by xenophobic priestly bureaucrats. Same question.

Torah evolved over a long period of time. While it is possible that it was crafted by a small group of people with a specific agenda this seems highly unlikely. It would be more coherent if it were.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
Just another brick in the wall.

snipped...

One can be pretty scathing and indicate great disagreement with matters Scientological without the negative personalization. Truefax.


Yes, one can ... but why bother when one is clearly talking to a brick wall?

Brick walls don't care about 'negative personalization' they only care about standing firm (no matter what is thrown at them) on their beliefs.

I imagine that's why "TR's" were created for the cultists, they are just a form of brick walling and I am bored stiff by them after years of repetition that goes nowhere.

brick_wall.jpg


 

Lone Star

Crusader
Interesting quotes of yours Fluffy. Call people cocksuckers yet a plea for the opposite type of expression. Your hypocrisy as the Nanny Board Monitor And Protector For The Friends Of The Tech is quit funny. Very contrary posts that display a total lack of consistency and rife with a double standard. If that's the new modus operandi here of discussing, I can accommodate with similar language.
:footbullet:

Oh I can't wait for her reply! There's nothing quite like Fluffy's poetic profanity.:thumbsup:
 

PirateAndBum

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: Just another brick in the wall.


Yes, one can ... but why bother when one is clearly talking to a brick wall?

Brick walls don't care about 'negative personalization' they only care about standing firm (no matter what is thrown at them) on their beliefs.

I imagine that's why "TR's" were created for the cultists, they are just a form of brick walling and I am bored stiff by them after years of repetition that goes nowhere.

brick_wall.jpg



lol, that's a GAT drill: Sitting talking to a wall for hours.

That wall looks familiar...
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
Re: Just another brick in the wall.

lol, that's a GAT drill: Sitting talking to a wall for hours.

That wall looks familiar...


Ah, I expect that was the drill for learning how to handle "HE&R" in any unfortunate fresh meat ... scientologists can't twin on that cos the "HE&R" was long ago knocked out of them and they are too (cough) ... brick wall like.

Actual brick walls probably contain more genuine emotion.

:coolwink:

It's a funny old world!
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Interesting quotes of yours Fluffy. Call people cocksuckers yet a plea for the opposite type of expression. Your hypocrisy as the Nanny Board Monitor And Protector For The Friends Of The Tech is quit funny. Very contrary posts that display a total lack of consistency and rife with a double standard. If that's the new modus operandi here of discussing, I can accommodate with similar language.

:footbullet:

Many critics refer to Cof$ members as "sucking DM's cock.". That's where I learned the phrase/allusion and that's where I acquired that viewpoint.

AFAIK, there are no Cof$ members here posting to ESMB to feel attacked by that particular turn of phrase.

Are you a cultie? If so, then I do apologize for upsetting you. It's just that so many of us here are used to thinking of culties as sucking DM's cock, you see.

I feel that people shouldn't emulate Cof$ culties.

That you evidently felt indignant at my dissing culties who do not post here is certainly interesting... I mean, it's weird but, you know, hey, mon.

Or maybe you misread my post. Either that, or you don't know the difference between discussing the cult in absentio and contributors (who are, in the main, EXmembers) to this forum.

That also strikes me as weird,, actually.

I had NO idea that I wasn't supposed to suppose culties!! Wow!!

And that you'd want to protect them. That's actually very sweet.
 

Royal Prince Xenu

Trust the Psi Corps.
I don't have to believe in Xenu. I am Xenu. Therefore the existence of Xenu is a fact.

As select Alphas conditioned to know without believing and to believe without knowing any histo-bunk surrounding placebic belief in a higher entity should not present a problem.

Ford bless you!
 

PirateAndBum

Gold Meritorious Patron
Many critics refer to Cof$ members as "sucking DM's cock.". That's where I learned the phrase/allusion and that's where I acquired that viewpoint.

AFAIK, there are no Cof$ members here posting to ESMB to feel attacked by that particular turn of phrase.

Are you a cultie? If so, then I do apologize for upsetting you. It's just that so many of us here are used to thinking of culties as sucking DM's cock, you see.

I feel that people shouldn't emulate Cof$ culties.

That you evidently felt indignant at my dissing culties who do not post here is certainly interesting... I mean, it's weird but, you know, hey, mon.

Or maybe you misread my post. Either that, or you don't know the difference between discussing the cult in absentio and contributors (who are, in the main, EXmembers) to this forum.

That also strikes me as weird,, actually.

I had NO idea that I wasn't supposed to suppose culties!! Wow!!

And that you'd want to protect them. That's actually very sweet.

