by Mike Rinder It was a beautiful day in Pinellas County, sunny and warm.   I was standing in a secluded parking lot in shorts and flip-flops talking on the phone while I was waiting for Christie to come out of the doctor’s office (nothing wrong, she consults on nutrition).  I was not really paying attention to anything but was engaged in conversation.   I turned around and suddenly there were 7 people dressed in “business attire” walking towards me, now about 10 feet away:  Jenny Linson, David Bloomberg, Sue “David Miscavige is Scientology” Wilhere, Guillaume “on no post but from International Management” Lesevre, Andrew Rinder (my brother), Taryn Rinder (my daughter) and Cathy Rinder/Bernadini (though she uses another name she kept screaming that she is my wife?). They looked more than a little out of place in their “power suits” (except my brother who was dressed in a polo shirt and looked normal).

They started right in — it was just like being in the hole — 7 people surrounding you yelling and screaming   “You are a fucking SP”,  “Stop doing what you are doing”,  “You are going to die”, “You are trying to destroy Scientology”, “You are hurting your family”, “You disconnected from your family”, “You are killing your mother”, “Stay away from Benjamin” (this last was a little strange given the statements that I refuse to communicate with anyone in my family)  etc. etc. etc.

The rabble was led by Jenny Linson and Cathy Neal/Rubio/Rinder/Bernardini  –  doing a perfect imitation of DM frothing at the mouth and yelling obscenities.  Guillaume said virtually nothing. Bloomberg tried to be Mr. Big and told me several times “Stop what you are doing.”  Sue Wilhere said nothing.   My brother who is an OT 8 but not a Sea Org member was the most civil and sensible and actually seemed to want to communicate something other than screaming “You’re an SP”. My daughter Taryn is a Gold staff member and is indoctrinated into the wonders of Ideal Orgs and I feel some pangs of guilt that I raised her in the SO and that she is now caught in the web of lies.  And of course, lurking in the background were the ever present PIs in sunglasses.

When I told my brother that I would talk to him without the assembled peanut gallery, the screaming only increased with “Tone 40” commands from Jenny to “Shutup and listen” and “you ARE going to hear us”.  I think he was a little surprised to see what he had gotten himself into.  Little does he know what really goes on – but perhaps he is going to now realize from personal experience that the “goodness and light” image that DM tries to portray isn’t quite what it seems.

But, DM couldn’t have foreseen that his little ambush squad would approach me when I was on the phone with John Sweeney from the BBC in the midst of a recorded interview!  So, everything the DMbots said was recorded as it went down by the BBC.  Of course, they were under strict orders from DM about what they were to do, so they just barged ahead with their craziness.  That’s the breaks when people in fear are operating on orders  – they cannot make a decision if something changes.  No “think for yourself”….  In fact, when I informed them they were being recorded by the BBC they seemed to take it as a challenge to their manhood (womanhood? bitchhood?) as if I was trying to trick them (cunning SP that I am).  So, it was all recorded (audio only unfortunately) and they couldn’t have done a better job of convincing the BBC of Miscavige’s insanity and that everything that is said about how people are treated by him and that they will sign perjured affidavits is absolutely, utterly true.  You often hear “he pulled it in” – a much overused justification that some (including DM) use to explain their overts on others – I couldn’t help but think that DM just “pulled it in.”

Jenny kept screaming about how I WAS going to listen to them (I guess she thinks I take orders from her or else she is going to take away my eternity?) and I told her and the assembled others to “Fuck Off” (if this ever airs on US TV there will be a LOT of bleeps though they will get the unadulterated version in the UK).  I then attempted to get in my car and leave.  A scuffle ensued with Dave Bloomberg, Jenny and Cathy holding the car door open as I tried to close it to drive away and my brother taking my keys out of the ignition as I grabbed his hand and bent his finger back (until he told me I was going to break it and I let go).  It wasn’t good odds.  So, I got out of the car to go into the doctor’s office to call the police.   More scuffling ensued as I tried to make my way 50 feet to the door. My sunglasses were knocked off and someone trod on them (my brother later insisted I take his nicer glasses to replace them).   

By this time, the doctor and her staff had heard the ruckus outside and she came to the door and told me I could come in and nobody else was welcome.  Cathy and Taryn barged their way into the doctor’s office saying “he’s my husband” and “he’s my father”.  She told them she didn’t care who they were, it was her office and they weren’t welcome (the rest of the gang were blabbering incoherently at the door).  During the scuffles, Cathy had somehow sustained a cut on her arm that was bleeding.  The doctor tried to 8C her out of her reception area and Cathy started yelling at the doctor “He’s my husband, and you have my blood on your hands”.  Pretty bizarre.  That was after she had shouted at  Christie in front of the Doctor in her reception area “You, you’re a fucking little bitch.”   

The doctor asked if I wanted her to call the police. I told her yes, as I wanted the record made then and there as no doubt the Church would try to claim that I hurt Cathy’s arm and (of course they waited until there were no other witnesses to approach me 7 on 1).  I have no idea how her arm was grazed, Jenny Linson might have bitten her in the throws of her frothing insanity for all I know.

The doctor locked her doors and she and her staff were too scared to venture outside until the police arrived. They were literally terrified.  She even called her next patient and canceled the appointment.  More excellent PR area control for Scientology in the Clearwater community!

The doctor also called the paramedics due to the blood on Cathy’s arm.  The paramedics arrived within a couple of minutes and the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Department (6 cars) showed up about 5 minutes later.  Of course, the real chickenshit rats scurried away before the Sheriff’s arrived – Linson, Lesevre and Bloomberg jumped in their cars and drove off as I waved fondly.   But Cathy was stuck in the ambulance, so Sue Wilhere stayed with her. So did my brother and daughter – the only two civil ones amongst them.  Everyone made statements to the Sheriff’s, as did the doctor and Christie.  I am sure Sue and Cathy would rather have left, but they were kind of stuck.

Just before the Sheriff’s arrived, I asked where my car keys were.  The assembled mob said “they didn’t know.” I told them that would really be a problem as soon as the police arrived – and suddenly Sue Wilhere “found them”.  Childish isn’t the right word for this sort of behavior.

Now, for anyone who thinks I should have “pressed charges” I can assure it would have been a waste of time.  This sort of thing is orchestrated to be 7 on 1 (not counting PIs) with no witnesses for a reason. These people will say anything – even under oath – and would simply claim that I attacked someone first (not true) and it would be a long, drawn out procedure that would, in the end, accomplish nothing. And make no mistake, it was a carefully staged (if botched) operation, they waited until I was alone as my brother said they had seen me yesterday (and all I did was ride my bike with Christie and Shane to the park so they were out stalking in the neighborhood).  The police DO have all the statements from the witnesses and they issued a trespass warning to the Church people who didn’t flee. There was little else they could do. 

Don’t worry, because better than criminal charges that go nowhere – it was all recorded by the BBC as it went down. And that is far more devastating in the long run.  

As for my brother and daughter (who I did manage to speak to alone for a few minutes), I told them they both looked good and I was very happy to see that.  I also told them they don’t know what is going on and challenged Taryn about the Ideal Orgs and how off policy it is and whether she thinks Miscavige beating people is acceptable.  And with my brother, I asked him if he knew what inurnment is because Miscavige is engaged in it and he is going to destroy the Church through his out ethics.  Of course, under the circumstances they aren’t going to agree with me.  But maybe they will think about it.  My brother asked me for my phone number so he could call me to have dinner, just him and me “if he can get permission.” I gladly gave it to him and told him any time.  But if he is going to ask permission, it’s never going to happen. One day I hope he will decide to do it on his own.

If anyone needed current proof that the activities of the Hole are still ongoing, it was played out in full living color today.  It was vintage DM, gang-bang yelling and screaming, attempting to drive in anchor points and intimidate.  Problem is that it occurred in the parking lot of a doctor’s office in Clearwater.  The doors weren’t barred. There was no Security Force muscle and there ARE phones with which to call law enforcement.   So, it didn’t work out so well for DM. In fact, as has become his personal trademark, he delivered himself yet another massive footbullet.

Meanwhile, he sits stewing in massive MWH phenomena, lashing out with wild animal reactions, wondering which of his crimes is going to be exposed next.

And he should be worried.

791 responses to “MISCAVIGE MELTDOWN

  1. Hi all,
    I had a party of 6 circle me once in a church owned, public area, it was a purposeful confuse and conquer. I had seen, heard and experienced many red flags prior to that, but that was the event when deciding who are my friends are (and aren’t) became obvious, liability step 1.
    “they” so wanted me to grab one of their datums to align on, nope couldn’t it. Slipped into an elevator and watched my back all the way home through tear filled eyes, with the major thought what would Ron do? “self -confidence alone is security.Your ability is your security. There is no security but you”.(HFP). “Security would lie only in a man’s confidence in reaching his goals and indeed, in having goals to reach”. (SOS,Bk2)
    So well done and let’s all keep on keeping on.

  2. Please, Church “police”, take notice! I have just discovered the “Freedom” Website and the piece you have put up there to malign Tom Devoght. Since you have taken liberty to invite public participation through web communication exchange, please add the following to your list of investigative findings : David Miscavige has not paid gift tax on his BMW, other cars, Monte Blanc Pens, Maid Service, Body Guard Service, Air Tickets, and host of other GIFTS offered up to him by the Church and various celebrities. No, these things are NOT part of any Sea Org Member contract. These are GIFTS! And no gift tax has been paid for decades on these items! How do you feel about your conspiracy to defraud the I.R.S. and the tax payers? Please add this information to your Scientology Babylon web site as soon as possible! The I.R.S. pays 20% commission on information regarding tax evasion. I don’t think this big secret is going to sit in the closet for long! This is MY argument back, to the Church and Ms. Linson, for their complaints aginst Tom Devoght.

  3. Hey everyone!Firstly-thank ypu all for sharing such diverse points of views and such dynamic interaction! Secondly: please relax- don’t grant beingness to Tiny Tim and Snow White though you’ve got to love her English composition- truly reminds me of Yael). Just bear in mind that whatever you say to them only helps them to paint a better picture of their opposition: who youi might be, what buttons to push,etc. No matter how much you are goaded into a response the best thing to do is “ack and shred”. Just delete the comm from your universe. If you are so inclined, handle originations and ignore comments (and much of the feedback from them are comments).these statements made are intended to rile you up; get you upset and trip you up so that you breech security or help divulge a picture of who we are, what we are doing, planning, etc. In a democracy remember: it is the will of the majority but the voice of the minority. Allow the forum for public discourse but you are not required to engage in it.

  4. truthseekerblog

    Marty, I know that you are not going to post this but I thought I would say it anyway in response to your accusation.

    If was a troll as you state then that must mean I’m working for the church of scientology.

    Since David Miscavige is running the church of scientology then that must mean I’m working for him. But if I was working for David Miscavige why would I be advocating that Mike Rinder go to the authorities and have David Miscavige arrested?

  5. In response to Splog. Hopefully others find it useful.

    The Scientology Indoctrination

    As Scientologists we are indoctrinated to some extent. By this I mean that
    we become less than adequately critical of Scientology and LRH. And this is
    a no-no. It violates study tech. More fundamentally, it contradicts a good
    deal of basic Scientology philosophy, and it’s from this that everything
    else is built.

    As a Scientologist, one has no business accepting *any* data without having
    evaluated it thoroughly, critically, and entirely to one’s satisfaction.
    Yet we all end up doing exactly this. The only difference amongst us is
    that some of us do it more or less than others.

    The vast, vast majority of Scientology data is perfectly legitimate, if not
    downright brilliant and extraordinary. The more Scientology one does, the
    more clearly one understands this and the greater one’s appreciation of LRH
    becomes. But there is also data included in the subject and authored by LRH
    which is simply false. I’m referring almost exclusively to what is a small
    portion of Scientology policy, and not to Scientology philosophy or the
    tech. We’ll look at an example in a moment.

    If, as Scientologists, we were not indoctrinated to be less than adequately
    critical, the false data in the subject would be clearly evident as such
    and known to all of us. The indoctrination makes us blind to it.

    If we’re envisaging what the ideal scene might be here, we might ask the
    question, “Who, if not a Scientologist, should be aware of anything in
    Scientology or about LRH which may be legitimately criticized?” Not
    exaggerated or incorrectly evaluated, as critics almost invariably do, but
    correctly evaluated and then correctly criticized because it warrants
    criticism. The answer, of course, is no one.

    KSW 1

    There are parts of this policy which make a great deal of sense, and this
    is evident. But there are parts of it which are false and make no sense at
    all, and this is just as evident if one evaluates it.

    Take a look at the following excerpts in a new unit of time. I will add
    some comments to bring to your attention some of the false or questionable
    data included in them.

    “In all the years I have been engaged in research I have kept my comm lines
    wide open for research data. I once had the idea that a group could evolve
    truth. A third of a century has thoroughly disabused me of that idea.
    Willing as I was to accept suggestions and data, only a handful of
    suggestions (less than twenty) had long run value and *none* were major or
    basic; and when I did accept major or basic suggestions and used them, we
    went astray and I repented and eventually had to ‘eat crow.’”

