Church of Scientology Full version of Operating Thetan leaked: your opinions

Some of it was around before particularly OTIII and the claptrap about Xenu. But to have it all together is very helpful indeed. No wonder David Miscavage and his cronies try to protect is as copyright, it’s the biggest load of crock I have read in a long time. Pity the rank and file members within the cult who don’t know anything about this.

WARNING. DON’T READ OUR SACRED TEXT!!!!
Warning! If you examine the OT-3 material without the proper amount of auditing, and without paying the Church of $cientology the $380,000.000 that we are due, you will fall down stairs, get cancer and you will receive a penilectomy in your sleep.

Hubbard never stopped writing science fiction. Scientologists are hypnotized to believe its true.

I guess after they’ve spent all that cash…it better be true.

CAREFUL!!! Scientologists say if you read it you may get pneumonia, go insane or even DIE!!!

http://truthtopplestyranny.blogspot.com

that $hit costs $400,000.00?
sad

I’m not surprised that Scientology tries to keep this silliness a big secret via the copyright laws.

When critical thinkers read this garbage they laugh.

Scientology is obviously a joke.

Someone help me out here…. I don’t get why Hubbard had to smuggle HIS OWN documents off HIS OWN ship because he disagreed with HIS OWN church.

Or was he just tripping his balls off?

Bartiromo, Hubbard was tripping his balls off. Documents written by hubbard state that he was, “popping lots of pinks and greys and drinking lots of rum” which leads one to suggest that Hubbard was indeed in a drug-induced state when he wrote OT III. Add his previous statements that Benzedrine would be useful in the auditing process, and you have the recipe for a very unstable individual.

I do not recommend you examine that information. You can be sure that you won’t fully understand it because it uses words, specific scientology words with specialized and specific meanings. Likely, you don’t have access to full definitions and are unlikely to fully understand every specialized term. In addition, the situation really is as the Church says it is. You’re not going to gain anything by reading it. Just let it go, get some space; spring is happening, see the children playing, enjoy life.

As a Scientologist, I once considered these protests to be the hubris of youth, misdirected by the seedy side of an internet culture. But now I know better. After reading the information gathered some anti-Scientology sites I now understand why they consider the Church to be an evil tyrannical organization that fleeces it’s parishoners. If it weren’t for what this little campaign has turned me onto, I would just be another sad commentator on the, I am sorry to say, gullibility of the people of my Church. However, this organization has taken on a much brighter side no matter what is professed by some of those in my Church. I was interested in finding out where some of these kids got their info so I visited the sites including the partyvan site where their “organization” started from. I must say I was impressed at the profound and thoughtful overtones of the discussion boards. Most were actively calling for peaceful, law abiding behavior at the protests, and they swiftly rejected any ridiculous calls for burning things, overturning cars, etc. In this age where we as Americans are being constantly reminded of how insecure our way of life is in the world. Where we seem to have lost some of the sanctity of personal freedom and the joy of pursuit of our way of life as we see fit, this campaign seems to be exactly what Scientology and our country needs, right now! These individuals know the Church is involved in some nefarious activity, and they have been very active in gathering any evidence of it, which they have promptly given to authorities. I have seen proof that the Church is fleecing people for profit and run as a pyramid scheme type of business, and I encourage everyone to contact the IRS, your representatives in Congress, and all other authorities and bring them your claims. Now I clearly understand that what the spokespeople of the Church of Scientology are doing is inciting malice and prejudice. Make no mistake not all in Scientology are the same and some probably just don’t know what they are doing. However, they are some pretty nasty characters in there, I have seen it.
It is unfortunate that the leaders of Scientology feed off of our youth to pursue their personal agendas of acquiring wealth and power. Quite despicable really.

Yes, Spring is happening, children are playing but the people in Scientology are not able to enjoy them because they are working their entire lives to give everything they have to the Church in order to learn this information. People have a right to know what their religion believes without worrying about punishment for reading documents not approved by the church.

Also, having read most of it. Nothing in there is so difficult that it’s not possible to understand.

Ah Terryeo, still going with the “nothing to see here, move along” thing, huh?
BTW, I think you’ve been replaced by bgodly as head scitroll.
Now why don’t you run along and go play with the children.

Does this have the supposed “Jesus was a lover of young men” letter in it? I’ve been dying to see that one.

None of that Ron tech is comparable to what Jesus did according to the 4 points of view who reported what Jesus had done.
It is remarkable how Ron stated that Jesus did tricks but Ron has convinced many of his converts about his trickery.
Scientologists require paying for services rendered whilst those at the time of Jesus got their help at no charge.
Both followers of Jesus & Ron & whoever is the leader of a band require giving of themesleves totally to whom they follow
Good luck

Hello! My name is Xenu, despite Scientology trying to deny me, I am part of the OT documents.

Look in OT3 and you will find Hubbard’s own handwriting talking about me!

It feels so great to be “out of the closet” now and I hope that the church will start being honest about my existence.

Oh, there is one misconception. You will not catch pneumonia or become retarded for reading about me, like some in the church will claim.

Anywhoo,
Take Care!

-Xenu, from OT3

A lot of Scientology kids are spending this spring digging ditches and watching their carefree childhoods pass them by.

I am going to show how some of Anonymous resort to lying and treachery.

There is an earlier post which is an obvious fake as I have posted several things under the moniker bgodley in comment sections of websites. The actual message I wrote can be seen in the following link:

http://www.richmond.com/news-features/23754

These folks unfortunately are not the social do-gooders they make themselves out to be. I must say that I do find the altered plagerism a tad on the humurous side.

OT III and xenu huh? thats funny, I saw the BBC panorama video and saw COS members flatly lying about knowing about it. Anyone can watch the video and read the material, and therefore have concrete proof that the COS doesn’t just hide, but lies about their own creation story to the world. try to spin that. It’s hard to think of another “church” that would do that.

I AM BGODLEY
read my comment here
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/T9PIDT3NJ4NNUOS68

“bawww wai do pple b stelin mine naem )))’: ” bgodley cried to his Auditor. Well, because it’s funny, and quite frankly you’re a joke. Care to answer to any questions that’re asked and adressed to you, instead of simply throwing out comments?

Terryeo writes: “Likely, you don’t have access to full definitions and are unlikely to fully understand every specialized term.”

Full Scientology glossaries, technical dictionaries, admin dictionaries etc are available via torrents.

Also, the bgodley posting at 8.14pm is not the genuine one, I have read bgodley’s comments elsewhere and as much as I disagree with them, they do not contain spelling errors like “plagerism” or “humurous”.

No that was me. I knew I didn’t have plagiarism correctly but I didn’t bother to look it up and I just mistyped on humorous. I am afraid sometimes my spelling isn’t very guud

“bawww wai do pple b stelin mine naem )))’: ” bgodley cried to his Auditor. Well, because it’s funny, and quite frankly you’re a joke.”

With all due respect, you are helping prove my case with comments like these. Here is some advice, some people read this stuff who aren’t Scientologists or Anonymous. This isn’t a video game message board.

There’s no way that post was actually written by Terryeo. That person has been so involved in the online discussion that he/she could not possibly believe critics to be ignorant of Hubbard’s specialized tech terms.

Most people interested enough to download the OT files are more than educated enough in church jargon to comprehend them. Asserting that internet users “don’t have access” to anything is too short-sighted a remark to ascribe to such a prolific internet user.

Also, stating that reading would be a waste of time while the interest is the pursuit of knowledge is beneath a person so well-read as Terryeo.

Still, the post was hilarious. Thank you FakeTerryeo.

Yeah, it’s pretty amusing. The various NOTs, L, and everything else have been afloat around the Intertubes for something like 15 years now — something like 1993 was the first series of “secret” documents scanned in to computer and routinely spread around the ‘tubes.

Having it all in one place is kind of interesting, though, but it’s unlikely that there’s anything actually new in this latest series.

Nobody but Free Zoners, Rons Orgers and the like who actually believe such insane, drug-induced stupidity actually wants this stuff. The rest of us step through it for the LOLs and then we delete them — or think that maybe they’re not spread around enough and lend a hand.

It’s funny. The Scientology crime syndicate is being dismantled with something like 40,000 remaining customers world wide — and yet their actual documents, the actual truth about what the insane crooks eventually sell to the rubes, marks, and suckers, have never been more widely known.

There is massive irony in all this. Try to keep one’s crimes, abuses, and bait-and-switch bunko frauds a secret and they’ll get wider coverage than if you try to sell them.

Any way, I looked these things over back before that profoundly insane criminal Helena Kobrin issued her RMGROUP to the alt.religion.scientology newsgroup to try to stop the civil rights and human rights activists from discussing Scientology crimes, homicides, and what the insane crooks actually sell their marks. I scanned through these stupid piles of idiot drugged out nonsense, laughed a bit, and deleted them. Nearly everyone does.

All my own opinions and just my own opinions, as always.

bgodley: I realize that, and I do plead mae culpa. Do not imagine that just because you act so authoritatively, people will start to think “Hmm, this bgodley guy just might have a point, I’ve best join the Church of Scientology and/or denounce Anonymous of its evil!”
For instance, you still dodge our growing questions and concerns; will you start answering us instead of denying us this truth that you tell us is so great? Please, release us of this agony and respond to our questions!

Anoynymause,

No I actually dodn’t dodge your “questions”.

I just have a hard time repeating myself over and over and over.

You can look at some recent responses in the message boards of ohio state’s online paper. I go over in exhausting length some responses to a few of the common accusations.

http://uweekly.com/newsmag/03-26-2008/7952

Now realize Scientology and L. Ron Hubbard and church staff have been accused of hundereds of things, whatever someone’s fancy lends itself to. It is virtually impossible for me to spend all my time trying to handle one wild accusation after another. You can come up with as many accusations as there are ideas. Often, when I have spent time addressing accusations, another accusation or rumor pops up and then I get accused of not handling that one. Then I handle that and then it repeats itself ad nauseum.

What I often think is that these critics are just talking to themselves in a way. Often to try and remind themselves that they are actually doing the right thing. They start sites like the enturbulation site where they can pat each other on the back for brave attempts at saving the world by trying to take down the “evil” church. Then they run to comment boards like this regurgitating the same stuff they bought hook, line and sinker from the anti-scientology sites.

My honest opinion and this is going to sound a little harsh – you are being used.

Any decent intention to help by some is being twisted by a campaign of those with not so decent intentions. They will talk to you nice, call you brother and reiterate with regularity all that is bad with Scientology. They will throw in some mockery and degradation to make it sound fun and for laughs. But deep down they don’t have the professed do-good intentions they claim. These guys would as easily throw you under a bus as they would ordering a cup of coffee if they thought it “right”. Now realize again when I say this it doesn’t fit the majority of the Anonymous group – it is minor portion. By the way this same minor group is what often comprimises that small band of ex-Scientologists who got thrown out of the church. Again not everyone of those, but some.

The reason I write these posts is often to not just defend my church but to try and reach those kids who are being duped and used. They often don’t see it which is something I am well aware of. It however has almost become a secondary goal. To help that portion of the anonymous group wake up a bit.

As for that minor group, well, lets just say I wouldn’t risk my neck saving theirs.

To really know the spirit a person would no longer be captured by religious, scientological & other superstitious or science fiction inventions about the spirit.
This is merely entertainment that keeps people preoccupied with whatever belief or study or faith thru whatever words that entertain converts to whatever a following.
Some though can be very insidious & a convert should be careful with regard to how they are committed to whatever asylum of considered spiritual security.

BGodley: Very well, I have read the 12 comments posted on the article under your name (and I do say it that way, because it’s quite obvious you weren’t the only person posting it).
If you don’t mind, I’ll try and respond with my thoughts on your comments in order (at least the ones I believe are yours), and add a synopsis of my remarks after the comments (or as we like to say, a tl;dr). You seem genuinely interested in a discussion, and I am genuinely interested in discussing also, and I don’t believe that making personal attacks, from either side, will help progress our understand of each other’s perspectives. And so we go!

first post, bgodley | 2008-03-25 – 09:13:58 PM (CDT)
You seem to question the validity of the sites and articles that Anonymous uses as resources. So are you then questioning the TIME’s credibility, or the BBC? I could understand finding suspicious a website that is anti-Scientology, however, Andreas Heldal-Lund continues to hold an open mind on the subject (I’m sure you know what website he owns, I don’t need to name it), and asks that if any misinformation be spread on his website, that you can email him and ask for it to be fixed. And he will do this, so long as you, the person who emails him, can prove that what they are saying is the truth, or that what Heldal-Lund is saying is ineffectual. Yet, his site continues to hold critical arguments that have not been disproven, even after the Church of Scientology brought him into a court of law on the subject of his website’s content (and several times, at that!). This, in my opinion, makes it all a more credible source.
And it is true, there have been some calls to physical action. But this happens in every kind of group, no matter what they are promoting. And Anonymous makes sure that these ideas do not propagate because it realizes that it’s counter-productive to our cause. How exactly does this make us bigots? (I see no religious argument if we’re opposing the Church of Scientology, as it is not the religion of Scientology.)
I have never seen a discussion about not having to prove anything. We feel there is a lot of proof that is currently available, what with all the testimonials. And I do understand that not everything works for everyone, but the amount of testimonials out there and their concurrency only makes them more valid, and usually when even only a few cases happen, there is an investigation opened as to resolve the problem, or at least there are claims within which has not worked (in this case the Church of Scientology.. I’m just feeling my wording might be a bit tricky) that it just doesn’t work all the time. But I’ve read many times on Scientology websites, or in comments made by self-proclaimed Scientologists, that the Tech has a 100% success rate.
On that note, however, I will not deny that testimonials on their own would stand in a court of law. And that is why that we use these testimonials so that if investigative organisations feel the need to do so, they will have some ground to suppose something is not right. And we do feel that these investigations will not leave them empty-handed.
And, I’m sorry to be beating a dead horse, but there have been previous investigations within the Church of Scientology, what with Operation Snow White and Operation Freakout. Also, there have been a lot of investigations happening lately; journalistic investigations, that we feel have really started to speed up thanks to our protests. If the journalistic investigations turn out to prove and show once and for all that the Church has nothing to hide, then Anonymous will cease and go back to doing whatever it was doing before. If this isn’t the case, then legal action will be taken and more police investigation will occur.

It is possible to accuse an organisation of commiting crimes, and not believe that all its followers are criminals and that they may continue doing what they please. When a company’s director is accused of embezzling money, the company will crumble; but the accountants can continue being accountants, and the secretaries may continue being secretaries, and so on. If the Church of Scientology does crumble under the scrutiny of an investigation (that we hope will happen), you can continue practicing and believing in Scientology under the banner of FreeZone. There is an alternative. Of course, people will continue to chuckle at what your belief system upholds (people chuckle at me, too, when I do silly things, I don’t mind), but at least they won’t believe that your Church is comitting criminal activities, or anything of that effect. (Anonymous is accountable as being “people”, and we do believe this is happening. We are spreading our beliefs, and hoping that they will continue to be supported through more empirical data and proof.)
I will answer your question: I believe that I am a leader. However, I also know that following is a good idea from time-to-time. It’s a terrible idea to always believe in the same concept, because then there is either: A) no progress, or B) no direction. However, I don’t think that’s very relevant to the discussion at hand.
I do not believe that you have some insidious plans, or that you’ve personally comitted crimes, nor that you are a bad person. There is absolutely no proof to support any claim like that. However, Tory Christman (also, I would believe you’ve at least heard of her? Although she did blow in 2001, so you might not’ve been a member early enough…) had been in the Church for over 30 years, and had achieved OT VII. And she admits to have participated in insidious plans to silence critics, for instance creating spamming accounts on websites such as a.r.s. . She did not make these plans up; the Church of Scientology told her to do it. And being a good follower, she did. I’m sorry if I’m dissecting your wording like this, but it’s a strategy that is often used both in Courts and in professional debates.
Also, the new website of Scientology.org, with its 82 videos… There is at least one person that is shown in the testimonies, who claims that their statements were taken out of context. And a few other people were found to’ve either been non-existant (as in, the position they claimed is not one that actually exists), or didn’t showcase the person who was declared to hold that title. This makes the videos dubious at least, and until the Church can at least adress the concerns of the single person who’s come out and contested his participation in these videos, I cannot personally hold them accountable or credible.
As Anonymous, we felt that we needed to take up this cause because we thought that what we believe about the Church is the truth, and we went out of our way to inform the public of the dangers we’ve perceived. I think it’s a bit ironic that you should say the following: “They in some way seem to see most of the world as an enemy and can\’t conceive of the idea that people actually do go out of their way to help other people.” We absolutely do conceive that idea, because it’s exactly what we feel we are doing. And we understand the world is not our enemy; unlike most protestors (think of those against the G8, or GreenPeace for instance), we try very much to comply and cooperate with the police, and to not endanger the public, and we make sure that we do not become a violent group that is only lashing out.
I personally do have a roller-coaster life, and I would not be surprised if other Anonymous were in the same situation. But you know what? That is the case for just about everyone in the world, at least at one time or another, most generally during the late teens/early adulthood (which is, coincidentally, where most Anons are). And I believe that there is nothing wrong with that. Protesting is actually giving us something steady that we can hold onto, and it’s making us happier. We could’ve joined a book club, and it would’ve had the same effect. Or, as you suggested, we could’ve joined Scientology; same effect.
(On a side-note, I don’t think many churches have “peace corps”, or at least none that I’ve heard about…)
I am glad that you did give the option to the author of that article to ask you questions. Whether you’d like to believe it or not, most News outlet do try to get in contact with Scientology representatives, but are unfortunately denied, or given a copy/paste response. Why? We don’t know, but it does not help them defend what is being reported.

