L Ron Hubbard’s Worst Enemy – Part II

References:

Miscavige: Hubbard’s Worst Enemy Part I

Ortega Calls Bullshit on Miscavige

Here is the promised rundown on Tony Ortega’s report of this year’s annual L Ron Hubbard Birthday Celebration event from Clearwater Florida.

It is just about the thirtieth anniversary of my introduction to the strange case of Gerry Armstrong.   Armstrong was the LRH archivist who left the church in 1981.  That year a tremendous amount of attention had gone onto how the church was promoting L Ron Hubbard to the public.  That was because the church was confronting a) the top eleven officials of the Guardian’s Office (including Hubbard’s wife Mary Sue) were facing lengthy jail sentences, while b) a rash of lawsuits had been filed naming the church as well as L Ron Hubbard as defendants, and c) the central claim of each suit was fraud, more specifically alleging that the church lured them into Scientology based on false claims as to L Ron Hubbard’s super man biography.  Essentially the claim was that if L Ron Hubbard was not an engineer, nuclear physicist, wounded and crippled war hero who was miraculously healed by his own brainchild Dianetics, and he was not the model of perfect virtue since then, why, then they were defrauded into spending money and devoting years to Scientology.

Now, this is a very short-handed summary of a history that was not clear to me for many years after the facts – notwithstanding my personal involvement in some of it – , not even totally clear until very recently.  The whole story will arrive soon enough.

Armstrong pointed out to L Ron Hubbard’s messengers that something had better be done about the representations the church was making. He based that concern on having worked tirelessly to provide David Miscavige’s Special Project (of which I was then the files man for) with material to prove the claims about Hubbard to be true, and coming up empty handed on many counts.  David Miscavige’s handling for Armstrong’s origination was to send Norman F Starkey down to the Commodores Messenger Org International to give Armstrong a Severe Reality Adjustment (SRA – loud verbal brow beating) for being “disaffected.”   Armstrong then blew, with a few boxes of LRH archives with which to defend himself.   In response to being hounded by Miscavige directed PIs for several months, Armstrong reacted by devoting the rest of his life to proving that L Ron Hubbard was a fraud.

As was Miscavige’s habit, he continued to pursue Armstrong as the devil incarnate while at the same time taking Armstrong’s advice, just ignoring the source of it communicating as if it were his own.  No more representations about LRH went out without my authorization – which was backed by an extensive fact-checking process.

We sued Armstrong for theft of the archives documents.  The trial occurred in early 1984.  We had two very competent trial lawyers doing a yeoman-like job putting on the plaintiff’s case for several weeks.  By the time the plaintiff’s case rested I had the unenviable task of informing Miscavige that the attorneys wanted authority to enter settlement negotiations before the defendant’s case was presented.  The attorneys demonstrated that while we could do significant damage to Armstrong’s credibility,  at the end of the day we did not have answers for the far more important and relevant issues – that is, the truth or falsity of representations made by Hubbard and the church about the life of L Ron Hubbard.  What’s more, they explained that by a number of comments by the judge (this was a non-jury trial) it was clear the judge was focusing on that lack of evidence . The attorneys reported that Armstrong’s attorney was amenable to settlement – and that this was a short window of opportunity to protect the image of Hubbard and the church; that once Armstrong’s side had the podium we were in for weeks upon weeks of medieval style Inquisition on L Ron Hubbard (all to be covered by the media).

Miscavige, in his inimitable style, called the attorneys “pussies” (his word) and worse and threatened to fire them if they so much as entertained the thought of “settlement”, let alone mentioned it, again.

The attorneys – and their back up staff – did everything in their power, short of being dragged out of court for defying court orders, to keep a lid on the evidence admitted.  They also did an admirable job of attempting to discredit the witnesses and evidence they entered.

But, in the end their prognosis turned out to be quite conservative.  The judge issued a ruling about Hubbard who of course was not there, finding as a matter of fact that he was a “pathological liar” and “paranoid” and  “schizophrenic.” Not only did L Ron Hubbard’s life history get annihilated by the world wide media – it continued to be for thirty years, with only lame denials in response, as Gerry Armstrong was right all along in this respect: the church had little to no to counter documentation for the claims the church had loudly trumpeted about L Ron Hubbard’s life.  Fact of the matter is, the church’s lack of ability to document many of the claims has been such a given fact that it has bred the type of disbelief expressed by Tony Ortega in his most recent article.   He can’t believe that that church is not only focusing on the claims, but thirty years later they are exaggerating them even more.

Some of the representations covered in this year’s March 13th event – such as the alleged Oregon sub chasing incident was “regarded as among the most regionally famed encounters of the war” – are so easily discredited that those in the know have to wonder: are the people making such representations attempting to set up L Ron Hubbard for a fall?

It gets worse.  The “L Ron Hubbard Biographer” attempts to position LRH as saving the world from “evil” scientists bent on blowing it up.  A five minute google research project (for the culturally or historically illiterate who don’t already know it) would show that those “evil” scientists allegedly plotting to destroy earth were engaged in precisely the opposite activity – they were the original movement to demand “conscience” be incorporated into science because of the destructive power of what they were discovering.

To position Richard Nixon with Robert Oppenheimer and Albert Einstein is about as credible as trying to position Adolph Hitler with leading members of the German underground anti-Nazi movement.

It is pure insanity that is issuing from the lips of Dan Sherman and David Miscavige.  It is madness.  I would write it off as only such if I were not aware of the fact that David Miscavige is acutely aware of who ultimately takes the brunt of this.

What is more a travesty is the overall technique of Sherman and Miscavige.  They are attempting to literalize L Ron Hubbard.  As any intelligent student of Scientology knows, one of Hubbard’s virtues is his story telling ability.  He can lecture for one hour on the subject of a simple principle; and he can tell a number of colorful stories and anecdotes to get the audience to view it from a number of angles to the point where they can understand the principle conceptually.  Of course, we also know that Hubbard has done that literally thousands of times and it was all recorded for posterity. So, Sherman and Miscavige come along – take an anecdote out,  alone, bereft of any context for what principle it is being used to illustrate, and tell the public:

a) Every word is literally true.

b) That “a” is of utmost importance, or why would they be conveying it with such ostentatious implant a/v technology; and thus

c) L Ron Hubbard ought to be viewed and treated like a God, and not as the thinking and living out of the box kind of guy he was, and thus

d) Scientology  is really about belief, and not observation and workability, and thus

e)  David Miscavige must be viewed as the Pope, infallibility and all.

While this madness is clearly intended to up the mushroom treatment (being kept in the dark and being fed manure) of captive cult member audiences – David Miscavige is well aware of what its long term effect will be, more years of dragging L Ron Hubbard through the mud publicly as allegedly making false claims as to his history, qualifications and competence.

I keep asking, and I keep meaning it when I do, how can it get any darker than that?

351 responses to “L Ron Hubbard’s Worst Enemy – Part II

  1. Careful Marty :) I learned something years ago when I would say — it can’t get any worse than this — and sure enough, it would.

    There is always “worse” — as there are no absolutes, positive or negative.

    But I concur — it’s pretty damn dark now.

    The indie movement though creating the positive to counter the negative —

    So thank you for this. dm will continue to go down, LRH and scientology will begin to go back up …

    It’s one of those incredible things, happening before our eyes

    WH

    • The way I see it is: Independents must make happy and able people through good auditing.

      Tabloid interests will always exist.

      The best thing a free Scientologist can do is be a good free Scientologist and help people free themselves from suffering.

      Ron’s legacy, in my opinion, can only be saved by Independents serving the greater purpose. That was his dream anyway right?

      And that will take time………….. and decent devoted Scientologists.

      Darkness flips into light, when great souls will it, serving a greater purpose than mere individual survival.

      Ron the man did his part. Whether some or none or all of the things said about him are true, he is gone. What he left, and the people practicing it are still here.

      Let the media do what medias do. We, as free men and women must do what we must do. Move On Up A Little Higher

    • Windhorse,
      My sculpture teacher escaped the NAZIs and got a job teaching at the University I attended. Whenever one of us students would get too optimistic and say something like “well it can’t get any worse” Steppat, who had had a hot poker stuck in his mouth by the Gastapo would say, “It can always get worse”!

    • Miscavige knows that LRH was not a “God”. Hubbard said it himself many times, that he was just a man. Just a man, and just as infallible as any other man.

  2. Marty,
    Thanks for the truth on the Gerry Armstrong scene it answers the questions I had for decades, having known Gerry and it makes a lot of sense that DM simply was doing his usual – making enemies which are expensive to solve and is bad for LRH.

    • I last saw Gerry Armstrong in November of 1981 down in LA. I was piloting TRs Clay Table Processing and ran into Gerry for the first time in months because he had been off the base doing his bio project. Man, he was beefed up beyond recognition, completely different from the guy I had known for a few years when he had first come to WHQ. He never gave me any specifics about what was going on but I remember him saying that I didn’t know what was really going on. Your post here, Marty, clarifies it for me. Thanks for that. Thanks also for helping everyone realize that David Miscavige is not to be underestimated. He obviously had an agenda all worked out more than 30 years ago.

      • Dan, with respect to the 30 year agenda, I don’t see it like that. I see it more like this kid was way, way over his head. He never got Dianetics and Scientology. He, like all of us, to some extent was molded by the times in which he lived. This is not an apology for him. There is an old Zen axiom that goes something like this, we in essence do not really change; the only thing that changes are the decisions we make. I think there is some wisdom in that – and that is why LRH’s technology which in essence rehabilitates one’s ability to alter his own considerations is so powerful.

        • Marty, that’s the way I see it with DM too — definitely was in over his head, and never actually got Scientology. Definitely the wrong guy to be taking over the CoS.

        • “I don’t see it like that. I see it more like this kid was way, way over his head. He never got Dianetics and Scientology. He, like all of us, to some extent was molded by the times in which he lived”

          I agree. The kid got over his head and his solutions to problems create more unusual solutions…………problems, problems.

          Time to move a little higher as the current scene results in more problems and NOT moving higher.

        • and I believe the phoenix lectures, what you consider is what you consider. Thus DM considers what he considers, as he holds the cards to the kingdom. He holds the keys, the mest, the PR, the whole works to the kingdom. He considers what he considers and nobody is going to stop him, as he considers.

          Thus, we need to move a bit higher, free scientologist.

    • Here is another example of the importance of this blog. The communication lines in the RCS has been cut for so many years that people who knew the man intimately didn’t know what was going on. I’m sure that much of this was to keep damage control to a minimum but really…who cares if LRH had an overactive imagination? The real test of whether Dianetics is a good or bad thing is in delivery results. Howard Hughes literally was nuts but does that mean we stop using the technology he designed?

      I know the whole Gerry Armstrong flap created a lot of mystery and antagonism in the field. I’m glad to see that this is coming out in the open…it’s time for some as-isnes on this whole thing. This certainly was a DM created antagonism, what a shame.

  3. Mr. Rathbun, you are making all very valid points. I believe Miscavige already now clings only to the most gullible – those that after long years of 6 and more over-the top video events a year couldn’t see what was going on.
    Those who went on with eyes shut even with the gross out-tech occuring as you would say, who endured the merciless fundraising, and who would go on believing in Miscavige even with the scathing exposes by print media and television that have come out the recent three years.

    What does he have to lose now by setting in black-on-white a bogus biography at this time? And I say, tactically, it may be at no better time to do so. Of those who have not yet left, which Scientologist is ever going to do the hard checking of facts presented in these books?
    I dont think that the church puts out a biography of Hubbard is ever going to be at the centre of media attention; the media and many citizens already know of the lying and deceit of the organisation, and to my knowledge, this “encyclopedic biography” is not being marketed much beyond the circles of Scientology.
    And some scholar who goes to the trouble of checking and says the biography is false, he will not be heeded by Scientologists, just as the countless voices before, like yours, were overheard by those who wished to remain true to the organisation.

    • “overheard” is a faux-ami when translated directly from my language. Replace “overheard” by “deliberately ignored” and we hit the mark closer.

    • I wrote many months ago that Miscavige would never put a biography out – because he knows he can’t get away with putting out the kind of tripe he spews in the events; and is incapable of conceding anything. I think the release of this “encyclopedia” is the proof of it. It is his substitute for the biography he is incapable of putting out. Bio=life.

      • To be honest, I am a tad curious about what is in these books. But I’m not willing to fork over 700$ for the pleasure. Guess I’ll have to wait for the next drop-out who will donate his set to our local cult commissioner, in 2 or 3 years :-)

        • One thing a first perusal by one purchaser told showed was there was no sign of his wives or children in them. Bio=life.

          • Marty,

            Isn’t this just another ubiquitous demonstration of dm’s in-your-face case on the 2nd dynamic? I know, goes without saying…………

        • Dr Faust — Get the Ron mags — you can probably find them for about $5 a piece and it will give you everything that is in the “encyclopedia” except maybe some photos and a “timeline” that is inaccurate anyway.

        • Try Ebay – There are tons of COS books for sale there.

          • I have seen them on Ebay. But I would be afraid that my name and address would then be used to pepper my home mailbox with all kinds of stuff. As well as being added to the stats of “new memberships”..you never know.

            • I wish they would add my name and call me, but no such luck. Every reg and recruiter has hung up on me or stopped mailing, including OSA and their agents who even stood me up on an appoinment and they removed me from their lists; I’m getting nothing anymore. Boeeey, what a loss…..

      • Marty, you just reminded me of the marketing plans that were beginning to be developed around the LRH bio. It was going to be the largest marketing campaign in the history of mankind. It was so over the top that it was dropped immediately and never heard of again. Maybe Steve or Jeff will remember some of the details but it was going to be huge beyond huge. Of course, Danny Sherman was full time on speechwriting so the bio project was way backburnered and then the burner was shut off. The Ron Mags in hardcover will have to suffice for the story of LRH’s life along with the Internet, of course. And the truth will lie somewhere in between.

  4. This stuff matters, Marty. If Hubbard lied about his career in the Navy, who is to say he didn’t lie about his OT discoveries? Those who have had bad results on the OT levels have to ask: Is it because DM squirreled the tech? Or is it because Hubbard lied about its results?

    I don’t think the Church is trying to discredit LRH, Marty. Those in the Church really believe this stuff about him. They don’t read much outside “entheta” like we do. The fact is, they can’t run away from the lies LRH told. And in a subject built around LRH’s discoveries and achievements, his credibility is important.

    But you’re right about one thing, this stuff getting out on the Net is devastating to LRH’s credibility.

    • If you lied about a grade you got in school forty years ago, who is to say you aren’t lying through your teeth when I accuse of being a troll?
      I didn’t say the church was trying to discredit LRH. You are altering my message. Perhaps that is why you missed its import entirely.

      • You’re missing a key point, Marty. If LRH lied about his navy career, he may be lying about the injuries he suffered in the navy. If he’s lying about his injuries, he’s lying about his ability to heal himself. And if he’s lying about his ability to heal himself, he’s lying about being able to achieve those same gains through Dianetics and Scientology.

        This is more than him lying about his marriages, Marty. This is potentially him lying about the basics of Dianetics and Scientology.

        Why the Church would want to publicize these lies and drag them out into the light is beyond me.

        • If that is your standard I reckon you ought to steer clear of Dianetics and Scientology.

          • Don’t worry, I do. :)

            • Just Some Guy,

              I get the impression that you’re Sherman in drag.

            • How do we know you really do(steer clear of Dianetics and Scientology)?

              After all, you just posted here……

            • First Principle

              JSG,
              Your distrust of your own ability to observe for yourself cannot be masked by such “logic”.
              If the person who invented toothpaste claimed it could help you sound smart, I wonder how long ’til you stopped brushing your teeth.
              You only tick me off because you’re a toe-dipper trying to pretend the water’s too cold. Fact is, not all the swimmers in the world would convince you it’s worth learning how to swim. And that’s your prerogative. Just don’t pretend it’s something else.

        • Audit someone. Follow the instructions as written. Then come back and tell me the relevance of his “war injuries”. Ffs.

        • Well, I am not lying about the benefits and gains that I personally got out of Scientology and the works of L. Ron Hubbard.

          • Bingo!

            This whole subject of Hubbard’s past is fraught with lies and confusions.

            Like GH says, Scientology works. If you’ve got any balls, JSG, go find yourself a competent auditor and have him run you through a painful incident from your past.

            Then come back and tell us what you think of the foundations of Dianetics and Scientology.

            My 40+ years of experience in this subject has taught me a lot of lessons based on many up front and close experiences. One of those lessons is that those who approach the subject by “thinking about” it, speculating about it, or theorizing about it, or relying on the opinions of others who have never tried it – are, to put it bluntly, chickenshits.

            Afraid to confront what is inside themselves.

            You don’t have to get near spaceships or distant planets or even 100 years ago. Just try running out a big loss you had somewhere along the line. We’ve all got some.

            Then come back and tell us what you think of the foundations of Dianetics and Scientology.

            As to LRH’s life and what he says about it, I am willing to be very wrong about whatever conclusions I’ve drawn, as they are not based on first-hand observation. But my conclusion so far is that much of what he says he did, he probably did. Because in all the anti-Scientology books I’ve read over the years (and I have NEVER been afraid to read them), there is one common denominator: an obvious, unmistakable intention and effort to belittle LRH in every possible way. This goes for Paulette Cooper, Bent Corydon, LRH Jr., all the way through to Tony Ortega and Janet Reitman and several others.

            I could give example after example. Starting with my current favorite, that he ripped off the Study Tech from someone at St. Hill, according to that paragon of ethical conduct Alan Walters.

            Yet I look at such things as the photo of LRH as a very young boy, in his Scout uniform, merit badges streaming down his chest – a photo from decades before Photoshop – and I marvel – because I was a Boy Scout and I clearly recall how overwhelmed I was at age 13 just by READING the requirements for each merit badge, much less what was required to become an Eagle Scout.

            Then there are the hundreds of lectures where I heard LRH discuss subjects I knew a lot about, and I marveled at the range and depth of his knowledge.

            This is not to say he didn’t embellish. I don’t know, but it sounds like he may have. I can live with that.

            But one conclusion I’ve drawn is, that the bulk any lies probably reside on the side of the detractors. Because, no matter what else you might say about him, LRH was a man of gigantic intellect and experience, and the tools he discovered WORK.

            Just stop your speculation for a moment & give it an honest try, JFG. There are plenty of good, competent auditors here in the Free Scientology community who would be more than happy to show you what it’s all about.

            Really, it is not all that scary to confront yourself.

            • WARNING: LONG with buddhist parallels so feel free to skip :)

              Publius: I had to chuckle “that paragon of ethical conduce Alan Waters” — I agree.

              My current teacher’s father — Chogyam Trungpa was born in Tibet, escaped at 20 when the Red Chinese invaded and crossed the Himilaya’s leading about 200 people … many died.

              He died of liver failure at 47. 25 years ago on 4 April. He was married (but not to the mother of my teacher, who was a nun) to a young woman about 12 years younger – she was 16 when he married her. He had numerous lovers while married and kept 7 of them as “consorts” that he even elevated beyond “mere” lover by giving them the Tibetan honorific of “sangyum”. They are all still actively involved with Shambhala today and maintain their “titles”

              Judging him on his obvious “immoral” behavior is foolhardy. Not ONE of his students who was there at the time and who stayed will EVER say a bad word against him. It’s impossible to even try to get them to discuss it. They won’t go down that road.

              It’s taken me YEARS to step beyond the obvious that he was a womanizer and a drunk and therefore I haven’t until recently studied his works.

              I am now reading his work and am flabbergasted. Moreover, you cannot deny 150 centers around the world that follow his teaching, one accredited university in Boulder Colorado that he founded in the early ’70’s. Countless books about buddhism that have made their way into modern society. An entire method of dealing with those who have lost their minds that is NOT psych based but buddhist based. Chogyam Trungpa along with Suzuki Roshi and Kalu Rinpoche are credited with bringing buddhism to the West. The Dalai Lama came almost a decade later.

              Judging LRH is equally fool hardy. It’s just plain stupid.

              We cannot deny the workability of the tech and the wonder of his philosophy, regardless how he wove it together.

              Those who are intent on salvaging the works of LRH, exposing the destruction of his work, freeing those who are still in prision, whether as KA drinkers or just downright out of valence devils, are doing a formidable service to mankind.

              JUST as my teacher has done in patiently watching his community that he inherited at a young age – from the person, much like dm who COMPLETELY F**D up the works due to his INCREDIBLY arrogant idea that HE WAS JUST LIKE Chogyam Trungpa.

              The Regent died and created an absolute mess in the Shambhala community which 20 years later is healing.

              So will Scientology but ONLY because of people like Marty, Mike and others who are stepping up.

              SPs can win – they can dominate and nullify a civilization out of existence. However, occasionally their own timing is so bad, that no matter the head start they might appear to have, the money at their disposal — they just CANT complete the cycle of action within their lifetime of utter destruction.

              And thus — they go down and not the group.

              His days are numbered.

              WH

            • I concur – I had to jump in on a few points:

              1. Study Tech, in the main, is captured in the Logics, which was written out well before 1964. He did not steal it from anyone.

              2. There is no dispute that Hubbard was an Eagle Scout at a very young age. What is in dispute is whether he was “youngest” or not. This is not provable one way or another – but 13 is pretty freaking young to be an Eagle Scout, and it was never something you can just pay someone to get.

              3. I don’t know how much Ron embellished or not. I have no reason to trust the government about the accuracy of its information about the man, for the simple reason of what we DO know about the government: MK-ULTRA is real, it happened, was secret, and we (Scientologists) were not shy about opposing these experiments. I am not crying conspiracy, but I am not going to let the government off the hook so easily, either. The government has legitimate reasons for discrediting Hubbard – they may or may not have acted on these reasons, but I don’t put it past them. So, where there is a discrepancy between what Ron said and what the Government said, I will give Ron the benefit of the doubt, but I will not bet my life on it because:

              4. It does not matter. People are complicated. Ron was not a saint, and neither am I (by a long shot) and neither is anyone reading this. I listened to the man talk on taped lectures for several hundred hours. I heard him say things that blew.me.the.cuss.away. And things that made me think “Ron, dude! What is this crap?” I see the dates and times of the lectures – Ron’s output was UN-believable. He would do 1 to 1 1/2 hour lectures DAILY, sometimes more than one lecture per day, on things he was researching the day prior, and also writing HCOBs and HCOPLs and Advance articles and running the whole organization. This is a FACT. This is a HELL of a lot of work output for someone committing a “fraud” or lying like hell all the time. If anyone were perpetrating a fraud, would they be putting in this kind of time? I think not.

              Everyone I know who met Ron personally (and that includes my parents, my mission holders who were on the original BC, and other friends of mine) were incredibly impressed by the man. Even those at the receiving end of his temper loved the guy, because Ron truly practiced what he preached: If you “shoot” someone, pick them up later. His only flaw in this area was that he allowed his CMO kids to take this thing WAY too seriously.

              So, to take a couple of internet “sound-bites” as proof that Ron was an evil bastard is lazy, at least. Disingenuous at best. There are a lot of people who have benefited from the work this man did. There is a lot that is provable about the good this man has done. And I am very happy that I knew him as well as I could have, if only through his lectures and writings. I would have loved to have hung out with the guy.

              And, by the way, auditing done well by someone who knows what they are doing is awesome. My life is so much better because of the auditing I received (and gave, for that matter).

            • Publius~You said it so perfectly. That is exactly how I feel. Having been on both sides of the auditing table, all that matters is workability.

            • Marty, I know you disagree with me, and you might not like me, but I genuinely appreciate you allowing me to take the conversation this far. I hope you will allow me to take it a little further. My intention is honest, open dialogue, not trolling.

              I have had some Dianetic auditing. I have also had psychotherapy, which is why I know that LRH’s claims about being the originator of Dianetics, and his claim that psychiatrists are the great evil in the world, are untrue.

              Here’s why Hubbard’s lies about his naval career matter: Hubbard claimed to have been blinded and crippled as a result of war injuries, and to have used his technology to heal himself. These techniques he developed and used formed part of the basis of Dianetics and later Scientology.

              If Hubbard lied about his Navy accomplishments, and lied about his injuries (as critics allege), then he lied about his ability to cure himself. That means he lied about the effectiveness of the techniques he developed. That means he lied about at least some of the claims he made for Dianetics and Scientology.

              We know some Dianetics techniques do work, particularly those early ones, which many (including myself) know to be based on existing therapy techniques. We know people get into trouble at the upper levels, which seem to originate entirely from LRH and his research. Hubbard says that if they don’t work, it’s because they were applied wrong… but if Hubbard lied about his early research, how do we know he’s not lying about more?

              This is why Hubbard’s credibility matters.

              • martyrathbun09

                Got it. You see eye to eye with corporate Scientology.

                • For the record, Marty, I don’t. I think it’s utterly ridiculous that a so-called “church” is trying to quash followers who don’t march in lock-step. What the Church is doing to the Independents, and what DM does to his staff, is nothing short of criminal, and I support you in your effort to stop the abuses.

                  Whether Hubbard’s tech is valid is a separate issue, and one that is not nearly so black-and-white.

                  JSG

              • I concur with this comment in so much that LRH did have “a thing” about psychiatrists as being the arch enemy, the root cause of all evil. David Miscavige is all about the global obliteration of psychiatry a natural extension of this ideology.

                Without getting in to the efficacy of “the tech”, which clearly works for you independents, I still question (under the point that LRH was just a man), the whole hate agenda against “psychiatrists”, which if you knew a few you would realise they’re quite a diverse bunch; one prescribes drugs the other therapy and combinations of that.

                As I tried to point out to one die hard church of scientology person, the sale of drugs benefits big pharma more than it does psychiatrists. Also big pharma is only successful because humans want quick and easy pill solutions.

                The UK does not allow direct drug advertising, although subtle adverts have started to appear, and yet even in our society people know of drugs that will make them better able to cope and prefer those to “therapy”.

                The current trend is drugs supplemented by therapy. There are however a lot of people who get on just fine with long term drug treatment; treatment that effectively negates extreme genetic variants that have some people hyper manic or crushingly depressed or swing between the two extremes.

                As someone who sees the “extremes” on a regular basis I can say for some medication with constant support or some form of advance brain surgery currently beyond our capabilities is the only option.

                I have no doubt dianetics can work for many mainly because faith (as Micheal Hobson pointed out to me) is 3/4 of the solution.

                I deal with the 2% quite often though. Some are that way too young and others that become that way much later in life.

                The youngest I know is a person of 12 and without a change in technology he will always require others to care for him. Dianetics, scientology are meaningless to him. He suffers from a varient of downs syndrome and such concepts are beyond him. Never the less we have managed to teach him empathy which as shaprly reduced his incidents of random attacks on anything he found strange.

                Now he recognises when someone is upset, even if they’re hamming it up, and he goes in to nurture (cuddle) mode. Previously he’d spit and throw his own shit at people he didn’t recognise.

                For these people there is no solution that will return them to functioning people in society unless there is a technological leap, there is only making the best of the situation.

                • Dean Fox wrote:
                  “I have no doubt dianetics can work for many mainly because faith (as Micheal Hobson pointed out to me) is 3/4 of the solution.”

                  Mr. Fox, I have a *very* short fuse when it comes to persons falsely attributing statements or asserted points of argument to me.

                  In all my time on the Internet, I have never once asserted or implied that faith or belief is a factor in whether or not Dianetics works for anyone. Make your words stand on their own and don’t you dare use *my* name to hold them up, mister.

                  Michael A. Hobson
                  Independent Scientologist

        • Just Some Guy — You raise an important point and I am sorry to see it effectively get shut down. For the broader public, for ex-Scientologists, and some Scientologists, it _is_ a question that we struggle with: If LRH fibbed about this, that, or the other, or if he got this or that wrong, how can you distinguish where he is correct and where not? By whose criteria if his word as Source is beyond reproach? Who decides what is meant as more of a “parable” and what is solid and unvarnished?

          Who then decides who is the squirrel for interpreting Ron one way versus another? Do the tall tales of WW II get reinterpreted as story-telling points to be made? How about when Ron fibbed on camera about the number of times he was married? What about the story of how he was on Venus the other day, and a freight train almost hit him — concluding that the planet Venus did not look uncivilized to him — which flies in the face of the molten, sulfuric world that Venus actually is? Was that a parable? To what point? What about the misunderstanding of radiation? And so on. These _are_ problems the Indies will have to face if they seek broader credibility than just those who are already in the group. And they are problems that were not created by DM, but by LRH himself.

          Probably most if not all of us here can say “it works” — I certainly fall in that camp myself to the extent that I did see actual benefits for myself and others through auditing and training and auditing I delivered. But to say “it works” and “you have to experience it for yourself” simply does not cut it for everyone who is interested in a more scientific approach, such as I would like to see.

          The criteria of “it works/you must experience it” sets a bar that every religion on earth can clear it, as probably can every New Age philosophy. So for a lot of the world, more evidence and critical thinking is needed.

          Why the response to Just Some Guy gave pause to some of us (not everyone will speak up) is that the Indies are supposed to be about open thought and freedom to express all views and think critically. If the Indies evolve in that direction, we/you will, in my cautious opinion, run the risk of trading one mental straitjacket for another.

          Let me close by saying what I would like to see: an independent field where the wheat can be separated from the chaff in terms of what Dianetics and Scientology can do, where everyone is truly free to voice any opinion and others will be open to reasoning things out critically, where those elements and beliefs and fibs that are rightly subject to ridicule are winnowed out, and where the subject is open to scientific study and validation.

          But hey, maybe that’s just me! :-)

          • Sorry — where I wrote “If the Indies evolve in that direction, we/you will, in my cautious opinion, run the risk of trading one mental straitjacket for another” it should have started as “If the Indies do not …”

            Again, just my opinion.

            • That’s assuming “the Indies” are or will be some kind of undifferentiated blob or mob. I think most “Indies” are Indies because the do not go along with a mob mentality, whether Miscavige’s or anyone else’s. I think at this point, “the Indies” are a bunch of disparate individuals who are tenuously united by a few common agreements.. There is no clique or “club” as such.

          • So perfectly stated, FOTF2012!!!

          • martyrathbun09

            Listen and word clear the PDC and it’ll all reconcile. 9999.99% of leading Scientists believe the universe is filled with paradoxes. But if one really looks – and clear his own mind of paradoxes – he’ll see it isn’t so.

            • Thanks Marty. I can get into that viewpoint (of paradoxes resolving if one’s mind is cleared of paradoxes).

              I have lots of Scn materials from pre-RTC. Not sure I have the PDC. I wonder if the RTC redid the PDC, too (a rhetorical question).

          • FOTF, you make a cogent argument. However I disagree with the following point:

            “The criteria of “it works/you must experience it” sets a bar that every religion on earth can clear it, as probably can every New Age philosophy.”

            With all due respect, I think you are wrong about this. Not that I’ve tried all of them, but I can list several I’ve tried, and they PALE in comparison to what I’ve experienced in auditing.

            There was one time when I was tired of the constant demands for money, the endless setups, etc, and decided to give a form of “visualization” a try. Bought a book, studied it, tried it. What a joke.

            I could list several others.

            Often I’ve speculated that one reason so many people who have “left” Scientology really have never left is that they know there is nothing else like it. Maybe it’s a bit like having developed a taste for very fine wine. Somehow it’s hard to ever go back to Two Buck Chuck!

            This is one reason I believe that once DM is gone, many who call themselves “ex’s” will come flocking back. And many who are sort of interested and fascinated – but are put off by the bad press generated by DM’s Reign of Terror – will seriously consider giving it a try. It’s already happening here in the Independent field, as I think any careful reader of this blog over the past few years can see.

          • Good post FOTF2012.

          • “If LRH fibbed about this, that, or the other, or if he got this or that wrong, how can you distinguish where he is correct and where not?”

            In my opinion, you’d tell by his actions not his words. LRH said many things, some true, some false? I don’t really care. I think his actions over the course of his life indicated his intent to help people better themselves. I think he did far more to help people than to harm people. Remember his essay on personal integrity, you needn’t believe anything unless you choose to.

            One of the things that I see as similar in history is Jesus being an enlightened person brought wisdom to an area and after he passes on, many stories and what not are made up. But who knows if Jesus made a few of those stories up and they were passed on or others made them up? In the end, the only important measure is, did Jesus help people? Never mind the bible’s tendency to control people’s thinking and doing. We have the same thing going on in the modern church by our modern pope David. (Don’t take this as a comparison of LRH and Jesus, I am simply making an example.)

            So, how can one distinguish where he was correct and where not? Well in regards to his technology which is the only real important aspect worth talking about (in my opinion), through the course of his development of the technology he tested it on people, this is very evident throughout any deeper study into the subject. He was also developing and refining things throughout his entire life; that’s why certain definitions changed or things were dropped out such as the Ded, Ded-ex, that’s why New Era Dianetics vs the process of Dianetics as first described in the 1950 DMSMH book, etc etc.

            Would the way some people perceive him, without any actual experience of the technology he created, be tarnished by his story telling, some true, some not? Maybe. Does it challenge his credibility by anyone who hasn’t actually gained or benefited from the subject? Probably, especially as spun with J&D by Tony Ortega or anyone else. But in the end the technology has bettered my life so I’m sticking with it.

            • FOS and others — I appreciate your reflections and thoughts on the issues.

              To an extent, I agree with your points. For example, no one doubts the genius of Newton (and Leibniz) originating calculus or Newton’s law of universal gravitation, even though they, especially Newton, were quite non-scientific in other ways — Newton, for example devoted much of his energy to alchemy and the search for the Philosopher’s Stone (which was actually a liquid) as well as trying to decipher secrets hidden in the Bible (book of Daniel in particular), in addition to being wildly temperamental and retaliatory to any competitor. Even a more modern figure like Einstein, a man of indisputable genius, had has 2D problems (an abandoned daughter, for example — but abandoned perhaps due in part to the mores of the time).

              So on this point, I suspect most if not all of us can find common ground: that a person’s past or even present behavior doesn’t invalidate discovered, verifiable truth.

              In contrast, where there are claims the discoveries that directly contradict known fact, that is an issue. If I listen to someone who claims the ability to exteriorize at will, and hear that his description of Venus is 180 degrees off, well, that’s a concern. And I don’t say that scoffingly at all — just a matter of dilemma in what to rely on or not as having differing levels of truth probability.

              Where I may differ from some is in holding that the truth of Scientology does not have to a belief to any degree, but can, where it is true, stand scientific and critical scrutiny of the highest degree. And for it to ever be more than a religion, it must, in my opinion, open itself to that scrutiny. That approach could, IMHO, validate the effective parts of Scientology in a way that would truly be the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics.

              • PS I don’t mean to imply that being “just” a religion would be wrong. It’s just that the Indie movement has excited a hope in me that more than religion can be achieved. I admire and support the Indie movement for its intentions and postulated results.

                My main suggestion if the group does continue the identity of a religion, which would be the group’s choice I suppose, would be to move away from the cheesy gold, sparkle, glitter, glow, and shine graphics that look so much like an imitation of evangelical religious television fundraising programs. (No offense intended to anyone.)

              • FOTF2012~ Have you noticed all these shows about psychic kids and adults on TV lately? Paranormal activity, ancient aliens, I survived; beyond and back? Documentaries about the “life source” that prove its existence but can’t quite nail down exactly what it is? What’s fact and what’s fiction? By whose definition?

          • FOTF 2012
            You said…
            “Why the response to Just Some Guy gave pause to some of us (not everyone will speak up) is that the Indies are supposed to be about open thought and freedom to express all views and think critically. If the Indies evolve in that direction, we/you will, in my cautious opinion, run the risk of trading one mental straitjacket for another.”…

            I am totally with people being able to freely express their opinions (although where and when can certainly be an issue). But you see, you seem to have fallen into the same “trap” that you are accusing others of. Your statement above is fine, the problem is when you use it to control the communications of others.

            You are telling those who have responded to a comment that they disagree with, that their disagreement is unacceptable. YOU are (whether realizing it or not) attempting to allow certain opinions (like that from “Just Some Guy”) and yet restrict others (those giving their opinions about what he was saying or in disagreement with what he was saying).

            Can you see how that is just a tad hypocritical?

            Yet another aspect of this is that, your comment, that I quoted above, attempts to force “indies” (who are actually individuals) into a group “straightjacket” of your manufacture… ie; “indies are this…., Indies are supposed to be…, a true Indie wouldn’t…, ” and similar restrictions.

            I also beg you to notice that the communications of “Just Some Guy”, yourself, and every other person communicating here are, in fact, posted here. So…You explain to me how that is restricting “open thought and freedom to express all views and think critically”.

            And I understand that what you said is “just your opinion,” but reflect on this for a moment if you care to…. Are YOU perhaps having a problem with allowing “open thought and freedom to express all views and think critically”?

            Eric S

            • WindWalker — you are correct that we are enjoying an open discussion. I value that. I suspect we all do.

              However, you are incorrect that I had any intent to control anyone’s communication.

              My point, if you duplicated me, and put differently here if it helps make it clearer, is that in my opinion a free Scientology movement will have to take extra pains to invite all views to the table for open discussion.

              Why? Because of years and decades of conditioning within the Church that any disagreement is a misunderstood, that any criticism is evidence of a missed withhold, and that anyone who thinks LRH just plain flubbed in some areas must be an SP.

              If free Scientology adheres to those same standards — I would say suppressive standards as they nullify critical thinking — then the fertile earth of free thought will not be there to let the good in Scientology cannot bloom. And the current scenarios of suppressed communication will run the risk of playing out again — not on this blog. That’s not what I’m saying. I’m extrapolating from past performance to future probability — based only on my opinion, which anyone is free to reject. No worries from me if you do.

              • FOFT 2012

                OK ,thank you for the added data… I’m thinking we are pretty much on the same page here.

                I definitely agree with the concerns of simply replacing one regime with another. This is why I tend to really push the idea of “keeping one’s own council”, and looking for oneself, and doing one’s own data evaluations.

                I value other people’s opinions because I am very much into multiple viewpoint data evaluations, particularly as they impact the third and fourth Dynamics. But, perhaps like you, I insist on my right to do as I please with those viewpoints. Some are valuable, some are nonsense, and some are interjected specifically to enturbulate.

                Accurate data evaluation seems to be one of the keys to a brighter future.

                Eric S

              • FOTF, “a free Scientology movement” is a bit of a contradiction in terms.

                Free Scientologists will move as they choose to move and each one will say whatever s/he chooses to say. Sometimes some will decide to work with others towards a common purpose. Or not.

                i don’t see there being much of a political platform involved or evolving, a la Republicans or Democrats. Perhaps a very basic set of agreed-upon principles at most.

          • FOTF, you wrote all that about what you’d “like to see” etc. None of it really spoke to what do you actually see, right now in present time?

        • Re LRH: “If he’s lying about his injuries, he’s lying about his ability to heal himself. And if he’s lying about his ability to heal himself, he’s lying about being able to achieve those same gains through Dianetics and Scientology.”

          Actually JSG, none of those statements logically follow one from another.

          You have arbitrarily associated them and that’s all.

      • As a never was a scientologist I think Marty’s characterisation of Hubbard as a colorful story teller who thought out side the box is not unreasonable.

        Having listened to some of his lectures I know LRH could certainly spin a tale.

        Hubbards’ motives behind what he did and whether or not he “lied” or “stretched the truth” or just presented his ideas as he saw them are no longer relevant.

        He’s dead and without his influence and without that of the church of scientology people are free to interpret LRH’s teachings for themselves and glean what ever value they can from them.

        Scientology is not for me but who am I to dictate where others gain their inspiration? As I’ve said before what I like about the independents is as view scientology as individuals and so don’t follow anyone.

        They think critically, the question and work out how thinks fit for them, not make themselves fit with others as happens in all churches of all denominations.

        Just because they may not arrive at the same conclusions i have or you have doesn’t necessarily make them wrong.

    • Just Some Guy,

      with all due respect – there are only 2 ways to know what is real or false about the OT levels :

      1. to do them properly

      2. to meet and observe people who did them properly

      Then all doubt will be eliminated. And the personal flaws of Hubbard will have a different importance.

      • Right on Han.

        I would say his personal flaws might then have little or no importance at all.

      • So true. To anyone following along the textual progression of my personal OTII auditing, it would lend itself to hoots and hollers of derision and jest. Yet, my spiritual gains on that level were daily evident and extraordinary. What does THAT say about LRH’s contract with all of us to deliver useful and workable truth?

      • +1 For well-said! Great way to cut right to the chase!

    • Hey, Just Some Guy,

      I am with you on this. My dad took off on me and my mother based on Hubbard’s “claims”. However, faith is faith. You won’t get very far on this blog trying to convince anyone here that their faith is flawed. It works for them. Marty is really receptive to these types of discussions privately. You should e-mail him.

    • You don’t “lie” about the OT Levels. You study, get the gradients in, and you DO them. This is a spectators viewpoint you express. There is a truth you experience personally. It is YOU, NOT L. Ron Hubbard that does these Grades. The results have to do with whether or not you are set up for the Level. Whether or not you have done the study to grasp the material. Whether or not you DO the auditing. Not whether somebody says they are something.

      Your own observation is the acid test.

      If LRH sat and watched Jack Parsons boinking some babe in a Babylon Working in 1945 and made notes of the exercise, that has ZERO to do with what happens when I sit down with a meter and follow a process and see myself what happens in front of me. This ridiculous and shoddy sophistry you present is 6th Grade social studies to please the teacher stuff. It’s inane.

      • This is misplaced in the cue. This is to Just Some Guy’s first comment on LRH cred.

        • Right there with ya Jim. Who cares what Hubbard’s life was like. I’d prefer he was a saint. He was not. He was a guy. What he developed was the means to rid yourself of self imposed disabilities, most of which you are not aware of until they are gone. Then you can’t hardly imagine how you didn’t see it. Those who study and audit see this clearly.

          Those who have never seen an LRH book cover but wax forth opinions, only demonstrate their ignorance. Embarrassing really.

        • Right on, Jim. Quite enjoyable to read your reply.

