RE: "When you look into the mirror/do you like what's looking' at you?"

This is consistent with speculation that Hunter has Borderline Personality Disorder. Just go back and read your posts about Story of My Life -- that all fits the DSM-IV. Hunter was sexually abused by her dad (the horse killer) in the book too, a background associated with borderlines. The theme of being "Lost in the Mirror" is a theme of borderlines because of identity issues -- there's even a book of this title [http://www.borderlinepersonalitytoday.com/main/moskovitz.htm].

The mirror theme also fits John Edwards' Narcissistic Personality Disorder, which goes hand-in-hand with a borderline partner like Hunter.

Ignore the new age Chopra b.s. for insight and instead read a little about real (rielle?) personality disorders.

From IMDB:
"For this top 250, only votes from regular voters are considered."

So, although this might artificially inflate the film's individual rating, it should not impact its standing in the top 250. In theory.

Wow, what a great piece of news. This is surely what we should be spending our time on: trivial details of the lives of people we don't know. Or maybe I should say non-details, because this article actually says nothing. But I'm glad it showed up on Google News, so I could read it instead of learning about what is happening in our world.

Ghost Bear says there is no basis for judging that the killer of the Jews is worse than the man who fights the killer of the Jews. He says, "You cannot tell me one is any worse than the other." Yet the danger of the Scientologists! You can tell me the Scientologist is worse, isn't it? The paradox!

Any plain person, not to mention any religious person, will see the true danger. The confusion and the brutality in thought. The lack of clarity.

Do you know Kams the practice of medicine has rules of the surgery? The physician follows the rules and has the good chance to save the patient. This is the true physician, this is the true medicine. A bad physician then disregards the rules of surgery. The patient is hurt. This physician is not a real physician then, this physician is not the true practice of medicine. The other physicians will reform this bad physician or will put an end of the bad practice.

Oh the many whom you neglect! Oh the sufferers whom Kams and Ghost Bear care for not! You must also protest every other church, and nation, organization, institution, company, city, family, and then everything else on the planet because your expert logic of "not everyone has had decent experiences, and that's why we protest" is childish and lacking. These words of Kams apply also to life itself. We will now protest the life because not everyone has had decent experiences!

Oh your neglect of the many others who need rescue from not having "decent experiences"! Oh the troubled many, numerous more than "hundreds", who could be helped by the wider protest!

Even despite the warnings of Kams to shut up, the protesters tell of why Scientology is the target when the diversity of other targets awaits the very special help! The hatred of religion. The simplistic contrast of the religion with the science. Children argue so in black and white. All religious people will see through this.

We will explore the great puzzle of Ghost Bear and Kams. Scientology keeps the secrets, except this one! Scientologists cannot view the anti-Scientology sites, except this one! Scientologists cannot talk to the anti-Scientologists, except to this one! Oh the great Ghost Bear and Kams have exposed Scientology! Now the great army of Scientology is breaking down my door to punish! Oh no. Kams and Ghost Bear are you next? Are they under the bed? Be mentally strong and they will not dare to come out!

Yes Kams, I am sure you want to talk about anything besides what is the motive of the protester, what is the mind of the protester. Many times you tried well enough to stop them from revealing! The enemies of knowledge and of religion with their savage talk, dangerous to all religions. You tried instead the fabrications, the propagandas. You want to say, "Look at the these secrets!" Oh the secrets that are kept locked by conspiracy but not locked well enough to keep Kams from discovering! You want to say, "I am the greater arguer!" Oh the thickness of the arguments with no savoir faire!

Ghost Bear has confident of his arguments. Ghost Bear's greatest argument is "I have won, I am the greater arguer!" The delicacy of the thought is lacking, Ghost Bear has the frustration. This will not soothe, but I wish not to agree to the conditions of the much stronger! Oh not to come to Ghost Bear's speed! Oh I am yet incapable!

The bent stick is not crucial to Catholic faith. The stick is called the staff of the shepherd and has meaning related to Roman Catholic religion, understood to greater degree by the Roman Catholic than by the arguer, the ignorant arguer not knowing better. There is much to what Ghost Bear agrees here.

