New book by LJ Kemsley, Co-Exec. Dir. of the Independent Scientology Advanced Organization of the Great Plains -- Why You Keep Failing and How To Stop

[I told you I was trouble]

I wonder what happened? Perhaps Scientology Inc. claimed copyright infringement.

I expect she pulled it herself to replace that (incorrectly assigned to hubbard) quote that was on the front ("if it isn't fun it isn't scientology").

 

[He-man]

Or she caved in, went PTS due to all the SP's on this site.

Or... She realized how silly the whole thing really is and decided to change her life, leave Scientology behind and go join the Black Templars instead(I could never resist those chainswords).

Or someone at Amazon died, choking of laughter, and they decided to pull it before the FDA showed up.

 

[ISNOINews]

Lisa Kemsley explains that she unpublished her book temporarily to make some necessary changes her Indy friends recommended. She asks that you give her a week to complete the revisions


Free Scientology: Chat : I have unpublished my book "Why you keep failing" temporarily to make some necessary changes indy friends have recommended (like including the whole tone scale was recommended by three) so I'll be getting to it


* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

I have unpublished my book "Why you keep failing" temporarily to make some necessary changes indy friends have recommended (like including the whole tone scale was recommended by three) so I'll be getting to it. Thank you everyone for your input and the sales! To those who have bought my book I'll be giving you the updated version for free (just inbox me)



(Gimme a week to complete though) :*

:*

* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *





/

 

[ISNOINews]

Lisa Kemsley has also completed her Independent Scientology Advanced Organization of the Great Plains (AOGP).Ethics and Integrity Course.


Free Scientology: Chat




/

 

[Bill]

Again, so harsh.

Did you make so few mistakes while a member of Scientology that you don't understand that novice Scientologists also make mistakes?

Have a little empathy.

Without new people, with differing views, this MB will eventually dry up and cease to exist.

Let's welcome new people, even if they don't think the way we do.

I do have a question: Which takes priority, making deluded True Believers feel welcome -- or -- telling the truth?

If you think we must never challenge false claims made by newby True Believers, I think you are not going to have much agreement. The key method of trapping people into Scientology is vast, unproven claims of results that never happen. Do we allow that?

I vote no.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

.

I expect she pulled it herself to replace that (incorrectly assigned to hubbard) quote that was on the front ("if it isn't fun it isn't scientology").

.
Rumor has it that the all-new-and-improved cover quote is going to be:

"If it isn't harsh it isn't ex scientology." lol
​

 

[ILove2Lurk]

Once again, this message board is not for everyone. Some people end
up here by mistake.

It's like the guy who's in a strange city and he's looking for a sports bar to share
some camaraderie and watch the game. He enters a bar and sees a bunch
of guys being romantic and hitting on each other. He probably needs to keep
walking and find another bar. Quite simple. Find your own kind. No big deal.

No harm, no foul. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

.
All joking aside, I think the problem that caused Scientologirl to hit the eject button was what I would term "THE CYCLE OF A SCIENTOLOGIST".

That cycle has been the same since DMSMH was published 71 years ago. It is the same in the Church of Scientology, Indie Scientology, Ron's Org Scientology, Freezone Scientology--and every other version of Scientology.

1. Scientologist discovers miraculous new technology.​

2. Scientologist generously offers to sell new technology to a troubled world.​

3. When reasonable people doubt, disagree and/or demand demonstrative proof, Scientologist becomes unreasonable, switches from science to religion---and begins preaching.​

4. When preaching fails, Scientologist begins indignantly declaring (e.g. You people are: 'low toned', 'toxic', 'PTS', 'trolls', 'anti-social personalities', 'dramatizing your overts, crimes & evil purposes', et al)​

5. When declaring fails, Scientologist resorts to fail-safe B & B TECH (Boat/Bluebird technology) and hits the road.​

All of the above is quite unproductive and unnecessary---and can easily be avoided if people would simply agree with whatever Scientologists say!

.
.

 

[ISNOINews]

.
All joking aside, I think the problem that caused Scientologirl to hit the eject button was what I would term "THE CYCLE OF A SCIENTOLOGIST".

That cycle has been the same since DMSMH was published 71 years ago. It is the same in the Church of Scientology, Indie Scientology, Ron's Org Scientology, Freezone Scientology--and every other version of Scientology.

1. Scientologist discovers miraculous new technology.​

2. Scientologist offers new technology to the world.​

3. When reasonable people doubt, disagree and/or demand demonstrative proof, Scientologist becomes unreasonable and begins preaching.​

4. When preaching fails, Scientologist begins declaring (e.g. "you people are 'low toned', 'toxic', 'trolls', 'pts', 'anti-social personalities', 'dramatizing your overts, crimes & evil purposes', et al)​

5. When declaring fails, Scientologist resorts to fail-safe Bluebird Motorhome tech and hits the road.​

All of the above is quite unproductive and unnecessary---and can easily be avoided if people would simply agree with whatever Scientologists say!

.
.

As I noted above, Lisa Kemsley has explained that she unpublished her book temporarily to make some necessary changes her Indy friends recommended. (She asks that you give her a week to complete the revisions.) I wouldn't be surprised if Scientologirl came back after the book is republished.

