Clean Hands

Having read every comment to my post Wholesale Violations of Priest-Penitent Privilege I want to state here exactly where I stand with respect to confidentiality of confidences shared in the practice of Scientology.

People can argue one Policy Letter and Bulletin against the other in attempts to divine where LRH came out on the subject.   They can argue it till the cows come home. That was the full-time occupation of International Management of Scientology – about fifteen years ago when they were last constituted – and they wound up accomplishing nothing but becoming slaves. 

The problem with analyzing every word ever written over time is that you are going to find apparent contradictions.  For one, you are going to run into the same conundrum discussed here before (in the context of Disconnection, and other issues) – the murky 80-86 period when all LRH communications were filtered through SPs.

There are dichotomies inherent throughout the subject of sec checking vs. confessionals.  I discussed this in a video interview in early 09 (to the right of the screen click on the segment titled Abuse of Trust):

http://www.tampabay.com/specials/2009/reports/project/rathbun.shtml 

LRH emphasized in the St Hill Special Briefing course that in the application of Scientology there is no substitute for understanding.  He emphasized it on Class VIII. He emphasized it on Org Executive Course.  You could remember all the tech volumes, all the admin volumes, and every lecture LRH ever did – and you might not UNDERSTAND a blessed thing about applying Scientology toward the betterment of people.

Now, there are many technical facts. They are technical facts because when recognized and applied they create an intended result.  My understanding of the importance of  ABSOLUTE TRUST BETWEEN AUDITOR AND PC is taken from this important technical fact (from LRH delivered on 2 January, 1960 during the State of Man Congress, a seminal series that explained the importance of allowing a pre clear to let go of withholds on his/her route to Clear):

Now, I’ve told you for a long time that auditing was a third dynamic situation.  And sure enough, we have to clear somebody on the third dynamic before we clear him on the first. And all those case failures that we had to this time have been because we’ve been trying to clear people on the first before we cleared them on the third. Do you see that?

An auditor-preclear situation is a third dynamic situation. That’s a third dynamic situation. And clearing a person starts right there in that auditing session. Now, any HCA can tell you better than I can — I think the number of the Auditor’s Code is 9, though, isn’t it?  Isn’t that it?  Whichever one it is. It’s “two-way comm must be established.”  It’s a breach of the Auditor’s Code actually.  We’ve had it with us for years. But what did this mean?

Well, this meant, essentially, that the preclear had to be willing to talk to the auditor. Well now, several things have to be guaranteed before this takes place. And one of the things that has to be guaranteed is that the preclear has some security in talking to the auditor that that information  not be falsely used.  Isn’t that right?

audience: Yes.

So this leaves us with an organizational responsibility heavier and bigger than we have ever had in the past.  We’ve now got to go all out and make sure that a certificate means, wherever it is to be found, that confidence can be reposed in the person as a confidant.  Isn’t that right?

audience: Yes. Uh-huh.

That organizationally, the information passing over organizational channels and so forth is inviolate — we have to be able to guarantee that, right?

audience: Right.

In my view,  there is a technical fact here.  If a pre clear has the slightest idea that he or she is not ABSOLUTELY privileged to say whatever he/she wants to say in a session, without the slightest consideration that whatever he/she says can or will be used against him or her, then by DEFINITION, one does NOT have an auditing session.

The proof is in the pudding. And while it apparently drives Miscavige absolutely bonkers that we are such purists on this subject at Casablanca, the proof is in the results.  And this particular understanding happens to work for us.

“Well”, some say, “what about reforming bad behavior?”

I say, that is a byproduct of auditing (including the relief from transgressions) because, unlike Radical Scientology, I happen to agree with L Ron Hubbard that beings are basically good.  When you help them to become more themselves (the entire aim of any auditing), they start operating more and more toward survive across all dynamics. There are literally dozens of St Hill Special Briefing Course lectures that describe how this is so, and how one can witness it for himself by creating an auditor/pc relationship that makes the disclosure of trangressions ABSOLUTELY safe, with no external consequences. 

“But”, someone might ask, “what about security?”   I agree with Amy’s comment on the blog to the effect of  “do an A-J check, if that is your obsession.”   And with, I believe Margarget, who said something to the effect, “use other means to investigate security threats.”   And with L Ron Hubbard who said, “So the ogre which might eat  us up is not the government or High Priests.  It’s our possible failure to retain and practice our technology.”

My policy is that I don’t care about the content of people’s transgressions. I make no note of them – beyond perhaps one word beside a read or blowdown if it is required for future processing.   I don’t do “Stenographic Auditing”, a practice outlawed by L Ron Hubbard on 10 July 1969 by the HCOB Stenographic Auditing.  Incidentally, try finding that HCOB in the church, or any of the Tech Vols published under the direction of Miscavige.  So, even if Radical Scientology broke into my house, broke into my safe and stole my pre clear and pre OT folders, not even they could make my pc’s and pre-OTs guilty of their own confessed overts.

That is Radical Scientology’s intent and standard operating procedure.

Again, LRH from State of Man Congress:

The greatest overt act in the world is making other people guilty of overt acts.  That is the greatest overt act in the world — about which, more later.  So don’t think at this moment that I’m trying to make you guilty of overt acts!  The only thing I’m trying to do to you is get you Clear!  That’s all I’ve got in mind.  And that’s why no resistance, no attack for ten years has been able to get anywhere on Dianetics and Scientology. Because basically, as far as the subject is concerned, there was nothing to hide. That’s why we’re still alive.”

And that is why, in my opinion, we are still alive and flourishing.

And that too is why, in my opinion, the church is dead.

206 responses to “Clean Hands

  1. ***tears****

    Sometimes some things just hit home.
    This one did.

    Thank you.

    T

    • Tears indeed Tory!

      A major driving ideal for the Scientologists I met in the 1970s was “the creation of a Safe Environment”.

      Maybe it was THE major ideal, coming off the wins of the 1960s Peace Movement, putting an end to the military draft, the Vietnam war, and the HUAC witch-hunts in Congress.

      LRH called it “Scientology Zero”. That was the dream. Remember this song? Somehow it says to me, WE COME BACK, and WE WILL, tears and all.

      • And Joan Baez did an absolutely astonishing cover of this song. The clarity of her voice is amazing! She and Jackson also did a nice duet of it at a concert.

  2. Clear conceptual understanding succinctly stated.

    DM take note –
    “And that is why, in my opinion, we are still alive and flourishing.
    And that too is why, in my opinion, the church is dead. ”

    Out tech never wins long term and only seems to ‘win’ short term, if you don’t look closely.

    david

  3. What she said.

  4. Pingback: Tweets that mention Clean Hands | Moving On Up a Little Higher -- Topsy.com

  5. Amen!
    That the content in ethics files is regarded differently than data in pc folders and not kept confidential in the church is a very, very, very serious issue. The church is indeed dead in my heart. Let´s bury it and start over.

  6. Thank you, Marty

    That IS what is true for me. EXACTLY.

    It was said eloquently by Xyandra on http:freezone.bravepages.com:

    “It was man that destroyed the C of S, not Ron. I don’t necessarily hold LRH and the C of S synonymously. He gave more trust and credit to people than they proved to be worthy of. The current heads of the C of S let their own hunger for greed and power overtake them and the lessons became second and many of the lessons are even being lost and altered. The C of S is taking the teachings that Ron gave us and going down the same route as Christianity went with the original teachings of Jesus. The true teachings of Jesus are all buried now. ”

    Btw, as she is — or was — on the east coast as I am, I have tried to contact her, but unfortunately her yahoo e-mail address in no longer functioning. I would like to acknowledge her here … as I have on my blog.

    • Thetanetworker,

      Your quote of Xyandra is right on:
      “He )LRH) gave more trust and credit to people than they proved to be worthy of.”

      This is very evident in listening to his lectures from early to later. He goes in an arc from the exuberant, trusting, laissez-faire Ron, who assumed people could duplicate what he did and do it too, and gladly, to the snap and pop Sea Org “Capain Bligh” style Ron the Commodore who had now learned through bitter experience that it just wasn’t going to be that simple, because humanity could and would find a virtually infinite number of ways to screw things up. Not that he did anything right or wrong, just that he realized it was going to take a lot more exertion of control on his part, for it to go anywhere but down the toilet.

  7. Marty, thats a wonderful, accurate and just summation of where we need to be going forward.

    By comparrison, the church is a vile, scary, untrustworthy place.

    It evolved into a siege mentality and police state. But there is no sense crying over spilt milk.

    Keep the Independent ranks swelling, flourishing and prospering, and man’s better nature and sense of rightness will take care of the rest in time.

    But its also important that those who have been supporting you and posting here remain engaged in contributing as the blogs success is really attracting efforts to muddy the waters and derail it.

    Fortunately, there is usually so much theta and genuine assistance and advice offered here that the trolls are pretty easy to spot. Especially as it gets closer to thursday at 2PM.

    Keep up the great work you are doing.

  8. That’s what it’s always been about for me. I left when the OTs closest to DM’s poisons started perverting it on my lines. Before that, I can honestly say every person I dealt with in Scientology personally hadn’t been poisoned that way. Of course there are always issues, but they were handled as on policy as possible, without malice and the make wrong/make guilty component so heavily in force.
    I was never in the Sea Org and my experiences with S.O. were as a public/mission staff and until 1998, I was handled quite nicely…by supervisors, auditors. I got my training and internships at LA Org and AOLA, standard cramming – truly amazing actually and I never had an upset with a supe or cramming officer, it was all like it should be. I did training at Miami Org and worked with them a lot and everything was the same…really never a problem that wasn’t quickly resolved.
    So I look up to you, Marty, and other tech people who are out from under the clutches of David Miscavige’s “church” and I count on you to lead by example. And when your examples are LRH-based, it just reaffirms truth and the workability of the tech.
    It also gives me courage to continue on my own path of auditing. Being a Grad V, certainly I look up to Class 6 and 8 auditors and do depend on them BUT only as examples, not source of how to audit. (Above Class 8 is above my head…so I can only imagine/admire those levels.)
    And there’s no way I could trust or look up to an auditor still IN CofM for my examples. They are still too PTS to make sane LRH-based decisions – their decisions are DM-based.
    So, I just really want to thank you for leading by example.

  9. Good article Marty.

    “L Ron Hubbard on 10 July 1969 by the HCOB Stenographic Auditing. Incidentally, try finding that HCOB in the church, or any of the Tech Vols published under the direction of Miscavige.”

    Is he suppressing an LRH HCOB?

    If he is, its a High Crime!

    • High Crime? Insignificant compared to so much else.
      How about negating or brushing off the policy that IS acknowledged???

      I’ll spare you my rendition of this entire blog and all it’s contents since it’s inception. High Crime? sheesh.

      • “High Crime? Insignificant compared to so much else.”

        How can a High Crime be Insignificant and still be a High Crime?

        “How about negating or brushing off the policy that IS acknowledged???”

        Yes, that is a High Crime also.

        • “Is he supressing an LRH HCOB?
          It’s a high crime if he is!”

          Your words.

          How in the HELL does that even compare to kidnapping? extortion? forced abortions? beatings? inprisionment?

          You really wanna make a mountian out of the FACT that he supressed “an” HCOB? I’m sorry, but I think you need to reevaluate the priorities here.

          Yes. It is a “high crime” in the eyes of Scientology, that he has supressed a bulletin. But seriously? How in the HELL does that even compare to the horror stories that blanket this whole freaking blog?

          Seriously? Seriously. I’m an FEBC grad. My affinity for the Tech is there. It is THERE. But this suppression is sooooooooooooooooo freakin’ low on my list of things to shoot this sonofabitch for, it’s almost laughable. Only thing is… it ain’t funny.

          Where’s Heber?

          High crime? Seriously? Fine. Ack. Now be outragged over LOST BEINGS. That’s all I’m trying to say.

          • I can say this but I doubt if you will understand.

            If DM hadn’t suppressed or stopped following LRH’s policies, I doubt you or I would be as upset with the church of scientology.

            • I think that’s very true, atcause.

              The downfall can start with ignoring, altering, misinterpreting an HCOB or HCOPL. That opens the door to more and more mistakes, out-tech, misapplication etc and eventually the whole scene can become very degraded, and lead to the commission of the type of heinous crimes Bozz is referring to.

              There can certainly be a connection there.

            • Okay. I’m fine with that. There is an earlier high crime violation that should have been handled THEN. Handled then, we would not be here now. I get where you are now.

              and I’m sorry for being such a jerk. I admit, I was. My thinking is so in the present. DM having violated bulletins 10 to 20+ years ago is so very, very “horse is outta the barn.” It’s done. Way long before now. And it’s sad and shameful that it took place at all. But we are all here and now… we have so much more to worry about. But the lesson of the previous high crime should not be forgotten either. I do understand.

              Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat their mistakes.

  10. Marty. I agree with everything you said here. LRH meant what he said. Only problem with what he said though is that the paradigm changed. He was always attacked from Day One, A.D. Zero. The 50s had their hairy moments and the 60s began with the FDA raid. Those attacks (save for perhaps the stuff that occurred around Sara) were tame in comparison to what would eventually happen.
    It was about the same time he established the new criterion of Clear (mid 60s) that he hired PIs to find where the attacks on Scn were coming from. This revealed the World Federation of Mental Health and the bankers behind them and also the repatriated Nazi connection. After he failed to “glow things right” in Rhodesia, he saw that his power was in the group and consolidated his power in the group with the Sea Org eventually coming out of that. So did the G.O. Ron was no longer “Mr. Nice Guy” in the same sense he had been. The stakes became bigger. Scientology was out of college and now into the NFL so to speak. The gloves were off and he would not have survived had he folded into soley being “Mr. Nice Guy.” Gremlins became a real issue in orgs and it became Spy vs. Spy.
    None of this excuses the abuse of confessionals that you have so appropriately delineated. The G.O. apparatus could not use the “man is basically good” datum and began to apply Black Dianetics here and there. It got worse. There was also now a policy on “pink legs.”
    I want to make it clear that I am neither blaming LRH or even the G.O. here. The game got dirty and then got real dirty. If you are fighting Nazis and their ilk (with a lot of MI5/MI6 direction), you are going to get singed. The CofS got pulled into the downward spiral and you end up with the travesties we all know so well.
    It is hard to judge history without viewing it first hand, but LRH arguably created more hubub and fanfare about human potential and spiritual matters than anyone since the time of Christ. He took on the whole ball of wax and pressed his foot on the accelerator and persuaded others to do the same. With hindsight, we can either say that it did not work or that it did not work out in the short run. With hindsight, we can also argue that the burden on LRH was too great.
    Jack Parsons used to say that you cannot properly judge a man’s contributions to humanity until 150 years after his death. Further, that you only begin to get an inkling or clue about these contributions 50 years after his death. In the end, life itself will filter, reassess and enhance. Future generations can be expected to have a far greater impact with regard to LRH than any of his contemporaries. The good and the truth will find its way to the surface. The negative will be ridiculed and discarded – hopefully.
    I am glad you stated that LRH’s comm lines were filtered by SP’s through that murky ’80 to ’86 period. I wish it were less murky. I know your book will help.

    • That is a really good post Metaqual.

      • I’m with you on that Marty.

        Metaqual stated it so well.

        I’m also looking forward to your new book and have it on my *must* read list already.

        Also what you wrote about sec checks is so true.

        Occasionally we missed on some guys and they ended up on our lines even though it came up in later sessions that they were ‘security risks’.

        So did we freak out!

        No we just audited them and hoped for the best now that their secrets were inviolate and most cases never suffered the consequences of any major flap.

        So one datum I learned from all this was what Ron has said many times and what you are basically saying here is that what is more important than anything else is just to audit the PC in front of you and ensure that they get case gain.

        No matter who they are or where they’ve been.

        They are all just PCs!

        A lesson I occasionally forget and need someone like you to remind me.

        Besides ethics, justice and security are only important if tech is out to a certain degree.

        I personally think the only reason why the Ol’man ever worried about it was because he knew the orgs were not perfect in their delivery of Standard Tech.

        However now that we have all the materials (somewhere) all we have to do is apply them standardly.

        My 2 cents.

        Ml

        Robin

    • Marty, this is a great post. And what you represent is the Scientology I’ve joined originally. But things are yet not clear to me. LRH worked out PTS/SP technology. He “researched” the Bridge up to at least OT VIII.
      I would not expect of a person like this to have his communications filtered by SPs.
      And I think that the attacks originally started because this nature what is the nature of the Church right now was the nature of Scientology before the Church. I can conclude this only from some writings of LRH (even early ones), he calls Crowley his good friend, (who called himself the Beast and knowingly had gross out 2D), stories of early SO members about him, and his appearances and words in some films I’ve seen.
      So those are my doubts about “original” Scientology.
      Although, I wish you are right.

      • I wanted to post it to the main thread. Sorry.

      • I think obsessing with how someone else behaved, whether it is LRH or Jesus Christ or one’s own parents, develops sort of a hidden standard that can hold one back.

        • “I think obsessing with how someone else behaved, whether it is LRH or Jesus Christ or one’s own parents, develops sort of a hidden standard that can hold one back.”
          But than what about the obsession with DM’s behaviour?
          LRH expected us to behave certain way. That’s why he promoted ethics technology. But his 2D was a mess. His 3D is also a mess. And as far as I see he effected only a few 1D in a really positiv way. I can’t see the effects on other dynamics right now. But he knew DM personally and right now I can assume he did not stop him.
          I can just only hope that things will go into a right direction eventually. And I can only hope that I am wrong regarding him.

          • That response is idiotic.

            • Marty,

              Not just idoitic but bat shit crazy!

              OD is the appropiate acronym.

              Man whatever you’re on sure must be heavy.

              I suggest allowing your crack pipe to cool a little😉

          • “LRH expected us to behave certain way. That’s why he promoted ethics technology.”

            He developed ethics in order to be able to get tech in.

            The idea is to handle those who’s ethics are out so others can move up.

            “But his 2D was a mess. His 3D is also a mess. And as far as I see he effected only a few 1D in a really positiv way.”

            I disagree with all three of those statements.

            • So do I.

              • Thanks for the answers, although I see my statement is not welcomed and not understood.
                I said his 2nd dynamic was a mess because one of his son committed suicide or died mysteriously. His other son claims he was a swindler. His great-grandson ridicules him on Radio show, etc. We do not know much about Diana.
                He devorced from his first wife. He says on Granada TV that he did not have a second wife. Mary Sue Hubbard went into prison and seemingly he forgot about her. And as far as I know he reported her to the FBI. And it is said he was in bigamy for a couple of days at least. Seemingly his marriages was not succesful either.
                We do not know about his parents but that they abandoned him when he became crippled.
                My statement that his 2D was a mess based on these facts.
                Or RJ do you want to have a similarly successful 2D? (“Shit crazy” that is a term which fits perfectly from the mouth of any Scientologist. That is a legacy as well of LRH. He stated right there in Book One that his followers, auditors are pretty free on usage on words. No elegance of any kind. Perfectly fits to any Scientologist. And you are not even addressing me, but going through a via…)
                LRH’s 3rd dynamic what he created is the Church. We know how it works at present.
                And on my third statement that he effected only a few 1D in a really positive way, just look at the statistics of people critical against the Church and Scientology general and compare that with those who left and not critical against Scientology.
                Many leaves Scientology after reading a book or taking some auditing action. Or just hearing about. On the few who were effected in a REALLY POSITIVE way I would not mean people like RJ who are turning into the well known hate valence of Scientology ethics warriors who knows from hip that a critique is an SP or some sort of. I would mean people who are able to well reasoning on a certain level and not just a bunch of guys who can use some good quote from LRH but who are able to think and behave in a certain positive way that gives reason to follow. You are certainly not included, RJ.
                Now on the part which probably made the most misunderstanding and I admit it would have been required a bit of thinking is the fact that as the actions of LRH can be criticised but said here that would lead to hidden standards, the same way, you criticize DM and I do not want to defend him just state that maybe he is misunderstood by you in the same way as I misunderstand LRH in your eyes. Take it as a Zen koan.
                And if any of you want to have a similar 2D than LRH had, than please, let me know.
                And if you build a 3D from Scientology than please, make it far more different than LRH architectured, because that leads to dictatorship. I knew it just by reading a few green on white even before I’ve got entangled with the Church.
                And by the way, Marty. Again you prove that you are far more superior than the Church that you let communications like mine (and mine are probably the most critical of Scn and LRH) to go through in your blog. Thank you for that. You are a good guy and a great man.

                • OD, who are you to judge? You are quick to spit out certain events over a 74 year life and pass judgment. Compared to what? Ozzie and Harriet? Your 2D? But, you don’t offer anything about that. Please someone point to me real people in the 20th Century who had an Ozzie and Harriet 2D? I have yet to meet anyone without some serious “dysfunction” with his family life over the span of a lifetime. With respect to the 3D, it did not go south till after his departure. There were three years after his life where it continued to rise upon the level of production from the momentum of the life he breathed into it. It continued to survive, despite others’ best efforts for another nearly two decades. How can you spit out such a bold pronunciamento in the absence of seeing where your third dynamic goes twenty years after you passing on?

                  • The difference between LRH and other accomplished people that they did not deified themselves. They did not say that on Earth and in the Universe their “technology” is the only workable solution for mankind. They did not uttered lies that they are Maitreya Boddhisatva.
                    LRH judges people on their products (statistics, etc.) He criticized for example Alexander the Great, Dzingis Khan and said their empire falled to pices because they had no 3D technology. Now, LRH has 3D technology… Really great…
                    Dzingis Khan: maybe he was cruel. Maybe he was brutal. He lived in another age. Maybe he had only that “technology” available that time to bring order into that chaos mankind lived than. You Indipendents are rather Underground Scientologists. You do not have Copyrights, which would be vital for your organization.
                    So I am interested how long LRH’s empire will last.
                    Who he was to spit out he was Maitreya?
                    “Idoitic” and “bat shit crazy”.
                    I understand if you do not publish this. And I do not want to. You have other things to do and you are really doing valuable stuff. I am not angry of you or anything like that. I just want you to think a bit.
                    Really, do not need to publish this comment. I see our viewpoints agree a lot and differ a lot. Do your best in “rehabbing” Scientology.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      No, by all means I’ll publish it. It demonstrates your the intent behind your smoothly polished previous utterances. Prove he wasn’t Maitrya. For that matter, prove you are a body and that you have no responsibility for what you do in this lifetime, because there is no possibility there is any afterlife and therefore you are free of karma once you drop the bod. Love ya.

                • Actually the term is bat shit crazy OD and I consider it an appropriate label for your diatribes.

                  BTW it isn’t a Scientology term.

                  Also I remember you on ARS peddling basically the same crap and I figured you were either OSA or one of their usefull idiots back then and still do now as you try to deflect the debate onto Hubbard’s alleged failings and how Miscavige isn’t any worse thus in a way defending him.

                  Old game Overdriver.

                  Should pick up a new one OD and come to present time.

                • He had a very deep and loving 2d relationship with Mary Sue.

                  I think if L. Ron Hubbard didn’t have the high goals of bringing mankind up, his 2d would have been easier.

                  The stress and strain of what he was taking on and of dealing with the SP’s of this world bled into his personal life. How could it not? It’s because of who he was and what he was trying to accomplish is what put so much strain on his family.

                  You have to put these things in it’s proper contexts.

      • If you study the history of LRH, you will find him more or less the darling of the press UNTIL Dianetics is released. Then the press treats him like a pariah and that is clearly because he is offering a cheap therapy (do it yourself) that is also workable and, at worst, arguably workable. Shrinks left more than a lot to be desired. John W. Campbell really did clear up his sinusitis with Dianetics. When he wouldn’t look at past lives, his sinusitis came back, and he became Anti-LRH, joining with Asimov. There were two big camps of Sci-Fi writers. Those pro-LRH and those anti-LRH. One of the reasons Crowley was so 2D oriented was that he was an evolutionary vehicle that had a whole matrix of entities pushing that button and this button. Part of evolution is sexual and it gets mixed up; mixed with psychic energies. LRH was a kindred spirit (I believe there was a genetic connection too but that is beside the point here) as far as being an evolutionary vehicle. It is not an accident that they cross networks.
        History tells us that LRH was vulnerable. What he was able to accomplish is amazing despite all the opposition.
        When you engage in a path of HELP and crank it up several notches, you will get attacked. If you maintain the status quo you will fit in. The Christ story is a good example, true or not. It symbolizes Mankind taking the best God has to offer and killing that which is unkillable.
        Mankind had a bad situation before LRH ever came along. He shed light on the situation and did more. The situation persists but I have witnessed improvements as well as backward steps.
        Dianetics and Scientology did great things for me and my friends.

