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

ISNOINews

Independent Scientology and Nation of Islam news

ISNOINews

Independent Scientology and Nation of Islam news
Yesterday, I posted that the Independent Scientology Advanced Organization of the Great Plains (AOGP) had announced that their Independent Social Scientologists app for Android phones and other devices was available for download on the Google Play store.

AOGP has now posted a YouTube video about the app.


Advanced Organization of the Great Plains


Screenshot_20210131-083040_1612107167805.png


Video: ISS Social App




/
 

ISNOINews

Independent Scientology and Nation of Islam news
We had good reason, have you seen the video?
I don't know whether or not I have. (I've certainly watched the video in this thread.) I try to post all of your videos to your thread, and general AOGP news to.the separate AOGP thread:


https://exscn2.net/threads/the-independent-scientology-advanced-organization-of-the-great-plains.113/


However, it is certainly possible that I missed something.

On another matter, if I may, I would be interested in your thoughts on general Independent Scientology news and issues if you are ever so inclined.

For example, lately I've been posting about the Independent Scientology Dror Center in Israel and their offshoot, LifePower:


https://exscn2.net/threads/the-independent-scientology-dror-center-in-israel-and-lifepower.1945/


They seem to be successful.

Likewise, someone recently posted an announcement that a new Ron's Org will be opening in Cancun, Mexico:


https://exscn2.net/threads/opening-new-independent-org.2710/


The Independent Reformed Church of Scientology seems to be pretty dormant:


https://exscn2.net/threads/independent-reformed-church-of-scientology.496/


And the First Independent Church of Scientology seems to be dead after their trademark application was denied:


https://exscn2.net/threads/first-independent-church-of-scientology.118/


If you have any thoughts on these, or on any other Independent Scientology news, I'll look for posts in the Independent Scientology section.

And no, I'm not trying to create a Third Party situation. :) You could praise all of them. I'm just interested in your thoughts on these matters.

/
 
Last edited:

Scientologirl

A new independent Scientologist with AOGP
I don't know whether or not I have. (I've certainly watched the video in this thread.) I try to post all of your videos to your thread, and general AOGP news to.the separate AOGP thread:


https://exscn2.net/threads/the-independent-scientology-advanced-organization-of-the-great-plains.113/


However, it is certainly possible that I missed something.

On another matter, if I may, I would be interested in your thoughts on general Independent Scientology news and issues if you are ever so inclined.

For example, lately I've been posting about the Independent Scientology Dror Center in Israel and their offshoot, LifePower:


https://exscn2.net/threads/the-independent-scientology-dror-center-in-israel-and-lifepower.1945/


They seem to be successful.

Likewise, someone recently posted an announcement that a new Ron's Org will be opening in Cancun, Mexico:


https://exscn2.net/threads/opening-new-independent-org.2710/


The Independent Reformed Church of Scientology seems to be pretty dormant:


https://exscn2.net/threads/independent-reformed-church-of-scientology.496/


And the First Independent Church of Scientology seems to be dead after their trademark application was denied:


https://exscn2.net/threads/first-independent-church-of-scientology.118/


If you have any thoughts on these, or on any other Independent Scientology news, I'll look for posts in the Independent Scientology section.

And no, I'm not trying to create a Third Party situation. :) You could praise all of them. I'm just interested in your thoughts on these matters.

/
Thank you for giving me the opportunity! Rons org and Dror centre seem to be actually doing pretty good. I have limited data on the Dror centre but with Ron's org, I wonder what implications one could have for opening one. I say this because last year I was contacted by someone in my country and they said they were going to open up one and wanted my assistance. The only thing is, it seemed as if they were operating independently and were just going to use the name "Ron's org" which makes me wonder, could just about anyone open an independent Scientology org and call it Ron's org? No data on that as of yet.

The Independent Reformed Church of Scientology or IRCS for short, holds true to their name, except just a lot less successful than the Church. What I mean is, they have Churchy mentality, strict ethics, KRs imposed on others, ethics orders on other orgs and auditors, and even members talking to Tony Ortega (a known "SP" of Scientology) which is obviously a suppressive act in Scientology on several accounts. To be quite frank, it's a shit show. I guess I may be doing the same here, talking to you and others but, nobody here is deriving financial gain and I don't have evil purposes while doing so. It's all about intention.

Some more about the IRCS: They operate covertly and the only "successful actions" they have are by suppressing others. They use the self-proclaimed "ethics officer troll" Cuitlahuac and his Facebook group "Free Scientology Ethics" as "facts" to harm others.

