The Hubbard Virus

Discussion in 'News and Current Events' started by exOT8Michael, Jul 21, 2008.

  1. Ironhead Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Al Queda does the same thing....ooooh *shiver*, tinhat time.

    No but seriously, if the heads of this whole organization so much as get dragged down town for questioning, that may be the catalyst we're looking for to topple the cult for good. people would start asking questions...looking into it...really discovering parts like "quietly and without sorrow"
  2. exOT8Michael Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    I think beliefs tend to fade away if not being fed.
  3. Robert S Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus


    I'll be more than happy to dissuade you from your fantasies. Just call me.
  4. Joreal Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Holy 1984, Batman. :colbert:

    I'm gonna read this again when I get home so I can comment more cleanly and with less :ffs:.
  5. Ironhead Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    they do indeed.

    not entirely, but a vast majority of people begin to see the folly in them. to quote WBM "there's always going to be people who believe in scientology..." I believe that to be true. but I believe the more we expose it the more likely it is to go the way of things like political ideals, that people no longer subscribe to because they've been shown to be far too extreme. said ideals still exist and there are small groups of people who refuse to let them go, but they only lurk in the shadows and have little chance of ever having those ideas flourish the way they once did.
  6. Re: The Hubbard Virus

    I think he's talking about Sam.
  7. Robert S Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    His post ends with "the same couple dozen sets of deaf ears that mine do." I think he was talking about himself.
  8. Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Oy, why is it that these guys are so confusing? Part of the problem isn't that the critics and Ex's don't make logical arguments... it's that I haven't seen a single FreeZoner that made any logical sense when debating their belief system.

  9. Ironhead Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    their beloved tech at work as usual.
  10. King Nerd Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    There is no possible way to reform the cult's practices. Its all built into the tech. The tech isn't designed to change. By allowing any of it, one gives it a chance to rebuild itself. The Co$ falls, Freezone takes its place. Freezone falls, some other tech junkies take over.
    To completely eliminate the weed, one must destroy the root.

    There are no safe beliefs in the tech. The Space Opera leads to thetans, which leads to auditing and courses. This leads to brainwashing and abuse, which leads to recruiting.
    Free stress tests lead to auditing and courses, which lead to the Space Opera, and then to brainwashing and abuse. And once again, the victim is recruiting.

    Everything is tied together. Remove one part, and maybe it will all crumble. Personally, I'd rather remove it all.
  11. goldenrodanon Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus


    I think you're running a specious argument here.

    Most of your terms seem like types and degrees of the same thing, taken in religious terms.

    A strong enough faith is indestinguishable from fact or truth, to the faithful in question. Of course they are going to say it's "true" or "fact".

    It's almost as if you use the word faith with a connotation of "fantasy".

    People have the right to their faith, beliefs, etc, including the right to consider them true, and factual.

    And I don't see any serious scilons, on either side of the official fence claiming scientific fact. (scilons as distinctly distinct from Church and it's official doctrine)
  12. King Nerd Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Read my sig. Especially this part:

    "Lafayette Ronald Hubbard insisted that Scientology® is a "science" and not a religion."

    What do you think about that?
  13. goldenrodanon Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    I don't care what Laffy said.

    My comments were about what Scilons in and out of the church believe, or have faith in, and that in either case, that's their right. Laffy lied his ass off all the time. Has nothing to do with the discussion.
  14. Don Carlo Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Xenu IS a core fact, according to Scientology dogma.

    QUOTE: The following comments were made by an ex-Scientology auditor and Case Supervisor named Caroline Letkeman, who was highly trained (Class IX) to administer the Scientology "technology" on the Upper Levels of Scientology's Bridge, including OT3:
    End quote from Caroline Letkeman at

    "The Road to Xenu" has the handwritten pages by Ron which "start" the Xenu story, including Ron himself saying the story was data (not belief):

    L. Ron:
    from The Road to Xenu, Chapter 13: "We Are All Many"

    The LA Times noted that the Scientologists thought the OT III levels were EXTREMELY important:

    My comments: To Hubbard, it was a core "fact." Not belief. Therefore, we can criticize this "fact" as though it was the age of the Earth, or the formation of the Moon. Facts can be mocked without bigotry.

    Bernie, a critic of anti-Scientologists, said that L. Ron Hubbard himself only "discovered" this incident in 1967, after Scientology existed as such for more than 14 years, and therefore Bernie claimed that the Xenu incident can't be what Scientology is all about.

    My comment: Hubbard kept promising that he would discover new levels of Scientology. He never said in the mid-1960's that Scientology was complete. In fact, people that had passed OT-1 and OT-2 were clamoring for the next level.
    According to the LA times, what comes before OT III is just preparatory courses.

    Scientology and Freezone try to use the magic phrase "spiritual technology" so they don't have to say "yes I must believe in the major tenets of Scientology (including Xenu)" AND so they can boo-hoo about religious bigotry if anyone criticizes them. This fence sitting lets Scientology try to wriggle into secular public schools as "technology" (leaving out the religion). But if it's technology, it's like.....dentistry. You can criticize mercury in fillings, or dental implants, without it becoming bigotry. If it's really religion, then why does Scientology try to crush its competitors like the Church of the New Civilization? If it's really religion, why do Freezoners trying to prosyletize by spouting loopy-euphoric me-me-me wins, rather than little pamphlets listing "What Freezoners believe?" Luckily for the Freezoners, they embrace the "gradient" approach of hiding the Xenu story until the student has paid for many hours of Freezone auditing, hungry for the big mystery, and has learned to swallow whopping lies and write wins about them.
  15. King Nerd Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    1/1 Hubbards insisted that its a "science" and not a religion.


    Faith and science do not work together. You cannot divide by zero.

    Freedom of religion is only a freedom in the fact that there will never be a mandatory religion. The tech is neither religion or science. It is not protected.

    Correct, Hubbard lied his ass off. Why continue thinking there is any merit in his tech?
  16. goldenrodanon Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Interesting post, and not much here that I'd disagree with.

    I'd only object to the idea that the Freezoners are the same as the church in this regard.

    In fact there was just a debate/discussion on IFA's chat list about the Xenu story, and whether it had to be accepted as truth, in order for the level to be "standardly" completed.

    It ended with Mod action, rather than completed discussion. But those contending that the story was bullshit, and not needed to successfully complete OTIII were winning the debate, IMO.

    IFA is the closest the Freezone comes to the church we love to despise. The mod just said the discussion was over for good, and any more Yeah buts... results in banning.

    There is an interesting thread on OTIII on ESMB. There are 2 or 3 contributors on that forum who were there, in 67, with Ron, who recall what really took place, and it's VERY interesting.

    One of the guys, Dart(something) wrote up his story on this. He had access to LRH's "off ship" quarters, and discovered a medicine chest full of drugs. He relates one evening on shore, where there was some kind of festival, and his description was identical to LRH's description of "Incident One" from OTIII.

    The poster put 2 and 2 together and figures Ron was on drugs, and witnessed the festival, and confused his observations in his following auditing.

    Which further illustrates the probable subjective aspect of auditing.

    I've talked to many OTIII, like Terril, who did just fine on OTIII while thinking the story lines were either bullshit, or irrelevant to what's really dealt with on the level.

    And since nobody would believe me on that, I'll just leave it be.

    But check out the thread on ESMB. It's very illuminating.
  17. King Nerd Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    So, what's really dealt with on OTIII?
  18. goldenrodanon Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    I'm personally a little conflicted on the definitions of faith and science. I see both as true in their own way.

    I see some of what Hubbard discovered as scientific, like some of the axioms which I believe to be correct and useful.

    I also see Scientology as entirely religious, as far as the view of what man is, and his relationship to the universe and God. No less religious than any other religion.

    But it's also, obviously, and demonstrably the grossest cult masquerading as a church.

    Science? some bits.

    Religion? certainly.

    Church? No fucking way.

    Cult? absofuckinglutely.

    Useful? some raisins in there, if you dig.

    The reason I see some merit in some of the tech, is because I do. I look at it. It looks OK. So I'm Ok with it.

    I don't do the Hubbard=liar=bigamist=egomaniac=start religion to get rich=tech=policy=abusive staff=fair game=science fiction writer=etc ad nauseum.

    These are separate things to me, and some relate, and some don't necessarily, but they don't all have to go into some big equation all together in order to isolate one final synopsis.

    These things don't all cross-taint one another in my mind.

    There are some things LRH said that I find true, and workable, and useful, and benign. Not a lot, but some.

    And I find that other researchers who used that as a starting point, have come up with some really good stuff. My opinion.

    But it's a fact that none of the post hubbard discoveries would have occurred if all the books had been burned. Each of his books have some stuff I can agree with. Some I might now see in a different light if I reread them knowing what I do now about how twisted hubbard became, but my recollection of them is that some of them are mostly about useful, common sense stuff.

    The biggest error I see being made in this (anonymous) movement, is in failing to differentiate. Hubbard did a lot of evil=hubbard was only ever evil. Hubbard wrote tech and policy, and policy regulates use of tech, and spawns incredible abuses=it's all bad.

    These suppositions are both true and false, depending on context.

    I believe it's as simple as it's being easier to motivate the activist verve if it's ALL completely bad and evil. See any potential good in it anywhere, and it starts to introduce doubt and perhaps unwanted moderation of some of that activist verve.

    Those are my thoughts on this, as of now.
  19. goldenrodanon Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    That would be a TL;DR

    Short version. Hubbard laid out what he called the theta/mest theory in 1951 Science of survival. (misnomer, I know)

    It purported that a human is made up of various components, including Thetan(spirit), body, analytical mind, reactive mind, somatic mind, and genetic entity.

    Each thetan has an "endowment" of theta, which varies person to person. Each engram, and other such disturbance, encapsulates a portion of theta, and turns it into entheta. (short for enturbulated theta.)

    almost as if a cup of the thetan gets walled off, and can't add it's "juice" to the overall effort anymore.

    One goal of auditing is to find these encapsulizations, and release them back into the pool the thetan draws on for it's life force.

    OTIII runs out BT's. Body thetans. Body thetans were thought by Hubbard to be degraded actual thetans, who were so beaten up in situations like the purported Inc 2 freezing, and dumping in volcano, and hydrogen bombing, and implanting with false orders, etc, and that they had to be located, and audited back to awareness, and sent packing, so they couldn't act as independent sources of thoughts, and emotions, which confuse the actual thetan.

    Although some of this phenomena is found on running the stuff, most of what's confused with BT's are these little bits of encapsulated theta, which can contain whatever associated thoughts, emotions, purposes, etc that were present at the time of the encapsulation, and so they can activate, and send signals that also confuse the thetan, because he knows they are not coming from him, and doesn't recognise the source.

    Actual BT's are often now thought to be much more rare than hubbard thought them to be.

    The other thoughtforms are nearly unlimited, and so you get OTIII and then NOTS turning into very lengthy levels.

    Now this is what Hubbard thought about it, and what many who've since moved on from his position on it think in their turn. Not what I think. It's just the theories that govern some prevalent views of the area.

    I personally believe some energy therapies, and Various well known thoughtform handling do a much safer, and quicker address of the phenomena.

    These phenomena taken to their extreme, show up like multiple personalities, or complete personality changes.
  20. Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Look at it this way people. LRH never intended Scientology to become a religion. FreeZone is a reinterpretation of his writing (although they say it came from other sources who had near death experiences and obtained the same knowledge).

    FreeZone is faith based Scientology. The Church of Scientology is KNOWLEDGE based.

    Hence: "Your own personal relationship with the tech and the study of the mind."
  21. goldenrodanon Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    I see it a little differently. I don't think LRH ever "only" anything. I think he had good days and bad days. Catch him on his good days, and he wrote some pretty inspiring stuff. And I believe that he meant well when he meant well, and meant evil when he meant evil.

    So even if his original notion was to make money, and even if he started the church thing to avoid taxes, he still put out some very religious material, and some of it would be inspirational to practically anyone, if they didn't know it came from him.

    I'm still fond of an article he wrote called what is greatness. Has that been leaked yet? It'll show what I mean.
  22. Anoanominous Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    I clipped a bit, but I really liked this post. In other word, wut u sayed
  23. Anoanominous Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    I did clip the above quote for justice. My line: OK then leak it. Post one thing, just one thing that makes my intuition say this is not just a con man. Just post it. Dont post rhetoric, give me some evidence. One little peeek.

    EDIT: I already know it will just be truisms
  24. 14G0 Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    You are correct...

    What Is Greatness? By L. Ron Hubbard

    The following essay begins with the question, “What is greatness?” Mr. Hubbard’s answer provides a fascinating perspective on human character. It also reflects the optimism and compassion that is the hallmark of his work.

    The “lesson” he speaks of below is a practical one that people of all faiths could well apply.

    The hardest task one can have is to continue to love his fellows despite all reasons he should not.

    And the true sign of sanity and greatness is to so continue.

    For the one who can achieve this, there is abundant hope.

    For those who cannot, there is only sorrow, hatred and despair. And these are not the things of which greatness or sanity or happiness are made.

    A primary trap is to succumb to invitations to hate.

    There are those who appoint one their executioners. Sometimes for the sake of safety of others it is necessary to act. But it is not necessary also to hate them.

    To do one’s task without becoming furious at others who seek to prevent one is a mark of greatness — and sanity. And only then can one be happy.

    Seeking to achieve any single desirable quality in life is a noble thing. The one most difficult — and most necessary to achieve — is to love one’s fellows despite all invitations to do otherwise.

    If there is any saintly quality, it is not to forgive. “Forgiveness” accepts the badness of the act. There is no reason to accept it. Further, one has to label the act as bad to forgive it. “Forgiveness” is a much lower level action and is rather censorious.

    True greatness merely refuses to change in the face of bad actions against one – and a truly great person loves his fellows because he understands them.

    After all, they are all in the same trap. Some are oblivious of it, some have gone mad because of it, some act like those who betrayed them. But all, all are in the same trap — the generals, the street sweepers, the presidents, the insane. They act the way they do because they are all subject to the same cruel pressures of this universe.

    Some of us are subject to those pressures and still go on doing our jobs. Others have long since succumbed and rave and torture and strut like the demented souls they are.

    To resave some of them is a dangerous undertaking.

    We can at least understand the one fact that greatness does not stem from savage wars or being known. It stems from being true to one’s own decency, from going on helping others whatever they do or think or say and despite all savage acts against one; to persevere without changing one’s basic attitude toward man.

    True greatness depends on total wisdom. They act as they do because they are what they are — trapped beings, crushed beneath an intolerable burden. And if they have gone mad for it and command the devastation of whole nations in errors of explanation, still one can understand why and can understand as well the extent of their madness. Why should one change and begin to hate just because others have lost themselves and their own destinies are too cruel for them to face?

    Justice, mercy, forgiveness, all are unimportant beside the ability not to change because of provocation or demands to do so.

    One must act, one must preserve order and decency, but one need not hate or seek vengeance.

    It is true that beings are frail and commit wrongs. Man is basically good but can act badly.

    He only acts badly when his acts done for order and the safety for others are done with hatred. Or when his disciplines are founded only upon safety for himself regardless of all others; or worse, when he acts only out of a taste for cruelty.

    To preserve no order at all is an insane act. One need only look at the possessions and environment of the insane to realize this. The able keep good order.

    When cruelty in the name of discipline dominates a race, that race has been taught to hate. And that race is doomed.

    The real lesson is to learn to love.

    He who would walk scatheless through his days must learn this.

    Never use what is done to one as a basis for hatred. Never desire revenge.

    It requires real strength to love man. And to love him despite all invitations to do otherwise, all provocations and all reasons why one should not.

    Happiness and strength endure only in the absence of hate. To hate alone is the road to disaster. To love is the road to strength. To love in spite of all is the secret of greatness. And may very well be the greatest secret in this universe.

    L. Ron Hubbard
  25. Robert S Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Is it a "science of the mind" or a "religion"? Is an engram measurable or isn't it? In religious terms is "faith" believing in something that has no more than a subjective proof or isn't it? Is there a "technology" that addresses specific conditions in a person in scientology or isn't there? If it's a "technology" then how is it mere "faith"? What's a Clear? What's OT? Are these defined states of existence or are they spiritual hypotheticals? Is there a specific process to attain them or isn't there? One of the hallmarks of sanity is the ability to differentiate; you calling something "specious" doesn't make it so... it would have to have no basis in fact to be specious. What's that you say? The only test of an engram came up empty? Oh dear - maybe the idea that there is one is specious. The long and short of it is that the nebulous, malleable nature of scientology's "TECHNOLOGY" and the horseshit that comes out of it does lend itself to the kind of specious mendacity you've just demonstrated. What you need to do is come out from under the influence of that cult. Because - I promise you - the next time you try to go earlier/similar you're going to remember this post.
  26. 14G0 Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    "Never desire revenge."

    Truisms AND hypocrisy. What a putz.
  27. Robert S Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Anybody can write great well-meaning stuff. Too bad he didn't remember this kumbaya when he was writing the specifics of his Fair Game order.
  28. Re: The Hubbard Virus

    This entire piece is a complete and total contradiction to every policy letter that Hubbard wrote.

    I would also like to say, that if Hubbard is SOURCE and all source is true to Scientologists, then there is no hope for reform. There cannot be reform because of the basic tenet that the only thing that matters is what Hubbard says.

    Also, Epic thread is Epic!

    Science is based on FACT.
    Religion is based on FAITH.

    Scientology is neither faith based, or fact based.
    It is neither a science or a religion.

    It's horseshit based on the drunken, drug induced ramblings of a sociopath.

    Any con man would recognize this as a "long con".
    LRH said what he needed to, to make the long con work.
  29. Robert S Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    I'm for this take on things but I happen to LOVE Bozo.
  30. Re: The Hubbard Virus

    I love Bozo too Robert. it just means.. "no bozos" as in.. no idiots.
  31. Robert S Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Well crap. OK... I'll go then. Hmph.
  32. goldenrodanon Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Well, once again, you are talking about different things as though they were one thing. That's not differentiation.

    Dianetics was hyped as a "science of the Mind". Scientology as a religion. There are no engrams in Scientology. They are the province of Dianetics. Hubbard made that distintion very clearly.

    So I could say yes Dianetics is a science of the mind, and yes Scientology is a religion, Except that I don't believe Dianetics fits the criteria of Science. But the subjects are different.

    per the above, faith would have no place in Dianetics, but it could in Scientology.

    You could say that the promise of OT in scientology is not so different from the promise of heaven.

    further confusing the issue is that there is a Dianetic clear, and a scientology clear. And neither lives up to anywhere near it's billing. Again, a big problem for Dianetics, but maybe not so much for Scientology.

    This is not me picking nits. These are clearly separated within the materials of Dianetics and Scientology. Hubbard said Dianetics was a mental study, and scientology a spiritual one.

    This discussion is much easier, and maybe possible if the subjects are not mixed like this.
  33. Re: The Hubbard Virus

    In relation to the "long con" I mentioned.

    Watch Jason Beghe's video again.

    He says something along the lines of... " It took hours! hours of waiting! It was like they didn't know what to do with someone who just walked in and wanted to pay for auditing."

    If you really think about it, the regs knew EXACTLY what to do with someone like him, who is overeager and ready to drop money on a whim.

    They knew they had to build value, because if they did not, Beghe would have realized that he was ripped off immediately. They played on his desire to have something immediate, by making him wait.

    It's like sex, if you have it the minute you want it, it's just sex.
    If you restrain someone from having it, and create a desire for it, it becomes much more desireable, even desperately so.

    An orgasm is an orgasm, it's the tease that makes it different or more powerful.
  34. goldenrodanon Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    This article doesn't fit the profile, does it?

    It's why I say good days-bad days.

    More bad than good, but not ALL bad.
  35. Anoanominous Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Oh I love ya, so many truisms, awesome post

    The world should be cleared for people who don't hate (scientology) lol:)
  36. 14G0 Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    "One must act, one must preserve order and decency, but one need not hate or seek vengeance. "

    If there will be a long-term threat, you are to immediately evaluate and originate a black PR campaign to destroy the person's repute and to discredit them so thoroughly that they will be ostracized.
    -L. Ron Hubbard, "Handling Hostile Contacts / Dead Agenting"

    Anonymouschick2 is right. Pick any statement out of that "What is Greatness" piece of garbage and then randomly choose an LRH PL.

    "What is true is what is true for you." - no wonder this is their motto.
  37. Robert S Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    No, I'm talking about different things as if they are different things. There's a difference between faith and science that for some reason it is important to you to want to blur. No idea why that would be (cough cough). But even if scientology is a spiritual study you have questions you need to answer, and don't lay this "no no you're not differentiating" crap on me. I say there's a difference between faith and science. You say I'm talking about two things as if they are one thing, except I'm not. I'm trying to figure out whether this bullshit is faith or science because if it's faith then I have no argument but if it's science than every scientologist that is on the face of the Earth right this second is following a lie. Imagine that.

    So I'll repeat; is it a "science of the mind" or a "religion"? Is an engram measurable or isn't it? In religious terms is "faith" believing in something that has no more than a subjective proof or isn't it? Is there a "technology" that addresses specific conditions in a person in scientology or isn't there? If it's a "technology" then how is it mere "faith"? What's a Clear? What's OT? Are these defined states of existence or are they spiritual hypotheticals? Is there a specific process to attain them or isn't there?
  38. Anoanominous Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    Fearsome post Robert, u rock

    EDIT: avatar prob, edit fixed
  39. Robert S Member

    Re: The Hubbard Virus

    w u t.....

  40. Re: The Hubbard Virus

    If there are no engrams in Scientology, then WTF is the e-meter for? Why is it considered a "religious artifact"?

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


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

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins