Subject: Re: SCIENTOLOGY:WHAT IT IS? Summary: Steve Boswell has his Scientology questions

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

From: jprice@jove.cs.pdx.edu (James Price) Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: SCIENTOLOGY:WHAT IT IS? Summary: Steve Boswell has his Scientology questions answered Keywords: madman cult murder Scientology mindcontrol Nazi fascist Hubbard Message-ID: <1096@pdxgate.UUCP> Date: 9 Jan 91 08:04:23 GMT This is a repost of a reply I posted during the last Scientology war, between the forces of good and reason against Steve Boswell, resident net Scientologist. If you weren't here then, you missed the incredible postings made by him, and the replies posted. Anyway, here's some rehashed material I can serve up a second time, for those who came in late. Steve's words are marked by question marks: ?Blah blah blah With no further ado, I bring you Return of Scientology Exposed: Subject: Re: Scientology Exposed >Dick later satirized Scientology in a story in which >the founder of a world cult, named Elron Hu, knows great ambition. ?Are you basing your argument on a story? No, I am basing my argument on experiential truth, experienced knowledge, not a dogma but a lived experience from which I may draw conclusions which may or may not satisfactorilly explain the encounter. >Hubbard took >to sea with an elite Sea-Org made up mostly of hot, sexy, pretty young women, >decked in sailing suits, brass all... ?Strange argument device here. Hell, strange deviant behavior if you ask Mrs. Grundy. While I applaud such a well executed scene, a party ship of the mortal (moral?) elite, and am NOT condeming on this, just gazing in awe at the achievement.... I am only pointing out the facts. Have you not seen the photos of the cute little girls? If not, I'll mail you photocopies...... >With a hodge-podge of philosophy, conspiracy, and psychology, >his illogical but drugging books poured ceaselessly out, like a bad dream. ?You seem prejudiced against Scn from the onset. Not the mark of an objective observer. I went into the Scientology Center in good faith -- the 1st time. I gave a full chance, took the test in hopeful anticipation of its being a good diagnostic tool, and watched the movie without suspicion (perhaps a raised eyebrow or two). I was willing to go with it. But, with the grading of the test (a promising one at that they said) and the subsequent nearly literal shakedown, I questioned. The charts on the walls about how many marks for the week, in plain sight, and I ask about it, they say, oh nothing come on, only after giving it a chance did I say its a BALDFACE pyramid scam. > [Talk about breaking the test deleted] ?Kind of defeats the purpose of the test, doesn't it? Actually, both the first and second times I took it, I put my HONEST answers. Figured it might BREAK the machine. Only after they very very reluctantly let me keep my score and did some simple comparisons of raw data and its interpretation, did I break the pattern. This is not a condemnation either, it works for its purpose.... Most effective, I'm sure. And why does it claim to be an OXFORD test when the real Oxford, probably never had ANYTHING to do with it. I don't really believe the test is from Oxford, do you? So the point is, it didn't defeat my purpose, it proved it. >... and "explain" it to you, and then try to sigh you up for remedial >sessions of their mixed up counseling. ?"Mixed up" counseling? How do you know it is mixed up? You seem to be fond of unsupported statements. And you seem to be very fond of short, inflammative replies to the select parts of the arguments of whose facts you do not address. May I add that you usually avoid all of the facts of the argument and only attack the "unsupported" conclusions. > I will work for the Church of Scientology for (1.5) (2) (5) check one > years without expectation of a guarenteed pay (buried in legalese to sign, >not read) or I will revoke full PUBLIC price for all therapy sessions I have >recieved....... ?I read it... "Strange argument device here." -SB :) > [Talk of "Heavy" deleted] ?If this really happened, you should report it to International ?Management. Or have me do it for you. Where did you go for this? ?That is not even close to what we do. Yeah, it might really help the home office if I toldja the when and where eh? You already have my name and address. I am really too scared of you guys to divulge that. Are you really a benevolent interest? It might not be close to what you do? Please do tell me what you do do. > Heavy> Here you sign these now OK. Do it! > Me > No way man, I'm outta here.... ?You have to be kidding. Yeah, it was quite a joke. Should've been there. > [Talk of pinch test deleted] ?Do you know the difference between "remembering" and "recalling"? If not, it's no wonder the pinch test didn't work. I don't have my handy dictionary from the back of DIANETICS (read it over a year before I went in, made me curious, well, only read 1/2 cause it got boring and seemed unlikely to the nth. Missed the actual techtalk in my imperfect memory I suppose...which did he really say then? At the library where