Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Boris Korczak, Feb 16, 2011.
Google is your friend. (perhaps the only one after you implemented the External Influences Course)
I googled it. All I got was page after page of places to buy feather dusters. I still don't get it. By the way, why do you think I'm a Scientologist? I'm legitimately curious. Why do I give off that Scientologist vibe?
For me it's the reset button, Herro, that causes me to mistrust you even though sometimes I agree with you.
Discrimination based upon evidence is not the same thing as bigotry. A group with explicit antisocial policies deserves condemnation. And members are responsible for the policies of their own group.
Rather than respond to reasonable points concerning the boundary between justifiable discrimination and bigotry, you reset and repeat. It gets old.
Its the typical reaction of many bigots to be defensive about their thinking. Prejudicial people often deny being prejudiced. When that doesn't work, they like rationalize, invent bullshit, and try to cover up their fear with all kinds of twisted concepts and half-truths. All of which say the same thing: "YOU ARE AFRAID!" Most people here who say "all Scientologists are the same" are scared out of their wits of Scientology. Their fears are understandable. After all, when we protesters deal with Scifags, when we put their videos up, we very often deal with the handlers and OSAbots! Its no wonder these fewer Scientologists are hurting the cult so much.
I do believe Jenna Miscavige stated that "Most Scientologists are nice people." Its those nice people, however, who are instructed to avoid us and not speak to us. Hence why you don't see them often.
I think that is a third reaction bigots make. Accuse the one who disagrees of being "in with the enemy." McCarthyists did that a lot when people thought McCarthyism was going too far. I look forward to hearing Scatman's reply.
I see Herro is up to his/her/it old shit again. A brief list of mistakes they are (deliberately) making:
1) Deliberately equivocating personal beliefs with group membership. The concern being expressed is solely to do with the latter, but all Herro does is deflect by hiding behind the former. Given how often and consistently Herro does this it seems clear that this is a deliberate tactic.
2) Deliberately equivocating between jobs involving security interests and the rest of society. The German government, for example, take this seriously and an example in this thread shows the French government are not dissimilar. But, instead of addressing these situations, Herro equivocates this with ‘public life’ as if this is somehow removing CoS members from society. Given how often and consistently Herro does this it seems clear, once again, that this is a deliberate tactic.
3) Deliberately ignoring group influence, especially the mountains of evidence that show just how successful CoS are on this. When examples of other groups has been raised (eg: Al Qaeda, Mafia, etc.), and the point of why group affiliation is sufficient justification for concern in those cases, this point is consistently side stepped and avoided.
Herro still talking shit and still using the same three obviously fallacious talking points.
We have insane Christian politicians who don't think environmentalism is a valid concern because "god promised" not to destroy the world. Therefore, we can do whatever damage we like, and it will be magically restored. Or something.
Dangerous religious beliefs need to GTFO at this critical point in human development. While our number soar, people like the fecund Duggars make the news. Like bringin up a whole litter of bible thumpin home schoolers is some sort of virtue.
Scientologists, because of their beliefs, engage in sloppy behavior coupled with magical thinking. If only that Scilon airline pilot had turned on the de-icers instead of trying to postulate that everything will be fine. That plane wound up in the water off New York City. They believe water will wash away radiation, and that cigarettes prevent cancer.
This is not a matter of law breaking or "corrupted practices." Scientology teaches magical thinking. Postulates. Rituals. The attitude found in witchcraft, that a spell will work if you do it right.
I don't care if it's a Christian senator claiming that god's promise means we can ravage His Garden, or a Scientologist who thinks you can just hose off a nuclear leak and hand out niacin all round to "run out the radiation."
I don't want crazy people, ignorant people, or "indoctrinated but otherwise intelligent" people running vital elements of our society. I don't care if they're "good people." I care that they are deluded, and their delusions are impacting my life in a negative way. You go right ahead and hop on a plane with a Scientologist at the stick. I'll wait for the next one.
Aviation is seriously unforgiving, and there's no place for superstitious fantasy sixty thousand feet above the ground.
How does someone with even a remote familiarity of basic nuclear science belong to a cult created by the fuckbag who wrote this pile of hot steamy shit?
Here's an ARS thread started by Pierre, Dec 29 1996:
He seemed to resolve the doublethink by .. well, here's his own words:
Anyone who was read All About Radiation knows that Hubbard wasn't talking about mental effects.
That is fucking insane. Just insane.
From that book:
“We can produce to a marked degree all the effects of radiation in Scientology with the greatest of ease simply by restimulation and in the absence of any real radiation!”
Fucking doo-laddy batshit insane.
In that case I suggest you hide from the rest of the world. Do you realize how many religious people with "magical thinking" permeate varying degrees of society? That includes important positions. And yet society isn't crashing down in a heap of apocalyptic proportions. If a Scientologist pilot has a good record and work ethic, I won't be afraid at all, even though I disagree with his beliefs and believe he is being deceived and lied to by his leaders.
You are correct that it does affect a lot of people (Christian psychos pushing for Abstinence Education, for example), but so do your beliefs Barb, not all of which are liked by everyone in the world.
Yes, I do realize that. And I can see that the same people who infest society with their magical thinking might clash with my beliefs, since I don't insist society be altered to reflect the values of the bronze age, and think you should be able to do whatever an' it harms none, in the privacy of your own residence. My belief that overpopulation is an increasing problem isn't agreed with by people who think a supernatural being vowed to never destroy them again.
That's about the sum total of my belief system. That, and my opinion of your post.
Damn girl, what airline do you fly?
Hmm. Real magic. A phisicist/scientologis/preacher/psychologist/intelligent/stupid/naive/brainwashed/cry-baby all in one person. By now probably unemployed. I've heard about split personality but this is the most unusual combination I have ever heard.
We can and we will discriminate against idiots, as we have always done.
"Discrimination" is another word for "thinking." It's a good thing. The bad thing is actually, "baseless discrimination."
I have already addressed this numerous times. I am actually the one arguing that these decisions should not be based upon beliefs (unless those beliefs are publicly stated and then they become a perfectly valid source of information to use when deciding whether or not to hire someone), but rather actual behavior. Those arguing that Scientologists are not to be trusted are largely basing that decision upon the expectation that the person is likely to engage in certain behaviors because of his or her beliefs.
I was responding to statements such as those made by Boris that scientologists should not be allowed to hold governmental jobs or positions within the government. That is excluding a group from public life. I'm also saying that it's wrong to discriminate against someone without evidence that their beliefs will cause problems. Say for instance that someone who is a part of the CCHR applied for some mental health job. Then it would be absolutely within reason to question them on their beliefs about medical mental care and whether those beliefs would interfere with their ability to do the job. Because in that case their involvement in the CCHR indicates a clear stance that they are extremely opposed to psychiatric medicine. However being in Scientology in and of itself is not a reliable indicator of a potential security risk.
I have ignored these comparisons because they are entirely irrelevant. Being in the Mafia means you are extremely likely to have engaged in criminal behavior because that's just what the mafia does. Being involved in Al Quieda means that you are clearly stating that you are willing to engage in violent actions against others and that you consider the United States and many other nations to be enemies that must be destroyed through violence. Despite what many on this forum seem to believe, people do not join Scientology in order to engage in terrorism or organized crime. Scientology is about many things and can mean many different things to its members. To be honest I don't see why I or anyone else should even have to explain these differences as the suggestion that Al Quieda and Scientology are comparable is patently absurd. And yes, I know you'll say that Scientology brainwashes it's members and they all have to KSW and they all get coerced and blah blah blah. But that ignores the fact that the vast majority of Scientologists are not out there engaging in criminal actions and subverting the government.
Sloppy analogy Barb. In the case of the Christian politicians you mentioned, we don't have to do any guesswork. They express their views and so we know that they should not be in positions of power. What boris and scatman are advocating would be akin to saying we should never vote for anyone who is a christian because surely all christians hold dangerous extremist views that are contrary to the public good.
There must be a reason why herro is defending weirdo from scientology who while holding important position in the government project engaged himself in preaching "religion" created by a well known enymy- LRH a criminal who escaped the justice and going to jail by his demise. LRH claimed and propagated destruction of the "wogs" - meaning you and me while we have all the rights to opose an organized semi-religious mafia. The experience with Operation Snow White ruined their veracity forever and disqualifies them as the organization to have access to any governmental institutions.
Scientologists are in no position to defend Scientology. They know less about it than Anonymous who has broad access to its written materials including the OT levels, as well as access to testimony from former members.
Anonymous knows that Scientologists are led to believe things that are not true until precise moments when they are made to confront their own delusion. There are two major reveals: the first concerning the "reactive mind" and the much later one concerning past lives.
A prolonged process of encouraged delusion followed by reversal of belief does damage to an individual's ability to test reality. It also damages a person's basic trust in their own community.
In a nutshell, Scientologists are victims of an elaborate practical joke. Maybe the joke is over with the EP of OT-8. But by then the poor saps may be too confused to understand what has been done to them.
I know of no religion or political organization designed with such layers of secrecy and misinformation --defined as such by the organization itself at the highest level.
Scientologists want to defend their right to their eventual cake and feel persecuted when Anonymous says, "the cake is a lie." But Anonymous would like to be honest, so Anonymous doesn't really have a choice.
You are not your reactive mind. You are not your past lives. There, you've no need to be a Scientologist any longer.
Is a Dome call still an infraction, or did infractions go the way of Sceptic and that limey asshole who got permabanned for namefagging people?
I think for ‘addressed’ we should all read ‘committed’. Your direct follow up commits it ffs:
I am actually the one arguing that these decisions should not be based upon beliefs… Those arguing that Scientologists are not to be trusted are largely basing that decision upon the expectation that the person is likely to engage in certain behaviors because of his or her beliefs.
In order to address the charge of ignoring group affiliation in favour of the personal beliefs strawman you a) ignored the group affiliation charge and b) spouted the personal beliefs strawman. Fucking retard.
So you respond to an accusation of equivocating ‘government jobs’ with ‘public life’ by performing that exact equivocation? Seriously?
And dude, the argument isn’t to bar them because their scifags – the argument is to bar them because of their affiliation in a group with a history of doing this shit. (FZ, for example, aren’t a problem since they have no group to influence them in this way)
Herro, yet again, pounding the beliefs strawman in order to ignore group affiliation. The real irony in this comes in the follow up which makes reference to group affiliation thusly:
Say for instance that someone who is a part of the CCHR applied for some mental health job.
Unfortunately, that minor lapse didn’t last long before the same beliefs strawman is imposed yet again:
Then it would be absolutely within reason to question them on their beliefs about medical mental care and whether those beliefs would interfere with their ability to do the job.
No more than being in Al Qaeda or the mafia would be a reliable indicator of potential security risk.
They weren’t ‘comparisons’, they were examples of why the metric of relevance is group affiliation. That is the reason you have ignored them.
You do realise that there are plenty of people with mafia affiliation who have not committed crimes? Why are you so willing to discriminate against those people? Are you a bigot? Or are you just being inconsistent in your zeal to avoid the group affiliation factor?
You are simply being bigoted against Muslims Herro. Why are you against the personal beliefs of Muslims Herro? Do you understand the need to elevate the pathetic strawman beliefs above any reasonable rationale based on group affiliation?
This is simply you, yet again, trying to side step the group affiliation question. Simply ignoring the use of coercion, threats of disconnection, threats of freeloader, threats of blackmail using confessionals, etc. and the history of how effective such techniques are on the unwilling is just ignoring why this group affiliation is concerning.
Different groups use different techniques on their members. For Al Qaeda it is a seething hatred of the US mostly. Having your house bombed and your family killed in a drone strike, for example, would tend to do. CoS relies on other methods, which have been hammered to death in threads you have tried to fag up. The point being raised is not that CoS and Al Qaeda are comparable, the point is to show why group affiliation is troublesome when that group has a history of successfully manipulating its members to its own ends.
I’d put more emphasis on the coercion and blackmail and threats of disconnection and whatnot personally. And given the history and form of the CoS for doing these things, it is incredibly disingenuous of you to try and ignore them because they cut into your bigotry bullshit. In this discussion you have people pointing this history out, and on the other is you simply ignoring it and dismissing it as ‘blah blah blah’.
This is why Germany and France don’t allow CoS members to have that chance. It ensures they don’t engage in criminal behaviour and subvert the government. We have seen what happens when CoS members do get government positions – and I really doubt you could sell the idea that the thousands of people involved in snow white were unrepresentative of the average CoS member.
An average CoS member generally doesn’t commit crimes. This really isn’t in dispute despite how often you like banging that drum. The problem is when a CoS member gains a position of use to the CoS. Then pressure is applied, and there is very little evidence suggesting many in that position resist successfully. I can point to CoS history as evidence. All you are doing, in essence, is shouting ‘bigot’.
Herro still throwing out the handful of fallacious talking points. A forth tactic has emerged – the wholesale ignoring of CoS history. Apparently the multitude of operations are ‘blah blah blah’.
Just to put the dot over "i" I quote the following:
From Domestic Safeguards of NRC
"The NRC’s domestic safeguards program is aimed at ensuring that special nuclear material within the United States is not stolen or otherwise diverted from civilian facilities for possible use in clandestine fissile explosives and does not pose an unreasonable risk owing to radiological sabotage. The users of the special nuclear and certain quantities of biproduct material apply safeguards to protect against sabotage, theft, and diversion, including
Physical protection of facilities and/or special nuclear material at both fixed sites and during transportation and
Material control and accounting for special nuclear material.
In order to determine how much physical protection is enough, the NRC has a threat assessment program to maintain awareness of the capabilities of potential adversaries and threats to facilities, material, and activities."
