Florida trip 614

By Tony DePhillips 

I write this in an attempt to clarify some issues that I have gone through since leaving corporate Scientology. It is a clarification of identity.

I used to call myself a Scientologist.

I don’t even really know why I did this, except that I suppose that part of it was that it was expected of me. If I didn’t, then somehow it meant that I was “PTS” or “out-ethics” or wasn’t really willing to take my fair share of the heat for “Clearing the planet”.

The way I feel now is that I can Be-Do and Have everything I used to Be-Do and Have without having to call myself a Scientologist. One reason I don’t want to call myself a Scientologist is that I don’t agree with everything that is being used by that organization. I don’t like the uniform idea of the Sea Org. I don’t like the RPF. I don’t like all the money and regging. There are other things too.

I have always felt that I was a truth seeker and I can still follow that goal.

I can still get auditing now if I want to analyze something or work on some sort of problem. I don’t have to call myself a Scientologist in order to get auditing. I actually feel that when a person declares themselves a “ fill in the blank” they to a large degree pigeon hole themselves. If a person is a “Scientologist”, “Buddhist”, “Jehovah Witness” aren’t they saying basically that the name they are using is their path and they think that path is the most correct path that they have found? To me, it sort of communicates that they now “know” and they might have a discussion with you but it’s only really to convince you that their way is the best. I think it takes away some objectivity. Also, you may be using the ideas of Buddhism and enjoying it and then stumble on something else like Scientology auditing, or Christianity and now feel that is a better path for you. If you aren’t calling yourself a ( fill in the blank) then it could be easier for you to transition into the new path you are interested in.

I think instead of labeling oneself, if a person just continued to look and act and figure things out they would be more willing to look and others would be more willing to look at what they had to say.

I am not a Scientologist, but I like and use the ARC triangle. I like most auditing that I have received. I have had wins with the ethics conditions and have used them many times on others to a good result. I have enjoyed many of the writings of LRH. I believe in past life and future life of the spiritual being. I think that the technology of earlier similar incidents are very valuable. I believe in many Christian Ideals. I like many of the writings of Buddha . I am sure that there are a great many wise and useful things in many bodies of technology. I am a person who is willing to look and use what is workable.


121 thoughts on “Identity

  1. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this Tony. I must admit to having similar “what do I call myself now” moments…. certainly not a Scientologist anymore. I was recently having a most interesting chat with a Greek Orthodox Priest, and of course the question “and what are you” came up. I found myself utterly at a loss for words – and mumbled something about “well, I WAS a Scientologist, then I woke up and I guess for now I’m just a person on another path – I just don’t know which one”. His reaction was total ARC flowed back at me. And of course it got me thinking……. which I still am!

    • Hi BP,
      I was in Florida recently and my wife’s niece wanted to know about Scientology. I told her all about it. The good, bad and the ugly and I really think she is very interested in finding out about the good now. It is much easier for me to “disseminate” if I don’t think of myself as a “Scientologist”. When I have done this in the past as a “Scientologist” it makes me feel a bit like a used car salesman. (nothing against them) But it makes me feel like I have to close them or something. Now I just give information and it is easy to be objective. I truly would recommend auditing to everyone providing they had a safe auditor and they didn’t get it in a cult environment. Your comment about the Priest made me think of this, thanks.

  2. Tony you have been a welcome commentor on this blog. Ive always enjoyed your perspective and like your support you show to others who have been through the church grinder! You are one of us now, good to see a face to the name. Happy searchings, findings without the necessity of identities to you mate!

  3. Tony,

    I was doing my own “scientology” thing for almost 30 yrs before I came across Hubbard’s scn in 97.

    I was only in the cos for a few weeks before getting declared for questioning the sanity of the staff and DM as I saw him in a video.

    I never did like conforming to “limiting labels”.

    I was brought up in the Christian religion, but one religion was never enough for me.

    And I did not like someone else doing the thinking for me. From a very early age, even preteen, I was beginning to question everything and was learning to be a “truth seeker”.

    Long story short: When I discovered scn via the cos, I immediately realized the incredible value of the data. At least most of it.

    My first question was that if the tech and data are so good why is the cos so insane?

    Why are the people in the org so “f**Ked” up?
    It was a case of the insane running the asylum.

    The question I asked was: “How can someone make such a mess of such a good thing?”

    The answer to that is in proverbs: “Don’t throw your pearls in front of swine, for they shall trample it under their feet into their manure.

    Or: “Don’t throw what is holy in front of dogs.”

    For if dogs can’t eat it, or f**K it they p**s on it.

    Now after studying scn and a lot of fz material it is my viewpoint that the problem with scn ( the good stuff) is that is very good as far as it goes, but it is missing the bible and Jesus factors and more.

    The good data of Scn data begins to work a lot better (as operating data) when combined with the good data of the bible and Jesus’ teachings to make still better life operating data. .

    And works still better when the principle of “how to study a science” is fully applied and all other subjects of comparable magnitude are studied and gleaned.

    What are other subjects of comparable magnitude? Any subject of whose goal is to help man understand himself and the world around him, solve his problems and become a better being and live a better life.

    The value of a datum is only determined by how many problems it solves and how well it solves them?

    Anyways, I began calling myself an intelligent, responsible, loving and unlimited free spirit, many yrs ago.

    Under certain conditions, or when pressed, or necessary, i will call myself a Christian Scientologist plus. That has only happened recently.

    Another reason I do not want to or certainly prefer not to call myself a scientologist is because of the stench and charge on the word.

    It is difficult to find anyone who will respond positively to me after I mention the word scientology.

    People look at me as if I have three eyes and will often bolt immediately or do not want to have anything to do with me after that meeting.

    I also remember Hubbard saying to John McMaster in private, that the only reason people call themselves a scientologist is because they do not know what kind of other “gist” to be.

    It is the first time they were ever able to “be” anything.

    In this degraded world it is often not safe to speak the truth.

    So my preferred title is “intelligent, responsible, loving and unlimited free spirit”.

    That way I can study anything I feel like studying or being or practicing.

    And the new religion of tomorrow is to study all religions of yesterday and glean all that is good and useful and chuck the rest up to experience. That means to be a truth seeker. And not to believe in anything but to learn how to know the truth of anything or everything.

    For a belief is a confession of ignorance.

    It means that you do not “KNOW”.


    • Great post Dio.

      And I’ve asked myself the same question “how can someone make such a mess of such a good thing?”