    Because I have virtually none of the data concerning suggestions others may
    have made, this isn’t something I can evaluate. I don’t know how true any
    of it may or may not be.

    That individuals, not groups, evolve truth–I would say that this is
    evident. This does not mean, however, that only one person in any given
    group or only one person on an entire planet is capable of evolving truth.

    LRH took the opportunity on a number of occasions in the early fifties to
    validate the “thinking men” who had come before him. He acknowledged that
    he owed much to them. They, too, had evolved truth. Amongst these were
    Sigmund Freud, who popularized the concept of locating and examining
    traumas in one’s past to resolve problems being experienced in the present.
    Why LRH went on later to attack Freud viciously and to thoroughly
    invalidate all of his work–about the best he goes on to say about him is
    that he was a cocaine addict–this is a good question to ask.

    “On the other hand there have been thousands and thousands of suggestions
    and writings which, if accepted and acted upon, would have resulted in the
    complete destruction of all our work as well as the sanity of pcs. So I
    know what a group of people will do and how insane they will go in
    accepting unworkable ‘technology.’ By actual record the percentages are
    about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human beings will dream up bad
    technology to destroy good technology. As we could have gotten along
    without suggestions, then, we had better steel ourselves to continue to do
    so now that we have made it. This point will, of course, be attacked as
    ‘unpopular,’ ‘egotistical’ and ‘undemocratic.’ It very well may be. But it
    is also a survival point. And I don’t see that popular measures,
    self-abnegation and democracy have done anything for man but push him
    further into the mud. Currently, popularity endorses degraded novels,
    self-abnegation has filled the South East Asian jungles with stone idols
    and corpses, and democracy has given us inflation and income tax.”

    Neither you nor I are familiar with the “actual record” to which he refers.
    Nor do I know anyone else who is familiar with it. One might legitimately
    wonder, then, whether any such record exists.

    Let’s look over the numbers to see what we’re looking at. Let’s imagine any
    old group. And let’s give its members as much time as they need to dream up
    100,000 ideas pertaining to technology. Twenty of these ideas will be okay,
    at least insofar as they would not destroy good technology. Some of the
    twenty would be those that actually resulted in new and workable
    technology, or which would improve already existing and workable
    technology. That would leave 99,980 ideas which would destroy whatever good
    technology this group already had.

    A few hours ago I visited my computer manufacturer’s website to check out
    their latest computers. Then I took a quick look at some of IBM’s. I know
    that both of these companies have more than one person dreaming up
    technology; they have quite a few. I imagine as well that if these people
    had been dreaming up twenty good ideas and 99,980 that would destroy what
    good technology they already had–well, I don’t think I’d have been able
    even to access their sites. Do you?

    Do you know of any group yourself, large or small, with such percentages? I

    The data is not just obviously false. It is obvious that it is ridiculously

    If it were even remotely true, all of us would not still be living in caves
    but would long ago have destroyed all livable caves and become extinct.

    Let’s take a look now at democracy. That democracy has given us inflation
    and income tax is false. There are a number of causes of inflation; none of
    them have anything to do with democracy. Look at countries which have never
    been or are not now democracies and you will see no lack of inflation. The
    same goes for income tax or, for that matter, unjust taxes of any kind.

    That democracy has pushed man further into the mud is false. Select any
    democratic country and take a look at what has happened in it for however
    long it has been a democracy. In all cases one sees that these countries
    have become more and more democratic over time, and that the people living
    in them have not been pushed further into the mud, but that their overall
    condition has risen and continues to rise.

    Modern democracies are not all fun and games. Neither can we assign the
    progress of the twentieth century to democracy as though nothing else had
    gone on. But I should think that with countries having become more and more
    democratic in the last century, if democracy were so bad, we wouldn’t have
    experienced the almost incredible progress we have.

    These three false data about democracy (inflation, income tax, pushing man
    further into the mud) are as false as the “actual record.”

    “Our technology has not been discovered by a group. True, if the group had
    not supported me in many ways, I could not have discovered it either. But
    it remains that if in its formative stages it was not discovered by a
    group, then group efforts, one can safely assume, will not add to it or
    successfully alter it in the future. I can only say this now that it is

    The false datum here is the conclusion that “group efforts” will not add to
    Scientology or successfully alter it. To state that “in its formative
    stages it was not discovered by a group” is fine. But why should this lead
    “one”–that means you and me–to “safely assume” anything at all?
    Especially in view of the fact that the *individuals* in the group we are
    discussing are Scientologists. These are people who are supposed to be able
    for starters, and who are supposed to become more and more able as they
    progress in Scientology.

    “There remains, of course, group tabulation or coordination of what has
    been done, which will be valuable–only so long as it does not seek to
    alter basic principles and successful applications.”

    In other words, the rest of us are up to nothing better than keeping score.
    And this only so long as any score-keeping does not affect basic
    principles, which is fine, or “successful applications,” which is actually
    not fine. What if, years after LRH’s death, someone discovers a “successful
    application” is not actually successful at all? Some of the policy from
    which the GO operated and OSA continues to operate, for example, is not
    successful in the least.

    “The contributions that were worthwhile in this period of forming the
    technology were help in the form of friendship, of defense, of
    organization, of dissemination, of application, of advices on results and
    of finance. These were great contributions and were, and are, appreciated.
    Many thousands contributed in this way and made us what we are. Discovery
    contribution was not, however, part of the broad picture.”

    Once more, this does not mean that “discovery contribution” could not
    *become* part of the broad picture. He has given no legitimate reason, nor
    does he in the rest of this issue or anywhere else, to validate such a

    “We will not speculate here on why this was so or how I came to rise above
    the bank.”

    This is actually my “favorite” in the entire issue. One is meant by this
    point to be in awe of LRH. Now, a certain amount of awe is fine. It is due
    him. But anything can be exaggerated, including awe. And it is the
    exaggeration here which creates another false datum. It is not just a bit
    of exaggeration; it is a whole heck of a lot of exaggeration.

    I don’t know about you, but when I used to read this myself, I would wonder
    in awe just how he *did* come “to rise above the bank”? I didn’t wonder
    long, though, because he leads one to believe that even speculating about
    it would be a waste of time. Why? Because, I imagined, I would get nowhere.
    Who was I, after all, to comprehend something like this? So, I’d leave the
    concept sitting there as a great and profound mystery–to be resolved some

    But guess what? There is no great and profound mystery. There isn’t even a
    minor and shallow mystery. There is no mystery at all. What does “rise
    above the bank” actually mean? Does it mean anything different than what
    any of us does when we rise above the bank? I rise above the bank at least
    a few times a day. I’m sure you do too. Just as I’m sure just about
    everyone else does. If we didn’t, we’d be back to the no-more-caves,
    now-we’re-extinct scenario.

    The statement, then, is actually nothing more than a mystery designed to
    inspire more awe and to establish more distance between himself and the
    rest of us.

    So, fine, let’s say there is some distance. Let’s say there is lots and
    lots of distance. But just how much distance is there supposed to be here?

    And how does this statement compare to other statements he made along the
    lines of, “If I can do it, I know you can too.” These statements seem to be
    considerably more accurate and in keeping with fundamental Scientology

    The “rise above the bank” statement is just another example of one of the
    basic concepts in this issue: that all of us are in no way comparable to

    Will any of us ever become comparable? Will any of us ever have an idea
    which would not destroy workable technology, but add to it? Will any of us
    even be capable of questioning anything in Scientology, critically and
    correctly? The KSW policy, written in 1965, was reissued with a “SPECIAL
    MESSAGE” in 1980. Included in this messages was the following:


    As mentioned, I think LRH is due considerable awe. Lots of considerable
    awe. Whole lots of considerable awe. But I also think that he went out of
    his way in this issue to assign himself considerably more awe than can
    possibly be justified. This is what I mean by exaggeration. And an
    exaggeration is a false datum.

    “We are dealing only in facts and the above is a fact–the group left to
    its own devices would not have evolved Scientology but with wild
    dramatization of the bank called ‘new ideas’ would have wiped it out.
    Supporting this is the fact that man has never before evolved workable
    mental technology and emphasizing it is the vicious technology he *did*
    evolve–psychiatry, psychology, surgery, shock treatment, whips, duress,
    punishment, etc., ad infinitum.”

    The above is either false, merely assumption or simply meaningless. For
    example, that man has never before evolved workable mental technology is
    false. There was some workable technology before. And there has been some
    workable technology which isn’t Scientology since.

    What is more interesting, however, is that even if the statement were true,
    it is meaningless. Before Scientology there was certainly little workable
    mental technology. Neither is there anything else around today which
    compares even vaguely to it. But, hey, until a couple of centuries ago, man
    hadn’t developed industrial technology to amount to much either. And until
    just a few decades ago, man was still using slide rules to speed up
    calculations and had not even dreamed of computers.

    Now the idea here is not to compare Scientology to computers. Nor is it to
    take anything away from what LRH did discover or any of the truly amazing
    tech he developed. The idea is to not exaggerate. Because *any*
    exaggeration is false. The idea is to correctly evaluate things so that one
    may arrive at correct estimations of LRH and Scientology.

    How far would he have gotten without the e-meter? He didn’t develop it;
    Volney Mathison did. And Volney would not have developed it if a whole lot
    of people had not developed a whole lot of other things first. How soon
    would LRH have even gotten off the ground if it had not been for Freud
    developing and popularizing some of the basic concepts of psychoanalysis in
    the late 19th and early 20th century?

    In other words, are we to understand that LRH descended from heaven, “rose
    above the bank,” and developed something that no one else can touch for
    fear of destroying it at the odds of 999,980 to 20?

    Or are we to understand that as extraordinary as was, and as remains, what
    he did, perhaps it was also about time that something like Scientology were

    I have chosen KSW 1 because *some* of the data in it is at the heart of
    what I consider are the very few things in Scientology which must be
    re-evaluated. But I have chosen it more so because it is at the heart of
    the indoctrination Scientologists receive. And it is an indoctrination
    which is drummed into them over and over and over again, and enforced at
    *all* costs.

    There is nothing more sacred in Scientology than KSW 1.

    And there is something very wrong with this when we realize that KSW 1 is
    not the Scientology Axioms or other fundamental Scientology philosophy. It
    is a policy letter. A policy letter which contains some perfectly correct
    data and some perfectly false data. And the latter conflict entirely with
    some of the Scientology Axioms and some of the other fundamental philosophy
    of Scientology.

    Scientologists develop a button on LRH. How can a Scientologist not develop
    a button when he is so thoroughly indoctrinated to have such a considerably
    exaggerated opinion of him?

    This wouldn’t be so bad if we were talking about Bill Gates and Microsoft.
    Bill might somehow indoctrinate Microsoft employees and clients to have an
    exaggerated opinion of him. He might exaggerate it greatly. But however
    much he exaggerated it, we would still be looking at Bill Gates and
    Microsoft, and very few people would be *that* impressed.

    Instead we are looking here at LRH and Scientology, and this complicates
    things considerably.

    It was entirely unnecessary for LRH to exaggerate his accomplishments: they
    were already enormous. But he did just that.

    At the same time he underestimated and invalidated everyone else’s
    accomplishments and abilities, past, present and future. And it was
    entirely unnecessary for him to do that either.

    This is why Scientologists end up with a button on LRH. Our estimation of
    him becomes far too exaggerated. We put him on a pedestal. Most
    Scientologists consider that he could do no harm; that he was perfect or as
    good as perfect. It becomes an overt or some other nasty thing merely to
    have a critical thought about him or Scientology. All of this is part of
    the indoctrination too.

    As we know, Scientologists are sheltered from “entheta,” especially about
    LRH. When we are not sheltered by others, we are discouraged from having
    any direct contact with it ourselves. And if that were not enough, there
    are policies which forbid all contact with the sources of “entheta”: SP’s,
    people antagonistic to Scientology, authors of “entheta” books, etc.. This
    too is part of the indoctrination.

    I am not interested in promoting actual entheta. But if there are critical
    facts to be known, why doesn’t each and every Scientologist learn about
    these sooner than later? Instead there is really no one more ignorant of
    what might be any of Scientology’s or LRH’s outpoints than we

    I will take up one last thing here. Why is it not just a good idea but
    actually indispensable to discover what, if anything, may have been not
    entirely right with LRH?

    If he had some aberrations and if these remained unhandled right up to his
    death, but if these aberrations *did not* end up in Scientology materials,
    then they could be considered little more than historical data. If, on the
    other hand, he had some aberrations which did work their way into
    Scientology materials, it would be vital to know something about them.

    It was with this in mind that I read some of the unauthorized biographies
    of LRH. I have read many other things about LRH as well, almost all of it
    available on the Web. These materials are often packed with their own false
    data, exaggerations and incorrect evaluations. It is necessary, then, that
    one evaluate it correctly.

    This includes leaving some of the data only partially evaluated or not
    evaluated at all, at least temporarily. The reasons for this are twofold.
    Some of the data is impossible to verify. Some of it, because of other data
    which is omitted (one just does not have it) can not be correctly

    This last point is important. When it isn’t possible to correctly evaluate
    some data because one cannot verify if it is true or not, or because other
    data is necessary for a correct evaluation but one does not have it, it is
    necessary to realize that one should not jump to conclusions. Continue
    researching. Continue finding data and, wherever possible, verifying it. Is
    it true? Is it false? And if some data remains unverified, recognize that
    it remains incompletely evaluated.