I work we all sat around and laughed uproariously at he DIANETICS glossary, one morning, just going through it. Quite a learned work, that. > [Talk of being kept in there deleted] ?Where did this happen, and when? Why, so you can report me? Don't call me paranoid, call it sarcasm or a :) please..... > (70 lines: I, xxx yyy did act in extreme cowardice and betrayed not >only my org but my duty to it. My obligation to the org comes before >all else, etc, etc, ad nauseum...) ?Sounds like a Treason Formula. Nothing unusual. Nothing unusual? To me it is very unusual. Perhaps you would be so kind as to post the text of one of the Treason Formulas to the discussion? Seems like something we all might be kinda interested in. (And they were sure interested in me NOT seeing it.....) >To this day I believe that a large gorilla in the center got the nod to come >after me, subversive that I was, and thought I saw him tailing us to the car. >A very unnerving time....... ?Sounds rather paranoid to me... Perhaps. Maybe he was just coming home "my way". I'll grant it possibility. In fact, my odds: 50% no gorilla 20% "coming home my way" 20% paranoid, no gorilla 10% paranoid, with gorilla > "Scientology" is a amorphous mass of pseudo-science, bunk, fabrication, >dreams of a madman. ?Do you have proof of this, or is it another unsupported statement? Well, if not an amorphous mass it certainly is a large mass. Does it continue to grow? You mentioned all work done on it was complete. I thought there would be people on the frontiers on dianetics, making new, revolution- ary discoveries, laboring to lesson the plight of humanity (the rest of us). How can you say it is closed, anyway? Is this an open way to think, or Dogma? Hey, while were on it, where are the new Battle Ground Earth tm (?) volumes coming from. I mean, is Elron being published from beyond the grave (ooops, i mean in the realm to where he has gone having no need for the encumberance we call the body)? Psedu-science: is it not? where are the scientific papers? journals? Bunk: self-evident on examination, from empirical observation. Fabrication: I suppose you would like to tell me what ever became of the emotion meter that the two poems are read into, one in English, the translation, the original in Japanese and they come out with the same emotional content on the graph. This was a big triumph in L. Ron's early career, according to the amusing movie they show you and give you free tickets to. Where is that machine today? Why has it never seen the light of day? Could it be that such an unlikely pseudo-scientific piece of bunk was entirely fabricated. Along with the movie's bio of Elron? Dreams of a Madman: I believe from reading Madman or Messaih, and Bare-Faced Messaih, two bios on him, or the definitive history of L. Ron Hubbard and Scientolgy, read A Piece of Blue Sky where one can find ABUNDANT evidence with a brief glance to suggest that at the very, very least, he was schizophrenic, perhaps paranoid as well. Certainly mad by the late 70's, IMHO. Certainly mentally unbalanced by observation. Socrates would say he had a disordered soul. You really beleive his 3 world record succesive car races, in 3 different personalities, story, where Elron keeps breakin' his record and getting killed, and coming back to break it again, til it got boring and he stopped? Hey, maybe I'M the crazy one..... >Even L. Ron's death was mysterious; he may have been >dead for years before Sci,Inc. admitted it, in their famous news release: > (paraphrs) "The entity known as L. Ron Hubbard no longer has need for the >encumberance of a physical form". He is now like an energy creature, pure >knowledge, truth, beauty, justice and wisdom I suppose. The scramble to >consolidate the holdings must have been intesense, oh, the power struggles. ?For your info, Ron was not the director of the Church after ?1968, and he willed his estate to the Church. What power ?struggles are you talking about? I did not say that he was the Director. I simply said that it may have been years since he died when the finally admitted it. Are you so naive as to ask "what power stuggles"? He had cash, when you die with a lot of cash, there tend to be people trying to get at it. I just can't help but to think that after Caesar, a new leader must have come. Or is it all so very benign that you are above all that? And don't tell me he had "no power" in the Church, people would kill for him. He did a lot more than will his estate to the Church, he used all kinds of legal loopholes and tricks to get away with various nefarious deeds. Some he didn't get away with. Are you aware of his criminal record? ?Steve Boswell Hope that addressed all of your concerns on my post. Please feel free to quote anything I say on this or any other media. And if you reply, please use arguments more than 1 sentence long. Your short, tart little charms just aren't enough.... James Internet jprice@jove.cs.pdx.edu "Justice is incedental to law and order." ICBM: 45 31 25 N 122 40 30 W - J. Edgar Hoover Unity not uniformity "Reading musses up my mind." - Henry Ford

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank