Reverse Scientology: Hypnotism

A lot of people have noted that Miscavige’s events and speeches are taking on more of an hypnotic sounding tone, and yet his sheep don’t seem to notice. There are also many comments here wondering aloud how on earth kool aid drinkers can keep compulsively drinking kool aid in the face of the abuses escalating within the church.   I believe the following may shed a bit of  light on those concerns.

David Miscavige developed a technique that he called “rolling thunder” for his event presentations.  Mike Rinder and others who worked on events over time can describe this far more competently than me since I was not so intimately involved in the event evolutions as they were.  But I know this much, Rolling thunder consisted of a series of “facts” and “stats” of the church – all exaggerated, and some made up out of whole cloth – being forcefully communicated to the audience and accented with overwhelming and building music, lights and graphics being flashed in the recipients’ faces – until the climax of an “applause line” is reached.   “Rolling thunder” is considered achieved if, and only if, the entire crowd is swept to their feet in adoring, accepting, and rapturous AGREEMENT with the “applause line” of the speaker.  Miscavige was obsessed with ensuring his speeches in particular had several “rolling thunder” moments. Over the years, he weeded out the involvement of other speakers in the events until over the past few years there has only been one, David Miscavige.  When you add to the equation that virtually all church of Scientology staff have been forced, coerced and conditioned into immediately and savagely punishing the slightest indication of “doubt” about the infallibility of David Miscavige that manifests itself with any church staff or public, you’ve got a perfect recipe for disaster.  That is, mind controlling hypnotism on a mass scale.

While reading a section of the Phoenix lecture – Axioms, Part III, on the subject of how Scientology can be reversed to effectuate hypnotism – all of the above came back to me.   I believe the following passage sheds light on what Scientology public have been subjected to, increasingly, for the past twenty years in very regular, predictable intervals.  

The whole of existence, actually, is run very much like an hypnotic trance.  How do you hyptnotize somebody?  Well, you get them to agree with you.  And then you get them to agree with you a little bit more. Oh, most people think that it’s done by watches or something or other. It’s not done that way. It’s done in a very interesting way.

I don’t know much aboutWestern hypnotism. I myself studied hypnotism in the East and when I came over to America again, I wondered what on earth this strange practice was that these people were practicing and calling hypnotism.  Because it wasn’t even vaguely what is taught in the East to induce trances.  It’s quite remarkable that hypnotism is inducible on small or large groups.

Now, the worse off a group is, which is to say, the less communication they have, actually, the more communication can be forced upon them. And you can get a form of hypnotism there.  But the interesting thing is that they must have been prepared by an enormous number of agreements before they got into that state. In other words, somebody else prepared them, so they didn’t care who they agreed  with after a while.

Anybody in a uniform walks up to a soldier, if that uniform has a higher rank on, the soldier will obey them. Well, this is a form of hypnotism.

Now, you can take an audience and simply get them to agree with you. And you get them to agree more and more and more and more and more and the next thing you know  — and, by the way, when I say ‘agree with you’, I mean you could get them to agree first that you were simply standing there.

And then, the next thing that you could get them to agree to is the fact that they were listening to you. And then you would give them a few little things on which they would agree with.  And the next thing you know, you could tell them that the world was on fire and the audience would rush out to find out.  Or maybe they just sit there and burn. It’s quite interesting. But you could move it out that way.

Now, what is this all about?  Does that mean that anybody bringing about an agreement would bring about hypnotism?  Oh no. The reason why in Scientology we do not bring about a hypnotism, even by Opening Procedure by Duplication – every Case V, that’s had this run on him claims, it’s a way to induce a trance – but every single one of the tenets of Scientology could be reversed and with a bad intention, and so forth, could be worked out in the opposite direction.

We are undoing the agreements which people have been making for 76 trillion years. Only we’re undoing them, so this makes them freer and freer and freer.

Now, show you this fellow on the stage who simply gets the audience to agree and agree and agree and agree and then tells them the place is on fire. Oh?  He isn’t really going in the direction of making them freer, is he?  His intention for this is entirely different.

It isn’t that intention is above agreement. It’s that consideration is always above agreement.  And he is trying to work them into a situation where they will accept what he says without question. We’re not interested in Scientology, in anybody accepting what we say without question. We ask them to question it. We ask them to please look at the physical universe around you, please look at people, at your own mind and understand, thereby,that what we are talking about happens to be actual.  This is the series of agreements. These are. They aren’t just fancy ideas.

Let us also consider the following facts.  First, over the past thirty years the church’s Bridge has altered to consist on average of more than fifty percent security checks. And those security checks are done within an imposed mores that considers the highest crime one can commit is to question the infallibility of David Miscavige.  Second, over those same thirty years church staff have been pressured and coerced into immediately, and ruthelessly, punishing anyone who might manifest the slightest doubt about the veracity of the utterances of Miscavige.  Third, RTC has been programmed to immediately target and destroy the life of anyone who dares report on false reports delivered in events by Miscavige. Those are people who actually observed arrogantly announced Miscavige “facts”  to not in fact exist in the physical universe. Fourth, church policy has evolved that has any member seriously punished for exposing himself or herself to any source of information (by personal contact, by way of media, or the internet) that does not agree with Miscavige’s official state of Scientology utterances. 

Is there really any question why once intelligent and caring people are now acting like so many cattle dutifully lining up for slaughter?

372 responses to “Reverse Scientology: Hypnotism

  1. “Is there really any question why once intelligent and caring people are now acting like so many cattle dutifully lining up for slaughter?”

    Yeah, I still don’t get it. Maybe I never will.

    • I think it takes more to come out of agreement than it does to go into agreement. Even those who left the church cling to many of the agreements we shared while inside. Which brings me to a point.

      Why do some leave when others do not, given the same level of exposure to agreement/hypnosis over time.

      I have always felt that it takes someone getting mistreated in order for the light to come on in their head. Then all the agreements are put on hold . They are not done away with, just given a temporary backseat.

      The mistreatment can be any number of things and we all know what it was that sent us individually out the door or into this blog or some other venue.

      And to the extent the agreements we had built up over the years are still in force, such as “the tech works”, LRH was a genius”, “managment sucks”, etc, we are still willing to beat those drums. The agreements are still there.

      My point is people, especially public scientologists, “look” at this blog or at the st.pete times article or AC360 AFTER something happened. They will still have their agreements for the most part and will do with them as they choose as they move forward.

      Those still in just havent been burnt yet or they are too far gone. It happens. If there is someone who left the church for altruistic reasons only after being involved for many years I would say you are in the minority. And maybee you gave it an altruistic face, but most likely there was something that burnt you first. It was a first dynamaic reason, not a third.

      How long it takes a staff member to leave might have something to do with their tolerance for abuse which could itself be tied into an agreement within the group about putting up with a bunch of hardships, abuse , etc, for the cause.
      We have all been part of the same drumroll, PR, Sales Pitch and Hypnosis. Why do some stay and others go? Its personal. Combination of getting burnt and their commitment level to begin with.

      And even once out, the agreements/hypnosis still haunt many in their dreams and other ways. Like I mentioned in the beginning, its easier to go into agreement than get out of it.

      • Independent Scientologist

        For my wife and I, horrible treatment is exactly what caused us to wake up!

        Ron Matlock

        • For what it’s worth, it was the continuous and unrelenting attacks on me and my wife and children that finally drove me/us out of any routine contact. I had been willing to continue in a light manner with the COS, in spite of the embarrassing events and moronic local staff, but the obsession with the local org on “getting me” was just too much. It was all so needless.

          • Either you are with us or ….. That’s the drill

          • As a staff member of many years, your statement of “moronic local staff” grates the wrong way. Frankly, if you were not talking about staff, but of people in general – I would still take offense. That’s a generality for starters. Furthermore – you are responsible for the choices you make and the actions you take. Perhaps you made some “moronic”, selfish choices in your quest for OT. Or perhaps you are merely trying to bullbait and/or derail from DM to “staff”.

      • Not everyone has to be mistreated to see the light. LRH himself gave us the proper attitude with which to regard Scientology: “We’re not interested in Scientology, in anybody accepting what we say without question. We ask them to question it.” If one can maintain that viewpoint and keep the eyes open while moving up the Bridge (and some do) then somewhere along the way, even without experiencing personal abuse, the outpoints of what’s happening in the organization outweigh the plus points of belonging to it, and one makes a causative decision to walk away.

        If there is one single lesson that we should take away from our experience with the CofS, I think it’s this: Never stop questioning, even with groups, subjects and activities that we have already agreed with.

        • I may be in the minority then, but when I learned about recent abuse at the hands of Miscavige (and not just a one-time flash of anger or some such, but a continuing, repeating and even worsening pattern of cruel and violent abuse), and that these reports were coming from those as high-up and dedicated as Marty and Mike, that was enough to get me to leave the CoM.

      • There is a lot of truth to that. I can’t count the times I’ve advised someone that a friend or loved one is still in because their tolerance level for abuse has yet to be reached.

        • Problem is, one shud not need abuse of oneself as 1st dynamic to walk away. Maybe the problem is those still in aren’t really 3rd dynamic aware enough? Lots of “small awareness beings” who ultimately resonant and agree with what miscavige represents… Or am i wrong?

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        What prompted me to wake up was not personal abuse (1rst dynamic mistreatment) by the Church of Scientology.

        What initiated my free thinking was the Church of Scientology’s censorship, especially when they came out with their nanny malware software they wanted all Scientologists to install on their computers. You just don’t do that to a Declaration of Independence lover and Bill of Rights Patriot!🙂

        That was it for me. Then, I knew there was real malfeasance in the Church of Scientology.

    • Victoria: The Sufis believe that there are 70,000 veils over reality.

      Through prayer and practice these veils can be lifted and one can unite with God or ultimate reality or what IS, which is TRUTH.

      An evil person will ENSURE that NO veils are lifted and IF they had been, will swiftly PUT THEM BACK.

      ONE of the methods of locking down these veils, is to create an atmosphere of excitement, euphoria. Think marching bands. Think motivational speakers. Crescendo builds.

      Anything that gets you to look OUTSIDE for answers, rather than inward is really hell-bent on making you less YOU and more THEM.

      LRH auditing guided a person to look for answers within.

      dms religion works to keep those veils intact so that you never see YOURSELF and you never LOOK.

      It is IMPOSSIBLE not to have a thought or two about how odd or strange scientology has become, one therefore becomes fearful of LOOKING IN (thought-stopping) and thus fixates always and only on looking OUT at dm, his pillars, his stats, his roaring ovations.

      It’s all to keep you from ever looking within yourself beneath those 700,000 veils blocking reality. Truth is within.

      WH

      • Opps — 70,000 veils (not 700,000, last line) but whose counting?🙂

      • WH,

        I assume that what you mean by looking inside has to do with trusting your own integrity rather than the “insights” of others.

        I’ve found that it doesn’t matter what direction you’re looking as long as you find truth and understanding. In, out, up, down. Doesn’t matter.

        Lies can be placed anywhere. It’s our lot to learn what is truth and what is a lie.

        And what about all those layers of dimension and universes which really obscure direction?

        My head is spinning.

        Michael

        • If your head is spinning – it’s a good start as the Sufi’s were known to practice spinning — “whirling dervishes” — just kidding.

          Rumi, IMHO, is a brilliant mystic who through beautiful poetry and short pithy statements attempted to bring to light the ineffable/unknowable.

          LRH spoke of 3 baskets — one of which was the unknowable – and that what he was trying to do was bring the unknowable to the knowable basket — and he said — (paraphased) that it didn’t matter to him if it meant reading colored sand to gain insight into the unknowable.

          I was attempting – obviously not well – to address Victoria’s comment that she didn’t understand HOW people could get hypnotized by an event from dm.

          I was trying to point out that we ARE already asleep/hypnotized by thousands of veils of delusion.

          dm is making those delusions more SOLID and not allowing for anyone to wake up.

          Didn’t mean to make your head spin.

          WH

          • WH,

            But, “if you give a mouse a cookie”…
            And if you wake me up…. I’m going to need coffee, and then I’m going to need something to read while I drink my coffee, and then….

            I do understand what you’re saying about the veils and about being asleep. I’ve been observing how pure awareness as source is separated from experience by these “veils.” I never would have used “veils” to describe this because I’m not culturally exposed to veils. But, the description is so apt. So many layers of intervening material between pure awareness and what we experience in this universe.

            As for what you write, the skill of writers depends much on the skill of readers. Doesn’t matter how skillfully you write if the reader is dense. Very few understand or appreciate Shakespeare these days.

            I was just trying to move one of them darned veils so I could see what you intended. I enjoy your ideas quite a bit. Even when we disagree. Our disagreements are minor compared to our agreements.

            Michael

            • Twasn’t I that used veils — but Rumi — and the Sufi’s — but I think it’s really very cool. Especially since a few gossamer veils are somewhat easy to see through, and so one would think — I have no veils over my eyes.

              It’s when those veils get added and added and added that they become over time 70,000 veils and are as thick as the Holland Tunnel – or more.

              And yet — since they were taken on, one at a time most likely – the owner thinks nothing of it.

              I often try to imagine what it would be like IF I were AWAKE.

              Too many veils — can’t get it (yet)

              Indeed we don’t disagree actually …

              WH

    • Marty, come back home. It really issnt so far away.

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Victoria,

      Have you ever been in and out of the inculcation of any religious doctrine, such as Christianity, when you were raised into it?

      How about in and out of the inculcation of the event of 9/11?

      Or what about in and out of the inculcation of government schools?

      Even in and out of the inculcation of what inflation really is?

      Or in and out of the inculcation of you must be conscripted to “pay your fair share” of taxes?

      Or in and out of the inculcation of using the punishment drive theory of raising kids?

      Or in and out of the inculcation of using anger, blame, shame and regret to control others, instead of working with others’ natural willingness to want to contribute to life voluntarily to make it more joyful for all.

      All this programming (“alledged education”) is inculcation which is difficult for many or even most to escape from.

      Hopefully, all us can and will regain our own free mind back, to analytically think with the data in any subject. That opposite of that Scientologists call “implanting”.

      The inculcation brought to many Scientologists is not an isolated problem for just Scientologists. It is done to most of The People on a lot of subjects, worldwide.

      Essentially, most of humanity has been hypnotised, not just Scientologists. Perhaps with church Scientologists, you just see a more obvious, vivid, higher degree of it.

      To escape any of this unfortunate inculcation is difficult (to say the least) and takes a lot of courage, alert intelligence (vigilance) and perservance.

      Once there is more understanding of this travesty of inculcation, it’s much easier to express compassion and empathy to what’s really going on.

      And then be able to do something constructive about it.

    • For sure the blind is leading the blind or should I say the members are deaf dumb and blind

      Blind Faith
      Devotion
      Stupidity

      Call it what you want, DM has quite a game going on with alot of rich followers who justifies day after day the money they give and the time they share with the church. People just are not willing to LOOK and take their head out of the sand

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        Rory Medford,

        That makes me sad and feel hurt inside.

        So I try to help, however I can, to open up eyeslids just a little more.

        I believe that’s the intention of most good people here.

        You wrote, “People just are not willing to LOOK and take their head out of the sand.”

        If that were true, I and many others here would not be here today.

        I completely understand the frustration of others not waking up as soon as we’d like that to happen.

    • I never found it in the least mysterious given that so many SO recruits back in the ’70s signed “billion year contracts” as an irrational expression of faith alone, without either thought or reason.

      As time has illustrated all too clearly, people of such character can easily be made to do ANYTHING.

  2. Marty, I was involved in some event scriptwriting in 2003-2004 and was very familiar with the “rolling thunder” idea. And yes, it was a buildup of a string of impressive sounding facts, ending off with a specific phrasing that was known to get applause – it went something like this: “Take all that we have seen tonight in terms of exponential expansion, add to it the fact that every 1.5 seconds, a new person is logging on to a Scientology website, that LRH’s books are now in every library in more than 7000 countries, that 2 billion books are rolling off the presses every week, that Scientologists are now applying Study Tech in every school in the world, and THAT’s what I call Planetary Expansion with Authority!!!” the end wording was key – it always had to end with “…and THAT’s bla bla bla,” with the word THAT’s punched. It would always get applause. If you listen to any event, you’ll see many examples of this “tech.”

    • Jeff — You got it exactly.
      Behind the scenes, Marc Yager was the king of “stat interpretation” — he would sit for weeks on end gathering together the most obscure stats and presenting “interpretations” to Dear Leader for his use (Yager was essentially banned from events by Miscavige as he said “Cue Ball [Yager] is too ugly to be on stage with me and he talks like he has a cock in his mouth all the time, but he CAN dig up stats).
      Yager would add up numbers and then try to equate them to things: 400 people a week starting on new services would become “a new person every 8 minutes of every day” (8 hour day though it was implied that it was every hour of every day) and if that didnt sound good, it would be changed to “and if every one of them held hands they would stretch from the Coloseum in Rome to St Peter’s Square.” And this is a “real” stat — you get to things like “number of people reached” by ads or publications and it was a whole new dimension of bs.
      He would find the total population of everyone in each city where the ad may possibly play — the “potential audience” and then take the viewership of every station (highest prime time viewers) it may play on even if the ad was actually airing on infomercials at 3am, and if it aired 10 times it would be 10X the total viewers — and this would become “people reached”. Or it would be “enough copies of Way to Happiness were distributed to reach from here to the moon and back” (if you took each page and put it end by end so the 108 pages of the book equated to 70 feet per book and you counted the number of copies “distributed” as the number shipped from the BPI warehouse (to the warehouses in orgs or these days to the U-Stor-It facilities a lot of public Scientologists have for their numerous copies of the same books and lectures they have bought as part of ethics handlings or out of pity for poor staff members forced to literally work around the clock trying to meet insane quotas on booksales).
      These “Rolling Thunder” openings are accompanied by distorted and over the top images that make everything look like it is huge expansion — if a stat goes up 10% the graphic (not true graphs with a real scale — they are “representations”} will make it appear that in the last X days/weeks/months/moon phases the increase has been “straight up and vertical”. These rolling thunders have become increasingly distorted/fake/manufactured/bs as the years have passed and Miscavige has no real expansion to talk about.

      • Your post stunned every thought out of my head, except for an echoing, “Wow” that trails off into silence.

      • Mike,
        Is ‘Triumph of the Will’ on the Speechwriter Hat checksheet at Int?

      • Mike… You think this method of gathering and stretching “facts” was based on the datum of telling “acceptable truths” was OK when the real truth was inconvenient if allowed to be told? And that if such a concept as an “acceptable truth” was never introduced in the Scn culture, these outrageous distortions would never be there?

        It’s always amazed me how justified and righteous one became invoking the “acceptable truth” datum, including myself. Truth is truth, whether you are talking about real world facts or other-worldly spiritual pursuits. But when it comes to the former, if “wiggle room” is invoked in the telling of stats at events or handling of authorities, it always comes back to haunt in some form or fashion. Acceptable truths may start as white lies, but grow blacker with time until you have the culture of the continual con we see in the church today.

        • Hopefully, Mike will see this too. But, I did not and to this day do not make that connection. Acceptable truth never meant that to me. And I handled many a PR cycle.

        • I’ve read a post or two on the subject of Acceptable Truth indicating that it meant a lie. I’ve never used it in that manner and it was never intended to be used in that manner. It was and is a Gradient so that the communication is within the reality level of the end point of the comm line (and thus does not cause an ARC Break). For example, who has not used this concept in answering a new Scientologist’s questions on the Whole Track or for a level above them or a more common example – in explaining something to your children.

          You answer the question with awareness of the reality level of the receipt point on the comm line. It is all about communication, not lies.

          • Exactly right!
            ‘Acceptable truths’ have never embraced falsehood or intent to mislead, but the exact opposite, to spot the R of the individual so you can better comm to them.
            This is one of those tech applications that has been misused by those of ill intent, the result being that the ‘acceptable truth’ tech is largely discredited these days, when in fact is is a powerful instument and should be used.

          • Random House defines “acceptable” as “pleasing to the receiver; satisfactory; agreeable; welcome.” LRH says in PR Series 2, “PR becomes the technique of communicating an acceptable truth — and which will attain the desirable result.” So, in other words, we should adjust our relay of truth in order to be pleasing and agreeable to people? We should adjust our relay of truth to achieve a specific PR result? We should hide those things that are disagreeable or unacceptable to people? We should hide things that are “out-PR”? If Scientology, for instance, is shrinking (which it is), then should we hide that fact from Scientologists in order to be “pleasing” and “agreeable” to them, and “not create out-PR”? At the very least, the result, in my opinion, is the spread of half-truths or misleading statements, and at worst, the propagation of falsehoods or lies. Either you deal in truth or you don’t deal in truth. Once you start to “filter” the truth for people, where do you stop?

            • Jeff, for God sake, every corporation, every religious group, any group that deals with media or the PR arena does this. I guarantee you do it in your marketing work today. If you did not, it would not be marketing.

              • Jeff and Marty,
                I’d like to offer my opinion of the “acceptable truth” concept: it is a needed and necessary tool that must be known and used when the situation calls for it because no matter how true something may be, it is not always the correct action to just blurt it out to anyone who could possibly hear it. Where it breaks down, however, is where the person or group using the “acceptable truth” has their ethics out. A person or group with their ethics out has to cover up their harmful actions. I think that an ethical person or group can, and sometimes should, withhold some truth about themselves as long as their true motives and actions are truly ethical (and I mean really ethical, not the “ends justify the means” philosophy that the church uses), and as long as the non-communication results in the greatest good (I’m talking about the actual greatest good, not the justified version of “greatest good” which is used to excuse one’s harmful actions).

                Jeff, you are right in your criticisms of the church’s uses of “acceptable truth”. I remember reading in one of your blog posts some examples of where the church used lies as “acceptable truths” (I don’t remember all the specifics but just to remind you of which post I’m talking about, one of the examples had to do with the church moving into the Fort Harrison). Your examples illustrated that in those circumstances they should have either just told the truth or stopped doing unethical actions that they needed to lie about, instead of using their version of “acceptable truth”. At least that’s what I got out of it. You’re right also that it is not ethical to make up a bunch of stats that are “factual” that actually attempt to cover up the fact that the stats that really matter are crashed and if the public knew about this they’d see what a destructive management it is that they had been following.

                But that doesn’t mean that I have to always tell people that I disagree with their religious beliefs or that I don’t like the kind of music that they like or that I bought the clothes I’m wearing at a thrift store. What would be the point in saying those things if it would bring about too much disagreement from the other person, that would damage a potentially ethical communication line? What’s required is good judgment measured out in each individual situation, as to what to say and what not to say.

                I think that a person or group who is unethical, who has things they feel they need to hide, has factually forfeited his right to use the “acceptable truth” as they cannot possibly use it for constructive, ethical purposes, and I think that that is the real issue here, not whether or not all “acceptable truths” are good or bad.

                “Once you filter the truth for people, where do you stop?” You stop where, by withholding truth, you create more harm than good. But this can only be done by someone who is not trying to cover up their harmful actions.

                In the church, I think that “acceptable truth” is a widely abused term used to justify lies.

                • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                  Very good, GetTheConcept.

                  It actually never occured to me to use the “acceptable truth” concept for evil purposes. Apparently, for an out-ethics individual, this realized concept can be juicely too convenient for their darker intents.

                  There always seems to be a line where an intended positive concept can be turned around for dark purposes, Scientology data or any other data for that matter.

                  Knowing how to know itself can be used to enable, OR disable (such as the reverse Scientology DM uses on others).

                  Of course, data itself can’t be evil (such as the concept of “acceptable truth”). Clearly, how it’s used can be.

                  When the whole HCO PL is read in complete context, it is clear to any good and sane person that LRH was offering this data to be helpful, data which he intended to be applied for the good.

                  Of course, I don’t expect this PR data to be used properly from DM and his submissive henchmen in the CofS.

              • Marty – good point. But there comes a point where it is fraud and lies – which I don’t do in any marketing. Sure, a lot of advertising presents a misleading or false picture of their product to make money, but one would hope that a religion would have the moral rectitude to draw the line. The C of S doesn’t.

                • Jeff, Thanks. All I am saying is that I believe it is a stretch that that Policy Letter commands people to lie or be deceitful. I never took it that way. There are other Guardian Office, OSA references that I would say countenance that. But, I never read the PR series as an injunction to deceive. It is Public Relations.

                • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                  Of course, a religion can’t have moral rectitude. Only the people of that church of whatever religion, can.

            • Here is an example of an acceptable truth;

              Wife: “Darling, look at this beautiful white dress I just got. Isn’t it gorgeous! I think It’d look lovely on me. What do you think?”

              Husband, considering the dress is as ugly as dog poop and suffering a near death experience, realizes that it IS a beautiful, shiny white, figures out a way to save his ass: “Wow, no kidding, that is the most lovely white I’ve ever seen you in.”

              • I tried that. She called me a lieing bast…

                Yours

              • As far as PR to the general public is concerned, I think unvarnished truth would serve any religion better than a polished version. Example:

                Interviewer: Is is true that you guys think Jesus walked on water?
                Christian: Yes.

                *Game over*

                Interviewer: Is it true you guys believe in the OT III story (blah blah blah)
                Scientologist: Yes.

                *Game over*

                Even if you lie, people will still believe that you possibly believe it anyway and might be are lying. If you tell the truth, the guy ain’t gonna die or get hurt in any way.

                Example:

                Interviewer: Some people say you are a brainwashed cult and if you say no, then how do I know you’re not answering that way because you really are brainwashed?

                Scientologist: Hmmm, you got a point there, guess I wouldn’t know.

                *Game over*

                Example:

                Interviewer: Does your religion practice forced Disconnection?

                Scientologist: Yes.

                *Game over*

                Seems simple to me.

            • And its done in interpersonal relations and “life coaching” so as to give people hope and “small wins” that build up gradiently to a much larger win. Person loses 40 lbs when they want to lose 80 lbs … you don’t say “you’re still fat” … you say “you’re looking much thinner”. Both are truths … latter is an “acceptable truth”.

              With that said, it’s easily open to abuse in my opinion. Up there with the “no stat pushing” PLs. When you have a climate that over emphasizes stats and PR image at the expense of the purpose and goals (not to mention real products and results) — as the CoM has become — it’s very easy to abuse.

              But here’s a valid question: with everything that LRH talked about with regard to real products and real results and personal ethics and meaningful change … would it really matter if the above “acceptable truth” and “stat pushing” PLs were changed or never existed?

              I wonder. I wonder if someone like DM would have found a different way to abuse the system, using different PLs.

              IMHO, it’s DM who has created this culture. By selectively emphasizing certain policies and ignoring LRH’s overall intent, he has completely altered the spirit, goals and purpose of Scientology organizations as envisioned by LRH.

              • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                “Person loses 40 lbs when they want to lose 80 lbs … you don’t say “you’re still fat” … you say “you’re looking much thinner”. Both are truths … latter is an “acceptable truth”.”

                Excellent example, Margaret.

                If I slammed my sister with what the “hard core truth” about what I believe about Christianity and the Bible, that would probably end our peaceful relationship right there.

                So instead of throwing the book “The Age of Reason” by Thomas Paine at her (and/or the website evilbible.com) and utterly destroying her reality, I try to gently bring her “acceptable truths” she can easily digest.

                Surely, a non-Scientologist can understand this too.

                Another “acceptable truth” I offered her is the saying,

                “Only cause those things others can easily experience.”

                She LOVES that quote so much, she has it on her bathroom mirror. She doesn’t realize it’s a quote and concept from LRH, yet, but does that really matter at this point?