        • MQ,

          Let’s not forget the fact that Crowley worked for MI6 and that Ron worked for ONI and that the OTO was a hot bed of espionage activity.

          I personally think their association was a lot less philosophical more practical than is conveyed by Miller.

          • History is defined by whoever puts it down in writing. I suspect it’s almost never 100% accurate and it is generally influenced by the viewpoint of the writer.

            For example, people who were there (“Sarge” and others here)
            have some really nice stories about LRH that give you an idea of what he was like that seem to fit with his public image.
            And then you have people who hate LRH telling stories of him being an absoulte devil.

            The tone level and intent of the writer is something to consider. Someone writing below 2.0 with the intent of making Scientology and LRH look bad is not going to be very concerned with truth.
            I’d bet on Sarge’s stories being truthful over a lot of the junk written about LRH because of that.

    • MQ,
      Great post – I’m sure you’ve read the post on Steve’s blog of how Pat and DM became the filters of data going to LRH in that time period. In case you didn’t it’s at: http://www.scientology-cult.com/secret-history-of-david-miscavige.html There are some very minor inaccuracies, but this article seems to be correct on the whole.
      There is also some info crossflowed from Mayo as he was saying to Julie his assistant at the time that DM& Pat seemed to be at odds with him as regards the subject of Confessionals/Sec Checking before he got busted, an accusation that there wasn’t enough sec checking happening and Mayo dropped out this Tech, from my recollections.
      In the early 90’s this auditor/pc trust was a situation, other than session data being broadcast by DM and execs. In the hundreds of hours of sec checks done FPRD style after gotten back to route out after blowing (with my then wife), one incident just totally changed my outlook on this subject. The auditor was an RTC sec checker (FM) supervised by the then IG MAA RTC Chris Guider. During a job I had while outside, a very pretty woman with very strong flows impinged on me so that the meter read. Nothing done & no overts found & it F/Ned. That night, I was confronted by my then wife asking about this woman with which nothing happened! The only source of this info was my auditor as we were segregated at OGH at the Int Base, separated from contact with anyone else except for a Security guard who just watched the two of us. Sure changed my outlook on sec checks from then on out & the misapplication of LRH tech by RS – Rad Scn pretty real and mostly getting lots of that type of metered actions in the last 10 years before I left the SO makes me totally agree that RS is dead and it’s bridge leads nowhere.

    • MQ,

      The 50s indeed “had their hairy moments”.

      America had just fought a massivewaragainstfascistenemies.There was a “cold war” going on with the Soviet Union, and a huge emerging Asian Communist threat represented by the Chinese but fought by proxy in the brutal Korean War.

      A very understandable paranoia about Communists and Asians was rampant in the USA, but it was used and exacerbated by the likes of J. Edgar/Cointelpro and Senator Joe McCarthy and his HUAC committee’s witch-hunt for “Communist sympathizers”

      These were the Scylla and Charybdis that LRH, like Odysseus(Ulysses), had to navigate in the 1950s. (Scylla andCharybdis were the 2 monsters, or perhaps giant whirpools, that the Greek hero Ulysses had somehow safely sail his small ship between, during his Odyssey.)

  11. Well, this posting certainly C*L*E*A*R*S it up for me. Hallelujah!!

  12. Thanks for promoting freedom to be there and communicate. Being there and communicating are the only real crimes in this universe, according to LRH. People are stuck in the church because such stuckness is a motivator. The more overts, the more they are trapped.

    • “Being there and communicating”.
      I recommend Eminem’s autobiographical movie “8 Mile”.

      It is well-done and exactly about winning by overcoming one’s fear of Being There and Communicating. In the end, Rabbit(Eminem) wins the rap battle because he is 100% truthful about himself, which leaves his opponent Papa Doc with no ammunition against him. The “313” is the Area Code for Detroit. 8 Mile Road is a major thoroughfare that divides the have-nots of Detroit from their more affluent neighbor cities to the north.

      The cult of Miscavige has put all who are connected to it in the position of being reluctant and afraid to Be There and Communicate.

      The solution, in life, as it is in the movie, is to BeThere and Communicate anyway. That breaks the trap one is in, and then one can begin to contribute to creating the safe environment. In 8 Mile, Papa Doc has no response and is forced to concede the contest. So is DM running out of responses.

  13. “That organizationally, the information passing over organizational channels and so forth is inviolate — we have to be able to guarantee that, right?”

    Perfect. Thank you.

  14. Parsing bulletins to further one’s organizational agenda only obscures the fact that LRH provided us with hammers, saws and screwdrivers but it is up to each one of us what we build with them. I don’t there is any escaping that.

    • Joe, You are absolutely right. It really doesn’t matter what you may think of LRH the human being the fact is the tech works. I happen to think LRH was a wonderful human being but he did piss off a lot of people. He was bullheaded and if you pushed him, he pushed back. But, look at the tech. Does it work for you? Read it, use it, but don’t bash LRH because you don’t understand it or you think he wore his cap wrong.

      • Absolutely Right ON Sarge!

        In Russell Salamon’s words,

        “It is here in the palm of my
        laughing. I carry the
        universe in my own looking
        and from the desire to be here
        I make it bright and free.”

        That was always LRH’s basic intent and that of those who became Scientologists back in the day. Yours as well. Thank you!

  15. Sound article that Marty. No blockage on confessional flows is the spiritual ideal. John the Baptist who was buried up to his neck in one of Pilates detainment cells with rats scuttleing around would be proud.

    • Is the use of incorrect historical examples helpful to this discussion or simply a deliberate waste of attention/life energy? Or maybe it’s trollish performance art.

  16. Wow! Thank you, Marty! Another layer of Church double-think is peeled off.

  17. Thanks for that, Marty – now I know why there was a “Sec-Checker’s” course in addition to Level II.

    At Narconon, there was a policy of giving the “student’s” O/Ws back to them once they’d been checked over for completeness – many would go burn them immediately or otherwise destroy them. This was because there was no “priest-penitent” allowance in a “secular rehab.” I’d joke with them about sending them off to a publisher and making a fortune and they’d laugh.

    But I’d noticed that those trained only in the “Church” wouldn’t return the O/Ws but keep them in the folder, and insist the folders be sent to the “Church” for “safe-keeping” once the person had left. As a C/S there, I was continually pulling O/W write-ups out of folders and insisting they be immediately given to the person who wrote them.

    Now I’ve had some horrendous crimes told to me when I was at Narconons because a) the person trusted me and b) they were too scared to write down the overt in case anyone else saw it. The relief from knowing that someone knew and wouldn’t tell it was obvious. I had one person wait early one morning for me (as he knew I was an early riser) and blurt out several REAL crimes in a very agitated manner then calm down and go back to writing the more mundane crimes of an addict, long before the rest of the folks had even gotten up.

    This post of yours also sorts out for me the “Ethics reports required” bullshit – thanks for the FDS🙂 I think I’ll be re-evaluating a whole bunch of “training” today.

  18. Hmmm,

    This seems to be a contentious issue. Not surprising really.

    I wholeheartedly agree with you Marty that unless there is trust between an auditor and their PC, you aren’t going to get much progress in session.

    Here’s an example from my own experience: A few years ago in the registrar’s office at St Hill, I was talking with Karen Rowell about something or other and I must have come across a bit CI (or perhaps it was just my inherent ability to upset women) and she suddenly appeared to get angry with me, and blurted out something that had come up in my auditing. I won’t go into the specifics, but it was very personal and I was rather taken aback at her using this as a stick to beat me with especially in such a public space.

    Oh, OK – I can tell you are all dying to know. She said “Do you still masturbate a lot? That’s disgusting, if you had a girlfriend, what would she say about that?”

    Now, quite apart from the obvious retort that if I had a girlfriend at that time, I’d probably be having lots of sex and therefore NOT masturbating, I’d be very tempted to answer, “Only when I’m thinking of you darlin’ ” (accompanied by a theatrical wink).

    However, I was so shocked and upset that I didn’t saying anything much at the time (why do I only think of cutting and witty retorts when it’s too late?). And naturally, this had a consequence a few days later when I was in session and the auditor asked me if I had a withhold. As it happened, I did and it concerned Karen. Dismayed at the thought that this might get back to her and be used against me again, I refused point blank to divulge it. Obviously the auditor couldn’t let this go and insisted that I give it up. But, I explained the situation and told her that if I couldn’t trust my secrets to be kept confidential, then I couldn’t talk freely.

    After much pouting and some heated debate, my auditor accepted the situation and continued with the session. Obviously this is a big no-no, but I felt justified in doing this.

    Also, on the subject of understanding, whenever I try to explain something to someone I always try to get them to understand the underlying issues. Firstly, in doing so it helps to remember what they are learning and secondly if they do forget, they can work it out for themselves if they understand what is going on. So many times at St Hill, especially when dealing with younger staff, I got very frustrated when they seemed to have no understanding or awareness of the ‘bigger picture’ and would just robotically repeat what was written in front of them instead of listening and trying to understand (ARC anyone?). Grrr!

    Anyway, enough of my ranting, why don’t you go and read somebody more interesting (than me)? 🙂

    Ax

    • I don’t know what you mean about your propensity for pissing off women. Mosey thought you were a perfect gentleman that evening over bitters.

      • Well, us ‘SPs’ can be VERY convincing. 😉

        Or perhaps Monique is one of those special people who can always see the best in everyone?

    • Your humble servant

      Hmmmm,

      Thanks for all that! This Karen Rowell seems to have been a suppressive person, or dramatizing one. I cannot imagine EVEN using preclears’ secrets divulged in session to suddenly introvert them and embarrass them in public.

      • Using “embarrassing past acts” like that is not allowed in any situation in any world! A golden rule for relationships of any type: never bring up past misdeeds! Totally not a fair fight!

      • Actually I know that Karen is a very good and caring person who has given the best years of her life to trying to help others. But, like most Sea Org members she was under a huge amount of pressure. Combined with lack of sleep and a poor diet, I expect that she just snapped when confronted with an obviously ‘out-ethics’ customer, er public who didn’t seem to want to ‘play the Birthday Game for blood’ and hand over wads of cash that very instant.

    • But, I explained the situation and told her that if I couldn’t trust my secrets to be kept confidential, then I couldn’t talk freely.

      After much pouting and some heated debate, my auditor accepted the situation and continued with the session. Obviously this is a big no-no, but I felt justified in doing this.

      Unfortunately, dude, there was no more session to continue. This is squirrel. You were out of session, and the auditor goofed by not getting the W/H.

      This is what is so tragic about this incredible breach of trust. The tech is gone. The correct thing for the auditor to have done in this case was pull the withhold. But, because the org did not honor its sacred sacrament, you were unwilling to give it up, and thus, tech is destroyed.

  19. Thanks for your understanding Marty, and for KSW.

    I recall that LRH says that we are not trying to “revolute” the civilization of Earth, but rather we are trying to “evolute” it. It’s done through a gradient scale of understandings — plural.
    This can only be accomplished one division of TA motion at a time, one cognition at a time. And, as you know, charge does not blow off the case if the attention of the PC is not directed and allowed to inspect that charge for themselves, without evaluation or invalidation by anyone. The definition of AS-ISness is very precisely stated in the Axioms. No other considerations apply for a PC. Either you get the exact time, place, form and event, or you don’t.

    For organizations or civilizations, the same Axioms apply, although the “case” being handled is much, much, much more solid! That is, the accumulated by-passed charge of all beings who contributed through the AS-IS, Alter-Is, Not-IS which has consolidated into a physical universe.

