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
- Thread starter ISNOINews
- Start date
Bill
Well-known member
Yes, you continue to misunderstand my intention here. That's perfectly fine.
Veda
Well-known member
I understand your intention, and it's my intention too.
How about answering my two questions?
Veda
Well-known member
Change naturally occurs when communication occurs.
Veda
Well-known member
Unsolicited advice
Link to the Talking to new Scientologists thread
The second post can be ignored.
Link to the Talking to new Scientologists thread
The second post can be ignored.
The self help industry has been going on for a long time. Dianetics was marketed as a self help, later turned into religion, scientology
. I think this article is pretty good at explaining it all. All the self help is derived from rhetoric by the way, one way or the other.
I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation.
No, it doesn't ... and I don't come here to "change" people anyway.
Each to his own though.
Bill
Well-known member
Why? Your questions pretend I'm trying to get True Believers to leave Scientology. I'd really like it if you didn't do that.
Read what I wrote.
Or, on second thought, don't. I don't care.
ILove2Lurk
. . Lisbeth Salander . . Back in Sweden
Why doesn't someone who's really interested in the current debate
do a "survey thread," asking members a few simple questions like:
do a "survey thread," asking members a few simple questions like:
- When during your exit from sci did you first come around to this message board?
- Why did you decide to come here?
- How far gone or out were you when you arrived here?
- What did you expect to find or achieve here?
- What were you looking for?
- What was most helpful?
- What was least helpful?
- What meant the most to you?
Veda
Well-known member
I guess you're not going to answer my questions, since you claim they're irrelevant since you're "not trying get true believers to leave Scientology."
The last time I actually - physically - participated in a protest of $cientology was the summer of 1985. I had a placard that said Free the slaves! (It was kind of funny, and poignant, at the time - probably "politically incorrect" now.) I, and a bunch of other people, went to Golden Era Studios (Gold base) in the southern California desert, then to the Blue Buildings in Los Angeles, then to the Celebrity Center.
At the Gold Base I encountered an RPFer, who was in a state of fear - psychologically overwhelmed. We stood at either side of a tall barbed wire fence. He was not a "true believer." He was a captive. I said some words that he heard that were meant to help him. Those words would likely stay in the back of his mind, as words tend to do. Whether he acted on them, at some point, I've no way of knowing.
At the Celebrity Center, I encountered several black-jacketed thugs (who resembled a particular style of Private Investigator) and was reminded that Celebrity Center was still a center of Spying & Dirty Tricks activities by $cientology.
I also encountered numerous Celebrity Center "public," because they came up to me and initiated conversation with me. They were being protective of $cientology, but all, after a little conversation, were shown to have questions, and even doubts, about $cientology.
I talked to then with the purpose of helping them, and I think they were helped.
Subsequently, I've talked with many people who left $cientology after such exchanges, with me, and with others. Not always leaving right away, but the exchanges stayed with them and, when the time was right, was consulted and drawn upon as inspiration.
As for the people who come to ESMBR, they've mostly already left $cientology, and some few are still in some form of Scientology. By no stretch of the imagination are they "true believers."
To someone making blanket statements, denouncing all this or all that, it might seem as though they are true believers, but they are not.
I think most people naturally want to help others. "I don't care" callousness is not typical of human beings, and as for the few people, here, who claim that is how they feel, I've seen each of them reach out and help others (including "Scientologists") at one time or another, so I don't think they believe it themselves.
This kerfuffle is, probably, largely a matter of misinterpretation and superficial stylistic differences.
Bill
Well-known member
Thank you for your response. I am sure you are kind and caring. Unfortunately, you do not afford me the same consideration. My "I don't care" referred only to you.
Veda
Well-known member
"I don't care" has to do with an expressed state of mind of many people. It can be expressed in various ways, usually in a state of mild exasperation.
If you don't care, why are you responding?
Oh wait!
Alright! Alright! You care!
Now I don't care!
I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation.
Snipped.
Veda, I'm pretty sure most people here are under no illusion that they are some kind of therapist or deprogrammer ... neither would they want to be. I also have no doubt that most people here do care about others but choose where to spend their time and energy so you can lose the attempted guilt trip.
I've never responded well to what I think of as wannabe gurus and I doubt that will ever change. They prey on people who are susceptible and use subtle overwhelm and threat to keep them entranced, then the serious stuff comes out ... the cultic glue, you know how it works. These wannabe gurus are the self nominated sales people of scientology. Fortunately there are not too many of these people around, most scientologists don't (or can't) drag others into the trap because they are not natural peddlers.
Reasoning with a wannabe guru is pointless and if you don't know why you have seriously missed the point.
I genuinely do not care a jot what people choose to believe in ... I care a lot when I see them blatantly dragging others into their delusion and find a few choice words often stuns the target (temporarily) faster than cajoling and pretention ever would ... far more importantly, any onlookers here (in this case indie# scientologists) may just decide that the cultic life is not for them and run for the hills.
#I noticed at the time that there were quite a few new members/onlookers lurking when scientologirl came here to "handle us" with her "theta and willingness to communicate" ... it could have been coincidental but could also have been part of a cunning plan to demonstrate her amazing, jaw dropping, causative, scientology abilities to her indie mates and any recruits (I've seen it done before, lol) ... but it failed so she's probably in the indie RPF now and re-writing her leaflet in her spare time.
I hope so.
Veda, I'm pretty sure most people here are under no illusion that they are some kind of therapist or deprogrammer ... neither would they want to be. I also have no doubt that most people here do care about others but choose where to spend their time and energy so you can lose the attempted guilt trip.
I've never responded well to what I think of as wannabe gurus and I doubt that will ever change. They prey on people who are susceptible and use subtle overwhelm and threat to keep them entranced, then the serious stuff comes out ... the cultic glue, you know how it works. These wannabe gurus are the self nominated sales people of scientology. Fortunately there are not too many of these people around, most scientologists don't (or can't) drag others into the trap because they are not natural peddlers.
Reasoning with a wannabe guru is pointless and if you don't know why you have seriously missed the point.
I genuinely do not care a jot what people choose to believe in ... I care a lot when I see them blatantly dragging others into their delusion and find a few choice words often stuns the target (temporarily) faster than cajoling and pretention ever would ... far more importantly, any onlookers here (in this case indie# scientologists) may just decide that the cultic life is not for them and run for the hills.
#I noticed at the time that there were quite a few new members/onlookers lurking when scientologirl came here to "handle us" with her "theta and willingness to communicate" ... it could have been coincidental but could also have been part of a cunning plan to demonstrate her amazing, jaw dropping, causative, scientology abilities to her indie mates and any recruits (I've seen it done before, lol) ... but it failed so she's probably in the indie RPF now and re-writing her leaflet in her spare time.
I hope so.
HelluvaHoax!
Well-known member
Veda, I'm pretty sure most people here are under no illusion that they are some kind of therapist or deprogrammer ... neither would they want to be. I also have no doubt that most people here do care about others but choose where to spend their time and energy so you can lose the attempted guilt trip.
I've never responded well to what I think of as wannabe gurus and I doubt that will ever change. They prey on people who are susceptible and use subtle overwhelm and threat to keep them entranced, then the serious stuff comes out ... the cultic glue, you know how it works. These wannabe gurus are the self nominated sales people of scientology. Fortunately there are not too many of these people around, most scientologists don't (or can't) drag others into the trap because they are not natural peddlers.
Reasoning with a wannabe guru is pointless and if you don't know why you have seriously missed the point.
I genuinely do not care a jot what people choose to believe in ... I care a lot when I see them blatantly dragging others into their delusion and find a few choice words often stuns the target (temporarily) faster than cajoling and pretention ever would ... far more importantly, any onlookers here (in this case indie# scientologists) may just decide that the cultic life is not for them and run for the hills.
#I noticed at the time that there were quite a few new members/onlookers lurking when scientologirl came here to "handle us" with her "theta and willingness to communicate" ... it could have been coincidental but could also have been part of a cunning plan to demonstrate her amazing, jaw dropping, causative, scientology abilities to her indie mates and any recruits (I've seen it done before, lol) ... but it failed so she's probably in the indie RPF now and re-writing her leaflet in her spare time.
I hope so.
LOL, had to laugh out loud when I saw your closing argument that contained the word "leaflet" (again). Perfection! lol lol lol.
I am willing to pay you a suitable royalty fee each time I use your trademarked word "leaflet" to properly re-categorize Scientologirl's nano-book. If this arrangement is not acceptable to you, I will elect to use alternate words for which you will not receive any exchange. Such as "flyer".
