The Scientologirl Independent Scientology YouTube channel associated with the Advanced Organization of the Great Plains

[NotsoNutsoNow]

.

Thanks for that judiciously balanced assessment of the pathways one travels within Scientology!

The truth of who Dr. Hubbard actually is and what his miracle tech actually does (and doesn't do) will inexorably leak out to all who seek truth.

After reading your post, I considered the pathway that Scientologists imagine themselves to be on which ascends to ever-greater spiritual heights (theta heaven). Hubbard called it a "Bridge to Total Freedom". And the pathway that Scientologists imagine others (DBs & SPs) are on, which descends to ever greater spiritual depths (MEST hell). From this, a fascinating graphic began to form in my mind of TWO (2) bridges going in opposite directions.

In fact, there are many more than two Bridges in ScientologyWorld. That's by intent, and they all go in different directions. Hubbard designed it that way to keep his marks and slaves deceived, dizzy & disoriented—making them far more credulous and compliant.

Scientology's stairways to Heaven and Hell. It's not as dark,
depressing & deceptive as it looks---just take a routing form!

​

As to your statement, "Remember this in a few months or years when you get a bit more experience. You will understand, I promise"—in one's quest to understand why it takes Scientologists so long to figure out the hoax, the noted philosopher Don Hubbard (cv, below) discovered this useful axiom:

"The knowing-how-to-know people are always the last to know."
- L. Don Hubbard​

.

El Con was a schizophrenic who could at times compartmentalise his different personalities but the overriding persona was Satan Sent but in the end a little twerp outsmarted him, similar to how Zaynab bint Al-Harith, a Jewish woman, outsmarted Mohammad, and. as a consequence, Mohammadykes have been enacting their revenge upon the two ever since.

 

[NotsoNutsoNow]

.

Let's break that down a little. . .

You said: "It's puzzling to me that most here, having been members of the cult, some for many years, have so little empathy for another person who is, essentially, much as they were."
Comment: Who specifically has so little empathy? Me? ITYIWT? What I saw on this thread looked a lot different than the way you describe it. I believe if you re-read the thread you will find that people here simply gave their opinions and then the Indie Scientologist immediately began insulting them by calling them "toxic" and "trolls" and some other choice degradations. It's a discussion board, so why are people not allowed to voice their opinions? It seems the supremely intolerant one is the Indie Scientologist.

You said: "While it's necessary to occasionally present information that may be uncomfortable for the person, would not a rational attitude be, mostly, one of patience and (as much as possible) tolerance, with the primary desire being to help?"
Comment: Sure, I agree with that. For example when the OP began claiming something that they obviously did not know about and had never researched (that Hubbard "canceled the Fair Game policy") several others including myself wrote the actual data that revealed that Hubbard Fair Gamed others at will before, during and after he issued that policy. I wrote a very concise post with citations and links wherein I used the Paulette Cooper example---which you added and amplified in your own post. Did the OP ever respond to any of these posts. I didn't see any response other than personal vitriol about the bad people here, with no specifics. If someone wants to jump on the board and spread Hubbard's propaganda and refuses to respond to factual history and the documents that support it, that sounds a lot like trolling to me. If the OP was interested in discussing Scientology (ostensibly why they showed up) why don't they discuss Scientology. I am highly doubtful that I am the only on this board who doesn't need/want lectures about Scientology from a newbie. That is ridiculous.

You said: "Yet, too often, the intent seems to be to drive away people who most need our help......"
Comment: How is disagreeing or voicing one's own opinion the "intent" to "drive away people"? What is it exactly that was said on this thread that should not have been said? The way i look at it is rather simple. It's an ex-Scientology message board where people have been discussing the GOOD, the BAD and the UGLY about Scientology for over a dozen years. So someone new comes onto the board. Cool! I like old posters and new posters alike. So far so good. But then the newbie starts throwing down fake Scientology talking points and doesn't respond to people correcting them? Okay, that's a little dodgy if you ask me. But then moments later they begin spewing insults against long-time posters on this board? I don't think so, LOL. How is that acceptable behavior. Maybe THEY need to get some manners or at least some courage to have a two-way conversation. As I said, I doubt anyone showed up on this message board to be "handled".

CONCLUSION: New Posters Matter. All Posters Matter. Let the discussions begin continue. . .


,

F***ing well said!!!! I barred myself from communicating with him/her, however, I didn't relay my thoughts as elegantly as you - I felt s/he wasn't worth the effort.

 

[NotsoNutsoNow]

After 34 years in Scientology, I came to the conclusion that I should NOT give advice to anyone about anything! Any advice I gave then (look at this reference, do process x, go to Flag, look up your word, etc., etc.) was worse that useless - it was outright harmful!

And now? I don't have any basis to think my advice is good. So I don't give any, even if asked!

I'm damaged goods, I suppose.

But it's a relief to attest to the state of "Total Lack of Certainty".

I, too, have 'Total Lack of Certainty', for example, I don't know what happens when a person dies and really don't care because if there is a God, the entity knows the score - so I, for one, can't BS, but if there isn't well just trying to do your best is pretty good road to travel down. Thus, I don't need the OT VIII realisation:

‘NOW I KNOW WHO I AM NOT, AND I AM INTERESTED IN FINDING OUT

WHO I AM.’​

(Ref: Why We Protest End Phenomenon Of Each Level Of The Bridge (https://whyweprotest.

net/threads/end-phenomenon-of-each-level-of-the-bridge.34816/).)

 

[programmer_guy]

El Con was a schizophrenic who could at times compartmentalise his different personalities but the overriding persona was Satan Sent but in the end a little twerp outsmarted him, similar to how Zaynab bint Al-Harith, a Jewish woman, outsmarted Mohammad, and. as a consequence, Mohammadykes have been enacting their revenge upon the two ever since.

Narcissistic personality disorder - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

David Mayo and friends at the Advanced Ability Center in Santa Barbara circa 1984.

There's a video made by a lady who attended the center, discussing her feelings as she walked along a beach. Can anyone find it? It's a bit of history.

Many groups existed at that time. Lots of people auditing in defiance of Scientology inc.

Lots of free exchange of ideas.

After reading your post, it made me think of how Hubbard brutally attacked and savage "squirrels". The reason Scientology gives on why they Fair Game squirrels is that non-standard Scientology doesn't work.

I just realized that the term "STANDARD TECH" is a shore story! The real reason that squirrels are brutalized and destroyed is because Hubbard realized he personally would not make any money from people auditing if they could just read the process commands and run it----the same way Hubbard PROMOTED and ENCOURAGED people to do with DMSHM in the early 50's.

I have said before that "there is no standard tech" and that is provably true. But I never completed drawing the rest of the circle to realize the thundering corruption of the term "standard". In Scientology "standard" is a synonym for money.

CONCLUSION: If Hubbard had any slightest intention of "clearing the planet" he would have been overjoyed that people wanted to run his processes any way possible, even if he didn't get his "cut" of the action.

.

 

[Irayam]

After reading your post, it made me think of how Hubbard brutally attacked and savage "squirrels". The reason Scientology gives on why they Fair Game squirrels is that non-standard Scientology doesn't work.

I just realized that the term "STANDARD TECH" is a shore story! The real reason that squirrels are brutalized and destroyed is because Hubbard realized he personally would not make any money from people auditing if they could just read the process commands and run it----the same way Hubbard PROMOTED and ENCOURAGED people to do with DMSHM in the early 50's.

I have said before that "there is no standard tech" and that is provably true. But I never completed drawing the rest of the circle to realize the thundering corruption of the term "standard". In Scientology "standard" is a synonym for money.

CONCLUSION: If Hubbard had any slightest intention of "clearing the planet" he would have been overjoyed that people wanted to run his processes any way possible, even if he didn't get his "cut" of the action.

.

What if the real reason Hubbard was so fiercely anti squirrel was that he was afraid someone would develop a tech that actually works?!?