Scientolipedia used to be a good thing before they selected incorrect targets. Dave Lacroix (founder of Scientolipedia) has unfortunately sided with the side that doesn't go toward the greatest good because his case and reactivity determines the conditions of orgs and auditors, not the actual conditions using statistics. It's very unfortunate.

What's more is that all of the above people and orgs mentioned, work together without any background checks. I'm not saying one needs to investigate and interrogate, but these people are all on board with each other without knowing much about members' stats, qualifications, or past actions. It's a big problem in the independent field, anyone can come around and say "I'm an OT4 trained as an ethics officer at x org" and nobody would bat an eye. I say this not to be critical, but to highlight why the independent "field" should STAY independent. If one org decides to target another org or auditor, they better make sure that they have the qualifications and more importantly, STATISTICS that are better than those they are targeting. In truth though, you'd never see this happening because up-stat orgs aren't concerned with imposing ethics on the weaker ones. A perfect example is the Dror center, maybe I'm under a rock but I've never heard of them attacking other orgs or auditors with ethics. It's the little ones that bark the loudest, like the IRCS. It's typical "I'll squash you to make me look big" mentality.

For example, a few months ago they compiled a poorly written, poorly executed, and out-pointy document against AOGP. Filled with generalities, inconsistencies and out-points, and basically they thought they were harming AOGP but really, they just made themselves look silly and suppressive as most independents couldn't believe what they were reading from a so called "Class 8" (9?) such as Chris Black. The Free Scientology Ethics group is run by a suppressive troll - he literally gets a kick out of harming auditors, and they largely used the data in the document from this source. They also used Mary Blackford, who not too long before went to what we consider an SP of Scientology being Tony Ortega, which is a suppressive act, and yet AOGP is the enemy. It was quite silly and the independent field saw who they were dealing with, finally.

I must also mention that many of the members listed in the document have things against them too. I won't assign them a condition or write KRs because I don't see them as part of my third dynamic, but I can say that these people have logs in their own eyes they refuse to take out.

So for the IRCS, I don't see a very bright future. Their statistics are low, they bark the loudest, and they are no organization as you base an organization off products and production. Even if their intention was solely to attack others, the products of that action is low too. LRH was right when he said: Ethics first, then tech, then admin. A successful org has their ethics in. The problem with IRCS and others is that they are trying to get ethics in on external entities, not the "orginization" themselves.

More on a successful org has their ethics in: Our org is not faultless. The difference is, we can admit to our shortcomings. This is where I will elaborate on the video mentioned. For a short while, we were doing everything in our power to maintain its up-statistics. I was posting content on my channel, we had more consistent students than we ever saw, and we were doing everything we could to keep ourselves from dropping to lower conditions - but, the problem was, the fruits of our labor were yet to be seen. We pegged it down initially to be due to the virus, or maybe it was the suppressive actions against us, or maybe, we thought, it was just a few dry months. We recently found out we had our very own staff member (Michael/Emir Salihovic) stealing from us. He was being trained as an auditor and as soon as he could audit, he decided fraud/suppressive acts against the org that was paying him, training him for free, and auditing him for free, was a good option. So we finally found the problem, and made the problem known. We are doing the conditions now on our org as an ethical action to resolve the issue. Additionally, the OT Ralph Hilton who has the v i r u s was CSing for him while operating within our social platform. I can't make this stuff up. Hence we had to make the platform a students-only platform as part of our conditions.

So again, it's always ethics first, then tech, then admin.

PS. The video can be easily found on Facebook.
 
Last edited:

ISNOINews

Independent Scientology and Nation of Islam news
Thank you for giving me the opportunity! Rons org and Dror centre seem to be actually doing pretty good. I have limited data on the Dror centre but with Ron's org, I wonder what implications one could have for opening one. I say this because last year I was contacted by someone in my country and they said they were going to open up one and wanted my assistance. The only thing is, it seemed as if they were operating independently and were just going to use the name "Ron's org" which makes me wonder, could just about anyone open an independent Scientology org and call it Ron's org? No data on that as of yet.

The Independent Reformed Church of Scientology or IRCS for short, holds true to their name, except just a lot less successful than the Church. What I mean is, they have Churchy mentality, strict ethics, KRs imposed on others, ethics orders on other orgs and auditors, and even members talking to Tony Ortega (a known "SP" of Scientology) which is obviously a suppressive act in Scientology on several accounts. To be quite frank, it's a shit show. I guess I may be doing the same here, talking to you and others but, nobody here is deriving financial gain and I don't have evil purposes while doing so. It's all about intention.