      Scientology does contain some of the deepest, highest and most applicable knowledge. It is a phenomenal tool, but as with all tools: you have to know how to use it and always use it with awareness and wisdom, never taking it for granted or operate on automatic – or it will bite you. The greater the tool, the bigger the bite.

      Repeatedly, Ron Hubbard exhorted his hearers and readers to think for themselves and be true to their personal observations. But this lesson is lost on too many, because it’s easier and more comfortable to think you’ve been given the total truth and need not REALLY observe, reason and evaluate for yourself. Yet that is exactly what you need to do.

      Your post is excellent and really appreciated. It’s posts like these that make reading this blog an interesting and useful exercise.

      • Oiram,
        I acknowledge and thank you for your reply.
        Scientology is the science of knowing how to know the truth of something.
        To believe in something means to accept something as true without proof.
        (all other definitions of the word are wrong, as all other uses of the word are wrong)
        To believe in something is intellectual dishonesty.
        A belief means you do not know.
        Believing is a confession of ignorance.
        To believe in something means you did not do your homework, your research to determine the facts on a subject or issue.
        How could a competent scientologist still believe things?
        The holy man says the holy is truth and the truth seeker says the truth is holy.

    • “In this degraded world it is often not safe to speak the truth.”
      “For a belief is a confession of ignorance. It means that you do not “KNOW”.”
      So, so true. Thanks, Dio.

    • Hey my big bro’! Nice to see you in such good shape, and fighting the good fight right here on our southern shores. Of course, Dio, nothing delivers a better punch than those four devastating blows, taught by Elron himself. Namely: 1) Communicate 2) Duplicate 3) Understand 4) Acknowledge.
      kind regards from your Durban bro’,

  4. Tony,
    I guess you can call yourself whatever you want or not.
    Me I’ll stick with Scientologist. The original definition as given in the tech dictionary instead of the IRS modified one that says you have to be a member of the Church.
    I say to hell with the Church.
    Just as someone saying that they are a Christian doesn’t obligate them to be a member of a Church.

    • Hi remoteviewed.
      I can’t get over the fact that LRH created the RPF and Disconnection and going off to target 2 and so forth. I feel that if I call myself a Scientologist that I am sort of validating all of these ideas that I don’t really believe in. I believe the Earth is round but I don’t call myself an astronomer. I have no problem on people calling themselves whatever they want. I just don’t feel comfortable with it. It is like a pair of pants, sometimes they fit and sometimes they don’t.
      Just curious as to whether you believe that Scientology will be going off to target 2 someday? Seriously. Not as a make wrong or anything, I am truly interested.

      • Tony,
        Actually it was Ken Urquhart who created the RPF:
        Besides the RPF which stands for Rehabilitation Project Force which included coauditing on all levels is a lot different back then than what they call the “RPF” these days which is nothing but a punishment detail.
        Disconnection was back then before it was canceled under the reform codes was completely voluntary the question was “Handle or Disconnect?”. Those who didn’t disconnect from a known SP that was one who was declared such by HCO was labeled PTS until they handled and could only get auditing that was directed toward resolving the PTS condition such as the PTSRD or SPRD which you will remember included getting the “SP” back in comm with the PC and resolving the estrangement which is completely different from what is occurring today.
        Regarding “Target 2″ or whatever which as mentioned in RED 399R.
        Never considered it that controversial nor important. Really nothing in my opinion to base my overall view of the subject which is on whether it works or not.
        Ron might have merely said it as some form of encouragement like that famous line from RJ 67.
        “I’ll meet you up the line at the other end of the bridge.”
        Personally I doubted if the Ol’man would be standing there like St. Peter at the gate or something like that but if you considered him a personal friend as I did It was kind of a nice thought.
        Sorta like telling a lover that you’ll meet again in Paris.
        Like over three quarters of the planet that believes in some form of reincarnation its always a possibility.
        Who knows?
        Like I said you can call yourself whatever you want or not.
        Me I still proudly consider myself an American even though I’m not that proud of what our Government does in our name.
        So on that note I’m sticking to calling myself a Scientology which to me means someone who is working on improving conditions.

      • RemoteViewed: Why are there so many stories of rampant disconnection and broken families from the 1960′s all the way until today? There were so many heartbreaking stories of families torn apart under Hubbard’s leadership of the cult Im always amazed when people try to blame it on DM. Hubbard invented it and he used it. Nor was Hubbard’s a kindler, gentler RPF – the stories of over boarding conducted personally by LRH, not to mentioning RPF conditions on the Apollo and in LA in the 1970s are just as bad as stories today. The only thing you may be able to say about Hubbard was at least he didn’t keep people on the RPF for years and years, but the conditions and treatment were always terrible.

      • Hi Remote,
        Interesting point on the label “American”. I am a US citizen and an American. Those are the facts, I can’t do anything about that unless I want to move elsewhere and that seems like too much trouble at the moment.
        As far as whether LRH created the RPF or not, I think you get my overall point that I don’t agree with everything that LRH said so I don’t wish to present myself as an all in participant of his goals and purposes. I will say again that he created and/or put together some incredible material and I am grateful to him for that.

      • Robin, Nice that you reminded us of the actual LRH on “handle or disconnect” question. Yes, the standard tech was that once the terminal was found, you then asked the PTS, “do you want to handle or disconnect from that person?” And LRH even says in the reference that they encourage people to handle and disconnection was only for a few cases. Now look at how DM has perverted that? Now disconnection is massive and stats on disconnection are straight up and vertical. And now disconnection is not saved for the truly psychotic “bad” people. Now it is used on good people for political reasons because these people were not politically correct. Now disconnection is used on good people to control them, and to crush them and to keep opposition or questioning out of the “pure” sheeple’s pen. It is astounding how Ron’s tech has been altered, twisted and squirrelled by the very people who shout “Squirrel!” at the in-tech people who are only trying to follow Ron’s writings. The overt doth speak loudly in protest.

      • Cindy,
        I remember back in the day when disconnection was verboten and the only option was to *handle*.
        Your daddy is a capo in an organized crime syndicate?
        No problem.
        Just write a nice good roads and fair weather letter telling him about all the new skills you’re learning in the GO
        Wow I can’t even list the situations we had to *handle* back then that the wooses back in the Church these days who run away like a bunch of scared lil’ girls from any one carrying a placard that says “Down with Scientology” or something would fold up like a bad hand in a poker game on.
        (Of course you get the occasional Oat Tee that does nothing but antagonize them as if they were reading “First Policy” while standing on their head or had a cranial rectal obstruction.)
        Yeah that’s really “confronting and shattering suppression”.
        (roll eyes)
        I remember sitting in a Coffee Shop with some guy who was so rabidly antagonistic to Scientology that foam was coming out of his mouth asking him what’s so right about the way he thought. You know like Ron says in you can be right and the guy totally ok with Scientology at the end of it.
        Now those sad sacks at the “Church” would probably declare both him and me for trying to handle him.
        My view is that by having everybody and their dog do the PTS/SP Course that they are trying to deflect the public’s attention from where the SPs actually are which inside the Church.

