quoted: Crowley styled himself "the Beast 666", servant of the Antichrist, and advocated the use of addictive drugs and bizarre sexual practices.
Jack Parsons was a chemist and an early member of Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, but his passion was Magick (as Crowley respelled the word).
Hubbard and Parsons performed sexual ceremonies to summon a woman willing to become the mother of "Babalon", the incarnation of evil.
The affair ended with Hubbard running off not only with Parsons' girl Sara, but also with his money.
Hubbard married Sara Northrup bigamously, and started to write pathetic letters applying for a war pension. In October 1947, when according to later accounts he had "cured" himself through Dianetics, Hubbard admitted to suicidal tendencies and begged for psychiatric help in a letter to the Veterans Administration.
Hubbard continued to perform black magic rituals and started to use self hypnosis, confiding to his notebook such hypnotic affirmations as "all men are my slaves". His personal papers also make it clear that he was deliberately pretending war-related ailments so that he could claim a pension increase.
By this time, Hubbard was already addicted to the barbiturate drugs originally prescribed for his ulcer. His drug use continued during his Scientology career, even though he was to sponsor the Scientology anti-drug group Narconon. Although Dianetics claims to overcome compulsions with ease, Hubbard was unable to kick the tobacco habit, and chain-smoked over 80 cigarettes a day.
In article <efiaho#$9GA.154@upnetnews03>, jeep93 <jee...@msn.com> wrote: >Go watch Star Trek...I only wish Bill Shatner was around to laugh at your >stupid ass...
Did I miss something? Did Shatner die? (I've been kinda bummed this year after Roy, and then Gene, and then Frank* died, so I may not have been paying attention.) Or does jeep mean only that Shatner is not reading this newsgroup? Well, he has his own religion to attend to, so I expect he's busy.
. . * yankovic, of course .
-- non-spam can be sent to lsc at this ISP
"What I mean by a shifty eye," continued Miss Marple, "is the kind that looks very straight at you and never looks away or blinks."
On Sat, 31 Oct 1998 17:57:46, lscdoesnteatspamanym...@netcom.com (Lisa
Chabot) wrote:
Oh dear...the gibberish the supercede bots are posting is getting slightly more coherent...and much much more offensive. Dear whoever thinks (s)he's gaining converts to his lil meme scheme by this, you're sadly deluded, please knock it off. And for the love of Dog and for little baby Santa Claus in the manger, _PLEASE_ go out and purchase one extra-large clue-catching mitt, because you really do need it.
>Thw wiccans I met have always one thing in common.They never run TO Christ but >have always been a part of a Christian denomination and run AWAY from Christ. >They were in a Christian religion and felt that they werent getting spiritually >fulfulled so insetad of looking INWARD to see if THEY may be doing some not >lining up with what they were taught they dump the responsibility of change >within themselves and abdicate what may seem harder and run to this stuff which >is far easier, everyhting goes, seems to have merit andpower and theres little >accountability. >In other words, I have never met a wiccan yet who wasnt at one time a Christian >first , even if a nominal one. >Wiccans have it easy, its HARD to follow Christ and theres the delineation >there. The ones who have courage(Christian) and the ones who follow this path >of darkness with the nah nah nah in your face response to God that is really >sad. >They say all kinds of things saying "Look < God hasnt done anything to me yet" >and get bolder and bolder in their scxoffings and dont realize Satan is sitting >on the sidelines rubbing his hands together saying " Thats right say what you >want..I have another sucker now" >Funny thing again though. >WHen Wiccans leave this stuff and BECOME Christians? They love the Lord so much >youll find no better or hard working Christians ever.
>Fawn
--- Ben Allen, Of course, it has to be *Kevin's* dead cat to count. heil...@wport.com Lame stuff is fun. remove e and l to e-mail
In article <efiaho#$9GA.154@upnetnews03>, "jeep93" <jee...@msn.com> wrote:
> Scientologists are Crazy!!!!!!!!!!!
Blacks are good dancers. Jews are *thrifty*. Women want to be dominated. Men don't know how to change a diaper. Gypsies only know how to cheat you. Californians are hypersexed and laid back. New Yorkers are rude.
What's wrong with all of these statements that is also wrong with "Scientologists are crazy!"? -- Kashmir in Your Ear ;)
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>Blacks are good dancers. >Jews are *thrifty*. >Women want to be dominated. >Men don't know how to change a diaper. >Gypsies only know how to cheat you. >Californians are hypersexed and laid back. >New Yorkers are rude.
>What's wrong with all of these statements that is also wrong with >"Scientologists are crazy!"?
Many blacks are not good dancers, never have been or will be, and are still just as black: being a good dancer is not integral to being black.
Every Scientologist believes that by clutching two soup cans sans soup attached to a cheaply made skin resistance meter, and digging round in their memories, they can have perfect memory raised IQ and be free from diseases such as athsma; if they do not, they disbeleive Hubbard's claims and are not Scientologists. Scientologists, by definition, at least beleive obviously crazy stuff and act in obviously crazy ways.
What's wrong with being unable to see the difference between the two?
>Blacks are good dancers. >Jews are *thrifty*. >Women want to be dominated. >Men don't know how to change a diaper. >Gypsies only know how to cheat you. >Californians are hypersexed and laid back. >New Yorkers are rude.
>What's wrong with all of these statements that is also wrong with >"Scientologists are crazy!"?
Hey! Is this like that Sesame Street thing "one of these things is different than the others"?
>Blacks are good dancers. >Jews are *thrifty*. >Women want to be dominated. >Men don't know how to change a diaper. >Gypsies only know how to cheat you. >Californians are hypersexed and laid back. >New Yorkers are rude.
>Blacks are good dancers. >Jews are *thrifty*. >Women want to be dominated. >Men don't know how to change a diaper. >Gypsies only know how to cheat you. >Californians are hypersexed and laid back. >New Yorkers are rude.
>What's wrong with all of these statements that is also wrong with >"Scientologists are crazy!"?
I was a scientologist. While I was a scientologist, it is fair to say that I was involved in an organization comprising an almost entirely obsessive-compulsive membership. Including me. Ask a scientologist what else he would rather be doing, and he will always say scientology is no.1 if he tells you the truth. In the 'wog world', we are not generally so exclusive.
I also suffered from delusional thoughts, evidenced by the stuff I came out with in session about being a wooly rhinocerous farmer 180,000 years ago for an alien race who would harvest rhino and take them back to their planet on huge banana shaped ships (actual session 'recall').
So, since every pre-clear has a folder similarly full of the very stuff of delusional psychosis, (let's not forget that in the R&D volumes Hubbard talks about one in six pre-clears running the crucifixion as if they were Christ), I don't think it's a particular generalization to say scientologists are crazy.
They may be driven to it, and it may be curable in most, given long enough, but they are completely yip yip snibbit barking doo-bleeding-lally.
(Notice I used the word 'generalizations' instead of Hubbard's VERY WRONG 'generalities'. And I can be as ser- faccy as I like. I'm suppressive. Ha.) -- Funky Donny
