when someones talking about COS (c stands for cult thank you very much) negatively, you people will come up and start spouting crimes they supposedly did. whether or not they are true, the person still has just as much right to thier opinion, and the fact that they have commited crimes in no way automatically invalidates thier opinions.
Gerry, thank you for speaking out. These messages are excellent. No matter whose ears they land on, your words are powerful and your heart is in the right place.
"Scientology is quite likely the most ruthless, the most classically terroristic, the most litigious and the most lucrative cult the country has ever seen. No cult extracts more money from its members." Agrees Vicki Aznaran, who was one of Scientology's six key leaders until she bolted from the church in 1987:
Gerry, your going way to easy on DM. I say off with his head. That is what needs to happen to make things right. People need to go to prision and pay back for ALL the pain they caused. To the children, fairgamed, defrauded and the ignorant WOGS that got in the way of this runaway cult scam, known as scientology. Good luck getting the criminals to change their evil ways. I'm sure DM is hanging on your every word. NOT. He's too busy covering up his crimes and plotting new ones.
The only way people get refunds back from what Ive seen is that you have to go on public TV in a documentry style to get it back that's the only way I've seen Co$ weaken. The legal system takes too long the media is the poor mans justice. But Gerry how did you get $800000? That's what wisegoat says you got. & Gerry I can only get fragments of Excalibur. I see that you have read them & did not go mad. now please tell me what magical secrets were in them & put them up with the admissions please.
Ask Gerry about proper support for his claims as well. All what he has been doing so far is alleging many things. He really is an expert with that. So, dare to ask him to properly clarify himself. About the source of the Affirmations, about his ignorance of HCO PL 21 Jul 68, and so on, and so on...
Obviously from LRH himself. Having studied the occult, I'm fairly sure I know what Ron's intentions were when writting these affirmations. They're not confessions but a form of self hypnosis / psuedo magic.
Do it, David! LRH was a liar. Scientology was build on lies.
Give it up, David! Co$ is crumbling and you know it. It won't last for long anymore. There might be still hope for you, if you do exactly what Gerry said.
Ask Gerry to properly explain himself regarding the queries send to his address. If he has right about matters, and if he really wished to resolve things, then there should be nothing that would stop him from doing exactly that.
It is old news actually. Guru's can not be questioned, they are 'believed'. Gerry doesn't substantiate, and 'apparently' YOU accept that what he says. Get the picture here?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
More statements, more assertions. And also distraction tactics. Gerry Armstrong simply, once again, refuses to explain himself and properly address queries concerning his claim of authenticity of these supposed writings the Affirmations.
The subject of Scientology has many tools that will defend the person. It is only a matter of enforcing them.
But ask Gerry about HCO PL 21 Jul 68, he ignores it completely on his own site and instead refers only to HCO PL 21 Oct 68 (do an Internet search)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
In fact there is none. Amongst Scientology staff it is very well known that Fair Game is not an option as per cancelled policies. No one in the organization operates off some long since cancelled policy letter.
That what you refer to is not based on valid policy. So find out WHAT it is.
Ask Gerry why this *expert* on Fair Game does not know about and denies HCO PL 21 Jul 68. Instead he claims on his site that L. Ron Hubbard was "just playing a trick on them". Ask him to clarify that! ASK him!!
The last example is Marc Headly, who filed a lawsuit against Co$ for their violations of californian labor law.
There were also a few others, that were part of the initial complaints. Within hours of the complaints being filed, the families of these people were contacted and as a consquence dropped out of the lawsuit. Now guess why.
This was expected and will be used in court. So you will have your proof, too.
Fair game wasn't cancelled. L. Fraud decreed that the phrase "Fair Game" not be used, as it created PR problems. But the policy continues to this day.
But you know that, as do all who are even cursorily familiar with Cult activities. Critics aren't buying Cult lies, and neither are informed Scilions. That leaves the struggle to inform the General Public.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
To Djangeaux...
"Fair game wasn't cancelled. L. Fraud decreed that the phrase "Fair Game" not be used, as it created PR problems. But the policy continues to this day."
Sorry, you have NO knowledge about the rules or how things are dealt with within the matter of policy letters and how they are used internally in the organization.
Ask the *expert* on Fair Game (Gerry)about HCO PL 21 Jul 68 and why he IGNORES it. In fact while ignoring it he is lying about it on his own site. EDUCATE yourself..
"Sorry, you have NO knowledge about the rules or how things are dealt with within the matter of policy letters and how they are used internally in the organization."
Neither do you have any knowledge, because you never were there.
Gerry were there and he isn't the only one, who has internal knowledge of how things are practically handled by the executives at the top.
Larry Brennan, Marc Headly, Jeff Hawkins, to name just a few. And they all confirm what Gerry said.
You need to determine what is and what is not Scientology. Marc Headly said that Hubbard had written a policy that deemed any person for whatever the reason that left would be labeled as a suppressive person. Sorry, no such policy in existence. So, if that did they at high strata in the organization then it was not Scientology. You need to sit down and understand the rules of the game.
Here is just a small excerpt of a loooooong list of suppressive acts:
"Suppressive Acts are defined as actions or omissions undertaken to knowingly suppress, reduce or impede Scientology or Scientologists.
Such Suppressive Acts include public disavowal of Scientology or Scientologists in good standing with Scientology Organizations; public statements against Scientology or Scientologists but not to Committees of Evidence duly convened; etc. etc.."
...writing anti-Scientology letters to the press or giving anti-Scientology or anti-Scientologist evidence to the press; testifying as a hostile witness against Scientology in public;...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Djangeaux
Your ignorance and lack of understanding is rather astonishing. 1. You have not a clue how things work in the organization, so how can you evaluate what the situation is? 2. During my 27 years I have NEVER seen anyone working off some old cancelled policy letter. 3. Amongst staff Fair Game is referred to as something that today is cancelled. 4. If there would be hundreds of stories then how many persons are telling them?
You need to determine what is and what is not Scientology!
Save it. Ex-members and long-time observers know you're lying. I'd ask you to visit some of the sites I mentioned, but you'll just attempt to denigrate them as you're attempting (and failing) to do to Gerry.
Your cult is teetering, and will fall soon. My advice to you is to make plans for the aftermath. If you've got family, reconnect, if they'll have you. If you know of evidence of criminal activity, make copies and take them when you blow.
Gerry's not lying. You are. Fair Game has been in effect since L. Ron Psych Drug Addict declared it. There are literally thousands of critics and ex-members that have been affected by this malicious policy.
The only way the FG policy will be cancelled is when the Cult has its legs cut out from under it. Which will be any day now.
We're right. You're wrong.
Make plans for the end, 'cause it's coming.
Call 1-EightZeroZero-XSEAORG if you need help in blowing.
Your responses in regards to this are feeble and infantile. There are no thousands of critics and ex-members that have spoken out.
I have seen NO person during my 27 years that worked of some Fair Game policy.
Gerry is LYING on his site about that Hubbard 'was playing a trick' with HCO PL 21 Oct 68 that only cancelled the use of the term Fair Game. Gerry ignores HCO PL 21 Jul 68. You are not scientific in regards to this. So be it then, continue to be in denial...
We don't need to ask Gerry. There's so much proof of Fair Game for those who are critical enough to accept the evidence that it's just overwhelming. You'll understand as well when you blow.
With other words, you determine what is true to me when something happens and also determine how it will happen. Thank you kindly...
Again you need to determine what is and what is not Scientology, and how the rules of the game are as covered in valid policy letters. If it is not in a policy letter it is not true and not to be operated on.
What I mean is you are unable to see the facts since you are in complete denial mode. I merely point to the fact that you will understand it when you blow (Atleast it's my hope that you will). And I am quite certain you will blow eventually. The whole organization is crumbling, this might even be it's final year. I hope you get out before the storm so you don't caught in any litigation proceedings for people WILL be going to jail.
Furthermore, the use of PC-Folders to extort members and use their personal information as scare tactics in Fair Game is not stated in any Policy Letter but has been proven over and over again to be "standard policy". But ofcourse, you won't accept that even with the overwhelming evidence.
If you say that then you are in denial about the rules of how policy is used within the organization. It has NEVER been proven after its cancellation in July 1968 that it was standard policy as it was not valid policy. I don't expect you to understand me.
You can't make something true which is NOT Scientology.
Sorry, you are ignorant. I NEVER said that policy is God. I try to make you aware that first you need to know how things operate in the organization before you can have an evaluation. In fact very few are that critical as I am. It is you that show that you are not!
Scientology can't be reformed, only destroyed. It's inherently evil and any reformations of this magnitude would be out-tech and impossible by it's nature in the LRH policies that built this organization. It would be nice but don't expect it, I sure am not.
Scientology is based purely on the twisted, pathologically insane and misanthropic worldwiew of L. Ron Hubbard. Without it being intact and unquestioned there is no Scientology for it's only intention is Slavery.
Learn how children are imprisoned & kept from their families, all for the "crime" of acting as children do, for acting silly. This was all started by Hubbard while at sea, he would lock naughty children in the chain box for days on end, no-one was allowed to go to their aid even when they were crying hysterically. Shame on Hubbard & shame on Miscavige for continuing this child abuse.
You should also be ashamed of yourself for defending such evil behaviour.
Tsk, tsk, I made the most detailed study about hte origin of RPF existing.
No, it was not started by L. Ron Hubbard. Thre are more people that were on the ship that speak against happenings of locking up children then there are that claim that.
did you get your information from outside the cult of scientology? because if you didnt, it doesnt count. getting lies from the lies store and acting like thats proof of anything shows how unable you are to grasp your lack of understanding on the subject.
every real religion (that does not include: nazis, freemasons, enochian magick, mormons, new agers, scientologists, theosophists, luciferians, levayan satanists, catholics, ect) encourages it's followers to look into critiques of the religion's beliefs, because it will make them a stronger believer. thats the nature of the truth. just because LRH arbitrarily redefined what truth is doesnt make it so. just because you think the will is all powerful doesnt make it so, even if you will it to be.
the reason why you cant will the will to be able to change things is because it would have already had to have been able to be for the will to have any effect. causality. scientology could most easily be characterized as taking the mind of a spoiled brat, mixing it with the mind of a egomaniac compulsive liar, stir, make a religion out of the mixture. it's so painfully obvious to anyone with any intellect at all that the first things he thought of were ways to invalidate critics conceptually.
you dont value peoples rights, because people have the right to say you're wrong, but you dont think they do. anytime they say you're wrong you find a way to "invalidate" (in quotations cause it doesnt invalidate anything, you just act like it does) thier critique without actually ever addressing a single point of it. you act like the only valid information about COS comes from COS, even though its COS dogma to never speak against COS.
but you suggest to critics they should study within the church before making thier critiques, implying if they want to after that they can, and you will accept thier opinion as a valid one, but thats not true. everything about scietology is built around intentional deception and willful ignorence.
you are a hate group against ex-criminals. only idiots dont understand that doing that is an attempt at changing the subject. if someones talking about COS, what does thier crimes have to do with COS. you dont have the right to change the subject of everyones dicussions. that's NOT a right anyone has. you also do not have the right to slander people. COS, nor it's members have a single right that any non member has. period, if you disagree say so, you mental coward.
which claim did i make that isnt apparent and obvious as the nose on your face? this tactic at obfuscating the truth only makes you look more intentional in your deception. you call that addressing points i made? you're pathetic. no wonder you follow idiots, you're just a rung below them mentally, so you look up to them. you did not at all invalidate anything i said. it still stands, and in addition, now you look like a jack ass. address points specifically next time, or get trounced again.
you want substantiation of the claims i just made? yeah the fact that you just tried to use that incredibly transparent tactic is a substantiation of my claim. i can show you clips of your cult's spokesperson exemplifying each characteristic i mentioned. but lemme guess, there will just be some other transparent distration to throw at those that doesnt actually refute or address my points, but you'll act like since you gave any response at all, you won the argument. way to downsydrome it up ass
If you attack a subject you get down and get the specifics of that subjects. Your studies please NOT your opinions!!!
Sorry, but it's you that is transparent, that's what we call twisting. You have not offered any points. Rough language, person attack, rude, inconsiderate, where do you people come from?
something can be a personal attack and true at the same time. you can be rude and be correct also. all your doing is further shoving your foot in your mouth. your assertion that there werent any actual points to what i said doesnt change that there are points to it. give me an example of something i presented as a point that is in fact not a point, since you really read with the intent to see truth where it was, why dont you actually break down how i didnt make a point? cause you cant. thats why
stop crying like a little baby and start actually arguing, or stop acting like you're winning the argument. the only reason you want me to show my studies is so you can, after the fact, change your standards of what valid information on the subject is to still invalidate my statements without genuinely refuting them. the SP doctrine was created because LRH knew some people arent stupid, and are infact the imbodiment of the enemy of liars. he did it to villainize people that cant be fooled.
define study. does reading ALL the information that COS has put out count? lemme guess it only counts as studying it if you go into the process assuming it's all true, otherwise you wont be able to understand how it is, right?
in other words it's not true. that's another way of putting something that you have to assume is true to see that it is, NOT TRUE. those two things are synonymous. now see, i just made a point, there's no need for a study, it's conceptually true, if it isnt, say how, that's how an argument/debate works, dunce.
just because you wanna make the naked assertion that im only speaking out of opinion, and not out of study, doesnt mean it's the case. it just means you will call anything that doesnt match up with your opinions as baseless, without actually looking at the merits of the information. we can go all day, you wont win, because the truth is invincible.
lemme just ask you a question (i know you will ignore it though), if i made a religion, with secret upper level doctrine, and those secrets equated to my religion's purpose being to destroy scientology, and we kept those doctrines as sacred secrets. you would be wrong to A) spread them B)find them out without our permission C)do ANYTHING to prevent or even discourage our followers from heeding that doctrine D)for asking us about that doctrine, or to explain it. RIGHT???!? or are you a hypocrate?
like i thought, another OT runs in terror instead of face the truth. you cant confront shit. if tom cruise was standing next to me right now with a sword in one hand and a gun in the other, both pointed at me, i would SP ALL OVER HIS ASS. the only thing people gain from scientology (and this is only the top few levels of the hierarchy) is the ability to be so obstinate in that face of obvious truths and being provin definitively wrong that is makes you look like you have downsyndrome.
im cravin some confront and shatter suppression, come on, give me some confront and shatter suppression. im suppresive right? come on, prove your religion does something for you. oh wait its all a lie and you cant confront and shatter a turd.
did you read the admissions? have you read a piece of blue sky? (just examples) no? yeah, didnt think so. all in all, what you're doing is saying you can validly and accurately discount information you havnt ever accesses, whilst complaining that we are doing that. but we STUDY THE MATERIAL. so in other words, you are critical of our study methods yet you are the one that takes all info from one side, and none from the other.
lemme just ask you a question (i know you will ignore it though), if i made a religion, with secret upper level doctrine, and those secrets equated to my religion's purpose being to destroy scientology, and we kept those doctrines as sacred secrets. you would be wrong to A) spread them B)find them out without our permission C)do ANYTHING to prevent or even discourage our followers from heeding that doctrine D)for asking us about that doctrine, or to explain it. RIGHT???!? or are you a hypocrate?
as soon as you clearly state the perameters for valid information that's critical of the COS, i will. but you wont do that, because that it means you cant use your only tactics to discredit it after the fact.
no matter how much you try, you cant change the fact that when someone can refute something they do, and when they cant, they say "you didnt make a point" but dont include and refutation of the supposed point. you cant obfuscate millions of years of evolution of how humans tell when someones lying.
i hope you arent a parent, because all your kid has to do when someone elses kid tells on your kid for doing something wrong, your kid just has to say is a counter accusation, and now you believe just your kid.like thats not the classic thing kids do when they are caught, try to shift the blame, even through lying.
notice that i didnt mention anything about who you are? yeah thats cause it doesnt matter, and i couldnt give a rats ass. i just take information on it's own merits, and who spoke it has no effect on the merits of the information. as in, just cause LRH says its true, doesnt make it true unless it already was true before he said it.
and since none of the stuff he claims was true before he said it, no matter how much egotistical people like to hear that their will defines reality, it's still not TRUE. WOW imagine that.
how does it feel to have all the character traits a person can have to make them so easily manipulated that someone who never met you can pluck your every whim into a melody most appealing to you? he wrote scientology around stupid people, and how they can be fooled. how does it feel to be a perfect exemplar of stupidity, ageless, timeless, stupidity?
any belief system that insists it's followers first determine who the teller of information is, before assessing the merits of the information, and taking into account the identity of the teller in the assessment, is fundamentally flawed.
The subject is no beliefsystem. Never was, never will be. You are too ignorant to perform any research. You continue spouting blind opinion. Have a nice day...
so the assertion you keep making about how i havnt done research (a conclusion you've reached BECAUSE, as in THE CAUSE, im critical of COS) isnt an opinion you keep spouting ad infinitum? the FACT is that i HAVE studied. the other fact is YOU HAVNT ANSWERED MY QUESTION (because you cant answer it). i get so happy when i see that you've replied to another comment iv made, its so fun to so completely shut someone down, when they deserve it because of intentional deception, of course.
it's funny how you define ignorence as "knowing more about my BELIEF SYSTEM" than me. and yes it's a belief system, any philosophy or religion is a belief system. while i dont think scientology is a religion, it is a philosophy. as in, your philosophy postulates that it's ok to harm SP's cause they deserve it. im neither spouting opinion nor blind opinion, im merely stating the results of earnest research into the subject.
see the difference here is that i actually have illustrated and demonstrated within the argument how my assertions are in fact the case, while you just like to make insulting arbitrary assertions that you act like are true BECAUSE im critical of COS. so all in all im pretty sure you're familiar with "What you hear is the sound of your illusion playing tricks on you, or is it delusion..." because that's the basis scientology is built around.
if you actually earnestly looked into the possibility of that being true for your self, as opposed to just looking into how church members and documents discount any criticism by simply stating it's not true and acting like that's proof, so you can immitate those techniques of obstinate and willfull ignorence.
"The action of bringing about a pro-Scientology government consists of making a friend of the most highly placed government person one can reach, even placing Scientologists in domestic and clerical posts close to him and seeing to it that Scientology resolves his troubles and case."
(Hubbard, "Department of Official Affairs", HCO Policy Letter of 13 March 1961)
you cult's standards of what substantiation of a claim is are double anyway. you act like anyone in the cult of scientology saying something is complete irrefutable proof, yet you act like documentation, numerous eye witnesses, ect arent even close to substantiation of claims. why dont you substantiate the claim that you should be able to confront better than an SP, yet cant.
and to reiterate, calling something that isnt better confrontation better confrontation doesnt make it that, it has to actually be OUT SIDE YOUR DELUSIONAL WILL.
and copywrite law does not protect fraud. if you lie people have the right to know. just as an example, the xenu thing, you guys lie all the time and deny that, yet its true as anything could be. the fact that you would deny your own beliefs to avoid ridicule, and not only that, but codify as dogma the denial of your beliefs, shows how little respect and reverence you have for them.
and turning the pages whilst glancing in thier direction isnt study. if you read a critical point of COS, and cant refute it, but still discount it, you are not studying.
@wiseoldgoat "Its target per its original published writings is to get people 'un'slaved."
Yes, thats nice. And here is a recipe for some yummy cookies. * 1 cup white sugar * 1/2 cup first grade crude oil * 2 cups all-purpose cement * 1 teaspoon pure arsenic * 1 cup chocolate chips
Bake with much love.
The cookies must be yummy because the recipe says so.
Scientology is quackery. Scientology is a fraud. Tax the cult.
stayjit1 2 years ago
Scientologys Fair Game Policy says that you acn "destroy" a SP. I like to know thier definition of Destroy!
Falsecults 2 years ago
They may cause bodily harm and death.
They may destroy your reputation.
They may cripple you financially.
They may trick or blackmail as they see fit.
It's true :)
ThatSatyr 2 years ago 2
Better do another re-take. You actually called David Miscavige "huge" in this video.
;-)
11Jamie11 2 years ago
when someones talking about COS (c stands for cult thank you very much) negatively, you people will come up and start spouting crimes they supposedly did. whether or not they are true, the person still has just as much right to thier opinion, and the fact that they have commited crimes in no way automatically invalidates thier opinions.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
good very good
AUSTINANONYMOUS1 2 years ago
Gerry, thank you for speaking out. These messages are excellent. No matter whose ears they land on, your words are powerful and your heart is in the right place.
Please keep 'em coming!
suchlegends 3 years ago
Google Operation Snow White
gappodnor 3 years ago 2
"Scientology is quite likely the most ruthless, the most classically terroristic, the most litigious and the most lucrative cult the country has ever seen. No cult extracts more money from its members." Agrees Vicki Aznaran, who was one of Scientology's six key leaders until she bolted from the church in 1987:
jnycnuk 3 years ago 2
Gerry, your going way to easy on DM. I say off with his head. That is what needs to happen to make things right. People need to go to prision and pay back for ALL the pain they caused. To the children, fairgamed, defrauded and the ignorant WOGS that got in the way of this runaway cult scam, known as scientology. Good luck getting the criminals to change their evil ways. I'm sure DM is hanging on your every word. NOT. He's too busy covering up his crimes and plotting new ones.
anonamace 3 years ago
Well done Gerry. I wish you lots of luck in your endeavours.
TheEvilOfScientology 3 years ago
The only way people get refunds back from what Ive seen is that you have to go on public TV in a documentry style to get it back that's the only way I've seen Co$ weaken. The legal system takes too long the media is the poor mans justice. But Gerry how did you get $800000? That's what wisegoat says you got. & Gerry I can only get fragments of Excalibur. I see that you have read them & did not go mad. now please tell me what magical secrets were in them & put them up with the admissions please.
chockmah67 3 years ago
To chockmah67:
Rather interesting that you do NOT know how he got $800,000 ! Then i wonder what actually DO you know about this person?
Well, let Gerry explain, and let him then tell you what he did with these funds ! Thus far he has refused to do so.
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
How he got the money is no secret. It's on frickin Wikipedia for god's sake. As for how he spent the funds. That's no ones business but his own?
How much do you make a year? How much do you spend on Scientology?
None of my business? Didn't think so.
Snarkonymous 3 years ago 2
Wow, Gerry Armstrong has a humongous pair of balls.
I doubt David Miscavidge will listen though.
Mr. Armstrong, I would like more videos detailing the crazy mental behavior of LRH. Specific incidents would be great.
Synth3t1cs 3 years ago
Ask Gerry about proper support for his claims as well. All what he has been doing so far is alleging many things. He really is an expert with that. So, dare to ask him to properly clarify himself. About the source of the Affirmations, about his ignorance of HCO PL 21 Jul 68, and so on, and so on...
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
---"source of the Affirmations"
Obviously from LRH himself. Having studied the occult, I'm fairly sure I know what Ron's intentions were when writting these affirmations. They're not confessions but a form of self hypnosis / psuedo magic.
Synth3t1cs 3 years ago
view_play_list?p=7DA47B9E27D497C8
sKepptiksowat 3 years ago
Do it, David! LRH was a liar. Scientology was build on lies.
Give it up, David! Co$ is crumbling and you know it. It won't last for long anymore. There might be still hope for you, if you do exactly what Gerry said.
exfalsoquodlibet 3 years ago
Ask Gerry to properly explain himself regarding the queries send to his address. If he has right about matters, and if he really wished to resolve things, then there should be nothing that would stop him from doing exactly that.
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
You ask him. I can't possibly do that because you give no indication of what the smack you are talking about.
Snarkonymous 3 years ago
Does this mean that you can not question your leader? You don't ask him to actually substantiate his claims with proper evidence?
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
I have a leader? That's news.
No. It means that you are retardedly cryptic.
Snarkonymous 3 years ago
It is old news actually. Guru's can not be questioned, they are 'believed'. Gerry doesn't substantiate, and 'apparently' YOU accept that what he says. Get the picture here?
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
Gerry has docs (some in L. Fraud's own handwriting) and literally thousands have backed him up with personal testimony.
$cientology's lies become more obvious, to more people, on a daily basis.
It's all coming apart. We know it. You know it.
Do you have a plan for after the Fall?
Djangeaux 3 years ago
I have a leader? That's news.
The evidence is EVERYWHERE. Do you ever research your own cult?
Snarkonymous 3 years ago
Leader? Leader???WTF are you talking about? Gerry is noones leader and you call yourself wise? blah
fzappa007 3 years ago
"Does this mean that you can not question your leader?"
Oh dear! Misinformed as well as gullible. A perfect Scientologist.
TheEvilOfScientology 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
More statements, more assertions. And also distraction tactics. Gerry Armstrong simply, once again, refuses to explain himself and properly address queries concerning his claim of authenticity of these supposed writings the Affirmations.
The subject of Scientology has many tools that will defend the person. It is only a matter of enforcing them.
But ask Gerry about HCO PL 21 Jul 68, he ignores it completely on his own site and instead refers only to HCO PL 21 Oct 68 (do an Internet search)
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
"This P/L does not cancel any policy on the treatment or handling of an SP. "
Fair Game was never cancelled. There's tons of proof right here on Youtube not to mention ex-member testimony and court information.
w0g4life 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
In fact there is none. Amongst Scientology staff it is very well known that Fair Game is not an option as per cancelled policies. No one in the organization operates off some long since cancelled policy letter.
That what you refer to is not based on valid policy. So find out WHAT it is.
Ask Gerry why this *expert* on Fair Game does not know about and denies HCO PL 21 Jul 68. Instead he claims on his site that L. Ron Hubbard was "just playing a trick on them". Ask him to clarify that! ASK him!!
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
Fair Game is still active.
The last example is Marc Headly, who filed a lawsuit against Co$ for their violations of californian labor law.
There were also a few others, that were part of the initial complaints. Within hours of the complaints being filed, the families of these people were contacted and as a consquence dropped out of the lawsuit. Now guess why.
This was expected and will be used in court. So you will have your proof, too.
exfalsoquodlibet 3 years ago 3
To exfalsoquodlibet...
Sorry, but you are not comprehending my words. Read actually what I write and its significance.
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
Fair game wasn't cancelled. L. Fraud decreed that the phrase "Fair Game" not be used, as it created PR problems. But the policy continues to this day.
But you know that, as do all who are even cursorily familiar with Cult activities. Critics aren't buying Cult lies, and neither are informed Scilions. That leaves the struggle to inform the General Public.
And we are winning that struggle.
It's toppling. Little by little, day by day.
Blow while you can.
Djangeaux 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
To Djangeaux...
"Fair game wasn't cancelled. L. Fraud decreed that the phrase "Fair Game" not be used, as it created PR problems. But the policy continues to this day."
Sorry, you have NO knowledge about the rules or how things are dealt with within the matter of policy letters and how they are used internally in the organization.
Ask the *expert* on Fair Game (Gerry)about HCO PL 21 Jul 68 and why he IGNORES it. In fact while ignoring it he is lying about it on his own site. EDUCATE yourself..
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
"Sorry, you have NO knowledge about the rules or how things are dealt with within the matter of policy letters and how they are used internally in the organization."
Neither do you have any knowledge, because you never were there.
Gerry were there and he isn't the only one, who has internal knowledge of how things are practically handled by the executives at the top.
Larry Brennan, Marc Headly, Jeff Hawkins, to name just a few. And they all confirm what Gerry said.
exfalsoquodlibet 3 years ago 3
exfalsoquodlibet
You need to determine what is and what is not Scientology. Marc Headly said that Hubbard had written a policy that deemed any person for whatever the reason that left would be labeled as a suppressive person. Sorry, no such policy in existence. So, if that did they at high strata in the organization then it was not Scientology. You need to sit down and understand the rules of the game.
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
Read the policy about the "Fair Game Law".
Here is just a small excerpt of a loooooong list of suppressive acts:
"Suppressive Acts are defined as actions or omissions undertaken to knowingly suppress, reduce or impede Scientology or Scientologists.
Such Suppressive Acts include public disavowal of Scientology or Scientologists in good standing with Scientology Organizations; public statements against Scientology or Scientologists but not to Committees of Evidence duly convened; etc. etc.."
exfalsoquodlibet 3 years ago 2
...writing anti-Scientology letters to the press or giving anti-Scientology or anti-Scientologist evidence to the press; testifying as a hostile witness against Scientology in public;...
etc.
exfalsoquodlibet 3 years ago 2
Constant repetition of the lie doesn't make it the truth.
If anyone's confused about this, check the hundreds of stories at the Ex-Scientologists Message Board, or Scientology Through the Door.
Fair Game is in full force. Don't take my word for it, and don't for a second believe WiseOldLiar's desperate, almost comical falsehoods.
This crap doesn't work anymore. Too many people, too well-informed, reading the words of too many witnesses.
It's over. Blow while you can.
Djangeaux 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Djangeaux
Your ignorance and lack of understanding is rather astonishing. 1. You have not a clue how things work in the organization, so how can you evaluate what the situation is? 2. During my 27 years I have NEVER seen anyone working off some old cancelled policy letter. 3. Amongst staff Fair Game is referred to as something that today is cancelled. 4. If there would be hundreds of stories then how many persons are telling them?
You need to determine what is and what is not Scientology!
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
Fair Game is done by OSA and PI's. You don't see their activities. WE DO!
w0g4life 3 years ago 5
Save it. Ex-members and long-time observers know you're lying. I'd ask you to visit some of the sites I mentioned, but you'll just attempt to denigrate them as you're attempting (and failing) to do to Gerry.
Your cult is teetering, and will fall soon. My advice to you is to make plans for the aftermath. If you've got family, reconnect, if they'll have you. If you know of evidence of criminal activity, make copies and take them when you blow.
You might be able to get your sentence reduced.
Djangeaux 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Djangeaux
Ask Gerry why he is lying about the matter while ignoring HCO PL 21 Jul 68, it is on his site till this day. Ask him!
Why don't you visit my site about these matters?
Tsk, tsk, you are accusing without actually having verified and studied these matters. I say that you have NO knowledge about these matters.
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
Gerry's not lying. You are. Fair Game has been in effect since L. Ron Psych Drug Addict declared it. There are literally thousands of critics and ex-members that have been affected by this malicious policy.
The only way the FG policy will be cancelled is when the Cult has its legs cut out from under it. Which will be any day now.
We're right. You're wrong.
Make plans for the end, 'cause it's coming.
Call 1-EightZeroZero-XSEAORG if you need help in blowing.
Djangeaux 3 years ago 2
Djangeaux
Your responses in regards to this are feeble and infantile. There are no thousands of critics and ex-members that have spoken out.
I have seen NO person during my 27 years that worked of some Fair Game policy.
Gerry is LYING on his site about that Hubbard 'was playing a trick' with HCO PL 21 Oct 68 that only cancelled the use of the term Fair Game. Gerry ignores HCO PL 21 Jul 68. You are not scientific in regards to this. So be it then, continue to be in denial...
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
Blah Blah...I'm done with you. Your lies are beyond transparent. We know the truth, and, increasingly, so does the general public.
Seek help when you decide to leave the cult. It's hard to escape on your own.
Djangeaux 3 years ago
We don't need to ask Gerry. There's so much proof of Fair Game for those who are critical enough to accept the evidence that it's just overwhelming. You'll understand as well when you blow.
w0g4life 3 years ago 2
w0g4life
"You'll understand as well when you blow. "
With other words, you determine what is true to me when something happens and also determine how it will happen. Thank you kindly...
Again you need to determine what is and what is not Scientology, and how the rules of the game are as covered in valid policy letters. If it is not in a policy letter it is not true and not to be operated on.
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
What I mean is you are unable to see the facts since you are in complete denial mode. I merely point to the fact that you will understand it when you blow (Atleast it's my hope that you will). And I am quite certain you will blow eventually. The whole organization is crumbling, this might even be it's final year. I hope you get out before the storm so you don't caught in any litigation proceedings for people WILL be going to jail.
w0g4life 3 years ago 3
Furthermore, the use of PC-Folders to extort members and use their personal information as scare tactics in Fair Game is not stated in any Policy Letter but has been proven over and over again to be "standard policy". But ofcourse, you won't accept that even with the overwhelming evidence.
w0g4life 3 years ago 2
w0g4life
If you say that then you are in denial about the rules of how policy is used within the organization. It has NEVER been proven after its cancellation in July 1968 that it was standard policy as it was not valid policy. I don't expect you to understand me.
You can't make something true which is NOT Scientology.
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
Your "Scientology logic" is very fascinating, and at the same time extremely saddening.
I urge you to stop thinking that the Policy is god and all-knowing and use your own ability to think critically.
w0g4life 3 years ago 2
w0g4life
Sorry, you are ignorant. I NEVER said that policy is God. I try to make you aware that first you need to know how things operate in the organization before you can have an evaluation. In fact very few are that critical as I am. It is you that show that you are not!
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
I'm gonna jump in and call BS on you, right here and now-
You sing praise after praise to Hubbard...
'Everything good about us is true, everything bad is a lie the evil psychiatrists spread.'
Hubbard was a con man, an expert at covering his ass, he died a fugitive of the law, leting HIS WIFE take the fall-
Don't believe me? look up the court documents of Mary Sue Hubbard.
CoS is NOT perfect, I've witnessed fair game in action here on youtube- with FALSE evidence~
epic trap is epic.
Jmbrandon9 3 years ago
Do you believe that some group has the answers to all of lifes problems? Are they ambiguous methods?
Does it take almost a lifetime to achieve almost NOTHING?
Hmmm maybe YOU life in the fantasy world.
lord69z 3 years ago
Scientology can't be reformed, only destroyed. It's inherently evil and any reformations of this magnitude would be out-tech and impossible by it's nature in the LRH policies that built this organization. It would be nice but don't expect it, I sure am not.
Scientology is based purely on the twisted, pathologically insane and misanthropic worldwiew of L. Ron Hubbard. Without it being intact and unquestioned there is no Scientology for it's only intention is Slavery.
w0g4life 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"Scientology it's only intention is Slavery. "
Sorry guy, it is OPPOSED to slavery. Its target per its original published writings is to get people 'un'slaved.
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
Three letters: RPF
Snarkonymous 3 years ago 3
Try googling "RPF" sillyoldgoat.
Learn how children are imprisoned & kept from their families, all for the "crime" of acting as children do, for acting silly. This was all started by Hubbard while at sea, he would lock naughty children in the chain box for days on end, no-one was allowed to go to their aid even when they were crying hysterically. Shame on Hubbard & shame on Miscavige for continuing this child abuse.
You should also be ashamed of yourself for defending such evil behaviour.
SlappyThePenguin 3 years ago
"Try googling "RPF" sillyoldgoat."
"This was all started by Hubbard while at sea"
Tsk, tsk, I made the most detailed study about hte origin of RPF existing.
No, it was not started by L. Ron Hubbard. Thre are more people that were on the ship that speak against happenings of locking up children then there are that claim that.
wiseoldgoat 3 years ago
did you get your information from outside the cult of scientology? because if you didnt, it doesnt count. getting lies from the lies store and acting like thats proof of anything shows how unable you are to grasp your lack of understanding on the subject.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
every real religion (that does not include: nazis, freemasons, enochian magick, mormons, new agers, scientologists, theosophists, luciferians, levayan satanists, catholics, ect) encourages it's followers to look into critiques of the religion's beliefs, because it will make them a stronger believer. thats the nature of the truth. just because LRH arbitrarily redefined what truth is doesnt make it so. just because you think the will is all powerful doesnt make it so, even if you will it to be.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
the reason why you cant will the will to be able to change things is because it would have already had to have been able to be for the will to have any effect. causality. scientology could most easily be characterized as taking the mind of a spoiled brat, mixing it with the mind of a egomaniac compulsive liar, stir, make a religion out of the mixture. it's so painfully obvious to anyone with any intellect at all that the first things he thought of were ways to invalidate critics conceptually.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
you dont value peoples rights, because people have the right to say you're wrong, but you dont think they do. anytime they say you're wrong you find a way to "invalidate" (in quotations cause it doesnt invalidate anything, you just act like it does) thier critique without actually ever addressing a single point of it. you act like the only valid information about COS comes from COS, even though its COS dogma to never speak against COS.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
but you suggest to critics they should study within the church before making thier critiques, implying if they want to after that they can, and you will accept thier opinion as a valid one, but thats not true. everything about scietology is built around intentional deception and willful ignorence.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
you are a hate group against ex-criminals. only idiots dont understand that doing that is an attempt at changing the subject. if someones talking about COS, what does thier crimes have to do with COS. you dont have the right to change the subject of everyones dicussions. that's NOT a right anyone has. you also do not have the right to slander people. COS, nor it's members have a single right that any non member has. period, if you disagree say so, you mental coward.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
Are you done? Ah, now what about substantiating your tirade of claims and accusations? Yeah..., thought so.
Present your studies please, NOT your opinions.
wiseoldgoat 2 years ago
which claim did i make that isnt apparent and obvious as the nose on your face? this tactic at obfuscating the truth only makes you look more intentional in your deception. you call that addressing points i made? you're pathetic. no wonder you follow idiots, you're just a rung below them mentally, so you look up to them. you did not at all invalidate anything i said. it still stands, and in addition, now you look like a jack ass. address points specifically next time, or get trounced again.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
you want substantiation of the claims i just made? yeah the fact that you just tried to use that incredibly transparent tactic is a substantiation of my claim. i can show you clips of your cult's spokesperson exemplifying each characteristic i mentioned. but lemme guess, there will just be some other transparent distration to throw at those that doesnt actually refute or address my points, but you'll act like since you gave any response at all, you won the argument. way to downsydrome it up ass
fmmetamc 2 years ago
If you attack a subject you get down and get the specifics of that subjects. Your studies please NOT your opinions!!!
Sorry, but it's you that is transparent, that's what we call twisting. You have not offered any points. Rough language, person attack, rude, inconsiderate, where do you people come from?
wiseoldgoat 2 years ago
something can be a personal attack and true at the same time. you can be rude and be correct also. all your doing is further shoving your foot in your mouth. your assertion that there werent any actual points to what i said doesnt change that there are points to it. give me an example of something i presented as a point that is in fact not a point, since you really read with the intent to see truth where it was, why dont you actually break down how i didnt make a point? cause you cant. thats why
fmmetamc 2 years ago
stop crying like a little baby and start actually arguing, or stop acting like you're winning the argument. the only reason you want me to show my studies is so you can, after the fact, change your standards of what valid information on the subject is to still invalidate my statements without genuinely refuting them. the SP doctrine was created because LRH knew some people arent stupid, and are infact the imbodiment of the enemy of liars. he did it to villainize people that cant be fooled.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
define study. does reading ALL the information that COS has put out count? lemme guess it only counts as studying it if you go into the process assuming it's all true, otherwise you wont be able to understand how it is, right?
fmmetamc 2 years ago
in other words it's not true. that's another way of putting something that you have to assume is true to see that it is, NOT TRUE. those two things are synonymous. now see, i just made a point, there's no need for a study, it's conceptually true, if it isnt, say how, that's how an argument/debate works, dunce.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
just because you wanna make the naked assertion that im only speaking out of opinion, and not out of study, doesnt mean it's the case. it just means you will call anything that doesnt match up with your opinions as baseless, without actually looking at the merits of the information. we can go all day, you wont win, because the truth is invincible.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
lemme just ask you a question (i know you will ignore it though), if i made a religion, with secret upper level doctrine, and those secrets equated to my religion's purpose being to destroy scientology, and we kept those doctrines as sacred secrets. you would be wrong to A) spread them B)find them out without our permission C)do ANYTHING to prevent or even discourage our followers from heeding that doctrine D)for asking us about that doctrine, or to explain it. RIGHT???!? or are you a hypocrate?
fmmetamc 2 years ago
like i thought, another OT runs in terror instead of face the truth. you cant confront shit. if tom cruise was standing next to me right now with a sword in one hand and a gun in the other, both pointed at me, i would SP ALL OVER HIS ASS. the only thing people gain from scientology (and this is only the top few levels of the hierarchy) is the ability to be so obstinate in that face of obvious truths and being provin definitively wrong that is makes you look like you have downsyndrome.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
im cravin some confront and shatter suppression, come on, give me some confront and shatter suppression. im suppresive right? come on, prove your religion does something for you. oh wait its all a lie and you cant confront and shatter a turd.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
did you read the admissions? have you read a piece of blue sky? (just examples) no? yeah, didnt think so. all in all, what you're doing is saying you can validly and accurately discount information you havnt ever accesses, whilst complaining that we are doing that. but we STUDY THE MATERIAL. so in other words, you are critical of our study methods yet you are the one that takes all info from one side, and none from the other.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
You should find out who I am before assuming things... you do not have a clue... .-) All silly...
You haven't shown anything, and thus I don't see of your 'study methods'...
wiseoldgoat 2 years ago
lemme just ask you a question (i know you will ignore it though), if i made a religion, with secret upper level doctrine, and those secrets equated to my religion's purpose being to destroy scientology, and we kept those doctrines as sacred secrets. you would be wrong to A) spread them B)find them out without our permission C)do ANYTHING to prevent or even discourage our followers from heeding that doctrine D)for asking us about that doctrine, or to explain it. RIGHT???!? or are you a hypocrate?
fmmetamc 2 years ago
as soon as you clearly state the perameters for valid information that's critical of the COS, i will. but you wont do that, because that it means you cant use your only tactics to discredit it after the fact.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
no matter how much you try, you cant change the fact that when someone can refute something they do, and when they cant, they say "you didnt make a point" but dont include and refutation of the supposed point. you cant obfuscate millions of years of evolution of how humans tell when someones lying.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
i hope you arent a parent, because all your kid has to do when someone elses kid tells on your kid for doing something wrong, your kid just has to say is a counter accusation, and now you believe just your kid.like thats not the classic thing kids do when they are caught, try to shift the blame, even through lying.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
notice that i didnt mention anything about who you are? yeah thats cause it doesnt matter, and i couldnt give a rats ass. i just take information on it's own merits, and who spoke it has no effect on the merits of the information. as in, just cause LRH says its true, doesnt make it true unless it already was true before he said it.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
and since none of the stuff he claims was true before he said it, no matter how much egotistical people like to hear that their will defines reality, it's still not TRUE. WOW imagine that.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
how does it feel to have all the character traits a person can have to make them so easily manipulated that someone who never met you can pluck your every whim into a melody most appealing to you? he wrote scientology around stupid people, and how they can be fooled. how does it feel to be a perfect exemplar of stupidity, ageless, timeless, stupidity?
fmmetamc 2 years ago
any belief system that insists it's followers first determine who the teller of information is, before assessing the merits of the information, and taking into account the identity of the teller in the assessment, is fundamentally flawed.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
The subject is no beliefsystem. Never was, never will be. You are too ignorant to perform any research. You continue spouting blind opinion. Have a nice day...
wiseoldgoat 2 years ago
so the assertion you keep making about how i havnt done research (a conclusion you've reached BECAUSE, as in THE CAUSE, im critical of COS) isnt an opinion you keep spouting ad infinitum? the FACT is that i HAVE studied. the other fact is YOU HAVNT ANSWERED MY QUESTION (because you cant answer it). i get so happy when i see that you've replied to another comment iv made, its so fun to so completely shut someone down, when they deserve it because of intentional deception, of course.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
it's funny how you define ignorence as "knowing more about my BELIEF SYSTEM" than me. and yes it's a belief system, any philosophy or religion is a belief system. while i dont think scientology is a religion, it is a philosophy. as in, your philosophy postulates that it's ok to harm SP's cause they deserve it. im neither spouting opinion nor blind opinion, im merely stating the results of earnest research into the subject.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
hear that sound? that's the sound of my arguments crushing yours.
fmmetamc 2 years ago 2
fmmetamc: hear that sound? that's the sound of my arguments crushing yours.
Respons: What you hear is the sound of your illusion playing tricks on you, or is it delusion...
wiseoldgoat 2 years ago
see the difference here is that i actually have illustrated and demonstrated within the argument how my assertions are in fact the case, while you just like to make insulting arbitrary assertions that you act like are true BECAUSE im critical of COS. so all in all im pretty sure you're familiar with "What you hear is the sound of your illusion playing tricks on you, or is it delusion..." because that's the basis scientology is built around.
fmmetamc 2 years ago 2
if you actually earnestly looked into the possibility of that being true for your self, as opposed to just looking into how church members and documents discount any criticism by simply stating it's not true and acting like that's proof, so you can immitate those techniques of obstinate and willfull ignorence.
fmmetamc 2 years ago 2
"The action of bringing about a pro-Scientology government consists of making a friend of the most highly placed government person one can reach, even placing Scientologists in domestic and clerical posts close to him and seeing to it that Scientology resolves his troubles and case."
(Hubbard, "Department of Official Affairs", HCO Policy Letter of 13 March 1961)
OpenComments 2 years ago
you cult's standards of what substantiation of a claim is are double anyway. you act like anyone in the cult of scientology saying something is complete irrefutable proof, yet you act like documentation, numerous eye witnesses, ect arent even close to substantiation of claims. why dont you substantiate the claim that you should be able to confront better than an SP, yet cant.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
and to reiterate, calling something that isnt better confrontation better confrontation doesnt make it that, it has to actually be OUT SIDE YOUR DELUSIONAL WILL.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
and copywrite law does not protect fraud. if you lie people have the right to know. just as an example, the xenu thing, you guys lie all the time and deny that, yet its true as anything could be. the fact that you would deny your own beliefs to avoid ridicule, and not only that, but codify as dogma the denial of your beliefs, shows how little respect and reverence you have for them.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
either you need to study critiques of COS or stop saying people need to study COS to critique it. or admit you are dripping with double standards.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
and turning the pages whilst glancing in thier direction isnt study. if you read a critical point of COS, and cant refute it, but still discount it, you are not studying.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
you know what does give you super powers? having the truth on your side.
fmmetamc 2 years ago
@wiseoldgoat "Its target per its original published writings is to get people 'un'slaved."
Yes, thats nice. And here is a recipe for some yummy cookies. * 1 cup white sugar * 1/2 cup first grade crude oil * 2 cups all-purpose cement * 1 teaspoon pure arsenic * 1 cup chocolate chips
Bake with much love.
The cookies must be yummy because the recipe says so.
BentStigsen 3 years ago