Why some Scientologists continue with Scientology

Oh Good Lord! Fluffy, I apologize, I goofed!

Very nice detailed and thoughtful post. I only hope that I can do justice to it.

I thought you might mean that but I wasn't 100% sure.

I guess it would depend on what one may mean by "out". I was using "out" in the more literal sense. Out of CofS. Out of the mindset? Maybe not.

Thing is, FZers and Indies come in all shapes and sizes, metaphorically speaking, re their practice of Scn. There's a far greater range there than one would see in CofS. So some are more hidebound and what I call "tech purist" than others are. So one cannot generalize quite as much as one could when speaking about churchies, IMO.

I've seen some hidebound thought modalities in the non CofS Scn scene. And I've seen some people get very loosey goosey, into experimentation, adding other things. I know of a couple non CofS Scn'ists who take psychiatric meds, for example. I know of others who never would. I know of non CofS Scn'ists who write KRs. I know of others who wouldn't dream of bothering and who'd just come up and talk to the person or put him on ignore or whatever.

So are some people out of CofS but not out of the indoctrinated mindset? AbsoFRIGGINGlutely. Is it all of them? No!

It's not dissimilar to Christians. What a broad spectrum of fascinating people we get there! My Mom, for example, a staunch Catholic, believed in a God of LOVE. She figured hardly anyone was in hell and anyway, it wasn't up to us to assess or guess that. She said "you don't know what's in someone's heart or what they said to God on their deathbed." But when someone I knew was in the hospital with slashed wrists, who already felt terrible about what they'd done and who'd already talked to clergy about it, they received a visitor. A fundie Protestant I know quite well. The fundie said if they were REALLY saved, they wouldn't have done that. Way to go, Fundie!!

My point being there's a spectrum with practitioners of any religion or ology and, thus, it's not fair to tar them all with the same brush.

Not if they say they aren't with CofS. Not if they say they are Indies or FreeZoners. Else, all Protestants (particularly in Elizabeth I's day, but even now) would be tarred with the Catholic brush....

"You"??? I'm not a Scn'ist.

Again, I must take exception to the second person pronoun here.

Many non CofS Scn'ists picket. Many send money to critics. Many are targetted by CofS.

Someone sitting down with someone else on his or her own time away from CofS to discuss whether or not he had an engram isn't doing anything to hurt anyone or anything.

Please see my reply to Synthia that I wrote yesterday re the death of my parents. It was a heartfelt, specific and detailed reply. I was an Indie Scn'ist at that time and had received auditing, which I described in the post. Please tell me exactly how the hell that's supposed to have harmed:

  • Someone other than myself
  • Myself

I think you must have missed quite a few of my posts. I understand the viewpoint far more than you think and I mislike being told what I do and don't understand. I mean, my gosh, you thought I was a Scn'ist!

You must have missed hundreds of posts. A non CofS Scn'ist doesn't HAVE a history of his or her group. (and, again, please don't include me. The proper pronoun would have been "they"/"them". Not "you") Did you know that many of them HAVE read every critical thing they could find about Hubbard and that many of them discuss these things with others? I know I did when I was an indie.

I know he was into control. I knew it before. I read the affirmations. I read at least as much critical material as you've done. Terril Park and Mark Baker also have. So have some other non CofS Scn'ist friends of mine. I know this because I've discussed this with many of them.

When I was in the process of deciding what to do about my CofS membership 12 years ago, someone reached out to me. This person was scathing about L Ron Hubbard. Scathing about CofS. Did not want to do FZ. And you know what? This person was a Scientologist. One size does not fit all.

But if someone who's read all this stuff about Hubbard- as I've done, as Mark's done, as Terril's done, as my other friends who I won't name (some of whom post and lurk here, some don't) have done- finds that he or she can still apply the Data Series or the ARC triangle, then it's not a matter of not facing up to whatever. Some of my friends who are doing so have a rather low regard for Hubbard and are, as I said, quite scathing about him. They're only looking at ideas.

Ok, again, you missed my sig line and many posts. I'm not a Scn'ist.