THIS IS OKAY!
Approved: _______________
Not Approved: ________________
.
Footnote to my previous "why you left" posting. Pardon any slight derail.
I'll not always be here on guard. The stars twinkle in the Milky Way
and the wind sighs for songs across the empty fields of a planet
a Galaxy away. You won't always be here. But before you go,
whisper this to your sons and their sons . . .
"The work was free. Keep it so."
View attachment 9974
Biggest indicator -- "tell" -- of the false narrative of scientology, which
I worked out for myself after I left for good . . .
From the early 50's and beyond, Hubbard made so many claims that
his work was an actual science and his main objective was to give it to
every man, woman and child on the planet for their road to freedom.
These claims were made pre-Internet, of course.
Today, all the books, lectures and other materials could be put on a server
connected to the Internet and distributed freely to every man, woman and
child on the planet. The cost would probably be under $250K for the hardware
and software. Much cheaper than running the ScTV on cable for a year.
Why not give this ultimate science of the mind and universe -- all the books, tapes
and source materials -- to all mankind? They're translated in every language and
digitized, ready for downloading.
This is the biggest and most obvious "out-point" ever, considering the digital
technology available to everybody on the planet.
The truth of the matter is scientology is about monetization, always and forever.
And not being too broadly and closely inspected.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
This is an AMAZING idea! It would create the biggest boom in Scn history. Call it "The L. Ron Hubbard Scientology and Dianetics Free Library". People could browse the book titles and pick one that interests them and start reading. There is SOMETHING in every Scn book Hubbard ever wrote which would interest or intrigue anyone reading it.
The biggest problem would be that Scientology Inc. as it currently exists would not be able to handle the inflow. Also, David Miscavige thinks small so he might not go for it. Elon Musk didn't get where he is by thinking small. ILove2Lurk's idea is thinking big!
Last edited:
ILove2Lurk
. . Lisbeth Salander . . Back in Sweden
I'll admit I was this ^^^ person once. I had hoped for something magical
that would lighten and leaven the uncertainty and harshness of life.¯\_(ツ)_/¯
that would lighten and leaven the uncertainty and harshness of life.¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Last edited:
I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation.
I started to reply to your post and then realised that your signature line said it all perfectly for me.
You have to lie every day to sustain a fantasy.
HelluvaHoax!
Well-known member
Once upon a time I did the Data Evaluators Course or some version of the "Data Series".
Within the Scn bubble it seemed (at that time) like a big breakthrough of some impressive orders of magnitude. Then again, virtually everything Hubbard said and wrote was treated like it was a discovery "comparable to the wheel or fire".
The problem with the "Data Series" is that after you get your certificate L. Ron Hubbard (and other cult management & members) are providing the definitions for these 3 terms:
To wit, to a suicide bomber on an airplane, it's an "outpoint" that when they deployed their detonator that the bomb and aircraft did not explode midair. It's a "situation" that the innocent men, women and children on the airplane did not die. According to the data series, it would be an "Ideal Scene" if the downstat suicide bomber could then go to plan B and open one of the aircraft's exit doors and manually throw all the passengers out.
SUMMARY: The Data Series teaches you how to think clearly. However in order to do that you have to become a Clear---which is a person who has L. Ron Hubbard's reactive mind.
.
Within the Scn bubble it seemed (at that time) like a big breakthrough of some impressive orders of magnitude. Then again, virtually everything Hubbard said and wrote was treated like it was a discovery "comparable to the wheel or fire".
The problem with the "Data Series" is that after you get your certificate L. Ron Hubbard (and other cult management & members) are providing the definitions for these 3 terms:
OUTPOINT
SITUATION
IDEAL SCENE
SITUATION
IDEAL SCENE
To wit, to a suicide bomber on an airplane, it's an "outpoint" that when they deployed their detonator that the bomb and aircraft did not explode midair. It's a "situation" that the innocent men, women and children on the airplane did not die. According to the data series, it would be an "Ideal Scene" if the downstat suicide bomber could then go to plan B and open one of the aircraft's exit doors and manually throw all the passengers out.
SUMMARY: The Data Series teaches you how to think clearly. However in order to do that you have to become a Clear---which is a person who has L. Ron Hubbard's reactive mind.
.
Last edited:
Similar threads
