Sitting In Judgment

 

In December 2012 I posted an essay on this blog suggesting that  judgmentalism is a negative  trait that Scientologists ought take care to curb.  This blog is frequented in the main by former members of the church of Scientology who still consider themselves Scientologists.  These are people that have been out of the organization for years and who profess that Scientology ought not be used to control and dominate the lives of others.  Nonetheless, a popular counter-position posted in response to my essay was that ‘labeling, and judgmentalism, is just fine in and of itself – the only problem with such practice is inaccuracy of the labeling.’   Even years after their participation in the organization, many Scientologists considered a judgmental attitude a positive virtue provided it is done in keeping with their own standards of accuracy.  The most zealous proponents of that idea resorted to ad hominem attacks on me for raising such issues, and ultimately disconnected from me.

I do not contend that the labels Scientology promotes usage of are inaccurate or harmful provided they are used in a professional manner as initially intended upon creation.   Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard created numerous constructs against which the mind, spirit and human condition could be understood and improved.   He observed and recorded gradient scales ranging from horrendous, painful conditions all the way up to beautiful, joyous conditions.   The scales are invaluable when used by professionally trained Scientologists to help move people up those conditions.  But, just like any other field of the mind and spirit – including psychiatry, psychoanalysis, and other religions and systems of spirituality – the moment one takes the diagnosis and treatment or practice scheme out of the hands of trained, responsible practitioners and applies it casually and inexpertly in the field of day to day human relations, disaster is close to inevitable.

Imagine a friend telling you that you are an obsessive compulsive disorder case – in all seriousness – , and thereafter treating you as leprous until you conformed with that friend’s standard of acceptable behavior.  How long would you tolerate that friend in your proximity?  Not for long I suspect.   Scientologists – regardless of levels of training – are encouraged to apply their own, equally judgmental, labels to others and apply them in life.

Scientology has a substantial lexicon of judgmental labels that rivals the scope and complexity of the American Psychological Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM).   Its organizations promote their facile use in day to day life.  Despite that, Scientology organizations spend millions of dollars a year condemning the DSM and its misuse or even professional use.  Their argument is that such labeling is judgmental and as such it does not promote improvement but instead categorization and stigmatization.

Perhaps the most commonly used stigmatizing terms in Scientology are “suppressive person” or SP and “potential trouble source” or PTS.   An SP is defined in Scientology as one of those roughly 2 ½ percent (Scientology founder  L. Ron Hubbard estimation) of any population who exhibit the characteristics of a sociopath or psychopath.  Scientology’s diagnostic scheme for identifying an SP is nearly identical to psychology’s and psychiatry’s diagnostic standard for identifying the sociopath or psychopath.   A PTS is a supposed  member of approximately 20% of the population who are intimately connected with an SP and consequently are mistake-prone or act ill or cowed.

Scientologists are encouraged to take a three week course of study in order to achieve the purported professional  ability and  license to identify and handle an SP and the target of his effects, the PTS.  All Scientologists are required to take this course and are expected to apply it with an attitude of certainty regardless of lack of any other professional credential.   The result, bluntly, can denigrate into a community  of untrained, arrogant, Monday morning shrinks passing the most condemnatory judgments upon one another at the drop of a hat.

To make matters worse, there is a distinct SP characteristic in Scientology writings that takes precedence over the other dozens that align with the psychology field’s similar diagnostic characteristics checklist.  That is, if someone exhibits an ‘anti-Scientology’ leaning he or she is sure to be diagnosed as being an SP.  To qualify one only need question the wisdom of any Scientology writing.  This fact alone is probably more responsible for Scientology taking on the character of an insular cult than all others combined.

L. Ron Hubbard once quipped that it is futile to get into an argument with a psychiatrist.  The problem, he noted, was that the minute you get a leg up on the psychiatrist he definitively ends the debate with the evaluation, ‘you are crazy.’   Ironically, this ad absurdum joke could almost describe the modern day Scientologist.  If you attempt to even discuss a shortcoming of Scientology the debate decisively ends with the evaluation, ‘you are an SP.’  Per Scientology policy all Scientologists must disconnect from an SP.  That is, the Scientologist must refrain from any type of communication with the SP, directly or indirectly.  That policy holds whether the declared SP is one’s spouse, child, parent, business partner or best friend.   The SP is entitled no civil or human rights as far as any Scientologist is concerned.

By way of comparison, the psychiatrists’ condemnatory label ‘crazy’ is a rather mild evaluation.

Nonetheless, Scientologists – even those who have disaffiliated from its organizations because of its alleged proclivity for judgmental evaluation, trying and sentencing of followers and the population at large – believe ‘judgmentalism’ is not a problem with Scientology.   They are so dead serious about that that they are prepared to prove it by disconnecting from anyone who says otherwise.

Decompression is important in any cult recovery effort.

Re-education is probably even more important.

398 responses to “Sitting In Judgment

  1. HCO Policy Letter of 15 November 1968 … Cancellation of Disconnection

    Can anybody here please tell me where i can find this on-line?

    • Bryan, it might be in one of the OEC vols (probably 0 or 1 or 7?) here

      http://www.stss.nl/en/

    • If I recall, it didn’t cancel disconnection, it canceled use of the term disconnection in any ethics order.

    • I found this policy in an older version of OEC Vol. 1, the full text of the letter is as follows:

      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
      Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
      HCO POLICY LETTER OF 15 NOVEMBER 1968
      Remimeo
      CANCELLATION OF DISCONNECTION
      Since we can now handle all types of cases disconnection as a condition is cancelled.
      L RON HUBBARD Founder
      LRH:rw.cden Copyright (I) 1968 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

      You may be more interested in a particular excerpt from Ron’s Journal 68 cancelling disconnection: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYXkZPUFQLI

      • Thanks for these references, John. Can come in very handy
        talking to people, especially the youtube one, in Ron’s voice!
        Marcel Wenger

      • Whether disconnection and fair gaming was cancelled or not, to me, is not the real issue.

        The real issue is that it existed at all. Somehow individuals feel Ron was being benevolent by cancelling his writings on ruining utterly the enemies of Scientology.

        It’s like, “oh well geeze, I guess the harming human being thing did not go over too well. Now that I look at it, oppressing families may not be a good thing either.”

        An incarnation of the Buddha would never have this as a doctrine to begin with. Any one familiar with the utter humility and kindness of the original Buddha would know.

        Fair Gaming and parts of the Ethics conditions came from Ron’s dark side. I believe Ron really enjoyed the adventure and drama of enemies and psy-ops. It was great fun! Thetans love to play!!

        The legacy is still alive. Even in the Indies. I see people here looking for trolls, osa, sps, disconnecting.

        Fair Gaming and disconnection is not a “Ron is simply human”. That doctrine is darker than just a human flaw.

        Human flaws: being late, getting angry, drinking too much beer, watching too much TV, not keeping your word, jealousy etc etc.

        Destroying and covertly approving of mortal harm on human beings comes under another catagory beside ‘just being human.’

        • And the cancelling of a policy does not make the reality of it go away. And I know all of you know this to be true.

        • Amen. I also don’t understand even the claims of it being canceled “on paper” because not one Scientologist from the late sixties until Ron’s death could truthfully say disconnection and fair game wasn’t in practice to full effect under LRH, even after the so called cancelation for PR reasons in NZ. Actions are what counts, not meaningless words, in practice there was always disconnection and fair game under LRH and right up to present day. It was never, in practice, canceled or ceased to exist – ever.

          • Amen. And after all the blah blah blah deeds are what count. To ignore what was done and what is being done in order to absolve LRH of responsibility for the ugly side of Scientology is a serious mistake. When you hear the “older” Scientologists talk eg Jesse Prince, Hanna Whitfield you realize that LRH was not a saint and that Miscavige is, unfortunately, the logical descendant of LRH.

      • Wow, John. RJ 68. Right from the horses mouth.
        Thank you. I doubt that the squirrels running the COS have that tape available for their parishioners to listen to. They would probably get sent to ethics for requesting it.

      • Hello JSC,
        great for uploading the excerpt from RJ 68.

        By the way, part of this excerpt can be found in the green “admin dictionary” under the article “reform code”.
        (And those dictionaries are still around in the church.)

  2. Pingback: Sitting In Judgment | Martyrathbun09's Blog

  3. Another great post Marty.
    I agree with everything you said here.
    Quite the dog chasing it’s tail. If you are an anti-Scientologist you are an SP. If you don’t agree with all the writings of LRH then you are an anti Scientologist and therefore an SP. But LRH says what is true for you is true. But if LRH’s writings are not true to you then you are anti Scientology. Huh??
    How about the code of Honor? Don’t compromise with your own reality. Isn’t that Scientology? How about the creed of Scientology? Isn’t that Scientology?
    The problem is there are so many things that contradict in Scientology that, as you say, you can find a reference to make anything wrong.
    My bottom line is, I don’t care who likes me for what my opinion is. My opinion is my opinion. Luckily I do have friends that I see eye to eye with.

    Another thing I just thought of is if you are new it’s fairly ok for you to not agree with averything you read. But if you are on OT and disagree then you are a true heretic and must be punished.
    I like where you are going Marty. You really are a big dog running in the tall grass!!

  4. “That policy holds whether the declared SP is one’s spouse, child, parent, business partner or best friend. The SP is entitled no civil or human rights as far as any Scientologist is concerned.”

    Unfortunately, this fact is not often recognized for what it is until one has personally experienced it as the adverse effect. Those who can open their hearts and observe it and better yet – feel compassion for that person – enough to stand against the overwhelming force of the “group” – are the real “big beings” and in my opinion, are well on the path to genuine spiritual growth.

  5. Marty, if irony was gold, there would be a fortune at your feet.

    By the way, SP declares are an excellent example of labeling gone awry. You would think SPs would be less prevalent among Scientologists, but assuming here too it’s 2 1/2%, that would still mean only 1000 SPs worldwide based on the most believable current estimates of Church membership. There are probably that many declared suppressives or more just among the readers of this blog. Heck, I can count more than a dozen just from my personal friends, and I suspect the total number of declared Scientologists and former Scientologists is actually greater than the total number of active Church members.

  6. Granting of Beingness:
    A process has not been the correct process or has not been run correctly, or has not been run long enough if there has not been in the preclear an increase in his ability to grant life to others and to his environment.

    Quote from Ability Mag, #6 (Major)

    • “The preclear is often found in valences (other identities) …

      “He is unable to achieve or obtain (he thinks) enough identity or an identity of his own. He decries or criticizes the identities of others (fails to grant beingness to them).
      He himself cannot obtain enough identity to feel he has an identity. Identity is so scarce that it’s too valuable. Nobody must have one. To be with such a person is therefore an uncomfortable experience since he does not credit our identity—does not grant us beingness.”

      -LRH, THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THOUGHT

      • They label because they’re not able to be themselves.
        They’re not able or not allowed to.
        Group-Think.

        • Excellent post. To which (amazingly) I have little to add: Excepting possibly pouring on more of SKM’s post about Granting of Beingness – which ranks as the most fundamentally beneficial of all man’s tools at his disposal for mankind (Moving on up a little higher…). One sits in judgment of others because they have not fully accorded themselves the beingness they feel ‘they’ deserve (a self-determined, selfish view). True Granting of Beingness can never be done in any other determinism than “pan.”

  7. Re-education indicates to me as a good place to start the De-indoctrination process that all of us are going through as we decompress from both our unique and common experiences in the cult of Corporate Scientology.

    A good foundation to pursue this re-education from is contained in “The three valid processes” described in Book Two, Chapter One, “The basic Principles of Processing” in LRH’s “Science of Survival”.

  8. This is striking close to home. I heard from a couple of “in” Scn”s that they are shooting people now at the orgs, no questions asked practically. Things have gotten very serious and heavy heavy ethics now. And if you dare to read anything on a “bad” site or from a “bad” person, if you only read it, you can be declared for that alone unless you sign away your life promising to never ever read anything about Scn at all anywhere. It used to be you were declared if you read about it AND talked publicly about it. Now even the talking or writing publicly about it is being waived to do the instant declares if you don’t stop reading sites, stop “associating with squirrels” stop watching any show on TV about Scn etc. And they are using your friends to come get word to you that they will disconnect from you unless you mend your ways. The two clubs used on my friends were “you’ll never get your OT levels unless…” and “tell him/her that you’ll disconnect from him/her if he/she continues to read on the internet about Scn.” It reminds me of how the Jews in Nazi Germany were handled in the Holocaust.

    • Grasshopper (Mark P)

      Well, except for the gas chambers and all. Perspective, please.

      • Mark, 1935 was different from 1945. Things had to start somewhere.

        • Yes, like with a political movement which had obtained absolute power and control of the government scapegoating a entire types of people – not a small insular cult people CHOSE to join and are merely thrown out of for not following whimsical cult rules.

          However it would seem of LRH’s writings which casually refer to disposing of certain types of people “without sorrow” certainly took a page from some facist play books, but no one has any worries about Scientology taking the reigns of power or gaining wide spread acceptance among the general population.

  9. You make some very important points.

    In my independent practice, I have observed that decompresssion may take several years, even when the person is getting auditing in the field.

    If the person is not getting auditing and is not getting reeducated, their cult indoctrination has a firm hold on them for decades.

    Interestingly enough, I have found that participating in group discussions in open forums can have a beneficial effect. It appears to act like group engram running and considerations will shift over time.

  10. What amazes me are the use of certain words and numbers ie. squirrel, SP, Pts, below 2.0, 1.1 etc to make someone less than human and its usually IMO only when someone thinks for themselves or questions or disagrees with LRH or Miscavich. So much for TWTH. I’m glad I’m out!

  11. “That is, if someone exhibits an ‘anti-Scientology’ leaning he or she is sure to be diagnosed as being an SP.”

    I always understood that a person was considered to be anti-Scientology because of their intention to suppress ANY betterment activity or group – and thus would be anti-Scientology. (Ref: HCO PL 27 Sept 66 Issue II “The Antisocial Personality, The Anti-Scientologist”)

    However, the OP seems to be inferring that “anti-Scientology” means opposing Scientology, PERIOD. That seems to me to be quite a different meaning. It may be how the CoS is using the word, but is there an LRH reference for this?

    • p.s. To make my query clear, I should have quoted a bit more of the OP than I did:

      “To make matters worse, there is a distinct SP characteristic in Scientology writings that takes precedence over the other dozens that align with the psychology field’s similar diagnostic characteristics checklist. That is, if someone exhibits an ‘anti-Scientology’ leaning he or she is sure to be diagnosed as being an SP. To qualify one only need question the wisdom of any Scientology writing.”

      The first query is, where does it say that “anti-Scientology” means simply opposing Scientology, rather than it being in the context of opposing all betterment groups – which would of course include Scientology and therefore be anti-Scientology. What is the reference, please?

      The other question is, where “in Scientology writings” does it say that “one only need question the wisdom of any Scientology writing” to qualify as an SP (or anti-Scientologist)?

      • I don’t believe the “sp” or “Anti-Scientology” crime here is critizing Scientology or LRH.
        The unforgivable crime is missing dm’s withholds or big withhold.
        I say don’t stop until we know all about it.

        • Marty’s statement does criticize Scientology – and not the CoS but the subject itself. He specified “in Scientology writings” and then stated what was supposedly in them – which I do not recall ever coming across. That was why I asked for the reference. Here are the pertinent parts of the excerpt I quoted above:

          “there is a distinct SP characteristic in Scientology writings that takes precedence over the other dozens…That is, if someone exhibits an ‘anti-Scientology’ leaning he or she is sure to be diagnosed as being an SP. To qualify one only need question the wisdom of any Scientology writing.”

          • I think an example of this would be page 308 Intro To Scientology Ethics the chapter “Suppressives Acts Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists”
            In this chapter LRH lists out suppressive acts.
            Of course the “Monday morning shrinks” have to add in their own alter-is and be prone to witch hunting to conclude that questioning the wisdom of Scientology writing is a suppressive act.

            • Thanks dan. I looked it over and I do see one thing that could fall under “questioning the wisdom of any Scientology writing” – i.e. the part about neglect or violation of the 10 points of KSW 1, specifically point Three: “Knowing [the technology] is correct”.

              Well, all I can say is that I concluded a while back that it is the Scientology of the earlier years that needs to be resurrected. The changes to that which came about, whether by LRH himself or others, is the reason things went bad, IMHO.

              Thanks again for answering my question! :)

              • p.s. On second thought, questioning “any Scientology writing” is a much broader statement than questioning “the technology”. So it still seems to me that the statement is too much of a generality.

                • These are high crimes – suppressive acts:

                  156) Public disavowal of Scientology or Scientologists in good standing with Scientology organizations.

                  157) Public statements against Scientology or Scientologists but not to Committees of Evidence duly convened.

                  159) Pronouncing Scientologists guilty of the practice of standard Scientology.

                  Here is the list of most of the high crimes:

                  http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/crime-syndicate-ethics.htm

                  There is no distinction made between ethics, tech, admin, organization or members. Public statements are not restricted to the press or media. I have no idea what “pronouncing guilty” means, it seems that this would be a matter of opinion. Disavowal can be seen to be questioning the wisdom…

                  If you read all the high crimes, or suppressive acts, it becomes obvious that there is a distinct “anti-Scientology” flavor to them, quite aside from the characters of an anti-social personality.

                  It goes like this: The Church of Scientology is the bastion of standard Scientology, consequently it is practicing standard Scientology. Questioning the C of S is the same is questioning LRH, the writings, the Church’s website, or the leadership. Attacks on Scientology include attacks on the Church, the writings, the members, and its social betterment activities. If you want to experiment with this, just go down to your local org and question the wisdom of the ideal org program or the IAS. Better yet, question the wisdom of the writings of David Miscavige, as found on the official Church of Scientology, especially the point that the website has re-written and published the materials as scriptures when there is not one single mention of scriptures by LRH! Get very insistent about it and I assure you, you will be found to be suppressive and it won’t matter a bit that you have many social characteristics.

                  • Thanks, Maria. I am quite aware of what you wrote about with respect to the CoS and how it can and has interpreted and even written or re-written policy any way it decides to. Even with that in mind, however, I looked over the list of suppressive acts when “dan 351” suggested it and didn’t see anything that defined anti-Scientology or SP the way Marty does in the OP.

                    Obviously, the CoS can impose its own false interpretation of any policy LRH has written, but that’s beside the point of the question I was asking. My question was, where in LRH’s writings does it say that “anti-Scientology” means being an SP and “To qualify one only need question the wisdom of any Scientology writing”?

                    Even the points you specified – “Public disavowal of SCIENTOLOGY …Public statements against SCIENTOLOGY” would, IMO, be way too much of a stretch for it to mean “questioning any writing”. Of course, the CoS could in fact do that, but, again, I don’t get that it is actually LRH’s meaning.

                    • I used to think that too, but I recently reviewed the materials of the OEC volumes, trying to figure out where this notion of tracking people down and sec checking them came from.

                      It comes from Div 1 policies on people who have blown, who MUST be gotten in at once and put on the meter to get off their withholds or have their status terminated. I’m paraphrasing here, but you get the gist. There’s no in between. They get their asses in the door and back on what they were doing or they are persona non gratis. Not coming in would certainly be questioning those writings in a very concrete way. In or out. That’s the choice.

                      I think that what I did in the past was ignore those materials because I personally didn’t agree with them and I could find other policies to focus on and read them against. What the Church does now is very much a literal application that rejects the idea that one can choose to follow or not follow a particular policy based on one’s own interpretation. But the policies are there, they are very clear and they are not canceled as far as I can tell.

                      This may be the rationale behind the blanket order for all Scientologist to do or retread the PTS/SP course starting around 2004. I blew from the course — the first time I had ever blown from a course-room, as the choices of policies to focus on were the very policies and bulletins that I didn’t agree with.

                      I think Marty has a point here, if you don’t have the right or ability to question the materials, and choose them based on overarching principles, then there is no real possibility of addressing elements in them that do produce antagonism and result in an isolated cult environment.

                  • Maria, when you say, “It comes from Div 1 policies…” but don’t give the specifics, it really doesn’t answer my question any better than where Marty said it’s “in Scientology writings”.

                    You may be right that there are “policies on people who have blown, who MUST be gotten in at once and put on the meter to get off their withholds or have their status terminated.” But that would be in conflict with the policy I know of in OEC 1, which is HCO PL 21 JULY 1973 RECOVERING STUDENTS AND PCS. Here is an excerpt:
                    ——————————————–
                    There are 5 main blow reasons:
                    1. Misunderstood words (or no materials).
                    2. No help or WC Method 4 from the Supers (or no Super).
                    3. Interference from the Supers that stopped them from getting on.
                    4. Personal out-Ethics resulting in a w/h.
                    5. Simply booted off for reasons best known to God or Registrars (like suddenly saying “You must now buy Method 1” etc, thus violating the “deliver what we promise” rule).

                    The interference and boot-off reasons are the ones you’d least suspect. Both generate a lot of H, E & R (Human Emotion and Reaction).

                    The reasons most pcs blow are
                    1. Out lists
                    2. No auditing
                    3. Invalidation of case or gains
                    4. Told they’d attained it and hadn’t.
                    ———————————————-

                    As you can see, only one of those (the one about a w/h) would indicate a handling of getting them in to get off their withholds. However, I would agree with you 100% on the following:

                    “What the Church does now is very much a literal application that rejects the idea that one can choose to follow or not follow a particular policy based on one’s own interpretation. But the policies are there, they are very clear and they are not canceled as far as I can tell.”

                    My whole point was that Marty is not talking about what the Church is doing but is saying that it’s “in Scientology writings”. And even though I would agree with you that Marty’s point is that one should have the right to question the materials, when he infer that it was LRH who denied us that right, it contradicts what he wrote in his “How to Study Scientology” blog post where he quoted LRH as saying “You are asked to examine the subject of Scientology on a critical basis – a very critical basis”. Not only that but in that blog post he also stressed the importance of learning to “play the piano”.

                    • Well, all I can say is track down a hard or digital copy of OEC Volume 1 and read it again! I’m not going to pull all the quotations and post them on this blog. I am sure there are OEC/FEBCs on this blog who can confirm the existence of such materials as I have described.

                      Also, I am not talking about WHY someone blows. I am talking about the policies that HCO is required to apply to recovering blown people who are not reporting in as ordered to have those various handlings. This has nothing to do with studying from a very critical basis and what is true is true for you.

                      The policies on handling blows are not offered on the basis of “what is true for you,” and they are part of the post hats for that Division. LRH wrote those policies and they have been employed and enforced on people.

                      “The student however may have blown off the premises or he has gone entirely. On a minor, momentary blow, where all it took was the student’s auditor and a few words to get the student back, the matter is not a real blow. But where the student leaves the premises in a blow or doesn’t turn up for class, the Tech Division must send an Instructor and the student’s auditor over to HCO Department of Inspection and Reports. An HCO representative should go with them at once to pick up the student. The student is brought back with as little public commotion as possible and the procedure of HCO checkout, etc is followed as above.” HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 APRIL 1965
                      Gen Non-Remimeo HCO Sec Hat HCO JUSTICE DATA RE ACADEMY & HGC

                      Do you seriously think for one moment that HCO staff members have the right to question the wisdom of sending people out to bring someone in for sec checking, to pull their withholds, to insist they come in to clean up their MUs? How long do you really think they would last in HCO if they refused to apply the policies relating to their hat?

                      And what if that person does not agree that they have MUs? What if that person does not agree that they have withholds? What if they totally disagree with the idea of the importance of MUs? Would you tell them they have an MU anyway? That they are just being the effect of their reactive mind? What then?

                      “Blown students are handled as per HCO Pol Ltr of April 5, 1965, HCO Justice Data re Academy & HGC – Handling the Suppressive Person, Volume 1, page 381 – “The Blown Student”, and any other policy letters dealing with suppressive acts.” 5 October 1966 LEAVE OF ABSENCE BLOWN STUDENTS

                      I’ll tell you what, if two staff members had ever arrived at my house to “take me in the the org” against my wishes I would have refused to go. I disagree that they have ANY right to come to my private home and demand that I come into the org. Yet that is what the policy says to do. I think this is most unwise and in many cases would only serve to CREATE antagonism and hostility.

                      How about the policy governing people who leave the Sea Org? The one that says they may not serve on staff again. Do those people get to question the wisdom of that policy letter, or are they simply told — that’s how it is. And if you disagree with that policy letter? Then what? Are you anti Ron? anti Sea Org?

                      You may think I am a harsh critic, but the fact is that I do not want to see a world where the policies like the ones I quoted above are in force — and I really have to question Ron’s wisdom when he established them.

                    • Maria, this seems to have turned into a general discussion of policy outpoints, which was the only reason I brought up the LRH principle of being able to “play the piano”, i.e. one needs to know policy well enough to be able to apply what fits the situation. And being able to do so is by taking a critical look at the various policies, as per that LRH quote from “How to Study Scientology”, which I consider to always be valid.

                      That was the reason I quoted from the ‘Recovering Students and Pcs” PL, since it is also a reference regarding blown students, one which strongly infers there are other handlings besides application of that one other PL regarding pulling withholds.

                      In any case, I’m not really into that particular discussion and it isn’t the subject of my query. Neither does my query have to do with VIOLATING policy. “Violating” and “questioning” are two different things. To question is simply “to doubt or dispute”. And when there are disagreements, one is supposed to get a “Disagreement Check”, not an SP Declare.

                      The point is that I’m not asking you to pull all the policies that you disagree with, or any of them, as it’s beside the point. I’m simply asking where in LRH writings it says that to qualify as an SP “one only need question the wisdom of any Scientology writing”. If anybody is able to give me a direct answer to that, i.e. a direct reference that essentially says that, I would be interested.

                    • Well, actually I was locating policy references of how to recognize behavior deemed to be suppressive, and thus “anti-Scientology”.

                      I did not realize you were looking for a quotation that specifically stated what Marty said in his post. Not likely, given how he arrived at what he said.

                      I think it is pretty clear that Marty was speaking of this, which precedes the comment you questioned: “But, just like any other field of the mind and spirit – including psychiatry, psychoanalysis, and other religions and systems of spirituality – the moment one takes the diagnosis and treatment or practice scheme out of the hands of trained, responsible practitioners and applies it casually and inexpertly in the field of day to day human relations, disaster is close to inevitable.”

                      Playing that piano is pretty much summed up by the above statement. The reality is that most of the people I have ever known who called themselves Scientologists are certainly not trained, and responsible practitioners and by observation many do apply these terms casually and inexpertly, including regarding those who question LRH writings as “anti-Scientology,” and even suppressive. I’ve personally been accused of being suppressive for refusing to buy newly released books on command!

                      Personally, I am baffled as to why you would seize on a few lines of a single paragraph in Marty’s post and suggest that it is a contradiction of his earlier post on how to study Scientology. Reading his post over again, I just don’t see that. Quite the contrary, I see him describing the ills that result from such a failure.

                      I would sum up his post as saying that Scientologists should curb their judgmentalism, particularly when it can be shown to be little more than knee-jerk labeling, the complete opposite of using good, responsible judgment. It certainly isn’t the product of thoroughly, and highly critical study.

                    • Maria, you wrote: “Well, actually I was locating policy references of how to recognize behavior deemed to be suppressive, and thus ‘anti-Scientology’.”

                      Policy regarding what is deemed “suppressive” is irrelevant to my query. Marty specified exactly what HE meant by “anti-Scientology’ and stated that this was “in Scientology writings”. No one, including you, has come up with a reference that essentially gives that definition. That was all I wanted to know since I’ve never seen such a reference.

                      You also wrote: “I did not realize you were looking for a quotation that specifically stated what Marty said in his post. Not likely, given how he arrived at what he said.”

                      As I wrote in a previous comment, what Marty meant by “anti-Scientology’ is perfectly clear and explicit in its own paragraph, and it’s also clear that he was attributing that meaning to “Scientology writings”. Here it is again:

                      “To make matters worse, there is A DISTINCT SP CHARACTERISTIC IN SCIENTOLOGY WRITINGS that takes precedence over the other dozens that align with the psychology field’s similar diagnostic characteristics checklist. THAT IS, if someone exhibits AN ‘ANTI-SCIENTOLOGY’ LEANING he or she is sure to be diagnosed as being an SP. TO QUALIFY ONE ONLY NEED QUESTION THE WISDOM OF ANY SCIENTOLOGY WRITING. This fact alone is probably more responsible for Scientology taking on the character of an insular cult than all others combined.” [my caps]

                    • martyrathbun09

                      The fact is throughout Scientology writings. For starters the very title of HCO PL The Anti-Social Personality The Anti-Scientologist.