But when I was a non CofS Scn'ist, I had read and researched and learned the truth. I've been openly mocking Hubbard and Xenu for years, long before I decided I was more a Buddhist than anything else. But I'd already learned certain techniques and spiritual theories. I already knew them before I'd done the research. An attorney I used to know used to say "Can't unring THAT bell." I already knew that I could do something with the "tech". These days, as I say, I'm less into that and more into other things. This is something my husband doesn't fully believe--he's still a staunch Indie- but it's true. Somehow, though, we muddle through together without discord.

Again, I refer you to my posted reply to Synthia about the auditing I got when my folks died. I got the auditing and it did something. If, conversely, it had been created by a warm fluffy benevolent guru and did not work whatsoever, I'd say that too. It would be the same scenario, only reversed.

You're assuming that I support and promote systems. I'm more into individual ideas. And I don't promote or sell anything. I developed an allergy to proselytization when I was in my 20s.

Yes. I've noticed that people who tell others what to believe are a lot like CofS members.

You'd be surprised how few. I wish you'd stop stereotyping.

You might want to ask people how they feel instead of assuming. You've made several mistakes here.

Well, I'm not an Indie, but when I was, I wasn't supporting a cult. See above.

Ah, but one can.

It's a connotation. That's all. Christianity has historically had the same problem...Islam does, nowadays. I was just talking to someone about that last week, in fact.

You've just written several paragraphs and other posts indicating that it's anything but ok with you.

So if someone goes into a little closet, reads Handbook for preclears, does a process on his or her own, how is that hitting the other guys' nose?

The auditing I got when my folks died, how would that have hit any other guys' noses?

Please stop making assumptions about me. You don't know me and you've clearly missed hundreds of posts I wrote, threads I've created and my sig line.

Yep. I'm with ya there.

So are a lot of FZers and Indies. Or so I've been told, talking to them on PICKET LINES.

And how is a woman who got some auditing for her grief outside of CofS from an expelled (and fair gamed) free Zoner responsible for that?

Yep. Sure isn't. It's not viable. It can't be reformed. (you're uh...preaching to the converted. See my warning about stereotyping.)

You are telling people what they believe, and that they haven't done certain research and you're wrong. It's both ignorant and condescending. And unobservant.

Someday she'll stop saying "you" when she replies to me and references Indies...o some glorious day. :coolwink:

I already did and so do the people I mentioned along with many others. Please stop making assumptions.

You've told people that they didn't do the research when, in fact, many people who still practice Scn outside of CofS have done so and have said so again and again. You've told them to listen to a critic who's just a person and is about as above reproach as anyone else. You've also not noticed all the things I and so many of us have said about ourselves and our stances. You've accused people here of not facing the truth, not doing the research and of HARMING OTHERS by privately practicing their religion. You've accused Free Zoners, many of whom picket and have been fair gamed by CofS- of enabling CofS.

That is really really not good, S&L.

Ask the Freezoners and Indies here what they've read and haven't read before you make this assumption. I used to be both of those things and you were wrong about me and my past research. I know you're wrong about a number of others. And ask them what they think instead of TELLING THEM what they think.

I am not being sarcastic. I really suggest that you create a thread asking. You could make it a poll. I think it would be a really good thread and could clarify some things. (no pun intended)

I have done.

I already did. I've mentioned those facts (abt Hubbard) for years in posts. I've also been mocking him for years. I'm far from the only one.

I think this is good advice and I'd like to offer it to you. I think you're laboring under some grave misapprehensions. I truly think creating a thread maybe with a poll would help. But one would truly have to read it and not make assumptions.

:ohmy: OH GREAT GOOGLIE MOOGLIES!!! :duh:

(Sorry, I don't know how to quote your above post showing both my post and your response to it, so only your response shows...that's not intentional on my part, I just don't know how to do it yet...I really am a very low-tech being! :blush:)

I'm on a break now and am going to write very fast...

Oh Fluffy, I'm so sorry! I have fostered a misunderstanding between us and I must apologize for it, and I want to do it publicly here!!! Please forgive me...let me explain and try to make amends with you...I made a mistake in the formating of my long post that you are very thoughtfully responding to here. (Good responses, by the way!)

