Finally got back into my account.
This blog is closed. no new entries will be posted on this blog.
Another blog is up and running.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
SELF-DETERMINISM AND SANITY
Here is a quote from L.Ron Hubbard. It does have some words you might not understand but it would pay to visit the Scientology Website and find out about these words.
Self-determinism goes up to enormous heights. And it doesn't mean that a person becomes completely indifferent and detached. He can become very, very intimate with existence because he dares to be, at a high level of self-determinism. A person is as sane as he is self-determined.
Now that should be fairly simple. It comes to this degree: Do you know that nobody can be sick unless he has desired to be sick at some time or other? That's very fascinating.
You say to somebody, why, you say, "Nobody can do this. I never wished I was sick—not in my whole life."
And you can always throw him this little curve and it usually throws him, if you get that reaction. You say, "Did you ever try to keep from going to school?"
And he says, "Oh, that. Well, yes, I pretended I was sick a few times then."
"Well, let's remember one of those times." And we find out that he's using this same mechanism to keep from going to work, years later. Only by this time it's developed into what they call a chronic whatever-it-is.
Such a thing as an allergy can develop in this fashion. The little boy is forced to eat something and he says, "I don't like it." Still they insist he eats it, so he says, "It makes me sick" And he says this very emphatically and he argues with it and he loses the argument. Twenty years later you pick him up and you find out very mysteriously that corn makes him sick. Now why should corn make him sick? Well, he said so. He's boss. So he said so, so now it's got to make him sick, because if a person doesn't obey his own postulates he is wrong. The second he doesn't do what his postulate said, then he proves that he is wrong.
And it's an odd thing about rightness and wrongness, but the—as wrong as you can get, of course, is dead. And if you get completely wrong, you're dead. So wrongness is a measure of level on the Tone Scale again. And when a person gets down around 2.5, 2.0, 1.5, 1.0, believe me, he can't afford to be wrong! Being wrong just once will finish him—boom!
And yet he's at a level where he's forcing himself to be wrong. And he's in a terrible chaotic state. Below 2.0 a person is more MEST (Matter, Energy, Space and Time) universe than he is—he's more controlled by the MEST universe than he is by himself.
PEOPLE WHO WORRY ABOUT POSTULATES
And so you find that at very low levels on the Tone Scale people worry madly about their own postulates—the second they begin to know about postulates. Then they'll start worrying about postulates and they'll go back and they'll pick up their own postulates. And then they get afraid to make postulates and so on because they can't afford to be wrong.
That is why invalidation of a low-level preclear can be almost fatal—because you tell him he's wrong, invalidate him. You say, "Something is wrong about what you remembered," and he just can't stand that strain.
Now, you can take somebody way up the Tone Scale and you can say, "You're wrong," and you can bring out mathematics, you can bring out Bowditch, you can bring out anything you want to bring out and demonstrate to him conclusively and utterly and forcefully and with harsh words that he is awful wrong. And he will look at it and he'll say, "Yep, I guess I was. What did we have to eat tonight for dinner?" he says, "Let's have some of that." I mean, that's about as much effect as it is. He can afford to be wrong.
—L. Ron Hubbard, from the lecture THOUGHT, EMOTION AND EFFORT.
Excerpted from the Scientology: Milestone One lectures
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Time sure flies
update ...
I am again flat out. These days since doing the Basics Books courses at the Scientology organization, my interest in other things have just tripled. I have learned to compose some music with Fruity Loops, some coding in http://pine.fm/LearnToProgram, some serious Visual Basic for MS Excel just to name a few.
In each of these fields I have no prior experience but it is the challenge of learning it that is fun. With Fruity Loops I create a single track, it took me about 15 hours to learn the program and put it together so it is not record studio material, it is mostly a demonstration of what Fruity Loops can do and I was just messing about. Tried to download it so you can hear ... but later on that.
In excel I have learned quite a bit, though I would consider myself and intermediate excel user , I can now write out userforms, create a database, update records , etc al in visual Basic.. they stuff I now can do...
This of course is quite time consuming but there is just so many things to learn, doing all this while doing a 8 hour Job and juggling being on Study at least 3 days a week.
Oh .. I am doing the "Advanced Procedures & Axioms " course now...
I am again flat out. These days since doing the Basics Books courses at the Scientology organization, my interest in other things have just tripled. I have learned to compose some music with Fruity Loops, some coding in http://pine.fm/LearnToProgram, some serious Visual Basic for MS Excel just to name a few.
In each of these fields I have no prior experience but it is the challenge of learning it that is fun. With Fruity Loops I create a single track, it took me about 15 hours to learn the program and put it together so it is not record studio material, it is mostly a demonstration of what Fruity Loops can do and I was just messing about. Tried to download it so you can hear ... but later on that.
In excel I have learned quite a bit, though I would consider myself and intermediate excel user , I can now write out userforms, create a database, update records , etc al in visual Basic.. they stuff I now can do...
This of course is quite time consuming but there is just so many things to learn, doing all this while doing a 8 hour Job and juggling being on Study at least 3 days a week.
Oh .. I am doing the "Advanced Procedures & Axioms " course now...
Friday, May 16, 2008
What are Human Rights?
1. We are all free and equal. We are all born free. We all have our own thoughts and ideas. We should all be treated in the same way.
2. Don't discriminate. These rights belong to everybody, whatever our differences.
3. The right to life. We all have the right to life, and to live in freedom and safety.
4. Slavery – past and present. Nobody has any right to make us a slave. We cannot make anyone our slave.
5. Torture. Nobody has any right to hurt us or to torture us.
6. We all have the same right to use the law. I am a person just like you!
7. We are all protected by the law. The law is the same for everyone. It must treat us all fairly.
8. Fair treatment by fair courts. We can all ask for the law to help us when we are not treated fairly.
9. Unfair detainment. Nobody has the right to put us in prison without a good reason and keep us there, or to send us away from our country.
10. The right to trial. If we are put on trial this should be in public. The people who try us should not let anyone tell them what to do.
11. Innocent until proven guilty. Nobody should be blamed for doing something until it is proven. When people say we did a bad thing we have the right to show it is not true.
12. The right to privacy. Nobody should try to harm our good name. Nobody has the right to come into our home, open our letters or bother us or our family without a good reason.
13. Freedom to move. We all have the right to go where we want in our own country and to travel as we wish.
14. The right to asylum. If we are frightened of being badly treated in our own country, we all have the right to run away to another country to be safe.
15. The right to a nationality. We all have the right to belong to a country.
16. Marriage and family. Every grown-up has the right to marry and have a family if they want to. Men and women have the same rights when they are married, and when they are separated.
17. Your own things. Everyone has the right to own things or share them. Nobody should take our things from us without a good reason.
18. Freedom of thought. We all have the right to believe in what we want to believe, to have a religion, or to change it if we want.
19. Free to say what you want. We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas with other people.
20. Meet where you like. We all have the right to meet our friends and to work together in peace to defend our rights. Nobody can make us join a group if we don't want to.
21. The right to democracy. We all have the right to take part in the government of our country. Every grown-up should be allowed to choose their own leaders.
22. The right to social security. We all have the right to affordable housing, medicine, education, and child care, enough money to live on and medical help if we are ill or old.
23. Workers' rights. Every grown-up has the right to do a job, to a fair wage for their work, and to join a trade union.
24. The right to play. We all have the right to rest from work and to relax.
25. A bed and some food. We all have the right to a good life. Mothers and children, people who are old, unemployed or disabled, and all people have the right to be cared for.
26. The right to education. Education is a right. Primary school should be free. We should learn about the United Nations and how to get on with others. Our parents can choose what we learn.
27. Culture and copyright. Copyright is a special law that protects one's own artistic creations and writings; others cannot make copies without permission. We all have the right to our own way of life and to enjoy the good things that "art," science and learning bring.
28. A free and fair world. There must be proper order so we can all enjoy rights and freedoms in our own country and all over the world.
29. Our responsibilities. We have a duty to other people, and we should protect their rights and freedoms.
30. Nobody can take away these rights and freedoms from us.
source:
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Another Scientology course completed !
In English Please:
I have completed the Course called Self Analysis by L.Ron Hubbard. This course I must say really put it into perspective the reason why you do the courses, one after the other, as laid out. While reading this book I saw how having the data from the books Dianetics and Science of Survival made understanding what I was reading so much easier.
I got from this book what people are lacking. Life go by people , they can’t remember as well as they use to, they don’t feel as bright as they used to, their energy levels are low and there are many other things that seem to be troubling people. This book gives a solution which anyone can use, in any place. Setting aside a little time each day and doing the exercises, a person can change the conditions facing them.
I knew about Self Analysis since getting in Scientology. I can tell you I had no interest in it really, as I always wanted the ‘advanced’ stuff, the ‘mysterious’ stuff , the stuff about past lives and space and other planets etc etc. The truth for me now is I need to understand the basics. I need to know the fundamental laws of life energy. This book gives some of those fundamentals. Past lives and other stuff called “Para-Scientology” has it’s time and place and to fully appreciate it, an understanding of the basics principles of life is needed.
The data in Self Analysis is so simple. I thought today.. “Why hasn’t anyone thought about it before?”.The rules of life and the behavior of human beings are exact.
I always wanted to be different and always thought I was, that the problems facing me were different to the problems others were having, which probably in my opinion was true. Self Analysis and the previous 2 books taught me that we all are pressured by the same problems, if we are alive we are governed by the same rules of life. Different problems but same anatomy of problem, different situations but same make up of situations.
Knowing these rules would be the most important thing to do and this is what the Basic Scientology books offer.
--
“An investment in knowledge pays the best interest.”. B.F
“To know oneself is to know your friends and enemies” © Ricky Saunders 2008
--
According to research at an English university, it doesn't matter in what order the letters
in a word are, the only important thing is that the first and last letter is at the right place.
The rest can be a total mess and you can still read it without problem.
This is because we do not read every letter by it self but the word as a whole.
--
In Gobbledygook please:
I have clpmoeetd the Csruoe called Self Aylansis by L.Ron Habburd. Tihs cruose I must say rllaey put it itno psrecepitve the rosaen why you do the csruoes, one atfer the otehr, as laid out. Wlihe ridaeng tihs book I saw how hvanig the dtaa form the bkoos Dnaicites and Sciecne of Sruivavl made uredntsdnanig what I was redanig so much eeisar.
I got form this book waht pelpoe are lcaikng. Lfie go by plpoee , they can't rmemeebr as wlel as they use to, tehy don't feel as birght as they used to, tehir eengry lleves are low and there are many other tgnihs taht seem to be truoblnig ppoele. Tihs book gvies a suloiton wcihh aynone can use, in any pcale. Sitteng adise a ltilte tmie ecah day and dniog the excreesis, a posren can cahgne the codntinois ficang tehm.
I kenw abuot Self Ansylais sicne gttenig in Sneictgoloy. I can tlel you I had no iretnset in it rllaey, as I aawlys wtnaed the 'aavdecnd' sfutf, the 'metsyiruos' sfutf , the sfutf aobut psat lvies and scape and oehtr plenats etc etc. The turth for me now is I need to unedsrtnad the baciss. I need to konw the fdnuematnal lwas of lfie enregy. This book gives some of tsohe fdnunemalats. Psat lievs and oehtr sfutf cllaed "ParcS-aiotnelgoy" has it's tmie and pcale and to fluly aperpictae it, an unsreddnating of the bcisas pirpicnels of lfie is nedeed.
The data in Slef Aylaniss is so smiple. I thuoght today.. "Why hsan't aynnoe tuohhgt aobut it bfeore?".The relus of lfie and the bhevaoir of hmuan bgnies are eaxct.
I aawlys wtnaed to be deffinert and awlyas thuohgt I was, taht the pbormels ficang me wree dieffnert to the prbomels others wree hanivg, wcihh paborlby in my oinipon was ture. Slef Anlasyis and the piveruos 2 bokos tguaht me taht we all are prserused by the smae plborems, if we are ailve we are gvoenred by the smae rlues of lfie. Dffineret prelboms but smae aotanmy of problem, dffineret sautitoins but same mkae up of sititauons.
Kiwonng thsee rlues would be the msot impatront tnihg to do and this is waht the Baisc Sicelotngoy bkoos ofefr.
--
"An ivnsenemtt in klwongdee pyas the bset iretnest.". B.F
"To konw oesenlf is to know your feirdns and emeneis" © Rciky Snuaedrs 2008
--
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Straight from Source.
Decision is, you will discover, one of the fundamental points of indecision and one of the fundamental reasons why people are sane or insane—decision.
You see, decision is a short way of saying choice. And choice, of course, is the keynote of self-determinism. To determine anything, you must have the choice to determine. Choice to determine means that you must have the power of decision.
Automatically, you will discover—automatically, in any case—that the one thing that is holding up beingness is indecision, a maybe.
In any engram that presents itself to be run—in any engram that presents itself to be run, there is a maybe: two choices which are relatively evenly balanced and their even balancing make an irresolution.
Now, there’s a great deal to do with time in decision. Decision and time have a lot in common. When we have clean, clear decision, we have clean, clear time. And when we have an indecision, there is an unclarity about time. If you are trying to decide anything and having a difficulty in trying to decide that thing, the root of its trouble is time. Not even necessarily data; it’s time. There’s a time hang-up there somewhere. And if you look for that back of the data, usually the data becomes needless.
Decision: The basic decision that life makes, that theta makes, is “to be or not to be.” Shakespeare’s famous line: “To be or not to be: that is the question.” Hamlet was in very, very bad condition that day. He was hung up on the squarest maybe that anyone can be hung up on.
If you see someone facing a new job—a choice of whether or not he’s going to continue with his old job or take a new job—you may think that he is resisting change or a lot of other things, and so on. He’s not anything. I mean, he is hung up until he decides one way or the other on a beingness situation. So that any beingness situation where you had a “to be or not to be” on a case becomes itself the most aberrative situation.
Running an engram is really, basically, only necessary until the preclear has reached, of his own volition and evaluation, the decision he didn’t make. He’s found the maybe in his life. He’s found that maybe. And having found the maybe, it is clearly enough in view so that he can resolve it or evaluate its importance, and the rest of the engram will blow. It’ll disappear—become completely unaberrative.
Postulates are important only because postulates are the root material of decision. That is to say, you have the decision and you make the postulate to resolve the decision. “To be or not to be” is action or inaction, existence or no existence.
L.Ron Hubbard
--
It is a quote like this and the thousand of others that make L.Ron Hubbard stand out.
To me he is a Man amongst men, A king amongst kings and I would even be so far to say a God amongst Gods.. though he would not approve of it at all..
Though I must say this quote , to fully understand it , would require a looking up of some of the linked words, it would be very worthwhile to do so.
R. Saunders 2008
--
Friday, May 2, 2008
A little time for A little while..
In English Please:
A little time for a little while; it is possible to be happy.
A day of happiness to be cherished instead of those days of misery.
One moment of peace to be enjoyed during an unrelenting war.
One data of certainty is worth more than a whirlwind of confusion.
A little time for a little while; it is possible to be happy.
A hour of quiet, is worth each minute to the full.
A minute of silence is stronger than a thousand speaking.
A second you know that you are, is worth the more than the endless forget.
A little time for a little while; it is possible to be happy.
--
“When the well's dry, we know the worth of water.”. B.F
A little time for a little while; it is possible to be happy.” © Ricky Saunders 2008
--
According to research at an English university, it doesn't matter in what order the letters
in a word are, the only important thing is that the first and last letter is at the right place.
The rest can be a total mess and you can still read it without problem.
This is because we do not read every letter by it self but the word as a whole.
--
In Gobbledygook please:
A ltilte tmie for a llttie wlihe; it is pissoble to be hpapy.
One day of hanippses, is btteer tahn a hnurded dyas of mresiy.
One memont of pcaee is better than an urnelenitng war.
One creattniy is wroth mroe than a wrihiwlnd of cfnouoisn.
A llttie time for a little welih; it is poslbise to be hppay.
A huor of queit, is lkie the wroth ecah mtunie to the flul.
A mintue of selicne is srtgnoer than a 1000 spkaenig.
A Sceond you konw that you, is wroth the mroe tahn the eeldnss fegrot.
A llttie time for a ltitle welih; it is pssoible to be happy.
""Wehn the wlel's dry, we konw the wtroh of wetar.". B.F
A llttie time for a ltitle welih; it is pssolbie to be hppay." © Rciky Suaredns 2008
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Another course completed
In English Please:
I actually have completed my Science of Survival course. This course as mentioned before holds the key to survival; it is the SCIENCE of survival!
The thing that I got from this course is why people don’t get the results of Scientology or Dianetics and why they seem to make no gain or negative gain. In 1951 L. Ron Hubbard discovered the reason and published in the manual Science of Survival. To say the book is only that would be like saying the Bible is only about Jesus helping people.
So why don’t people get the expected results with Scientology and in particular when receiving or giving Dianetics processes?
The answer to that is “the process is just too high for them.”
The whole idea of the emotional tone scale as covered in Scientology is so that the right process is run to the right case so that they can get results.
Even today, somebody walks into an organization in Scientology and if they do something that is too steep a gradient for them, they will not get the gains and benefits from it, it is a matter of accessing each individual separately.
Scientology works, FACT! The only times it does not work is when it is not applied correctly.
The Science of Survival course has shown me that, no matter what state a person is in, if they are somewhat willing to do something about their lives or have a desire to improve it, no matter their mental state or otherwise, Scientology can do something about it.
After completing this book I know how important it is for others to complete this book, especially if someone is going to be your Auditor. I would liken it to a plumber doing plumbing without having the proper tools and this book is the next most vital tool to have after the Dianetics Book.
---
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” B.F
---
“Waste no time to complete something, do the hardest first and easiest last” © R. Saunders 2008
--
According to research at an English university, it doesn't matter in what order the letters
in a word are, the only important thing is that the first and last letter is at the right place.
The rest can be a total mess and you can still read it without problem.
This is because we do not read every letter by it self but the word as a whole.
--
In Gobbledygook please:
I autcally hvae clpmoeted my Siccnee of Sivruavl coruse. Tihs cuorse as meitnenod beofre hodls the key to sivruavl; it is the SCNEICE of sivruavl!
The tihng taht I got form tihs cuosre is why ppoele don't get the ruselts of Sneicolotgy www.sneiclotgoy.org or Denaitics www.dainetcis.org and why tehy seem to mkae no gian or ngeative gian. In 1591 L. Ron Hubbard www.lhnorurabbd.org docsireved the raeosn and plbusiehd in the maaunl Seiccne of Sivruval. To say the book is olny taht wolud be lkie sniyag the Bilbe is olny about Jeuss helnipg pelpoe.
So why don't ppoele get the excepetd rsetlus with Sneictgoloy and in pitrauclar when reeciving or giving Denaicits pcorssees?
The awsner to taht is "the pecorss is jsut too high for tehm."
The wohle ieda of the eitomnoal tnoe sacle as cevoerd in Sctneiloogy is so taht the rhgit porcses is run to the rhgit case so taht they can get rseutls.