    What happens with many Scientologists who do study this data is that they
    do not correctly evaluate some or much of it. Some of the data is shocking
    and there is no getting around that. It simply is. But instead of
    evaluating it as calmly as possible, and entirely to their own
    satisfaction, these Scientologists lose themselves in wild speculations.
    There is nothing wrong with wild speculations if one recognizes that that
    is all they are, and that they are not conclusions to which one has arrived
    through correct evaluation of data.

    The good news is that there is no reason anyone can not correctly evaluate,
    or temporarily leave unevaluated, any of this data. This may be more
    difficult for some than for others, but that is all.

    Some Scientologists, however, do fail to correctly evaluate some of this
    data. The result is that instead of becoming more aware and more
    responsible Scientologists, they become disaffected.

    Some become disaffected to the point of becoming ex-Scientologists. Some go
    into apathy on the subject or merely lose interest. I imagine there are all
    sorts of gradients and kinds of disaffection.

    I consider any degree at all of disaffection to be an outpoint. This
    doesn’t mean that when one finds out something about LRH or David
    Miscavige, or about the RTC or OSA, or about whomever or whatever, that one
    can not become alarmed or annoyed, or very alarmed or very annoyed, and
    thoroughly arc broken. Responses such as these are often pluspoints because
    they are understandable, rational responses to some of the unpleasant
    surprises one may experience.

    If, however, one has had some time to cool off and reason things out, to
    further research and evaluate, but one still leaves oneself sitting in a
    major arc break, this becomes another outpoint. There is no reason for an
    arc break to *persist*. One should be able to get through it and out the
    other end.

    After I re-evaluated all sorts of things myself, I did not end up with less
    arc for LRH but with more. Understanding is composed of affinity, reality
    and communication. What I no longer have is some of the awe I had before,
    but that’s good because it should never have been there. I no longer have
    some of the considerations that went with this awe, but that’s good because
    these considerations were false.

    What I have now is a far more accurate appreciation of the man. And it *is*
    appreciation. A lot of it. In fact a whole heck of a lot of it. All that
    has gone are false data and considerations which should never have been
    there in the first place. The result is that I have far more *genuine*
    understanding and appreciation.

    This is what I consider any Scientologist should end up with after
    re-evaluating some things. If they end up with something else, I can only
    conclude that it is because they manage to accomplish more misevaluation
    than evaluation.

    The “Veritas” Bunch

    They are all in a chronic games condition with Church management. When
    you’re interested, find “The McDonald Papers” on http://www.xenu.net. Led by Randy
    McDonald, many or most or all of these people were declared. They were
    then, and remain now, thoroughly indoctrinated Scientologists.

    They have done some interesting research into some of the corporations of
    Scientology and have published documents which show, if I recall correctly,
    that the CST (Church of Spiritual Technology) owns the copyrights and
    trademarks of Scientology. And that Meade Emory, ex-Assistant Commissioner
    of the IRS, if I recall correctly, is a member of the board of directors of
    CST. As are one or two or more non-Scientologist lawyers.

    From this research they go on to conclude that Scientology was taken over
    twenty or so years ago. By whom exactly is not known. They also conclude
    that LRH, himself, was controlled at least in part by these people, and
    that David Miscavige is merely their pawn.

    As even some of the less intelligent people on a.r.s. have pointed out,
    whatever these legal papers may say, that is all they are: legal papers.
    The corporate structure of Scientology must include stacks of these, and
    there is every reason to suspect that there are papers which render null
    those that have been found by Randy and his friends.

    It is naive to deny the mass of evidence which makes it clear that
    Miscavige is running things. It is wild speculation to conceive a vast,
    still hidden conspiracy to explain some of the outpoints in Scientology. In
    other words, we are not looking at evaluation but at a bad excuse for such.

    Unfortunately the Veritas bunch are too fond of their games condition to
    understand this.

    “The McDonald Papers” describe the genesis of Veritas but not the real
    beginning. That will found in the Scientology indoctrination each of these
    people experienced and continue to swear by. This indoctrination will not
    admit that LRH could possibly have been responsible for some of the
    unchanging bad, as well as all the good, which is Scientology.

    The “Criminal Time Track”

    If I understand correctly, it has been under construction for a year or
    two. The gist of it is that management has been squirreling the tech and
    screwing up many other things as well. Therefore, management are the bad
    guys, criminals.

    What the authors of this time track and the Veritas people keep missing,
    because they don’t want to confront it, is that although management has
    indeed been screwing up some things, management is not the primary who.
    Most of management’s screw-ups are nothing more than their attempts to
    apply various LRH policies and programs and orders and advices and who
    knows what else. The primary who is LRH.

    Now, if you’ve been management for nearly twenty years, and if you just
    keep making the same kind of screw-up over and over and over again in the
    name of Keeping Scientology Working, well, this isn’t too bright either,
    and it makes these people whos too. But if all of the management were
    replaced and none of the policy which may be responsible for the screw-ups
    cancelled or revised, we would only have other people committing and then
    repeating the same screw-ups over and over and over again.

    Who are the good guys?

    An area you will have fun re-evaluating is PTS and SP philosophy. LRH
    developed some spot-on philosophy and some absolutely amazing tech. The
    Suppressed Person Rundown, for example, is exactly what he wrote it was:

    Some parts of the philosophy, however, could be far better researched. For
    example, I would not be so quick to label some people PTS or SP. Most
    Scientologists, for example, would consider many or most of the critics on
    ars (alt.religion.scientology) to be SP’s because they are publicly
    criticizing and attacking Scientology. Well, things aren’t quite this

    What is true is that ars critics, virtually without exception, have
    Scientology and LRH misevaluated big time. They have some of the criticism
    right, but the rest of it and everything else wrong. This doesn’t, however,
    make them SP’s.

    I think the biggest problem with critics of Scientology is that it’s
    impossible to be a good one without understanding Scientology very well,
    and none of these people do. Even the ex-Scientologists on ars have ended
    up perverting much of whatever understanding they may have had of
    Scientology as part of the their experience of unbecoming Scientologists.

    All ex-Scientologists have experienced overwhelm. The only difference is
    one of degree.

    Many of their stable data disappear, but this isn’t the problem: so did
    many of mine. The problems arise in the handling of any confusions that may
    arise when these stable are invalidated and blown. Ex-Scientologists get
    some or a lot of this handling wrong.

    The Scientology indoctrination includes some data which are false but which
    are adopted by Scientologists as stable data. These false stable data need
    to be recognized as such and blown.

    A mistake is made, however, when valid Scientology data, especially data of
    some importance, is invalidated and dropped. Those who become
    ex-Scientologists, in their attempt to purge themselves of the false stable
    data in the indoctrination, commit this exact mistake. In other words, they
    throw the baby out with the bath water.

    Lastly, a Scientologist who discovers that she has adopted some of the
    false data of the Scientology indoctrination as stable data for herself may
    need not only to blow these stable data, but to adopt other, better stable
    data to take their place. With some of those who become ex-Scientologists,
    however, this can get pretty weird, and we see them come up with real
    winners like, “I am my body” or “I think with my brain.”

    So, we have an extraordinarily bizarre scene overall.

    We have critics who aren’t the best of critics.

    We have Scientologists who don’t know there’s anything major to fix in
    Scientology, let alone what it might be.

    We have Scientologists who fail to handle in an intelligent and responsible
    manner whatever upsets they may experience when they try to confront what
    is major and needs to be fixed in Scientology.

    Last but not least, we have a few Scientologists who do have a good
    estimation of what’s wrong and needs to be fixed, but who can not speak
    freely because if they did, they would be declared–for starters.

    One of the things which contributes to making this such a bizarre scene is
    that even when a critic does get some criticism right, instead of being
    acknowledged, he is roundly ignored. Unless, of course, he persists with
    his criticism, in which case he may end up being investigated by OSA’s
    private investigators and sued by its lawyers.

    In other words, this is a considerably more bizarre scene than it has any
    business being.

    The why is some of the policy concerning criticism of LRH and Scientology.
    It commands those who are indoctrinated and, therefore, willing to apply
    it, to discredit and eliminate the criticism and, if necessary, to destroy
    the person making it.

    Even this wouldn’t be as bad as it is if it were limited strictly to
    invalid and highly destructive criticism. But it is not even limited to
    that. This policy applies to all valid and constructive criticism of LRH
    and Scientology as well.

    The who could only be the man who wrote the policy: LRH.

    Can things be changed from within?

    What I’m certain of is that things can and will be sorted out. Exactly how
    or how long it might take–this is perhaps what makes this scene more
    interesting than anything else.

    I’m thrilled, actually, that ars and activities connected to it are
    elements of the scene. Regardless of how poor some of the criticism may be,
    Scientology needs external, public criticism, and any criticism is better
    than none. Fortunately some of the criticism is quite good. Chris Owen’s
    research into LRH’s military record is an example. So, perhaps the most
    important thing about ars and the rest of the critical stuff on the Net is
    simply that it’s there.

    That more and more Scientologists will bump their noses into it is only a
    matter of time. Many will become disaffected, just as many already have.
    Others will be more intelligent and responsible. But however long it may
    take, the Scientology indoctrination will become real to all
    Scientologists. If nothing else has a big impact first, such as Miscavige
    having a few cognitions, more and more Scientologists unindoctrinating
    themselves certainly will.

    • crashing upwards

      Damm, Terril. That wasnt exactly an “oh, by the way.” How long you been sitting out there waiting to unload that? I liked it.

      • That was absolutely brilliant, Terril. Thank you.

      • I like a good deal of this post too.

        Terril, I’ve seen you post this elsewhere, but I think you said someone else wrote it. Am I remembering that correctly?

        Anyway, whoever wrote it, it’s got a lot of truth in it.

    • Terril,

      Congratulations on an excellent summation!

      The fact of indoctrination is hard for scientologists and ex-scientologists to confront.

      A cult needs a fundamental dogma which cannot be questioned and that is KSW #1 which appears at the beginning of every course pack and is drummed into the heads of scientologists from day one.

      Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or diverged from.

      KSW #1 was the key step in the “cultification” of the Church of Scientology. Prior to its appearance there was the appearance, at least, that one could question authority and even consider that Ron was making mistakes. One KSW #1 was slammed in, any violation was considered heresy.

      If we take a long hard look at KSW #1, we can see that it added nothing to the discoveries and relationships of basic scientology. It only added imperatives that we must act in unquestioning accordance with Ron’s word.

      In short, it is the keystone on which the current cult was constructed. When the true role of KSW is known, the church will have a chance of reform, and not before.

      For more data see this article:


      • David,

        Whole heartedly agree. I have said before that in my experience of scientology, KSW changed everything.

      • David,

        this is what I came up with, too, over the last few months of intense study of what is out there in the net. It IS hard to confront and your site helped a lot. Terril’s summation IS brilliant whereas I have to say that my judgment comes out much harsher given the debilitating consequences and scope of cultification KSW1 really had and still has and will even continue to have for quite some time.
        Thank yee both!

    • Terrill, this is brilliant. Deserves a post of it’s own. Hope it goes up on Scientology-cult.com as such.

      • Terrill’s post is surely one of the longest I have read on “teh intartubes” in a long time. And he makes some good points too (which I haven’t had time to fully digest yet). But for now, a few more thoughts of my own.

        We have Scientology technology and Scientology practice. I am free to make up my own mind on any and all aspects of the philosophy. I am not free to alter the practice. And by practice I mean things like basic issues on how to pass TRs, the sequence of auditing commands, the EP of the processes and the exact wording of the commands.

        So I take this to mean I must leave the author’s words intact. They may be wrong and I may disagree with them, but what the author says must stand. If I disagree with portions of that tech, it is incumbent on me to write up *my* tech myself and sign my name to it, then promote it myself.

        I like to compare auditors to technicians, for that is what they are – people who apply known processes to known problems to achieve known results. Auditors in session are not research scientists – that is a completely different hat.

        Life on this planet seems to be an eternal conflict between the 1st and 3rd dynamics, there’s even a mention of it in KSW.

        So consider the tone of KSW, it’s very much in-your-face and people reading it for the first time tend to have a “reeling” moment. The problem is that low-toned persons take it completely literally and illustrative comments become exact instructions. And so the 3rd dynamic becomes everything, which is a point of insanity (omitting the other 7), which leads to roboticness, which leads to automatons, which results in the group becoming the Borg if you will.

        It is quite obvious to any outside observer that this is what happened to the Sea Org. It might not be the basic Why, but that mechanism sure played out.

        And consider this, violating any of the 10 points of KSW 1 is the high crime. Disagreeing with anything else in KSW 1 is NOT listed as a high-crime.

    • Terril,

      Definitely article-worthy.

      I, for one, found it very useful. I’m sure there are many others who will, too.

    • Terril,

      I agree we each need to be able to evaluate the data better and realize the dergee of importance and workabilty of what we read.