 

[NotsoNutsoNow]

Narcissistic personality disorder - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That's just one of the Cluster A, Cluster B and Cluster C personality disorders the covertly hostile, criminal conman possessed.

 

[NotsoNutsoNow]

I'd take that date a bit further----earlier similar, so to speak.

I would not recommend doing anything from Scientology after 1950. More specifically, after reading the title of Dr. Hubbard's first book, DMSMH.

I would suggest that anyone reading the first 7 words Hubbard wrote on the subject ("Dianetics The Modern Science of Mental Health") immediately run the following process:

1. Close the book and calmly lay it down on a nearby table or shelf.​

​

2. Using a simple grade school dictionary, look up the terms "SCIENCE" and "MENTAL HEALTH".​

​

3. Go into any org/mission and/or personally speak to any Scientology Clear or Operating Thetan. Ask them to​

demonstrate to you any one of their miraculous powers. (NB: Don't allow them use their demo kit).​

​

4. When they are unable to do so, ask them to do a clay demo of how it is "SCIENCE" if nobody can marginally prove​

even one (1) extremely minor supernatural ability.​

​

5. Thereafter, spend a judicious amount of time observing Scientologists in real life and on the internet. Read at​

least one hundred testimonials of upper level Scientologists who blew -- and listen to what happened to them​

and the people around them. Listen closely when they describe how Ron and the most senior leaders of Scientology​

over the past 70 years engaged in a crime wave of perverse human rights violations, black ops thuggery, fraud and terrorism---and​

ask yourself if that looks like or even remotely sounds like "MENTAL HEALTH".​

If after that the Scientologist or Indie still wants to be part of the great sector salvaging crusade, the following applies:

CAVEAT EMPTOR DONATOR
let the donor beware

.​

THAT SHOULD BE FRAMED!!!!

 

[NotsoNutsoNow]

After reading your post, it made me think of how Hubbard brutally attacked and savage "squirrels". The reason Scientology gives on why they Fair Game squirrels is that non-standard Scientology doesn't work.

I just realized that the term "STANDARD TECH" is a shore story! The real reason that squirrels are brutalized and destroyed is because Hubbard realized he personally would not make any money from people auditing if they could just read the process commands and run it----the same way Hubbard PROMOTED and ENCOURAGED people to do with DMSHM in the early 50's.

I have said before that "there is no standard tech" and that is provably true. But I never completed drawing the rest of the circle to realize the thundering corruption of the term "standard". In Scientology "standard" is a synonym for money.

CONCLUSION: If Hubbard had any slightest intention of "clearing the planet" he would have been overjoyed that people wanted to run his processes any way possible, even if he didn't get his "cut" of the action.

.

From my understanding 'tech' or 'technology' is singular.

Since El Con plagiarised and collated others work to create Dianetic$, in particular Ab(normal) reaction theory, then continuously morphed his created wreckology, which led to the wreckology known as $cientology, which was, too, morphed continuously, how can there be a ‘Standard Tech’, surely it would have to be ‘Standard Techs’ or ‘Standard Technologies’?

So what El Con should have written to describe his wreckologies is:

Crappy Standard Techs or Crappy Standard Technologies or CST.

Perhaps he did and to hide his loot also came up with:

CST = Cult of Spiritual Technologies.

But technically that should have been:

CSW = Cult of Spiritual Wreckologies.

And, to continue to build on his ill-gotten gains came up with:

The Bridge to Total Fleecing-Serfdom,

which was to be manned by:

CSW = Completely Stupid Wankers.

(I think I am getting the hang of one of El Con's personalities.)

CSW (Completely Stupid Works)
(To Satan)​

Approved Not Approved

 

[Dotey OT]

After 34 years in Scientology, I came to the conclusion that I should NOT give advice to anyone about anything! Any advice I gave then (look at this reference, do process x, go to Flag, look up your word, etc., etc.) was worse that useless - it was outright harmful!