Why I said pi is still not understood. I do not say pi is unreal. I say only that Ghost Bear's conditions of how things come to have the character of "proven" do not apply to pi. Ghost Bear said this himself many times without knowing it. This is what the thick of Ghost Bear misunderstands many times. Ghost Bear will struggle through the Wikipedia, and one day understand. Or maybe not understand. The important point is not whether pi is a mathematical law, this is obvious. The important point is how this law is seen, is known, is applied, not by the Ghost Bear's conditions of "proven knowlege".

The friendship will come more than the boasts. Ghost Bear and I together in a room will make a machine of cogwheels and pulleys. Ghost Bear will draw the map as the scientist. I am help to build only, not being capable to draw the map so well! The map marks down the motions of the cogwheels and pulleys to show them travel the way of pi. Ghost Bear will draw the map well according to his favorite formula of pi in the Wikipedia, an approximation, like all formulas of pi. Ghost Bear and I will build the cogwheels and pulleys to exist in the room. We possess now the machine, we operate the machine next. The machine moves like Ghost Bear drew. Except if the machine could be measured exactly, the machine would not perfectly match the formulas of Ghost Bear's map. We would not have possible to calculate pi from the motion of the machine either. The motion of the machine would not move according to the ideal of pi, isn' it? The machine of imperfect materials built by two imperfect bodies would not match to pi perfectly or even at all. Even if it could, no one would know this match because no one knows the precise nature of pi. A watcher of the machine might infer pi from these imperfect moves. The watcher deduces a pi that is in reality closer to pi than the motion of the machine! Has this watcher then created a better pi? Has pi existed always perfectly despite our imperfect machine and this watcher's imprecise thoughts? Yes pi exists! Pi is not seen, not known except by the imperfect formula and the imperfect sample, the contexts, which do not match precisely but hint well enough the perfection they can never express. This is why the thoughts of Ghost Bear of proven and unproven knowledge have not delicacy.

Scientology promotes the knowledge of self. The knowledge of self leads to the knowledge of relationships with others, this then brings the knowledge of the others as they are. Then the knowledge of the Universe, then the Creator of the Universe, in order so.

Ghost Bear has lost the humor. Cheer up! The killing of the Jews is not good, not bad, it was just what Hitler thought right and convinced the Nazi teenager to do. This is Ghost Bear's "logic". It is for Ghost Bear, not for me, to defend that the killing of the Jews is good inside Hitler's mind and bad inside the mind of the man who fought Hitler, simultaneously good and bad depending on Hitler or the man who fought Hitler, but unable to be judged by a true measure outside their minds. Ghost Bear proposes the opinion, this is for Ghost Bear to defend. I said before many times the people of religion will see what is Ghost Bear's mindset compared to mine. This is the direction Kams was trying to prevent the protesters' posts to go. Sorry Kams they went!

Ghost Bear falls in love with pi. Does Ghost Bear know that no one can figure pi, no one knows the complete pi, no one knows what pi is except by observing some imperfect context, which gives an approximation, never to be calculated or represented, only expressed by reference to other things? Ghost Bear says "mathematical law". Big words, isn't it? Pi = c / d. Does Ghost Bear know that different numbers of c and d will never make the same pi, or even any pi, only estimations of pi, known not in itself but only in an infinity of different approximations? A fine law. Was it Ghost Bear who said "knowledge does not have a frame of reference"? Then pi is not knowledge because pi only emerges in a frame of reference, and not even precisely as pi is proposed to be. Was it Ghost Bear who said "proven knowledge can be attributed across many different situations"? Then pi is not proven knowledge because no situation that tries to show pi or how pi is said to operate gives results identical to another. It matters none that all the situations are "close" to each other. "Close" is a subjective matter of degree, not a matter of fact. I show this to explain how wide are Ghost Bear's skeptical ideas of what is knowledge. Ghost Bear if you were honest you would admit that not even pi is knowledge according to your definitions.