    • Sorry JSG, but if you are feeling like you are getting short shrift from us on the subject that you feel is so clear, perhaps it is because we’ve been hearing this same question for 30+ years and we’re sick of it. It’s not just your fault, there are many more like you who just don’t understand and most will never make any real effort to understand even when we lay out the answer. So just in case you are not one of those, the e-meter does not react on things that are not charged. I can spin a lie right now: “We are all descendants from an ancient race of pencils. They evil Pencil King instilled into the formula for erasers a mind bending formula that make people behave like objects. All you need to do is run this process on the emeter, “I am not a pencil.” Just say that several hundred times and you will restore your spiritual abilities.”

      I made that up. It’s a lie. And you know what? You can run “I am not a pencil” for the next 10 years and nothing will happen of any benefit whatsoever. It is what we call in Scientology “null” — there is no charge on it. There is nothing under it. That isn’t what happens when you run the processes of the OT levels. It doesn’t matter whether you believe them or not. They simply work. Based on their workability, many people construed the data must have some validity. But that really isn’t necessary. It works regardless of what you believe. Like when you turn on the faucet, water comes out. When you get onto the OT levels, the e-meter responds dramatically.

      So, speculating on whether LRH lied about the OT levels is missing the boat is like speculating on whether GM lied about the Corvette going from 0-60 in under 4 seconds. The workability is easily demonstrated and if it works, whether LRH lied is not immaterial.

      The e-meter won’t react and processes will not run that are not charged. TRY IT. It’s not just me saying it. It is a scientific fact. Unreading (uncharged) processes, flows, items, rundowns and OT levels won’t run (won’t take you anywhere).

      • Great explanation Steve!

      • >So, speculating on whether LRH lied about the OT levels is missing the boat is like speculating on whether GM lied about the Corvette going from 0-60 in under 4 seconds. The workability is easily demonstrated and if it works, whether LRH lied is not immaterial.

        Well, if you bought a Corvette because you wanted to go 0-60 in under 4 seconds, and it doesn’t, that’s a problem. You spent money and time based on a claim that wasn’t true. If GM came back and said “Well, it’s really 4.3 seconds, but you’ve gained a fast car!” that’s not good enough.

        JSG

    • This subject comes up over and over again, because there is a huge false datum floating around- probably for thousands of years, – the false idea states that the workability of a technique is dependent on the virtuous life of the technique’s originator. That idea is false- period. It’s like a whole bunch of people standing on one side of the Golden Gate bridge, reading the biography of the chief architect and finding out the guy skipped child support, claimed he was Buddha re-incarnated, never completed his doctorate, went to jail 8 times for drunk and disorderly and was married to two women at the same time and they say “OMG! I cannot possibly risk my life driving across this bridge! Look at the moral standards of the chief architect.!! I will not place my life in his hands!!!” Well people do that all the time. It’s the nature of the stupid. But don’t look at the biography, look at the damned bridge. It’s got big old trucks rumbling across day and night. It’s a bridge, it does what it’s supposed to do. Actually the original designer did not even have a degree in engineering. How many people even know who the chief architect was? I bet of the millions who use that bridge only a handful know or care that the design concept was created by a poet with a degree in economics. But I tell you one thing for sure. The people who drive their cars and trucks over the Golden Gate bridge would never question the credibility of the the guy who came up with the design. That is one credible dude. All the flack LRH gets is from people who never made the trip or even put one foot on the Bridge, people that never even touched the handrail. “OMG! I could not put my delicate foot on this Bridge! Look at the qualifications of the designer!!” Barf. Our problem is that there is a guy who has appointed himself “troll of the bridge” and is taxing the heck out of all who try to cross and when people complain, he tosses them over the side! And of course that is when people start to wonder about whether the bridge is save to travel or not.

      • Beautifully stated! Thank you.

      • Joe Strauss, that was the best example ever!
        So get the troll away from the bridge and let people actually roll a foot forward, another foot forward, another foot forward, till they get across.

      • Joe, well stated, but I think there’s a difference. If Hubbard was a terrible husband or father, that doesn’t necessarily invalidate the worth of his work (except maybe any books he wrote on marriage and parenting). If a comedian cheats on his wife, that doesn’t mean he’s not funny.

        But if Hubbard lied about the successes he had with his techniques, that’s a different story. That matters, because it directly affects the results he said his followers could achieve. Do you see what I mean?

        • johnny d / thetan-x

          JSG,
          Makes absolute perfect sense to me !!!
          I don’t see why one would find fault in your statement.

      • Much better analogy than comparing Corvettes with LRH/General Motors.

  5. Wow Marty, thanks for the laser-sharp focus on the masked nature of the basically twisted 1.1-ness of the operation against LRH, by Miscavige and Sherman!

    Really fits the definition, “Overt or covert…. complex and continuous effort to harm or destroy”.

  6. Marty, You hit the nail on the head. Even the whole release of “The Golden Age of Tech” and “The Basics” was used to black PR LRH while making Miscavide “the man”.

    Miscavige canceled ALL auditor training certs, even those trained directly by LRH. Non tech trained David Miscavige had a new way to train that made everything done under LRH, worthless.

    When Miscavige released “The Basics” he stated at the release that no one could have been “a real Scientologist” before his correction of LRHs screwed up books. Are you kidding?

    Now I’m hearing that staff are saying that policy in the OEC volumes are not applicable because Miscavige hasn’t revised/corrected them yet. I have also had ex Sea Org members tell me that when they tried to refer to a policy in an OEC volume when dealing with Miscavige, that he threw the volume across the room, invalidating its validity.

    Another point is that Miscavige has all his verbal dribble recorded, transcribed and put into binders. There are Sea Org members who have the full time job of doing this. All the binders from years of dribble are kept
    on shelves, in order, in a large secure room – like they are the Dead Sea Scrolls or something. Tom Devocht told me that Dave took him to this room
    and bragged that he had created more than LRH….

    Miscavige is so pathetically insane that it boggles the mind. When the sheeple wake up and start confronting, they will have to eat so much crow
    and open their mouth so wide, so they will have permanent stretch marks on their face…..

  7. Wow, Marty, I always wondered about Amstrongs “being right” on that whole cycle (until this day).
    Thank you for putting this into the right perspective. Makes sense now.

    DM, let the Church alone.

    • Well, it is not quite that black and white as I noted in response to another comment – his subsequent propagandizing is as inaccurate as the churches in many respects.

      • Yes, I can see that.
        I just didn’t know what drived him to do it.
        I had this miscing link.

        • I think two things drove Gerry Armstrong:

          1) A desire for the truth to be told

          2) a direct reaction to David Miscavige’s harassment

          • martyrathbun09

            I don’t think either is the case; both were far weaker than the assertion of self-importance button drive.

            • Yes, I saw an interview in which Mr. Armstrong claims he is a prophet of God. That is pretty damned important.

  8. I recall once that LRH mentioned something along the lines of liking historical fiction better than recorded fiction as at least it (historical fiction) had SOME chance of being correct. Verification of 1st-hand accounts is NOT always available through a search of recorded history.

    That reliable sources are not available (per Data Series) does not mean that a recount of events is untrue. What Ron says about Nixon, is indeed consistent with what we know about Nixon. What Ron says about the 1945 nuclear physicists is at least consistent about individuals who knowingly brought into being on crazy-planet Earth the means to destroy it all.

    So there is an impasse here. The words of LRH trend across the popular beliefs of our society. Nothing new. I agree whole-heartedly with Marty here that this was yet another ingenious effort by David Miscarriage to throw LRH under the bus.

    • You forget the purpose for the tall tale in the first place: that LRH wanted his followers to believe that he helped avoid a diabolical takeover of America by the world’s leading atomic scientists.

      Miscavige no more threw LRH under the bus than LRH threw himself under the bus in an attempt at personal aggrandizement. David Miscavige only foolishly repeated the tale, bringing attention to a, frankly, stupid lie told to make people like him better.

      What’s amazing is that David Miscavige is so unbelievably incompetent. The guy has a *billion* dollars at his disposal, and he continues to drive people out of Scientology through crush regging. On top of that, he pulls stunts like the above highlighting of LRH’s whoppers, no doubt stretching people’s ability to take LRH as a credible source (well, that may not be entirely true-only the must gullible are still in, now). What a moron.

      • martyrathbun09

        Quite presumptuous.

      • Mr. Fancy,
        You should spend some time reading up on the history of this period, including Robert Heinleins’s recent authorized biography. There’s no question that Miscavige/Sherman are propagandizing the whole thing to deify Hubbard, but you might be surprised at how closely connected the atomic scientists and sci-fi crowd (including Hubbard) were in the months leading up to the dropping of the atomic bomb, as well as the months after. There was in fact a push by scientists to “internationalize atomic weapons control”, while others wanted America to remain free from any international oversight. And there were camps of scientists who thought the dropping of the bombs on Hiroshima/Nagasaki was the correct thing to do, while others thought a “warning shot” (e.g. on an unpopulated island) would have been just as effective.
        Hubbard, of course, was no policy/decision maker in any of this, but it is no stretch to say that he was involved in these circles and in various campaigns. As was Heinlein. Heinlein and Hubbard were good friends, and Hubbard even lived with Heinlein and his wife (in Hollywood in 1945) for a while, after Hubbard and his first wife separated. Heinlein would even go on, oddly enough, to be part of the “advisory committee” for Reagan’s “star wars” program (SDI, Strategic Defense Initiative).
        In the end, I wouldn’t be so ready to write the whole thing off as “Hubbard throwing himself under the bus”. To me, this is clearly Miscavige/Sherman throwing Hubbard under the bus with their inability to humanize Hubbard, and remain balanced and rational.

  9. Listen,
    I think the church is trying, very hard, to keep the superman image of LRH very much alive. That is, after all, all they really have. Because, if none of that is true then the rest really could be called into question.

    I urge everyone to do your own research. Via the freedom of information act you can look up LRH’s military record and it will either match or conflict with the stories that you have all read in the Ron mags and all that other stuff.

    I started looking into the different aspects of Scientology and Dianetics, the key principals mind you to see where in fact they came from or how LRH came up with such vast ideas. And I found that some of his most famous ideas and quotes weren’t really his own. But borrowed and reworked from others that he didn’t credit for the idea at all.

    Like for example, “The way out is the way through.” is really a stolen, slightly altered, form taken from Robert Frost, “The best way out is always through.” (A servant to servants poem)

    Similarly I stumbled upon a man named Ernest Holmes, who in 1927 (When LRH was 16) developed the “Science of Mind” some 23 years BEFORE Dianetics came out. Now he isn’t credited in the beginning of the book but most of the techniques and principles of Dianetics and even some of Scientology are covered there.

    I don’t propose this data as a debate to who is “Source” or if LRH was better or correct, or even if Scientology works or not. I just want to point out that there are lies on the line.

    The Naval record that we were all told about and admired in the SO is blatantly false. Just lie after lie. Secondly, LRH was without a doubt the worlds greatest orator. And he was definitely the most well read person of his era. He took from all the greats and the obscure and put together his technology. It is held together by the thread of trust and the power of NOT looking into it further. If you don’t ever look into how he came to these conclusions or if anyone else ever thought of these concepts you can easily think that he thought this all up himself. That he is in tune with universe in a secretive and powerful way that only he could possibly understand, and if you obey enough and are good enough someday you may be able to understand it too.

    Probably the best advice LRH ever gave was “Look, don’t listen.” So I beg all of you, actually LOOK. Look at his Naval record. Look into Ernest Holmes and read Science of Mind. You looked at the church and you finally saw the truth of what was going on there. I urge you all to really LOOK at L. Ron Hubbard and see the whole picture as it is and not as someone else has painted it for you.

    • You have pendulum swung in the other direction. Armstrong, Atack, and many who followed are as inaccurate about LRH’s past as the church is. Your Frost quote is so shallow and absurd as….well, I guess your “science of the mind” argument – there are dozens of “sciences of the mind” – all the way back to St Thomas Aquinas – and probably earlier. More importantly, what’s the point?

      • Marty, my point is that everyone, including you needs to actually LOOK into LRH. Really look. When we were in the SO we were made to wear Naval based uniforms because he had been a Navy hero and formed the SO based on Naval principals and all that.

        I am sorry to say that NONE of that was true.

        THE REST WAS EXCISED – AS THIS IS THE FIRST STRAIGHT OUT LIE STATED AUTHORITATIVELY BY YOU, OPENING A LITANY OF ILL-INFORMED ATTACKS ON HUBBARD. YOU CLEARLY ARE NOT LOOKING, LISTENING NOR ACKNOWLEDGING. YOU ARE PROPAGANDIZING. IF YOU OBJECT TO THIS MODERATION…HEAD OVER TO VILLAGE VOICE OR ESMB – I’M SURE THEY’D LOVE MORE OF THAT ENDLESS PILE ON. – BEST REGARDS, MARTY

        • Ex-RPFer, why the hell would you care about the life of the person who invented the hammer before you used it to pound a nail? Either the hammer works or it doesn’t.

          • So scientology is just a hammer? It’s that primitive?

            Hmmm.

            I disagree. Ron’s technique/philosophy is more sophisticated and potentially a lot more dangerous as LRH himself pointed out. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7Pt29wConU

            Sorry for weird and obviously not matching video of him, but, this IS the voice of Ron. And I know those of you here are familiar with the full text of the George Orwell reference.

            Ron said:

            “Therefore we really do have the remedy before the assault weapon is produced. Did you ever read poor old George Orwell’s uh.. 1984? Yes, yes, that’s wonderful. That would be, could be, the palest imagined shadow of what a world would be like under the rule of the secret use of Scientology with no remedy in existence. Well it’s all right in this offhand age to just brush things aside and say, “Well, it’s of no importance, no importance, really, and.. let’s not be dramatic the way people are being about the atom bomb.” Actually the atom bomb isn’t as serious as this subject. It’s just a MEST weapon. And, it’s all right to be very offhand, and very cheerful and so on, and – like the little boy whistling in the dark says, “No ghosts or boogymen exist.” – Well, this boogyman does exist. It’s a very simple remedy. And that’s just make sure that the remedy is passed along. That’s all. Don’t hoard it. Don’t hold it. And if you ever do use any Black Dianetics, use it on the guy who pulled Scientology out of sight and made it so it wasn’t available. Because he’s the boy who would be electing himself “the new order”. We don’t need any more new orders – all those orders as far as I’m concerned have been filled.”

            I’ve not been acquainted with a hammer capable of this.

            I think, when dealing with philosophy and the science of the mind, it IS important to evaluate the inidividual who has created it and in whom one chooses to invest one’s belief, faith and trust.

            To dismiss all critical thought regarding Ron as a being with a two-sentence riposte is to relegate him and scientology to an off/on state — like an old light bulb, there are no gradients (no shades of grey, not to mention technicolor — which is how life really is; not black and white, not shades of grey, but brilliant, multi-hued shades of outrageous color). Just OFF or ON.

            AS

            • Didn’t the reference to 1984 disappear or wasn’t it truncated in the latest release of this lecture? I recall hearing two versions of this lecture with the most recent having a sentence or two missing. (Those damnable transcription errors DM keeps banging on about – odd they should occur in a recording of LRH’s voice though).

              Anyone throw any light on this?

              • martyrathbun09

                DM deleted much of it – most particularly the message that the only one upon whom Black Dianetics ought to be practiced upon is the Black Dianeticist himself. Interesting conundrum.

            • Not primitive, but simple (R2-12 notwithstanding!)

        • Ex-RPFer, “When did you start to think like that?” and when you found that: “What happened just before that point?” You don’t have to answer that publicly. If needed, find someone who helps.

          The second point I see is a weakness in your evaluation of data. For example, if you google the navy record of L. Ron Hubbard and you don’t find anything it means that you didn’t find anything. (data not available) and if someone else wrote that L. Ron Hubbard had been making his living in WW 2 selling peanuts at sport events you would have not proven that the “Navy record” was a lie. You would have just found a chance of contrary data.
          The things you find in Google are there because someone put them there. And some things were put there with an intention, and some things were not put there intentionally. “Google is entertainment” as Walter Maddison from “Mission Earth” would put it. Of course many true statements can be found as well.
          The same goes for “records”. In German records of the Nazi-period you could find dozens of “documents” as to the effect that Hitler was a “lovely guy”, loved children, dogs and was concerned about establishing the “New World Order” for the “benefit of the planet”. The question out of this is statistics. What were his products? If you judge by facts, by statistics, by products you have somewhat safe ground.
          Thirdly, a statement or story is better be viewed in the context of what was the intention it was given with. What was the message LRH wanted communicate? There can be stories, if told truthfully, no one would believe. If you found Sun Tzu has been your class mate and that he was an arrogant prick with no trace of ARC, would you go around and tell that to people who admire his work? You probably would change the story, if you cared to tell it at all.
          The Data Series is available. David Miscavige has not worked it over, yet. Study it, understand it, check it out.

          • Wise post Worsel.

          • I will answer here your, non standard, coffee shop auditing questions. When I started thinking like that was when I finally escaped the RPF. What happened just before that, well I was TORTURED physically and mentally for years on the RPF and force fed “Scientology” until my mind was practically jello and I could no longer think for myself or even have the will to live at all.

            I wish that I had your easy life and all Scientology took from me was money and some years where I had to sit in comfortable chairs doing courses and getting auditing. Wow what a hard time you had. Did someone yell at you? Did they make you donate to things that turned out to not exist or just cost too much. Geeze what a bummer. Why don’t you gimme a call when someone, let me clarify, 15 people are holding you down and choking you and cutting you and not letting you leave a room because they are accusing you of doing something that you didn’t do. Or when you are being pushed down a flight of stairs because you said “No”.

            Did you experience that? I did. If that happened to you in the name of LRH, which it did in my case, would you believe in him still? Maybe you would but I just couldn’t.

        • Hi Ex-RPFer,
          I’ve studied up on Hubbard’s Naval career (service and medical files) and the related public record in some depth, and have also studied up on Chris Owen’s “Ron the War Hero” pages (as well as others).
          You might be surprised at how incorrect much of Chris’ information is, when you actually dig into it. Drop me a line, if you’d like to discuss it and/or see the documentation: mesamarg @ earthlink (dot) net .

        • Ex-RPFer, I had been in the SO for many years and no one told me that we were wearing Navy-like uniforms “because LRH had been a Navy hero”, so that’s news to me.

          I actually looked into the “Science of Mind” by Ernest Holmes, and I fail to see the connection (much less any basis for your accusation of plagarism) between Dianetics and a book which “proposes a science with a new relationship between humans and God”.

          For your information (because I doubt you have actually read it), here is how he explains his Science of the Mind:

          “Prayer” is “Spiritual Mind Treatment”. This is the main Religious Science technique to tap into God to create all the good we desire on the human level, analogous to God creating on the Universe level. This requires faith in the knowledge that the technique is working right now.”

          Does that really sound like Dianetics to you? You think that’s the true source of Dianetics?

          I don’t think it is Marty who has to start looking, because this blog is FULL of facts, names, dates, events, real research and the results of looking, thinking and evaluating, while your comments lack any similar substance. I think it’s you that have to start looking before you make a fool out of yourself by making such ridiculous statements.

          • Globetrotter, great info on “Science of Mind” … oh, and Black Magic and Crowley … just a dead ringer for the Scientology Axioms and Factors, no? lol

          • To clarify, I don’t think that EVERYTHING in Science of Mind is where he got it from. Clearly not the prayer aspect. My point was that the concepts of Reactive and Analytical mind are there, and the spirit being separate from the body and mind is there, which was a new concept at the time.

            All I was saying is that I found it “interesting” that so many concepts of Dianetics and Science of Survival were first put forth by this man.
            PS. I am trained. VERY. And I have read Dianetics 8 times. So I am pretty familiar with the topic.

        • Marty,

          I am really shocked that you would censor what I am saying. That really surprises me. I thought this was an open forum. I respect what everyone has said here. And what you say.

          And now because of your censorship my entire post has been lost and I will admit that it does look a bit crazy. But I will chalk that up to missing data.
          I really don’t know why you have a GIGANTIC back off on confronting the fact that LRH lied about some things. Whether or not the tech works is up to you and your PC’s. If you are getting wins and so are they then really, truly I am happy. I am happy for all the christians out there who find comfort in Jesus and his teachings and turn to Christ in their time of need. I believe that when they pray and something good happens for them that is divine intervention. And I am happy for them.

          But lets face it, even you have admitted that there are just some whoppers out there.

          The way I look at the tech, because I am trained, and have “gotten results” with it, VERY good ones, that if both the PC and the Auditor have their Act 1 in, SOMETHING good is going to happen there. There is an agreement that something good is going to happen. The PC knows, we are going to do Process X and they see on the grade chart that Process X gives Y result and both the Auditor and PC have Y result in mind, it will happen. They agree on it.

          I just see this differently than you do. I don’t see that as a “Bad” thing. I just see it as a magic trick. The magician tells that audience,” Look at this beautiful woman. I am going to put her in this box and she is going to disappear.” Everyone in the audience says, “oooohhhhh she’s going to disappear.” and then she “does” and everyone is wowed, even though they know she didn’t really disappear but they believe she did.

          And yes when you, and I do mean YOU Marty, audit someone, you get good results and people are happy. In my opinion, not because you are using the most workable magic tech on the planet that no one else knows or anything like that, but because when you sit down in that chair you are there to do one thing, and that is to ACTUALLY HELP the person in front of you. And that is what the PC feels and they ARE helped. And that is magic. So if you think I belong on ESMB I guess I understand. I don’t. I am just challenging the eco system here with my other viewpoint. I didn’t mean to piss you off which I clearly did. Everything I stated is my opinion and mostly backed up by facts. But I do understand if you or other people don’t agree with me.

          • I wonder if your horrific experiences in the RPF have colored your viewpoint of how the tech works. You call it “magic” and seem to mean by that some sort of power of suggestion, on a similar level as prayer. You say it is not “bad” if people think the lady is going to disappear and seems to disappear, even though she does not.

            So I guess if you run someone through a secondary enough times, and they “feel” the charge has blown, it really has not – but who cares, they “believe” it has and because of the belief they feel better.

            What a strange view – really a very subtle form of inval – what I and others think we see is not really what we see – but what YOU see, is real. YOU have pulled back the curtain of deception but all of us who think we are helped, are being fooled. WOW is all I can say to that rather arrogant viewpoint.

            • Sorry if you find it arrogant that I have seen the man behind the curtain and I see that there really is no wizard of OZ, but that as, Dorothy finds in that classic film, I had the power all along.

              Yes I think the “tech” works because people believe it works. That is the sum of it in my view. That doesn’t make it bad or good or real or not. I just think that it can work for anyone who chooses to believe that it does. Simple as that.
              Just like if someone takes a placebo pill that is supposed to cure an ailment and they truly believe it is the cure, it will work.

              I am pretty sure LRH covers this in numerous places. The Axioms, Science of Survival, Dianetics, pretty much the entire Bridge I think. It is all about being Cause right? So if I can see how it all works then I am at Cause then aren’t I?

      • The same old LDW

        His point is that HE never got any real case gain from applying standard tech (to self or others), therefore it can’t be true.

        You know we’ve had four full sets of the “basics” books donated to our ministry and all of them are missing The Phoenix Lectures. I was going to check to see if the beginning article in that book, Scientology It’s General Background, was still included in the new version. Anyway, in the older version of the book, in that article and many other places, Ron credits just about every worthwhile phiolopher and thinker in the history of the world as originators of the data in Dianetics and Scientology…including Freud, Aquinas, JC etc etc. The data is not new…it’s evaluation of importances and the step by step technology of how to get from point A-B is very new.
        The certainty of how to get where one wishes to get is new.

        The only reliable source, for me, on whether or not this stuff works is ME. It’s really a shame that there are sooooooo many altered importances… no more so than davie’s cult.

        Audit a couple of hundred PCs with standard tech. Really. There is nothing more theraputic for one’s own soul than to truly help another.

        I truly apologize if my certainty offends some of you onlookers. If you are truly upset, come on over…I’ll give you a free session to handle the charge:)

        • Great post Les! There is nothing like auditing to constantly remind me what a miracle worker Ron was.

        • LDW-

          What you write has always been a stable datum for me. Scientology is discovered and an organized body of data, not invented by LRH. Discover means to un cover. LRH put the data into something workable as opposed to something to just read about, and he put it in a form that anybody can apply it to an end result of improved conditions or betterment.

          To make LRH into some God the current members must hip hip to and clap to a bust, well that is just going way overboard.

        • The same old LDW~ :D Simple truth.

        • Did I say that I never got results on myself or anyone else? I don’t believe that I did. You missed the point, mostly because Marty censored my main point. Yes results happened. I got good ones on others all the time. The things that were done to me weren’t standard and I paid the price for that, mentally, spiritually and now physically. Whether that was “black” diabetics or not is for a C/S to decide, but I made the firm decision LONG ago that I was NEVER going to put myself in the situation to receive anything like that again. So judge away if you will. You don’t know me. You don’t know my story. My point was to look at the WHOLE story not just the fun parts. All of it. As LRH would say, “Even hero’s can have lice.”

    • Be willing to research, look, investigate, reason, extrapolate, prove, disprove, verify, demolish anything, anytime, anywhere about anyone.

      And sometimes, the greatest liberation comes from the dissolving of cherished beliefs masquerading as fact and truth.

      And to me the proof of my finding is in the increased happiness, love, tolerance, benevolent power and clearer understanding of life that comes from that investigation.

      I strive to never be afraid of looking. And if something in me is kicking up a storm and doesn’t want to look: that is evidence of a new truth being born in me. I relish the discomfort, because truth is close at hand.

      • Thank you for this reply Brian, you are eloquent and sincere and I am humbled by your grace here. I wish I would have said it like that!

    • There is no such body of knowledge about life, spirit and human mind as put together by LRH.
      Who cares about what he used as starting point?
      Check out the Data-Series. Ron talks about how he “put together” Dianetics.
      The data you give is not new.

      I wouldn’t mind if he took parts of his knowledge directly from hell. Scientology works and if he was a charlatan as many say, why would he work for so long to enhance results and speed of processing?

      What’s your point?
      War hero? Please. Rons illustrations in lectures? Lectures are not the “history channel”. I like most of his stories in lectures and I don’t mind if they are always based on actual time/place/form/event. It even does not have something to do with the main subject.

      At the other hand, of course, you are absolutley free to have your own conclusions.
      But, there is lots of crap on the internet – and LRH had real enemies before the show really started. I understand that. He could look deeper into man as the majority of the population and it’s not always easy for others to confront that (check out: Certainty, Vol 7 No. 2 “Why Some Fight Scientology”, 1960).

    • Ex,
      Umm, what? Are you serious? LRH’s naval record has to do with the fact that when I audit a preclear and he’s burdened with black mass over his space, his eyes, his life, and he spots the source (HE spots it) and it blows and the cheeks flush, the eyes sparkle and he goes off and deals successfully with that area of living, this didn’t happen because what? LRH’s purported Naval records?

      Are you SURE you are writing on your computer. You never know, maybe Bill Gates’ “records” don’t support what you are seeing. Ask somebody. An authority or somebody such like.

    • He took from all the greats and the obscure and put together his technology.

      Pretty cool, huh. That’s kinda the “USP” of Scientology; it is “distilled wisdom”, presented in a new and more practical format. It is one of the reasons I was first drawn to the subject. In all fairness to Hubbard, he tells you this right from the start. (See page #1, chapter #1 of Original Thesis as a prime example)

    • You should take into account that docs in governmental, or army files were/are falsified. A usual intelligence practice to destroy reputation or
      establish misleading data. But it would be difficult to prove 65 years after the war ended.

  10. ” b) That “a” is of utmost importance, or why would they be conveying it with such ostentatious implant a/v technology; and thus…”

    The above is a very important point in this succinct and informative explanation of actualities regarding DM, Dan Sherman and LRH.

    The implant part is particularly spot on. Scientology implant “events” were terrible in many ways and it’s probably mostly due to being fed all that uncomfortable false data, just below one’s awareness, while in the church and drinking the koolaid. Ram it home with audio/visual glimmering “stats” and a little nausiating Pomerantz voice over and you’ve got an audience of sheeple with credit cards.

  11. Your humble servant

    One thing that is clear from these accounts is that David Miscavige has been causing serious trouble, and doing so insanely, for a very long time..

  12. Only the darkest shade of green…darker than black.

  13. haydn (T Paine)

    Wow! The coast of Oregon episode, portrayed by Miscavige as “among the most regionally famed encounters of the war”. Total bollocks, as we say in England. If it took place (it was utterly denied by US Pacific Naval Command), it was a tiny skirmish when compared to the Battle of Midway or Pearl Harbor.

    “The Battle of Gerry Armstrong” on the other hand was and still is a total cluster you-know-what. Precipitated, brought about and orchestrated by David Miscavige.

  14. Here is a useful term:

    USEFUL IDIOT

    “In political jargon, “useful idiot” is a pejorative term used to describe people perceived as propagandists for a cause whose goals they do not understand, who are used cynically by the leaders of the cause.
    The term was originally used to describe Soviet sympathizers in Western countries. The implication was that although the people in question naïvely thought of themselves as an ally of the Soviet Union, they were actually held in contempt and were being cynically used. The use of the term in political discourse has since been extended to other propagandists, especially those who are seen to unwittingly support a malignant cause which they naively believe to be a force for good.” From Wikipedia.

    Clearly, the Koolaide drinking staff and public who remain in the CoS are varying degrees of “useful idiot” to David Miscavige, as might be others in the public at large; media and government figures etc.

    It remains to be seen if ultimately, Tony Ortega is not himself a “useful idiot” to David Miscavige, to the extent to which he actually furthers Miscavige’s agenda by painting LRH all black. Perhaps that is why Miscavige is allowing him relatively free reign to publish whatever he wants to publish – Tony comes across more as anti-LRH than anti-Miscavige.

    It is one thing to expose falsities in the official LRH biography, and another thing entirely to represent that those falsities are the God’s truth about the actual man himself.

  15. JSG,
    Evidently you are new to this. I can tell you from the personal wins I have had from Dianetics alone that LRH was not lying about the basics of anything he wrote. It only got better and better.
    Fortunately I didn’t receive any of DM’s altered tech after Clear. As a result I am still alive.
    I can say that LRH’s Dianetics saved my bacon!

    • And LRH’s Scientology saved mine.

      Early in this life I lost my son and wife to an SP. Had it not been for LRH I would not have recovered…….that I am sure of and will forever be grateful.

  16. I’ll note that when I first got into Scientology in 1970, there was virtually no emphasis put on LRH’s personal story or much actually on LRH as an individual. First of all, he was referred to then only as “Ron” and the only biographical information about him was the one page bio that was included at the end of most Scientology publications. The point here is that the emphasis was on LRH’s IDEAS. THAT is what people were attracted to in the first place and what their attention was on. That was certainly true of myself.

    I have made a number of posts over the past year about the institutionalization of Scientology as a big church/religion and the deification of LRH fits right into that scene. Though I think that LRH himself got the whole church thing really going big in the 60s (with its almost 300 crimes/high crimes, ethics penalties, ethics courts, military uniforms, ranks, eternity view, complete autocracy of the founder, etc etc) there is no doubt that this deification went into warp speed during the “Miscavige era.” My analysis of this is that this deification almost always results (in religion) in the viewpoint of perfection of the founder’s ideas, that they are always true, all the time and that there is always something wrong with the quesioner of the founder’s ideas. This has largely been true in all major Earth religions and is used to control parishioner’s thoughts and actions. Jesus was the only perfect one – without sin, all Presidents of the Mormon Church receive all their pronouncements from God and are never wrong, ditto with the Pope; everything that Mohammed did in his life needs to be studied as the perfect way to live one’s life, besides the fact that he is the only fully true phrophet from God, etc etc etc There is no major religion that I know of where the key sources of the religion are looked at honestly as beings who lived life as we all do, with both good and bad actions, being right and also being wrong. Why this is so is a subject for another venue than this, I’m sure.

    But where it becomes important in Scientology is how this viewpoint created within the Scientology community a lockstep type of thinking where the group never questions what comes from “command intention.” And Miscavige has just continued HARD the idea that now that HE is command intention, HE is never wrong and everything that he says is simply LAW for Scientologists. And thus THIRTY years of pretty much unchecked power.These

    I think LRH did promote during his lifetime that he was completely certain of everything he said because he simply knew the truth. I don’t happen to go along with this way of thinking, but independantly of this I happen to think that he indeed did discover and explain many vital data about life as well as create a work of genius in auditing theory and technique.

    *and again, I note that early LRH (1950s) emphasized over and over again that all information should be obectively questioned by each individual for himself, including his own work.

    Also, I don’t think that the TRUTH about LRH’s life revealed can ever really be an adverse thing. I think his own experiences and life no doubt DID effect how he set up and ran the CoS. Of course, no matter WHAT he did or didn’t actually do in his life, an acknowledgement still works wonders in communication, beings do unfortunately often act reactively in life towards non-survival, people in higher emotional tones live better lives and are better to others than those in lower tones – and this data can be used in thousands of ways to live a better and happier life. These are workable truths for ME independant of my knowing ANYTHING about LRH himself. There are thousands of other pieces of usable truth that Ron communicated in his works. I can recognize and salute those even as I can be critical of the way he ran certain aspects of the church. I tend not to be critical of his personal life though as I myself have…. uhm……well…..uhm……

    • Thank you, Joe. I thoroughly enjoyed your post. I’m also an admirer of Ron’s workable tech. I no longer blindly think it’s all perfect and I know Ron wasn’t. So there you go. What I’m left with is some fantastic tools to improve my life and everyones around me, and I’m very thankful for those. That’s really the bottom line.

    • Joe~I’m sure LRH wasn’t finished either. And living and experiencing the tech as we went along, perhaps he died before it was completely ironed out or proven out, I should say in some administrative way. I mean, let’s get real here, something went very wrong in the administration – big time. I am not criticizing his work at all. I know very well by personal experience the tech works. I also know from experience something went wrong with the administration. We’re addressing that right now in present time. A work in progress. A living organization.

  17. Much of the marketing LRH did was an age or two, or even three ages ago, by today’s standards. It’s a mistake to trot it out. It served its purpose well. My guess is that what Hubbard would like for a birthday gift today, is valid, true, honest to goodness genuine, solid, completions on rundowns and courses. And that’s not just auditors being made, but the real beef of auditors auditing, gaining invaluable experience, and getting ever better results. There are precious few who have a grasp of what Hubbard achieved, but the validity of what he achieved can only be found, only, in the echo of the hearts and duplications in the minds of those who take it up and use it to better themselves and their fellows. And that is what it is all about.

    By me, take hoopla and shove it on the shelf with the Breakfast of Champions and the all the Budweiser I’m just so sure NFL teams guzzle down before the Super Bowl so they can be fully appreciative of wardrobe malfunctions. “Where’s the beef?!” was a great ad campaign for more reason than one, and I’m not sure the guys who designed it anticipated the responsive chord it struck with the public.

    The beef is in the results. It is in comprehension of the philosophy of Scn. It is in workable understanding of the technology of auditing. It is in greater understanding of Man and of Life. Only the individual is capable of this, and some are already way ahead, while others are lagging far behind. While the disfunctionality and inaccessibility of the Co$ dismantles itself with some much-needed and wanted help from various quarters, let us not forget the real beef of understanding more about life, and doing something
    with that understanding to better the human condition. Our new age is truly the age of intangibles of spirituality and goodwill towards men.

    Footnote – As far as aspercions on LRH: It is a pitiful comment on some in our society that they are unable to conceive of anyone who would dedicate so much of himself to accomplish the betterment of Man, for that purpose first, and for all else second. What a sad state of blind suspicion that some would view anything dedicated to achievement of the goals of thousands of years of religion and philosophy from the broken mirror of their own minds as reflections of greed and deception, and as something to be attacked and destroyed.

    • Li'll bit of stuff

      Carcha, thanks be to you for sharing your depth of insight
      and doing so in such a highly articulate manner. This
      cannot be done without full duplication and therefore total
      understanding of the essence of LRH’s heuristic works!
      IMHO, your commentaries, along with that of The Oracle,
      Sapere Aude, Valkov, Mike Laws,WW, WH and in fact, many
      others, who contribute similar, well thought out postings on
      this blog, are what lend a richness of quiet wisdom and a therefore welcome balance, to the business end of Marty’s
      deadly serious and highly effective multi faceted campaigns,
      in countering and exposing the insanity of David Miscavige.

      Most of all, it goes without saying, we all owe a tremendous
      gratitude to Marty & Mosey, Mike Rinder, Steve and all the others not mentioned, for leading the way in recovering LRH’s legacy, Real Scientology. that we can continue to have and share the benefits,among all those who reach for them.

      Collectively, we contribute to the motion.

      Thanks, Li’ll bit

      • Li’ll bit – Thank you, man. It’s interesting how diverse viewpoints come together in support. You’re one of the least politiized amongst us. Politics (aka “real life”) is an interesting subject, and when I get done reading Aristotle’s Ethics, I’ll be picking up his comments on politics with great interest. Jocks v. Nerds: If it weren’t for the nerds and their hypotheses and hypothenuses, the pyramids wouldn’t be there, but the same can be said, that if it weren’t for the muscle, they wouldn’t be there either! It’s all testosterone, just how to channel it. – Carcha.

      • Thanks Li’ll bit.

        You bring a unique positive focus and granting of beingness to this blog which I find very welcome.

        “When all around you are losing their heads……”

        • Li'll bit of stuff

          and thank you too, iamvalkov, BTW, I really like your
          new title! It REALLY makes a TR-1 statement!!!!

          Hey, after all is said and done, it’s just so damn easy
          to grant beingness to those whom you admire!!

          THE FACTORS — LRH —- April 23 1953
          29. In the opinion of the viewpoint, any beingness,
          any thing, is better than no thing, any effect is better
          than no effect, any universe better than no universe,
          any particle better than no particle, but the particle
          of admiration is best of all……

    • Beautifully said Carcha.

      Eric S

  18. I was never a cult of the personality person. I was raised an atheist. When I first was introduced to Scientology I was pretty depressed. I felt like the little Indian in the Al Capp funny papers that always had a black cloud following him around. As I got the grades audited on me the cloud seemed to be going away more and more and and finally when I went clear on the Clearing Course the cloud vanished entirely and has never returned in these last 43 years. My tone level went from borderline grief chronically to pretty much cheerful as a normal state of mind. Then on the other flow I was given Joan Breeding whose husband Don had helped LRH with the Mark 5 E-meter, as my twin on the Standard Dianetics course. She had a back and neck brace on from past injuries and was told by her doctors that she would have to wear them for the rest of her life. After 38 hours in the chair over a period of several months of my auditing her she took the braces off. I of course graduated with the Miracle we were required to make and I didn’t see Joan again until two years later at a party. I asked her about the back problem and she said she had never put the braces back on.

    I really have no interest in the truth or falsity of the words LRH spoke. I am grateful and I do honor the man for the techniques he developed that helped me and gave me tools to help others.

    And remember LRH’s statement that there is his opinion on things and there is the Tech. The only thing of importance and which we should pay attention to is the Tech.

    • martyrathbun09

      Thanks for sharing that Richard. Illuminating.

    • Bang on Richard and well done on your Dianetics miracle.

      Yes, LRH’s personal opinion and the technology and the Axioms it is founded on are different. That differentiation eludes many.

    • “And remember LRH’s statement that there is his opinion on things and there is the Tech. The only thing of importance and which we should pay attention to is the Tech.”

      Bang on!

    • Richard -VWD on the results of your applying the Tech. That is what LRH wanted us to know, to remember, and to carry forward. LRH wrote – mid January 1955 – a handwritten note in the original Tech Vol II the following:

      “The focal pt is upon Scientology not its organizations or auditors or personalities.” LRH

      That is the simplicity of the facts. The buildings, mest, overwhelming events, demands for attention to certain current personalities, etc – NONE of that is what matters. The subject matter, the tech, and it’s application by anyone is all that matters.

      Just as you did so many years ago – sit down, apply the tech and audit another to a life changing win. We are able sentient beings. Simply sort out the thoughts and pictures of what is real, what is ours, look at it and have one’s present time decisions made in present time. The entire world, the culture, the future would be like a bright beautiful day dawning over the horizon.

      I still align with that purpose and all who journey foward toward it.

    • Richard Royce~More truth revealed. I love it.

  19. Marty, your candour has to be commended. As a never was a scientologist I can still concur with what you have stated.

    As I have said before LRH’s motives as was are no longer relevant because he is dead (and if he has return it is nor manifest); like many of his ilk I suspect his motives and his nature were quite complex. What matters now is what you do with his concepts and philosophies.

    I saw in another forum some comment about Jesus being a totally nice guy and LRH being, well less than that.

    Truth is there is no hard evidence for the existence of Jesus let alone the type of guy he was. The bible is a compilation of documents none of which are contemporary to Jesus’s time.

    For all we know Jesus was a snake oil sales man suffering from schizophrenic delusions if he existed at all. For all the pomp and ceremony in documentation demonstrably written at least 100 years after his supposed death there is not one mention of him in Roman or Egyptian records contemporary to his supposed existence.

    In other words the Jesus who supposedly caused such a flap wasn’t noticed by other record keepers at the time. Indeed there is a fair amount of contemporary evidence that contradicts the claims made in the Bible regarding Jesus’s existence.

    Take for instance the matter of him throwing the money makers out of the temple on the sabbath. We know the temples were huge. We know it was customary for people to sell all manner of wares within them of “holy” significance, they were big holy markets where people bought offerings and prays and lucky talismen. If Jesus had really caused a disturbance it would have been in one corner and he would have been quickly pounced on by local security. Think of someone taking exception to a city fair and unilaterally trying to shut it down by pushing over a few tables.

    Christians credit Jesus as being the son of god who died for our sins (if you seriously think about this you ought to have doubts) meanwhile Muslims are more reserved and say he was a prophet, not some god on Earth figure. Who is more accurate? My money is on the Muslims but I still think much of their beliefs are false.

    There are philosophers who are remembered for their ideas that contributed to human understanding right or wrong and inspired others. Then there are those who are remembered or even invented as messiahs who laid down a dogma based on hard and fast dictates of some “truth”.

  20. I think it is an indication of people who cannot think for themselves that they will rely on what they are told. If they are told that LRH was a great man, and cannot look themselves, then their certainty can be shaken by those who seek to discredit the man, whether whatever facts are presented are true or not.

    It is evident in the world around us. Folks look to ‘celebrities’ or opinion leaders to make decisions for them, to determine what the current style of clothing to wear, etc etc. To the degree that the population cannot think or evaluate for themselves, then they can be led in whatever direction someone else chooses to lead them.

    It certainly seems to me that LRH was attempting to wake us up, to provide tools for us to observe and evaluate for ourselves. And to the degree that we do not use those tools, we can end up enslaved or obedient to false data and opinions.

    Scientology is true for you if you have evaluated it and used it and discovered for yourself if it works or not. If you decide it does benefit you and has meaning and substance, then no matter what LRH was or was not, it really makes no difference. The truth is true no matter who said it, or what kind of life he or she did or did not live.

    Tom Price

  21. haydn (T Paine)

    The truth about LRH’s life (including his naval record) is somewhere in the middle, neither totally false nor as spectacular as the tissue of lies portrayed by Miscavige and Sherman. Armstrong did a lousy job of research and concluded LRH’s life was a total lie. How convenient for him. A great deal of time, effort and resources has been sunk into digging up facts about LRH’s life since Armstrong’s day that prove some points Armstrong just had to believe were false. Unfortunately, it seems they aren’t going to see the light of day. It is a great shame. I for one believe the truth, whatever it might be, given in context, would make fascinating reading.

    • Haydn,
      You’re right, the actual facts of the military records are murky at best. There was a girl on Geir Isene’s blog some time ago, Maria I think her handle was, that had done an incredible data evaluation of extant records and pointed out the contradictions, omissions and false data of one of the “official” versions of the service.

      Fletcher Prouty is adamant about the hazy nature, and duplicate records and official indications that show that any LRH military record is not what it seems. He was refused contribution to Gerry Armstrong’s eventual venue, Russel Miller’s work.

      I agree, this isn’t “black” it isn’ “white”. I marvel at the controversy. That makes more sense than anything. It’s Axiomatic.

  22. What to do if you are called to buy the “new” LRH Portraits:
    You could ask if it covers his marriage with MSH and something about his children.

  23. I’ve been threw hundreds and hundreds of tapes by L. Ron Hubbard. I’ve heard all sorts of angles to all sorts of things, including tons of anecdotal material. The anecdotal material is just that, anecdotes. By way of illustration and I’ve never considered them anything else.

    All the falderol about his college days for instance. On various lectures from the mid 50s he says he barely made it through math and was much less than a “model” student.

    This “movement” he’s referring to in the video clips provided by DM and Sherman, for one thing, I understood he referred to Einstein as being opposed to nuclear proliferation, not what is construed otherwise. Taking words literally without being able to be the speaker and duplicate what he’s saying ends one up in all manner of wild ideas about what that speaker is trying to convey.

    Tony Ortega’s take on these snips is as far off as DM’s. Neither are the truth.

    Another thing, what in the name of Pete does this have to do with the body of work that is the technique of application? Jack squat. I no more consider what he wore to a party where he sucked back a quart of some really fine Cuban rum and chatted up the blonde, than these stories of exploits that are illustration of some point ( or none at all and he’s just spinning a yarn for pure entertainment).

    The fallacy of a hagiography of this man or the complete tear down of him based on this false deification is fodder for those who feed on this type of nonsense, a la National Enquirer.

    Tony did use some fancy words though, so at least he’s got out his online thesaurus. Sherman hasn’t added ANY new words or twisted constructions so in that regard Tony’s winning.

  24. The ninth-century Buddhist master Lin Chi is supposed to have said, “If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.” Like much of Zen teaching, this seems too cute by half, but it makes a valuable point: to turn the Buddha into a religious fetish is to miss the essence of what he taught.

    Per LRH’s own words, his legacy is the tech.

    • “There are two ways to dehumanize someone: by dismissing them, and by idolizing them.” — Jason Pargin

      • Yes. Which is why, even if you see an opinion you do not agree with or even disagree with strongly, you should not attempt to stop them from speaking with words like “fool” or “ignorant” or “should be embarrassed”. It does nothing, except show people on the fence about speaking out that being told you can now speak freely, without fear is not always true. Opinions can differ but no one should be called names because of it. We can be better than that. This is my opinion, just that. I am not speaking to any one person here and I am sorry if it upsets anyone.

  25. “Per LRH’s own words, his legacy is the tech.”
    I agree. This the thing that is important and obviously what he most wanted to give to the world. Why? To my observation it was because he really liked and cared about his fellow beings. In my experience every person I have met who puts down or ridicules the tech has not taken the time and attention to apply it exactly per the directions. Or has had someone apply it to them who did not follow LRH’s directions exactly. I have never believed in Scientology and Dianetics, per se, or even believed words Ron said just because he said them. From what I have read he would be disappointed if I did so. What I have done is to try his procedures out….apply them as exactly as I can and see what happens. What has happened for me has been mostly very very wonderful. As a result I encourage and help others to do this too. And I haven’t heard many if any complaints from those people who have done this. I’m sure that if someone didn’t follow the directions exactly it wouldn’t work well or maybe do nothing. But that is true of any activity. To expand upon the hammer analogy, if somebody grabbed a nail, held it against a piece of wood with their thumb on the head of the nail, and then tried to pound the nail into the wood it would likely cause some discomfort and cursing. Same is true for Dianetics and Scientology. But, standardly applied, it is very benign and helpful to people according to my observation. In fact to my observation, taken as a whole, it is the work of a once-in-a-millenia genius. But he was still a person. I’m sure that he had arguments with Mary Sue sometimes. At least he said that they did in the marriage tapes. And I’m sure he did worse things than that during his life. I know that I have.
    But the point is that it is beside the point when discussing the subjects of Diantetics and Scientology. Does anyone look in Einstein’s or Sir Isaac Newton’s personal lives in order to cast aspersions upon their discoveries?
    I also agree with Marty that Miscavige’s long range goal through the COS is most likely trying to set LRH up for ridicule in the press. Despite his pandering to Ron’s image by issuing coffee table books, his actions of altering the tech (Ron’s true legacy) tell the story of Davie’s true intentions. The coffee table books are just pretty distractions. Or they might have been had he not tried to air-brush Ron’s loving wife and family out of history and forward unverifiable statements.

    Ron’s legacy is the tech. It is really suppressive to say to him (or anyone), “he dude, but you’re not perfect and you may have told a couple of entertaining tall tales, so nothing you say about anything can be true”. That would be bullshit.
    We do not have to worship Ron as an idol to have great appreciation for what he has done for the benefit of mankind.

  26. Really all I can say is that my introduction to Ron’s philosophy/tech was the original communication course. I was in college and read Dianetics, was impressed, but still skeptical. I did the Com course, after getting the ok from the GO ( long story I was a journalist at the time). That was in 1975. I was totally blown out when finishing that ‘little course on human communication”. Hubbard provided an excellent break-down on what real communication is but also provided practical drills on how to improve two-way com amongst us people. That course changed my life! That was and is still very

  27. Changing historybooks is an old strategy with totalitarian dictators (catholic churchleaders, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, you name it). DM looks like one of those bishops of the middleages who organized the Inquisition. He is trying to make a God out of Hubbard. This is all to justify his own terror. Defending a God justifies all means in DM’s distorting reality. But the real reality is of course that DM thinks that he himself is godlike, at least he acts like one. He is the little dictator who will end like all the others.

  28. In the seventies, there was no attention on LRH life before scientology. We couldn’t care less. He was not this “LRH” sort of cult founder he is now. He was Ron, you could write him though SO1 (well, I don’t know how he managed to answer so many letters, but it looks true up to 1980), and the real subject was not PR questions but technical query. I remember having written him in spring 1978. I was auditing standard dianetics and I had some crammings I wasn’t happy with. I didn’t feel I wrote to god, nor I couldn’t care less if he would have saved the world from Nixon, he just answered me : “Interesting points you bring there. Very soon there will be something you’ll like. Check the bulletin board.”
    2 month later there was NED and NOT’s. That is where my interest was : the tech.
    So came Miscavige. By the way how a 20 years old little bully could do that?
    I think it was with Broeker. Both look like from The Godfather. (Broeker I look recently on you tube LRH death event, Broeker looks mainly like actors studio, and he is trying to take over the little punk, who in a movie would have at least put a bullet through his mouth.)

    Well, I have this picture by a sort of pervasion or imagination, back in 1982, of Miscavige and Broeker meeting a wog PR compagny. And those wogs say “Hey guys, you’re broke. Your “church” is broke…” and they show them how in real cult they fundrise! (bright idea!)
    I think, basically they took the “cult hat” from some advisers. The point was to try to make a monopoly…
    And little scientologists, weak they were, let that happened, to be taken over by two little crooks, gangsters, they are really characters for a Martin Scorcese movie.
    And blunt, idiot scientologists, gullible, can’t see an outpoint, there is no word to describe how miserable people we are to have accepted this shit for 30 years.
    And the idiots still inside are really so gullible. Is there a time when idiots realize without any doubt how idiots they are? Do they have still to be right?
    Given the tech, i cannot understand how scientologists have been so stupids.
    I love the tech, but I hate to be a scientologist means now “poor gullible idiot”.

  29. In relation to the RELEVANCE of the truth or otherwise of LRH’s claims (whether about his own personal history or about the benefits of his offerings) it appears as if there are at least 2 main groups of reasonable people around – with naturally very different perspectives.

    There seem to be:
    A) Those who believe they have repeated evidence of elements of LRH’s work delivering significant benefits to both themself and others.
    B) Those who don’t have this experience.

    For group A, the experience of results achieved, is perceived as being FAR, FAR, FAR more significant than any inaccurate claims that may have been made ( in relation to either LRH’s history or the offering).

    For group B, repeated evidence of lack of credibility in relation to some claims made, cannot help but call into question the credibility of the offering – particularly given the nature of that offering.

    (If the offering were simply a coat hanger or a hammer or a sweeping brush, the truth of its effectiveness could be established quickly, easily, cheaply and without risk and without being too concerned about the personal attributes of its originator. But given the actual nature of the offering, it is, I believe, counter-productive to expect a Group B member to be willing to disregard concerns as to the integrity & personal credibility of LRH.)

    The concerns of Group B will often be further compounded by the evidence of extreme dysfunctionality within the corporate Co$.

    In response to worries about LRH credibility issues from Group B, Group A’s responses seem to be sometimes patient and understanding, sometimes as if understandably frustrated (here we go again, year after year after …) and sometimes as if threatened (possibly by their own unacknowledged disquiet).

    Is there benefit to be gained by some from Group A GRASPING THIS NETTLE ONCE & FOR ALL in a CLEAR PERMANENTLY REFERENCEABLE FORM?

    Is it possibly to start building ONE SINGLE, CLEAR, WELL-RESEARCHED REFERENCE DOCUMENT, covering MYTHS, LIES, TRUTHS &BENEFITS (in any order) spelling out eg:
    – exactly what Scientology has to offer
    – the strongest evidence ( of any kind) currently available to substantiate this
    – some idea of requirement range in $, time … to achieve &maintain these benefits and any relevant risks
    – LRH’s key contributions to this
    – Valid criticisms of LRH &Scientology which Group B may find disturbing
    – Why these valid criticisms do not threaten the efficacy of the offering.

    Or maybe there is a better solution to bridge this gap in perspective ?

    But without some good solution, it seems as if many of the reasonable people of both A and B will remain separated by this gulf and mutual misunderstanding and frustration will continue…

    • It is a lot simpler than all that in my view. The man wrote and lectured about phenomena and technique. Use it or lose it.

      • Marty, within the confines of Group A, that may very well be a very valid perspective.

        That leaves the gulf with Group B, for whom that perspective is not available.

        Is this a gulf that merits attention?

        If so, how might it be crossed?

        • martyrathbun09

          Communication.

          • Thanks. From your perspective, how might that communication work with a person who is currently in Group B as described ?

            • martyrathbun09

              Read my blog – all 770 posts.

              • Marty, in the last 3 months, since Debbie’s email, this particular Group B person has very much enjoyed reading your blog, probably every article since then, and spinning out from here, I’ve linked to lots of older articles and read masses of other stuff too.

                Over this period I’ve developed a great deal of respect for you and for many of the people who write here and support you in many of your aims.

                However, I am very far from having any sort of satisfactory and concise clarity on the topics mentioned above – despite feeling very open to listening and learning.

                The perspectives of Groups A and B cannot help but be very different. Maybe crossing that gap is a subject for another time.

                All the best.
                Neil

                • martyrathbun09

                  I would say if you are curious try reading some LRH books. If you are not, and you’ve read what I have to say, I don’t have any other tricks up my sleeve to interest you.

                  • Neil, the simplest way to move out of Group B would be to get a used copy of Self Analysis on Ailbris for about three bucks, read the first 50 pages and then do the exercises in the book for half an hour a day for a couple weeks. That would be far less an investment of your time than you have spent reading this blog and begin to give you some subjective experience with what LRH is about.
                    In my opinion, Self Analysis is the best of LRH’s books as an introduction to Dianetics/Scientology, far better than DMSMH. The first chapters of SA summarize both Dn and Scn very simply and the exercises introduce a person to the benefits available with very little investment of time and money. The risk is almost non-existent and the ROI can be huge.

                    • Or you could find someone to run you through the original communication course – see DuckSoup’s excellent comment above.

                      That course was my first introduction to the subject. The pure simplicity of how LRH broke communication down into its component parts blew me away.

                      Merely pointing out that the first step in handling a problem or situation was being able to confront it – and then, providing a tool – a simple drill – whereby you could improve your ability to confront – all I could think was, whoever figured this out has to be a genius. It was so simple and so basic. So obvious in some ways as to be completely invisible to me and to everyone I knew.

                      So stop thinking about it & making it so complex – you cannot and will never get your arms around it that way. You gotta try it.

                    • Jean F. Genest

                      Θ I concur with Mr. Koon.

                    • Li'll bit of stuff

                      Dan, a resounding thumbs up, for the
                      most for the least investment in time.
                      Same goes for Publius, commenting on Ducksoup, where that little Comm course also blew me away and turned me into a lifetime, committed REAL (LRH)Scientologist,way back in 1971.

                    • Ronnie Bell

                      I concur 100%, Dan. Back in the day when Scientology was fun and simple, a small investment in time and money for something like the Comm Course, or Self Analysis, produced results for most people that were life-changing, and often spectacular. I know that was the case for me and others I knew during that era.

                      I’ve said it for decades now, and I’ll say it again. The Comm Course was powerful, and made lifelong Scientologists out of most of those who did it. The wins that course provided were so great, that I still dare to compare them to those of the OT levels – and they were right at the very entrance gates of Scientology.

                      I don’t know whose eval produced the solution to remove that course from the starting line-up of Scientology training, but nothing that has been offered at the lower levels since, has ever produced the same results, or the numbers of new people onto the Bridge.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Ronnie, I have said the same of the 1970’s Comm Course. TRs 0-9 – with tough standards right in the Div 6 Course rooms – was what made the Missions surpass the orgs and put Scientology on the map. It was a grave error to take that out of the line up. It was part of the victim-mentality “evaluation” that said the success of missions was the why for failing orgs – I say ‘WRONG WHY’ to this day and that the proof is before us. Now there’s no orgs or missions worth spit.

        • Neil,

          “Is this a gulf that merits attention?”

          It does not merit extraordinary measures. It may require some handling at times. There are plenty of references that apply, right within LRH’s recorded works, apocryphal and otherwise.

          “Let homo sapiens snore in the bulk”.

          The whole idea of “selecting” people for services embodies the concept of finding the folks who are interested/awake enough/aware and seeking a certain kind of knowledge.

          It really is a bit like that old maxim from Sales – “Some will, some won’t, who cares? Next!”

          I have heard that LRH himself wrote “Scientology is not for everyone.” It seems to me that is likely to be true at any given point in time.

          The problem that a Miscavige type suppressive presents is he alters and misrepresenst Scientology thus turning away exactly those who are searching for true Scientology. Seekers can’t find it if it is misrepresented and mocked the way Miscavige does.

          That’s my take on it in 25 words or a few more.

      • Thank you Marty for revealing these very important facts that are helpful, factual and explain a mystery here and there. Super good essays.

    • You raise good points. I would suggest there is a group C (in addition to your A & B suggestions). I myself would fall in a group C that:

      Saw and experienced ample workability (as in group A) but who also see, and are troubled by, the level of fallacious stories from the person who created the processes that we have experienced as workable.

      Communication is certainly part of the solution, but so is critical thinking and higher level of being able to accept criticism of Ron where that criticism is due.

      I think it is hard for some of those in the camp A that you (Neil) posit to step away from from the very ingrained view that a criticism of any part is a criticism of the whole — but failure to distinguish between levels and validity of criticisms (along with belief that all criticisms spring from one’s own crimes) is exactly the kind of A=A (everything equals everything) thinking that led to a certain level of madness and feeling of suppression with corporate Scientology.

      I think you raise a very valid point that those participating in these discussions are speaking from positions informed by different viewpoints and experiences. I am sure that the discussion will remain open and free in this blog and am appreciative of that.

    • Neil,
      The issues related to Group B’s concerns are likely only several. The Naval Record (see Margaret’s posting above, she has a very well researched body of material on that, if she is the one that used to post on Geir Isene’s blog); the question of whether Scientology is Crowley in disguise (which for some, even the mention of “witch” conjures all sorts of occult and malevolent darknesses and without further enquiry, “it’s evil”); perhaps the “half of Montana” claim for Grandpa’s holdings; the injuries sustained in WW II; umm, lemme see, what else, “start a religion” to be RICH!!!!; he’s a “nuclear physicist” or a Doctor (i.e., no establishment “cred”, no PhD, no “authority” etc.); uhhh, yeah, he DID have three wives.

      I’m sure there are a couple/few more.

      Perhaps you’re right, maybe those in Group B need these things cleared up so they can swing that needle of contemplation to one side or the other and make a personal decision about whether or not to study, duplicate and apply the materials. With lingering doubts as to the man, and his apparent lack of attention to the socially acceptable beingness of some “type” that is supposed to be the proper source of such material as Scientology is, and the portent of that on their survival in a society that holds these things important (“what will others think, will they agree, is this OK, am I going to be looked upon as wacked”, and so on) then YES, it would be handy to have something in a simple form that does what you suggest.

      On the other hand, it could be considered, at the outset of a personal adventure into “terra incognito, a half an inch back of the forehead”, that these things as “barriers” are a sort of filter. The first challenge to the person to look, observe and decide on that observation themselves what makes sense to them individually not whether or not the neighbors are going to look askance at their “cultification” as they step forward to the exit from the Matrix.

      I suppose one day soon, what you envision will be done. Or not. As the controversy itself, the alteration of the “history” alone provides a means of persistence that will racket down the time track. It is my decision to see that what exists of the material IS what was originally recorded so each person can make up their own, individual, mind.

      • Jim, then there will always be the Group B lifers who remain perpetually in doubt and so never make a decision and so never move from Point B to Point Anywhere. Not saying Neil is one of those but some people are.

      • Li'll bit of stuff

        Jim, thanks for this great response. Some may regard
        it as insouciant, if it wasn’t so spot on! Oh well, what
        a great pity, some will run round and round the
        mulberry bush, never thinking to actually stop and
        taste the mulberries! Sigh!
        BTW, your’e a veritable pillar of strength for so very
        many, who get a bit wobbly, in their determination to
        look through the pile of mind control gobbledegook,
        ( CO$ ) orchestrated, directed and produced by none other than the Chairman of (mini) Bullies, inc.

        • I think Jim, in his inimitable way, has smashed through all this prior bullshit. One group sits at ‘know about’ – data, data, data. It’s all got to match up and fit. The other is on a path of self cultivation and enhancement. The one watches the world; the other makes it.

          I believe LRH said in one of the study tapes that in the final analysis, it boils down to, what can a person DO?
          not ,
          what does he know?

      • Thank you Jim, I appreciate what you said here. I always look for your comments here at Marty’s site.

    • Jim, Dankoon, Publius, JFG, LBOS, Ronnie, Marty, iamvalkov, FOTF, PJ I’m very grateful for your various contributions. In very different ways you have each helped, including helping me further clarify for myself what I was really trying to communicate. I realise though that it would take quite a while to write that up. Meanwhile, the blog has moved on and some big pressures are calling out here, but I very much appreciate your responses. Many thanks

  30. “Never use lies in PR”. Too bad LRH and his creation, the church, could not follow its own policies. Whose idea was that? His? His wifes and the GO?
    He certainly had to know it was crap when he still was all over the lines in the 70’s. But lets face it, his genius gave a workable tech and that trumps his bio bullship. Sadly, there was never a need for the exaggerations but that was not appreciated at the time.

    But this has been beat to death. Truly beat to death. Marty needs to lay out the truth as best he can in his book and everyone just acknowlesdge what is and was and move on.

    I would rather hear more of the tech delivery in the field expanding.

  31. Marty,

    Thanks very much for posting these recent articles. I have been submerged in my own battles at this end, but feel impelled to comment on this with my view.

    I came into Scn after LRH was gone. I did not know the man, knew little of him, but knew much of his work.

    After I came to Int in the early 90’s. there was much flurry and commotion on the Ron Mags. Andy Lenarcic was the “Ron Mag I/C” and was on direct orders from Miscavige to get these produced and then each would be released with great fanfare at events. They were translated into different languages, there were late nights getting them proof read and printed — it was all a big deal.

    Then Miscavige hired Danny Sherman to get the long awaited LRH biography done. All sorts of research, travel and so on was being done by Andy, Karen Stark (the LRH Biographer’s Assistant) and Danny. Then, around 1993, the floor fell out for Andy Lenarcic. From what I recall, he included information in a Ron Mag that was wrong, or there was evidence that was found that showed that what had been earlier printed was wrong, or something. Don’t have the specifics, but that was the end of Andy Lenarcic. He vanished and I never saw him again.

    The screws really went onto Danny then, but Danny, despite contracts of large sums to write the bio, never got far into it as he was instead constantly called to Miscavige to write speeches for events (6 per year). The event speeches were high pressure, late, late nights, constant rewriting and reediting. Mike Rinder has personally experienced it — as have most of the senior executives in Scn Management. It is a nightmare. Danny did not do well with this. Stress and strain started to show. He started to have doubts about this contract and his continued work with Miscavige.

    So DM gave him a gift of a restored green MG — mint condition, worth a large amount of money. Later on, he had an entire house in Sublet Road (just a block from the property) renovated as a lush retreat and writer’s paradise, looking out onto the golf course. Sea Org members worked around the clock for weeks to get that space ready for Danny. All part of the blackmail and ongoing program by Miscavige to control and use Danny Sherman.

    Between 2000 and 2003 I was working in the Gold Galley, and was cooking for an extensive time for the VIPs, actors and talent that come to the Int Base. This is when I learnt more about Danny Sherman than I had known before.

    Danny is physically ill — terribly ill. He has gum disease that renders him unable to eat virtually anything solid. He is under great stress and strain, barely sleeps and during pre-event times, gets to a point where he is virtually unable to string a sentence of words together he is so out of it. I was feeding him for months on protein shakes, trying to get some basic nutrition into in and trying to pep him up to be able to continue.

    Danny Sherman is a puppet of Miscavige. He writes whatever Miscavige wants him to say. Listening to the recent event proclamations about LRH gave me a sick feeling in my stomach — not just because it is false words about LRH and portrays him in a way that is so unbelievable that it brings people to disbelieve the body of work as well — but also because Danny Sherman is not a Scientologist and never was. He is a writer. Probably not a very good one — and certainly a terrible speech writer — but he is a decent guy who is under the thumb of a lunatic, who is making sure that if Danny Sherman ever leaves the employ of Miscavige, he will never get a job writing anything, anywhere, ever again.

    I don’t think to this day Danny Sherman has ever had a session. He is certainly a chronically ill preclear, in constant pain, and PTS to the eyeballs.

    Miscavige has not been in an auditing session since the early 80’s — now over 20 years ago. And here these two are — raving on with anecdotes about LRH’s life taken out of context, all for the purpose of just continuing the vast International Scientology money-making scam.

    Sick, sick, sick.

    • martyrathbun09

      Lana,
      Thanks for this interesting history. A fact that might not surprise you can be added. Andy was never punished for making a mistake regarding L Ron Hubbard. Andy was torpedo’d and put through heavy mind-control conditioning because of one thing, and one thing alone. Andy demonstrated a lack of fear and respect for David Miscavige. Miscavige raved like Colonel Kurtz about Lenarcic being an evil disaffected. And that is why he was disappeared. He came out the other end robotically saluting with both hands to Miscavige. Also, Sherman was a “Scientologist” when he got hired. Miscavige, in his inimitable style, corrupted him to some other type of creature entirely.
      Marty

      • Wow — well having just read through the responses from both you and Mike I certainly had some of the facts wrong! Isn’t it amazing how you we can all work in such close proximity and yet not have the basic facts underlying a situation.

        That is why I love this blog — because it is a chance to actually sort out the mysteries, confusions and alter-is that Miscavige has woven through the place. You can actually get relief by finding out the truth.

        Thanks very much.

    • Lana,

      Just a few points to clarify here. Much of what you say is true.

      Dan Sherman was originally a public Scientologist. He was OT 5. He used to write spy novels for a living and was a mildly successful novelist. He was recruited by Linda Hamel and Doug Jacobsen to become an agent on Gerry Armnstrong and was the conduit to Gerry that ended up with him being covertly video’d in Griffith Park explaining to me his plan to take over the church.

      I hired Dan to do the LRH biography when I was LRH PPRO Int. It was all he did to begin with. He worked with Andy and Karin who had been gathering information for MANY years. Dan submitted a first draft biography in 1991 — I remember as I read it on the plane enroute to Denmark for the IAS event. Miscavige dismissed it out of hand, said it was garbage and that he had a bigger and grander view and that we were thinking too small as usual. He wanted every single thing about LRH’s life documented and THEN the biography would be written. And it descended into insanity from that point — expensive trips to Oregon to use sonar gear to “find the subs” that were sunk off the coast (net result was a lot of people got seasick — I think Ted Horner was even roped into that one), constant efforts to “prove” that Sarah’s child was fathered by Miles Hollister, extensive efforts to prove that LRH was in fact working for naval intelligence during the OTO time, that he was never really married to Polly before marrying Sarah etc etc etc. And when the “facts” as postulated by Miscavige didnt turn out to be true, everyone was sent back to the drawing board to do “real” research as the problem was notbeing diligent enough and failing to find what Miscavige was certain existed. Miscavige is the absolute champion of “if LRH said it, its true” no matter what it was that was said or what context it was said in, whether a story, a sideline comment or a note for a book…. Funny, he then adpoted the same mantra, “If I say it, its true” and there are so many stories about this little Miscavige trick its not funny (and mostly he contradicts himself endlessly, so there is always SOMETHING he said that proves him right).

      As the “research” proved impossible, and thus “No Bio,” the solution became to put out “Ron Mags”. The first of these had been done by Vaughn Young at ASI. ANd then gradually Dan was weaned off anything to do with an “LRH Biography” and became the “COB scriptwriter.” It started with Dan writing “Bio speeches” for March 13th. “COB” liked his style and started having him edit his speeches. THen write them. Dan was quite disaffected about all of this, and his wife even more so. A lot of drama surrounded the fact that he was always at Int and she was in LA. Then she got cancer. After she passed away, he was gotten fully on board and became the full time Miscavige apologist — of course, he never joined the Sea Org and was paid a handsome salary.

      BTW, the car he was given was a dark green Mazda MX5 Miata, not a restored MGB.

      As for Andy Lenarcic, Marty is very right. His BIGGEST beef was his disagreement about the exclusion of the family. He had been in the GO. He liked Mary Sue. A lot like Gerry Armstrong, he disagreed with trying to change the facts and pretend things didnt happen that did. He was constantly accused by Miscavige of being a disaffected, black PR infested “GO sympathizer.” But he was kept under control because he knows way too much and could become a very nasty problem for Miscavige if he was let loose on the world.

      • martyrathbun09

        Thanks for this Mike. All true.

      • True indeed Mike. A 5 hour barf trip looking for a sunken sub with a remote submersible.

        Ted

        • My 2 cents on Dan Sherman: he was not always the wimpy, lisping English Lit professor trotted out each March 13 to shill for LRH on behalf of DM’s greater aggrandizement. I first got to know him during the WIS? Project in 1992 when he, Trevor Meldal-Johnsen (RIP) and I wrote the WIS? book under Mike. DM had shattered his leg playing basketball with other short people that summer and decided to rewrite WIS? while he was laid up in his office, staying out of sight of the rest of the crew so they would not see him as PTS. The one thing an SP does not want to appear is PTS!
          Anyway, Danny was a very communicative, very funny, very alive guy in those days. He hd a Woody Allen nebbish beingness that he was in more or less all the time and his interactions with Trevor’s open sarcastic disaffection with all things Sea Org were highly entertaining.
          My point is that Dan Sherman is just one more notch on DM’s belt of obliterated creative types. Two others were Barry Stein and Rick Cruzen. Oh, and can’t forget Peter Schless. If you have a creative bone in your body, DM will first shatter it and then set it so you have a permanent limp.

      • tonydephillips

        Thanks Mike and Lana.
        All very interesting stuff!
        It seems in some twisted way that dm thinks he IS LRH. Very bizarre.
        Going back to the Tony Ortega article and the event where LRH apparently told the criminal crew it is “between you and me”. That is also quite bizzare. I am thinking that maybe dm is trying to add in some data to these events that make the Kool aid drinkers think that it is ok to commit some crimes as lond as it it for the “greater good”and we keep the authorities “out of it” as they are the “bad wogs”. So even if dm did hit people it would be “ok”…
        Very twisted situation.
        I also agree that the tech should be judged on it’s own merits.
        I also think that LRH making up stories that “seem to be true” doesn’t help in his credibility to someone who hasn’t tasted the fruits of the tech.

      • Thanks Marty and Mike for filling in some parts of the story I was not aware of and for correcting some of the information I had wrong. It is all so twisted and sick. And the person they work to destroy the image of — is LRH.

      • Thanks, Mike for telling what happened back then. It makes things make more sense, in that once again Miscavige had his dirty little hands in all this. It also again begs the question about how different the COS would be right now had Miscavige never stepped foot in the doors.

    • Danny at one time was married to Manot Sherman. She was a very troubled woman, almost type III, and a difficult PC. She was always getting some type of auditing/handling at FLAG. Manot also had some serious physical problems. At the time I wondered why Manot wasn’t off loaded. She was the type of person FLAG likes to get rid of fast. Yet she was on public lines for years. Now I suspect she was part of the deal to hang on to Danny.

      Manot disappeared from the scene some time ago, aat least a decade. I am not sure if there was a divorce or if she died. Anyone know her fate?

      • Manot died nearly 20 years ago of cancer. IMHO, her “troubled” nature was, in part, her refusal to not-is the bullshit she saw. And given what Danny was doing to make a living, she saw plenty.
        JM

    • martyrathbun09

      Posting response from Rachel – who is having trouble getting through wordpress to post:

      In the early 1990’s, Danny Sherman’s wife was brought into the WOTF Office at ASI. I was to brief her on WOTF and try to get her interested in helping out. I did my best but she was really quite upset about being away from her husband. In the end, she didn’t come to work with WOTF. Some time later, I heard she had passed away from cancer. Sorry I cannot remember her name. Rachel, TheWidowDenk

      • Danny’s wife was named Manon. She did not like being disconnected from her husband and it was a huge problem on Danny’s lines and by extension DM’s. Mary Arbuckle and I were once dispatched to LA to try and handle her. She eventually made it to Flag and was doing well on NOTs and I believe Solo NOTs but the disconnection from Danny never got handled and she passed away probably 14 years ago by now. DM, of course, viewed her as an obstacle that had to be dealt with and/or gotten rid of. The fact that two people are married and actually like being married and living together means absolutely NOTHING to David Miscavige.

        • If Manon was a petite French Canadian, I knew her from the 70’s in LA. I remember seeing her at Flag, I believe in 97 or 98. She looked bad. She was BI’s. I remember because, I tried to cheer her up with no luck. I never knew why. This is sad. She was a very sweet girl.

  32. Since I have personally benefitted immensely from LRH’s work, I greatly admire him. That is only natural. But in disseminating Scientology or Dianetics, I’ve never found the need to mention his personal life. Those of us that have been around a long time and experienced standard tech know that it is the tech that is our stable datum. I believe it is not our responsibility to have to defend the personal history of the man. But it is our responsibility to ensure that the technology isn’t lost. That is my fear, that the current generation burdened with out tech and smears about the Founder are in no position to carry on his legacy. I pray that the Independent movement rises to the occasion. “Teach your children well”.

  33. I once had a chat witIh Fletcher Prouty who was a member of the joint chiefs of staff during the JFK administration. He told me that the Smithsonian Institution was the place where all returning from duty CIA, NSA, etc agents go to live out their lives.

    Their original names are changed along with their entire life’s record(date of birth, school records, who they were married to or not, etc) and sometimes they even get a little plastic alteration to appear different. They became anthropologists, archaeologists, paleontologists, etc. All somewhat similar technologies to being spies. They had spent their lives investigating for clues, looking for the plus points and outpoints and coming to the correct conclusions.

    Those that didn’t never made it out, didn’t survive. Some of the most deadly spies who worked for the OSS later worked in the Smithsonian.

    I knew a guy who worked in the OSS in this country whose job it was to find German spies. This guy was a Black man and a personal friend of mine who spoke fluent German, French and other languages. He had a perfect photographic memory. His name in the Smithsonian was not the same as what it was when he worked for the OSS. He could glance at a 30 page sanskrit record on papyrus and then duplicate it exactly as it was on the record.

    Having been so good with his memory at his job with the OSS he was able to carry over that ability to the Physical Anthropology Lab and reconstruct an entire skeleton from a pile of broken shards. It might take him a couple of weeks but he had the same patience and care when he was tracking a German spy.

    The point to this is that government records are not always what they are made out to be. They can always be changed and no one the wiser. After all it is the US Government and the US Government can do anything, change any record, make anyone seem stupid when they were smart. Have a failing career when it was in actual fact excellent.

    Unless you were there, you really can’t say accurately anything about anyone.

    • martyrathbun09

      Thanks. Ignoring LRH’s training and service in US Naval Intelligence is the first huge step in launching into black propaganda pieces on him – e.g. Russell Miller. The church, by turning such events as the sub chasing incident into the battle of the Midway do essentially the same disservice.

  34. Someone said that Miscavige didn’t get a single auditing session since more than 20 years.
    Someone knows where he was on the grade chart?
    Well, he wasn’t trained, but he is CSing, worst writing an issue on the subject of solo nots. I remember that I read a policy which said it’s an high crime to CS without proper certificate.
    And how could he has the right to have access to solo not’s data when it was never his case level?
    This is not enough to buy him an SP declare?

  35. Let me get this straight. So, you’re saying that if you see Hubbard’s lies as lies, you are missing the subtlety of his message? It’s possible I suppose. But then that makes Scientology a rather unattainable subject to people with only slightly above average intelligence. I once considered myself one of the upper tenth of the upper tenth. It’s not as attractive as it once was. Maybe that’s all DM’s fault, but I don’t really think so.

    • martyrathbun09

      you noted: “Let me get this straight. So, you’re saying that if you see Hubbard’s lies as lies, you are missing the subtlety of his message?” You haven’t got it straight at all. Dichotomy: Some Scientologists consider themselves the upper tenth of the upper tenth, and yet if they honestly accomplished what once was the very first step of Scientology (and still is in my parts) – OTTR0 – they couldn’t possibly have such a conceited idea.

      • Huh? I still don’t get it. But I did get my TRs passed by David Mayo in 1977. I suppose I need a retread. I just haven’t been in the mood to sit still much since leaving the cult. I thought it would be easier, but it’s not.

        • Patti,
          I can do that retread with you.

          • LOL, if you end up going to the Independents party, you should seriously do a comedy routine, you had us in stiches when you visited. Laughter being a rejection of outpoints, you point them out so cleverly and blow a lot of charge in the process.

  36. Man the Church is very abberative. What state was I in that I would sit through these events and let these obvious lies and false stats pour into my mind for years without the courage to express doubt?

    I remember a friend of mine brought his brother to an LRH birthday event who was getting off drugs and he was trying to get him into Scientology and on his purif. During the event he tutned to me and said something to the effect of “there is no way this is true- it’s physically impossible”. He was really turned off by the event and never did his purif.
    I cringed when he said that at the event because I thought somone would hear. Turns out he was probably in better shape than me at that time.

    The way I feel about Scientology has changed a lot since leaving. Before it was like I was in a “faith church” like a Christian based church or something. I felt my only hope for “spiritual eternity” depended on me doing my entire Bridge in the church- which I felt was impossible in the Church.

    Now I feel like the charge is off that and I can look at it for what it is and do it or not do it without all the bullshit. Scientology is good and it works. What they sometimes say in the chuch (but dont follow) is true- that what is true is whats true for you regarding Scientology. So far I’ve found that anything I’ve done or applied in Scientology has worked like it says it will when applied correctly and away from all the suppression of the Church.
    This other “biographical” stuff I don’t care so much about. I have the feeling LRH’s accurate biography would be as interesting as the made up hyperbole spewed at these events. As far as I’m concerned, most of it, or atleast te important part we already have- it’s the subject of Scientology.

    • “Before it was like I was in a “faith church” like a Christian based church or something.”

      This is what DM is turning it into—only DM has lots of money and free labor to make it high tech

    • Good post Chris.

  37. The best way to not disseminate someone is to bring him to an event. They smell the bull shit. And when they stand up an “hip hip”, it’s done.

  38. As time goes on more and more truth and transparency opens up on the RCS, boy, what a pack of literal, unhumorous, solidity & money oriented losers.
    The simple fact that if only the morons who run the Church simply did what it’s own Policy stated none of the crap would be going on and Miscavige would be somewhat of a hero.
    But no… the knucklehead SP resorted to a heavy handed downward spiral to a wretched path to oblivion. He, if anything will be remembered as one of the most despised men in history. Nice tag Davy boy, I’d say see you in hell, but they don’t want you either. This is certainly the last lifetime you’ll ever experience something even closely resembling conciousness, bye bye in advance, no three swings for you.

  39. Random Stranger

    David Miscavige said to his dog, “I spoke to LRH last night and we had a long talk. Good god, I felt embarrassed and ashamed that I’ve been so nice. Despite all the great things I’ve done, I felt like I was letting everyone down by being so…so easy on everybody. They don’t even appreciate it. That’s it! I’m going to start getting @#&%ing tough! No more Mr. Nice Guy!”

    “Let me make a new list:

    1) Tire iron

    2) New epaulets

    3) New uniform for you

    4) Bigger pillars

    5) See if Sherman has completed my biography.

    6) Cancel all sleep

    7) Expand the hole

    8) Cut food rations to Leserve

    9) Punch the next 20 people I see

    10) Everyone in lowers

    11) Go online and get that custom-made life-like Debbie Cook rubber punching dummy made

    12) Get some more suits made

    13) New shoe-lifts

    14) New presents for Tom

    15) Edit some more stuff out of the lectures

    16) Throw some objects

    17) See if I can catch that @#%&ing cook stealing strawberries

    18) Spit on Heber

    19) Cut some pay

    20) Pin someone to the wall

    • Random Stranger

      21) Get more buildings

      22) Create higher IAS status levels

      23) Ask Tom for more money

      24) All celebs in lowers – no, hold off on this one

      25) Count my money, again

      David Miscavige
      Supreme Rulah

      • 26.Drink more scotch.

        • Random Stranger

          27) Get stronger steroids

          28) Get Tom to teach me that cool Twist-O-Punch he used in that movie

          29) Start biting people

          30) Start Tasering Leserve to see if it gets rid of his stupid accent

    • You know, I was very disappointed with the pillars at the Event .
      I donate money – I want huge freaking 100 ft guilded pillars. It’s what I have come to expect as a Scientologist and franky I felt it was a degrade of COB.
      A suppressive act really. The man has a huge head. He needs huge pillars.

      • Random Stranger

        CHURCH OF SPIRITUAL TECHNOLOGY
        Office of COB, RTC

        EVENT PLANNING

        At the next event I want the following:

        1) Levitating stage

        2) Anti-gravity suit so I can float above the audience to demonstrate my unbelievable powers

        3) Pillars that come alive and dance on stage

        4) USC Marching Band to open for me

        5) Use of Air Force One to get to the event

        6) Mohammed Ali to show up and mumble to everyone that I’m his hero

        7) Some kind of @%#&ing award for me

        8) Longer standing ovations

        9) Faster spinning graphics

        10) Louder music and sound effects

        David Miscavige
        Supreme Rulah

  40. There is a lot of hype about LRH and “Scientology” at the church while none of Scientology is being done. I think the Founder would have preferred that people were simply learning and applying his discoveries to improve their lives and share the technology with others, then be endlessly bombarded by propaganda and fixed ideas about him and having to clap in unison to his bust or a portrait. The first time I saw it when I came into Scientology, it was like “returning” back into communistic Russia. I think Dianetics and Scientology would do much, much better if it was treated like mathematics applied to humanities which it already is according to LRH himself – no direct quotes but I remember him comparing his discoveries to mathematics quite often in his lectures. It would indeed be very strange if when taking mathematics in school, students were devoting a great deal of time clapping to the busts of individuals discovering the principles instead of focusing their attention on getting the theories and learning to apply them, and from that developing a sense of appreciation for the founder(s). Instead the church has turned Scientology religion into something that is hard to understand as you are continuously baffled by utter redundancies in its social dynamic and inevitably end up in wanting to have absolutely nothing to do with it. That is quite unfortunate.

    • It would indeed be very strange if when taking mathematics in school, students were devoting a great deal of time clapping to the busts of individuals discovering the principles

      Can you imagine mathematics lessons run like events? Two big screen monitors with flashy graphics of explosions, fly thoughs and fire works as Maths Professor David Miscavige does his pythagorus lecture sans teleprompter.

      “Thank you and good night. Tonight I will reveal it. Important discovery LRH. We have triangles see and they’re sided with two. LRH worked this out. But they have another side. Now these triangles are in rightly triangles. It’s import understanding. They having all sides. Okay so what do we do? We make sure it’s done right because two sides. If it’s wrong it’s fucked up. Fucked up and you have out. No good. Heads on pikes. Ethics. Now we have squares. Squares are two triangles rightly. It’s important this works. If it doesn’t we handle it. Who handles it. We assign him, he does it. Or him he does it. Her, wtf she doesn’t know it. Lucky for her she’s Lucky, get it. I strike Lucky then Lucky Strike, get it? Fucked up. (Pause as DM gets over a fit of laughing) Serious or HCO will get it. Get where it goes? TC knows this. Ethics. Of course. Now we have another 2nd side what isn’t. It needs to be. Yes, righted but wrong. You see? Now we have two and another is wrong. Then we make it right proceduraly. So it’s all right and that’s so. Simple rat-a-tat-tat. Thank you. You pay on the way out.

    • I sure as hell agree with you. From the first time I witnessed it (1971, ASHO), I thought the standing, cheering and clapping for the huge photo was cult-like and I always felt totally OOV (“out of valence” for you newbies) when I’d join the crowd out of what could only be called fear of standing out (if I didn’t stand up!).

      I never could figure out whether Ron or someone else instituted that little ritual. Didn’t really care all that much, as what I was learning and experiencing was so awesome. And you only had to do it at the end of class.

      But later on DM took it way over the top, turned it into some sort of super calisthenic workout, Stand up, clap, hip hip, sit down, repeat the sequence every 30 seconds for 3 hours. That’s when I decided to blow – my aging heart couldn’t take it.

      • This so much reflects my own experience. Toronto, 1971. New on staff and called to applaud LRH at a staff muster. Awkward at first, as it, as you say, seemed cultish. But there was also the truth that I respected Ron immensely for having given me so much truth in an insane civilization. I too applauded. But the ritual has always remained in my mind as group enforced; did not like that, then or ever.

        • I’m with you there, pazooter. It was one of the things that gave me pause about joining staff at all. Which in the end I never did.

  41. Benjamin Cisco

    Many have known the truth about Gerry Armstrong for many years. Others have been waking up for the past few years and are now learning many truths. I hope there will be lots of apologies and statements made to correct what has been said and done to Gerry. It makes me sick to my stomach to think of what he has endured.

  42. HannibalTheFirst

    When I looked at the Sea Org in 1985 I noticed a culture of “You get told what to do.” I looked at this and decided not to join the sea org for exactly that reason. Any encounter with Sea Org after that just reconfirmed what I saw. The culture was one of “domination” and complete disregard of reality and common sense. People, staff, public, enemies and reality were all to be dominated that was the obvious sea org solution. And anybody not in agreement with being dominated was out ethics and needed to be dominated even more. In the eighties a completely idiotic low life Sea Org recruiter (he looked like a bum from the street with no teeth in his mouth and smelled like one as well) recruited my sister, who was an illegal case due to drug related issues. I wrote reports and pointed out the out points in this cycle. Nobody listened; my sister got recruited, got married 2 weeks into her EPF and blew 6 weeks later. All of this resulted in a huge personal mess for me and my relations to my family courtesy of Sea Org.
    During several stays at Flag from 1988- 1995 I spend about a year at Flag. I found the organization acting insane, the constant attempt to dominate every aspect of my stay, where to stay, what to donate, when to leave, when to come, whom to see and so forth. And the complete and utter unreality that manifested itself in a conversation with a Flag Sea Org staff in the 90’s telling me “It will take about 2 years and then we will control this planet.”
    Sea Org IAS reges raped and pillaged Germany in the 90’s. They were irresponsible lowlife criminals in what they did. They had no sense of reality and decency and any opposition to them was answered with the “domination” response in one or another from.
    Then in the US (1997) I met a former Sea Org member that told me about her life at Int. Mgmt. In her own words it was complete and utter insanity. She told me her senior threatened her on almost a daily basis to send her to the RPF, her children got neglected and got no education. So the outpoint I saw in 1985 had obviously escalated into open bloody raging insanity.
    Some former sea org members here are probably offended by now. So I have to say I have met many individuals in the Sea Org I loved and respected. I just never understood, why they would expose themselves to this insanity.
    Oh yes, the events were just the tip of the iceberg. They were always a ludicrous show of bullshit, no real data or information, just blown up baloney. I do not remember how many continents were opened up for Scientology with big Fanfare, India, Africa all completely and utterly inflated trumped up BS already in the mid 1990 and it never changed when I spot checked events . Today, there I see my very nice and friendly neighbors after having given $10 Mio to DM sitting from row in the latest event frantically applauding to the latest insane bullshit produced by DM. How can people become so stupid?
    LRH developed a technology to free man, make him more aware and intelligent and restore his sanity. This technology is usurped by a completely insane organization that is based on the exact opposite what this technology is intending to produce. What a tremendous trap.
    The honey of LRH technology leads you right into the jaws of the devil, and after you have given years of service to it destroys you in the RPF and/or hole and spits you out like garbage, not before he forces you to sign your life away and agree to continuously being dominated by the beast. And if you ever dare to speak up like Mike, Debbie and Marty did, the beast sues you and does everything to destroy you.
    Marty is correct. The instigator of this Sea Org culture David Miscavige is the worst enemy of LRH but also the worst enemy of mankind.
    After 32 years in Scientology I am grateful to my guardian angels that I was able to get to the technology while keeping the beast at bay.

    • that’s how I see it. Thanks for the observation.

      +1000000000

    • I was told by an SO in a recruitment cycle that eventually EVERYONE will be in the Sea Org. That was quite alarming to say the least. So no one will be able to have a job and have a fair exchange for the labor, own no property, expect absolute obedience to “senior management”, and not expect to have children on top of it? I think by sheer fact of not having kids, the entire human race would just perish. What I also don’t understand is how I have met so many good individuals in the SO, actually some of the most intelligent, caring, and ethical people I have ever met, yet these are also the same people that participate in and by doing so support this total lunacy that the SO has become. In the wog world, you hear about an emerging totalitarian world order, the SO’s already live it and even intend to spread that culture onto everybody else. This is quite scary because Scientology does have the technology to create slavery of unprecedented proportions. Imagine, mandatory sec checks everywhere you go, being declared a “suppressive person” and not allowed access to anything if you disagree with the regime. You will not even be able to even think of anything of your choosing. This is already a reality at the Church so it is not surprising that staff act the way they do and will not even hear of anything “critical.” On some level there must be a fear that they might just accidentally agree with something and that will show up on a sec check, and you are done in the “hole” or cleaning toilets or whatever else. Some physical “hole” is really nothing in comparison to and probably a reflection of a developing “hole” on a spiritual level – a place where you go to have your soul taken and subjected to agonies of spiritual and evidently financial slavery. It is quite unfortunate, but is it really that surprising? “Welcome to Planet Earth” so to speak. Didn’t LRH himself forewarn that something like this is likely to develop because “it has always happened that way?” (I don’t remember were I recall this quote from).

      • I am hearing from your post here and realizing that there have been a million² alter-is’s of LRH’s tech and admin; each of which has become sticking points in a Scientology experience.

        Ultimately, the recorded tapes in the box of the back seat of Ron and Mary Sue’s coupe as they drove from one outpost to the next, might save our Earthly civilization. But that is now for us to decide.

      • you are correct in your statement, he says it in the early 1950’s lectures, many places.

        “Didn’t LRH himself forewarn that something like this is likely to develop because “it has always happened that way?”

        Thus Free Scientologist = free being.

    • I can see how you would get that picture from what you experienced… I spent many years in the Sea Org and it was SOME of what you say but there were also a lot of VERY sane, very creative, very successful things we have done – mostly in the areas that were of little interest to DM so he wouldn’t try to “manage” them and just left us alone, so sane people were allowed to create in those areas with little interference (except when we had to go off post to sell books or fill events, which we hated with a passion). Other than that, those areas were actually pretty sane and fun. I may be one of the few who feel that way, but despite the many things I now disagree with, or find really stupid in retrospect, and despite having perpetuated some of the kind of insanity you are mentioning, never regretted my years in the SO, having an honest vision, working hard on achieving it and actually producing results, having our my wins, etc. I have good friends still in the SO. Some of them are truly great guys. Not idiots, not blood sucking regges, etc. but just honest, dedicated guys doing something they believe in. My experience in the SO made me richer, and taught me a lot about life. It was a true learning experience – luckily for me, it was relatively free of DM’s insane influence.

      Not arguing with any of what you said, but I had to comment on it because it felt it was too black and white for me. Even if the net result may have actually been all screwed up, it wasn’t all bad. There have been and will be many great guys in the SO, just like you can find talented, honest, albeit mislead people supporting any insane dictator. That’s the only reason an SP survives on the top – he sucks the life, creativity and energy out of the social people who join him to support “his cause”. The whole organization can be on an almost automatic operation – social people can recruit other social people, train them, and get them on post, and the whole thing can work – until the SP arrives and turns it into a raging madhouse using 3P and other means to undermine the operation. Then all the things you describe start to happen, and it results in the whole operation going PTS and making mistake after mistake, spreading insanity, ARC breaks and “I am better than you” ser facs as motivated and perpetuated by the SP, eventually turning it into a disaster scene. Then the SP bring in the heavy artillery to kill all the staff who “betrayed him” and it’s game over. He just “cleared” the area (of any life, value and creation).

      This is how David Miscavige is “clearing the planet”.

      • Lol. I got a laugh on your last point. I guess there are different kinds of “clearing” that can occur. Once I learned how much auditing really costs or how much time you have to spend on training (apparently squirreled with GAT as I have learned from friendsoflrh.com), that killed the idea of any kind of real planetary clearing in terms of auditing/co-auditing up the Bridge. There are so many arbitrariness in the organization… I still don’t have my question answered on what “Planetary Clearing” really entails when the majority of population would not have the time or the money to do the Bridge in its present condition (just my viewpoint). I got a lot of excuses, justifications, and verbal explanations along the lines that “planetary clearing” is truly accomplished with 4th dynamic campaigns or that the Bridge is only meant for 10% of the brightest population… etc. I’ve never seen anything to that effect from LRH, but I have seen that “get only decent people” is indication of an SP in HCO PL 7 AUG 1965. I think the one bellow it is a “hit in the nail”: “When somebody is demanding less reach, that person is an SP.” This basically says it all. Would it be up to me, I would even reach out to people who were ‘critical’ of Scientology. “Why don’t you come in and get some auditing…” – wasn’t that LRH’s solution to handling the critics? As far as the SO goes, I do understand that the majority of the members are very well intentioned individuals for whom I myself had a lot of affinity for, but as time went on and I learned more and more, my sense of respect took a sky dive and instead became filled with a sense of betrayal. There are all these tools, and all this knowledge, and all this purpose yet Scientology is now in the hands of some lunatic(s) and the Sea Org has just marched along, and marched along for a very long time. I want to feel benevolent, but there is really no excuse. It is already 2012, and the indicators and criticism of DM was already hot back in early 80’s as I understand. I guess there were bigger enemies to fight back then, but still… How did it ever come to this?

      • HannibalTheFirst

        Globetrotter, thank you for your comment. The problem is with the general direction of the Sea Org. This is not “some” of it.
        There were nice corners in Nazi Germany as well. Youth camps, folk dancing events a lot of nice stuff. A small minority of Germans were killers. This minority killed some great-great uncles of mine in concentration camps because they were against Hitler. They kept watch in the Gestapo prison where they threw my Grandfather into because he had the humanity to help his Jewish friends.
        The problem with the Nazis was not with the good willing people, the problem was the ideology and the fanatic will for absolute domination that destroyed most of Europe.
        The key thing with the Sea Org is they have this huge service fac they are the best thing since the invention of sliced bread and as long as they are OK the planet will be OK. They are saving the planet, – destroying one human life at a time.
        DM’s enablers are scrupulous; they do not care for principles, policy, decency or the stated goals of Scientology not to mention human beings. Amazingly quite the opposite of what motivated LRH to found the Sea Org.
        You are right, there are many good willing Sea Org members and when left to their own devices they will carry out good intentions to their best ability. No doubt about that.
        The problem though is the overall direction and products of the organization they are part of. The product of the Co$ and the Sea Org is the ongoing abuse of technology, the abuse of it to coerce money and cave people in. Since DM is ruling the Sea Org has a track record of making enemies, destroying families and bankrupting people. The only consciousness the Sea Organization has these days are the former members that speak up and work against the abuses. Interestingly those are declared “suppressives” by the Sea Org. Many good willing people are in the system. I wish they would wake up and make their way to Hemet and take care of business as LRH would expect them to do and give DM a bath in the lake.

        • Hannibal, you make great jokes. I had a big laugh on this one “The key thing with the Sea Org is they have this huge service fac they are the best thing since the invention of sliced bread…” This is so true. When I first came in and started learning Scientology I wanted to run out and share it with everyone else. I was effectively stopped by the Sea Org itself through continuous subversion of my viewpoint and my more or less straight intentions. Instead of focusing on workable solutions and putting them to action, I somehow ended up struggling with a growing separation from and and even hatred toward myself, hatred toward other people (SP’s, wogs, psychs, “critics of Scientology”, db’s… you name it)… It’s already taking me a number of years trying to get myself back into alignment with myself and sort out the truth from the… well… brainwashing. Your joke really indicated. Scientology at the church is increasingly all about superiority and self-importance rather than real production and positive results. It’s like a devil’s substitute for real Bridge progress and rising above the world in a true spiritual sense of increased ability and understanding.

          Why do all that work, if you could just basically “decide” that you are better than anybody else and consider yourself an “OT?” This is a very wicked ideology of self-praise and self-importance that is being implemented in the Sea Org to cover up the harsh reality of no results or even bad results, overt products, as well as substitute for real valuable exchange to the SO’s for their dedication (i.e. Bridge progress). The “exchange” for being in the SO is “feeling special” because you are in an “elite group,” “top 10% of the planet,” or whatever else. This is 1.1 hypnotism level of control – quite disgusting. I saw it from the very beginning, but I didn’t want to say anything. I didn’t want to upset anybody and just say it or even see it how it is. I wouldn’t be surprised that when all the cards are on the table, Corporate Scientology will turn out to be some complex money laundering scheme which will be more in line with the general trends of corporate out-ethics out in the wog world. This could be the very reason why even the very act of looking at the organization itself gets so viciously attacked (under pretense of protecting Scientology) so that the scam is not discovered. I suspect that there is somebody above DM that is collecting the “dough” and will go to any extent to protect the “turf.” This is why folks like Marty or those who were loyal to LRH are perceived to be so dangerous to the organization.

          Really, if the CofS was what it said it was, and if it did what it said it did, then who cares what anybody says, right? Why spend so much time, effort, and resources trying to shut people up, and invest into massive propaganda of how good and square everything is? I mean you even get attacked for simply trying to be there and look. You HAVE to believe, and you HAVE to agree 100%. Why is there so much anxiety about people who look and question? That’s what I’ve been trying to get at – there is something that is not known and that something is probably so shocking, so simple, and so revealing that it would blow the whole thing to pieces at once it is discovered. This would be the ultimate true why that will explain everything. Is DM working for someone else and who would that be? Who are his mentors? Who is coaching him on how to continue to fool the public and subvert Scientologists toward stupidity and ultimately self-defeat? For some odd reason Zbigniew Brzezinski comes to mind, but that’s just me. There is just no way that these “cats” up toward the very top of the world’s pyramid did not stick their hands into Scientology in one way or another, and DM being a coward that he is (not the OT 15 that some people think he is) has probably sold himself out and the rest of the group a long time ago. He knows he is a traitor. He secretly probably hates LRH with passion so he feels he needs to go out of this way to demonstrate how dedicated he is to the man. He must’ve justified his actions of selling out the organization that he was doing it for the sake of the group and that he was the only one who knew what was right, and that he was the only one who knew what would happen if he didn’t “submit,” that he was special in leading Scientology toward survival and that if others knew the truth, they would not understand and only prevent his good intentions and release the menace that we was trying to keep at bay. Long live the king!

    • tonydephillips

      Well said Hannibal. You da man!!

  43. I think one has to view the knowledge seperately from the person. I do respect LRH very much but I don’t see him as a holy person who never lied, who never could be sick or whatever.
    Let’s assume Newton was the craziest person on the planet, even a mass murder or the devil in person. That’s an extreme example, I know… But would the laws he found out be untrue because of that? Would aples fly instead? Or jumping or doing weird other things instead of falling down?
    Or let’s take John Forbes Nash. Because he suffered from shizophrenia the knowledge he found out was also shizophrenic?
    So many Scientologist got „trained“ to view LRH as a God or to mix the knowledge with the person. And then their whole system of data can be shaken because somebody proves that Ron was also sometimes sick as OT or he was not 100% blind after war or whatever – who cares?!? And then this person assumes incorrectly that the laws, knowledge, tech is also wrong.
    Outpoint= Assumed identities are not identical.
    This does not mean I think LRH was crazy or whatever. He lived and had a good life. I thank him for Scientology, for the knowledge I can use now to find out truths for myself as every person in the world or free Scientologist (thanks for the term :) ) if they want. It’s there for everybody as Ron intended it. I don’t get OT or Clear or Release by learning data abour Rons personal life…..

    • Exactly as you say, peace.

      If Hitler and Stalin both told you that 2+2=4, would you be that more sure it was not true? Of course not. But that is how doubt is sown.

      • Right!
        I remember I had to handle years ago a person who was completely enturbulated because he read in the internet that Ron was married twice or even 3 times. He assumed then everything was false as he was apparently not able to handle his relationship, his own marriage. I was puzzled by this conclusion. I also did not know the he was married before Mary Sue. But I also couldn’t care less.
        Later I realized why this person was so enturbulated. LRH – not Tech, the knowledge – was a stable datum for this person, for the confusion of his life. And I assume this appears to be true for all who take LRHs life to seriously and to much as an example.
        Instead of taking the data and evaluating life, their past, their presence and future for themselves and making their own decisions.

        (Which is of course not possible in an enviroment where you are not allowed to think for yourself and disagree if you feel you should per your own integrity)

  44. This is a point I have been trying to get across to anti-Scientologists for many years now: our faith in Scientology (the religious philosophy and set of spiritual techniques) is not even remotely founded upon “believing L. Ron Hubbard”. Our faith is instead founded upon personal observation and experience using Scientology(no tm) techniques in life.

    All of these attacks upon Ron Hubbard, The Man are aimed at breaking robotic belief in whatever Hubbard said or wrote with the intended purpose of causing one to then abandon Scientology (no tm) – in most cases – with the hope of recruiting the now ex-Scientologist into the anti-Scientologist ranks. For those of us whose faith in Scientology (no tm) is not based upon faith in Ron Hubbard himself, propaganda against the man is completely pointless and merely annoying, as evidenced by many of the comments here.

    Michael A. Hobson
    Independent Scientologist

    • Hi Mike, I get what you say regarding not having faith in LRH rather having “faith” in scientology having applied it and it working for you.

      This is a symatic point of communication and why I put the 2nd faith in quotes. Faith as I’m sure you know is a belief in something without evidence.

      If you apply scientology methods and they work for you surely then that is proof they work for you. If you have proof you have evidence, surely then you don’t need faith?

      I’m not anti-scientology, I’m anti the abuses that occur within the church of scientology and am increasingly anti-churches, as oppose to anti-religion; a realisation of mine the experiences of you indies have fostered in me.

      I know many “critics” poke fun at scientology but I think Marty is doing a splended job of pointing out some of the reasons why.

      • Excuse me, Dean, but there is more than one common definition for “faith” in modern usage:

        From Miriam-Webster Dictionarly Online ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith ) :
        =============================================
        1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty
        b (1) : fidelity to one’s promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
        ——————————————————————————
        2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion
        b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
        ——————————————————————————
        3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs
        ==============================================

        It should have been quite obvious from what I wrote that I did not mean definition (2b) with regard to “faith” in Scientology, rather I meant definition (3).

        Kindly do not presume to instruct me in English again, Mr. Fox.

        Michael A. Hobson
        Independent Scientologist

        • You know what Michael, I spend too much time listening to christian v atheist slanging matches, I need to get out more.

          I asked and you answered. Fair enough. ;p

      • scilonschools

        “I know many “critics” poke fun at scientology but I think Marty is doing a splended job of pointing out some of the reasons why.”

        Critic is often a mis used word,a word used by somebody who just wants to complain about something!! a true Critic (like a food critic,theatre critic, etc) loves his subject, knows it inside and out, and is just as prepared to compliament excellence as he is prepared to find fault in weakness.
        A true critic is not affected by Peer pressure or financial enticement, not by popular assumptions or personal grievance.
        I hope i have become a ‘Scientology’ critic, a tall order starting from a ‘Scientology hater’ as I did!!!

        • scilonschools

          What is a Critic?A REAL Critic?

        • My bad, you’re correct and make valid points. Replace the word critic with protestor (of the abuses of the church of scientology).

          • I would never have classed myself as a hater (who does though I guess) but what started me was the stories of the abuses, mainly the destroyed families and robbed childhoods.

            Initially I guess I saw this as part and parcel of scientology and

          • I would never have classed myself as a hater (who does though I guess) but what started me was the stories of the abuses, mainly the destroyed families and robbed childhoods.

            Initially I guess I saw this as part and parcel of scientology and so was “anti scientology”

            Since then it’s become clear that the abuses are sourced from the church of scientology and those who manage it, with David Miscavige at its head

            I now protest the abuses which are facilitated by the church of scientology organisation as a manifestation of David Miscavige but that’s a lot to fit on one sign.

    • OneInFlightFromThe CuckoosNest

      There is a tape I listened to the other day and it is called Decision from the route to infinity. It is well advised for one to re listen to that lecture. As it involves self determinism, time, choice, and the root of it all. And it says what you say Mike.

  45. A letter to lurkers and those under the radar.

    I have been thinking about my kids and everone elses kids, family and friends that they have been disconnected from and I realized that you folks have a big roll to play in righting the wrongs created by current management lead by David Misgavage. What are the facts:

    DM has dismantled the internal corrective structure left by LRH so that there is no correcting the organization from within. Many have tried and failed finally giving up in dispair and leaving the Church. If the church were fixable from the inside it would have been a Suppressive act to not use the internal structures to correct it and those persons refusing to use the correct lines to correct it would be obviously attacking the church with evil intent. In that case it would have been reasonable to not let those persons up set you. Those persons would demonstrate the majority of the characteristics of an anti social personality. In this case the folks that left the church and try to correct it from the outside are social persons. Everything is upside down. As was mentioned earlier in the blogs the Admin Scale explains this situation. The goals and purposes are senior to Policy and if they are evil the policy will only further the goals. Here, where the self corrective structures, the checks and balances LRH put there to correct the organization are eliminated, forcing those of good will that could see the corruption, out.

    So again, the Policy is furthering the evil purpose of DM in that Disconnection prevents the folks of good will inside from coming in contact with the realizations and cognitions of the folks of good will outside.

    LRH said that a ten foot thick wall gets breached by the water carrier. In other words someone exposed to the truth that is still in good standing can be of immense value in righting the wrongs by becoming the water carrier. During the Second World war many of the conquered people went underground and helped the allies.

    Your mission if you choose to take it is to, in what ever way you can, bring to understanding of the truth, those folks of good will that are still inside the Church.

  46. I’d say this entire idiotic effort, going on now since 1980 or before, to make LRH into some kind of magical, idealized, ridiculous fantasy-land or fairy-tale story — an effort which is utterly doomed to failure — is, taken as a whole, an outpoint: ADDED INAPPLICABLE.

    However, in the 1970s LRH did write advices noting the culture was moving toward a messianic resurgence, and as I recall he did advise we work with that. One result was the Volunteer Minister program. I was a volunteer minister and I thought it was a brilliant damn program. But I don’t recall LRH every saying anywhere, “Position me as LEGENDARY.”

    As far as I know, please correct me if I’m wrong, the only thing LRH ever said was “I am a man.” In fact he said, “Don’t turn me into a savior!” Intelligent? Yes. Caring? Yes. Perfect? Never!

    Going even more fundamental we come as always to the ARC triangle and the R of that story stands for “reality.” All this bullshit spin-doctor insanity by Danny Sherman and David Miscavige is as unreal as it can be because it’s not even true. Their VFP (“valuable” final product) is to sour people on LRH and turn them away from Scientology by putting out stories about him that turn out to be lies.

    I assume this is just another example of the trademark “David Miscavige Kiss of Death” that he places onto everything he touches.

    • If david miscavige says LRH is God and he is his representative of Earth and savior of humanity they shouldn’t he be nailed to something for all our overts and withholds or something?

      Allergy warning and legal disclaimer: the above statement is an attempt at humor. It is not intended to encourage anyone to commit any illegal act. Let me say now that I do not condone nailing anyone to anything unless they conscent in writing first (each to their own). This is not like that dastadly evil Tom Cruise Missile joke that resulted in the poster to alt.religion.scientology news group being sent to jail. (Someone clarify, was he sent to jail for the post on ARS or because OSA managed to antagonise him in to doing something illegal?) Name? I forget but I could find out.

      • Keith Henson. He skipped a trial date, and then skipped town (went to Canada to seek asylum). When he finally came back to US, he had to go to jail — not because of original accusation, but because he “fled from justice”. He probably could have avoided jail if he had gotten things together legally in the first place. I don’t know all the particulars though.

    • i see exactly the same thing when I look

    • “As far as I know, please correct me if I’m wrong, the only thing LRH ever said was “I am a man.” In fact he said, “Don’t turn me into a savior!” Intelligent? Yes. Caring? Yes. Perfect? Never!”

      ———————-

      you are correct. If it ain’t written it ain’t true. People don’t even apply that at events. I once went to an event, every 5 minutes somebody had to stand up and clap, then everybody else stands up and claps. I decided not to for once. I didn’t follow the sheep affect.

      The sheep effect. A fellow staff member told me about it. When I was on staff, green guy, the exec’s had us handing OCA’s to the public in the city, gotta get them stats up, all hands no matter your post. Oh, I just hated it, couldn’t confront it, I felt like I was in a cult. But I knew it was for a greater good I guess, I thought. But I still hated it, what if somebody asks me a question – what do I say, no hatting on questions. Anyways, I just dumped off the handful of OCA’s in some apartment building front door area when nobody was looking. Good, I’m done, walk around for hour and enjoy the city. But my thoughts, oh I committed an overt, oh boy, but maybe not, it’s outflow I guess.

      Then an expert staff member at handing them out says to me, look you have to utilize the sheep effect. For example, give an OCA to a couple, the guy, if he takes it, give to girl, she will always take it. And this, it you have a line of people walking, and if you give the OCA to the first guy and IF he takes it, why the others behind him will see that and they will take it to, boom, boom, boom, all gone the OCA’s. That’s the trick.

      I’m thinking, my god, here I am college trained, had some wins in auditing, read a lot of the books and listened to a lot of the tapes/lectures by LRH, did the IQ test and scored above average of 100, scored 120 I think. And here I am in my late 20’s handing out OCA’s. What did I get into? I just wanted to be a staff member and also go up the bridge to Clear. So I continued. And now 25 years later, we are clapping and making LRH into some god and BS PR stuff, that ain’t what I read it the books and lectures.

      • Captain Bob, as far as I’ve ever read or heard, yep, you’re right about LRH. Anything otherwise was someone else saying something else based on something else.

  47. Even heroes have lice. Enough said.

  48. Marty. I audited on otvii from 89 to 96 and so avoided gat. I never listened to or complied with any push to audit x hrs and just stuck with what I studied. Short sessions and ep etc. Did I audit on dm suppressive tech and therefor effect of that?

  49. Random Stranger

    REASONS WHY DAVID MISCAVIGE’S LACKEY EXECUTIVE STAFF LOVE HIM:

    1) He doesn’t hit them when they love him

    2) He’s so tough, it’s amazing

    3) They want to be that tough, too

    4) They love all the new orgs

    5) The stage pillars are amazing to them

    6) They know how OT he is by being able to pronounce so many words that rapidly in just one sentence with a consistent sing-song

    7) If they don’t love him they get very hungry

    8) They are SO grateful to him for getting rid of all the black-infested, LRH-hating SP scum

    9) He knows the Marcabians personally

    10) He’s promised to let everyone out of the Flunky Hole as soon as the planet is Clear

  50. Agreed. But whatever Dave’s motives for the enforced literalness of LRH’s life, I can’t help thinking: would he apply the same rigorous standards of factual examination to his own Bio?

    For some one as obsessed with the literal, factual, time-place-form-event style of analysis Dave seems remarkably casual with the truth of his own life’s events and their veracity. I don’t recall seeing on the official Scn web site any reference to how he forcibly and violently took control of the Church, or any mention of the hundreds of brutal assaults on senior staff that have been witnessed and verified. Overseeing 3 decades of declining delivery statistics has become “the tireless work of a new type of religious leader”. Deleting sections of LRH tapes he doesn’t like has become “making Source available to the millions”. And any verifiable facts that don’t fit have become the twisted imaginings of bitter defrocked apostates.

    For some reason the opening line of the, IMHO, vastly underrated Mission Earth music album come to mind: [Cue deep gruff voice] “Soltan Gris (read David Miscavige) “You will stay here until you write a full confession”. (Cue awesome Edgar Winter guitar riff…)

    • Miscavige has no motive for his enforced literalness of LRH’s life. It’s a manifestation of where Miscavige is on the tone scale. Throw in some certifiable psychosis and there you go. You could probably find many people in mental wards with similar symptoms. No motive, just nuts.

  51. I don’t mean to be glib but I could give a damn about the damnation. Why? Because of the gloriousness and joy resulting from the delivery of standard tech. And it wouldn’t matter if it was LRH or someone else who developed it and had less than a perfect saint like background, I just want more of that good stuff. And thank you LRH for creating it, you less than perfect being! But the creation certainly is!

  52. The beauty of this blog, this group of people, is the free communication. For Ron, against Ron, maybe Ron.

    It’s great!! no one is sending out the thought police to destroy those with “dangerous and bad thinking”. What a friggn relief!

    Ya know, aurgumantation has gotten a bad rap in this era of contemporary culture. It use to be an art, a skill, a way to find deeper truth with each other.

    I’m so glad people disagree with me. How boring to always be agreed with.

    It’s wonderful to hear people’s views. Left right center up down and through.

    • Nice post Brian!

    • I totally agree. Opening up communication is an essential step in getting dePTSed from a suppressive environment at the Church. Just the fact that you can say whatever you want to say is huge. It is baffling how I even got to a point of believing that simply expressing my opinion was a crime. This blog is helping to reverse that “evil spell.” Good job Marty!

  53. And when it comes to publicity and his biography, don’t forget this from LRH – which clearly shows his opinion and priorities in regards to this:

    “This morning I received a cable from an Org. An urgent cable. Did it say, ‘How do you assess for a Pre-Hav level’ or something sensible? No, it didn’t. It said, ‘Send us some biographical data for a newspaper article.’ I spit. That Org is doing the lousiest job possible in Technical and is all worked up to get publicity.” (from HCO PL 26 May 61 (Reissued on 21 June 1967) “A Message to the Executive Secretaries and All Org Staff; Quality Counts”)

    Dave? LRH said he wouldn’t spend as much time on that subject as providing enough “biographical data” for a NEWSPAPER ARTICLE and you direct the Sea Org to work over 10.000 hours to create a brand new $700 ENCYCLOPEDIA filled with LRH biographical data? Really?

    Will it be turned into a course and made a prereqisite for the Basics now?

    If LRH’s reaction to that request from that org (which neglected tech delivery) was to “spit”, what would he say to THIS? Davey, the orgs are empty, tech delivery is down the drain, international stats are plummeting, PR is at an all time low and you keep the SO busy for over ten thousand hours to produce THIS?!

    I need to spit too.

    • Will it be turned into a course and made a prereqisite for the Basics now?

      It most likely will be now you’ve given him the idea. :)

  54. Tom Gallagher

    Hey Dan Sherman………

    My latest Bright Idea!

    Why don’t you write “The Unauthorized Biography of POB”. That would be a lot more fun than the hell-hole you’re caught up in now.

    Besides, you wouldn’t have to then exaggerate or lie.

  55. Hear, hear! Well put.

  56. The same old LDW

    The multiple viewpoint system at work again. It is so great to be able to have this comm cycle with such intelligent beings.

    My final cog on the matter: Those in the CoS who want it, but have no clue what the tech can really do, they can’t apply it, they don’t really understand it. So they have to mock up adulation to compensate.

    Those outside the CoS who can’t “have” the the help which the tech offers need to mock up hatred toward the guy who created it.

    Those of us who know the tech works and can and do apply it, simply understand Ron, his pluspoints and outpoints, and we try our best to put correct evaluation and sanity into the scene.

    Thanks everyone for sharing.

  57. scilonschools

    Nice overview Mr R, when using Google Earth there is always a desire to overzoom and look for your nieghbors swimming pool, though interesting in a way the pool may have changed since the satellite photos were taken.
    Zooming back gives a clearer picture of the forest and nieghborhood!!

    Marty I enjoyed the work you put into this Zoon Back! :)

  58. Pingback: LRHs schlimmster Feind – Teil 2 | Der Treffpunkt

  59. Marty, I wanted to thank you for this article, it means a lot to me. I know we don’t see eye to eye on LRH and this article by you makes it easier for me to feel like there is an honest accounting about the subject. As I have always said, you have every right to believe what you want and practice it too and I stand by that as much as I stand by right to be critical. Your response honors the other side by confirming they are not crazy and that right or wrong there is at least something to the concerns they have had for years. It takes a big man (much bigger than DM but who is not ) to be willing to talk about something that has been so taboo in Scientology for so long. If LRH had any redeeming values they can only be appreciated in an open forum, with an honest accounting and willingness to separate and promote the fact from fiction sounding this man. You clearly are practicing what you preach and in this case are a credit to the independent movement. I know this could not have been an east point to reach and having heard all the stories of how hard it is for people to deal with these types of issues once they are out, you have earned my respect on this matter.
    Thank you again
    RP

    • If LRH had any redeeming values… ???

    • It takes a big man….to be willing to talk about something that has been so taboo in Scientology for so long.

      Paul, I think you’ve missed one of the strongest undercurrents of sentiment expressed here. We who have experienced the workability of L Ron Hubbard’s tech have had little to no attention on the details of his personal life during our decades of membership in the group, and have not encountered the taboo you speak of.

      Frankly, the story of his life is one that only rates mild interest among most people who’ve benefited from his developments. More interesting to most of us, are the anecdotes of his adventures along the way to fully developing the technology. Talking to old timers who knew and worked with him during the early days of Scientology is always a treat – but nothing more. Our primary focus is, and has always been, the proven, workable path to personal enlightenment that he developed.

      No one has ever told me that I can’t express a critical thought about LRH, but to tell you the truth, I’ve never had any reason to do so. I knew that he was just a man, and that he was as tainted with as much mud as the rest of us. What made him special, is that he found a way to crawl out of that mud, and he was caring enough to show others how to do it, as well.

  60. All of this about Hubbard, including the perhaps infamous LRH ED of 13 Sep 84, Ron’s Journal 38, (never published), does nothing if not enhance my admiration for Ron. Puts him and certain other things he did or didn’t do in a different perspective, indeed more realistic and believable than all the tales of woe we were fed, but still in my mind any attempt to denigrate LRH only shines light on those who would do so.

  61. Dianetics; The Modern Science of Mental Health – case in point. LRH actually wrote a book that I, as dumbed-down as I was at the time, could read (not clearing a single word) and when done, actually could conceptually understand it enough to reach for training and then actually DO it. That was no small feat on LRH’s part! And I’m so not kidding about being a dumbass back then.

    David Miscavige knows what he’s doing to LRH.

    • Tara, you make a very good point. When I got layed off from my job back in the 1980’s, and realized holy shit, I’m going down hill not up hill. Why I seeked help by going to he library and reading self help books. I read several and they were all cool, but which method to do? I didn’t seek religion at the time. But by chance I read Dianetics, and while reading it I fell asleep reading so many times a PT course sup would throw their arms up in the air. But I got the message, I saw the contagion of aberation in my family, in my present time environment at the time. So I got some auditing and lo and behold I got relief, I got gains. So I continued.

      • Captain Bob, that’s cool. I later cleared all my misunderstood words in the book, but the point was LRH’s ability to write such a book and actually make it comprehensible (by restating it in sooooo many ways) to someone like me in my quasi-illiterate state, so much so that I could envision doing it and did do it – took action. And so did you. :D

  62. This is horrible. I just had a clear realization that if things continue the way they have been there will be a massive backslash against Scientology “like never before in history” as DM would always say. The level of attack will come from all corners of the world. I don’t know why I think that, but it somehow indicates. The storm has been building up already and that’s with us – the ones who know the goodness of Scientology as knowledge and technology itself. Imagine the reaction of the public not so enlightened. The sense of betrayal could be massive. It is even frightening to think about it. It may very well be the case that it is the independent movement that may save the day for Scientology in the long run. At least there will be some other direction for people to look at like: “Look these guys are Scientologists and seem honest. They have been pointing out flaws within the organization for a long time. Maybe Scientology is not all that bad. Maybe we should support them and give it another chance…” or something of the sort. The practice of Scientology must be saved, and so in this I think Marty is playing a very important role. There needs to be more people coming out from the Church and speaking to the public that what has been taking place is NOT Scientology.

  63. LRH said in so many lectures, “I am just a man”.
    This is such bad PR and adds to the list of lies by the corporate church. What a Roman Circus.

  64. Pingback: Response to Mark Rathbun

  65. About Rhodesia
    19 Jul 66 BC Lecture #432
    Pg. 221 Now, we’re going to have to do something about those fellows and we better move fast because it’s all to slow. I mean, it’s all too slow the way we’ve been going about it. We’ve got to make up for some lost time here. But these fellows do things like get your headquarters robbed of private research papers, buy them off the thief, publish them out of context and thus confuse the theory and research papers of Scientology with actual practice of Scientology. And I point out to you that these are two entirely different things. Because I have just reserved the right all the way along the line to write down whatever I found. But I did not put it out for unlimited circulation. You see? So they’re challenging a fellow’s right to make notes of what he’s seen. But those research papers and books, today, actually do not much reflect the practice of Scientology, which if you look at it up the grades has very, very reasonable and very comprehensible goals. Do you see?

  66. An Observation: On every forum, blog comments section I have ever seen, whenever the topic of David Miscavige’s heinous activities is under discussion, there suddenly appear a plethora of pseudonomous identities, whom no one in our community actually knows to exist in the real world — and whom loudly express their agreement with one another — arrive to change the subject to bashing (“criticizing”) Ron Hubbard.

    This seems to have happened on this particular blog posting.

    Michael A. Hobson
    Independent Scientologist

    So why am I not surprised

    • Now that you mention it that is odd. I thought it was just some protestors trying to convince y’all that scientology is a crock so you could all be “truely free”.

      Your implied observation that it may be orchastrated by OSA makes more sense.

      As I understood it OSA could say what they liked about scientology or the church of scientology to align themselves with critics but they could not disparage LRH. Another change in policy perhaps? Wonder if they’re allowed to call David Miscavige a alcoholic psychotic tiny tyrant as people claim he is?

      • Dean Fox wrote:
        “Your implied observation that it may be orchastrated by OSA makes more sense.”

        When are you going to learn that I mean precisely and only what I actually write, neither more nor less ?

        There are other parties besides the OSA Internet Unit who might *orchestrate* such a coordinated activity.

        Michael A. Hobson
        Independent Scientologist

        • Michael, you have me at a disadvantage since I wasn’t the one who suggested there was a cause and effect pattern between posts of David Miscavige’s crimes and the appearance of posters who all agree with each other and try to besmirch LRH (paraphrasing) and alluded to the idea this was orchastrated.

          Perhaps I’m naïve in thinking the OSA are the only ones who would orchastrate such a thing.

          To me OSA was the logical choice, indeed the only choice. The only other mischief makers I’m aware of who might be interested are Anonymous and they’ve being besmerching David Miscavige and LRH for over 3 years without any such patterns to my knowledge. Please elaborate on who else might be up to such mischief.

          Your post was vague. You pointed out pattern you’d seen and suggested in a round about way you felt there was more to it, that it was no chance happening and so was orchastrated.

          You cannot be both precise in meaning and vague, although it is something the church of scientology attempts to do often (as do politicians).

      • Dean, I believe the reality is that OSA (and others) can criticize LRH all they want.

        What is strictly forbidden and not tolerated is any criticism of David Miscavige by anyone.

  67. Holy Hannah! So much significance over something so simple.

    A man has a realization. It changes his mind about life and to the degree that his mind was changed, changes his life.

    He starts operating with and investigating into this new realization. Wonders! He has another realization that changes his mind about life and to the degree that his mind was changed, changes his life.

    This keeps occurring until he has a body of data that he shares with others so they don’t have to do all the “figuring it out” from scratch.

    Where he was wrong he admits it sometimes, and yes he does, if you’ve bothered to actually read/listen to a great deal of what he’s written or taped. He also eschews any “godhead” or “sainthood” and cautions those who read/listen to his words against attributing these to him.

    Was he wrong at times? What is “wrong”? What he 100% truthful every second of every day? Is any of humankind 100% truthful always? Did he become a better, more honest person as time went on and his realization of what he had grew? Of course, as would any of us if we but applied ourselves to our own betterment.

    I personally view LRH as a man who was once young and filled with the hubris and yearning for fame that all young people have. As he worked, studied, researched and matured – he changed. As we all have.

    I used to be a hellion at 22 that could drink any man under the table, wore fedoras while smoking cigars just to make the older men cringe and holler. Does that make me “evil” and fractious today at 50+? Hardly, I’ve grown and learned how better to ease my own travels through life, as no doubt LRH did – in his own way.

    P.S. It’s funny, what I recall from reading LRH is his stated involvement with atomic scientists who were appalled at what atomic energy was to be used for.

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