1977 scientologist, in the independent field since 2005.

[Cuitlahuac Rivas]

Are you suggesting that Hubbard made false charges re. Mayo to prevent Scientology from being split?

I never knew Jonh McMaster. He never changed his mind and would have been the most powerfull enemy of Hubbard had he not declared him first. McMaster was able to split the scientology field even after his death.

Could you elaborate on that last paragraph?

Hard to have a certainty on the Mayo case.

Today there are scientologists listening to McMaster conferences on the Power processes.[/QUOTE]

 

[Cuitlahuac Rivas]

.
I can see how being an INDIE would have many advantages over being a COS Scientologist.

For starters, Indies have less arbitraries and stops. For example, they don't even require a church building in order to defraud others.

.

Quite a change...

 

[Cuitlahuac Rivas]

Is Cuitlahuac already in the independent hole?

You're the first one to spell the name correctly (without accents). Congratulations.

 

[Cuitlahuac Rivas]

I like it too.

Aside from the admirable candor, Scientologists are the only beings in this world who can construct a single sentence that contains both the noun "wogs" and the adjectival phrase "on this planet".

.

Please do not forget the Marcabians. What would life on this planet be without them?

 

[Veda]

What's your opinion of Jack Horner, founder of Eductivism, who was one of the first targets of Fair Game as instructed by Hubbard?

Horner was the first person to receive certification as a Doctor of Scientology, the equivalent, in those days, of a Class XII.

He broke with Hubbard over the idea of there only being one allowed source of Scientology, with Hubbard being Source, with a capital S.

The justification for Hubbard being the Sole Source of Scientology, and having his status as Sole Source enforced, was that he had built the Bridge to Total Freedom.

Every Scientology Organization had this picture of Hubbard - roughly five feet by three and a half feet -
in a gold frame, on prominent display.​

As we know now, there is no Bridge to Total Freedom. There are some interesting processes but there is no Bridge to OT.

We also know there were many sources of the benign parts of Scientology. KSW was a lie which was justified by Hubbard having to assert control - including with deception, various manipulative mechanisms, and hypnotic "R6 bank" re-stimulation of "whole track implants" - to assure the delivery of this Total Freedom.

Hubbard lied when he assured Scientologists that there was an (old) OT 8 (Total Cause), and then lied when he told Scientologists that there were many more, already developed and unreleased, upper upper OT levels.

Wouldn't that make invalid, and illegitimate, the structure that was justified by the promise of Total Freedom?

We now know Scientology had many sources.

Considering all of the above, wouldn't that require a re-thinking of the meaning and legitimacy of "Scientology Ethics"?

 

[Riddick]

There are probably about 3-400 photos in both my books combined if your interested. The two books cover the 8 years I lived on the Royal Scotman/Apollo.

If I recall correctly, Hubbard's lectures throughout the early years, ie Apollo, talk about how he turned people into able bodied seaman. That would be you and a bunch of others. What actually happened was that he trained you peeps, and glorified the story into clear and OT, and the birth of the Sea Org.

That's my take, correct me if wrong.

 

[Veda]

If I recall correctly, Hubbard's lectures throughout the early years, ie Apollo, talk about how he turned people into able bodied seaman. That would be you and a bunch of others. What actually happened was that he trained you peeps, and glorified the story into clear and OT.

That's my take, correct me if wrong.

Don't you guys feel just a little bit bad about hijacking this thread? It seems a rude to me. It's like you're thumbing your nose at a new person who introduced himself in the New Person Introduction section.

 

[Riddick]

Don't you guys feel just a little bit bad about hijacking this thread? It seems a rude to me. It's like you're thumbing your nose at a new person who introduced himself in the New Person Introduction section.

don't you think the new person ought to know the actual history from old timers being involved?

 

[I told you I was trouble]

Don't you guys feel just a little bit bad about hijacking this thread? It seems a rude to me. It's like you're thumbing your nose at a new person who introduced himself in the New Person Introduction section.

I feel about as bad as I would if I were an alcoholic that chose to stagger into a successful AA group and immediately began trying to encourage the participants to neck a bottle of scotch.

Please note @Veda that this one did not introduce himself until he was asked to by the board admin ... he slammed down a ridiculous 'ethics report' instead as his first post, that seems like sly baiting to me.

 

[Veda]

don't you think the new person ought to know the actual history from old timers being involved?

On a separate thread. Still, I suppose, no harm done. Just a matter of being considerate.

 

[Veda]

I feel about as bad as I would if I were an alcoholic that chose to stagger into a successful AA group and immediately began trying to encourage the participants to neck a bottle of scotch.

Please note @Veda that this one did not introduce himself until he was asked to by the board admin ... he slammed down a ridiculous 'ethics report' instead as his first post, that seems like sly baiting to me.

