Re: Questions about Scientology? Jung was the first to use a skin resistance galvanometer and also a list of questions to ask while connected to such an instrument. This is very key concepts re scn auditing, and are VERY mainstream in scn. No. Hubbard was a master hypnotist and per his beginners book " Evolution of a Science" [ re dianetics] used it as a research tool. There are schools of psychological thought [ Specially NLP I believe] that believe concentrating on anything is liable to induce a hypnotic state. However scn is the reverse of that. For example " Objective processing" is designed to bring one up to "present time". ie the reverse of hypnotism. Commands such as" look at that wall" etc. You want more on this ask. c You may wish to give examples as I don't know exactly what you are referring to. There are obvious mistakes re homosexuals and the famous quotes in SOS. That would be IMO an error. In the fifties Gays probably were in some sense " 1.1 Covert hostility" as they were not considered a proper part of society. Hubbard also perhaps considered the denial of children assumed was non survival. Would have been nice if he was a trailblazer re human rights here but it would have back then been " Out PR". I guess he just expressed his own prejudice which persists till today in COS. Most definitely not in the FZ bar a few ------. Absolutely not. See a later post. I do consider Hubbard a genius in his work. I consider those who try to improve on it have a tough job. I have on my forum done an admin scale which includes trying to improve this as a goal. His stuff works, others I hope improve it. Don't consider scn is hypnotherapy. Yes. Ideally. From tech Dict. Case Gain. Def 2 " Any case betterment according to the PC." Well monetary loss. Upset. Can scientific proof work here? Can the same re mainstream psychology do better? CO$ have a companion site to " Religious freedom watch" " Freezone Survivors" detailing the fuck ups of the FZ. Almost all examples are complete bullshit. Probably all. I know all the people involved. Even CO$ with its resources finds just about nothing to find wrong re the FZ. You might wish to see the " Proof "That Max Hauri is working with the german secret service. Its a clip from " The Beginners Guide to L ron Hubbard " a brit channel 4 TV programme which is the only one to ever see scn tech as valuable. Only re Metapsychology and TIR which I believe I've cited. others long ago of little significance. Thanks.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Not falling in love indicates a problem area. Love is a loose term. Had much comm with Gottabrain and phone conversations. I see her as a star and am thus in love with her. We never met as it happens. Had lots of comm with you and really liked it. Despite you gently trying to bust my balls. Does anything get better?
Re: Questions about Scientology? I am not sure you are aware what hypnotherapy consists of. Hypnotherapy is establishing a authoritative connection with your client you control, this is called a rapport. After having brought your client into a state of relaxation --which contrary to popular belief needs no pendulum or any of the sort. Using posture, speech patterns and strategic questioning you direct your client through a memory, phobic scenario, condition or matter you want resolved. The art lies in being suggestive, all the while maintaining a tight grip on the subject. Everyone can do this, the problems arise with poor planning, lack of judgment or understanding of what is done. I am not a trained therapist and thus stay clear from helping people improve conditions. Knowing that the last thing you want is to have no exit strategy, aggravating the trauma by leaving the client unguided in the middle of their torment, or possibly worse finding both you and the client trapped in annexed intricacies. It is only good practice, and foremost responsible to know what you are doing, know what you can't do, acknowledge the possible consequences and thoroughly weigh the pro's and con's before giving any form of counseling / therapy. I sincerely wish i was overstating this; malpractice can lead to a clients suicide. So now that i explained the functioning and ramifications, i will let you make up your own mind. "scn is the reverse of hypnotism" Auditing consists of asking vague questions and directions, you call those processes. Now compare what do you really know about processes with what was said about rapport. "Don't consider scn is hypnotherapy" What if it actually was? with the exception that trained auditors may be unaware of it, which as you do imagine brings forth potential complications. Will you consciously knowing this, acknowledge the risks present of even you not considering it for what it is. "In future I hope the ideas will be forwarded in the general area of psychology." Since both psychology and psychiatry have evolved since hubbards alleged findings, would you also hope for the exchange to go in the other direction, i.e that auditing is held to the same standards of psychotherapeutic practice. "In a sense I'm a dying dinosaur. I do my best to promote the good of Scn. The COS has fucked that up completely. I still live, survive, but I don't see a good future for the subject. I hope I'm wrong. " I can not imagine the emotional rollercoaster you avoid facing, that what you have believed and practiced may be conflicting to the ideal you believe in and promote. I fully comprehend you try to avoid this, since clinical depression is no win --the sad truth is that when avoiding something, it means it is already there. Please tell me Terril, and don't hide behind someone else's exscn success story. When was the last time you experienced absolute bliss?