    • Hi Remoteviewed,
      Thank you very much for the above link! So glad to discover this body of work by Ken Urquhart, which – I only had a peek so far – appears to D/A “A piece of Blue Sky” – how refreshing! Another treasure trove of data on what went on back then!

  5. Tony, I could not agree with you more. I wrote an entire article on the dangers and thought-stopping associated with labeling. It prevents critical thinking and was one of the biggest layers of the “onion” I had to peel off when I was decompressing from Scientology. SP, PTS, middle-class PTS, disaffected, “he has enemy lines”, out-Int, etc. are all used in Scientology to prevent thinking and stop action. It’s is one of the most label-happy organizations anywhere. So good for you for shedding that whole idea and just being YOU. That’s what’s important anyway.
    If anyone’s interested, here is my article on this:

  6. Very clean statement of intent, Tony! And at the same time, you sure communicated a lot of heartfelt honesty with it too. If more truth be “told”, as the old adage says, we would have gotten where we’re going, a lot quicker! As it turns out, we sometimes kick ourselves, when we realize we have bought into someone else’s idea, of where we think we’re going, only to find we’ve been hoodwinked, and end up at square one.
    One guy who can straighten this ‘mystery’ out, and leave one with a profound certainty of one’s ultimate beingness –( check out his video )– “Adyashanti the gift of wanting” & tell me what you think Tony, will you?
    kind regards,

    • Thanks Calvin. I will check it out when I get a chance and get back to you. You were helpful to me in my decompressing process. Thanks.

  7. Well said Tony and your view points are interesting.
    The Truth is you can be do and have what ever game
    you choose to play.

    • Thanks Goldie.
      You made me think of something else I really feel strongly about…GAMES. I seem to recall some lecture where LRH says you should be able to create your own philosophy. I think it was in one of the basic lectures. Anyways, I started thinking about games and being involved in games, and almost developed a whole philosophy around this one idea. Sometimes you are a part of a game unknowingly and sometimes knowingly. It can be valuable to list all the games you are involved in and separate them out and then decide if you want to be in that game or not. Such as the republican/democrat game? I used to get involved in that in the USA but it’s really a scam. How about the “economy game”? It’s hard to get out of that one, but if you start to examine it and see who is running it you can get some major tone arm action. (I still love to use some Scientology terms, Lol)

    • One of the losses I experienced when I denounced formal religion and dependency on God, was my prayer when I was in trouble, “Please God. Help me!” For some unknown reason, just saying that out loud to the ethers made me feel better. It calmed me down somewhat.

    • Amen to that Tony. I was a Christian before Scientology and prior to leaving my best friend asked me WHO God was to me in my life. I went blank and realized I stopped praying, stopped believing in a higher power – I was God less and in hell. It was traumatizing to have this realization! I had abandoned my own identity. I did not know what happened!

      • BTW – Scientology staff members told me I could be a Christian – it was a “religion for all religions” but I never had any time to further my goals with Christianity because I was going up the Bridge and getting trained. I don’t think you can be anything but a Scientologist in the cult of Scientology so I believe this is a lie!

      • I am not a Christian either. But I hear what you are saying when you say the “church” promotes that you can still be a member of another religion. try doing yoga or meditating while on Solo Nots and see where that gets you! I do think that there are higher powers out there. I may not understand their nature yet but it does feel good when needed to ask them for help. When I was in the cult and on Solo I thought doing this was a lack of responsibility. Like I couldn’t confront it so I had to ask God for help. I always ended up dealing with whatever issue I needed to deal with but being in communication with what I perceived as God felt real good and nice.

  8. Fair winds and following seas, Tony. May you always man your own helm, and choose your own course in life.
    That said, do you also grant beingness to those (like me) who still call themselves Scientologists and adhere to that path?

    • Thanks Ronnie. I like the poet in you.
      Of course I always try to grant beingness. I am not a perfect being so I do fall short from time to time. I don’t care if someone wants to call themselves something like Christian, Scientologist or whatever. I also like to understand things so I may ask questions about things and then someone could take it as an inval. When I look at why I used a label for myself these were some of the answers I got and I just pass them on. I think I called myself a Scientologist at one point because of all the wins I got and I felt that I wanted others to have those wins too. I still want others to have those wins. I just don’t think that I need to call myself a Scientologist to get them to have those wins. Also I am very ashamed at what the once decent group of Scientology has become, a rabid, horrible cult and I don’t want to be associated with that in any way. This whole thing just got me thinking about why people feel the need to label themselves. It is an interesting topic. Some labels seem right. Like Man or Woman. Or painter if that is what you do for a living. I guess if you are a professional auditor it might make sense to me to call oneself a Scientologist if that is what he or she was using.
      When a person calls themselves a Christian it usually infers that they believe that Christ is their savior and they believe in Heaven and so forth. When a person calls themselves a Scientologist, what does it mean?? That they believe in past life, thetans and that auditing is good? I believe in all of that. But if it means that they believe in going off to target 2 after Earth is cleared and if it means they believe in everything LRH wrote, like the RPF, Sea Org being like a military styled organization, then I don’t agree with all of that so I don’t want to use the label Scientologist to me. I am truly interested in finding out WHY people like to use the title “Scientologist” and what it means to them. Maybe there could be some interesting answers that I haven’t thought of?

      • I am very ashamed at what the once decent group of Scientology has become, a rabid, horrible cult and I don’t want to be associated with that in any way. This whole thing just got me thinking about why people feel the need to label themselves.

        Tony, I disassociated myself from the group pretending to be (or represent) Scientologists. In my mind, a Scientologist is merely a person who uses the tech and wisdom of Scientology to better theirs and others lives in whatever way they can. Those people now running the church cannot lay claim to that simple distinction in any way, shape, or form. They have all of the tech and policy of Scientology at their fingertips, but choose to practice an altered, bastardized version of Scientology, that is 180 degrees out of sync with what’s written, and what was successfully practiced by many thousands for decades.