Some more about the IRCS: They operate covertly and the only "successful actions" they have are by suppressing others. They use the self-proclaimed "ethics officer troll" Cuitlahuac and his Facebook group "Free Scientology Ethics" as "facts" to harm others.

Scientolipedia used to be a good thing before they selected incorrect targets. Dave Lacroix (founder of Scientolipedia) has unfortunately sided with the side that doesn't go toward the greatest good because his case and reactivity determines the conditions of orgs and auditors, not the actual conditions using statistics. It's very unfortunate.

What's more is that all of the above people and orgs mentioned, work together without any background checks. I'm not saying one needs to investigate and interrogate, but these people are all on board with each other without knowing much about members' stats, qualifications, or past actions. It's a big problem in the independent field, anyone can come around and say "I'm an OT4 trained as an ethics officer at x org" and nobody would bat an eye. I say this not to be critical, but to highlight why the independent "field" should STAY independent. If one org decides to target another org or auditor, they better make sure that they have the qualifications and more importantly, STATISTICS that are better than those they are targeting. In truth though, you'd never see this happening because up-stat orgs aren't concerned with imposing ethics on the weaker ones. A perfect example is the Dror center, maybe I'm under a rock but I've never heard of them attacking other orgs or auditors with ethics. It's the little ones that bark the loudest, like the IRCS. It's typical "I'll squash you to make me look big" mentality.

For example, a few months ago they compiled a poorly written, poorly executed, and out-pointy document against AOGP. Filled with generalities, inconsistencies and out-points, and basically they thought they were harming AOGP but really, they just made themselves look silly and suppressive as most independents couldn't believe what they were reading from a so called "Class 8" (9?) such as Chris Black. The Free Scientology Ethics group is run by a suppressive troll - he literally gets a kick out of harming auditors, and they largely used the data in the document from this source. They also used Mary Blackford, who not too long before went to what we consider an SP of Scientology being Tony Ortega, which is a suppressive act, and yet AOGP is the enemy. It was quite silly and the independent field saw who they were dealing with, finally.

I must also mention that many of the members listed in the document have things against them too. I won't assign them a condition or write KRs because I don't see them as part of my third dynamic, but I can say that these people have logs in their own eyes they refuse to take out.

So for the IRCS, I don't see a very bright future. Their statistics are low, they bark the loudest, and they are no organization as you base an organization off products and production. Even if their intention was solely to attack others, the products of that action is low too. LRH was right when he said: Ethics first, then tech, then admin. A successful org has their ethics in. The problem with IRCS and others is that they are trying to get ethics in on external entities, not the "orginization" themselves.

More on a successful org has their ethics in: Our org is not faultless. The difference is, we can admit to our shortcomings. This is where I will elaborate on the video mentioned. For a short while, we were doing everything in our power to maintain its up-statistics. I was posting content on my channel, we had more consistent students than we ever saw, and we were doing everything we could to keep ourselves from dropping to lower conditions - but, the problem was, the fruits of our labor were yet to be seen. We pegged it down initially to be due to the virus, or maybe it was the suppressive actions against us, or maybe, we thought, it was just a few dry months. We recently found out we had our very own staff member (Michael/Emir Salihovic) stealing from us. He was being trained as an auditor and as soon as he could audit, he decided fraud/suppressive acts against the org that was paying him, training him for free, and auditing him for free, was a good option. So we finally found the problem, and made the problem known. We are doing the conditions now on our org as an ethical action to resolve the issue. Additionally, the OT Ralph Hilton who has the v i r u s was CSing for him while operating within our social platform. I can't make this stuff up. Hence we had to make the platform a students-only platform as part of our conditions.

So again, it's always ethics first, then tech, then admin.

PS. The video can be easily found on Facebook.
Thank you for the information. Very enlightening.

Oh crap, I regularly post on Tony Ortega's comment section. I guess I must be PTS. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ :)

Despite that -- I can't find the Facebook video that you are referencing; any chance you could post a link?

I also have never heard a negative word about the Dror Center. I have heard only good things about them. They seem to be successful. One suspects that there is a correlation

************

On yet another topic, would you or anyone else at AOGP be willing to answer my LGBTQ Survey on behalf of AOGP? The survey is set forth below.

LGBTQ Survey For Scientology Organizations

1) Does the Advanced Organization of the Great Plains (AOGP) perform gay weddings? If it hasn't done so to date, is AOGP willing to perform gay weddings?

2) Does AOGP support adoption by gay couples?

3) If AOGP supports adoption by heterosexual individuals, does AOGP also support adoption by gay individuals?

4) Can a gay person become and remain a member of AOGP in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?

5) Can a gay person become and remain Clear in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?

6) Can a gay person become and remain OT 8 in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?

7) Can a gay person become and remain a staff member of AOGP in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?

8) [INAPPLICABLE] Can a gay person become and remain a Sea Org member in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied If heterosexuals?

9) Can a gay person become and remain a member of the clergy of AOGP in good standing without being required to be celibate, without being required to eventually become heterosexual, and while continuing to have gay sex subject only to the same ethical requirements applied to heterosexuals?

10) Is it TRUE that AOGP does NOT perform, endorse, advocate or accept the validity of any form of gay conversion therapy, or any form of therapy or spiritual practice or technology intended, designed or that has the purpose of changing a gay person's sexual orientation from gay to heterosexual?

Ver. 2.1

NOTE: As a result of the Independent Reformed Church of Scientology at least partly addressing the issue of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in 2014, I decided to revisit my questionnaire. In version 2.1 above I revised question number 10 to (perhaps awkwardly) include a double negative. I did this so that the Church of Scientology International (or an Independent Scientology organization, omitting the Sea Org question) will pass as not discriminating against LGBTQ people if and only if all of the questions are answered "yes." I believe that overall the questionnaire is less confusing that way, and less likely cause question number 10 to be answered inaccurately.]

/
 

Scientologirl

A new independent Scientologist with AOGP
Yes to all of the above. I forgot you asked this at some other point, but yeah, we're less concerned with the body and its preferences than the spiritual being himself/herself/themselves. In fact, our org currently has members of the LGBTQ community in it. Anyone who condemns a person and makes others wrong for their self-determinism provided it does not include evil purposes against our org, is not tolerated with us.

As for PTSness, you could be an SP yourself, who knows? I kid, of course... :)

I guess I either have you blocked on my account or you're not in the groups, likely I have you blocked. I'd rather not include the video here for legal purposes.

Feel free to ask me some more questions!
 

ISNOINews

Independent Scientology and Nation of Islam news
Yes to all of the above. I forgot you asked this at some other point, but yeah, we're less concerned with the body and its preferences than the spiritual being himself/herself/themselves. In fact, our org currently has members of the LGBTQ community in it. Anyone who condemns a person and makes others wrong for their self-determinism provided it does not include evil purposes against our org, is not tolerated with us.

As for PTSness, you could be an SP yourself, who knows? I kid, of course... :)

I guess I either have you blocked on my account or you're not in the groups, likely I have you blocked. I'd rather not include the video here for legal purposes.

Feel free to ask me some more questions!
Thanks for answering my LGBTQ questionnaire. I really appreciate it. You are the first Scientologist to do so on behalf of an Org, Independent or otherwise. Since you did so publicly, I will probably cross-post your response (yes, to the comment section of "SP" Tony Ortega. :devilish: ) and maybe create a new thread here. I think the issue is very important and may (or may not) be a way in which various Independent Scientology Orgs can differentiate themselves from the Church of Scientology International.

In case you are interested, the Independent Reformed Church of Scientology (IRCS) never answered my questionnaire, but did issue a general statement. Unfortunately, the original statement was posted to the old Milestone Two blog, which has been removed by its owner, as same was embedded into the IRCS blog, which has been parked and is unavailable. Fortunately, I screenshot the statement and posted it to the original ESMB:


https://forum.exscn.net/threads/independent-reformed-church-of-scientology-incorporated-in-california.49366/page-3#post-1209142


* * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

The highest human virtue

I know of at least 4 homosexual parishioners who were on-lines with the Church of Scientology who were prevented from receiving auditing and treated with ethics and justice because they were in a same sex relationship. This is despite LRH clearly stating in HCO PL 11 August 1967, Issue 1, Second Dynamic Rules “It has never been any part of my plans to regulate or attempt to regulate the private lives of individuals. Whenever this has occurred, it has not resulted in any improved condition. All I have been interested in, so far as Scientology law was concerned, was in removing retarding elements or practices from the path of progress toward freedom. Man is aberrated. Otherwise we would not be here. He is hard to rescue as he has been carefully “trained” to do himself harm. I have no concern about the second dynamic activities of Scientologists save only where they bring suffering to others and so impeded our forward progress. Therefore, ALL FORMER RULES, REGULATIONS AND POLICIES RELATING TO THE SECOND DYNAMIC ACTIVITIES OF STUDENTS, PRECLEARS, STAFF AND SCIENTOLOGISTS ARE CANCELLED.”