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril, thanks for taking the time to respond to all those questions in my post. I'll go through the thread again later to see what I may have missed. But I encourage you to try to look past the challenging or demanding tone and consider some of the stronger questions in this thread, as many of them can be provocative in a positive way, leading to deeper consideration of important ideas. It all depends on how you use them. Also, a calm and well thought out response is disarming, and while some people are not here to listen and learn, others may be and in any case most will respond positively to a sincere and open-minded answer even if they disagree. (I say this optimistically, knowing full well that this place isn't exactly a tea party. But still.) You haven't solicited advice but (apologies in advance) I'll offer some anyway. I think you would do well to read up on some of the areas where your knowledge is admittedly spotty--psychology, hypnotherapy, and yes, philosophy and critical thinking, which is useful to anyone and doesn't necessarily turn people into atheists. Your arguments tend to break down in places where your understanding of these subjects is weak. I think you'd find much that is inspiring and valuable in these subjects, including tips on argumentation that help anyone to more solidly defend a position. I'm sure you'd disagree with some things as well. But I think you'd find it all fascinating. More knowledge never hurts. And truth is truth, whatever its source. So I encourage you to do so, realizing that this kind of advice may seem patronizing but really, it isn't. Also, I think this applies to everyone, not only to you. I personally don't have an issue with others' beliefs as long as those beliefs don't lead to harmful practices. I salute you and others for your intellectual honesty in departing from the Church of Scientology in the ways that you have. In my opinion, the FZ will greatly enhance its prospects by making a rigorous and informed evaluation of developments in medicine and particularly psychology/neurology over the past 30 years, and also of Hubbard's teachings and of philosophy in general. If nothing else, ignorance of these fields leaves you open to accusations of malpractice, which become more likely as those who have exited CoS become more acclimated to the ways of the world outside. Hold to what's true; let go what isn't. Whether it works is not the test. Some things work wonderfully, but very slowly over time; other things, such as shotguns, work pretty well but shouldn't be used in most cases. And a lot of things work as well as they can and are still in progress. We can think of many charismatic leaders whose teachings worked spectacularly for their followers but ultimately proved untenable or even destructive. Forgive my preaching, but this subject is close to my own experience. I tend to be a die-hard and in a number of situations have stuck to my guns beyond the point where a cool-headed examination would have led me to a stronger position. (I was the last kid in my third-grade class to admit that Santa wasn't real, and debated it tenaciously with my friends until our teacher held a discussion in which each child was invited to tell how they "found out." I don't know what a Sec Check feels like, but that was pretty damn devastating!) One doesn't have to throw out the baby with the bathwater--I still celebrate Christmas--but it doesn't do any good to stubbornly hold on to beliefs of which, deep down, you aren't entirely convinced. It just makes you spiritually uneasy, guilty, afraid of challenges, and closed to new possibilities. I'm sure that in leaving organized Scientology and joining the Freezone you must already have undertaken a somewhat similar process. Love is an interesting topic for this discussion, as someone brought up above--although I haven't read all there is about Scientology, I don't remember seeing it addressed directly and would be curious about that. And by the way, I didn't mean to suggest NEVER falling in love. There's a lot of area between too quickly and never. The love part was the joke--the critical thinking, more serious. Also, my intent isn't to break anything, least of all your balls , but rather to suggest possible new avenues of thought to consider. I'm sure you understand.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril, TIR seems to be some sort of proprietary thing affiliated with a Scientology front group. Beware name brands. Real psychologists translate jargon and proprietary terms into generic language that most everyone in the field can understand. I wonder what distinguishes TIR from a therapist simply asking a client what happened, what did you feel, how does the difficult past experience relate to the here-and-now, where to go from here, etc. --basically, providing someone with a relatively non-judgmental social context in which to think out loud about events that have provoked a sense of alienation and confusion. Sometimes "the talking cure" is enough. Sometimes the relief associated with sharing intensely emotional experiences with another person can become a little addictive. Good therapists encourage clients to improve other important relationships rather than depend upon the therapist for the sense of intimacy all humans need. I suppose if I wanted to make money off emotionally vulnerable people I might invent a proprietary technique with a trademarked name. In that way I'd imply that I was sitting on top of specialized knowledge --always a good set-up for selling mystery sandwiches to the unwary.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Just told Miranda and Gottabrain I loved them. Was pretty blissfull! There a difference between hypnotism and hypnotherapy? This is not me.
