jonas.no-spam@physik.uni-dortmund.de wrote:

>> That's an excellent article on the relevance of a.r.s. for
>> Co$-members. Maybe someday OSA will get it that fighting SPs can not
>> save Co$, while treating members decently possibly could.
Dave Bird <dave@xemu.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>> I would guess that the most influential materials are Hubbard
>> biography and revealing Scientology's own utterances. I can
>> only add a bit of commentary to that.
When I first happened upon a couple of websites, particularly xenu.net, I would have to say that, yes, it was many of the actual truths about Hubbard that was quite telling. And the true Hubbard background data is so very opposite of the known version throughout the church with a vast quantity of items and so many that are documented facts which prove the church version to be wrong. And that certainly opens the flood gates of "well, if those things aren't true about the author/founder himself, then what about the rest of it?"

As far as "revealing Scientology's own utterances," I would have to say a number of things matched up with what I had already been starting to experience and see for myself over the years. No products of so-called OTs, nearly impossible quotas set for releasing the "real" OT levels (all orgs to be old saint hill size) while the absolute vast majority have never been close to this size and they sure won't be in my lifetime. Shrinking stats and orgs. And so many contradictions within the tech itself, leaving it more an interpretive subject than a technology - particularly once you are well trained in it, at least for anyone being honest about it and not just speaking the "company line"

that they knew they have to say for fear of ethics.

Also, there was one time a couple of years ago when I was getting some auditing and we seemed to address the right thing, and then the auditor automatically goes into checking for whether it was me or a BT, a cluster, etc. as is the tech to do. I remember thinking to myself that if someone asks me about a BT just one more time ..... grrrrr! :-) In other words, over the years I had grown tired of being asked if that intention, cause or whatever was a BT's, etc. Whatever happened to personal responsibility and cause? Screw the so-called or imagined BTs. This whole "tech" on BTs certainly didn't make sense in the scheme of much of the other tech.

And no sweepingly noticeable results with the vast majority of people who were moving through those OT levels either. I've seen/done about 4 different versions of OT 5, and look at the fact that there is not one single completion of OT 7 (current version) after more than 4 years.

But, what does that matter anyway? No person will be moving on through OT 8 and onto OT 9, etc. for decades or longer. That's my prediction anyway. Or more likely - no one will *ever* get onto the "real" OT levels because finally, at that point, it is supposed to be the actual payoff of OT and if there is no product of OT there, that finishes it.

No more belief, and therefore no more church.

And it is on the talk of OT that the term "belief" comes into play.

The church explicitly shouts "technology" from the rooftops throughout it's writings, yet turns around in forums like this and states people are tromping on their "beliefs." The fact is that they *believe* it's a technology but the real belief and "faith" that they are hanging onto is in the possibility of real OT. And, since those states of existence have never, ever been produced yet, there is only belief and faith that it's even possible to reach OT. Not one scientologist *knows* if a true OT can be made, so therefore they hang on solely based on belief and faith.

This is all probably way more than you wanted to know. LOL! Well, let me end by saying that I've realized over time how lazy and unthinking the subject can make a person in scientology. It becomes very easy to just confront life and others by categorizing and labeling people and situations with minimal thinking ability. He's "1.1" or you're "suppressive" or that's "third-party," etc. Uptone, downtone, PTS, upstat, downstat, and on and on. Strangely, considering the theories of dianetics, these labels unto themselves are A=A=A within the tech. That action *always* equals that label, for example.

I know some devotees will say that it's simply compartmenting life for a better understanding, but it just doesn't work in real life to rotely do so. It is easy to observe for yourself. Maybe experiment and the next time you see something where you might automatically label someone as a "joker and degrader" or whatever, stop and reason it through a bit. Does that systematically place them into the category of all the other so-called attributes of this label? Does it seem too easy to label such a person or his/her actions based on such superficial criteria or few instances of behaviour? And have that label stick for a period, and maybe even stick for life just because they disagreed with you or went against some factor that now says you should label them?

I'm not against betterment and self-improvement mind you! In fact, I support activities of any kind that help a person in life. I've just got kind of jaded about doing so in the name of "total freedom."

Thirty years of scientology pretty much abused me of that idea.

And I apologize to all those that I've so easily labeled in the past and to those that I've callously and robotically turned away from or harmed while in the church, and in the name of the church. This includes family, friends and perceived enemies. I never realized how much love and lack of caring had left my life until this past year.

That's my responsibility and I intend to make up for it.

Other scientologists: just take a look at some of the information outside of the church. You won't burn or die or get sick by looking.

It is not unethical or PTS or enturbulative to look and decide for yourself. Get educated. And YOU decide.

Happy Holidays!

Alfred E. Noumenon "You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan "It is wonderful how much time good people spend fighting the devil. If they would only expend the same amount of energy loving their fellow men, the devil would die in his own tracks of ennui." - Helen Keller

Go Back