        Per the simple definition above, they’re NOT Scientologists, and I reject the notion that they own that label at all. The cultists who inhabit the buildings with the giant Scientology symbols on them, are nothing more than usurpers, in my mind. They’re posers, defrauders, usurpers, liars, con artists, and dumbed down sycophants of a demented little dictator. The good people who learned and used the tech of Scientology for so long, and who put their shoulders to the wheel to build that organization, are the ones who own the title: Scientologist.

        Yeah, I call myself a Scientologist, and always will, despite the fact that so many people today find it hard to differentiate between the cultists and the real thing.

      • Tony I believe labels are only bad due the significances we ourselves add to them. Once upon a time you were probly proud to be labeled a good scientologist. Your check book was open, you believed in the IAS PR solution for the 4th dynamic perhaps and went up the bridge too. It is only now in the aftermath of it all where you (us all too) are re-evaluating things again, including what it means to be this or that. Maybe a relook at the conditions perhaps? They deal with be, do and have. Just a thought.

        Philosophically you are here amoungst fellow seekers. Most of us avid blog readers ask themselves more often than not, who am I really, what is my purpose here? More now than ever the ex-scios when the win of making it out of the church fades, ask themselves can I find my big game again? I believe so. I enjoy every day on solo, its my best time every day! I hope more can do the same, but I have no need to reg them to do it. Im happy to assiciate with anyone who offers good philisophical subject matter. Most viewpoints have their unique beauty Ive found. I love this new online space for us to debate, vent at times while offering support. We are not alone. Its all good 🙂

      • Thanks for the answers you guys.
        I think as I experience things I then review and come to new conclusions. I don’t feel the need to call myself a Scientologist in order to use Scientology. Maybe some would think that is treasonous? I don’t. I think I paid for the use of my hard earned knowledge. As I have already said, I don’t care if others like and feel comfortable with that title, it’s an individual choice.

    • Hi Ronnie
      “I feel very ashamed at what the once decent group of Scientology has become…”
      I feel the same way.
      Your posts are always interesting, differentiating where differentiation is necessary and well written. I find them uplifting. Thank you.

      • Tony, thank you for your post.
        I agree with SheepleBane and with Ronnie Bell — the significances on the word “Scientologist” stem from our own ideas of how Scientology is now perceived. There is no question that Scientologists (who are actually sheeple that do every bidding of a corrupt church), are no representation of the body of work, or of the philosophy.
        Here in Australia the word has been so tainted that if you place the word Scientology on a resume then your chances of success at the job interview are going to be slim. Not because there is anything bad with Scientology — but because the C of S has managed to create such a bad PR for themselves here (and elsewhere) that it has become a mystery and therefore dangerous.
        I ignore all that and decided if I was a Scientologist based on whether or not I use and apply the body of work. And by that I mean clearing words, ARC/KRC, tone scale, basic administrative tech, management tech, assists, 3rd party tech, PTS/SP, etc. I know this stuff works — and it makes for a wonderful, happy and fulfilling life. Add to that auditor training, auditing others, and moving up the Grade Chart honestly and thoroughly, and it is a blast. Life could not be better.
        But here is what is even more interesting — I find that as I live my life as I feel good about, and around my own integrity, and around basic principles from the work, people just keep getting involved and there is a growing number of people (non-Scientologists) who want to be part of whatever I am doing, and want to find out how, and why life is so good.
        Further, when people ask about Scientology, I tell them to truth about the situation as I see it. Which is that there is a wonderful body of work, which improves conditions and life and makes for a great life, but there is a lunatic who has a heavy power thirst and has corrupted those that were trying to achieve the same (and they don’t even see it). I explain my own experiences, my own observations, and my own wins — and every single person says that they would like to know more about Scientology (NOT the church) and then we talk more. When you solve the mystery for people, the ARC goes through the roof and they want to talk more about the subject. They have no fixed ideas on Scientology — they have mysteries on what the hell this C of S is all about.
        LRH says in one of his references that you can get out of a sticky situation by asking yourself, what would Ron do? I asked myself that question and he would hold his position in space, would use and apply the tech, and would show people through his own activities, works and life that Scientology IS a good thing. In fact, not just a good thing, but a vital body of work — and through interest and theta produced, the cycle of real Scientology would start again.
        That is what is amazing about Scientology. It works. Does not matter what DM does, or Sea org members who are off the rails, or the group bank keyed in. Scientology can handle even them.
        Sorry for getting on a roll. I am proud that I am a Scientologist (and I am not doing some fricken New York Times full page ads or posters with a slick smile and crappy PR line). I am just bringing up my boys, helping others, and getting the show on the road by using and applying the tech across my dynamics.
        And there are lots of others who are doing the same.
        You are a good man Tony and I understand where you are coming from. From my view you use and apply tech in your life, and I don’t care if you call yourself a Scientologist, in Indi, an ex, or a serpentologist.
        My door is always open to you.

      • I have always had a lot of respect for you Lana.
        I am impressed on how you use the tech in life and create good. I believe every word you say and I think others deliver the tech too. It is easier for me to see why someone who has a practice and delivers auditing would call themselves a Scientologist. If you are applying something that was created by a person and he developed a name for that job then I guess it would be wrong to change it and attempt to say that you created his tech. Like a person who is an electrician saying he is a “plumber” but does electrical work. I could also see a professional auditor just calling themselves an auditor or councelor and crediting LRH for developing the tech.
        To me saying I am a Scientologist besides having all of the bad connotations that you mention, also has the inference that I am “all in” (poker term meaning fully committed to the current hand) with the “off to target 2″ idea and full OT stuff. I know that Scientology tech developed by LRH gets great results. I don’t think the full OT end phenomena has been reached by anyone so for me it is a limited result although a good one.
        To say the tech works, is somewhat of a generality. What does “works” mean? It can get great results, yes, I have had and experienced that. Does it do what LRH talks about in the PDC lectures…I would say no. So to that degree it doesn’t work and all the insanity that has occurred has largely occurred because people seem to think that the full OT stuff has occurred.
        Anyways, I think I get where you are coming from. I respect anyone who uses LRH tech in a positive way to help people and they can call themselves anything they wish.
        Thank you for the offer to me, you never know I might take you up on it someday. You are a person I feel that can be trusted.