I absolutely did not mean to direct this whole thing to you, personally, holy moley! I'm so very sorry! :sorry:

I have no excuse, I really goofed by not making two clearly distinct posts here, I was rushing and was careless. I should have made the first post answering your question to me and clarifying what I meant in an earlier post, and then made another separate, second post later on, continuing on with my thoughts (which have been called a diatribe :D) on the Exeyness of Exes!

I'm sorry for misleading and upsetting you and mis-communicating to you due to my carelessness.

My only explanation is that I am not currently on my computer and had someone else breathing down my neck and pressuring me to "hurry up and post" so that something else could take place. I am multi-tasking several things at once, managing several simultaneous events today and was just careless and rushed when posting. I just kept writing when I should have made myself more clear...answered you first and then gone on to create another distinct post. :faceslap: My mistake, and I apologize for making it!

Please believe me that none of my long post was directed at you personally, even though I inadvertently surely gave that impression.

You're right, I've read your posts and gotten to know you over time here, and I know that you are not one of the still indoctrinated people I was directing my thoughts to. In fact, I think you are a shining beacon of sanity as an former Scientologist, and among the more lucid and intelligent posters here. I have seen you change your views and your attitudes over time and I can see that you personally are not stuck in some cult indoctrinated mindset. :)

Maybe it is upsetting that I write directly to the collective "you" out there, instead of using a less direct and more passive voice. But I mean what I say to be a wake up call and a reality check for those who are out of COS but are still pretty indoctrinated. I have them interacting with me IRL as well as I see them on various boards and other places on the Internet. I mean to be direct. I don't mean it personally for any one single poster here, from the OP on down! Can I please make that clear? :)

In fact I'm not trying to tar anybody with any brush. Of course, Indys and Free Zoners have the right to hold their own beliefs and call themselves Scientologists. I do think it's a slippery slope...I do think it's a lot better and less harmful if they squirrel the tech, call what they are practicing something else, mix it with other practices that work for them, etc. Maybe that is what many of them intend to do, maybe what I am arguing against is standard tech, which I understand to be inherently harmful to one's mental/emotional health? (Based not just on reading and research about Scientology but on my life experience with former Scientologists and their struggles.)

I do have some concerns for the well-being of Indys who want to re-create Rons early church, however they group themselves together. I find the tech to be intentionally and irretrievably flawed and hazardous, a mind trap.

That may not be a popular view, but it's the one I am currently holding.

I also do think that the very word "Scientology" is really tainted, maybe will be for all of our lifetimes. Maybe a miracle will occur and COS will get ethics in, there will be massive reform, they abolish RPF, RTC, CMO and SO and go back to the franchise Mission system, they will start making all services free, sell all their ideal orgs and other big real estate, get rid of all the flash and start feeding the poor and housing the homeless. Wouldn't it be nice!

I was directing my remarks mostly to those lurkers and posters here who are still raving fans of Scientology without looking (because they have been taught to avoid entheta like the plague) at the reality of the history of it's dark side and the misapplications and vast potential for abuse, which I know that you, Claire have already read and researched and taken a hard look at.

I really didn't mean you personally, but I sure can see why you thought I was talking right to you Fluff! I'm very embarressed :blush: to have made this mistake, and I apologize to you. :flowers2:

I'll have to read over everything again when I have more time and can respond better, as I feel that I'm leaving some details and other stuff out that I should address here, in apologizing to you, but I'm currently outta time, and gotta go! Once again, I'm so sorry! :sorry: :bowdown:
 
Last edited:

Gadfly

Crusader
Maybe a miracle will occur and COS will get ethics in, there will be massive reform, they abolish RPF, RTC, CMO and SO and go back to the franchise Mission system, they will start making all services free, sell all their ideal orgs and other big real estate, get rid of all the flash and start feeding the poor and housing the homeless. Wouldn't it be nice!

In your and my dreams!!!!! :thumbsup:

But, there is far TOO MUCH LRH policy that MUST BE FOLLOWED, and that situation will always act to prevent something like what you describe above from ever happening. :bigcry:

It seems that the only real "solution" for the Church of Scientology is eventual failure as public opinion continues to grow against it, largely due to the reporting of endless disreputable FACTS about Hubbard and Scientology on the Internet (YouTube sure helps too).