                She has gradiently accepted me for not being a “Christian” (my family was inculcated in this religion), and has granted me beingness as a Scientologist. She doesn’t consider me evil for not being Christian, and she is hard core in her religion!

                I’ve accomplished this helping her expand her viewpoint by gently bringing her more “acceptable truths”.

                Another example is introducing her to the book, “Mere Christianity” by C.S. Lewis who, goes into what ALL Christians believe as basics. This expands her viewpoint. That’s all I’m doing. This book helped expand my narrow thinking at one time.

                Another example;

                I don’t slam her (or anybody else) about what I believe really happened on 9/11. I just bring acceptable truths about it, such as commenting to her that it’s interesting how World Trade Tower 7 came down just like a demolition, yet never got hit by a 747 and this was barely mentioned in mainstream media.

                Offering little, itty bits and pieces of digestable “acceptable truths” is about all anybody can do to help another expand their awareness just a little higher.

                The concept of “acceptable truth” is very usable and an ethical concept for ethical people, but can be a black concept for the wicked, IMO.

        • Mickey,

          Anyone who thinks “acceptable truth” means anything other than acceptable truth needs extensive word clearing on the phrase.

          The “tech” you are describing is not in any PL but has been used extensively by the espiocracy for decades and is known as disinformation.

          This is what Miscavige uses.

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            RJ,

            The phrase “acceptable truth” IS in an HCO PL. Ron wanted this information widely known to Div 2, 6, 7, and 8 Org Staff.

            “Don’t tell a lie to city officials when the truth is just as easy to tell. Why go to all the work of dreaming up a lie? If you do it will weaken you if it is found out that it is a lie. Now you do have a PR problem with the “official public”.

            Any lie will either blunt the C (communication) or end the C off one day with revulsion.

            Handling truth is a touchy business also. You don’t have to tell everything you know-that would jam the comm line too. Tell an acceptable truth.

            Agreement with one’s message is what PR is seeking to achieve. Thus the message must compare to the
            personal experience of the audience.

            So PR becomes the technique of Communicating an acceptable truth-and which will attain the desirable
            result.

            If there’s no chance of obtaining a desirable result and the truth would injure then talk about something else.”

            – Management Series 1970-1974, PR Series 2

            HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 AUGUST 1970
            Issue 11
            Remimeo
            Div 6 Hats
            Div 7 & 8 Hats
            Div 2 Hats
            Ltr Reg Checksheet
            PES Hats
            I/A Hat PR SMes No. 2
            PR Cse Checksheet

            • Agree.

              Jeff, the interpretation you give to “acceptable” just doesn’t hold up if you look at the WHOLE PR series and everything else LRH said. It just rains against its grain!

              No question, you CAN interpret that single statement the way you do.

              But whether or not it should get this or a more honorable interpretation depends on what you want it to be, IMO. No amount of examples will “handle” as there is always an equal number of opposite examples as to how it could be or has been applied.

              Knives are bad – if used to kill. It ends a life.
              Knives are good – if used to slice food. It helps extend life.

              So, are knives good or bad? Depends on what one’s intention is when using one.

              Jeff, have you ever presented something in more simple terms so it could be understood by a laymen? I’ve read your book (an excellent book) – have you omitted a few things that you did or didn’t do that you were ashamed of or which could be used (if twisted) to construe a picture that wasn’t true? You may not have covered everything because it just wasn’t important to what you wished to say or there weren’t enough pages in the book to cover them?

              I strongly hope you take it in the spirit I pose these questions. I”m not running an introvert flow on you.

              Maybe you prefer a different term to describe “acceptable truth” to mean what I and those disagreeing with the “license to lie” interpretation mean. You came up with psychopath instead of Suppressive Person (and I think it is a good one because SP has been so lousily overused by the c of m that it literally could make an SP out of you for farting.

              What do you think?

              • Interesting discussion. This is one of those slippy-slidey datums that is, unfortunately, prone to misuse. Sure, if the wife asks, “does this dress make my ass look fat?” a wise husband is going to tell her something flattering, if he loves her. On the other hand, if she asked him “Are you having an affair?” he’d better not tell an “acceptable truth.” He’d better be honest. Sure, one has to explain things so people understand them, but that’s not a license to lie, IMHO. When my stepdaughter was little, she used to ask me a lot of questions, and I always answered her straight – of course, in terms she would understand. But I never lied to her (“babies fall off turnip trucks”, etc.).

                As to the Church, the lies about their “unprecedented expansion” and “global impact,” and their categorical denial of any abuse, might be seen by them as just acceptable truths, to protect the Church’s PR, but it is, in my opinion, fraud, as it convinces the average Scientologist that “management is doing a good job,” and obscures the abuses. It presents an utterly false picture.

                • Jess, full agreement with the examples you give but I do miss a direct answer to the point I made – regarding the intention of the user of the “acceptable truth”.

                  I feel the argument goes a bit in a circle and you bring more examples how “acceptable truth” is being misused to cover up crimes (and so is lying) – my exact point above – people have used this reference now for decades and you will find all sorts of things to “proof” or “disproof” the same point.

                  Maybe I could have expressed it better and, frankly, my understanding of what I believe is the problem also increased in the course of this back and forth.

                  Jeff, those arguing here “for” the validity of this CONCEPT (acceptable truth) agree with you that lies are NOT “acceptable”.

                  Call it what you want. There’s more to policy than mere words. There are people doing something with it. And THAT is what counts. And HOW they apply it depends on their tone level which is a whole package of actions, responsibility, ethics etc.

                  NATURALLY, you will have the whole gamut from “criminal” to “saint”, each one referring to the same policy. What they do with it however will range from pitch back to bright white.

                  The sad part is that a criminal got to be the boss trying to model or forcing those below him to be act and “think” like him.

                  We will never come to an understanding here if you assume “criminal intent” (without saying so) on the part of LRH in writing it as we try to explain with examples (which come after the writing).

                  Does this communicate better?

                  • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                    I just have to acknowledge you, Samuel.

                    Your writing style, art of diplomacy, and nonviolent communication is astounding to me.

                    How did you get so good at it?

                    • LOL (I think you know the answer already) – TRs …. the real way and a good deal of LIVING.

                      BTW, I look out for your comments too.

                • Jeff,
                  I couldn’t agree with you more, on the examples you give and the way you differentiate here.

              • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                Samuel,

                Excellent thoughts!

                Also, you totally cracked me up with this …

                “You came up with psychopath instead of Suppressive Person (and I think it is a good one because SP has been so lousily overused by the c of m that it literally could make an SP out of you for farting.”

                ROTFL!😆

                • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                  Samuel,

                  Some may believe you’re just joking, taking things to the extreme.

                  But farting at the CofS could be construed, by some, as “Committing a Problem”, which is one of the listed 273 church crimes listed in the squirrelled 2007 version of the “Introduction to Scientology Ethics” book.

                  Farting = Polluting the Environment = Dev-T = Committing a Problem = Crime

                  Of course, this could lead to security checking on a meter to see if you INTENDED to fart (and then what are the overts and withholds and evil intentions behind the fart).

                  Then, perhaps, it could further lead to a fishing expedition for any “thought crimes” you may have about CofS or DM.

                  Isn’t it nice to be out from under the insanity of the CofS?

                  • Now YOU made me crack by extending that “logic”.

                    BTW, and that is neither a joke not do I intend to go further into the story, as I only have it second hand (though believed to be true): Someone DID get busted from post for farting (sic!) in the wrong place.

                    Yes Wayne, it is so good to be free again to fart self-determinedly! ROTF

                    Samuel

                    PS: your count of crimes is interesting. Since the c of m has extended the list of crimes it also means that their problems have increased (if you want to know what problems some group has, look at their list of laws – a datum I always found interesting, paraphrased from LRH)

                    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                      Very interesting datum, Samuel. It makes much sense to me.

                      When I posted the list of the 273 crimes of the CofS that Scientologists can commit, on the A.R.S. newsgroup in 1999, the CofS bedeviled me … effectively shutting me up through use of terror. Nice “church”.

                      Surely the CofS wouldn’t mind their church’s core 273 “ethical catechisms” posted for all the world to see … nothing to hide, right?

                      Not.

                      Of course, their shore story was I had allegedly violated the church’s copyright (ugh) of their copyrighted “religious” scripture. They stuck their finger up at our Constitution’s Due-Process clause, disrespecting it, by rushing legal process so fast, I never had enough time to defend myself.

                      Not the typical behavior or the “compassion” one would expect expressed from a “church.”

                      (IMO, had I not asserted myself as an “authentic” Scientologist, and instead, was just a typical non-Scientologist critic, perhaps their vindictiveness toward me would not have occurred. Many more larger sets of the “work was free” Scientology texts by LRH were posted by critics, yet they were not attacked. Why? The CofM’s true intention was to silence me to set an example to other “rebel” Scientologists who dare speak out against the CofM in protest, IMO. Shutting me up worked for 10 years, too, I’m sad and sorry to acknowledge. CofM terrorized me. However, I’m prepared to fight now, and make it very well known to all along the way, if CofM decides to try to silence me through terror again this time. It will only be another stupid PR foot-bullet if they try. I promise that.)

        • Mickey… and everyone who has locked up on this “acceptable truth” thing:

          Speaking from experience, if word clearning doesn’t clear this up for you, try False Date Stripping the subject.

          I came across numerous things just like this that I could NOT see as being acceptable or kosher, if you will, while on the FEBC. False Data Stripping was SWEET and totally cleared up any number of things that I just could not get despite all and every method of word clearing being used.

          I highly encourage anyone and everyone to FDS “acceptable truth”, then go back and re-read that passage. Call me crazy, but I’ll bet it will seem like a new datum.

          LOVE me some FDS!!! I’ll bet one glance and I’ll still have the commands verbatum! LOL

      • Much ado about NOTHING.
        What a mindpluck.
        I do remember way back hearing the ridiculous number of people reached by some ad and thinking how ridiculous that was. A moron knows you can’t count how many people watched an ad.

      • I have looked at DM speeches on youtube. Besides being a remedy for insomnia, they are also somewhat reminescent of speeches by Stalin regarding production stats and 5 year plans, and/or the scene in 1984 where the talking head on the telescreen is telling everyone how great it is that the chocolate ration has been raised to 20 grams this week (where the previous week’s chocolate ration was 30 grams).

        Pete

    • You got it Jeff – that’s exactly what I’m talking about. And if your script or speech did not follow that pattern, it would likely get thrown at you literally.

      • I don’t know if anyone else noticed this, but back in the 70s and 80s, Heber Jentzsch used to give these very inspirational speeches and had a natural ability to end his speeches with this same sort of build up “… and THAT’s what I call expansion on a Planetary basis.” It came across as natural, genuine and very much his own style. And people loved him.

        And towards the late 80s and into the 90s, it seemed that others who were now speaking at these now-regular Int events were trying to copy this style. But it never quite felt natural or genuine.

        It eventually got to the point where ALL speeches contained this and it felt like this sort of buildup was “packaged” and “in your face” and over-the-top … “Rolling Thunder” … as though Miscavige had taken a formerly successful, and very natural and articulate speaking style … and warped it into an implantable/hypnotizing effect.

        Just like he did with Scientology itself.

        • Great observation.

        • A few months ago, I watched the Heber on Phil Donahue show (from the mid 90s I think). Heber sounded rehearsed and strident, repeating the then current PR phrase “think for yourseelf” about 20 times. Very NOT impressive performance. Heber was an enabler and ally of Miscavige. Compare this performance with Vaughn Young’s ofover 10 years earlier. Young appeared natural and in comm. All on youjtube (was a few months ago anyway).

          • Yeah, I’d have to agree that Heber was showing clear signs of stress by the late 90s … I last saw him speak publicly with Bryant Gumble during the Lisa McPherson period. 1998 I think. Heber was slipping up pretty badly.

            I remember wondering to myself what he was going through behind the scenes. Now that the truth about DM and DM’s involvement with Lisa McPherson is out — and how degraded Int and DM was becoming — I can only imagine the type of irrational and insane treatment Heber must have endured.

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            Heber wasn’t that way in the late 70’s, I assure you. He was one of the most lucid speakers I had ever heard.

            Clearly, Heber went down a dwindling spiral later.

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          Yes. Heber Jentzsch was extremly inspirational to me in the late 70’s. I loved his IRS (I Rock Slam) speeches, and speeches about mental health abuse.

          His inspiration drove me to join the Guardian Office (GO) in the late 70’s. I was an Expeditor for Al (forget his last name) in HCO. Little did I know what was about to happen.

          I got an LOA to handle my debts. When I came back, to my surpise, the GO was history. The ASHO Foundation “Ethics Officer” declared me an SP. Of course, that didn’t indicate to me.

          So that was the end of my Sea Org days, but not yet the end of my Church of Scientology days.

  3. I think this is a powerful article. And while I was reading the LRH quote my hair was standing up on my arms.

  4. Independent Scientologist

    Great reference and analysis. Before I got out of the church, I would tell my wife how much I HATED going to the major events. They were too LOUD and too rapid fire – I used to say that I felt like I was being “machine-gunned” with data. Never occured to me that this is an implant (hypnosis) technique.

    I think that it is difficult for somebody who has never been involved in scientology to understand why the parishoners put up with all this crap, without this other piece of data: when applied straight, or even somewhat straight, scientology WORKS. When you stack up enough life-changing wins with scientology at the lower levels of the Bridge, it just becomes unthinkable that the subject could be so perverted that at the upper levels as well as at major events, the LEADER of the religion is trying to pound people into submission with hypnotism and other techniques.

    It would be like being told that your family doctor is trying to poison you or that the friendly-seeming crossing guard down at the corner is trying to get you run over by a car. Too incredble to believe, even if true.

    Ron Matlock

    • “Never occured to me that this is an implant (hypnosis) technique.”

      The MEST mockup of events has been progressing towards implant station mockups for years.

    • Ron, that is a very important point to remember and to note: Scientology works. It’s what keeps them coming back.

      To make an incredibly crude analogy, most people are not very good at golf. But, usually, once or twice per round, they make an incredible shot – the straight and true 250 yard drive, the chip-in from off the green, the 30 foot putt – and they glimpse the real game. If any of you have played golf, you know the feeling. It is awesome! At the end of the round, you don’t talk about losing 10 balls, about slicing into the trees, etc., etc., you talk about that shot you made in the clutch, or the 30 foot putt you just missed or that rolled around the cup and plopped in. That’s what keeps you coming back.

      In Scientology, you have (or should have) life changing moments regularly. You erase a chain in Dianetics and lose a recurring headache (say), or run Op Pro by Dup and exteriorize such that you embrace the whole neighborhood. Or you gain an insight into why you just could not get math. Or have the correct item from a list indicated to you. Etc. When I was on Level A of the BC, there were a group of us in one area, at about the same place on the check sheet. We were reading the basic books, and every few minutes, one of us would start chuckling about something, or would go “Ah Hah!” We called ourselves “Cognition Corner.”

      This is why we are Scientologists, ladies and gentlemen. That’s why we come back. It has been wonderful for us, and we want to share it with others.

      DM plays against this truth. The main agreement we all share is that Scientology works. Then he runs with it. And, naturally, if what DM says in his events are true, why, we should be ecstatic! We should be overjoyed!

      Why should we doubt the man? Why should we ever have to question the integrity of Mr. David Miscavige? And I mean that seriously. Why should we doubt him, when Scientology works, and he is the leader of the Church of Scientology?

      We should not have to doubt him. We really should not. But, Freedom requires constant vigilance, and while I am not a cynic and I hate being skeptical all the time, we have to keep our due diligence hat on, and say “show me.”

      Unfortunately we have at the helm of the church a man who no one said “no” to, including LRH. And, this man is an obscene, small-minded, little man, who yet knows how to manipulate the SO culture, and knows how to misuse the very subject he has been entrusted to safeguard. It is, actually, an amazing story.

      He used the very subject itself to take it over and start to destroy it. I reread KSW last night. What an incredible piece of work by LRH. It really is. And DM uses it to control people, while violating each point on it. Uncanny!

      And in his twisting of Scientology, he has betrayed the people who know Scientology works.

      So, what do we do? Well, now we know. We know that people will misuse the tech, we know that people can set themselves up as the police over what is and is not Scientology, and we know that people will twist it to hurt people while claiming the exact opposite. We really should not be surprised because every technology Man has ever devised has been used to hurt, kill, control, and maim people. I think we were hoping for higher here in the church, that somehow we could avoid this fate, because we could clear people of their reactive banks. It is disappointing that it happened.

      But, here we are. So now that we know, we know. What do we do? We expose the usurper so that other people know, we document the hell out of this, and we apply Scientology correctly, and for good.

      Because Scientology does work, after all.

      • Brilliant post Grasshopper – and brilliant analyses Marty, Jeff and Mike, above. It is not in spite of the truths within the tech that makes the current scene so unbelievable, it is BECAUSE of it. As you said, why should DM be questioned? After all he is the duly appointed head of Scientology, right? Scientology works and is good. David Misacavige is head of Scientology. Therefore Davis Miscavige is good, and everything he says is correct. (QED).

        • Martin
          I apologize if I am wrong, but I am guessing that you wholly support David Miscavage and do not question him. OK
          But one point you have voiced is in no way true. David Miscavage was never “duly appointed head of Scientology” No how… No way… He has coerced, lied, and bullied his way to where he is. Not only has he done this to many staff and executives, he did it to LRH himself. He has no “right”, no authority, and there is no such post as “Chairman of the Board” on any LRH Org Board ever published or authorized by LRH, that I know of. He is a fake! He is an imposter! He has hijacked Scientology for some purpose that is demonstrably counter to the intentions of LRH and the tech and philosophy of Scientology.
          If this was a thinly veiled, covert attack, you are hereby “busted”. If not, then I apologize and recommend that you check out the points that I have made here, for your own edification.

          WW

          • WW, I did not get that out of Martin’s post. I think he summarized the content of Grasshopper’s post quite well and was essentially agreeing with it.

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          Martin wrote … “Therefore Davis Miscavige is good, and everything he says is correct.”

          ROTFLMAO!!!

          Surely, you’re joking, right?

        • I was attempting to succinctly precis Grasshoppers excellent reading of the situation, topped off with a layer of thinly veiled British irony (let’s call it call it sarcasm – because that’s what it is). Anyone who could write “…therefore David Miscavige is good and everything he says is correct” and actually mean it, might need to go lie in a darkened room for a rather long time.

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            Martin wrote, Anyone who could write “…therefore David Miscavige is good and everything he says is correct” and actually mean it, might need to go lie in a darkened room for a rather long time.

            LOL! What’s scary is that I think they exist!

            Of course, I personally didn’t buy you were serious. Though a few, perhaps, who may not already know your style may have until this later clarification.

            (I’ve certainly been sarcastic several times here, too. I like to use the rolling eyes smiley🙄 to indicate certain sarcasm so it reduces my potential for miscommunication, especially for first time readers who don’t know me. Writing clearly can sure be sticky sometimes, especially without the tone inflection from oral comm, which would indicate what I really mean. Thankfully, somebody invented Internet smileys. :))

          • Martin

            Thank you for clarifying that it was sarcasm. I was hoping that that was the case. I have a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to posts that contain total lies and misleading comments. We have had that fabrication about the COB being “duly appointed” posted by others who were serious!
            In considering that you may have been serious I was actually struck by the cleverness that would have been displayed in appending that particular comment to Grasshoppers post. I am guessing that some of the readers that come here were nodding their heads and smiling and thinking..”how true..how true.”

            Anyway… Thanks again for the clarification, and as I said I would, I apologize to you for misduplicating your communication.

            WW

      • Grasshopper, I award you a round of golf…on me.
        Get in touch, let me know where you like to play, and it’s done.

      • Grasshopper,

        I truly believe this is the best reply I’ve read, in the 6 months or so that I’ve been participating here.

        Your golf analogies are perfect! I’ve long believed that golf was perhaps the closest game analog to Scientology, especially useful when trying to explain Scientology to someone having no familiarity with it:

        – golf is a very technical game.
        – to play it well, you have to learn and master lots of different tools.
        – it is not easy to master.
        – when you do master it (if only momentarily), it feels incredible.
        – tools you learn must be practiced and applied in order for you to play well.
        – there are an infinity of ways to do it wrong, only a few ways to do it right.
        – it is always your choice as to whether to apply the tools or not.

        When I was on the BC, I was also part of a group just like the one you were. Sounds like your time was a bit later than mine. Same thing though. We spent the day listening to tapes, having cognitions, applying what we had learned to our preclears, giving them incredible wins in the process.
        It was probably the most uptone period of my life.

        Echoing your last sentence: Scientology does indeed work. Which makes the intentional or unintentional misapplication of it to so many people all the more tragic.

        • The BC was was a great ride. I loved it. It was a hell of an accomplishment to get through it, but it was fun, and challenging.

          I had a twin that would listen to a BC tape and then try it out in session on the PC next time around – except that the technique was updated or deprecated. He had a lot of fun in qual, I rolled my eyes each time.

          But yes, golf is exactly as you say, and is a good metaphor. I never used it for Scientology until now, but it sure seemed apt. The good news is that Scientology may be hard to master, but it is not as hard to master as golf!

      • “This is why we are Scientologists, ladies and gentlemen. That’s why we come back. It has been wonderful for us, and we want to share it with others.”

        Ding, ding, ding!!! 🙂 Somehow, some way, everyday.

      • Brilliant. Beautifully written….and thank you!

  5. I agree. There’s much in LRH tech to agree with and most Miscavologists conflate the Church with the subject, so they’re already set up to accept the utterances of its ‘leader’.

  6. I do not think that all are deeply hypnotized. They may know whats going on. But leaving all that behind is just too painfull. They had to give up some goals. They would have to admit that they wasted this life, wasted much money and LOST the game. This is the not so easy part leaving the game.
    They way out may be to look at the Goals put into them while being inside.
    Artificial Goals like “clearing the planet”, “Saint Hill Size”, “Ideal Orgs” and all that stuff. And then look at your own Goals and how they had been invalidated.
    Maybe that Goals invalidation delivered the charge neccessary to hypnotize the staff and public.

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      Perhaps if church Scientologists knew there was not only a “Freedom From” the abuse and psychosis, and a “FREEDOM TO” Independent Scientology, they would be more apt to not hesitate leaving the suppressive CofS.

  7. I’ve said this before elsewhere. But I swear the reason I left the Co$ was because of the PDC, the big fat EP of which (for me) was learning how to merrily disagree. Happily! Joyfully! With knee-slapping hilarity!

    Disagreeing (usually with ARC) is a wonderful way to live YOUR life.

    Just Me

    • Just Me,
      I’m totally with you on that one – the EP of the PDC. Hah!

      • mariachi El Bronx

        Unless you disagree with Marty of course, which I do on just about everything he has to say about scientology. He has said and written many valuable things that do not pertain to scientology, which is why I like him. But I have noticed that many I should say most of my critical comments never see the light of day in this comment section.

        • That’s bullshit, unless you posted them under a different name than this one.

          • mariachi El Bronx

            Quite right Marty, not in an effort to deceive though. Simply wrote the comment under the name I use on a different blog. I am sure you would have no problem figuring out the other name used, but really, why would you care?

            • I wouldn’t and I don’t, thanks.

            • I am not quite as savy, with all the internal blog intel. So, what is your “other” name “not in an effort to decieve”? Bullshit! Your whole game is deception! Marty might not care, but I do. Marty is a FRIEND of mine! Never mind…..I really don’t care after all – you are a pathetic pimple on my ass.

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          Are you practicing nonviolent communication in your unposted comments?

    • The ability to disagree is one of the highest abilities. Good on ya, JM.

    • Just Me,

      I disagree.

      Michael

      PS: I think that a lot of people leave the COS because they reach a huge win that isn’t on the grade chart and isn’t really acknowledged. Some of the readers here can probably think back to a huge win that got overrun and invalidated in the Church’s agreement swamp.

    • Interesting. I heard DM mutter on several occasions about people who loved the PDC; oh, he’s one of those squirrel old timers who thinks everything is in the PDCs.

      • Marty… So DM thinks the PDC lectures are bunk? That’s interesting!

      • Marty, that’s funny. Although I can’t imagine ‘everything’ is on the PDC, it sure is one fine collection of information to play with. However, if DM thinks a ‘squirrel’ is someone who thinks something other than what DM gives her permission to think, then I’m feeling pretty bushy-tailed.

        Just Me

      • I’ve always liked squirrels, but now they’re fast becoming my favorite animal of all. Just bought a new 2011 calendar with each month sporting a full color big-ass photo of a squirrel.

        And yes, by today’s standards I’m an old-timer and I love the PDCs.

      • Marty,
        That’s amusing – Ron Snr (DM’s Dad) raves about the PDC, we used to talk a bit about it as when I was on the course and having tons of wins. Ron Snr could almost sell the Brooklyn Bridge to most anyone and he credits it to fully understanding the flows and characteristics of as laid out in the PDCs. Funny that DM would think “he’s one of those squirrel old timers”…

    • Some wise old fart somewhere said ‘Freedom begins with the word, NO!’

      So true

  8. GREAT point Marty.
    REVERSE SCIENTOLOGY.
    More examples :
    1)Auditing is supposed to be RELEASING CHARGE on the itsa line
    of saying one thoughts and viewing it it all BUT
    The paradox and dichotomy is that it is so UNSAFE to talk in session, so
    that in ACTUALITY one has to WITHOLD in a session.
    So a session CREATES charge instead of releasing charge !
    The complete REVERSE Scientology !
    (Lord forbid someone at INT Base voices DM is the SP)

    2) THE BUZZWORD in the promo is FREEDOM.
    The Bridge to “FREEDOM” etc etc.
    But inside in DM’s cult, it is a total TRAP. And the higher up the Bridge, the more ENTRAPMENT.

    2) Whistleblowers report the TRUTH to Law Enforcement. There are dire situations and criminal acts and cover ups and these need to be reported. DM’s cult MANUFACTURES LIES, made of wholecloth, utter scandalous fabrications and post these on their Hate WEBSITES .
    They make “ANONYMOUS” phone calls to law Enforcement with incredibly cooked up LIES.
    A Church that LIES LIES LIES.
    Their SP declares are a tissue of LIES.

    4) Nowhere than in the Red volumes is there more on tech on ARC.
    How to increase, how to use it, how to repair it. But in DM’s Reverse Scientology there is more ARC BROKEN STAFF, ARC BROKEN PUBLIC, ARC BROKEN NON PUBLIC than in the history of the Church. The CHURCH does not create ARC, it seems almost driven to CREATE out of ARC ness.
    It does the reverse, it creates massive ARC Breaks which it does not then repair.

    • Karen,
      Good points. Wendell Reynolds did name DM as his SP in an interview in the 80’s; and periodically since, every year, DM belittles, degrades, and rants about him to the rest of the staff (in front of Wendell) as the most evil of SPs because of it.
      Marty

      • Marty, I’ve wondered on a number of occasions if I was targeted by DM due to the fact that I was finding out too much. If you remember, I was the De-PTSer for the base for several years, and as time went on, the more and more DM and other executives like Yager started to come up as “items” in staff PTS interviews. At the time it was considered that these people were naming “good hats” as SP’s, and of course these items would be taken back E/S, even back to whole track SP items. But looking back on this, the truth of the matter is that these folks were being suppressed and abused by DM. This was the beginning of the end for me when crew kept telling me about how abusive Dave was being. For a while I thought things were being blown out of proportion, until I finally saw DM beat the shit out of Marc Yager right in front of my eyes and then later saw his abusive behavior on a number of other occasions with other staff. That’s why I left back in 2000, because by then, it had all added up for me that Dave was truly psychotic and that nothing would ever get better for me for knowing too much already. I think he knew that about me.