Just wondering ... For how long did you suck DM's cock Claire?

Hope you didn't mind my asking it using "critic" speak for your former state. No, there aren't any of those "culties" lurking about this forum to be insulted either.

Yeah, I know, "blow me" ...

:hysterical: :batseyelashes: :smoochy:
 

Mythbluster

Patron
Many critics refer to Cof$ members as "sucking DM's cock.". That's where I learned the phrase/allusion and that's where I acquired that viewpoint.

AFAIK, there are no Cof$ members here posting to ESMB to feel attacked by that particular turn of phrase.

Are you a cultie? If so, then I do apologize for upsetting you. It's just that so many of us here are used to thinking of culties as sucking DM's cock, you see.

I feel that people shouldn't emulate Cof$ culties.

That you evidently felt indignant at my dissing culties who do not post here is certainly interesting... I mean, it's weird but, you know, hey, mon.

Or maybe you misread my post. Either that, or you don't know the difference between discussing the cult in absentio and contributors (who are, in the main, EXmembers) to this forum.

That also strikes me as weird,, actually.

I had NO idea that I wasn't supposed to suppose culties!! Wow!!

And that you'd want to protect them. That's actually very sweet.

Maybe I'm confused here but that isn't what I took to be your meaning from this quote:

"Yah. I wonder if some of those people who scream the loudest about anyone posting (what amounts to) a minority view re Scn-..."

/To me this is a direct reference to forum members responding to others opinions agressively or in a way you find somewhat distasteful.

"...weren't nice little DM style martinets gaily fucking everyone over when they were in CofS. Then they kept the attitude after leaving CofS."

/Implication here seems to be that because they put forward an argument in a way you found aggressive or similar to cofs "handling" it is likely, in your opinion, that they A: sucked dms cock and fucked everyone over while in the church and b: have maintained a similar attitude now they are an ex

"I've seen it. People are identified as "dangerous" "trouble makers" and so on and they go after them just the way they did when they were still sucking DM's cock."

/This reinforces previous point with example of how you feel this occurs on the forum, not saying you are literally saying anyone gave dm a bj, I accept that as a metaphor for being in cofs. However in my opinion, the gist of your point seems to be that because an ex reacts a bit strongly to a stament they disagree with about "tech" of similar that they are comparable to a full blown dm worshipping crazy who fucks people over as they likely used to be like that as a member. (id rather be called a cocksucker!) Correct me if I'm wrong, not looking for an argument, just clarity.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
Torah was written by xenophobic priestly bureaucrats. Same question.


Mark A. Baker
p.s. Much of the Tech volumes was actually written by Hubbard associates. Hubbard just claimed the credit.


Smilla wrote:

Snip

Current Freezone PR Nonsense:

"3. Whenever any criticism is made of the Freezone that contains an accusation of abuse - brainwashing etc, the reply goes: "Tell that to the Catholics, Jews, Muslims" etc. Don't look at us - look over there. Look over there. Look over there. Look over there."
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Just wondering ... For how long did you suck DM's cock Claire?

Hope you didn't mind my asking it using "critic" speak for your former state. No, there aren't any of those "culties" lurking about this forum to be insulted either.

Yeah, I know, "blow me" ...

:hysterical: :batseyelashes: :smoochy:

I'm sure all members of the cult do that, nicht var? To varying extents.

The trick is to ditch that type of thinking, obedience and behavior when one leaves.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter

Smilla wrote:

Snip


Current Freezone PR Nonsense:

"3. Whenever any criticism is made of the Freezone that contains an accusation of abuse - brainwashing etc, the reply goes: "Tell that to the Catholics, Jews, Muslims" etc. Don't look at us - look over there. Look over there. Look over there. Look over there."





It's one thing to make comparisons and analogies and another to tell people (or imply) that they shouldn't look at the subject under discussion.

Humans relate things to other things. They've done it since time immemorial.

The best thing I can recommend is to see if such comparisons may be valid or are invalid and if the latter, then, exactly, what was invalid.

There are a lot of things in ideology that have commonality between belief systems. I thought (and I could be wrong) that the point was, hey, if you think Scn is weird for its belief in infestations of space cooties, you might want to look at the fact that it's not too different in some respects than what one finds in some elder religions.

When the chips fall (with salsa!! and dip!!), the fact is that CofS is very very different from any established church that practices an elder religion. It's run differently. It's set up differnently. Some other churches are pretty nasty but most don't come close to CofS in that respect. Plus it's a different type of nastiness. Elder religions/churches are moving with the times (except for some fundamentalists). CofS refuses to do so. If anything, they are meaner than they used to be and they were already pretty damn bad. I really think we can agree on this, all of us.

