§  Legal Archive  ||  Wog Media  ||  Cult Media  ||  CoW ® ||  Writings  ||  Fun  ||  Disclaimer  ||  Contact  §




Date: 11 Feb 2003 04:46:22 -0000
Message-ID: <IR1IOU9N37662.9488657407@anonymous.poster>
From: Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Cerridwen)
Subject: Re: Methods To Waking Up
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
References: <b292p001qj7@drn.newsguy.com>
Comments: This message probably did not originate at the above address.
It was automatically remailed by one or more anonymous remailers.
Please use abuse@dingoremailer.com to report abuse
X-Remailer-Contact: Anonymous Mailer <DingoAdmin<AT>DingoRemailer<DOT>com>
X-Return-Path: dingobounce@dingoremailer.com
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: mail2news@dizum.com
Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com
Organization: mail2news@dizum.com
Lines: 227

"Warrior" <warrior@xenu.ca> wrote in message

> In article <A2WG9H3O37662.5468055556@anonymous.poster>, Cerridwen
> <Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header> answered:
> >
> >I believe you answered me honestly. If I implied something that
> >was not true I apologize.
> I was trying to clarify/understand what you were saying. I have a
> way of speaking my mind in a direct manner. Maybe it's because I'm
> from Texas. In my mind, there's no need to apologize, since you
> didn't offend me. :)

Thanks :-)

> >"Warrior" <warrior@xenu.ca> asked:
> >>
> >> How long do you consider you have been "out" of Scientology?

> >Approximately two and a half years. At first I would be stripping
> >the Scn indoc almost on a daily basis. Now it seems to happen once a
> >week or so. I have a feeling I will be working on it a long time.
> >
> >Cerridwen
> I understand. For the first few years after I left Scientology
> I realized certain Scientological/Hubbardian concepts lingered. For
> example, every time someone near me got sick, I immediately had the
> that it "meant PTSness". And even after I realized this was crap, I
> had those implants pop up from time to time. It seemed Pavlovian-
like, in
> the sense that "a" happens/exists, so "b" is the conditioned response
> upon what Hubbard said. The difference between now and then is that
now I
> know it's bull, whereas back when I still had lingering false data
> I would try to "locate" the "SP". *Now* Hubbard's crap is nothing
> than a bad memory, and I no longer use *any* of his so-called "tech"
in my
> life. Some people think otherwise, because of my use of Scientology
> inology. I say that while I am able to remember the concepts and
> that's different from using the "tech". I remember my Spanish, my
> onometry and my micobiology, zoology, etc. too, but I don't use that
> in my life anymore, either. It's there to be recalled, though, if I
> to recall and use it. Readers can rest assured that by my use of
> marks around certain words, I am aware that I am using Scieonspeak.
> are a number of reasons I use the terminology, and my reasons have
> stated over the years in various posts I've made, and my reasons have
> relationship or basis in reality for claims made by a few others that
> the "tech" in my personal day-to-day life, or that I'm in
the "mindset" of
> a Scientologist. Besides, I was a finance guy -- not a "techie".

I do understand.

> Here's part of an earlier exchange we had. I'm curious about what you
> thought I was trying to imply and why you thought I was even trying to
> imply anything, even if you no longer feel the same as you did at the
> time you made your post.
> === begin stuff from an earlier post ===
> You:
> >Because I don't care what osa does here and if they have upstats or
> >not does that make me a bad person?

> Warrior: Do you really wonder about that? Geez...
> You:
> >I know what you are trying to imply.
> Me: Then you best come out and say it directly. Go ahead. Spit it
> I'd like to hear what you "know".
> === end of extract from an earlier post ===
> I'm still curious about this.

When I told you I didn't care about OSA,
I knew it would sound hypocritical, because I post anon. But
what I didn't explain was exactly what I didn't care about. As I
explained somewhere on this thread, of course I care that they
fair game people, of course I care that they try to destroy
people for speaking out against them. If I didn't care, I
wouldn't be here posting their crappy stats and going through
the task of assembling those list so that no one could
deny the truth of the stats.

