2112db31fc8d3918aeefcfa926838d64This is a great comment, in response to the Scientologists Back in Comm moderators posting an OSA Program written in 2007 to handle the “squirrels”.

“thetaclear on November 22, 2014 at 7:27 am said:
You know, the “enemies” are not only from OSA , they come from within too, from us Scientologists. OSA uses our own “disaffections” among ourselves to create conflic and the apparency of “lack of group morale” and coordinared goals.

There is something I call (almost paraphrasing Rinder) “fundamentalist Scientologists” ; I was certainly one of them till recently. Here is a quote from Wikipedia defining the term :

“Fundamentalism has been defined by its leading historian as the demand for a strict adherence to certain theological doctrines, in reaction against Modernist theology. [1] The term was originally coined by its supporters to describe what they claimed were five specific classic theological beliefs of Christianity, and that developed into a Christian fundamentalist movement within the Protestant community of the United States in the early part of the 20th century. [2]

The term usually has a religious connotation indicating unwavering attachment to a set of irreducible beliefs, [3] but fundamentalism has come to be applied to a broad tendency among certain groups, mainly, although not exclusively, in religion. This tendency is most often characterized by a markedly strict literalism as applied to certain specific scriptures, dogmas, or ideologies, and a strong sense of the importance of maintaining ingroup and outgroup distinctions [4] [5] [6] [7] ,which can lead to an emphasis on purity and the desire to return to a previous ideal from which it is believed that members have begun to stray. Rejection of diversity of opinion as applied to these established “fundamentals” and their accepted interpretation within the group is often the result of this tendency.” End of quote.

These are some of the characteristics of a Fundamentalist Scientologist :

  1. We think that the only possible truth in existence is contained only in LRH’s texts. No other philosophy has any value for us. No other great Leader has any value to amount to anything compared to LRH.
  2. Anybody thinking differently from LRH is immediately labeled as a “squirrel” or at the least, as a “disaffected” Scientologist with one foot already in the “dark side”. Having a different opinion than any statements presented in any LRH issue, is immediately interpreted as M/Us being the cause , and/or “false data”.
  3. People manifesting BPC with any part of the subject of Scietology or LRH (I don’t mean carping unfounded, biased criticism) are only “natteries” full of M/W/Hs . Scientology is infallible as well as its founder, we think.
  4. We hold the ONLY route out in existence. Any other past or future roads are not to be looked at in any way, shape or form. Not to be even examined, not even read about. That’s “”mixing practices” and borders on the “squirrel”.
  5. We form a special “clique” of people, separted from society to a large degree, living and working mosly among us, avoiding contagion from “the wog” .
  6. We need a LRH ref for everything in our lives. We feel lost w/out it. We feel uncomfortable with creating knowledge. “What if we are wrong, what then ? ” , “We better stick to what is already written”.
  7. If we disagree with the minutest part of the Tech , then we know we need to do a “Disagreement Check” to sort it out cause Tech is not to be questioned in any way. That would be “blasphemy” in itself as LRH is never, ever wrong about anything in any way, shape or form.
  8. We feel greatly OUT-OF-ARC with the ones “who think differently, with the ones who disagrees with anything no matter how minute.
  9. We feel no need with studying many subjects (writing , general Science ,electricity, Art, navegation, etc,etc,etc,etc) as LRH already covered them. So why even try it ? It is already written, isn’t it ?
  10. Only the blogs that don’t mention anything wrong with Scn and LRH , not even if expressed with the correct manners and with valuable arguments, are to be considered “In-Tech” and as “Scientologists blogs”. The rest of them are “dark forces” blogs, or “dissenters blogs” , or “BPCed natteries”.

Do any of those points sound familiar to anyone ?

I used to post at one known blog and as long as I “behaved” and “stayed with the flow” I wasn’t moderated. No heated arguments or discussion are allowed as that is “enturbulating” the status quo and their little “comfort zone”. “Highly trained” auditors can’t be publicly questioned by “low level” auditors on subjects of great importance like the exact Bridge sequence LRH left for us. Or the origin of the upper level materials that we have here in the Field so that others new comers can feel at ease with it, knowing they are unaltered from the Originals.

No way, you are immediately an OSA troll only “trying to fish for upper level delivery terminals”. As if I really care for something I have already done decades before them and with the master himself.

“Any comm below 2.0 in the tone scale” according to the dear moderator is not let through even when you are defending yourself from obvious attacks only attempting to drive you away for thinking differently.

They heavily criticize blogs such as this one and “Scientolipedia” – because, “they are letting natteriers about Scn and LRH post” and “posting articles” from “ex-Scientologists” as well. I fell myself for that crap and violated my own personal integrity by agreeing with such assessments. I was blind myself, and were it not for a good, solid “kick in the butt” I got from BIC Admin (for which I’ll be eternally grateful) , I would still be posting there probably criticizing you guys here. They are fundamentalists “KSW” terminals only trying to “be right”.

But I fully grant them the same beingness that I was granted and the same patience I received from an obvious high toned and incredible balanced individual.

We as Scientologists must change. We must learn to let go of hates , intolerance for divergence, censorship , “know best” , and “religious mania”. Only then can we really be “Scientologists ” ; a link for many religions and philosophies , a Bridge that unites credos, races , viewpoints, and mutually agreed goals for the self-preservation of the human race.

OSA ain’t the real enemy. It is our own attitudes toward the world and towards our fellows. W/out such attitudes, OSA are just kindergarten boys.

ARC
PETER

My congratulations to the moderators of the Scientologists Back in Comm blog for letting this comment from Peter through.

Alanzo