The Lynch Mob and the Creepy Church

Backdrop: Article on Tony Ortega’s blog and my blog post titled, “WTF? OMG! BBQ!

When this news reached the main Independent Scientologists Facebook group, all hell broke lose. Even before the comments to Ortega’s piled up good.

brian3

Without any more data, without any due process. Brian was promptly proclaimed guilty. Not only that, but within minutes, a lynch mob gathered and called Brian anything from “traitor” and “slime boy” to “degraded being” and “sociopath”. He had clearly and intentionally back-stabbed every Indie Scientologist. Clear as day!

Ortega’s view of this was taken as fact, and Indie Scientologists instantly cried out for “Disconnection!”

What happened to “innocent until proven guilty”?

Then I dared to ask for known and public facts in the case, specifically, “Did his declaration contain anything that wasn’t already public knowledge”. And instead of answering my simple question (with a number of repetitions), I was lambasted for daring to ask such a question. I was immediately seen to be defending Brian. I was on his side and a suspect guilty by association.

I know Brian from before. In 2011, he moved to Norway for a few months to work with me. Before Scientology, he was a basketball star and successful business person. When he came to Norway, his spirit and abilities was broken. I understand that he wants nothing more to do with Scientology. Our working together didn’t work out, and I haven’t been in contact with him for more than a year until now.

brian1

I talked to Brian a couple of hours following the online onslaught. Although he didn’t say much, I got that he did not intentionally want to betray anyone. Others that actually talk to him would conclude the same. He was a fool to sign the declaration, and I told Brian personally that I thought he was hopelessly naive to think that the Church wouldn’t double-cross him. After all, this is one of the most insidious, creepy organizations in the Western World.

I never supported him signing the declaration. I think he was stupid to do so.

I withhold judgment until facts are on the table. I still don’t have all the facts as to how and why Brian signed the declaration. Even if Brian is proven to have intentionally back-stabbed others, it still does not vindicate a lynch mob that cried “guilty!” right off the bat.

Indie Scientologists started to plaster his Facebook wall with horrible accusations to the point where Brian had to take down his FB account. And it went viral. He was accused on more and more channels, labeling him worse and worse. E-mails containing character assassinations were even sent to his family. He was completely shattered to the point were I was seriously worried about the guy.

When I see a group react in such a way to such a serious result, I decided to leave the group.

And all this went down in a group of Scientologists – the most ethical people with the best ethics and justice systems known to man, the most enlightened and mentally balanced people, those with the best communications training on the planet. Or so the legend goes.

From this and other recent events, I concluded that Scientology tends to corrupt what it touches. The results, the products, tell the tale.

I talked to a few of the Indie Scientologists from the FB group back-channel after I left. They agreed that the group got out of hand, and agreed that it quickly became a lynch mob. And no one in the group lifted a finger to handle this KKK. That is cowardice of the same shade we see in the Church where every Scientologists observe shit happening but very few dare to say anything.

Moral: Never interrupt a good lynch mob with facts. Or: Fuck this cult think.

I suspect that then the truth comes out about what really happened in the process between Brian and the Church, it would shake the foundations of the Church of Scientology.

389 thoughts on “The Lynch Mob and the Creepy Church

  1. Thanks Geir, appreciate the note. I’d like to know the facts myself. And frankly, when I read his declaration, I didn’t see how it would damage the Garcia’s case against the church (though I’m not a lawyer).

    1. Someone pointed out that it may even help Garcia’s case as the Church has tried to force the Garcias into the CoS arbitration system all the while they gave Brian the money without following that procedure with him.

      1. I am a lawyer and I addressed this question on Tony Ortega’s site. If for no other reason, the declaration hurts the Garcia’s case because it permitted Scientology to create a legal dispute which wasn’t already present, which legal issue will require more legal resources to be expended in its defense. Without Culkin’s declaration, Scientology could not have brought a motion to disqualify the Garcias’ attorney; it serves as the factual basis for the entire motion.

        As for how it damages the Garcias’ case, unless you can say with total certainty that Scientology’s motion to disqualify the Garcias’ attorney is frivolous and will be easily dismissed, the answer should be self-evident by the purpose of the motion, i.e,. to disqualify the Garcias’ attorney. Without knowing a lot more, I am unable to say with certainty that the motion is frivolous, and I have a decent grasp of the Florida ethics law in question upon which this issue turns.

        I argued elsewhere that a possibility existed that Culkin didn’t understand that what he was signing would have adversely affected the Garcias’ case. Even allowing for this possibility, however, leaves me to then conclude that Culkin was, at best, profoundly reckless. Signing a declaration in which he confirmed Scientology’s interpretation of events, including the legal strategizing of an ongoing case proceeding against the church–what good can possibly come of that for the litigant in that case?

        I can only assume he didn’t have his own attorney review the declaration before signing it, since he’s now claiming ignorance as to its effect; if that’s the case, this fact doesn’t reflect any better on his judgment. If you’re over 18 and you let Scientology’s lawyers draft a statement that you have no idea how it’s used, well, you deserve to be criticized when you claim to be surprised that the organization that you were complaining last month ripped you off to the tune of $350,000 suddenly betrayed your trust as to the meaning of the thing they drafted and asked that you sign.

        1. Nice to have a lawyer commenting on this one. And though you have the skills set to aptly determine the legal consequences of that declaration, even you cannot shed much light on what went down behind the scene. Those that claimed the Brian was a “sociopath” or worse seem to know stuff about his inner mind that none of us have any access to. We don’t know how the declaration was signed or under what conditions or under what terms or promises of its use by the Church.

          1. G-man, someone told me that Brian was told that the declaration would not even be used. Typical of the church and its legal team and utterly naive of Brian.

          2. Whatever facts may emerge that are at present unknown would not affect the conclusion I drew above, which is that the kindest possibile interpretation of events still finds Culkin profoundly reckless with respect to the Garcias’ and their lawsuit.

            Culkin signed a declaration that was used by the Church to attempt to kill the Garcias’ lawsuit, to which Culkin isn’t a party. If he didn’t already know how things would proceed, which I’m willing to believe, he definitely should have known that his actions would nevertheless result in harm to others. Res ipsa loquitur.

            1. There is the possibility that foul play or unlawful acts were committed on part of the church that may put the declaration in a different light, no?

            2. “There is the possibility that foul play or unlawful acts were committed on part of the church that may put the declaration in a different light, no?”

              Now you’re inventing an alternate reality that not even Culkin has suggested in order to justify the mental gymnastics it takes to exonerate him. Culkin made a public statement already and could have but *did not* suggest that duress was behind his actions. Instead, he said that he “just wanted to get on with [his] life.” So sure, the moon *could* be made of cheese, but my ability to reason suggests otherwise.

            3. No, I am not inventing anything. I am asking if it is possible that actions behind the scene may have negative consequences as to the CoS’ use of that declaration. Knowing the church tactics, I’d have to say this is slightly more probable than the moon being made of cheese, don’t you think?

            4. “No, I am not inventing anything. I am asking if it is possible that actions behind the scene may have negative consequences as to the CoS’ use of that declaration. Knowing the church tactics, I’d have to say this is slightly more probable than the moon being made of cheese, don’t you think?”

              The question isn’t whether Scientology *would* use duress but rather whether here, given everything we know in this particular instance, they did. And there’s nothing suggesting they did. Your argument is ridiculously untenable in light of Culkin’s own statement.

            5. I find it interesting that you would categorically dismiss any possibility off hand that does not conform with your initial position. Let’s wait and see, shall we.

            6. Also, would you think that the most probable course of action would be that when Brian made his sparse appearance on Ortega’s, that he would have spilled any beans of possible foul play?

            7. “Also, would you think that the most probable course of action would be that when Brian made his sparse appearance on Ortega’s, that he would have spilled any beans of possible foul play?”

              You’re deep down the conspiracy rabbit hole here, but I’ll answer–yeah, why not? What are you suggesting as a reason he wouldn’t attempt to fully explain his actions on Tony’s site? You can’t just offer up a possibility without expressing why it’s a reasonable one. AND, if you’re right, then also realize your hypothetical explanation would necessarily conflict with Culkin’s statement there. So if Culkin is the victim you’re suggesting he is, he’s also a liar.

        2. I don’t understand why Culkin is ‘reckless at best’

          Why don’t we talk about something that no one else seems to be talking about.

          Not one person has called Brian’s a declaration a lie. Not one. No one seems to be mentioning that Brian told the truth. The truth about what? The truth about utter unessential bullshit that the church is trying to use NOT to defeat the case itself, but to remove a lawyer that use to represent them?

          I read the declaration and I really can’t see one thing Culkin said that was negative against the case itself, or ‘secret’ information, or anything at all that could be used as a torpedo. Does anyone think the church will actually call Culkin to the stand? That would be SUICIDAL for the church. What if he is cross examined and asked about the settlement or even worse ….. Scientology regging practices. Do you actually think he is going lie under oath? I think not.

          Good for you Brian. Based upon your track record I’m sure you will be doing more exciting things in your life and I bet once the dust settles you will be getting plenty of apologies.

        3. Scott –

          I’ve re-read your post here and studied your legal logic. It is a great lesson.

          Thank you.

          Your contributions are very valuable.

          Alanzo

  2. I talked this over with another indie, and said I thought the guy had to do what he had to do, I am not mad at him, and I agree that I don’t know his whole story. I do agree that a lot of Indie’s have not yet peeled off the cult mentality. That can take time.

    1. Yes – it can take time. But it makes me wonder if it is just the CoS-instilled think they have to peel off or Scientology proper.

    2. Brian Culkin’s Declaration is based upon information Culkin provided to Sarah Heller, as outlined in Heller’s Declaration.

      Brian also commented on Tony’s article, making it clear that he knew what he he intentionally wrote it. Best to stop justifying what he did. Even Brian isn’t justifying what he did! :
      “Brianc •

      People who know me, know fully where i stand on this issue. There is nothing in that declaration that was secret in any way, shape, or form.

      I am truly sorry if I hurt or offended anyone on this blog.

      I want nothing to do with Scientology, independent, the church anything.

      I just wanted to move on with my life.

      Again. I am incredibly upset by this and I feel extremely angry and upset. My hands are shaking typing this.

      I never thought for a second I was selling anyone out. And if you put emotion aside and read it closely — I hope you see the same thing.”

      htttp://tonyortega.org/2013/05/10/scientology-files-to-remove-garcia-attorneys-from-fraud-lawsuit/#comment-892621004

  3. What we have heard is the ex scientology COS members talking and complaining about Brians actions. And I suppose ex means ex members who are declared, or left, or lurkers, or indies or wogs voicing their opinion. Don’t know.

    But, what about the members of the COS. We don’t know their viewpoints.

    LOL

    1. Gib: And I suppose ex means ex members who are declared, or left, or lurkers, or indies or wogs voicing their opinion. Don’t know.
      But, what about the members of the COS. We don’t know their viewpoints.

      Dee: IMO and from my vantage point, An ex’s is someone who has been a member and are now out completely. Some care about seeing changes made but don’t believe. An indie is an independent scientologist, but out of the CofS and still practices it or believes. A wog was never a member but could be very educated in the org’s ways.

      Most members in CofS don’t have a viewpoint outside of the bubble and don’t know what’s happening outside. Shame. Those that might, are on the fence so to speak. Change occurs slowly through education.

  4. I completely agree with you Geir about Brian Culkin. There is also a huge group of people on Tony’s blog who are belittling Brian without really knowing what the hell happened, or how a guy getting $350,000 of his own money back is betraying anybody.

    Miscavige and others who wage war for Scientology like to follow Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War”. That book teaches to use the resources of the enemy against itself, and to take out two enemies wherever you can with one blow.

    Turning a person who was going to be suing you into an asset to disrupt an existing lawsuit is pure Sun Tzu. And paying $350,000 to stop a landslide of millions of dollars of lawsuits – which the Garcia lawsuit will open the floodgates on – was worth the risk for the Church.

    But in doing so, the Church also demonstrated loudly and clearly to the court that they do not follow their own arbitration procedures, and so forcing Garcia to follow those procedures – while letting Culkin out of them – hopefully sunk their motion to throw out the Garcia case.

    They follow Sun Tzu, but you can’t be a brainwashed Scientology idiot and apply Sun Tzu correctly. Sun Tzu himself taught that you have to be completely non-ideological in order to win against your enemies and apply what he taught. That’s not possible for brainwashed Scientology idiots like David Miscavige.

    The Church tried to use Brian Culkin and get something for their (his) $350,000, that’s all.

    I think they will fail.

    If Brian can weather the next few weeks, I hope we see a lot of people apologizing to him – both Indie and Critic alike.

    Alanzo

    1. what you are missing here is what would the members of the current COS do if they were asked to vote on it. And the members are not allowed to vote on it as they don’t know. LOL

  5. I think the guy is a backstabber.
    All anyone had to do is look over his affadavit. He was assisting the cult and he did what they wanted to help himself. Who wants to be friends with someone like that. Maybe he was naiive. It doesn’t change the fact that he helped to screw others over. Anyone with half a brain wouldn’t help the cult. He did. He sucks.
    Geir, I usually like what you write. You are dead wrong on this one.

    1. It was the Church who tried to use Brian to break up the Garcia legal team. Brian was only getting what was rightfully his. The Church did it, not Brian.

      If the Church’s motion fails utterly, and no one is harmed by Brain’s success at getting his own money back, why would you blame Brian for the Church’s actions?

      Alanzo

    2. I agree with you Tony. Signing a piece of paper not knowing the content is one thing but supplying all the information, including emails and such which resulted in the created document one read and agreed to and then signed…. well, it’s clear that he knew what he signed and said as much after the fact. He said it right here:
      “People who know me, know fully where i stand on this issue. There is nothing in that declaration that was secret in any way, shape, or form.”
      htttp://tonyortega.org/2013/05/10/scientology-files-to-remove-garcia-attorneys-from-fraud-lawsuit/#comment-892621004

      Many people have gotten their money back without doing a fraction of what Brian did. For that much money, he should have had an attorney of his own advise him.

  6. If you follow Alonzos logic then Luis Garcia, Mike Rinder and Marty should all sell out to get money they deserve. I don’t think any of those guys would do that and that is what differentiates them from others.

    1. Tony DePhillips wrote:

      If you follow Alonzos logic then Luis Garcia, Mike Rinder and Marty should all sell out to get money they deserve. I don’t think any of those guys would do that and that is what differentiates them from others.

      What money does Mike Rinder and Marty Rathbun “deserve”?

      Luis Garcia is having to sue the Church to get the money he deserves. They won’t give him the money he deserves, that’s why he is suing.

      Sorry. Your post makes no sense, Tony.

      Alanzo

      1. Yeah, I don’t think Mike and Marty are trying to get money are they?

        I guess Tony was trying to make a point, like, you were saying it would also be okay if Luis finally got his money by dropping the lawsuit AND giving all the data he had about all his communications with Rinder and Rathbun and other data that helped the C of S in some way, thereby turning his back on friends that were earlier trying to help him and others?

        Seriously, I think one of the big problems is that lots of people have LOTS of missing data and really are not equipped to accurately comment. That, of course, will NEVER stop people from commenting on blogs, Scientology or otherwise so, again, the onus falls on the source of the published data to a large degree.

        1. Sindy wrote:

          I guess Tony was trying to make a point, like, you were saying it would also be okay if Luis finally got his money by dropping the lawsuit AND giving all the data he had about all his communications with Rinder and Rathbun and other data that helped the C of S in some way, thereby turning his back on friends that were earlier trying to help him and others?

          OK. If that’s what Tony meant, then that makes more sense.

          Signing an affidavit that Mike Rinder is helping to recruit new business for Babbit’s law firm has no effect whatsoever on the Garcia case. And Brian only speculated that the Johnson attorney was on the call, he did not see him. However, that Johnson is helping to recruit new legal business for Babbit’s law firm also has nothing to do with the Garcia case – even Ted Babbit said that to Tony Ortega in his brief interview with him on Monday.

          I’m not a lawyer, but I really see nothing harmful to the Garcia case in the information Brian Culkin provided in his affidavit. I think it’s all smoke and mirrors by the Church and an attempt to distract the judge from ruling on their motion to dismiss the case because Garcia signed an agreement to undergo the Church’s arbitration procedures. It’s pure idiotic bluster, distraction, and desperation.

          I should also make the full disclosure that sometimes my hopes are reflected in my legal opinions.

          What the Church really loves is to have the chance to divide and conquer Indies and Critics and get them trying to destroy each other. That’s also a Sun Tzu tactic.

          Alanzo

          1. Thank you. Harmony is certainly better. Can you respond to my first, longer comment? Please 🙂

          2. “I’m not a lawyer, but I really see nothing harmful to the Garcia case in the information Brian Culkin provided in his affidavit.”

            I’m not surprised that non-lawyers can’t quite see why the declaration is harmful, but I’ve explained above in some depth why it is.

            1. Well, you know how it goes, t1kk — all knowledge is within the reach of Scientologists and some others. All they have to do is “understand.” 😉

            2. Scott –

              Do you think that the motion the church filed using Brian’s declaration to break up Garcia’s legal team undermines their motion to dismiss the Garcia case by demonstrating that even they do not follow their own refund arbitration procedures?

              Would it matter at all to the court that they proved they don’t follow their own procedures which they are trying to force Garcia to follow?

              Alanzo

            3. “Do you think that the motion the church filed using Brian’s declaration to break up Garcia’s legal team undermines their motion to dismiss the Garcia case by demonstrating that even they do not follow their own refund arbitration procedures?

              Would it matter at all to the court that they proved they don’t follow their own procedures which they are trying to force Garcia to follow?”

              Not really. I don’t understand why they’d be beholden to claim that they use arbitration in *every* instance of a refund dispute, which is all this would tend to disprove. Culkin’s declaration is very unlikely to have anything to do with the main case. Scientology won’t enter it because it doesn’t help them except for this disqualify motion, and Babbitt won’t enter it because Culkin is inherently untrustworthy as a matter of law–Babbitt might wind up needing to depose Culkin in this matter and need to impeach his declaration. Not exactly someone you want testifying for you later on.

            4. OK, I’m done commenting on anything having to do with the law or legal disputes.

              Being from this planet, I run on the assumption that the law has something to do with my own sense of fairness. It doesn’t. It is a planet unto itself.

              Every time I visit that planet, the people there do very strange things, and move in ways from a sense of gravity that make no earthly sense to me.

              I have no fucking idea what I am talking about.

              So this is Alanzo, over and out on the Brian Culkin Declaration.

              Alanzo

            5. It should be noted that a lawyer is only an expert on the law. Not people’s or churches’ intentions or tactics. There may also be something to the saying that a lawyer is only right about 50% of the time 😉

            6. “It should be noted that a lawyer is only an expert on the law. Not people’s or churches’ intentions or tactics. There may also be something to the saying that a lawyer is only right about 50% of the time ;-)”

              I’m no stranger to the subject of Scientology either, as you may or may not realize. Regardless though, you don’t need to be a lawyer or familiar with Scientology to simply evaluate the available data in order to arrive at the most reasonable array of conclusions, none of which suggest duress was present. If Culkin himself had ever suggested that he signed under duress, your argument might have more force than what it’s devolved to, i.e., “sometimes lawyers are wrong.” Good luck with that.

            7. “I trust you talked to Brian to come to your conclusion.”

              Obviously not. But I trust *you* did given your personal relationship with him, and to the extent you’re *publicly* debating a topic of which you have information that others aren’t privy to and not disclosing what that information is (but nevertheless coyly suggesting you do have), you’re being wholly dishonest with your readers. Disclose what information you actually have that we don’t, or don’t bother suggesting as much. As I’ve previously stated, I only have Brian Culkin’s declaration, his public statement on Tony’s site, and my understanding of the law. If you’re going to suggest the presence of a deeper darker mystery, the burden is on you to present a plausible scenario. Instead you’ve proposed some preposterous What Ifs about possible duress that, if true, would contradict what Culkin has already said. If you know something, then say something. Otherwise, you have no credibility.

            8. I am pointing you to the fact that you are not privy to all the facts. Neither do I – and that is precisely why I reserve judgment in this situation. You, on the other hand, swiftly conclude. Read Kim’s response. Try to understand it. Compassion is the key.

              Peace. And a hug.

            9. “I am pointing you to the fact that you are not privy to all the facts. Neither do I – and that is precisely why I reserve judgment in this situation. You, on the other hand, swiftly conclude. Read Kim’s response. Try to understand it. Compassion is the key.”

              Kim’s experience, of which I’m familiar as an ARS reader from eons back, isn’t similar to Brian Culkin’s. I’ve always empathized with exes who just want to get on with their lives and signed gag deals. This isn’t that–this is someone signing a deal the purpose of which was to torpedo another ex’s lawsuit. I’ll allow that Brian may not have understood this. But he should have. And to the extent he’s not being welcomed with open arms for actively aiding Scientology, knowingly or not, in its attempts to kill one of the most dangerous lawsuits it has encountered since Lisa McPherson, well, wake up if this is a surprise to you.

            10. Also, Kim Baker’s actions were reasonable because she was essentially defending herself from an attack by Scientology. Brian Culkin was *himself* prepared to bring a lawsuit against Scientology and wound up helping it against someone else bringing suit. He approached Scientology from a position of *legal strength*, Baker reasonably believed she had her own liability to be concerned with respect to FACTNET. I appreciate that Kim Baker sees similarities but I would suggest the situations are apples and oranges.

            11. You will have to excuse me for trusting Kim’s own judgment on this one.

              Another Peace and a Hug.

  7. In general I agree with you. Unfortunately, due process really only pertains to an official court of law (if in fact it is even applied there – at least there are rules). I am going to go out on a limb here and say that I believe the burden of responsibility, when it comes to putting data on the Internet as “news”, belongs to the outlet or source of the information. In this tight knit community, one has to be very careful to make sure that all the subtleties are fully understood. That’s tough with short attention spans and LOTS of jargon to read (like long, official declarations).

    I don’t believe it can be expected that one will get anything less than an instantaneous “stoning” when you have a bunch of individuals, most of whom are not commenting under their real names, leaving quick, not thoroughly thought out comments in rapid succession. It has nothing to do with “Cult Think”. Most of the people on Tony’s blog were never in Scientology but boy do they hate it and often those who were ever involved are marginally maligned, in general, by some.

    Here’s what I think. Brian was a bit of an ass per what I can deduce from people who say they did speak with him before this all came out. He was a bit sneaky. I don’t like what he did BUT, I dislike the mob lynching even more. It’s wrong and some of the vitriol was/is downright psychotic. The day in and day out concentration on the loathing of all things Scientology is toxic and unhealthy and leads to some of the hideous and ridiculous comments posted over the past several days.

    I was wondering when you or one of the people who know him better was going to chime in. Apparently you have been doing so all along and I didn’t know it. I thought the fact that you hadn’t spoken (which now I learn that you had) was odd. The fact that Brian hasn’t cleared it up better is annoying too but possibly you will defend that silence by stating that he had no chance of getting his communication across to people who were frothing at the mouth. There may be some truth to that but I think he would have fared just fine if he hadn’t done anything shifty. People would have listened to him.

    It’s the silence that almost ALWAYS comes after these agreements with the cult that is infuriating. Is he gagged? Did he sign away his right to free speech?

    These are the only reasons that I can see that he would not communicate this out himself:

    1) He is worried he won’t be understood because of all the details that need to be communicated.

    2) He really doesn’t care what people think (which people tend to be annoyed by as they feel disrespected).

    3) He really did do some shifty nonsense, now that he looks at it, and doesn’t know how to make that right.

    4) He signed an agreement to no longer speak on the subject in public.

    Do you know what the reason is?

    1. Sindy –

      Most of your questions are to Geir though, right?

      He’s sleeping now because he’s from Norway.

      Shhh. Just between us, he’s (whisper) Norwegian.

      Anyway, I can totally agree with this statement you made – with one amendment:

      The day in and day out concentration on the loathing of all things Scientology is toxic and unhealthy and leads to some of the hideous and ridiculous comments posted over the past several days.

      I would only cross out “past several days” and scribble in “past several decades”.

      As for Indies, I would say that their toxicity leading to hideous ridiculousness comes from the “5 Minutes of Hate” rallies they hold against David Miscavige and the “RCS” every day.

      Otherwise I do not know Brian and can not answer your questions because I do not know his reasons.

      Good to see you here, though, Synj. Hope to see you becoming addicted to posting here more!

      Alanzo

      1. You’re the best! I shall wait for Geir to awake. I have actually been waiting for Geir to speak to this and I am happy to contribute to this blog.

    2. My assessment: #1 and #4 and a #5: In shock over the whole scene and not knowing whet the f#¤ck to say to an angry lynch mob already well underway to stone him.

      1. You see, it may seem naive of me to say this or disingenuous, but it is in fact true, I would NEVER sign away my freedom of speech. I would never agree to that with the C of S for any amount of money. That’s me though and I am well aware that the cult is sneaky and they could very well have worn him down using all sorts of subterfuge.

        1. Yes – and we don’t know that – and thus the stones should be reserved for other purposes until further notice.

  8. Brian did what he had to do to get his money back. I don’t understand the controversy. It don’t think he betrayed anybody. I think people need to get a life. Geez!

  9. There is an important issue here at stake, which is rather independent of Brian Culkin and the question if he intended to betray or not.
    Some people felt betrayed and have a hard time staying somewhat objective in their attitude, others reacted indeed like an angry mob. They felt “in the right” to do to Brian, (Facebook disconnection, harassment and other methods of labeling and denigration), what they call abuse when it is done by the COS. Just voicing some concerns and the question if independents shouldn’t be better than that, led to immediate harassment by a self-appointed independent Scientology Security Guard and some others.
    The issue at stake is this, if independent Scientology as a group is not better than that, we have lost.
    If a cool head, balanced reasoning and fair treatment are not higher valued than a holy wrath, – if that is the case, than we have lost. Because at that point we clearly do not looking at a group of enlightened beings but just a raving mess of bank.
    What we need is independent Scientologist to be a group of enlightened beings, such a group is needed to repair the damage done by the COS and to find a way out of this trap.
    So any discussion did Brian or did Brian not? Is a wasted effort as what Brian did is not decisive in any way if we make it or not.
    How we as a group deal with such a thing is what really matters and defines the make or break point.

    1. Excellent comment. That is my main point of this blog post.

      It is really not about why Brian did what he did – even though lots of people seem to know exactly what’s going on in his head – it is about how an angry mob of Scientologists is at best at par with another angry mob out there (or even worse off). And this does not bode well for any handling of the current messy Scientology scene.

    2. Gerhard – Great comment. “If a cool head, balanced reasoning and fair treatment are not higher valued than a holy wrath, – if that is the case, than we have lost.” This is the real make break point on the use and subject of Scientology. I do not agree at all with what Brian signed. He seemed to have a benefit – but at a cost to the efforts of others. Naive, absolutely. Evil or purposeful damaging, I doubt it. I believe many are upset as they had their hopes that his shoulder to the wheel would help right the train of truth and justice.

      This upset by others does not justify the type of criticism some have written. If and when Brian is able to comment he may be able to clear up some of the why this and why that. Win or lose in the legal arena is but one facet of becoming better as a person. For the group of independent Scientologists’ to win the legal battle and at the same time lose their integrity and ability to have empathy and understanding is a poor trade-off. I believe the best is to win the legal, the moral, the ethical and the ability to view and communicate truth. That is a win for all sides – even the current followers and members of the RCS who have decided to remain deaf, dumb and blind to the obvious.

  10. The generalities are like a swamp here and the target is “Independent Scientologists” and it seems THIS is a witch hunt.

    Please stop ascribing a few posts to “INdependent Scientologists”. There are THOUSANDS of Independent Scientologists that don’t even USE FACEBOOK! This is what I see as injustice. I for one, DID NOT target Brian or judge him.

    This is EXACTLY what I wrote:

    “Brian Culkin takes Church payola to turn on Marty and Mike and throw Louis and his wife (And everyone else who could have gotten a refund based on this outcome) under the bus.

    See what the Church can do? Wear down and overwhelm a man to the tune of 350K in DONATIONS, giving him NOTHING in exchange!

    Then, turn him into an instrument to harm attack and suppress others to obtain some of it back. Just degrade him right down into a blatant treason condition.

    This is how the Church helps one “improve conditions” in their life these days?”

    And:

    “In David’s own sadistic way I am sure he took the overwhelm of Brian as a personal win. Well, I have no intention of bashing or degrading Brian. Frankly David, what you did to that man sickens me.”

    So please, do not fair game the ENTIRE Independent Scientology community or start declare everyone of them part of a lynch mob. THAT is injustice.

    1. Marty, Mike, Karen and the ENTIRE FREEZONE forum haven’t even mentioned his name or the incident! It is YOU over here making it an issue and calling Brian “stupid” on your blog!

    2. Hello M’Lady Oracle!

      Way to come in with gun’s blazing with the furor of injustice in your postings. I love to use that kind of entrance myself sometimes.

      Depends on the scene, though, and what the other actors are going for dramatically.

      Don’t you think? <:)

      Alanzo

    3. In recent days, Culkin has called numerous people, telling them that he received a full refund — $350,000 — in return for signing the declaration.

      He can move on now.

      If the Church would give everybody back their money that was asking for a refund or SOME EXCHANGE, that would make up for the damage done, there wouldn’t be ANY NOISE or OUT P.R. out here.

      Need you wonder WHY Karen de la Carrier is dismayed and disappointed?

      How is this for “exchange”? From Karen de le Carriere:

      “I served aboard the Flagship Apollo where I was trained by LRH to the level of Class XII C/S. I am one of only seven Class XII C/S’ LRH ever made.

      After LRH took Flag ashore in Clearwater, I met and fell in love with Heber Jentzsch. We married and Heber went on to become the President of the Church of Scientology International. I remained devoted to LRH and to my duties as a Class XII C/S at Flag. I won “Auditor of the Year” at Flag numerous times.

      COB RTC David Miscavige ordered Heber Jentzsch and I to be divorced and has utterly destroyed our 2nd dynamic.

      I was suddenly a single mother with a child to support. Heber was unable to pay any child support.

      Indeed, Heber could not even support himself on his $50 per week Sea Org pay. I did not protest this as Heber was the President of the Church of Scientology International and I did not want to create a flap for the Church. The Church had me sign affidavits on video camera that I would never ask for child support.

      I routed out of the Sea Org in 1990 and took many years to pay off my $90,000 Freeloader Debt.”

      The Church made her sign her civil, legal and human rights away and sent her packing with a 90,000.00 “Freeloader debt” after DECADES of service, as a single mother with no support. They FILMED her promising not to ask the father of her child to take any responsibility! Then they suppressed her son TO DEATH.

      SHE got faced with a lynch mob, up at the INT BASE!

      It is NOT the “INDEPENDENT SCIENTOLOGISTS” that are the source of abuse here Gier.

      There are a LOT of unhappy customers.

      LRH gives an answer in PAB 13 ON HUMAN BEHAVIOR, written in 1953.
      It is a briefing to auditors on the importance of knowing the most aberrated and most aberrative types of personality.
      In this PAB, LRH says:
      What we will call the aberrative personality does the following things:
      1. Everything bad that happened to the preclear was (a) ridiculous, (b) unimportant, (c) deserved.
      2. Everything the preclear and others did to the aberrative person was (a) very important, (b) very bad, (c) irremediable.
      3. Those things which the preclear could do (a) were without real value, (b) were done better by the aberrative personality or by others.
      4. Sexual restraint or perversion.
      5. Inhibition of eating.

      The Church of Scientology’s attitude is 1. Everything bad that happened to the preclear was (a) ridiculous, (b) unimportant, (c) deserved.
      2. Everything the preclear and others did to the Church was (a) very important, (b) very bad, (c) irremediable.

      Likewise, there are people out here that feel everything done to the THEM was (a) very important, (b) very bad, (c) irremediable. And whatever they do to others is (a) ridiculous, (b) unimportant, (c) deserved.

      With attitudes like this “justice” is unlikely. In ANY arena!

    4. My specifics, as reflected in the OP and the backdrop is that there is a Facebook group (the main one) of Indie Scientologists where this went down. It has some 450 or so members. Scores of people chimed in on the thread that was hundred of comments long. I was the only one trying to get facts on the table to handle the lynch mob going apeshit. One other person said he reserved himself from passing judgment without proper facts. Some 400+ didn’t say anything, but was either not seeing this happening or watching the lynch mob go about its business.

      However, there are enough crazy rants caused by my posting over the past weeks to both that group and the Freezone mailing list to draw the conclusion that the Main Indie venues are not predominated by enlightened, well-balanced and rational people.

      There are of course exceptions. But they should hurry up and speak lest their voice of reason is dwarfed by stones hitting the black guy.

      1. Well, I am not on that group. Are you claiming that you are are an “enlightened, well-balanced and rational person”? That is a yes or no question. It is either Yes, or No. For the record I have never claimed to be an enlightened well balanced, or rational person. So I have no obligation to live up to these standards.

        Who’s standards are these anyway? I want to know right now who is going to stand on public forum and say, “Me! I declare myself enlightened, well-balanced and rational .” And, according to what standards.

        Sanity is simple, very simple. It is assisting things that assist survival, inhibiting things that inhibit survival. I do have the guts right here to declare that I am sane.

        Who / what is Brian assisting right now? He is assisting things that inhibit survival. He is being a crazy motherfucker.

        YOU are inhibiting “Independent Scientologists” with your DECLARE and FAIRGAMING.

        Sorry, Marty, Mike, Karen, and a host of others, are ASSISTING THINGS THAT ASSIST SURVIVAL. It is NOT a rocket scientist goal! Fucking LANDSCAPERS and FARMERS assist things which assist survival! What did you eat today? Who grew it? Did it keep you alive, the food? Those people assisted your survival.

        Let’s come on up from BLAME for a minute here.

        Take a breath.

        I don’t want to op term you. I don’t want to blame you. I am just asking you to be FAIR. Do not associate Independent Scientologists with the K.K.K.. That is an A=A.

        SPOT SOURCE. WHO is the source of this conflict if not the C of S? Brian has a RIGHT to his refund.

        Louis has a RIGHT to his refund.

        Please, let’s not turn on one another.

        EVERYBODY has a RIGHT to WIN. We are all told this is the game where everybody wins. We were PROMISED. So why should any one of us be comfortable with a loss?

        1. It is very possible that Brian gets his money back and so will Louis. It is still possible wait until this chapter plays out. Maybe we will all win. For the love of God, it isn’t the end, it is the beginning. All we have to do to make sure everybody wins in the end, is to create that reality. Don’t think a few of us are not trying. There are only a few out here that are SETTING PEOPLE UP FOR LOSSES. The majority is SETTING PEOPLE UP FOR WINS. Otherwise, we would not have a civilization here.

          1. By the way, I consider it vital information that Brian is backing the Church efforts to ensure people can not PROVE the Super Power fundraising is caste with fraudulent purposes. I consider that vital information. I do not see him as anything more a traumatized figure in this theater. And his efforts and personal decisions do not misdirect my attention on to him and off of the C of S. The Church used him like a piece of meat thrown to wolves. I can see exactly what they did. But in the end, why did he owe it to anyone to have a loss? I hope he gets his money (with any dignity he will make an anonymous contribution to Marty as he used Marty’s blog to relieve himself and position himself as a benefactor), and so do the others who have been defrauded. It does not bother me that Brian prospered. He was supposed to prosper. So were all of us.

            If he prospers at the benefit of many others who will loose as a result of his decision, he will live with being in the same boat with the David Miscavige. It is not like there are not a lot of people out here in and out of Scientology that profit off of other people’s misery and do not give it a second thought.

            But SURLY Karen is not to be scorned for alerting people there has been a game change. I would like to find ONE other living person out here that measures up to her standards of loyalty, devotion, professionalism, courage and exchange with the world.

            David Miscavige frankly, is no match for her. He overshot on that one. She has higher altitude. She has a longer record of humble service, she is higher trained and higher audited. While he depends on the efforts of slaves she rose above the economics of the world while raising a child and she has come out ON TOP of every game. Only CONTRIBUTING to others and caring about the people in front of her.
            She has prospered by supporting genious’ visionaries and artists.

            David makes his way by dominating slaves. Establishing beggar units.Pulling the rug out from under others. He managed to make the IRS go PTS to him by suppression.