                    • Thanks for your reply! I actually reviewed that PL and didn’t see a connection between what it says and “To qualify one only need question the wisdom of any Scientology writing.”

        • O.K.! He hasn’t filed for divorce because THEN he would have to disclose his financials.

          In Jenna Miscavige’s book she said she was no longer qualified to work at Int after her parents routed out. Didn’t David’s dad route out? Isn’t he out qualed to be there now as his parent and siblings left? Hasn’t he been in an out 2D for years? Isn’t he the source of major out P.R. flaps? It seems to me he is not there on the same terms as anyone else.

          Found out the purpose for the Freewinds was NOT to deliver OT8! Per L.R.H. it was to be delivered in the A.O’s. Never saw one L.R.H. reference on the Freewinds. Why was the I.A.S. Org built into the ship? Off shore accounts in the Cayman Islands attached to the Freewinds!

          David’s CofS is a house of cards.

          Brace yourself for a bombshell event sometime in the next three weeks. Stay tuned…………. It’s going to be a nice long hot summer with lots of T.A.!

          Looking into my crystal ball, I see a heatwave! With a hot wind blowing on a house of cards. I see, ……….I see suitcases are packed but someone missed the plane. Mother Justice, arriving for muster, and pulling an ace from her sleeve. Her side attendant, looking quite splendid, and doting over a wreath.

      • I think you make an important point. The only people I ever truly believed were SPs were those (very few) who disapproved of me or someone else getting better or, to put another way, engaging in an activity for the purpose of self-improvement.

        The fact that I was doing Scientology meant that these people were anti-Scientology, or perhaps better stated, anti-me doing Scientology.

        If I’d been engaging in meditation, they’d have been anti-that too. More than one expressed disagreement with my exercise program, while they themselves were heavy smokers!

        Point being, there really are people out there who oppose others getting better, by whatever means. Whether you call them SPs or sociopaths, they are few and far between, like LRH says.

        It’s like so many other things in Scientology: LRH gave us tools to spot and deal with people like this, but the tools have been horribly misused, especially by real SPs who seem determined to destroy Scientology at all costs.

        • Publius: “SPs were those (very few) who disapproved of me or someone else getting better or, to put another way, engaging in an activity for the purpose of self-improvement.”

          Yes, that point is also from the PL “The Antisocial Personality, The Anti-Scientologist”. But using “anti-Scientology” as an unqualified generality may include a person who actually does want an individual to get better – but he may believe (due to Black PR, false data, MU’s or whatever) that Scn doesn’t make someone better, that in fact it makes a person worse. And I don’t know of any written materials that includes such people as “anti-Scientology”.

          • I think this is why in a PTS handling, you are given the choice of handle or disconnect.
            If the antagonistic person has heard black PR, false data, has MU’s etc, he or she should be handled with the truth or getting word cleared. If they are really an SP you’ll never handle them.
            My father was a very devout Christian. He wanted me out of Scientology asap. In his mind, this was to protect me.
            I invited him for a tour of my local org. I was the PES then. He met everyone there that day and left saying what friendly and wonderful people Scientologists were. To his death, which was 27 years later, I never heard him say one negative thing about Scientology.
            We had a great father/son relationship. It was simply that I was a Scientologist and he was a Christian.
            Of course that was 1980 and a Scientology org or mission could be a really fun place to be. Now telling someone the truth about the current scene would make a non hostile person become antagonistic.
            DM has been very busy creating antagonism toward Scientology.

            • Yes, I had in mind just what you wrote about PTS handlings. And thanks for the nice story about you and your dad. Perfect example too. :)

            • “If they are really an SP you’ll never handle them.”

              I don’t know about that, consider the materials on the Suppressed Person Rundown:

              “This new rundown, the Suppressed Person Rundown, produces the wondrous result of changing the disposition of an antagonistic terminal at a distance, by auditing the PTS preclear. Where this terminal was antagonistic, invalidative, hostile or DOWNRIGHT SUPPRESSIVE, he will suddenly have a change of heart and seek to make peace with the PTS pc.

              This rundown is not considered complete until the magic occurs; that is on this rundown, we take a PTS pc and we audit this pc and audit him and audit him on Problems Processes until a major change occurs in the antagonistic persons universe which prompts him to make a friendly overture to or concerning the pc.

              This friendly and unprompted origination or attempt at origination from the antagonistic terminal to or concerning the pc will occur in all cases if Problems Processes are run and are fully flattened. This happens no matter how out of comm the two terminals have been or what length of time has intervened between their last communication .

              The rundown is continued until the EP occurs. Each problem process is run to its own EP.”

              The Suppressed Person Rundown
              HCO BULLETIN OF 29 DECEMBER 1978

              I’ve had the rundown on one terminal and I did get the EP exactly as specified. It really made me look at this whole SP concept in a really different way. The SP in this case was a bonfide SP, based on all possible methods of detection and all extant materials on the subject.

              It really was a surprising rundown. And I have ever since questioned the very idea of a suppressive person for whom there is no remedy.

              i.e. Do we create SPs, just as we create reactivity?

              • Maria,
                I agree. I believe that man is basically good. Even the worst SP.
                It’s just well beyond my skill level to handle one.

              • Thank you for that statement about the Suppressed Person Rundown. Over the years I had only one PC I ever ran who did not get the person who was the terminal suppressing the PC contact them and make things right. That one person was contacted and apologized to. The “SP” even made things okay with others they had done wrong. But my PC was pissed that the rundown had not destroyed the “SP”. They went looking for an auditor who would help them realize their goal…the complete and utter destruction of the person they perceived was suppressing them. Those who have really duplicated the tech on handling an “SP” , and how to do the Suppressed Person RD will get what I am saying. Every other time it worked, no exception. I learned from this. Power Processing has long been known to help those considered suppressive also. We have long had the tech to handle this, if used. of course who in the RTC gets Power these days?

                Thanks marty for what you have said.

                Anyone here getting spurious emails from someone calling themselve Squirrel Exposer?
                Cheers,
                Frank

                • You’re welcome! I was always surprised that more people didn’t get that rundown, it would have saved a whole lot of grief for many, many people.
                  Unfortunately, it was 1978 when it came out and by that time the prices were going up and up, never returning to a price that put the rundown in reach for most.

                  This rundown would have been a great candidate for people to do on credit or donate as you can — especially since PTS conditions impact both reach and havingness. I would think they would be able to learn more effective and high ARC ways of working through situations with others after the rundown.

                • Great post Frank. I got it!

                  Yes, a bunch of us got it. It didn’t matter much to anyone except the person sending it. They are on purpose to harm attack and suppress. The purpose line flows through time…………..

                • Thanks to Marty. Yes Frank – squirrel.exposer@gmail.com is sending emails to crusader473000@yahoo.dk with link to an blog with the usual OSA inspired “truth and news”. They might see the end coming, as all original unaltered LRHs scriptures is on stss.nl – free for all Scientologists. Cheers Henrik

    • Being marildi a pro word clearer with years of experience, she is trying to differentiate between LRH’s writings and misinterpretations or misrepresentations of LRH‘s writings.

      Marildi’s point is that per LRH’s writings to diagnostic somebody as a Real SP, (s)he has to have (the majority of) the Real SP characteristics. (Ref: HCO PL 27 Sept 66 “The Antisocial Personality, The Anti-Scientologist”).

      Somebody who is committing high crimes or suppressive acts, per LRH’s writing is a bad person, but (s)he is not a Real SP unless (s)he has (the majority of) the Real SP characteristics.

      So far, the only references provided in this thread (at the time of this comment) are LRH’s writing of high crimes or suppressive acts.

      In order to counter marildi’s argument somebody still needs to provide an LRH’s reference where LRH explicitly states that committing (some) high crime(s) automatically classifies the committer as a Real SP.

      • Bottom paragraph page 318 Intro To Scientology.
        “The imagination must not be stretched to place this label on a person. Errors, Misdemeanors and Crimes do not label a person as a Suppressive Person or Group. Only High Crimes do so.”

        • dan 351, my understanding is that per LRH policy (not the CoS) the determination of whether a High Crime has actually been committed is done by means of a Com Ev. And I agree with what MaBű infers, i.e. that the “Anti-social Personality” PL would be an applicable reference in the deliberation of any bona-fide Com Ev, and should be a primary factor in their findings.

          Aside from that, however, I still don’t know of a specific High Crime or any other LRH writing where “anti-Scientology” is defined in such a way that “To qualify one only need question the wisdom of any Scientology writing.”

          • There is a reference somewhere, which I could not find where LRH says that he would be disappointed with Scientologists if we accepted everything that he said without question.

            I believe the idea that someone is “anti-Scientology only because they question the wisdom of any Scientology writing” would be a Miscavage alter-is of what LRH actually said. And there are many examples of Miscavage alter-is like the Ideal Org Policy Letter.

            People have been declared anti-Scientology only because they questioned the wisdom of a Miscavage alter-is.

            I would say there is no reference where LRH says it is anti-Scientology (or a high crime or SP act) to question the wisdom of Scientology writing.

            As far as using a Comm EV to determine whether a person is an SP see page 362 Intro To Scn Ethics the Chapter “Levels Of Ethics And Justice Actions”
            There are 36 levels of justice. The last of these is expulsion from Scientology (ie SP declare). It’s quite a process to get someone declared SP per justice policy.

            It was a huge shock when Miscavage invented the instant SP declare at the 1982 Misssion Holder’s Conference in San Francisco. The instant SP declare essentially canceled the 36 levels of justice. The transcript of this is in SOED 1278. I believe it is on David Mayo’s web site.

            • dan 351, you make an excellent point about the levels of ethics and justice actions! This is utterly relevant as there are many levels before an SP declare and expulsion.

              And yes, I have read too where LRH says he would be disappointed if we accepted everything he said, I’ve also seen other posters saying the same.

              Thank you for straightforwardly saying, “I would say there is no reference where LRH says it is anti-Scientology (or a high crime or SP act) to question the wisdom of Scientology writing.” :)

              ARC, marildi

  12. Bravo Marty, good post.
    In the words of Rodney King.,
    “Cant we all just get along? “

    • And in the words of the police;
      “Come to LA, we’ll treat you like a King!”.

      Joke aside, thanks Marty, this is so true. You know in over
      60 years of living I hardly ever met an “SP”, but then as a
      Techie you have so many tools to use to deactivate the
      bad tendencies of such people that it fizzles out before
      they explode in your face.

      • 16 Feb, 2013
        Good Lars,
        Exactly
        A few days ago, I was trying hard to list in my mind the SPs this lifetime. It started out to be a very long list. At the end ~
        I looked over the list and I actually loved them all ‘cept a couple (Angela Alvet, Kerry Gleason, Reggie Caldwell, James Burn, and one unnamed who kicked me out), But even these guys I felt, I ‘had transgressions against or they who’d never have affected me.
        And the rest were just like me; PTS individuals and they needed help.
        So I became responsible for my own self.
        So much for that list :)
        Cece

        • Beautiful Cece. I know most of those and audited one of them.
          The ones I know are not SPs. In the final analysis we all could
          use some help as you say. Good on you for using the Tech to
          sort it out for yourself!

  13. Scientology is a thought system. Absolutely anything that challenges that system to any degree is perceived and “judged” as an attack. And, the judgement is always justified. Of course, the more trained in the methodology of Scientology the one making the judgement is, the more justified the judgement is, the more acceptable and purposeful the judgement is. In other words, the more trained Scientologist is capable of rendering a judgement that will serve the person being judged “best interests.” And, will know the most appropriate label to pin to the person.

    Judgement is a tool of the reactive mind. As a tool to separate, elevate, and diminish it is most efficacious in protecting a thought system. But, the downside is…doing so only serves to reinforce the reactive mind. Judging comes after deceit. One must first deceive themselves into thinking something is real before they can judge. Then, after they begin to judge, they can do harm and be harmed.

    It is inevitable that any thought system that engages in judgmentalism will eventually go by the boards.

    • Grasshopper (Mark P)

      I’m sorry, but judgement is not a tool of the reactive mind. There is no judgement in the bank. A = a = a. Judgement is the tool of a being, and judgement of the nature Marty is describing is the result of ser-facs – aberrated unevaluated stable data the being uses to not-confront threatening situations. IMHO.

      Mark

      • Correct. Using judgement is probably the most basic ability we have for making it through the day successfully. Is it safe to cross the road? Yes, next car is half a mile away. Judgement.

        This business of the time taken to decompress is also very real to me. After a few months out in 2009 I thought “Yup, great – I’m done” – then look back at some of the thought processes I was still engaged in and, well it’s embarassing. It’s a sobering reminder of how absolutely non-judgemental it behooves us all to be when – as will inevitably happen – the cult finally implodes completely and we are in the position of having to help the folk spinning out, who are likely to be disorientated and confused. I was shocked to see a video of an Idle Orgs reg-fest for Birmingham Org very recently – posted on Tony O’s blog. Shocked because there was a line of people I know very well – some of whom I have pesonally educated about the current scene – bouncing up to the front to pledge their hard earned graft for this wacko real estate scam. That would have been me 4 years ago.

        • The question to ask is: Do the words judgement and judgmentalism mean the same thing?

          A person judging when it’s safe to cross the street is not the same as an entity observing another entity then making a decision (a judgement) that the other entity is more than or less than or the same as self. Determining whether another is more than, less than or the same as self, is an expression of the value system (thought system) of the one making the determination (judgement).

          When I was a Scientologist, I truly believed that I, because of my awareness, because I had both the “inside story” and the “back story” of what was Really going on here on Earth and who and what I Really was and others Really were…I was “more than” “better than” any other person from any other religion. And, from this elevated opinion of myself, my fellow Scientologists, my religion…I knew what was in the best interests for those outside my thought system. And occasionally, for some of those inside my thought system. In this fantasy I had going on I felt completely justified in reaching out to adjust anyone’s trajectory so as to put them on a workable path to spiritual freedom. Man! Is that insane or what?

          For quite sometime after I left the thought system of Scn, my judging didn’t abate one iota. I had lots of judging to do with regards to other Scientologists, the church, LRH, the tech, and on and on and on. Just more insanity on my part.

          I have recently moved into a new and different perspective of truth for myself that I’ll share a bit of with you. This is very simple but it is, at least at this time, not so easy. At any given time I have only two choices of how to respond to the circumstance I’m in. I can choose Love and Forgiveness or, I can choose Fear and Judgement. Love sees only Love and holds no grievances. Love unites. Forgiveness collapses time by recognizing and acknowledging that what appeared to happen never really happened. Fear and Judgement divides, separates and evokes revenge and punishment. Choosing Love and Forgiveness reinforces Theta, reinforces who and what I really am. Choosing Fear and Judgement reinforces the bank and perpetuates an insane world.

          Scn was a very important step in my journey and I hold no regrets or grievances for any part of it then or now. Indeed, I cherish the experience.

          • +1

            • Marty, excellent essay. I read the whole thing and even had to look up a word before finishing reading. Can there be any other reason than this why the Church of Scientology has been around since 1954 and STILL has not gotten off of it’s launch pad? :) The organization has become a joke worldwide. Here is a little secret I have never told anyone before but I will tell it to you and the readers of your BLOG. :) A few years ago I received a letter of apology from the then International Ethics and Justice Chief stating that my Declare was not valid, despite it’s circulation in the church, because I was not a full member of the church at the time of it’s issue. :) I would say that somebody in the church was acting purely judgemental towards me wouldn’t you. But, I have lived with this weird organization pulling stunts like this with me for a good portion of my life, so nothing really interests me about it any more. I really like your blog too, by the way. :)

            • +1 back at you Marty.

          • Monte, that made me cry, it was that good. I am happy for you!

          • Grasshopper (Mark P)

            Agreed.

          • Judgment and judgmental are two etymologically related words which have very distinct meanings.

            First, a comment on whether the reactive mind has some type of judgment. I would say it does. It wrongly judges A=A=A (where A = anything, creating a reactively judged identity of different things). This is not analytical, rational judgment, but it could be argued to be a type of judgment.

            Being judgmental has many of the same features as reactive A=A=A judgment. One typical definition of judgmental is “A value judgment is a judgment of the rightness or wrongness of something, or of the usefulness of something, based on a personal view…” Judgmental has to do with opinions typical based on some moral code or value system.

            A judgmental Khomeini issued a judgment (fatwa) of death on author Rushdie, based in his opinion (and that of others) on the values of Islam. Judgmental inquisitors applied their opinions of Christian values to commit a European holocaust on women (“witches”), heretics, and non-believers. Judgmental Rwandan Hutus used their opinions on values to commit genocide on Tutsis. Judgmental Nazis used their opinions … you get it.

            The problem with judgment is that there is good judgment and bad judgment. People die from bad judgment every day. The problem with judgmentalism is that it shuts off observation, nullifies the granting of beingness to others, and paints the judgmental person into a corner of perceiving things from only one viewpoint based on opinions that shut out gathering of facts.

            Being open-minded is not being “reasonable” in the pejorative Scientology sense: It is being rational in Scientology analytical mind sense.

            Being judgmental is not the same as using judgment. Being judgmental is invalidating rational concerns by saying we won’t worry about blue asbestos on the Freewinds because LRH only mentioned fiberglass as a problem. Using _judgment_ in contrast would be to say, maybe LRH wasn’t aware (gasp!) of the blue asbestos data that science has now established, and so we had better check into it whether LRH mentioned it or not. A judgmental person will say things like he/she is too short, tall, fat, thin, old, young, religious, not religious enough, poor, wealthy, fast, slow, etc. Those “too this/that/the other” are judgmental judgement — a subset of judgments that fall in the irrational zone because the judger forces his or her values, opinions, and limited information onto the person or thing being judged.

            Judgment is a tool of social domination too. If the judgmental person has power over the judged person, that judgmental denial of beingness has an immediate contra-survival effect on the person being so judged.

            Who would you rather sit down and have a beer or a lemonade with on a lazy summer afternoon: A judgmental person, or a non-judgmental person? (Your answer may reflect what category you tend to fall into!)

            • That was a most excellent dissection FOTF2012. Thank you. I really enjoyed reading it and appreciate your attention and interest.

              You ask who I would rather sit down to have a beer or a lemonade with on a lazy summer afternoon: a judgmental person, or a non-judgmental person. That is a great question! A parallel question to this might be: Would you rather have an auditing session with a Class XII or would you rather play a game of fetch with a Golden Retriever? To either question, the answer depends on my level of awareness. I’ll explain…

              If indeed I am one hundred percent responsible for everything that I knowingly or unknowingly perceive, and I can accept this fact or at least pretend to accept it, then that would mean that the appearance of a judgmental person or a non-judgmental person in my field of perception has been caused by me. What that means to me is that onto the non-judgmental person I am projecting (giving) an attitude, a behavior of mine (how I consider myself) that the person, in their behavior within my field of perception, mirrors back to me. I see myself in that person. The mirror returns to me the image that I have projected onto it and I recognize myself in the reflection. This reflection causes me no stress.

              Onto the judgmental person I am also projecting an attitude and behavior of mine, but the projection, in this case, is originating from my unconscious mind (my reactive mind). This person’s attitude and behavior I find quite annoying but I realize that they are giving me an opportunity to view a lie about myself that I unkowingly carry. Through this person I am able to see a lie of me that I have mistakenly identified with and have been unconsciously holding as my own. I realize that if I attack this person, even the slightest bit, I will be reinforcing and perpetuating the lie I am viewing. I will be choosing to make the lie real. I don’t want to do that. So I don’t attack. Instead, I forgive. I acknowledge that whatever I blame this person for, whatever harm I think they caused, was never anything but my out of control imagination being projected onto them. I forgive us both for never having done anything wrong. In truth, there is only innocence and peace. Anything contrary to that is a lie, an hallucination, and never even existed. When I, as Theta, forgive in this way I deny the lie, deny the bank, and in the process clear away a bit more of the fog that interferes with my being able to see the whole truth of who, what and where I really am.

              With the above in mind, even if it is a bit uncomfortable, I would rather have a drink with the judgmental person as this person is going to give me an opportunity to let go of a meaningless, valueless, additive to self. But, if the above is not in mind, then I would rather have a drink with the non-judgmental person.

              • What a beautiful, theta, growth-oriented perspective, Monte.

                It brought this conjecture to mind: The dwindling spiral may lie in getting judgmental about judgmental people. The upward spiral would be to stay grounded and raise one’s own awareness of one’s own actions, considerations, projections, etc.

                Very cool — thank you for sharing. Resonates for me on many levels.

                • PS I’m referring to dwindling spiral here in the very limited sense of how to respond / not respond to judgmentalism.

                  LRH was great on visualizing gradients and scales. One that I love is conceiving of communication on a scale, with high rapport with effortless duplication at the top and communication particles becoming solid at the bottom — bullets, bombs, etc. That spectrum parallels what would happen to affinity, reality and the resulting understanding too. You don’t go to war with people you love and most humans find it hard to love those who are trying to harm them.

                  LRH’s scale even gives a solid basis for sayings like “make love, not war.”

                  For me, I think I would judge (pun intended) judgmentalism to be fairly low on the ARC scale. It lacks affinity (judgmentalism is typically negative). It lacks reality (judgmentalism essentially says “my reality is right, yours is wrong,” and that is at the core of refusing to grant beingness). And it lacks communication (judgmentalism fails to give or receive communication in an effective way). And hence understanding is impaired.

                  What I love about Monte’s insights is that we can approach judgmental people from an at-cause, pan-determined angle and by doing so learn and grow. That approach empowers us whereas shying away from judgmentalism puts us at effect of it.

                  I can now enjoy my coming work week better, given that there are a couple pretty judgmental people in the mix!

                  • Thank you very much for extending the message FOTF2012, It feels good!

                    I have a morning ritual that I have been indulging in for several years now. I awake early while it is still dark and my neighborhood has not yet awakened. It is quiet. In this quietness I am able to find and move to the stillness within (Theta) and commune with what I refer to as “my higher self.” Recently, while in this state of communion, something very interesting and surprising occurred. Suddenly, people, events, circumstances, incidents, etc. from all over my timetrack and in no particular order, that I had issued critical and condemning judgments against, begin to appear in my vicinity. One after another I forgave each and in so doing I simultaneously forgave myself. This process continued for several minutes and when it was over, I was in an incredible state of peace. I had collapsed a substantial amount of time that was being held in place by these judgments.

                    This blog of Marty’s and the generosity of all those commenting has given me an incredible opportunity to practice forgiveness. I am very grateful to everyone here for revealing to me the false me, the false terrified me that needs to condemn in order to survive as a false reality.

                    Forgiveness is gold, as Eric Bibb reveals in this video.

          • Thank you Monte. I feel the love and forgiveness. I needed that, and that advice, today!

          • Monte,
            I like how you disitnguish judgement from judging as an act of degrading another. Its like when LRH says in Tech Degrades about people getting this strang idea that you can never evaluate, referring to the difference between an auditor evaluating for the pc and evaluating a scene. Yea, its all about being able to differentiate. Nice post!

        • Martin, well said. These people are really going to need help. I myself shuttle emotionally between exasperation and flashes of compassion for the good, well meaning people I know who remain so blind they will not see what is right in front of them. I struggle with this continually as it is so easy to be exasperated, yet, beingness must be granted, from the heart, unequivocally and without strain to these people. High ARC is our power, our rudder and our strength.

      • No need to be sorry. We just have different interpretations. But that’s no surprise as we are not viewing the same thing i.e., we aren’t referring to the same reactive mind.

        I once believed that all that I had learned about the reactive mind as a student of Scn was all the story. Prior to my reading Dn I had never seen or heard anything about a reactive mind. Then, suddenly finding this enormity of data about it in Scn, I accepted that the subject was complete. And, in all my years of being a Scio, it never once occurred to me that there might be more to the story of the reactive mind or an earlier beginning. Indeed, if I would have ever expressed such a query in earnest, I could have and probably would have, been judged to be attacking LRH. However, being that I was thoroughly indoctrinated and in full acceptance of the Scn thought system, I never had to experience, even being tempted, to make such a gross mistake.

        I have not been a Scio since early 2010. Leaving such a rigid thought system after thirty plus years certainly has its pros as well as its cons. One of the major pros, though, was that of being free to look and question (anything) without fear of being punished. Excuse me, I meant to write “corrected.” That being said, at some point along my journey through time and space, I must have posed a “What if…?” with regards to the possibility of there being more to the story of the reactive mind. Because, in a very gradual way, I did discover (for myself), that there indeed, was a great deal more to add to the story as it was revealed to me in Dn and Scn. The “A=A=A” part is just the tip of the iceberg.

        Now, expressing what I have, is there an appropriate label that readily comes to mind that you would feel justified in assigning to me? :)

        • Yeah, I have actually – here’s a label I’d like to assign you – perceptive dude! Take that!

        • Grasshopper (Mark P)

          The problem with the written word is it can come across harsher than intended.
          I agree with your point, and especially with your observation regarding love and forgiveness vs condemnation, fear, and judgement.
          We have too many “Church Ladies” in Scientology.
          I guess my point was that people who elect to be judgemental are not doing it because of their bank, but because they choose to do it. They choose to be fearful and stop looking. And they choose to assert their rightness by making others less.
          I remember when I did the BC when I looked across Los Angeles ( I was driving to course) and felt such amazing love for everyone I saw. That feeling was augmented by OT III when I did that later. That love is what Scientology needs. Looking at the tech with the goal of love will provide the criteria for what to use and how to use it.

          • Thank you for your reply Mark. I appreciate your perspective and it has given me something to ponder. Something that I’m going to ponder out loud here in my reply to you. BTW, my pondering never goes where I think it’s going to go.

            A fact, the spoken or written word or any other symbol is not really the problem is it? Whatever the symbol is that we perceive is not the impetus of the emotional response we consciously or reactively choose to have. The impetus of our emotional response and/or response of action is due to our interpretation of the symbol. That noted, it would be prudent for me to closely examine my interpretations before I act or react on them. I think if a person can know when they are in the grips of an insane thought (and I would consider judging another to be more than or less than myself to be an insane thought) and effectively resist the temptation to act insanely, then that person could honestly say that they have stepped onto a rung of the ladder of enlightenment.

            Before I was enlightened I carried wood. After I was enlightened I carried wood. But…I now knew that I was carrying wood and to where I was carrying it to.

            The word ‘Love’ is a word that I did not hear spoken much among Scientologists. Nor did I hear or read LRH using it all that often. Instead of using the word love, which has so many interpretations and could be restimulative, the replacement word LRH used was ‘admiration.’ But, for me, even understanding the probable liability in using the word love, it has a great deal more power as a comm symbol for concepts like compassion, healing, warmth, empathy, gentleness, softness, nurturing and forgiveness than the word admiration. In my experience, people, in general, just don’t readily resonate to the four syllable word admiration like they do to the one syllable word love.

            I do absolutely agree with you Mark when you say that Love is what Scientology needs. It seems to me that at some point Scientology and many Scientologists became stoic (nonsympathetic, lacking in compassion, lacking in Love) and began to project that image both internally and externally. I know I sure did. I had a lot of love when I entered into Scientology and little by little it became encased an put out of the way. It has taken me a while (actually still working on it) to dig my love out of its hiding place and bring it back into use. And the more I use it the better I like it and the more at peace I am even if the circumstances around me don’t appear to support peace.

            The word ‘forgiveness’ is another word that I didn’t hear being often said among Scientologists. And when LRH uses it in his essay, What is Greatness, he refers to it as being censorious. Certainly, when ‘the Bank’, with usually much fanfare, uses forgiveness it is most definitely censorious (a tool of judgement). But, when Theta is using forgiveness it’s an entirely different matter. Forgiveness coming silently from Theta erases misperception and misinterpretation. In other words, it erases that which never even happened. After all, this whole MEST universe drama is nothing but an illusion so how could anything that happens in it be anything but illusory. Forgiveness from Theta takes time out of the illusion (reduces its longevity) while forgiveness coming from the Bank adds time to the illusion (increases it’s longevity). The MEST universe illusion (the Bank) will most definitely disappear. Through Theta’s Love and Forgiveness. all the time will be as-ised and only Love will remain. What is True never goes away and can’t be harmed. What is not true…never existed.

            Emily Dickinson wrote: “That love is all there is, is all we know of love.”

          • Mark, since we were speaking of Love and how Scientology needs more Love, I wanted to add this quote, that I just came across, by Osho where he speaks of Love. It is an interpretation of Love that I resonate with.