Someone says to Ghost Bear, "I do not believe in God, now justify the Catholic religion by telling me why the bishop carries a bent stick!" Ghost Bear says, "If you do not believe in God, why does does it matter the bishop carries a bent stick?" This person answers, "You believe the bishop is a god, isn't that why the bishop carries a bent stick?" Ghost Bear says to himself, "This person has not ready to understand how little it is important to the Catholic religion that the bishop carries a bent stick." Ghost Bear then says to this person, "If you do not believe in God, convince me that there is no God, then you don't have to convince me that the bishop needs no bent stick." Then this person says, "Why are you lying about the bent stick? This is the most important fact of Roman Catholic religion, and all these Catholics lie to avoid the bent stick!" Ghost Bear knows this person does not have correct information.

Why I said pi was not understood again. I did not say that pi is unproven, I said that pi is not proven in the way you claim things have to be proven. What is pi? Either pi is a real thing that exists, or pi is just a deduction invented by human beings looking at round things in the nature like stones, planets, and so forth. The round things exist, pi is deduced by humans from the round things and does not exist else, only in human invention. I do not believe this but explain this line of thoughts to show where your way of thinking leads. All intellectual knowledge is like this from your point of view. The knowing of things like pi is a best guess about the way things are. Proven knowledge or unproven knowledge, the things not the knowing come first. This is your mindset, this is your agenda. The truly spiritual people will see this for what it is. The view of humanity as a bunch of cells, etc, thought of after the fact by human fantasy as spiritual beings.

In a room with paper and pencils, I ask you to show me pi, you draw a circle, you write 22/7, you explain irrational numbers, and so on. I say no pi is not proven knowledge because you never showed me the real pi, only approximate representations. You only showed me your badly drawn circle, an approximate equation, a theoretical idea, but you showed no pi. You showed me a context, and the context does not even represent pi perfectly. Does it make pi unreal? Pi is real. The question of proven or unproven as you offer it is irrelevant. You cannot show me pi except within a deficient context, yet pi is real, and pi is there existing even without the context.

Scientology promotes the spiritual reality of human beings, all religions do the same, in different ways yes. A doubter of religion tells to me, "Show me the spiritual nature of a human, or else I cannot know for certain the spiritual side exists." Do I answer to them, "See that person does good, has morals, this proves the spiritual being"? No it is inadequate, this person does bad too, has no morals at times. The other person says more, "Show me the spiritual nature of this being dammit!" Unfortunately for me who has to answer this person, the life of the person in the physical body is a context, a deficient context, it will never show perfectly the spiritual being just like the fraction you wrote will never show pi perfectly. Pi exists despite your circle's imperfection. The spiritual being exits despite the body's imperfection. Pi while always existing will never actually be seen by itself on this planet. The spiritual being while always existing will never be seen by itself either.

An infant does not know bigotry is wrong, so bigotry is not right or wrong until the infant decides whether it is? An infant does not know the earth is round, so the earth is not flat or round until the infant says it is? The fact does not depend on the infant, still Ghost Bear says, "You cannot prove one person's morals are more correct then anothers. It's impossible as they are subjective." Good, the ideas of the Nazis were just as right as the ideas of those who fought the Nazis. You cannot prove the gas chamber man was less correct than the man who fought him. The Jews should not be exterminated. According to your way, this "opinion" of the Jews is "unproven knowledge," this is impossibly subjective morality, just as correct one way or the other. Here we arrive. Go to the final end of your way of thought and you come to the impossibility of spiritual knowledge. I said times before that your agenda is bigger than Scientology, you are a skeptic of spirituality and of morality, even of knowledge in general, scientific or not. If you do not see this, it is not because you are not saying it, only because you do not understand what you are saying. Any truly spiritual person will see this, not just Scientologists. Then next time they hear Scientologists saying how Scientology is persecuted for being spiritual or the next time they hear Scientologists offering that the big-scale ideas of Scientology are the important part of Scientology, they will know why Scientology is protested against by the skeptics of knowledge. They will see then who are their enemies and who are their friends to keep religion free and not persecuted.