      But the writings of LRH should NOT be modified because you, me and others were not able to evaluate data properly or want to save another from the problems some have encountered.

      Who would decide what part is easy to evaluate or be understood or is too much of an exagration or what LRH is “entitled” to boast about. Every page of Scn doesn’t have to be perfectly true or understandable.

      Just take what you know works and apply it, that’s all. If you disagree with it skip it. No big deal.

    • Hi Terrel,

      That was quite a post!! I didn’t read it all, but what I read I liked.

      This is an interesting subject that you bring up. We need free thinking people to evaluate these things for future survival.

      You seem like a very good guy.


    • Well,”You’de better start swimming or you’ll sink like a stone, cause the times they are achanging”.

      Just get your asses up the bridge O.K.?

      The more we ponder “history” instead of getting into session the more we gamble with the brief window open for us.

    • Terrill didn’t write this post. The post was written by a good friend of mine (10 years ago). It was actually a series of emails between me and my friend and those emails were instrumental in having me look at the Scn indoc and critical information.

      The emails were edited and put together and posted as the unindoctrination hat.

    • I’m still confused about this;

      This is what you quote from KSW;

      “By actual record the percentages are
      about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human beings will dream up bad
      technology to destroy good technology.”

      Then you go on to say;
      Twenty of these ideas will be okay,
      at least insofar as they would not destroy good technology. Some of the
      twenty would be those that actually resulted in new and workable
      technology, or which would improve already existing and workable
      technology. That would leave 99,980 ideas which would destroy whatever good
      technology this group already had.

      Isn’t LRH saying that 20 out of 100,000 (the 2%-ers would actually dream up a counter tech to actively destroy a viable tech?

      I was on staff at Dean Stokes mission when this KSW frenzy came about, that’s when we started treating everyone like an enemy or a threat instead of having fun turning people on to what Scn could do for them. Yes, it was a dinitive change…I’d never put the two together. Since I was a fairly new Scientologist I didn’t know this KSW rage was a new thing.

      STAMPING OUT became a mantra.

  6. Interesting point Oracle.
    DM has a top Tax attorney Monique Yingling who recently appeared on CNN.
    She hides his crimes ~~ She earns $1.5 million a year to do it.
    The question is ~~ Does Monique Yingling work for the Church of Scientology as her client, or personally only for Miscavige?
    And is all the $1.5 million for Yingling annually come from Parishioner money paid to the Church for services ? For Ideal Orgs ? For Super Power ?
    For IAS ? For the Library scam ?
    Is Yingling looking out for the best interests of her client if her client is C of S ? Is she watching the destruction of the Church because $1.5 million a year is too seductive ?
    How does her husband Gerald Feffer feel about the criminal client of his wife ? Is he embarrassed ?
    I invite Feffer to post on this blog making me wrong.

    • one of his more infamous clients was Leona Helmsley.

      So what do you expect if this is the roster of clients he has. He loves the criminal tax evaders!

    • Why would a tax exempt Church need to keep a tax attorney on retainer for 1.5 annually? She is another “Gift”.

  7. “By actual record the percentages are
    about twenty to 100,000 that a group of human beings will dream up bad
    technology to destroy good technology. ”

    I’m not sure your getting the actual meaning of this line though.

    • Victoria,
      I think with the suggestion that KSW is the ‘root of evil’ that the ratio of good to bad suggestions has just gone up one more on the bad side. Perhaps the author of the above will have to rewrite KSW to include that change. That would be something new to wonder about. Think , think, figure, figure and it can all be handled by a simple application of the very points of KSW.

      But hey, what’s a mind for if not to to think, think , figure, figure, logic, logic. After all, an immortal being needs to compute how to survive, right?

  8. A bit off subject, but just received the latest Source mag and some news of note.

    Here’s some completion totals over the prior 2 month period: State of Clear=14, New OT 1’s=5, OT III’s 6, New OT’s=7, (despite the Mag boasting that the Advanced org has 90 auditors, must be hard to get pc’s and WDAH for those 90), New OT VII SOLO NOTS comps=12, CL VI Auditors=1, CL IX AUditors and Internship completions=0.

    And finally, GR IV quickie completions=36.

    • Worldwide???? That’s bleak.

    • If you do that math the people going from OT1 through ot3 should be about the same. How did they start five people out on ot1 and get six ot3’s? I guess one could have been left over from the previous issue?

    • Margaret, you said, “But from my research, Flag makes about half of the world’s Clears, OT IIIs, OT Vs, and of course all the OT VIIs”.

      I can understand the OTs but half the Clears sounds like an outpoint to me. Is that because the other orgs have been bypassed by Flag?

      • She’s probably being generous here by saying that this is only half of the Clears. Based on my (admittedly a few years out of date) knowledge, most Class V orgs have not been able to make Clears for a long, long time because they do not have full CCRD delivery teams.

        SF Org’s stats are rather more abysmal. For an org that is supposedly ‘doing good’, they had a total of 23 releases in the last 2 months and 5 training (Student Hat and above). No Clears and I’m not sure if they can make Clears at the moment, they couldn’t for many years. Keep in mind also that these stats encompass 2 orgs, Day and Foundation.

  9. Freedom Fighter

    Here’s a little humourous, but effective hatting on trolls from:


    The Care and Feeding of Your Troll: A Primer

    November 1, 2006

    So, you brought home a new Internet Troll. Congratulations! If you are a first timer having a troll, you may have questions. Here are a few suggestions so that you and your troll can live in karmic balance. Now remember, each troll is different and your results may vary. However, this primer should help you get on your way. Welcome to the world of having a troll!

    How do I refer to my troll now that I have him/her?

    First, your troll may show up already named. Yet, you will find the “pre-fab” names to be rather unoriginal such as Annonymous [sic], ihateyou or yousuck. Never fear, you can always change their name. If this is your first troll, I find that it is best to give him/her a soothing, happy name to remind you that they are really just helpless, sad creatures. A good name can make all the difference! I recommend something like FluffyLoveBunny or Silly Billy Chickie Boo. How scary is that? Not so much.

    So your troll has a name! Congratulations! You are on your way!

    How do I discipline my new troll?

    Now as trolls are known to do, yours may act up from time to time. He or she may get down right nasty and vicious towards you. Remember: That is in their nature. They are inbred to act that way. It is just NOT their fault. (And rumor has it most of them were dropped on their head often as tiny, baby trolls.) Of course, your first instinct as you get used to your new troll is to lash out and want to punish them for being so incorrigible. That would be your first mistake! It only encourages their behavior. The best way to keep your little FluffyBunnyLove in harmony with you and your home is to ignore him or her. Unlike their human counterparts, neglect keeps trolls temperamentally neutral. Allowing them to see your anger or pain at their behavior merely encourages them to keep it up and makes them raging mean. Neglect. Ignore. Restore (the balance). Those are the keys to disciplining your new troll.

    Now that I have a new troll, what do I feed him?

    Like any wild animal, it is important to understand the indigenous nature of their diet. Your new troll may try to convince you that the best thing you can feed him is a diet of your anger, frustration and pain. Don’t listen. As any child can tell you, they will try to get away with anything they possibly can. It would be a mistake to listen to them. Your anger, frustration and pain is their main source of nutrition and growth and– unlike human beings who need good nutrition and growth to survive– it is vital that trolls maintain a steady diet of ambivalence and ignorant bliss to maintain their puny stature. As much as you want to punish him or her, remember that little FluffyLoveBunny needs to be ignored after he or she comes home with you. A steady diet of neglect will keep you living in harmony with your new troll!

    Where do I keep my new troll?

    That is a great (and normal) question! As with any troll, he or she will want to be front and center in your life. He or she will want your never-ending attention at all times. It is their nature. However, to live successfully with your new troll, you must remember to keep him or her locked in a corner or sitting so far in the back of the room that you forget her or she is there. Remember: Neglect makes this work! Don’t feel guilt. It is how this relationship was meant to be.

    What if my troll runs away from me and never returns? Does this mean I failed as a troll owner?

    Absolutely not! In fact, just the opposite. If your troll gives up in frustration and leaves you for another, that simply means you have done a good job in the care and feeding of your troll. Pat yourself on the back. You deserve it!

    However, remember this: The troll population is diverse and re-spawns quickly. Don’t get too comfortable. Before you know it, another troll may follow you home. But, with this handy primer, you will be ready for the care and feeding of your troll!

    Good luck with your new troll! May your journey be swift and painless!

  10. Interesting points, but to me they seem irrelevent, sorry to say. One, yes policy is not law and should be evaluated as times change ; Jim Logan posted a reference on this point earlier on this blog. Two, the tech works. To start introducing change to the tech could only be disasterous, as evidenced by what’s already happening in the C of S. IMO alteration, obsessive alteration is built into the very structure of this universe per the four conditions of existence per Pheonix Lectures. In other words, as beings we are continuously alter-ising and that works as a liability in trying to keep the tech standard, as beings feel compelled to change. I realize you only mention KSW 1 as an example of, ah, LRH’s faults, but I believe what you consider to be exaggeration on LRH’s part is his attempt to burn the concept into our heads, “don’t alter!” What does it matter if the isolated examples you gave in KSW 1 are not “to the core literally true”? The point is clear: standard tech must be preserved, if we have any chance in hell of making it. He’s not talking about policy even though it’s a PL, he’s talking about tech.
    Last point: What does it matter what kind of person LRH was? Did he have a case? I guess so, he was auditing on Solo Nots, so we know he was subject to at least that stuff and that’s enough to make anyone crazy. It’s irrelevant . Does the Tech work or not? I say it does. And I will always be grateful to LRH no matter what his shortcomings were.LRH will always have my love and respect no matter what his shortcomings were.

    • Beebercat,

      There is always a give and take between the preservation of workable technology and the freedom of individuals to look and evaluate.

      But if a being is permitted to look and evaluate, there is always the possibility that additional workable tech, or even alterations that improve the tech in some way, may be discovered.

      So, to prohibit any possibiity of improving any part of the tech, one would have to prohibit looking and evaluating. And that in itself contradicts the most basic elements of Scientology, as well as the basic nature of a thetan and his rights (which itself is delineated in the Scn basics).

      Therefore, no matter how brilliant and workable the tech, one must always permit people to look and evaluate, and one must therefore also allow the possibility that the tech can be improved or beneficially augnmented.

      A thetan has the ability and the right to look, to evaluate, and to create (postulate). Those rights can’t be abridged. To attempt to abridge them is to suppress the being. No matter how much we love the tech, not matter how brilliant we find it, no one should ever cede his or her right to discover something new. And no one should ever ask another to do so. Even if the one doing the asking is LRH.

      I therefore agree that KSW 1 formed the basis of the cultification of the church, and the baisis for the divergence of Scientology’s brilliant *tech* from the fascistic organization that the church became under DM.

      Parts of KSW 1 are workable, but parts of it go too far. Perhaps LRH had idiots cross his lines one time too many before he fired it off. Writing KSW 1 in response can certainly be understood. LRH is an amazing being, but, after all, he’s not god.

  11. *
    Marty, thanks for cleaning up the ‘sewage’ that has crept along here.
    – Time for a new post, please. :-)

  12. The more I think about this, the more it pisses me off. I see your essay on LRH as carefully constructed natter. You’ve very cleverly stated this in an intellectual format which tends to hide the fact that it is indeed, just natter. And one of the tricks being used in your argument is to basically state that Scientologists have been brainwashed by LRH himself into believing that LRH is faultless. So therefore it follows that anyone disputing or refusing to listen to attacks on LRH automatically makes one guilty of having been brainwashed.
    The point I want to make is “Have you experienced case gain with Scientology?” There’s no arguing with that. It’s an amazingly beautiful gift to enable a thetan to blow charge and rise out of the insanity of this universe. And LRH is the one who made it possible. End of story.

    • I think one of the fundamental problems with the CoM is that they have taken KSW into a whole new level by using it also on policy (instead of just tech) and also into a justification to deify LRH.

      KSW as it applies to “standard tech” does have a place. When you start applying it to *everything else* that LRH ever wrote, said or did after 1950, you enter into deification and dogma land.

    • Let’ see Beebercat if I have understood you correctly?
      Terril Park claim x, but you have allegedly spotted some of his character flaws, therefore; x is false whatever x is!

    • Agreed…

      Scientology is for one to apply to their own self. LRH would never have anyone believe he was perfect. I know he wasn’t. But Scientology well delivered and practiced produces results nothing else will.

      For that LRH stands above all the rest.


    • crashing upwards

      Hi Bebercat. I have to disagree with you. Calling it natter is a cheap shot. And no one is saying stop using what works.
      Challenging KSW understandably would invite attacks. Overall Terrill makes sound points. It was a brave post and not likely to be accepted by the kool aid drinkers. But it deserves analysis and reflection and not dismissal as “natter”. That sort of dismissal only makes his case.

    • Excuse me, I appreciate your devotion and loyalty. But this “Hubbard made it all possible” is not quite true.

      Thousands of people upon thousands of people working together have made it all possible. We ALL contributed. And until each one of us acknowledges our responsibility good and bad we will not be in command of the Scientology.