            “Nobody can teach you love. Love you have to find yourself, within your being, by raising your consciousness to higher levels. And when love comes, there is no question of responsibility. You do things because you enjoy doing them for the person you love. You are not obliging the person, you are not even wanting
            anything in return, not even gratitude. On the contrary, you are grateful
            that the person has allowed you to do something for him. It was your joy, sheer
            joy. Love knows nothing of responsibility. It does many things, it is very
            creative; it shares all that it has, but it is not a responsibility. Remember.
            Responsibility is an ugly word in comparison to love. Love is natural.
            Responsibility is created by the cunning priests, politicians who want to
            dominate you in the name of God, in the name of the nation, in the name of
            family, in the name of religion — any fiction will do. But they don’t talk
            about love. On the contrary, they are all against love, because love is unable
            to be controlled by them. A man of love acts out of his own heart, not according to any moral code. A man of love will not join the army because it is his responsibility to fight for his nation. A man of love will say there are no
            nations, and there is no question of any fight.” ~ Osho

      • Right on, Grasshoppa!
        Greta

      • Spot on Grasshopper. I was just about to say essentially the same thing. All those disconnecting from Marty are just ser-fac -ing which is the final attempt of those in the wrong to try to make Marty wrong. What happened to friendly communication? They have hidden agendas that’s what! Don’t lose sleep over it Marty, you are in the right :)

  14. Thanks Marty & Mosey. Thank you both very much.
    Cece

  15. Grasshopper (Mark P)

    This is a no-holds-barred post. I read it about an hour ago and let it percolate a bit.

    Labeling and judgment only makes sense if there is a benefit to doing it. We as beings look and observe and analyze situations and conditions all the time, and when we see similar situations happen, we can categorize them. These categories are labels, and the act of categorizing something could be called judgement.

    To me, the only benefit to this analysis process is to determine how to deal with it – make it better, keep it the same, whatever. In other words, to better conditions.

    As I write this, it occurs to me how the phenomena you are describing is so well covered in DMSMH, SOS, and Advanced Procedure & Axioms. It’s held-down 7s and ser-facs, born out of group-think and a dangerous environment.

    Makes me wonder what these people are reading when they read “The Basics”.

    Btw, “Re-education” is such a charged word. Reeducate them how? With what?

    • Eric S AKA WindWalker

      Mark

      Yes, the term “Re-education” leaves a sour taste in my mouth too.

      Generally not such a good thing when it is being done TO a being, but quite benign, and in fact quite survival, if being done BY the being. I believe I understand Marty’s use of the word (as in being done BY the being), but I feel that it was a bit of an unfortunate choice because of the potential for misunderstandings that can be generated.

      Personally I feel that when suppression is reduced in one’s environment, and the person is then encouraged to view the actual scene around them, they will naturally re-evaluate their postulates and data. To me, this is one of the main results of auditing. Encouraging the being to then broaden his data base is also potentially very therapeutic. This seems to be at least one of the purposes that Marty has for this blog.

      Eric S

      • Grasshopper (Mark P)

        Yes, I agree. We do need to reorient ourselves to what it is about Scn that appealed to us, and to the world at large.
        The term “re-education” is just too associated with Commie Re-education camps for me – and I get a picture of Strother Martin saying “What we have here is a failure to communicate.” I’m sure it’s just me.

    • I think Marty is specifically using the term “judgmental” and its second definition “having or displaying an excessively critical point of view” Miriam Webster online. Being judgmental implies applying labels as a criticisim of the person.

  16. It perhaps starts with “homo novus” vs. poor “homo sap,” and of course the term “wog.”

  17. Hi Marty,
    There does seem to be agreement between the subjects of psychiatry, psychology, Scientology and other systems that Suppressive persons, sociopaths, psychopaths, crazy people, whatever the term used actually do exist.
    In Scientology a suppressive person is defined technically by certain observed behavioral characteristics and e-meter phenomena. Some of these phenomena are: routinely hates others overtly of covertly, emphasizes and creates bad news, stops good news, attacks and seeks to stop helpful people, “helps” destructive people to destroy, may have distinctive e-meter reactions on the subject of “help”, etc.
    These are Tech phenomena and it is very useful to have and use this data in order to help not only the people affected by a psychopathic SP but also to help the SP himself. So the term is useful to accurately label on a phenomenon which does in fact exist.
    That said, as you point out, the problem comes when individuals use that label in non-technical ways which are not intended to help. Some policies even promote this behavior. For instance if one commits certain acts like interrupting auditing sessions more than once, failing to disconnect from someone declared to be an SP by the COS, and other acts one is “declared” to be an SP. This makes no sense. If that were true then theoretically doing a certain action once could magically cause one’s entire attitude towards the human race and one’s case to instantly change. This is absurd. So, in my opinion, there are real SPs which is a tech phenomenon. And then there are also “Adminstratively Declared SPs”. The latter label is used as a control mechanism by the Church as they play “SP dominoes” by declaring someone to be an SP for administrative reasons and then declaring all those brave souls who refuse to disconnect from their friends on someone else’s say-so. Soon the only ones left in the COS will be people who will respond to threats and have no personal integrity. Maybe that point has already been reached.
    The only thing I disagree with in the post is that I think that the comparison of Scientology labeling with psychiatry labeling is not quite accurate. When a shrink says that you are “crazy” it can be much worse than a “mild evaluation”. It can literally result in one being incarcerated, abused, and tortured without a trial. I know that you have witnessed this stuff and so have I. It is not mild stuff. It is intensely evil. There are many many buildings in this country full of people being drugged and abused. Psychiatry is so imbedded in the court system, education and government that suppressive psychiatrists and their supporters can get away with it. Not that Miscavige would not expand his gulag if he was so favored by the powers that be, but suppressive psychiatrists are and have been doing this for a long time and still are. If the only result of one of them saying that you are “crazy” was that you could not receive any more psychiatry and couldn’t talk to any mental patients, then “SP” and “crazy” might be labels of comparable magnitude. But not at this point in time.
    Still, both are labels. They are terms. When such are used as control mechanisms, to prevent people for looking for themselves, or to harm rather than heal, in both cases their use is an evil act……in other words a truly suppressive act.

    • Clearly you still have some de-programming to do. The asylums have been closed, albeit as a cost saving measure, those that still operate as you imply are the asylums for the criminally insane. Families cannot commit their relatives anymore, even if that person is mentally ill. As for the “evils”, the most barbaric of them are all now elective. Yes, in some of those wards, people are kept drugged; these are the people who are violent and would cause harm to other patients and/or themselves.
      Most facilities are fairly pleasant, provided you are cooperative and want help. If you do not want help, and are not demonstrably (at least two independent diagnoses) a danger to yourself or society, you are free to go. The “abusive” part of the system can only be accessed through court order, ie. being forced to take medication, being forced to go through a course of treatment. The system has come light years from where it once was, and where it was at the time LRH was writing about it.

      • Frankly sir or madam, you dont know what the hell your talking about.

        Your statements are not factual. Funding for asylums, crazy houses, is on a state by state basis. Some states fund these things fairly intensely and have fairly loose commitment laws. Other states have little funding for these places and make a non-voluntary committment illegal. Some states, if the police think your acting a little wierd, they can send you right off to a facility for “observation.”

        My sister lives in a southern state that does hot have a single full time state operated mental institution and technically they do not have non-voluntary commitment laws. However, after an episode with the police two years ago, they sent her to a private psychatric facility for “observation.” She was, against her will, heavily medicated. The pscychiatric “doctor” put her on TWO anti-depresents. When she started having bad reactions to these, the “doctor” put her on TWO depressants to counteract. So FOUR heavy phychiatric drugs, all against her will and while she was “under observation.”

        The courts where not involved. So, tell me my friend, how do you get a good “observation” about someones behavior or mental state when you alter it drastically with FOUR heavy psychiatric drugs? This was not ancient history.

        While your correct that its not as bad as it was 25 or 30 years ago, at this time, its not quite the warm and fuzzy friendly pleasant scene you seem to think.

        When she called me to help her, her speach was heavily impaired from the drugs they had her on, and she told me she couldnt walk without help. Now, yes, she did give the police a hard time and was having a screaming fit at them. She was not totally innoccent here, but i also dont think it was right for the state to what it did with her.

        Because she was already on medicade, this “fairly pleasant” facilty you boast of, was angling to get her committed so that they could collect on her benefits. Personally, i think thats what the drugging was about. The police report described her behavior as nuts, then they were further trying to make her nuts in “observation” by putting her FOUR drugs, so they could justify to whatever benefit granting board of medicaide further treatment, and they where also working to get her declared mentally non-competant (even though there was no serious crime attatched to the police action), so they could get around the voluntary committment laws of that state.

        This was all rolling along nicely until i got involved. I called the “fairly pleasant” facility. I asked why my sister was there. The rep gave me the story about her behavior with the police. “so she’s there for observation?” with smiling pleasant voice, “yes sir, thats right.” “so, your state has a 72 hour observation law, why she still there after 96 hours when she wants to leave now?” “well sir, the doctors have diagnosed her with BLAH BLAH BLAH syndrome, they wont authorize her release.” “i see, and though she did not consent to pscychatric medication or treatment, i understand she is heavily medicated” “I cant speak about that sir.” “fine, as her next of kin, i am telling you to release her, unless she concents otherwise. If not, you will explain the actions of your facility and its medical staff to my attorney, fair enouph?” “oh sir, thats really not necessary.” “i believe it is” “sir, i will speak to the director, can you please call me back in two hours?” “oh, sure, i can give your two hours.” two hours later: “oh, hello sir, thanks for calling back. i have good news, the medical director said that we can release your sister if you will pick her up and sign a waiver.” “oh, thank you, i’ll bee there in the morning, first thing.”

        While i take marty’s point that many areas of the mental field have progressed in the years since diantetics and scientology first entered the scene in the 1950’s, this is mainly in the psychoanalytical areas, not in as much in psychiatry. Now that the mental health field is heading towards a national socialist model with Obamacare, we may well see a return to large scale government run mental facilities (the states cant print money, the feds can), and i dont think this is a good thing.

        Any system that allows people to be rounded up by the police (or family member) and imprisoned against their will (especially when no serious crime has been committed) and, drugged against their will with major pscyhoactive drugs (some of which can have lasting and permenant effects) and threatened with further “treatment” against their will (even if some think such places are “fairly pleasant”) is a very great danger to our health and our liberty.

        • Nice post Moonshot. I’ve seen what you say is true. Which southern state was that where your sister had her experience?

      • Not sure where you get your information. Just regarding schools, a child can be taken from their parents and locked up for 72 hours without due process and forcibly drugged. This occurs if the parent or parents refuse to accept the label of the teacher, school counselor or psychologist. Not sure what planet you are referring to.

        • Bob, what state can a student be taken from school. locked up, and forecebly drugged, and under what conditions exactly? I don’t know of this law in California and I’ve had classes which invlove the educational rights of schools and teachers. I’d sure never saw it in the educational code, but I haven’t read that whole thing by any means.

      • Lowjo,
        You should check out what Moonshot has to say for a graphic contemporary example of the the current scene. Your data is incorrect. In fact people are being warehoused and abused in institutions all over the country. Suppressive psychiatrists are also “diagnosing” and “treating” the elderly in nursing homes with heavy “anti-depressants” and “anti-psychotic” drugs on a WIDESPREAD basis and then billing Medicare and Medicaid for drugs and “treatments”. It is an TERRIBLE scene. It is actually criminal. If your grandma ever has to go to a nursing home or convalescent home I advise you to keep a close watch on her and monitor her care very carefully if you love her.

    • Marty will forgive me if I repost this and the accompanying definitions ~~
      DEFINITIONS OF SUPPRESSIVE PERSON ~~ Part 1

      The declare of “Suppressive Person” has been nothing but a “TOOL” ~~ a political tool to label a disaffected person or a whistle blower so as to separate connection between 2 people so that the wisened up person is unable to reveal to the dupe what is really going on.
      It is meaningless as a label, but it does keep a certain amount of Kool-aid drinkers toeing the line.
      A huge number of people watched the Alexander Jentzsch enforced disconnection from me and saw to what lengths the “Church” would go to separate a mother and son…even in death, denying a last look before cremation. I received 1000 Emails a day, many still in good *standing* risking their so called *ELIGIBILITY* to become more enlightened ! :mrgreen:
      These are definitions of the so called “Suppressive Person” SP.
      Let’s Continue.

      GOOD SP Good SPs keep it all “under the radar”. They are not doing the A to E steps, but they are not speaking out either. If they post on the Boards, they do it anonymously. Overall, they do not make waves, do not talk to the media, and are nice and sweet. No combativeness on the Church, they do not ask for refunds even of unused pre-paid “donations” and even though they are wise to the IAS scam, the library scam, and the Super Power scam, they want to just let go.
      UPDATE: These “GOOD SPS” are now fired up to join the Babbit Law suit, so they may not be that GOOD after all.

      BAD SP These are troublemakers ! They post on the boards and blogs overtly using their own names….They talk to media. They reveal the abuses and atrocities. They influence others. They visit with Marty and Mosey. They get deluged with Emails from those “on the fence’ and “under the radar” and tell them the “Church” has gone rogue. They are a continuous headache for the “good repute” of Scientology Inc. They no longer believe lying for the “Church” is “The Greatest Good”.

      PROVISIONAL SPS This is a relatively new invention of David Miscavige and Radical Scientology Inc. It means You are already a Suppressive person, but it will not be broadcast if you toe the line and abide by the behavior modification. And if you dare not be “good” voila ! the declaration of your Suppressive Person status will become more widespread. So you see, it is not a matter of whether you are, or not a suppressive person, it is merely a political tool, and the degree of broadcast of your SP declare is used as a threat to keep you in line !

      NEGOTIABLE SP This is a marketable commodity based on money. Does money $$$$ make you a Suppressive person or a non-suppressive person ? For Years and Years at “Int events” the flock were told how bad, evil, predatory the IRS was. The IRS was the devil incarnate. No one screamed the “Church” had sunk to depths of SPness as the IRS !
      So how did the IRS flip from being a Deep SP to a good *FRIENDLY* agency ?

      $$$$$$$$ Baby, $$$$$$ Show me the money !!!
      501C3 Tax exemption makes a deep SP enemy Government Agency NO LONGER an SP. Overnight. Just like that !

      Does Money $$$$$ make you SP or not SP ????

      a LARGE BIG BIG DONATION CAN UN-SP you in a New York Minute ! Giving a bunch of loot to the coffers means you were :::ahem:::not SP after all ! :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

      ~~~ To be continued on Part 2

      • One of these (provisional SP) can be further broken down
        to “Provisional SP declare en masse”. Case in point (as Dan
        S. says so eloquently) in 2004 about 20 Gold staff were
        declared provisional SPs in one fell swoop and off-loaded
        from the PAC RPF. Of course trying to get the definition
        of “provisional SP declare” was not possible as DM does
        not believe in word clearing.

      • Thank you Karen, I liked your posting. If you don´t mind I will add one to the list. In a small Org there was a dedicated staff and she received an e mail from a person named Debbie Cook. This staff member didn´t really know who was Debbie and so went to the Org to tell the MAA that she had received an e mail from this person and wanted to know who she was. Rather than answer her question the staff MAA questioned how much she had read of the e-mail and so on….shortly later she was declared SP and routed out. This, you may say, is an INSTANT SP…. pitty though to see how far things have gone.

      • Brilliant Karen#1, and funny :–). I recently received my declare “notice” apparently from 10 months ago via a recent email fwd’d by another who was slandering me and he didn’t know she was out. I’d love to have a name for this one.

  18. I would heartily agree with your statement re decompresssion and reeducation. Hubbard provided some significant insights re life and the mind- whether they were original to him or the result of his coordination of data is immaterial. Unless one falls prey to becoming subject to someone else’s thoughts instead of maintaining their own identity. I truly believe the majority of people who became involved on a long-term basis would have walked out the door on day one if they knew what lied ahead in terms of mind control and alteration of beingness. The good that was available from Scn was overwhelmed by the organizational madhouse that was created to protect Hubbard, as much as the tech he was involved with. Hubbard did not die a happy man by all stories I have been able to find and from some intimate sources. And yet people are stressed out on a daily basis to achieve a spiritual state as promised by this person. It was an experiment gone very wrong in my opinion and it is up to the individual to separate the wheat from the chaff and to also realize there are many wheat fields out there in spite of enforcement of ideas to the contrary. It is a long road and Hubbard stated that once on the road to truth you can’t step off without consequence and perhaps this is simply the next leg on the road. Best to all.

    • As you said: “Hubbard did not die a happy man by all stories I have been able to find and from some intimate sources.”
      Yes, I agree that this is probably true. I think that Ron himself was actually PTS to a suppressive person a.k.a a sociopath named…….guess who. Yup.
      I think it is probable that this little creep got control of Ron’s comm lines in his later years and then fed him lots of very upsetting news about how bad it all was over a period of time. Many people have been PTS to this A-hole, but fewer every day thanks to Marty and his blog.

  19. Marty,
    I applaud you for encouraging people to open their minds.

    The main problem with Scientology is that it seems to turn people closed-minded if it isn’t applied judiciously. A subject that should help people grow ends up stunting their growth: they may become trapped mentally in an ever-shrinking little box.

    It seems like some of the people who have so noisily disconnected from you are still thinking inside that little box, where they know best, they have it all right, LRH is never wrong, and nobody else has anything worthwhile to communicate.

  20. 97.5 of us had a GREAT time with their auditing. Mainly because it was STEEPED in recognition of the rightness of the being.

    Nearly 100% of us had a very rough time with the group. Even those still with the corporate church have had a rough time. You never hear anyone completing a two and a half year stint in a Class IV org saying “That was so cool!!! Where do I sign up again?!?!”

    And that’s mainly because exec mentality was not focused on our value, it was focused on the idea that we were likely defiantly negative,wholly shiftless, robotic people needing penalties for non compliance that are too gruesome to confront. Administratively we were trained to believe that there was an 18 to 1 chance that the person you were dealing with was a degraded being who was just continuously messing things up.

    The optimism and clarity with which the majority of the tech was written up and the jaded cynicism with which much of the PLs are written are in stark contrast. Both technically and administratively we get what we postulate. The tech terminal postulates a bright shiny being and gets them by the score. The administrator makes true his imaginary world that it’s a cruel and unjust place we live in that needs to be unreasonably fought back against and sees himself surrounded by loafers and defiantly negatively people who need to be threatened to get into production.

    The Auditors’ Code! What a precious document! Wonderfully demonstrated in the training film of the same name. With that and some basic auditor training, a being like that just walks through life, resolving things.

    Nope, the labeling tools of the executive and ethics terminals don’t work in the most expert hands. The number of fully trained OEC FEBC grads, even those who did the KTL and LOC and the PRD can be counted on the edge of a dull hatchet blade. There’s very few standing. Ask any of them (in session) if they’re proud of the way they have managed their lives and the lives of others and watch the TA rise!

    Ask Trey Lotz and the Warrens and Marty and the many others who have had the Auditors Code as their senior stable data how their lives are going and I think you’ll see some FNs.

    Somewhere someplace, Ron lectured that you only have organization to the degree that one person fails to take responsibility for an individual. The corollary of that would seem to be, if you can take full responsibility for the person in front of you, you don’t need no organization. (I want some Pink Floyd in the background here: Leave Our Kids Alone!)

    There’s been a few places where tech people mainly ran their organizations and they moved along on wins, purposes and encouragement. The high prices for even beginning services that Int Management began to demand they charge put most of them in a no-win corner back in the late 70’s and early 80’s. Most of those got rounded up and shot at the mission holders’ convention in ’82. Since then the only way a group could win is if they were a LONG ways away from an SO installation and likely not to be interfered with. I digress.

    I know auditing could flourish again without all that confronting and shattering going on. There’s been enough shattering in Scientology. It’s time to get some wins in session.

    • Dan, this is one of the best posts ever!!!

      It’s hard to get an F/N out of me this early in the morning, but reading your post accomplished that. And it is a wide one too.

      This is a MUST READ!

      • Hello there Publius Maximus Fantasticus. I don’t know if we know each other, but here is my encouragement to you that might widen that F/N further and give it some persistence: Get or give some auditing. I am confident that many of the auditors in the Independent field are doing a fine job of it and probably charging a lot less money.

        I got a little bit of field auditing recently and had a lot of fun with it. The easy laughter that comes when you are in session with a friend… it’s just one of the easiest and best ways to interact with another person.

        Not so long ago I thought to myself that I would just wash my hands of this whole subject. But really, that’s a reaction to the losses. Auditing itself is the precious “baby” of Scientology. Much of the rest of it is the dirty bathwater that really should be thrown out. But that baby! Don’t throw it out!

        Even though it would be a gas to have some auditor rehab all those releases, there’s much of that that can be done by just sitting down and reviewing them yourself.

        You can find a reference that will allow you to do just about anything you want with your own mind and others that will make you terrified of ever thinking a thought without an auditor standing by. I like Ron’s references that granted us the beingness that we could do much of this by ourselves. No auditor available? Grab one of the dozens of techniques offered in the various basic books about how to run a pleasure moment of being audited and bask in your own sunshine for a few minutes!

        I’m a bit of a hypocrite. I have not audited anyone at all for about 8 years. But I am de-hyprocating myself, bit by bit: like I said I got some auditing recently and that, for me, is the first step to being an auditor again.

        Hope to hear from you more and hear that you are winning.

    • So true Dan. In fact there was a time “way back when” when virtually no one ran an org or mission who was not already a highly classed auditor. And not surprisingly orgs did deliver much better service back then. …..Sure helps to understand one’s product and be an expert in how to produce that product keep in “practice” if one is going to run a group of people whose purpose it is to do so.
      Is it just me or is this terribly obvious? :-)

      • Yes it is obvious. I am looking forward to auditing again. Both as a pc and as an auditor. Let’s postulate this: Welcome to the Golden Age of Scientology. It’s the new era of self determined practice of Scientology.

    • one of those who see

      Great comment Dan!!

    • Way to go Dan! Excellent Post. Yup that is the way it is.
      Thanks for theta. Love you Dan.
      Kat Brady

    • I was thinking along the same lines as you Dan. The Auditor’s Code! “I promise not to evaluate . . ., I promise not to invalidate . . ., I promise to grant beingness . . . .” That’s why auditing, when the Code is followed, is so safe and freeing. Yet outside session, it so often goes out the window! I’ve even had that run on me, the “I’m not auditing you, so I don’t have to follow that” kind of thing.

  21. Quite a post Marty, except for the fact that the psychlos have never had a real clue, and historically have done far more harm than good, and still do. They have no L1C’s, much less Dianetic’s erasure of engrams. They promote harmful solutions in fact, mostly involving drugs, and still ECT. As to the judgmental parts, from the old Church, I see most Indies moving away from this, as you yourself are, and we are free to be, with free judgement.

    • As someone who has seen ECT, and worked with many people with major depressive illnesses that have been considered untreatable, I personally consider ECT a valuable treatment. So much so that if a family member of mine was going through what Ive seen treatment-resistant depressives go through, I would gladly help them receive ECT.

      Sorry, don’t want to derail Martys thread with unrelated points, but I honestly, genuinely believe that. I know that’s more than likely a minority position on here, and that US mental health treatment differs markedly from my own countries mental health treatment. I take nothing away from your context Ron – Im sure you’ve seen things that make you believe it is barbaric. But I have watched ECT save lives.

      • Hi B,
        I met a couple who had resorted to modern ECT as a means of helping bring the wife back from what they both described as her as not even being present in/with her body (as in a catatonic state). She still has no recall where she was.

        The treatment worked and they are both grateful.

        Just another example from my experience tending to confirm what you describe.

    • psychlos = label. You should talk to some sometime.

  22. “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.”

    Matthew 7:1-5 ESV

  23. From my understanding an SP (suppressive person) is one who does not want the betterment of a fellow human being (or potentially a group of people or all of humankind in extreme cases) and actively seeks to suppress any attempt at creating such betterment. This goes far beyond merely having a difference of opinion or having a different reality of an idea or situation. An SP, for whatever aberrated reasoning, has malicious intent towards others. A PTS (potential trouble source), again from my understanding, is someone under the influence of an SP.

    History is rife with examples of oppression through use of and misuse of labels. We have seen people being disposed of simply by being labeled in some official manner as a “heretic”, “witch”, “insane”, “communist” and “terrorist” irregardless of truth. Now certainly Dianetics & Scientology has had it’s fair share of detractors and outright enemies long before David Miscavige came along and there were those who were deemed rightfully so SPs and PTSs. But I know for a fact that certain members of the Church of Scientology have taken liberties with their declarations of SPs and PTSs, far beyond the definition and policy set forth by LRH. It has been used as a tool of power and destruction and this is in part why the Church of Scientology today is regarded by many as being the very evil that LRH was attempting to save people from in the first place.

  24. Eric S AKA WindWalker

    Judgmentalism vs. judgement.

    My take on the words themselves…

    Obviously judgement is an invaluable tool for survival. Without judgement one cannot proceed effectively toward their goals of survival, and spiritual advancement. It is the ability to recognize similarities, differences, and identities. It is a demonstration of sanity.

    “Judgmental” however, carries the concept of “prejudiced”, and the idea that one is over zealous with passing judgements on others. Pigeon-holing others into categories. It often contains the belief, by those doing the judging, that they are superior in some manner.

    Unfortunately being judgmental does seem to be rampant in earth societies. I would be so bold as to suggest that the more judgmental one is, the less security they have in their own beingness and ability. It is demonstrably a form of suppression, designed to lessen the value of others in order to raise one’s own self esteem.
    ——-
    But who would ever do that? Who would ever attempt to put another down by labeling him/her an SP, PTS, Wog, ethics bait, DB, ser- facey, low toned, 1.1, black five, out-pointy, squirrel, casey, “reasonable”, “other fish to fry”, A=A=A, Dev-T, aberree, Kool-ade drinker, OSA Bot, Troll, etc., etc., etc.?

    Well… actually… you see…. ummm… ouch…

    It seems it would be more beneficial to be “inclusive” in one’s attitude toward others, rather than “exclusive”. Those that you have not included into your dynamics actually end up as “opposed” to your dynamics.

    One of my main values for Scientology wisdoms and technologies is that they are tools that can be used to bring this whole sorry mess that we call Earth Society closer to an ideal for us all.

    But we are all going to have to work together to pull it off… Not just us here, or a select few…. EVERYONE. And it is inconceivable to me ( or even desired) that we will ever ALL follow this or that specific ideology. But with sufficient “Granting of Beingness”, it CAN be done, and frankly I think this is the only way it will ever be done.

    OK… it is a big dream… but what is the point of Scientology if we are not at least trying?

    Eric S

  25. Gerhard Waterkamp

    Marty, I love how you think against the grain. When I was on the PTS/SP course I retained from the concepts I read together with other items these 2 important things. One, be very careful to judge, labeling can be used to start witch hunts so be very, very careful with this label business. Secondly the term “Scientology” was positioned as an activity or group that actually helps others and the criteria of a destructive person was that she objects against helping people, making them well and making them stronger. Objecting to “Scientology” therefore was only than in indicator for a destructive person if it equates in the mind of that person an objection against helping people, making them better and making them stronger. If somebody was misinformed, had actual bad experiences and was therefore critical of Scientology did not make him an SP at all. Same thing if whatever instantiation of “Scientology” was not helping people or making them stronger but was detrimental to their wellbeing, anybody who was not trying to handle it, which includes constructive criticism, was off the mark.
    So I disagree wholeheartedly that the PTS SP course made or was intended to make me a judgmental asshole. 
    The problem is some people never make it up to a level of understanding but get stuck at the level of words or symbols. “Oh, there is a Scientology sign at that building so criticizing the group living within this building makes you an SP” There is no understanding of what the definitions are in the PTS/SP course, there is no inspection of the actual activities of these people in this building (crushing people and pillaging their bank accounts). It is just plain stupidity what you are up against.
    If you put a really stupid person on the PTS/SP course you can get really stupid results. The ones you describe so colorful in you essay.
    What the heck, it makes perfect sense to be careful around a person who likes to put others down loves it when they are sick and ill and attacks anybody who really tries to help. That is what I took from the PTS/SP course.
    Robots and people with the mental capacity of hamsters in heat never reach a level of conceptual understanding by themselves. Course Supervisors and cramming officers need to lend them a helping hand and guide them. I always thought and fought for that the best and most enlightened people of an organization need to be Course Supervisors. Reducing those roles to administrators of study tech was a mistake. Source can give the data but source was not there and spot the wisdom or stupidity a student gained from absorbing the materials. As a result plenty of stupid’s armed with two liner LRH quotes started to populate the ranks and wisdom vanished from the ranks giving place to a fascistic system of control.
    The teachings of Scientology are aimed of creating wisdom but that was left to chance and luck. That is why we have these stupid ignoramuses ruling the COS today.

    • Your sir are full of a whole lot if bullwhip. Be very careful to judge manly man? I’ll judge whatever I want whenever I want, frankly, anytime I want. That is what you are dealing with.

    • Grasshopper (Mark P)

      Well said. In my view, this can be boiled down to this: the problem with the church is Scientology is that they are not learning and using Scientology.

      I can also say this: the purpose of Scientology is to help people. Therefore, all of Scientology should be read from that point of view. When studied and practiced with the intention to help and better conditions (i.e. with Love), Scientology becomes very effective, and bad practice falls away.

      When studied and practiced with a view to dominate people and justify your own existence, we get RPFs that last for years, kids being neglected or aborted, verbal declares, insane diversions of resources into empty buildings and anti-“other” tech centers (like the anti-psych “museum”), and closeted homosexuals calling each other Big Beings.

      Miscavige has proved that Scientology does not work when practiced with Hate. Therefore the answer is clear: practice it with Love.

  26. Great post in many ways, Marty !

    Years ago I realized this : when I stick a Scn label on someone (PTS, SP, low toned, out ethics, etc.) then my affinity to this person gets reduced. The labeling seems to give me some ideas about handling (separation, let him do conditions, court of ethics, auditing at his own expense, whatever). But all too often these are not practical or realistic.

    However, this labeling process turned me into a cold bureaucrat. I “administered” my contacts instead of being in comm, in affinity and experiencing them.

    After I had stopped labeling I realized that some good old comm, fresh breeze of affinity, plain reason or responsibility could often handle the former “labelees” successfully and without much effort.

    • That’s a great point you make— that labeling a person reduces your affinity for them. Plus, it turns you into a “cold bureaucrat” .since now you are “administering” rather than communicating. I enjoyed your post.

      • Thanks for your ack, Leda2.

        Yes, LRH had stated it : there is nothing that can replace BEING THERE and COMMUNICATING :-)

  27. Hi Marty,
    my opinion is that you may appear to be supporting psychiatry. If you are, then you are definitely anti Scientology (BTW I have been declared, in effect, since 1986, by, no other, than Jane Kember who fired me from the Jhb. org because “my case was very bad”) in the eyes of “the church”. My experience has been that the subject of scientology has been attacked and suppressed by the persons who hold the balance of power within the field of psychiatry simply because scientology preaches the FACT that man is a spiritual being and can and must be superior to MEST. This contravenes the religion of science which has man believing that he is simply a body and nothing else. To oppose that idea (which is the basis of all scientology tenets) is, to psychiatry, the equivelant of the idea that the earth was the centre of the universe or that blood did not circulate through the heart. Therefore they attack and try to suppress that which might prove them to be wrong (and they wield a LOT of power).

    You are bumping up against the ignorant few whom everybody has been educated to believe; and they WILL NOT BE PROVED WRONG by some “insignificant writer” who tries to say otherwise. Ignore them please, there are sufficient members on this blog who KNOW the truth and will not be subverted.

  28. There’s a reason the Auditor’s Code prohibits evaluating for the pc. It’s more than just a nice idea. The judgmental attitude spoken of here is a direct violation of that, albeit out of session, and the effects created are the same.

    • About that, I recently rehabilitated a win from my auditor training and practice: if your tr 0 is really in, you don’t even evaluate MENTALLY for the person in front of you. Once again, ritual is not synonym to spiritual.

  29. The whole internet comm and social media thing is pretty interesting. It’s an entirely new method of social interaction. Say 30, or even 10 years ago do you think we would have been able wrap out heads around the idea of a completely open, free comm line where we could communicate our thoughts at any time to anyone? I think one next step in blogging and these “bulletin board” types of sites, and of course stuff like Facebook will be integration of some sort of speech recognition. I sometimes wish I could just say what I want to “write”. Or maybe audio/video will become more part of the process.

    We should all just be aware that it is a new frontier where ideas and things can get thrown around pretty fast and hard and I think it can contribute to ARC breaks (or make them more evident). What we are dealing with here is a group of people who have things in common like speaking openly and freely of deep-seated ideas and beliefs and saying what they believe is true despite others objections.

    Where I am at right now has been simplified by a new, firm policy (which is subject to change at any time), which is something like: “I am for for and against against.”. I feel I prefer to give attention and energy to groups that are for rather than against. Thats why I just never got into, supported or felt ok about Anonymous and the other “against” groups and people out there (Except the Church- they are possibly the biggest “against” group involved).

    Actually, as I write this I somewhat regret any “against” I flowed towards the Church. I still think the Church, as led by Miscavige is WAY off the rails, but I suspect being against it was an error. I probably would have better spent that time moving forward. Well, maybe a little against is ok. But there should be some sort of limit- like a three second rule. If you are against for more than three days your face will get stuck like that and you’ll look like the guys on ESMB- complaining about Scientology the rest of your life with a scowl on your face.

    So I think everyone, everyone should just fuck off, get over yourselves, let others believe and say what they want to say, allow people to form groups and communicate and do what they want, unless of course they are against- then please kill them because I am against that.

    The other blog is not against. Well, there are a few slight hints of residual against, but overall the content is very positive and theta and has a forward potential to it. I don’t know whats going on over there, but the cool kids seem to be gathering.

    • Chris — I’m lost — or perhaps not invited but what “other” blog are you talking about where the cool kids are.

      I’m gobsmacked (british for astonished) cause I’ve ALWAYS been one of the cool kids :)

      How did I get left behind … :)

      • Well, I read between the lines a little. Not sure if that what Marty is butt-hurt about. From my viewpoint there were some people, mainly long term Scientologists who had some disagreement with some statements of belief given on this blog (R). Some arguments occurred (A), and now Marty is sad because some are not talking to him (C) and now he is calling them names. Regrettably no technology exists to better this situation.

        • Interesting Chris. I never got the idea that Marty was sad. The fact that first he was called names by some of those who got this new blog going (should I repost what Steve Hall had to say about Marty?) seems to have been missed by you.

          It’s beginning to feel like kindergarten when someone throws sand in another kids face, the kid not liking it says – knock it off, the sand throwing kid starts screaming bloody murder, picks up his toys and leaves.

          Fine by me frankly.

          Why?

          Because I’ve never fully trusted those people who themselves are SO brand spanking clean that they can’t tolerate a bit of having a mirror held up to them. That they have forgotten just WHERE they left and why. How perhaps they were starting to seem a hell of a lot like THEM — over there. OH – I know – shoot me for saying THEM.

          I simply dare anyone to come after me. The church, the indies, the “new improved indies”, any former auditors with all my secrets or former friends to whom I shared secrets, being from outer space, WHATEVER …

          Doesn’t mean I won’t feel fear but I will never lack the courage to not get back up and smack the bejesus out of my attacker.

          THAT SAID — I have never to my knowledge ever attacked first.

          I wish you well with your new blog community Chris. Why didn’t you just say Lana and Steve had started a blog. Heck – you can’t have forgotten. You add comments to almost every article.

          (I found it thanks to my friend, google)

        • Well, well, all this seems so complex, and a lot of people seems to be adept of dichotomy, duality and some other “tity” stuff. No problem with me. Theta embraces everything… :-)

        • I don’t know if Marty is hurt by it or not.
          If you are a person who is so opposed to being “against” things, you sure want to drive home the point of Marty being “bad” somehow. If we apply the 30 second rule to you, I think time is up. Now how about you stating all the things you LIKE about Marty?
          I will tell you that Marty has done more to expose the abuse than any other person I know of, and the man audits. If you don’t like what he does, why don’t you stay over on the other site? (just joking) We need an ambassador trying to bring peace.

          • Ok, Tony I’m going to try this.
            Marty was a hardcore, get it done SO guy and say what you will about the SO or Miscavige there is still something I respect about the SO “back in the day”. It raised ones confront to have to produce impossible products and make things happen despite all.

            I think when he went public and did the Truth Rundown and all that followed, despite knowing what he might be in for demonstrated balls of some other material yet discovered much harder than steel. If you look at things like other whistleblowers, recent examples Julian Assange, Bradley Manning etc I think what Marty did was right up there. Maybe not as widely known, but definitely comparable in many ways.

            It also seems that we wear the same kind of shirts.

          • The question is, how can we maintain a cohesive blog environment while managing all this conflict generated by people in an enemy condition towards Marty? Someone actually used thumb symbols the start a revolution!

            1. Develop solid policies and administer all policies the same across the board, with no deviation. Marty does that already. He grants beingness and importance and value to all. I could improve on this one myself.

            2. Train blog guests on effective communication. I did put in my 2 cents on handling originations.

            3. Establish an “expected behavior” policy among all guests, write it and publish it in on the blog. (I think Marty attempted to do this when he encouraged granting beingness to others. He has asked me to chill a few times. It was not a problem. )

            4. Develop goal setting for all levels of blog guests. I think most of us want to KNOW. Whether it is an inconvenient truth or not.

            5. Do not micromanage other blog guests, stress freedom within established guidelines.

            6. Develop a policy for issue resolution; give blog guests the steps to follow to resolve any issue. That is usually, “take it back lines”.

            7.Provide blog guests with a wealth of information, develop resources so everyone has access to materials, terminals and Academies for training. Provide information on energy savings in the office and at home, such as moderating the hostiles .

            Provide assistance numbers for legal, counseling services, self help programs. The more information you provide the more blog guests can help themselves.

            While we cannot avoid conflict, we can try to minimize it and provide a cohesive blog environment.

            Looking at all of the above, it would seem these are already established! The blog, Marty, and us are not in a condition of liability, we are in normal or above. And Marty’s blog stats are out the roof!

            Hey! We are not downstats! We are not suppressives! It was a wrong indication! A wrong item!

            Whew!

      • It looks like Lana Mitchell and Steve Hall started thier own blog.
        I think that is a great idea. Different menus for different appetites.
        In the disclaimer she wrote that the moderators won’t allow any SP’s to bash LRH.
        So now I guess anyone who wants to critique LRH and openly disagree with some of the things he did and said are SP’s? I hope they don’t really believe that.
        I may sneak a peek over there once in awhile, but my tastes lean toward open communications in my own decompression process.

      • After fair gaming Marty and others here,, a few usual guests set up their own blog which is “theta only”. “No abuse”. “No L.R.H. bashing”.

        I think “L.R.H. bashing” is anyone using the tech or Scientology in a manner that sets others up for a loss. And doing so under the mask of “love for Hubbard and Scientology and mankind”.

        It is total orthodox Scientology, minus anything that might be an inconvenience. Such as all of the policies about splinter groups, group justice for those that do not tow the line, etc etc. And I suppose. putting people on the OT levels with no solo course checksheet done, no OT preps, no review if ordered by a C/S, or anything else that might get in the way a funky good time. At least, that was the practice over at my place when one of them came by.

        They have washed their hands of the sinners! And started a REAL HOLY BLOG where everything can be beautiful all day long. And the proper worship can begin . The lambs are flocking towards the righteous and the light! The congregation is building at a rapid rate!

        I think it is a fabulous idea! Pure seventh dynamic! Real religion! The new International Guardians of the Tech! Safe guarding and protecting Scientology and keeping it pure. As long as it’s a comfortable convenience.

        Someone has even posted a success story just being attached to the group!

    • If it were not for Marty’s blog there would not even be “the other blog”, Fact is the “Cool Kids” didn’t take the heat Marty did to safe point the Indy movement. I don’t care what the “Cool Kids” think. If they are as
      unthinking as the church or as blind to the truth or real intentions of others I am glad they are gone. Besides another Blog for the church to contend with will only take some of the heat off Marty, Let’s see how long they can stay in the kitchen.

    • Chris, with regard to your desire not to be “against” anything, as well as your criticisms of ESMB and Anonymous, I have two things to say.

      First, I will cite a quotation commonly attributed to Edmund Burke:
      “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” You don’t want to be “against” evil? You aren’t comfortable being “against” suppression and harassment? Fine, then evil triumphs. Suppression and harassment triumph.

      Secondly, as I’ve pointed out on more than one occasion on ESMB and WWP (sometimes to their consternation), as a practical matter one of the reasons you have the freedom to practice Independent Scientology without being harassed and Fair Gamed is because Anonymous, ESMBers, and the OCMBers an OG before them fought AGAINST Fair Game, AGAINST harassment, AGAINST disconnection.

      Yes, Marty and other Independent Scientologists have done more than their part. Yes, Marty has willfully and intentionally taken heat off of other Independent Scientologists, fought for differentiation in Germany, and exposed corporate Church of Scientology abuses. But alongside them, and indeed historically preceding them (e.g. the OG of ARS and the OCMBers), were Anonymous, ESMB, OCMB and the OG.

      To be brutally honest, if you can confront it, many OG, OCMBers, ESMBers and Anons were against Fair Game, harassment and disconnection before many of the current Independent Scientologists “woke up” and were against Fair Game, harassment and disconnection.

      To be even more brutally honest, if you can still confront it, many OG, OCMBers, ESMBers and Anons were against Fair Game, harassment and disconnection at a time when at least some of the current Independent Scientologists still SUPPORTED and/or justified Fair Game, harassment and disconnection.

      Some Independent Scientologists mistakenly believe that the fight against abuses by the corporate Church of Scientology began with them. At best, that is ignorance and perhaps the willing failure to confront. At worst, it is historical revisionism of the most self-serving sort.

      The delicious irony is this. As a practical matter, some of the biggest supporters of religious freedom for Independent Scientologists are (again to their sometimes surprise and consternation) members of OCMB, ESMB, Anonymous and old OG.

      Finally, I suggest that if you can’t confront honest criticism of the Tech and honest criticism of LRH, you might want to limit yourself to the “good news only” blog. In its way, it is just like the current COS — nothing but Wins! and happy news, and no need to confront reality.

  30. Another classic post Marty – they just keep on a-coming recently. Thanks.

  31. Roger From Switzerland Thought

    I intended to write a long post with all kind of experiences, thoughts and references, But this all has already been said and written on this blog in the last years.

    It’s a matter of real honesty and confronting of what one has been supporting in the last 30-40 years and one was accomplice of creating .

    If the exes would look at all instances they ever promised to an individual or a group or themselves ” Paradise on earth or homo novis ” and didn’t deliver.

    It’s very easy to critisize others and find their faults, but HONESTY would also be to critisize ownself and state what one did to be blinded for 30-40 years and take the full responsibility for it !

    ” Self reflection” is a virtue that is forbidden for any Scientologist of any colour as it is ” Self auditing” or “self listing” or one should keep the critical thoughts for session and so there is no road for honesty without going into session. Why ?

    If we would start a blog where all exes could write down their own actions of dishonesty towards themselves and their brethren in the last 30-50 years and where they would write down what their real motivations were for their actions – I bet it would propably be ” empty pages” as the actions were done by others but not self. The exes would propably only remember their good actions and up statistics and it was mostly DM or another SP or being the victim of historical circumstances !

    One can do the same again. Close own eyes and just audit others or oneself and teach others and feel good and not care about ” The evolution of Scientology as a subject” like Marty does. In 20-30 years we would have the same result again !

    As Einstein says:
    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    He also said:
    “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

    So let’s start of getting ” Honest” and stop judging other peole because only of their opinions, but not actions !

    In my life I mostly don’t care about what a person thinks or says. I only care about ând judge them (if it is needed) by their actions.

    Marty you Rock !

    LRH would be proud of you !

  32. Roger From Switzerland Thought

    My god ! Nevertheless it became a long post ! :)

  33. I can agree. Inside Scientology my labels had been: List 1 Rock Slammer (someone that has evil intentions towards Scientology), PTS of various types including 3 (crazy), SP with one SP declare form AOSH EU, DB (degraded being = someone that is very low level). And various other labels of that kind. Result: mostly only Scientology friends with similar labels. No Scientologist women. Low level jobs as staff member. BUT: some very able beings that I had as friend too. Those had been able to look. By the way, at the time I did quit with being a staff member and Scientologist I simply could leave. No one that wanted to get me back on lines. Just as a side comment: I did not as is my presence, postulates and intentions in the building and environment. They are still there and active.

  34. Let us do some differentiation and define some terms.
    Judgmental (Adjective)
    2. Having or displaying an excessively critical point of view.
    Judgment (Noun)
    1. The ability to make considered decisions or come to sensible conclusions.
    2. An opinion or conclusion.
    Reason (Verb)
    Think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic
    Reason (Noun)
    4. The capacity for logical, rational, and analytic thought; intelligence.
    5. Good judgment; sound sense.
    6. A normal mental state; sanity

    Reason: The correct estimation of effort. – LRH, Advanced Procedures and Axioms

    Exercising judgment is not the same as being judgmental. They are polar opposites.

    Judgment requires the application of reason to arrive at logical conclusions. That logical conclusion is one’s judgment on the matter.

    Being judgmental is having an excessively critical (derisive, derogatory) point of view, and is based upon illogic –usually false generalizations.

    Pop culture would have us believe that exercising judgment in evaluating those with whom we come in contact is being “judgmental”. We need not fall into that trap. The exact outpoint (illogic) is that the assumed identities are not identical or same class of thing.

    If one did not use judgment with respect to dealing with others, one would have a very rough time of it, much less being able to help anyone.

    Sound judgment is necessary to identify one’s own condition and that of others, if any improvement is to be had. Sanity is the ability to determine similarities, differences and identities (things that are identical). Such determinations and identifications are vital, particularly in therapy but also in social or business contexts.

    Public labeling of others is unnecessary and anti-social, except in the case of a sociopath.

    A sociopath is himself covertly anti-social and the label is necessary to warn others, as sociopaths are often very charismatic and ingratiating. One should then be able to use one’s own judgment as to further contact. One has a right to handle or disconnect from sociopaths as a matter of personal judgment and choice. No one has the right to override that personal choice, though they do have the right to deny one further service for maintaining such a connection where such connection will render further service ineffective and a waste of time and money. But to then publicly label one also as a sociopath for doing so is itself anti-social behavior.

    There is a difference between a sociopath (suppressive person) and someone who merely commits a suppressive act. And who hasn’t at some point? One can suffer duress either from the ongoing overt or covert oppression of a sociopath, or merely from an oppressive act by someone who is not a sociopath (see LRH Talk to Saint Hill Ethics Officers).

    A suppressive action does not an SP make. A suppressive person or sociopath is a specific set of rare behavioral case phenomenon very clearly defined in and out of Scientology. Familial disconnection from someone manifesting sociopathic behaviors is a cornerstone of Family Law as implemented through restraining orders against abusive parents, abusive spouses and stalkers. It should be used very judiciously with a high degree of professional judgment applied against established and validated past behaviors and against risks and benefits.

    Although your wife forbidding you from having a Super Bowl party of just your mates at the house may infuriate you, be oppressive to your social and business life, and cause you to knock over the mail box and dent your fender when you peeled out, it doesn’t make her a sociopath.

    This is where things went awry. Someone gets a 10 Aug or an S&D on their accident or illness and they name a WHO as the source of the suppressive act that precipitated it. Without any judgment being applied, some dumb-ass rotely offers to handle or disconnect. The person opts for the easy out – instead of confronting their responsibility for creating any antagonism in the first place – and plays victim. “Oh, yeah! She’s suppressive alright. I’m better off separating!” And then chooses to write a highly judgmental disconnection letter that really “makes the sparks fly” (i.e. exacerbates the situation and causes even greater mutual oppression and antagonism). Whereas, all would have been fine if whomever was helping the guy got him to admit that last year his mates got drunk, trampled the flower garden, threw the cat in the pool, puked on the rug and she was picking chips and Cheetos out of the furniture for weeks thereafter with no help or apologies.

    Those who are critical of “Scientology” are either using judgment or are being judgmental. The latter aren’t helping as they only exacerbate the situation and further entrenching opposing positions (perhaps their aim). The former should do is clinically with full adherence to the Data Series if they really expect to affect any reforms (for themselves or for others) as that provides for an acceptable form of criticism that, when properly executed, brings in Very Good Indicators and gets cooperation “all over the place.”

    I like the idea of handling Scientology with Scientology, not another earlier practice. The introduction of earlier practices into Scientology is what got us into this mess.

  35. DEFINITIONS OF SP
    YOU ARE *REQUIRED* TO LAUGH WITH ME.
    I want to be flippant ON THIS VERY SERIOUS SUBJECT and cover once again the TYPES of SP “Suppressive Person” because it is good for a laugh.
    We can all use a laugh now and again.

    In the never – never land of Scientology Inc the Word “SP” has taken on “a whole new meaning !”…..and whole new sub-divisions.
    This has slowly occurred over the last 2 decades. There is no textbook policy on any of this it is just “made up” by the Church as Time Marches on…..LOL.

    FLIP-FLOP SPs. These are Suppressive persons, who the Church want back in the Church. Highly Embarrassed that their Top echelon RTC (“Religious Technology Center”) staff members have fled to join Marty Rathbun and Mike Rinder, the Church sent out “Missions” to recover them. Namely Hansuili Stahli, Marion Pouw and Mike Sutter. Now, for anyone who renounces Marty and Mike ~~ BAM they can be UNDECLARED and in a matter of hours a Suppressive person can become an UN-SUPPRESSIVE PERSON. In other words, say bad bad things about high profile Indies, and you are Un-SPd just like that ! :skull: :skull: :skull:

    TAME SPs. These are people who have been declared SP, run to do their A to E steps and even give the CHURCH Money $$$$ to get back in good standing !

    They even do spying for OSA as “amends” They do not talk to Bitter Defrocked Apostates, or other SPs, they keep their nose clean and pray on bended knee that they will get their eligibility to become advanced Spiritual Beings ! They are willing to do their Objectives over and over even after OT VII at $60,000 a pop and even agree to re-do their Purifs ! The CS tells them they are a “by-passed case” as they became SP after clear and OT levels, so they sit and do their NED and Dianetics all over again, obediently ! :-c

    INT BASE SPs. As far back as the issue of the book “Blown for a Good” Marc Headley a few years ago revealed how most of Senior Management at INT Base had been declared SPs. They cannot leave the base. Most of them cannot leave SP hole, they are doing massive “Amends” programs for their wicked evil deeds against David Miscavige! Even though they are “SPs”, they may not communicate with other SPs. They also, in the never-nmever land of Scientology run management programs of the Church simultaenously with being SP !

    BOARDERLINE SPs A Boarderline SP is one who is REFUSING to give new money to the Church, refusing to buy more books, CDs, refusing to attend more INT events and IAS events. They sometimes furtively read the Internet and read all these stories and do not confess and sometimes furtively pick up the phone and call someone like me. This is Boarderline SP ! There is no green on white whatsoever on Boarderline SP but it used by MAAs. “You need to cease communication with so and so because they are Boarderline SP ” You need to unfriend so and so on Facebook because they are talking to those who have “gone over to the dark side” and they are now “Boaderline SP!” :P :P :P :P :P

    VERBAL SPs These SPs are so confidential that it is a secretly disclosed at the Ethics Office, sometimes, nothing is shown in writing. The Ethics officer” says “so and so is an SP,” “so and so is disaffected and written “Knowledge Reports against Management !” “So and so has been in touch with squirrels and apostates” “so and so is using Enemy Lines and Black propaganda because they are reading the internet” and refusing to return to Freewinds and Flag so now they are verbally declared “SP.” :cool: :cool: :cool:

    OVERNIGHT SP I made this up and it caught on fast when I posted it…. You can serve in the Church for decades, yes, with slave labor, almost no pay, no day off, and enduring all the punishments etc. the Church who apparently with all their advanced spiritual qualities, cannot detect that you are SP. SUDDENLY *OVERNIGHT* you are delcared for not toeing the party line…and the Church that happily took your donations for the previous 25-50 did not know that you were a Suppressive Person all along !!!!!!

    Here’s a toast to my fellow SPs ! It is the Natural EP of a long journey in the “Church” of Scientology !
    ✩ ♥ ❀ ♫ ☺ ❀. ♥ ♪ ☼ ♪ ☼ ♥♥ !!
    ☪ ✿♞☭☂ ✈☃ ♥♥
    ✩ ♥ ❀ ♫ ☺ ❀. ♥ ♪ ☼ ♪ ☼ !!

    • K#1: Thanks for the morning laugh.

      I think you missed one.

      SP IN WAITING: Everyone. It’s only a matter of time and the whim of Dear Leader and his RCS Minions. The fickle finger of fate may be directed your way by the Facebook Police or a spouse or workmate writing a KR. Pretty much anything will do, and the speed with which you are ultimately cast aside is a direct ratio of how much money you have.

    • Karen, here is perhaps another one you missed, THE PROTECTED SP: this is a scientologist, who no matter what crimes they commit, so long as they are not caught and prosectued by the police/state, no matter how many other scientologists they chew up and spit out, no matter how matter how many spouses they cheat on and abuse, no matter how many business associates they cheat and defraud, so long as they donate MASSIVE amounts of money to the church and all its scam projects then the have ultimate ethics protection.

      In fact, ANY scientologist who writes a KR against such a person or seeks to have any crimes against themselves addressed is in mortal danger of finding themselves in heavy ethics or being declared!

      And, if the church should deign to take up any of the matters brought up by lesser members of SCN, any ethics action taken against the PROTECTED SP will be remedied by an amends donation to the church itself. Yes, no need to bother with making any victums whole as the church is in fact ALL the dynamics incarnate.

      However, if at any time the PROTECTED SP should turn their tender mercies onto the church itself, as oppossed to its theta-slaves on its spiritual plantation or members of the general public, the church has carefully catalouged ALL the crimes of the PROTECTED SP and is on a hair trigger to move them to one of the other SP lables at any time.

      Of course, after many many years of covering and protecting such individuals, when eventually they do turn against the church and are declared, the church simply has no repsonsibility to the many many people the formerly PROTECTED SP has harmed only because the church protected them.

    • add to the list, the Supreme Leader’s euphemism for SP: ‘enturbulative source’

    • What?!!! You ORDER me to laugh? That is a violation of my self-determinism and I absolutely refuse! ……………………..
      Hahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahaha! :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
      Ooops. Couldn’t help it. :-) That was just hilarious!
      Karen, I think that thanks to your observations regarding Miscavige’s blatant out tech, the term “SP” now has a second definition. It now can mean “Special Person”.

    • Thank you Karen # 1 – yes less serious thus less massy and yet spot on.

    • Karen, God, I LOVE your 2 part post. ♥♥

      I’m a BAD SP according to your write up, by receiving my recent declare issued Jan 29, 2013. Since I’m not an indie, but do follow Tony Ortega’s Underground Bunker, he published it, as you know a few days ago. Hope OSA gets a ‘big kick’ out of the exposure. It made me very happy to finally receive it.

      I like Mike Rinder’s post too, A Waiting SP.
      As you say Marty:
      Decompression is important in any cult recovery effort.
      Re-education is probably even more important.

      Dee Findlay
      A former Scientologist, who is not against beliefs, only suppressive and insidious cults, as the CoS.

    • Here is one more SP type.

      MARTY & COMPANY TYPE SP:
      SP = Social Personality.

    • Funny, Karen. And accurate. :)

  36. Though I use Scientology basics all the time to improve conditions in my life and others’ lives, after 35 years “in”, I no longer consider myself a Scientologist, nor do I ever identify myself as such.

    Scientology follows a long tradition in Earth religion, which it dramatises frrequently: I am one of the righteous. I am saved and protected for eternity. You have broken our moral code by your actions and so you are the un-righteous and you will be condemned by all right thinking folks and shunned as a person we would ever want to communicate with unless you repent and see the error of your ways, and follow what our priesthood has decreed.

    So went Orthodox Jews, Muslims and Christians and so goes Scientologists. Any of you folk read the paranoid right wing ravings of some “Clears” and “OTs” on facebook? It’s every single day by the way. I like to think I handled a whole lot of my Grade 4 case, but there are many OTs out there who just revel in judgement against others. Must make them feel saved, free from dying, able to dominate others, loved and admired by “the group” …. and very, VERY “right.”

    Oh yeah, I remember the teenage MAA yelling at me “You’ve been labeled by the group, LABELED ….” and that my only way of getting UN – labeled was…… ah, you might have guesses it ….. give the CoS tens of thousands of more dollars to buy basic book collections. Yes, this young woman was one of those who are going to “get ethics in on the planet.” Pathetic. Now looking back I can’t believe I ever went into agreement that she had any standing in my life. BUT ….judgment folks, JUDGMENT …. “the group” judges who is righteous and who is not, and somehow group members have in their wierdly abberated way agreed to this set-up. Otto Roos and David Mayo audited L Ron Hubbard himself (and presumably did a great job and helped him tons or LRH, the developer of auditing tech, would have noticed any bad work they were doing) UNTIL Ron judged them as no longer among his righteous. Of course, as we know now, certain HCO Bs didn’t apply to LRH … or to Davey. And so it goes.