I come down. There is no reason arguing Scientology in particular when the division is so wide between what is subjective and what is objective, what can be considered with certainty to exist, and what can only be called "unproven" knowledge. You are on the side that denies not allows the certainty of spiritual knowledge. As you can see, this is the grounds of Scientology's fight because all else depends on it.

Ghost Bear why I said pi was not understood. Pi is unable to be represented. Pi is true knowledge. Pi is true knowledge that cannot be shown except in context. The context will always be approximate, for example I draw a crude circle on paper, you say 22/7, and so on. The context will always be approximate or at best incomplete, still pi will always be more true and more proven then the context! Me and you are in a room with paper and pencils. I tell you to show me pi, you draw a circle, you write 22/7, etc. I say no pi is not proven knowledge because you never showed me the real pi, only approximate representations. You say no the bad circle I drew is the way to show pi, pi was not proven until I drew the circle! I say the circle is so bad that if anything it disproves pi! Show me pi dammit! Pi is not proven knowledge in the way you say things have to be proven. All this shows your so called unproven knowledge is sometimes more real than the examples. The context is deficient and actually false, what cannot be shown completely is full and true. Does the context stop anywhere Ghost Bear? You use condoms, good for you. So and so is Roman Catholic and says there is no God. Is it possible? Is anything there to stop So And So from really conforming to Roman Catholic no matter what So And So says?

You killed this robber who broke into your house. So then the killing is not a bad thing even if you are not a bad person for doing the killing? No the context does not change the bad of the killing even if the killed person is the robber and you are innocent of the killing. The killing is still a bad thing. Because the bad thing is the robber is killed and dead, the good thing is you protected yourself. Still
the killing is a bad thing even in the context of you protected yourself.

All spiritual people will take note here and see what is Ghost Bear's meaning compared to mine.

What is Scientology? Scientologists approve the spiritual side of human beings. What is life? It happens that the episodes of life are less proven than the spiritual being and the spiritual knowledge of things. This is Scientology. Scientology helps people to truly find themselves, to have clear understanding, and to gain freedom.

Ghost Bear I am glad you are amused. You seem frustrated too, a strange combination. As you no doubt know from university or maybe 9th grade math, 22/7 is not even a representation of pi, at best it is an approximation. Pi requires context more than any of those other things you name because pi does not exist as a thing and there are not even any things that exist to show pi to perfection.

I find humor in you as well. That you are a Roman Catholic and do not believe there is a moral law that can be known apart from context! Also that Roman Catholics believe in divinely given knowledge don't they, so how do put knowledge into just two categories, proven and unproven? Any truly religious person should not look past your ideas. Your ideas are a real danger to religion. You may not even know this but in your way the situation creates the morals. Your ideas say the morals cannot really be valid first and then be applied to situations. The morals get validity only when they show up in a life context. Whether you like it or not the life context could not be judged by the morals unless the person judging had knowledge of the morals first. If the person had knowledge of the morals first but could not trust this knowledge until a situation came up, then the person would never have valid grounds for judgment. This is truly dangerous, it is an agenda, and goes against all religions.

Someone who has grown up with bigotry does not view it as evil. Is bigotry not evil then? Does this person's view of bigotry change the truth that bigotry is evil? Is evil really found this way? Is the statement "genocide is evil" a dangerous statement because it has no context? A Nazi does not view the killing of Jews as evil. Is the gas chamber good whenever the Nazi operator calls it good and evil whenever the Jews inside call it evil? Or is it evil no matter what the Nazi or the Jews for that matter say? Do not tell me "context." If you understand the number pi, you understand this knowledge in context. You could not actually show me the number pi if you wanted to, you could only show me its application.

Let's get to the bottom of your ideas Ghost Bear. They go past arguing Scientology. Your argument is not just with Scientology, like Kams and the others you have a bigger agenda. Different maybe, but still bigger than Scientology. Scientology acknowledges the spirituality in existence. Your argument against this side of things is not an argument against just Scientology but against all religion and philosophy. Like Kams who distrusts all types of institutions in general and so distrusts the Church of Scientology too, you deny spiritual knowledge generally and so deny Scientology specifically. To be fair you should say you are a skeptic of all religion since they all claim to have knowledge past your little definition of knowledge. You can get to the point faster this way. If you do not agree spirituality is a kind of knowledge generally, there is no point to arguing Scientology specifically because the first disagreement is already a stumbling block.