            Hubbard said the common denominator of all losers is incorrect estimation of force.

            David with billions and thousands of slaves has not been able to suppress Karen de la Carrier. All of his efforts to unmock her has only made her grow. He does not have the resources to unmock that woman.

            Not today, not ever.

            1. If fact, if it were not for Marty and Mike, Brian would not had anything to sell the Church for that 350K. The “illusion” is that that was a “refund”. In fact, it was selling vital information collected on the BACKS of Marty and Mike because they CARED for Brian and others. Brian has his OWN EXCHANGE he needs to put in with these people. I hope he has the DECENCY to make an APPROPRIATE DONATION to both men, so at least they have the wherewithal to continue CARING about and supporting others. I do see him as being out exchange with BOTH of them. Their time, attention, counsel has been VERY valuable to Brian. It gave him something to sell for 350K. Just because they got thrown under the bus does NOT mean they have not been of value. THat was just injustice.

        2. I’m not a fan of the emotional Scientology drama. If I had the pharmaceutical licence needed, I would promptly go into business and start dealing chill-pills wholesale. Because the market is clearly expanding.

          1. Isene: I would promptly go into business and start dealing chill-pills wholesale. Because the market is clearly expanding.

            That cracked me up, what a sense of humor. 🙂
            Maybe F**kIt pills could be made. Placebos!

    5. Oracle: The generalities are like a swamp here and the target is “Independent Scientologists” and it seems THIS is a witch hunt.

      Please stop ascribing a few posts to “INdependent Scientologists”. There are THOUSANDS of Independent Scientologists that don’t even USE FACEBOOK! This is what I see as injustice. I for one, DID NOT target Brian or judge him.

      Spyros: Yes, I disagree with this generality too, although it works both ways. I have read the implication or direct statement, a few times, that the churchies are like this (bad) and independents are like that (good) which is in a way third party too. And most independents have been churchies too. I don’t think people suddently see the holy light, once they exit, especially if someone is willing to give up the status he had in that church. 🙂

        1. I think the best would be to deal with individuals, not independents nor churchies, but then there wouldn’t be the ‘scientologist’ generality either. What does it mean? God knows what. I asked him once and he told me, and decided to fuck off :p

          1. I agree 100%. Treat people with the respect you would give any individual. Deal with individuals. That is very sane Spyros. The people that will not give up the “status” they had in the Church, well, it really also depends on the Individual there. These Bucks that are coming out here fair gaming Freezoners and Independents because they worked at the Int Base (and left there declared S.P.’s) are using “status quo” to DOMINATE. (And suppress). There are some fanatics out here calling themselves Indies that are running the same party line and working to DOMINATE others. I do not contribute to those web sites or FB groups. They have nothing I want or need, in fact they are telling others what THEY want and need and seem to be collecting data already for their file clerks. They are not INDEPENDENTS. No matter the banner they fly. When you are out here harming and attacking and suppressing others under the mask of “Love for Hubbard and Scientology” it becomes obvious right away because the majority of us are SELF CORRECTING.

            1. Yeah, I haven’t met anyone who worked at Int Base, but I think domination is 100% against that basic purpose of freeing beings, although I have met people who rationalized that it was very well aligned, and said that it’s what LRH did too, etc. I think they just used a couple of references while they ignored 2000 lectures, just to justify themselves. It’s what makes me bitch at ‘some scientologists’ or something of the sort, sometimes. And I think it’s ‘illegal’ theta-wise, to act like that. And I think that -to a huge degree- SCN has decayed in terms of popularity so that such people will no longer be able to do that. There is no outside enemy. I’ve grown up with Hubbard’ s stuff too, but I don’t want to be same group (scientologist) with such people nor their sheep.

  11. Since I am a Bunker regular it needs to be said that yes, a lot of the comments were against him. On the other hand the same number gave him the benefit of doubt. Most speculate a lot and give their view of possibilities of what may have happened. There are many very intelligent commenters who really do care about the people and abuses in the organization and want to see them free someday. There are also very warm, very warm hearted wogs and ex’s who want to help ex’s and they provide good communication to them when they are sincere. It’s a tough crowd and know all about trollers, ronbots and accept no proselyting. Tony O. puts up what’s happening around the Scn world and ex’s news and the commenters Freely speak. Most are very rational and educated in worldly ways and of Scn. At least there has been some good sane thinking along with the usual hits. They do like to have fun too and if you’re not strong, you will become or leave. This time with Brian, it was tough, but all in all, it sounds better than the indies attack on him IMO. Nobody knows the truth yet, therefore much speculation and eval.

    I believe Brian was USED by the CofS one way or another, because that’s what they DO!
    I can sense how destroyed he must feel and hope he has a pal to help him get through this.

    1. BTW. There are several indies that regularly comment on the Bunker. And they are treated with interest, fairness, consideration and are appreciated since others like to learn. As long as they are honest they are treated thusly.

  12. Looks like a bunch of over reaction from a bunch of people who have developed a craving to have symbols to attack, so as to build an/or reinforce the case that “we are in a war, and we must act like we are at war, because ‘the enemy’ is always upon us”. That’s what I call getting out of the C of S, but not having the C of S (mentality) out of you. “stand shoulder to shoulder, call out the SP’s and confront all that ‘evil’! ” “Curse the infidels!”; bores the shit out of me. There must be something better to use to make a group and hold it together, like, I dunno, the earnest search for case gain and enlightenment, and respect for others with similar interests?

        1. Thanks Kim (love you too, what a great being you are to have risen above and come to understand the pointlessness of silly war games!) and Geir, for the kind words, and for being beacons of sanity in an environment where contention and finger pointing seem to be the very basis of the agreed upon game. So many people have so long bought into the paranoia/war game hook, line and sinker so thoroughly that they will redefine and misuse any and all principles and information to jump start or perpetuate the mudslinging for fear that without this, they would have no identity; what such people need to understand is that this IS merely an identity, and that there are better games to play, and better ways to define oneself.

  13. This subject came up on Marty’s blog (just once that I know of) when a poster asked Marty about it yesterday:

    Elle | May 13, 2013 at 4:14 pm | Reply
    I know your blog has changed significantly in the last few months so I don’t know if my question is relevant here. But I read today that Brian Culkin signed a declaration for Scientology and against the Garcias and got a 350,000.00 dollar refund. Are you following this story and do you have an opinion to share about it?

    And his reply was:

    martyrathbun09 | May 13, 2013 at 7:50 pm | Reply
    I am not involved beyond being a witness. Opinion? Much ado about not much.

    http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2013/05/12/self-transcendence/#comment-265588

    1. And Marty is well in the know on this one. He retains his cool. It’s not like “the more data you have the more outraged you will be” in this situation. Marty knows the legal scene and he’s not stoning anyone.

      1. Yes, I thought it was significant that he is in the know and thinks there is “much ado about not much”.

  14. The document is just fodder for the CoS to spin a story, and wave it around, Senator Joe McCarthy style, claiming it is ‘evidence’ and ‘proof’ even if it is only some mundane information of no importance. They will spin it to have ‘importance’. That’s why it would have been better for Brian to hold the line and not communicate with them at this time. The CoS did co-opt him, and wittingly or not, he has provided them with some ‘ammunition’. It maybe useless ammunition, it may be ammunition that backfires on them, but nonetheless he did compromise with them and he will be used.

    When I was very young, just after the end of WWII, my family was caught in North Korea by some Soviet Intelligence agencies and placed under watch. Very few were able to escape outright. Some, including my father, ‘escaped’ by compromising in some way with the Intelligence people. He was tainted by this and had to disconnect himself from the rest of the family in an attempt to protect us from future threats.

    There are some situations in which it is better not to make any ‘deal’ with an adversary; if you make a deal it will cost you something; you may be compromising not just yourself, but others as well.

    I hope it all works out OK. We should know fairly soon.

  15. Am I correct in believing he was involved for less than a year? What loyalty is due?, He had no common experience which he could relate to with the Indie’s and the In’s. He hadn’t been damaged and betrayed like all the people who’d like to lynch him. But, at least now he has a little taste of the Scn experience!
    But, the fact is “Stupid is as Stupid does” for the CoS because in their rush to present this Proof of reasonable settlement, they proved the point for the judge that they do not follow procedure and the action needs to be denied! And it will be thanks to their stupidity and his help.
    All of this is soo blatantly idiotic it almost appears as DM wants the road to destruction to manifest in order to fulfill some greedy, unspoken purpose.
    Anybody want to start a post on weird outcomes from the Cos and DM 5 years into the future?

    1. Brian was involved for a year or so.

      Any scenario painting the future of Scientology/DM 5 years from now is bound to get very high odds. I believe what will happen may be crazier than we would put our money on.

  16. Greed, fear, anger. They bring out the worst in all of us and throughout history, always have. If there were a lust/sex/jealousy angle, the drama would be complete.

    Geir, it’s great you brought up your personal history with Brian. It’s easy to de-personalise someone from a distance. When we perceive another as an enemy, we stop considering them as individuals.

    Still, I’m not sure another discussion about Brian is the way to go right now. I’d rather wait to see what happens. It will all unfold eventually.

  17. To the commenters on this blog post: You make me proud. This right here is an honest exchange of viewpoints. And even though the views span a fairly large spectrum, cool is kept. Thank you.

  18. Thanks for this post Geir. While I have also made ‘negative’ comments at the bunker they are not of the “he is evil” variety, but naive and perhaps self serving. It is disappointing when someone who you feel is standing with you breaks ranks, but I agree this isn’t the end of the world. Thank you again for the moderate discussion

  19. Aren’t we having fun in mental space-time?

    The physical objects that we perceive, seems to exist in space and time. We may say that space-time is the prominent property of the “manifestation-perception” system. We wonder what is beyond space-time, and we get into speculation.

    The next thing we know is that we now perceive the mental objects provided by speculation. We may think that we are looking beyond space-time of the “manifestation-perception” system, but are we? Is there such a thing as Kant’s “thing-in-itself”?

    We are no longer looking at the physical objects, so we may be outside of physical space-time. However, we seem to have entered mental space-time. We perceive mental objects, so we are still within the manifestation-perception system. There seem to be no escape from the manifestation-perception system. This is because there is neither manifestation nor perception beyond this system. This tells us that we have something very fundamental on our hands.

    Kant separates ‘things’ perceived from ‘sense’ that perceives them, and puts “thing-in-itself” beyond sense perception. But this, then, presents a conjecture to be perceived by the mind. The physical senses can see ‘three spoons’, ‘three cups’ and ‘three plates’, but it is the mental sense that recognizes the pattern of three. So, beyond physical objects, we have the harmonic of mental objects that are perceived in mental space-time by the mental sense.

    Kant is making a conjecture, but he doesn’t seem to recognize that conjecture as a mental object existing in mental space-time, and being perceived by the mind.

    The dimension beyond physical is the mental dimension. The harmonic beyond physical space-time is mental space-time.

    .

    1. Vin, I just want to say that while I like reading your stuff, I like reading it ON YOUR BLOG. Not as a completely off-topic posting here on Geir’s blog. Why don’t you just restrict yourself to link-whoring by posting a link if you must do your promotion here?

  20. I agree with those who are taking a wait and see position as to the impact Brian’s declaration will have on the Garcia litigation. I appreciate very much t1kk’s comments here and elsewhere on this issue.

    Several years ago, Brian made himself a public person in the indie and ex communities. Based on Brian’s own descriptions of his dealings with the Co$ (while he was in the cult) and his very recent actions (not the silly stuff some have imagined), I think he’s a terrifically naïve, not very swift person.

    FTR, I don’t think he’s a sociopath. I think he’s stupid. Plus, his shocked butt-hurt that some feel betrayed by his stupid behavior just confirms that he’s extra-stupid.

    My opinion of Brian doesn’t make me a lynch mob. It makes me a person with an opinion. Like you, Geir.

    Just Me

      1. OMG!!! How dare you criticize us!!!! What the hell is wrong with you? I think you must have had a very unusual childhood full of scary clowns and spiders and stuff!! OMG OMG. Where’s my holy water….

      2. Alanzo: But what the fuck. It’s only my flesh.

        Chris: Figuratively! We bloggers can take ourselves too seriously (not you, we.) Sometimes its good to remember there is a literal side to our metaphors.

      3. Alanzo: The Fundamental Attribution Error.

        Chris: It seems to me that we can avoid this error in thinking by being mindful that everyone’s behavior makes sense to them.

  21. Geir – I feel you are too critical with the Indies!
    We know what the culture within the Church. Suppression and arbitrary and injustice are not only carried out by DM personally. Many many staffs are executing this, following ‘command intention’. And they’ve been doing it for many years.
    Some of them have left the Church and are now part of the Indies’s group.
    I think it takes a longer time until this ‘culture’ which these people have practiced for years is washed away. Just by blowing people who have behaved mean for years don’t become people with high ethics.
    I think that this should be looked at by the Indies. And they should make sure that everyone ‘behaves’.
    I did not ‘behave’ to their standards. And I was kicked out of a FB group. I had dared to criticize one of the Indies’ heroes.
    This was not allowed within the Church and it is not allowed outside. Free speech is not yet reality among Indies yet. Being banned for being to critical is still practiced. Like inside.
    I’d like to invite the Indies to a helicopter flight, looking at the subject from an exterior position. I’m sure this would provide the opportunity for many cognitions.

    1. DanielV: Just by blowing people who have behaved mean for years don’t become people with high ethics.

      Chris: So true. I’m not understanding your post, though. You opened with a defense of Indies? But then wrote a cogent comment about some of their problems with tolerance? I would be interested if you would say a little more to clear me up.

      1. He’s saying that Geir should have more tolerance of the those that have yet to fully emerge from the damaging effects of the Co$.

        I think the problem is more general in nature and doesn’t just apply to some of the indies. It applies as well to some fanatical exes and critics.

        Dos it makes sense to request one be tolerant of the intolerant?

    2. Nice, Daniel. I would like to see Scientologists gathering and helping each other. No pyramid thing. Not one delivering and others expecting etc. This goals has been set ever since DMSMH and continued with most books and other issues. But I haven’t seen it happening. OK, the church didn’t allow that, but now there is no church for independents, dammit 😛

  22. I am having my say here later rather than sooner, for a reason, which you know about, Geir. And I cannot elaborate too much at this stage.

    But I will say now that I am 100% with Geir on this. In a nutshell, the same thing happened to me 18 years ago. No-one had any idea of what had gone down with me, but I watched online as a similar lynch mob “dubbed in” what they thought happened, and tore into me. That was in 1995.

    Back then, it was primarily critics that were dogpiling me. I even received a death threat. It was someone from the old “Free Zone” who displayed that enlightened compassion, reached out to me, and helped me through it. I was suicidal, but made it through the experience because one person said: “Kim, I love you.”. I could, from that, then navigate my way out of the mess. Yes, I was undoubtedly naive and taken by OSA hook line and sinker. My bad, no argument, BUT I was able to fix it because of those few who kept their reason in tact, and suspended judgement.

    The lynch mob may have f**ked up any chance of getting this situation fixed. Compassion and reason could have gone a long way towards addressing it. And those who participated are too self-righteous to see that.

    I will have more to say later, maybe, if relevant, But for now, I wanted to put on record my THANK YOU, Geir, for your stand.

    For reference purposes, my personal experience, which is documented here: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/mystory/kimbeast.txt and which has surreal similarities to Brian’s situation.

    1. Kim. This brings tears to my eyes. I really don’t fuckin care if people becomes upset for me standing up for fairness and for not jumping the gun. I find it befuddling that my stand is mistaken for defending Brian’s action. What I stand for is what you sum up here. Those who can’t or won’t understand that, I will offer this: HUGS.

    2. Your story is a remarkable one, Kim.

      Wolf-pack flesh-ripping is a blood sport on the Internet. Once they start, they do not stop until they are satisfied.

      And some are never satisfied.

      Alanzo

      1. Thanks, Alanzo. Yep, and I did not see this time any differences between the mob from my time of 1995, who were critics of Scientology (not all, but mostly), and the mob of 2013, who are Independent Scientologists.

        (In fairness, I do note that some Independent Scientologists are exceptions, as evidenced by the comments from some here on this blog). But that group, that mob that Geir is referring to, showed nothing to distinguish them from ordinary people who fall into the “mob” psychosis syndrome.

        Doesn’t inspire confidence in them to be people to better conditions on the planet at all. Any more than the Co$ does.

    3. Kim: “which has surreal similarities to Brian’s situation.”

      Dee: I do see the similarities.
      Now I must say I looked at your letter some time ago. This time I read the whole thing. I can hardly put into words what I felt and feel for what you went through. I can relate with some of it myself, like a snapping moment. Funny how that works.
      My heart shed tears and all I can say is that you are loved my dear And understood as well. Anyone familiar with the insidious ways of OSA, not just particular individuals, will understand also. Look forward to your posting again. Thank you so much for helping others.

      1. Dee – many thanks, greatly appreciate your comment. I can tell you have deep insight and understanding into this as well. And yes, while there are obviously contextual differences, the similarities are uncanny. Very few people understand that “snapping” effect. Very few. Thank you for your love, it is well received.

        I can assure you that I am personally well over it all now, and past it. If anything, in the long term, the experience deepened my range of understanding of the human condition, and also my ability to have compassion for others, and it is also why I can never walk the path of hate again. And I will always help another in distress, if I can.

        I personally would like to have the same outcome happen for Brian.

        Love to you too.

        1. Kim: I personally would like to have the same outcome happen for Brian.

          You’re welcome and thanks too. Yes hope for Brian!
          I’m happy to hear you are through the past and stronger, and me too. We can appreciate the trip, be better and more compassionate because of it! 🙂

  23. A person succeeded in getting his money back from the C of S. There’s no reason to rush to judgement, and more basically, there’s no reason to judge at all, which is Geir’s point to begin with. He certainly has been judged by certain people with their own axe to grind, which is to fan (or re-ignite) the flames of over-indulgence in playing a dramatic role in opposing the C of S, so as to be counted among the “on-purpose LRH loyalists”, or some such, and part of that role is to have a target to attack always. We all know enough about the abuses of the C of S to stay away, and to, with a level head, inform others not to be drawn in. Beyond that, it seems to me, there are quite a few people who would be better served by moving on to something more beneficial with their lives, than to dream up excuses for paranoia and finger pointing. For action drama, maybe play paintball, or cowboys and indians, or whatever, and don’t confuse or associate that role playing with real life. Again, this is the point of Geir’s original post.