TL;DR : Anonymous in no way condones criminal activities / You can continue practicing Scientology in the Freezone / There are investigations happening in the Church of Scientology and that have happened, both investigative and journalistic / There is nothing wrong with a roller-coaster life.

I will only be adressing this first post for now, I have some things to work on for two or so hours. I hope it wasn’t too much to digest, and I also look forward to continuing this discussion with you.
Please feel free to express any concerns in regard to my comments, or adress anything that you might feel was misinterpreted. I’ll gladly oblidge to admit my mistake, or to reiterate if I feel you have a point on the issue.
Thank you!
-David (no, it’s not my real name — it’s an Anonymous thing)

Is there a posting limit? I just made a three-page post (in Microsoft Word, Times New Roman size=12) and it’s not coming in. This post is a test to see if it has been blocked or if it’s just lag — please delete it (:

BGodley: I have read the comments, and would like to adress them and earnestly hold a discussion with you. Not on the subject of the allegations of the Church conducting criminal activities, but rather on the group that is Anonymous.
I would have liked to have held it here, but that doesn’t seem possible. There seems to be a posting limit, and I feel that it would hinder our discussion capabilities. If you could please send me an email to : anonymousanonymousanonymous1@yahoo.ca, I’ll gladly reply so that we may hold a civil debate. Obviously, that email is not my legit email, and if you feel so inclined you may also use a throw-away email.
I look forward to discussing with you (:
-David

Scientology can score from the maxim that ‘ it doesn’t matter what they say about Scientology either good or bad as long as they have their attention on Scientology then Scientology won’t be forgotten’
It is those services & products for sale that are not to the good or bad spoken about that have no chance of any success.

Anonymaue,

I would prefer to address your concerns here in a public forum so as to have others follow the discussions.

In reference to your comment about Time magazine and BBC, yes I very much do consider them to be dubious sources. I have met and know about the lives and businesses of some of the people referenced in the Time magazine article. I can tell you personally that there is flagrant untruths. So you can just toss that one out the window.

I wasn’t as personally connected to the BBC piece but I can tell you that much of it was filled with generalities and inuendo. “people say”. “critics think”. This type of reporting is used to obfuscate the source of the comment which is often the reporter himself. This makes the comments inflammatory and relegates the piece to opinion not journalism. This, not to mention that the reporter lost it in his job. I sent an email to the BBC after the piece and the editorial staff responded and said that they were aware of the problems associated with the piece and would look to address problems regarding it internally.

As to Heldal-Lund and the Xenu site. He has about as an open mind as fort knox safe.

Here are some direct quotes from his own website;
Frequently Asked questions page.

“I do not state anywhere that I am objective. On the contrary, I am a thinking human and I have my personal opinions.”

“I made a web site to inform others about my concerns. It is not unbiased or objective, and it never claimed it was. Why should it be?”

He then goes on to contradict himself in a few comments later.

“I do not want others to base their opinions on censored or biased propaganda.”

He explains that he is biased and then says he doesn’t want others to base their opinions on bias information.

This is an attempt to cover his tracks in saying he is only giving his unobjective opinion and then trys to say that he really wants others to be objective. This is a sign of an artful liar. If you careful examine the communication of others you can see it.