  9. I called my self a Scientologist in 1974 when I decided and gave my support to that group which included the tech. In mid 2010 when I no longer found that group to be worthy of my support (Amy’s book) I still called myself a Scientologist. When I spoke about it I simply explained I did not agree with the group but I did agree with the tech. Many persons asked questions, no one ridged on me or it. Then mid 2012 after Karen’s son died I very suddenly realized I was still part of the problem. I was still to a degree supporting Scientology. I was UTR so I didn’t lose my family, my PC folder contents would not be on display etc = fear.
    From that moment forward I have openly used my own name and told my own stories. I don’t say I’m a Scientologist anymore because to a degree that is support of that group which I’m preferring to have minus support for

      • Yes, much Tony. Thank you! Some persons seem to have so many wins right off after leaving … for me it’s been like traveling on my belly through a mile long culvert. Thank goodness I can always hear happy voices in the distance:)

    • Cece, We haven’t chatted much. You may remember my aka “li’l bit of stuff” from Marty’s blog, some while back. I know you have been through ‘the culvert” and can see you are now mostly standing in “the sunshine”
      By way of healing, the beauty of ‘duplicating’ those all important Scn AXIOMS, actually hands us a beautiful choice. ie. Through their ‘truth’, we are assisted in being able to shift our viewpoint, sufficiently and thereby, ‘change our minds’, about almost anything we choose.
      Thus was born, the incredible auditing technology, and the results therefrom.
      At the end of the day, though, it is you, me and anyone else, that has to ‘do the work’ , ie looking, or viewing, which produces the miracle of ‘as-isness’ that can finally delete that pain and loss from our lives.
      ML, Calvin, Durban, South Africa.

    • Thank you Cece – this is the truth! The group is criminal and the name is ruined forever, in my opinion. I say – take out of what works for you and call it something else!
      According to the World view of Scientology – Its reputation is completely ruined and smashed into the History book due to the internet.
      Scientology has killed itself and the name as well.

  10. Nice one Tony. Call yourself whatever you like. I agree.
    I have appreciated all your many, many comments across the various blogs. Thanks.
    Truth Seeker, maybe that is Veritologist. Or even Veritian.
    Pan Determined Earthling!
    Like Classic Coke, maybe we have a case, for those who want to differentiate their status as Scientologists from the RCS brand, there is a Classic Scientologist.
    Just as you stated the case for no labels, here I go inventing them!

  11. Thanks for this though-provoking article. I’d agree with most of the comments above, that you’ve put into words what a lot of us have been thinking. It reminds me of the difference between continuing to use the words scientology (the subject) and scientologist (an identity). I’m more intersted than ever in the subject but don’t have to assume any identity except ‘me’.
    David Mayo once said that a person can know all about plumbing and do plumbing jobs without getting stuck in the identity of ‘A Plumber’. Plumbing is a technology that exists and can be used. The body of knowledge that is called scientology also exists objectively for anyone to study and use, whoever they are.
    There was always the question of whether Scientologist ™ meant a practising auditor or just anyone who agreed with the facts of the subject. By insisting that everyone become fully trained, signed-up, on-source Scientologists ™ the church tended to alienate the people who agreed with some or most of the subject but still had their own lives to live. Yes, the KSW attitude again: far from keeping scientology working, it came close to getting the whole subject lost. It would be far wiser to validate any person who can take and successfully apply any part of scientology tech (or plumbing tech, if that’s what a situation needs).
    But I think we have more right to the name of scientologists – if we choose it – than does Miscavige. At least we are still seeking truth, and interested in knowing how to know.

    • Great points David.
      To me it got to be more and more enforced onto me the higher I went up the Bridge. I guess I am exercising my own rights and doing my own “reach and withdrawl” from labels.
      I think your point about competence is excellent. I think it is MUCH more important that a person knows how to get a product than what they call themselves.

  12. Great post Tony and thank you for saying how you feel.
    I will not call myself a Scientologist because the “word” has become infected with slime, greed, abuse, lies, deceit and the smashing of the family.
    It no longer has any good meaning left to the outside world – do a survey for yourself.
    There was a few days when I was “proud” to be a Scientologist. That is when they were showing the Tom Cruise film in the Org over and over and over and over and over. Then some co-workers, friends and family members started talking about how crazy Tom Cruise was with his Scientology video. I went into hiding again!
    Honestly, I was ashamed to call myself a Scientologist when I was in. My experience was so negative regarding the reaction from the outside world I stopped telling anyone I was in. When I sold books – I was told by public people that Scientology is “creepy, disgusting, cult, crazy, money grubbing, mind controlling etc”. I stopped talking to outsiders about it – I got such horrible reactions to it. If I tried to disemm to friends and associates – they would treat me differently – sort of stay away from me. I could not take it anymore. I just had to stop disemminating Scientology to anyone.
    I would never admit it to any Scientologist that I felt ashamed of being in Scientology but did not know why. I shoved that thought way down in my mind and covered it with a blanket. I hid my books from friends and family, I lied to them about where I was going (when going to the Org) and I did not know why! I also did not know why people were not coming into the ORG.
    Finally, I had enough of the abuse, no services in exchange, constant crush regging, lies, deceit, extortion – caving people in and straight up and vertical SP Declares. So when I had just about my threshold of pain by being a “Scientologist” – I received Debbie Cook’s e-mail and everything finally made sense.
    Has anyone else here had a similar experience – the “silent” Scientologist?

    • The fact is that the cult has put the subject of Scientology in a lower condition. You mention Scientology and you get the reaction of the publics awareness of the condition the cult has created which is liability or lower. It makes much more sense to talk to people about ideas. Talk to people about past lives or about if they are spiritual beings and you will probably get some interesting discussions going. Admit and tell them about the cult and how awful they are. You can then tell them about ideas and auditing and send them to an independent thinking person for some auditing if they want some.
      I feel your pain.
      I always felt that the organization was handling things in the wrong ways. Mostly I felt if the “upper orgs” just stayed the hell away from the local Orgs that they would have done WAY better. Let the local Orgs keep all the income they produced. Why give any to “uplines” when they did nothing but interfere and make things worse and steal from the local Orgs.

    • Hi Idle Morgue, thanks for your story. As for me, it would be more accurate to say that I was ashamed for many of the actions performed by my “Scientology friends”, in particular certain staff and SO members as these were affecting my life negatively, and constantly having to hide, downplay, excuse or lie about them to protect the word “Scientology” in its original meaning, as I respected and loved it.

      • Yes Meja Deja – it is constant justification of “it was an individual”. I would say – true – but when does the Organization take responsibility?
        If money is being extorted out of people by keeping them up all night, ganging up on them 5 to 1, showing gloom and doom videos and being relentless until they give their last dime (not allowed to obtain their “service” until they pay their way out of Scientological enforced lower conditions) – only to be financially ruined! One guy recently told me he went to Flag and the MAA, Tamara Steineck (now married and don’t know spelling) brought up an overt from 10 years prior and said he was not to be trusted and needed to make a donation to TWTH campaign to get out of the condition of TREASON. He had already handled that overt and was fine with it for 10 years – then she tried to cave him in with it. He blew Flag and was Declared an SP!
        When I questioned staff about the crush regging and financial ruining of people – that person is blamed? “What did they do that for?” would be the canned response…or “I was not there – I don’t know anything about that” is another famous staff response when I questioned this stuff.
        I also would ask, “What Sea Org person gets up in the morning and decides to cave someone in financially? Well, the MAA’s at FLAG are experts at financial rape of the victims that are trapped in their convenient “routing form”. Why is the MAA declaring what condition someone is in and why are they demanding money to get out of that condition to go in session? This is EXTORTION and it is against the law! It is a felony!
        I would ask – WHO is ordering this regging that puts people at total effect. Borrowing money to the point of financial bankruptcy is not OK. I would get the blank stare and no response.
        This drove me crazy – why are my friends that I care about getting hurt? Their fault? NO – it IS the Organization and Scientology has no accountability to where the money is spent and NO ONE QUESTIONS this – how irresponsible of some of these veterans…regardless of how they have been shut up – they are not thinking for themselves. When they get caught – they blame the individual!
        I did my own private investigation of the few members in our Org – and 99% were bankrupt or losing or lost house to foreclosure. Now the staff members are getting sued by creditors after being forced to proceed up the Bridge – they were blamed as to why the Org was not expanded. Divorces are straight up and vertical too! Now the 30 year olds that have been running the Org (they were raised in Scientology and have no experience of the outside world, how to handle themselves, how to stay out of debt etc, are getting sued by creditors and getting divorced. Several couples in the past year!
        This is public information in the court system I went to the court house and I looked them all up! I was shocked and saddened by their condition – all they did was do what Command Intention told them to do. So many lives are devastated by this financial rape, which leads to emotional, mental and spiritual rape! It is traumatizing!
        Thanks for letting me vent. I hope Scientology gets sued for doing this to the trusting souls that are under its “spell”. We need to help them if we can by exposing the truth!

  13. Not to derail this thread from Tony but please pass the word around about FLAG DOWN 2014 in Clearwater, Florida. You are all invited to attend a conference from May 5-10, 2014. Please watch this inspiring video:

    Thanks South Africa! You are all lovely SP’s! I appreciate your courage to speak out and tell the truth. This is helping people not feel alone!

    You are “DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT” and we all love you here in the States!

    Come on over to Clearwater for this momentous event – FLAG DOWN 2014!!


    Hope to see you there!!

    • That’s cool. I guess everyone has to come up with their own purpose and “title” for what they are trying to accomplish. I like “truth seeker”. Labeling myself “Scientologist” seems very limiting to me for some reason. Like all of my truths have to come out of the basic books or something. I also see that so many Scientologist’s have such varying realities and as was said above the public doesn’t have a high regard for that title, why use it? I have never found any religion that has taught me more or given me better personal gain than Scientology. I will never forget that or say I didn’t get anything out of it. That would be a lie.
      I will use what I learned and liked in Scientology. I use electricity all the time and I don’t call myself an electrician. If someone asked me what is my religion, I would probably say that I don’t’ belong to any organized religion and I have my own hybrid religious beliefs that I learned from many things. I could probably create my own religion (probably have already) I just haven’t spent the time mocking it up. I feel very good about myself spiritually now, I’m in a good place. Part of what bugged me about the cult was the enforcement from them that I play their game instead of my own games. This really threw me off my own purposes. I have been on my own purposes now for several years and life is good.
      I have always enjoyed the people I met in Scientology, for the most part they were all pretty cool with the occasional asshole.

  14. Thanks Tony I really enjoyed your article and agree 100%. I have always been the type of person that hates being labeled and refused to follow the “life rule book” so I guess it has made me quite a loner. My experience is most people have a set of questions to size you up and place you in a box. What kind of car you drive, what job you have, are you buying or renting? It seems to me life in the western world is more about status. I prefer to be just me, listen to all views and make my own mind up, I don’t have to agree, I don’t have to have a label and I don’t have to believe in god or any other man that believes he has all the answers.

  15. Great post, Tony. I relate to it a lot.
    One of the greatest wins I had was when I decided that I was done with Scientology – I probably meant the church because I use Scientology every day in my life. I don’t just mean the admin tech but the insights I have so that I can understand what’s going on around me, understand the people I’m with, solve problems, know when I’m not feeling good about something and being able to analyse why and repair it, etc. The knowledge I’ve gained is invaluable and for this reason I’ll always acknowledge Scientology. It may be said that this information could have been gleaned elsewhere, too, however, it was LRH who put it into a body of work that was available to me on tap. I’m a different and better person for it.
    Having said all the above, the feeling of freedom that I experienced when I threw off the shackles of the church and/or calling myself a Scientologist, is indescribable. I’m free now to feel so much more and to know even more without confines. I don’t call myself a Scientology any more either. It does have a stigma and I no londer want the bother of defending it. I’ve done that for over two decades and it’s draining. Now, with all the truth coming out on the media about the cult, I lose credibility, anyway.
    In addition, it’s so nice to sit with a bunch of people, new or old friends, and not be thinking I’m apart from them, different from them. I’m able to have more respect for them, too. I used to feel very apart. I used to think I knew more about life than they did (was I even a bit superior about it?). I now respect my friends knowing that they’ve weathered life and come out on top in spite of not doing Scientology! They’ve done well!
    To my few Scientology friends left, I’ll always probably be a Scientologist. But only in that we know the same things.

    • hc, that is a very refreshing and amenable piece of writing. Thank you.
      Once again, it is apparent, that when the door of the ‘cage’ is left open, the bird will emerge and take to it’s native activity— namely, flying free!
      The cage ‘door’ in this case, was merely the inhibition of communication.
      And i would urge all the naysayers and critics of LRH, to note that, among some contradictions in his writings, there were nevertheless, two absolute gems, that he did pass on.
      * “The first step in handling anything, is gaining an ability to face it.”
      (both prelude statements in the ground-breaking “Communication Course”)
      Very hard to top that, wouldn’t you agree?
      kind regards,

    • There is an HCOB that says something to the effect that the item “me” is the only right item and should never be refused by the auditor.