Scientology promotes a knowledge of life. Pap should not have beaten Huck. Jim should not have been made into a slave. Prove it in a scientific journal. Slavery is wrong. This is knowledge isn't it? Show a scientific journal that proves it or else all knowledge is not proved in the way you want to say it is. Scientology is not needed for these ideas, just knowledge. Your protest of Scientology might mess up your ideas of knowledge. If you do not know whether you love your child or your parents then maybe you also do not know what knowledge is. Maybe though you do know that you love your child or your parents. Like you said, how would you apply this knowledge?! I am sure you do not live by the idea of knowledge you are using to protest against Scientology.

Are the principles important? Maybe a math teacher yells at a student who is not able to do calculus. Maybe a math teacher tries to teach calculus to a student who does not know addition. Does this teacher's mistake mean the principle is wrong that calculus should not be taught to a student who does not know arithmetic? You talked up the principles. They are important more than any one person. They stay no matter what any one person does to break them. Is this true? Is this knowledge? Is this proved in the scientific journals?

Scientology accepts that humans are spiritual beings. In Scientology people progress as spiritual beings and gain knowledge of their true existence. A math teacher starts with basics, 1+1=2. A math student who does not know 1+1=2 is not going to understand a2+b2=c2. A math student whose teacher says solve a2+b2=c2 is not going to want to do any more math that's for sure! A math student whose teacher says you are good at addition and later I will show you multiplication is going to work harder at addition because of the knowledge of multiplication promised. What is knowledge? For something to be truly proven the majority of people do not have to agree with it. For something to be understood as fact a person does have to agree with it because only a person can understand something but a person does not make it a fact by understanding and agreeing with it. Let's say Huck had a friend and this is proven on page XXX when he met so and so. Let's say Huck healed a toothache with plants and it is not proven that Huck's plants heal toothaches. These are your two examples ok. But now let's say Pap should not have beaten Huck. This is real knowledge but it is not proven in the way you want things to be. It is knowledge. It is not dangerous to use just because it is not to be proven in the way you say things have to be proven in order to equal knowledge. I am sure you do not apply your principles of "not proven" to everything.

Ghost Bear, I am ok with saying Dianetics is available in as many libraries as The Cat in the Hat. Two hard to find books! If I guessed at things I would guess you live in California but I don't know. Even if you do, I am not going to hide in your closet and spy on you for the Church of Scientology so don't worry!

I am sure your ideas about what is proven are not the way to define all knowledge. You said knowledge is only good when it is proven. When something is not proven it is not good. Like me you and the other people may have read Huckleberry Finn in school. This is knowledge. This is not PROVEN. This is still good though. I am sure you do not really believe what you wrote about knowledge. You made a point that you would not make about everything, only Scientology and maybe like Kams the Government, Roman Catholics, and Corporations! Don't worry I don't drink Starbucks either.

Scientology puts people in touch with the past experiences of their existence. In Scientology people discover knowledge about themselves. Scientologists do not tell anyone what to think. The knowledge of yourself cannot be told to you by anyone else. You have gotten knowledge from scientific journals and your university education. Very important knowledge I am sure. Like it or not you have also found knowledge of other things not in scientific journals. If you have ever truly known anything about yourself, you already have something in common with Scientology and the type of knowledge Scientology brings to people. Most people will say this type of knowledge is real even if it will never be written about in the scientific journals.

Scientologists do not hide or live cloistered lives. The technology of Scientology is not hidden. Scientology provides the tools for everyday living. People join the Church of Scientology freely. People leave the Church of Scientology freely. People are free not to join the Church of Scientology. People who join and stay are better off than people who leave or never join. The Church of Scientology does not make people's decisions for them. Anyone who does not agree with the Church of Scientology is able not to join or to leave. More than likely they do not have true knowledge of the Church of Scientology or they would not leave. Anyone who joins and stays would not be a person who thinks the Church of Scientology is corrupt!