++++++
 

Royal Prince Xenu

Trust the Psi Corps.
I'm just saying that it does not pay to make assumptions about non CofS Scn'ists any more than it would to make assumptions about "all critics" or "all Christians" or "all atheists" or "all Hindus" or "All Muslims".

Yet that has happened here.

It's been alleged that Indie (and in my case, ex Indie) Scn'ists haven't read the critical stuff, seen the vids, etc. Yet many of us have done.

So, I'm asking YOU to look and to stop generalizing and assuming.

If you want to know if someone read certain things, ask him or her. Ask WHAT he or she read. Ask what he or she thought.

VC: There is one group where you can say "ALL of them" and that is the JREFs.

To you or me, if it looks like shit, and smells like shit, we're pretty much satisfied that it is shit.

However, a JREF must remain completely skeptical as to whether it is shit or not until he has touched it, tasted it and listened to it. Only then will he agree that it's probably shit.
 

Gadfly

Crusader
That is the mechanism of how the system works. Problem, reaction, solution. In Iraq two plain-clothed British soldiers were driving around randomly shooting innocent civillians thereby creating "terror" amongst the locals so that they would welcome curfews and weapons searches etc. They got caught and locked away but with the use of u.s. and british resources they were busted out of jail and removed from the country.

Is this where you got the notion of "Problem, reaction, solution" from?

There is a great section in Antony C. Suttons, "America's Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones". It is a chapter devoted to Hegel's philosophy. Hegel's idea was based on the notion of three key factors. The thesis, the antithesis and the synthesis. Simply:

Hegelian dialectic, usually presented in a threefold manner, was stated by Heinrich Moritz Chalybäus as comprising three dialectical stages of development: a thesis, giving rise to its reaction, an antithesis, which contradicts or negates the thesis, and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis.


Hegel viewed the evolution of everything, from the beginning of the Universe until now, as following this tension and growth, tension and growth, on and on forever. It is an interesting theory.

Read more on Hegel's Dialetic here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic

Certain conspiracy theorists posit that there are elitists out there, with lots of money and lots of power (mega-rich), who have funded research into Hegel's ideas, and came up with the interesting notion that "if this tension will always exist naturally, as some basic law of the universe, well hell, we might as well get in there are CONTROL the tensions and what comes out of the tensions".

Thus you get various international bankers funding BOTH SIDES in WWI and WWII. But, it also leads to other conclusions and actions. For example, when the Japanese were on their way to bomb Pearl Harbor, some say that the US president was WARNED ahead of time, but that he DID NOTHING. Why? Because, the US population was overall very isolationist, and wanted NOTHING to do with another world war. But, Roosevelt felt that the US HAD to get involved, for both political and economic reasons, so he LET THE ATTACK OCCUR, so that THIS "thesis" would create the "antithesis" of a ragingly mad American public, and the result of US at war in Europe. And, of course, WWII was a HUGE tension between world powers that resulted in a new synthesis, and on and on. The big question, of course being, whether there actually are people with such a horrendous absense of any sense of morality that they will happily "stage events" that harm and kill some or even MANY people (i.e. AIDs as an intentionally "created" solution to "over-population" and "less than desirable genotypes" - and also possibly a way to "test out" new versions of "biochemical warfare").

More about that here:

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/pearl_harbor.htm

Many "key events", if they were "staged", such as the JFK assassination and the WTC attack of 9/11, might have been planned and enacted according to this "elitist application" of Hegel's Dialetic.

Who knows? :confused2:

So many conspiracy theories, so little time. :omg:

But one thing I learned from involvement with the Church of Scientology. Do not ever underestimate the lengths a person or group will go to to bring about results that align with his or her insane and fanatical view of "better". So it was for Hitler, Stalin, Mao and every other nutbag dictator who was trying to FORCE humanity into rigid alignment with some "intellectual IDEAL" (which exists almost entirely as an IDEA in some person's head). When Hubbard says "Ideal Scene", I say "RUN"!