  24. Geir: “I never supported him signing the declaration. I think he was stupid to do so.”

    He maneuvered himself into a position to make his signature worth 350K to the Church of Scientology. He used staff as volunteers for information gathering. He slid into a position of power by means of donations from others.

    That isn’t stupid. That was brilliant.

    Scientology is a “pay to play” game from day one. If you don’t have cash, they will take your time, your energy, your talent , your skills. your life.

    Some people catch on fast and fast forward to the winners circle.

    Brian’s performance is one of the most spectacular I have ever seen.

    He is far from stupid. He paid, he played. He got played and he played some others.
    And he was very witty and crafty about it all. That guy is fucking genius! Dangerous!

    1. Perhaps I’m just uninformed but what staff did he use? What donations from others are you referring to? Garcia’s?

      From what I have seen, I don’t see the genius that you are seeing.

      1. He used Marty, Mike and a host of Independents as his staff. Gathering reports, information and intel for him. (After all, that is what he sold for 350K).

        All of what he had to sell in way of intel, was DONATED to him. Also time, attention, help and care.

        He did not have to spend anything to gather that intel except emails and posts.

        1. You seem to assume that he knew there was an exchange of His money against anything the church didn’t already know.

          1. I am not assuming anything. I can only remark on the outcome and how it all came together.

            These are indications. “You assume” “You misreacted” etc. These are wrong indications to a lot of people and that is why you are getting the protest reads you are getting. And I think you provoke people in this way for the communication, which is the fruit of all livingness.

            I could open a blog and accuse everyone in Europe that gets shocked with some incidents as being Nazi. That is how the Church rolls. Labels. “K.K.K., Nazi” Whatever.

            This could be employed to DOMINATE others and run herd on them. “Don’t act like this, don’t say this, don’t respond like that.”

            I have employed people to treat others as they would like to be treated. At times it has worked and at times it has not. These are personal choices.

            The bottom line is that you have summoned up a comm ev here on the Independents. You have also summoned up a comm ev here on the ESMB crowd at one time. If you want to summon up a comm ev on me, I would like to have my own thread. Although I doubt I would attend to speak up for myself. But I understand these justice events attract a lively crowd.

            1. Brian is not the only one to be gathering intel. Go on over to the IScientology blog and check out the all of surveying going on. People love to communicate and to help. But there are some shady people in this game and it is rife with treason. Religion is a charged item for a lot of people. Domination is a charged purpose for a lot of people.

            2. Wow. Touchy much?

              I write what I observe. Deal with it.

              Oh wait, I guess this is your attempt to deal with this.

              Try objectivity, tolerance, compassion, not jumping to conclusions, assumptions and not finding another guilty of crimes against (whatever) until due facts are on the table.

              I never labeled “Independent Scientologists”, “Independent Scientology” or “The Whole Group Of (fill in)” anything. I observed a Lynch Mob. I reported what I saw. I am sure there were also many well meaning people in that group that would never dream of join the lynch mob. But only one person said he would “suspend judgment” on Brian. To me, that says a lot. Way too much.

              You may continue to defend this act of injustice if you like. Because injustice it is. Even hanging a known child murderer without due process is injustice. The result of a trial does not justify corrupting the process. I say “innocent until proven guilty”. And I stick to that. It forwards objectivity, cool and rationality. And human decency.

              I see a possible dramatizing of the lack of legal protection that Scientologists are used to experience in the Church of Scientology.

            3. I’m sorry Geir, but this seems disingenuous on your part. Here’s the opening of your OP:

              “When this news reached the main Independent Scientologists Facebook group, all hell broke lose. Even before the comments to Ortega’s piled up good.
              Without any more data, without any due process. Brian was promptly proclaimed guilty. Not only that, but within minutes, a lynch mob gathered and called Brian anything from “traitor” and “slime boy” to “degraded being” and “sociopath”. He had clearly and intentionally back-stabbed every Indie Scientologist. Clear as day!\
              Ortega’s view of this was taken as fact, and Indie Scientologists instantly cried out for “Disconnection!”

              To anyone I know who reads this, it implicates “Independent Scientologists” as a class. It does not specify or disclaim that it was a segment of “Independent Scientologists” ,a portion of “Independent Scientologists”, or anything of the kind.

              It reads like a blanket indictment of “Independent Scientologists”. That may not be how you intended it, but that IS how it reads to me. There is no indication on your part that it was SOME of the posters there who acted as hysterical vigilantes, you made it sound like it was the entire group.

            4. Val, that was the impression I got too. And Geir also implied that it wasn’t just Independents in general, all of whom had been involved in the CoS, but that it was a matter of “Scientology Proper”. This isn’t the first time Geir has expressed his viewpoint about Scientology itself being at the root of various negative attributes – which explains why he would generalize about Independents, who continue to be Scientologists. This was his comment at 2013-05-15 @ 02:54:

              “Yes – it can take time. But it makes me wonder if it is just the CoS-instilled think they have to peel off or Scientology proper.”

            5. marildi, my impression is, he has increasingly adopted Al’s style of indiscriminate generalization, and assigning cause to external influences rather than to a person’s own personal responsibility.

              Gern Gascoen has a comment on Marty’s blog referring to “Cleared Cannibal” that I think is apropos.

              Basically it is that when you clear an asshole, you get a cleared asshole, who is capable of being more intense of an asshole than before. You don’t get a different person.

              It is education and culture that produces a more refined person, not clearing by itself. The culture of Scientology as represented by the Church has grown in the opposite direction, becoming increasingly insular and inbred. They are more and more like the cannibalistic hillbillies depicted in some Hollywood horror movies like “The Hills Have Eyes”, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, WrongTurn etc.

              In the meantime, the “Critics” become more and more like those they criticize, only in the other direction. And nobody actually places responsibility where it belongs, on the individuals who perform the actions. Blaming the actions of people on others or on a philosophy or book is nothing more than the Nuremburg Defense. Or what LRH called “responsible for condition” cases.

              To me the fact is, when you clear a sheep, you get a cleared sheep, or whatever the basic nature of that particular person happens to be. Human nature is always in play and history shows us humans are capable of just about anything, from Buddha and Christ to Nero and Caligula. In fact LRH in a lecture from 1955 mentions there is a “band of cruelty” above 8.0 which a person must pass through to become better, more benign. Perhaps this is true. So perhaps clearing in that sense can produce a better person, without education, I don’t personally know. But I doubt the bulk of humanity is there yet, at a self-determined level of “goodness”. Most people do try. Some don’t.
              One contemporary social philosopher who at least tries to address this issue is Jacob Needleman, whose most recent book is titled “Why Can’t We Be Good”?

            6. Val; Make sure to promote the corollary, than: Never assign responsibility or credit to Scientology for any gain a person has had.

            7. To say that a tool worked to deliver a specific result for the person using it, is that “assigning responsibility to the tool”?

              I think not. The person applying or using the tool is responsible for the result. In the case of auditing, it is the 2 people working together who are the “proximate cause” of the result. Of course in the background there is the CS and possibly others involved in the situation, but it is the people who pick up and use the tools who are responsible.

              I think this is implied when anyone says “Scientology works”.

            8. If it is OK to say “a tool worked to deliver a specific result for the person using it”, then it must also be OK to say “a tool worked to deliver a specific destructive result for the person using it.”

            9. “Scientology proper” does not teach slow, deliberative logical thought and critical thinking – especially when it comes to “SP”s like that 1.1 DB Brian Culkin(!).

              “Scientology Proper” teaches to use your “knowingness” of the “tone scale” and 12 anti social characteristics and the endless list of crimes and high crimes to instantly smash and shatter suppression.

              LRH did not give Scientologists the thinking skills and emotional discipline necessary for treating people fairly and avoiding injustices. He did not have these skills himself. How can you expect him to teach them to anyone else?

              LRH was not perfect. And all his imperfections are ending up in the training that “Scientology Proper” puts out, and Scientologists learn.

              If independent Scientologists are going to become sober and deliberate judges of people and treat emotionally charged situations in constructive ways, they are going to have to throw out much of what LRH taught them about human evaluation and look to other teachers in other subjects than Scientology.

              Alanzo

            10. I call b.s. Just more of the usual preachy “Alanzo knows best” blanket generalities. It’s your opinion which of course you have a right to hold, but preachy opinions are preachy.

            11. I supplied specific technologies that Hubbard taught Scientologists to employ, and which were definitely used in the lynch mob that Geir described against Brian Culkin.

              The Tone Scale
              PTS/SP Tech
              Lists of Scientology Crimes and High Crimes

              Can you supply the slow, disciplined deliberative technology that Hubbard taught Scientologists from “Scientology Proper” to use in emotionally charged situations which would have kept the lynch mob from sparking up?

              I’ll be waiting breathlessly for your reasoned response, Valkov.

              Alanzo

            12. Al, you throw out the name of a course, the name of a basic concept,and the existence of some “lists of crimes” –
              The Tone Scale
              PTS/SP Tech
              Lists of Scientology Crimes and High Crimes –

              without identifying one single specific out of all those that bear on the situation in question. Basically you posted a vague generality which apparently refers to some understanding you apparently think you have in your mind that answers the question of why those people acted as they did.

              As for your question to me, “Can you supply the slow, disciplined deliberative technology that Hubbard taught Scientologists from “Scientology Proper” to use in emotionally charged situations which would have kept the lynch mob from sparking up?”

              Why yes, I can: the very basic of basics, TR0, for starters.

              That toilet is waiting for your head, Al. Oh, it’ll still be there after you finish lynching me, too.

            13. TRZero doesn’t teach how to deliberate, and how not to jump to conclusions like the Tone Scale does. The tone scale is all about jumping to conclusions, isn’t it?

              Sorry Val. Scientology does not have the skills necessary to avoid lynch mobs. And it has lots of training in it that contributes to lynch mobs.

              If that wasn’t true, then the lynch mob on Brian Culkin would not have occurred as Geir described.

              You can’t face this. So you talk about how I am dumb as a rock, and that I should dump my head in cold toilet water to understand Scientology better.

              You’re a good foil, though. And I’ll bet you were a real pistol back in the 60’s.

              Alanzo

            14. Well Al, TR0 did for me, and the Tone Scale is not about that at all. That’s your way of looking at it, not mine. Does that make you a moron? I suppose not, just different. But you seem to think your take on Scientology is the God’s Truth, when it’s really just one man’s interpretation/opinion. So maybe you are not a moron. But I can think of other rather unflattering characteristics I can attribute to you, just like the one I just mentioned above.

              Critics accuse LRH of genralizing his case to all of humanity; well, you generalize your perceptions and interpretations as being the ultimate truths for everyone. That has a totalitarian aspect as far as I’m concerned. “Accept Alonzo’s Truth or else!”

            15. In this, I find striking similarities between the two of you. I could speculate about that being the reason why you are so “#%%¤#” about each other.

            16. You didn’t notice that if a person displays antagonism, or anger, then the Tone Scale technology from LRH says you can jump to all other kinds of conclusions about them?

              In fact, the Tone Scale says you can jump to all kinds of conclusions about people just by the emotions they exhibit while you are talking to them.

              So jumping to conclusions is kind of embedded in a Scientologist’s training.

              There’s lots of other “jumping to conclusions” tech in Scientology – like if someone criticizes Scientology, then you can jump to the conclusion that they are a criminal!

              Right?

              Can you think of other jumping to conclusions technology in Scientology, Valkov?

              So if there is so much tech in Scientology that trains in jumping to conclusions, why would lynch mobs NOT be a regular occurrence among groups of Scientologists who face an emotionally explosive situation together?

              Alanzo

            17. There is another one:

              There are two stable data which anyone has to have, understand and KNOW ARETRUE in order to obtain results in handling the person connected to suppressives.

              These data are:

              1. That all illness in greater or lesser degree and all foul-ups stem directly and only from a PTS condition.

              2. That getting rid of the condition requires three basic actions: (A) Discover; (B) Handle or disconnect.

              Persons called upon to handle PTS people can do so very easily, far more easily than they believe. Their basic stumbling block is thinking that there are exceptions or that there is other tech or that the two above data have modifiers or are not sweeping. The moment a person who is trying to handle PTSs gets persuaded there are other conditions or reasons or tech, he is at once lost and will lose the game and not obtain results. And this is very too bad because it is not difficult and the results are there to be obtained.

              … from HCOB: PTS Handling (10 August 1973)

            18. An HCOB issued later states that:

              “unhattedness, ignorance of Scientology basics for handling life, past bad auditing uncorrected, as well as unhandled bad intentions and personal out-ethics can be mistaken for PTSness and won’t resolve as PTSness.” (HCOB 20 October 76 PTS HANDLING)

            19. Ah, I was waiting for exactly that (you see, there are more exceptions to that bulletin). So, here we have a prime example of an inconsistency in the tech – and that HCOB I quoted was never revised to reflect that. His absolutist statement in that HCOB stands and is Absolutely true. Yet there are exceptions. 😉

              The PTS/SP course teaches the above datum with a vengeance. Do you see how that datum could help a person jump to conclusions?

            20. Gier, as others have observed too, your viewpoints are not based on a full enough understanding of the tech. As regards the contradictions between these two HCO B’s – LRH clearly stated that the later HCOB’s take precedence over earlier ones. Obviously, research can add to or change previous findings.

            21. And should thusly be revised. Or else one could end up taking LRH literally in this case and end up jumping to conclusions, right?

              This is how Scientology in some cases end up as a mess: You simply cannot read that bulletin and understand it – because there May Just Be some later text that takes precedence over it. By this it follows that you cannot trust any text in Scientology that is published before 1985 unless you have carefully studied every possible text later on that may take precedence over it. So, in light of that, we can simply disregard any of your quotes from LRH unless you can swear with absolute certainty that there is no later text that could possibly be interpreted as taking precedence over the quote you provided.

            22. It’s not that complicated as you make it. The reason there are courses is so as to have all relevant data on a particular subject grouped in one place.

              It’s easy to say, why didn’t LRH revise everything, including all the books and lectures. Instead of that he carried on with his research. He never said the tech was a perfect system. In fact he said it wasn’t – just that it was workable. And if people did both sides of the Bridge, as he intended, they wouldn’t be missing so much data and have so many confusions.

            23. Ah, but when you cannot trust the Church in getting the courses right, what’s a poor man to do, then?

              I tell you what LRH should have done – he should have come up with the Wikipedia idea from wholetrack recall and let others do the dirty work of revising everything that needed revising and made this tech so streamlined that it would in fact generate a grass roots movement – like Vinaire has pointed out many times. But instead we see this out-dated, inconsistent, unrevised, mashed-up-by-the-church tech. And I may add: By LRH’s own dictation via “Technical Degrades”, it would be impossible to properly revise it anyway.

            24. Isene: … By this it follows that you cannot trust any text in Scientology that is published before 1985 unless you have carefully studied every possible text later on that may take precedence over it. …….”

              Dee: There you have it, as they say, in a nut shell.

            25. Furthermore, the PTS/SP Course includes the bulletin on false ptsness.

            26. … but it doesn’t include all the other exceptions to that “rule” – exceptions that in fact renders that rule void as a guide in life – at least for the common man who cannot verify if the person for instance has out-list (which, btw can also happen in simple 2WC).

              You said earlier that you cannot find any inconsistencies in the tech. Is this an exception?

            27. This is an example of how you filter out some of my comments. Just recently I stated that it was an overstatement on my part to say there were no inconsistencies. And it was in an exchange with YOU.

              As for the other part of your comment, again I’ll say – all the data is on the course that the “common man” studies.

            28. I’ve read what the auditing consists of on the OT levels and I would say that the part on false ptsness as regards uncorrected past auditing could apply. I once had a correction list when I got sick after auditing and what read was “not your overt”.

              And, as I say, someone who does the PTS/SP Course has the data about all the different reasons for PTSness, including false PTSness.

              You wrote that you intend to finish your Bridge. I really think hope you also get your confusions and disagreements checked into too. In some instances, I imagine you will find you were right about there being contradtions, but I think you would find a lot that was either MUs or false or missing data. And I think you would feel differently about Scn and its potential outside the CoS.

            29. I think the Tone Scale is a good descriptive construct in terms of the flows, dispersals and ridges it depicts. I think the Tone Scale exists, it is directly observable

              As far as LRH’s evaluation of the human behaviors that are purported to accompany the various Tones, I don’t give a fig. They are his opinions.

              There are sheeplike people who “jump to the conclusion” that all LRH words are the Word of God. I’m not one of them.

              If you ever were like that, I’m sorry, it must be quite a burden for you but you need to forgive yourself. You basically meant well and managed to pull yourself out of it.

            30. Valkov: “As far as LRH’s evaluation of the human behaviors that are purported to accompany the various Tones, I don’t give a fig. They are his opinions.”

              No Valkov, they are part of the basic tech – and that is precisely what Alanzo is pointing out. And in this very case giving an exact example of how the tech helps instill a “jumping to conclusions”. You criticized him for coming up with generalities, and when he so diectly gives you an exact example in the basic tech itself, you wave it off as “LRH’s opinion”. Sorry, Val – you have to do better than that.

            31. No, I don’t have to do better than that, because the senior monitoring consideration is that if I have not verified it for myself, it is not true. That is straight from the horse’s mouth. And I haven’t verified many of those things for myself, by my own observation.

            32. To the extent that LRH’s statements about tones, or anything else, have a predictive value, they may be valuable. If they have no predictive value, they have no other value than …. entertainment?

            33. Alanzo: If independent Scientologists are going to become sober and deliberate judges of people and treat emotionally charged situations in constructive ways, they are going to have to throw out much of what LRH taught them about human evaluation and look to other teachers in other subjects than Scientology.

              Dee: Good post. It’s very possible too, just takes time.

            34. I must say I don’t agree with this general conclusion, this blanket evaluation. However LRH set doctrine for orgs to be run by, when I have listened to LRH tech lectures, I have often been surprised at the fine detail he saw about various aspects of life and cases.

            35. Val & Marildi; I am not surprised at how you read what I write. Let us leave it at that.

              Group hug.

            36. Geir, you can “leave it at that.” And I will leave it after this post.

              I know what I think. Interesting that you specifically lump marildi and I together on this and then appear to dismiss the point of view implying an unspoken understanding you have of where “we” are coming from. Kinda like that old U.S. political saying from the 1950s/1960s “You can trust a communist to be a communist”. But being able to predict how folks will act or view something is a good thing, so I can’t fault that.

              I do stand by what I posted. Your OP opens with
              “(when the news)…. reached the main Independent Scientologists Facebook group,…..
              …..Brian was promptly proclaimed guilty”…. and goes on from there, mentioning “independent Scientology” as a generality 2 or 3 more times. This is clearly indicts “Independent Scientology” as a whole, in the English language I speak and read.

              You tell me, how else can it be read?

              Enough said. If you don’t want to clarify this, that’s your business and your right.

            37. No, Valokov. I referred to “the Main Indie Scientologist group on Facbook”. I further refered to “a lynch mob” as a sub-group of that group (it would be beyond silly to assume that every member of a Facebook group would react to anything). I never referred to Independent Scientology. You read what you read here because you want to read that. You are biased. It follows a habit of yours that is clearly visible throughout your comments on this blog. There are literally thousands of examples of this from you.

              I love you regardless.

            38. Geir to Valkov: “You are biased. It follows a habit of yours that is clearly visible throughout your comments on this blog. There are literally thousands of examples of this from you.”

              Valkov writes what he sees that makes sense to him and aligns with his experience. And he is not always pro LRH and Scn. So what you write is BS, especially your bombastic “thousands of examples”.

              You are more biased than Valkov, by far. But of course you also filter anything I say through your bias.

            39. I have already compared your comments to Vals’. Yours are less level headed and the last one to him was gross Ad Hom.

            40. Of course.

              To the reader of this: Compare the following: Valkov’s bias in his comments versus mine. Ability to change or evolve viewpoints, Valkov versus mine.

              There. Back to discussing other stuff.

              Anyone up for a post on a juicy HP-41 program to calculate essential values of telescope/ocular combinations?

            41. Geir, what was the change or evolution in your comments that you are claiming?

            42. In general, throughout the past three years. Let’s leave it at that, OK. I wouldn’t like to see you take on another “I must push on until I get that last word or prove him wrong”-tirades again. Please?

            43. That is more Ad Hom and also an attempt to stop. What you mean is you don’t want me to push on because it’s possible that I will show that you are full of it, as I have done at times, although you would never admit it.

              Valkov was right in his comment about your generalities. Here’s a prime example from the blog post itself:

              “From this and other recent events, I concluded that Scientology tends to corrupt what it touches. The results, the products, tell the tale.”

              Now you are trying to deny it , but the above is your basic viewpoint from what I have observed.

            44. The original point was what Valkov asserted with regard to this thread – that you had made a “blanket indictment”, And he was right. You then entered in Ad Hom and Red Herrings through the use of additional generalities.

            45. I am happy to let this stand and not counter you in any way and simply let the readers decide for themselves.

            46. marildi,

              Now there’s a logical vector I hadn’t thought of myself.

              If “scientology tends to corrupt what it touches”, then perhaps we need to be a little wary of Geir? He was ‘touched’ quite extensively by ‘scientology’, doing the entire Bridge and more……

              No offense intended. Just following that logic there…..

            47. Well said, Val.

              Sorry Geir but there are too many contradictions in your views. You praise to the hilt what you yourself got out of Scn and then try to demonize it as much as you can.

            48. Exactly, Valkov. You hit the nail on the head, so thank you for pointing that out. I am busy figuring out if there are parts of me that were corrupted. I did find one, though – that I was hardened by my years in Scientology – less in contact with my feminine side. I will figure out whether there is more to be corrected.

              But mind you, I did say tend to and not will always, so I bet there are a sizable percentage that was not in any way corrupted. But I was not one of them. I’m working on it and I am always happy for a helping hand in pointing out my weaknesses, although trying to change me to conform to some underlying biased agenda does not go down well with me, but I guess you have already understood that 🙂

            49. Thank you Geir, I understand. Although I largely avoided it, Scientology gets its ‘hooks’ into people, including myself to a relatively small degree, and I actually don’t know how people who were deeply involved ever ‘decompress’!

              It does seem natural and inevitable to oscillate from one extreme to the other before finding or settling down to one’s own actual ‘center’ or Middle Way.

              I seem to recall, LRH talked about pcs doing this during processing, swinging from “wow. scientology really works!” to “wow. scientology really doesn’t work at all”.

              I would guess in your case and maybe others, at the same time as scientology controlled and ‘corrupted’ you, it increased your strength and ability to break free of it and think for yourself.

              To the extent scientology presents only one side of things, inevitably eventually the balancing side emerges, fighting its way up into consciousness. Carl Jung called this “the return of the repressed”. Both sides insist on being acknowledged. I guess that’s what means the balance of Yin and Yang.

            50. I have stopped judging Scientology by any other yardstick than the results it creates – in individuals, groups and in society. I do see many excellent results up close in people I know (myself included). I have also seen some really odd or even destructive results – also in groups (this OP). I note’em all, I don’t get distracted by opinions or hand-waving. And I don’t justify the stats. Period. When I see good results, I applaud. When I see bad results, I issue warning signs. I will complete my Bridge because I am so nearly done, and I want to extract what I can from it. But I must admit – it is very hard to read LRH these days when my blinders are off. There is a ton of inconsistencies to wade through – just like Roger Boswana pointed out in the “Conclusion: There are no Clears”.

            51. Valkov: I would guess in your case and maybe others, at the same time as scientology controlled and ‘corrupted’ you, it increased your strength and ability to break free of it and think for yourself.

              Chris: Not in my experience. Nothing in Scientology or about Scientology reinforces a person for their inevitable leaving Scientology. People leave Scientology wounded and conflicted. All of that “strength” you are mentioning comes after the fact of decompressing and healing from their vicious experiences on the inside of this cult.

            52. I hear ya Chris. But I think in Geir’s case he got some positives out of going up the Bridge. It’s supposed to increase a person’s self-determinism and ability to think for oneself, as well as increasing a person’s ‘horsepower’.

              Geir may have gotten lots more good auditing than others, for whatever reason. He was a paying public pc not a staff serf, and perhaps at a time when the CoS was not as far gone down the tubes as it has been in more recent years.

            53. Chris: All of that “strength” you are mentioning comes after the fact of decompressing and healing from their vicious experiences on the inside of this cult.

              Dee: Right and they don’t fully realize it until the head is completely out of the bubble. 🙂

            54. Dee: Right and they don’t fully realize it until the head is completely out of the bubble. 🙂

              Chris: That’s a good way of putting it.

            55. Geir: Anyone up for a post on a juicy HP-41 program to calculate essential values of telescope/ocular combinations?

              Chris: You did this already? Wondered about it from time to time since your OP on the new telescope and making the HP41 do work . . . wondered why you wanted to use the HP41 for this task rather than the built in telescope factory hardware.

            56. Marildi wrote:

              Valkov writes what he sees that makes sense to him and aligns with his experience. And he is not always pro LRH and Scn.

              Really???

              I’m sorry, but I can not remember one post from Valkov that was ever NOT pro LRH and pro Scn. I’m not lying.

              So could you refresh my memory and show just ONE post from Valkov that was not pro LRH and pro Scientology?

              Thanks.

              Alanzo

            57. Marildi: It is a bit typical and somewhat cute when you attempt to paint my views as “based on MUs or lack of understanding of Scientology” when they oppose your views. It is bad form at best and is covered in the logical fallacies. Can you see which it is?

            58. What I said may be typical and it can be looked at as a logical fallacy, but that doesn’t necessarily mean there isn’t truth to it. Surely you have had many experiences in all your years in Scientology of clearing up confusions or disagreements by clearing up an MU or false datum.

              You haven’t answered my question at 2013-05-17 @ 03:05 regarding “Technical Degrades”. Right there may be an opportunity for one or both of us to clear something up. Let’s complete the comm cycle.

  25. Let’s not forget that the Co$ went to war over a mere $3,000 refund that brought about the need for their “religious freedom crusade” in Portland. Could have cost them 30 million. How moronic is that?

    I sure hope Garcia wins this case because it will open the door for some serious Co$ whacking.

    1. Where is this goal of “becoming judges of people” coming from in the first place? Indoctrination into the idea of “SP’s”? Isn’t the very idea of “judging people” simply lazy ad hom thinking, in place of understanding that all beings are capable of anything, depending on what beingness they are currently assuming at that moment toward whatever purpose, and that it really behooves us to rise above the human tendency to resort to classifying and stereotyping people, and to instead retain the consciousness and willingness to have a straightforward look at whatever is being presented here and now, on its own merits? (That’s my view, anyway) 🙂

      1. Geir, did you ever get your question answered: “Did [Brian’s] declaration contain anything that wasn’t already public knowledge?” As well, the implicit
        question: “Did Brian’s declaration imperil the Garcias’ position in that litigation in any way(s)?”

        Other inquiring minds would like to know.

        1. Not really – just generalities, no specifics, like; “Of course there are non public data in there”. When I also got several “I can’t see anything secret in his declaration”, I really can’t make up my mind about this. The people screaming the loudest to hang Brian from the nearest tree sure can’t answer the question.

          On the second question, all bets are off. I have no clue. There are lawyers claiming this that and the other. Uncertainties abound.

      2. Dexter: … retain the consciousness and willingness to have a straightforward look at whatever is being presented here and now, on its own merits? (That’s my view)

        Dee: Very nice view too!

    2. I find the “Scientologists” typecast and “INdie” typecast just as ignorant and lazy at understanding another human being as “Oh, he from Europe” “Oh, these midwesterners” “Oh, he’s a white boy” “Oh, he’s a Christian”. “She’s a New Yorker what do you expect”.

      It doesn’t matter where I got my knowledge and reality. Whether is from reading or not reading or because I am from America or what culture I grew up in or what my Interests are.

      typecast – identify as belonging to a certain type; “Such people can practically be typed”

      identify – consider to be equal or the same; “He identified his brother as one of the fugitives”

      It is lazy backwards and frankly, ignorant. In fact, exactly what the K.K.K. are famous for.

      If you think you know people on this blog because they traveled through the Scientology arena, you are looking at your own fixed ideas instead of the person. There is LOT to know about a person beyond personal interest talk.

      Make the person you are talking to senior to the “Scientology” and then you might make headway at finding out who that person is. Making any study or belief system senior to the humans in front of you will lead you into dark, very dark mirrors.

      The purpose of any knowledge is to SERVE other people. Not the other way around.

      1. Millions, millions, of people have passed through the front doors of the Church of Scientology over the last decade. You have to sell a million books for it to appear on the best sellers list. The membership is at about 40,000 tops and the staff at Int Base are maximum 500. That should show you right there everyone who passes through the front door isn’t stamped into “type” and the majority of people curious take what they want and keep it moving. Those that remain stuck and fixated in it amount to a smaller population than knitting groups obsessed with yarn. To typecast every person who admits to finding something useful as “brainwashed”, or typecasting everyone who found it repelling an “S.P.” is ignorant. Just straight up ignorant. The minute , and I mean minute percentage of the population who became overwhelmed by the books and culture, a.k.a. “fundamentalists and fanatics” amount to a population smaller than Situbondo, in Indonesia. In fact, there are HUNDREDS , HUNDREDS of cities all over the world that exceed the Scientology population.

        http://www.mongabay.com/igapo/2005_world_city_populations/2005_city_population_23.html

        Scientologists, are different than people than have wandered through the doors of Scientology, O.K.? They come from all different corners of the world. There are about between 35,000 and 40,000 people on the planet claiming to be “Scientologists”.

        In the earliest issues of Creation of Human Ability Hubbard denounces Scientology as a religion, so those early folk that explored didn’t even see themselves as “Scientologists” (coined later) or see themselves as being involved with a religion.

        Page 251 1954 edition book :

        “Scientology has opened the gates to a better World. It is not a psycho-therapy nor a religion. It is a body of knowledge which, when properly used, gives freedom and truth to the individual.”

        VITAL INFORMATION DELETED by David Miscavige Corporation.

        So, when people say “Scientologists” “Kool Aid Drinkers” “Indies” “Ronbots” whatever, they are falling into the same typecasting as “Niggers” “Honkeys” “Blondes” “Singles” “Limeys” “Ghetto” “Money” “White trash” “Ex’s” “Ex wives” and all of the rest of typecasting people do because they are too lazy to find out who anybody really is.

        And it ignorant and backwards mentality. And it is a convenient LIE.

        1. But treason, betrayal after trust, is universally understood as a life manifestation.
          Witch hunts and injustice, is universally understood as a life manifestation.
          Prejudice, shunning and typecasting , is universally understood as a life manifestation.
          Ill will, mean spiritedness, sadism, typecasting, greed, purposes to unmock and degrade others, is universally understood as a life manifestation.
          Fanatics, are universally understood as a life manifestation.

          Most of the losses and abuse in this arena is not even about the Scientology.

          It is about very common universally understood as a life manifesting.

          1. I find it disturbing that Scientology apparently does not make much of a dent in these life manifestations. All we can do is justify that these are indeed “life manifestation”… and then what? Leave it at that?

            While there are normal society educations that attempts to help denting these “life manifestations”, Scientology does little to alleviate them. Our current school system in Norway seems to do a better job than Scientology – as witnessed by the world’s astonishment about how the people of our nation handled the greatest terrorist tragedy of our nation on July 22 2011. I observed Anders Behring-Breivik get a better handling on average in the Norwegian population than Brian got in that Indie Group.

            Chew on that one for a while.

            1. “I find it disturbing that Scientology apparently does not make much of a dent in these life manifestations.”

              Again, I urge you to look at people and take them, one by one, as they are without blanket analysis of a “group”.

              Again, you had expectations for others. So did I. I think it very much depends WHAT in Scientology a person accomplishes. Most people involved have never read a book cover to cover! Most have never done the L’s. Clearly, many do not even think with it or use it in a constructive manner. Purpose is senior to policy.

              Many people that approach Scientology have already formed subtle or major aggression against THEMSELVES. They did not even LIKE themselves or some part of themselves, that is why they got in. They wanted to get to a point where they could LIKE themselves. Emeter phenomena is simply an area of subtle aggression against self.

              If a person has aggression against self, this is going to manifest in purpose. People get into suppressing themselves. And demanding to be suppressed by others. This flows across the dynamics and in all arenas the person visits.

            2. My conclusion is that Scientology should have made a statistical difference in a group of Indie Scientologists were many of the people comprising the wolf pack was indeed trained OTs. It didn’t make a difference. In fact it was worse than the average Norwegian population.

              Which bring me to another conclusion:

              If you are seeking to become more tolerant, compassionate and respectful of others, stay away from Scientology. Move to Norway instead.

            3. “My conclusion is that Scientology should have made a statistical difference in a group of Indie Scientologists..”

              There you go with the “group” thing again. Your expectations for a group. An “Independent” person does not manifest as a “group”. So right there is the lie. If someone is calling themselves an “Independent” yet manifesting “group” think, they are not independent at all are they?

              That was elementary math Geir. The “groups” are NOT Independents.

            4. Whether they are calling themselves “independents” or not! “A group of independents” is not a possibility is it? Yes, there are people out here forming a GROUP under the INDEPENDENT banner. That is only evidence of CONFUSION.

            5. Oracle; What is your purpose on this thread? Can you state clearly what you intend to deliver here?

            6. On the other hand, that kind of talk and attitude appears to be more than acceptable within that group, and therefore, representational of the group’s attitudes. Was there any small, or substantial objection are argument raised against this vilification party? Or did this line of conversation go completely unchallenged?

              For me, the point isn’t to vilify the participants, but rather to observe and acknowledge the cultivated culture of antagonism seeded into the policies and attitudes of institutional Scientology-which, for me, does not negate the fact of there being much value in many of the techniques and principles related to Scientology, understood and selectively applied with a greater freedom of thought than is granted within the C of S.

            7. There were no objections to the dogpiling except mine. One other person “suspended judgment” – that was it.

        2. T.O, I never called myselfa “Scientologist” because I was not a trained and interned auditor. Back in the 1970s, I felt it just wasn’t done. Scientologist =ed Auditor.

          1. Nobody is evil because they stumbled across Scientology. They were evil before they arrived. Nobody is mean as a result of Scientology. They were mean already.
            People are what they always were and will continue to be them. People out here bullying people, on both sides of the fence, were already bullies. People saying and doing stupid things were always saying and doing stupid things. Scientology does invent or reinvent or create people. It is only an education. People take that education and use it the way they use all of their education, to forward their purposes and agendas.

            1. The Oracle wrote:

              Nobody is evil because they stumbled across Scientology. They were evil before they arrived. Nobody is mean as a result of Scientology. They were mean already.

              Phillip Zimbardo disagrees with you.

              Alanzo

          1. “Well said Oracle! was the post in reference to Oracle: ” VITAL INFORMATION DELETED by David Miscavige Corporation.”
            and
            ” all of the rest of typecasting people do because they are too lazy to find out who anybody really is.”

      2. Oracle: “I find the “Scientologists” typecast and “INdie” typecast just as ignorant and lazy at understanding another human being as “Oh, he from Europe” “Oh, these midwesterners” “Oh, he’s a white boy” “Oh, he’s a Christian”. “She’s a New Yorker what do you expect”.”

        I fully agree.

        That is why I am particular when I say “the Main Indie Scientologist group on Facebook”, etc – and specifically not “Indie Scientologists in general”.

        1. O.K., Thank you for clarifying. As I understand it there are quite a few groups on FB and I am not on any of them. There are some groups formed out here I steer clear of myself. Mainly because I know the person / people behind them personally.
          There are some people I steer clear of because they have set me up for losses, not wins. I think in this Brian Culkin matter, he did set some people up for losses. So he got some protest response. And I think that is to be expected. And I think it is that simple.

    1. REALITY SHOW / SOAP OPERA UPDATE

      Episode 1
      The Brian Kulkin Show: The $350,000 show.

      Episode 2
      Geir Isene & The Oracle: Is The Oracle drunk? Or, she’s just dancing to a different tune?

      Episode 3
      Dexter Gelfand & The Oracle: Russians & Hungarians showing their … The author of this update will not comment on this show-episode in order to avoid being accused due to possible conflict of interests.
      Due to a special request, this show will be continued outside this blog.

      Episode 4
      Spyros & Sapere Aude: What did Geir Isene said?

      Next episodes/shows: Stay tuned, there might be some surprises.

      1. Excellent review. 😀

        Looks like Episode 4 has concluded already. Geir clarified his position and Sapere Aude posted a comment about it at the bottom of the page. However, dear Ferenc, you may not have seen S.A.’s post as there was no email notification – no doubt due to the fact that it included a link and was thus awaiting moderation until Geir got to it. I just happened to see it by chance.

        As for Episode 5, I hope that as a “sub-plot” Geir remembers to ack (reply) in some way to the posts that he moderates, so that an email notification goes out that includes the post he’s replying to – and then we all get notified of it. (Okay, Geir? :P)

        And as another “sub-plot” I hope that Marianne and Spyros will start using the reply button on email notifications, instead of using the nearest reply button above the comment they are replying to. Maybe then we can make more sense of what the heck they’re talking about! (Okay, the two of you lazy bones? :P)

        Aside from those sub-plots, I wonder what the main plot of Episode 5 will be on Geir’s Serial (pardon the connotation :)) Reality Show? Maybe Geir can get the ball rolling by commenting on what he thinks are the “booby traps” in Scientology. That might be a good discussion and an exciting episode. 😉

          1. Valkov: For those who want to know, “boobytrap” spelled backwards is “partyboob”.

            Chris: Yes, thank you. I’ve been wanting to know that! (Good one.)

        1. UPDATE:
          One of these Episodes/Shows has a surprise hot sex in the making.

          Marildiv,
          A good review should have good teasing and not spoil the end of the episode/show. (Before writing, I have read all the comments – including Geir’s – regarding Episode 4).

          1. Oops. My bad. 😛 🙂

            I guess neither one of us should comment on the rumored show in the making, since we both could be accused of conflict of interest. (You being half Hungarian, and me being half Russian. ;))

            1. Marildiv, We could write some good teasing without writing our opinion. 🙂

            2. Nice Russian Gipsy girls!
              Just be careful of their rings. 🙂

              I wonder if the hot sex in the making is related to Episode 2 (no conflict of interest for us) or to Episode 3 (where our conflict of interest lays). 🙂

            3. You are fun-loving Ferenc, but if this is a reality show, then realistically speaking I would say you are teasing about an episode for the distant future – like maybe some future lifetime (as postulated by a member of the “cast” ;)).

  26. One slant which has not been picked up is the veracity of Brian’s declaration.
    1. Is the declaration true?, and if it is then,
    2. Does this mean that the attorneys in question are scoffing at judgments which have barred them from working these cases? And if they are circumventing the law in order to represent the Garcia’s, then:
    3. How are they ever to win a real victory?
    I’ve been trying to understand this argument by reading the declaration as well as the arguments provided here, and I have a shaky understanding of the salient points.

    1. I am not going to comment on legal stuff because I am completely ignorant of the law. But Ted Babbit said this to Tony Ortega about that:

      Yesterday, we spoke with Ted Babbitt, who told us he’d been out of town over the weekend and was just getting his first look at the motion. We asked how much time he had to answer it, and he said he wasn’t sure, but assumed he had 15 days to submit a response.

      “It’s not going to be dispositive. There will probably have to be discovery and an evidentiary hearing,” he says. In other words, Scientology’s lawyers have brought up some issues that Babbitt will need to gather facts about before he can answer. But Babbitt also questioned the timing of the church’s motion.

      “One could ask the question, why would they file this before a ruling on the motion about arbitration?” he asks.

      He’s referring to the fact that at any moment, federal Judge James Whittemore is expected to rule on Scientology’s motion that the Garcias be compelled to take part in the church’s internal arbitration scheme and remove the case from court. And if Whittemore did side with the church, the lawsuit would be done with. So why not wait for that ruling?

      “The only thing I can think of is they’re desperate, or it’s to prejudice the judge and make him think we’re bad guys,” Babbitt says.

      Babbitt says Whittemore isn’t the kind of judge who could be prejudiced so easily, and he expects that Whittemore will rule on the arbitration argument before he even looks at the church’s motion to disqualify Babbitt and his team.

      “A lot of this is silly,” he says, pointing specifically to the statements about Mike Rinder and Marty Rathbun. “What Mike Rinder has said about Scientology he’s already said on your blog,” Babbitt says dismissively. “And I’ve never spoken to Marty Rathbun. I’ve never communicated with him by e-mail or any other way.”

      As for Robert Johnson, the attorney who previously litigated for the church, Babbitt says, “His role is limited. He’s not named in the litigation. The reason he’s not named is that he’s not involved. We needed someone in Tampa to meet new clients and get information from them, but he’s not involved in the formation of any pleadings or anything else in litigation proper.”

      http://tonyortega.org/2013/05/13/will-scientologys-motion-demolish-the-garcias-federal-fraud-lawsuit/

      Alanzo

      “I think it’s a baseless motion,” he says. He also pointed out that he’s never met Brian Culkin.

      As to Culkin’s involvement, he spent less than a year in Scientology, leaving it in February 2010. But in that short time, Culkin has said he turned over a total of about $350,000. (Many Scientologists end up turning over sums that large during the course of their careers in the church, but almost no one spends that much so quickly.)

  27. I will say this, (sorry for hogging up your FB page Geir with resent comments and visits to your past) I will say this. I have said it before, a person can bring you down condition, just like they can bring you down level. Someone goes into Treason. the people that saw it flip into enemy against him. I did not permit myself to be dragged into an enemy condition towards Brian Culkin. Just because he took a dive in treason. And the people that protested about him, most of them made a level and fair analysis of the situation without wavering into a lower condition. Tony is a good example of that. But I will say this, I am glad to see Geir did NOT flip into an enemy condition towards Brian because Brian went south into treason. I just don’t understand why Geir flipped into an enemy condition towards the Independents upon Brian’s free fall south into treason.

    1. Tony is an excellent example of what not to do. He called Brian “a degraded being” – the most horrible term I can think of. And after continuing to justify his use of that label, I must say I lost a lot of respect for him.

      And no, I did not go into an “Enemy condition” toward “The Indies”. I pointed out a specific instance in one specific Facebook group of some 450 people that all but one who said something about Brian proclaimed him guilty before proven guilty – something that is not OK in my book. And only One person beside me suspended judgment until essential facts are on the table – facts that key people in the trials still do not have, as is evident by the fact that they are trying to extract those facts from me back-channel (I don’t have the facts of what happened, btw).

      Up until this incident in That FB Group, I really thought a group of Scientologists would not become a wolf pack like that. This surprised me and I blogged about it. Then a discussion ensued (level-headed [thanks]). And Alanzo has helped me realize that it is in fact ingrained in the tech to jump to conclusions – like the Chart of Human Evaluation where LRH tells you precisely that you Should jump to conclusions. Same with the ethics tech with its list of crimes and more. He does instill short-cuts and mental laziness in people here, something I think contributed to the lynch mob. I didn’t look at this in that way before Alanzo gave references on this. I had other objections to the COHE before, but this was news to me.

      1. When I say something critical about WWP, there is an ensuing outcry. When I say something negative about ESMB, some over there go batshit. When I comment on injustice in one FB Indie Scientologist group, Indies – even those not part of that group – object to me being an Enemy of them. When I criticize the way someone is treated in the HP forum, I get a level-headed debate.

        I am so with Dexter on this. The Us vs. Them, the We Are At War, the OMG! WTF? BBQ! that torments many camps of Scientology is a waste of time and resources. Being able to calmly look at something and discus it with a level head is something to be desired, methinks.

        One is not An Enemy when one criticizes outpoints in another or points out over-representation of negative acts in a group.

        1. “Us” “Them” “We” are broad generalities. Would you like for me to see if I can obtain a copy of the Data Series Evaluator’s Course and get it over to you? It is truly all about the math. I loved math, I still do. Majored in mathematics all through elementary school up through high school. It is very easy to do the math in any situation, but these “X and Y” symbols ALWAYS get replaced with specifics.

            1. I just laid out plenty of statistics here on this blog. However, I think statistics can be turned into something harmful. Frankly, I would never myself put statistics above the welfare of someone else. “Gross Income” statistic can be out the roof if you are a drug dealer. You can be “upstat” if you are a drug dealer in your G.I.. “Bodies in the shop” means nothing vital, if they all left disgusted and spread bad word of mouth. I honestly do not think it is fair to enforce success story writing on people. Especially when, if you ask them if they would like to write a success story, and they say “no”, there is punishment of some sort awaiting them. A home invader can “make it go right” if he kills everyone in the house, rips them off, and gets away with the crime. Some of these traditions in the culture are way off base. Especially the Sea Org. The police force dressed up in military 24/7 Halloween 365 days a year? . That was just sick. The payment structure was criminal. “Volunteers” being herded and punished? Staff not getting paid because all the profit sent to Sea Org? Lots of very crazy unworkable policy. The best case scenario was the missions. The people out doing their own thing with their own friends and clients, making their own reality work. Everything outside of that did not work. Again, everything beyond the mission network did not work.

            2. And this is why David Miscavige went straight for the mission network and unmocked it.

            3. The video, and comment with it, was addendum to my statement: “Everything outside of that did not work. Again, everything beyond the mission network did not work.”

          1. Any ‘outpoint’ is an outpoint if one already has a preconceived illusion of an ideal scene. Or a set of illusions, at least. Then there is still another question, who is the
            creator of the ‘ideal’ and/or in what ‘context’.

      2. Geir, in a comment upstream you said the Indie Facebook group “has some 450 or so members. Scores of people chimed in on the thread that was hundred of comments long.”

        From that it’s hard to tell what percentage of the 450 actually chimed in. “Scores” (units of 20) could be as little as 40 with some making multiple comments, and 40 would be less than 10%. So the statement you are making is ambiguous and may be misleading. Please clarify.

        1. I can’t count anymore – not part of the group. What is specific is that lots of people formed a lynch mob (at least 50% of those that post there regularly – the rest being passive members at best) and only One person suspended judgment. The rest were silently watching the lynch mob or not being there. As I said, the treatment was worse in terms of condemnation and percentages than the Norwegian Terrorist Anders Behring-Brievik (who killed more than 70 people in cold blod in 2011) got from the Norwegian people. Are you trying to somehow justify the lynch mob, Marildi?

          1. No, I’m not justifying anything or even making an evaluation one way or the other. I’m simply doing the kind of think you yourself have suggested, which is to get the data and reserve judgement until then.

            I was asking you only about the count you had made when you posted the comment about it, not what the count is now. And here again, where you say “at least 50% of those that post there regularly” there is the question of what percentage of the 450 are those who post there regularly? If it’s anything like blogs, yours and others, it’s a very small percentage of the total.

            1. Then I don’t think you can draw a conclusion about the whole group, based on that small percentage – much less extend it to Indies in general or to conclude that this small group indicates anything about “Scientology proper”, both of which notions you have implied in some of your comments.

            2. As I said, it is the worst I have ever seen, and with many being trained OTs no less. And the rest of the group Let It Happen. It is disgraceful. Up until this happened I was in fact expecting rational analysis, and if not at least some people voicing rational viewpoints or at the very least a handful that would voice something rational. But this forms only one piece of the puzzle in my conclusion on Scientology’s destructive side. There are many, many instances on both ESMB, FZ list and several FB groups. It is very hard to find tolerance, compassion and respect in the Scientology Indie field. As usual, there are individuals who are beautiful and lovable. But the statistics are looking very grim.

            3. Geir, you said that about 15-20% were posting regularly and only about 50% of that 15-20% of regular posters made comments on the subject – which would amount to 10% or less of the regular posters, which would be less than 2% of the total membership.

              And of the 98% who didn’t make comments I wonder how many of them did not do so because of this viewpoint: “There comes a time in life, when you walk away from all the drama and people who create it” (quoting from your recent blog post “Letting go”).

              I also wanted to note that your conclusion about Scientology’s destructive side is based on products of the CoS – i.e. all or virtually all of the people in that group, as well as other Independents, have been through the CoS mill. Maybe we should be impressed by the fact that there are any Scientologists at all “who are beautiful and lovable”. And maybe the fact that there are some is an indicator that some individuals got what Scientology really is. That’s just as likely a possibility as the inference you are drawing, that Scientology itself may be destructive – since you are basing your viewpoint on products of the CoS, which we know has altered core Scientology. We really have no hard statistics on either group – especially on products of core Scientology. Just our own chance observations.

            4. No. Redo math: 50% of 15%-20% of 450 is…

              I appreciate your effort to make me change my mind about this, but as I said there is sooo much data beyond this horrible dogpiling that you might as well just give up. Then there is the point that the burden of proof for Scientology’s statistical workability lies with… yes, Scientology. Nobody should be asked to prove it isn’t creating statistically significant betterment in people compared to the norm. It is the other way around: It needs to be proven that Scientology creates a significant positive statistical deviation from the usual. So far I see a negative correlation, so good luck trying to find a positive correlation between Bridge done and compassion, respect and tolerance.

              I am Only pointing out these three terms as these constitute the core of what I criticize here. Scientology may do a world of good in any other area (and I believe it does – saying that also to alleviate your emotions) – but this OP is about the Warm Trio: Compassion, Respect and Tolerance.

              The challenge is yours. The ball is in your court yard. Can you prove there is a positive correlation between Bridge progress and the Warm Trio?

              If not, I will be true to my own observations based 5% on the experience in this OP, 45% from my experiences interacting with Independent and Ex Scientologists and 50% on my experiences in the 25 years of studying Scientology in the CoS. And the three groupd of experiences I mention here all correlate – they point in the same direction: That Scientology lacks Compassion, Respect and Tolerance at its core. It is a masculine subject. It is cold and hard and tends to harden people. As it did me.

            5. Oops, you’re right. I got tangled up where I got to 10% of the regular posters – it should have been 10% of the total membership. My point is the same, however – even 10% is a small percentage of the total. And, as others have pointed out, those who select themselves out and pipe up are probably not a good representation of the group as a whole. So I still think that drawing conclusions from that small, self-selected group is a mistake on your part.

              You say, “It needs to be proven that Scientology creates a significant positive statistical deviation from the usual.”

              By that, I see you missed my point – which is that you are not talking about “Scientology proper”, as you yourself phrased it. You are only talking about the Scientology of the CoS, and its products.

              Also, dear Geir, when you refer to alleviating my “emotions”, what you are saying is that because I have a viewpoint different from yours, you assume mine must be based on “emotions”, as it couldn’t possibly be rational. That is an assumption based on you being so sure your own viewpoint is the correct one. And I realize you were trying to be nice to me by indulging me in “my emotions” but it’s a little bit condescending on your part, if you think about it.

              You also wrote, “The challenge is yours. The ball is in your court yard. Can you prove there is a positive correlation between Bridge progress and the Warm Trio?”

              Again, you are looking at “Bridge progress” that is almost entirely “CoS Bridge”. And the personal experiences you listed out all relate to the CoS brand of Scn. What do you know about the pc’s of people like Marty, Trey, Per, Dexter, Les Warren, Patricia Krenig, David St. Lawrence, etc. and the various groups outside of the Church?

            6. Geir: That Scientology lacks Compassion, Respect and Tolerance at its core.

              Chris: That’s what you guys are arguing? You didn’t need a lot of statistics for that, you could’ve just asked me! (As I check my plane reservations for going to watch my oldest daughter graduate from medical school and wishing her mother could be there to see how wonderful her daughter became — a loving and compassionate doctor of medicine, only her handlers trained in the only tech on earth that can HELP anybody won’t let her even know this is occurring let alone attend.

              Independent Scientology is Scientology.

            7. Marildi, you said to Geir further down, “I don’t think you can draw a conclusion based on that” (the 15-20% of the Indies that commented and made up the attack group)

              Good point. One error in statistics is that surveys only include “those willing to participate in the survey”. Internet sites tend to have regular posters that dominate.

              I’m not sure the Independents behaved any worse than most other groups that invest time and effort into a project and see it needlessly threatened. The pack mentality is instinctual in all of us. I’m certainly not above it. It takes stepping back for a moment to behave calmly, rationally and compassionately when emotion sweeps a group.

              What is clearly demonstrated is that Scientology did not prevent the reaction. Clearing the planet as a concept is a fallacy. OTs can behave as badly in a group as any others. Though I’ve seen trained auditors behave a bit better, that probably has more to do with the empathy of those who turn to counselling as careers.

              Some Indies do practice censoring, disconnection, name-calling, social shunning and belittling of those who sincerely hold different viewpoints. Certainly not all.

            8. Sheila, I agree with everything you wrote except this: “What is clearly demonstrated is that Scientology did not prevent the reaction.”

              Please see my last reply to Geir as regards “Scientology”.

            9. Chris wrote:

              That’s what you guys are arguing? You didn’t need a lot of statistics for that, you could’ve just asked me! (As I check my plane reservations for going to watch my oldest daughter graduate from medical school and wishing her mother could be there to see how wonderful her daughter became — a loving and compassionate doctor of medicine, only her handlers trained in the only tech on earth that can HELP anybody won’t let her even know this is occurring let alone attend.

              Independent Scientology is Scientology.

              Congratulations on your daughter!!

              Is her mother an independent Scientologist who has disconnected from her own daughter and won’t even show up for her graduation from medical school??

              Sorry if I’m behind here. But what is this story?

              Alanzo

            10. Alanzo: Is her mother an independent Scientologist who has disconnected from her own daughter and won’t even show up for her graduation from medical school??

              Chris: Her mother is Int-base Sea Org whose disconnection from me and her daughter has held firm for over 20 years. Her mother doesn’t know even one fact about her daughter since she was 10 years old.

            11. Amazing.

              Oh well. Congratulations on your daughter!

              You did your biological and social duty and have achieved one hell of a product as a parent.

              Way to go.