Yes I can see ad hominem arguments. Guyfawkes says "the cult sock puppets are giving their usual show." Guyfawkes says LRH has "brainwashed Scientology followers as props." AuraraBG says LRH "was quite clearly suffering from mental health problems." Stivbator says LRH "was sick, evil, drug adicted - and you're his follower." The comments are not doing anything except saying how bad was LRH and other Scientologists. Then the comments are not arguing anything except how more knowledge is not a good thing. They know the Church of Scientology enough already without even reading Dianetics!

For the libraries Wordcat.org includes only some libraries not all. Anyway all your percent figuring also works for The Cat in the Hat doesn't it? Dianetics shows as many copies as The Cat in the Hat in Worldcat.org, so those two are rare books I guess!

Your group has spelled out your true thoughts in your posts. Yes I am sure you are not concerned with what Danetics is about and thanks for saying it yourself. For you the real knowledge is always hidden. "They" are trying to keep secrets from you. Secrets that you think everyone has got to know and only you can help them find out! Government hides this knowledge. Corporations hide it. The Catholics hide it. The Church of Scientology hides it. You have somehow figured out the biggest secret and you are on a mission to let everyone know! The secret is that real knowledge is always hidden through a big conspiracy but you have found it out! Yes admit it protesters. Maybe you would have even more knowledge if you went and read the books of L Ron Hubbard? Would that hurt you? You would know more not less about the Scientology you protest. No you want to keep your heads in the sand and stay in your small world where what is real is hidden and not available from places as simple as a library! For you the alternative source is the true one!

Scientology promotes the freedom of the individual. The Church of Scientology does not hide and offers the technology of Scientology to people. The technology helps explore the past in people's existence in order to free them from anything that might cloud their judgment in the present time. L Ron Hubbard discovered a simple but true idea. As you can see Scientologists do not put all their trust into the Church of Scientology like you say. Scientologists learn to put trust in themselves. This is the goal of Scientology.

Scientology helps people understand the painful experiences they may have had in their existence. People in Scientology learn how to handle the everyday experiences of life without reacting based on false feelings and bad information. They are thinking clearly.

It is not thinking clearly to say that any authority should not be trusted just because. Yes I see you mention Roman Catholics and the White House too. You are the types who think everyone is out to get you and is hiding the facts. Facts that only you know and have to get out there for everyone's protection! It is not thinking clearly to confuse truth and make believe. Conspiracy theorists like to think they are so important that they have the real knowledge and the average person does not. I am sure the critics of Scientology know less about what Scientology sources have to say than Scientologists know about what the critics have to say. Scientologists do not live cloistered lives. They are out in the world and see criticism all the time. Have you ever read a book by L Ron Hubbard? How much of what you know comes from the Church of Scientology and how much comes from critics and your own imagination?

Scientology promotes freedom. Your point about the Catholic Church tells alot. Yes like Scientologists Catholics might understand what it is when the whole group gets attacked for the bad actions of a tiny few who do not even follow the ethics of the church and can't be considered members of good standing. Christians might remember the lies and persecutions in Roman times when Christianity was a new religion too. Scientologists do not jump on board with the prejudiced criticizers who pick and choose their points in order to tell lies. Understanding, communication, and freedom are values of Scientology, and not attacking other groups out of prejudice alone by twisting the facts. Scientologists will not ignore unfair criticism either though because the truth and reality are important in Scientology. If you are set to protest Scientology, I am sure you will even if your imagination runs wild and tells you that the Scientologists are coming to camp out under your bed and spy on you if they find you out. I am sure the average person out there will understand where you are coming from when you explain all these conspiracy theories about the Church of Scientology.

Scientology is the study of knowledge. It helps people gain more independence and control in their lives. Scientology teaches spiritual enlightenment. Anyone who wants to know their spiritual being as an individual can already identify with the goals of Scientology. The Church of Scientology and the books of L Ron Hubbard are a good source on Scientology. Go to the library for an afternoon and find L Ron Hubbbard's Dianetics. I am sure you will come away with a better idea of Scientology.

Yes I am sure the critics of Scientology would like Scientologists to join in the criticism. Why not look at the criticism then? Kams says that even though Scientologists are not rapists, you should worry about being raped by a Scientologist anyway. Ok, that makes sense? Stivbator says money that church memebers think is supposed to go to send LRH books to libraries gets wasted because libraries throw out or sell the books for pennies and that's why it is "not factual" that you can read LRH books in libraries. Huh? I'm sorry that is just crazy talk. AuroraGB says Scientology blackmails IRS officials. Ok, which officials then? Then AuroraGB goes on defending the psychiatric industry which is known to be full of abuses and crimes. I am sure the critics of Scientology are the types who love conspiracy theories and think novels like the DaVinci Code or movies like JFK are real history. What a reasonable bunch of people to listen to! Have a storeroom of canned goods for when the revolution comes, huh guys?

Scientology offers people the technology to be more truly themselves, to have better relationships, and to achieve greater freedom. L Ron Hubbard was able to give the planet a science of the mind that was not entirely new but was expanded with his new discoveries and finalized by him, a great achievement. Look for yourselves at who is brainwashed around here and who makes sense. Who is open to engage with the other and who is not open?

Scientology is a technology of living that helps people on this planet understand themselves, their aspirations, and their relationship to others and to the Universe. The discoveries of L Ron Hubbard are technical tools for better living. No reasonable being would protest against this. I am sure only judgmental people with bad information would. Anyone who really wants to know about Scientology should visit a church center or read the books of L Ron Hubbard. Yes, the books are in your local library. I first found them there after all. What people do after these first steps is up to them, not up to the Church of Scientology! Some people will never go into Scientology any more than looking into a Dianetics book. Some people will decide to take Dianetics to heart and follow L Ron Hubbard's guide to a better life. Some will even join the Church of Scientology and support it!

Who told you Scientologists "are not allowed" to hear criticism of Scientology? Scientologists do not live cloistered lives. Any Scientologist who has never heard criticism of Scientology must be living under a rock somewhere! Scientology ethics stop any Scientologist from putting thoughts and words into someone else's head. Scientology is about learning your individual history and becoming independent. I'm sure anyone who reads these posts will be able to tell who is thinking for themselves and who is just repeating conspiracy theories and wild hearsay.

According to Worldcat.org, Dianetics alone, not even counting LRH's many other books, is available in 2853 copies in libraries around the USA. I guess these are the precious few that didn't "get tossed or sold for pennies" like all those others you know about! The same site shows The Cat in the Hat has 3327 copies in libraries around the USA. Does that mean there is a big librarian conspiracy to sell Dr. Suess' books for pennies too? Anyone reading these posts can see who has the facts and who is spewing stuff off the top of their head!

Scientology is about dealing with life situations, having better relationships, and living a productive life. People on the internet will spit out all kinds of rumors and innuendo. Anyone who truly wants to know about Scientology can visit a Scientology Church or read the books of L Ron Hubbard. Check out a copy of Dianetics from the library, and you don't have to worry about spending your money!

Is psychiatry the answer to problems of the mind? Psychiatric drugs do subdue a person, sure. These drugs that no one even knows the effects of take away people's ability to understand themselves. They push the problem under the cover of a drug-induced stupor, brought about by the trial and error process of prescribing many different drugs if one doesn't "work"! This masks the problem, but the problem is still there, isn't it? Scientology promotes clarifying and understanding problems, as opposed to covering them up with drugs.

I wonder who is thinking for themselves? Scientology is against brainwashing. Scientologists never try to put words into anyone's mouth. This actually goes against the ethical principals of Scientology. Scientology teaches individuals to solve their own problems for themselves, so there is no brainwashing in Scientology!

The Scientology religion is about freedom. Its technology helps people handle the things that prevent them from truly being themselves. Scientology enables the individual's journey to freedom. Most of this journey is unique for each person because everyone has a unique history and unique experiences. As you can see, Scientology is opposed to anything like "brainwashing" despite what uninformed critics say. Anyone who is seeking freedom, better relationships, and a healthy life is probably already using some Scientology practices. L Ron Hubbard made a method for the search that humans on this planet have been setting out on for ages. LRH made great discoveries about this search, and Scientology wants to bring these discoveries to everyone.