/

 

[Veda]

I do have a question: Which takes priority, making deluded True Believers feel welcome -- or -- telling the truth?

The choice you're presenting is between "deluded true believers" and "the truth."

In real life, when people are not yet IN Scientology Inc., or are OUT of Scientology Inc., usually they have already had some doubts, even if those doubts are mainly about the people running Scientology Inc.

It's a beginning.

A sledge hammer is usually not an appropriate tool.

Each person is different. There are novices, and then there are sales people who've been around for decades.

You can do what you want with the old cynical, manipulative, sellers of bridges, who know they are taking advantage of people who have been mind-gamed by Scientology Inc.; but, for those who don't know any better, and who are novices - and a person can be a novice for years - I've found that a more nuanced and gentle approach is preferable.

If you think we must never challenge false claims made by newby True Believers, I think you are not going to have much agreement. The key method of trapping people into Scientology is vast, unproven claims of results that never happen. Do we allow that?

I vote no.

If a person chooses to believe something, we cannot change their beliefs by not "allowing" it.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

As I noted above, Lisa Kemsley has explained that she unpublished her book temporarily to make some necessary changes her Indy friends recommended. (She asks that you give her a week to complete the revisions.) I wouldn't be surprised if Scientologirl came back after the book is republished.

/

I would (and why is she calling us her "Indy" friends?).

 

[ISNOINews]

I would (and why is she calling us her "Indy" friends?).

My guess is that you are joking but just in case you arent, one of the recommendations that she is implementing is "including the whole tone scale [which] was recommended by three." I'm.pretty sure that no one here advised her to do.that.

/

 

[I told you I was trouble]

The choice you're presenting is between "deluded true believers" and "the truth."

In real life, when people are not yet IN Scientology Inc., or are OUT of Scientology Inc., usually they have already had some doubts, even if those doubts are mainly about the people running Scientology Inc.

It's a beginning.

A sledge hammer is usually not an appropriate tool.

Each person is different. There are novices, and then there are sales people who've been around for decades.

You can do what you want with the old cynical, manipulative, sellers of bridges, who know they are taking advantage of people who have been mind-gamed by Scientology Inc.; but, for those who don't know any better, and who are novices - and a person can be a novice for years - I've found that a more nuanced and gentle approach is preferable.



If a person chooses to believe something, we cannot change their beliefs by not "allowing" it.

Yes, each person is different including on this board ... and that's a very positive thing.

Massaging the inflated egos of scientologists while trying to 'gently' manipulate their thinking into more "correct thinking" is certainly not why I am here and never was.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

My guess is that you are joking but just in case you arent, one of the recommendations that she is implementing is "including the whole tone scale [which] was recommended by three." I'm.pretty sure that no one here advised her to do.that.

/

Yes, I was joking and I couldn't care less what her reasons are for changing her leaflet.

 

[ISNOINews]

Yes, I was joking and I couldn't care less what her reasons are for changing her leaflet.

"Leaflet?" Wow, that is harsh. LOL ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The text is 35 pages long. It may wind up being longer with new material. E.g., the Tone Scale in full.


/

 

[I told you I was trouble]

"Leaflet?" Wow, that is harsh. LOL ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The text is 35 pages long. It may wind up being longer with new material. E.g., the Tone Scale in full.


/

Oh well in that case I hope it wins a literary prize (for fiction).

 

[Bill]

If a person chooses to believe something, we cannot change their beliefs by not "allowing"

You completely misunderstood my intentions. I don't care one tiny bit what she believes and I don't care if she changes her beliefs or not.

I am only pointing out Hubbard's lies that bait his trap so readers will be warned.

No, I don't have to tiptoe around, hoping not to offend.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

You completely misunderstood my intentions. I don't care one tiny bit what she believes and I don't care if she changes her beliefs or not.

I am only pointing out Hubbard's lies that bait his trap so readers will be warned.

No, I don't have to tiptoe around, hoping not to offend.

.

You nailed it!

In fact, Scientology specializes in gimmicks which trick others into "tiptoeing around, hoping not to offend" the "advanced beings" parading about and pretending they have supernatural Clear & OT powers.

That is precisely how the cult ensures that their marks remain crazy-glued inside the hoax for decades. Scientologists don't allow others to express disagreements or doubts about their magical tech.

When Hubbard says
"When in doubt communicate"
what he actually means is
"When in doubt, STFU!"
​

.

 

[I told you I was trouble]

Snipped.
.
When Hubbard says "WHEN IN DOUBT COMMUNICATE" what he actually means is "WHEN IN DOUBT STFU!" lol

.

I love that ... it's the best thing I've ever read about hubbards ranting's and true intent.​

 

[Veda]

You completely misunderstood my intentions. I don't care one tiny bit what she believes and I don't care if she changes her beliefs or not.

I am only pointing out Hubbard's lies that bait his trap so readers will be warned.

No, I don't have to tiptoe around, hoping not to offend.

I'm very familiar with the varieties of bait in the trap.

You were in Scientology for a while. How often during that period were you told it was all nonsense?

Did it change your views?