++++++++
 
Last edited:
... For example, the "Patriot Act" was a direct result of 9/11. The catastrophe of 9/11 directly resulted in the "solution" of the "Patriot Act". It could have been all "natural", and it could have been "manipulated" (if the attack on the WTC and the Pentagon were "contrived" (staged) events, intended as a way to loosen up public opinion so that such things as the "Patriot Act" could be passed)

++++++

Most likely it was the third option, 'opportunistic'. That is to say, the events of 911 having transpired the cheney administration took political advantage of that fact to push through as much corrupt legislation as they possibly could under the guise of 'national security' & the 'war on terrorism'. :eyeroll:

The history of events since 911 support this interpretation.


Mark A. Baker
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Most likely it was the third option, 'opportunistic'. That is to say, the events of 911 having transpired the cheney administration took political advantage of that fact to push through as much corrupt legislation as they possibly could under the guise of 'national security' & the 'war on terrorism'. :eyeroll:

The history of events since 911 support this interpretation.

Mark A. Baker

Actually, the history of events since 9/11 would support BOTH the second and third interpretations.

I suspect that most people are simply too "decent" to be able to contemplate the sort of REAL EVIL that exists in this world, and that can happily and easily decimate entire groups of people in the name of some IDEAL. The sheer "evil" inherent in many conspiracy theories prevents many people from ever even slightly entertaining such notions as possible. The absurdity factor acts to protect such nefarious shenanigans from being taken seriously.

Verbal Kint (The Usual Suspects):

"The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist".

I read that as a metaphor - and not literally.

In the same way, I think many are incapable of grasping the true EVIL that Hubbard manifested and acted out through his endless manipulations of his "loving and adoring followers".

+++++++++
 
ah. a conversation

You managed to "prove" your point that all psychiatrists, everywhere, are currently and always evil by the use of three unverifiable anecdotes and a very old incident. Well done! I am thoroughly defeated.

And you managed a nice ad hominem to boot, always the sign of a solid argument.

Yes, you proved your generality. CCHR has won! :happydance:

Aside: I used to man those VM tents. I'd give the little tour of the panels representing all of Scientology's claims and "solutions". Time after time one of the "wogs" would get very upset by Scientology's hate-psychiatry poster and would nicely explain how their brother, daughter, grandfather, good friend had been greatly helped by some psychiatrist. Some would even cry when explaining how grateful they were that such help was available and how terrible it was that we were attacking them. I was floored. I believed what CCHR said. CCHR was wrong. There is much, vital good done by the psychiatric profession. And, I do understand that a few psychiatrists, like a few Scientologists, do really horrible things.

You could get rid of your generality and talk about which specific psychiatrists do which specific harm -- rather than painting all psychiatrists with your broad brush.

i am not now and have never been a scibot. i parrot nobody's party line. i do not now and have never categorically condemned psychiatrists or psychologists as evil. i have known a couple shrinks who were exceptionally warm and humane people. many writers on the subject have valuable insights into human nature. and psychiatry is not nearly as rotten today as it was when i was a boy back during The Boxer Rebellion.

but...

it's still pretty bad.

and i apreciate your disaffection for having been stuck with spouting the CoS party line. in point of fact CoS indoctrinates rather than educates.

and you're still copping an attitude on me.
 

Royal Prince Xenu

Trust the Psi Corps.
Is this where you got the notion of "Problem, reaction, solution" from?

There is a great section in Antony C. Suttons, "America's Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones". It is a chapter devoted to Hegels philosophy. Hegel's idea was based on the notion of three key factors. The thesis, the antithesis and the synthesis.

...

Yes, I have seen it presented using those three words as well.

Most likely it was the third option, 'opportunistic'. That is to say, the events of 911 having transpired the cheney administration took political advantage of that fact to push through as much corrupt legislation as they possibly could under the guise of 'national security' & the 'war on terrorism'. :eyeroll:
...

"Do the orders still stand?"
"Have you heard anything to the contrary?"


Cheney knew what was going on as it was a manufactured "opportunity".
 
Last edited:

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
I'm so confused.

I do not now and have never categorically condemned psychiatrists...
Back a few posts you said, "psychiatrists do far worse".

Not "some psychiatrists", not "a few psychiatrists", not "psychiatrists I have known", but categorically "psychiatrists do far worse".

And that insults many fine psychiatrists. Now you say you don't categorically condemn them. I accept that as a correction to your original statement.
and you're still copping an attitude on me.
Yep. Sometimes I definitely do cop and attitude.
 

Gadfly

Crusader
:puke2:
Cheney knew what was going on and it was a manufactured "opportunity".

I early saw how people can "manufacture opportunities" and it thoroughly disgusted me. I have no doubt that condescending A-holes all over planet Earth do it in the name of some IDEAL, because to these despicable examples of humanity "the end always justifies the means".

That is one reason why I view the Church of Scientology and Hubbard as rotting, putrid, decaying organic matter. Sure, they are far from being the only people who manipulate perceptions by "staging events", but the severity of the DISGUST is exagerrated a thousand times, because Hubbard and the Church of Scientology present themselves in this "holier than thou" image.

For a "church" to do such things! For a group that claims to provide a "road to truth" to do such things!

How any person can remain affiliated with Hubbard or the subject of Scientology knowing that Hubbard WROTE THE BOOK ON "STAGING EVENTS" (for the GO and OSA) is beyond me. Denial? Justification? Stupidity? Because these sort of people resonate with similar deep-seated evil motivations? :confused2:

Hubbard talks about the "Merchants of Chaos", and it is THOSE types of people who happily manufacture events, often with harm to some or many people, to create selfish desired outcomes. But, the truth is that Hubbard is exactly the same sort of "Merchant of Chaos".

Mixing "covert ops" with a "road to spiritual freedom" is just so GROSS! Hubbard did THAT! Hubbard designed and created an organization that continues to do THAT!

He is the big pretentious buffoon that so many stand, clap and cheer in unison to everyday. Hip-hip-hooray!

:puke2: :puke2:

:puke: :puke: :puke2: :puke:
 

Infinite

Troublesome Internet Fringe Dweller
Cheney knew what was going on and it was a manufactured "opportunity".

AKA "Shock Doctrine" - a long established and effective tool for foisting rapacious capitalism and inhibiting civil liberties.
. . . Part 1 begins with a chapter on psychiatric shock therapy and the covert experiments conducted by the psychiatrist Ewen Cameron in collusion with the Central Intelligence Agency: how it was partially successful in distorting and regressing patients' original personality, but ineffectual in developing a better personality to replace it. Parallels with economic shock therapy are made, including a digression on how government agencies harnessed some of the lessons learned to create more effective torture techniques. Torture, according to Klein, has often been an essential tool for authorities who have implemented aggressive free market reforms – this assertion is stressed throughout the book. She suggests that for historical reasons the human rights movement has often portrayed torture without explaining its context, which has made it frequently appear as pointless sadism. The second chapter introduces Milton Friedman and his Chicago School of Economics, who Klein describes as leading a movement committed to free markets even less regulated than before the Great Depression . . .
 

Royal Prince Xenu

Trust the Psi Corps.
Back a few posts you said, "psychiatrists do far worse".

Not "some psychiatrists", not "a few psychiatrists", not "psychiatrists I have known", but categorically "psychiatrists do far worse".

And that insults many fine psychiatrists. Now you say you don't categorically condemn them. I accept that as a correction to your original statement.

Yep. Sometimes I definitely do cop and attitude.

I too have an attitude problem. Some people find it a problem that I have an attitude.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Sweetness and Light,

Will have more time later...just want to say love ya much, all's well and thanks for the reply. You deserve more time than I have right this moment so I thought I'd just let you know I saw your response and we're cool, you and I.
 
picky picky picky

Back a few posts you said, "psychiatrists do far worse".

Not "some psychiatrists", not "a few psychiatrists", not "psychiatrists I have known", but categorically "psychiatrists do far worse".

And that insults many fine psychiatrists. Now you say you don't categorically condemn them. I accept that as a correction to your original statement.

Yep. Sometimes I definitely do cop and attitude.

ah yes semantics. those famliar with my writing would know the requested qualifiers were implicit.

i have posted some writing on psychiatry on this board and will post more. for the moment i would like to respond to your account of doing VM/CCHR work and having people come and say they know people who were helped by psychiatry with the rude and egregious statement that some though not all people who say that are actually saying "in my family and our community everyone acts like barnyard animals but my cousin charlie used to act like a human being and it really bothered us so we pushed him into a mental hospital and now he acts like a piece of furniture and it doesn't bother anyone."
 

Veda

Sponsor
ah yes semantics. those famliar with my writing would know the requested qualifiers were implicit.

i have posted some writing on psychiatry on this board and will post more. for the moment i would like to respond to your account of doing VM/CCHR work and having people come and say they know people who were helped by psychiatry with the rude and egregious statement that some though not all people who say that are actually saying "in my family and our community everyone acts like barnyard animals but my cousin charlie used to act like a human being and it really bothered us so we pushed him into a mental hospital and now he acts like a piece of furniture and it doesn't bother anyone."

Commander, do you agree with the Scientologists that the psychs were behind 911?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmlCFeMrssg
About the above video: http://mirror-of-dr-lilly.blogspot.com
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Commander, do you agree with the Scientologists that the psychs were behind 911?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmlCFeMrssg
About the above video: http://mirror-of-dr-lilly.blogspot.com

I assume that your question is rhetorical.

Psychiatrists were not "behind" 911--it's no secret that the pilots themselves were psychs! Who the hell else in their right mind would attempt to attack and shatter their imagined enemies like that?!

Having said that, my space feels calm. Thanks Ron!
 

Helena Handbasket

Gold Meritorious Patron
I had a car.

I drove it to try and get to the land of self-improvement.

I LIKE driving there!

I drove my car to a bridge and started crossing it.

But over the years the car got more expensive to run. It broke down a lot, kept getting stopped by the police for inspections, and didn't quite take me all the way to the land of self-improvement.

I tried to get my car fixed by taking it to high-priced specialists. All they were interested in was taking my money; the car did not run any better.

So I junked it and bought a German model. I like this car even better. It gets more miles to the gallon and doesn't break down as much. And I can go farther with it than with my old car.

But even if I do get to the other side of the bridge, that won't get me all the way to the land of self-improvement. For I do know people who have nearly finished crossing that bridge and they act real stupid sometimes. So one needs more than a car and a bridge.

I have a frying pan. This frying pan is on the stove. Because a car and a bridge are not enough, I have to follow other paths at the same time (education, social contacts, life goals, etc).

Because I have filled my frying pan with OTHER FISH TO FRY.

Helena
 

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
Nice strawman. You're really good at nonsense.

ah yes semantics. those famliar with my writing would know the requested qualifiers were implicit.
Guess what? I don't know you and I take you at your word. Say what you mean and I'll "get it".
i have posted some writing on psychiatry on this board and will post more. for the moment i would like to respond to your account of doing VM/CCHR work and having people come and say they know people who were helped by psychiatry with the rude and egregious statement that some though not all people who say that are actually saying "in my family and our community everyone acts like barnyard animals but my cousin charlie used to act like a human being and it really bothered us so we pushed him into a mental hospital and now he acts like a piece of furniture and it doesn't bother anyone."
No. Geez are you that hard up for negative information about psychiatry that you just make stuff up? This is not what they said and this is not what I said.

I know you hate to hear this, but they were talking about troubled family members who were finally able to live normal lives because of psychiatry. "Normal lives"! Not locked and drugged in some mental dungeon, as your fantasy demands, but able to function normally and live in the real world (Something you might consider).

You've been sold some heavy-duty anti-psychiatry propaganda and seem unwilling to look outside of that tiny mind-trap. That's your problem. The propaganda you spout is propaganda, not truth.

And your little strawman lies about what "people said to me" is stupid and very insulting (and very creepy). I'd rather you not do that.
 
Last edited:

Royal Prince Xenu

Trust the Psi Corps.
Commander, do you agree with the Scientologists that the psychs were behind 911?

I have no doubt that there were psychiatrists involved in the prediction of public reaction who had input into the scenario----similar people would have been involved in the psycho-strategy of trigger words and phrases in the publicly released information.

However it is a hugely illogical leap to blame an entire profession for the acts of a few rogues.
 
Top