Eevn toady, sbemodoy wklas itno an orgnatazioin in Seiclotnogy and if tehy do semoihtng taht is too setep a garneidt for tehm, they wlil not get the gnias and beifents form it, it is a mtaetr of acsecnisg ecah idniviudal sapeetarly.
Seictnology wroks, FCAT! The olny tiems it deos not wrok is wehn it is not appleid crotcerly.
The Scneice of Sruvavil cosrue has shwon me taht, no mtaetr waht sttae a pesron is in, if tehy are smoahwet winillg to do semohtnig aobut tehir lievs or hvae a drisee to iorpmve it, no matetr thier matnel state or oehtriwse, Seicntology can do semoihtng auobt it.
Atfer coelpmting tihs book I konw how iopmrtnat it is for oehtrs to cpmotele tihs book, esepaiclly if smoenoe is gonig to be your Aduotir. I wolud lkien it to a plbmuer donig pbmulnig wohtiut hivang the pporer tloos and tihs book is the nxet msot vatil tool to hvae atfer the Dnaiitecs Book.
---
"Tehy who can give up essnetail lbitrey to obiatn a liltte tmeporray sefaty dseevre neehtir lbirety nor stefay." B.F
---
"Watse no tmie to cpmoelte semotihng, do the hrasedt fisrt and easiset lsat" © R. Suadners 2008
--
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
This could happen to you !
source:
Philip Hensher: The so-called 'insane' whose lives are thrown away
In English Please:
You have to ask how many people are in mental institutions who professionals think are harmless
Tuesday, 2 October 2007
In 1972, the psychologist David Rosenhan conducted an experiment into the validity of diagnoses of mental health. Eight associates of his, all in perfect mental health, went to psychiatric hospitals and told them that they were hearing voices. Their behaviour in all other respects remained normal. All eight were admitted to hospital, mostly with diagnoses of schizophrenia.
Where records were kept, almost all the other patients realised immediately that the researchers had no mental health problems. It took the hospitals, however, up to 52 days to realise the same thing, and in one case, the researcher was only discharged with considerable difficulty. Subsequent to the publication of Rosenhan's paper, numerous people with real problems were turned away from American hospitals in the belief that they were psychology researchers.
The debate over Rosenham's experiment goes on, but we've just been reminded in a heartbreaking way that the institutional tendencies he exposed can destroy entire lives. When Rosenham conducted his experiment, Jean Gambell had been in mental institutions for exactly 35 years, for almost no reason. She was to remain in them for another 35 years, and now, at the age of 85, there seems no point in removing her.
Her story begins when she was working at a doctor's surgery as a cleaner, at the age of 15, in 1937. Half a crown – perhaps the equivalent of five pounds now – went missing and she was accused of stealing it. Instead of being prosecuted, she was sectioned under the 1890 Lunacy Act and committed to a mental institution. The money turned up some weeks later. A normal criminal case would have been dropped, but by that point she was institutionalised.
Her family was subject to other pressures; her brothers were themselves placed in care homes. Her family broke up, and when her mother died, a quarter of a century ago, all connection between her and her nearest relations was severed.
Heartbreakingly, she went on insisting to her carers that she did have a family, describing them and giving their names. The institution did not explore this adequately, and indeed seems to have dismissed this as the fantasies of Miss Gambell, who by now had been characterized as feeble-minded. She remained where she was, unvisited.
By chance, one of her brothers went on living in his mother's house, and it was there that a letter recently arrived, addressed to his late mother – it does not seem to have occurred to anyone involved that a woman of 85 might not have a parent still living, though in this case the negligence had a benevolent result. He noticed that the envelope had the name "Jean Gambell" written in the corner, and opened it. It was a questionnaire inquiring whether his mother was satisfied with the care being given to her daughter. He carried out his own inquiries, and discovered that a sister he barely knew about was still living.
When he and his brother visited her for the first time, they were warned that she could only communicate through writing and was unlikely to be able to understand who they were. She came into the room, looked at them, and unhesitatingly said "Alan ... David." and embraced them. A whole life gone.
The medical authorities of the time were, clearly, not just negligent but actively wicked. Whoever engineered the incarceration of Miss Gambell should be reviled, even at this distance in time. But whoever it was, they do not hold the responsibility for keeping her inside for 70 years. The relevant institutions took no effective action to discover why she was there; whether she could be released; what benefit was served by throwing away a person's lifetime. When "care in the community" started to be the watchword of mental health services, it did not seem to apply to one harmless lady already old.
As many observers have established, lives are destroyed not just through the act of incarceration, but through the pressures of mental health care themselves. Erving Goffman's wonderfully-entitled study "Making Out In Mental Institutions" has shown that mental patients "go mad" when under observation, urinating on radiators and so on, when under the microscope. When unaware that they were observed, many in Goffman's study were perfectly rational and well-behaved. The idea, popularised by Ken Kesey's One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, that mental institutions make mental patients is not just an absurd Sixties trendy dogma. Some people genuinely are mad. Some people are just in madhouses.
We have no idea at all whether Jean Gambell had, or has, mental health problems.
If she has, that would not be surprising after the three-quarters of a century of incarceration. Signs of perfect lucidity – her descriptions of her family – were dismissed as if she were ranting about aliens. And that can only be because the professionals saw nothing but a mental patient.
You have to ask the question of how many people there are still in Britain's mental institutions who are regarded by the professionals as harmless, or a pet, who have been there for many years with no particular reason; people who were put there at someone else's convenience who never had the wit or articulacy of David Rosenhan's highly-educated researchers, and could not argue their way out. I don't know. I suspect we never will know.
--
Comment by Ricky Saunders: Psychiatry is known to have caused countless of abuse to patients.
find out more here.
--
“Time is money”. B.F1789
“I just love to have lots and lots of Time” © Ricky Saunders 2008
--
According to research at an English university, it doesn't matter in what order the letters
in a word are, the only important thing is that the first and last letter is at the right place.
The rest can be a total mess and you can still read it without problem.
This is because we do not read every letter by it self but the word as a whole.
--
In Gobbledygook please:
You hvae to ask how many ppoele are in matnel itsntitunois who prsefosianols tnihk are hlmrases
Tuseady, 2 Obotcer 2007
In 1792, the phcysgolosit Divad Resoahnn cnoudcted an eepxremint itno the vdilaity of dngaiesos of mneatl hetlah. Eihgt assotaices of his, all in pecefrt matnel helath, wnet to pyshctaiirc hipsolats and tlod tehm taht tehy were haenirg vecios. Thier beahuoivr in all oehtr repsetcs rmeniaed nromal. All ehgit wree aimdettd to hoipsatl, moslty with daisonges of shcziorhpeina.
Wrehe rroceds wree kpet, asomlt all the oehtr peitatns resilaed idemmailety taht the reserachres had no matnel htlaeh prelboms. It took the hoipstals, hewover, up to 52 dyas to rilaese the same tihng, and in one case, the reaeshcrer was olny dihcsegrad wtih cnodisarelbe dfficiluty. Sesbuneuqt to the publtaciion of Rnesoahn's paepr, nremuuos peolpe wtih rael porbmels wree tuenrd away form Aremiacn hoipslats in the bleeif taht tehy were pshcygoloy resehcraers.
The dbetae over Roshneam's eepxemirnt geos on, but we've jsut been rmeednid in a htraeaerbnikg way taht the isntitoituanl tdneecneis he eopxesd can drtseoy eitnre lvies. Wehn Roesnham cudnotced his erepxinemt, Jaen Gebmall had been in mneatl initsitutnos for etcaxly 35 yraes, for amlost no rosaen. She was to riamen in tehm for anehtor 35 years, and now, at the age of 85, tehre smees no pniot in reivomng her.
Her sroty bgenis wehn she was wroknig at a dcootr's sruregy as a caelenr, at the age of 15, in 1397. Hlaf a cworn - pahreps the eqaviulent of five puonds now - wnet missing and she was acsuced of setlanig it. Isnaetd of bnieg pesorucetd, she was sitceoend uednr the 1890 Lanucy Act and cmmoettid to a mneatl intsutition. The menoy truend up smoe wkees letar. A noraml cmiranil case wluod hvae been dreppod, but by taht piont she was isnittutnoiilaesd.
Her faimly was sejbuct to oehtr perussser; her btorhres were tmehvleses plcaed in crae hemos. Her flimay bkore up, and when her mhtoer died, a quetrar of a cneruty ago, all cnotcenoin bteewen her and her neraest rtalenois was sveeerd.
Htraeerbakignly, she went on isisnitng to her cerars taht she did have a flimay, drcsebinig them and gvinig tiehr naems. The initsituton did not eolpxre this adauqelety, and iedned semes to have dimsssied tihs as the fnatisaes of Msis Gbmalel, who by now had been cahartczireed as fee-elbnimedd. She rmeeniad wrehe she was, usivnetid.
By chnace, one of her borrehts went on lnivig in his mtoehr's huose, and it was tehre taht a ltteer receltny airrevd, arddsseed to his ltae mhtoer - it deos not seem to hvae occrured to aynnoe ilovnevd that a woamn of 85 mhgit not hvae a perant sitll lnivig, thuogh in tihs case the nelgnegice had a bveneonelt reuslt. He notcied taht the enolevpe had the name "Jaen Gbmalel" wttiren in the croenr, and oenepd it. It was a qtseuioannire iiuqnnirg whteher his mehtor was ssitaifed wtih the care bnieg gevin to her dhguaetr. He cirraed out his own iqniriues, and diocserevd that a ssietr he braley kenw abuot was slitl lnivig.
When he and his broehtr visietd her for the fisrt tmie, they wree wenrad taht she colud only cmoumacinte tuorhgh wrtinig and was unlekily to be able to uednsrtnad who tehy wree. She came itno the room, loekod at tehm, and uhnseiatitgnly said "Aaln ... Divad." and earbmced tehm. A whloe lfie gone.
The meacidl atuohtireis of the time were, craelly, not jsut nlgeginet but avitcley wikced. Weohevr eignreened the iracnctareoin of Msis Gabmell suohld be relived, even at this dtsicnae in time. But weohevr it was, they do not hlod the ropsesnlibitiy for keepnig her idisne for 70 yraes. The reavelnt iitsnutnoits took no eefftcvie acoitn to dcsievor why she was three; wehehtr she colud be rleeesad; waht bneifet was sreevd by thiworng aawy a peosrn's litefmie. When "crae in the cmomnutiy" satetrd to be the wtaowhcrd of matnel htlaeh svreecis, it did not seem to apply to one haelmrss lday alreday old.
As many oesbvrers hvae eslbatiehsd, lvies are drtseyoed not jsut trhguoh the act of iacnrecraoitn, but torhguh the perseruss of mneatl hetlah crae thmelesves. Evrnig Gmffoan's worednfyllue-itneltd sutdy "Maikng Out In Matnel Intsutitnois" has swohn that mtneal ptaitnes "go mad" when udner oesbvrtaion, uanirtnig on rdataiors and so on, wehn udner the mcircsopoe. Wehn uawanre taht tehy were oresbevd, mnay in Gfoamfn's stduy were pefreltcy ritanoal and wlleb-aheevd. The ieda, poupaliresd by Ken Kesey's One Felw Oevr the Ccuoko's Nset, taht mneatl intitsoituns mkae matnel paeittns is not jsut an asbrud Sxiteis terdny dmgoa. Smoe pepole geniunely are mad. Smoe ppoele are just in mohdaesus.
We have no ieda at all wtehehr Jaen Gbmalel had, or has, meatnl helath pborlmes.
If she has, taht wluod not be spruirisng after the terhq-etraures of a cutnery of icncraretaoin. Sngis of pefrcet ldicuity - her drcsepioitns of her fimaly - wree dsissimed as if she wree ritnang abuot aleins. And taht can olny be bcesuae the porfisseanols saw nhtonig but a matnel peitant.
You hvae to ask the quesiton of how many ppoele trehe are slitl in Batirin's matnel insituttnois who are rrageedd by the profsesianols as haelmrss, or a pet, who hvae been three for mnay yraes with no pratucialr rsaeno; ppoele who were put tehre at soemone esle's coevneincne who nveer had the wit or atriluccay of Divad Resohnan's hilhge-ycudtaed rseaeehcrrs, and cluod not agrue tiehr way out. I don't konw. I supscet we never wlil konw.
--
"Tmie is moeny". B.F8719
"I jsut love to hvae ltos and ltos of Tmie" © Rkciy Saudnres 2008
--
Monday, April 28, 2008
It's time to get busy...
Hello All
I have been neglectful of my blog, but not intentionally. I have done so many things over the last few months and I think it is time to focus and keep the blog updated.
I will try to keep to the theme of Ricky Saunders and the quotes of Benjamin Franklin going till at least the end of 2008. Also the gobbledygook (see blogs entries for 2007 if you want to know what gobbledygook is) feature will be incorporated as it increases traffic to the blog.
Ricky Saunders 2008 ©
I have been neglectful of my blog, but not intentionally. I have done so many things over the last few months and I think it is time to focus and keep the blog updated.
I will try to keep to the theme of Ricky Saunders and the quotes of Benjamin Franklin going till at least the end of 2008. Also the gobbledygook (see blogs entries for 2007 if you want to know what gobbledygook is) feature will be incorporated as it increases traffic to the blog.
Ricky Saunders 2008 ©
Thursday, February 14, 2008
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY STATEMENT
CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY STATEMENT
ANDREW MORTON’S UNAUTHORIZED BIOGRAPHY OF TOM CRUISE
For the last two years, the Church of Scientology requested to be interviewed or be presented with any allegations so we could respond. Morton refused despite our insistence in offering our cooperation. At no time did he request interviews nor did he attempt to get any information from us. Accuracy and truth were not on Morton’s agenda.
While making all sorts of bizarre and false allegations about Mr. Miscavige, the Church’s ecclesiastical leader, Morton at no time ever attempted to contact, speak to or interview him.
As a result his book is a bigoted, defamatory assault replete with lies.
Morton comes from a tabloid background and his book reads like British tabloid journalism at its worst.
British publishers rejected the book because of Morton’s inability to prove the truth of his allegations, something the laws of the UK require and of which Morton is well aware.
Notwithstanding his US publisher’s knowledge that his British publishing house refused publication of Morton’s diatribe due to his inability to substantiate his claims, they still steadfastly refused to present any of the allegations for either refutations or response.
Furthermore, scandalous falsehoods attributed to Morton appeared in the UK press 2 months ago. The Church demanded he correct these falsehoods which he and his publisher refused to do. However, the newspaper that published Morton’s lies did take responsibility—printing a full retraction when presented with the facts by the Church.
Morton’s book is replete with documented lies which have long since been disproven in court rulings. His “sources” have similarly been ruled by courts to lack any credibility. Morton’s use of these lies and sources is, thus, both reckless and malicious.
1. Is Tom second-in-command in all but name?
Insinuations that Mr. Cruise is second-in-command of the Church are not only false, they are ludicrous . He is neither 2nd or 100th . Mr. Cruise is a Scientology parishioner and holds no official or unofficial position in the Church hierarchy. Claims to the contrary are offensive to both Mr. Cruise and the Church. No planning, strategy or policy of the Church is, or has ever been, cleared through Mr. Cruise.
No planning, strategy or policy of Mr. Cruise’s movie career is, or has ever been, cleared through the Church. All statements to the contrary are blatant falsehoods.
Certainly Mr. Cruise is a prominent Scientologist, but that is due to his prominence as a celebrity and movie star. The Church has many well-known parishioners such as John Travolta, Kelly Preston, Kirstie Alley, Anne Archer, Jenna Elfman, Lisa Marie Presley, Isaac Hayes, Chick Corea and many, many others. All are well known to be Scientologists. All of them are close friends with the Church leader, Mr. Miscavige. None of them hold any position within the Church itself. They are parishioners—period.
2. Is it possible Katie and Tom’s baby could be the vessel for L. Ron Hubbard’s spirit?
Was Katie impregnated by L. Ron Hubbard’s frozen sperm?
The Church does not, and never has believed any newborn is the reincarnation or the offspring of its Founder, Mr. Hubbard—never, never, never.
Morton’s allegation is vicious sensationalism of the lowest order and Morton could not have possibly believed such a story to be true. The author’s inclusion of this falsehood proves only one thing: His religious bigotry and hatred for Scientology is so deep-rooted that he even spreads his false venom against a mother and father about their child, not to mention a defenseless child known to millions.
The Church not only does not believe any such thing about Mr. and Mrs. Cruise’s child in the present time (that she is the reincarnation of Mr. Hubbard): They never believed such a thing and, indeed, never even heard of such a bizarre allegation until Morton’s book.
Similar to his many other fictionalized allegations, Morton never asked the Church about this scandalous lie, thus ensuring he would not receive a response categorically denying it.
The allegation is invented by Morton and is pure fiction. Indeed, Morton does not list the name of a single individual who believed, let alone ever thought of what he suggests – for the very reason that nobody in the Church ever did.
Further, and quite in addition to its vicious insult on parents and child, Morton’s allegation could hardly be more offensive to the Church and its members concerning, as it does, the Founder of the religion and a man revered by millions world over.
Finally, as distasteful as it is to have to say it, Mr. Hubbard’s sperm was never frozen.
To reiterate, and to leave no room for any misinterpretation, there is not a molecule of truth to Morton’s allegations and their inclusion by Morton is simply sick and depraved.
3. Was Isabella’s adoption orchestrated by David Miscavige?
Absolutely NOT. The allegation that Mr. Miscavige and/or the Church had any involvement in the adoption of Mr. Cruise’s children is totally false.
Moreover, the Church categorically denies Morton’s insinuation that Isabella is the daughter of a Scientology staff member and, as with all adopted children, has absolutely no knowledge of who her biological parents are and had no knowledge whatsoever of her adoption until after it occurred.
The Church is totally offended that anyone would stoop so low as to make such an allegation about this young woman. Morton obviously has no regard for anyone’s feelings, including those of minor age who can’t defend themselves, let alone the nature of the allegation (since Isabella, as an adopted child, undoubtedly is also unaware of who her biological parents are).
4. Do Tom and Katie live by the same rules as other Scientologists?
Is it true that Scientologists don’t approve of pregnancy outside of wedlock?
Yes, Tom and Katie live by the exact same rules and moral code of all Scientologists and Morton’s insinuation they are afforded “special” treatment not in accordance with the principles of their religion is totally false. While the Church of Scientology believes in marriage, there are no prohibitions to pregnancy outside of wedlock nor does the Church dictate that partners be married or dictate other aspects of its parishioners’ private lives. Morton’s insinuation that Tom and Katie violated rules of the Church enforced upon other parishioners is pure invention.
In making his scurrilous allegation, Morton intentionally distorts Church policy to confuse readers of the general public who are not familiar with Scientology beliefs. So blatant is Morton’s falsehood, it is analogous to writing that “a noncelibate Catholic doesn’t live by the same rules as other Catholics” when the fact is that only the priesthood lives by rules of celibacy. The ecclesiastical order of the Church of Scientology is called the Sea Organization. It is analogous to the priesthood of the Catholic Church and comprises only 20 thousand people, compared to millions of Scientologists. Although members of the Church’s religious order do not take vows of chastity, pre-marital sex is prohibited.
Neither Tom nor Katie are members of the Church’s religious order. They are parishioners.
If Morton had conducted any of the research he claims to have done, such a misinterpretation would not have been possible. Virtually every Scientologist is aware of the distinction between the Church parishioners and the Church’s ministry and, indeed, the Sea Organization is fully described in the encyclopedic reference of the Church, What is Scientology?
Although not prescribed one way or the other by the Church, members have had children out of wedlock. Similarly, when such occurs, most Scientologists usually formalize their family relationship through marriage, as did Tom and Katie.
In summary, Morton’s allegations about Tom and Katie not abiding by Church rules are not only false, they are disingenuous. Morton quite obviously does not respect the religious beliefs of Scientologists and repeatedly refers to Scientology in the most pejorative terms and, hence, could hardly care about any of its members following the rules or otherwise—except to prejudice his readers through misinformation.
5. Did Scientologists build Tom a wildflower field and a tennis court?
The allegations regarding a “meadow” are blatantly false. No “meadow” was ever desired by Mr. Cruise or Ms. Kidman, nor was any presented as a wedding present or otherwise. In fact, Mr. Cruise and Ms. Kidman did not ever stay at the Church property following their wedding and, as is public knowledge, they were both involved in the production of their next movie together ( Far and Away) immediately following their wedding.
Contrary to other allegations by Morton, no “special” facilities were ever provided Mr. Cruise or Ms. Kidman. Their accommodations were the same guest quarters provided to all visitors and which have been used by hundreds of visitors to this Church facility. The guest accommodations were not built for Mr. Cruise/Ms. Kidman. They are structures built on the property in the 1960s, prior to the Church’s acquisition of the property.
The property in question is over 500 acres in size and, as photographic evidence demonstrates, the entire property is a lush green landscape and no “meadow” exists unless one considers the entire property a meadow!
The tennis court on the property is similarly one used by all guests at the facility.
Additional: Elsewhere in Morton’s book, he similarly provides false, bizarre and sensationalized descriptions of this Church property (Golden Era Productions), referring to it as “secret”, as a “desert lair” and other tabloid-like false descriptions.
Claims of a secret “desert liar” with “bunkers and war rooms” are not only sensationalistic, but entirely false.
The property is not in the desert, it is in an agricultural community.
The property is not only not secret, but major news organizations such as ABC Nightline, the St. Petersburg Times, Los Angeles Times and others have aired footage/printed photographs of this property.
The property is so prominent and public that it both includes a public golf course and serves as the polling station for Presidential elections for all voters in the surrounding community.
The truth is that Golden Era Productions houses a state-of-the-art audiovisual production facility for all Church of Scientology promotion and dissemination. As such, the property contains numerous film soundstages, film and video editing facilities, as well as several audio recording and mixing studios.
The property is 500 acres in size and in addition to audio-visual production facilities, also includes numerous administration offices for Churches of Scientology around the world—quite in addition to apartments to house the 800 plus Church staff. The property includes recreational facilities for use by the hundreds of staff and dozens of guests that routinely visit Golden Era Productions—includingbasketball courts, football and baseball fields, running tracks, etc. THESE FACILITIES ARE AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN USED BY ALL STAFF AND GUESTS.
No special facilities were ever built for Mr. Cruise and Ms. Kidman and, indeed, the very facilities they used have been used by hundreds of other guests these past 15 years.
Prior to its acquisition by the Church, the property was a public golf course and resort. The golf course continues to be maintained for use by the surrounding community and is provided free of charge for all charitable activities.
No better evidence of Morton’s falsehoods exist than photographs of the property he describes as a “desert lair” with “bunkers” (provided by electronic transmission to Today).
Morton has no excuse for his false allegations. He was not “misinformed.” He was, at the least, willingly ignorant—refusing to even ask the Church about this property. More likely, he knew the truth but wrote his falsehoods to intentionally misinform readers. After all, in addition to its appearance in network TV programs and prominent U.S. newspapers, photographs of Golden Era Productions can also be found on the Church’s web-sites, entirely disproving Morton’s description of this property—which is, in fact, not “secret” but very public.
6. Did Scientology find Nicole Kidman to be a potential trouble source in Tom’s life?
No the Church did not find Ms. Kidman a potential trouble source nor did it advise any such thing to Mr. Cruise.
This story is entirely false, is categorically denied, and is nothing more than an invention by Mr. Morton. The Church had absolutely no involvement in the separation of Mr. Cruise and Ms. Kidman.
Further, Morton’s book alleges this fictitious incident took place in 1999, a year our records show Mr. Cruise did not so much as visit any Church of Scientology due to his film production engagements.
Morton gives no “source” for this allegation for the simple reason that none exists as no such thing ever occurred.
Neither Mr. Miscavige or any one in the Church had any involvement in the divorce of Mr. Cruise and Ms. Kidman and categorically denies their separation had anything to do with the religion of Scientology.
Additional: Throughout his book Morton makes other false and scandalous allegations about Ms. Kidman, including her fear that her “secrets” would be used against her.
The Church finds this offensive not only to itself, but to Ms. Kidman.
The Church has never used any parishioner information in any way against any parishioner. Church confessionals are held confidential and ministerial privileged. It is the foremost policy of the Church to refuse to divulge any such information.
Not only has the Church never threatened Ms. Kidman, but Morton’s claims, by their very nature, insinuate Ms. Kidman would have some secret that could be used against her. The Church not only denies any use of information, but rejects the author’s vicious insinuation Ms. Kidman has anything to hide.
Morton also makes false, scurrilous and unfounded claims about the involvement of the Church in other relationships of Mr. Cruise.
Virtually every allegation made about the Church concerning Mr. Cruise’s relationships are false and nothing more than tabloid innuendo. The stories he alleges simply never occurred. So there can be no question or misinterpretation, answers to specific allegations follow:
Ms. Mimi Rogers:
Neither Mr. Miscavige or anyone in the Church had any involvement in the divorce of Mr. Cruise and Ms. Mimi Rogers and categorically denies their separation had anything to do with the religion of Scientology. Indeed, Ms. Rogers herself is now on record in US Weekly calling Morton’s claims “ludicrous.”
Ms. Sofia Vergara:
Mr. Miscavige did not greet and then tour Ms. Sofia Vergara at the Church’s Celebrity Centre. Indeed, Mr. Miscavige has never even met Ms. Vergara – at the Church or anywhere else. The Church similarly denies any attempt to recruit Ms. Vergara and is entirely unaware that she was ever Mr. Cruise’s girlfriend. Ms.Vergara’s representative is also on record in US Weekly denying this allegation.
Mr. Cruise/Ms. Holmes, Courtship and Honeymoon:
Mr. Miscavige did not travel to the Maldives with Mr. and Mrs. Cruise for their honeymoon (nor has he ever been there in his life). This allegation is a complete lie and was immediately corrected when it first appeared in the press, as Morton well knows. Similarly, Mr. Miscavige did not attend Tom and Katie’s first date, as Morton conjectures, nor has he ever been in attendance at any of their dates.
As is evident, Mr. Morton has no scruples. Each of the above alleged incidents never occurred and Morton could not possibly have any evidence of their occurrence as they are untrue.
Moreover, Mr. Morton never asked either the Church or Mr. Miscavige to respond to these scandalous allegations and, indeed, refused the Church’s offer to answer any allegations he may have. Further, in his unrestrained attempt to prejudice the Church and its leader, he also callously besmirches the good name of others such as Ms. Kidman, Ms. Rogers, Ms. Vergara and Ms. Holmes—not to mention Mr. Cruise.
7. Does Scientology encourage their members not to speak to their family if they don’t support the religion?
This allegation is not only false, it is the opposite of what the Church believes and practices.
On an institutional basis, the Church is well known for its community interfaith work with all religions. And, on a personal basis, the moral code that Scientologists follow specifically mandates:
“Respect the religious beliefs of others.
“Tolerance is a good cornerstone on which to build human relationships. When one views the slaughter and suffering caused by religious intolerance down all the history of Man and into modern times, one can see that intolerance is a very non-survival activity.
“Religious tolerance does not mean one cannot express his own beliefs. It does mean that seeking to undermine or attack the religious faith and beliefs of another has always been a short road to trouble.
“The way to happiness can become contentious when one fails to respect the religious beliefs of others.”
It is inconceivable how Morton could have gotten it so wrong, except that he only spoke to disgruntled ex-members who do not abide by the principles of the religion of Scientology and, as is typical of apostates, provided a distorted one-sided view intended to cause further prejudice.
Consider that Scientology is a new religion, just over 50 years old. Most members are first generation and only a rare few extend to third generation. As is evident, most family members of Scientologists are themselves not Scientologists. And yet, as any one of millions of Scientologists would have told Morton if he had asked, they maintain a loving relationship with their families. Indeed, the Church always counsels to mend any and every familial upset – whether between Scientologists or those of another faith.
The only history of familial upsets source to prejudicial and false allegations, such as Morton’s, wherein parents or a family member of a Scientologist are told lies – such as this one – intended to cause familial discord.
On the other hand, Morton’s book makes clear he does not abide by the precept of respecting the religious beliefs of others. That’s not only the sign of a bigot; it’s un-American.
8. Are Scientologists taught to harass people who oppose them?
This allegation is not only false, but another of Morton’s false propaganda. To be clear, it’s Morton who is harassing the Church, not the Church harassing him.
In November of 2007, Morton was quoted in the British paper, Sunday Express, alleging harassment by the Church. We can only assume it was a tactic he employed to cause controversy and generate publicity for his book.
In doing so, he stated “I have received threats from the Scientologists and things have become pretty heavy – to the extent that it is more than my lawyers can handle. I have sold my flat and I am not telling anyone where I am moving. I intend to disappear for a while.” This statement was a total lie and the Church had never threatened Mr. Morton in any way.
So great was the evidence of the falsity of Morton’s claim that the newspaper printed a retraction and apologized to the Church for the falsehood. (Article attached).
If this is an example of what Morton refers to as “Church harassment”, then Morton obviously feels that the Church engaging in a legal defense of itself or insisting that journalists not concoct fictional stories is some form of “Church harassment.”
The Church does not believe in harassing those who oppose the religion and the endless vitriol spilled on the Internet by anti-Scientologists leaves no doubt who is doing the harassing. The Church refuses to respond in kind and would prefer to (and does) work to provide actual information and education of the Church’s beliefs to overcome misconceptions fostered by those who harass the Church.
Frankly, the Church is insulted Morton would make such an allegation about Scientology. Consider the world in which we live and the religious conflict through the ages which has become the rule, rather than the exception: The Middle-East conflict, the “troubles” of Northern Ireland, not to mention the Crusades and Inquisition—let alone, terrorists acting under the guise of “religion.” The Church of Scientology has no such violent history and never will have such a history.
We’re a new religion and all things new are misunderstood. Our efforts to reach out and our open-door policy belie Morton’s claims. We abhor conflict and the only time we respond are when others challenge our rights to freedom of religion.
The Church inherently does not seek retaliation and to do so is a violation of what we believe. Considering Morton’s diatribe against the Church—for which he steadfastly refused to even accept any information from the Church, while writing sickening allegations of the “Rosemary’s baby” ilk—the one doing the harassing is plain to see and his name is Morton.
On the other hand, our view of conflicts and hatred is clearly articulated by our Founder, Mr. Hubbard:
“The hardest task one can have is to continue to love his fellows despite all reasons he should not.”
“A primary trap is to succumb to invitations to hate.”
“The real lesson is to learn to love.
“He who would walk scatheless through his days must learn this.
“Never use what is done to one as a basis for hatred. Never desire revenge.
“It requires real strength to love man. And to love him despite all invitations to do otherwise, all provocations and all reasons why one should not.
“Happiness and strength endure only in the absence of hate. To hate alone is the road to disaster. To love is the road to strength. To love in spite of all is the secret of greatness. And may very well be the greatest secret in this universe.”
9. When L. Ron Hubbard died was his body full of Vistaril, a psychiatric drug? If so, how do you explain this?
This allegation is a vicious lie.
As Mr. Morton is aware, the Church of Scientology is entirely opposed to psychiatric treatment.
The facts are these:
Vistaril is an antihistamine. It is used to treat itchiness from allergic reactions.
Mr. Hubbard lived on a ranch with horses, cattle and other livestock—hence, the allergic reactions.
Further, Mr. Hubbard’s body was not “full” of Vistaril upon his death. As the oxicology report clearly states: “Trace of Hydroxyzine (Vistaril).” A “trace of” is not “full of” (and as the toxicology report clearly provides, no other drugs or alcohol were present).
The Church of Scientology is not, and never has been, opposed to treatment by medical doctors. As such, Mr. Hubbard was under the care of a medical doctor during his last days and at the time of his passing.
To leave no room for “mistake” or “misinterpretation”:
MR. HUBBARD WAS NEVER GIVEN, NOR DID HE EVER TAKE ANY PSYCHIATRIC MEDICATION.
A printout from medicine.net is attached that clearly states that Vistaril is an antihistamine and, in the first sentence “…is used to treat allergic reactions.”
10. Claims by Morton to have engaged in “serious” or “extensive ” research for his book are disingenuous.
As but one final example of the gross falsity of Morton’s book, in a single paragraph he cavalierly writes of the Church being banned in foreign countries such as England, Australia, France, Germany and Spain. This is entirely false. The Church is not and has never been banned in any of these countries or any nation anywhere.
Any journalist getting it so wrong cannot use the excuse of ignorance. Claiming a Church is banned when it never occurred is not a “mistake.” It is an invention of fiction of the most horrible nature with the obvious intent of inciting hatred of an entire religion, leaving no doubt that Morton is a complete bigot.
Moreover, while Morton claims the sources for his book are somehow “insiders,” the fact is that they have not had any affiliation with the Church for 10 to 20 years. Not one of Morton’s alleged “sources” of information regarding the Church was ever in a position to observe Mr. Cruise’s activities in the Church, let alone interact with him.Their “inside information” is no more and no less than tabloid innuendo based on nothing but imagination.
And, to reiterate, not once did he ever attempt to speak to or ask Mr. Miscavige about any of his allegations – even though Mr. Miscavige is a central figure to his book.
What excuse could Morton possibly have for his lack of objective research and journalism?
Indeed, he doesn’t seem to have spoken to anyone who has spoken to, worked with or known Mr. Cruise for the last 25 years.
SUMMARY
The above provides but a mere sampling of the falsehoods contained in Morton’s book.
Morton has not researched a “biography.” He has provided a compendium of rumors and tabloid lies from years and even decades ago, which have long since been disproven. As is plainly obvious to anyone who reads his diatribe, while pretending to be writing a book about Mr. Cruise, his actual motives were to attack his religion. By his refusal to inform the Church of his allegations (lies) he has proven his intent to print falsehoods by actively ignoring the truth and actively refusing to have it brought to his attention.
The Church provided evidence of these falsehoods, as well as many others, to the publisher so they have the opportunity to take appropriate action before official publication and distribution.
The Church reiterates that it repeatedly asked Morton and his publisher to present any allegations to the Church so it could provide him information allowing him to avoid the publication of falsehoods. Both he and his publisher agreed—indeed, promised—to do so and yet never did. The result is a knowing and malicious dissemination of known falsehoods.
END
A
ANDREW MORTON’S UNAUTHORIZED BIOGRAPHY OF TOM CRUISE
For the last two years, the Church of Scientology requested to be interviewed or be presented with any allegations so we could respond. Morton refused despite our insistence in offering our cooperation. At no time did he request interviews nor did he attempt to get any information from us. Accuracy and truth were not on Morton’s agenda.
While making all sorts of bizarre and false allegations about Mr. Miscavige, the Church’s ecclesiastical leader, Morton at no time ever attempted to contact, speak to or interview him.
As a result his book is a bigoted, defamatory assault replete with lies.
Morton comes from a tabloid background and his book reads like British tabloid journalism at its worst.
British publishers rejected the book because of Morton’s inability to prove the truth of his allegations, something the laws of the UK require and of which Morton is well aware.
Notwithstanding his US publisher’s knowledge that his British publishing house refused publication of Morton’s diatribe due to his inability to substantiate his claims, they still steadfastly refused to present any of the allegations for either refutations or response.
Furthermore, scandalous falsehoods attributed to Morton appeared in the UK press 2 months ago. The Church demanded he correct these falsehoods which he and his publisher refused to do. However, the newspaper that published Morton’s lies did take responsibility—printing a full retraction when presented with the facts by the Church.
Morton’s book is replete with documented lies which have long since been disproven in court rulings. His “sources” have similarly been ruled by courts to lack any credibility. Morton’s use of these lies and sources is, thus, both reckless and malicious.
1. Is Tom second-in-command in all but name?
Insinuations that Mr. Cruise is second-in-command of the Church are not only false, they are ludicrous . He is neither 2nd or 100th . Mr. Cruise is a Scientology parishioner and holds no official or unofficial position in the Church hierarchy. Claims to the contrary are offensive to both Mr. Cruise and the Church. No planning, strategy or policy of the Church is, or has ever been, cleared through Mr. Cruise.
No planning, strategy or policy of Mr. Cruise’s movie career is, or has ever been, cleared through the Church. All statements to the contrary are blatant falsehoods.
Certainly Mr. Cruise is a prominent Scientologist, but that is due to his prominence as a celebrity and movie star. The Church has many well-known parishioners such as John Travolta, Kelly Preston, Kirstie Alley, Anne Archer, Jenna Elfman, Lisa Marie Presley, Isaac Hayes, Chick Corea and many, many others. All are well known to be Scientologists. All of them are close friends with the Church leader, Mr. Miscavige. None of them hold any position within the Church itself. They are parishioners—period.
2. Is it possible Katie and Tom’s baby could be the vessel for L. Ron Hubbard’s spirit?
Was Katie impregnated by L. Ron Hubbard’s frozen sperm?
The Church does not, and never has believed any newborn is the reincarnation or the offspring of its Founder, Mr. Hubbard—never, never, never.
Morton’s allegation is vicious sensationalism of the lowest order and Morton could not have possibly believed such a story to be true. The author’s inclusion of this falsehood proves only one thing: His religious bigotry and hatred for Scientology is so deep-rooted that he even spreads his false venom against a mother and father about their child, not to mention a defenseless child known to millions.
The Church not only does not believe any such thing about Mr. and Mrs. Cruise’s child in the present time (that she is the reincarnation of Mr. Hubbard): They never believed such a thing and, indeed, never even heard of such a bizarre allegation until Morton’s book.
Similar to his many other fictionalized allegations, Morton never asked the Church about this scandalous lie, thus ensuring he would not receive a response categorically denying it.
The allegation is invented by Morton and is pure fiction. Indeed, Morton does not list the name of a single individual who believed, let alone ever thought of what he suggests – for the very reason that nobody in the Church ever did.
Further, and quite in addition to its vicious insult on parents and child, Morton’s allegation could hardly be more offensive to the Church and its members concerning, as it does, the Founder of the religion and a man revered by millions world over.
Finally, as distasteful as it is to have to say it, Mr. Hubbard’s sperm was never frozen.
To reiterate, and to leave no room for any misinterpretation, there is not a molecule of truth to Morton’s allegations and their inclusion by Morton is simply sick and depraved.
3. Was Isabella’s adoption orchestrated by David Miscavige?
Absolutely NOT. The allegation that Mr. Miscavige and/or the Church had any involvement in the adoption of Mr. Cruise’s children is totally false.
Moreover, the Church categorically denies Morton’s insinuation that Isabella is the daughter of a Scientology staff member and, as with all adopted children, has absolutely no knowledge of who her biological parents are and had no knowledge whatsoever of her adoption until after it occurred.
The Church is totally offended that anyone would stoop so low as to make such an allegation about this young woman. Morton obviously has no regard for anyone’s feelings, including those of minor age who can’t defend themselves, let alone the nature of the allegation (since Isabella, as an adopted child, undoubtedly is also unaware of who her biological parents are).
4. Do Tom and Katie live by the same rules as other Scientologists?
Is it true that Scientologists don’t approve of pregnancy outside of wedlock?
Yes, Tom and Katie live by the exact same rules and moral code of all Scientologists and Morton’s insinuation they are afforded “special” treatment not in accordance with the principles of their religion is totally false. While the Church of Scientology believes in marriage, there are no prohibitions to pregnancy outside of wedlock nor does the Church dictate that partners be married or dictate other aspects of its parishioners’ private lives. Morton’s insinuation that Tom and Katie violated rules of the Church enforced upon other parishioners is pure invention.
In making his scurrilous allegation, Morton intentionally distorts Church policy to confuse readers of the general public who are not familiar with Scientology beliefs. So blatant is Morton’s falsehood, it is analogous to writing that “a noncelibate Catholic doesn’t live by the same rules as other Catholics” when the fact is that only the priesthood lives by rules of celibacy. The ecclesiastical order of the Church of Scientology is called the Sea Organization. It is analogous to the priesthood of the Catholic Church and comprises only 20 thousand people, compared to millions of Scientologists. Although members of the Church’s religious order do not take vows of chastity, pre-marital sex is prohibited.
Neither Tom nor Katie are members of the Church’s religious order. They are parishioners.
If Morton had conducted any of the research he claims to have done, such a misinterpretation would not have been possible. Virtually every Scientologist is aware of the distinction between the Church parishioners and the Church’s ministry and, indeed, the Sea Organization is fully described in the encyclopedic reference of the Church, What is Scientology?
Although not prescribed one way or the other by the Church, members have had children out of wedlock. Similarly, when such occurs, most Scientologists usually formalize their family relationship through marriage, as did Tom and Katie.
In summary, Morton’s allegations about Tom and Katie not abiding by Church rules are not only false, they are disingenuous. Morton quite obviously does not respect the religious beliefs of Scientologists and repeatedly refers to Scientology in the most pejorative terms and, hence, could hardly care about any of its members following the rules or otherwise—except to prejudice his readers through misinformation.
5. Did Scientologists build Tom a wildflower field and a tennis court?
The allegations regarding a “meadow” are blatantly false. No “meadow” was ever desired by Mr. Cruise or Ms. Kidman, nor was any presented as a wedding present or otherwise. In fact, Mr. Cruise and Ms. Kidman did not ever stay at the Church property following their wedding and, as is public knowledge, they were both involved in the production of their next movie together ( Far and Away) immediately following their wedding.
Contrary to other allegations by Morton, no “special” facilities were ever provided Mr. Cruise or Ms. Kidman. Their accommodations were the same guest quarters provided to all visitors and which have been used by hundreds of visitors to this Church facility. The guest accommodations were not built for Mr. Cruise/Ms. Kidman. They are structures built on the property in the 1960s, prior to the Church’s acquisition of the property.
The property in question is over 500 acres in size and, as photographic evidence demonstrates, the entire property is a lush green landscape and no “meadow” exists unless one considers the entire property a meadow!
The tennis court on the property is similarly one used by all guests at the facility.
Additional: Elsewhere in Morton’s book, he similarly provides false, bizarre and sensationalized descriptions of this Church property (Golden Era Productions), referring to it as “secret”, as a “desert lair” and other tabloid-like false descriptions.
Claims of a secret “desert liar” with “bunkers and war rooms” are not only sensationalistic, but entirely false.
The property is not in the desert, it is in an agricultural community.
The property is not only not secret, but major news organizations such as ABC Nightline, the St. Petersburg Times, Los Angeles Times and others have aired footage/printed photographs of this property.
The property is so prominent and public that it both includes a public golf course and serves as the polling station for Presidential elections for all voters in the surrounding community.
The truth is that Golden Era Productions houses a state-of-the-art audiovisual production facility for all Church of Scientology promotion and dissemination. As such, the property contains numerous film soundstages, film and video editing facilities, as well as several audio recording and mixing studios.
The property is 500 acres in size and in addition to audio-visual production facilities, also includes numerous administration offices for Churches of Scientology around the world—quite in addition to apartments to house the 800 plus Church staff. The property includes recreational facilities for use by the hundreds of staff and dozens of guests that routinely visit Golden Era Productions—includingbasketball courts, football and baseball fields, running tracks, etc. THESE FACILITIES ARE AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN USED BY ALL STAFF AND GUESTS.
No special facilities were ever built for Mr. Cruise and Ms. Kidman and, indeed, the very facilities they used have been used by hundreds of other guests these past 15 years.
Prior to its acquisition by the Church, the property was a public golf course and resort. The golf course continues to be maintained for use by the surrounding community and is provided free of charge for all charitable activities.
No better evidence of Morton’s falsehoods exist than photographs of the property he describes as a “desert lair” with “bunkers” (provided by electronic transmission to Today).
Morton has no excuse for his false allegations. He was not “misinformed.” He was, at the least, willingly ignorant—refusing to even ask the Church about this property. More likely, he knew the truth but wrote his falsehoods to intentionally misinform readers. After all, in addition to its appearance in network TV programs and prominent U.S. newspapers, photographs of Golden Era Productions can also be found on the Church’s web-sites, entirely disproving Morton’s description of this property—which is, in fact, not “secret” but very public.
6. Did Scientology find Nicole Kidman to be a potential trouble source in Tom’s life?
No the Church did not find Ms. Kidman a potential trouble source nor did it advise any such thing to Mr. Cruise.
This story is entirely false, is categorically denied, and is nothing more than an invention by Mr. Morton. The Church had absolutely no involvement in the separation of Mr. Cruise and Ms. Kidman.
Further, Morton’s book alleges this fictitious incident took place in 1999, a year our records show Mr. Cruise did not so much as visit any Church of Scientology due to his film production engagements.
Morton gives no “source” for this allegation for the simple reason that none exists as no such thing ever occurred.
Neither Mr. Miscavige or any one in the Church had any involvement in the divorce of Mr. Cruise and Ms. Kidman and categorically denies their separation had anything to do with the religion of Scientology.
Additional: Throughout his book Morton makes other false and scandalous allegations about Ms. Kidman, including her fear that her “secrets” would be used against her.
The Church finds this offensive not only to itself, but to Ms. Kidman.
The Church has never used any parishioner information in any way against any parishioner. Church confessionals are held confidential and ministerial privileged. It is the foremost policy of the Church to refuse to divulge any such information.
Not only has the Church never threatened Ms. Kidman, but Morton’s claims, by their very nature, insinuate Ms. Kidman would have some secret that could be used against her. The Church not only denies any use of information, but rejects the author’s vicious insinuation Ms. Kidman has anything to hide.
Morton also makes false, scurrilous and unfounded claims about the involvement of the Church in other relationships of Mr. Cruise.
Virtually every allegation made about the Church concerning Mr. Cruise’s relationships are false and nothing more than tabloid innuendo. The stories he alleges simply never occurred. So there can be no question or misinterpretation, answers to specific allegations follow:
Ms. Mimi Rogers:
Neither Mr. Miscavige or anyone in the Church had any involvement in the divorce of Mr. Cruise and Ms. Mimi Rogers and categorically denies their separation had anything to do with the religion of Scientology. Indeed, Ms. Rogers herself is now on record in US Weekly calling Morton’s claims “ludicrous.”
Ms. Sofia Vergara:
Mr. Miscavige did not greet and then tour Ms. Sofia Vergara at the Church’s Celebrity Centre. Indeed, Mr. Miscavige has never even met Ms. Vergara – at the Church or anywhere else. The Church similarly denies any attempt to recruit Ms. Vergara and is entirely unaware that she was ever Mr. Cruise’s girlfriend. Ms.Vergara’s representative is also on record in US Weekly denying this allegation.
Mr. Cruise/Ms. Holmes, Courtship and Honeymoon:
Mr. Miscavige did not travel to the Maldives with Mr. and Mrs. Cruise for their honeymoon (nor has he ever been there in his life). This allegation is a complete lie and was immediately corrected when it first appeared in the press, as Morton well knows. Similarly, Mr. Miscavige did not attend Tom and Katie’s first date, as Morton conjectures, nor has he ever been in attendance at any of their dates.
As is evident, Mr. Morton has no scruples. Each of the above alleged incidents never occurred and Morton could not possibly have any evidence of their occurrence as they are untrue.
Moreover, Mr. Morton never asked either the Church or Mr. Miscavige to respond to these scandalous allegations and, indeed, refused the Church’s offer to answer any allegations he may have. Further, in his unrestrained attempt to prejudice the Church and its leader, he also callously besmirches the good name of others such as Ms. Kidman, Ms. Rogers, Ms. Vergara and Ms. Holmes—not to mention Mr. Cruise.
7. Does Scientology encourage their members not to speak to their family if they don’t support the religion?
This allegation is not only false, it is the opposite of what the Church believes and practices.
On an institutional basis, the Church is well known for its community interfaith work with all religions. And, on a personal basis, the moral code that Scientologists follow specifically mandates:
“Respect the religious beliefs of others.
“Tolerance is a good cornerstone on which to build human relationships. When one views the slaughter and suffering caused by religious intolerance down all the history of Man and into modern times, one can see that intolerance is a very non-survival activity.
“Religious tolerance does not mean one cannot express his own beliefs. It does mean that seeking to undermine or attack the religious faith and beliefs of another has always been a short road to trouble.
“The way to happiness can become contentious when one fails to respect the religious beliefs of others.”
It is inconceivable how Morton could have gotten it so wrong, except that he only spoke to disgruntled ex-members who do not abide by the principles of the religion of Scientology and, as is typical of apostates, provided a distorted one-sided view intended to cause further prejudice.
Consider that Scientology is a new religion, just over 50 years old. Most members are first generation and only a rare few extend to third generation. As is evident, most family members of Scientologists are themselves not Scientologists. And yet, as any one of millions of Scientologists would have told Morton if he had asked, they maintain a loving relationship with their families. Indeed, the Church always counsels to mend any and every familial upset – whether between Scientologists or those of another faith.
The only history of familial upsets source to prejudicial and false allegations, such as Morton’s, wherein parents or a family member of a Scientologist are told lies – such as this one – intended to cause familial discord.
On the other hand, Morton’s book makes clear he does not abide by the precept of respecting the religious beliefs of others. That’s not only the sign of a bigot; it’s un-American.
8. Are Scientologists taught to harass people who oppose them?
This allegation is not only false, but another of Morton’s false propaganda. To be clear, it’s Morton who is harassing the Church, not the Church harassing him.
In November of 2007, Morton was quoted in the British paper, Sunday Express, alleging harassment by the Church. We can only assume it was a tactic he employed to cause controversy and generate publicity for his book.
In doing so, he stated “I have received threats from the Scientologists and things have become pretty heavy – to the extent that it is more than my lawyers can handle. I have sold my flat and I am not telling anyone where I am moving. I intend to disappear for a while.” This statement was a total lie and the Church had never threatened Mr. Morton in any way.
So great was the evidence of the falsity of Morton’s claim that the newspaper printed a retraction and apologized to the Church for the falsehood. (Article attached).
If this is an example of what Morton refers to as “Church harassment”, then Morton obviously feels that the Church engaging in a legal defense of itself or insisting that journalists not concoct fictional stories is some form of “Church harassment.”
The Church does not believe in harassing those who oppose the religion and the endless vitriol spilled on the Internet by anti-Scientologists leaves no doubt who is doing the harassing. The Church refuses to respond in kind and would prefer to (and does) work to provide actual information and education of the Church’s beliefs to overcome misconceptions fostered by those who harass the Church.
Frankly, the Church is insulted Morton would make such an allegation about Scientology. Consider the world in which we live and the religious conflict through the ages which has become the rule, rather than the exception: The Middle-East conflict, the “troubles” of Northern Ireland, not to mention the Crusades and Inquisition—let alone, terrorists acting under the guise of “religion.” The Church of Scientology has no such violent history and never will have such a history.
We’re a new religion and all things new are misunderstood. Our efforts to reach out and our open-door policy belie Morton’s claims. We abhor conflict and the only time we respond are when others challenge our rights to freedom of religion.
The Church inherently does not seek retaliation and to do so is a violation of what we believe. Considering Morton’s diatribe against the Church—for which he steadfastly refused to even accept any information from the Church, while writing sickening allegations of the “Rosemary’s baby” ilk—the one doing the harassing is plain to see and his name is Morton.
On the other hand, our view of conflicts and hatred is clearly articulated by our Founder, Mr. Hubbard:
“The hardest task one can have is to continue to love his fellows despite all reasons he should not.”
“A primary trap is to succumb to invitations to hate.”
“The real lesson is to learn to love.
“He who would walk scatheless through his days must learn this.
“Never use what is done to one as a basis for hatred. Never desire revenge.
“It requires real strength to love man. And to love him despite all invitations to do otherwise, all provocations and all reasons why one should not.
“Happiness and strength endure only in the absence of hate. To hate alone is the road to disaster. To love is the road to strength. To love in spite of all is the secret of greatness. And may very well be the greatest secret in this universe.”
9. When L. Ron Hubbard died was his body full of Vistaril, a psychiatric drug? If so, how do you explain this?
This allegation is a vicious lie.
As Mr. Morton is aware, the Church of Scientology is entirely opposed to psychiatric treatment.
The facts are these:
Vistaril is an antihistamine. It is used to treat itchiness from allergic reactions.
Mr. Hubbard lived on a ranch with horses, cattle and other livestock—hence, the allergic reactions.
Further, Mr. Hubbard’s body was not “full” of Vistaril upon his death. As the oxicology report clearly states: “Trace of Hydroxyzine (Vistaril).” A “trace of” is not “full of” (and as the toxicology report clearly provides, no other drugs or alcohol were present).
The Church of Scientology is not, and never has been, opposed to treatment by medical doctors. As such, Mr. Hubbard was under the care of a medical doctor during his last days and at the time of his passing.
To leave no room for “mistake” or “misinterpretation”:
MR. HUBBARD WAS NEVER GIVEN, NOR DID HE EVER TAKE ANY PSYCHIATRIC MEDICATION.
A printout from medicine.net is attached that clearly states that Vistaril is an antihistamine and, in the first sentence “…is used to treat allergic reactions.”
10. Claims by Morton to have engaged in “serious” or “extensive ” research for his book are disingenuous.
As but one final example of the gross falsity of Morton’s book, in a single paragraph he cavalierly writes of the Church being banned in foreign countries such as England, Australia, France, Germany and Spain. This is entirely false. The Church is not and has never been banned in any of these countries or any nation anywhere.
Any journalist getting it so wrong cannot use the excuse of ignorance. Claiming a Church is banned when it never occurred is not a “mistake.” It is an invention of fiction of the most horrible nature with the obvious intent of inciting hatred of an entire religion, leaving no doubt that Morton is a complete bigot.
Moreover, while Morton claims the sources for his book are somehow “insiders,” the fact is that they have not had any affiliation with the Church for 10 to 20 years. Not one of Morton’s alleged “sources” of information regarding the Church was ever in a position to observe Mr. Cruise’s activities in the Church, let alone interact with him.Their “inside information” is no more and no less than tabloid innuendo based on nothing but imagination.
And, to reiterate, not once did he ever attempt to speak to or ask Mr. Miscavige about any of his allegations – even though Mr. Miscavige is a central figure to his book.
What excuse could Morton possibly have for his lack of objective research and journalism?
Indeed, he doesn’t seem to have spoken to anyone who has spoken to, worked with or known Mr. Cruise for the last 25 years.
SUMMARY
The above provides but a mere sampling of the falsehoods contained in Morton’s book.
Morton has not researched a “biography.” He has provided a compendium of rumors and tabloid lies from years and even decades ago, which have long since been disproven. As is plainly obvious to anyone who reads his diatribe, while pretending to be writing a book about Mr. Cruise, his actual motives were to attack his religion. By his refusal to inform the Church of his allegations (lies) he has proven his intent to print falsehoods by actively ignoring the truth and actively refusing to have it brought to his attention.
The Church provided evidence of these falsehoods, as well as many others, to the publisher so they have the opportunity to take appropriate action before official publication and distribution.
The Church reiterates that it repeatedly asked Morton and his publisher to present any allegations to the Church so it could provide him information allowing him to avoid the publication of falsehoods. Both he and his publisher agreed—indeed, promised—to do so and yet never did. The result is a knowing and malicious dissemination of known falsehoods.
END
A
Thursday, January 31, 2008
What has been happening?
I am getting back into the work grind slowly but surely and I am today making the attempt to update my blog. Due to my long Holiday over 6 weeks from work and another 3 weeks get the home in shape, I have been away from computer for over 2 months.
My journey was to Africa and Thailand. Not as I planned but fun none the less. I wanted to go to Hong Kong and Japan but a set budget did not allow for this..
Africa , of course is as beautiful as she will always be and Thailand exotic as ever.
For those who have not ventured into the Urban Jungle of Southern Africa , you have so much in store and Thailand, well it's speaks for itself.
For 2008 I am working on some bigger projects which is taking a lot more of my time than predicted. My goal is of course to complete my basic courses in Scientology as fast as possible. This and a few more activities I have lined up. So my blog might get neglect.
until my next post
Ricky Saunders
My journey was to Africa and Thailand. Not as I planned but fun none the less. I wanted to go to Hong Kong and Japan but a set budget did not allow for this..
Africa , of course is as beautiful as she will always be and Thailand exotic as ever.
For those who have not ventured into the Urban Jungle of Southern Africa , you have so much in store and Thailand, well it's speaks for itself.
For 2008 I am working on some bigger projects which is taking a lot more of my time than predicted. My goal is of course to complete my basic courses in Scientology as fast as possible. This and a few more activities I have lined up. So my blog might get neglect.
until my next post
Ricky Saunders
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Back from holidays !!
Okay I am back from my very long holiday!! and will be getting back into the blog..
R. Saunders
R. Saunders
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