I guess we see things differently.

 

[Riddick]

On a separate thread. Still, I suppose, no harm done. Just a matter of being considerate.

anyways, what do you think about the post I made?

"If I recall correctly, Hubbard's lectures throughout the early years, ie Apollo, talk about how he turned people into able bodied seaman. That would be you and a bunch of others. What actually happened was that he trained you peeps, and glorified the story into clear and OT, and the birth of the Sea Org.

That's my take, correct me if wrong."

Do you think that is true or not? What's your take, Veda.

 

[Harold#1]

Please do not forget the Marcabians. What would life on this planet be without them?

Sorry to have "derailed" your thread but did you enjoy seeing the historic photos of LRH and the Apollo crew?

ps Don't answer that here, it will further derail your thread. lol

 

[Veda]

anyways, what do you think about the post I made?

"If I recall correctly, Hubbard's lectures throughout the early years, ie Apollo, talk about how he turned people into able bodied seaman. That would be you and a bunch of others. What actually happened was that he trained you peeps, and glorified the story into clear and OT, and the birth of the Sea Org.

That's my take, correct me if wrong."

Do you think that is true or not? What's your take, Veda.

It's true. All is well.

 

[Veda]

Sorry to have "derailed" your thread but did you enjoy seeing the historic photos of LRH and the Apollo crew?

Yes, but in another thread.

Edit: And this wasn't my thread.

 

[Riddick]

Ron, the writer,



self portrait?

Using a fountain pen, look on his face. Nice quarters, books on the shelf, looks very learned, dressed nicely,

oh the rhetoric of it all.

 

[stratty]

LOL. Then you have not put attention to Pink Floyd's Lyrics.

I very much doubt that there is any Pink Floyd song from 'Meddle' onward to which I don't know each and every single word.

 

[Zertel]

I am a scientologist since 1977.

In the year 2005 I came to the independent field. In the year 2014 I created several Free Scientology groups, including the one on Ethics.

What are Free Scientology groups? Are you a self appointed Indie World Ethics Officer or something?

 

[Cuitlahuac Rivas]

What are Free Scientology groups? Are you a self appointed Indie World Ethics Officer or something?

Free Scientology is a denomination used since the 60's by independent scientologists in Saint Hill UK.

Any scientologist has the duty to wear his Ethics hat. The policy letter "Administration Outside Scientology" instructs you to use scientology ethics, tech and admin in the society. Scientology handles life. Didn't you know?

 

[Cuitlahuac Rivas]

What's your opinion of Jack Horner, founder of Eductivism, who was one of the first targets of Fair Game as instructed by Hubbard?

Horner was the first person to receive certification as a Doctor of Scientology, the equivalent, in those days, of a Class XII.

He broke with Hubbard over the idea of there only being one allowed source of Scientology, with Hubbard being Source, with a capital S.

The justification for Hubbard being the Sole Source of Scientology, and having his status as Sole Source enforced, was that he had built the Bridge to Total Freedom.

As we know now, there is no Bridge to Total Freedom. There are some interesting processes but there is no Bridge to OT.​

We also know there were many sources of the benign parts of Scientology. KSW was a lie which was justified by Hubbard having to assert control - including with deception, various manipulative mechanisms, and hypnotic "R6 bank" re-stimulation of "whole track implants" - to assure the delivery of this Total Freedom.

Hubbard lied when he assured Scientologists that there was an (old) OT 8 (Total Cause), and then lied when he told Scientologists that there were many more, already developed and unreleased, upper upper OT levels.

Wouldn't that make invalid, and illegitimate, the structure that was justified by the promise of Total Freedom?

We now know Scientology had many sources.

Considering all of the above, wouldn't that require a re-thinking of the meaning and legitimacy of "Scientology Ethics"?

The problem with Jack Horner is that he would have split the Bridge with his own copyrights. One example is the "self claimed Hubbard" Andreas Buttler. He developed "Sperianism". Latter said his tech was flubed and avandoned it all. Now he is suing people commenting on him. If Buttler invalidated all his tech. Just imagine the coplications if every collaborator of Hubbard claimed ownership of their share? How many collaborators would be sueing scientologists over the use of their contributions and processes to The Bridge?

That is why he must remain Source.

Yes. I remember that gigant photo in the golden frame at my Class IV Org.

So, we can agree that the R6 bank "iconology" was a success.

Sure, Hubbard didn't gave a real OT 8 level, but that doesn't mean the Bridge is not there. Bill Robertson (allegedly on telepathic comm with Hubbard) developed OT 8 (Excalubur) and the next levels in his Ron's Org.

Hubbard himself explains how Scientology has many contributions dating back to millenia. But Scientology has remained a single subject thanks to Hubbard being the Source of it.