What I don't care about is how they (OSA) feels. I don't
care about their Plans, Programs,Project, targets, orders, stats,
VFPs or anything else like that.

One of the reasons that is given for attempting to squelch critics being
critical of other critics was because it "helped OSA".
It helped them with their programs and their stats. The idea was
that OSA would like the fact that critics criticize each other therefore
we shouldn't do it. My view is I don't care what OSA likes.

I thought you may have been one of those critics that
thought that being critical of other critics was bad.

If you recall, I was rather critical of both Gerry and Caroline, at
least critical enough to earn a spot on their OSA goon page,
Gerry appears to be a good friend of yours and you didn't seem
to take to kindly to my or others criticism of him.

Because of this I felt that you thought I was bad or certainly
something was really wrong with me for being critical of these two
people that you hold in high esteem and who I think are..... not in
very good emotional shape.

You and I have sort of stayed away from each other on ars. You would
respond to my completion lists, which I have always appreciated that
but other than that we never really exchanged idea or chatted. I felt
whether I was mistaken or not, that you were somewhat disapproving
of me and my opinions, if for no other reason than I offended your
friend, but I think it may have been something even before that but I
just don't know what.

As a matter of fact.this post below is what may have kicked me off.
Other than responding to the comp lists, you never really spoke to ME
much on ars. This is one of the first posts that I can remember where
you addressed me and I felt is was condescending in attitude. You
didn't respond to it either leaving me to believe that you didn't care
to tell me what it was that I did that caused you to be so

Date: 6 Jan 2003 16:17:30 -0000
Message-ID: <EY7ZN7YT37627.4288194444@anonymous.poster>
From: Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Cerridwen)
Subject: Re: Warrior Squirms Again (Re: Challenge to Mike Rinder)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
References: <avavpr02a0g@drn.newsguy.com>
"Warrior" <warrior@xenu.ca> wrote in message

> >>In article <H2MNTO9I37618.449212963@anonymous.poster>, "Cerridwen"
> >><Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>I've read most of Diane's posts with a very critical eye. I know
> >>>exactly how Scientologists think
> Wow. I want you to explain "how Scientologists think". Your
> statement is so sweepingly broad that you seem to have stated
> that Scientologists think alike. Do you think Scientologists
> all think alike about everything? If not (and I assume you do
> not feel that way) then how can you know how "Scientologists"
> (a class of individuals) think?

Have I done something to offend you? I don't understand why you
have a hair across your ass when you address me.

To answer you question, I was referring to the Scn Indoctrination.
Call it the mindset, the mindfuck, the borg think, the brainwash or
whatever you like.

Scientologists "think" a certain why when it comes to certain issues.

Yes, You are absolutely right and I am absolutely wrong that
Scientologists don't think alike on all matters, but the indoctrinated
ones think very much alike on certain issues especially regarding Scn,
and especially the subjects of PTS/SP, entheta, and the handling

So let me rephrase that and say I know how indoctrinated Scientologists
think in regard to certain issues. I would go even further to say that
I am a expert in this area because I lived with it, in it and around it
for 30 years.

That is what I was referring to. I am surprised you responded with
such condescension. I happen to think you are one of the better
posters here in regard to information and general contribution. I have
no desire to get in a pissiing contest over this point with you. But
in the future, if you would like a reply from me or information to
clarify what I am saying just ask me without all the added inapplicable


So what was this all about? I'd appreciate some answers rather
than more questions.


"Informing people doesn't involve trying to silence those who
disagree with you." --Prignillius

To lurking Scientologists-- Please read the following links:




§  Legal Archive  ||  Wog Media  ||  Cult Media  ||  CoW ® ||  Writings  ||  Fun  ||  Disclaimer  ||  Contact  §