  13. Terril,

    Thank you for the insightful post.
    I found it interesting and beneficial. I have been sorting through much of this information alone and rejecting some, putting some on hold; until more information is obtainable, and holding tight to many of my rock solid certainties, which in the beginning were shaken miserable by the sheer shock value of the date taken in.

    I’ve seen a perfect painting.
    I have heard a perfect song.
    I have yet to see a perfect human being.

    The Muslims know this. That is why, most of the Muslim weavers, when creating a hand woven rug, weave an “intentional mistake” into the body of the design, just to insure no disrespect for their God, who they consider perfect.

    LRH was brilliant and incredible, as many here realize. Was he perfect?
    The good news is, there were many “perfect auditing sessions” in my history and I have a good memory.
    Some, not so great, as my last adventure at the Co$ left me in spiritual pain. Luckily, I survived that and finally decided to look.
    My best guess, since I recently disclosed my real name is that I will soon be declared. I do know, with certainty, I am not a suppressive person. Of course, per the data, that says nothing, but trust me on this one!

    In all my searches online, in trying to obtain truth on this subject, I have found this blog to be the most sane point of reference.
    Thank you Marty for that and thank you Terill for a great post.

    • Penny, you wrote:

      “I do know, with certainty, I am not a suppressive person.”

      THAT is exactly what an SP would say! Real Scientologists might ask themselves sometimes if they could possibly be an SP. Only SPs have certainty about, they are not!

      • *sigh*

      • crashing upwards

        Sorry Snowwhite, but Penny never said she didnt ever ask herself if she was or was not what. YOUR POST is the one and SP would offer, attempting to cave her in and label her suppressive. And its obvious to all here.

      • Snowwhite,

        Your post begs the question…so, do you think you are an SP?

        I can vouch for Penny however because I know her well, extremely well, and I can tell you with complete certainty she does not have a suppressive bone in her body.

        Frankly, Snowwhite, if your tech was in and you actually cared about your public you’d probably still have her as a dedicated church going member.

        Sorry for the evaluation Penny, but I’m sure you thought long and hard prior to your announcement, and wouldn’t have made it if you thought there was any hope of standard tech being applied.

      • Snowhite,
        OK, let’s say I’ve read the Anti-social Personality issue, I’ve introverted on some of my failings, I’ve wondered whether or not I’m Suppressive and I get to that paragraph that says if I did wonder then I’m NOT SP. Whew, I think, I’m NOT an SP because I DID wonder if I was while reading the issue. Does that realization that I’m NOT an SP, as per the HCOB, then mean that I AM an SP?

        If after you’ve read this HCOB once, wondered if you are Suppressive, gotten to that sentence, realized you aren’t then does that mean from then on you have to wonder each time you read it so as not to be an SP?

        Do you know what the ol’ ‘witch test’ was? Perhaps you can recall a time you dunked a young woman under water and if she drowned she wasn’t a witch, if she survived she was a witch and so she was burned at the stake?

        OK, here’s something simpler, I AM an SP, I have been declared such. Am I now NOT an SP? If so, would you please tell DM?

        Also, would you please respond to Caliwog’s comment above?

      • Here you are again. I’m an SP auditor who audits SP preclears and pre OTs! But you now what? Piss off!!!

      • Snowhite when you become 18 maybe we can have a talk in real life about things. Maybe we could even meet at the Amsterdam Org, oh wait they are 78.000 Euros behind on their rent so maybe not.


        My own translation of the dutch news article:

        -Scientology sued for rent arrears
        April 27, 2010

        The landlord Libra (http://www.libravastgoed.nl/)has filed a “kort geding” (interim injunction proceedings) against Scientology. The movement is facing a rent arrears of 78,000 euros. De Telegraaf (dutch newspaper) reported this Tuesday.

        Yesterday were demanded the interim measures of evacuation of the building on the Damrak and payment of arrears of rent. It is the second time that Libra gets to go to court to force payment. “Sometimes it takes a long time, but until now they always come with money on the table. The case is a big stick for us,” said the Libra lawyer.

        A spokesperson says Scientology is not woried about the debt. “We are busy with more important things, like a project where we help children eleven years old to come of their addiction.” Thursday, the court ruling. Scientology in the Netherlands about 500 members. The movement is controversial because it is said to be be a cult that brainwashes and financial undresses followers.

      • Hi Jim Logan,

        LOL on your rebuttal to Snowhite!!

        I thought the same type of thing.

        It’s like the old ” Do you still beat your wife?”

        And let’s say you are declared SP and then you cog that you are an SP then does that instantly mean that you are not??

        This is what happens I think when justice is left in the hands of the “not quite bright” using the KSW jargon. And while I am on the subject of KSW, I believe that we all need to think for ourselves and disagree with what we want to disagree with. I don’t think the tech should be altered at all and should be applied as LRH said if we are to call it Scientology.

        And I do want to do Scientology.

        I feel that the current CofM is altering the tech and people are getting watered down versions of it.

        Further I do have doubts as whether or not the upper Bridge is really there and finalized. ( OT 9-22?) If these are not in final form then SOMEONE OTHER THAN LRH, would have to use judgement and get them into a usable form. This would seem to violate KSW. But we are not robots. We have to think-decide-act and our results will tell the tale.

        I don’t think LRH would want us to sit around like lost sheep, he would want us to use the tools he gave us to MAKE IT GO RIGHT, which is the supreme test of a thetan isn’t it?


    • Penny,

      My love, of course you aren’t suppressive. Suppressives don’t make case gain. You have.

      A suppressive isn’t in valence so can’t duplicate, thus can’t as-is.

      So there, Snowhite, pflllllllt!

      Snow, the reason a real SP has certainty he or she is not a suppressive lies in the data on ser facs not in certainty. Certainty is good. Fixation is not.

      An SP is always right, and everyone else is always wrong. We all make others wrong now and then. We all have case involving this. But a suppressive case is anchored here. Making others wrong, Making self right. Surviving by denying other’s survival. Domination and escaping domination. SP’s don’t have a level two case until you can get them to entertain the idea that they might have done something wrong.

      But what is making someone wrong if not an overt? And what is quoting someone’s heartfelt statement of personal integrity and declaring , “THAT is exactly what an SP would say!” What kind of person justifies such unkindness and how can it be anything other than wrong?

      Hmmmm. A story:

      “I’m happy,” the child says, her white dress new and clean. “The world is beautiful!”

      “Happy,” sneers the creature Snow, wringing its gnarled fingers and glancing sideways, its vision impeded by malignant growths. “Happy? Only miserable people tell you they’re happy. It’s a desperate cry for help.” Snorts. Coughs. Spits up a malodorous bile and sniffs it rapturously. “Ah, you lucky child. I’m here to help you. I can make you truly happy. None of this pretense.”

      Snow bends stiffly, watching the glistening puddle on the floor and groaning inaudibly, until it lays a long and languid tongue in the bile. Not bothering to lick or move, Snow’s eyes roll backwards and disappear as it savors the taste.

      The little girl looks on in horror. She steps back to keep her freshly shined shoes away from the spreading puddle.

      “That’s so, good,” Snow murmurs, eyes closed, the syllables hushed, indistinct and sibilant. “So good.”

      Slowly, Snows eyes refocus on the child, tongue reluctantly returned for speech, right cheek still lying next to the puddle. “Only a very bad and very evil child would not want my help. You’ll see that in the end. When you recognize how bad you really are, you will thank me. You will see my beauty and admire me. I’m just here to help you. No one else can.”

      Snow’s eyes roll back to the puddle, the longing so strong as to be palable. “Now, if you’ll just go back to your room and lock the door, I have something important to attend to,” Snow rasps. “Important.”

    • Jim Logan>[Snowhite] would you please respond to Caliwog’s comment above?

      I think we’re going to be waiting a while, Jim.

      BTW, Terrill’s essay makes a lot of sense to me — but if I understand LRH correctly, you can’t pick and choose which bits of the tech, or even which bits of policy, to believe. Isn’t that squirreling?


  14. Soory, my posts above are in response to Terril’s post, somehow I didn’t do the reply button.

  15. RE: Troll Tim H.
    “Arguing with a fool makes two of them”
    [or more . . . ]. Thank you for flushing.

    • And the internet version of the same thing:

      Don’t roll in the mud with a pig – you get dirty and the pig likes it

  16. Terril,
    Ol’ buddy, I’ve read pretty much everything you have, save for ars (I also don’t spend lots of time perusing the so-called ‘natter boards’, including Minerva’s) and yet I’ve come out with a different understanding of KSW.

    I am without question, and will remain as far as I can see forward on the subject of the 10 points of that policy letter as firm and ardent in the importance of them as could be. Under my personal care, in the absence of good sense appealed to and wisdom shining, well, you know the rest.

    Consider me indoctrinated. I consider I have sense enough to evaluate the importance of the policy.

    The technologies of application of the principles of the Axioms and Factors, the Pre-Logics and the basics of the subject are maintained by following the 10 points. Again, under my personal care, you can expect me to follow them.

    I’ve recently re-read the early issues of the Journal of Scientology. One in particular, with the tape lectures of the time, spring 53, covers the point of certainty being knowledge. It gives some simple procedures that go over ‘certain it is’ ‘certain it isn’t’ various topics.

    It’s issue 16-G, Scientology, The Science of Certainty.

    For some, KSW seems to be a policy that could use a little of the process described in the above issue and tapes: ‘KSW is valid’ ‘KSW isn’t valid’. Or a similar sort thing (you have to read the issue and listen to the tapes to get the full idea and theory behind the resolution of a ‘maybe’.)

    One last note, I don’t speculate on how LRH came to rise above the bank. In fact, he clearly explains it beginning with the Original Thesis. I’m grateful he did as I come to rise above it myself.

  17. I loved Terrill’s excellent treatment of Scientology’s most sacred cow, KSW1. No doubt the most wrongly applied HCOPL ever published. Function monitors structure, or at least that was the theory at one time. Now you get in trouble if you try to take some responsibility.

    If there is altered tech, this can be worked out through the application of the logics and axioms, and the Factors. Since these are the basis of Scientology, all policy and tech can be evaluated for correct application. LRH said:”If it doesn’t work, it is being altered.”.

    Also, anyone who has gotten high enough on the bridge can create a new bridge. If it weren’t like that, LRH’s efforts would ultimately mean nothing. LRH was the first, he cannot be the last. We can admire LRH for giving us some strong shoulders to stand on, but we need to stand. Taking responsibility ultimately means being Source.

  18. Hey Marty,

    Is there a “Miscavage Meltdown” correction list?

    1. jumped chain – LFBD
    2. running the wrong chain – x
    3. went on too long – tick
    4. went past an F/N on the chain – sf
    5. chain unflat – x
    6. distractions – x

    Yes, went way off track, felt like I was being assulted along side Mike Rinder and now realize it was just a restimutation of mine, but I’m back now. Whooooow! F/N vgi’s


    Marty Mike for the TA.

  19. Here’s a post made by “Maria” over at Geir’s blog back in Nov-2009. It is nothing short of brilliant, and I think does a good job reminding us what Ron meant by “Standard Tech” and “Keeping Scientology Working”.


    From: Maria
    Date: 6-Nov-2009
    Subject: Scientology the philosophy vs Applied Scientology

    Each year, L. Ron Hubbard would record a message that went out to Scientologists around the world. The message was always called Ron’s Journal.

    From about 1963 to 1968, he worked flat out on completing research on what is now referred to as standard technology. This was incorporated into all of the auditor’s courses from Class 0 – 7 and in 1968, releasing the Class 8 course. In 1965, he released a policy letter called Keeping Scientology Working, stressing the importance of using exact applications of standard technology.

    In Ron’s Journal 1968 he makes the distinction between standard technology, to which Keeping Scientology Working applies to and the philosophy of Scientology, which is not authoritarian.

    This excerpt from Ron’s Journal 1968, clearly states his intentions on the difference between the philosophy of Scientology and applied Scientology.

    I am posting this here because I have seen all manner of problems resulting from not distinguishing the differences between these two branches of Scientology.

    Excerpt from Ron’s Journal 1968 by L. Ron Hubbard:

    “Now there’s something I’ve been meaning to point out to you about Scientology that’s not been mentioned in some years and it needs to be mentioned because of the exactness of Class 8 and the stress on compliance with the exact processes. I don’t think Class 8 was well understood. The message was not one that one had to comply, it was that when one used these exact processes in this exact way got 100% tech on all of his preclears. The message was that we had achieved 100% tech with these exact processes wherever they were exactly applied and with one or more Class 8s in every org we could achieve 100% results which we are now doing.

    “Now this is what I haven’t pointed out for some time. There are two branches to Scientology. One is Scientology the philosophy, it is a religious philosophy, but it is a philosophy and that is something you use to think with, to wonder with, to accept or reject and the other is Scientology the applied philosophy and that is where it applies directly to processing. Now there’s a lot more to Scientology of course than processing. Philosophy means a love or pursuit of wisdom or a search for the underlying causes and principles of reality. We certainly have that in the body of Scientology — a great number of principles and causes exist in Scientology today. It’s probably the largest written and spoken body of work of any philosophy ever undertaken. Out of this many things can be made and of it we can say such things as what is true for you is true for you in Scientology. This is a vast area of observations in the humanities. It is yours to think with, work with, accept or reject as you wish. It is still there, it is still valuable. No matter how old the book is, no matter how old the tape, it is still part of the body of Scientology known as philosophy. There’s nothing authoritarian about it, it is yours to accept or not as you see fit. It is Scientology the philosophy. Nothing has changed it.

    “Now there’s this other thing called applied Scientology or processing. Because it obtains a result and is valuable to you personally, processing could seem to be the whole of Scientology. Well it isn’t. Goodness, when you think of the number of policy letters we have on organization and these other things and look at this new third party law, that is actually something you think with, not something you process with. Now, Scientology processing today is made up only of those things which apply uniformly to all cases. Processing is made up of common denominators which apply to all life. There are no variables, no different cases, and this is a considerable achievement. It is a specialized form of Scientology and a specialized use. And these exact processes must be exactly done to produce an exact result. It’s like making pie. If you don’t use the same ingredients the same way in each case why you don’t get pie. And we call this standard tech. And if an auditor is to see it then you really have to get him to do it exactly that way a few times and suddenly he does see it and by doing it why he sees in the preclear that it is the right way to do it and after that he doesn’t require any further persuasion — he has seen it — so it is true for him. I doubt you could make a Class 8 trained auditor do tech in any non-standard way. He has seen the fantastic precision of modern processes — he knows he can get results that way and so he does it without any variation. He isn’t doing it because I say so, he’s doing it because it works and he knows he can make real pie. Not to compare you to a pie, of course.”
    Source: http://www.scnforum.org/index.php?t=msg&goto=77&S=bc320733f9a0f990643340362ff5604c#msg_77

    • Bravo Margaret,

      Thanks for the reference.

      I hope this clarifies it for Terril and others.

    • I think the problem enters in when people believe that Ron is a being of a higher order than any of us will ever be and he knows things that we don’t. Rather than inspecting then, they take the data as 100% true and this is certainly the operating basis for many, many Scientologists. In the past, I have tried to filter decisions through what Ron would do (because he knows more than I do). I have come to realize how irresponsible and destructive this is. I respect and admire Ron and use his wisdom every day, but I won’t make myself less.
      I thought I would never know what really happened in Scientology history, but this site and others have provided me with much Time Place Form and Event which have allowed me to as-is and properly evaluate. I appreciate the unsanitized version.
      IMO the lack of inspection is what is making the Cof M a hell. The arguments used for the Idle orgs, various fundraising schemes and reverse scientology do not hold up to casual inspection and if you are “in” it is too uncomfortable to permit looking. It is easier to dismiss quesions as CI, disaffection, etc.

    • Thank you for this reference. It really brings a clarity to the subject of KSW that I can think with.

    • Freedom Fighter

      What a great reference! Thanks for posting this Margaret!

    • Margaret, this is the perfect reference! Thanks.

    • Thanks so much, Margaret. I’m going to go and listen to this lecture, I think. It’s a perfect clarification on this subject.

  20. Hey Marty, hi everyone. Just wanted to let you know today was off the hook awesome!

    Marty …my life has been getting better by the day since meeting you, exponentially since auditing, and off the hook with the awesome Independent Scientology community around the world. And my life was already pretty amazing (except for the big hole of a loss when I realized I could not support the “Church”). But truth and facts unsnarled that snakepit that was holding Scientology hostage!

    So …not to be redundant … but because there’s even more to thank you for today:

    Hope everyone has a great week this week! It’s going to be my best ever :-) and it if isn’t yours, well…it can get there, better than before. THAT is the way of Life.
    ∞ L✩ve

  21. Wow. I just finished reading Blown For Good. Amazing book. It makes sense now. It answered so many questions. It answered all my questions about the key int execs. It put it all in context. It’s a game-changer for anyone who reads it. It’s not even critical. Just factual. The stories are amazing and compelling. Their truth is obvious. Any staff member can see that. I watched the LA org grand opening video after I finished the book and it was like I was watching it with a different set of eyes. What a joke. What a charade. What a hoax. The end of the book totally blew me away. The ex-int staff at PAC were so gnarly. So jaded. So beaten down and disaffected. Now I get it. There were a few noble exceptions. Ken Mortenson among them. I had no idea he’d been WDC Gold!! He might have been down in folder archives at AOLA when I was there, but he did a great job and he held his head high and didn’t look like a DB like a lot of the other guys did. He probably considered it a vacation!! Anyway, the book is amazing and I highly recommend it to anyone.

  22. I’ve been reading the Freedom website, the outpoints are glaring. Just from Jenny Linson:

    “Where I come from, you don’t just walk out on your wife without saying anything.” Jenny, you come from the Sea Org and that is typical.

    “Now, after he left, I found out that on our wedding day he stole the money my grandmother had given us as a wedding gift for our honeymoon.” Jenny, how can you steal money that was given to you as a gift?

    ” While I was away on projects, he sold my BMW and my Honda del Sol and spent the money. ” Really Jenny? Can you tell me how he was able to sell and transfer a vehicle that belonged only to you without your signature on the pink slip?

    “On a personal level, he spent my money, too—he spent my inheritance.” That is a generality. Was it 5.00 or 5000.00 or part or all of it? And how could he possibly have spent it if it was not in a joint account you authorized him to use?

    “He was taken off post three or four times because of his negligence and, frankly, his incompetence.” But DM cannot be taken off post for negligence and incompetence can he? It seems not to matter to her if a person is negligent and incompetent, it is whether they can be busted for it!

    I’ll tell you a story about Linson. At Flag one year it was the usual. Staff working 100 plus hours a week, no libs, under nourished, half paid, sleep deprived, pimped into the ground until they couldn’t permit themselves to think anymore. And it was Sea Org Day. And Tom Devocht who was CO CMO in Florida got up in front of every Sea Org member assembled in the auditorium and announced not one Sea Org member was getting a promotion or award that year because they just hadn’t earned it ( you jerk TOM!) BUUUUT! But Jenny, she was the ONLY ONE getting a promotion or stripes or whatever bone it was he was throwing away that day, that year. She rose proudly from her seat and went to collect it. Can you believe that shit? I would have DIED if that had been me! But not Jenny! She cracked the whip all right that year and was the only one worthy of honor! Applause was too good for those staff working those hours under those conditions! Excuse me? Does it take a rocket scientist to figure out if all the people below you are so fucking downstat how can you be so fucking upstat? She snatched her award and proudly returned to her seat!!! WTF?!?!

    And THAT descibes Jenny Linson.

    And DM? He wears ten pounds of medals on his uniform when he does inspections. Where did he get those from? Since he has been in charge from the age of 21, he had to GIVE THEM TO HIMSELF! The FIRST thing I noticed about the guy coming face to face was that he had to buy those for himself and stick them on, because, well I’m good at math. And that says it all. I realized what a carnival abbracadabbra act was coming toward me, because well, I did the math.

    Now, if these are the LEADERS, where the hell do you think we are going?

    To the fuckin bus station in Clearwater on a one way ticket out of Dodge!

    I’m not religious but the ten commandments are easy math.

    Bearing false witness is social taboo. Hubbard said injustice ALWAYS recoils on those that deal in it.

    And the Church can stack up false witness’ on top of one another. But that is not going to change the fact that the injustice of that is going to recoil on them so fast they are going to feel the slap.

    A uniform can only cover up so much.

    A title given to you but monitored by another is never really yours.

    This Freedom sight whoever put it up is a disgrace and about the worse PR I have seen. Anyone with an I.Q. over 100 will get nausiated reading the National Enquirer type of whining and complaining there. They are holding up all these execs x wives complaining what has been done to them and what a motivator flow they are on.

    HUH? WTF?

    Can I get a witness?

    • Hey Teoracle I was intrigued by your comment that you have been reading the Freedom mag on line. I didn`t know I could do that so I went to check this out.
      I concurr with your observations. I know and dealt with Jenny many times while at Flag. The photos of these women are something. I had NEVER in my life seen Jenny smile! (OK may once or twice) and I have to say that this is the most forced smile I`ve ever seen in this article.

      I wanted to check the traffic to this site and let me tell you that Marty`s blog has more trafficc than the “dmfreedommag.com” check it for yourself:

      Miscavology ra-ra mag:


      Marty`s blog:


      Can`t wait to see midget taken down from any position of power as he sure will be because it is inevitable, it is just a matter of time. And his time is ticking.

    • And lastly, there are two other funky issues…half truths…on this Tom Devocht thing and the Freedom Website. Firstly, Tom is only referred to as a construction worker through this entire series from every angle. That guy was the CO CMO Clearwater for YEARS. The TOP man in Florida over that entire Land Base. On the Freedom site with all the false witnessing and whining, they dare not mention actual names, and I suspect they have been advised not to do so otherwise become open to law suits for libel slander gossip lies etc etc. But I don’t think they are safe not using names because they have peoples spouses up there . This is teen age behavior in our current culture. Teen age facebook culture. Would someone in the Church PLEASE Grow up and act responsibly! And for the love of God next time someone is in an interview headed for national television and the interviewer asks why nobody ever contacts the police can you explain it is against Church Policy and listed as a suppressive act in the ethics book to offer up a Scientologist to the police? I can’t believe one single person couldn’t communicate this to Anderson Cooper! It’s a withold so deep nobody dares to mention it, even in an explanation when they are out of the group!

      • “listed as a suppressive act in the ethics book”

        Please explain, I find it disturbing.

      • Tom is only referred to as a construction worker through this entire series from every angle. That guy was the CO CMO Clearwater for YEARS.

        Typical. But Bingo: Tragic to say, but that very thing — lies, misrepresentation and deception — has come to be recognized as the brand of “Church” of “$cientology”.

        This type of action can now be predicted from corporate Co$.

        Teens can be irresponsible and not yet fully aware of others but as a whole are not so strategically, intentionally, persistently nasty.

      • Wow…juts took another viewpoint, too — the viewpoint from whence that originates…

        even more insidious … the condescending degrade is *how DM toxin really views people* !!!

        Swathed in capes of delusion, he literally *believes* everyone around him is a treacherous, traitor, incompetent SP and if not for him there would be no universe! :-( !!!

      • Hi CAT DADDY,

        Are you asking about the fact that it is listed as a Crime or High Crime in Scientology ethics Code to turn over another Scientologist to the authorities when the Scientologist is in good standing?

        If so, then yes that is true. Just pick up a copy of the book:Introduction to Scientology Ethics, and look at the Justice Codes.

        It doesn’t mean that you can’t turn someone over to the police, because LRH talks about doing that too, in the same book. As everything else in life, judgement is required.

        I’m afraid Scientolgy as enforced by DM starts to make robots and PTS people who cannot act on their own initiative. People that are so afraid of “losing their eternity” that they lose their common decency.


      • “Scientologist to the authorities when the Scientologist is in good standing?”

        Same crime same treatment, I totally disagree with that good standing gets you a get out of jail free card.

  23. partial lyrics

    How I treasure every minute
    Being part of it, being in it
    With the urge to move on

    I’ve travelled every country, I’ve travelled in my mind
    It seems we’re on a journey, a trip through space and time
    And somewhere lies the answer
    To all the questions why
    What really makes the difference
    Between all dead and living things, the will to stay alive

    Like a roller in the ocean (la la la la la la-la)
    Life is motion (la la la la la la-la)
    Move on (la la la la-la)

    The morning breeze that ripples the surface of the sea
    The crying of the seagulls that hover over me
    I see it and I hear it
    But how can I explain
    The wonder of the moment
    To be alive, to feel the sun that follows every rain

    Like a wind that’s always blowing (la la la la la la-la)
    Life is flowing (la la la la la la-la)
    Move on (la la la la-la)
    Like the sunrise in the morning (la la la la la la-la)
    Life is dawning (la la la la la la-la)
    Move on (la la la la-la)
    How I treasure every minute (la la la la)
    Being part of it (la la la la-ah)
    Being in it
    With the urge to move on

    To Delivery! To discovery and Life and Love.

    • Move(in) On UP! ☼ The best blog anywhere! :)

      • Veritas — fantastic — love ABBA and Julie Andrews!!

        (BTW — how do you embed youtube vids into an email rather than the url address ) (you know, we need to include hatting here :)

      • Windhorse, look under a vid on YouTube, see button: Embed. Click.

        It will give you options, such as size (I pick small for blogs) and even colored borders. (I usually deselect “include related videos).

        After selecting your option, copy the code in the small window bar, and paste.

  24. Hope you got to see the waltz in the end… cause that’s what we’re doing!;)

  25. I’ve experienced lots of case gain with scientology. The main reason I’ve been promoting the Freezone for a decade now.

    I like the statement that scientology may not be a perfect way, but is a workable way.

    I should have stated that I’m not clever enough to have been the author. It was written by someone who posted under the name
    ” Unindoctrinate”. He was a member of COS when he wrote it, perhaps 6 years ago. I don’t know his real name, or what he’s doing now.

    • crashing upwards

      Thanks Terril for assigning ownership of that article to “unindoctrinate”.
      And thank you for reposting it.
      It triggered some interesting follow up comments and reminders including the fact that function dictates structure. There are 2 scientology’s, one philosophical and one applied. Both have been corrupted and sullied. Applying KSW to the “applied” or the tech aspect of Scientology as Beebercat correctly argues for is important. It works. Back when many of us actually thought we were in a race to clear the planet we swallowed Policy like this hook,line and sinker. There was no room for questioning policy or the luxury of experimentation. LRH said dont do it, dont even think about doing it. It was all a part of the KSW indoctrination.
      Something went wrong.
      “Unindoctrinate” mentions LRH as the “who” in several areas. I suppose one cannot be “source” and rule an organization for 30 years more or less and only be recognized as the “who” on the good things. That would raise LRH above being human and that again is the point of getting people to unindoctrinate from the cultish aspects without loosing the invaluable processes.
      But I disagree that your not clever enough to have written it. If there are any flies on you, they are paying rent.

  26. This is a wonderful and inspiring speech — I find it poignant at this time, at our juncture right now with scientology and our future.

    It is something I believe we must always remember. “For peace is a process” …



  27. I thought Terril’s post was respectful and thought provoking and I think that it brings up a very necessary issue, one that has caused the world of Scientology much grief – that is to say, when and how do we shut down our own powers of observation and personal evaluation because we are members of a church or a discipline?

    I got into Scientology almost 40 years ago and it wasn’t until last year really that I started to question some of LRH’s materials. True, these were almost always green on white and my disagreements had more to do with what Ron DIDN’T say or emphasize more than what he did say. But I think that the attitude of being UNQUESTIONING towards “our leaders” is not only against what LRH said early on about “authority”, but has also resulted in much of the trouble with Miscavige and the current church.

    This I have found out is very common in religion by the way. The “deity” can never be wrong. In Judeo-Christian theology, God “walks in light”, never “in darkness.” Jesus is “without sin.” He is perfect. He has NEVER commited an overt act. See the recent Freedom mag; David Miscavige is ALL good. Of course, most people know that an official church mag, for PR reasons if nothing else, is not going to print and widely distribute any stories of its leader’s faults/overts. But the act of worshipping the leader COMPLETELY does in fact result in the “understood agreement” that the leader, the source, the diety IS NEVER WRONG. The Pope is “infallible.” The President of the Mormon Church’s pronouncements are revelations from God (so you don’t question them).

    I will say that as someone who was an auditor/CS for more than three decades, that LRH’s point in KSW 1 about people altering the tech is completely correct. The cog I had the last time I read KSW 1 on course a few years ago is that people left to their own devices (in Scientology for sure) WILL DO ANYTHING! I mean they will come up with the wierdest ideas and actions due to their mu’s.

    And need I remind y’all that that is what is exactly occuring in the present time? Leaders of the Church who OBVIOUSLY have not TRULY understood the ARC Triangle, the Tone Scale, the purpose of Ethics, the definition of postulate, self-determinism, HCO PL Manners, and on and on and on……. Uhm, you know, like they can’t assimilate straight Scientology or something like that. So I think LRH’s points on this are very well made.

    But despite my VERY deep reality on how standard tech works (and how you DON’T get results handling cases doing it “another” way), I now think it is not only very OK to personally question or disagree with LRH, but I think per Ron’s own writings/lectures on study and taking in data, one SHOULD demand of oneself that the data he reads is real to him before COMPLETELY agreeing with it and SHOULD make it his own, not just accept it because someone else said it (see LRH’s own point on this in regards to himself in Study lecture “Training:Duplication” near the end about the stage of “realization” where something is true for you because you know it yourself, not just because Ron said it.

  28. I will start this by disclaiming that Violence sucks, and I hope it remains out of this struggle on both (or all three?) sides.

    However, having said that, I would like to point out that Florida is a Conceal Carry state. A 7 on 1 confrontation as described here qualifies under Florida law as “Disparity of Force,” which would equate with a “justified self defense shooting”.

    It’s a horrific idea that I am NOT advocating, I’m just saying that DM and company should be really, really careful when pulling these sorts of stunts.

    Even if it wasn’t DM’s target who defended himself it could easily have been an innocent bystander — witnessing the disparity of force and coming to Mike’s aid. A situation that would’ve been bad for all involved on all sides.

    This was a dangerous, dangerous move — conceived by dangerously ignorant minds.

    It’s clear DM is not consulting attorneys before pulling this crap.

    • You have a point about arming oneself, they have gone beyond normal behavior. Hurray for the second amendment!

    • Ray said: “It’s clear DM is not consulting attorneys before pulling this crap.”

      I agree. Not smart. Stupid, reckless, and dangerous, in fact.

      Just Me.

    • Freedom Fighter

      Very good point, Ray. My guess is they’re banking on there being no witnessess so they can make up whatever story they’d like. Very risky dice game to play, IMO, especially when you consider the intervention-by-a-good-samaritan bystander variable.

    • If you arm yourself because of DM it means he has won

    • Everyone has their place amongst their fellow persons in imprint and influence. You have to really love someone before you can hate them enough to shoot them. There isn’t much love between Sea org people, you cannot afford that since you can’t be in charge of it, when someone else is in charge of you. I think I could swear on a stack of Bibles nobody loved David enough, to evolve into hate deep enough to shoot him. And Scientologist is usually sane enough to come up with solutions way beyond something like that. I do not forsee anybody getting shot or killed in this street fight. Love and passion are taboo in the social arena and ARC’x are cleaned up and problems releases come up with solutions. I’m the only one I know of that uses voo doo dolls.

  29. Hi, I just wanted to comment that I have seen other sites that are anti-rathbun which are portraited as “from individual scientologists” but which I am positive are “OSA-generated”. This sites have patetic traffic and therefore “support”.
    There is a site called compete.com that shows the traffic for a particular site and I was checking Marty`s site to the above mentioned and you can actually see the results here for Marty`s site:


    When you check the “OSA-generated” ones there isn´t even a report that can be generated because you get a message that says
    we do not have a Site Profile for:_site.com____”

    Marty is upstat for this month with 13,037 unique visitors in April compared to 4,120 the previous month.

    Keep it up mate!

  30. Ray,
    I think DM consulted Snowhite before pulling this crap :-)

  31. Geez, maybe we should all carry about a cell phone to record, just in case. They should have been arrested – but then, some were Mike’s family, very hard situation. But they knew that didnt they? Use the family members.

    • I like the idea of Mike having a 24×7 videographer, recording all the goings on. Maybe you can set something up in your car Mike, that you can just flip on in a moments notice.

  32. Re: “I feel some pangs of guilt that I raised her in the SO and that she is now caught in the web of lies. ”

    Me too.

    I thought I was doing right, and she had some wins…at least I got my younger one with me.

  33. I think I’ve to change my nickname to “simplicissimus”.
    Since I’ve done the student Hat with spectular wins and after my OT IV the theory of Scientology became very simple to me.
    Many times I couldn’t understand why my fellow Scientologists could see all kind of significances in Lrh Tech I just couldn’t percieve. I’d thousands of handlings (maa, registrars, seniors, qual, fellow staffs ….) where people wanted to get me to see and understand what Lrh wrote in certain References. So many times I didn’t see those significances that other saw in it, so I went into apathy and self inval.
    But now, after all that is happening my self esteem is rising each day.
    I never understood the fuss that was made about KSW and the seriousness connected to it and the constant indication I would have KSW not in. This was a big riddle for me. What the hell are they talking about ?
    Here is my understanding of KSW applied on a cooking class:
    We take a successful cook that is teaching the right tech to cook and run a restaurant to about 10 future cooks that want to open a restaurant.
    If all 10 cooks are succesful afterwards they duplicated the tech and were applying it correctly and propably would raise hell on their juniors to cook the right way.
    By those cooks that are not successful, you’ll find out that one or more of the 10 points of “Keeping cooking and running a successful restaurant Working” is out. That’s all !
    Per my own understanding it’s no more complicated.
    The same is with KSW. Lrh, when he wrote it was propably somehow frustrated and made it dramatic for to impinge more.
    But the main message I got was when you do it right you’ll get the expected results, and when you do it wrong you have a big mess and all kind of problems so please…..learn it the right way and do it right, he was begging for it.
    That’s all !
    I don’t see any indoctrination in it, nothing wrong, but a very clearcut simple communication and in fact very theta. You can apply it to any subject 100%.
    So please, sorry for being a little bit sarcastic, can the people here that are more intelligent than me, explain what I didn’t get from KSW. I’m really curious.
    The christians were fighting and killing each other, over centuries about the real meaning of eating bread (the flesh of Jesus)and drinking the blood of Jesus.
    You can take anything written by LRH, make out of it a holly scripture then discuss what it really means and fight about it. It’s fun and keeps the thinkingness running.
    One could discuss about the consequence that LRH stated man is a soul. I can imagine of people then, that do no more care about their body as a consequence. So one could than say the guy is ill because of LRH said he is a thetan.

    I apologize again for being sarcastic. But I could restrain myself.
    Now I gonna have a good dinner and then continue on my OPERATING THETAN TR0.
    I just love it !
    Never had so cheap wins !

    Have a good day.


    • @LO,

      I’m sure you have you tongue stuck right in the middle of your cheek when saying that! :-)

      But I’m certain you are correct. KSW 1 really is that simple and there is no need for others to add extra complexity or “meaning” to it. In fact, if people do that, they have already missed the boat – adding extra complexities comes under the heading of what KSW 1 says NOT to do!

      The old man was obviously royally pissed off when he wrote that issue. Maybe one too many numbnuts crossed his path that day, I doubt we’ll ever know for sure.

    • LO,
      I got the very same message from KSW. Not an implant, not an indoctrination, not some theft of my rights, just plain old “Hey, do it this way and it works. That’s the whole bloody point, in’it!”

  34. Having derailed this thread I’ll compound that felony by giving a brief Film review. I just saw
    ” Agora” which has Rachel Weitz taking the role
    of Hypatia, a famous teacher of mathematics and Philosophy at the great library of Alexandria
    in around 400AD who lived through one of the destructions of the world’s then greatest library.

    It recieved lukewarm reviews in the UK and is only showing in one cinema in London. However on the movie website imdb it has recieved many rave reviews by readers.

    In this movie Hypatia is asked by her most famous pupil, Bishop Synesius, to convert to christianity. This philosopher and first female writer on mathematics replied:-

    “You are not permitted to doubt your faith, I must.”

    It is in that light that I appreciate Unindoctrinates essay. I’m in favour of keeping scientology working but don’t like the way the PL is written, or the abuse that has gone on in its name. Also consider that when the class VIII
    course was first delivered quickie grades were standard tech!

    The movie has many parallels to our situation
    re the COS, and now getting back to the topic at hand it was the Pope of Alexandria who exorted his monks to attack Hypatia , strip her naked and torture and murder her and drag her body through the streets!

  35. This comment thread has been a fantastic read (albeit time consuming – wow!), thanks to all contributors. I am left with some questions, though, if anyone would be so kind? (Jim Logan, you out there?) ;)

    First, Mike says the doctor “tried to 8C her out of her reception area”…8C means…?

    Mike’s public brother had to ask permission to have lunch with him. Who would he have sought that authority from and why is “permission” needed? Is it permission to break the disconnection policy and avoid jeopardizing his future in the Church…or otherwise?

    Lastly, regarding that incident, has anything relevant occurred since then (that you are at liberty to discuss)? Any blowback from on high?

    An observation pertaining to that incident before I move on to another issue, from a relatively “outside” perspective, what happened in the parking lot is just bizarre. For a person just walking down the street to see something like that – seven people ambushing a guy, two of them women screeching obscenities at the top of their lungs – I would have been looking around for the movie camera filming a scene from Hitchcock-esque horror flick. Mike later states this kind of behavior filled a hundred days in the SP Hole…and again I marvel. How does one emotionally withstand a barrage like that? I have to say that as a woman I am particularly saddened to see other women so completely bereft of compassion. It is especially revolting to me that there are women within the ranks who are willing to assume Miscavige’s valence of complete disrespect for other human beings.

    And speaking of Miscavige, my next question pertains to last weekend’s speech at the LA Org dedication. Please forgive me for this, but how is it that people in the audience aren’t sitting there scratching their heads and asking each other, what did he just say? I’m not poking fun at his speech – although he does sound just like the K-Tel voice over guy in the 70’s commercials. Prove me wrong:


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCVesI6AH9M (starts 38 seconds in)

    A serious question, now. What I’m wondering about are the publics in attendance. Do they ever ‘notice’ that he isn’t really saying anything substantial? Most Scientologists I know are quite intelligent. Help me understand how they can hear something like the above and not question the rhetoric?

    My last question goes to Mr. Rathbun’s “Tonight’s report” teaser which, to me, was FAR MORE ALARMING than the incident report Mr. Rinder provided (not that I’m minimizing the experience; it’s just that it was handled so well). Mr. Rathbun said, “After speaking to Tom Devocht, Mike Rinder and other (whose names must still be protected) about what occured at Int after I had left, I was gravely concerned lives might be in danger. I told the Times and CNN, and I’ll tell you right now, I spoke in the hopes of preventing what I was concerned might deteriorate into a Jonestown situation.” Now, what happened in the parking lot was violent, but it wasn’t in league with this buildup. So, I am very curious. There is grave concern that lives might be in danger. Does anyone have any further input as to this potential state of Miscavige’s mind? Mr. Rathbun ends by saying, “I’ve studied Koresh and Jones. They were Boy Scouts compared to Miscavige at similar stages in their careers.” May I ask, what “stage” is Miscavige currently at?