He also says on the website:

“I spell it out pretty clearly; these are my opinions and here is the documentation which I base them on.”

So I looked at his “documentation”. The thing I found to be of most interest is that almost all of his sources are just opinions of others. More specifically opinions of apostates and few critics.

I can pretty much sum up his whole website for you.

Opinion based upon opinion.

Thus I can also sum up the entirety of many of Anonymous claims too as many other critical sites cross reference each other to look legitimate.

Opinion based upon opinion based upon opinion.

The opinion gets whitewashed as being documents and evidence. For example, some use Judge Latey’s judicial opinion from 30 years ago on Scientology as evidence. He obviously didn’t like it but that was his opinion. He was not trying a criminal case, it was a custody battle (where his decisions ended up tragically by the way).

I repeat:

Opinion based upon opinion based upon opinion.

Now, Lund does reference people who have very unethical backgrounds including Steve Hassan.

He was involved in several kidnapping/”deprograming” events in the 70′s and 80′s. In one such event was with a member of the Unification Church, Arthur Roselle. He testified in a sworn statment, “Hassan aided, abetted, and conspired in my kidnapping and in my subsequent false imprisonment.” Roselle also accused Hassan of actively assisting in depriving him of sleep, insulting and humiliating him, and treating him like “a captured animal in a zoo,” as well as attempting to coerce him into signing a false affidavit exonerating Hassan of the kidnapping claims.

He also references only information that supports his hypothesis. He references all scientology critics, no shock there really.

Opinion does not make something true. Facts and evidence of wrong doing make something more true. Why has the Church not be convicted of crimes? Because there aren’t any. If there were ,we would have seen something on this by now.

There was a blight on the chruch’s image in the form of old group of Scientologists who were convicted of a crime. That singular crime had nothing to do with the vast majority of Scientologists or L. Ron Hubbard himself. The prosecutor in that case even stated that these individuals acted autonomously. The group that they belonged to was obviously summarily disbanded and many of those members kicked out for unethical behavior. The irony in this is that actually many of those same scorned ex-Scientologists make up a percentage of the critics that are often referenced as sources.

Now possibly it was this case that has caused so much controversy. Possibly it was this case that caused some critics to think of the church as a criminal organization or some such. I cannot be sure.

What I can be sure of is that all these claims of evil doing are bogus and, as mentioned above, are opinions and remain opinions until hard facts are shown. What I can state is that many cases of slander and criminal convictions have occured amongst many within this small band of church critic. There is proof of that.

I do not know if any of this sways you. I am not going to kid myself and think it will. I will only offer it for your inspection.

Scientology shmientology…plays GLADLY with the kids outside – for THAT is where God is.

FOR SALE The power of God.
Be like God & u too can have anything u want.
Special rates to be like God.
Get to know the tech God didn’t want u to know.
Don’t go for cheap substitutes.
Get the real power of God at your Org.
It seems to me that Scientology is selling the power of God to those obviously who can afford it.
Too many Gods spoil the broth unless they are democratic.

I can honestly say the episode of South Park that had a spoof with Tom Cruise and John Travolta featured a detailed story of Scientology Creation that is dead on with this information. I remember the COS was denying that this was the truth, and as we see, they really are crazy. I know that people can say negitive things about any religion but lets be honest, this one was created up by a science fiction writer. Scientology is not about religion, Its about money.

I will post this think for all you that want to see what i’m talking about and have a good laugh.

I haven’t really read and posted on a lot of blogs and message boards before, but I’ve been following this Anonymous vs. Scientology thing.

One thing sticks out to me that is worth commenting on. These anonymous people are shockingly rude. They are just plain out disrespecting people in any way they can.

Maybe it’s the culture on the internet, and something they’ve gotten used to being able to do being “anonymous”.

I’m personally shocked to see the epithets and complete disrespect Scientologists are being treated with. I can’t imagine why this is acceptable to do to any religious group. It’s like you think they aren’t even human beings.

Is anybody seeing this except for me and the Scientologists? Does no one want to stand up for individul Scientologists at all? Is this okay just because it’s not directed at you, or your religion, or your family?

It makes it clear to me that this “anonymous” movement is a bunch of immature kids who don’t know what they are talking about. It’s really cruel and a sad sight to see.