              Alanzo

            12. ‘It is cold and hard and tends to harden people. As it did me.’
              I don’t know, Geir. I have read some of your posts from the time when you started your blog. Your answers look to be uptone and warm. This is what comes through. There seem to be some ‘turning points’, which may not only be due to your
              changes of viewpoints regarding scientology, but perhaps to the changes in your private life and the influence of people around you. This is of course my opinion but I am voicing it as the latter may have a bigger part. This is an ‘energy’ universe.
              As I observed it in my own life, even if to stay ‘uptone’ doesn’t require effort or thought, the people around me do indeed have ‘energy’ levels, the slightest resistance results in getting into my ‘face’ what I resisted. Here I am speaking about
              the perception of ‘raw’ energy – much like in the pictures you posted with the ‘heart-love’. Then there are the remaining concepts which, at a very subtle level, form the
              basis of agreements and emotions, and some more energy. No matter that there is no sense of ‘ I ‘, that is there is the ‘Flow’ (life), these phenomena can be perceived and have shorter or longer effects. Of course all can be fully observed and I do that. You can have a look at ‘your’ turning points, if you find that relevant.
              My point is in short: the body being here, some remaining ‘mind’, the energy coming from ‘other beings’ and not fully confronted can have an effect which reduces the ‘tone’ of the person, even if the ‘theta/core/flow’ part stays forever intact.

  28. On rooting out prejudices

    It’s the 17. of May, and Norway is celebrating like no other nation on Earth. Children parade in every city, and in Oslo, the King is standing on the castle’s balcony waving for hours and hours to the children marching, school by school, with brass bands, in front of his castle. Anette and I took the subway to the center of Oslo to be part of the party.

    On our 25 minute subway trip, we pass a house that lies squeezed in between the subway and the highway – possible the worst spot for a house in Oslo. We commented on how shitty it must be to live there with all the noise and everything.

    Suddenly, the guy beside me interrupted our conversation. He was 18 as evident by his “russedress” and with a mohawk. He interjected “It’s actually not bad at all”. He told us he just came from that house where his friend rents an apartment and said the noise is not a problem. We talked and I told him that this is an excellent example of correcting another with a prejudice based on a lack of facts. I drew a conclusion based on my sparse information from the outside, while he had actually been inside the house and had access to the facts. I told him it served me well that he so promptly blew my prejudice to bits, and that I really like when others blasts my preconceived ideas like that. And then I told him it was great timing and referred him to read this blog post to understand why.

    Thanks, Sjaak for giving me a nudge 🙂 Good luck with your study to be an architect. Keep the social touch, you’re a cool guy.

    1. Like it! Great story! He ‘had access to the facts’. What if you had gone into the house and still would have found it noisy? Isn’t the ‘noise’ in the ‘head’? Anything that you resist tends to persist. If you resist the noise in your head, it may get stronger and stronger. You know the saying that you can be in a market-place full
      of noise and still be very calm, peaceful and silent in your mind.
      Can you ‘rest’ as that silence….?

  29. Geir – Nice story and so true. In reference the the events, comments, embroiled concepts of recent days I thought this might be a reminder of what can be changed.
    We owe it to ourselves to be honest in our evaluations, observations and actions. Enjoy the holiday.

  30. Beautiful…each sentence can serve one by one for contemplation until they sink in the Heart. No other guidance is needed in life than the innocent and sincere Heart out of which the equally innocent and sincere actions arise. They are always proper to the situation no matter what form they take. I find love as the only true power, may it be part of humanity or any other spiritual form.

  31. Speaking of people not using the tools at hand in Scientology to just fix things and improve conditions, anyone that is a solo auditor only needs to fly their ruds if their ruds go out on something.

    1. I mean, I could say, “I would expect more of a solo auditor………” blah blah blah.

      But that would imply YOU OWE ME SOMETHING as a result of your adventures exploring the occult.

      People out here that go out ruds about “others beingness, doingness or havingness” as a result of exploring the occult are people that feel you OWE them something.

      You owe it to them to react a certain way. You owe it to them to honest. You owe it to them to be truthful. You owe it to them to be this way or that way or say this or do that…….what ever.

      No. It is not true. Nobody owes you anything because they chose to dabble in the occult. They never did, they never will.

      1. The Church of Scientology has morphed into one big police department. One big Internal Revenue Service. Offsprings are out here wearing police hats. “I’m going to put ethics in”. And these people I have met face to face, are the most criminal and out exchange. The “I’m K.S.W.” bible thumpers have been the WORST scam artists. It doesn’t matter what they promise you over the internet. After you cut the check or wire the money or hand over the cash they slide into the “oblivious” section on the awareness chart. In a heavily policed structure they may have been able to keep up some standards, but out here they fall apart with standards and agreements. They don’t feel they owe you anything. They feel they “must be contributed to” on “status quo”. Such as, “I was Int base staff” Or, “I was an auditor for XXX years” “I am a class XXXX” . Nobody in the Church delivers standard tech anymore. There are a handful of people left on the planet to deliver. Trey Lotz, Karen de la Carrier, Marty Rathbun, The middle East AO, Claudio in Italy, Per, a few others, Les Warren, a few others. This is all a result of everyone in the game feeling THEY ARE OWED SOMETHING by the others. As soon as you get the idea nobody owes you anything, align yourself with some people that DO NOT set others up for losses, figure out how you use what you took with you from this arena almost empty of seats, and figure out how to use what you have to help yourself and others BEYOND this chapter of your life, the sooner you will move on to making the world a better a place. In the end you have to travel with yourself through time. Feigning dissapointment in others does not really elevate one. Not being dissapointed in yourself should always remain your first priority. Everyone else is a tourist running through your life.

        1. “The Church…class XXXX” Oracle, I think you said it all 🙂

          Only, I would clarify now ‘The Churches system’, as ‘The Church’ includes all people therein or from there too, and some are good folks. Also, I have something against ‘standard tech’ (although I don’t know whether it means the same thing for all) because the OT Bridge seems beheaded to me (the ‘OT’ EP). It’s some major outness that I think the internet SCN that I have observed, is way too quiet about. I know Marty made that point and there’s also a group about it, but other than that…goodnight people.

  32. isene
    2013-05-17 @ 22:02
    Oracle; What is your purpose on this thread? Can you state clearly what you intend to deliver here?

    isene
    2013-05-18 @ 00:42
    Wow. Let me clarify: Did you study the mathematical subject called “Statistics”?

    isene
    2013-05-17 @ 22:06
    Did you study statistics?

    isene
    2013-05-17 @ 22:02
    Oracle, did you ever study statistics? Or any higher mathematics?

      1. I guess this would be a P.U.I. Charge? Posting under the influence?
        Or a, P.W.I. charge? Posting while under the influence?

        Firstly, it is 5:28 p.m. here . I don’t know what time people Norway start drinking, but 5:28 p.m. here is a bit early. Most people are getting dinner on the table. Or, In my case, since I am running three companies from the house and usually work until midnight, it is more like lunch time here. I don’t drink and drive and I still have plenty of driving to do today.

        Geeze, isn’t it 3:00 a.m. there in Norway? In the middle of the night / early morning?

        That is closer to a drinking time. I mean, someone could be really sloshed at 3:00 a.m., especially if they started up late in the evening.

        I am pleading innocent to this most recent charge as well.

        Very curious that such an idea would enter your mind at 3:00 a.m. in Norway!

        Laughter! Cheers!

        1. Oh, I just remembered, someone on another forum you were part of did try reduce me to “a drunk” before my peers when I mentioned an upset I had with him. He vacationed here as my guest, my treat. We did hit a bar (I work and spend hard as a hostess) . That translated from him onto the Internet that I am an alcoholically inclined person that drinks all night every night and posts while doing so. Perhaps that bled into your assessment of me. Subtle injustices. Notice I am still here and willing to communicate and did not cave in under the wrong indications and wrong item and that purpose to unmock and devalue me? Clean hands make a happy life.

        2. Not a charge. A question.

          Your posts were so non-sequitur that I had a hard time understnd why. Thus I ask instead of drawing any conclusion. Still don’t know why they were so off, though.

          1. Wow. I sure have had a lot of feedback via emails over the last few days as a result of my posts here. Even emails from people way up in your part of the world that I never heard of before. I am surprised to be labeled a non sequitur. However, I am admittedly dancing to a different tune. The world accepts all kind of dancers and that is good news for both of us! XXOO Thank you for being you.

            1. P.S. Yes. I studied higher mathematics. And statistics. I was labeled a mathematical genius and skipped two grades in school because of my mathematical abilities. I was given full scholarship to a private high school as a result of my mathematical abilities.. Mathematics is a study of SYMBOLS. When I got into Scientology and realized I was firmly stuck at SYMBOLS on the tone scale, I let it go and began dabbling in the supernatural and occult.

            2. Blogging has its moments. I know I do. The consistency comes and goes. Don’t worry about it and just keep writing to us. Common ground and understanding will ensue if we try.

  33. I can’t understand why people without knowing “all the facts” acuses and judges other people’s intentions. Putting attention on the intentions are always a bad move, is like the difference between “what I want” and “what I do”. I think the doingness can be evaluated, or judged if you want to judge and know the facts and circunstances, but always will be the move and not the person. Any correction is suppose to be good, anything wrong is suppose to improve, and what I see is that people don’t want to improve other people’s beigness. And regardless if they want to do that but maybe they can’t (they are too far away, or not involved, like a criminal you see on TV and makes you feel pity but only are watching), then again, what they do is what can be evaluated. I feel like if they want to improve, they just can’t carry on with themselves. What about Criminon? Isn’t suppose that Scientology converse criminals into fine people at least? What about this highly crimes? When happens that a bit of objectivity like some mind or mechanism went to only judge good or bad spirits? Where is the “inherent good” in human beings? I guess that axiom is wrong. 😀

  34. Geir, this line of conversation has provided an opportunity to grow through my observations, some of which I’ll share here:

    (1) The value of forming opinions of other people is highly overrated (which, to be honest and fair, is not to say that I have been less guilty than anyone else over the course of my existence).

    (2) The importance of enforcing one’s opinion of another on others is overrated beyond expression through the English language, and is very telling.

    I never saw this so clearly before, but when you see a person go on and on with badmouthing another person, resorting to dredging up unrelated and irrelevant ideas and information, asserting “facts” not at all in evidence and become increasing shrill in proportion to the perceived rejection of their efforts, what this shows is that the person doing the badmouthing identifies far too closely with the perceived adversary(ies) of that person. Likewise, when you see someone acting this way in defense of people whose actions are being criticized, you know that the person is identifying far too closely with the people they are so doggedly (and sloppily) defending. They are “taking it personally”, which is simply another way of saying the same thing.

    (3) My take on the Brian Culkin tempest in a teapot:

    Brian Culkin was successful in getting his $350,000 back from the C of S. That’s a good thing. That’s what he wanted, that’s what he got. He never pretended to have any interest in being a part of anyone’s crusade or war. This suggests that he has a life that is satisfying enough that he doesn’t crave the drama.

    Others have been engaged in a well-played legal action against the C of S to enforce getting their money back from the C of S, well-played enough that the C of S decided that the correct play was to change their behavior and refund a substantial amount of money, and to use this action to demonstrate to the court that it won’t be necessary for others to resort to legal action to get their money back. I’d say that Brian Culkin has these litigants to thank for influencing the C of S to behave more acceptably.

    As to the likely effects on the ongoing litigation, these litigants against the C of S, assuming their purpose is to get their own refunds, should probably suspend legal action and, through their attorneys or otherwise, request the C of S for their refunds. I suspect the C of S is now of a mind to cooperate, rather than experience all the impact of a public legal defeat. Judges are not so stupid as to assume that this one concession to Brian Culkin is anything other than a transparent attempt to manipulate the court, if it is not followed up with further action consistent with that shown to Brian Culkin. If the C of S were to deny the others their refunds, there is nothing to stop them from resuming their legal action, and with an increased confidence, given how the C of S tipped their hand with regard to their own opinion of their chances in court in refunding Brian Culkin’s money.

    I think that these conclusions should be fairly obvious to anyone who is fairly intelligent, and not heavily biased, and the prime reason why some don’t acknowledge what a win-win situation this actually is, is that there are those who, simply have a need to have a crusade and a war to dramatize, and who value and identify with this role so much that they fear to let go, because then they wouldn’t know who to be.

  35. Just one point, Dexter. You said about Brian that “He never pretended to have any interest in being a part of anyone’s crusade or war.”

    Actually, he used to post regularly on Marty’s blog and I would say from all those comments he did give the impression that he was a part of the crusade against the CoS.

    Overall, however, you made some great points and laid out a very positive outcome. Thanks for that!

    1. Thanks Marildi, including for correcting me- If that information was in any of the previous comments I didn’t notice it, and I haven’t been a follower of Marty’s blog. Things have come up involving Marty in some of my clients’ sessions that caused me to find no positive value in directing my attention there, although from what I’ve heard lately, he seems to be in a better place mentally and spiritually.

      1. Things have come up involving you, in my sessions. I have not used that to degrade you widely on some blog. Either has my auditor. I do not think it is fair to present such vague innuendo’s about a man’s life without witness’ to back this up. Such as the “clients” (a generality) themselves being willing to vouch for this or at least specific names. Discussing session data on the Internet is already very murky. Aside from whatever “clients” situations you may want to divulge, you have posted widely entheta about Marty. While a guest in my home, you asked me if I would be willing to tell you how much money I had donated to Marty. That seemed to be an issue for you. Then you proceeded to tell me whatever “funding” (were your words), I had been giving to Marty, YOU felt, I should be giving to “The Freezone.” I don’t know WHO you meant by “The Freezone”. I suppose it was to be you? It was an attempt to unmock his income lines. You were the one on the Freezone forum to insist that auditors should never get attacked. Yet, you are before an audience publishing rumors against an auditor, on another man’s platform. What you mean by assessing and evaluating Marty’s place “mentally and spiritually” as being in a “better place” I do not understand. May I ask as to your place mentally and spiritually that evidences you as more enlightened, more aware, more educated and more competent than Marty Rathbun? How your products and accomplishments would elevate you to a position to assess Marty’s “mental and spiritual place” ?
        Do explain.

        1. It seems you just cannot help but expose yourself, Catherine Zoltan/”Oracle” (yes- if you’re going to float false innuendos at another by their name, then stand behind your own name, or else do not engage).

          Firstly, your behavior here is emblematic of what I was just talking about. Marty Rathbun does not need others taking his words out of context to create and promote a conflict with him and me, and neither do I. I was merely explaining why I hadn’t the interest to have been reading his blog. Only an opportunist like yourself, with the ever present purpose to stir the pot, would do this. All your nonseqiturs, which Geir referred to, are consistent only in your intent to create in others the idea that “there are enemies to fight”.

          As to the good I do, everyone here is welcome to take in the testimonials on my website, Gateway to Answers. I also have an active Facebook group of my own, Free Scientologist with over 100 members (including Geir, Kim Baker and other subscribers here) who find my activities worth supporting.

          You have always, however awkwardly and transparently, positioned yourself as the “mother guardian-protector of the set-upon victims”, while mostly puzzling people trying to figure out what you’re talking about. Perhaps the most bizarre, over the top example of this was when you got your husband involved, but then since you have demonstrated the amazingly poor taste to once again embarrass yourself by reigniting a public pissing mstch with me here in Geir’s blog, let us allow sunlight to disinfect, and tell the full story behind this:

          (1) Approximately 2-1/2 years ago, you approached me, and made me a financial offer to provide processing for members of your family; you COMPLETELY set the terms yourself, including an advance payment of $10,000 to reserve a month or two in the summer time, all for your arrangement and no other clients during that period; you also INSISTED that the advance payment be non-refundable. (To be clear, I have NEVER insisted on such terms with anyone, not then, not before, and not since, have I EVER even suggested such a thing as a nonrefundable advance payment of any kind).

          (2) You then later did an about-face and accused me of “bait and switch”, of “turning out to be a squirrel”, and withdrew from this plan. (I had not been aware that you had done this same dance with at least two other field auditors, and would go on to do this at least once more with someone else afterward)

          (3) I immediately told you I would not keep your $10,000 because in my mind, while your reserving that time did in fact prevent me from seeking and accepting other bookings, I could not in good conscience take that much money from you when I have never actually provided a single auditing session to any member of your family. I did say that I would return $8,000 out of the $10,000- which you utterly outright refused to accept; quoting you verbatim here: “If you send a check I will tear it up”. So I set the money aside to return at another opportunity.

          (4) You then, on more than one occasion, publicly LIED about this, and pretended that you had asked me for the money back and that I refused. You did everything in your power to use lies to make me look untrustworthy. Again, quoting you verbatim (this you posted on Freezone.org): “Dexter Gelfand is a fucking criminal!”; then, only on private emails, did you admit that you were lying.
          When my wife Marina confronted you over the phone on this, you offered the weak excuse that you felt some things I had posted were directed at you, so then in your mind, that justified spreading such lies about me.

          (5) Then, you retreated to your act as “mother guardian-protector”: I confronted Terril Park, who had appointed me moderator to help him to curb vulgar outbursts such as yours on Freezone.org for immediately taking you off moderation and singing your praises after what you said about me (and failed to disclose that he had been the beneficiary of your financial generosity- you had paid thousand$ of your husband’s money to treat Terrill to expensive L’s auditing); what did you do? You bleated “stop attacking Terril!” in a transparent attempt to disguise the fact that I was confronting Terril for having supported your attack on me, on the very list that he had asked me to help him moderate. There you were again, being the instigator of a conflict, and then opportunistically positioning yourself as “mother protector-guardian”. PS, NOBODY is buying your act, Catherine; minus the people you have swayed with your husband’s cash, I haven’t seen even one supporter.

          (6) “But wait, there’s more!”- You next brought your husband into the act-which is a shame, because when I met him, I found him to be a very nice and friendly being. He asked what had happened, and was upset about my wife Marina having called you about this- (no doubt, you made it sound like Marina “attacked” you-which is WAY outside her wheelhouse). I explained that I also was not happy with my wife interceding in this matter, and preferred to handle it myself- now get this-
          Your husband then took your “mother guardian-protector” bullshit act (with your influence, without a doubt) to amazingly ridiculous proportion- and I do mean AMAZINGLY-

          He then pretended to take my words to mean that I was going to harm my wife- wait, we’re not even there yet- and said, as a Hungarian, he felt a kinship to her because she is of Russian ancestry (never mind the fact that I am also), -wait for it-….and, he ACTUALLY-LITERALLY, MIND YOU- THREATENED TO SEND “A BAND OF GYPSIES” after me! For real!

          Imagine the state of mind it takes to think that this is going to drive a edge between my wife and myself and position you as a “protector”. Beyond the ordinary concepts of insanity by light years.

          Everything you could ever say about me is drenched in self-promoting, self-serving lies of biblical proportion, Oracle.

          I rest my case.

          1. I do not care to dirty up this blog like this. I will put up a separate blog with copies of our emails and correspondence. It’s all in writing. I have copied your essay here to add to it. People can go there if they want to see it all in writing. The last time we game to a disagreement your spouse put matters right. So this time I will refer this to my spouse to take it from here.

            1. YOU are the one who “dirtied up this blog” , quite knowingly and intentionally, mind you, by, without giving YOUR name, introduced into Geir’s discussion topic your distorted version of personal events that occurred between us. If you woiuld like to “put matters right”, then reach out to me personally and privately, and I will be more than happy to work with you to restore the good relations we originally enjoyed 🙂

              One more point I wish to make known here, now that the rest of the story has been presented: Months ago, I did in fact send back to Oracle every penny of her $10,000, which I had kept in reserve for that purpose all along.

            2. Geir! I am outside! Far far away away, and it is beautiful up here! Lots of space, gentle winds as a balm upon my soul. I experienced for myself becoming the subject of a “lynch mob” right here on YOUR blog! It was rather thrilling! So, I am thinking Brian is probably somewhere settled in his new position, feeling comfortable and in a better place in the world in spite of all. I hope so. I wish only the best for him, and for you too. May the day come when we construct better games where everybody really does have a chance to win. XXOO Love to you………….

            3. I have no idea why you wanted to start a fist fight here on my blog. But I am happy if you’re done with it.

            4. XXOO! Next time we have a fight perhaps in another life, let’s promise to have some hot make up sex afterwards!

            5. In retrospect, we both are flowing on an Honor purpose. You chose to defend your friend, Brian. I chose to defend the Indies who did not participate in the Fair gaming, and Marty. Was that wrong on either of our part? No. There was actually a lot of rightness on both our part. We are flowing on the same purpose line, to curb abuse, fair gaming, and injustice. I think we both have clean motives. I will remember that rightness in our exchanges.

            6. For the Nth time: I was not defending Brian. I was defending objectivity, fairness, facts and justice.

        2. I’m a witness. I also have not been a follower of Marty’s blog for the same innuendo as Dexter mentioned. Marty’s past is blighted by his gestapo record in COS — this is simply a matter of record. That Marty is vague about his destructive actions through those years shows a reluctance to come clean but witnesses to it are many. I don’t know who you are to write anonymously vague innuendo against Dexter’s vague innuendo but if you have a really good reason for doing so, you should say. And if you’ve any courage like the rest of us, maybe you should identify yourself and spend some time bolstering your credibility rather than say even one word against the brave men and women who’ve OPENLY suffered and pulled through the bullshit years of COS and made new lives for themselves.

          This kind of even goes for the rest of the readers who comment here anonymously. You can come out of the closet and maybe you should if you want to really make any difference. Or don’t. But respect the integrity of the ones who know who they really are.

      2. I would venture to say, Marty could rise up to a better place spiritually and mentally, without this suppression on his lines.

  36. I didn’t have any idea what this story with Brian is about, as other than this blog, Marty’s, and some other small facebook group (from which i left) I haven’t been discussing about SCN. When Geir said that there is nothing left to be salvaged from SCN, I didn’t quite agree. But through all this time that I’ve been reading and writing on this blog I had some inner conflict-charge that gradually revealed to me. I have more or less written what it is about, and no SCNist has ever discussed it with me.

    Anyway, I’m not going to say over and over what I agree/disagree with SCN. But I think there are mostly good people involved with it, but I think that the sect and authoritarian, evaluative (psychology-like) mentality does not match SCN’s core. And maybe reconsider if it is OK to go free in this fashion. If somebody says that there are no Clears he is evil, but most SCNists say that there are no OTs (with the definition of OT) and that is OK, and they’re reasonable about it, because otherwise it would be unrealistic(?). I think this stuff is absurd, dogmatic thinking. If SCN is THE way, then have you made it all the way through, or have others that you know made it? Just saying…

      1. Per said that there’s nothing to salvage because we have the class 9 materials. Then you said fuck it, it is too much of a trap.

        1. …and you cancelled what you had said that there’s something worth to salvage (?). Don’t make me search back now 😛

            1. You may check out ‘Improving upon Scientology’ and ‘Fuck it’ (I don’t want to quote others like this). Then pay me for the invalidation mental stress. My thetan is not feeling well.

            2. Spuros: (I don’t want to quote others like this). My thetan is not feeling well.

              Dee: I know what you meant, so perk up and not to worry. 🙂 Exact words, yuk! Unless we’re in court!

            3. HaHa…no implication at all!
              Corollary (learnt this word from Ron):
              If all verbal comms are completed, all the verbal comms are referring then to the present – but why talk then? (obnosis) Most possibly for the pure fun of using
              words freely (ref. the tool scale – Geir Isene- Haha). Like you guys!

            4. Marianne, that’s way too many considerations! Where’s that obnosis from life’s point of view? 😉 You yourself were telling me the other day 😛

            5. Dee: I know what you meant, so perk up and not to worry. 🙂 Exact words, yuk! Unless we’re in court!

              Spyros: Yes, it would be yucky if somebody thought I was making an accusation or something and used people’s past against them. F@ck the past 😛

            6. Spyros: F@ck the past

              Dee: Right! One of our many wise men wrote – I don’t worry about the small stuff, and it’s all small stuff. 🙂 and from the F**it view, F the worry at least.

            7. Dee: I don’t worry about the small stuff, and it’s all small stuff.

              Spy: Nice point of view! In SCN it was said that if one had a PTP, he didn’t have enough. You should have him mock up more.

            8. Spyros: Nice point of view! In SCN it was said that if one had a PTP, he didn’t have enough. You should have him mock up more.

              Dee: Hey that’s right and same principle. However, I found that in a small book titled “It’s all Small Stuff’ I believe. It works for me and easy to remind and expand self when needed without mock ups or $$.

            9. Spyros
              Like your humour, get what you are saying! I have been trying to find a good music video for ‘paying’ but in vain so far. Can you help me out? Or we could just ‘get off it’
              and find some better music?

            10. Dee: It works for me and easy to remind and expand self when needed without mock ups or $$.

              SP: You don’t need $$ to make mock ups Dee 😛 David may have the copyrights of the word, but the action existed for long before he did.

          1. Spyros – The only time I recall something similar from Geir was his comments about the current C of S organizations were not worth trying to salvage. If I recall correctly he did not feel it was capable of being reformed by its own policies and was not worth the immense effort to salvage. Something along that line of concept. I don’t remember him ever stating there was nothing to salvage in scientology.

            1. Alright, you can read what I told Marianne, then pay me too for the public black PR against me.

              By the way, I didn’t mean it as anything bad. I just said I disagreed at that time. And implied it made more sense to me later on. It isn’t that everything in SCN is bad…on the contrary. But yes, there’s something evil involved with it, in it’s most popular form, from my view.

            2. Spyros – Why don’t you lighten up! I did not black PR (there is no falsehood stated nor implied in what I wrote) you or even disagree with your opinion. I simply stated the most similar thing I knew Geir had written. You already wrote a week or so ago you were done with scientology so why get in a pissing contest with someone simply trying to help you with your question and then challenge me about a subject you say you are done with. Listen to the wind in the air and have a tea. Then if you wish to re-read what I wrote you will see there is no personal attack on you.

            3. Something to be kept in mind by all readers of this blog. Each person has their own viewpoint and thoughts based upon their own unique data and experience.

            4. Sapere, thanks for the wonderful video. Sooo true! I went to YT for better format and to read. Just learned how to do that here.

            5. Sapere: Each person has their own viewpoint and thoughts based upon their own unique data and experience.

              Dee: How about every blog? An excellent reminder. 🙂

            6. +1

              This reminds me of something I read recently, a quote of the Buddha:

              “One is one’s own refuge, who else could be the refuge?” (from What the Buddha Taught, by Walpola Rahula)

            7. Sapere Aude: “I don’t remember him ever stating there was nothing to salvage in scientology.”

              I don’t either, and in the past he has said the opposite. However, more recently, in so many words he seems to be implying that there is nothing to salvage, as in the comment upstream on this thread, pasted below – which is a pretty broad appraisal:

              isene
              2013-05-15 @ 02:54
              “Yes – it can take time. But it makes me wonder if it is just the CoS-instilled think they have to peel off or Scientology proper.”

              Saying that he “wonders” about it may have just been a way to soften what would have been a pretty controversial statement otherwise. The reason I think that is possible is because he has posted a quite a few criticisms of the basic philosophy and tech over a period of time.

            8. Sapere Aude, I was totally kidding about the black PR, as well as for the ‘sue you’ I said to Marianne. And I’m not darkened.

              Last week or so I said I’m done with SCN. Actually I was done for years before I was drawn to this blog (and later to Marty’s) by Geir’s powers. Don’t blame me, blame Geir.

              I may or not be done talking with/about SCN(ists) too, but I take no directions what to do.

            9. Spyros – Understood. As to who you take directions from – tis your life and your in charge of it. Now the mud ball continues to turn and the game continues.

            10. Spyros
              You may have missed my comm about finding some good music. Last time what you posted was great! Do you feel like putting here another good one?
              (P.S. the point is there about your obnosis comm.!)

            11. Sapere Aude: Now the mud ball continues to turn and the game continues.

              Spyros: What does that mean?

            12. Spyros – Earth is just a mud ball spinning round and round and traveling through space. We are here and doing whatever each of us do. That is the game of life.

              Just another way or saying another day will arrive tomorrow and the game of life will be for us what it will be. Hope that clears it up.

            13. Marianne. no I didn’t miss it, I’m just not musical right now. Maybe later on, OK? Though I would prefer your $$ than a music video 😛

            14. Sapere Aude, fine, got it. Though I don’t understand how it fits. You’re talking like I’m the hurt or pissed SCN victim or something. I don’t like it. And the evaluation you made about me before, is totally yours. If you like to solve the primary MU you can check the parts where PEr and Geir said what I said they said, or call me ‘negative’ forever and then put me on the straight road. I dont seek to be positive nor negative. I can be this and that and the other. I’m fine with it.

            15. Spyros – It is just treated as a social ack that the cycle has ended and we each go on living life without attention on our past comm cycle. You accused me of black PRing you which I wasn’t doing. You clarified that point with your later post so it is done as far as I am concerned. On scn etc I only saw you what you posted and your viewpoint. I don’t personally have a viewpoint on your viewpoing – It is fine with me. I never implied nor intended to imply you were a victim so there is no evaluation. I don’t even consider you negative or positive and I have absolutely no intention to put you on any “straight road.” Now, you are fine with it and I am done with this comm cycle. Nothing left on this. I don’t plan to respond any further as it isn’t part of the overall comm cycle of this OP, in my opinion.

            16. Yes Sapere Aude, it’s all irrelevant to the OP as well as what I said. I never accused Geir about anything, nor am I nor do I the things you said about me. I’m not glad we didn’t settle it. Bye.

          2. Here’s my actual viewpoint just for the record: I don’t think Scientology is salvageable as a whole. I think it is boobytrapped. I think parts are useful and some parts highly valuable. These Parts should be used as tools. But to salvage The Subject… nope… fuck it.

            1. Ja, similar to what I think, with emphasis on the boobytrapped and partially highly valuable. See? You did this to me 😛

            2. You know LRH is the only person I have ever heard describe other religions as “booby-trapped”. Other people in other religions have said things about other religions to denigrate them, but I have never heard this particular term used by anybody else.

              I think LRH is the only person I know to have described other religoons as “boobytrapped”.

              I think that is very interesting.

              Alanzo

  37. Spyros
    When one clearly understands what another says, that part of the comm is completed, that is no attention is left on it. One may or may not be able to recall
    the comm later if another situation brings it up but this recall is valid only if one
    is able to repeat the exact words said then. If not so, there are some ‘additives’
    which were there in the original situation (misunderstanding) or put to that later on
    by one’s mind. So then one can clear the comm(s) – that’s the why for the search.

  38. Video from above on Don’t Take Anything Personal. I am re-posting here so a larger view shows for all to more easily view this. You can also click the lower right corner and go to full screen if your computer can handle that.

    1. Marianne, Miraldi and Dee – Glad you found something from this. Yes, this applies to any blog or any group communication endeavor. To Miraldi, I saw what you posted above and Geir has clarified this. The basic truths within the works of LRH will not change if they are actually truths. The personal opinions stated and viewed by some to be truths will fall aside when evaluated and found not to be true. I, personally, am a better person for having done the bridge. I do not, out of automaticity, reactively support anything and everything within Scientology.

      I feel we are all a project or work in progress. My intent is that all can become the fullness of who they really are. I think you will enjoy this (yes, Marianne, I have an entire collection of quotes, video clips, etc I have found and kept):

        1. marildi – tku. I happen to be one who appreciates all who communicate on the blogs. Those that have left the SO, staff or the CofS as public all have their own story, their own experience, their own upsets and their own path for them to travel to get them out of where-ever they are at that time. I appreciate all who post with the intention to make a benefit to all. For those that just want to attack or be right then I don’t support that. More dark intentions to counter dark intentions is just a recipe for crap. I don’t care if the concerned person was ever involved in Scientology or just seriously attempting to right a true bad scene. This video applies. I posted this elsewhere originally about two years ago.

          If there is a good side to mankind then let us be an example. I am on the side of those with good intent, want to help others, whatever their path of life – as long as it isn’t evil or what I consider bad. I consider all my friend if they are not blocking the pathway or others or holding people down from what they could add to our future. I have felt this way before I ever heard the word scientology. It happens to be a stable datum for me. Others, may make up their own mind. I enjoy all who feel like me and have nothing but good wishes and thoughts for them. Not theetie weetie – just a clean good thought from me. I have seen enough bull….. for one lifetime.

          I have enjoyed your posts. I think you will enjoy this along with others:

          1. This one struck some chords I can’t even fully explain. Very moving.

            LOVED your post here too. Thanks for setting a good example in your attitude. 🙂

            1. Marildi – This struck a chord with me also. I have had this clip on my computer for over two years and have played it several times. No matter what we chat about on these blogs I never lose sight of the fact there are people in the world who really have to sacrifice to communicate and take a stand. The drive of a human being to maintain personal integrity, fight for dignity, and stand up against oppression is so strong that in all societies we see it. Yes, there is a basic goodness in all of us. I know you understand.

            2. Yes, I do understand! You put that “struck chord” into just the right words:

              “The drive of a human being to maintain personal integrity, fight for dignity, and stand up against oppression is so strong that in all societies we see it.”

              I watched the video twice in a row, just to savor the experience. 🙂

          2. Yes, you can be clearer, if you want, who has good and dark intentions and how that is. As you implied it for me too before, while holding on to a misunderstanding, which I pointed it out twice that was misunderstanding.

            I think the darkest dark of all is done in the name of light. That’s what I mean when I say ‘booby trap’ in SCN. Everybody has the best of intentions…and 8 millions former members. So, if I point out there’s something 1.1 about it, then I’m dark? I love it then.

            1. Oh I forgot, you don’t want to discuss it, as it is irrelevant to the OP. You just want to imply it without getting a reply. Perhaps you’d like to have had me sit down and point out to me what’s wrong and dark about me, without me saying anything back? That’s very light of you. Thanks.

            2. Honestly, Spyros, I saw the exchange between you and S.A. and it was clearly misunderstandings from both sides. Really. You meant no ill and he meant no ill. 😉

              But we all know you are a little devil. 😛

            3. Spyros – Nothing implied that you are a dark sider. By example of what I mean I posted that video with a comment about those trapped and locked up behind a razor fence. Those in the SO who are mistreated and whose only desire in joining the SO was to help. Those who support this with the facilities as shown at:
              http://publicintelligence.net/scientology-headquarters-gold-baseint-base/

              I am not in the mood for arguing back and forth as to what I mean. This is Geir’s blog and I treat it as I would his living room. If we were a guest in his house I would not take the opportunity to argue with you and won’t here. Just to state the facts there have never been 8 million members of the C of S to now be former members. You stating your opinions, your reasoning and your experience in and with scientology is not 1.1, nor dark. They are your originations.

              This OP is about a lynch mob mentality reacting without all facts. I am not reacting to your communication but I am responding to your comments to me. I am really not sure why my posting a response and video directed to Marildi elicited this response from you about something that is not at all in my communication. But, you are welcome to love your viewpoint and I state that with no animosity.

            4. Spyros – correction. In my answer I want to clarify. When I say I posted that video – I am saying when I originally posted the video (They Are Heroes) it was in a post about the razor fence … etc.

            5. Sapere Aude, as Marildi said we have a continuous MU thing going on. OK. What I last wrote didn’t have to do with the video. It was about dividing light and dark intention with the criteria you divided them. I thought you continued from the previous cycle with me.

              So, I wont argue anymore. The 8 million ex members is taken from ‘factnet’. I don’t know what a member means to them.

            6. Spyros – OK. Namaste to all concerned.
              (Spiritual Significance of Namaste:
              The reason why we do namaste has a deeper spiritual significance. It recognizes the belief that the life force, the divinity, the Self or the God in me is the same in all. Acknowledging this oneness with the meeting of the palms, we honor the god in the person we meet.)

            7. Thanks Sapere Aude. Among those SCN things, I was going through some important ridge and I sort of behaved as if I was a woman with on her period 😛

              *bow –the Japanese way

          3. SA
            Love the video! It is interesting for me now to play with the question why a person is born in a particular country, culture. What values and lessons await to be experienced and what the person can contribute to that culture or the world at large. The ‘at large’ for me is even more interesting – when though a person lives in
            a particular country, all the identifications, attachments (with the underlying energies) to the ‘values’ can be seen through and can be gone from the person’s mind and consequently the activities. Then one is ‘culturally free’ which means that one is ‘humanity centered’ and can see things as they are, that is they are just different, without any preference, any bias. Its practical, visible outcomes are beautiful and useful.

      1. SA
        Your intent has been crystal clear to me from the first second I read you. Thank you for being and being here…
        Sharing softly, without any push…I have enjoyed all the videos you have posted so
        far..always fit and always on time. Thank you.

Have your say

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s