I do sometimes relate practices (not ideology/belief in this example) of CofS to elder religions but only to underscore the fact that Hubbard said he didn't want to do the stuff the others did throughout history, yet, IMO, he repeated many of the same mistakes. The only thing CofS hasn't done is burned people alive and I would guess that if DM thought he could get away with it, he would.
Now, could we have a group hug?

 
The only thing CofS hasn't done is burned people alive and I would guess that if DM thought he could get away with it, he would
No, he quenches them in a barrel while they chant "I am a lesbian" It is part of his know best mentality.

Mimsey
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Maybe I'm confused here but that isn't what I took to be your meaning from this quote:

"Yah. I wonder if some of those people who scream the loudest about anyone posting (what amounts to) a minority view re Scn-..."

/To me this is a direct reference to forum members responding to others opinions agressively or in a way you find somewhat distasteful.

"...weren't nice little DM style martinets gaily fucking everyone over when they were in CofS. Then they kept the attitude after leaving CofS."

/Implication here seems to be that because they put forward an argument in a way you found aggressive or similar to cofs "handling" it is likely, in your opinion, that they A: sucked dms cock and fucked everyone over while in the church and b: have maintained a similar attitude now they are an ex

"I've seen it. People are identified as "dangerous" "trouble makers" and so on and they go after them just the way they did when they were still sucking DM's cock."

/This reinforces previous point with example of how you feel this occurs on the forum, not saying you are literally saying anyone gave dm a bj, I accept that as a metaphor for being in cofs. However in my opinion, the gist of your point seems to be that because an ex reacts a bit strongly to a stament they disagree with about "tech" of similar that they are comparable to a full blown dm worshipping crazy who fucks people over as they likely used to be like that as a member. (id rather be called a cocksucker!) Correct me if I'm wrong, not looking for an argument, just clarity.

Nah. I was answering the person (FreeBeing, I think?) who dug up a post I wrote earlier on the thread and, yesterday, said that this meant I was calling people cocksuckers and that this was at odds with my various chidings, etc, to people here on this thread re ad homs against forum regulars posting here.

I thought this was odd since I was speaking of churchies, who do not post here. So I kinda wondered if FreeBeing thought we shouldn't diss churchies or was him/her/itself a churchie, since my alluding to them (sucking DM's cock) was such a sore point. I believe, IIRC, the word was "Hypocrisy". Yet, I don't see any culties posting here and I see people referring to them in similar wise on a daily basis.

And, as I also said, I'd made the point that one does not want to emulate CofS members once one's out (if one is an ex member).
 

Mythbluster

Patron
I don't see any culties posting here and I see people referring to them in similar wise on a daily basis.

And, as I also said, I'd made the point that one does not want to emulate CofS members once one's out (if one is an ex member).

Fair enough, as I said not looking for an argument, but what I was highlighting is that imo he main point of your post was to make a direct comparison between the way some forum members behave here and the behaviour of "cock sucking" "culties"
To me this seems a bit harsh. Sorry if I misunderstood you.
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
. . . I do sometimes relate practices (not ideology/belief in this example) of CofS to elder religions but only to underscore the fact that Hubbard said he didn't want to do the stuff the others did throughout history, yet, IMO, he repeated many of the same mistakes. The only thing CofS hasn't done is burned people alive and I would guess that if DM thought he could get away with it, he would . . .

Your comparisons are invalid in that they are a logic FAIL of the apples/oranges variety. Scientology is not a religion. It is an on-going organised criminal conspiracy to defraud and has been since the day L Ron Hubbard said he used Dianetics to cure war injuries. Those who persist in making comparisons with religion are perpetuating L Ron Hubbard's original criminal intent to avoid taxes, labour laws, and merge mendaciously into society by leeching from the good name of established religions. The more valid comparison would be between Scientology and the Mafia.

Now, could we have a group hug?

I'm not drunk eough. Yet. Maybe later.
 

Smilla wrote:

Snip

Current Freezone PR Nonsense:

"3. Whenever any criticism is made of the Freezone that contains an accusation of abuse - brainwashing etc, the reply goes: "Tell that to the Catholics, Jews, Muslims" etc. Don't look at us - look over there. Look over there. Look over there. Look over there."

You are certainly free to look at whatever you wish, nor is it in any way legitimate to suggest that I seek to prevent reasonable discussion. But be prepared to face the unpleasant similarities with your own pet ideologies. :)

Traditional doesn't equate with rational, nor is an embrace of emotionalism a valid argument against applied reason.


Mark A. Baker
 
Top