    • Yea , why is it so many Scientologist love to be super politically conservative and act as though it is the ONLY way to be . I think it boils down to LRH comments here and there which are taken out of context, like Republicans are a half a tone above Democrats, and I don’t even remember off hand if he was talking about a Repulic or Republicans anyway. I know people who use that as a way to be right because ‘Ron said’ this or that. Or how about ‘worker oriented’ as a phrase. This becomes an excuse not to pay workers well or to care about them and so on. I think there is much misduplication and or over-generalization. Moreover, it is just a symptom of letting someone else do your thinking. What started out as a group supposedly oppossed to the Nazis, is making its way to that side of the fence
      by its singular view.

  37. Dizzy Mizz Lizzy

    To me, a scientologist is a person who lives in accordance with, or who at least does his best to live in accordance with: The Creed of a Scientologist, The Auditor´s Code ( no evaluation, no devaluation of others ), The Code of Honour and finally “What is Greatness”. This means that anything Hubbard ever wrote or said, which is not in alignment with the above, cannot be true and should be cancelled.

    For these reasons it is obvious that one cannot remain a member of a church that shows no GREATNESS and which instead constantly evaluates and devaluates people and declares and harasses them for speaking their minds. According to Hubbard´s own teachings, these are people of personal integrity and should be respected as such – because, again according to Hubbard, and common sense I might add, when you lose the courage and willingness to say out loud what is true for you, you have lost EVERYTHING!

    How can you become more yourself, if you´re not allowed to think or express anything that does not align with church policy? How can you go free and KNOW, if you´re only allowed to know what the church dictates?

    Hubbard tells us: “Look, don´t listen.” How can you practice Scientology, when you get punished and declared for doing just that? I say it´s rather impossible to actually practice scientology within the church because of its vested interests. Your personal freedom and “saving the planet” are obviously not the primary goals of The Church of Scientology! The goal now is to extort as much money as possible out of every single gullible parishioner in order for the church to enrich itself! It appears that the best way to do that is to turn everything Hubbard said up side down, thereby creating so much confusion that no one knows what is right and what is wrong anymore. This strategy seems to work in that it makes people more susceptible and willing to listen to and obey orders and “Policies” that are non survival not only to themselves but also to the public and even to the church itself. – I mean, what good is all the money in the world and all the glitz and glamour churches in the world, if everybody hates and distrusts you, and nobody wants to be saved by you?

    The church and everybody in it is in a condition of CONFUSION, because church members are NOT allowed to KNOW how to KNOW! – That is the ultimate deception!

  38. I think your observations and conclusions are very pertinent to the situation that the Independent field is facing.
    We badly need a re-education and a re-evaluation of those “stable datum” that acted as “safe solutions” in a way or the other.
    We can say we had those safe solutions making the confronting for us and justifying actions that were just absurd.
    If one does not do that it becomes stagnant in his doing and in his understanding of the subject and will end in abandoning it.
    I must say I am having a ball re-educating myself and having the wish to fully understand the technology, the philosophy, its development and applications and most important the actual goal of its application.
    This should actually be the test of its validity.
    Improvement? No improvement.
    So labelling as you wrote can be very beneficial if, as you write:
    “provided they are used in a professional manner as initially intended upon creation. ”
    “The scales are invaluable when used by professionally trained Scientologists to help move people up those conditions. ”
    Yes definitely IF “used in a pro manner AS INITIALLY INTENDED” –
    Why were those labels created? To stigmatize or to provide a mean of better understanding and handling for improiving OUR lives and the ones of others?
    LRH intentions I think was always on “improving conditions”, on improving abilities – not labeling just for labeling.
    And is the “HELP MOVE PEOPLE UP” that is the actual test.
    Does it?
    Does it not?
    But as said we live in a very imperfect world that we a trying to understand and improve.
    Those imperfections need to be adressed and it needs to be done in a very intelligent way with a very sharp ability to see identities, similarities and differencies.
    Let’s re-educate, let’s help us and our friends for real this time.
    I think we have a real chance now to see how positive is this subject and we must for sure get out of the insular cult we have been indoctrinated so much in following and being.
    In essence I think is the “help” factor in play here. Is this labelling used to help or is being used to dominate and control the life of others.
    This is the difference, and I think and I have been a witness that your intentions and the intentions of this Blog have been constantly in the direction of helping us gain a better understanding even if has been challenging at times – but the challenge has always been in the direction of a better understanding.
    This is my take on this.

    • That’s a good take Claudio. Yes, the actual test is does it “HELP MOVE PEOPLE UP”? as you say. That is the only criteria in which the subject of Scientology should be judged. For that matter, the same criterion applies to people as well.

  39. “Scientologists are encouraged to take a three week course of study in order to achieve the purported professional ability and license to identify and handle an SP and the target of his effects, the PTS.”

    Clearly it was all for nothing and the proof to that is the current position DM is holding. I still hold my position that the tech is incomplete and is destined to struggle and never reach “world domination” so long as there is such thing as unhandled case. Not that I care about it to reach world domination at this point but in my opinion the unhandled case leaked into SC and screwed it up. It’s like a fucking amoeba war when you look at it from 10000 ft elevation. There are two kinds of people. Those who can be trusted and those who can’t. Inherently those who can’t be trusted are not going go up to you and say “hey you know I’m going to fuck you over right?”. No they are going to pretend to be trustworthy. They will do that until they get trust.
    Then they betray the trust. Not only do I think that it is important to be able to detect those you can’t trust but I think that not willing to be able to do that is a contra-survival act!

    Of course those who can’t be trusted and already penetrated the church used the “PTS/SP” courses (and such) as a license to run around and label anyone that was in their way SP/PTS or anything else that was useful to them thereby giving these lectures a bad name. The PTS/SP course and knowledge base is deadly accurate. Those who misapply it are to blame IMO and not the tech.

    • Forgot to mention that what I mean by unhandled case is of course those who can’t be trusted, not open to self betterment and are stuck in that condition. The irony I see here is that LRH knew all this stuff and SC still got screwed up by those stuck in the unhandled case band.

  40. Marty.I came across a sentence that the Dalai Lama said recently, that backs up 100% your last posts about viewpoints and evolution.
    Here is what he said:
    “We must conduct research and then accept the results. If they don’t stand up to experimentation, Buddha’s own words must be rejected”

    http://imgur.com/z72wW9g

    http://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/02/what-other-religion-says-this/

    I hope that the Indies can see the truth in this statement and not hang on “being right”
    If we want Scientology tech and salvation to be available on this planet for thousands of years to come, here is a good example of how the Buddhists achieved it.

  41. I have seldom read an author more judgmental than Marty Rathbun.

    • Name one, just so we know a little more about you.

    • you threw your water balloon, now keep running, dont look back, or the truth might catch up with you and shatter your glass snow-globe. Marty;s authorship does a lot of things, but denigrating, controlling and keeping other suppressed are not among them. Thanks for reminding me that those who support the status quo stand in quick sand and cannot look or hear. Truly a sad condition and one I hope you can find your way to break free from. It takes some courage and strength of will. I hope you find it and start to look.

    • TCT, Hope that missing punch did not swing around 360 and hit you
      In your own face.

    • Are you serious? Who are you? An OSA bot.

    • Otto,
      Given that you seem to have videos praising Narconon and ridiculous Scientology “psych-busting” videos on your Youtube page… it’s pretty obvious why you made this post.

      I wish you the best, friend, but I’m afraid you are still thinking inside a small, shrinking box.

  42. What a….. super great…… post !!!!

    Thanks Marty

  43. In the health care world, only physicians are allowed to diagnose because they have had the extensive training to do so. Nurses do not diagnose in medical terms but we certainly recognize certain diagnoses as we see them often and again have extensive training and experience. Applying a diagnoses requires judgment, training and experience. Being judgmental is a cutural phenomenon of the CoS and reflects the critical nature of those still inside. In my opinion, being overly critical of others is a symptom of insecurity about ones self and says more about the hyper critical person than the person being criticized. You can parse this in a thousand ways but what Marty has posted rings so true to me, and I can only reaffirm how good it is to be out of the stiffling environment of the CoS.

  44. LAUGHTER! “Monday morning shrinks”! My ribs hurt! What a blow down! It’s TRUUUUUUE!

    “The most zealous proponents of that idea resorted to ad hominem attacks on me for raising such issues, and ultimately disconnected from me.”

    Chapter one

    ” Duplicating in one space continually, is in itself identification.” L.R.H.

    IDENTIFICATION, 1. the inability to evaluate differences in
    time, location, form, composition, or importance. ( SOS, p. 153)
    2. identification is a monotone assignment of importance. (SOS,
    p. 153) 3. the lowest level of reasoning is complete inability to
    differentiate, which is to say, identification. (SOS, p.153) 4. Duplicating
    in one space continually, is in itself identification.
    (2ACC-25B, 5312CM17)

    There are people that can only duplicate themselves as copies of L. Ron Hubbard. Or apostles of L. Ron Hubbard. And Hubbard distanced HIMSELF from those people as fast as he could after being cooped up on that ship with them for a while. Note! He CHOSE NOT to live with the Sea Org after a very short time.

    That must have been a NIGHTMARE for him! Can you imagine everyone around you mocking up your valence? Wanting to be a form you? Identity theft. I think that is criminal.

    Christians do it too, try to act like what think Christ might act like. Buddhists do it too. Try to act like what they think Buddha was like.

    You are guilty as you are not a co conspirator in this identity theft. Therefore the copies have clustered elsewhere.

    Chapter 2

    You stood up and left the Church on your own accord. You were done with that process.

    They were kicked out of the Church against their will and under heavy protest. Escorted by security. They were NOT done with the process. They are still running the process. They want to have a win at it.

    Sometimes, the only way to have a win is to stop losing. Stop the bleeding.

    They haven’t gotten there yet, as they were fine to lose you and create more losses. A little blood letting.

    Lose to win, is a GPM. That is what Joe Shmoe is doing when he drops a quarter in the slot machine. Look at Las Vegas. Lose to Win is a common GPM. The Sea Organization really has it going on. People agree to lose everything before they come in. Really. Give it all up! Your cell phone will be taken if you happen to forget to drop that before you arrive. Lose it all, to join the game where everybody wins!

    They know flat out Hubbard never considered such a thing himself. He played to win. Flat out. “Maximum creation, minimum destruction” was his MOTTO. Verbatim.

    So, someone disconnected from you = someone decided they had to lose to win.

    Now, I agree some people who think like this create create create LOSSES and LOSSES and LOSSES for themselves and others. They have to lose to win! That is a purpose!

    They have spent their dime here. And it was spent to create losses. One of them operating at “maximum destruction, minimum creation”.
    “If I can’t start a civil war between the Freezoners and the Independents, I’ll get P.E. on T.O. and get that battle going, then I’ll start a civil war on Marty’s Blog.” He won no war. He was the only one here for war. The others here for the most part, are curious about creation, not destruction. Maximum creation, minimum destruction.

    I don’t think you should take it personally. You only recommended granting beingness to others. You are benevolent. And you play to win.

    It is only a matter time, before they will have to lose to win, again.

  45. Marty, I’ve been disappointed to see the disconnections to which you are referring. Such actions don’t make life any better, they just make it worse. So from an ethical standpoint, I think they don’t stand up as correct things to do. The C of S likes to point out that “other churches” practice disconnection. In fact disconnection or the threat of disconnection goes all the way back to the schoolyard and is even common among groups which aren’t religious. In most cases it is an effort to make someone wrong rather than to protect oneself against some potential harm. I hope that the severed comm lines will be restored with some personal and private comm.

  46. Of course, anyone who can see is able to observe that some people exhibit decidedly anti-social personalities. This should be based NOT on what others have said about them but by our own observations of their actions.

    HOWEVER, I would posit that the current situation which Marty mentioned about some formerly active posters on this blog disconnecting from him (and thereby by our “culture” have deemed him suppressive) is simply a question of being lazy.

    It’s far far easier to put someone in a box, complete with DO NOT OPEN stickers all over it than to actually sit down, learn the other side and intelligently communicate differences. Sometimes coming to the conclusion to simply agree to disagree.

    When you dismiss someone out of hand (without any more thought) in truth you have cut yourself off from possibly expanding your OWN viewpoint and perhaps learning at least something about the other viewpoint.

    Admittedly I tend to dismiss something out of hand that I deem too “conservative” or perhaps something that touches me too closely. However it’s a terrible habit and this particular article of Marty’s has caused me to step back and observe my own mind — which often does dismiss out of hand.

    So — I promise (OMG, can this be true) to read those “outrageous” :) emails from my republican friends and at least start to learn something. :)

    We should all be grateful that we somehow have arrived in our lives at this point – where we can freely discuss LRH and KSW without fear of landing on the RPF for years.

    Now taking it a step beyond that – why not decide that we are in this together – this life – and since we do at least speak the same language, endured the same hardships and now similar freedoms — meet and talk.

    Love,
    Christine

  47. Well put, Marty. Rather than try to talk some sense into a church member, save your breath because the continual hammering they are receiving day in and day out from church staff after their money and only their money is sure to wake them up sooner or later, probably around the time they wake up to the debt nightmare that repeated capitulation to IAS regges has created for them.
    Oh, by the way, did anyone notice that Jenna Miscavige Hill’s book debuted at #4 on the NYT bestseller list this week? I will bet Uncle Dave did. It is time that she was paid for her years of child labor and that appears to be happening now.

  48. Over my 43 years in Scientology, my view of “the Scientologist that was declared an SP” evolved over time: In years 1970 to 1975 I thought Scientologists declared SPs were probably real SPs, like Otto Roos (never knew anything about him, just heard stories). In 1978 I got declared myself for missing one of my justice hearings and concluded there were “political Sp’s” and there were “real SP’s” … In 2005 when I finished OT V at Flag, I concluded there were “real SPs” inside the Church and “they” were squirreling the technology and producing 1,000’s of “political SPs”.

    In 2009 (when I read the Truth Rundown in St Pete Times) I concluded there was one “real SP” running the Church and that all of LRH’s organizational checks and balances and fail-safe policies failed to keep a “real SP” sociopathic, Scientologist from becoming the dictator of the Church of Scientology.

    In 2012, I concluded that being a dedicated, educated Scientologist and NOT being declared SP was simply an embarrassment. Today, my view is still the same… if you are an educated Scientologist and have not gotten your goldenrod yet, well, you should be embarrassed….

    • Robert, I nominate this for quote of the day:

      “if you are an educated Scientologist and have not gotten your goldenrod yet, well, you should be embarrassed….”

      Sad, but true. Also funny as hell.

    • Gayle Smith aka TroubleShooter

      You hit the nail on the head for me Robert. “My god why hasn’t _________ left or been declared yet for sticking to their guns re tech and policy?” has been a qn I’ve mulled over since I made my decision. In some cases “embarrassed” is replaced by me with “ashamed”. As time has gone on my observation is that many weren’t cut out to be leaders and thus fall short of the tech posts they fill while others have bunkered down to dodge the bullets and do the best they can to keep delivering DESPITE the hostile and squirrel environment because they don’t believe they can survive outside of the org board environment or they don’t want to navigate the waters out here because of the “SPs”.

      But to the point Marty made about labels etc in his post – labelling is an effort to solve a problem as much as it’s a tool to put order in to confusion. There are certain tendencies I’ve observed in man that aren’t going to go away anytime soon if at all in this universe and that’s the tendency to agree with someone they believe is a leader. “He’s the boss.” is a label. But they’ll do what he says to keep food on the table. If the job becomes to unbearable he’ll move on and “He’s not my boss.” will be reflected in this man’s viewpoint.

      I personally thing that labeling people is like insisting that the salamander is blue. People’s viewpoints change. To insist that they are this or are that is like saying people don’t or can’t change, that help can’t be given or that one can’t get better.

      If everyone honestly answered yes to these familiar (and paraphrased qns) “Do you consider that you usually know best about a subject.?” or “Do you feel it necessary to give your opinion in a conversation with experts on a subject?” do we label them?

      The point is that Judgement is the key word to the use of labels as Marty said. An expert I believe treats a label like sugar – it can dissolve in an instant.

  49. It took me years to evaluate all the info I learned in Scientology. Freedom of thought and reason is always a danger to fixed faith and beliefs.
    A good measuring stick for knowledge not fully known or belief masquerading as knowledge is: anger.
    If someone gets angry or bent out of shape for their knowledge being challenged, that to me, is evidence of knowledge not known or rigidly held belief.
    Because, something that is truly known never feels threatened. Only faith can be threatened because faith is an assumption of something not knowledge of it.
    If I have brown shoes on and I know it, and you say they are black, my direct knowledge of my black shoes simply gives me certainty that you are not correct. I won’t get angry but I may draw a conclusion on your ability to see clearly.
    For all the rhetoric of science and reasoned truth, Scientology beyond a doubt is a faith.
    Just challenge some dogma and the guns come blazing.

    • I meant “my direct knowledge of my brown shoes”. Pre coffee brain glitch. It happens :-)

      • Addendum: Scientology is not just a faith. It is also an applied technology. But the line between the two gets very blurry. Thus the years needed to sort out the truth from the wrong knowledge.

  50. I have no idea who these people are that disconnected from Marty. But, the term implies prior connection. So, I’m guessing Marty was OK when he was putting himself on the line in order to shine light on some very important issues. Without this blog and it’s contributors the Indy field would be a much more difficult place to be, IMO.
    So, now that Marty doesn’t serve any further purpose some will drop him like a hot potato? This is typical of the behavior, I thought we were trying to leave behind.
    It’s OK to disagree with Marty or anyone but, really!
    I can count on one hand the people I would share my deepest thoughts with because I feel safe it will go nowhere else and that I won’t be judged but, cared about and understood. Two of those people are Marty and Mosey. Friends like that are treasures.
    So, if there is an SP list floating around the Indy field and Marty and Mosey are on it, please add my name.
    I’ll be with great company!!

  51. I think part of the problem and why some of us are too quick to judge is that we look at Scientology in isolation and without the attendant perspective. Hell, I know I did. When you first discovery it for yourself and even re-discovery it for those that found it a second time in this life, it seems all important. It had been such a long journey without it you want to immerse yourself in it, do all you can to help it, protect it, defend it and make sure it never disappears. It becomes a single thing unto itself, without perspective or context in the world. But that is simply not true, it just looked that way.

    As laid out in Creation of Human Ability, Hubbard knew that Scientology was simply a link, one I consider a truly vital link but a link nevertheless, a technological link in a very long chain. Just as a tree branch cannot exist in mid air, Scientology can’t either. It sits squarely on a trunk and roots, Buddhist/Hindu roots and trunk in fact. And though Hubbard knew this and stresses it we all too easily forget. So, lets not forget, Hubbard considered that Scientology fulfilled the Buddhist prophecy of Maitreya. I am not saying whether it did or didn’t, I am merely pointing out the fact that Hubbard knew he was continuing a VERY long tradition and that his part was to develop technology to make it EASIER for people to go free. In short, Scientology is technological Buddhism if you will, put in science terms that westerners can understand. Don’t forget Scientology’s real target was the west.

    And our biggest failure was not that we didn’t clear the planet but that we didn’t preach the word of Scientology and get it out to the western world as a helping hand. “If we, without therapy, simply taught our truths, we would bring civilization to the barbaric West.” L Ron Hubbard, Creation of Human Ability, 1954.

    I think it is time to embrace our roots, put Scientology in full and correct perspective and above all, practice what we didn’t preach.

    Hope you all don’t think I’ve “gone off on one” because the above is what I truly believe.

    • Haydn, well stated. Scientology would have to truly embrace its roots for the first time, actually. It never walked the walk, as the saying goes, only talked the talk. It never was willing to “be” what it promoted, so there never was a “do” without some other motivation involved, or a “have” that was in alignment with its “be”. Things got twisted for sure. Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.

    • Really nice post, Haydn – you make an important point very well.

    • One of those who see

      Love this Haydn. Perfect!

    • Hayden, i dont think you have “gone off one one.” Very much the opposite.

      Doing what you suggest, preaching the word of SCN is infinitely better than what the Cof$ has done: create a cult of mystery and secrecy and charging crazy amounts of money for it.

      The church owns its own printing presses and has for a long time. Books should have been vastly cheaper for all this time. This alone could have boomed the orgs. Then, if training was affordable for the common man, those interested could have been co-auditing and auditing those they care about, or joined staff, or could have gone into private practice.

      But in any case, increasing meaningful communication with the world at large can only have increased ARC.

  52. When I changed the way I looked at things….The things I looked at Changed…….When I purify my thoughts and stop judging others and just work on me……the things around me get better and better and I don’t have to do anything outside myself. There is no need to judge…..
    This world is going to be for you… what you project on to it.

  53. Marty Mosey and all,
    There is just not enough spoken about the effects of all us (attitudes, thoughts) have to do with this universe we have.
    What you and us are doing is making it a better place. That’s our job.
    TRs (be hear now – thank you Ron) and some basics in how we got here would help.
    HARMONY is the only English word I have for the state.
    The only words/thoughts I follow are mine derived from the experiences I’ve had. LRH just put it together nicely for me.
    I just loved those thoughts “Wow! This guy is putting in words what I already know!”
    Thanks Ron and thanks Marty and all for letting get these thoughts out of my head.
    Hugs,
    Cece
    Marty, Maybe to undercut the current state of affaires in 2013, LRH would have re-issued PAB 6.
    Buddha said it nicely “Be hear now”
    Please put Hymn of Asia by L. Ron Hubbard on your recommended reading

  54. its a sad situstion and so much change.

  55. I am paraphrasing here, when I say that the essential idea of the ethics function in a Scientology organization was to create a safe environment in which auditing can occur. The idea was to remove individuals that compulsively and deliberately created a dangerous environment from the inside perimeter and from the outside perimeter temporarily, while an individual was getting auditing.

    This is the rationale behind it, as found in the Volunteer Minister’s Handlbook, in the Dangerous Environment section:

    “Even somebody who has heard very little of Scientology has less turmoil in his environment. An individual, less threatened by the environment, tends to resurge. He gets less apathetic. He thinks he can do more about life. He can reach outward a little further; therefore he can exert a calming influence upon his immediate environment.

    “As that progressed forward, more and more individuals would be produced who could bring more and more calm to the environment or handle things better and better. It is only the things which aren’t handled which are chaotic. It would result in a situation where the threat of the environment would die out. This overwhelming, overpowering environment would be tamer and tamer. People would be less and less afraid. You would have more and more opportunity of handling the actual problems that exist instead of people dreaming up problems in order to make some money off of it. It would be a different society.

    “The merchant of chaos does not like calming influences, however. He will fight anything which lessens disturbance in the environment.”

    http://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH12.HTM

    As I see it, the genus of wholesale “executions” in the form of SP declares and disconnections is that of the “cutative.” It is not a new problem for Scientology, as clearly laid out in the policy letter “Cutatives” http://internationalfreezone.net/cutatives.shtml

    When I & R does not effectively and ACCURATELY investigate “Things that Shouldn’t Be” reports (or their own post-originated observations) of internal situations, and handle them to achieve the purpose of ethics, a cutative action takes place. Instead, the bearer of the report is shot, and people attempting to reduce dangerous environment PRODUCED by the introduction of coercion and overwhelm are targeted and declared.

    The idea of post conditions was an excellent idea, and its purpose is to detect the “loafing” or “incompetent” staff member. Introduce the cutative and now you have conditions assignments with no qual or remedial actions, no planning, nothing but threat, coercion and a demand for stats regardless of the cost of those stats.

    The I & R and MAA are supposed take the time to pull the string, pull it accurately, detect and handle both the inhibiting factors and chaos merchants, even those that are senior to them.

    When this isn’t done, staff positions become a living nightmare that can end only by leaving staff, and then by leaving the organization. For they will fail, their stats will be down, and they will be subjected to a merciless round of conditions, RPF, labels, and ultimately disconnection whether they choose it, or it is enforced on them.

    And how about if the I & R pulls that string, and the Sherman Tank is a senior, or a group of seniors? Well, that was why HCO was given one of the the senior divisional positions along with Qual. On up the line it is supposed to go, to the local HAS, to the local HES, on up to the continental and to international. But if the shit is rolling downhill, that I & R will inevitably find himself under the gun.

    All of this was intended to produce a calm, safe environment — an environment that is not disturbed, agitated, or excited. An environment under control for the purpose of delivering auditing and training. A safe environment that is dependable and trustworthy, secure from liability to harm, injury, danger, or risk. An environment that is desirable, and wanted, not just by Scientologists or preclears, but by just about anyone who does not make their way in life by capitalizing on dangerous environments.

    If processing has worked at all on an individual subjected to deranged cutative applications of “ethics” or “justice,” they will not shut up and no amount of threat will make them shut up. This is particularly true of OT3s and above, after all, the EP of OT3 is freedom from overwhelm.

    What they will do, and very effectively I might add, is work to make a safe place to speak up from and then they will speak up. They are not stupid. No amount of threat will shut them up and they can focus on a target forever, just as they do on ESMB, on this blog, and on other blogs. They will not give up. They may decide they are not Scientologists any more, but this denial of membership does not mean they have lost this gain of freedom from overwhelm. The same is true of most of the auditing a person has along the way. And they come back.

    And in the meantime, the there is no safe island, the island itself has gone dangerous internally and cranks out enemies faster than it produces clears and then attacks its own clears and OTs. And attacks anyone who thinks this is a bad idea. Frantic under the demands of a cutative ethics system, fearful of the “outside” world and its dangers and hostility, it seizes upon any evidence of dissent as something that must be stomped out quickly and without hesitation.

    Attention riveted on predators, enemies and dangerous entities, it doesn’t see plus-points, for plus-points are not dangerous. Unfortunately, this means that it also cannot see friends, allies and beneficial entities and activities for what they are.

    Cutatives. Stat push. PT Production only. Dangerous environment.

  56. “[…] That is, if someone exhibits an ‘anti-Scientology’ leaning he or she is sure to be diagnosed as being an SP. To qualify one only need question the wisdom of any Scientology writing. This fact alone is probably more responsible for Scientology taking on the character of an insular cult than all others combined.”
    I am trying to ask this now as littlle provocation as possible:
    Are you serious about that and hold it to be a policy that has to be cancelled?

  57. Meant to write: I am trying to ask this now with as little provocation as possible.

  58. “Scientologists are encouraged to take a three week course of study in order to achieve the purported professional ability and license to identify and handle an SP and the target of his effects, the PTS. All Scientologists are required to take this course and are expected to apply it with an attitude of certainty regardless of lack of any other professional credential. The result, bluntly, can denigrate into a community of untrained, arrogant, Monday morning shrinks passing the most condemnatory judgments upon one another at the drop of a hat.”

    I don’t completely agree with the above statement. When I first got on lines I was immediately a magnet for some really low toned attacks. I’ve found through the years that if you stick your neck out and attempt to do something that excels, your probably going to be attacked. Being trained in the SP and PTS tech has made all the difference for me. You may have gotten misapplication but you also got people who were equipped to progress up the bridge. There was also plenty of tech that should have kept people from being arrogant and judemental. A few of these would be the Auditors Code, the Way to Happiness, the 2 Rules to Happy Living and the Comm Course.

    There was one culture in Scientology that I always found to have an unacceptable level of arrogance and that was the Sea Org. While some of the best people I’ve ever known were in the Sea Org, there were always far too many who were arrogant. I’ve communicated here before that I believe when a person collapses their dynamics and makes a narrow focus on one thing, it can result in arrogance. I believe that has always been a real source of arrogance in Scientology.

  59. I am not so sure that it is true that former Scientologists have trouble with labeling people and are still repeating sins of the past. I think most of us are in the mode of re-evaluating everyhtng. We jsus don’t want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

    Honestly I really admire you a great deal and support your efforts in correcting the sins of the past but truthfuly I think you need ot be out of corporate Scientolgy for a much longer period of time. As I see it you’re doing pretty much the same thing I did when I left. I looked in every corner for parrallels to Scientology and read countless books on every seeemingly related subject there ever was. After years of doing this I one day realized that with the exception of a few serious faults Scientology really is the best answer there has ever been for advancing mankind to higher and higher states. Once I realized that I loaded up my car with boxes and boxes of books (two carloads actually) on every seemingly worthwhile alternataive to Scientology and took it to a local “new age” temple and gave it to them. When they asked why I was giving so many books away I told them becasue I was a Scientolgist and even though I tried to find something better in all of these books I just didn’t. Not even close really. I didn’t say it to be mean because certainly these were nice people but I couldn’t bring myslef to lie to them and tell that much of what I had discovered in all of these books had been truly helpful. .

  60. Excellent post, Marty!

    Labelling is truly a sickness amongst many scientologists, and sooo tiresome. Hanging out with these birds is like walking down the street with a person that can not resist naming everything he sees, thinking he is intelligent. “Look! There is a sign over there!” “Do you see that vehicle over there, it is a car, I am sure.” “This side walk is dirty.”

    Make me wanna say: Please use the tech in the auditing room to get rid of your charge and your case, fuck the rest of Hubbards 25+ million words and for goods sake get a life!

  61. I think there are different types of labeling/judgement that go on within Scientology. I think the “SP” label is more of a political tool of corporate Scientology to keep the kool-aid drinkers toeing the line than it is an individual Scientologist judging others. All cults have some of “information control”, and within corporate Scientology, you have the SP declaration and subsequent disconnection as a way of keeping a “purity” of thought among the sheep.

    At a different level, I have seen a lot of individual Scientologists judge others dismissively by saying things like “so-and-so is a 1.1 degraded being”, for example. I think this sort of labeling is thought-stopping in that once a person has been labeled/judged, one no longer has to think about the person as the label explains everything. This is what myself and others refer to as “labeling instead of thinking.”

    I think the Scientologists who do this type of labeling often do it to give themselves a false sense of superiority, though I think all labeling and judgement has that as it’s main purpose. I don’t know why Scientologists are so prone to this type of labeling – perhaps because the lingo is so contagious? I mean, once you have a few Scn words under your belt like “1.1”, “degraded being”, “wog”, “squirrel”, “druggie”, “freeloader”, etc., it’s just a little too easy to get carried away. I, for one, didn’t join a religion or self-help movement to label others or give myself a false sense of superiority, but I think some may have. Perhaps some feel better about themselves when they put down others. Or perhaps, Scientologists like to think they are smarter than the average bear since they think they have special information that no one else knows and are well on their way to becoming (supposedly) “homo novus”. Perhaps that is where the false sense of superiority comes from. Regardless, I think anything called “religion” shouldn’t be used to put others down.

  62. Hi Marty,
    Great post as usual. I‘m sorry for the fellows that disconnected from you, they are probably suffering from a bout of religious identification.

    My two cents, is that one should be very careful when stepping into any religion or religious philosophy, as our past are strewn full of religious catastrophes.

    Here is one example of “The Spanish Inquisition”

    http://www.richeast.org/htwm/Inqui/inq.html

    The Inquisition allowed for anybody, rich or poor, criminal or exile, to accuse somebody that they thought was a heretic. According to Bahr (1993), “Informers were encouraged to accuse those they suspected, but the accused were never confronted by their accusers, and the convicted were not allowed to appeal to the Pope.” (p.40). There were many different ways of proving a heretic. Some of them almost anybody could be guilty of and some of them were directed toward a specific sector of the population.”

    “The process that one had to go through when being charged as a heretic was complex. The many steps were difficult even for those who wanted to love. Major Arthur Griffiths (1991) explained them:

    First came the denunciation, followed by the seizure and the commencement of an inquiry. The several offenses imputed were next submitted to those logical experts name ‘Qualifiers’ who decided ‘whether there was a true bill,’ in which case the procurator fiscal committed the accused to durance. Three audiences were given him… The charges were next formulated but with much prolixity and reduplication. They were not reduced to writing and delivered to the accused for slow perusal and reply, but were read over to him, hurriedly. On arraignment he was called upon to reply, then and there, to each article, to state at once whether it was true or false…If the accused persisted in denial he was allowed council, but later the council became an official of the Inquisition and naturally made only a perfunctory defense. An appeal to torture was had if the prisoner persisted in denying his guilty, in the face of plausible testimony, or if he confessed only partially to the charges against him, or if he refused to name his accomplices. (p.66)

    “Anybody could accuse anybody else of heresy, a son could accuse a father; a mother could accuse a daughter; a neighbor could accuse a neighbor, and all accusations whether signed or anonymous were accepted. (Griffiths (1991) refers to Llorente who explains the actions of the penitent…”

    I hope this helps.

  63. Marty,
    You have written so many insightful blogs, to say nothing of your published books. There are usually many responses that mirror my own view so that I find that I have nothing to add. But, this time I felt the urge to contribute.

    I was really struck by the fact that some “Indies” disconnected from you in disagreement over the benefits of having a “judgmental” attitude. Perhaps the misunderstanding of “certainty” and “knowingness” in Scientology tech allowed them to feel superior and in judgment of others? My only surprise is that these people left the church at all. After all, the church welcomes and, in fact, requires judgmental attitudes, as you’ve pointed out.

    When I was active in the church, if I hesitated or questioned something I was being told to do, I was admonished. It was not okay to question. Instead, I was told things like, “C’mon . . . you know what you know” or “Where’s your certainty?” They were judgmental of me and I was accused of not being judgmental enough.

    At first I thought everyone else just “knew” and was “certain” about things and that it was I who was inferior and flawed. Therefore, I committed the overt of obeying and doing what I was told, even when it didn’t seem right. I hurt many people in the process. Eventually, I found a way to deal with it. . . . I would just agree with what I was being told, but then not do it! (. . . just be covert) Of course, this did not last for long since, 1.) I got caught and, 2.) it was a severe breach of my integrity. I became miserable. I couldn’t continue to be that deceitful. This led me to some true “certainty” and “knowingness”. . . there is something VERY flawed going on in the church of Miscavige.

    Best,
    Sarah

    PS: Regarding your sentence, “If you attempt to even discuss a shortcoming of Scientology the debate decisively ends with the evaluation, ‘you are an SP.’” —So true! What a great scheme to make sure that you only keep those members who never look within for answers, but just remain robotish zealots. That pretty much describes today’s church members, doesn’t it?

    • +1

    • “My only surprise is that these people left the church at all.”

      They didn’t leave because they wanted to. I think that is a major issue. They did not want to leave. They were kicked out. Otherwise they would all probably still be there.

    • Those people who disconnected:
      Not everyone who was kicked out of even the RTC was a Good Hat. Sometimes even RTC (but not very often) got it right. Oddly enough some of those people who left were some who would previously have attacked full force anyone who did not agree with Marty. But only as long as what he said was in accordance to what they thought. I have always suspected anyone who was so quick to attack and demand instant obedience. I never took that from the church and I would never take that from someone just because they call themselves an Independent or any other label. They are just labels afterall .

  64. Marty, you write in your December article on judgment: “In the long term, judgment winds up destroying the labeler as the label, the fixed stable datum substituted for a being, makes the labeler cease to look, to inspect, to live.” That pretty much sums it up I believe.

    Judging, and holding on to judgment, keeps us stuck with a past impression, and prevents us from understanding a new truth. When we free ourselves from the rules of old judgments, we create the space for new understanding to come in.

    Judgment, like a drug, feels good. It gives you a temporary high. It gives you a feeling of power over what you judge, it enables you to reduce whatever you judge to whatever smallness you would like to see them reduced to. If you want to make someone a speck of dust, or a cosmic error, judgment allows you to label that, and to make you feel that this label has strength of reality. What you don’t realize while you are doing this is that you are cutting yourself out from your own capacity to understand and grow. Ultimately judgment creates great damage to the judge.

    On the physical side, too, judgment is bad for you. I’m no doctor, but I’ve read that judgment is bad for your health. For this body to thrive and live long, positive energy needs to be left flowing unimpeded, good feelings need to be felt, relationships need to be harmonious. Anger, pent up negative emotions, judgments, all these create energy blockages, which are bad for the heart and many other bodily functions, from what I’ve read.

    What’s the opposite of judgment? Non judgment? I don’t think so. Jst like there is more to peace than being the absence of war. I’d say that the opposite of “judgment” is “appreciation”. To appreciate every person, every creature, and all of life for what they have to offer. Truly, in a hartfelt way. To live one’s life from a place of appreciation. I’m not saying “think positively” which I see as just a cerebral decision to just putting rosy labels without truly experiencing the rosiness. But my sense is that its just not possible to be angry from 8 to 10AM, content from 10AM to noon, and upset from noon to 2PM. These moods tend to reduce themselves to their lowest common denominator.

    I love this quote from Lao Tzu, it’s not directly about judgment, but more about living a life of appreciation, free of judgment: “Be content with what you have; rejoice in the way things are. When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you.” That’s quite an agenda he is setting here.

  65. The quote is from: 520303 HCL 1 – Scientology – Milestone One. You also can
    find it in New R&D-Volume 9, p. 456

    “If you will just stay with me on this line, up to the first
    milestone in Scientology, and bring yourself up to a high level of ability
    and apply yourself to that, you will be free – free from me and from
    Scientology too!” Milestone 1 – LRH

    I take this as an indication that one needs to have absorbed the subject

    very deeply to get good judgement on it, and to fully make it your own. I also

    suspect that Ron knew he had thrown a few curved balls, or could be percieved

    as having done so, and wanted to make it clear that the aim was personal

    ability and sovreignity above all else.

    Interestingly Geir Isene has just written how he has found scientologists make poor

    staff members. Here is a partial quote in the blog by “Maria ” illustrating one

    example of being judgemental:-

    ” As Geir has pointed out, there are Scientologists he hired that did work out on the hiring line, and that was true in the company I worked for as well, however, they had been trained that it was their job as Scientologists to write Knowledge Reports and failure to write those Knowledge Reports meant that they were culpable. So they wrote Knowledge Reports.

    What was interesting (and annoying) was that they did not write Knowledge Reports on non-Scientologists because the non-Scientologists didn’t have ethics files at the Church and therefore they were not responsible because they were not Scientologists! And therefore they needed to be “handled.””

    Marty mentions a need for re-education. I suggest this includes False data stripping on

    LRH datums. Note that in the data series he recommends it done twice in case he had put some false data there. Here is an incomplete list of questionable LRH datums, all the more pernicious in that he is reveered as a source of data:-

    Diminishing statements re other philosophers

    Diminishing statements re other psychothapies, in particular Freud and Jung

    without whom we may well not have had Scn and Dn.

    Diminishing statements re the medical proffession.

    Diminishing statements re legal institutions comparing them unfavourably to

    the mess that is Scn justice. Nice ref.

    http://www.freezoneearth.org/HolyCows/cows/05ethica.htm

    Diminishing statements re political philosophies. I’m happy about that one as in

    a very early sec check to join the SO circa 1966 was asked which political system

    encouraged bank think or something like that. Inspired from KSW1 I said

    Democracy. Wrong answer. I was supposed to answer communism. Failed

    the sec check. :)

    He said take my data not my opinions. Guess he was serious about that. :)

    Oh one other, he felt he had solved the problem of succession. The successor need only to have done OEC/FEBC. Look how that has worked out!

  66. Judgment, as presented here is, to me, an effort to protect oneself from what would be a negative experience to one.

    A barrier one attempts to form to nullify the experience or the source of that experience.

    To hardcore fanatics, of any organization, any criticism, any attack is a threat to their NEED for the organization, they have very solidly identified with (have become it), to be what they need it to be.

    In my experience, the need to produce judgments is directly proportional to the need one has for one’s viewpoints and beingnesses to have to be the correct ones.

    Inversely, the more exterior one can be to one’s viewpoints and “beingnesses”, the less the urge to demonize or “barrier” against those who criticize or attack them and the more one can warmly grant beingness to them.

  67. Marty keep doing what you do. Reading these message boards is important and is de-compressing us as we unwind ourselves from the tight bands that kept us mummified while in the church. At least for me that is the case. I blow charge reading these comments and your posts. I loved Karen # 1’s definitions of all the types of SP’s. Laughed out loud on that.

    But then had the sobering thought that made me sad again. A dear friend is going through that right now. He has done nothing wrong , other than to “look” and “read” on the internet (Marty’s site etc) and a few books by “apostates.” But he has been under the wire and not talked about this to those still in. Yet his best friend came to tell him that when he was “handled” on his own reading of the internet and news articles about Scn, that he was made to give up names of others who had talked about it or forwarded on things about it and he gave up my friend’s name. The MAA said, “Oh we already know about him… he is connected to squirrels and is going down that path.” The friend said oh no, my friend wouldn’t do that and defended him to the MAA. The friend even asked to see the KR’s on his friend. They didn’t show one KR, didn’t have one specific time, place, form, event of proof. It was all just a “whispering campaign” being shouted from the rooftops instead of whispered. It was character assassination without having to show one iota of proof. And it was not true. But because a bad thing was said, my friend’s best friend delivered the news that you’d better talk to the MAA or get declared and I would disconnect from you and so would your kids. the “you’d lose your kids” button was pushed several times in that conversation. So the friend called another “under the radar” friend who is in good standing in the church to say that his name came up too since the first friend had to tell ALL people and that his name came up also. This other friend said he was disconnecting from the friend who called because “you’re under investigation and I don’t want it coming back to me cuz I don’t want to lose my kids.” So based on unsubstantiated rumor from an MAA, this person lost one friend and her other friend allowed his affinity to go down and he is teetering about to disconnect too, al based on no proof and lies. This is what our Ethics and Justice system has deteriorated into. Shameful. The church has people running scared and turning in their friends and the MAA’s are on witch hunts with no proof and are condemning people based on lies and maybe one isolated false report, which is against what LRH wrote about. So all the good you did in the church, whether on or off staff, all the money you gave, all the auditing you delivered, is gone in a nano second because some MAA shot his mouth of with no proof and no one had the balls to stand up to him.

    • Jane,
      I understand your post and your description of the current state of affairs. I have also experienced it and observe it happens as your describe.

      “So all the good you did in the church, whether on or off staff, all the money you gave, all the auditing you delivered, is gone in a nano second”

      But maybe your statement has another side to it. Maybe all that good is still there. It was created and it was received and it was/is true for the person creating it and likely still is. So don’t grant those who sit in judgement of anothers actions the moral high ground to take that away. Apply ‘What is Greatness’ and live the life you always wanted to live.

      An Uncle of mine used to offer up some interesting comments to me as I was proceeding through life. He had seen some tough parts of living during WWII on Guadalcanal and the South Pacific.

      It’s a great life as long as you don’t weaken”

      “Don’t let the bastards get you down!”

      “Some people are just no damn good!”

  68. i left scientology or it left me 27 years ago after being very involved 19 years.
    i went through periods of great relief, regret, feeling such a failed purpose.
    over the years i created a better life for myself, when i wanted auditing i got some,it is a slow process to grasp how intense it was. it is an important post marty brought up.people have to wake up from a deep sleep and see the world they live in, and it is a beautiful world even with crazy shit happening daily.

  69. One last thing and then I have to get working here, and I only say this to give you guys an opportunity to tell me how full of it I am, and I have not formed any conclusions or “judgements” based on this data. But it is an observable truth. Tell me what it means. It may just be a part of being human, I don’t know:

    This blog post is a lot more active so far as responses and I assume views. It will probably end up with 300+ responses. It’s content is controversial and “against” something. However you interpret it, you can’t deny it is against something. The previous blog posts were generally positive and for the most part not against anything and they were also less popular based on responses. Controversy and conflict are more popular in human culture. But it’s sort of like “the dark side of the Force”. You can get a million people to come out and protest if you are firmly against something, but if you want to build something or push forward with some positive activity it generally receives less praise as if it is boring (I mean in society in general). AS far as Scientology I dig stuff like new groups forming, new orgs and delivery centers starting up, auditor training getting sorted out and pushed forward, independent Tech Films apparently coming up(awesome), getting peoples purpose in Scientology revitalized and restored. That is the good stuff IMO. The independent check sheets made available (Thank you Dan Koon and whoever else) I am working on one now and I realized what a valuable product these are. This is the stuff that gets my energy going Marty. Where are you at on that type of thing? Are you for, against, disinterested?

    • Chris — since I was pretty harsh in my other comment to you – I’ll respond here with I have observed the same thing too. Of course.

      Blogs articles that are controversial, against, about celebrities do have more responses than just good news.

      Same is true of the media, as you know.

      This is because … LRH said it … the bank follows the line of attack (I believe he said) or “Buddha’s Brain” says we, as humans are WIRED to default to the negative … for example — here comes a tiger, run like hell.

      Anyway – I think the time has come to acknowledge that we (not just you and I) but those who have left are simply talking past each other.

      And it’s best to end the day on a genuine wish that everyone continue in their lives, working towards their own happiness and the happiness of others.

      God speed.

      Love,
      Christine

  70. Were a few of my comments were censored?

    • Yes, because you announced your speculation and claimed if it were true you would pack your bags while at the same time noting that you felt it ought not be aired here. And that is the problem with running the gossip circuit – one tends to get what he mocks up. And your evaluation of me is so far off the mark as to be further evidence of the malady of which I speak in the blog post. Do you have any original thoughts with respect to the the post we are discussing here, or only speculation as to who is zoomin’ whom?

      • Ok fine. I am happy to hear that my speculation was incorrect. It was sort of a multiple choice though. Maybe you could have just acked that the second part was wrong and the first was correct, if it was.
        But who are you talking about? These people you are talking about in your post. You nearly verbatim quote one person so I assumed you were talking about specific people. If you are going to call them out why not specify who you are talking about? Responders don’t know. I responded to Dan who thought you were talking about church members. It’s a generality. Right now it is a “them”. Anyone who scans over the responses to the Judgement article can probably get the idea. I haven’t been party to or recipient of any gossip. I guess I’m on the wrong lines or haven’t sought it out because I just haven’t heard it.

        Who disconnected and/or labeled you an SP? Are you sure they just aren’t upset? Have you done anything to handle it?

        • Still nothing original to originate about the concept communicated in the post?

          • Ok. As far as labels, I rarely use them. I use them a lot less since I left the church. I think I always felt they were mis-used. People looking at someone for two seconds and saying “that guy is 1.1″, or “That guy is a DB”. I found in the church most times when someone was labled in this way, as an SP, PTS etc, it was either just plain wrong, or often did not lead to any betterment in conditons. To be honest, I have only met one person I was sure was a “Suppressive Person” based on LRH’s materials and that guy was bad news. I do not believe you are a suppressive person Marty and I do agree with probably 80% of what you say on here. I don’t quite get stuff like this one though. Am I reading it wrong? You give this concept which is fine, but then you define some unknown group of people who have wronged you and you give this as the explanation for their behavior. So I was trying to get more specific data on this. I think that is applicable to your post Marty. It’s time, place, form, event type stuff. Will these guys not communicate with you? As in, you dial their number and they tell you they disconnect? Did they send you a disconnection letter? If not, whats the difference between disconnection and just being pissed at someone and comm going out?

            • Chris,
              First, thanks for continuing to post here even if you disagree with some of what Marty might be saying or what others might be posting. Kudos to you for trying to keep lines of communication open and sharing ideas.

              I would say that the difference between disconnection and being pissed really does all come down to being judgmental.

              You can get emotional and get upset with someone and just not want to speak to them for a bit. That happens to all of us. But disconnection involves some “rational” judgment. Instead of “I’m so mad right now, I just can’t talk to you,” it’s “I’m so mad right now, I won’t ever talk to you, because you are wrong, and you don’t know what you are doing, and you are not worth talking to.”

              I think that if you stop talking to someone and you do it for those judgmental reasons, you’re disconnecting- you don’t have to have a letter or a some formal document, as the attitude is what matters. Maybe that is what Marty is referring to.

              I don’t know Marty’s situation at all, except for what I have seen people post publicly on this blog. When Marty is referring to the “ad hominem attack,” I think he may be talking about a particularly nasty public post that was made on this blog a couple weeks ago. The post insulted Marty directly and was a long, loud diatribe blaming Marty for all kinds of problems, written in a total “fixed, dedicated glare” and “I know better than you” valence.

              If I were Marty, I’d definitely feel like that post was judgmental, not just an angry, emotional outburst. If someone stopped talking to me after dropping a piece of communication on me like that, I’d assume they were disconnecting, not just crabby.

          • Oh, and I am a fan of a thorough understanding of SOS and other materials if anyone is going to be labeling people. I’m more into loooking at long term products if anything. I’m not really even into labeling anyone, but I reserve the right to. I’ve known too many Scientologist family members, brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, friends who are labeled, degraded and marginalized by a family member in the Church. “Why dont you talk to your brother?”. “Oh, he’s low-toned”. The real situation being more like his brother doesnt like talking to him because the church member is an arrogant douche.

    • Hey Chris,
      Does critiquing LRH create a problem for you?

  71. Marty,
    Even if some “Fundamentalist Indie’s” disconnect from you, the goals of ultimate survival (evolve, integrate and transcend) are paramount.
    On page 150 of “What is Wrong with Scientology” you quote from a 1954 lecture by LRH where he references early Buddhist literature to explain some of Scientology’s bedrock principles. Well, my copy of Buddha’s Brain is in the mail.
    Some fundamentalists maybe do not want to evolve, integrate and transcend. They merely wish to depose or seperate from DM. Ultimately, they may even begin their own splinter group as conservative fundamentalists. And this too would be part of Scientology’s decompression out of the corporate cult.
    This blog is doing such good across the dynamics. Don’t sweat the small stuff.
    P.S. love the family pic

  72. Well, Marty, if you ever wanted to school anybody on the roles Serv Facs and/or Computations can play in peoples thought processes- on all flows, including the dynamics and reverberations of secondary effects, THIS post and the comments it generated should provide all the material you would ever need.

    • It has been startling to me these last few years to see how many Scientologists have “gone up the grade chart”, and yet still dramatize computations to make themselves right and others wrong almost on a daily basis. Ditto how many Scientologists claim to be “Clear” or even “OT” and yet seem to drop down into fear and covert hostility on an ever increasing basis. And these are the same folks who would readily quote Ron as to the two crimes people will be gotten for are “being there and communicating” and yet, make other people guilty for these two acts all the time. They’ve read the books and heard the lectures. They’ve done the PTS/SP course. They may have even gone “clear” and “ot” and yet after years and years in Scientology remain essentially clueless as to the essentials of the subject. And yes, I’m observing and commenting here, rather than judging them (ha, but I think true).

      • “Showing” judgement, Joe, isn’t the same as “passing” judgement. Apparently word clearing has fallen by the wayside since the days of the Super Literate Course, and a word like this, which has a scale of definition and nuance rising, it seems, parallel to the Scale of Awareness, and even Emotional Tone Scale from apathy up through serenity, tends to point out that lack. On your comment itself, I agree completely, and that was, to some degree, what I was alluding to myself. I can only surmise that “mutual ruds” must be largely responsible for this phenomena; which serves to suggest that the environment (the moral/ethical construct of acceptability, if you will) tends to create a limited *sphere of awareness* within which progress up ones personal “Bridge” is, essentially, allowed to take place. Everyone “drinking the kool-aide” is pretty much on the same page, and doesn’t perceive the outness. Unfortunately, even after they stop drinking, and begin their path to real spiritual freedom, those past awareness constraints can continue to show evidence.

  73. Thank you for a thought-provoking blog, Marty.

    At age 20 I found the world very confusing and complicated. When I got into Scientology it was a relief to have all my questions answered by either “this is what LRH says about it” (which was normally great as LRH had some incredible insight into just about everything) or “don’t worry about that now, it’ll be handled as you go up the bridge”.

    This was the slippery slope into believing the upper management who were way ahead of me in having studied and gone up the bridge in Scientology, were right and righteous in their actions. It was abdicating my own judgement. So when I heard someone being “disaffected” I would treat that person with disdain without having heard that person’s side of the story.

    This kind of group-think is not unique to Scientology but it is by far the most extreme I’ve ever come across.

    Two things happened: I grew up and I had kids whose welfare was more important to me than even Scientology. So without knowing it I was as Mike Rinder said above “An SP In Waiting”. Rumor is that I have been declared but I’ve never seen it.

    Most of us who follow this blog are 40 and older and I believe that helps us as well getting clarity of the lives we have lived up to now and the lives we will live in the future. Being it vertical, horizontal or 5th dimension, whatever, we want to grow spiritually and live good lives and there’s one thing that is as sure as Amen in church and that is that it cannot happen if you’re in the grips of David Miscavige’s version of Church of Scientology.

  74. Mike and Robert I would like to second your nomination for quote of the day.

    “if you are an educated Scientologist and have not gotten your goldenrod yet, well, you should be embarrassed….”

  75. Marty, i’ll bet you won’t publish my comment as to some degree it’s “entheta”.
    First let me tell you all the good I think of you, what you did for me was to ack from an official ex RTC what I thought for 30 years without to dare to express it or to join the freezone. If the term SP fits with only one person on this planet it would be David Miscavige. Beyond that I was always opposed to any type of eval, like saying to someone that is a 1,1 or anything like that is against anything I think and the auditor code, means I couldn’t be more in agreement with your post. And again, I owe you, you brought freedom to me, my family and some of my friends.
    But what entheta am I talking about? You see I’m so curious : Who has disconnected from you?
    I’m not seing any post from Jim Logan and Thoughtful for quite a while. Again, it’s mere curiosity, gossip line call it, but also a feeling of outpoint. Disconnection? A big word. I would more wonder about an ARCX.
    From my own recall, you had an argument with Jim Logan about if “PTS and disconnection” was or not written by LRH. And since then it didn’t seems that there was a post of him on your blog. Of course, I have no idea of what happen off the record. I’m just a lurker, but your post give me the feeling of outpoint, validating my perception. Again, who disconnected from you and why? After all, there also might be a third party.
    Sorry to be so curious.
    Jim Logan, if you read, say something. Maybe I’m mocking it up and there is nothing.
    If you don’t want to publish like for Chrismann 9, I will understand. And if I’m dreaming up something which doesn’t exist, please tell me.

  76. Well once again thanks Marty for some further FALSE DATA STRIPPING.

    It’s been suggested here that some folks are in protest, perhaps by silence. I sense its because they don’t look. They feel and think, which are demonstrably lower orders of business.

    They’ll get over it as the sun will shine tomorrow. If they are willing to.

    I’m currently a Human Being. None-the-less, I AM an immortal being and further, a practitioner of LRH stuff.. Scientology can be its own deadly trap or a vehicle for a somewhat ‘total freedom’. That said, Ron did not get everything right.

    Unfortunately, even good folks hang on to every thread for fanatical reasons.

    Scientology provides the tools to understand that one isn’t even a Scientologist. Go figure!

  77. Disconnection???
    Thish should be of no shignificant difficulty mish money penny.

    Any independent scientologist disconnecting in this age of data availability needs to seriously take a step back and evaluate data with their own eyes.

    “You want the TRUTH, you CAN”T HANDLE THE TRUTH!”

    But I hope you can…
    The tech is the tech, Evaluate by datum, not over all.

    The following are Coroner and Toxicology reports.

    Are they forgeries? Are worthy of scrutiny?
    Are they true?

    Confront these data and the whole scene changes.

    It’s time to grow up.

    Evaluate technology for yourself.

    • Um, I don’t think we are supposed to know this. You have taken great license here to know. How did you know how to know this? This is highly offensive! This should be top top secret! It is not O.K. to know! Further, you are enabling others to know. Not cool at all. If you were on lines at the Church I would have to write a K.R. on you right this minute! Please ensure that others do not know this. We have an obligation to make people do not know or know how to know certain things which might be bad for business.

      • Hahaha
        I often think if I didn’t know now, thoroughly, what I know now, what I really should have know then, that partly knowing then would possibly have never brought, knowing what I know now through what others knew then that they made sure I could know now what then was not able to be made known in a thoroughly available to be made broadly known way, would have made knowing all that I know now unknowable to me, I would not have known what I didn’t know, enough to keep trying to know, knowing me, that is.

        “It’s a good time to know. That being said it’s always a good time to really know – you here… I am talking about, really the ability, see, you see that there – KNOW as a-bill-a-teh. You know you could, just as an aside, just an observing of an observationess, you unneccesarily call someone a know-it-all, you see, for the fact that if they did know it all, they wouldn’t need to be told, it’s just inefficient, you know (chuckles, audience quiet, some one in the back coughs). If they knew it all, they’d already know, but you COULD, see, just say “yeah…that!”, if you know his self-certainty seemed just a hint under total certainty you might just want to make sure you gave the right, timely, indication. (audience laughter, slightly brighter audience member face palming).”

        I just don’t think without the internet I could have known.

        But all my natter aside, the old man had an ice breaker hull, and a razor sharp explorers instinct to voyage into terra incognita. And for that I am very very grateful.

        But don’t tell anyone I said that. You know what they think they would then know about me… If only they knew…

        • That above wasn’t an LRH quote by the way, I was just making it up.

          • Scientology is “Knowing how to know”. It is defined as a group for people who want to know how to know. The problem arises when someone comes along who wants to know how to know and then learns how to know. And certain people in it attack you for “finding out”. Yes, “finding out” or “having knoiwledge” becomes a “suppressive act”. An “invasion of privacy”.

            People get ;locked into GPM’s little by little. First, you are asked to “not know” anybody who questions or doubts your faith. GPM. You get through grade zero, attast that you have the ability to communicate to anyone on any subject. Then you become instructed on who you can not talk to and what you can not say. GPM. and it goes on and on like that right up the grade chart to the very end. Right up to joining the Sea Org. Where you are asked to lose everything you own or own and everyone you know in order to join the group where everybody wins.
            Finally you have these people locked behind walls at the Int base who agree not to know anything unless they are given permission. Not to communicate with anyone who is not on an approved list. You are shown people in the group who are being thrown out who could not be helped or handled. You are punished for any change. And you really have no tools left to resolve problems. The people are being ruled by a sociopath who has been blown off the bridge for decades, and they can not confront getting out the front gates and walking down the street to face reinvention. And the whole invitation to Know how to know has turned into one big GPM they are all locking into.

            If you mention any part of the outpoints you are an “L.R.H. basher”.

            And the only freedom that exists for you anymore is within a group of wogs .

            It’s a pretty tricky walk to staying on the path of knowing how to know. Even in the Church of Scientology who teaches that as a goal.

            • The problem is, your own group in Scientology opposes your gains!

              For instance, you finish grade zero. You attest that you are willing communicate to anybody about anything. Now, who would oppose a person who is willing to communicate to anybody about anything? Why, A Scientologist! You are not supposed to discuss your case. You are not supposed to discuss your upsets. You are not supposed to talk to anyone who is not in good standing. You are supposed to talk to the press. On and on and on. So you see, the group does not want a person who is willing to talk anyone about anything! So, where is your suppression coming from? The group!

              You can go grade by grade ot level by lot level right to the top. And for every gain you can attest to, you can figure how the group itself opposes what you have become on some or many levels.

              All the while you are told, “The suppression is “over there”. The suppression is “out there” somewhere.

              Laughter! Now it doesn’t mean a damn inside the Orgs to declare their products for manifesting gains! Look at the declares issued on people who are willing to communicate to anybody about anything! Who are problem solvers. Who can experience change easily. Who can spot source.

              • And in the times when someone was allowed to go out and manifest new abilities, whatever they were allowed to keep under thier command, and become successful. Then the Church wanted you to come back and donate it all to them either in terms of cash or labor or influence.

                So what you got here folks, was an unwillingness really for the Church to let you have and keep under your command, your gains and profits.
                In truth then, they was no exchange. Sure, you could get over your hang ups on communication. But only if you learned then to speak in their language and talk to an approved list and to say approved patter.

                So you see, you get something, then you are asked to give it all back.

                The entitiy itself became a sponge. And if you walked away with all that you paid for, for anyone else’s benefit, even your own, you are condemned as being self interested, greedy, and a consumer Scientologist.

                And yes, when you look at the truth matter then, it is a rip off.

                But it only begins to be a rip off when you agree to give up your gains. Or pretend that you don’t have them for the benefit of the group or for someone that need to keep knowledge from surfacing.

                Go on, have the conversation now you made it through grade zero to have. I don’t have a problem with anybody here having and keeping their wins. It makes me dizzy when the people around me roller coaster.

              • HaHa, that is the truth. When I was on the ship once, I was pissed off about some stuff, and so when the PR lady (the Engllish one who always use to be on the Welcome to the ship film ) asked people one by one, ‘how is it going’ I started to tell her… she actually started backing up away from me! It was too funny, even though I had to handle stuff, I couldn’t believe my eyes. Her existence was false.

  78. @marildi “Knowing [the technology] is correct”–KSW. I take that to mean, knowing the “auditing” tech is correct. In the context of KSW, that is what LRH was talking about, the auditing tech.

    • Overall 10, thanks. I agree and that was my second thought when I wrote this p.s.:

      (February 16, 2013 at 5:14 pm)
      p.s. On second thought, questioning “any Scientology writing” is a much broader statement than questioning “the technology” [as in KSW 1]. So it still seems to me that the statement is too much of a generality.

      • Yes, it is too much of a generality when the statement is divorced from its preceding paragraph: “But, just like any other field of the mind and spirit – including psychiatry, psychoanalysis, and other religions and systems of spirituality – the moment one takes the diagnosis and treatment or practice scheme out of the hands of trained, responsible practitioners and applies it casually and inexpertly in the field of day to day human relations, disaster is close to inevitable.”

        Taken in context, it isn’t. It targets inexpert, knee-jerk labeling and judgmentalism, supposedly supported as the “right thing to do” by the many references to suppressive acts that can be found throughout LRH writings.

        • Sorry, Maria, but the context of what Marty meant by “anti-Scientology’ was perfectly clear and explicit in its own paragraph, and it’s also clear that he is attributing that meaning to “Scientology writings”. Have another look:

          “To make matters worse, there is A DISTINCT SP CHARACTERISTIC IN SCIENTOLOGY WRITINGS that takes precedence over the other dozens that align with the psychology field’s similar diagnostic characteristics checklist. THAT IS, if someone exhibits AN ‘ANTI-SCIENTOLOGY’ LEANING he or she is sure to be diagnosed as being an SP. TO QUALIFY ONE ONLY NEED QUESTION THE WISDOM OF ANY SCIENTOLOGY WRITING. This fact alone is probably more responsible for Scientology taking on the character of an insular cult than all others combined.” [my caps]

          • This is true, but in listening to early lectures it is quite clear to me that LRH equated “Scientology” with “good, helpful, social”; thus anyone who attacked it, he identified with “anti-social”, “suppressive”. It was a pretty good ruleof thumb litmus test, once upon a time. It also became an unsupportable generality, over time.

            As he himself wrote, “The frailty of showing how the harmful people can be known is that these then apply the characteristics to decent people to get them hunted down and eradicated.”

            That is essentially what has been happening within the CoS under the “leadership” of you-know-who. Social people have been driven out, expelled, declared, etc.

            This is not to say LRH himself did not sometimes misuse the rule of thumb or use it mistakenly.

            • Thanks, Valkov. Yes, I recognize that quote from “The Anti-social Personality, The Anti-Scientologist” PL. What is interesting about that PL is that the word “anti-Scientologist” is only in the title and no where in the PL itself. But in any case, what I clearly get from reading it is that the anti-social personality is against betterment groups – which would, of course, include being against Scientology as it is a betterment group, and thus the anti-social personality would be anti-Scientology.

              However, as I’m sure you know, sometimes the apparency of being “anti-Scientology” may be due to various other things (which can often be handled relatively easily) and not due to being against betterment groups, including Scientology, In other words, I didn’t get that it was LRH’s intention that the meaning of anti-Scientology could be stretched to mean anyone questioning any writings. But like you, I wouldn’t doubt at all that the CoS could put that interpretation on it.

  79. Is there any meat left on this Judgement bone?

    Well, let me take a sniff at it!

    Aaaaaha!

    Suppose I look at the stove and what I see is a pot, fire and steam.
    Then I think: the pot is hot (judgment!). Then I conjure up a bit of logic (at least most of the time) and think: if I touch it I will get burned!(logic/prediction)

    Another:
    I get ripped off by a pretentious SOB self proclaimed tech guru.
    Then I think: He can’t be trusted. (judgment!) Then the prediction again: If I or anyone else for that matter trusts the bloke again they will most likely be ripped off. (logic/prediction)

    (Recommended look up: “logic” in tech. dict.)

    What we do with the prediction is a subjective choice. That choice can be overshadowed by missing information easily. But when we know that it has happened already and the potential is related to a particular being then what is wrong with judgment and prediction? Not to judge in this case would be contra-survival but if we care about the third dynamic then not sharing the information is also contra-survival on the 3rd dynamic.

    Viva la judgment(alismness)! LOL (just kidding)

    I think judgments are not only necessary but at its elemental core we can’t even exist as human beings in this physical universe without them. Judgment is as important to humans as breathing IMO.

    What makes or brakes judgments is accuracy and honesty involved.
    The thing that is important not to miss is that those who wallow in the dishonest bands are endlessly dishing out words/phrases which are interpreted as judgments by the receiving party. In reality such originations (if I dare call it that) are seldom the result of honest 3rd dynamic considering logic/prediction. Instead it is ‘bank-rubbish’ such as computations, ser-facs or at best inaccurate judgments which are routed in A=As or hidden agendas. Of course such abuse in turn gives a bad name to judgments.

    I am beginning to see this whole SC struggle not even as a struggle of SC vs the world or SC wanting to better the world.
    It’s more like a dishonest vs honest struggle which is a human problem that’s been around as long as humans have.

    • BTW note that I have intentionally said: “what I see is a pot, fire and steam”.
      These are the evidence at hand. How long the pot has been over the fire, what is in the pot and such is unknown. What if there is ice in the pot and the steam is coming from spilled water boiling away? Then the judgment could be wrong.

  80. Thanks for the post, Marty.

  81. Every time. If you understand Scientology, and its so consistent…
    The Course Room was full of fun and oh so strange, there was no room for Judgment.
    LRH was exact and pretty pure on what was expected.
    Just read his words. And quote them more HERE plse. :)

  82. This is how I feel about people disconnecting from Marty. They have all piggy backed on Marty for income cycles, support, boyfriends, girlfriends, auditing friends and help.

    It is Marty and Mosey that spent 180 days under the Squirrel busters domestic terrorism. It is Marty and Mosey stalked harassed and fair gamed from Texas to Germany for taking a stand. It is Marty that has been sitting in Texas patching people up with their auditing whether they have money or not to pay for it. It is Marty and Mosey that pulled all the heat off the Freezone and made it possible for people to meet up out here and sell and deliver and receive auditing without worrying about death threats and domestic terrorism. Marty has taken the worse ass whipping out here from sadistic people. He has over 250 threads fair gaming him on ESMB on one side, David Miscavige on the other. He still has covered everybodies ass that needed help. He has continued to care about the people in front of him. From helping Daniel Montavo escape, and others, to helping the Headleys pay for their legal fees.

    He is not on any amends project that I can see. Everybody parked thier ass wherever they did when they did and contributed to whatever happened to them. Yes, I mean all of you. And me too.

    He and Mosey have built bridges, opened their home, opened their hearts.
    Shared whatever resources they have had. Because they CARE. Not because they are looking for applause or trying to set up some income cycles on the net.

    It pisses me off that someone, anyone, who has not walked that distance and couldn’t if they wanted to, is trying to set either one of them, or us, to look like fu*&^$g S.P.’s. That is straight up injustice and betrayal.

    This is a two way street. Most people here get it that they should watch Marty and Mosey’s back as well. This is not a gray area for me.

    Hubbard said, “A Team mate knows what the other team mates are doing and thinking and co ordinates thereby and there with”. He DID NOT SAY, “Wait until you think you can pull the rug out from under your team mate’s feet and get away with it and then go for it.”

    There are people that go into a Treason condition and pull others about them down into doubt and enemy. I watched it happen here. Who sent Marty a doubt formula? Nobody. Because if his stats are down , and none of us have done 1/10th of what he has, and what Mosey has, how can you put forth a doubt formula with a straight face? Which one of them had to cope with squirrel busters? Which one of them is auditing for free or donation? Which one of them got up off their ass and went to Germany? Which one of them has taken on more and faced this issue? Well, most of them were on honeymoon or fishing someplace while Marty and Mosey were deep into this political situation.

    Fuck this bullshit. Over 250 threads fair gaming Marty on ESMB and someone is over there posting, “Um..maybe Marty will take back his remark about us being a natter board”.

    For REAL? For REAL? How is that for some fu^&%$g injustice? A little bit of imbalance? That is as unbalanced as it gets! One fucking comment against over 250 threads fair gaming him and someone wants a f^%*^%g apology! This is how f*&%^$g INSANE it can get! That is BLINDNESS all the way. Makes it hard to believe anyone of them have suffered as they attest! When you can turn that into a victim situation you can turn ANYTHING into a victim situation!

    It’s time to get real and cover Marty and Mosey’s ass . This is the way it goes. Everyone who posts here is very intelligent. Survival is a combination of intelligence and force. Figure figure = doubt. For real.
    This is a two way street.

    If David Miscavige had personally strangled me to death, it could not out create all of the adventure, gains and exploration I have had in Scientology. And you KNOW it’s there or you wouldn’t still be here. You are curious. That is WAY up there.

    Marty, Mosey, Mike and Karen and all of us, all of us, have kept the porch light on against the madness of this impossible situation. Terrill Park has kept the Freezone Forum propped up for YEARS. I don’t want to come back in my next life to a planet with out Scientology.
    Don’t think this can happen without a few street fights. For the love of God just look at history.

    But it is just plain wrong to sit on the fence when you see people like Marty. Mosey, Les, Trey, Mike, Tony, anyone of us, taking an ass whipping. This is not Washington and this is not the White House. Scientology is in a Danger condition. It has practically been wiped out. The government is here to stay. Bypass normal habits and routines! Maximum creation, minimum destruction. Insist on it. Every action counts! We can not move on up a little higher if we don’t have some love and passion to back it up.

    There are kids dropping on the desert floor of Afganistan dressed in soldier uniforms and I gotta hear someone’s greatest need is an apology from Marty on ESMB? Someone is offended by thumb symbols?

    Somebody here isn’t hungry! Somebody here can not evaluate importance’s. Let’s look at the big picture! PLEASE!

    THIS is what Hubbard was up against!

    “Man’s worst difficulty is his inability to tell the important from the unimportant. “Every target is the same as every other target” is part of A=A=A.
    It takes good sense to be able to survey an area and find out
    1. What MUST be done.
    2. What SHOULDN’T be done.
    3. What is only desirable to be done.
    4. What is trivial.
    As Man all too easily specializes in stops he tends to stress what SHOULDN’T be done. While this enters into it, remember that it’s a STOP.
    STOPS ALL OCCUR BECAUSE OF FAILED PURPOSES.
    BEHIND EVERY STOP THERE IS A FAILED PURPOSE.
    A stuck picture or a motionless org are similar. Each has behind it a failed purpose.
    THERE IS A LAW ABOUT THIS-ALL YOU HAVE TO DO TO RESTORE LIFE AND ACTION IS TO REKINDLE THE FAILED PURPOSE. THE STOPS WILL AT ONCE BLOW.” L.R.H.

    There is some real trivial f&^$%#g bullshit going on around here.

    Marty and Mosey, and Mike, Karen, Louis who is facing that lawsuit, the people who established that A.O. in Israel, Claudio, these people are NOT dabbling in the trivial!

    Let’s keep the porch light on and the purpose hot. We are in a mess on this planet. Every action counts. That is MY judgement.

    • HOLY SMOKES — someone who gets as pissed off as I do and unlike me, doesn’t mince words.

      Marty and Mosey are two of the kindest, most generous people I’ve ever had the pleasure to meet. They freely open their home and their hearts to those interested enough to come meet them.

      They deserve every bit of love and support we can muster.

      Those who are all in a dithering about Marty whether on ESMB, Ortega’s comments (notice Tony doesn’t dis him), OR this new love only blog —

      I say — start looking at the three fingers pointing back at you whenever you point your finger.

      Seriously – we had better all grown up pretty damn fast before we find that the ground we are standing on is no longer there.

      We are in ALL of this together. The tragic murder by an Olympic hero has SOMETHING to do with YOU. The tragic murders by Christopher Dorner has something to do with YOU.

      DUH — EVERYTHING has something to do with YOU.

      Time to grow up.

    • o.m. I really like your comment. Ir rings very true.

    • oraclemysticism said in an earlier comment: “It is Marty and Mosey that pulled all the heat off the Freezone and made it possible for people to meet up out here and sell and deliver and receive auditing without worrying about death threats and domestic terrorism.”

      This is my observation too. Not only did they draw the fire, they also demonstrated in a very public way that one can practice one’s religion without interference from a Church intent on using trademark and copyright law to stop you from doing so outside of their authority. Remember when they got married? They were legally married by Mike Rinder, Minister of the INDEPENDENT CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY, announced by Marty on this blog on September 11, 2010. That was a MAJOR precedent and it has not been challenged to this day.

      There were 305 comments made on that post that day. Only two of them directly acknowledged this landmark action and its critical significance to anyone wishing to practice Scientology on an independent basis.

      It should be noted that no matter how you want to slice this, this action is in 100% violation of published and still active LRH policies on trademark and copyright. These policies are crystal clear in their intent and no amount of interpreting or applying the overarching concepts change their meaning one iota. Face it: it is not just a matter of disagreeing with the C of S. It also requires full and total disagreement with numerous LRH writings. It was NOT DM that instituted the concept of only one Church, only one brand, and copyright everything under that one entity, with no schisms and total devotion, thrusting out all possible deviations from “standard” ethics, tech or admin. DM is the enforcer, not the originator.

      Marty, Mosey, Mike, and any others who worked to put this landmark precedent in place, and those who flanked this action: I salute you, not because you are an authority, but out of deep respect.

      Its been a long haul, but I do believe celebration is in order, for the precedent stands unchallenged.

      Am I on the right track here Marty? Has enough time passed for it to stand without danger of challenge?

    • Righteousness.
      It needed to be said & you for sure said it.

    • You see over 250 threads fair gaming Marty on ESMB? Please point me to at least one and I will happily report it and make a huge stink as fair gaming is againsts the board policy and cruelty is not tolerated on that board either! Thank you!!
      Missy

      • I agree with Missy here! I’m not a fan of throwing the “fair game” term around lightly, because it implies that what the CoS is doing is little more than name-calling, when it is much more serious than anything that could be going on at ESMB! “Fair Game” is more than just talking smack about someone, it is a TERRIBLE policy abused by the CoS to hurt and damage enemies. Talking badly about someone may be crass, but it doesn’t rise to the level of Fair Game. I, too, would defend someone on ESMB who was a victim of fair game. Gossip and smack talk? Meh. Fahgeddabouddit.

    • What a powerful post, Oracle – talk about an accurate evaluation of relative importances,. You lay it out, across the boards!

      “THIS is what Hubbard was up against!” – such an accurate statement. Ron’s courage in persisting in spite of all the efforts to derail him was one of the traits I admired most about him.

      The same goes for Marty.

    • Agree with you re: “fuck that bullshit It pisses me off that someone, anyone, who has not walked that distance and couldn’t if they wanted to, is trying to set either one of them, or us, to look like fu*&^$g S.P.’s. That is straight up injustice and betrayal.” Yep, its left overs…false think from years of forced agreement.
      This blog is unique. It is theta, interesting, educational, and free speech occurs . People post videos, jokes, and beautiful things as well as bitch sessions. It is real and alive. I never look at ESMB or whatever because I have never found it to be of high quality. It is entheta. There’s enough entheta about LRH and or Scientology all over the place, without any more purpose than to stir up bank. That is simply not true of this blog. If others want to leave and go natter it up somewhere, then let them. If some want to create an ‘everything is beautiful’ blog, then they can take the prosac or Kool Aid with others who won’t look. I say, look and see what is and you’ll see evil, but you can also see beauty and create it.

  83. Im starting to suspect a judgemental person is judgemental regardless.

    Send a judgemental man to a Buddhist temple, you’ll create a man who views his newfound state of mind as a tool of superiority. I don’t think it is unique to Scientology at all. Christians can be incredibly fond of a judgemental position.

    Scientology may attract someone with that outlook, but Im really starting to think it indicates something a lot deeper, and Im not sure spirituality can help beyond a certain point/age.

    Depressing, but I don’t see a lot of change in this area for many people. At all.

  84. The book “Science of Survival” is the handbook on how to evaluate another person. It comes with a ‘Chart of Human Evaluation”. I don’t know of any other philosophy or discipline that has such a definitive text on the subject. (not saying there isn’t – just not any I can think of) I really had a lot of wins on that book and it is useful to know the intent of others in my dealings with them. However, I can very well see, how a ‘certainty” on the subject can spill over and make one a “know better” and judgmental – if not somewhat cynical about others. Its a tricky horse to ride and I agree with you Marty when you say it is something that must be curbed. I recognise that trait in myself now that you raise it, and I will be the better for it by tossing the attitude.

    On the flip side there is also a tendancy to judge people to be better than they really are too. For instance, someone who is OT 7 or 8, has been perceived by me in the past as being better than me. I have even been judgmental of myself. It is crazy either way.

    I really identified with what Monte said above.

    Very little can beat “granting of beingness” in others and self. I have had some great cognitions on this topic. Cool session! As for the key question – yes I do wish that others would have the wins I have had.

  85. Best Post Ever! Scientology and Psychiatry/Pyschology are closely related in many aspects without modern-day Scientologists even realizing it.

    This sums up the current membership of Scientologists in the church. “The result, bluntly, can denigrate into a community of untrained, arrogant, Monday morning shrinks passing the most condemnatory judgments upon one another at the drop of a hat.”

    And if you don’t think that Scientology is closely related to Pyschology, take a look at LRH’s own propaganda from 1956 trying to position Scientology as part of “that branch of psychology which treats of human ability” — notice the words “treats” here….not studies, not researches….but “treats” thereby implying a “cure.”

    See the picture of the booklet at https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=614351615247973&set=a.614351611914640.153118.601517986531336&type=1&theater

  86. I’ve never met Marty in person, but my gut feeling is that he is someone who has just decided to MAXIMALLY COMMUNICATE, and when any person does this (and I think Marty does it with a high level of ARC) you’re gonna ruffle feathers, ESPECIALLY within sort of a closed community that has depended previously on a certain accepted “line” or complete orthodoxy. And so there’s a backlash from those who cannot be fluid in their thinking or their observation, or can NEVER agree to disagree, to acknowledge that we CAN have different ways of looking at things.

  87. Just want to make a statement here. I don’t know who disconnected from who recently, as referred to in this blog. But I disagree with the idea of labeling and disconnecting with someone who does not agree with you on something, even if it is something you consider important.

    Just because you disagree with someone doesn’t mean you should disconnect from them.

    You can learn a lot, without compromising, from people who you disagree with. They are people with viewpoints. They have originations to make and most of them deserve to be heard.

    I would bet that there are no two people on earth that agree on every fundamental issue. How are you ever going to learn from and experience affinity, reality and communication from others if one disagreement means disconnection?

    Respect is a two-way street. How can you expect anyone to respect your ideas if you can’t at least show some respect for theirs?

  88. Marty & Mosey — I smile every time I arrive on this blog and the first thing I see is the photo of the three of you. Mosey, I am humbled and grateful that you choose every day to support the effort to embrace freedom.

  89. I found out the hard way that missing witholds on a PC is an effective way to get yourself judged by someone. Oh boy do you get judged. Even worse is screwing up a list and giving the PC a wrong item.

    Missed witholds and out lists occur in life too. Not just sessions. “Concentrated hell,” Ron says. Yikes.

    A really good friend of mine told me several years ago that if anything LRH may have said was found to be untrue then it opens the door to disbelieving anything LRH said, which then opens the door to squirreling. He ridged on any evaluation of Ron’s past and immediately siezed on any “logical” explaination for any outpoints.

    The entire subject of auditing rests on the concept of as-isness. A perfect duplicate of the picture or postulate or intention or confusion…time place form and event. Once you get that as-isness, all the charge is gone. Poof! Just like that.

    The random labeling of people has absolutely nothing to with as-isness.
    Judging others with random labels accomplishes nothing.
    “He is PTS.” Used by an auditor who programs for a proper handling and bringing the guy up to gentle cause is helpful.
    “He is PTS.” Used by someone as a reason to shun another, or make them wrong, or make them disconnect with another because of petty disagreements…well that is another story.

    After reading all the crap on LRH and the tech he developed and confronting the out-points and LOOKING without fear, I am left with more, not less certainty on many things.

    One thing I’m certain of is that I don’t have any out lists or missed witholds.
    Another is that the tech of out lists and missed witholds is true.
    Another is that if one uses the tech in a standard manner, it really helps people and can help one achieve a greatly elevated spiritual awareness that in turn, if used altruistically, helps one help others even more.
    Another is that if one holds to a certain standard the tech works better than if one messes around with it.
    Another is that if a person truly intends to help others, he will.

    Personally I very much appreciate this blog. Our third dynamic engram is not yet as-ised and the process needs to continue. I believe that we need to be very well informed regarding what the people on this planet think of our subject. We need to know what people are searching for and what they are agreeing with. When someone says “yea, that idea comes right out of the Vedic hymns” we need to be able, to some extent, to have an intelligent comm about it. He is really telling us HIS “R”.

    If someone says “bla bla bla L Ron Hubbard was this, that or the other thing, we need to be able to discuss that intelligently too. “Yea, he said he was just a man…I guess he was. But the truth is, the subject he developed has lasted this long because it works. Let me give you an example…”
    Easy, no witholds, no problem.

    I really like Steve’s blog, scientology-cult.com. I like the APIS forum. I like the iscientology blog.

    I like to have a place where I can go where succesful applications are discussed. No noise and confusion or LRH “bashing” or “other solutions” are allowed. I like it because the majority of my life is involved in standardly applying the tech so I can help beings go free.

    Here’s my “judgement.”

    Ron said in the article What I think of Auditors, “I consider all auditors my friends.”

    • This is an excellent point of view and very workable to my way of thinking. It’s really a matter of purpose. I see several purposes running as a thread through the various Scientology blogs and sites.

      – Whistle-blowing on current abusive or coercive practices
      – Sensational or titillating exposes a la gossip column
      – Philosophical discussion in terms of epistemology, ethics, etc.
      – Third dynamic engram running
      – Sense of community, connection, reconnection
      – Auditing technology, and its best practices in terms of workability
      – Teaching the auditing technology, and its best practices
      – Offering the auditing technology with a possible qual type function
      – Multiple viewpoint systems for analyzing consequences
      – Discussion and integration, consistency within the philosophy and development for use in various applications or social settings

      What seems to happen is that these purposes are often collapsed, and this results in derailing the purpose of a particular thread or blog.

      • Ron said in the article What I think of Auditors, “I consider all auditors my friends.”

        But he didn’t mind to smack his friends around if they appeared to be acting stupid. That is why people got over boarded on the class 8 course. That is why John McMasters and David Mayo and Otto Roose got beached and bitch slapped. Along with a whole catalog of auditors who went into what Hubbard perceived as enemy conditions towards him.

        Just keeping it real. :)

        If he believed in ethics conditions, all auditors above the condition of enemy were his friends. The ones in enemy or below were not his friends.

        • I know of a class five right now that is describing himself as a “power processing specialist” and delivering power over the phone. He has not done the briefing course. Which, by our standards, would define a power processing specialist.

          Now, I personally don’t have a problem with it. As it would seem to be an activity only possible between two consenting adults. So it’s none of my business. And it is not my practice and this falls within their civil rights. If they are happy, I am happy.

          But I don’t think Hubbard made ka kahn provisions for this path. As it has nothing to do with him or his brand. Between Marty, Jim, Steve and Lana, Marty is the only trained auditor between them, unless Steve Hall is and I don’t know about it.

          The truth is, if you think with the ethics conditions, I mean if they are real to you, and I know they are not to a lot of people, but, a person who is in the condition of normal or above with you, has the potential of being your friend. A person who can stand in normal or above can be a stable friend. If that person drops in condition though, that person is a potential enemy. Just like that.

          I ceased to think of friends in terms of name, identity, religion or group or time. I go by conditions on a daily basis. A person in the condition of enemy on the second dynamic, let’s say they are a raging enemy of a former spouse, will attract someone else in the condition of enemy to mate with. That is how it goes. A person in treason will attract others in treason. That is how extra marital affairs get flamed. A person in treason on any of their dynamic will be in treason to Hubbard and fuck up people with the tech. I don’t care how loyal they are pretending to be.

          Your potential friends are people that are in normal or above.

          This is no big mystery to figure out and manage. You can look at a person and see if he is in normal or above just by talking to him and looking at the condition of his dynamics. There are PLENTY of people in this world that are in normal or above that never heard of Scientology.
          With their case! They just don’t grant their case any beingness. Look at Anthony Robbins.

          People that are attacking Scientologists? At random? They are just stuck in an enemy condition. Go by the deed, not the breed.

          That is why there is a doubt formula, so you can evaluate a person’s worth before you set out to smack them around.

          I get someone attacking me on a constant without good reason? I don’t take it personally. I figure they are wallowing in an enemy condition straight across the dynamics.

          I have found I can bring people up condition just like I can bring them uptone. But just like you have to meet tone, you have to meet condition. That means you have to get down there and wallow in lower condition with them then pull the both of you back up at the same time.

          That is why people can fight and work it out and become friends again.

          But once someone hangs a burn notice on your back, you tend to fall from desire on the CDEI scale and the lifting up of the other person can go down into the enforce band. Parents spouses and lovers seem to manage that and work through it as the love is a power that transcends the rest.

          • And I have no purpose here to drag someone or anyone into an enemy condition against anyone else. Yes I spout off about David Miscavige because I think Scientology is a just cause. I think that is worth fighting for. All I am saying is, do the math. And plaes do not permit yourselves to be dragged into a lower condition towards Marty. Because I do not believe he is in a lower condition to anybody. That is a wrong item and a wrong indication for me. And an item that is being pushed on me that I do not want. He is being presented as an LRH basher, a squirrel and an S.P., he is being packaged and sold like that. And I am not buying that idea. I think it’s a mislabeling. And it is as disturbing as being given a wrong item in a session. So there, my protest read is over. I don’t like getting scammed. Or having someone try to pawn something off on me that has been alter ised so I am not to understand it’s true nature.

            • The majority of us, when we show our true colors, make a rainbow. :)

              • I do not believe you can disconnect from anybody you either love, or hate. Ever. I figured that out on L12. You can’t even disconnect from former selves you loved or hated. I don’t care what any golden rod says or how many letters of disconnection someone writes. You can only truly disconnect from someone you are indifferent about. That is the magic of auditing. You can get indifferent about it all.

  90. One thing I’d like to say about judgment is when one is going through an important issue such as disconnection with the church. It is very necessary to find an trusting reliable auditor or trained person who can help you. Someone to communicate with, who understands and doesn’t judge you.
    The one person who trusted and helped me was Ragne Mansfield, a Freezoner in Sweden. Who by email showed me sites and gave me links that helped me find answers to the many complicated questions I had, plus emotional support. Altho I am not an indie, tho wasn’t sure at the time, he had the courage to stick by me and be my friend and continues as such.

  91. “If you judge people, you have no time to love them.”
    Mother Teresa

  92. Search provides only one prior use of Re-education.

    “Mike Rinder exposes David Miscavige and his Scientology Inc torture and re-education camp called ‘the Hole.’ He discusses the mind set of a corporate Scientologist subjected to such treatment. He touches on other subjects of interest to Independent Scientologists, … Continue reading →”

    ML/A

  93. morelivesthanacat

    LRH once issued as policy a quote from an author unknown. It was easy to remember:
    “There’s so much bad in the best of us
    And so much good in the worst of us
    That it ill behooves any of us
    To talk about the rest of us.”

    • One of my favorites. Short, sweet, and so applicable.

    • Jean-François Genest

      Awesome, I LOVE this one! Thank you for quoting it !
      It is in OEC Vol 0 – Basic Staff Hat. I have often cracked it open and made Sea Org staff read it, especially those who had a quick “trigger-finger” on their “label gun”. It works wonders.

    • An oldy but goody! My grandmother used to recite it whenever she felt anyone was getting too judgmental!

  94. Yes, I really feel we need to throw off the shackles of those judgmental labels we use as Scientologists: “SP”, “PTS”, “1.1”, “downtone”, “nattery”, “just dramatizing”, “case on post”, “refuses to make it go right”,”just being right”, “out ethics”, “In Treason” (or whatever arbitrary condition) “making me wrong”, “motorvatorish”.

    Apart from being extremely judgmental they are LIMITING and cut communication short. Instead of trying to understand your friend or family member or neighbor you say “he’s just an SP” or “he’s PTS to his mother” This is limiting YOUR viewpoint and YOUR ability to understand what is going on in YOUR life. Lets not forget that your friend is YOUR third dynamic. Your mother is YOUR second dynamic. To the degree you don’t understand your dynamics you can’t understand your own life.

    People are not perfect, they mess up in life, they make bad decisions. Even LRH – God love him – (and I do too) was not perfect. Lets try and empathize and understand instead of label and shun. Understanding can be gained by communicating MORE and being willing to receive communication and see a viewpoint that you don’t necessarily like or agree with. Life isn’t black and white. We need tolerance….and lots of huggies :)

  95. As for me, I don’t and will not sit in judgement of any of you. I pretty much like you all, I don’t want to fight with any of you, with the exception of the true 2 1/2 percenters who are destroying others lives whom I will help to expose for the safety of ourselves and others, which is why I continue to support Marty’s blog in the exposure of the worse of the worst – DM.

    IMO there is a lot of healing that needs to be done from the exposure to the SP David Miscavige and the closer you were to him the more healing needs to be done, as from personal experience I found myself walking on eggshells around some that were closest to DM. I think Mike Rinder is an exception IMO. I learned not to ask questions for fear of what would happen, to be there and communicate was dangerous indeed, I did and was all but annihilated (I recovered and this particular individual had the grace and courage to apologize, some would not).

    That being said whatever the conflict may be, we need to stay focused and united on the true source of the problem and that is DM. Many have been set free to a degree but there is a lot of work to do yet, as the true SP is still at the Helm suppressing this fabulous technology. Fighting with each other weakens us and must cease, find a way to unite once again in a common purpose of freeing this tech from the suppression. Yes, none of us are perfect, but WTF, who is? – no-one!!!! So let’s stop judging each other!!!!!

    That’s my rant!

  96. I think the current church is what is making disconnection remain alive and well and enforceable with robotic zeal. I seriously think that given today’s current scene, LRH would have anything mentioning disconnection stricken from the records. It served a purpose in a cold-war era but is no longer useful and in fact is one of the key things that have made splintering so easy.

    All that aside, as a side note, back in the 60’s I think LRH had a Guardian Order, now an OSA NW Order where he recommends some books. One of them was Total Espionage by Curt Reiss. It basically lays out the Nazi org board and strategy and why it was so successful. A great book. One of the things it mentions early on is the invention of a spying “technique” (for lack of a better work) used by the Japanese and taken up by the Germans that “everyone must spy” and “everyone is a spy” … the idea was that all nationals abroad would act as spies and report data back home for analysis – I believe LRH made a mention of the faultiness of this in the Data Series (without mentioning the book).

    The point being that the current church culture is very much an “everyone must spy and everyone is a spy”. Mention a viewpoint different from “command intention” or a disagreement, and you are automatically reported on. When it turns into an ethics matter that involves a department 3 of an org, then you have a high chance of being treated like a PTS or SP or “out ethics scumbag” depending on how much that particular HCO has been corrupted with the Miscavige interpretation of ethics policies.

    This pits Scientologists against each other to a degree and keeps people wanting to talk about the things they are thinking, the outpoints within the church, but they are afraid to because they don’t want to be reported on as that opens up a can of injustice and witch burning tactics. The higher up the org board you go as a staff, or the higher the org for service, the crazier it gets and the further away from LRH you go, the closer to Miscavige you become.

    Anyway, given all this talk on disconnection, I think that if LRH were around he would likely do away with it or clarify that it’s a last resort and only for those directly on service lines, who are actually the EFFECT, undergoing active suppression and even then not necessarily permanently nor would the disconnection be so official. It’d be tactful and by the full self determinism of the person.

    In the lecture “About Rhodesia” LRH talked about running into a real SP. The description he gave in that lecture has always struck me and he even said not to hand out SP declares because most are just upset people and that when you meet a real SP you will know it.

    Anyway, 2 pennies.

  97. Passing judgement and labeling is common practice in a lot of religious cults. I’ve talked to many many ex-Jehovah Witnesses, Ex-Mormons, Ex-Amish, Ex-Orthodox Jews and even Ex-Polygamists and they’ve all experienced to a greater or lesser degree this judgement and labeling within their churches. One of the things I did to help me understand my experience with this cult was to meet up with Ex-Mormons / Ex-Jehovah Witnesses etc and compare notes – what an eye opening experience that was and still is. There are some truly damaged people who’ve left these cults and they really do need help coming to terms and dealing with their experiences, especially a lot of Ex-Jehovah’s who were sexually abused by “elders” in their church. A lot of them suffer from depression, anxiety and what is referred to as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD (yes another label) which is what a lot of military personnel experience after returning home. There are plenty of psychologists out there who are great at what they do and don’t medicate their patience, but truly help them through communication and understanding. To a greater or lesser degree we’ve all been through something traumatic with this church – again some more than others and I can tell you that talking to people who’ve left other cults has been one of the simplest ways for me to get over it and learn to laugh about it.

  98. Here’s how I see it: Some people are simply “doctrinaire”. They may be narrowly doctrinare on one subject, or broadly doctrinaire across the board.

    These people tend to be “judgemental”.Here are some definitions to carify what I mean:

    doc·tri·naire

    Adjective
    Seeking to impose a doctrine in all circumstances without regard to practical considerations:
    “a doctrinaire socialist”.

    doc·tri·naire
    n.
    A person inflexibly attached to a practice or theory without regard to its practicality.
    adj.
    Of, relating to, or characteristic of a person inflexibly attached to a practice or theory. See Synonyms at dictatorial.
    [French, from doctrine, doctrine, from Old French; see doctrine.]
    doctri·nairism n.
    doctri·nari·an n.

    doctrinaire
    adj
    1. stubbornly insistent on the observation of the niceties of a theory, esp without regard to practicality,
    suitability, etc.
    2. theoretical; impractical
    n
    a person who stubbornly attempts to apply a theory without regard to practical difficulties
    doctrinairism , doctrinarism n
    doctrinarian n

    Noun 1. doctrinaire – a stubborn person of arbitrary or arrogant opinions
    dogmatist
    drumbeater, partisan, zealot – a fervent and even militant proponent of something
    Adj. 1. doctrinaire – stubbornly insistent on theory without regard for practicality or suitability
    instructive, informative – serving to instruct or enlighten or inform

    I suppose it may have to do with a failure or refusal to obnose, confront, and grant beingness.

    But I try not to forget that each person has the right to communicate or not, and to what degree, as s/he chooses. That is part of the Code of Honor.

    Also, the condition part of which is “Don’t disconnect”, is the condition of Power. People working their way up to Power must sometimes choose whether to communicate or not, and with whom. Each person is working on his/her own purpose line, and that is how it ought to be.

    In the end the stew will be all the more savory, for having all these different cooks working on it.

  99. Jean-François Genest

    Nice post and info. So true. Sorry for the attacks you received. When putting order in, it is normal for disorder to take place.

    I also agree with the re-education concept, and “letting-go” of that labeling and judgmental culture. I found it annoying when I was staff & Sea Org. It went against the precepts of NO EVALUATION, NO INVALIDATION and THE GRANTING OF BEINGNESS. Unfortunately, it was commonplace.

    There also was/is a judgmental “labeling” that I disagreed with to a large extent: the one concerning illegal Pre-Clears (and Pre-OTs by extension). It was OFTEN heard in orgs (both service & management) that so-and-so was categorized and labeled: ” illegal PC “. [Access Denied] In Flag Bureaux it raised a Big Red Alarm if an org had found an illegal PC. It had to be handled IMMEDIATELY !!.

    ► I do wonder if Independent Auditors apply this policy to the letter.

    Per that policy, a person working for ANY government is to be denied auditing. Therefore, that EXCLUDES firefighters, road patchers and water-treatment workers (municipal), clerks who process driver’s licenses, toll-booth clerks (state/province), any clerk who works for any Federal Government, such as U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Education, Labor, Health & Human Services, etc. Social workers at each level, translators, etc. The Confederation of Canada also has a Federal Government so it applies here too. Here, hospitals and homes for senior citizens are provincially operated (state gov). So all nurses, medical personnel, personal support workers, etc. must be denied auditing. [hello ???]

    That still does not make sense to me. It goes against LRH’s concept of INCLUSION in his HCOPL Group Sanity. All of those government workers, at all levels, have at least a birth incident, perhaps have problems, ARC Breaks, losses, transgressions, accidents in which they were unconscious, etc.

    I can’t believe that those regular workers are considered potential “plants” with the intentions of infiltrating a Scientology Org, and cause damage. Not in this day-and-age.
    ► Mind you, a few “plants” of that sort might actually do some GOOD to The Radical Corporate Church right now. [ ;-) ]
    [to those who take every significance literally → it’s a joke]

  100. I’m suppressively reasonable.

    So to me, this uptightness among this recent decade or so of exited Scientologists are way more uptight, compared to the way more reasonable and open minded attitudes of those who “defected” in the 1950s and who wrote articles in the old 1950s era Aberee magazine, and also compared to those that exited in the early to mid 1980s and who showed up in the pages of the “Free Spirit” magazine in the 1980s and 1990s..

    I just spent a couple hours boning up on the “squirrels” of the 1980s and 1990s, and boy, it seems people here ought not get all bent out of shape by the shades of dissent from strict Hubbard absolutism.

    I just read, for instance, the very excellent reviews written in 1990ish, upon Jon Atack’s first edition “Piece of Blue Sky”, and boy, people who were independent Scientologists as of 1990s, per the two excellent reviews of Jon’s book done in “Free Spirit” showed remarkable reasonable and balanced smart attitudes.

    I wished more older timer independents who have seen it all, and lived through these last 30 years of exited official Scientologists would possibly comment here once in a while.

    • I’m a old timer but haven’t seen it all. Yes, would be nice to hear from some. But then they did what they could do and have turned it over to newer generations to carry forward. Tho there are still many around that are helping.
      However I will tell you, I’m familiar with the “Free Spirit” in ’84. After finishing a mission I was on, found myself in a delicate situation. By getting in touch with an old friend led me to the indies and David Mayo, and finding out some Why’s for that time period. The magazine and Mayo’s tapes pretty much saved my sanity and therefore I was not alone with my questioning thoughts anymore. Stayed in touch with them for several years, went to their first convention in San Fran and met my future mate shortly after. They, the ’80’s indies of course had many legal problems, also was destroyed from within by scio intelligence and law suits aplenty, as most of you know and it fell apart. I was playing wog much of the ’90’s.
      Today, actually since the internet, it is a different world and so many indie’s, ex’s, blogs, sites are available with information/facts, to help those that leave, and most WILL leave at some. Look at falling stats.
      A stupid me did it twice. Go ahead, laugh! I can now laugh at self too.
      Marty’s blog and others have been available for support to those hurting, and let’s face it, one does come out of there hurting in some way, and it’s important to have terminals who can relate to that.
      OSA and DM are doing it’s best in every way, or in using anyone, to undermine and disable the indies or ex’s who support, educate and encourage those who want major changes in the organization.

    • Chuck, I find it interesting that Jon Atack, as Chairman of the UK OT Committee Worldwide, signed the apparent Ethics Order #1/SP Declare of David Miscavige in 1984. This was after Miscavige didn’t show up for the Comm Ev on him that had been called a few months earlier.

      http://www.scientology-cult.com/1984-sp-declare-on-david-miscavige.html

      • Yes, if you research closely, each of the later very harsh critics of Hubbard and Scientology, there will be a snippet period directly after them getting out (of course this does not fit all exiting members who turn into the “harsh critics”, whatever that means, I mean the famous harsh public critics who’ve written books, done media, been on TV, and whose viewpoints are basically 100% today anti Hubbard’s totalism and anti Scientologists pretty across the boards, freezone and independents included), so I hear you!

        I’ve seen it too! Gerry Armstrong had one or two milder thoughts about Scientology and Hubbard, I’ve either read or listened to, before he wised up and turned fully against the evils he sees in Hubbard’s work.

        If I go into Scientologist mode, use my LRH training, I think of how start, change stop, which LRH borrowed from the Vedas, is basically what is also today the ‘bell curve” and also the “learning curve”.

        I think it is totally valid to look at all of our lives, in terms of the start, change, stop, or the create, survive, destroy, and then expand our views and look at things in terms of learning curves, and bell curves. I think, frankly, we all, and all of our thoughts, falls on these “curves” and “arches” of transition.

        As we age, we naturally have some change in our thinking, etc, etc.

        • I don’t fully agree with what you say.
          There is a different cycle of action involved.
          A thetan can always choose if he falls for the “crate-survice-destroy cycle” or if he recognises his involvement in the “CREATE, create-create-create, create-counter-create, (or) no creation, nothingness” – cycle.

          As for the above people, they just ceased to create-create-create what they started creating. It may be, they encountered to much opposition and “lost ground”.

      • Yea that ethics order Jon Attack issued was well distributed
        way back then with Indepts free zone was beginning and later
        addition those in Rons Org also got it . It was not expected DM
        he would appear.And in Dm’s eyes probably at the time didn’t
        see it , even if so would just ensured thatit got swept under the
        carpet, because at that time he was to busy destroying Mission
        Holders and breaking up succesful groups and firing upstats
        off their Posts and sending them to the RPF after hrs and hrs
        of sec checks, aswell as sending hetch men around to enturblate the
        depedence movement.

  101. Ok, I have come to see this situation hopefully more clearly.

    I still think you should have stated specifically who and what you were talking about. I think that would have made more obvious that it should have been handled more privately (if possible).

    I think the lack of detail leaves it open to speculation and innuendo.

    I think there is a thing here that needs to be cleaned up, or it would be better regardless of what people do afterwards.

    I am still assuming this is related to a blowout you had with Steve Hall in the Judgement blog.

    I dont know how to accurately describe what happened after that because it would be more speculation.

    I like the content at the iScientology.org and blog. I like the people posting there. I also like the people here.
    Well, theres no one here I dislike, I just feel a little more R for the people posting there.

    I don’t consider this blog to be the central hub of independent scientology, as I see it anyway. I don’t mean that in a bad way, just that it’s ok for different purposes to have different homes.

    I think the iScientology.org site and blog are definitely needed and valuable, but to the degree there has been conflict entered into it somewhere I think it will be hindered from accomplishing it’s much needed purpose.
    No one has convinced me (or tried) that Marty Rathbun is a Suppressive Person. If a real Disconnection (not just out of comm) has occured I think it is the wrong handling and will cause further upset and problems.

    I therefore advise all parties involved to accept responsibility and to clean this up. Then I think the real purposes(s) can shine. And I do like the purposes and goals being postulated over there. For my money the future of independent scientology is being postulated over there. But it should not be in a competition or games condition with this blog (unless it is some sort of high toned game) .

    • Chrisman9…I think we are on the right road….

      “The only “disconnection” I’ve engaged in of late is to disconnect the charge cord from my meter after delivering an auditing session. It was fully charged and ready for the next one :-)”-Jim Logan

      “I never disconnected.”-Steve Hall

      Warriors get tired, they get injured in battle, and they can disagree on how to proceed within the fight. In an incautious moment they can even turn their swords on each other. But it is not real!

      Even when they face each other in anger they recognize the man they face is not the enemy. Later, when the battle has been won you find the same warriors raising a mug of suds in an arm over the shoulder embrace, laughing, celebrating because the real enemy has been injured or vanquished.

      There is only one real enemy.

    • I think you need to stop “masturbating” yourself.

    • I think you need to cool off.
      Stop “Figure-figure”.
      Relax….
      It’s just a blog.
      If you want to go to war with David Miscavige, just do it.
      Stop blaming.
      Start having fun. Enjoy your new life.

    • I liked the iScientology site from the start.
      It has a good, positive aim.
      Steve made other sites concentrating on abuses (scientology-cult, rediscover-scientology).
      The iScientology Site is unique as it concentrates on the positive aspects of Scientology and gives a space to rekindle the higher purposes of Scientologists and Auditors, creates a blog/forum for people who want to use and deliver Scientology.

      Is it a substitute for Marty’s blog?
      No.
      This blog here is also unique but has a different approach. And it is a private blog from Marty. Marty is doing a load of good work.
      I love this blog as it helped me to understand (through multiple view points) what happened to the church. However, there is still a lot of unconfronted material from the time between around 1975-1990, as I could see in the “KSW” blog-post. That’s where some good guys disappeard from here.

      Of course all this “labeling” is a stupid activity.
      I for one don’t want to be labeled a “KSW-maniac” just because I say it would be great to have all the original materials collected and preserved.

      It’s great to know that well intentioned people are working on projects in order to safeguard the technology and to keep Scientology applied.
      And it is also great to know about people who do something against the suppression and abuses.
      After all it’s all part of the Code of a Scientologist (re-revised version).

      P.S. I didn’t hear any bad about Marty. I only have seen the conversations here on this blog.

      Please get your originations handled and the ARCx’s blown.

      Love,
      SKM

    • What a troll. Don’t feed the trolls.

  102. I’ve heard there was a secret chord
    That David played, and it pleased the Lord
    But you don’t really care for music, do you?
    It goes like this
    The fourth, the fifth
    The minor fall, the major lift
    The baffled king composing Hallelujah

    Hallelujah, Hallelujah
    Hallelujah, Hallelujah

    Your faith was strong but you needed proof
    You saw her bathing on the roof
    Her beauty in the moonlight overthrew you
    She tied you to a kitchen chair
    She broke your throne, and she cut your hair
    And from your lips she drew the Hallelujah

    Hallelujah, Hallelujah
    Hallelujah, Hallelujah

    Baby I have been here before
    I know this room, I’ve walked this floor
    I used to live alone before I knew you.
    I’ve seen your flag on the marble arch
    Love is not a victory march
    It’s a cold and it’s a broken Hallelujah

    Hallelujah, Hallelujah
    Hallelujah, Hallelujah

    There was a time when you let me know
    What’s really going on below
    But now you never show it to me, do you?
    And remember when I moved in you
    The holy dove was moving too
    And every breath we drew was Hallelujah

    Hallelujah, Hallelujah
    Hallelujah, Hallelujah

    Maybe there’s a God above
    But all I’ve ever learned from love
    Was how to shoot at someone who outdrew you
    It’s not a cry you can hear at night
    It’s not somebody who has seen the light
    It’s a cold and it’s a broken Hallelujah

    I did my best, it wasn’t much
    I couldn’t feel, so I tried to touch
    I’ve told the truth, I didn’t come to fool you
    And even though it all went wrong
    I’ll stand before the Lord of Song
    With nothing on my tongue but Hallelujah

  103. Ain’t got no home, ain’t got no shoes
    Ain’t got no money, ain’t got no class
    Ain’t got no skirts, ain’t got no sweater
    Ain’t got no perfume, ain’t got no beer
    Ain’t got no man

    Ain’t got no mother, ain’t got no culture
    Ain’t got no friends, ain’t got no schooling
    Ain’t got no love, ain’t got no name
    Ain’t got no ticket, ain’t got no token
    Ain’t got no God

    What about God?
    Why am I alive anyway?
    Yeah, what about God?
    Nobody can take away

    I got my hair, I got my head
    I got my brains, I got my ears
    I got my eyes, I got my nose
    I got my mouth, I got my smile
    I got my tongue, I got my chin
    I got my neck, I got my boobs

    I got my heart, I got my soul
    I got my back, I got my sex
    I got my arms, I got my hands
    I got my fingers, Got my legs
    I got my feet, I got my toes
    I got my liver, Got my blood

    I’ve got life , I’ve got my freedom
    I’ve got the life

    And I’m gonna keep it
    I’ve got the life
    And nobody’s gonna take it away
    I’ve got the life

  104. Mr. Backlash, Mr. Backlash
    Just who do you think I am?
    You raise my taxes, freeze my wages
    And send my son to Vietnam

    You give me second class houses
    And second class schools
    Do you think that all colored folks
    Are just second class fools?

    Mr. Backlash
    I’m gonna leave you
    With the backlash blues

    When I try to find a job
    To earn a little cash
    All you got to offer
    Is your mean old white backlash
    [ From: http://www.elyrics.net ]

    But the world is big
    Big and bright and round
    And it’s full of folks like me
    Who are black, yellow, beige and brown

    Mr. Backlash
    I’m gonna leave you
    With the backlash blues

    Mr. Backlash, Mr. Backlash
    Just what do you think I got to lose
    I’m gonna leave you
    With the backlash blues
    You’re the one will have the blues
    Not me, just wait and see

  105. Thanks for the post Marty- it opens up a whole host of differing viewpoints! What strikes me most is that corporate Scientology has become judgemental about its own members – the Scientologists who are actively working to better conditions. And in doing so, has set up a branding system that defeats its own ends. Karen very humorously laid out the gradient scale of ‘SP’ for Scientologists. Looking back 30 to 40 years, the term SP was better reserved for those who were destructive of society… those who were actively destroying the lives of individuals, groups and nations, and in that regard I had no reservation in declaring to myself and others that such and such person was ‘SP’ due to the nature of their crimes. I had the experience of investigating folk who were doing psychosurgery – wiggling icepicks through the brains of victims – with no compunction or humanity, or using chemical coshes. They in turn, were connected with Nazi collaborators in Interpol, who in turn were forwarding mass false reports about Scientology and LRH. Were they SP by any proper definition of the term? Sure. Their destruction was apparent in the incoherent burblings of their drugged incapacitated victims. And up till around 1982 Scientology and related groups were active in rooting out and exposing such destructive influences in society. We stopped psychosurgery in our particular country as an accepted treatment. But around that time there was an organizational edict, to go softly softly. We had gone too close to the bone with mind control exposes perhaps, to a point where the real SPs were close to declaring Scientology a terrorist/subversive organization, with all that that entailed (which was not a pretty picture really). However that change in policy direction, affecting OSA mostly, has created a parodym shift in how ‘suppression’ and ‘suppressives’ are defined. OSA had its wings clipped, and no longer pushed the boundaries of social acceptance as the champion of freedom. The ‘Freedom’ mag back then was a hardhitting, news busting broadsheet that was creating acceptance of Scientology with the media and public alike. It impinged. It exposed rotten spots of society and the SPs behind the bad conditions. Dianetics and Scientology’s expansion in the 70s and 80s had ridden on the the back of this white horse. Now the ‘Freedom’ mag is a curiosity of infighting amongst Scientologists alike. How could it have come to this? OSA, with no enemies to fight, has chosen to make their own. In my view, OSA has come right down the CDEINR scale to refusing Scientology to the many, and especially those who particularly deserve it – namely those contributing to this blog! And that’s on the basis of being judgemental towards Scientologists, who are after all, the very people aware enough to see that conditions need to be changed, and that the world could be a better place with the application
    of LRH tech and a lot of auditing!
    In my experience with labelling an SP within the organization, the only validity with it was where the condition involving an SP was markedly turned around as a result of the declaration. And only then on the basis of a Comm Ev duly convened and carried out. If the conditions did not immediately improve, then the declare was wrong and was undeclared.
    Even then it was seriously considered and the ethics gradients were applied, so you only tied the knot as far as was needed for ethics to go in.
    How far afield is it now! I was ‘conditionally declared’ by a kangaroo Comm Ev and it seems my only way to retribution is to empty my bank accounts and rack up credit card debt to become a Patronous Meritous SP! (Another one for the collection Karen!)
    To me, the judgement of the organization has been skewed by DM driving it into self-consumption, completely missing the targets as laid out in the Aims of Scientology, and instead erecting its own gallows in a manner even George Orwell in 1984 could not have predicted. The SP label is now the primary tool of choice being used to crush dissent while the express train is derailed and the gravy train carries on its merry way to oblivion!

    • Gayle Smith aka TroubleShooter

      I don’t know who this is above but I am TroubleShooter. It has been my moniker since ’09. Please change your name.
      Gayle Smith aka TroubleShooter

    • “Now the Freedom Mag is a curiosity of infighting amongst Scientologists alike”…”OSA, with no enemies to fight, has chosen to make their own”…tragic and true.

      • Excuse my paraphrasing, but somewhere in SOS LRH mentions about how a 1.1 subversive group with no further designated outside enemies will devour each other. Wow, this is what’s happening.

  106. It seems that people who happily label others find a sense of security in doing so.It seems to give them great satisfaction that LRH or somebody else gave them a license to discard what is mysterious or apparently dangerous so they do not have to look and get their feet wet.It is a cowardly way of looking at others but allows for a life of self satisfaction that one or two words can box somebody in …problem solved…
    I agree that education is key.
    Disconnection is a process that happens naturally in life when one doesn’t see an end to enturbulation .Maintaining a good road good weather comm line but giving nothing of importance or deeper meaning is disconnection to me,simply a protection mechanism right or wrong.
    I have had some horrendous recruit cycle in my family and was able to observe that,amongst other tricks, without labelling the recruiters didn’t have a leg to stand on but it eventually turned against them and killed their cycle.
    But that’s because I was trained and duplicated LRH.
    So yes,education,that’s what it is all about.

  107. Marty, I do realise that writing an essay like this and thereby establishing this clear position, especially with the great amount of dogmatic believing that is present in some, does take a lot of personal integrity. I respect you enormously for it.

    Best regards,
    Thilo Schulz

  108. Pingback: The Psychopath Test | Moving On Up a Little Higher

  109. Pingback: The Scientology ‘Why’ Trap | Moving On Up a Little Higher

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s