        • John,
          You may well be right. Many an MAA, Auditor, C/S, Chaplain, etc was blown away under the justification that they were “worker oriented” when giving solace to a staff member crushed by Miscavige, or even RTC or Int “execs”. I don’t have any recall on you in particular, but the more I learn of your experience it may jog some memory. From the sounds of your experience in this comment, it is quite likely you were targeted as a “dangerous MAA.”
          Marty

  9. Such a precise reference!

    Carrying on an attack line on Miscarriage (sorry, that’s what my spell checker INSISTS on!) is essential to the salvation of organized Scientology, for the simple fact that DM’s fingers must be pried off of the copyrights. DM continues to alter and destroy authentic Scientology materials – sheltered by copyright law. He also has access to mega-millions of dollars, which he will use to crush all incipient Scientology movements.

    Try finding older SCN materials on the web…before DM’s pulp program, these materials were relatively abundant, but I suspect there has been a well-financed, quiet program to scoop us these materials, wherever sold, and then destroy them.

    To “go off and practice Scientology” without publishing the truth about Miscarriage? That would be a fatal strategy. He’s not going to “die on the vine” because his access to megabucks lends him a pseudo-life. He doesn’t need to exchange valuable production with anyone, because he has Power, Force and Money.

    Keep telling the truth about this guy – I suspect he can’t STAND IT, as 1.5s are brittle weaklings anyway, despite their fearsome presentations.

    Look at that wimp in North Korea! Or Hitler….Stalin….FDR….all of them became chronically ill and died early. LBJ only survived a few years after the White House. The press started indicating Lyndon’s lies, and he folded up.

    It is too soon to sound the dirge for Miscarriage…..but perhaps a “dirgelet”?

    • Independent Scientologist

      Gee, I rarely ever respond to a post because it contains statements that I consider inaccurate, but . . .

      I don’t recall Hitler or FDR dying particularly young. I thought Hitler took his own life in his bunker in Berlin, when Allied troops where on the outskirts of the city.

      My point is: don’t count on Miscavige getting sick or suddenly dying!

      Here’s a better way to plan (I think) as an independent scientologist: assume the guy is going to live to be ninety and not relinquish control until his dying breath. Unless the federal government can figure out a way to indict and convict him, and don’t count on that either.

      We DO need to keep exposting DM’s crimes, but we also have to get busy and create training and auditing in the independent field.

      Ron Matlock

      • Hitler – 56
        FDR – 63
        LBJ – 65

        Stalin must have been pretty ornery, he made it to 74.

        Doesn’t matter if Hitler killed himself or had a heart attack. He died young.

        • Hate to burst your bubble, but that’s not “young” – dying young means you die before 40 or 35. Especially when you consider that the men you named were men of the first half of the 20th century – those were typical ages of death – just google it.

          “Life expectancy at birth in 1930 was indeed only 58 for men and 62 for women.”

          I must tell you Stalin and LRH both lived to age 74. So going on your theory what does this mean?

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      It’s difficult for me to imagine that DM can even confront reading this blog, which lucidly exposes his overts. It’s also hard to imagine how any of his handlers, who may be reading this blog, would not cringe and decide to leave.

      It’s also difficult to imagine that DM would want to be vunerable to exposing his overts by allowing anybody under his totalitarian regime to read the information here.

  10. For those totally other determined by hypnotism it’s very difficult to break loose but we can help them a bit. Hypnotism is 1.1 and so is the C of M and thus it’s impossible to be above 1.1 and be in good standing with C of M. Corollary, it’s impossible to be in good standing with C of M and rise above 1.1, thus roller coaster is their written law. Being against C of M without saying so won’t allow stable case gain either. Withholding identity guarantees anxiety for being found out and for disconnection of self, family or loved ones. It’s only fear that sticks one in a not confronted situation which happens to be the very basis of Davey’s freak show. Without fear he couldn’t scare a single soul and all would be free to rise a little higher every day.

    Per definition it’s impossible to be anonymously on this site and have personal integrity in or even start delivering any blow, effective or else, to an enemy one even doesn’t dare to announce. Hiding identity negates the ability to take responsibility for one’s words and maintains a condition of alter-is. It’s not true that speaking out against Davey takes a lot of courage; on the contrary, one has to confront a lot of mental suffering, continuous hiding and prolonged lowers for not doing so. Those that refuse to hide are amongst the most intelligent, powerful and upstat beings with enough guts to do something about it. Nowadays, they happen to be the few still able to experience lasting case gains from Scientology.

    Clean hands lead happy lives, allow upper conditions and in this case they either prevent bogus attacks or yield lots of media exposure. They may get some family disconnected, but that’s family nobody wants to be connected to as long as they work full time for the bank. Why not let Davey do everyone a big favour and allow some massive case gain by disconnecting just about everybody. Get some balls rolling; lifting years of suppression might just be the most enlightening thing ever experienced. It might even restore some self respect and willingness to fight back or, shall we say ….. Freedom.

    • Why make it easy for OSA?

      I’d rather be the Cheshire Cat in the tree.

      Let THEM sweat it out!

    • “Hypnotism is 1.1” No it isn’t

    • Erwin

      Keeping in mind that I am posting under a pseudonym at this time, I offer the following…

      I agree that PTSness is often involved in being “anonymous” and should be addressed. but I do not hold that it is the only reason why one might choose to be “invisible”. I offer this….

      Suppose you are fighting in a battle against an enemy with superior resources. Every person that stands up and can be seen is immediately targeted and shot at. Sounds pretty standard.
      Well suppose that you had a way to shield your location or make yourself “invisible” to the enemy. Would it not behoove you, in some circumstances, to adopt a “stealth” mode, in order to be more effective? Doesn’t necessarily mean that you are “afraid” of the enemy. You may be simply seeking or using anonymity or invisibility to your advantage to preserve or protect your own resources in order to deliver a more effective blow to the enemy. Also pretty standard tactically.
      At some point you will likely need to stand up and fight “hand to hand” and you need to be ready and able to do so, but advancing under the “cover of darkness” or ducking behind shields of one kind or another, in order to keep yourself alive and functional as long as possible first, is just good soldiering. The ability to shield ones location, capabilities, and movements is always an advantage in any battle.
      I admire those who just stand up and attack in full sight of the enemy, unless doing so is tantamount to a blatant waste of resources.

      WW

      WW

      • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

        I figure those whom operate in “stealth mode” and who are fully aware of what’s going on are the “snipers”, so to speak, for the cause of Truth.

        As long as this stealth is more effective for them, I have no issue with that.

        • Wayne

          Thank you for your understanding.
          I do have to admit though that I am not really much of a sniper myself. I am in “stealth mode” partly to avoid exposing another to “gunfire”, partly as an internet security issue, and partly because I am kinda fond of my pseudonym.

          WW

      • I see what you mean. Sometimes it might not be feasible but I like to see people improving. I guess you signed a gag order and got a legal copy of it.

        • Erwin
          Thanks for seeing my point, but no, no gag orders. Well I guess I do have some version of a gag order in that I signed papers, many years ago, that were to prevent me from taking legal action against the church or a fine would be invoked. I am glad to say that I consider that of no consequence as to whether or not I am visible. I am quite thoroughly D-PTSd from the Church. Check out my response to Wayne above for some of my reasons for staying in “stealth mode”.

          WW

        • Erwin
          Thanks for seeing my point, but no, no gag orders.
          Well I guess I do have some version of a gag order in that I signed papers, many years ago, that were to prevent me from taking legal action against the church or a fine would be invoked. I am glad to say that I consider that of no consequence as to whether or not I am visible.
          I am quite thoroughly D-PTSd from the Church. Check out my response to Wayne above for some of my reasons for staying in “stealth mode”.

          WW

      • Windwalker,

        For the most part i do agree, i merely feel the need to communicated my thoughts on your writing. For in life it frequently does seem that there is not always black and white areas, but many shades of gray. An i do consider that there is also a time in which people should confront the reality of any battle and know when to put those fears and phobies behind you and confront the battle head on.

        But there is awlays a time and a place for many things its up to the being to decided wether ot not they are hiding or cowering.

        D.

    • Erwin, while I understand and appreciate where you’re coming from, I’m honestly growing just a bit weary of this type of evaluation. There are many reasons people choose to stay under the radar and it’s not up to you nor anyone else, really, to determine whether or not doing so is the right or wrong thing for anyone but yourself. We each have to keep our own council and do what each of us determines to be the greatest good for the greatest number of our own dynamics — whatever that is.

      Just as there are distinct advantages to being out in the open, there are equally distinct advantages to remaining under the radar (yes, Davey, we’re EVERYWHERE). This is a war, of sorts, that we’re fighting here and winning it, IMO, takes people on both sides of the front lines.

  11. Dear Victoria: Is that a postulate? Maybe you should word clear what you just read. Also, try asking a staff member if the church is beyond reproach and what LRH means when he says in KSW : “IT IS THE BUSINESS OF EVERY STAFF MEMBER to enforce it!” Wake up!! Do you want freedom for all who will take the responsibility to attain it?! Or do you want to join Mark Bunker and the rest of them who only mark-time and Q&A? Scientology frees. Q&A doesn’t! Scientology is data that when duplicated, understood and used, frees! What else need be known before you know?

    • When I was on staff, I did speak up when I noticed an out point. People are responsible for applying KSW on a personal level. However, KSW clearly states that “attacks from government or monopolies occur only when there are “no results” or “bad results”. The very existence of the IAS is purportedly to protect the church from external attack, when LRH said that the true cause of the attacks is internal. I refuse to be part of a Scientology group that will not permit KSW to be applied. These include any of the following:

      Any group associated with RTC
      Any group associated with the IAS
      Any courseroom that isn’t packed
      Any HGC that isn’t full of enthusiastic and winning PCs, with no red tags

      Also, I think that Mark Bunker could be turned into a great Scientologist, given some ARC and some subjective reality on what REAL Scientology is about.

      • Mark Bunker is not a Scientologist and probably never will be. But he is a compassionate communicator and a great example of non-violent activism.

        Question is, “Can Orthodox Scientologists offer the same level of ARC to Mark Bunker that Mark Bunker brings to broken and abused Scientologists?”

        • I’d say describing Mark Bunker as “brought with ARC” is a massive stretch.

          Just starting with the name of his video channel… do you really think the name “xenutv” communicates (as in affinity, reality, communication) with Scientologists? Me thinks you should clear up the meaning of A-R-C, if you’re going to use it to describe him.

  12. Marty to me there is NO question really. Thank you for being so analytical and clear cut. I didn’t know about “rolling thunder”.

    It’s interesting to see that Miscavige finally can evolve some “tech”, even if it’s a form of hypnotism. Good for you Dave. However, the sheep have started to wake up from the trance. Hohoho!

  13. “Rolling Thunder” yes that sounds familiar- I briefly fell for it at first, but caught onto it soon thereafter. First it was the Tom Cruise “event”, then the final caper was the “Basics” event which was billed as the biggest event in Scn since the IRS victory.

    By then, I knew something was really wrong. As for why people still fall for it, it’s definetely the threat and coersion aspect of it all.

    Good article.

  14. “We ask them to question it. We ask them to please look at the physical universe around you, please look at people, at your own mind and understand, thereby, that what we are talking about happens to be actual.” (emphasis mine)

    Notice that LRH is not saying “we ask them to please look at the physical universe around you, please look at people, at your own mind and understand thereby”….that you are capable of figuring things out on your own, that your own interpretations of these things are valid.

    No.

    He is getting you to agree that “what we are talking about happens to be actual.”

    This itself is a plea for agreement. This itself is a positive suggestion.

    And most importantly, within 12 years of speaking these words, L Ron Hubbard went on to design the Sea Org military uniforms, the command channels, the RPF, and every other tool of coercive agreement that exists in Scientology. He created a multitude of them.

    He created an onslaught.

    Why do you consistently distract from the source of these things and look only at David Miscavige, who is simply applying LRH’s own tools of coercive agreement for blood?

    Don’t get me wrong, David Miscavige is bad, bad, bad, just as you say. But why don’t you look at what he DOES that is so bad, and allow yourself to see where it came from?

    I am sincerely asking. I do not understand why you consistently overlook the primary source of these things and fixate on David Miscavige, a secondary cause.

    Please explain.

    If you explain, I won’t ask again. Because then I will understand.

    So please, explain.

    Thanks.

    • No you won’t. You will have me explain till my last breath. LRH is referring to the Axioms in the quote you refer to. He spent dozens of lectures explaining the Axioms – and he is saying in the quote you have pasted to go test them out, look at them in use in the universe around you, don’t just remember them and accept them.

    • Alonzo,

      THis reflect my present pov and questions !

      Who made the Celebrity Centers system to attract celeb and pamper them with specials treatments ?

      Who created the RPF?

      Who ordered , long time ago on the Appolo , some people to be throw out in the water or in the hole

      Wo invented the (make me crazy) run around the pole or the parking lots at flag for hours?????

      Who decided that there would be downstat persons that would be treated like criminal and deprive of good food, rest, proper birthing ?

      Wo had all these people to carea bout him – his laundry for 13 rince of his clothes – hispills – his food – anything that he would need a little Davey would comply to provide fast!

      Who settle the Author Service that from what I know was The real business that collected from alle the non-profit churches to this profit organisation! ? I guess David continue with the same track with som lit
      tle changes with the names of the organisations and perfect the org board to serv it!

      Who CREATED THE FAIR GAME some of you are stil running in a a wonderfull scientology exit rundown ????
      Ron Himself said that theu should lie on you, harrass you and humiliate you! Why making Little Davey all responsible of that _ we all knew this policy and lot of us applied us to other that ran out!

      A high percentage of ex-church of scientology members are not even able to question if the scientology it-self or Ron can be a source of these results!

      So..it’s the same attitude toward Miscavige that some of you that still run some charge on him call Miscavige the ”dear Leader”
      All of you that worked for him did not question Dear Leader – we have plenty of this on video is perfect, tapes! Our great Dear Leader is the best human being on this planet – as your fellow SO (The other crazy one Davis that appeared to be a nice person at the begenning and others.. ) still beleive because they REFUSE to EVER THINK QUESTIONNING AND LOOK and CONCLUDED by themself in a doubt formula – who or what causes what or contribute or are of valu or not!

      A long time sciontologist (on that wrote a book) talked about this fact!
      His conclusion was that the case of refusing to recognized some proven facts are that they have too much money and time (a lifetime for some) invested in that beleif of gettig their freedom …so..

      I guess that just approaching a question might involved of finding an answer that is very difficult to confront!

      Form scientologist who have been able to completly deconstruct their ”scientology fabricated mind” (thank’s god it can be acheive” – and I forgot a lot of HCOPL – and build my own) – it’s difficult to read all the time that the ”why” id DM…You remember the ”why is god” ???

      The real why of all this abuse, child and adult suffering, bancrupcy, families broken, psychotics breaks, death, lack of medical tratments, people incarcerated an humiliated , elderness bad conditions , is

      USSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSss

      Our aggreement ot that that we supported, continu to support and approve ad our ownnnnnnnnnnn Blindnesssssssssssssssssssssss to give a lot of power TO ONE MAN as to dictate our lives and agree to shot our mind. to shot our mouth and to reject our cherish ones…The reason is USSSSSSSSSSSs because DM’s power – as any criminal organisation – held in money he has to controls thigs..and the money comes from USSSSSSSSSSSSSSSs and the fact that we obey to him or what the other master said!
      Something is never completly good or bad..it cannot eexist in a duality universe! So one, to be smart hat to understant te good part and bad part of it – Like salt – like sleeping, like eating..like loving…like sex..
      To be awake-moderate-and evaluate constantly one’s attachment

      Per buddhism scripture – and per ine’s results of years of Zazen one will probably discover that the roots of suffering are ”attachment and ignorance” and the day he sees it and throw s into the ”hole” any old beleif or attachment to a cult or religion or religious beleif..to RE-EVALUATE WITH A NEW SIGHT – this day he can chose to think freely – till it makes sens for him – but always keep the option to trhow in the garbage what is not good or not good anymore for him..
      This is an aspect of Freedom – the freedom of choosing!

      but IMHO . as far as I read All the comments abouts THE TECH and RON as the mecca ot the truth on earth and the answer to the search of freedom – in it’s pure essence…
      from my viewpoint.. it is still a ”cultist” attitude that make DM should be feel safe! There is still a potential of Slave and fans.
      RESPONSIBILITY as a person and RESPONSIBILITY as a group of human being!
      The are just viewpoints , that can be consider or not – AS my N ame isn’t Shantideva lol –
      but it migh be not completly stupid
      though may be offensive to the Dear Truth –
      but good intented to our human freedom and freedon of mind!

      • this is what I was looking for

        Joshu Washes the Bowl

        A monk told Joshu: ”I have just entered the monastery. Please teach me.”

        Joshu asked: `Have you eaten your rice porridge?’

        The monk replied: `I have eaten.’

        Joshu said: `Then you had better wash your bowl.’

        At that moment the monk was enlightened.

        Mumon’s Comment: Joshu is the man who opens his mouth and shows his heart. I doubt if this monk really saw Joshu’s heart. I hope he did not mistake the bell for a pitcher.

        It is too clear and so it is hard to see.
        A dunce once searched for fire with a lighted lantern.
        Had he known what fire was,
        He could have cooked his rice much sooner.

        *** Our way to awaking is not written in a book nor coming from the master’s mouth nor from statistics or a machine or buddha statue..it as to be found inside in a second of being totally in the present time open minded to feeling of what it is IS.

    • Allen

      David Miscavige has elevated any penalty within the Sea Org to severe and cruel ~~ almost Medieval Drachonian atrocities.

      You state LRH created the RPF, well I happened to see the original issues (carefully now hidden from public view). This was a 3 month cycle, 6 months at most with 5 hours auditing/training a day. The emphasis was on the 5 hours of enhancement. Anyone could talk freely inbound or outbound within the RPF which at the very most had 12 ~~ usually 6 or less on.

      DM version : The SO member is in the RPF 11 years, 13 years, 8 years, complete lock down, no communication with own spouse, RPF’s RPF with SLEEP DEPRIVATION which has even been assigned for asking to leave the Sea Org.

      I recall an exec in Flag Bureau that was “busted” to the gallery to wash dishes on the Apollo. He had done something which had repercussions.

      LRH came down to the Gallery 3 days later, put his arm around this Sea Org member and said “Hey, are you MAD at me ?” with a twinkle in his eye. The SO member cracked up. All was forgiven, the Exec back on post. 3 day Ethics. End of cycle. Ethics and Justice was swift, fast, it did not GRIND anyone into a pulp and smash them spiritually.

      ++++In 1122 Christian crusaders swept over Jerusalem and slaughtered men, women and children, ‘until their horses were knee deep in blood.
      +++++In 777 , Charlemagne, a devout Christian, after conquering the Saxon rebels,gave them a choice between baptism and execution.When they refused to convert, he had 4500 of them beheaded in one morning

      DO YOU BLAME AND ASSIGN CAUSE TO JESUS CHRIST FOR THIS ?

      ++++Karl Heinrich Marx wrote the Bible on communism. He authored the Text that began it all.

      DO YOU ASSIGN HIM AS SOURCE FOR KGB SLAVE LABOR CAMPS ?
      IS KARL MARX RESPONSIBLE FOR PUNITIVE PSYCHIATRY FOR RUSSIAN DISSIDENTS?
      IS KARL MARX RESPONSIBLE FOR NORTH KOREAN STARVATION OF 12% OF ITS POPULATION BECAUSE AFTER ALL, HE IS FOLLOWING KARL MARX TEXT AND THEORIES ?

      There is no As-Isness when you mis-assign source. It only gets more solid.

      • You know this is a great post Karen. I think like this, but you really said it.

      • God I love when you get sudden Karen. Thanks! Here’s my Cliff Notes: A=A=A=LRH gets the blame for others misapplications.

        ML, Tom

      • Karen, I agree with you on this. Its so easy for people to assign blame
        to LRH . People who have never met him or worked for him have no
        right to judge him. I knew him as a very warm compasionate man.
        Sure he lost his temper but more often than not he had cause. He
        always forgave and he really did care. He did not create DM nor the
        others who take ethics to mean punishment.

        • Sarge,

          Thank you for your note. It is interesting that in the main (with very few exceptions), those that lived in the same location as LRH whether on the Apollo, Creston Ranch like you for all those many years or any other location ~~those that actually spent time and interacted with him ~~ truly loved him.
          I had a typo above where I kept saying “gallery” ~~ I meant galley (ship’s kitchen area).
          Barney mentioned how the LRH version of the RPF was almost like a Holiday Camp. Barney who posted just below , was on the Apollo and verifies this ~~~ penalty, punishment, extreme duress, extreme slave labor was NEVER the point of the Apollo RPF. The theory was REALLY studying up on the technology at 5 hours a day could educate them on the auditing side of it all and enhance and improve performance. If an RPFer stayed over 3 months in the RPF on the Apollo, I recall them being nudged and poked…”Hey you, enough of being on VACATION ~~ get back on post ~~ we need you back !”

          RJ ~~ excellent point. Ethics was used only to the point of ETHICS change, then there was no need to keep going. On a week a Flag auditor did 50 hours in the chair we would get an LRH signed photo “Love, Ron.”

          LRH said “One ounce of PR can equal one TON of ETHICS !”
          One thing about the Apollo. There was simply no FEAR, NO DREAD, No terror of a Madman running a meeting and punching his execs and ordering their next few years of life to be savagely changed such as shipped to Australia, RPF, failing Org etc.
          The Apollo was a high high ARC production machine with a sense of adventure, laughter, team activity, high spirits, FUN FUN FUN and LRH set the tone level.

          • If all what you say is truth how do you explain the observations of David Mayo,Ken Urqheart, John Mc Master, Kima Douglas, Mike Goldstein, Pam Kemp and others

            • Ken Urquhart says many positive things about LRH, not to mention he is still auditing!!

              Ken simply doesn’t hide his own opinions that LRH could have been and should have been more compassionate and less egotistical. Ken btw, knows a great deal about the original RPF as he was asked by LRH to put the program together.

              Not sure what the others have to say about LRH. I was never a great fan of Mayo’s, never knew the Kemps or M. Goldstein.
              WH

      • Good point Karen.

        Bravo!

        Also I knew the exec you were referring to and others who’s conditions were cancelled by the Ol’man because ethics had served its purpose and any further ethics action was overrun.

        Of course you don’t see that sort of thing today in the Church of Squirrelotology.

        Overrun is SOP there!

      • Karen,

        I agree with Marty this is a great post. I was there as well when the PRF was created, the original issues made it to be almost a holiday camp. A chance to say “yes, I am being removed and I can get a few months of stress free mest work (no laps, no sleepless nights) and enhancement. It was easy to get through the damn program. I no too long ago that someone was in the RPF for 13 freekin years.

        The RPF became completely insane in the post LRH years and was impossible to get though unless you gave your soul to the devil (DM). Most who were there in these years will agree with me.

        Allen, get your facts straight.

        • I think some of you guys are suffering from uninspected assumptions.

          Marty posted what LRH said in the Phoenix Lectures:

          “Now, the worse off a group is, which is to say, the less communication they have, actually, the more communication can be forced upon them. And you can get a form of hypnotism there. But the interesting thing is that they must have been prepared by an enormous number of agreements before they got into that state. In other words, somebody else prepared them, so they didn’t care who they agreed with after a while.’

          ‘Anybody in a uniform walks up to a soldier, if that uniform has a higher rank on, the soldier will obey them. Well, this is a form of hypnotism.”…

          LRH is telling you in the mid 1950’s that people in uniforms, and ranks in military-like organizations, are a form of hypnotism.

          So what is the Sea Org doing in Scientology?

          He is saying that uniforms are a way to coerce you to agree.

          Why do Sea Org members wear uniforms?

          Maybe the RPF was a vacation spa-type activity in LRH’s day. Was it used to reward upstats? Or was it a “too gruesome” for downstats?

          Come on you guys. Does Scientology exist to increase a person’s power of choice – or not?

          The Sea Org, the RPF, lower conditions penalties, etc etc etc, are all techniques, developed by LRH, to coerce agreement from you.

          And you are all agreeing big time right now.

          Step back. There are outpoints all around you but your uninspected assumptions keep you from seeing them.

          I agree that David Miscavige must be stopped. But there are specific reasons WHY he must be stopped: He is using techniques of brainwashing, and those techniques were given to him by L Ron Hubbard as Hubbard went down the CDEI scale over the years trying to make Scientology work.

          It is those techniques – the same techniques LRH pointed out to you and warned you against in the 50’s – which are the real target.

          There shouldn’t even BE a Sea Org in Scientology, if Scientology really exists to raise the self-determinsim and power of choice of people.

          Many people here have said that those things which exist in Scientology which go against its basic principles should be abolished. LRH, in this lecture Marty cites, is giving you those basic principles. I understand that you love and admire and respect LRH. If that is so, correct his mistakes for him, and for God’s sake, build a better bridge.

          • Alanzo,

            You seem to have some familiarity with Scientology, but you also seem to be seriously lacking in subjective reality when it comes to the technical side of the subject.

            Did you personally ever have a major win in auditing? If so, to what do you attribute that?

            To achieve the positive results of AUDITING, a very tight standard must be adhered to. It is something like making a complex recipe at a high-end restaurant. Get a few ingredients wrong, and you botch the whole thing – which, in the case of auditing, can HARM the person you are trying to help.

            One reason for the creation and existence of the SO was to maintain, and yes, enforce, the “Standard” in Standard Tech. Pray tell – what problem do you have with that – assuming that such enforcement is proper and appropriate to the circumstances?

            Another purpose was to create a highly disciplined group to help hasten the process of clearing the planet – a planet where, in 1950s-1980s time frame, the risks of nuclear annihilation seemed to be very high.

            Seem to me to be very positive, laudable goals, at least if one truly believed one had the tools that could avert a global holocaust and render nuclear war a bygone threat. NOT by forcing the tools on the population, but by way of an increased discipine and focus, simply
            speeding up the process of getting them into broad use.

            “Hubbard went down the CDEI scale over the years trying to make Scientology work” – total crock. What specific knowledge do you have that would render you credible on the subject of Hubbard’s case state over time? As compared to, say, Karen, Sarge, or Joe H. who worked with him on a daily basis?

            Sorry, as most people on this blog KNOW, you cannot “make Scientology work”, at least not by force. And, though I never met the man, I can tell you for sure, no one knew that better than LRH.

            You can “make” people do Scientology correctly, I suppose. What problem do you have with that? Most who have actually experienced Scientology know that it is very powerful stuff. Very different than just putting flowers in your hair, lighting up the incense & dancing around chanting the name of some deity. I have known any number of people whose cases have been seriously messed up by the faulty application of Scientology tech.

            If Scientology tech is to be applied at all, it needs to be applied correctly, and IMO, there needs to be some sort of agency or authority to ensure that it is applied correctly.

            A common denominator of all those participating on this blog – at least those who have first-hand experience with Scientology TECH – is an understanding of how badly the tech has been MIS-applied during DM’s reign of terror, along with a shared determination to see that this malpractice is stopped, and if possible, its damage undone.

            “The Sea Org, the RPF, lower conditions penalties, etc etc etc, are all techniques, developed by LRH, to coerce agreement from you” – again, what arrogance on your part! What unique insight do you have that gives you the ability to divine LRH’s purposes? Yes he did
            develop these things, but for what purpose? Was the purpose to help or harm? And, applied as intended by LRH, did they in fact help or harm? (See Karen’s post above).

            I was never in the SO, although I trained and interned at SO-run organizations. I had much interaction with SO staff for years. They were my seniors, supervisors, preclears and often friends.