    We are not going to As-Is the physical universe. However, we may be able to recover our ability to create a new one, as described in the PDC lectures.

    Thank you for your As-Isness.

  20. So WHO got it worse ? Jesus or Jojn

    • John got it worse. Severing the head is purposeful intent of disconnecting the spirit and effort to kill the spirit and not just the body. Celtics used it.

      • Meta,
        Celts had an abiding awareness of living more than one life. This scared the crap out of Caesar. Hacking heads off was to get the guy to end cycle on that body. Not kill the spirit.

        They also had really good bands. Still do.

        • Here are The Old Blind Dogs, a Scottish band from the 1980s. They played traditional music with a twist- they used Middle Eastern percussion. I believe this kind of fusion was pioneered by the Incredible StringBand back in the 1970s.

          As usual, good speakers or earphones are needed to not lose the bass, especially on a laptop. Half the ffect is lost if you can’t hear the deep drum.

          • The tune is “The Barnyards O’ Delgaty” from their album titled “Live”.

            Actually this band played from 1992 until 1998, then there was a change of personnel.

  21. Here, here! That is exactly correct. VWD as per usual, Marty. Metaqual, great post.

    One of the big turning points in my evolution since leaving the Church, and what led to Scientology-cult.com was a realization about the nature of the universe: there is both good and bad in everything.

    I learned this from studying LRH’s research on the nature of GPMs, where he said a person’s goals are both good and bad.

    Holding LRH up to a unrealistic standard of idealistic perfection is simply in itself a hidden standard. LRH was not perfect — nothing is in this universe. Maybe he went a bit PTS over the years. He certainly had to bear the most horrific suppression and his life was not his own because he dared to try to help people understand life. The remarkable thing was that he created what he did.

    It’s all great to talk about non violence, but in a knife fight when you are getting stabbed, you either start stabbing back or you perish. The point of Scientology was to have some technology to audit out the engrams that inevitably ensue in the process of survival so that one does not become stuck in the past.

    Additionally, the times we live in have changed drastically from the years of the cold war, spawned in turn by the hot war of WWII.

    The standard throughout everything is not “did LRH do correctly in all times and in all circumstances” for that is not proof of anything except that LRH is exactly what he always said he was: an ordinary man. The plus point is what can we learn from Scientology and how do we bring our group back on course after it has been knocked aside. How do we bring the pc “back up to present time”?

    The technology, these early discoveries, these are the compass by which we can navigate. Maybe LRH always followed them or maybe he didn’t. That doesn’t even matter. What does matter is what are we going to do?

    The real target is for personal integrity to replace blind obedience.

    Steve

    • Another great post Steve. Thanks.

      • I second that!

        In HCOPL ‘Safeguarding Technology’ he didn’t say the tech was perfect only that it was workable.

        It’s Miscavige the perfectionist (perfectionism is a ser fac and cousin to an ev purp but you already knew that😉 ) has been trying to perfect the tech since at least since ’96.

        And look where it’s gotten him!

        The only thing he’s achieved is that he has become the perfect example of a Squirrel.

        But I digress….

        Anyway Scientology was never perfect and still isn’t perfect.

        Nor where the actions taken to defend against the attacks.

        But the fact is that we’re still here.

        You can’t kill a thetan!

        Something that Miscavige and his “friends” haven’t learned.

    • Steve,

      Your post made me think of this:

      “Life is like a knife fight in a dirt-floored bar-room. If they get you down, you’d better get back up.”

      (Bonus points for anyone who knows where that comes from (without Googling)).

      Perhaps not totally relevant, but I find that insightful comments get me thinking.

    • Steve, I agree with you totally. Great name! Love

    • Steve,
      Very classic thoughtful post:
      “The real target is for personal integrity to replace blind obedience.”

    • Good statement Steve.

      “…The real target is for personal integrity to replace blind obedience.”

  22. Marty,

    With that type of trust, auditing can occur.

  23. Guillaume du Houx

    Mark, in 1968-69 there was an official inquiry, a one man commission, into Scientology in NZ. In the ensuing agreement between the Church (GO) and the Commission it was agreed that ( paraphrased) “Scientology auditors should NOT be allowed to write down the pc’s confessions: the danger of blackmail or the documents falling into the wrong hands is too great to allow this.” Paraphrased. Other points of agreement were staff members should not be made to wear a “dehumanising” grey rag on their arms if assigned Enemy or below as ethics conditions, nor were actions of aggression, damage or violence allowed on real or perceived enemies. The GO agreed and the Church had no further problems with the Govt.
    In my humble opinion that Commissioner was a sane man.
    Some 12 years later, when I did some auditing at SH UK I was blasted because I only wrote “overt” on the worksheet, no details (that’s how I was taught to keep a worksheet). It was attempted to force me to write down the details afterwards. I refused point blank. That was also the last auditing I did for an Org.
    So your article here is very pertinent, valuable and should be widely known.
    Keep up the good work.

    • There was a short period of time in the 70s – 72/74 time frame, if memory is correct, where HGC auditors were told NOT to write down specifics of overts but instead write on worksheets “pc gets off overt” or words to that effect. I also believe some efforts were undertaken to go back through pc folders and black out specific details of o/ws from sessions before that policy change.

      I think the order came down from the GO, but I could be wrong about that.

      The details of all this are fuzzy. Perhaps someone else can fill in the blanks. I was auditing public pcs in an HGC at the time. It was a very liberating feeling for both auditor and pc. Unfortunately it did not last long; the order was countermanded & we went back to writing down o/ws on the worksheets just like any other pc data – which was still not all that bad, given that the HCOB on “stenographic auditing” was always in force.

      Anyway, I always liked the idea of not writing down o/w specifics. It made for a much safer auditing environment for the pc & greatly enhanced his/her opportunity to experience the spectacular wins that are the result of getting off withholds.

  24. Guillaume du Houx

    Mark, in 1968-69 there was an official inquiry, a one man commission, into Scientology in NZ. In the ensuing agreement between the Church (GO) and the Commission it was agreed that ( paraphrased) “Scientology auditors should NOT be allowed to write down the pc’s confessions: the danger of blackmail or the documents falling into the wrong hands is too great to allow this.” Paraphrased.

  25. Marty’s a helluva sec-checker. Hands down the best I ever had. He audited me extensively when we were both still in the church and had many occasions to pull my overts.
    Once, out of session, I asked Marty’s advice about something having to do with an overt he had pulled on me the day before. He couldn’t remember what I was talking about….

  26. God dammed right Marty
    .
    I was on the original Rollback mssions into the USGO/GOWW. This was the epitomy of a grand witch-hunt.
    I can see now, that LRH was fed crazy, wild false data in ’82-’86 in which the entirety of management was turned inside out, looking for FBI, CIA plants or even “Martians”. And sometimes it felt like we were looking for the little green ones.
    USGO and GOWW staff were made to give up overts and withholds on a wholsale basis by sharp, well trained sec checkers. For the most part we came up empty handed. This was not tolerated. We got our asses kicked for not finding the plants. Much like CIA got their asses kicked for not finding weapons of mass destruction.
    The GO staff might have accomplished fantastic products, but they got hung for one puny overt product or for following an enemy line.

    Most of what had been happening in the GO could have been handled with correction. Or if you put on a fantastic production push SPs will actually come out of the woodwork and tell you what you are doing is destrcutive (I had an SP say that to me). But the witch hunts, which seem to be the mainstay even today, is only the act of the madman who is trying to, actually, find out who is out to get him.
    Picture a being sitting at the top of the org board, having made a fantastic amount of enemies, worried day in and day out who is out to get him. Therefore the confessional tool is used to ferret out these would-be assasins and if the mad man could not count on the confessional itself to stave them off, then their own crimes can and must be used against them to stop them. At least that’s what he thinks. This is SP 101. What you are seeing is exactly how a 2.5 percent of the public SP operates.
    J. Edgar Hoover did the same exact thing. He amassed intell on the transgressions of everyone around him and more powerful then he. And he used the information freely. He was madder than a hatter. Instead of just refining and building the FBI he became worried about who was out to get him.

    Marty, if you are trying to get anyone in the OSA or above realm to understand what you are talking about, forget it. You might as well try to catch the wind. These people lost the concept of Scientology/Dianetics and the purpose of the what we were doing long ago. If they understood what the correct target is, per DMSMH (“The target is the engram.”) (and the reduction thereof) they would knock all of this nonsense in the head.

    This is exactly why the Church is dead. The Church stopped worrying about attacking the bank long ago and now practices attacking the being.

    So instead of a wonderful organization where you can go free and OT, we have the current embarrassment. The one that HATES LRH,

    ML Tom

    • Tom, interesting you should mention J Edgar. I am working on a post that draws parallels to his Ops to what Miscavige is attempting to hit us with today.

      • Marty – I can’t wait. Ya, – the parallels are chilling. I think our boy studied up on him or maybe under him…..

        ML Tom

        • Wow!!!!

          Tom.

          An excellent post!!!!!

          So true

          A lot a times we ended up chasing our tails and lookin’ real silly.

          Some the RBs were hillarously idiotic.

          One girl got RBed because she wanted to be a dancer.

          I kid you not!!!!!

          Sheeeeesh!!!!

          Whoever infiltrated us including the little green guys in most cases got the f*ck outta dodge and left no forwarding address!

          Maybe they knew with Dave now in charge they pretty much achieved their objective.

          Who knows?

    • For anyone interested how false reports can destroy an organization, a book titled “Mole Hunt: How the search for a phantom traitor shattered the CIA”, by David Wise, is a perfect case study. From the back cover:

      “In the 1960s, the CIA launched a clandestine, twenty-year operation that destroyed scores of innocent lives and left the agency permanently crippled – a secret war against it’s own people.”

      Someday perhaps someone will write and publish a similar case study of what happened to the CoS.

    • Tom, thanks for saying that about Rollback. I never understood what the hell was going on there and knew it was wrong. The false reports (I know Marty has alluded to them as well) make a lot of sense. It was finding opposition and Rollback replaced De-Op and there was oppression ever since. And by the way, Hi! (from Vince)

      • MQ,

        RB like confessionals is pretty incredible tech when its not used maliciously as a control mechanism.

        I also remember de-op tech which included full Post Purpose Clearing and Product Clearing as part of any hatting action on staff.

        Unfortunately managment at the time didn’t seem too interested in getting it applied and preferred heavy ethics so you could say it was lost technology.

        Technology it is doubtful that the self proclaimed “Finder of Lost Technology” will likely find soon because fully hatted staff would begiu to query his insane orders and eventually demand his removal.

    • Tom M

      Thank you for this: …

      “This is exactly why the Church is dead. The Church stopped worrying about attacking the bank long ago and now practices attacking the being. ”

      Good post.

      WW

  27. Marty,
    I think there is a whole way of “thinking” with the tech that LRH hits on with KTL. People who have done it, get it. Others who may not have, won’t. But it is truly more than just one bulletin vs. another bulletin. It is thinking with the Tech as a whole, through the eyes of the KTL E.P.

    You did as well of a job as anyone could do, explaining all this here and now. Take the win! Anyone else still arguing, doesn’t get it, loves semantics, or just has it in for you. In any case, there are far more better things to do than rinse and repeat. Kudos for trying and winning! Personally, I wouldn’t have had the patience. But then again, that’s kinda how I ended up “out” in the first place. LOL

  28. Marty, After LRH left I was subjected to many, many sec checks. I new that any and all data would be shared and or used to control me. Pat and then later DM were looking for dirt. I knew it so I only gave up what I wanted to. I became good at it. I was NOT in session and I was NOT willing to speak to the auditor. The problem is that knowing what I knew and that anything I said would be used against me I could not get any case gain within the ‘Church’ and I knew it. I became ‘gun shy’ . When you came to see me in July and we got in session, I was very nervous. I told you so. Even though we were good friends it was hard for me to talk on the cans.
    That didn’t last long. Once Trust was established OMG. You directed me right where I needed to go and I knew I was IN session. Not only did I get case gain but the cancer that I had is now gone. Thank you my friend!
    God bless you and LRH!!! I Love you buddy.

  29. Marty, you gave me a good cog here.

    I’m not usually long-winded in my comments but I must communicate a little on this one.

    I did not know of the Stenographic HCOB until this very minute.

    The now-dead Church of Mest is the polar opposite of proper confessional usage.

    A person can commit all manner of overt acts, from jay-walking to murdering babies. If you are a tough auditor with the intention to help, you will keep your pc in session despite how bad the overts are. The mere fact that the pc is even there, holding the cans, means that there is hope for him. He’s doing something about it as he squirms and sweats on the cans, unburdening his cache of less-than-desirable activities.

    But it will only work out okay if the pc knows he won’t, in fact, ever end up in prison or the like for having the guts to confess.

    It is so bad inside the church that when I was simply helping with the files project as a public, organizing for the big move into the new Idle piece of shit real estate ponzi scheme debacle, I ran across various people’s o/w’s left and right. I tried not to snoop but when the top piece of paper in one particular folder was an o/w from somebody I actually knew, and it was about out-2D, I became furious. Not at the person or the overt act, but rather at the church’s massive disarray, disorganization and utter lack of concern for privacy. And this particular o/w indeed needed to be PRIVATE.

    In short, I didn’t want MY dirtly laundry spread far and wide but I knew that it was a hopeless cause trying to put a stop to it. I had witnessed first-hand, several execs sitting around what I deemed “the gossip table”, laughing out loud at the aberrations and shortcomings of a couple specific public.

    I had witnessed first-hand, the course admin pouring right on through ethics folders of specific pc’s.

    I had experienced first-hand, several execs using my own confessional data (which I had only shared with my auditor and my E/O), as leverage to demean me and then get me to sign a staff contract.

    A number of the staff proved by their actions that they knew how to TALK pretty damned openly to one another about very confidential, totally private material.

    The Miscavige regime has indeed taught staff how to use, abuse and manipulate the public and even eachother by making and keeping people guilty constantly.

    I believe it’s the only semblence of “power” an exec or a senior has in that circus tent calling itself Scientology.

    It’s sick and wrong and has nothing……NOTHING…… to do with helping a person whatsoever.

    What it does instead is, it drives people a bit insane with introversion, guilt, fear, lack of pride or self-esteem, lack of willingness to reach, lack of confront, and a nearly complete loss of one’s true beingness.

    Fuck you David Miscavige. You are busted. Time for you to blow, asshole!

    With love,
    Idle Org🙂

    • Idle Org,

      “On the day when we can fully trust each other, there will be peace on Earth.” L. Ron Hubbard. A New Slant on Life.

      How ideal is that scene? It’s a world where you could leave your overts laying in the street or even post them on a billboard, and it wouldn’t matter. A world where anyone who saw them would just say “OK, you’re forgiven.”

      The ultimate safe environment, full of folks who could really be trusted.

      Would that be the ultimate “cleared planet”?

      • Felicitas Foster

        “On the day when we can fully trust each other, there will be peace on Earth.” L. Ron Hubbard. A New Slant on Life.

        Yes – and it starts on a one on one basis IN SESSION!!!!

    • “It’s sick and wrong and has nothing……NOTHING…… to do with helping a person whatsoever.”

      I agree.

      It’s just the same control crap from off the track.

  30. Beautiful Marty.
    In a nutshell we believe that man is basically good, can reform and can be helped.
    The church believes the opposite.
    It is black and white with no shades of grey.

  31. Hi Marty;

    There is no greater security than clean hands.

  32. Marty,

    You hit the exact right nail on the head with the exact right hammer!

    What you describe so artfully is the very essence of Scientology. No amount of fancy processes will work in the absence of that safe auditing relationship and space.

    This is something that no longer exists in the C of S which means that by definition it is no longer Scientology.

    Even if there is still some small corner somewhere in the world where a lone org auditor is holding out and trying to do his or her best for their PC, the ever present corporate and organizational threat from above is enough to undermine, betray and cancel those efforts because there’s no way that auditor can control org execs, ethics, qual or senior bodies (the rest of the 3rd Dynamic). Alas, they are all influenced and controlled (perverted) by Miscavige.

    The C of S has morphed into something else entirely, something grotesque and threatening, the antithesis of Scientology.

    Indepedents that maintain the sanctity of the auditor/pc relationship are the only real hope the subject has.

  33. ABSOLUTE TRUST BETWEEN AUDITOR AND PC

    Thanks Marty for reminding us all a BASIC

    When I had my 6 months of HELL at INT Base, I was summoned one afternoon 3 months into the cycle out of the Carpenter shop to Qual.
    I had a surge of happiness thinking this was an ATTEST cycle, and that I would be done with my sec checks and have the ability to return to Los Angeles.

    I was asked to pick up the cans. This is the R-factor I got.
    ” “The Power to Forgive” you received at the end of last session was a mistake and given in error and is hereby cancelled. Anything you will be sec checked on in the future and anything you have previously said
    (RETROACTIVELY) will be used against you in a Committee of Evidence ~~ you may put the cans down.”
    This is verbatim.

    It had a sledgehammer effect.

    • Karen — When you first told me that, I was stunned. When I read it here again, I have the same reaction. They have the perfect expression for this in the UK. Gobsmacked. It is sick beyond contemplation. You always were a threat to Dear Leader because you couldnt be controlled. Oh, how right he was. But oh how wrong his handling was! You remain a nightmare for him, but he no idea what to do to get you to shut up. I know the answer to that — its NEVER going to happen (not until he can no longer hear).

    • Wow Karen that’s totally f*cked up.

      I remember making the “mistake” a couple of times giving the PC “power to forgive” on an HCO Sec Check unintentionally of course and the C/S being smart enough to ride with it by not making trouble for the PC.

      Though the auditor did spend some quality time in cramming😉

    • Wow, what kind of reverse Tech is that? The unforgiven black Rad Scn Tech.

    • I am very sorry that happened to you Karen.
      Confidentiality is the essence of whether or not Scientology will work on someone because it is at the core of the Auditors Code. If you look at the tone-scale somebody who was high up would maintain a confidence even if someone later disagreed with them about something.
      A down tone person probably around 1.1 would use it to blackmail or coerce.
      I would not (knowingly) let a 1.1 audit me, for the above reasons.
      I would let a high toned person audit me. That is why I sought Marty out to get auditing from him.

    • Journey Continued

      Karen that R factor is truly evil and just goes to show how the CoM will now so willingly and openly pervert Scientology to achieve their draconian SP end of making sure that no one makes any case gain. CoM will go to whatever lengths they can to drive a person’s anchor points in and make sure that they are less able and that they lose any form of self-respect.

      If DM wasn’t such a lying SP bastard he would openly change the OIC to include stats such as these:
      1. The number of PCs caved in per hour.
      2. Flawlessly trained auditors that routinely mess up cases.

    • Worse than stabbing you in the back. That was a knife in the heart. Pure EVIL.

    • Good friggin’ bags of almighty in a basket!

      Next, he’ll be instituting “Case Put-Back” techniques. He probably has his Super Double Secret Special Team of Krack agents working on the pilot already.

      DM’s newly revised definition of R-Factor: Restimulation Factor. Here’s how it most likely goes:

      “This is a Restimulation Factor from the Chairman of All Universes Meritorious and Ultra-Benevolent Global Senior CS, David Miscavige:

      “Any case gain you may have received was given to you in error and is hereby revoked. You are to restimulate yourself and put all charge back in place immediately. Any cognitions you may have had are unauthorized and hereby cancelled.”

      Probably thinking about how to build a device, similar to an E-meter, but one that puts actual electrical force and digitized pictures back into place. Yeah, an implant machine. Wasn’t it always guys like DM who spearheaded implant campaigns?

      Probably got the speech writing guy drafting the introduction to the newest Lost Tech service: Sustaining the Proper Balance of Case, Motivators and Havingness. “Some SP hid this vital piece of tech from us all. That SP has been taken care of, I assure you. I’m now proud to make this withheld rundown available to you. The reason some of you haven’t made it is because of an imbalance caused by too much case gain, too much freedom, too fast versus your own havingness level and whatever motivators you still have from undiscovered overts. This is definitely something many of you will want to start on immediately. And by the look on most of the faces I see out there in the audience tonight, you need it. START!”

      Yeah, something like that.

      • Seriously dude, you crack me up. I assume you are a dude, I think you would have to be to have a sense of humor like that. Not that women can’t have off the wall humor. Example: Sam.
        Where would one go about getting one of these meters?

      • OTDT,

        Gawd that’s pretty close what he said when he released the “basics” and before that GAT.

        I guess since he’s totally invalidated training.

        Why not move into the area of Case Gain.

        Seems like the logical next step.

        I mean with the Triumph of the Will pillars and everything.

        So far it’s only been inval on a PC by PC basis.

        Now stop right now OTDT we don’t want the His Satanic Majesty to get any ideas.

      • OTDT,
        I believe that’s “Galactic Senior C/S”, or[possibly even “Pan-Galactic Senior C/S”

        As poorly translated from the Japanese language, his slogan is
        “All your case are belong to us!”

      • That’s funny, but, true! I mean, what else can you call it when people are told they are clear… no, wait! Not clear! Er, Clear! (Smack!) no! Not Clear! Now, get your NED you OT VIII sack of crap!

    • Wow, Karen. What incredible BS.

      Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what the ratio is of HCO Sec check is to in-session confessionals? Or, what the ratio of an auditor’s time in the HGC is giving HCO-style sessions vs. real auditing? If HGC’s are counting HCO sec checks in the WDAH (Well Done Auditing Hours), it is a false stat, since HCO checks are not auditing. Anyone have evidence of that?

      Also, I am curious, has anyone had their OWs from session, either from a confessional or Ruds or in general OW auditing, written up and put in their ethics folder? I remember a major shift from the early ’80s was the so-called non-actionable KRs from auditors.

      Also, I’m curious as to where Rollback (“RB”) so-called “tech” came from. I was RB’ed once in my life by a CMO chick probably because I said something to someone about how the prices were too high, or that some SO members acted like Nazis. Either way, she asked me where I had heard this. I looked at her and old her it was my own observation, and that nobody had to tell me this, it was pretty observable from the surface. This, of course, was done HCO style (that’s probably the only way to do an RB, I would guess).

      And, why is the church charging money for auditing intensives for HCO-style eligibility checks, when they are not auditing, they are inquisitions?

      • Hey I agree with you 100% regarding sec checks.

        I mean since the R-Factor is “I’m not auditing you” how could they be counted as “Well Done *Auditing* Hours”.

        There seems to be a contradiction in terms.

        Originally when HCO Sec Checks were required for “investigatory purposes” like the HCOB on ‘Confessional Procedure’ says they were conducted by HCO back in the day when most staff where trained auditors.

        More recently they try to rook someone in Tech or Qual to do these actions for them because as you know most “Scientologists” on lines these days are for the most part untrained morons.

        I personally refused to do them when I worked in Tech or Qual because for the most part the PC or Pre OT they wanted to Sec Check into oblivion had gross out tech on their case so I’d offer to FES their folder and program for a review instead which didn’t seem to align with the HCO terminal or Exec’s idea of extracting some kind of vengence or effort to make the staff member or public guilty or wrong in some way.

        It was really wierd.

        However I digress…..

        The fact is that an HCO Sec Check is not a Tech or Qual action should be evident by the name.

        Regarding RB.

        Yes actually the Ol’man did develop this tech and it was designed to locate infiltration of the organization by individuals who were adverse to Scientology.

        More data on this can be found in the HCOPLs ‘Counter Espionage’ and ‘The Ethics Officer and his Character’.

        It was mainly used by mainly Missionares, many who probably could have used the procedure of themselves and specially trained Tech and Qual staff who were assigned to assist them.

        The procedure is confidential but is very similar to False Data Stripping in a way where instead of recall on a false datum it is to locate the common source of a “enemy line”.

        A term that has been perverted beyond all meaning by the Church to include any valid complaint like the one you just mentioned.

        Its used mostly nowadays to suss out people who have the audacity to demand standard tech or disagree with “command intention”.

    • The current scene with the church of Miscavige is like the KGB using black Scientology to control people.

      This all very very serious.

