RVY dog, update (and the scn mind)
[19 Feb 1998]

They can only see what they believe. They believe that if they do X, then Y will happen. Anti-Y happens. This could mean that X was not done or that "the tech" doesn't work. This can't be so they negate the fact and it didn't happen.

Main Index A.R.S. Web Summary Ex-Scientologists Speak

From: Robert Vaughn Young <writer@eskimo.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: RVY dog, update (and the scn mind)
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 16:02:34 -0800
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
Lines: 133
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.980219152209.12754g-100000@eskimo.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eskimo.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Originator: writer@eskimo.com
Xref: spln alt.religion.scientology:264356

In a previous article, jbwebb@idt.net (jbwebb) says:

>Jim Byrd wrote:
>> In article <34DF361C.106F@idt.net>, jbwebb says...
>> >I would never believe that Young intentionally hurt his dog, but RVY,
>> >have you ever considered that your dog was hit by a car accidently?

Yes and the dog was examined for that. Except for a tiny abrasion on the
face, there were no abrasions on the rest of the body.

>> >And the perp is either a scared teenager or an embarrassed adult who
>> >doesn't want to admit he hit your dog. I find it hard to believe that
>> >COS would hurt your dog given the "climate" between you two.

Then - if you will pardon my directness - you need to learn more about
RTC/Dept 20, where all of this is directed. Hubbard's wife and 10 Dept 20
personnel went to jail for a lot less than the evidenced showed, e.g.,
fake hit runs, fake mail bomb threats and threats on lives of White House
aides, etc.

>> >I could very well be wrong, but I would entertain the possibility it was
>> >a car.
>> I think RVY answered this on in another post; the dog was found 4 miles away,
>> with severe injuries to its mouth and teeth.
Additional injuries have since been found. He came out of surgery
yesterday for serious abcessing in the back, covering an area about 6 x 12
inches. He has four drain tubes and other stitching to get to the abcess.

No direct/hard injury was found to the skin to explain the massive abcess.
Many things can cause abcessing (such as an insect bite) but this was
quite deep, indicating a blow to the body by a hard, abrasive instrument
such as a car. As there was no abrasions, if it was frp, a blow it was
"soft," from an instrument that would leave no such marks, e.g., fist,
shoe, rubber hose, but not likelyi to be an automobile.

>I didn't see the post you refer to, but what does being 4 miles away
>have to do with being hit by a car?

Nothing. The 4 miles north was important as he could not have run that
distance in that time, given the location etc.

> Maybe the dog got in a fight with a
>wild animal.

No bite marks.

>I don't know, it seems rather incredulous that COS would
>hurt the dog.

You need to read up on the history of this organization to reach a new
level of "incredulous."

>How would someone hurt a dog's teeth?

Simple. With a mallet/stick/hose/boots.

>Seems like the
>perp would be badly bitten, requiring stitches. Could be that someone
>hit the dog with a baseball bat, but seems like the dog would have taken
>off before being beaten.
Not if the dog was captured with a loop, such as those used by animal
control people for wild animals, and then someone else beat or kicked the
dog when it was being held, not able to defend itself.

What is more incredulous is that there are people who think that everyone
would be cowed or frightened, if that was done to them. These people have
no idea that often causes exactly the opposite. But, you see, these people
can't see that it causes the opposite because - are you aready for this? -
because it can't happen.

Are you ready for this insight into the mind of a true Scientologist?

What I just said was that they don't see it because it can't be happening.
You know that adage, "Seeing is believing"? Well, this is, "Believing is
seeing." They can only see what they believe. They believe that if they do
X, then Y will happen. Anti-Y happens. This could mean that X was not done
or that "the tech" doesn't work. This can't be so they negate the fact and
it didn't happen.

Are you following this?

They unleash an attack on X believing that this will make X smaller and
make him go away. But X doesn't go away but gets bigger. Well, that can't
happen. X can't be bigger so it must be an illusion, it has to be an
illusion. The tech says X will be smaller so X is smaller. Now, this
needs to be done again to make him finally go away. (It is okay to fudge
on this one. Insider talk: It is TR3/4.)

Example: They attack Bob Minton and he ends up with an article in the NY
Times about how they attack people. Does anyone at the RTC/Dept 20 level
see this as a major loss, or what peoplle on ARS called "Operation
Footbullet"? Doesn't ANYONE in there see that what they are causing is the
exact oppostie?

Nope. Because there is another explanation for it. The person only
seems bigger or better off. They are not. [Because if they were then the
tech is a lie and what you are doing is a lie and that's not okay to think
so the tech is true and this person is not bigger.] It's an illusion. All
we need is just one more piece of information [equivalent to one more
incident on the chain or one more item on the list - remember those? and
we'll have the Who and the whole house of cards will fall because that is
what LRH sez what will happen.

This is not unque to Scientology. Hubbard was just better at it and the
methods are codified and studied and practiced.

Look, we've seen people lead off to meet the End of the World and the
fatal date comes and nothing happnes and the guru/leader says, oh, I got
it now because... And there is a percentage who are prone to say, Oh,
yes, great leader, what's the new date? They never see there is a flaw
because that would lead to other things to see and know.

That's all you see with a True Scientologist and why they continue to get
it wrong and have no cognizance or awareness.

That's why they can't imagine what they have done with Stacy and me.

Robert Vaughn Young * The most potent weapon of the oppressor is *
be376@scn.org * the mind of the oppressed. -- Steve Biko *

Robert Vaughn Young * The most potent weapon of the oppressor is *
writer@eskimo.com * the mind of the oppressed. - Steve Biko *