And now? I don't have any basis to think my advice is good. So I don't give any, even if asked!

I'm damaged goods, I suppose.

But it's a relief to attest to the state of "Total Lack of Certainty".

I think that your post may be my favorite post that I have seen in a while.

After 30 years in scientology and about 4 years out, I am certain that I do not give advice,

I spent 30 years trying to think the way that I was supposed to. Course after course, auditing level after auditing level, ethics cycle after ethics cycle. It was a house of cards. I am still pulling out the cards.

Advice, I can give great advice on what NOT TO DO, and this thread happens to be a great example.

That should worry anyone that is ascending the bridge. It is actually a descent from reason and an ascent towards the goal that flubtard figured out.

 

[NotsoNutsoNow]

What if the real reason Hubbard was so fiercely anti squirrel was that he was afraid someone would develop a tech that actually works?!?

That would have probably destroyed him as he would no longer be the centre of attention, even though he'd still think he should be.

"Move right to the back of the bus Ronny, you're no longer driving and you should have never been."

 

[Chuck J.]

That would have probably destroyed him as he would no longer be the centre of attention, even though he'd still think he should be.

"Move right to the back of the bus Ronny, you're no longer driving and you should have never been."

Hubbard's ego was bigger than a blackhole star. His ego had its own gravitational field.

 

[HelluvaHoax!]

What if the real reason Hubbard was so fiercely anti squirrel was that he was afraid someone would develop a tech that actually works?!?

.
A very likely scenario!

In fact, when Scientologists did create a tech with any degree of "workability" (e.g. the Study Tech reportedly developed by educators Charles and Ava Berner) Hubbard then stole it and took full credit.

Those two got Fair Gamed, just like the most senior technical terminal and technical collaborator David Mayo, who helped develop the NOTs upper levels OT IV through OT VIII.

Just like the first person to attain the legendary state of Clear, John McMaster. He too was soon thereafter declared "SP" because Hubbard feared anyone else getting attention, credit or money.

SCIENTOLOGY: Where all the most advanced OTs turn out to be the most degraded SPs.

.

 

[Veda]

.
A very likely scenario!

In fact, when Scientologists did create a tech with any degree of "workability" (e.g. the Study Tech reportedly developed by educators Charles and Ava Berner) Hubbard then stole it and took full credit.

Those two got Fair Gamed, just like the most senior technical terminal and technical collaborator David Mayo, who helped develop the NOTs upper levels OT IV through OT VIII.

Just like the first person to attain the legendary state of Clear, John McMaster. He too was soon thereafter declared "SP" because Hubbard feared anyone else getting attention, credit or money.

SCIENTOLOGY: Where all the most advanced OTs turn out to be the most degraded SPs.

.

Don't forget such luminaries as Sigmund Freud and Alfred Korzybski, who were both listed, as source material, at the front of the 1951 book Science of Survival and the 1952 book Scientology 8-8008, along with Aleister Crowley, who was cited, by Hubbard, as his "very good friend," during the 1952 Philadelphia Doctorate Course lectures, only to be later denounced: Freud as a "criminal" (1982), Korzybski as "the father of confusion" (1970), and Crowley as the leader of a "black magic group" (1969) - a black magic group that Hubbard "broke up, "and from which he,"rescued a girl," whom he later bigamously married, then divorced, then erased.

_______________​

I disagree with those who assert that Hubbard wrote absolutely nothing of value.

I'm sorry so many spent decades in Scientology. At least they are recovering.

I did not surrender my life to Scientology. I was lucky. It could have gone the other way.

I couldn't stand being around an Org for more than six months; then, completing any actions I had set out to do, I'd politely depart (as a public person), and return to my house at the beach with its 3,000 book library, and continue my association with my many "wog" friends, until the next Scientology (six month) go round.

I wasn't until I resigned my membership in Scientology that I began a project to to audit outside the Organization (to see what it would be like), and research Scientology further. This involved many projects, plus dealing with Scientology thugs, and involvement in many legal battles.