            To the best of my ability to perceive, I really don’t think I was in any way “hypnotized” by my interaction with folks in the SO. What a friggin’ joke!

            The real failing, IMO and I’ve stated it before, is that there were and are insufficient checks and balances against the possibility of injustice within the organization. A subsidiary problem is that there are too many people in positions of power who lack the education and hatting to do their jobs competently. Fix those two problems and you might wind up with the very ethical, effective organization that LRH envisioned.

          • Alanzo wrote: “LRH is telling you in the mid 1950′s that people in uniforms, and ranks in military-like organizations, are a form of hypnotism.”

            I guess if you ignore EVERYTHING ELSE that was written in that quote that Marty provided, your statement might be true. But of course the quote — and its overall intent — doesn’t say what you imply at all.

            The LRH quote above begins with “The whole of existence, actually, is run very much like a hypnotic trance.” LRH is talking about the very fundamentals of existence “being like hypnosis” … as in agree’ing with the physical universe. He describes how this “gradation of hypnosis” runs all the way down the scale, and he gives real world examples today of low-toned agreement running amok. He mentions that in groups that are bad off (low-toned, lacking in ethics, etc.), how this “group agreement” is the worse off and is used very hypnotically (which is Marty’s point). LRH cites the uniformed military as one example.

            Is LRH saying: disband governments! disband hospitals! disband the military! disband all uniforms everywhere!

            No, he is giving a casual real-world example of the “gradations of hypnotism” BEGINNING WITH ALL OF EXISTENCE at the very end of the scale (i.e. our agreeing with the MEST universe), and then describes how it gets worse the lower-toned you go, where the lowest-toned, bad-off groups are at the bottom of the scale.

            This is not about the evils of uniforms and the RPF … this is about tone level and the free choice to be part of a group or not. To choose to agree or disagree at will, and to do it all under ones own self-determinsim.

            • OK, well Margaret, I have to disagree with LRH here: all of existence in not hypnotism. That is a completely absurd statement. It is false data. Only someone who knew nothing about the mind and hypnosis would accept that datum from LRH without question.

              He has also defined hypnotism as coerced agreement, and that is a more workable piece of information than “all of existence is hypnotism.”

              LRH most definitely worked socially coercive techniques into Scientology in order to enforce agreement and lower the power of choice and self-determinism of Scientologists from the mid-1960’s on. I am not the only person on Earth to have observed this, in fact many experts have noted this and wrote about it since the 1970’s.

              If this was not true, just take a look at all the comments in this very discussion, and the post that Marty wrote: Here we are after 60 years of operation of Scientology, and we are talking about hypnotized Scientologists.

              If Scientology truly understood the mind, understood what hypnosis really was, could spot SPs and un-hypnotize people, etc: how could this situation possibly exist?

              If Scientologists weren’t hypnotized at the time DM first showed his face in Scientology, why wasn’t he IMMEDIATELY shot from guns?

              Answer: there must have been some hypnosis in the form of coerced agreement going on prior to that. The very forms of hypnosis that LRH identified in the 50’s were going on in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s in Scientology, and DM has just stepped into the boots and kept on walking, as he was trained to do by LRH.

              You can disagree with me.

              But I ask you: Can you disagree with LRH?

              • Acually Alanzo your statements are routinely “completely absurd”. Your communication is condescending, with a biased slant at every turn to denigrate and belittle L Ron Hubbard and Scientology. You have proven again that your intent is not to learn and perhaps move up a little higher. So, again, I think I’m going treat your comm as an intentional diversion.

              • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

                I don’t agree that all of existance is hypnotisim either.

                You make some very interesting points for argument. I have nothing I have to concretely disagree with your hypothesis. Those are pretty cynical thoughts about Ron, for sure. But I’m not here to shame you for “bad” thoughts about Ron. lol.

                Assuming you’re correct, what do you believe is the reasoning of Ron having “worked socially coercive techniques into Scientology”?

                You wrote to Margaret, “But I ask you: Can you disagree with LRH?”

                My own answer. Absolutely, and I do disgree with several items.

                The only part I have any serious skepticism about your opinion is what you said here is this statement …

                “and DM has just stepped into the boots and kept on walking, as he was trained to do by LRH.”

                I’d like to see any documentation which clearly shows LRH handing DM the torch as the new “pope” of CoS. That would prove quite interesting.

                • That I can’t do.

                  Marty would know WAY more about that than me.

                  • We do go through life on many routines and forget to question if they are still valid in the present. You could argue we are often in a trance lacking awarness doing things on automatic pilot and thus going through life in a hypnotic state.

                    Time to turn on the “mindfullness” CD

                • Wayne, I think the operative word here is “coerced”. Al insists that agreement is coerced. LRH said nothing about agreement being coerced. Putting the word “coerced” in there is Al’s own alter-is or additive which distorts the entire perspective on it.

                  LRH is saying there that agreement is created or built up in small increments. None of those need be coerced at all. The person agrees to agree, then he agrees to agree a little more, and so on. Nowhere does LRH say the agreements must be coerced. Manipulated, perhaps, but that is not the same as coercion.

                  Like the fish in Lake Tanganyika who believe they are trapped by thes hadows of a net on the bottom, a person can be trapped by the use of his own prior agreements against him. That’s the “beauty” of hypnosis – no coercion is necessary! The person has agreed that s/he will comply. S/he may feel coerced, because the force in the bank is restimulated to enforce compliance with the agreement, but beyond that, there is actually nothing to prevent the person from just saying “NO!” and walking away….

                  That’s really why Al’s agrument holds no water – LRH said nothing about coercion being necessary. That’s purely Al’s insertion. The feeling of being coerced is coming from the person’s own bank.

                  As for the proposition that “existence is hypnosis”, acceptable truth, anyone? It depeneds on what level of truth is acceptable to you.

                  Reality(existence) is quite Real, but…. Create-Survive-Destroy is the apparent cycle of action. According to LRH the actual cycle of action is…. Create-create-create-Cease creating.

                  This is entirely consistent with older teachings from Sufis, Buddhism, Vedas, etc about the nature of reality and existence. Beings are seen as entranced by the phenomenal world, samsara, maya, craving for sensation, the endless cycle of birth and death. They are asleep, as in hypnosis. The goal of those teachings is to awaken from the trance.

                  It explains why some older teachings characterize “reality” as being an “illusion”. A being has agreed to it, that’s all. Then if he loses control or forgets of his own agreement, he is like asleep or entranced and existence proceeds automatically for him.

                  Well, didn’t mean to write a dissertation on it….

              • Alanzo wrote: “I have to disagree with LRH here: all of existence in not hypnotism. That is a completely absurd statement.”

                That’s because you seem to have a need to think with it literally, Alanzo. And you’ve reworded LRH’s statement and intent to try to fit it into this literalness.

                He is saying (in the Scientology model of existence) that the moment a being agrees with the MEST universe (or any universe), and loses the ability to disagree at will, he is that much less self-determined and “pure static”. Take this pattern (i.e. “agree with something, then lose the ability to disagree at will”) down the scale, and you’ll eventually get down into what we know as garden-variety “hypnotism”.

                At least that’s how I read it.

                Can I disagree with LRH? Sure, I make it a habit of disagreeing with LRH at least once a week — right before Thurs @2.🙂 Not always easy, as he did manage to come up with the best go’darned model of existence in these here parts. At least, imho.

            • Hey guys,

              Alanzo’s like one of those obsessed cops who ain’t interested in the suspect’s innocence.

              He’ll “prove” the Ol’man’s “guilt”, even if he has to plant the evidence.

  15. Marty, that was a great LRH reference, especially that last paragraph – VERY poweerful. In fact, I thought the last paragraph of your post was also very necessary reading as it paints an accurate picture of where much of the church is currently at. Especially your comments on sec checking and punishments.

    I will say though that the events don’t act much as hypnotism from my point of view. The first 15 minutes are usually interesting as one gets what Miscavige is currently “into” and then the event slowly descends into sort of a mind numbing boredom. Not in a hypnotic way I don’t think, but just so freaking dull that one starts thinking of many other things and then as the event gets on to the two and half, three hour point, most people are just silently praying for the end. And then finally, they really DO cheer! Ha.

    There REALLY isn’t much of the agreement in these events that LRH is talking about. Most people at the event are just “putting in their time.” I don’t even think they’re listening enough to agree or disagree. As for “rolling thunder”? Give ma a break!! Talk about knee jerk standing ovations! We just get up when everyone in the video gets up (you don’t want people to think you’re disaffected by sitting down during the standing up times , do?)

    The Miscavige events hit their high point in 1996 (as far as audience impact) with the GAT event. I last went to an event almost 4 years ago, so I’d be interested to hear what others would say about more recent ones. Too bad they’re not on the inernet, but that would be a BIG embarassment for the church I think if the broad public could see these things.

    • Independent Scientologist

      Current events are like being hit with an information sledge hammer.

      Ron Matlock

    • Joe,
      The other day you posted a description differentiating the results of auditing/training with the difficulties encountered within the 3D activities. I’m doing a Data Series 11 on that ‘oddity’. That the organizational issues can overbear the factual purpose of the organization.

      I think this idea of hyptnotism by gradient scale agreement is possibly part of that same area. In the absence of auditing – the undoing of past hypnotisms/gradient scale agreements and ‘now I’m supposed to’s’ – then what’s left seems to be the ‘group think’ and mores, tacit or ‘understood’ by looking around and agreeing with what seems to be the way to act, think etc.

      I think you’ve made plain a string to pull on how the 3D in Scn has gone off the rails to be an entity that more or less serves its own purpose of ‘3D survival’ in whatever form is agreed upon, rather than the actual purpose of a Scn org, delivery of that which undoes all these ‘agreements’ and returns to the being the power of choice over what it is to agree to or not.

      In the absence of auditing and training, then all DM has is these events/attempts at mass hypnosis and the IAS/criminal rip-off- no exchange- one way flow- mass maker. You have MESTology. A concentration upon dimension (and that, MEST, depends utterly upon agreement), as opposed to Scientology, the rehabilitation of the viewpoint, which then enables new creation.

      DM’s bullshit events are designed to gain agreement on MEST. He’s the leader of MESTology/Dimension-ology/Hypnotology.

      • P.S. I’m ‘gone fishing’, or as I’m looking at it; assuming a viewpoint and extending points to view that hopefully a large Atlantic salmon will view favorably🙂

      • Jim

        Something that caught my eye the other day that may be of interest to you.
        I was glancing through the recent Flag Land Base publication and on the back of the cover page, at the bottom, is a glossary.
        I looked at the definition of Overt, out of curiosity, to see if it had been altered from LRH and this is what this altered version says….

        “OVERT: a harmful act or transgression against the moral code of a group is called an “overt act” or “overt”. When a person does something that is contrary to the moral code that he has agreed to or when he omits to do something that he should have done per that moral code , he has committed an overt act. An overt act violates what is agreed upon.”

        I was shocked by that “definition” as it has virtually no similarity to the definition in the Dianetics and Ssientology Technical Dictionary. It is also in total disregard to the first several paragraphs of the Code Of Honor by LRH.

        What I see here is an attempt by Miscavage (or someone else) to make disagreement an overt! Very clever. Not what an overt is at all per my understanding.

        WW

        • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

          Holy sh*t WindWalker!

          Good catch! This kind of crap pushes my hot button regarding CofM’s squirrelling.

          Let’s do a direct comparison for “fun”.

          DM’s Definition; (Notice no source specified for the definition)

          “OVERT: a harmful act or transgression against the moral code of a group is called an “overt act” or “overt”. When a person does something that is contrary to the moral code that he has agreed to or when he omits to do something that he should have done per that moral code , he has committed an overt act. An overt act violates what is agreed upon.”

          The REAL Scientology Definition:

          OVERT ACT, 1. an overt act is not just injuring someone or something; an overt act is an act of omission or commission which does the least good for the least number of dynamics or the most harm to the greatest number of dynamics. (HCO PL 1 Nov 70 III) 2 . an intentionally committed harmful act committed in an effort
          to resolve a problem. (SH Spec 44, 6410C27) 3 . that thing which you do which you aren’t willing to have happen to you. (lSH ACC 10, 6009C14)

          – Dianetics and Scientology TECHNICAL DICTIONARY by L. Ron Hubbard (5th Printing, 1975)

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            The CofS IS the valence of David Miscavage.

            Break an agreement with DM (CofS) and you commit an “overt”.

            Of course, I’m “sure” that the same SP transcriptionist squirrel David “discovered” in 2007 GAT, wrongfully altered the definition of Overt Act way back in the 1975 Tech Dictionary, right. That would “justify” DM’s new definition.
            🙄

            The actual word “Overt” (not Overt Act) in American English to the culture outside the CofS means this …

            overt (ō vʉrt′, ō′vʉrt′)

            adjective

            1. not hidden; open; observable; apparent; manifest
            2. Law done openly and publicly, without attempt at concealment and with evident intent

            Origin: ME overte < MFr overt, pp. of ovrir, to open < VL *operire < L aperire, to open: see aperture

            Related Forms:

            * overtly overt′·ly adverb

            Webster's New World College Dictionary

            o·vert (ō-vûrtˈ, ōˈvûrtˌ)
            adjective

            1. Open and observable; not hidden, concealed, or secret: overt hostility; overt intelligence gathering.
            2. Of, relating to, or being military or intelligence operations sanctioned or mandated by Congress: overt aid to the rebels.

            Origin: Middle English, from Old French, past participle of ovrir, to open, from Vulgar Latin *ōperīre, alteration (influenced by Latin cōperīre, to cover) of Latin aperīre; see wer-4 in Indo-European roots.

            Related Forms:

            * overtly o·vertˈly adverb

            * o·vertˈness noun

            The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th edition

            Definition 1 of “Overt” in American English is a POSITIVE thing.

            To redefine regular English words from a good to a bad thing is pretty Orwellian to me. I have no problem with the word “Overt Act” as a different word/phrase, as it’s not in a regular dictionary.

            But to radically change the meaning of the word “Overt” (by itself)? Yes, I have a disagreement with that because it cris crosses, twists, and mixes up understanding with most people who already know the word. Language ends up losing clarity and the hazard is in creating confusion.

          • Wayne

            Thanks man for the excellent follow up!

            WW

  16. I was always bothered by his “rolling thunder”. For one, it was difficult to duplicate. After he announced the Basics were in all US libraries I checked every library near my home and in my county. I of course found that not to be the case. All libraries in my county and some beyond had a policy of not accepting donated materials for their catalog. They instead tried to sell them 1.00 a piece to make money to purchase books they did want. When I reported it to my local Org, I got written up for daring to look.

    A few years ago DM announced that Dell, Kimora Lee Simmons and a few other big names were supporting the Way to Happiness campaign. Others questioned these companies directly. I saw their responses online and it was NOT true. A few had given money to what they thought was a local community group, not knowing it had anything to do with WTH, that gets stretched into how they are onboard and promoting the campaign.

  17. The more glamour, the more disgust

    @Victoria: Hope you will get it soon. It helps to confront it. The envelopment of spirit and soul into MEST seems to be a series of solutions to manage exactly this phenomenon: Cumulative unduplicating agreements. One can even see a second as-isness added to a first one without granting the first one beingness as that – and hence existence / isness as such a slip-up. Seen like that, Miscavige is just managing and surfing on the downfall. Would not seem so terrible, a lot are still in this “phase”, seems to me each of us to some extent; DM wouldn’t be a big exception if he wouldn’t pretend to further the opposite or better an embracing movement which is aimed at overcome these mecanisms – or at least the enslaving aspects of them.
    One could, a bit simplified, say that Scientology is no longer Scientology if it specializes on fixed ideas. The expansion of existing without actual new views but only new hideing is not change, but fixedness which is agreement without duplication which is on the effect side slavery. The world is full of it, so better you duplicate that somehow – soon. For you and those who still are on this path and you don’t get it … if you never will, you’ll never will be able to do something about.
    To be good is dangerous if you have no real basic not fixed ready-made understanding what YOU mean with good. Else, just choosing sides results of it – good on doubt, but the conditions are there to move up a little higher, not stay on the top rim of doubt. It takes duplication to come “over” the sides and not be of the flock on one side. Nothing to not get. By all means which might serve (except the bad ones in YOUR fixed understandings of bad) , get it! I’d consider my understanding in liability if I’d state, maybe I’ll never get it. And would look for the group or context to which this liability refers …
    @Marty, if you allow a bit evaluation: Great observations and arrangement of importances!

  18. Amazing Marty! That LRH reference could have aptly been named, A Study in David Miscavige. You’ve made it crystal clear – again.
    The more disagreements you have with the charade, the further to the top your name goes on the hit list.
    And in reverse, the more disagreements you have, of course, then the more likely you are to get out!

  19. I remember showing my other half, a non-scientologist, the This is Scientology DVD when i was a churchie because I thought it would impress her. After a half hour she got up and said ‘I cant watch anymore I feel like I’m being hypnotised’.

    I couldn’t see this truth even though it was under my nose. Forest and tree’s and all that.

  20. “There are lies, damned lies, and then there are statistics.“

    (This comes from Mark Twain’s autobiography. Twain attributes it to Disraeli, but it is not found anywhere in Disraeli’s writings.)

  21. Great write-up and LRH reference Marty. I immediately thought of another character who used the same techniques. Does this look and sound familiar?

    • Tom, I had exactly the same thought. The parallels to Hitler are uncanny.

      • Sarge-

        It’s an honor to share these “impure” thoughts with you. (chuckle)

        The last Int event I attended about 10 years ago I stayed seated in my chair during the Sieg Heil moments. I watched intently realizing my friends were acting like Adolf’s audience (or the winged monkeys a la Oz). And you know in retrospect that’s when I finished my doubt formula. My Hasta la vista moment.

        ML, Tom

        • Thought Provoking

          “The last Int event I attended about 10 years ago I stayed seated in my chair during the Sieg Heil moments.”

          You had the courage to do what others only thought about doing.

          It’s funny how you justify doing this “normal” display of appreciation when you are with the mob. But, as a Div 6er sending my newbies to an event, my radar was fully in on how they would react at the first mass Heil and some of the smarter ones walked because of it.

          • Thanks Thought Provoking for prodding my memory bank.

            Within three or four earlier events I was provoked to bring someone “new” to one of these Int events. First was my dearest relative, my first cousin, who I grew up with since being diapered. The second was one of my best female friends since earliest High School.

            Needless to say disasters, both.

            They saw the mob. Their reactions were similar to having been transported back in time to the video I linked to above. Utter revulsion. More than blemished our relationships. After all these years I realize I need to make up the damage.

            Thanks for the reminder and additions to my weekly battle plan.

            ML, Tom

  22. Well that explains why the Stevens Creeks org must PAY OFF IT’s MORTGAGE, so then hundreds will come through the door!. That was the recent presentation by the IAS in the Bay Area. Orgs that have their
    mortgages paid off have increased traffic.

    • Thought Provoking

      I am sure that went well with all of the public (bay area wide) that donated from 2004 – 2006 hundreds of thousands, some taking out second mortgages to pay for their new building only to have Int landlord declare they have a mortage with Int. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands have been collected since that time.

      I believe they call that “Rip Off” exchange.

      Then the public are harrassed in their homes and at work with phone calls ordering them to the next IAS event where they are demanded to produce money that they no longer have, with threats of KRs and some of them are lucky enough to see their recently selected Div 6 public quietly freak out over the ordeal.

      The public give and give and give (time, labor and money) as do most of the staff. They bought the Ideal org agreement and now they are like hampsters who can’t get off the wheel.

      When I left in 2006, it was common to hit up every one in the field multiple times for money or staff. All of this came as quotas from management and had to be done now! After watching this org’s public and staff get hammered relentlessly for three years it was obvious that there was never going to be a big booming org as long as there were reg events for donations AND staff. The way to increase traffic is to get rid of the IAS, do away with corrupt out exchange management targets and orders and DELIVER Scientology.

    • Pay off it’s mortgage to who, Int Finance? If so then it’s a made up mortgage, paying for something already paid. Is there a way you could confirm how this works? Last I checked Scientology pays for buildings upfront with cash per policy. There’s no loans taken out for purchases.

  23. Honest question, something I’ve always been curious about which has been touched upon recently. Mark states:

    “..the Bridge has altered to consist on average of more than fifty percent security checks. And those security checks are done within an imposed mores that considers the highest crime one can commit is to question the infallibility of David Miscavige.”

    Now, from my reading its certainly true MORE sec checks than ever are being performed at the CoS. However, since the early days of Scientology I’ve always understood questioning the tenants of Scientology or the truths of LRH has always been a “high crime” or something that can lead to some very uncomfortable circumstances for members.(RPF, Conditions, PTS, Suppressive declares, etc…) Admitting to having any doubts about Scientology is not something you want to have your auditor discover.
    A friend of mine who was once a CoS member commented on the “thought stopping” issue from Glenn’s post last week. She felt that was true far before DM’s reign. That if you had read any entheta or had any negative thoughts about Scientology you did your utmost to not think about it or keep it out of auditing sessions due to the consequences that would result. She said there was always “thought stopping” in auditing sessions because bringing up certain issues, particularly any questioning Scientology doctrine or the way it was managed – could result in unwanted consequences.

    Another former member who writes a blog, who’s mother raised him in Scientology and was a active member from the 1960’s to early 80’s stated there was plenty of “thought stopping” in Scientology – because there were unwanted consequences for certain thoughts and therefore you did your utmost to keep them suppressed.

    I would like others’ opinions on these matters. Would any of you freely express doubts or negative thoughts about Scientology tenants or LRH in auditing? If you did, what would the results be – now or in the past?

    • Unity Mitford wrote: “Would any of you freely express doubts or negative thoughts about Scientology tenants or LRH in auditing? If you did, what would the results be – now or in the past?”

      I’ll give you my experience. First some background. It’s a bit long, but hopefully will give you some context to understand my answer.

      Before I ever considered myself a “Scientologist”, I went to a local Scientology mission in the mid-70s, because someone I knew was a Scientologist. I did the comm course and HAS co-audit. They were ok, but not life-changing for me. I didn’t consider myself a “Scientologist” based on those. And when those courses were over, I pretty much walked away … with a few interesting ideas, but in retrospect, still pretty confused by the whole thing. (And in looking back on it now, I was really taking those courses to indirectly please my friend, and not out of a sincere desire to do or understand the subject.)

      About four years later, while quietly in “pursuit of happiness” in life, I decided to setaside everything I had heard, learned or been told about Scientology — good or bad — and just see if the actual subject of Scientology had any ideas or useful information for me. So I started perusing some basic Scientology books, and then tried out “Self Analysis” on myself. I noticed, from doing so, an increase in my general happiness and outlook in life.

      At that point, I decided to start reading the books more intently. I didn’t tell anyone I was doing this, and was approaching it all on a very self-determined basis. As part of doing so, many previously confusing ideas started clearing up. And I started understanding where LRH was coming from. And so I started progressing into some of the more intermediate and advanced books. And my life started feeling simpler, and my happiness seemed to expand and expand. The living of life and how to achieve happiness, in my estimation, was becoming clearer and clearer to me — I could see improvements in my relationships, my friendships … and just my overall attitude had improved enormously. I was in school at the time, and my approach to being a student and studying turned completely around. My grades reflected it, as I started once again getting As, where I had earlier been getting Bs and Cs … and heading lower.

      At that point, I was REALLY interested in Scientology. But I hadn’t set foot in a Church of Scientology in several years, hadn’t gotten any auditing and didn’t really feel I had a need to. I certainly wasn’t ready to call myself a “Scientologist”. This studying of the subject was something I was doing completely on my own, and I wasn’t particularly interested in the “group” or some larger cause.

      But I was deeply interested in learning more about this subect. And so I started REALLY digging into the advanced books, to see if it made sense. And I started really looking at and soaking up the Axioms, and Factors, and just the whole notion of being spirit and not just a body/brain. I doing so, my space … my universe … just expanded and expanded. My life, my attitude, my level of happiness and my love and understanding of others and the world was out the roof, and my pursuit of happiness had been achieved beyond my wildest dreams and my interest was now in helping others achieve it.

      For that reason, and for those experiences, I considered myself privately, a “Scientologist”. This subject had transformed my life. And for the subject alone, I felt a part of the group of people who also understood the subject and were applying it to help others.

      And so that was the background in which I re-entered the Church of Scientology and eventually joined staff for 2.5 years in the mid-80s, and then eventually became a “paying public” with a desire to go up the Bridge from then until I left in 2009.

      So in answer to your question “would you freely express doubts or negative thoughts about Scientology or LRH” … I had already calmly, privately and to my own satisfaction expressed and answered any questions, doubts and disagreements that I had had with Scientology and LRH. To me, once I thoroughly understood the subject, I realized that “being true to myself” always trumped both the subject of Scientology and LRH. And I was free to agree or disagree with LRH at will. True self-determinism and personal integrity are at the core of the subject of Scientology.

      —-

      Now, to be honest, that was/is much easier to apply and learn as a “public” Scientologist as opposed to a “staff” or especially “Sea Org” Scientologist. I can’t speak to what it was like to be “staff” or “Sea Org” in the 60s or 70s, but I can tell you that one was expected to “agree with and follow” LRH and Scientology policy while on staff in the 80s. Since I already had done a fairly thorough vetting of “Scientology – the subject” before joining staff, it wasn’t much of a problem for me. I didn’t particularly agree with all of the policies, but overall it wasn’t too bad. Others, who hadn’t done the same vetting of the subject, clearly had many internal conflicts as they moved through the Scientology system — as too often, they weren’t allowed to really think through the subject in the comfort of their own homes and on their own time. And if they were then coerced into joining staff or the Sea Org before doing so (which happened constantly), then this almost invariably led to problems with people joining staff then blowing, being declared SP, etc. It was/is a mess (and has led to today what we have on the Internet and around the world).

      My conclusion was (and still is): if Scientology organizations were truly applying the principles of Scientology (the subject) to the administration and management of their groups, all would be fine. It would require, imho, re-evaluating some LRH policies (written in different times, places and circumstances) and adopting new ones. But the underlying subject itself not only suggests, but demands, that Scientologists do re-evaluate certain policies and do adopt new ones, based on the yardstick: did/does/will it work in improving conditions?

    • Unity,

      I can attest to having read almost every critical book or article on Scientology over a span of 25 years. I made it a point, from my first days on the HAS course, to always look at whatever I came across about Scientology, positive or negative. Many times I discussed what I’d heard or read with others. Sometimes I’d read something that would upset me. I would bring it up in session, and it would be handled with standard rudiments.

      There was one time on a solo level (won’t mention which one) where I went on a natter tirade against LRH. It all went down in the worksheets. The auditor (me) handled per standard tech. No ethics, no sec checks, no nothing. Just with auditing. On that particular level, eventually I went to cramming, found that I had a huge m/u on something (I found the m/u, it was not imposed on me in any way), and I went on to have HUGE wins on the level.

      Of course, this was all before DM’s reign. And, I’m speaking only from my own experiences, not those of others.

    • It didn’t even need to be during an auditing session. I got in in the early seventies, never on staff, a paying public only. After I’d been in a couple of years, I mentioned to a friend that I wanted to finish my university studies, and had plans to do many other things that were not compatible with spending Monday through Friday evenings 7-10 pm in the mission. The next evening, I was called into “Ethics” the minute I arrived. Apparently I had uttered an unacceptable thought! (My friend had passed my remark on to another acquaintance, who ratted me out.) I remember thinking it absurd that this very unimpressive man believed he had a right to censor my thoughts and speech. It would have been funny had not he taken himself so seriously. We worked it out somehow to his satisfaction, and I returned to the course room still bemused. It took me several more years to leave. I realized that I really did not agree that I needed to be there Monday through Friday, or in fact at all. My observation throughout a six year involvement of training and auditing was that there was a strong undercurrent of having to agree. If something wasn’t “true for you,” the solution was to demo it out until it became so- in other words, you capitulated. This is my own experience, and not intended to insult anyone or anyone’s belief.
      Some of the things Marty has written have made me think that it might be possible that someone could participate in Scientology outside the organization in a much more free and self determined manner, that perhaps it could really be “an applied philosophy” instead of a dogma. That would be something I would be happy to see happen. It is another topic entirely, but when I first went on course, I was assured that an “applied philosophy” compatible with one’s own religion was what I was getting into. Later, I saw that it was meant to replace my religion, and that was something I did not want to do. Best to you all, Pax

    • Thought Provoking

      Unity,
      I have to say that I really didn’t experience this sort of “thought stopping” until I was on Org staff. It was non-existant on mission lines in late 70′ and early 80’s. I worked in education for 17 years and it was not present for the most part but if disagreements did come up they were handled with tech, particularly ALL available study tech and the concept of “what’s true for you…” was normal. Self determinism and Integrity were heavily endorsed.

      Margaret,

      I LOVED your post! My affinity for you went way up on that! 🙂

    • Unity

      I have been a Scientologist for almost 40 years. I have seen many examples of the situation of which you speak. I have also experienced it first hand on many occasions.
      Within a year of getting into Scientology I was the Comm Course supervisor at our local mission. I got some auditor training and then supervisor training and am currently a Hubbard Professional course supervisor.
      I have worked with students for thousands of hours and personally never considered a student who disagreed to be any kind of a problem. It was a challenge sometimes , and time consuming, but I wanted the person to arrive at an understanding that was true for them. I am not much interested in students who do not challenge things that they do not agree with. I was never one to accept data on “authority” personally, and I did not expect it of my students. I got good results in training students that could “think with the data” and could get results. This was how things were done in that Mission. So I know some were trained with this attitude.
      But, the other part of your question….
      To be totally honest with you, my participation in this particular blog/forum, is the first time in my Scientology “career” that I feel totally at liberty to discuss any and all points of view about the subject. To me this is HUGE!
      ( Marty, Thank you for this wonderful gift, as I say… it is HUGE)

      The repercussions of not “towing the line” or challenging ranged from subtle “shunning”, invalidative or evaluative “handlings” to misguided “ethics” or “justice” handlings. Generally I chose to avoid the inevitable confrontation by keeping my own council and keeping my mouth shut while still acting on my own integrity.

      My separation from the current Church was, for the most part, precipitated by an ever increasing encroachment on my freedom to be myself and express myself freely and to handle people with ARC not force.

      WW

    • Unity, sure, I was and am very vocal in my disagreements. Example:

      1. In session, I would regularly be upset about the prices the church was charging, and the 5% per month rule. Ruds were checked, but no ethics – this was my opinion.

      2. I was declared a “Borderline Suppressive” due solely to having had low TA during M1 co-auditing (a procedure where you are off the cans a lot, looking up words, so where could the TA be?) I challenged it, and got the offending idiot Crammed.

      3. On my test to pass the Briefing Course (Class VI), I “missed” one question. The answer cited a certain reference, which did apply, but I used a more recent and exact reference for the situation, and the Qual Sec passed me and updated the test.

      Now, if someone comes in an says that there are no such thing as ARC breaks or Missed With-holds, and that therefore we should disregard them, that person will be challenged (or would have been in the old days). Not declared. Depending on circumstance, he or she would be referred to materials to read, demo, and star-rate, or be crammed if the person was not a student and was auditing. The attitude is that Standard Tech works, and if challenged, it is up to the challenger to make the case. It was not a perfect system, but it did work.

      As far as in session goes, I never had any issues at all saying anything at all in auditing. It was never used against me. The only time it could have been was when it was not auditing – HCO sec check. They were very rare, and you knew what you were getting in to. I did have some crazy ethics cycles, and some great ones. I made it a point to stay out of the ethics office. I was not always successful.

      More recently, I told a Class XII at Flag that I had no reach to do OT V. He was doing an assess and indicate on a C/S 53 (a repair list). This was in 2002. The most surprising thing happened: Nothing. No one said anything to me.

      It could be that people were afraid to voice their opinions because they were afraid they’d be shot. But they probably would not have been. I never was.

      One time I was applying to a position at an Scn org, and they were worried that I may be a security risk. I told the terminal that if I were a security risk, I would already have broken in and did the damage and left, and here’s how I could have done it, and so, because I didn’t, he had nothing to fear from me. He hit the CEILING! He said that proved I was an SP for only an SP could think up such crazy ways to violate security, etc. That was truly crazy. I declined to work there. He did some report somewhere that I think got to my PC folders, but it never went anywhere. This person was an SO member, and was from my old mission, so he knew of me and knew my family well. So, that was my indicator of DM-style craziness. This was in 1986 or 1987.

      One more comment: Sec checks were never meant to be punitive or punishing. Yes, HCO sec checks could be, for people in an ethics situation, but, as I said, they were rare (at least for public) back in the day. But the whole point of sec check/confessional is to help people find and discover their overts and withholds in an area, and so get them into view and confronted. Never, never reported to ethics. Not an ethics issue. It was only after DM that that trust was broken.

      And, sec check questions are not even barometers of what Scientology’s morals are. They are just a list of overts that the PC could consider are overts. If they read, you get it. I have seen that non-Scientologists cite sec check questions as proof that Scn does not like one thing or another. Not true. You could have a question “Have you ever had sex before marriage?” and it does not mean that we care. If the PC cares, though, we address it. It is actually kind of fun to make up sec check questions.

      • The more glamour, the more disgust

        “But the whole point of sec check/confessional is to help people find and discover their overts and withholds in an area, and so get them into view and confronted. Never, never reported to ethics. Not an ethics issue. It was only after DM that that trust was broken. ”

        This is a bit too black and white – was maybe the ideal scene “before DM”, but not really the scene.

        I EP’d as a pc on the HRD on the point “Don’t support a bad government” (or so, it’s from beginning 80’s for me) with FN VGI on no longer supporting the Scientology management / institution. Pratically, it meant that I would no longer do anything else “for the org” than audit their staff. But it didn’t come so far – before I could practice my new directive, the EP got reported to the I + R departement, which was, by the actions of Ethics started off by this, the beginning of my leaving Scn. The last action in the sequence which I experienced after this break of safe auditing, immediately before I left the ethics room, the org and the whole thing at once and forever, was a gang sec check by three persons – two monster missionaires and an overwhelmed local Dir I + R.

        Things didn’t start with Miscavige. He’s just a beridden rider of the suppression – and a one trick pony too, stuck in a win of using the “use suppression valence”. Shouldn’t forget this on the day when he’ll be out of the way – or on the day when you decide to go another way for some time. He is not the sit, just the who – or even just a who, depending on your view what your group and game is.

        Putting a head on a pike is in itself a risky tech. Sometimes needed, but probably the one which gets most easily overrun and stuck – and then sticks you on “the other side”, as a fixated white hat in opposition to the blacks. And in opposition you just react … which turns your hat black as time goes on (GPM and goals tech explain it if you didn’t yet observe it). Isn’t it that which happened to the church? Too much head on a pike tech, too little really ending it on a good point.

        There’s a difference between the danger of putting heads on pikes, and disagreeing and take a bit distance to do your thing and hopefully outcreate the enemy (also this as a phase only, of course, it’s emergency …). Shouldn’t miss the point where it’s good to change from the former to the latter.

        • Please place this event on the time track for us. What *year* did it happen? That is vital information for adjudicating whom might or might not have originated that “gang bang sec check”.

          Michael A. Hobson

          • The more glamour, the more disgust

            Okay, I warm this up a bit – mhmm – it was beginning / mid 81 when I left staff after the CO and HES (both usually nice guys) had tried to enforce SO conditions for working times on me who was on kind of a foundation contract. This leave / blow I did when they told in their overzeal dead ernestly to me, “we prefer you dead than unable”, one of those gradientless overpointed mistake-statements by LRH … the more if you take them out of context and apply them seriously to an individual situation and value 3D all, 1 + 2D nothing for the givenness and applying of ability … .

            Some months later I was “rehabbed” into good standing by a tech mission, but preferred to stay public now, and helped the org mainly as tech terminal without pay (didn’t make nearly a difference, but I felt less in danger of enforcement attacks). I did this as NED- and Cl4-Auditor, Pro Course Supervisor and qualified Evaluator / Why Finder, guess for about a year, then the HRD course got the new fad, I did it and was auditing staffs and some publics on it and getting it myself. So it must have been ’82 or begin ’83 the latest when the story I told about happened.

            It was only two or three years later when I realized that this had been somehow anticipating the big exodus – I hadn’t been in close private connections with other Scientologists, and when the “revolution” became really something with big physical consequences in the orgs in my vicinity, I was already separated and without contacts and missed this part of Scientology history as a personal experience. No internet yet … for good luck also not for the church, so I could for about half a year buy materials like the PDC and other lectures from Pubs till they realized they should no more deliver to me. Studied those things and learned to apply them on my own till I discovered and joined the materials exchange and free zone later, David Mayo, Irene Mumford, Captain Bill, and their comrades-in-arms in Europe.

            I guess if you want to look in that scene in the eighties and where the outpoints were, you find better hints than my marginal story. As far as I can judge it (and that’s not far) was David Miscavige then much to much involved in infightings that he could have cared for daily business or would have already had the positional power to steer such developments like these gang bang missions and similar (mission holder conference, finance police, cutting lines to a beyond comprehension not really caring or inable to care LRH …) . He’s the surviving (till now) offspring of these going ons then, not their architect – in my view. He’s today the chief zombie in a dieing body called Scientology (just a word, the word doesn’t matter). The only thing worth to attack him is in my view, that there might awake some beings attached to this body who are easier able to leave it and orient anewly, if they recognize how they were misused and extended in a slavish sleep the dieing period.

            So I hope you can use my placing on the time track, but I also hope it will not help extend your attention to the past, but help to shorten this and free it for the future and timeless causes.

        • Well, yes there were abuses and bad justice cycles and all that prior to Miscavige. In a way, DM did us a favor (back-handed) because he is the distillation of all that is wrong about the workings of the SO and Admin. The assumption that Ron made, I am sure, when designing the SO and the policy in general was that the people applying it would be sane.

          So, we learned what happens when the less than sane apply selective policy.

          Here’s what I believe: When DM is brought down, all the bad policies, Fair Game, bad sec checks, roll-backs, the RPF – all that – will be wound up with him like a black mass, and will go along with him. Regardless of whether he invented it or not. He sure “perfected” it.

  24. The “REAL TRUTH” about activity in SCN:

    1. People are LEAVING in DROVES
    2. Very and I mean VERY FEW people are getting IN or entering through the front door
    3. The PR is the WORSE its ever been
    4. People aho are “IN” are starting to WAK UP and no longer are giving insane amounts of money to support the fraud
    5. The critics and reporters are “NO LONGER” afraid to report and confront this group
    6. DM is the laughing stock of both the business community and religous community, oops forgot also the entertainment community
    7. Libraries are “THROWING OUT” the books they donate
    Need I say more, please feel free to add

    • rory medford | September 26, 2010 at 2:30 pm
      7. Libraries are “THROWING OUT” the books they donate

      I doubt Miscavige even cares. He was interested in the approximate $450 per set “donation” cost. Multiplied by the boasted number of libraries worldwide now containing sets of Basics, it came to about 1/2 billion gross profit. Even taking into consideration the construction cost of the 2 new printing facilities, I see quite a tidy net profit there.

      • EVERY MAJOR GLOBAL CATASTROPHE USED to increase and pump up the BOOK Stat for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

        +++++Haiti has catastrophic earthquake. Population is starving and without drinking water ~~

        GIVE ME YOUR VISA/MC/AMEX CARD FOR “WAY To HAPPINESS” Donations for them to READ !

        ++++++Hurricane Katrina ~~thousands of displaced residents in Mississippi and Louisiana.

        GIVE ME YOUR VISA/MC/AMEX SO WE CAN FLOOD THE LIBRARIES IN THESE STATES WITH SOURCE !

        +++++++9/11 CATASTROPHE in New York. Twin Towers go down, 3000+ killed

        IMMEDIATELY Give Money VISA/AMEX/MC so we can FLOOD New York Residents with “The Way to Happiness” booklets and NY and NJ libraries with full library sets.

        Be a Volunteer Minister but you will PAY your own air fare and so on. (NOT CHURCH FUNDED, the “volunteer ministers” pay their own way.)

        BUT they do look good in a PHOTO Op For DM INT event of Rolling Thunder…

        You get the idea.

    • Most important — you can get auditing outside the church and experience bigger wins than any you got inside. Let’s make it official here:
      The glass is half full.

      • With Rory’s 7 points plus bigger wins in auditing outside the church, I’d say the glass is just about topped off.

        • The more glamour, the more disgust

          If not, you can always pour it in a smaller glass or fill it up from your own water tap. Personal advancing is not depending on glasses, if you do not consider so😉.

  25. I’ve long considered that DM knew implanting tech long before he got into Scientology. His getting into Scientology was probably not haphazard, though not a result of some great conspiracy.

    Implants weren’t always used to harm or control. LRH deals with benign implanting in some of his works. A person wants to know French so gets an informational download. Implanting is just a science of transference of data and ideas and behaviors. And beings often look for an easy solution to getting these ideas and behaviors. Most smokers would gladly get an implant that stopped them from smoking. Or a guy who is clumsy socially would gladly get an implant to learn how to sweep girls off their feet.

    It’s much easier to implant a willing audience. They want the ideas and agreements and behaviors. It fills a need they have. The need provides them havingness. The havingness is their reality. The need drives their behavior.

    The GPMs from implants are pale in comparison to those originated by a being’s own intentions and goals.

    Getting in or out of Scientology or the C of M has to do with the ability to change your mind. It’s no more mysterious or magical than that. Either you have so much integrity that you examine events and information independently and change your mind on your own terms. Or events unfold with sufficient impact that you are forced to change your mind because of the resounding cognitive dissonance: the disparity between what you experience and what you are told.

    Those stuck in the CofM either can’t or won’t change their mind regardless of conflicting data. And they’re willing to be implanted with justifications and nullifiers to explain data opposing to their position. Helps keep their need fulfilled.

    So, bring on the rolling thunder. I’m about to climax. My need’s fulfilled. Never felt better knowing how righteous my movement really is. I’m in agreement. Bring it on. Dear Sweet Jesus, I see the light!

    Michael

    • Yes, the Diabolical Maniac knowing and using implant tech, is so stretching to ones credulity.

      I had my fill of ‘agreeing’ when the supervisor one day sent me to ethics because I had declined to confirm to an event. In ethics I asked about the reference which gave the right to route a public to ethics for not attending events, and that question made the MAA complete fidget around. Seeing I was an upstat student, she dismissed the whole thing quickly, but there never was any correction of the supervisor or any explanation, and it happened to many other publics.

      Remember I concluded, that events apparently had become as important as training and auditing or even more, now being backed up by ethics. That constituted the biggest outpoint of altered importance I had witnessed to date, and lead me on to realize what terrible state the church and tech must be in, for the leader to have to use mandatory implants to keep people inside and in the ‘unknow’.

      Those events are hazardous to ones ability to obnose!

    • DM does things on instinct. mind of a shark. But I totalyl agree that Hypnosis can be good or bad depending on it’s use.

      • CD,

        And where, exactly, does “instinct” come from?

        • Deep from within, action without wisdom.

          • CD,
            Perhaps, if you take it deeper, you find wisdom precedes action. Or awareness precedes the action. Some form of intelligence/awareness intends and precipitates the action.

            • Instinct born into a creature. It seems there is more than one way to see instinct.

              in·stinct (nstngkt)
              n.
              1. An inborn pattern of behavior that is characteristic of a species and is often a response to specific environmental stimuli: the spawning instinct in salmon; altruistic instincts in social animals.
              2. A powerful motivation or impulse.
              3. An innate capability or aptitude: an instinct for tact and diplomacy.
              adj. (n-stngkt)
              1. Deeply filled or imbued: words instinct with love.
              2. Obsolete Impelled from within.

    • “Most smokers would gladly get an implant that stopped them from smoking.”

      Hypnosis has been psychologys ugly little brother for a long time and has had a smoldering half-life in the entertainmenr industry. But no more.

      http://www.unconsciousresources.com/hypnosis.html

      “Implants weren’t always used to harm or control. LRH deals with benign implanting in some of his works”

      Can you say Training Routines😉

      Back in the day one would think twice to utter the word hypnosis. But it is around us everywhere. You can harnass the power of the unconsious to be a helping force in your life.

      • CD, Gonna delete such pronunciamentos till you come to Texas for a week for some real TRs.

        • Okay I stand corrected. I do see that it will change a person’s way of reacting to another person wich for communication can be good and I am going on Geir Isene’s and AnonSparrow’s expierences. So in that way it is a good change. The way it leads to robotism in the “church”is a bad way.

          The same things can be used for either bad or good. And If I am ever in the position to take you up on your offer I will. You are welcome here too if you ever find yourself in the reverse position.

          Namasté

      • TRs are about waking you up, CD (at least if done in a non-“enforced reality” environment.)

        “Rolling thunder” is about putting you to sleep (in more ways than one).🙂

      • CD,

        TRs practiced incorrectly can certainly lead to a robotic demeanor. And TRs are/were often practiced incorrectly. But that is not the fault of the training drills; it is the misunderstanding of those performing the drills.

        If you imagine perfect communication, where a person is perfectly there, and not distracted, giving you full attention, talking directly to you, acknowledging what you say, responding to what you say, then you have an idea of the correct goal of TRs.

        TRs are not designed to hypnotize. If anything, TRs will undo the semi-hypnotic state in which most humans exist. You will find very few humans who are able to just be there and communicate with you. And when you find someone like that, you’re usually very impressed with them.

        I know that critics have latched onto this notion that TRs are designed to hypnotize a person so he will be more susceptible to accepting Scientology. I’m sure there are people who did the TRs incorrectly on some comm course and walked around with robotic TRs, which lead a critic to observe that “TRs create robots.”

        But, it’s about as stupid an observation as: “hammers are designed to break windows and kill people. I just saw a guy bust up windows with a hammer and then kill everyone in the house. Hammers are just dangerous and should be outlawed. I can’t believe anyone would be so stupid as to use hammers. I’ve even heard of them being used in schools to break the fingers of kids who misbehave. Barbaric!”

        It’s just plain silly if you don’t understand the use of a hammer.

        Misuse and poor practice do not representations correct use and practice.

        Next time you are sitting across from someone you really care about, giving them your undivided attention, listening intently to everything they say, speaking to them directly at complete ease, at that moment you will understand TRs.

        And at that moment, should we then say, “Cat Daddy is in a hypnotic trance?” Or would you think us crazy for making such a foolish remark?

        Michael

      • CD,

        I know you’re trying to understand, so…

        CD,

        TRs practiced incorrectly can certainly lead to a robotic demeanor. And TRs are/were often practiced incorrectly. But that is not the fault of the training drills; it is the misunderstanding of those performing the drills.

        If you imagine perfect communication, where a person is perfectly there, and not distracted, giving you full attention, talking directly to you, acknowledging what you say, responding to what you say, then you have an idea of the correct goal of TRs.

        TRs are not designed to hypnotize. If anything, TRs will undo the semi-hypnotic state in which most humans exist. You will find very few humans who are able to just be there and communicate with you. And when you find someone like that, you’re usually very impressed with them.

        I know that critics have latched onto this notion that TRs are designed to hypnotize a person so he will be more susceptible to accepting Scientology. I’m sure there are people who did the TRs incorrectly on some comm course and walked around with robotic TRs, which lead a critic to observe that “TRs create robots.”

        But, it’s about as stupid an observation as: “hammers are designed to break windows and kill people. I just saw a guy bust up windows with a hammer and then kill everyone in the house. Hammers are just dangerous and should be outlawed. I can’t believe anyone would be so stupid as to use hammers. I’ve even heard of them being used in schools to break the fingers of kids who misbehave. Barbaric!”

        It’s just plain silly if you don’t understand the use of a hammer.

        Misuse and poor practice do not representations correct use and practice.

        Next time you are sitting across from someone you really care about, giving them your undivided attention, listening intently to everything they say, speaking to them directly at complete ease, at that moment you will understand TRs.

        And at that moment, should we then say, “Cat Daddy is in a hypnotic trance?” Or would you think us crazy for making such a foolish remark?

        Michael

        • Thank you for your effort to reach out to me . It is well aprecïated and understood. Routines are very handy and actually many routines are very useful in daily life. The routine to drive a car for instance or even to go to the toilet. Both are learned and stored in the brain as automatisms. Soldiers are trained to have many automatisms:Acting without thinking isalsoo good for survival in certain situations.

          Damn I am watching Jason Beghe in present Time on Panorama on BBC1. I feel transfixed😉

          • CD,
            Yeah, routines can become a means of supplanting normal response or of enhancing response by removing hesitation. An example of the first is when someone asks, “How are you?” and you automatically respond “fine,” even when you feel like shit. (Not to be condescending, but this is called a “circuit” in Scientology.) Five minutes later you realize you said “fine” but felt like shit.

            Practicing routines can create circuits– or simply improved response. When I used to do a lot of martial arts, we drilled and drilled and drilled until we had no lag in response. But all responses were directed in present time with full awareness–even enhanced awareness. Getting in a fight was like almost having an accident where time just seems to slow down. Your awareness became so intense that the other person seemed to be moving in slow motion. And you could determine the exact response from a wide array of possibilities. It wasn’t an automatic response but a reasoned response. You could throw a series of kicks punches or blocks–or merely move out of the way in an effort to control the situation and not hurt the other person. Very aware, very reasoned, very much in present time.

            This differs from automaticity where your responses are automatic without reasoning and without awareness. You are operating from a position of knowing rather than not knowing. And you are selecting your responses from a wide range of possibilities. And the more skilled, the better able you are to improvise rather than simply use a set technique or response. You can change your patterns instantly. Which is vastly different than operating from purely automatic response.

            TRs attempt to provide a wide range of experience so the auditor can respond in present time to nearly infinite possibilities in session. He has to be able to categorize those responses so he knows what to do. TRs also help a person stay in present time to communicate with other people and respond to nearly infinite possibilities.

            I’m not trying to beat a dead horse here. I’m simply trying to take this one step further as there is so much false information and false understanding about TRs–even by those who have “practiced them for years.” TRs break down automaticities rather than create them. If done correctly. It’s just that people often are afraid to just be there and experience another person so will find all sorts of ways not to do this–including setting up robotic responses that are supposed to be “TRs.” If you observe the people around you, you will be able to spot the circuits they use to communicate rather than just being there and communicating. It’s kind of interesting.

            Michael

            • “TRs attempt to provide a wide range of experience so the auditor can respond in present time to nearly infinite possibilities in session.”

              Thank you for your exuisite explanation. Even the Marshall arts metaphor rang home, Not that I did that myself but I did Judo once.

              In the Truman sJim carey always says the same thing in the morning to his neighbours. In the end of the show were he Chooses to be free he says it again but he chooses to say it than being very aware.

      • Must-reply-to-this-post……

        CD, one problem that can arise in this kind of discussion is that of the very definition of hypnosis itself. It is a “Tower of Bab el” situation, where the word does not mean the same to each person, and they assume they are talking about the same thing when they really are not.

        I noticed your link is to a page about the “modern” Ericksonian definition of hypnosis. That is a far cry from how hypnosis was generally defined in the 1950s , and a far cry from what Hubbard meant by the word. Back then, and previously, the word meant a very specific condition referre d to even by Sufis, Buddha, and the Vedas, as a condition of “sleep”. In other words, of unawareness. Thus the meaning of “Buddha” – one who is awake. Related concepts are of Maya or Samsara as “illusion”. What the “sleeping”person sees and thinks is real.

        As an aside, doing TR0 correctly, a person might pass through a stage where he says “I’m hypnotized!” So, was he hypnotized by the drill? NO. He was already”asleep” before he started the drill, but doing it actually raised his level of awareness enough for him to become aware of his state of “sleep”(relative unawareness) . This is quite common. if he stops there he might go away telling everyone “They tried to hypnotize me with their drills!” NO. He was already “hypnotized”, the drill woke him up enough to realize it.

        In the book 8-8008 and the associated lectures, Hubbard goes extensively into the hypnotic nature of the MEST universe experience. his take on it complements the older teachings quite well. The MEST universe is seen as a continuous inflow upon the being, which is the basic definition of hypnosis as Hubbard uses the term. A being is as “healthy” as he can create, ie, outflow and make his own postulates work. A continuous inflow which he cannot escape or flow back against (disagree with), eventually nullifies him and puts him at effect – ie, in a suggestible state in whichhe will agree to whatever is presented to him. McDonald’s? “I’m lovin’ it!”

        This is the narrow and strict definition of “hypnosis” as used by Hubbard and other older writers and teachers.

        It has little to do with the broad modern”Ericksonian” definition of hypnosis. It is a condition in which the subject is literally helpless to do anything of his own volition, and under the control of the”operator”.

        For more info about this meaningof “hypnotism” try Googling for “Hypnotism” by G. H. Estabrooks, first published in 1943, and also for “The Control of Candy Jones” by Donald Bain, about a CIA venture into PDHing an unsuspecting woman for their own spooky purposes.

        • Thank you for your informative post. All those different definitions or viewpoints on hypnosis can dazzle the mind ;)Hypnosis in my view can be used to harnass the power of the subconcious to work for your benefit or used to turn your subconsious against you.

          The same voice that is in the back of your mind telling you you won’t amount to anything can be turned into a positive voice. Don’t overdo that or you endanger your own survival by being reckless and superarrogant or just sheer obnoxious.

          Hypnosis for Habit Control and Relaxation

          “In essence, hypnosis is a means of communication between the conscious mind and the subconscious mind. It is a natural, psychological state experienced as trance. Hypnosis can be induced through the interaction of one individual speaking to another, or to an entire group as (group hypnosis); we can also learn to self-induce trance when we practice (self-hypnosis).”
          http://www.1stchoicehealthcenter.com/services4.htm

          What a wonderful world it is😉 CD

          • CD, I totally get where you’re coming from. I will only mention again that in “hypnosis” as Hubbard or the older writers mean it, the conscious mind of the subject is helplessly out of action. It is the conscious mind of the operator, that is communicating with the subconscious mind of the subject and controlling the subject through it. This is a crucial difference between your definition of hypnosis, and a scientologists definition.

            Establishing better communication between the conscious mind and the subconscious mind is in fact exactly the goal of Dianetics and many Scientology procedures. Doing the Self-Analysis lists, for example, goes a long way towards establishing better communication with other parts of your own mind.

            Much of this is right there in the Dianetics book (DMSMH), as well as the “Dianetics: Evolution of a Science” book. Why a person has a conscious mind and a subconscious mind in the first place, is fully explained in DMSMH, and what it is that divides the mind in the first place is explained there quite clearly.

            Whether or not what you call hypnosis can actually help you get your conscious and subconscious minds in better communication, I don’t know because I haven’t tried it. However, I do know that using Dianetics and Scientology methods like Self Analysis can definitely accomplish much of this.

            But my main point is that in scientology, hypnosis is defined as the procedures of making the conscious mind less aware, ie putting it to sleep, while auditing and TRs are designed to make the conscious mind more aware and awake, including more aware of other parts of the mind such as the “subconscious”.

            Thus understanding can break down, if one is not aware of the diifferent definitions being used….

            • No need for your mind to be dazzled by”all those definitions of hypnosis”. I am making a distinction between only 2 definitions – yours and Hubbard’s.

              By extension, scientologists would tend to use it in Hubbard’s definition.

  26. Miscavige uses the same technique as Hitler except Hitler utilized anger because he was most often expressing how “screwed over” the German people had been by their “enemies”, something some people could really agree with at the time due to their financial depression, whereas Miscavige uses a forced enthusiasm to reach Scientologists as he knows they can’t disagree with that, he can say just about anything as long as he uses that carrier wave.

    And very much like Hitler’s Brown Shirts, Miscavige uses RTC & the Sea Org as his enforcers, which is also very much the military you-must-follow-orders hypnotic aspect referred to by LRH in his lecture.

    I can’t help wondering what would have happened if the Sea Org hadn’t become Scientology Management because Miscavige used that military framework as one of his tools to grab and maintain control of Scientology, along with his own brand, his personal arsenal of hypnotizing techniques, which included getting someone (and observers) to fully agree with him about how lousy or inept they were.

    Sequentially, LRH developed admin tech – how to run an org – in the 60s at St Hill. He then went off in the late 60s and formed the Sea Org project, leaving regular Joes managing Scientology internationally (Worldwide). Not sure that he ever intended to have the Sea Org run Scientology as a whole. But by 1970 Worldwide was failing in its management duties and the Sea Org had to take over on an emergency basis and things stayed that way. Unfortunately, LRH didn’t complete and perfect management tech until a few years later. If Worldwide had had management tech perhaps they would have succeeded.

    In any event, there is no doubt the military aspect of Scientology management is at odds with Scientology tech as a whole — explained so well in the posted lecture.

    In reading this post I realized that decompression, as far as I’m concerned, has been one long process of stripping away the things I’ve been forced to agree with but which don’t add up.

    • Haydn — Hitler used anger in his public utterances and Dear Leader uses false enthusiasm. But outside the glare of the video camera, the Vampire Emperor is chronically in Anger/Hate/Resentment (1.5 – 1.3) as his SOCIAL tone.

      • Very true Mike, as many have found to their detriment.

      • I hope there’s someone inside who can capture that on a cell phone video. (Just before they leave)

        • I doubt anyone is permitted within 100 yards of a cell phone, much less one with a camera since JB took off with his electronics in April. Most likely, all communication at Int these days occurs over tin cans and string. Maybe drums. But mostly with high decibel yelling.

          • The “lost tech finder” aka “cross order big-wheel” will now perfect “Mood Drills”. Of course he’s found a long lost dispatch, advice or the ever present and evil transcriptionists for source material.

            Bruce

      • Mike,

        He uses those tones to drive people down the tone scale from where they are.

        By operating in the 1.5 – 1.3 band, he drives others downtone till they are operating in the 1.2 (No Sympathy) to 0.0 (Body Death) band.

        Don’t expect any sympathy or understanding from Kool-Aid drinkers.

        The only way others even register on their radar screens is as a TARGET.

        Scott

  27. Ironic. “Rolling Thunder” was also the name of a major bombing campaign in the Vietnam War that lasted from 1965 to 1968.

    It failed because key areas were deemed “off limits” to bombing, such as Hanoi, Haiphong harbor, and the Chinese border. These areas ended up being where the North Vietnamese concentrated airfields, ammo and arms dumps, and air defenses, since they wouldn’t be bombed.

    In the same way, DM’s “Rolling Thunder” fails because it deems certain areas “off limits”. Such as the TRUTH. Such as FACTS. Such as COMPREHENSIBILITY.

    I knew I was becoming “disaffected” when I could sit through entire Int events in the Shrine auditorium and not feel compelled to spring up and applaud mechanically — not even once.

    I really knew I was “disaffected” when I didn’t go to an Int event and found myself summonsed to my Scientology company’s Ethics Officer for failure to attend the previous weekend’s Int event.

    Keep at it Davey. You’re bombing.

  28. These guys are very good at distortion. I’ve just got a message on Facebook:

    “not sure if you are scientologyst or not but can you please remove that completely bullshit lie video from BBC?? just for your info John Sweeney presently spending his time in jail for absolutely his malicious and unsupported occusation against Scientology Cjeers”

    repeat: “John Sweeney presently spending his time in jail” From where do they get these kind of desinfo?

    • Well, you did say distortion; perhaps Sweeney is in jail — interviewing staff and inmates for his next story.

      Bruce

    • John is alive and well and no doubt looking forward to seeing the fruits of his hard work tomorrow evening. Here’s a taster with video (not sure if you can get the vid outside the UK)

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_9032000/9032278.stm

      I never meant to shout.

      Strangers had been on my tail. Scientologist Tommy Davis and his colleague Mike Rinder – my handlers – had been on my case, day in and day out.

      They had taken me to an exhibit called ‘Psychiatry: Industry of Death’ on Hollywood Boulevard, where a Scientologist told me psychiatrists set up the Holocaust. I feared I was being brain-washed.

      And then I lost it – big time.

      The Church of Scientology put out my impression of an exploding tomato onto the internet which millions had a laugh at courtesy of YouTube.

      It was no way for me to behave. I apologised then and I apologise now.

      Shortly after that programme, Scientology & Me, aired in 2007, I received a tip-off that Mike Rinder had left the church.

      Three years on and my old adversary came to me to shed some light on what had been going on behind the scenes in the days leading up to my infamous meltdown and screaming session in Los Angeles.

      Now an independent Scientologist, Mike is critical of the church and of its leader David Miscavige, who was actor Tom Cruise’s best man at his wedding to Katie Holmes.

      Mike, 55, wanted to meet and talk about his life in the church, which he was a part of from the age of six.

      ‘Freed’

      He began by telling me about the moment when he decided to get out: “I knew as I was walking out – that was the last time I would ever talk to my wife, my children, the rest of my family. I couldn’t take it anymore. When I left I felt I had been freed.”

      FIND OUT MORE
      Panorama, BBC One
      Secrets of Scientology
      Tuesday, 9pm
      Mike was subjected to what the church calls disconnection. His wife, daughter, son, brother and mother have cut him out of their lives.

      Mike was one of a number of people we met who effectively grew up in the church and have since left.

      Those who speak out say they can be deemed by the church to be enemies and subjected to disconnection – when all ties to family and friends are severed.

      The Panorama team were followed while filming in America
      The church acknowledges some Scientologists choose to sever communications with family members who leave. The church says it is a fundamental human right to cease communication with someone. It adds disconnection is used against expelled members and those who attack the church.

      During our investigation in 2007, black SUVs with tinted windows appeared to be following our team as we carried out interviews. A mystery man who we suspected was from the church also appeared to be keeping tabs on us at breakfast in our LA hotel each morning.

      At the time, I put my suspicions of being under surveillance to Tommy Davis. He responded: “I don’t know what you’re talking about. It seems to me you’re getting a bit paranoid.”

      Mike Rinder has since given me a different answer.

      “Was I being paranoid?” I asked him when we met again.

      “No, you were being followed. No doubt whatsoever,” he told me.

      Mike said he should know as it was he and Tommy Davis who were doing some of the covert surveillance.

      Mike said he and Tommy were reporting back on our movements to David Miscavige’s office every few minutes or so.

      Through its UK lawyers, the firm Carter-Ruck, the church deny spying on us and reject Mike Rinder’s version of events dating back to 2007.

      Celebrity members

      The public face of the church is as a force for good, perhaps most familiar to the public for their offers of free stress tests at their shopfront centres in major cities.

      Its star members include Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Kirstie Alley and Juliette Lewis.

      When I interviewed Alley in 2007 and put the question to her that many believe Scientology to be a sinister brain-washing cult, she replied: “Would you ever sit with a Jew and tell them that their religion is a cult?”

      When I asked the same question of Juliette Lewis, star of the film Natural Born Killers, she replied: “Some people say women are really stupid and shouldn’t have the vote.”

      Panorama Archive: Scientology and Me
      The church said it is a religion and is recognised as such in America for tax purposes. It denies emphatically that it is a cult and has maintained that I am biased.

      Many ex-Scientologists disagree with the celebrities who defend the church.

      Amy Scobee, now in her mid-40s, is a former member who said she believes it is “a dangerous cult”. She was a member from the age of 14, much of her time in the church was spent as part of what is known as the Sea Org – the highly-disciplined wing that effectively runs the church’s day to day operations.

      Private details

      When Ms Scobee left and began to criticise David Miscavige and the church intimate details of her sex life before she was married leaked to the St Petersburg Times in Florida newspaper.

      The church admits sending the newspaper material about Ms Scobee’s sex life, but said it was acceptable because the information was contained in an affidavit signed by her. They say it was not confidential.

      Ms Scobee said she had disclosed those details but she believed they would remain confidential.

      During our time in America for the latest Panorama, we were once again followed by people filming us, this time more openly than before. When we approached the people with cameras to ask them who they were with and what they were doing, they refused to answer our questions.

      That is why I was somewhat grateful to Scientology’s UK lawyers at Carter-Ruck when they sent the BBC photographs of me hugging Amy Scobee at the end of a long and at times harrowing series of interviews about her experiences.

      The photographs were meant to demonstrate to my bosses at the BBC, once again, that I must be biased against the church as I was overly familiar with its critics.

      This was, oddly enough, welcome proof that the people who had been following and filming us in the States were indeed working for the Church of Scientology. As Mike Rinder had said, I was not being paranoid – I was being followed.

      The Secrets of Scientology: A Panorama Special, BBC One, Tuesday, 28 September at 2100BST and then available in the UK on the BBC iPlayer.

      • Grigori Borzov (Charles Bronson): Just because I’m paranoid doesn’t mean we’re not being followed.
        — Telefon (1977)

      • Martin,
        Thanks for the link, it’s incredible how completely “mindless” Dear Leader, who has to approve everything done, has become. He’s a specialist and most accurate in shooting himself in the foot!

        Sweeney says: … “Through its UK lawyers, the firm Carter-Ruck, the church deny spying on us and reject Mike Rinder’s version of events dating back to 2007.” …

        Sweeney says: …”That is why I was somewhat grateful to Scientology’s UK lawyers at Carter-Ruck when they sent the BBC photographs of me hugging Amy Scobee at the end of a long and at times harrowing series of interviews about her experiences.

        “The photographs were meant to demonstrate to my bosses at the BBC, once again, that I must be biased against the church as I was overly familiar with its critics.

        “This was, oddly enough, welcome proof that the people who had been following and filming us in the States were indeed working for the Church of Scientology. As Mike Rinder had said, I was not being paranoid – I was being followed. “

  29. When I was around 22 and first getting into Scn in the late 80’s/early 90’s, I dragged my poor mother to an event.

    Somewhere during the Pomerantz hyperbole, she looked at me a bit worriedly and whispered something to the effect of “Honey, if I were to bring my well-educated, intelligent friends to this ‘cram-it-down-your-throat’ dog and pony show, they would look at me like I was the village idiot. Why does it have to be so corny?”

    I’m embarrassed to say that I chastised her at the time, telling her she just didn’t get it. Although, as a thetan, I recall that I DID get it. I knew she was right. But I mentally buried my knowingness just as quickly, the above article by Marty being very apropos here. I had already placed the church above my own family. I had already begun to agree.

    Then, when the glossy postcards of the Freewinds and the forty-page magazines full of glitz and glamour about Flag, ASHO and St Hill began dominating our mailbox, she said something to the effect of “Why does the church think these things are attractive to people? All they show is that it will cost you a fortune to belong. Not to mention the massive costs associated in producing this flashy promo”.

    Being a good little churchie and wanting to propitiate to the proper authority figures at my org, I, of course, told her she was nattering (not that she knew what the hell I was talking about).

    Nothing like creating a little PTS type A for oneself, right out of the starting gate.

    The lesson for me has ultimately been that a boy should LISTEN to his mother!

    • Yeah, mothers can be pretty damn wise.

    • I also took my mother to an event once (this was in the mid 70s) and she loved it. Of course it was Amanda Ambrose playing the piano and singing and she was GREAT – a very theta perfomer. But these were LIVE events with live beings making a real connection; when Amanda, Heber and Dick Glass would do the “Scientology circuit”, and actually ccommunicate and raise tone levels of audiences.

  30. It should be noted that the sound level at all events is so loud that it hurts the ears. The speeches are loud, everything is overwhelmingly loud.

  31. Aircraft crashes into 4 buildings
    The Arrive Alive Website received an email earlier today with the following heading:

    “Brace yourself before looking at the below image. A pilot at low level has no control over his aircraft. It narrowly misses a crowd gathered for the airshow and slams into four buildings. One can only imagine the horror of the occupants inside those buildings.”

    We thought this is simply too good not to share..and this might bring a smile to the faces of our regular visitors!!

    If you go to the link you will see this is a parallel to “straight up and vertical”

    http://www.accidents.co.za/tag/crash/

  32. I do not go to events from many years. I became very suspicious when I saw that every known face disappeared around Miscavage. Seemingly other Scientologists did not notice this…

  33. Even the phrase “Pick up the cans please this is the session,” can be used to key in a Scientologist who has O/W’s on CoB or CoS.

    KSW = Giving DM a never-ending series of blank checks to do whatever he wants.

    To simply disagree with COB and his wasteful, extravagant, and destructive actions that have annihilated the subject of Scientology itself is by definition, violating KSW.

    DM has Scientologists checkmated from the very outset by his use of KSW. The agreement DM demands is that it is okay for him to destroy LRH’s version of Scientology in favor of DM’s version. Hence, there is a Battle of Realities at work in CoS. Language is part of the trap.

    The terms “Scientology” and “Church of Scientology” do not mean the same thing to Miscavigologists and Scientologists. Miscavigologists keep writing blank checks because they are afraid of losing Scientology, losing their salvation, losing their Bridge, and losing the chance to do the OT levels. Hence, the continual fear of loss is what negatively motivates Miscavigologists.

    The denial of gross out tech, of having to continually explain away DM’s out points as one’s own overts or misunderstoods, and the overall thought-stopping environment of CoS is a toxic, hypnotic, Death Energy. This is why CoS is a Cult. Specifically, the Cult of David Miscavige.

    DM uses icons to represent stats. In lieu of real stats, icons are used as representations of actual stats as Mike Rinder has pointed out. In the same way, LRH has become an icon who face and name are plastered over overt products and an overt Bridge. In hijacking LRH’s name and copyrights, DM gets to say what and what is not LRH and Scientology. To disagree with his alterations is to violate KSW. Therefore, it is a perfect trap. A Scientologist has to push it all down and become repressed.

    DM has provided an outlet for all of this repressed energy. This outlet allows all of the pent up anger to be discharged. The false target is “The Psychs.” Scientologists take out all of their anger and aggression on medical doctors who specialize in psychiatry. Culture looks at Scientologists attacking medical doctors and deem Scientologists to be insane. This reinforces the alienation of Scientologists from Culture and allows DM to keep Scientologists insulated from any form of “wog” reality.

    CoS is a cruel hamster wheel of pain, repression, and anger. Raging at psychiatrists does not actually accomplish anything. Paradoxically, CCHR has only helped to improve Psychiatry by getting laws passed that enforce stricter labeling laws on psychiatric medicines. That is a stunning thing to look at. Psychiatry is not the enemy. Consider this fact: Psychiatrists are subject to civil and criminal law. They can be sued and imprisoned for their mistakes. Conversely, the CoS Parishioner contract has Scientologist sign away their rights, agree to be locked up in an Introspection Rundown if needed, to never sue CoS, and to hold CoS harmless in the event of injury or death. A Scientologist also agrees that their confessional folders remain the property of CoS forever.

    ******
    “Pick up the cans please this is the session: The very beginning of a Miscavigology sec check begins with the presumption of guilt. Sec checks are about a Scientologist’s relationship in PT to David Miscavige and his programs such as the Basics. Hypnosis, threat, sec checking, KR’s, etc are all used to ensure and enforce compliance. I have read more than a few KR’s people showed me. These KR’s were spouses reporting on each other to RTC. When DM is the third wheel in a marriage, that marriage will fail. DM is right there even in the marriage bed wanting to know what a couple says during pillow talk, those supposedly intimate moments between two people who love each other. In SO, especially, there are no intimate moments. Spouses know that DM controls their marriage. How cultic is that? What the hell does DM have to do with other people’s marriages?

    Who died and made DM God?

    *****
    I attended the 2007 New Year’s Eve event and saw rolling thunder at work. It reminded me of one of those giant Amway pep rallies. Amway is a lot like Scientology insofar as monstrous peer pressure is applied and stats are demanded. Amway people call themselves “Dream Builders.” Anyone who disagrees with Amway is called a “Dream Stealer.” This is Amway’s version of an SP. Amway is a crush reg Cult. Go read up on it if you don’t believe me: http://www.ex-cult.org/Groups/Amway/amo/

    If you leave Amway, you are a “Quitter” and it basically ends there. If you leave CoS, that is quite a different story!

    /////

    • Oh, but I DO believe you!
      I got into Amway at 21.
      Like an ignorant fly heading straight into a spiderweb, whistling dixie all the while.
      Amway’s motto used to be “Go Free!” with a heavy emphasis on becoming a born again Christian if you weren’t one already.
      They aggressively denied that Amway stood for “American Way”, as this had recently become politically incorrect. They lied.
      They blatantly discriminated against single women and I watched one get very angry at one of their events one time.
      The speaker actually said “The man is the head and the woman is the neck, beneath him.”
      The guys at the top of Amway got busted for fraud some years ago. Don’t know all the details but I sure wish it would happen with DM!

    • J Swift

      Immediately following the opener “Pick up the cans please. This is the session”, if it is a “sec Check” is “I’m not auditing you.”
      Some of the “handlings” I have experienced following that last phrase had very little semblance to auditing to be sure.
      Seems I should have paid a little more attention to that one! I was warned….

      WW

  34. Great reference, Marty. Excellent. And very telling about how DM does his thing.

    But, I wonder. Despite the use of DM of these techniques, I don’t think the majority of Scientologists are hypnotized by them. Scientology events have been corny for a long, long time, and my friends never were starry-eyed about them. They may believe some of the BS stats (because, why shouldn’t they?), but I think most Scientologists are used to the over-the-top BS, and just put up with it.

    The only event that stuck out as being real to me was the event where the IRS agreement was announced. That one stuck, because it was obvious that settling with the IRS was a major, major deal.

    But, every other one was, to be frank, more of a social event to see friends we haven’t seen in a while. I remember lots of eyes rolling, and lots of obligatory standing O’s.

    To me, the most destructive thing the church is doing now (other than the extreme mistreatment of certain staff) is the crush-sell. The gang-up sell. Because you have to agree that the world is going to hell, that we can do something about it, and that we have it in our power to help reverse the decline.

    I almost joined the SO when I was younger. I was heavily recruited as a kid, because I was a kid, had no debts per se, and did not take LSD (a requirement that really mystifies me, by the way). Finally, a button was pushed, and I agreed. That night, the book store officer (who got commissions from book sales, so they were the highest paid staff members at the org!) came by my home to convert the rest of my BC into books. And the reality hit me. If I joined the SO, I had no need to pay for the BC, and would no longer be on it. That did not sit well with me. Also, the precision greed of the book store guy disgusted me, and it pissed me off. I felt like a carcass. So, I said no. No to the sale, and no to the SO.

    That night, I drove out north of LA, to the Apple Valley. This was before they overbuilt the hell out of it, and it was desert. I pulled over, got out of the car, and looked at the stars. I had to reorient me to myself. I looked up, saw my place on this planet, and saw my place in this universe. I saw my place as a human, and as a Scientologist. Hard to explain, really, but it was a profound night.

    As I was driving, I heard a new release by Devo: “Through Being Cool.”

    And I yelled “Yes!” It was a statement of ME. Not just the words, but the whole thing – the fact that I liked it, and that pretty much no one else I knew would or did. It was a statement of ME – This is who I am. I am not you, and you are not me. This ballooned past the SO, but it was also: I am not the SO, and I will not be bound by your ideas or opinions.

    The reality of pulling away from such a drastic event forced me to look at myself pretty hard. Almost like a near-death experience. The ironic thing is that it was a life changing and actually positive thing for me, but only because I was able to raise up, confront it, and say NO.

    I bring this up because this was the result of a crush sell on the SO. The IAS crush sells, orgs crush sell, and this whole Idle Org thing – a crush sell. And what are they doing? They are hitting below the belt. YOU have the power to save the world, YOU KNOW the technology works. WE CAN’T let the psychs win and KILL SCIENTOLOGY! We have only a SHORT TIME. Just this INSTANT IN ETERNITY. Here, let me call your credit card company and raise your limit – you NEED to do this.

    Events are fucking minor compared to that.

    • Interesting. I posted this after running into numerous accounts and experiences of staff and public vehemently thought stopping using the justification of the good David Miscavige is up.

      • And, to your point, one thing that has happened over the last several years is using event DVDs as part of the hard sell. In my email comm, I am asked a lot if I had seen the latest event DVD. I saw the “Basics” release as a DVD – I was mailed quite a few of them!

        • Somebody could make it his/her project to put everything on one USB stick 😉 in multitude. Not that I condone that. Just speaking hypotheticly of course😉

          • CD, it’s been done. And I mean everything. Every issue. Every re-issue. Every printing and re-printing of every book. Every original lecture. Every transcript. Every edited lecture. Every edited transcript. And every magazine.

            And it’s all completely searchable.

            And it’s been done by an Independent.

          • Dude, I found all this stuff already. I have access to the entire BC, circa 1980 (complete with David Mayo TRs!), with checksheets, all the PLs, all the tapes in transcript, all the books. It is absolutely unbelievable.

            The tech volumes and other books are available in PDF as well. It is unbelievable.

            This is, naturally, all illegal. I happen to have many legal copies of all these materials (for the record).

            At the end of the day, I don’t mind paying for materials (I already have, as noted). Let Bridge Publications have some GI.

  35. “…And he (the hypnotist) is trying to work them into a situation where they will accept what he says without question. We’re not interested in Scientology, in anybody accepting what we say without question. We ask them to question it. We ask them to please look….
    Unihibited, unsuppressed questions.
    It is interesting to note the demonization of those people who question the CoM or even those who question the government’s official stories.

    A good documentary which cites many examples of the “PsyWar” upon society – http://www.openfilm.com/videos/psywar

    I think that everyone should question the government’s official NIST 9/11 story. It is remarkable to see such vitriolic opposition to the MANY valid questions about 9/11/01.

    Emotion can certainly play a role in Reverse Scientology.
    Here is an example of how our government utilized it with “incubator babies”.

    • REVERSE SCIENTOLOGY and “question” as a keynote.

      I keep looking at this LRH quote above and the aspect of safely asking questions.

      For example: An auditor asks a question. The environment is safe. The asking of the question leads an individual towards more awareness and more self-determined thought.

      The REVERSE would entail: Making it forbidden or unsafe to ask questions. This would stifle awareness and lessen self-determined thought.

      The entity which imposes restrictions upon the individual’s ability to freely and safely ask questions, then becomes the authority, the dominator, the “other determined influence”. This entity becomes the hypnotizer. The hypnotized are those beings who are unable (willingly or unwillingly) to freely view a question.

      It seems to me that people like DM, Hitler, Stalin, elements of our own government and media, utilize the suppression of the right to freely question in order to control a group.

  36. Here’s some “rolling thunder” from Incubus. MEGALOMANIAC

    Seemed like an appropriate place to share this. (long intro, the real fun starts at about 1:45) The original music video was great but it was banned because of Hitler and Bible images… so this is a live performance.

    MEGALOMANIAC
    I hear you on the radio
    You permeate my screen, it’s unkind but
    If I met you in a scissor fight
    I’d cut off both your wings on principle alone
    On principle alone

    Hey megalomaniac
    You’re no Jesus
    Yeah, you’re no f*ing Elvis
    Wash your hands clean of yourself, baby maniac
    STEP DOWN, STEP DOWN
    Step down

    If I were your appendages
    I’d hold open your eyes
    So you would see
    That ALL OF US ARE HEAVEN SENT
    There was never meant to be only one
    To be ONLY ONE

    Hey megalomaniac
    You’re no Jesus
    Yeah, you’re no f*ing Elvis
    Wash your hands clean of yourself, baby maniac
    STEP DOWN Step down
    STEP DOWN!

    Yeah
    You’re no Jesus
    You’re no Elvis

    YOU’RE NO ANSWER!

    Hey megalomaniac
    You’re no Jesus
    Yeah, you’re no f*ing Elvis
    Wash your hands clean of yourself, baby maniac
    STEP DOWN! STEP DOWN! STEP DOWN!

  37. I’m trying to read the complete reference (at least the chapter) you are referring to… The version(s) I have don’t entirely match and don’t contain the second paragraph you quote, at all.

    What version of Phoenix Lectures are these quotes from?

    • copyright 2007 – pages 203-204

      • Thanks, Marty.

        Most of my books and meters and such were effectively stolen when the first batch of new and better books was released. I didn’t get the new releases…

        The “techie” in me cringes at the changes – be they “better or worse”.

        Didn’t mean this as a derail – as the difference does not matter in the points that you are making with the reference, IMO.

        • To me, the issue is not so much the corrections and edits of the books and tapes (as bad or good as some of them are). It is the complete lack of transparency. It’s the unwillingness to document and be forthcoming, in a detailed way, regarding the how/why/where of the changes. And who decided what. It’s the attempt at “historical revisionism” and machine-gun-style “explaining” at an event.

          And it’s the punishing of those who question the changes and want to see the specific reasons for each change.

          DM’s and RTC’s reaction smacks of a missed withhold (or 10,000).

          (And btw, this doesn’t include the much grosser changes to fundamentals, such as the whole 3-swing floating needle arbitrary — in those cases, no explanation is needed. The perpetrator[s] should just be sacked.)

  38. Wonderful post – it aligns beautifully with the Logics lectures of Nov 52. Just get postualtes made in your favor little by little, increasing the gradient over a longer & longer time span and eventually that you literally own the being. It’s similar to the mechanism kids use naturally to get what they want from parents, etc. DM indeed has his flock under that spell. We’ll have our work cut out picking up the pieces one day – if they are lucky.

  39. The C of S events remind me of a term that author Alvin Toffler (Future Shock) popularized, “Information Overload”.

    Toffler states:
    “When the individual is plunged into a fast and irregularly changing situation, or a novelty-loaded context … his predictive accuracy plummets. He can no longer make the reasonably correct assessments on which rational behavior is dependent.”

    Adolph Hitler also proffered a version of this, with his theory of the Big Lie:
    “All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true within itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.”

    —Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

    An explanation, as to why some people are more susceptible to these types of Mass-Hypnosis inducing techniques is contained in a simple test. Please do not reject this test out of hand, it is a very accurate predictor of who are the most easily induced hypnosis subjects.

    Someone who is easily hypnotized can roll their eyes back so far that only the whites can be seen by the observer. Approximately 20% of the population can do this. Potential PTS’s anyone?

    That fact in itself may seem to be apropos of nothing, however we are talking a game of percentages here. Numerous experiments have proven that approx. 70% of the population can be hypnotized relatively easily, while only 5% are categorized as difficult or impossible to hypnotize. Indoctrination by inculcation works just as effectively (if not as deeply) on those not so easily induced.

    Do any of these percentages ring a bell?

    The question is, If we know that people are susceptible to this type of influence, what is the best course of action to take in dealing with others?

    The answer is contained in these lines from L.Ron Hubbard’s “What is Greatness”,

    “The hardest task one can have is to continue to love his fellows despite all reasons he should not.

    And the true sign of sanity and greatness is to so continue.

    For the one who can achieve this, there is abundant hope.” -LRH

    I hope this helps,

    Scott

    • Scott

      Fascinating. I came across that same test for the easily-hypnotized in my own reading, and do not discount it. I had failed to make the connection between the percentages, though. I am complete agreement with your conclusion.

      lunamoth

  40. Great article Marty. It’s another technical explanation as to why sheeple are sheeple. Sheeple didn’t start out that way — they got into Scientology to go free. Hypnotism as defined by LRH above (in all its parts) is exactly what happened to them. When going through my announcement as an Independent with my family and some (used to be) close friends – they each told me: yes, the church has some problems, but we are expanding. When I asked them how they knew the church was expanding, they each sited and quoted the int events. It’s very effective.
    Spanky

  41. It is all coupled with the the NEED to belief wich is born out of fear for the unknown. A sort of shortage of the circuit creating a shortage in reasoning.

  42. A good friend of mind got regged constantly to bring his non-Scn girlfriend to an event, “Who are you bringing to the event? Who are you bringing to the event? …” He was told it would be a great way to disseminate Scn to this girlfriend. Well, he finally caved, and he brought his girlfriend to an event. She didn’t last very long at the event, and it actually created a negative impression of Scn on her. She told her boyfriend, “Your so-called religion is nothing more than a game show; this event looks like Michael Bay produced Wheel of Fortune”.

  43. Not to change the subject, but for those that didn’t catch it, John Sweeney gives us another little sneak (written) preview of Tuesday night’s show here:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_9032000/9032278.stm

    He also brilliantly proves that the CoM is lying. He states:

    During our investigation in 2007, black SUVs with tinted windows appeared to be following our team as we carried out interviews. A mystery man who we suspected was from the church also appeared to be keeping tabs on us at breakfast in our LA hotel each morning.

    At the time, I put my suspicions of being under surveillance to Tommy Davis. He responded: “I don’t know what you’re talking about. It seems to me you’re getting a bit paranoid.”

    Mike Rinder has since given me a different answer.

    “Was I being paranoid?” I asked him when we met again.

    “No, you were being followed. No doubt whatsoever,” he told me.

    Mike said he should know as it was he and Tommy Davis who were doing some of the covert surveillance.

    Mike said he and Tommy were reporting back on our movements to David Miscavige’s office every few minutes or so.

    Through its UK lawyers, the firm Carter-Ruck, the church deny spying on us and reject Mike Rinder’s version of events dating back to 2007.”

    Later in the same article, Sweeney writes:

    During our time in America for the latest Panorama [2010], we were once again followed by people filming us, this time more openly than before. When we approached the people with cameras to ask them who they were with and what they were doing, they refused to answer our questions.

    That is why I was somewhat grateful to Scientology’s UK lawyers at Carter-Ruck when they sent the BBC photographs of me hugging Amy Scobee at the end of a long and at times harrowing series of interviews about her experiences.

    The photographs were meant to demonstrate to my bosses at the BBC, once again, that I must be biased against the church as I was overly familiar with its critics.

    This was, oddly enough, welcome proof that the people who had been following and filming us in the States were indeed working for the Church of Scientology. As Mike Rinder had said, I was not being paranoid – I was being followed.

  44. Excellent article. I’m so glad that among the top precious rights I’ve valued is the right to agree or disagree. Looking is fundamental to that. The Hubbard excerpt is just the Bingo woof and warp of how sheepledom happens. Thanks for this post!

  45. Wow…

    This article hits home.

    The last time I saw the Pint-sized Pope in public was during the opening of the new LA Eye Doll Org. For the first time, I really observed and listened. And for the first time I sensed the methods being used to mezmorize the public – just like outlined in the above. Mini Pope does not talk in a natural relaxed way that LRH did. LRH had clean space, and talked with such high ARC.

    Mini Pope, well, how do I saw this……..he is somewhat glitzy…as if he is selling a car or a house. And the article above explains the machinations behind his approach and delivery. Mini pope efforts his way through his speeches. There is a sense of nervousness about him, as if he is finding it hard to confront the audience. I actually feel somewhat sorry for him. He is in need of help.

    You know, I wonder if mini pope every sat in on an academy and actually helped someone do a drill, or spot check someone. Or ever went into the HGC and asked how the auditing was. Has he ever interacted with common Scientologists at an org?

    Last I saw of him at an event at the Shrine in the 90’s, he was in the after event area and was standing behind a table at the foot of the stairs, alone, looking over the crowd with not even a hint of pleasentness on his face.
    He looked displeased….as if people were enjoying theselves too much and purchasing too little.

    I hope he gets the help he needs.

    Centurion
    Pax Vobiscum

  46. “…over those same thirty years church staff have been pressured and coerced into immediately, and ruthelessly, punishing anyone who might manifest the slightest doubt about the veracity of the utterances of Miscavige. Third, RTC has been programmed to immediately target and destroy the life of anyone who dares report on false reports delivered in events by Miscavige. ……. Fourth, church policy has evolved that has any member seriously punished for exposing himself or herself to any source of information (by personal contact, by way of media, or the internet) that does not agree with Miscavige’s official state of Scientology utterances.”

    This is the operational and management culture that convinced me CofS had become a group I no longer wanted anything to do with. As long as this kind of organizational behavior is tolerated, there will be no change or reform from within.

  47. Thought Provoking

    Marty,

    Great excerpt! It really lined up with data that I already knew such as the tech dictionary definition of hypnotism, and the chapter in 88008, Affinity, Reality and Communication where LRH talks in depth about agreement being an inflow and the need to break these MEST agreement, thus creating your own universe.

    This is absolutely one of my most favorite chapters and it really does demonstrate how the church turned into the bank mob that it currently is dramatizing. DM is actively recreating the agreements that LRH talks about disagreeing with. If one adds in the Factors, which demonstrates the outflow nature of a being it is clear that the church is creating beings who withdraw instead of reach. The church is going more solid, becoming more MEST, just like the Idle Orgs, massive mest buildings void of theta.

    I am understanding more and more why you use the term reverse Scientology.

  48. Marty, an excellent article!
    Brainwashing is often used synonymously with mind control, but they are very different.
    An excerpt about brainwashing from my soon to be released book:
    “The constitution of man lends itself easily and thoroughly to certain enforcements from without. All learned functions, including thinking, obedience, and loyalty, must be controlled if the greater State is to ensue. The end thoroughly justifies the means.”

    Scientology has policies on the suppressive person. The policies on SPs have their proper place in organizations and in society. But a true SP is rare, 2-3% of the population. But, you learn that if you commit a crime against Scientology or blow staff for whatever reason you will be labeled an SP. You will be prohibited from further auditing or training which threatens your belief in eternity. This data can inlay a phobia. The current leadership uses this threat as a mind control/ brainwashing tool to gain access into member’s psyche to enforce and demand loyalty. A client revealed that threats of expulsion are used regularly in the GAT against public paying pcs for purposes of greed. The pc had agreed to a week of auditing at the FLB and no more. When the week was up and he had to go back to work and his family, they wouldn’t let him go. The D of P threatened to declare him an SP if he left. He stayed against his own will………
    How well do you think the next few sessions went?

    “The current members must be brought into the belief that every individual within it who rebels in any way, shape, or form must be considered to be a deranged person whose is neurotic or insane. By declaring publicly that the sanity of a person is in question, it is possible to discount and eradicate that person. Belief is enforced by fear and terror from an authoritative level, and this will be followed by obedience.”

    Brainwashing is usually done in an adversarial environment. The person knows he is in the enemy camp, but by force, duress, and ideology the will of the prisoner is broken. He then does things he wouldn’t normally do. But, when he leaves the enemy’s environment and the fearful surroundings his beliefs and sense of truth usually returns.

    Miscavige’s brainwashing is more along the lines of what is called mind control. Mind control is more insidious and dangerous. Through gradient coercion and manipulation the person thinks the beliefs and enforced realities are his own. He believes that he is in a friendly place and he cooperates. He knows he hasn’t been brainwashed and would react violently if told so.

    A major part of mind control aligns with what Marty has said about Miscavige selling himself as “perfect.”
    “The doctrine, the group and the leader are purported perfect. Thus there is only one place to direct any impure thought, to oneself. Self-blame perverts any sense of reality. It is by far the single most powerful mind control technique because it is self-perpetuating.

    Feel free contact me: glennsamuels@gmail.com

    • Hi Glenn, I’m interested in your book. Let us know when it’s available. In the meantime, here’s re-post that seems related to your topic:

      NEGATIVITY KILLS

      The concept of “North Korean Brainwashing” has been bandied about in various threads, so I though it would be good to inform readers of what this actually is and how it is done.

      North Korean Brainwashing is based completely on denying the target prisoners all positive emotional support, and exposing them to an all negative emotional atmosphere, and actually rewarding them when they acted to destroy their own ideals and emotional capacity and relationships.

      The North Korean brainwashing camps were unique in that the prisoners were relatively well-treated in the physical sense.

      They had adequate food, shelter, and water, and were not physically tortured. In fact, their captors were careful not to make them angry, as this could have provided them with motivation to oppose the brainwashing process.

      A study done after the Korean War, of 1,000 returned prisoners of war who had been “brainwashed”, found the majority never got back in touch with old friends and family. They were found to be in a condition described as in “mental solitary confinement”.

      All their bonds of affinity and relationship with others had been broken, and apparently they had lost their capacity to have positive relationships.

      The camps they had been in had no barbed wire surrounding them, and very few guards, yet escape attempts were very rare.

      At the same time, it was found that something like 28% of the prisoners had died in these camps, essentially by giving up their will to live.

      These camps had the highest death rates of any camps anywhere, ever recorded.

      Many of the prisoners just went to their quarters one day, sat in a corner covering themselves with a blanket, and died, often within two days.
      Usually no-one of the other prisoners tried to help them, because the bonds of relationship between them had already been broken.

      The researchers concluded these men had died of “extreme hopelessness”.

      Here is how it was done:

      1. Group members are all channeled into informing on each other. Informers are given rewards. This broke the trust between the group members and isolated each person from the others. No-one could be trusted, because anyone might be or become an informer at anytime.
      Interestingly enough, no-one was punished for anything they had reportedly done. That was not the objective. The objective was to destroy the trust and emotionally supportive relationships the group members had with each other.

      2. Prisoners are organized into smaller groups of 10 or 12, and required to confess bad things they have done, and also to confessing good things they failed to do. They did not confess to their captors, but to each other, the other group members. This was a “reverse group therapy” process which gradually eroded the caring, trust, and respect the men had for each other.

      3. Efforts are made to destroy loyalty to leadership and their country, and their own ideals. This was done by carefully controlled communication, exposing all the negatives about the USA and never mentioning any positive aspects.

      4. All positive support was withheld. For example, all supportive mail from home with any good news or encouragement was withheld. All mail with bad news was delivered – news of death, pending divorce, dunning letters for unpaid bills, etc were all promptly delivered.

      The goal of this kind of brainwashing is basically to completely ARC break (destroy the positive emotion in their lives) the prisoners with themselves, with their fellows, with
      their leaders, their country, and with life, and eventually their will to live.

      Some of the prisoners essentially became like their captors, and became apologists for the North Koreans. Most did not, but were severely emotionally damaged.

      Much of the information here I took from the introduction to an audiobook called “How Full Is Your Bucket?” by Tom Rath and Donald O. Clifton PhD.

      They are founders of the field of “Positive Psychology”, which they promoted to businesses, but which has application to all people.

      Positive Psychology has to do with the study and implementation of methods for reinforcing and increasing mental health in any setting, instead of focusing on the sick, disordered, or pathological.

      It does reveal how positive or negative interactions between people strongly affect their “mental health”.

      The basis of the North Korean approach appears to have been sytematically ARC Breaking a person on all flows, including with himself. On top of that, of course much implanting could be done in a much more aggressive way than the North Koreans usually did. But if you have ever seen photos of the scowling, hateful North Korean soldier’s faces, it is easy to see how a culture of hated and violence could be built on that foundation.

      Exactly the kind of culture that DM has been systematically creating within the CoS.

  49. Heh, heh, heh!

    Less than 48 hours to go, and the newspapers in the UK are getting into the act.

    Thanks to Anonymous, here’s a scan of the two-pager in today’s Sunday Times at http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/3682/18602times1221130lo.jpg. And here’s a transcript of what Sweeney wrote about Tuesday’s program at http://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2010/09/26/bbc-journalist-john-sweeney-writing-for-the-sunday-times/ .

    FYI, Sweeney mentions the assault on Mike in the parking lot by his wife, brother, daughter, Jenny ‘Inchwife’ Linson, and other Co$ ‘clergy’:

    Last April he drive his girlfriend to a medical appointment. On his own, in the car park, he was approached by seven Scientologists, including his wife, his daughter and his brother. One woman screamed: “You deserted your family, you piece of s***.” His wife screamed: “You walked out on me, you f*****.”

    What the church didn’t realise was that Rinder was on the phone to a reporter – me. It sounded ghastly. “The intention was intimidation,” said Rinder.

    Heh, heh, heh!

    Just Me

    • I’m impressed, particularly by John Sweeney’s forthrightness and responsibility level. What is the reference/quote I’m thinking of ? that sometimes it’s the sane person who can be seen howling while the evil stays calm and manipulative).

      It’s curious that Mr. Sweeney says John Travolta called his employer 8 times demanding his head. John Travolta usually looks so congenial and pan determined, but this kind of activity belies hypnotism IMHO. Was he being directed to do so? Did he earn brownie points? Or is he a “vigilante”. What’s most interesting is that any Scientologist who has done a Communications Course knows about bull baiting, and how to drive people into anger — that “drill” is obviously being directed for nefarious reason (to introvert and cave in) Mr Sweeney. That’s surely obvious to John Travolta, who one would think knows these mechanics of the mind. He knows Mr/ Sweeney was manipulated to frustration by people well-drilled in how that happens. And still, he calls to demand the guy be fired. Eight times. Wow.😦

      • He’s going for the medal of valor that Cruise got. He’s a virtual shoe in. Mark my words.

        • It’s difficult to have much sympathy left for John Travolta. This week, when grocery shopping, pick up the Enquirer. Headline Banner – front page – Travolta expose about his gay lovers. And new expose book to follow.

          dm has him completely boxed in. His private pc data would be all over the internet and sent to thousands IF he were to get honest.

          I find it truly upsetting that he has cheated on Kelly and I for one do not doubt it at all. Too many of my friends KNOW someone who was involved with JT as a fast spa “romance”

          Besides — I was there when he got in — back in 1973 or so. And I haven’t developed selective amnesia.

          Do I care that he’s gay? Not even slightly. Do I care that he’s chosen to hide this all his life and life a double life.

          YES — why? Because it can lead to such emotional stress that ones heart just can’t take it.

          (happened to a dear friend about 6 months ago — massive fatal heart
          attack at 45 from living a double life)

          John was a warm endearing man. I continue to hold out hope that he will be brave and leave.

          But, it’s doubtful. If he wins the freedom award, I’ll weep.

          WH

          • Dear Valkov,
            This was a very revealing and informative post. It explains a lot, especially as regards the possible frame of mind of INT Base staff, who stay no matter what befalls them. It also explains what happens to people who are declared, unjustly and with lies, when DISCONNECTION is practiced. I experienced great periods of deep apthy, after this happened to me, and never could fully understand what was going on. Your post has brought a lot of understanding to these situations. There is a lecture, a Congress lecture, I believe, that talks about one of the few truly overt acts a thetan can commit is the cutting of others comm lines. I have never mentioned this as I wanted to quote the exact reference, but haven’t been able to find it again. Your post brings home the severe emotional damage done by such overts. It makes the actions of DM and the C of M even more insidiously evil than I had previously thought, if that is possible. Also the publishing of overts, thought confidential, makes one not trust your group members anymore; that happened to me also. It is very clear to me that there is the intentional causation of ARC Breaks that is part of the psychosis that we have witnessed, and these ARC Breaks make those affected more easily controlled, and more able to be hypnotized and robotic. What an operation!
            Thanks again for this data.
            ML, Lady Minn

            • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

              Lady Minn,

              Very observant! Is this the subject matter you’re referring to regarding the cutting of other’s comm lines?

              Educational Fair Use of “religious” scripture (gasp!)

              “Two viewpoints setting up terminals to be viewed by the other viewpoint demand attention one from the other and will invent all manner of ‘reasons’ to command the continuing attention of the other viewpoint. One of the primary methods of operation is to make one’s object or action of object so strange that the other viewpoint cannot look away. Another is to make the object or action of object so artistic or colorful or interesting that the other viewpoint cannot look away. Another method is the command by force for attention. Another method is to inhibit the attention so as to invite it solely to one’s objects.

              One can plot this as a cycle of demand for attention with curiosity below 40.0, desire below that, enforcement down to as low as 1.5 on the scale, and inhibition at 1.1 on down.
              The lowest methods of this scale are quite observable amongst men, and the primary operation, very low on the scale, is inhibition of attention elsewhere. By cutting the communication lines of another viewpoint, an effect is created on the other viewpoint by which that viewpoint fixes with whatever emotion (since any attention is better than no
              attention) upon the products or objects of that one who cut the communication line. There are many methods of cutting communication lines. A common one could be summarized as ‘It’s too horrible over that way for you to look’. Viewpoints are thus given the understanding that they are surrounded by horrible things which they have never perceived and which, indeed, have never existed but which are said to be there so that they will be forced to give attention.

              Hidden influences are the commonest methods of enforcing attention. Of course, any analytical mind is itself a hidden influence since it cannot as itself be perceived. Only its energy and objects can be perceived. Thus comes about the worship of the hidden influence, the fear of the hidden influence, the neurosis about hidden influences.

              The goal of seeking attention is to receive the particle admiration. One creates effects simply in order to create effects, but he is given the bonus of admiration when he creates
              sufficient effect or, what is most important, when he demands, commands and is able to effect admiration by duress.

              (Italics and Bold are mine)

              T H E J O U R N A L O F
              SCIENTOLOGY
              Issue 16-G [1953, ca. mid-June]
              Published by
              The Hubbard Association of Scientologists, Inc.
              Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

              Copyright (©) 1953 by L. Ron Hubbard.

              Also published in the “Creation of Human Ability” by L. Ron Hubbard

              (Note: On page 300 in the CoS 2007 squirrel edition)

              It looks to me like David Miscavage has created the fear of the hidden influence with most church Scientologists. Could it be?

            • Lady Minn,

              Thank you! I am very glad the post was helpful.

              I truly believe North Korea is the “datum of comparable magnitude” we need to perceive the true nature of the Church of Miscavige.

              The parallels are striking. Both exist in present time, and it is easy to compare them point by point and show how they are alike. They suppress and control people in remarkably similar ways, and their leaders are very much alike, living in luxury while their people starve. A focus of both is the concept of external enemies which the group must hate, remain eternally vigilant against, and at war with.

              I really believe CoS needs to be positioned right there alongside North Korea at every opportunity. They are so alike.

      • “What’s most interesting is that any Scientologist who has done a Communications Course knows about bull baiting, and how to drive people into anger”

        What’s most interesting is that any Anon who has been on the Internet knows about trolling, and how to drive people into anger😉

      • Veritas

        I’ve looked online for mention of Travolta’s attempts to stop the showing of the latest Panorama expose on the church but can only find reference to his efforts to get the 2007 show canned. Can you direct me to this recent attempt(s) ?

        Thanks.

        lunamoth

        • Lunamoth, whether Travolta did that in 2007 or 2010, my sentiments about it are the same. Unless he’s changed his operating basis — of which I see no evidence.

          • Well, it might make a difference. Because after the last year he’s had, there’s reason to believe his continued support of miscavige’s church might be a little grudginly given. I’m not dismissing the significance of his having done so in the past, just saying that NOT doing so in the present may be an indicator.

            I don’t discount indicators.

            • IC. I was surprised he would do it at all, as someone in the film industry commiserated “It doesn’t seem like him.” Do you know of any indicators this year that change his position from 2007?

        • John Travolta the “sweet and humble good guy” who, behind the scenes, repeatedly calls a reporter’s employer to bully presumably the guy getting fired — when Travolta is 100% familiar with the “tactics” used to essentially drive someone to lose their temper (entrapment?)

          Check out the video preview in the upper right, they’ve put in the “button pushing” segment of the show! anyone who’s been through a Comm Course knows the tech — how it can be abused depends on the intention.

          http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_9032000/9032278.stm

    • More from John Sweeney on BBC site:
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_9032000/9032278.stm

      The church was accusing the reporter of bias and it attempted to stop the documentary from being broadcast – a campaign backed by Scientology A-lister John Travolta. Sweeney has returned to investigate the church again.

      THANK YOU Mr. Sweeney and the BBC and all the courageous people with integrity who will not be intimidated by cheap dirty tricks.

    • This will be delicious. Absolutely delicious.

    • Thought Provoking

      Just Me,

      Thanks! Excellent article! I am so glad they made mention of the Independent Scientologists practicing Scientology…Go Mike! Hoo Hoo, can’t wait for the show to air!

  50. I took one of my neighbors to the “New Basics” release event. He was impressed with Miscavige’s charisma and speaking ability. He expressed doubt however, as to the motivation of the group.

    When I asked him why he thought that, he told me that he knew a lot about the subject of mind control and what a charismatic leader could get people to do. He said that in his opinion, Miscavige was of the classic mold for an evangelical, military or national leader who plays on the hopes and fears of people in order to evoke a blind following.

    I can’t say that I was surprised at my friends analysis. He was a Captain in the Special Forces during the Vietnam war. He was a counterespionage expert who recruited, trained and ran French, Chinese and Vietnamese Spys during the war.

    I’ll refrain from telling you his opinion of anyone else in the field of philosophy, psychology or the humanities, including LRH. Suffice it to say that he is somewhat jaded and cynical.

    Scott

  51. BTW, I just remembered the only questions my neighbor asked me during the event. He said, “Have you every met this guy?” When I said yes, he said, “How tall is he? Is he a little guy?” I said something like “yeah, he’s not too big, pretty short”.

    My buddy just nodded and watched the rest of the event.

  52. ClearlyMistreated

    Hi Marty,
    Excellent article. When I saw Miscavige on the video of the Seattle Ideal Org grand opening I noticed how different his voice seemed than the other speakers. Even though it was an outdoor event in broad daylight he sounded exactly the same as he did at events. Do you know if he uses some sort of a voice enhancer or modulator? That booming voice coming out of a little guy seems suspicious.

    You’re spot on about the hypnosis. When I talk to Scientologists about the truth I hit this instant wall of “David Miscavige is an upstat” and they refuse to look any further. This has been implanted by these events. Event after event showing David Miscavige next to these “upstat” graphs, again and again and again.

    I used to love the events myself but I had gotten bored with them in recent years. After being mentally “out” of the church I went to my last event and I could see the hypnotic effect that I used to agree with. Everyone around me seemed to be buying it. Needless to say, it was weird.

    • I believe it is Clearsound (TM). Even TC is said to have used it to boost his voice in some of his films. Of course in the case of the Seattle grand opening, it was only turned on for DM. A little like the man behind the mighty Wizard of OZ. Don’t look behind the curtain.

      • Then you don’t have the slightest clue what Clearsound(tm) actually is or does, it would seem.

        I once spoke about this system with the electronics engineer who designed it – Don Breeding. This is what he told me, as near as I understood it:

        Every time a magnetic tape is played on the commonly available systems, it gets partially erased by the magnets in the playback head! Clearsound(tm) involves an adjustment to the tape bias signal (an ultrasonic signal that is used to sort of shake up the magnetic domains on the tape to prepare them to accept and audio signal), special grounded magnetic shielding around the playback head, and some sort of signal regeneration to put back what got partially erased. Because of all this, the audio frequency response is extended somewhat beyond the norm and the signal remains *clearly* audible over many, many more plays than usual.

        Nothing at all to do with Public Address systems.

        Michael A. Hobson

  53. Marty, All I know is Miscavige speeches (events) always put me to sleep. If I wanted to catch a nice catnap I would go to an event.

  54. Yes, it was personal mistreatment that started my ears to perk up and for me to LOOK beyond what I was told- then—When friends and selectees and family members were mistreated- I put the spiritual Spotlight on the church and we were ALL PTS to our own church and suffering not winning anymore and the doubts were GONE!

  55. theystolemychurch

    OMG…….

    dm is more and more becoming clearly the little “general bethlehem” character from the “Postman”…. Just look at it… can’t keep his wife in his bed and takes on a new woman… she doesn’t look to happy in her photos… beats his own staff and does not feed them enough to actually support life…

    And then, he “shoots” any real man in the near vicinity …. I’m just saying……

    Time to use the Rule of “8”… Who’s ready?

  56. Naturally, the PDC (as the “universal resource”) also contains data on hypnosis. Here’s a short quote (page 606 from the PDC transcript available for download at http://www.stss.nl):

    “There’s various methods used. You just capture their perceptic line and you’re the only one in whom they’re on agreement. You’ve just separated their agreement from the rest of the world and they think you’re the only one, see? Very simple. Then be careful never to remind them that there’s any other part of the world with which to agree …”

    Any semblance to DMology?

    References on hypnotism are actually all over the place. Another one from “Technical Bulletins 1950-1953” (same location for download, page 232):

    “Communication is defined as the use of those sense channels with which the individual contacts the physical universe. Any enforced communication will cause hypnosis. That is what hypnotism is: an enforced communication channel. “

    Anyone involved in event preparations will have their own bits and pieces, large and small, how this actually is an enforced (with exclamation points) communication.

    Take Walter Kotric (long-term CO CLO EU and a robotic minion to DM) – reference is made to Int Events in Copenhagen from a few years ago: he ordered CLO EU staff to watch out for publics who “don’t stand up and applaud DM” (when the video clearly shows what to do: everybody standing up and clapping) or setting up “MAAs” at “strategic escape routes” from the event hall to catch and handle leaving publics – ideally returning them to the eventraganza, or else! – if they had enough or didn’t want to play “sitting ducks” waiting to be regged at the end of the show.

    LRH also gives a handling to not hypnotize people in the first place, which, incidentally looks like a general handling to wake people up (same PDC reference above, where LRH continues the incomplete sentence at the end of the above quote):

    “… – don’t do as I do here. I talk about this field and that field and some other field. And it spots it around, and it requires… you… you go all over the doggoned space area, see? Well, that keeps people awake, and it keeps them alert and they keep learning. ”

    By putting people’s attention on this abuse, that outpoint, another aspect, another viewpoint, different things, different things etc. (Marty’s, Steve’s, Jeff’s blogs, books by Amy, Marc, Jeff and other ex-Int Staff, media interviews, Anderson, Sweeney, our comm lines to churchies etc.) unfixes their fixed attention to whatever degree, slow or fast, and they will “learn” (for themselves) which in turn DECREASES the level of “pain” necessary before they truly make up their own mind and split because it increases their awareness level and, bit by bit, wakes them up.

    It’s like continuing to increase the volume of an alarm clock to get someone out of deep-sleep … eventually, they will smell the coffee!

    Marty, spot on! So is the handling.

    Samuel

    PS: having mentioned Walter Kotric as a true minion to DM, I would be remiss to not point out that this is NOT the only thing I saw of him – I also have been privy to him strongly disagreeing with “nuts” orders, violations of Policy etc. – however, in those instances he has chosen to walk out of the room and vehemently and dutifully “toe the party line” to his staff (sort of a double-betrayal, first himself and then his staff) and ruthlessly enforcing the very same “nuts” and “off policy” orders. I wish him lots of sweet dreams about the time when he worked directly for LRH in the Household Unit so he again can become a true staff member …. and wake up for real! For he will have lots of stories to tell, interesting ones, to undo what he now enforces.

    • – BUMP –
      Some good LRH quotes here.

    • Samuel,
      Walter Kotric never worked directly for LRH nor has he met him – just so you know. Seen some other mention of Walter’s implying that he did so. He was posted as my deputy in the HU at the Int Base in preparation of LRH’s return, but LRH was off the lines and never came back to the Int base.

      Saw him several times at Mar 13 Birthday events in Clearwater. We had been good friends & worked together for years – he would not even say hello or look me in the eye. This was because of Dear Leader’s orders.

      • THAT is a surprise to me as Walter most definitely cultivated the image of “having worked directly with LRH” he even gave examples of LRH talking to him.

        So, just more lies? Wow!

        PS: there are other people on this blog who have worked with Walter – is it true what I say here that Walter cultivated that “worked with LRH” image?

        • LRH went off the lines in Feb 1980 from a place in Hemet, not the Int base, in the company of Pat and Annie Broker. He never returned to the Int Base – where would Walter Kotric have talked or worked with him?

        • From what I personally have heard from Walter, apparently, he briefly met LRH at AOSH UK and was giving a series of assists to some kind of rare Japanese fish that was feeling sick and sad at the time, to a full EP. I am not joking. Seems like LRH had some rare fish at his UK ponds by AO. Walter said it/them were kind of cool and almost intelligent fish. LRH made Walter feel very welcome and assign him to give that fish a Reach and Withdraw assist on a daily basis, so the fish doesn’t feel an effect, but at cause. The idea was – the fish went an effect to people and when you do R&W on it, it starts thinking that you are afraid of it and feels at cause again, therefore doing better. Apparently it went well. Interesting story. Straight from Walter.

  57. Yesterday, what shows up on my wall? The John Sweeney, BBC trailer for the Panorama Show to air on 28 September.

    A close, non-scientology friend posted it to HIS wall — he’s got about 200 non-scientology friends. He was never in scientology but knows I was.

    So — I expect this show to be watched by millions in the UK – and youtubed over here in short order.

    The clock is ticking.

    (btw sorry to hear about John T’s part in trying to stop the show. He always would use his celebrity clout to attempt to stop bad press. I imagine after the death of his son — he became even easier to control. IMHO. And Kelly is very active … sad)

  58. Marty,
    Maybe I needed to be in longer for longer agreement, but when I’m told to read KSW # 1 over and over, begining of every class… then I look around and see something OTHER than LRH being done, that’s twhat makes me shake my head and question their intellect.

    The church public is SO far in agreement, they don’t even know they are NOT doing what LRH said to do! It’s beyond misunderstoods, it’s into overt-withhold cycles on a mass scale.

    It’s infuriating. How people can become so blind is beyond the imagining. Beyond criminal.

    • “It’s infuriating. How people can become so blind is beyond the imagining. Beyond criminal.”

      It is human nature. It is abilties that have been develloped for survival twistedinto something else. Like the abilty to stote fat,salt and sugar. It comes back to bite us in the ass. Man has a need to belong, The urge to belong 3th dynamic ? No family outside no friends outside. Fear of the other(group). These things have been enhanced to the max by the Cof$. It is a Cult. Alsoo the 8 Dynamic played out as the first. We have your eternity and thus withoutthe “church” you will not survive in the present.

      • I gotcha, Cat, to some degree. But how can someone OT? not see these things? Have I got a misunderstood on what OT means? What awarness level is reached at OT7 or 8 and still they are buying into this crap?

        I can get “man off the street” falling for the hype, but OT’s? Obviously the sec checking CoB has been demanding has all been for not!

        I get what Marty is bringing up here. I agree with Ron and the clip mentioned above. But it still pisses me off to no end that beings who call themselves “OT” are in lockstep with this shit. Ya know?

        I guess I need to stop disbeliveing.

  59. OK, here is an excerpt from PDC Tape 20, “Formative state of Scientology / Definition of Logic.” This part has been seamlessly edited from the newer releases, so this is from the old cassette or reel-to-reel version. I think it applies very well to the current situation. Ron is talking about Scientology …

    “It is a method of thinking about things. And is just as true as it is workable and NO TRUER.

    And is not in itself an arbitrary police force to make sure that we all think right thoughts. It’s a SERVANT of the mind. A SERVO mechanism of the mind. It is NOT a MASTER of the mind.

    Scientology WILL decline and become useless to man on the day WHEN … IT becomes the MASTER of thinking. Don’t think it won’t do that! It has every capability in it of doing that.

    Contained in the knowable workable portions, before your eyes, there are methods of controlling human beings and thetans which have never before been dreamed of in this universe. Control mechanisms of such awesome and solid proportions that if the remedies were not so much easier to apply, one would be APPALLED at the dangerousness to beingness that exists in Scientology.

    Fortunately it was intelligently invented. And I say that without any possible bow. I saw that because part of its logic was the remedy should exist before the bullet. And that is just an arbitrary, there really is no reason for that except for this:

    When you invent the bullet before the remedy, you have to invent the remedy under DURESS. It’s very hard to kneel along side of a patient who is suffering from a super radioactive burn …. and try to figure out in that moment … what is radioactivity, and how does it effect the human flesh? That’s not the time to figure the remedy. The time to figure the remedy is BEFORE the bullet.”

    • Dear Bryon,
      Thank you so much for this! This is an invaluable datum and an incredible piece of technology.
      One of my biggest wins in Scientology was hearing a lecture from “The Creation of Human Ability” lectures. LRH tells the story about an old Greek Academy in which the instructors gathered the students in the academy, and waited until a student asked a question. He was then told to ‘THINK ABOUT IT”. That was the curriculem! THINK ABOUT IT!
      I was so blown out of my head. For weeks I went around telling people to “think about it!” I have never been the same since. Thank God!

      This piece of LRH lecture enhances and reinforces that win.

      The thing I realize now is that people (Scientologists) develop ideas like:
      “The Church of Scientology controls my eternity, therefore I must overlook or ignore these illogical things that I see happening, (outpoints) and do what they say, and think the right thoughts.” It is my opinion that this is done on a sub-awareness level. They don’t ever ask themselves the question: ” How is it that an outside group (meaning outside myself and my ability to have conscious awareness) can control my eternity?” and then think about it! Especially when they, the group, ( the C of S) deal in the fraud and illegalities that are perpetrated upon themselves and their friends. The list that is detailed over and over in this blog: beatings of Int staff, forced abortions, RPF’s that last for years, OSA dirty tricks, sacred confessional data used against one as blackmail, a building for Super Power used to raise hundreds of millions of dollars that never gets finished, IAS donations that get raised for specific purposes that get used personal inurement and a lavish lifestyle of the alleged leader of the group. A group that orders disconnection of family and friends, while running around the world and campaigning for “Human Rights” is going to have control over my eternity?????????!!!!!!!! These people are going to contol my life and my eternity?

      All I can say is “Bah , humbug!”. Well, yes, I DID THINK ABOUT IT!
      And all I can say is “I DID THINK ABOUT IT, and the answer is: NOT JUST NO, BUT HELL NO!!!!!!
      I AM NO LONGER HYPNOTIZED.

    • Thought Provoking

      Thanks, loved it and I agree, it is fitting to the post!

  60. If ONLY more of you had actually experienced OT.

    What a pity.

    Not even Marty has. He has the instinct, but he has never ever BEEN there.

    Nonetheless, I respect the wins y’all have had along the way. Keep at it! I myself have only known about a half dozen people who have had OT-realm experiences, and ONE of them was Ron! Most of them did Scientology 1950 style.

    Miscarriage has not even experienced LIFE REPAIR!

    Most of you have experienced a pseudo “exterior” as “feeling kind of floaty”.

    Keep at it! If you even have the willingness……you are beyond David Miscarriage. One thing none of you can hide is that FEW of you even have a clue about real OT.

    I have.

    Ron has.

    How many others? Maybe 20? The rest of you just WISH! The old-timers from the 50s have.

    Keep trying – when you finally DO experience actual OT…you will know IT.

    Carry on! In the meantime? I watch, and laugh. OT is real……are you?

    Work on your OT-TRO.

    But…you – won’t….it requires more concentration than you are capable of, doesn’t it?

    START!

    • Just as CD, I think I’m gonna start deleting you too, till you come down to Texas for a spell for TRs the hard way. Your arrogance apparently still knows no bounds. And to that degree you are blind.

    • OK, if this guy is an example of “true OT,” I’m no longer interested. An asshole who can walk through walls is still an asshole.

      lunamoth

    • In a word- Bizarre.

      Marty can you vouch this guy’s real? Seems synthetic.

      • No

        • Marty, This “person” has to be a troll. Just follow his pattern- makes insightful statements to lure others in, then enturbulates, doesn’t respond to any of the feedback re his inflammatory statements, then posts with some rational statements to lure people back in and then unloads again. He has done this too many times to count.
          My 2 cents, but his intents are pretty visible even though I am not OT enough to know ( sarcasm). I personally would appreciate his deletion from your site.

          • That’s what I see too, lookingin. Boring troll is boring.

          • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

            lookingin wrote to Marty,

            “I personally would appreciate his [OT VIII] deletion from your site.”

            I request that you please don’t do that, Marty. OT VIII’s communication is good practice for myself, and perhaps some others. (Besides the fact I’m not big on censorship.)

            Of course, arrogance isn’t appreciated by most, but I believe OT VIII’s posts result in more awakeness, not less … whether or not it’s from his communication or others’ communication in response to it.

            So I appreciate OT VIII for that added awakeness, whether that’s his own intent or not.🙂

            Thank you OT VIII for the “lessons”, even if they were not meant to contribute to Life, they have.

            • Wayne, I suggest you labelling such moderation decisions “censorship” indicates gullibility. As it is gullible to consider this guy ever cracked an LRH book, let alone attained OT VIII. This forum is not for trolls. It is for people earnestly attempting to move up a little higher. If you like that kind of bullshit, there are plenty of forums out there that cater to it.

      • I think I know who he is.
        There was someone who posted here a few times under his real name who had the same type of arrogance

    • I guess when you become an insufferably arrogant asshole you know you’ve reached “real OT” according to “OT VIII.” No thanks.

    • It seems you are my /b/rother now Anon OT VIII

    • Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

      So let me get this clear to myself …

      Is the cognition of “I’m greater than thou”, from the EP of one of the OT levels you did, really what you intended to communicate here?

      Is there not humbleness learned on the way up through “The Way”?

    • OT VIII is either a put-on, or the rest of the OT Bridge wasn’t going where I thought it was. Nobody could be enlightened and so infuriatingly condescending at the same time.

    • OT Viii,
      You talk like a jerk.
      You should know better.

    • OTVIII

      Sorry. ARCU comprise theta. To operate as theta, you must operate at a high level of ARCU. Lots of understanding. Lots of KRC. Responsibility and knowledge. This post smacks of low ARC, a make wrong/make right. It’s something handled at level 4, not in the upper reaches of theta.

      A real OT knows that all of us are operating as theta all the time. Only an operating thetan can make a bank and all this crap. It isn’t easy to make all this stuff and hold it in place. Being nuts is much harder than being “OT” because you’re doing so much more than you have to. But, you still have to be “OT” to mock up all the crap.

      The turning point comes when you can knowingly mock it all up. KRC and ARC. You know what you are doing and you can be cause over it and responsible for it. Being OT is a gradient of knowing cause. But, the other side is being unknowing cause. You’re still being cause; you’re just hiding the fact.

      I don’t know what you are trying to knowingly cause here. An ARC break? A make wrong? A surge in your own status? Reaping our awe and admiration? Driving in our anchor points with invalidation? It sounds more like the kind of OT DM is making rather than the OT LRH tried to make.

      Tsk, tsk, tsk.

      Michael

    • Boy OT VIII,
      You must be OT indeed to know what others have or have not experienced!

      As a matter of fact, since you brought it up, I was with Ron in Phoenix in the 50’s, so yeah, I got an idea of how things “were.” But only a glimps of it. I’m on life #2, and it’ll probably take another to get it right. But as it’s often said, we come back.

      PS: It wasn’t 3 feet… more like 150 feet, give or take. But I’ll keep working at it! *wink* Thanks buddy! *rolls eyes*

    • You are an example of why I am not interested in what is represented as scientology and/or scientologists.

    • OTVlll?? ….right! Or should we just call you Robin (Scott) you fucking arrogant lunatic. ” If it walks like duck…”

  61. Here’s a better one word description: Hallucinatory

    His theme song:

  62. Hello All!
    Marty, what a great collection of beings and viewpoints! Thank you.
    One of my favorite LRH quotes apropo to this discussion….”too much agreement under duress brings about the banishment of one’s entire consciousness” Tech Dict “ARC”

    Bluesailor

  63. “One definition of a cult member is someone who continues to delay the day he or she will defect.” – Joseph Szimhart, page 12 (International Cultic Studies Association) ICSA Today Magazine, Vol 1, No. 1, 2010

  64. Pingback: Top Posts — WordPress.com

  65. Here’s a question to do a big bong hit by and ruminate upon:

    If LRH had his own blog, would he allow Alanzo to post there?

    • Completely pointless hypothetical question and absolutely no way to say what Ron Hubbard would or would do, were he alive today.

      You obviously figure he wouldn’t be tolerant of you and your bullshit, or you would not have posed the question.

      Michael A. Hobson

      • Mike Hobson, I think you just Flunked. Where’s your “spirit of play”? Could we not duplicate Hubbard well enough to have a pretty good idea of what Hubbard would do?

        Personally, if we are going to boot someone, I vote it be “OTVIII”, and we keep Al as our “pet troll”, “armadillo”, or whatever we want to call him. Al is more interesting and human in a Ren and Stimpy kind of way – “Oh, the humanity of it all”, as Ren always said at the end of the show….

        Besides, Al recommends the book “Beyond Belief” by Elaine Pagels, which really is an excellent and insightful book by a world-renowned scholar of early Chrisitianity. Anyone who likes that book can’t be all bad….

        • Alanzo, I do not have a bong, but I ruminated on your question anyway. I don’t know about LRH’s blog, but here is what I saw:
          If he was in the mood to do so, LRH would sit with you around that bong, take a hit, tell stories and sing songs with you through much of the night, such as Tom Petty’s classic “You Don’tKnow How It Feels(ToBe Me)”.

          The next morning after a good breakfast he would take his niacin etc and making sure you took yours too, jog on down to the sauna to sweat it all out. He would twin with you all day or for as long as necessary for you to get the EP too.

          You see? LRH was pure genius. By developing the Purification Rundown, he made it possible for us to have our brownies and eat them, too. Or have our bong and hit it too.

          He ought to be hailed worldwide for this one development alone. LRH – a very compassionate and underappreciated man!

          YOU DON’T KNOW HOW IT FEELS by Tom Petty
          Let me run with you tonight
          I’ll take you on a moonlight ride
          There’s someone I used to see
          But she don’t give a damn for me

          But let me get to the point, let’s roll another joint
          And turn the radio loud, I’m too alone to be proud
          You don’t know how it feels
          You don’t know how it feels to be me

          People come, people go
          Some grow young, some grow cold
          I woke up in between
          A memory and a dream

          So let’s get to the point, let’s roll another joint
          Let’s head on down the road
          There’s somewhere I gotta go
          And you don’t know how it feels
          You don’t know how it feels to be me

          My old man was born to rock
          He’s still tryin’ to beat the clock
          Think of me what you will
          I’ve got a little space to fill

          So let’s get to the point, let’s roll another joint
          And let’s head on down the road
          There’s somewhere I got to go
          And you don’t know how it feels
          You don’t know how it feels
          No, you don’t know how it feels to be me

          You don’t know how it feels
          You don’t know how it feels
          No, you don’t know how it feels to be me

  66. I well remember being a new Academy student, excited about my decision and CHOICE to learn to be an auditor. I had paid for my next course (I had chosen to pay for it without any prompting) and I had planned to start the course in 2 weeks time. I had been working full time and going on course 7 days a week for two months (I had chosen to do that) and I no longer had any clean clothes to wear, had not seen any of my friends or family during that time and just plain well needed some time to myself.

    I found myself in front of an ethics officer who told me that it was not acceptable for me to take two weeks off before starting. I needed to start immediately. Right now – this moment. He explained that this was an all or nothing venture, a brief breath in eternity, a chance of countless lifetimes. Laundry, relationships, other activities such as music and art had all played out time and again and therefore the most and really only important activity was my training and auditing.

    At the time I wasvery much in an “escape” and “activist” frame of mind. What was I escaping? The physical universe and its constant demands to conform. What was I an activist about? Corrupt government, social ills, and bucking the arbitrary status quo, educational systems and societal indoctrination that made people into sheeple.

    So it made sense to me that one wouldn’t want to waste this miniscule blip of time on the vast panorama of eternity.

    It was a total invalidation of my current life existence and activities, yet it was a total validation of my very existence as an immortal spiritual being. And I knew already that I was an immortal spiritual being. I didn’t believe this. I knew this. There had been no coercion or tricky persuasion involved in my knowing this.

    Still, I argued that I needed the time off and… drumroll…. argued that my friends and family members would become very antagonistic to my pursuits if I did not put some attention on my relationships with them and that they were already upset by my neglect.

    So I got my time off so that I wouldn’t become PTS.

    How I thought this all through was that I could go for broke and get up the bridge as quickly as possible. And then I would be blinker free and then I could re-assess everything. After all, the bridge had a finite number of levels didn’t it? And once I had it all done then there would be no more to do and I could come off this emergency situation of having this extremely short current life in which to get every done before my body bit the dust. Why? Well, I wasn’t willing to gamble that I would have raised my spiritual abilities and awareness enough to make it past the death of the body. I wanted to get through with enough time to take additional steps if need be to get off the wheel of death and rebirth and secure for once and for all a freedom for me, and sufficient awareness and ability not to get lost again.

    I made damn sure that I totally duplicated my training. Personally. Without any coaxing from anyone. I made damn sure that I got my auditing. All of it. Correctly. I even joined staff to make sure that I had some means of ensuring that. I cracked the books, I did my drills, I ate, breathed and slept the bridge. I did a full pass through all of the published books, admin volumes and tech volumes at least five times – very thoroughly, and to my own standards, which were very, very high standards.

    I watched others hopelessly misapply various principles and tried my best to get them sorted out on it. But man, there simply wasn’t enough time in the day to correct so much misunderstanding, inability to study, failures to duplicate. I concluded that the only possible way to get there was to ensure that people could get auditing, training, ethics and eventually they would come up in awareness so they could even see outpoints. So I decided that patience was a virtue and that I would patiently work with people as they tried to help me as best they knew how, for by this time I was a “public” Scientologist and staff felt they needed to “help” me.

    As the decades passed, it became clear that there was never going to be a day when I could say I had completed the bridge. Courses were repeatedly canceled, along with my certs. The bridge was altered with all kinds of new and “mandatory” rundowns like KTL, WTH, LOC, FPRD introduced as a MUST do this action. I was de-attested as Clear at least three times (I never agreed to that) and made to do NED, and I watched my friends do OT7 and then start all over again on OT7.

    And I watched with horror as the books were re-written, the tech altered and the demand to spend ALL my time either working to pay for the endless bridge became a ferocious push with the penalty of being declared SP and disconnected held out.

    I simply vanished off the grid. Easy enough to do when none of the Churches have your phone number or address.

    I don’ t really care if people want to go to events. I find them boring to the nth degree. I don’t really care if people want to be activists. There are so many social ills that its just a matter of picking your favorite social ill.

    But the one lesson I learned through all of this was that there is ONLY one good reason for the existence of the C of S: to train people as auditors and to expand the implementation of auditing.

    All of the rest of it?

    Not very important to me.

    • Maria,

      Sounds very similar to the reasoning I used. I just love personal stories of individual experience: how a person thought, how they responded, what was going on around them. Lends so much reality to all this.

      As for people all around misduplicating and misapplying the information, it’s no wonder that Scientology gets a bad rap. It’s like taking your car to a bunch of “mechanics” who give you great pr about the excellence of their service but couldn’t tell the difference between a manifold and a distributor if you sat them down for a week trying to explain it. Consequently, you drive away with a car that still doesn’t work and think, “Man, Toyotas sure suck.”

      With today’s technology, the Church always seems to be able to track you down and find your address and phone number. I’ve been so long gone and so far removed that I thought I’d never get a call, but guess what? And me having been declared way back when! And I still don’t know why exactly–nor do I care. Seems they don’t care anymore either. Let bygones be bygones. Please give us some money.

      Glad to see another avid student on board.

      Michael

    • Dear Maria,
      Thank you so much for your story! I was very impressed with it. And I agree that training people as auditors and to expand the implementation of auditing was the true mission of the C of S. Did you get trained as an auditor? Are you an Independent Scientologist? …Would love to know your current situation.

      • Lady Minn: Thank you for your kind words. I don’t have a current situation per se. As far as Scientology goes, I have been working on the KRC triangle for some time now, on knowledge in particular. This blog, and several others have been a source of a great deal of knowledge for me – not just what happened in the C of S, but also how outsiders and critics view and understand the subject to be. It has been very enlightening to say the least.

        I am a trained auditor and I continue to use what I have learned on a daily basis, for it is forever integrated into my own thinking which evolves every day. I will always be grateful for the gift of great auditing that I got along the way for I am not just a student of Scientology, I am a student of life itself the good, the bad, the ugly and the transcendent. I learn every single day and I have wins and new insights all the time as I work to be the change I want to see. That was and still is the true gain I had from all of my auditing and training.

    • “I don’t really care if people want to be activists. There are so many social ills that its just a matter of picking your favorite social ill.”

      “There is a direct ratio between the health and ability of the person and his willingness to accept responsibility.”

      —L. Ron Hubbard

    • “But the one lesson I learned through all of this was that there is ONLY one good reason for the existence of the C of S: to train people as auditors and to expand the implementation of auditing.

      All of the rest of it?

      Not very important to me.”

      I think I should elaborate on this.

      When I speak of all of the rest of this, I speak of the endless parade of social activist programs of the Church, the PR efforts and the actions taken to secure the Church’s survival.

      They were a solution to a problem. They were originally programs initiated by the Guardian’s Office to protect the very existence of Scientology against a backlash response to the extremely different spiritual point of view and activities of Scientology, a difference that is quite fundamental in many ways.

      These events are little different than the events the Guardian’s Office used to do. The hated actions such as smear campaigns, enforced ethics actions, intelligence gathering – these were all moved into the province of the Guardian’s office. The social coordination programs such as Narconon, CCHR, ABLE programs – these were all moved into the province of the Guardian’s Office. Even the IAS was a Guardian’s Office program originally, called “Safe Environment Fund.”

      Their purpose was simple enough – flank the main organizations and serve them well so they could audit and train in peace and quiet. They were supposed to deal with and address the dogs barking at the wheels, they were never intended to control everything in sight.

      Over time, they have become the main show, their actions and activities enforced on everyone, bypassing the training organizations, bypassing the power of choice of individual members to participate or not. Instead of keeping the entheta off the lines, they pour it on the lines with constant demands for money for their programs and activities.

      The Guardian’s office was disbanded, so they say. I disagree. I say that it continued on and has become a massive distraction to the main purpose of the Church of Scientology.

      And every one of these ailments stems from a societal backlash against new movements and ideas that shake the status quo or at least appear to.

      Read the Age of Reason by Thomas Paine again.

      He understood that status quo very, very well.

      If you think for one moment that the real auditing and training activities of Scientology has gone mainstream I suggest you think again. If you think that society consists of enlightened people who embrace the idea of an immortal spiritual being on any other level that lip service, think again. The reality simply isn’t there yet, not by a long shot. I believe that it’s getting there, it’s getting better. But there is still tremendous resistance to different or new ideas and the resistance is formidable.

      As an example, the entire “religious cloaking” activity that morphed the Scientology organizations into a parody of Christian Churches directly resulted from the IRS codes that govern how a Church is identified. Most of the dozen or so characteristics are peculiar to the Christan Churches. And willy nilly here we have the Church of Scientology emulating the activities of the Christian Churches.

      And the main show?

      Lost and pushed down in importance against the backdrop of rolling thunder and proclamations and continual demands for donations a la mainstream religion.

      • Maria, I agree with your analysis on the Guardian’s Office and DM’s church. The guy rose to power on the claim he was saving the church from the cliff that the Guardian’s Office took it to. Then, he carefully turned the ENTIRE church – not just one branch – into a Guardian’s Office with a different name. It is one gigantic Intell, PR, and Legal operation; with no workable technology left in sight. And that is why it is dead.

        • @Marty

          Sad but true.

          But on the bright side, the sun is shining and life continues on in all its splendor. And you are auditing others and putting your shoulder to that great wheel of life. My heart goes out to you as you find yourself in the glare of retaliation and redemption. But I do believe that the Independent Church of Scientology will bring much wisdom to its inception and growth. Hard won, painful to learn but wisdom nonetheless. I salute you and all the good-willed people who share this dream of life triumphant.

  67. Wayne Froemke (AKA "Safe")

    To discuss the dark side, “Reverse Scientology: Hypnotism”, behooves me to help bring to light its opposite, what IS Scientology? I agree with the 1953 compassionate Ron that Scientology IS a science, and THE science of “knowing how to know.”

    Here are some of my favorite words of Ron, the beautiful empathetic Being I’m so fond of …

    This is Scientology
    The Science of Certainty

    by L. Ron Hubbard

    FOREWORD

    “For nearly a quarter of a century, I have been engaged in the investigation of the fundamentals of life, the material universe and human behavior. Such an adventure leads one down many highways, through many byroads, into many back alleys of uncertainty, through many strata of life, through many personal vicissitudes, into the teeth of vested interests, across the rim of hell and into the very arms of heaven. Many before me have made their way across these tumultuous oceans of data, where every drop of water appears to be any other drop of water and yet where one must find THE drop. Almost everything I have studied and observed has been evaluated otherwise somewhere, at some time, in relation to this or that.

    What equipment must one have to venture upon these wastes? Where are the rules-books, the maps, the signposts? All one perceives when he peers into the darkness of the unknown are the lonely bones of those who, reaching before, have found their hands empty and their lives destroyed. Such a thing is a lonely drama; one must cheer one’s own triumphs and weep to himself his despair. The cold brutality of the scientific method fails far back, almost at the starting point. The airy spirallings and dread mysteries of India, where I drank deep, lead only into traps. The euphoria of religion, the ecstasies of worship and debauchery, become as meaningless as sand when one seeks in them the answer to the riddle of all existence. Many have roved upon this unmapped track. Some have survived to say a fraction of what they knew, some have observed one thing and said quite another, some looked knowing and said naught. One engaged upon such a quest does not even know the answer to that most important question of all: Will it be good for man to loose upon him, all in a rush as an
    avalanche, the knowingness of eternity?

    There are those who would tell you that only a fiend would set you free, and
    that freedom leads at best into the darkest hells, and there are those to inform you that freedom is for you and not for them, but there are also men of kind heart who know how precious is the cup and drink of wide, unbounded ways. Who is to say whether man will benefit at all from this knowledge hardly won? You are the only one who can say.

    Observation, application, experience and test will tell you if the trek has been made and the answer found. For this is the science of knowing how to know. It is a science which does not include within it cold and musty data, data to be thrust down the throat without examination and acceptance. This is the track of knowing how to know. Travel it and see.”

    T H E J O U R N A L O F
    SCIENTOLOGY
    Issue 16-G [1953, ca. mid-June]
    Published by
    The Hubbard Association of Scientologists, Inc.
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

    (Italics and bold are mine.)

  68. Pingback: Miscavige Brand Brainwashing | 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