I think that CO$ with its ideas and hunger for power would not hesitate to have their man in NRC and violate all the regulations just like during Snow White operation.
Stay safe. (I mean it).
I doubt that they let a hired web monkey play with radioactive material, but don't let that derail a good conspiracy theory.
Just in case it hasn't sunk in yet: ColdFusion is an application for developing web site applications.
No, it isn't. The priorities of a Scientologist are way different. You think you can ask them about their views?
What are the chances that they'll apply TR-L and lie to your face?
We know the POV of the Xian pols I mentioned, yes. But we also know that Scientologists are desperate to appear intellectual, and that they take shortcuts to support that delusion. We also know they believe in postulates.
Are you implying that Scientologists won't use the tools they've paid big bucks for out in the real world? We can't know which ones will apply the tech in place of real world skills, but it happens and I do not want to be a part of some silly Scientology fantasy when I'm on public transportation.
Well logic doesn't work with you so let's try this. Prove it. Prove that there's a reason to discriminate against Scientologists.
You can’t even drop the strawman for a reply this small. CoS members are the concern. And, as pointed out to you ad nauseum, the multiple examples of CoS ops, use of disconnection, threats of releasing confessional files, threats of freeloader, etc. are plentiful evidence. Evidence you are still ignoring.
Not surprised you didn't respond in depth. It is hard to use the same handful of fallacies to respond to a post point their use out.
All this is fascinating and amusing. My question is a simple one. What would make anyone to complain to YouTube two years after like an idiot he stepped out into the street trying to explain to Anonymous in Washington D.C. the virtues of CO$ while having a responsible position as a contractor with NRC.
One would think that he should be intelligent and knowlegable enough to know that making statements in the streets and being video taped will be all over YouTube and other Internet places in no time.
YouTube proved to be smarter than him and therefore his complaint was dismissed.
Don't they teach them in CO$ anything about the laws like you may not walk on your hands in public places, or that you have to wear pants and not offend the public, or - don't try to convince Anonymous about CO$ and its ideology because they know it much better than you and therefore they are against the cult.
What you don't seem to understand is that there isn't enough evidence that a scientologist is particularly likely to be coerced into doing something illegal for us to discriminate against him or her. We have laws against that kind of thing for good reason. The fact that some scientologists did some shady shit in the past is not sufficient reason to deny jobs to scientologists today. Where is the evidence of Scientologists being coerced into subverting the government? You just come off like someone freaking out that Muslim Senators will try and institute Shariah law because their faith requires it and because their constituency will demand it. And France and Germany? The way those governments treat scientologists is shameful and an affront to the ideals upon which those governments are built.
He probably did it because he doesn't like you.
Miranda said no ad hom.
Go fuck yourself.
You are just unmanageable aren't you? Like a wild untamed horse with wings. It's kind of cute. I love it when you resist.
Yes there is Herro. The entire history of CoS points to it. You keep trying to whitewash over this relevant point, but it isn’t going away. I, for one, think France and Germany have got this entirely correct by treating the CoS as they do crime organisations and the like.
I am unaware of any evidence that the CoS has changed its operating m.o. The litany of stories concerning the threat of disconnection, threat of freeloader, etc. to manipulate people haven’t seemed to have gone away. If you have stunning evidence that the CoS has reformed then please share the good news with us.
It didn’t take long for you to, yet again, play the beliefs strawman. The correct analogy would be to refer to an actual group with a history of doing bad shit. But you are deliberately refraining from doing so to avoid group affiliation in favour of this pathetic strawman.
Barring group members, when that group has a fucking history of concern to any functioning democracy, is shameful? Only on planet Herro.
Seriously Herro, this blatantly obvious tactic of pushing beliefs rather than group membership is getting increasing pathetic.
Quite the paradox.
Where's the evidence of government infiltration and subversion?
You're either that dimwitted or trolling by playing devil's advocate.
In any case, I'd like to see you gone..
Aren't your true initials RK?
That's not evidence...
Sure. Why not.
The fact that when they had gov employees snow white happened…..
Jesus are you really this fucking dumb?
The evidence is overwhelming. All over youtube, Hubbards leaked orders, busted by the FBI on OP Snow White, OP freakout.
Although I realized you are too far contaminated by sci bs to know up from down, so I'll stop wasting my time typing to the likes of you.
He's a scientologist or a troll. Either way, what a fking loser...
Some Church Scientologists remind me of "Sleepers", the kind that have undergone heavy indoctrination and conditioning and even hypnosis of the darker kind.
They act normal for years or decaded but than a switch get triggered and they turn into psycho's
Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!