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

vTmBjtS.png


I certainly understand about you not wanting to post a link to the video. No worries.

******************

New question: Any thoughts on Justin Craig aka Lafayette Ronald Hubbard aka Ron 2.0, and Esperianism? It, too, seems to be dead or so far underground that I can't find any activity.

/
 

programmer_guy

True ex-Scientologist
@Scientologirl

1. How many people are members of AOGP?

2. If AOGP has Scientology class courses (with HCOBs) how does AOGP do that without violating copyright law?
 
Last edited:

Scientologirl

A new independent Scientologist with AOGP
Thanks for answering my LGBTQ questionnaire. I really appreciate it. You are the first Scientologist to do so on behalf of an Org, Independent or otherwise. Since you did so publicly, I will probably cross-post your response (yes, to the comment section of "SP" Tony Ortega. :devilish: ) and maybe create a new thread here. I think the issue is very important and may (or may not) be a way in which various Independent Scientology Orgs can differentiate themselves from the Church of Scientology International.

In case you are interested, the Independent Reformed Church of Scientology (IRCS) never answered my questionnaire, but did issue a general statement. Unfortunately, the original statement was posted to the old Milestone Two blog, which has been removed by its owner, as same was embedded into the IRCS blog, which has been parked and is unavailable. Fortunately, I screenshot the statement and posted it to the original ESMB:


https://forum.exscn.net/threads/independent-reformed-church-of-scientology-incorporated-in-california.49366/page-3#post-1209142


* * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

The highest human virtue

I know of at least 4 homosexual parishioners who were on-lines with the Church of Scientology who were prevented from receiving auditing and treated with ethics and justice because they were in a same sex relationship. This is despite LRH clearly stating in HCO PL 11 August 1967, Issue 1, Second Dynamic Rules “It has never been any part of my plans to regulate or attempt to regulate the private lives of individuals. Whenever this has occurred, it has not resulted in any improved condition. All I have been interested in, so far as Scientology law was concerned, was in removing retarding elements or practices from the path of progress toward freedom. Man is aberrated. Otherwise we would not be here. He is hard to rescue as he has been carefully “trained” to do himself harm. I have no concern about the second dynamic activities of Scientologists save only where they bring suffering to others and so impeded our forward progress. Therefore, ALL FORMER RULES, REGULATIONS AND POLICIES RELATING TO THE SECOND DYNAMIC ACTIVITIES OF STUDENTS, PRECLEARS, STAFF AND SCIENTOLOGISTS ARE CANCELLED.”

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

View attachment 9719


I certainly understand about you not wanting to post a link to the video. No worries.

******************

New question: Any thoughts on Justin Craig aka Lafayette Ronald Hubbard aka Ron 2.0, and Esperianism? It, too, seems to be dead or so far underground that I can't find any activity.

/
Unfortunately, as I said before, the IRCS operates covertly. They will use PR and then talk to each other about how aberated this or that person is because of their choices. One can easily find their general tone, on the Fb page, most of the posts have something negative, authoritarian, or they include strict ethics. So no, I don't buy for one second that they're ok with LGBTQ community. Like I said, they are basically Churchies outside of the church, with the same mentality, and it's obvious how the Church views LGBTQ people.

Justin Craig - he's quite a character. I thought it was so strange to see some good auditors fall for his crap. The guy has an infinity symbol tattooed on his forehead, com' on! He's nothing more than a criminal, and it's an absolute joke with all the things that LRH says about criminals that good auditors actually thought he was LRH reincarnated. Something I have seen in the field though is A LOT of reasonableness. I know one auditor who, depending on who speaks to her, will change her mind rapidly about things. I mention all this because we do need start doing things differently or even the independent field will cease to exist. As for where he is or what he's doing, I heard he was protesting a few months ago in the streets of LA I think, not sure what he was protesting about though.
 

Veda

Well-known member
....