So I have a slightly different perspective than some.

 

[NotsoNutsoNow]

For cultists and non-cultists:

Arnie Lerma’s Best Of The Newsgroup alt.religion.scientology (https://lermanet.org/cos/bestoars.html);

 

[NotsoNutsoNow]

I have heard one can have designer toilet paper made:

I am going to see if I can get a picture of El Con put on each square.

I should also be able to get all the valuable words he said and wrote he didn't plagiarise and collate on the other side, namely, “I'm full of shit!”

El Con was a quite remarkable sick being and BIG OT, as his shit was in, on and around him, just like the bodies thetans he could never get rid of.

(Ref: YouTube Sarge Interviewed By Wright. Vital Info For All Scientologists To Know (

).)

 

[Scientologirl]

Thank you very much for this. While I *might* disagree that Fair Game was even "slightly changed" (depending on how one defines the word "changed" and whether merely ceasing to label people Fair Game so qualifies), the important point is that you are the only Scientologist who I have ever communicated with who has admitted that Fair Game was not cancelled. That is major, and speaks to your intellectual honesty.

FWIW, I have long thought that IF there were to be a "kindler, gentler" Independent Scientology, Independent Scientologists would have to jettison KSW, stop treating everything Hubbard said and wrote as sacrosanct, actually confront (per the Scientology definition) the morally objectionable things that Hubbard said and wrote, and be willing to excise those things.

/

I can respect that, thank you.

 

[ISNOINews]

"Scientologirl" at the Independent Scientology Advanced Organization of the Great Plains (AOGP) has a new video about the cost of Independent Scientology auditing. She:

-- indicates that anything below $80 a session is too cheap (indicating a lack of quality) and anything more than $250 a session is too expensive;

-- offers a checklist of five items to consider; and

-- notes that AOGP currently has the only online course room.

NOTE: While Scientologirl gives the cost "per session," I am not entirely confident that she doesn't mean "per hour." I have difficulty believing that a three hour session costs the same as a one hour session.

The video description adds that you can book a free auditing session with AOGP.

* * * * * BEGIN INTRODUCTION * * * * *

Published on Mar 5, 2021

Study Independent Scientology with Scientologirl here: Home

You can also book a FREE auditing session with an independent Scientologist here: www.ao-gp.org

Independent Scientologist girl answers how expensive is it to study Scientology and do auditing in 2021

* * * * * END INTRODUCTION * * * * *

/

 

[ISNOINews]

IS SCIENTOLOGY EVIL? INDEPENDENT SCIENTOLOGIST GIRL ANSWERS!

/

 

[Veda]

IS SCIENTOLOGY EVIL? INDEPENDENT SCIENTOLOGIST GIRL ANSWERS!

/

The question "Is Scientology evil?" assumes that Scientology is one thing, when, in reality - since at least March 1955, with the instruction provided in the Manual on Dissemination of Material - Scientology is many different things, depending on the audience. To a Scientologist, this secretive and chameleon-like behavior is simply an application of "gradients."

In the same Manual on Dissemination, Scientologists are instructed to "always attack" and "ruin utterly" anyone, or any group, that is regarded as using Scientology without authorization, or in a manner displeasing to Scientology's founder.

Virtually from its inception, Scientology has acted more like an aggressive, sometimes violent, political organization, than a philosophical association or spiritual fellowship.

Scientology has a well earned reputation for being secretive and dishonest, and this secretiveness and dishonesty is either flatly denied or rationalized and justified by Scientologists.

Scientology is stratified and compartmentalized, by design.

Corporate Scientology uses the complete design with each stratum and compartment in place and functioning.

Independent Scientology varies, and usually uses parts of Scientology, while neglecting or ignoring other parts.

Thus, it becomes a bit unreal, when an Independent Scientologist insists that "Scientology is _____fill in the blank_____," or "Scientology in not _____fill in the blank_____," since the Independent Scientologist is neglecting or ignoring parts of Scientology, and is presenting an unrealistic depiction of Scientology.