      L. Ron Hubbard warned us that this could happen, and it has!

      Once this gets set to right ( and I know that it will ) we must make sure that this never happens again.

  34. Marty this is EXCELLENT! Agreed the Church is Dead.

  35. Great post! You and I track very well on handling PCs. Great additional comments from metaqual, Old Cuff and Steve.

    When I look out at society, it is hard not to notice the decline over the past 30 years. One of my greatest disappointments with the church is that it could have been helping people go free but instead took on an evil valence in which it takes able people and throws them back into their case. The very same OTs (by action more than grade level) who are the most able to bring about positive change in their environment have had their trust betrayed, been blackmailed, threatened with loss of family (continual secondary restim implanting), had their reputations slandered, some have even been beaten all by the church that professed to have the road to freedom.

    It is an outright fraud!

    Only since the whistleblowers have come out and the blogs have started writing the truth has their been a reversal of the downward spiral of the church. Those who tried to handle inside were thrown into the vortex. It is only now that freedom and truth and light can be seen. Individuals can have free thought and communication, they can open their doors again to practice Scientology honestly. Though the church tried to put Scientology in the Dark Ages, it has failed to do so!

    What is the point of getting auditing when you can’t be “in session” for fear of whatever you say is getting out to others. I am certain that I would have been quite a mess had I not been granted the beingness of “man being basically good” in both my sessions and while working with the EO. I want to take this opportunity to thank all of my auditors and ethics terminals who held in their code and helped me to confront my case, whose trust was in so completely that I was able to as-is the case. Your application of the tech has given me a gift that can never be taken away…freedom! I hope that some of you are lurking out here because what you do is awesome and it should not be suppressed. You are free to practice LRH’s Scientology, the tech that made you want to be an auditor in the first place.

  36. Marty,
    Excellent writeup.
    I have also gained some personal insights emanating from this writeup.
    Thanks.

  37. LRH
    “The greatest overt act in the world is making other people guilty of overt acts. That is the greatest overt act in the world — about which, more later. So don’t think at this moment that I’m trying to make you guilty of overt acts! The only thing I’m trying to do to you is get you Clear! ”

    Whatever shenanigans he got into this is a great truth.

    Great blog post Marty.

    • “shenanigans” Terril?

      That wouldn’t be a hidden dig against LRH now would it?

      • I’m with you on this one, atcause.

        That is an unnecessary remark in another wise OK post.

        Terrell’s “credit rating” just got downgraded a bit here.

        Unnecessary remark is unnecessary.

        • Its real covert and subtle black PR on Terril’s part.

          He writes a post that is 95% ARC and then puts a tiny bit of black PR in hoping that it will all be swallowed at the same time.

          It’s like taking a piece of steak and putting a few grains of rat poison in the middle of it. A person could eat the steak ( readers of this blog ) and not even know they were being poisoned ( LRH black PR ).

          A post like that would have passed just fine on ESMB.

  38. Couldn’t agree with you more, Marty. Since I’ve been out, I keep very breif notes and my C/S is fine with it. As long as the procedure is standard and the PC is getting good Tone arm action, and F/Ning, who cares what the details are?
    My auditing room is sacred and so is the communication within. My PCs know they can trust me.
    Thanks for everything you are doing.

  39. Thanks Marty,

    The very FIRST confidence I entrusted to a scientologist was used to crush reg me. It was the subject of my first KR. Yet I still felt that Scn was a group that should be helped, so I joined the S.O..

    I can’t put into words how much that incident negatively affected my trust and communication with “auditing” and “not-auditing” terminals who had me on the cans at various points during my time in the S.O. and with other church terminals after I left.

    Ahhh, nothing like a chaplain’s interview delivered by a scowling, BI’s interviewer…

    Interviewer: “Has a withhold been missed?”

    Me: “Yeah. Why are you so BI’s?”

    Suffice it to say that I am certain that you have shown us the primary reason for the Downfall of the C of S, and also the means by which Independent Scientologists may thrive and yet achieve “The Aims of Scientology”.

    Scott

  40. Your humble servant

    Marty,

    This is a wonderful and insightful post–thank you. You are absolutely correct that keeping the confidences (and confidence) of the p.c. is absolutely vital, not only for that one particular p.c. you happen to be auditing at the time, but for the subject as a whole. Thanks also to the rest of you great posters who express such wisdom, intelligence, experience and good will!

  41. Hi Mary, Re “Stenographic Auditing”, a practice outlawed by L Ron Hubbard on 10 July 1969 by the HCOB Stenographic Auditing. Incidentally, try finding that HCOB in the church, or any of the Tech Vols published under the direction of Miscavige” When I was training auditors in the field years ago I used to use the older version of Dianetics Today for referrence on what you need to write in a worksheet by LRH.
    It is in the Auditor Admin section and it really handles a would be stenographic auditor.
    I had to use this reference for “Stenographic Auditing” correction since that was also covered in the Welcome to The Flag Internship Tape by LRH on the Internship Checksheets in the field which was not available to lower orgs going back all the way to 1971.
    Hope this is of some help to anyone out there looking for another available source on it.

    • Also additional information is in the lecture Auditor Administration ExDn Tape 3 when Ron talks about Quentin’s work sheets i.e. noting “PC Itsa”.

  42. Thank you so much to all who have posted. Much of the history of the Church and LRH’s personal life have been hard for me to reconcile with the profound brilliance of the Tech and its ability to free individuals from their reactive minds.
    These posts have helped me to put the life of LRH and what he might have been going through in some perspective.
    So, thank you all for your posts.

  43. Marty,
    your ability and intention to help is quite evident to me by this post.

    Back in 81 our session worksheets on Grade 2 and confessionals were so abreviated all our C\S wanted to know was were we following the steps of the procedure a word or two just enough to show we were on the same chain and most importantly DID the PC BENEFIT from the action, period.

    Also, I know of a CL6 field auditor that basicly does metered O/W sessions on non-Scn business executive to handle the areas of difficulty they’re having and at the EP of the handling after the forgiveness part he has the PC/executive pass the work sheets through a paper shreader.

    It’s all about beingness and intention.

  44. I audited over 10 years on staff and plenty elsewhere. I’ve been connected to a number of 3rd Dyns including a stint in the military. It now seems the true feeling and code of commarderie is a rare thing – yet it would seem obvious that in such a thing as a church or group professing understanding of life and the mind it would practice honesty and companionship as a natural course and reward. That is not the case within the CofM. It shocked me then and it shocks me now, the deciet practiced agianst their own uniform. Yet, it is written and spoken of all through the Tech & Policy – LRH knew exactly how to control people – by their willingness to help and by positive results towards know goals. The force with lies used by DM has created many enemies and will continue to do so until it consumes him and those who are blind to good old fashioned common decency. I pride my self on the fact my laughter is honest – I wonder what makes someone who stabs his comrades in the back smile?

  45. Excellent post, Marty. Here are some basic references:

    Pab 41, in the Code of a Scientologist, from 1954, point 9:

    “To refuse to impart the personal secrets of my preclears.”

    Auditor’s Code, 1968, revised 1/1/1976, point 22:

    “I promise not to use the secrets of a preclear divulged in session for punishment or personal gain.”

    (By the way, this is the code I memorized when I did Level IV later that year!)

    There is really no argument here, nor is there a fine line. Trust between auditor and preclear must be inviolate.

  46. Pingback: Clean Hands (via Moving On Up a Little Higher) « My LRH

  47. Marty;

    Superb! The reason you get results is you apply LRH tech. Exact reference are many but I like these:

    HCOB 30 April 1969 Auditor Trust
    “A pc tends to be able to confront to the degree that he or she feels safe.

    If the pc is being audited in an auditing environment that is unsafe or prone to interruption his or her confront is greatly lowered and the result is a reduced ability to run locks, secondaries and engrams and to erase them.

    If the auditor’s TRs are rough and his manner uncertain or challenging, evaluative or invalidative, the pc’s confront is reduced to zero or worse.

    This comes from a very early set of laws (Original Thesis):

    Auditor plus pc is greater than the bank,

    Auditor plus bank is greater than the pc,

    Pc minus auditor is less than the bank.

    (By “bank” is meant the mental image picture collection of the pc. It comes from computer technology where all data is in a “bank”.)

    The difference between auditors is not that one has more data than another or more tricks. The difference is that one auditor will get better results than another due to his stricter adherence to procedure, better TRs, more confident manner, and closer observance of the Auditor’s Code.

    No “bedside manner” is required or sympathetic expression. It’s just that an auditor who knows his procedures and has good TRs inspires more confidence. The pc doesn’t have to put his attention on or cope with the auditor and feels safer and so can confront his bank better. ”
    by LRH

    ==

    To not apply the tech and keep the PC in ARC and really in session is a GAE Gross Auditing Error). HCOB 7 May 1969 THE FIVE GAEs

    “The five Gross Auditing Errors (GAEs) are:

    1. Can’t handle and read an E-Meter.

    2. Doesn’t know and can’t apply Technical data.

    3. Can’t get and keep a pc in session.

    4. Can’t complete an auditing cycle.

    5. Can’t complete a repetitive auditing cycle.

    These are the only errors one looks for in straightening up the auditing of an Auditor.

    If you look for other reasons, this is itself a gross goof. There are no others.”

    ==

    As covered by much that has been written this is the Tech of Scientology by LRH directly. Application of is what ensures wins, case gain and ultimate of beings without bank and with full ability to act and create for themselves. Again, thank you Marty for a really nice piece of writing.

  48. I had been a difficult PC. I could see the „computations“ and intentions of my auditor. Or if he noted down something on the worksheets he considered important. Then I had a closer look. If the auditor did worry about his course completion or whatever then that was the end of the auditing for me. And I could not be audited by a stone or robot. If that would be possible you could use a computer to ask you questions, then he recording it and a computerized E-Meter would then call you the F/N. That cannot ever work this way. The current church may have all the correct data on OT levels above 8. But they cannot use them. Lets call this the system built in security. Imagine someone in the current church going real OT. In the „good old days“ on the academy if I had problems understanding something I did ask the Supervisor a question regarding this and he first trying to understand it himself then me picking up his concept of the matter and me saying „thank you“. He knew that I picked up his concept to know. That had been the trust relation of those days. (shure he sometimes told me that I should find out myself, but he also knew that I could do it without his knowing and thus he let it be that way)
    Without trust you have nothing but words.

    • Doesn’t sound like you were a difficult PC, sounds like whoever was auditing you did not actually get you in session, not if your attention was on them.

  49. MissedGarbage Watcher

    I agree on your point 100% , Marty.

  50. All these years and this is the first I’ve heard of the data about stenographic auditing. Thanks for that, Marty. Makes complete sense. Aside from the arguments already discussed, it makes it a tougher job to be an auditor with all that note-taking. The biggest problem for me during my Class 0 – IV training was the “requirement” to keep detailed notes of the pc’s remarks. Good to know there was no such requirement.

  51. Aylesbury Wolf - a Hubbard Knight

    Hi Marty

    I had a look in my original set of Tech Vols (printed 1976) in order to read the HCOB you refer to, namely “Stenographic Auditing”. Volume VI covers the years ’65 to ’69. I regret to inform you that there is no HCOB issued on 10th July 1969 nor one entitled “Stenographic Auditing” listed in the contents or the index. Could this be in another HCOB?

    • It was an “assisted by Brian Livingston” which was a justification for removal after 80. I find it very hard to believe Brian Livingston while on the same ship as LRH could sneak out HCOBs without direction or approval from LRH. Double standard too when compared to the scores that were included in the eighties with “assisted by Snr CS Int” (while actually directed by DM).

  52. I came across this post on David St. Lawrence’s blog this morning and it just rang so true when reading the experiences discussed by everyone and then comparing to my experiences in my sessions with Marty. Here is the direct link to the article: http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&q=http://possiblyhelpfuladvice.com/%3Fp%3D1345&ct=ga&cad=CAcQARgAIAIoATACOAJAosaO5wRIAVCLAVgAYgVlbi1VUw&cd=IQZftn_AMGI&usg=AFQjCNHbcxu-1-TmkNasepicnaLeGsVMdg

    In case it doesn’t link correctly for you, here is the full text. Thanks for listening, Enjoy!

    On Wasting the Willingness of Scientology Parishioners
    Plain Old Thetan serves up another gem after studying one of Ron’s early lectures. He reveals the secret of the expansion of Independent Scientology and the decline of the cult of Scientology.

    You are increasing in the preclear, then, only one thing… his willingness to play the game.
    On Wasting the Willingness of Scientology Parishioners

    I was studying the 4th London ACC last week and during the lecture 3 October 1955 FUNDAMENTALS OF SCIENTOLOGY AND RUDIMENTS OF AUDITING, I came across this passage:

    “And that’s the only thing an auditor has to work with — the willingness of the preclear. And where he loses that, he loses the only goal there is in this universe. This is so much the case and is so easily forgotten that governments fail, revolutions take place, worlds end, and they end simply because they forgot that the only thing there was present, in the first place, was willingness to play a game.”

    “That’s the only thing was there. That’s the only thing you can tax, the only thing you can stop. There’s nothing else to tax or stop or turn upside down or throw away but willingness to play the game. It’s the only reason a job gets done. A job never gets done because somebody’s standing there with a whip. That whip isn’t driving anybody into the execution of a job. It is simply extracting the remaining atoms of willingness. And these can be so slight as to turn around the other way and become a willingness to destroy. And so we have a Christian revolution in the Roman Empire.”

    “The willingness to work becomes only a willingness to succumb. The only thing that any nation can tax, that any group can exist on, is the willingness to play the game, to do, to survive, to continue on. Now that, by the way, doesn’t just apply to auditing. It’s a terrifically, fantastically important principle. When this gets forgotten, auditing sessions stop. But also, when it gets forgotten, groups break up. And also, when it gets forgotten, governments come to an end. And they begin to have to pass law after law and punishment after punishment and upset after upset. And they even get out to a point where they will practically slaughter the entire population in an effort to get that one last drop of willingness. There was a little baby that lived over on Palace Court that was still willing to smile when you rattled a rattle at him. Well, they just had to shoot him up, that’s all, to get that last item. Get the idea?”

    “You are increasing in the preclear, then, only one thing. You aren’t increasing his ability to exteriorize. You aren’t increasing his ability to play tricks. You aren’t increasing his ability to think faster or forget more quickly. You’re simply increasing his willingness to play the game.”

    “And when you decrease his willingness to play the game called auditing, don’t think, then, that any process will ever carry you through into increasing his willingness to play the game called life! He must always audit better than he can live. Or he won’t live better than he can audit or be audited. Do you follow me?”

    “The increase of willingness to play the game in session is very marked: the person simply looks brighter, is less easily stopped, can outflow better.”

    “Now quite an interesting thing can occur with a preclear — something that is fabulously important to us — is that we can run a session, see the preclear getting brighter and brighter and brighter. It’s only important because it’s something you can observe directly. We run the session, the preclear is getting brighter and brighter, they are more vivacious, they are talking better, they are acting more alert.”

    “And what’s very, very interesting is, is that our auditing has to be so much better in terms of life than life itself.”

    This reminded me to think of Scientology as a game. And that the Church Of Scientology is no longer the game postulated and orchestrated by Ron in 1955.

    I pulled out my Tech Dictionary to remind myself what a game is:

    GAME, 1. any state of beingness wherein exist awareness, problems, havingness and freedom (separateness) each in some degree. (PAB 73) 2. a contest of person against person, or team against team. (PAB 84) 3. all games are continuing by definition, since an unstarted game isn’t a game and a finished game isn’t a game. (PAB 101) 4. a game consists of freedoms, barriers, and purposes. (POW)

    Not by coincidence, next to the definition of GAME was another definition:

    GAMES CONDITION, 1. when you say games condition you mean that somebody’s power of choice has been subjugated against his will into a fixated activity from which he must not take his attention. (6107C20) 2. the word games condition is a derogatory actually. There is a technical thing goes along. When you say games condition you mean a package, and the package has to do with this: It means a fixated attention, an inability to escape coupled with an inability to attack, to the exclusion of other games. There is nothing wrong with having games. There is a lot wrong with being in a games condition because it is unknown, it is an aberrated activity, it is reactive, and one is performing it way outside of his power of choice and without his consent or will. (6107C20) 3. have for self and can’t have for others; now that is a true games condition. (6107C20) Abbr. G.C.

    Aha! Scientology was a game under LRH. But under the current command, it’s turned into a games condition.

    And when it turned into a games condition, it ceased to be fun.

    And when it ceased to be fun, it became serious, and the willingness of the intelligent, perceptive, aware parishioners vanished.

    And the revolution began.

    Lo! Then the Miscavige looked over all he had made, and he saw that the people were saying it was very rotten. And he sent forth more messengers to extract more money during the shearing of the sheep before the sheep figured it out. (Apologies to the author of Genesis.)

    — written by Plain Old Thetan

    • Great post Mosey and Marty.

      One line got me in Mosey’s post: “And that’s the only thing an auditor has to work with — the willingness of the preclear.
      To me, what Marty’s post has done is made it SAFE again to even contemplate getting auditing. My last auditing was with Claire Reppen and it was wonderful & fabulous and just as it should be. Then I saw what was happening with other people as the rotten age of out-tech took hold. You couldn’t have paid me to pick up the cans and that’s no joke. It simply wasn’t safe. But I never articulated it in those words until I read Marty’s post and Mosey’s comment.

      How did I manage staying away from auditing when everyone around me was going for it? I hid in plain site, was at the org nearly every day, talking to everyone. But I knew a cancer had taken hold and was growing within the group. Auditing had become a thing of the past maybe to be picked up in some future lifetime.

      Thanks Marty from the bottom of my heart. You’ve made it safe. You may even see me at the shack one of these days.

  53. On the subject of the 1980-86 period, it has suddenly dawned on me- is the OW Write up HCOPL a DM invention?! That is a hell of a string pull.

    I know the old danger formula makes a mention of writing up OW’s, but I also know for a fact doing an OW Write-up in Ethics was a rare incident until 1982 or thereabouts.

    • Barney,
      I can’t tell you exactly what the circumstances are for the OW Write-up, but when Chuck Beatty and I were over the OEC/FEBC (1979 for me), the ‘string pull’ that led to KTL was going on at the FLB and in the course rooms, among staff etc.

      One of the cycles that came down was this full lifetime, all dynamics, OW write-up. It was part of some evolution coming from ‘up lines’ and was implemented by the CMO. To the best of my knowledge DM wasn’t the originator.

      • Jim,

        The OW write up PL is dated 2 March 1984, revised 24 April 1990. I thought the Danger Formula (4 Apr 72) PL, mentioned OW Write up’s but it does not. Suspicious.

        • Barney,
          Check 9 APril 72R, (revised 79), Correct Danger Condition Handling. It had an OW write up under Junior Danger Formula.

  54. morelivesthanacat

    I’ve seen mentions now and then (most recently from Joe Howard) regarding the apparent increasing number of staff who are quietly following this blog. So I thought I’d mention for the benefit of Marty and the regular posters, and especially for little dave, that I’ve been following this blog every day since October of last year–and I think it’s reasonable to assume that there are hundreds, if not thousands, like me. I found out the hard way that you just can’t crack the kool-aide drinkers. It’s something that each and all will have to find out for their own–just like any truth in auditing. Many of us have networks of family on lines, on staff or in the Sea Org. Perhaps, like me, many of those have also found it’s not easy, or perhaps possible, to “disseminate” this information. And the probable consequences of causing more grief to families by so doing is not worth it. On the bright side, I don’t think it will take that long for the truly bright ones to finally realize that something is wrong, and they will eventually find themselves here.
    So, just to re-iterate little dave, WE’RE EVERYWHERE! Oh, and many of us really do know about you PERSONALLY.
    Tick tok.
    Sorry for the diversion, but I finally decided to post because these last two posts, Marty, were the best ever! (and all the preceding ones have been great!)
    Hey Sarge–no one’s going to mind if you pepper in a few more LRH stories…

  55. Marty, your posts are just getting better and better. You say here what I believe many (including myself) have tried to say (and yes, I agree in full) but you said it simply and to the point. This blog is truly about moving up a little higher and no wonder that it was visited by almost 17,000 individuals last month. It’s posts and comments are my daily news, if you like.

    A great eval or a simple observation well communicated prompts greater understanding. It did for me.

    Any workable technology, system or machine MUST and will agree with all other parts of that philosophy, system or machine. Otherwise there’s friction and destruction which was the route of the c of m. Not even the “latest tech” agrees with the “latest orders”, not to mention the “old tech” and the “latest mis-applications” thereof. Naturally, it is dying from within where not already dead and only its death throes make it appear to still have a life.

    The point of this post could be argued from practically any other technical viewpoint for if the parts of a technology agree you would find a shadow of every technical aspect in all the other parts of that system as well: Survive, ARC = U, theta/entheta on and on.

    The PC went into session to talk (C) about his troubles and did not chose to step on a soap box on town square to make them public (R). Nobody likes (A) to tell (C) you a secret if you are not considered trustworthy (R).

    If betterment of self and others is one’s objective than anything reducing that is wrong (an outpoint), no matter its source. And I have yet to see a man or woman to brighten up if his or her transgressions confided in confidence have been made public.

  56. When I walked away from the church the subject of confessional tech was one of my biggest issues. It was the source of some of my biggest wins and greatest upsets both as an auditor and a pc. On grade II I gained tremendous relief and an incredible resurgence of long lost forgotten comm lines and in the joy of life. I ended my church auditing on a never-ending sec check spending tens of thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours grinding on and on looking for crimes that didn’t exist. As an auditor I witnessed tears of joy and gut wrenching emotional releases as well as serious chronic somatics blown for good. One pc couldn’t stop smiling for days after being forgiven following a Joburg confessional. I also had a staff pc, who I ran into 2 weeks after a very successful sec check ,pulling his hair out in qual still trying to get through his ethics handling. After that, I managed not to do any more HCO confessionals as I could not justify pulling someones withholds and handing them over to an untrained ethics officer. The training was difficult for me because I had to reconcile some data that was frankly irreconcilable. Does the statement “I’m not auditing you” relieve you of the constraints of the auditors code? The Golden Age of Tech introduced more imponderables like taking up a question that gives an instant FN and giving examples of how to Q and A with the PC’s answers justified by the data series. (clear misapplications IMO)
    I was very happy after reading your blog today. I found that you came to the almost identical conclusion as I did in regards to confessional tech. It gives me great joy knowing that lost tech can be easily regained and sorted out by aligning it to Scientology basics.

    • Samuel C~I can TOTALLY duplicate what you wrote. It was the GA(of out)T that kick-started my departure, being an auditor.
      What you wrote is why I really want to acknowledge Marty for leading by example. That is more valuable than the other horror stories (not making less of them) for me, because it moves me back into the chair.

  57. Marty being a Tech Terminal, makes a difference. LRH was never just an “Administrator”. He researched into the human soul and delivered results. Now it’s our turn to continue on the research, application and other stuff and I am proud we have such a good Understanding of things amongst us here. Great article.

  58. I knew Scientology was dead the moment I attempted to get off an overt I had committed against an SP, For several years I lived (as a spy) with SP’s.
    The auditor threw a fit and refused my comm screaming at me that “you can never commit an overt on an SP” Having been well trained in PTS/SP tech, I knew that the ONLY way you can become PTS to an SP is by committing overts on the SP. In that moment, I may not have known it all, but I knew Scientology was no longer being practiced. Hubbard’s Scientology was dead.
    nancy

    • Wow Nancy, that just blows my mind! Cruelty to the max! Total black!

    • Nancy,

      I remember that datum too.

      It’s from the HCOB on PTS RD.

      I’ve audited a few spies and one of the biggest overts is pretending to be someone they are not.

      It’s a continuous Missed Withhold/Overt that all by itself can create a PTS condition.

      All I’ll add is what this person said was utter crap and totally inval.

      Nice to see you posting on the board and congrats on your book:

      ‘My Billion Year Contract’

      Ml

      Robin

  59. Nancy: Wow. That’s quite an illuminating incident. You are correct, of course, in citing HCO PL ETHICS AND EXECUTIVES wherein LRH gives the theory of how one becomes PTS by committing overts on the being who is now a suppressive person.

    It also documents a number of auditor’s code violations:

    11. I promise never to get angry with a preclear in session.

    14. I promise to grant beingness to the preclear in session.

    16. I promise to maintain communication with the preclear and not to cut his communication or permit him to overrun in session.

    17. I promise not to enter comments, expressions or enturbulence into a session that distract a preclear from his case.

    The auditor violated every SHSBC lecture on sec-checking a person against his own moral codes.

    The auditor especially violated SHSBC lecture 289 30 April 1963 PATTERN OF THE GPM, where Ron says: “I never Sec Check a pc, I AUDIT A PC WITH SEC CHECKING.”

    But most of all, it explains how DM can do the things he do and orders the things he do. Since everyone in the world is an SP except him, it’s impossible to commit an overt on them.

    • That big black mass I thought was bottom, ain’t. It is one more stop on the way to bottom.

      In their omniscience and contrived omnipotence, the transgressors have yet agin tossed LRH’s tech and he under the bus — this time by corrupting a point of the code of honor — never fear to hurt another in a just cause.

      Sorry, cat.

      Bruce Pratt

  60. Marty

    Thanks for this post. I agree.
    Here are some of my own thoughts on the matter.

    I feel this whole aspect of “confidentiality” in auditing was, and is, necessitated by the existence of an underlying anxiety in society that communicating on anything but a superficial level is inherently “dangerous”. Unfortunately there are some beings who use one’s past to try to control. It produces a general PTSness , not just in Scientology, but throughout society. One is made to feel that one cannot freely communicate “anything” and everything, in “session” or out. ( moderated by consideration of the receiver’s ability to receive the communication, of course)

    I feel one necessary aspect of freedom for a being is to get to the point where they are no longer PTS to society. If handled correctly I feel they will eventually reach the point where they “frankly don’t give a damn”.

    I consider that it is VITAL that a being be given the opportunity to reach this level, and to do so requires “gradients”. If a being has been handled correctly and permitted the chance to become stronger and more free by the application of the correct technologies and the Auditors Code and “confidentiality”, in session and out, he will be able to D-PTS from the society and it’s aberrations, on his own terms, and in his own time. It has to be the beings own gradient.

    I feel it is important, through whatever uplifting means, to bring a being up to that point. His/her very freedom depend on it. Guaranteed confidentiality, is a vital part of that journey.

    It seems that the only truly safe place for ones dirty laundry is hanging right out in plain sight for all to see. When one has achieved the ability and confidence to do this one can no longer be “blackmailed” (made effect) with their past.

    It is a high goal. I believe we have the tools to achieve it. Many have the willingness to achieve it and many the technology and understandings required to help them do so.

    Thank you all.

    WW

  61. Plain old Thetan, Thanks for all those references. I’m going to keep them handy. I also found out that at the time she was one of only two Auditor’s approved by Int to do sec checks, lucky me (LOL)..took a while to filter
    down to the regular orgs and missions, but another stable point of Ron’s is that “If it’s out at the top, you certainly know it’s out at the bottom”. That was the year the Lisa McPherson died.
    nancy

  62. Pingback: Top Posts — WordPress.com

  63. Blacker than Black. I almost did not make it back. And now that I can speak, I am.
    nance

    • Thank you. It is good to know your voice is not lost.

    • Nancy – I’m sorry that you gave your trust and it was betrayed.

      All I ask of you is is to make sure to identify those who did that to you and not to wrong target.

      Did Scientology tech betray you or did certain people in the church of scientology?

      Did LRH betray you or did certain people in the church of scientology?

  64. Marty: “I think obsessing with how someone else behaved, whether it is LRH or Jesus Christ or one’s own parents, develops sort of a hidden standard that can hold one back.”

    Or ex-spouses. Or role models. Or dear friends. Or anyone we respected or loved. This is at the heart of forgiving ourselves, as well as others.

    Thank you for this, Marty. Really blows charge.

    Just Me

  65. Valcov and Just me,

    thanks for the responses. I am soo lucky that my entire grade chart (old OT7)
    and then the new nots OT5, was all in and solid. With auditors, who made a mistake here and there, but never where I felt betrayed. I had a good solid base case wise going in to that session. And I was also highly Admin Trained, solidly and several times under LRH himself . Again, incredibly safe and standard care.
    And always amazing how the Admin Tech truly worked, in sometimes miraculous ways.
    LRH had nothing to do with this. The two highpowered Sec Checkers were
    the first two to come off of the new DM bridge. I was just lucky enough to be
    one of the first to get their “special tech”. LRH had passed, and I was trained enough to know this was not Scientology — just like those Gang Bang Sec Checks were not from him. In part I do believe it was my original good case state and my solid base of training . I can actually remember myself trying to use the Eval training, to get myself back. “Is that person over there a real person or a hallucination” == well, I had to discern the facts. and follow the string back to somewhat sane.
    This absolutely would not have happened if LRH knew anything about it,
    but he had been eroded away by DM,
    Not as many people as I have had as much good auditing, and pilot auditing, and Training, as well as Pilot training. I’m very very glad I had that.
    Noone can ever take that away from me. Ever. It comes with me when I pass as well…
    nance

  66. RJ,
    I’m glad to hear you have audited some of us who spied for the GO or RTC,
    Talk about a missed withhold, when I would go back on lines, I would run into someone who I couldn’t quite recognize, and they would call to me and start walking towards me –I was usually standing next to an unknowing Scn, and my mind would race, where do I know this person from???? Is he from this, or that or is he a Scientologist????? Talk about huge WMH’s, and I’ld be standing next to a Scn who had no idea of my past…..
    That’s how come I decided not to use Greatest Good as a measure of my OW’s, because it had been used so often in intel against “SP”‘s that it became a justification.
    I live my life by do unto others as you would want done to you… For me, it’s just a clearer and cleaner definition of an Overt. Too many misuses of the “Greatest Good”.
    nance

    nance

    • Nance,

      My 2d also worked as a spy for the GO.

      She was thinking of writing a book entitled “I Was a Spy for the Church of Scientology”🙂

      If you ever want to get in touch with us my email address is archangel88(AT)hushmail(DOT)com

      Again I love your posts.

      Ml

      Robin

  67. LRH was a MAN, he said it many times. He was not a perfect “GOD”.
    I was very close to his family members, so I know a lot more than most,

    But he was a MAN, just like us, we all have made mistakes, and we also
    have done great things.

    LRH was a Great Man who did good, but just like the rest of us, he sometimes acted before confirming the facts. He sometimes got angry. I’m sure other times he got sad. He was a Person. I never put him on a pedestal, so he never
    had one to fall off of. Some Scientologists made him out to be this GOD, and then were so disappointed if he fell off of their imagined pedestal, some became completely disillusioned and left. He never wanted to be put on a pedestal.
    nance

  68. Marty, thank you for this.

    Until I finally broke down and found an independent auditor this year, I wasn’t really aware how deeply my mistrust of confidentiality in the CofS had been breached. I knew from pretty early on that what I said was not treated with confidentiality, and that affected what I was willing to say.

    Over time, I was more and more “out of session” and willing to divulge less, plus I bought more and more into the trap and trimmings. At one point, I realized how far off the rails I’d gone and left. Best thing I ever did.

    But I wasn’t aware how insidious the lack of trust was, not until this year, 20 years after I’d left.

  69. Marty, if that demonstrates my intent, than the present Church demonstrates the intent of LRH. Despite DM made available all LRH lectures (maybe he distorted a bit here and there but I do not think that would make so much difference) Scientologists would be blind to the nature of Real Scientology? One thing is for sure, Scientologists are too quick to fire from hip.
    I do not really get what you say about responsibility here. I certainly does not think that humans are only bodies.
    Regarding the LRH-Maitreya connection it would be very hard to prove to you that he was not Maitreya as you probably beleive in that. It is very hard for you as well to prove those who beleive in DM that DM is an SP.
    I can’t prove it of course. It is not that easy as proving that one overstepped the speed limit. However I have some argument which I state and either you accept it either you do not.
    Maitreya is probably not a capitalist and not a communist either. The admin system in Scientology and the working of the organization with statistics and knowledge reports, etc. mirroring both systems well. You can call me stupid, I lived in communism, I know what I am speaking about. Regarding statistics, the nature of the universe is not expanding but cyclic. Seemingly very PTS… It expands then contracts. This is healthy. Planets go around a star. Months repeats after a year. Same with the 4 seasons. A person has birth, growth, death. Energy extends in waves. Breathing works with the lungs expanding than contracting. The natural law in this universe seems to be based rather on cycles than expansion. If there is a reason, you can grow. It’s good. If the growth is “enforced” even with logical steps, like with stats and as the Scientology system requires, the situation is unnatural. Do you think Maitreya would go against these laws held universally true by all spiritual masters of all ages? An organization needs some growth for sure. But break it down to persons and see the difference. The above law also explains the “ups and downs” of organizations in a way which does not lead to stat pushes. And if organizational good is never ending growth than it’s purpose is for sure to eat up anything and everything around it.
    Now this was a bit long and for sure you can disagree. I will be shorter from here.
    LRH usually speaks about the importance of high ARC, etc., but he does not care so much about those below 2.0 the tone scale. He would “quietly dispose them without sorrow” if they would not better under auditing. Now, call it stupid or whatever but the main characteristic of Maitreya is LOVE. Unconditional, unselfish, unbidden love. And this is something in which all spiritual leaders agree. But they have no PTS/SP technology we all know from LRH. LRH had PTS/SP technology but he could not spot DM as an SP???
    Maitreya is egoless. This is also true for all TRUE spiritual leaders. Is this true for LRH?
    Maitreya knows there is samsara and there is nirvana. LRH gives a wrong definition of nirvana. It seems LRH wants thetans to become the kings or demi-gods, gods of samsara. For sure it can work very well for a couple of millions of years… Once he said something about this question like we will get back (to that state) but we won’t ever be that stupid again… So besides his wrong definition of nirvana, he definitely wants to do business in samsara. How could you get “back” to nirvana what is beyond time and concepts if you say you were stupid in that condition? For this the only explanation can be that he teaches people with lower understanding but than how can he declare someone an SP who begins to do other practices or who leaves Scientology publicly? This is evil, because realization or call it “Total Freedom (™)” can be achieved by other means than Scientology. Demonstrated even by certain Christian Saints as well and we all know Christianity is not in the business of teaching people to attain Total Freedom. Each and every person needs the teaching on his or her level. Not an enforced teaching. Scientology never demonstrated that Total Freedom can be achieved and as well it never demonstrated that even the state of Clear as described in Book One can be achieved. (Although I do not argue that the state of Clear would not be a good condition.) The fact is that there are some real powerful “clearing procedures” in other religions as well. Very different from Book One. Rather “whole track” oriented but does not narrowed down to specific incidents.
    (And frankly, I do not beleive that by auditing out some cosmic space opera incidents the person would achieve the first real OT level… Were these guys OT’s just prior they sit into their starships? I know this is confidential material, I do not expect you to publish these lines.)
    The characteristics of Maitreya in Hymn of Asia are from unnamed and unknown sources. Ask a Buddhist scholar about those characteristics. In my opinion LRH was self-claimed Maitreya in the same way as he was a self-claimed nuclear physicist.
    Maitreya would not develop technologies. He is a manifestation from a pure dimension. He does not need to dig a tunnel or build a Bridge for escape. He descends from “heaven”. He is free from the beginning.
    And there are a couple of other teachings of Maitreya. Rather secret teachings.
    Despite all the above there are very useful methods LRH collected or discovered I definitely do not argue with that. It would have been polite to exactly name his sources. It would have been polite to let others use his “technology” partially freely as well as he used other peoples discoveries freely without a though of naming his sources. I am not sure of his true intentions and I am not sure if he wanted to go into the same direction as you seemingly want at this time, Marty. And I’ve said all the above with responsibility. You warn people against DM and against the abuses of the Church. I warn people against blindly following and believing everything and everything LRH said. I hope and I wish that you go all along into the right direction.
    Love, peace and respect, Marty.

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