  16. Great post, great responses. Ever since I made the statement, several years ago, that there are “truths” beyond the “truths” of Scientology I thought it inevitable to be judged an LRH wannabe by the majority who can not conceive of anyone, other than LRH, having an original and worthwhile insight into what existence is about. From what I would like to call my exploration of consciousness I have come across some fascinating facets of existence, which would have been denied me had I not been willing to look beyond the “truths” of Scientology. For what it is worth, one particular insight in particular made it easy to change my perspective – an understanding of the Mindset Factor. The only reality we live by – the only truth we respond to, is that provided by the prevailing mindset. Consequently the study of the Anatomy of Mindset has been a major interest of mine for many years.

    • Interesting Joe. I have much enjoyed and admired your postings. Not only for their eloquence, but also from your well traveled perspective.
      The Factors, by LRH, not only remain a constant and regular reference work for me personally, to reflect on and to compare prevailing assumptions and the grist of established philosophical standpoints.
      The idea of “a Viewpoint, extending points to view…(which are dimension points”)…seems to hold up under the most ‘rigorous’ of accepted questioning by those intent upon spiritual enlightenment.
      These are indeed exciting times for those of us seeking / achieving spiritual enlightenment.

    • Thanks Joe.
      That’s another thing, I got a ton of wisdom from LRH. I want to continue to be my own man and not feel that I have to follow all of these “policies” or I will have to answer to the MAA or anyone else who might question my judgment.
      LRH talked a lot about not needing a license to survive, yet in the cult, you need a license for anything. Not calling myself a Scientologist was another way for me to break away from fixed ideas and leaves me more mental room to maneuver.
      Thanks for all of your posts Joe. You are obviously a guy who can think for himself. That was Scientology’s motto wasn’t it?? “Think for Yourself”, they don’t seem to like it when you do…

  17. “What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
    By any other name would smell as sweet”
    (Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet)
    Excellent post Tony. A label does make a person who he is. And person who thinks he is his label is in a trap.
    Have always loved and appreciated your posts, Tony. Keep ‘em coming. Onward and upward!

    • Wendy, concise and clear cut a response as one could wish for.
      “Clear” in that you leave no room for uncertainty to prevail!
      “Cut” in that you utter no useless drivel, to muddy up your comm!
      How would we win the legal battle/s without the assistance of el sharpo ‘legal eagles’. such as you? (pardon the use of said ‘labels’ above.)
      Calvin, Durbs ( by die see, nogal )

  18. Tony – what a lovely topic you chose to share your thoughts on.
    My 2cents worth and without having to overstate the obvious – we live in a world where any information on any topic is available instantly. Therefore the ‘group compliance and group-think ignorance’ of active Scientologists who are still flowing support and power to DM in any which way – is not bliss.
    Since mid-July 2009, when I first Googled the words ‘International Justice Chief of the Church of Scientology’ – (in a guest to find this guy’s email address to forward the umpteenth KR directly to ‘him’ who supposedly occupies this ghost post) – I found much more than what I bargained for. I have always given active Scientologists and ‘the church’ the benefit of the doubt about the craziness that I experienced. My Google search brought more to my attention than what I bargained for. I found out I was not alone in all of this – as confirmed by hundreds and hundreds of testimonies from so called ‘SP’ees’.
    Despite SLICK PR – labels such as ‘Scientology, Scientologist, and ‘church’ of Scientology conjures up ‘the crazy’ in public perception! I read one public opinion poll where the church of Scientology ranked on a par with the criminal enterprise of the Mafia.
    I remember attesting to Clear and in a D of P interview with George Southworth (who wanted me on staff), and when I would not budge, he tried to run a ‘guilt trip’ by asking me to clear the words ‘true group member’ and ‘group member’. After clearing the words I said to him ‘George I WILL NEVER BE a true group member.’ Even then I associated this to mean an SO member, and my experience of them even then, conjuring up the ‘weird’ and ‘group think’ associated with the word ‘Scientologist.’
    To quote Karen De La Carriere – as she said it best:
    ‘Imagine a Mobster religion that Spies, stalks, imprisons, intimidates, threatens, kidnaps, holds against will, makes anonymous calls to Law enforcement, rapes finances in false claims, runs a business ruthlessly, (which) is run by a sociopath who beats and body slams his staff ~~ Imagine this Frankenstein *religion* pretending moral authority to declare who is sociopath and who isn’t?
    David Miscavige views himself as a Legend in his Own Mind. He commands Time, Space, Dimensions we know of and other Dimensions we know nothing of. The master of the spiritual future destiny of all Scientologists.’’
    View “International Event”. Here he declares the most amazing statistics of how Scientology is practically taking over the world. ‘’

    Living in a bubble of the make believe world of $cientology where truths are called lies and lies called truths…..
    It must surely be embarrassing for any self-respecting individual, and those who still call themselves ‘Scientologists’ to be lumped in with ‘the crazy’ and viewed as weak-willed people who participate in ruining lives and will tolerate the ruined lives of others, who participate in financial terrorist activities, who will see others loose their fortunes, and families in a ruthless global scam….

  19. I mean this as no disrespect for L Ron Hubbard as his body of work applied literally helped salvage the trajectory of this current life cycle for me. Hubbard was a truly gifted “labeler”. Perhaps better than most in his own way. If the purpose of Scientology is to help clarify a person’s sense of self as a spiritual being from the entanglements of the physical universe and subsequent confusions as they may relate to identity, I see no practical reason to apply labels that may further exacerbate the situation.

    • Interesting Doug.
      I think labels have their place. I do label some things mentally just to do an initial sort out or differentiation. But some truths take precedence over the labels such as Man is basically good. I still use that a lot and it has always been real to me.
      In some ways I feel a label is sort of a stepping stone towards understanding.

      • Hi Tony, I guess my feeling is that if labeling then opens the door to the social pressure of “now you are supposed to’s” then in the case of a technology like Scientology which is supposed to improve a persons self determinism, it can be self defeating. I recall Hubbard writing something to the effect that putting a datum where a thetan should be is a step back and away from where he was trying to go with the subject. Too many opportunities for others beings opinions to be inserted into the equation. “Well are you a GOOD Scientologists or not?” would require a consensus on the meaning of good otherwise off we go to the races. Nothing wrong with a label if it increases and improves differentiation, otherwise it’s a self defeating proposition.