Do you harbor the same objections to psychiatry and psychology as you do to Scientology? Probably not, despite psychiatry and psychology being the source of many horrors like the Holocaust. Merk and the other big pharmaceutical companies do more to harm than your imagination can ever conjure about Scientology's so-called evils, but do you protest the true violence of the psychiatric industry? I didn't think so.

Scientologists do not live cloistered lives. They do not hide under the cover of a "cult" of anonymity as others might do. The missionaries of Scientology are out in the world, offering help to other Scientologists and to non-Scientologists alike. Scientologists want to discover more about themselves and to share their discoveries about the human mind with others. Anyone who also has this desire is already on the way to being a Scientologist.

Those who know about Scientology only through listening to hearsay on the internet cannot be blamed for being misinformed, but anyone who really wants to know about Scientology should read the books of LRH or visit a local Church. By doing this, one will see that L Ron Hubbard, although he was in many ways a man like any other, was perhaps braver than any other adventurer in human history. With no regard for his own life, L Ron Hubbard explored an uncharted territory and emerged from the danger to bring a comprehensive technology of the mind to the human race. Scientology exists to share this new science with everyone on the planet.

L Ron Hubbard endured trials and dangers, almost costing his life, to give the world the gift of a scientific technology of the mind. This technology provides the solutions for people to discover the true cause of their fears and insecurities, to find their real selves, to improve relationships, and to live healthy lives. What's there to protest? Protesting Scientology is like protesting math or physics. The protest may go on, but the facts that LRH brought to us will always remain real.

local paper's story - the ship is definitely sealed up

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=287791

WILLEMSTAD: During refurbishing and reparatory work, which involved removing the ceiling and panelling on cruise ship Freewinds, blue asbestos was released and ended up in the ventilation system.
Freewinds' captain did not report this when it's own personnel were working on the ship on the Mathey warf in Otrobanda. The Curacao Drydock Company (CDM), where the ship was taken for reparatory work on the hull, heard from the surveyor that there may be asbestos on the ship. The captain acknowledged the incident and said that after the incident Freewinds had some investigation done. Keeping the incident quiet became more noticeable when it turned out that the 40-year-old ship contatined blue asbestos.
The question is whether or not the blue asbestos dust, which can cause cancer, can be removed from the ship. The CDM has stopped all work on the ship. The ship was sealed and isolated and experts will investigate and measure the presence of asbestos dust in the hull and surrounding areas. Commissioners Eugene Rhuggenaath (Economic Affairs) and Humphrey Davelaar (Public Health) said on Friday.
CDM interim director Frank Esser, deputy head of the Department of Labour Affairs Christiene van der Biezen were accompanied by two inspectors and head of the health Department Tico Ras. Samples taken from the panelling last week by inspectors that were sent to the Netherlands showed that they contained significant amounts of blue asbestos. After an extraordinary meeting, the Executive Council decided to inform the public in general about the incident to avoid remours and panic.
The CDM personnel were also informed via the media because it was impossible to gather all the workers Friday evening to personally give them the information.

lol i still have mine [up in the attic]

theve been made illegal now [uk] xD

http://picasaweb.google.com/michelle.caruso/China02

Looks like they went on a "date" to China. And it doesn't look like she cares about keeping it a secret.

This is not about right and left. It is fundamentally about accuracy and truth. The main stream media, including Newsweek, is absolutely incapable of reporting the complete fact and truth.

Go back and read a newspaper from the early 1900's - you will see names, places, event, descriptions - factually reported. Today, the so-called journalists report their opinion as if fact.

Note the number of headlines that end in a question mark. A fact does not end in a question mark.

The current crop of news readers and reporters seem to want to inject themselves into each story. Personally I want the facts and I do not care to hear the writer's opinion. That is what the editorial pages are all about. Good riddance.

PS: It just so happens that these media people are mostly liberals and leftists.

Why are there so many fanboi's of Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich on Digg?