    • @Patricia Curtis:

      I’ll answer a few of your questions with the simplest answers I can come up with.

      “8C” comes from the name of a drill about control. In this sense, it means the doctor tried to get the people to leave the room.

      Mike’s brother meant he would have asked permission from the Ethics Officer to speak to Mike. Yes, it’s crazy.

      About Miscavige’s rhetoric: do you know the old story about boiling a frog? Put a frog into boiling water, he will jump out. Put him in cold water and slowly raise the temperature, you can get the frog to stay in the boiling water.

      Publics in orgs are the frog, the rest of the scene is the water. Miscavige has been on his post for 28 years or so, that’s a lot of time to boil a pot of water; the public have become numb and stupified over the years. Even DMs voice, the way he moves, the completely over-the-top sets on stage at events, all these things are designed to overwhelm people. I feel the same way when I visit the local casino – all the brights lights and bells going “ping!” make me reel so much that I have to leave after 30 minutes, tops.

      You are correct when you spot that DM never says anything of substance. he’s quick to give information about what the enemy is up to, but never really nails down what the orgs are going to do with his programs in the future. It’s all “We will spearhead expansion into new realms!! This heralds a new beginning for all mankind!!” or similar pompous words. He never actually says how this will work, or how long the ads will run on TV, etc, etc. People got used to this and after a while they started to believe it. Frog, water.

      Don’t underestimate DM. As someone else said earlier, he’s been at this for the best part of 30 years and took out some formidable opposition along the way. He is many things, but he is not stupid and he knows how to bend people and he knows how to play the waiting game. If he didn’t know these things, he would not have made it this far. Yes, he even knows how to completely dupe a lot of smart folks; so did Napolean and Lenin. (I won’t mention that German fellow from the ’40s on account of Godwin :-) )

  36. DM is Snowwhite.

    Also, for all the rest of you people out there chewing on the subject of KSW – here’s the deal:

    Scientology is here for you. You can do whatever you want to with it. You can read it, you can play with it, you can change it all around to fit your personality and “free spirit” and you can criticize it. It is yours to do with whatever you want. No one out here cares what you do with it. It is yours.

    All LRH is saying is that Scientology only works when it is done the way that he researched it to work. It just doesn’t work any other way. That’s all. Just like science – nuclear fission only works one way.

    Saying that you disagree with science is like saying, “I think I am going to assemble an atom bomb my own way.” Okay, well you certainly have the God-given right to. And I say: “Go for it, but please, do it on a far away atoll in the Pacific. I can’t stand radiation myself.”

    So for the rest of us who understand order and discipline, we are going to apply LRH to the letter and get the fabulous results that we have already gotten from applying what LRH said in KSW. I have, and I know a lot of my friends have had fabulous results from the tech correctly applied.

    So the next time you are dying and someone does an assist on you and they say “feel my freedom” and you get worse, know that it is your own postualte that killed you.

    ML Virg

  37. Common Terril,
    “You are not permitted to doubt your faith, I must.”
    Lrh is quite more theta when you read his essay about personal integrity”.
    Sorry, me simplicissimus, I don’t get it. Above sentence is 1.1, a trap and of no help to anybody.
    It sounds intelligent, that’s all !
    I’m really eager now to understand what’s wrong with my thinking that I can’t understand what you mean.
    I’m working in the computer industry and I learned it the hard was that tech is tech and if you fumblo with around with you’re in big trouble. If the servers of our customers are not working for only some minutes my god, then I got to run. There is exact tech to get servers to run for unlimited times, you just have to apply it per the book. So what the hell are you talking about ?
    Sorry, for the tone. I just express myself and want to understand !


  38. I enjoyed splog and Terril’s posts above and think that the authors of those comments are on the right track. We do have an obligation to think critically for ourselves even when it comes to policy, tech, and LRH.

    But I’m not sure that KSW is the root of the problem. I wouldn’t change the content of KSW #1 or even try to soften the influence it has on people. I think people can be trusted to assign the correct value to those words on their own.

    In my opinion, it is either Knowledge Report policy or the way KR policy has been applied that is at or near the root of the problem in Scientology. I think KR policy has turned us all into little spies who run around snitching one another out to ethics. As a result we have created an thought-police environment where we are afraid to talk freely, act freely, and even think freely.

    That doesn’t mean that KR policy doesn’t have its place, but the way it is being applied is creating little a church full of little oppressed robots. Yes, if someone commits a real crime then a KR should be submitted (as well as a police report perhaps). One the other hand, using KRs to stifle free thought is killing this movement. People should be able to stand up and bitch about the cost of a service, or a crappy exec, or a policy they disagree with, without having to worry about getting written up and going to see the EO.

  39. AfterwardDeified

    What’s the story with Jenny Linson?! She seems like a psycopath in every sense of the word. Does her father even know a tenth of the shit she’s been involved in?! When DM falls, I’m sorry but Linson has to follow him to the big house. She cannot escape prosecution. Lock her up for at least a decade. Seriously, what a vile POS she is.

  40. Just re red Mr rinders post, I hope DM is REAL Worried.

    “Meanwhile, he sits stewing in massive MWH phenomena, lashing out with wild animal reactions, wondering which of his crimes is going to be exposed next.

    And he should be worried.”

  41. And not only what is going to be exposed next, but he doesn’t know our plans to expose it to the entirety of the Sea Org and to all Cl V Org Staff.

    Stand by DM, we have the goods.

    ML Virg

  42. One day I hope we will get into what the “real why” is behind all this stuff. My own suspicion is that by aping “Earth/wog religion”, Scientologists are now dramatizing the whole Earth religion scenerio in all its worth aspects – to wit, the complete get in line unquestioning following its leader, complete authoritarianism, 2D nuttiness/enforced can’t have & punishments on this line, punishment as a form of ethics, no personal privacy or right to have one’s own Code of Honor, the turning over of one’s money and financial decisions, threats or real loss of family, friends, jobs, etc etc etc. The Church was necessary in the dissemination of Scientology as it provided LRH with personnel, financing and establishment of a stable base from which to operate (to say nothing of the resources necessary to publish and distribute his books), but at this point (I’m certainly speaking for sure of what I need and want in my OWN life,) I think that the “ONE church idea” is no longer either a workable or desirable model for Scientology. I think it’s obvious (to me anyway) that the RTC is not a guarantor of the purity of the tech of Scientology (red on white OR green on white) and that a better way as we head into the next couple of hundred years is for smaller groups that do NOT exercise, or try to exercise complete control over people’s lives (I will certainly never turn my life over to the judgment of a religious group again) but instead do their best to remain true to the original spirit of LRH’s research. In this light, I think this whole Miscavige 3D engram of the last 30 years (as loathsome as it is and as completely pissed off about it I still am) may be a necessary step and you know, a GOOD one (a FREEING step as Scientologists decide to become MORE in charge of their own lives and step away from an all powerful/controlling/abusive church structure.

    • Theo Sismanides

      Joe, two things to corroborate what you said:

      LRH said why do you need a church for a via

      and in the PDC 1st lecture what is to be done on course he says if you want something to continue existing (like the Tarot cards) give it to the gypsies (LOL!)

      I think you are right. This is what is happening now.

  43. LO // April 27, 2010 at 7:06 pm | Reply

    “Common Terril,
    “You are not permitted to doubt your faith, I must.”
    Lrh is quite more theta when you read his essay about personal integrity”.
    Sorry, me simplicissimus, I don’t get it. Above sentence is 1.1, a trap and of no help to anybody.
    It sounds intelligent, that’s all !”

    There are numerous LRH statements on truth being what oneself observes, including the essay you quote, how one must make data ones own. How in fact one must become source.

    From factor 28:-

    “Certainty in all three universes must be regained, for certainty, not data, is knowledge.”

    In a theocratic dictatorship, such as the one that killed Hypatia because she wasn’t a christian, burned books on the largest scale and exiled the jews, “You are not permitted to doubt your faith” , and one of course can not be self determined in ones thoughts and beliefs less risking death. Or the RPF in the case of the SO.

    Hypatia’s statement ” I must” is the path that leads to self determined certainty.

    • OK Terril

      I got you.
      But as I still think, Lrh isn’t responsible in any way for the current mess as well as Einstein or other scientist aren’t responsible for Hiroshama.
      It’s always an individual that took the decision to do evil and then did it. Those people have to be taken to justice. !

      Thanks for your answer !

  44. Just the ability that we have of DISCUSSING these topics makes me VGI’s!!

    Isn’t this what Scientology is all about?

    Learning and communicating and applying to get results?

    In the CofM you cannot discuss these things without becoming an “ethics particle”.


  45. Man, What a show!!

    In a testy exchange at today’s Senate grilling of Goldman Sachs executives, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., confronted a former Goldman trader with e-mails in which another former Goldman executive described a mortgage-backed deal as “sh**ty.” ….

    Well DM, guess what? The clock is ticking … Tic, Tac, Tic, Tac…

    JUSTICE, 1. the action of the group against the
    individual when he has failed to get his own ethics in.

    15. don’t ordinarily put a head on a pike unless it’s the right head. But remember that there are times when it’s vitally necessary to put some head, any head, on a pike to quell rising disorder. Just remember that justice is an action to deter disorder and secure the public safety. But if you do put the wrong head on a pike, be sure to put it back on the body again as soon as the need for its being on a pike is over. Justice is not always the matter of an individual. It is a short-term method of bringing order and it is needed for all dynamics.

    ps: No worry with you pal (dm), we wont have to put your head back on… Because you are the right target!!

  46. Marty

    This has been one helluva thread, but it’s so unwieldy to find the new posts now, I’ll come
    back when you it’s a new article. I hope you break 1000. See ya.



  47. Patricia Curtis,

    Mike has been “declared” a suppressive person and with that, each and every member of the Cof$ in good standing must disconnect from him and not communicate. He has become a non-person.
    If they do communicate, they have the threat of being “declared suppressive” themselves.

    Your observation was correct.
    I re-watched the video and nothing was said. The words were meaningless.

    My observation.
    The little guy looked terrified under the social presentation. Now that I have more accurate information, it was almost obvious! Ridges a mile thick and even the way he was moving his body, while he covertly (very, I might ad) tried to look around to ensue no bad surprises were about to enfold. Watch him carefully. Makes me laugh, except for the horrifying consequences of his daily activities

    Something to remember here guys.

    Page 2:

    The world is full of madmen.

    The basic characteristic of extreme madness is perpetual attack, attacks on anything, attacks on persons or things that contain no menace.

    Extreme, not petty, crime is at the root of such an impulse.

    The attacker has an evil purpose in life. He is a thing of death, not life. His harvest is a death harvest.

    Such a person feels he cannot be safe unless everything else is dead.

    His evil purpose takes many forms and expressions. The end product is the same-death.

    L. Ron Hubbard

    Watch the video again. Under the pretended certainty, there is FEAR.

  48. The main issue I see people on both sides struggling with is identity. Many Sea Org people identify with the identity they used the day before, for years. It violates them when one of them assumes a new identity, that is a crime. People that once called themselves Scientologists, identify with that identity for themselves and also by identifying with a former identity think things should be the same as when they first mocked up that identity. The identity worked in an earlier environment but not the new one, or the environment outside of the Church as they knew it. It is really a matter of people not being able to reinvent themselves. And getting upset when someone else does. But this is evolution. I became eager to escape the Sea Org identity the day I was lined up to do marching drills on a roof top in L.A.. That was the last day I was able to see myself as a Sea Org member. As if we were going to be marching off to some war?….. Not me! That was the day that pretense just did not work for me anymore. And yes, I was gone within a few days. Sleeping until noon under the scent of a magnolia tree in the warm sun of Los Angeles and feeling like a naked baby with a world of possibilities before me. As you read this now, you are not the same Scientologist you were yesterday, or the same staff member you were yesterday, or the same student or P.C. you were yesterday. WE can only have conversations about these things when we identify with an identity we had from the past. The people that are back there, are stuck in time and identity. They are trapped by “the past” on many levels. When something new and fresh and different reaches out and touches one of them, it is like disturbing some case sitting there. The best thing we can do is invent something new and fresh and exciting and fun. We are blocked in that we have copyright issues and cannot disseminate and invent our own kind envirnment with the Scientology. The best problem we can address is how to overcome this obstacle and move forward with our interests without legal stops and penalties and be able to practice in an enviroment free of suppression. And as problem releases and there are many here, we should be able to solve that.

    • Alan Cohen:

      “It takes a lot of courage to release the familiar and seemingly secure, to embrace the new. But there is no real security in what is no longer meaningful. There is more security in the adventurous and exciting, for in movement there is life, and in change there is power.”

  49. Pingback: Miscavige Meltdown – the Proof | Moving On Up a Little Higher

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s