This is despite LRH clearly stating in HCO PL 11 August 1967, Issue 1, Second Dynamic Rules “It has never been any part of my plans to regulate or attempt to regulate the private lives of individuals. Whenever this has occurred, it has not resulted in any improved condition. All I have been interested in, so far as Scientology law was concerned, was in removing retarding elements or practices from the path of progress toward freedom. Man is aberrated. Otherwise we would not be here. He is hard to rescue as he has been carefully “trained” to do himself harm. I have no concern about the second dynamic activities of Scientologists save only where they bring suffering to others and so impeded our forward progress. Therefore, ALL FORMER RULES, REGULATIONS AND POLICIES RELATING TO THE SECOND DYNAMIC ACTIVITIES OF STUDENTS, PRECLEARS, STAFF AND SCIENTOLOGISTS ARE CANCELLED.”

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

If we're going to be "intellctually honest," as the phrasing goes, and realistic, it's more complicated than finding some "LRH" quote that agrees with whatever is useful at a given time. Hubbard is all over the map on this, and throughout the span of Scientology.

Don't forget the Law of Commotion, and also the Scientological Onion.

"PR is overt. Intelligence is covert." PR Series 7

There's DMSMH, Science of Survival, link to the 1961 Security Check (scroll down to the sexual questions), and that contrasts with your quote above, plus "You should be able to use the body in any way you want," from late 1952, with similar exhortations about the ease of (do-it-yourself) abortion, and "drinking as much liqueur" as you want, etc.

"First real Clear" John McMaster was Declared in 1969, and one of the reasons given was his homosexual activity.

And then there are various Sea Org issues, and what happens when a LGBTQ person joins the Sea Org?

And don't forget the Pain and Sex HCOB, of 1982, where it's announced that sex was invented by destructive creatures to shrink people.

What a mess.
 

ISNOINews

Independent Scientology and Nation of Islam news
Unfortunately, as I said before, the IRCS operates covertly. They will use PR and then talk to each other about how aberated this or that person is because of their choices. One can easily find their general tone, on the Fb page, most of the posts have something negative, authoritarian, or they include strict ethics. So no, I don't buy for one second that they're ok with LGBTQ community. Like I said, they are basically Churchies outside of the church, with the same mentality, and it's obvious how the Church views LGBTQ people.

Justin Craig - he's quite a character. I thought it was so strange to see some good auditors fall for his crap. The guy has an infinity symbol tattooed on his forehead, com' on! He's nothing more than a criminal, and it's an absolute joke with all the things that LRH says about criminals that good auditors actually thought he was LRH reincarnated. Something I have seen in the field though is A LOT of reasonableness. I know one auditor who, depending on who speaks to her, will change her mind rapidly about things. I mention all this because we do need start doing things differently or even the independent field will cease to exist. As for where he is or what he's doing, I heard he was protesting a few months ago in the streets of LA I think, not sure what he was protesting about though.
Regarding the Independent Reformed Church of Scientology (IRCS) statement regarding gay rights, I will note that the statement was made when Lana Mitchel and Mike Eldredge were in charge. They are no longer in charge. They turned IRCS over to a new management team headed by Tom Martiniano. I have no idea whether or not that makes any difference.

Regarding Justin Craig aka Lafayette Ronald Hubbard aka Ron 2.0 and Esperianism, I know that you consider Tony Ortega a "SP," but seriously, Tony has done good journalism on the subject:

Scientologists, gullible? Would they fall for a felon saying he’s the returned L. Ron Hubbard?

Scientologists, gullible? Would they fall for a felon saying he’s the returned L. Ron Hubbard? | The Underground Bunker

Ex-con who says he’s returned L. Ron Hubbard has an indie Scientology revolt on his hands

Ex-con who says he’s returned L. Ron Hubbard has an indie Scientology revolt on his hands | The Underground Bunker

‘Scientology is dead’ says the ex-con claiming he’s the reincarnated L. Ron Hubbard [And announces Esperianism]

‘Scientology is dead’ says the ex-con claiming he’s the reincarnated L. Ron Hubbard | The Underground Bunker

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.

*******************

Are you familiar with Post-Scientology Spiritual Rescue Technology founded by David St. Lawrence, an old Scientology Auditor? I'll post the ESMBR link below, but must warn you that it assumes familiarity with, or at least an ability and willingness to consider and discuss, OT and particularly NOTs theory. I don't want to cause you problems if you are not.

https://exscn2.net/threads/post-scientology-spiritual-rescue-technology.2727/

/
 
Top