Customize

It's not allowed to talk about Katie Holmes in Scientology... Proof!

Discussion in 'Tom and Katie' started by Anonymous, Aug 19, 2012.

  1. Anonymous Member

    LOL! OSA really checks out this board 24/7. They have updated the Facebook rules:

    [IMG]
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. anonymous612 Member

    Someone tell me what verbal tech is.
  3. Anonymous Member

    Talking? Fuck if I know.
  4. Anonymous Member

    Speaking in moonbat-ese, AKA upstat Ron lingo.

    It sets off the mindlessly barking anonymous running dogs, dontcha know.
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  5. Anonymous Member

    Speaking without reference to the exact policy or specific Hubbard writing or tape.

    More generally it means speaking any truth that hasn't been Officially Issued.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. bAnon Member

    Item #5 - "Feel free to share your success, wins, good news, and Theta."

    Translation = Keep Drinking this refreshing Kool-Aid.

    PS - don't forget to provide the LRH reference

    FEEL FREE

    FEEL

    FREE
    • Funny Funny x 2
  7. anonymous612 Member

    Oh I see what they're going for there. They mean only make claims that are in the text from Source, as opposed to shit that travels through word of mouth, thus VERBAL tech. I got it.

    I suppose it was too fucking hard for them to just say "yo, don't spread gossip, guys."
  8. The Wrong Guy Member

    www.google.com/search?q=verbal+tech+Scientology

    Verbal Tech: Penalties

    HCO Bulletin 15 February 1979, Reissued 12 April 1983, is titled Verbal Tech: Penalties. The bulletin is item 24 in the Keeping Scientology Working series, and appears in the 1983 version of the Hubbard Professional TRs Course booklet and many other Scientology volumes. It is very short: just 3 paragraphs, totaling 76 words. A verbatim copy was formerly presented here under the ``fair use'' provision of the US Copyright Code,, but after Scientology attorney Helena K. Kobrin complained, I replaced it with the following summary:

    The first paragraph simply says that anyone found to be using ``verbal tech'' will be brought before a court of ethics.

    The second paragraph gives the actual definition of verbal tech. It lists the following activities:

    1. "giving out data'' that doesn't agree with official policy as stated in HCOBs (Hubbard Communications Office Bulletins) and HCOPLs (Hubbard Communications Offfice Policy Letters)
    2. obstructing the use or application of HCOBs and HCOPLs
    3. "corrupting their intent''
    4. "altering their content in any way'' (fixing typos? correcting fracured grammar?)
    5. "interpreting them verbally for another [person]'',
    6. or pretending to quote from a bulletin or policy letter without showing the actual text.
    Item #5 makes it a crime to interpret Hubbard's writings for another person. That's the real meaning of ``verbal tech''. The critical point here is that it's been cleverly slipped in among a set of much more clearly objectionable acts, so that the reader is not given a chance to notice what's really going on.

    The third paragraph says that any of the above actions will be punished. That's it.

    What's the real motive behind this HCOB? By preventing people from discussing their interpretations of his policies, Hubbard has effectively squelched all internal debate on the way his organization is run. If one disagrees with a policy, public discussion and analysis are not an option. The only acceptable action is to ``go back and find your misunderstood word'' (a Scientology catch-phrase), repeating as often as necessary until the disagreement has been suppressed.

    Note that according to Hubbard's policy, this very web page is an instance of ``verbal tech'', since I am interpreting the bulletin, and quoting from it without showing the actual text. Well, I tried to show the text, but a Scientology lawyer complained about it. Twice!

    Source: www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/verbal-tech.html
    • Like Like x 5
    • Winner Winner x 3
  9. RightOn Member

    there have been plenty instances of COS promos that quoted Hubbard and did not list the source
    I remember a discussion on this long ago
  10. bAnon Member

    LRH never said 'Yo' - therefore it doesn't exist.

    What's true for you, is true for you. (As long as there is a memo from LRH justifying it.)
    • Funny Funny x 2
  11. anonamus Member

    "Verbal tech" / penalties as listed above is a strong tool to prevent you from having an opinion of your own re. scientology, which is not entirely ElRon's.
    Very efficient to keep you from thinking for yourself.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. anonamus Member

    Another good read about Hubbard's mind-fuckup tech:

    http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?20567-If-it-isn%92t-written%85

    ElRon's brainwash tech does work on some, unfortunately. The rest of the "tech": well.. Where's all the "dianetics clears" with perfect memory, perfect vision, no diseases, -let alone the "OT"'s with zoopah powah?
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. RightOn Member

    in wog world it is verbal diarreha
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  14. Nada Member

    I just read that as sarcasm from a troll.
  15. Nada Member

    Oh brother!! They are everywhere in your personal business!! Infantilizing its members is the modus operandi!
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. RightOn Member

    well I wouldn't have been surprised if it was the real deal! Some of the sci speak is REALLY sickening
    • Agree Agree x 2
  17. Anonymous Member

    They don't like the leaks lol:
    ulZOj.png
    • Like Like x 2
  18. anonymous612 Member

    Lol Michelle, did OSA bitch to you about being on WWP? You poor dear.
    • Funny Funny x 2
  19. DeathHamster Member

    Glad to see that increased security thing is working out for her.
    • Funny Funny x 4
  20. jensting Member

    More basic than that: it disallows discussions which might lead to awkward questions, like "has anyone actually floated the damn ashtray?"

    Best Regards

    Jens
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  21. Anonymous Member

    TC would have to take his dick out of DM's ass for Katie to get a goldenrod. lol
  22. anonymous612 Member

    Well, she could be considered PTS without a declare, right?

    Of course, this pretends any negative part of scientology actually applies to Tom Cruise. They can't make him disconnect, he might stop giving them money. Tom Cruise =/= a Sea Orger, etc.
  23. anonamus Member

    Considering the censoring among public scilons = only talk about positive things re. the TomKat situation,
    I wonder what the SeaOrgers are allowed to discuss / know about the divorce.
    My take is, only the very highest ranking of them knows any real truthful info. Which they of course are forbidden to discuss with others in the cult. The rest of the crew are probably told some "acceptable truth", -if they are told anything at all ...
    Just my 2cents...
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  24. DeathHamster Member

    He's at least an Honorary Sea Org member. (There's a policy for that.)
  25. SOJOA Member

    Go read a Harry Potter book. Oh wait you cant cause its about the devil and witchcraft........

    See what I did there.....
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
  26. Budd Member

    No one is saying you can't read it. My pastor would say, "Read it. Think about it. Talk about it."
    • Like Like x 2
  27. RightOn Member

    a normal response from a real church :)
    • Agree Agree x 2
  28. SOJOA Member

    No one was saying she COULDNT post it either but some people felt that she shouldnt. Same principle. I know much is strongly discouraged and "boycotted" if you are to be a "true" christian.

    Again, not saying you cant but it is looked down upon.

    Pot calling the kettle black.
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  29. JohnnyRUClear Member

    Not from my experience. There is a kind of social stigma attached to making a regular habit of delving into "Satanic" stuff, which seems just intuitive to me (for Christians, I mean). There is not, however, any sense of "VERBOTEN" attached to that stuff. So, for example, you might find a Bible study or home fellowship group where one of the members reads something considered to be evil and then does a book report for the rest of the group. They would all join in discussing the material and nobody would have any hesitation about doing so, as an intellectual pursuit. There's no "entheta" corollary within Christianity, only an exhortation to let your mind dwell on edifying things rather than garbage. Seeking to understand things is considered virtuous.

    By contrast, imagine a Scientologist fellowship group studyi--oops, such groups don't even exist since they are prohibited altogether. No verbal tech! Only discuss your case with your case supervisor!

    This is one of the key reasons I do not agree that what Elron created was a church. He was a liar, and he lied when he stuck the label of "church" on his creation. Many people fell for it, but that doesn't make it true.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  30. Well any religion that can't see Harry Potter for the wishful juvenile fantasy it is, preferring to denounce it as satanic is truly missing the point and are a bunch of humorless wanks (and I'm not even a huge fan of the series myself).

    I have seen christians who superstitiously ward off 'entheta' as much as any sci, preferring others think for them so they can assure their eternities eating pie in crystal and gold palaces with their sky-god after death. I also have seen this from new-agers, moslems, etc, so it is not confined to any one 'faith'.

    May I suggest viewing Diane Keaton's oscar-winning but now quite rare documentary 'Heaven'? The materialism of most people's afterlife projections is staggering, making up for deprivation in this life with promises of 'all the gold you can eat' (as Python put it) or in the case of reincarnation, a 'good' birth into a place where you have 'all the gold you can eat'.

    Anything that keeps you from innocently experiencing and enjoying life (even if it as silly as HP books) as it is for a promise of eternity is fucked up, IMO. Moral compass is one thing, but compasses are made for exploration.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  31. Ron B DED Member

    Flag Order 3323

    19730509fo3323celebritijf8.png

    .

    HONORARY SEA ORG MEMBER, celebrities are very special people and
    have a very distinct line of dissemination. They have comm lines
    that others do not have and many medias to get their dissemination
    through.

    Because of their value as disseminators it is unwise to
    make them staff members working full time as any other Sea Org
    member does in an organization, rather they should be allowed to be
    the celebrity they are, utilizing their talent, to get them more
    and more into the public eye. If these celebrities want to join the
    Sea Org they may be awarded the status of Honorary Sea Org Members.

    This title is not given to just any celebrity but rather to those
    who have shown and proved their dedication to the Sea Org. This
    title is awarded to those celebrities, this makes them no less a
    Sea Org member than any other but it does free the celebrity up to
    disseminate broadly. (FO 3323)

    http://www.b-org.demon.nl/scn/tech/admin-dic-2-4.txt
    • Like Like x 4
  32. anonamus Member

    Of course celebretards are valuable to your cult, ElRon, it's not rocket science! Any half-brained scammer would know that famous people's recommendation is of great value to lure the vulnarable into buying your useless bridge. But of course you had to write it as a formalized "Flag Order" to make it look as if you discovered it for the first time in man's history.
    Same goes for rest of your "tech": The few parts that may be of some value, was to my knowledge not invented by you, but are other's work, rephrased with your scilon lingo terms.
    An out-ethics suppressive rock-slammer you were Ron, to put in in your own terms.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  33. JohnnyRUClear Member

    That was what you did there.
    The "religion" didn't denounce it. There is no authority within Christendom for anyone to do so, except perhaps within individual churches or denominations (i.e. the pope). Individual Christians may -- and some do -- hold views like that, but if they do, it's because they see that as being in line with the Bible, not because they were ordered to think that way by Christ-OSA or whomever. They are, in general, still free to have a contrary view, to read whatever they want, and to discuss their reasons for doing so with anyone they choose. That some act in unison with others may create an appearance of uniformity, but any such is generally a result of actual agreement, not enforcement.

    With that borne in mind... as to your opinions about the religion on the basis of its effects on people's attitudes, those are your opinions and obviously you're free to believe whatever you like about that. Just don't couch it in terms of "Christians can't read X" and try to compare it to "entheta"; that's not an accurate comparison. The Bible encourages people to think about edifying things and not dwell on sinful things. Some Christians take that exhortation further than others, but it's up to the individual to choose.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  34. SOJOA Member

    I totally agree with what you stated about Scilons however I have experienced the flip side where certain books, movies, shirts, notions and even games (no not ouaji board or whatever that is) have been ban cause they are not christian based. BTW Christians are the ones known throughout history for banning ideas, public get togethers for fear of verbal "tech" and book burnings. Now although it may not be so common now, think of all the ideas that were torched merely because it was against the "church" or their religious beliefs.

    To even claim because you are an ex post facto christian does not mean that your religion was founded upon the same basic principles. Hell do some research and read about "Paul" who was "Saul". That guy was nuts and he was the one that took christianity to a whole new level and made it survive.....along with the Catholic church but thats a story for another time.
    • Like Like x 1
  35. SOJOA Member

    I guess ultimately what im saying is Christianity victimized people too in many similar fashions throughout history. It has changed and evolved but still, it happened.

    I can not justify a born again christian claiming OMG THE HORROR when far too many of them do similar things right here in the US. Not saying its you or your church or anyones but it happens.

    So like I said, in many respects ONLY TO THE FACEBOOK POST, pot calling the kettle black
  36. SOJOA Member

    Heres a prime example



    And then the pastor yells "Thats my boy!"

    Whether you agree or not with the statement or idea, still indoctrination and a "tech" of sorts. Not labelling, not all but it does happen and more than you think amongst christians.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  37. Anonymous Member

    Is there by any chance a list of these celebrity Honorary Sea Org Members anywhere? A dated one even?
    • Like Like x 1
  38. Ron B DED Member

    Not to my knowledge. I've never seen a list of Honorary Sea Org Members.

    However, it is basically the same as HPRO - Honorary Public Relations Officer.

    Here is one old mention of HPRO

    "In October, Norwegian HPRO [Honorary Public Relations Officer] Dan Viggo Bergtun visited his country's Defense Minister, Mr. Jorgen Kosmo, to present The Way to Happiness to him and show its value in improving society. Mr. Kosmo instantly grasped its potential."

    http://www.xenu.net/archive/media/kosmo.html

    I don't have dox on this, but from memory, the HPRO course is done in the Qualifications division in Scientology.
  39. Ron B DED Member

    http://www.lermanet.com/reference/BatEarthfaq2.htm

    AFP - Agency France Presse

    "I'm very interested in Scientology but that's personal. This is different. This has nothing to do with Scientology," he said.

    But Stephen Kent, a professor of sociology at the University of Alberta
    in Edmonton, Canada, believes otherwise.

    "John Travolta is an honorary public relations officer for the Scientology," said Kent, an expert on new religions.

    "'Battlefield Earth' is an attempt to get Ron Hubbard's name widespread in popular culture with the hope that people would like to see other works from him.

    "Actually, I don't think it's a coincidence that the movie is being released on the 50th anniversary of the publication in May 9, 1950, of Ron Hubbard's seminal book: 'Dianetics: The modern science of mental health'."
  40. Ron B DED Member

    Somewhere, very recently, Marty was trying to discount the idea of "Honorary Sea Org Member".

    Here it is, in the old Admin dictionary, which was in use when Marty was still "in" CofS.
    [IMG]
    • Like Like x 2

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins