The Advanced Organization of the Great Plains announces a new social media platform for Independent Scientologists: Independent Social Scientologists

[Scientologirl]

When Tony talks about people who committed suicide and others getting cancer, whether or not they are Scientologists, I think it's fair to say the level of evil in his heart is pretty large. He does not care about the families that could be reading it. So yes, excellent journalist, shitty human. He's an SP by definition as we believe Scientology (the subject) goes toward the greatest good, and he seeks to prevent that. As for OT materials/NOTS stuff, I don't care for reading it at this stage.

 

[Scientologirl]

As for if me and Tony are similar - absolutely not. As I said earlier, the difference is intention. Intention is everything. When he titles something "Scientologists, gullible? ..." it's covertly hostile. I am outright saying SOME independents are "reasonable" (and that I couldn't believe SOME fell for it).

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

.

double post (deleted)

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

.

As for if me and Tony are similar - absolutely not. As I said earlier, the difference is intention. Intention is everything. When he titles something "Scientologists, gullible? ..." it's covertly hostile. I am outright saying SOME independents are "reasonable" (and that I couldn't believe SOME fell for it).

So you are better than Tony Ortega, is that what people are suppose to agree with?

Why is that? Because he asked if Scientologists are gullible? Asking that question is not "covert hostility", it's sanity. Why are you so afraid of people asking that question?

As for my own opinion, the answer is "YES", Scientologists are extremely gullible. Am I covertly hostile too--or am I higher toned at hostility? LOL.

And by the way, you're not better than Tony Ortega or any of the other people you trash. You just have a different opinion, which is hardly a reason to go on a virtue-signaling, chest-thumping crusade.

Have you considered investing in a mimeograph machine and some goldenrod paper? You could really get rid of all that enturbulation on your case with a bulk mailing of declares & disconnections.

.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

Tony Ortega is not "covertly hostile" @Scientologirl ... he is overtly hostile towards con artists (in this case hubbard). That does not make him an "SP" "evil" a "shitty human" or anything else that fits neatly into your cult agenda.

 

[Scientologirl]

.



So you are better than Tony Ortega, is that what people are suppose to agree with?

Why is that? Because he asked if Scientologists are gullible? Asking that question is not "covert hostility", it's sanity. Why are you so afraid of people asking that question?

As for my own opinion, the answer is "YES", Scientologists are extremely gullible. Am I covertly hostile too--or am I higher toned at hostility? LOL.

And by the way, you're not better than Tony Ortega or any of the other people you trash. You just have a different opinion, which is hardly a reason to go on a virtue-signaling, chest-thumping crusade.

Have you considered investing in a mimeograph machine and some goldenrod paper? You could really get rid of all that enturbulation on your case with a bulk mailing of declares & disconnections.

.

Again, INTENTION.

 

[Scientologirl]

Tony Ortega is not "covertly hostile" @Scientologirl ... he is overtly hostile towards con artists (in this case hubbard). That does not make him an "SP" "evil" a "shitty human" or anything else that fits neatly into your cult agenda.

You're twisting my words. He is a shitty human because he posts things about people getting cancer and committing suicide as news. If you believe anything else, I have no problem announcing you're a shitty person too.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

You're twisting my words. He is a shitty human because he posts things about people getting cancer and committing suicide as news. If you believe anything else, I have no problem announcing you're a shitty person too.

Yet you greatly admire one of the 'shittiest' people to ever walk this earth, one of the nastiest con artists ever known, the creator of 'fair game' and many other evils.

You are quite something.

 

[Scientologirl]

Yet you greatly admire one of the 'shittiest' people to ever walk this earth, one of the nastiest con artists ever known.

You are quite something.

That's your opinion, based on your reactivity.

My opinion is based off of evaluated data. Is it necessary, to shame anyone, regardless of race, religion, creed, or choice, on them getting sick or them killing themselves? Your hatred blinds you to the possibility that maybe the people who you support are shitty people. Good has come from LRH for me, I've improved in so many ways, I have so many things to be thankful for. There is no comparison. Shaming anyone for either of these two headlines is just shitty, and the fact that you even think you can justify it/him tells me a lot about who you are as a person.

Consider the families of those people. Consider the suffering of a cancer victim, consider the suffering of those who loved them. Consider the complete lack of willpower by the suicide victim to continue on in this world, consider they may have been incredibly suppressed before doing what they did. Consider anything else but YOUR need to be right when supporting someone who takes jabs at people, living breathing human beings, is completely a shitty thing to do.

As for covertly hostile, in many of his posts he attempts to "feel sorry" - let me be clear, Tony doesn't give a shit about any Scientologist whether they're dying or dead or not. He is only interested in stories.

I'd be more respectful to a journalist who was a Scientologist before and gave it a shot, than I would for someone who saw a good story and ran with it for years to make money.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

For the record I don't read Tony Ortega's blog. I've probably glanced at it around 6 times over the last 12 years when directed to something specific by a poster here. I neither like nor dislike his journalistic style but I greatly appreciate anyone that tells the world the truth about hubbard and his cult, because hubbard and his cult have harmed (and continue to harm) a lot of people and apparently failed to help the poor man who recently threw himself from a very high building.

Link.

Tony Ortega was fearless when many others were still nervous about being attacked (fair gamed) by hubbards goon squad (AKA OSA and prior to that, the Guardians office) ... he broke down a lot of barriers (real and imagined) and gave people somewhere to voice their often sad stories and made it available for the world to see so that less and less people got trapped in the glue.

Ortega is one of the good guys ... and anyone in this day and age who seriously believes hubbard was "a good guy" when they have the internet at their fingertips is either blind or being deliberately obtuse.

 

[Scientologirl]

I have no issues with anyone reporting things about the corrupt Church of Scientology. What I have issue with, is when people use others' pain to fuel their agenda. I would NEVER, and you can screen shot this and blast it everywhere if I do, but I WOULD never use someone's illness or death against them or their choices in life and broadcast it publicly. I don't need Scientology to tell me that's just messed up, cruel, and evil.

We can agree to disagree about if Ortega is a "good guy," that, I will never believe. Many people throughout history have acted in such ways that seem as if they are fighting a good cause, simply to advance economically, politicly, or to achieve fame. I read between the lines, and you saying anyone should "just use the internet" for data evaluation, really? Do you honestly consider, as one example, the psychiatric industry is not suppressive towards mankind? And these people are considered "professionals" and there's an address for a psych or institute every few blocks when I "use the Internet."

 

[ISNOINews]

When Tony talks about people who committed suicide and others getting cancer, whether or not they are Scientologists, I think it's fair to say the level of evil in his heart is pretty large. He does not care about the families that could be reading it. So yes, excellent journalist, shitty human. He's an SP by definition as we believe Scientology (the subject) goes toward the greatest good, and he seeks to prevent that. As for OT materials/NOTS stuff, I don't care for reading it at this stage.

I actually agree that, for example, Tony Ortega's recent story about the Scientologist who jumped from the building was crude, distasteful and potentially hurtful. (I say "potentially" only because I can't imagine that any of the deceased's family members will learn of, much less read, the story; it would be a different matter if he wrote for a publication with a general audience like The Daily Beast.) I would not have written the story in the same manner. Having said that, I certainly don't agree that Tony is a "SP."

I am an ex-Scientologist. I no longer believe in SP doctrine. I did, however, certainly study it at great length when I was in Scientology. One thing that I recall, and just confirmed, is that Scientology teaches:

* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *.

The identification or labeling of an antisocial personality cannot be done honestly and accurately unless one also, in the same examination of the person, reviews the positive side of his life.

All persons under stress can react with momentary flashes of antisocial conduct. This does not make them antisocial personalities.

The true antisocial person has a majority of antisocial characteristics.

The social personality has a majority of social characteristics.

Thus, one must examine the good with the bad before one can truly label the antisocial or the social.

In reviewing such matters, very broad testimony and evidence are best. One or two isolated instances determine nothing. One should search all twelve social and all twelve antisocial characteristics and decide on the basis of actual evidence, not opinion.

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *.

And no, that is not an invitation to discuss and debate twelve characteristics for Tony. That would not be useful, and indeed would also be crude, distasteful and hurtful. We will have to agree to disagree. I just wanted to point out that "isolated instances determine nothing" and "one must examine the good with the bad."

I completely understand about the OT and NOTs material. That is why I warned you. I didn't want to refer you to a thread and cause you to see material of that nature that you weren't ready to see or didn't want to see.

/

 

[ISNOINews]

As for if me and Tony are similar - absolutely not. As I said earlier, the difference is intention. Intention is everything. When he titles something "Scientologists, gullible? ..." it's covertly hostile. I am outright saying SOME independents are "reasonable" (and that I couldn't believe SOME fell for it).

I never said that you and Tony Ortega were "similar." I said: "While you may find some of Tony's language distasteful, it appears that you agree with the point he made about the Indies who fell for Craig." Note that I was not talking about all Indies, but only the "Indies who fell for Craig." I believe that my statement was accurate.

Also, you have two PMs.

/

 

[Dotey OT]

Do you honestly consider, as one example, the psychiatric industry is not suppressive towards mankind?

That is what is called a massive generality.

 

[Scientologirl]

I never said that you and Tony Ortega were "similar." I said: "While you may find some of Tony's language distasteful, it appears that you agree with the point he made about the Indies who fell for Craig." Note that I was not talking about all Indies, but only the "Indies who fell for Craig." I believe that my statement was accurate.

Also, you have two PMs.

/

Noted!

 

[Scientologirl]

That is what is called a massive generality.

I could share the specifics if you like, the history, personal experiences, my friends' experiences, the statistics, etc. I was simplifying, assuming ones who were in the COS knew all about the industry.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

I have no issues with anyone reporting things about the corrupt Church of Scientology. What I have issue with, is when people use others' pain to fuel their agenda. I would NEVER, and you can screen shot this and blast it everywhere if I do, but I WOULD never use someone's illness or death against them or their choices in life and broadcast it publicly. I don't need Scientology to tell me that's just messed up, cruel, and evil.

We can agree to disagree about if Ortega is a "good guy," that, I will never believe. Many people throughout history have acted in such ways that seem as if they are fighting a good cause, simply to advance economically, politicly, or to achieve fame. I read between the lines, and you saying anyone should "just use the internet" for data evaluation, really? Do you honestly consider, as one example, the psychiatric industry is not suppressive towards mankind? And these people are considered "professionals" and there's an address for a psych or institute every few blocks when I "use the Internet."

Not too long ago the cofs (based 100% on hubbards policy's) would have sent their thugs to terrorise you for stealing/squirrelling their tek ... fortunately for us all a small group of strong people have worked hard to ensure that the cofs no longer gets away with their fair gaming. Tony Ortega is one of them ... perhaps you should write and thank him.

 

[Scientologirl]

Ok, let me talk about what an SP actually is. An SP is one who actively suppresses Scientology and Scientologists and others as well, and he/she is also one who has the twelve traits of an SP.

Because we, as independent Scientologists, are a 1-8 dynamic field, we are essentially the ones that (at least try to) progress towards the greatest good, for the greatest number. So, any suppression from any person against the subject of Scientology, is suppressing the dynamics 1-8 in greater or lesser degree. Again, by all means, expose the Church of its abuses, it does not go toward the greatest good, for the greatest number anymore.

When you consider that we've helped heroin addicts stay clean, we've helped potential suicides being prevented so they may and are living full lives, when families on the verge of breaking up have been helped to stay together, you'd know we were doing good work.

People need to make the distinction between the Church and the Independents, or at least, our organization. I only call Ortega or anyone else an SP based on the fact of being ANTI-SCIENTOLOGY, ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST. It is likely that he has MUs, because he hasn't studied any of the stuff, but regardless, he's shitty for bringing in the loss of lives in his articles. I had some respect for him prior, as yes, I did see him doing good, but after incorporating these headlines and stories, and then seeing his 1.1 tactics, I quickly changed my mind on him.

So as for all of you being SPs, it's likely there are some here, but mostly I consider you all to be PTS. Sorry if that offends, but, it is what it is.

 

[Scientologirl]

Not too long ago the cofs (based 100% on hubbards policy's) would have sent their thugs to terrorise you for stealing/squirrelling their tek ... fortunately for us all a small group of strong people have worked hard to ensure that the cofs no longer gets away with their fair gaming. Tony Ortega is one of them ... perhaps you should write and thank him.

Justifiers and motivators.

 

[Veda]

....

What I have issue with, is when people use others' pain to fuel their agenda. ...I WOULD never use someone's illness or death against them... and broadcast it publicly. I don't need Scientology to tell me that's just messed up, cruel, and evil.
....

From the HCO Manual of Justice of 1959:

_____________________________________Begin quote_______________________________________​

Dianetics and Scientology are self protecting sciences. If one attacks them one attacks all the know-how of the mind. It caves in the bank. It's gruesome sometimes.

At this instance there are men hiding in terror on Earth because they found out what they were attacking. There are men dead because they attacked us - for instance Dr. Joe Winter [wrote Introduction to DMSMH and, after leaving the organization, one year later, wrote the book, A Doctor's Report on Dianetics with an Introduction by Fritz Perls]. He simply realized what he did and died. There are men bankrupt because they attacked us - [Don] Purcell, Ridgeway, [and publisher of DMSMH] Ceppos.

_________________________________________End quote________________________________________​

And then there's the 1966 broadly circulated - including to "wogs" and "raw meat" - PR piece What is Greatness?, that extolled LOVE, written concurrently with the establishing of the (non re-mimeo/semi-confidential) Fair Game Law-implementing Guardians Office.

What is Greatness? was a PR Piece, yet, in it, Hubbard couldn't resist gloating over the assassination - three years earlier - of his perceived enemy, John Kennedy.

________________________________________Begin quote_________________________________________​

Were you to approach many ruling heads of state and offer to set them free, as only a Scientologist can, they would go berserk, cry up their private police and generally cause unpleasantness. Indeed one did - he was later assassinated by no desire of ours but because of the incompetence of his own followers about him. He could have tried to use Scientology. Instead, he promptly tried to shoot it down by ordering raids and various berserk actions on Scientology organizations. That he was then shot had nothing to do with us, but only demonstrated how incompetent and how mortal he really was.

_________________________________________End quote__________________________________________
​

There are many examples of schadenfreude, and also overt cruelty, by Hubbard. For example:

Link to 1986 interview with former Class 12 auditor and Senior Case Supervisor David Mayo.

Do a find on the word peanut.

​

"Always attack," being "ruthless," the "Pink Legs" and "Fair Game" mentality, are woven into Scientology, as designed by Hubbard, if one ventures beneath the Public Relations coating.

Remember, there's a lot of Scientology that is not shown to you, or that, perhaps, you would prefer not to see.

The central dynamic principle of Scientology is SURVIVE! That's much closer to the philosophy of Mussolini than Buddha.

​