Re: Questions about Scientology? I wondered what you meant by this. You feel that there is something at the heart of it that is good, but that has been damaged or destroyed, and you hope but are not confident that you (plural) can restore it?
Re: Questions about Scientology? This is the greatest post from any moderator I've ever seen including my own. Its in particular a stark difference from the moderation I suffered on enturb.org. My love is not so far removed from critical thinking. Perhaps my most intense desire is to connect people up in a good way, so they appreciate each other and all that may flow from that. If you grant permission I'd like to post this on ESMB, My own FZ forums, and Marty's blog, and in fact anywhere I post my scn success stories. To help connect people who look for betterment of existence. To help remove some of the strong barriers and forces that devide them. This was beautiful.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril, that's touching, and you give me too much credit. I'm just glad if it didn't offend you. As for quoting it, I'm happy to have people on those sites read it but would rather that they saw it in context. Would you be willing to link to it rather than quoting it independent of the rest of the thread? I'm sympathetic to your wish to bring people together, but I also think that a part of that is acknowledging differences. When you see the distance between, you can start thinking about bridges. Uh, metaphor, not Scientology allusion
Re: Questions about Scientology? Jeez! Dunno which anon you are but you need to research a bit more. In 1992 scn produced an enemies list and most enemies were people who did offshoots of scn. Specially Hubbards auditor David Mayo. These people are----" Officially SPs!!!----" Front groups of scn are micromanaged by DM. So TIR uses ideas familiar to mainstream therapy. Duh! This of course was one of the main sources of Dn, Scn. You want to make loads of money? Become a freezone auditor!!! Lol!
Re: Questions about Scientology? Last I heard Scn was considered even lower than Al Quiada. Once it was thriving until DM smashed the very successful mission network that got most people involved. Some had 200 staff. Now the man in the street considers scn as anathema. And in COS that is quite valid. Its hard to progress from that. In Russia the FZ is doing pretty well. The ideas and processes are in the mainstream via TIR and Metapsychology and seem to be doing very well there. People are doing offshoots which may or may not last. Certainly not doing well. Mainstream therapy does very well and answers a public need. Scn could be doing that but few would even wish to examine it. I hope for something like the Berlin wall collapsing, DM jailed and COS repairing past injustices. Not sure if even that would help. Your opening statement is correct.
Re: Questions about Scientology? No, it was started by Serge Gerbode who is not in CofS. He's an ex. Much of TIR is loosely based on Dianetics.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril, please post the certification you have, no need for proof. For example: have you done TIR workshops. The reason i am asking is that i need to know which jargon you understand.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Smells a lot like Re-Evaluation Counseling including the terminology. On the surface it seems as legit as chiropractic manipulation. For those who don't know RC is a "mild" psychology cult originating from Dianetics. Is founder left the leadership of the organization after being busted for "counseling" naked teens. When you gotta "discharge", you gotta "discharge".
Re: Questions about Scientology? No, but have several friends who have. Also heard Steve Bisby give a talk on TIR which to me souded exactly like Dianetics.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Whats the connection exactly with Frank Gerbode. Do you work for COS?
Re: Questions about Scientology? Why did nobody throw the fat fruitcake off his rusty ship when he started locking up terrified four year old children in a chain locker?
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril, Hypnotism is the mean to an end, hypnotism is used during hypnotherapy. Much like engineering is used in the design of a power plant, it doesn't mean power plants and engineering are mutually exclusive or synonymous. Hypnosis is an abstract wakeful state, it resembles sleep due to lessened awareness of the subject's surrounding (periphery), in other words a lower state of consciousness. Both the subjects suggestibility and concentration are heightened, and depending on the form there are little to no physical symptoms, you can for example for short periods of time hypnotize someone, even while walking. Hypnosis can be induced by either a third party or yourself. The first being for example a hypnotherapist, the second being the reader of Allen Carr's "easy way to stop smoking" book. The pop culture image given to hypnosis by hollywood is that of swinging pendulums, snapping fingers and giving commands. This barely scratches the surface of real world hypnotism, and is very far from the truth. I am again not claiming to be a professional in mental health, but your lamenting and seemingly defeatist tone --all the while deflecting the issue by projecting the blame on David Miscavage and Organized Scientology reaffirm that you are in denial, I insist that while it is less than desirable it is OK for you to be in this position, there is no guilt, nor is that a sign of inferiority. I am not pulling dirty cards, or trying to lessen your argument by labeling you as a depressive, Science and non circular logic will suffice for me to argue the cons of any form of auditing. I am instead giving you my utmost honest observation and most of all hoping that what i am writing will help you advance positively. Terril, i suspect you will not like nor enjoy the following paragraphs. I have repeatedly said that what is fueling my and others condemning tone is your apparent taste for intellectual dishonesty. I am very sorry to say that your courting and ever so transparent deceit does not go unnoticed, the question remains whether this is done consciously or whether this is a product of your indoctrination and insecurities. Taking apart the first sentence tells me that it, as you likely will deny is the latter. "This is the greatest post from any moderator I've ever seen including my own." Putting someone on a pedestal, you were compelled to mention yourself. In other words egotistical insecurity translated: "Miranda i would like to flatter you for what i deem to be the greatest post ever. Even I, with my otherwise excellent writing am not equivalent to your literary brilliance." Your motive for this flattery and your desire to quote Miranda's post raise suspicions, again i am not inclined to believe there is any malign intent, but rather indoctrination. It is perfectly human for one to desire uniting humanity, the great majority of humankind wants to, except is not vocal of that. What i am however afraid of is that you might believe Miranda's post reaffirms legitimacy of indy therapies, which it if taken out of context could. This while not with bad intent is still a nefarious act, and i can not refrain from pointing that out. Will you consciously distort the context Miranda's post was made in to further your desire of (re)uniting the independent scientology movement? Is the agenda you pursue worth lacking integrity? First of, i hope you meant the last ironically for it is similar to LRH saying "religion is where the money is at". Now that you keep bringing TIR up, i will quote straight from the TIR .org faq. "In the great majority of cases, TIR correctly applied results in the complete and permanent elimination of PTSD symptomatology." (SIC) On a scale from "lol self improvement" to "Shit This is pretty serious" PTSD is extremely difficult to treat and is a responsible practitioners nightmare. That TIR advertises the elimination of PTSD symptoms with as quoted below: dissociation is not only irresponsible --it is criminally negligent-- and shows the incredible lack of understanding of the consequences such shortcuts can provoke. "TIR could also be described as a technology for enabling clients to 'dis-identify' with thoughts, emotions, and any other inner experience, seeing inner experience as separate from the self."(SIC) In other words you are stimulating regression and dissociative fugues in people suffering from a Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, pushing them further into the already overlapping Dissociative Identity Disorders (in the former DSM-III) Multiple Personality Disorders (current DSM-IV) Dissociative Identity Disorders (criteria revisited in the future DSM-V). I do not know if you are aware of the horrors people suffering from either nor what their peers have to go through, but if there was any linear scale of inflicted psychological duress i would argue that MPD's trump PTSD's. I would like to thank you for bringing TIR to my attention, i at first shrugged it off as quaky depression treatment --what you instead have shown me is a horrifyingly dangerous malpractice, and i will first thing in the morning contact the HSS The Data Bank - Homepage for advice on how such practices can be shut down. "Applied Metapsychology International (AMI) and the TIR Association, recognize people who have successfully completed one or more of the AMI professional skills workshops with a Certified/Accredited Trainer." Please, TIR/AMI sells their own certification. Unless there is something fundamentally wrong with the US healthcare certification system this should not be possible. I sincerely pray the HSS will answer the many questions i have, on the legality of all this. You fell back to blame David Miscavage for the many inconsistencies and LRH TECH lack of success. May i point out that the Anderson report was published in 1965, unless David Miscavage at the age of 5 smashed the ever so thriving scientology enterprise. If you want to repair past injustices i can only second what Miranda said: go to a university library and get educated, start with philosophy, psychology and basic neurology if you must. Then: get a legitimate degree. I insist, drop the can's and drop the meta-psychology certification to routinely practice what might be well intended but dangerous mal-therapy, you owe it to your conscience. Then what are your freezone / dianetics degrees / certification what ever you call them. Dude.
Re: Questions about Scientology? this EPSN.net website seems to be some sort of scam - the whole website is a template, if one relates to the other, then they must both be scams! After reading pages and pages of post, stuff like this makes me sick!
Re: Questions about Scientology? From the bottom of the TIR certificate: Class Hours/Credits: 24 Date: 2006 December 11 - 14 Location: [SIZE="4"]World Literacy Crusade, [/SIZE]Compton, California Last I checked, the World Literacy Crusade was a Scientology front group.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Fascinating! TIR and Metapsychology are most definitely considered "SP" organisations by COS. Frank Gerbode funded 10 years of litigation for Mayo vs CO$. No way is TIR a CO$ front group. Issac Hayes may be somewhat disafected. Think I heard rumours. Caught in the crossfire of south park. More details?
Re: Questions about Scientology? Not sure what you're on about. This is what i get. Home Seems innocuous and no connection to scn.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril, I hope you read this part carefully and ensure you understand all the terms here. What the Anon has said here is extremely important. "Dissociation is a partial or complete disruption of the normal integration of a person’s conscious or psychological functioning.[1] Dissociation can be a response to trauma or drugs and perhaps allows the mind to distance itself from experiences that are too much for the psyche to process at that time." "Symptoms of dissociation resulting from trauma may include depersonalization, psychological numbing, disengagement, or amnesia regarding the events of the abuse. It has been hypothesized that dissociation may provide a temporarily effective defense mechanism in cases of severe trauma; however, in the long term, dissociation is associated with decreased psychological functioning and adjustment" Dissociation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I often see this in Scientologists, particularly the depersonalization and psychological numbing. If you are a believer in the original Dianetics and much of the 50s & 60s writings of L Ron, Terril, then you know that blocking out incidents or setting oneself apart from incidents are detrimental to a person's well being. It may give short-term relief, but in the long term is very damaging. L Ron mentioned more than once in technical writings that a person observing an incident from afar was not actually running the incident, but was "out of valence". "Out of valence" means dissociated, Terril.Does that make sense to you now? Consider how L Ron died - the drugs in his system, etc. Consider the sworn statements of David Mayo as his auditor that in those 70s years, L Ron was running incidents from a distance, not directly participating. Dissociated. The personality was splitting up. Consider L Ron's very changeable personality, kind and magnanimous at some times, cruel and exploitive at others. Symptoms of dissociation. How this came about is what we don't know. L Ron was fed drugs heavily in his final days and drugs can exacerbate dissociation. A person with a predisposition to a mental illness can crack when put under drugs or other stresses. L Ron used LSD in his earlier years - LSD is known to cause dissociation. I knew someone in my teens who became catatonic schizophrenic after LSD and spent the rest of his life in a mental institution. Genetics is a factor. And yes, it is a nightmare to counsel PTSD properly. The worst thing that can be done is "help" a person by further dissociating. I think the Anon wrote you that with the best of intentions, Terril, so that you could be aware of something very destructive and dangerous in TIR and keep your clients away from it.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Wow! much to look at and answer. Some of this is hostile to me and my views, and some is not. First I'm very enthusiastic on some people I interact with. Always look for the best in them. And their is some rule, or simple maths that what you look for you will find. So I find Miranda is a revelation to me as a mod here. [ note that on Marty's blog you here are the last circle of hell] Also I find that Miranda is someone with much wisdom and someone I connect with. Whether she considers that or not. I'm not at all shy about expressing admiration. So do you consider what she posts as nonsense? What indoctrination in scientology would make me wish to send a "love letter" to a moderator of this forum? You a defender of DM? You said:- I have of course looked at these areas prior to finding SCN/Dn. Not to the extent of full academic study. Is this the correct approach of all who protest on a regular basis? So include almost all of us out. IMO more FZers is a good thing. YMMV!
Re: Questions about Scientology? Got you re dissociation equals out of valence. Most of the bridge is about that. Also strives to unblock areas of dissociation.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Agreed. The anonymous poster made extremely important points. Dissociation is real and dangerous. And from what Gottabrain says, it sounds like Hubbard, in his own terms, realized that. TIR, it sounds like, would push individuals in exactly the wrong direction--so it's confusing why FZ people would advocate it. As someone else posted earlier, one can often identify quack treatments by the trademarking, aggressive sales pitches, and self-accrediting that generally accompanies them. What is frustrating and dangerous is that to people who aren't aware of the body of knowledge that already exists on such topics, these treatment schemes may sound perfectly reasonable. Even more troubling is the fact that they're offered to the vulnerable--mentally ill or troubled people and their families. To be very frank, this is something that worries me a lot about any kind of Scientology. Scientology creates a pretty much self-contained system of beliefs and practices. There is a naivete and paucity of outside information that is often very noticeable in people who have spent years within this system. (I don't mean CoS but more broadly, the Scientology belief system.) I am glad to see, Terril, that you are able to admit the necessity of study "outside the system." I really do hope that includes serious endeavors--enrolling at a university and thoroughly exploring these subjects. EDIT: I can assure you that the anonymous poster you mentioned is not a defender of David Miscavige.
Re: Questions about Scientology? I have a question, what happens if your a scientologist, did the 1,000,000,000 year contract, yet the anoms saved him and he quits, what will the church do?
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril, you may have responded to this and I may have missed it--but is it agreeable to you to link to rather than to quote my post, should you decide to share it? Just want to be understood in full context. Thanks.
Re: Questions about Scientology? I hate to keep banging the same drum, but this bugs me: Terril, you lament the lack of widespread appreciation of Scientology among mental health professionals, yet you don't show any zeal to bring about scientific study of Scientology. Scientific, peer-reviewed studies are, to my way of thinking, the only route to mainstreaming (any of) Scn which can possibly work. Shouldn't that be a primary focus of your energies? "You gotta shoot if you're gonna score." Terril's not in the "church", so this may not be the place to get that one answered. I'll take a crack though: they'll pout and call the cops on us.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Until we get your views on these questions, Terril, I will give my answers to these questions, as a 20+ year obsever of Scientology. You are of course welcome to comment on my views if your views differ, Terril, since the questions are for you. 1(a) No, I've never seen any "OT abilities" not otherwise possessed by non-Scientologists. 1(b) Yes. 1(c) Yes. The term for this is reification, I believe, taking an imaginary concept to be a real thing. 1(d) Yes, it's hard to create a cult without making up stuff to attract people. 1(e) Since it's not a real thing, we don't know one way or the other. 2(a) Yes, plenty. 2(b) Yes. 2(c) Yes. 2(d) Yes, except to the extent that LRH's concept of "psychotic breaks" is part of a delusional thought system, itself. 2(e) These things don't reconcile. 2(f) Scientology is a process of indoctrination and is not risk free. 2(g) Yes. 2(h) The premise that LRH's invention of Scientology was wise or enviable is a false one. As far as anything could be described as a "psychotic organization", LRH seemed actively created one.[/QUOTE]
Re: Questions about Scientology? Since I've gotten no response to this request, I'll state my position more directly: Terril, you do not have my permission to quote my post on other sites. You do have my permission to link to it from other sites. Thank you.
Re: Questions about Scientology? For someone clearly out of touch with a few well-known facts (e.g., Isaac Hayes is dead), you seem quite confident of your own opinions. "Knowing how to know" was one of Hubbard's scams. In reality his "tech" was designed to undermine the kind of self-scrutiny necessary for separating facts from fantasy and guessing. Now I'm going to indulge in speculation here. When I ask myself, what would I do if I were Scientology right now? I see a role for creating a soft front group out of the Freezone. By "soft" I mean I won't get my 10% of the cream right off the top. However, I will get a lot of people willing to back many of my policies, particularly anti-psych, anti-AMA, and pro-alt med. I also get customers for my pro-woo WISE businesses. And I cultivate a culture that won't find my batshit so off putting. If Alfreddie Johnson, a baptist minister, can be a leading Scientologist and if the NOI can serve as a soft front, why not the Freezone?
Re: Questions about Scientology? Except that the cult hates the Free zone. The cult created the "freezone survivors", something that some of the more naive and more vitriolic critics have embraced - which is actually kind of funny, when I think about it. Also, the FZ is chock full of "SPs", many of whom once knew DM and other higher ups personally and have spoken out against them, and continue to do so. Additionally, the FZ as group/concentrated entity is a bit like cat herding. Doesn't work, can't be done. It's a loose knit bunch of heretical Scientologists (or, if you like, "Indie Scientologists"- my own term for it), of all different sorts, there's no centralization or anything like that. Some front group that would make.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Re Disassociation, care and feeding of. My question: So, with the above posted caveats in mind, do you folks have a problem with Buddhism?
Re: Questions about Scientology? I will of course follow your wishes. More backchannel. Still thinking about this.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Did you do OT9? It's a secret trial that only a few OTVIII are permitted to experience. Long story short: as you go through OT9 you are made to realize that each grade leading up to that point is nothing more than a test of loyalty. None of the content matters. Only the loyalty. And for the most committed, power. And thus the friendship between Scientology and NOI, the Scientologists running Christian mega-churches, the GO's Intelligence bureau helping out the Moonies, the dirty tricks agents via Second Chance, the wogs on the board of CST, etc. Once you realize the content is unimportant, the contradictions are not a problem.