  20. Loved this article Tony – you are spot on.
    If I have to settle on a label I also prefer truth seeker. Having been born into the CoS and having observed so many outpoints over the years, the earliest from the age of 3 or 4, I was always something of a ‘quiet rebel’ when it came to following the rules within the RCS. For example choosing to pursue the world of academia over joining staff or the SO despite being put under severe pressure to do the latter from my mid-teens onwards… Rollback, KRs, ethics handlings, invalidation, evaluation all part of the process. Still, I always had a deep yearning for spiritual knowledge and philosophy so of course I hung around and continued with my Scn studies alongside my other passions in life. I even joined staff eventually and worked the typical 60-80 hour weeks throughout what was the most hellish 2-and-a-half years of my life! All for the cause…
    Now that I’ve left the RCS I have experienced the most incredible return of self-confidence and surge in my own integrity; a return of my own identity after all those years of first resisting becoming a clone and then finally moulding myself into an ideal follower.
    Things are the clearest they’ve ever been now that I’ve seen the group for what it is – a system of mind control. I still love the subject but at least I can now differentiate between the subject and the group, with my own sense of self not only intact but stronger than ever.

    • That’s awesome Truthseeker!!
      It is really sick how a group of (probably well intentioned) people can become a festering group of greedy robots that will do ANYTHING for the group. There is a comment made by LRH in the KSW 1 reference of; It is the bank that says the group is everything and the individual is nothing. (paraphrased) Well, that my be about one of the only lines I liked from that policy that I was pressured to read over and over and over.

      • Tony, picking up the cue from Truthseeker, plus your and other comments, perhaps we might now, plausably and justifiably, call ourselves by a less ‘reactive’ label? (for convenience, of course!) Rehabilitated Truthseekers?

  21. Such a deep and insight-filled comment thread! Thanks to all who have shared their experiences and thoughts.
    When the question of religious affiliation comes up (as it does now and then in the U.S., though not so much here in New England), I just say, “Well, I was raised as an Episcopalian…” and that answer, including the trailing-off at the end, seems to satisfy nearly everyone. I think in our day and age, most educated people have experienced some kind of truth-seeking or doubt-confronting during their lives, which has taken us beyond the confines of a single well-defined tradition. Many of us are not quite sure what to call ourselves, or even whether it’s possible to put a name to it.
    As many commenters have noted, Scientology presents an additional quandary because the management of the corporate church has managed to create a total PR disaster, to the point that the word immediately conjures up all kinds of nasty associations. But in a weird way, something similar has happened with “Christian” in the U.S. I would hesitate to identify myself that way, for fear that I would be assumed to be a Bible-toting fundamentalist, an evolution-denier, a homophobe, an Obama-hater, and an extreme political conservative. And yet I have never personally felt an urge to disavow my childhood faith.
    So to me, this points up a divide between how we categorize ourselves publicly versus privately (or in more deep and personal discussions, as here). I don’t think it’s necessarily hypocritical to have two answers, a short one and a longer one. In the right sort of context, with truly interested people, I can pour out the longer one with all its twists and turns. More often than not, others will have comparable but probably quite different stories to tell. It’s one of the glories of our age, really, that we are free to be spiritual explorers, or not, as we choose.

  22. Newsflash – Thanks to the Goldberg’s who spoke out about disconnection – the Mecca of Scientology is getting hammered with the truth!

  23. I cant help but think of a possible future discussion that may take place if communication was done telepathically. Just think no more pesky words and labels to be disagreed with. Perhaps debates on how one projected that idea or concept telepathically to another was better or worse. Too much light, intention too forceful that time maybe? Picture stream too fuzzy that time? Point being its all comm. It is not just about how you send the communication its how one chooses to receive it too.
    In conclusion, my take is whatever method we are able to articulate ideas into, whether it be words, sign language or mental telepathy we have to have some agreements going as to what means what I guess. Pity the word Scientology has lost the gradeur it once held, maybe it can be reclaimed one day I hope. All it meant to me was hope. Hope that more could be understood while we safely looked into the great beyond..

    • Good point Sheeple bane.
      Words are used to communicate things to people and get across concepts. I like telepathy too.
      If you say you are a Scientologist to a person of the general public, what concept will they get? Hard to say, but probably not a good one. Seems self defeating. Why not say if you are an auditor that you are a counselor?? That would be easy to understand and then as you signed them up you could tell them that what you do is based on the works of LRH and handle things accordingly. Or give them a session first and then explain it so they understand better that the tech can get some good results? Or call yourself an auditor? A person can call themselves whatever they want as far as I’m concerned. I am just sharing my ideas on the subject.

      • Yeah Tony, funny thing is when I have given someone a session I didnt need to give them a backround history into LRH or the subject. It just worked! Could have told him it was black magic from the planet Zookie and he wouldnt have minded a sod! His migraine disapeared! Thats all he cared about really. So, I guess if you doing what you doing while doing it, no explanation would be needed. People would understand that you offer true help and look past you believing in past lives, 5th invader forces and wall of fires! Its that simple really. Aha so therein lies the crux of the whole matter in discussion..
        Symbols, labels etc allow another to attain answers to questions but are not a substitute for the answers or wisdom itself – there it is! I hope..haha!

  24. Great post Tony. I’m there with you on the label thing. I don’t call myself a “Scientologist” anymore. I like “truth Seeker” better.
    It was Tony’s and Marie Jo’s SP declare that was the final straw for me. I stood there outside of HCO reading the declare and saying to myself, “WTF? They (HCO) have got to be kidding!” My questions on how the declare got issued went unanswered. No one at the Org was willing to talk about it. So I went straight to the source – Tony and Marie Jo. They were the first people I talked to when I decided to leave the cult. They have been wonderful people for helping me get my head on straight. Thank you Tony and Marie Jo. I consider you good friends and having good friends makes the journey through life worthwhile.

    • Thanks Jeff. You have been a true friend also. We have been lucky to have a few people out of many that didn’t abandon us. You are one of them Jeff. Thanks for being a man of honor.

  25. Fantastic post Tony!!! And that includes all your comments to the people above. I happen to agree with YOUR point of view as expressed. At the same time I am happy to see Ronnie’s and all the other shades of viewpoints. As you are, I am now for the freedom to TRULY apply “personal integrity” in determining my own truths. And calling that anything I want. And happy to have others have the same freedom of thought as well.

  26. Bonjour Tony !
    It was great to read in good English what I should not dare write in that language!!! hahaha!!! I was feeling the same, being withholding that I was a Scientologist. But now I dare say it and also how the work of LRH is great and worthy. So many topics he didn’t develop are nevertheless of good help.
    I wish you all the best.

  27. Hi Tony,
    I enjoyed reading your point of view and think you are a true independent thinker and spirit!
    My best to you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s