AnonKat
Crusader
Is that an auditing session ?
Is that an auditing session ?
The major difference (and the reason comparing the two is a false equivalency) is that Mayo was not a Scientology thug who plotted the destruction of anyone opposing himself, Mr. Rinder, Mr. Miscavige, Mr. Yager, et al. Instead, he was a highly respected auditor, a position very different from any other Church position, as well as a person entrusted to ensure the quality of people's auditing planet-wide by the Church for many years (and Hubbard's own auditor, and developer of NOTS, the HRD and probably other piloted programs).
There is no comparison.
I can see how the sudden arrival of a recently exited Class XII Snr C/S Int could be both a blessing and a curse, particularly if that person had the typical SO Arrogance.
Sigh, fucking churches should not have gag agreements. Imagine the Chatolic Church having gag agreements with their abuse victimes. Well maybe in America
Churches shouldn't be allowed to incorporate, nevermind then be allowed to enter into contracts based on fraudulent services and issue gag orders on apostates.
[QUOTE
The main person in making this paradise ("as scientology should be") possible was David Mayo as the trusted one to procure the tech, of which none of all local involveds had enough to guarantee the future of the movement.
You are mistaken in your thought that "the locals" didn't have enuff of the materials. We had ALL the materials. That was the LA locals. I don't know where you were.
Bent Corydon's Mission was still hanging in there when David hit the LA area. There was a booming Independent Field. I myself had begun to deliver NOTs to trusted friends who were leaving COS.
For the record, not every practitioner in the LA field was thrilled that David had come along and sort of announced himself as THE Sr C/s among us. Many of us already had C/Ss that we were happy with, and had PCs that were not 'bogged', nor was it felt that we had need of someone coming in to organize the Field operations. A lot of us were thru with organized anything.
But we did have ALL the materials ( except the Flag NOTs pak, which happily came along about that time.
My recall has holes in it.
I am at an age where too much cannot be expected, but I assure you that the Field had everything that was needed and wanted, and if not immediately at hand, we knew where to get it.
David quickly became known and much respected in his AAC. Some of the brightest people gravitated to his practice. It didn't take long for AAC to become a bustling practice, and word of mouth was bringing the highest trained tech terminals into his Sta Barbara offices. David was and is loved.
FYI.
chlng
people use money motivation to accuse Rathbun
Everyone is free to earn a living. I myself do from time to time point out that Marty earns a living from delivering Scientology. My point is not to condemn that he earns a living from it, but to point out he is most likely inherently biased when it comes to find objectively about Scientology and Hubbard. It's because of that sort of economic bias there are such concepts as "disclosure" and "conflict of interests." David Mayo's case just can't be used for comparison here, so it's total nonsense to use him to make a point about the "hypocrisy" you say you see out there.
Yes it can , he alsoo made a living once delivering scientology
I am using this aspect.
Everyone is free to earn a living. I myself do from time to time point out that Marty earns a living from delivering Scientology. My point is not to condemn that he earns a living from it, but to point out he is most likely inherently biased when it comes to find objectively about Scientology and Hubbard. It's because of that sort of economic bias there are such concepts as "disclosure" and "conflict of interests." David Mayo's case just can't be used for comparison here, so it's total nonsense to use him to make a point about the "hypocrisy" you say you see out there.
Serves no purpose whatsoever. David is bound by the legal terms of the agreement whatsoever they may be provided only in that they are legally constituted.
Mark A. Baker
Whatever "reform" the Church will undergo, one point of credibility would be to drop unilaterally the enforcement off all gag agreements, giving back to the gagged people their freedom to write and talk their mind and experiences freely without any penalty whatsoever.
There will be no true reform without that step.
Absolutely!
Take up the cry: Drop all gag orders! Drop all gag orders! ...
No.. In such circumstances a gagorder would be invalid.. If it's not invalid it would be plausible reason for starting a civil war.. IMO... But I ain't no lawyer..This reminds me of a point that I have often wondered about. What if the terms of the "agreement" violate the Constitution of the United States of America, especially in regard to Free Speech as well as other clauses? What if, speaking in supposition, the agreement was signed under duress, possibly including one or more death threat(s) toward self and loved one(s)?
In such circumstances could such an agreement still be binding?
If so, WTF!
Whatever "reform" the Church will undergo, one point of credibility would be to drop unilaterally the enforcement off all gag agreements, giving back to the gagged people their freedom to write and talk their mind and experiences freely without any penalty whatsoever.
There will be no true reform without that step.
Serves no purpose whatsoever. David is bound by the legal terms of the agreement whatsoever they may be provided only in that they are legally constituted.
Mark A. Baker