Scientology Standard Operating Procedure

The following unalterable, senior policy of Scientology has been in continuous effect since March 1955 to the present.  It might help explain a few things you have observed.

The DEFENSE of anything is UNTENABLE.  The only way to defend anything is to ATTACK, and if you ever forget that then you will lose every battle you are ever engaged in, whether it is in terms of personal conversation, public debate, or a court of law. NEVER BE INTERESTED IN CHARGES. DO, yourself much MORE CHARGING and you will WIN.  And the public, seeing that you won, will then have a communication line to the effect that Scientologists WIN.  Don’t ever let them have any other thought than that Scientology takes all of its objectives. 

The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly.

L. Ron Hubbard, Manual on Dissemination of Material

274 responses to “Scientology Standard Operating Procedure

  1. For anyone who reads this blog and does not check Tony Ortega’s — read the story on Ortega’s blog this morning about yesterday’s activities in Monique Rathbun’s lawsuit. It will provide you with good context for this posting.

    • Mike, thanks for drawing attention to Tony’s post. What an astonishing read it is.

      One would have thought, that since the RCS makes such a big deal about being the holder of all trademarks and copyrights, the first line of action would be to invoke their rights under those copyrights and trademarks in a court of law.

      And that would be RTC and COB who are credited with “keeping the tech pure” on every OVIII’s success story – not so much CSI who gets that credit. Isn’t that their alleged gripe – “squirelling the tech”? COB was not only involved – his job description (credit grabbing) defines him as the leader of the “squirrel buster” ring.

      If there was no legal remedy (because Marty was not infringing their rights) – then there is absolutely NO justification for harassing Marty outside his house and on and in his property, and less than no justification 9if that is possible) for harassing Mosey in the process.

      What utter head-spinning, mind-numbing, credulity-straining B-S!

      • Yes, your analysis is exactly correct. But way too logical for Miscavige. Your expertise as a lawyer makes it easy to see — can you imagine a judge won’t see the same things?

    • Mike, I knew yours would be the best viewpoint on the whole matter than anybody. One can only keep a secret for so long buddy!🙂 I ventured over to one of the hate sites that has been put up by the church and lo an behold, for some reason, no new entries about Marty, Monique, their families, their relatives their kin and friends since June. Monique’s lawsuit and its suppoters have struck a nerve in the church.

      I will not set foot in any Church of Scientology. The environments of these organizations is too aberrated for anyone. The staff have case. The public have case. The staff try to take advantage of public’s case. The public try to take advantage of staff’s case. And all these lies are passed on to the innocent public as truth that wouldn’t even know anything about the subjects of Diantics and Scientology and are getting mowed down unjustly as I write this because of it!🙂 Should the fate of Mankind be in the hands of such people? I think not. I think not!🙂

  2. … or you will then have a communication line to the effect that Scientologists are sociopaths for whom winning is the only purpose and to hell with truth, justice, honest help, compassion and other common virtues.

  3. Grasshopper (Mark P)

    I’m with Mosie and you on this, Marty.

  4. The Church openly admitted of its crimes on harassing others…but claims they are justified as a defense of its ‘freedom of speech”. His obsession is evident.
    However, the attack of an individual, just because his association to an ex member who expresses himself, is done in such a criminal level that, I hope, no law should condone.

    • Isn’t SLAPPY already a Registered Trademark of DM’s?

    • The Church is on record forever. They admit running “Squirrel Busters.” They are are on record forever as stalkers, intimidaters, using vigilante justice, spying, using creepy PIs, ambushing, acting out on revenge
      WHILE
      Wanting *Religious* benefits and the Courts to acknowledge they have Religious rights !!!!

      • Vox Clamantes in Deserto

        That was rivoting!! I can’t believe how sleezy the organization that I worked for and believed in for so long is! Jeez!!! Just plain SLEEZY.

        • Vox,

          Quoting you: I can’t believe how sleezy the organization that I worked for and believed in for so long is! Jeez!!! Just plain SLEEZY.

          Me: It is like I have been saying for some time now: Scientology (The CO$) is a trap for fools and a freedom and power for the wise. And the keys ( the directions) to the way out of the trap are practically hanging in plain sight on the wall.

          And Hubbard put them there purposely, for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear and a mind to think and understand.

          And to quote Joe Larabel. The truth is the best bait in the universe.

          It is the fault of anyone who got caught in the trap.

          There is a Psalm that I remember that goes something like this, with some paraphrasing:

          Though I walk through the valley of death with ten thousand demons on one side and ten thousand demons on the other, and go where angels fear to thread, I shall not flinch, because Lord God protects me, and makes my way safe.

          Or something to that effect.

          And to add; in my paraphrased words: (Gods’ word) is a crown of glory by day and a guiding light by night.

          Dio

  5. This wouldn’t have been nearly as damaging a policy if Ron had said, “That doesn’t mean you always attack violently. Sometimes the best attack is an act of kindness to illustrate that another doesn’t understand the higher game. Or simply a moment to carefully observe. Looking is a very gentle attack.”

    Instead there is a frantic state caused by those that use this policy to hide crimes they commit while using this policy.

    • This wouldn’t have been nearly as damaging a policy if Ron had said, “That doesn’t mean you always attack violently. …

      Actually, 2bc, there are such statements in the PR Series, and elsewhere. But unfortunately, very little emphasis was put on “document the lies with truth”, and much more emphasis was put on “attack”. And as nice as it would be if this was true under only Miscavige’s watch, it was unfortunately also true under Ron’s watch as well (e.g. John McMaster, Paulette Cooper, et al in the 60s and 70s).

    • I think Hubbard was aware of that, and some of the people who will probably never recover from Scientology are those unfortunate individuals who, at a time of vulnerability, were recipients of an “act of kindness” from Hubbard, the savior of the galaxy, who owned and controlled the toll booths on the “bridge to total freedom and total power.”

      Around the time that Hubbard was finalizing his attack tech, in 1960s and early 1970s, he also developed his public relations tech which was, basically, a tech of “defense,” although it also, inevitably, included elements of the “attack” philosophy.

      Unfortunately, despite lip service to the contrary, Hubbard’s public relations tech was dishonest. Plus there were confidential PR issues not in the Green Volumes, and other confidential issues regarding the use of propaganda.

      What’s most startling, perhaps, is that Hubbard didn’t just use this stuff on outsiders, but also used it on Scientologists.

      And it continues to this day as Scientology Inc.

      • This is a part of the reason I’ve said throw out Green-on-white. Most people got into Scientology for the Red-on-white. And, while there are a few gems in the Green Vols, having not proven itself as wholly workable, Admin Tech is not true to me.

        • Unfortunately, there’s no shortage of dishonesty and manipulation in the red on white too. Hubbard had no problem deceiving and manipulating Scientologists. And just as not all Green on White is in the Green volumes, so all Red on White (“auditing” tech) is not in the Red volumes. Something pleasantly benign, such as “Grade 0,” is not representative of the over-all “Tech” of the “Bridge.”

          • I find that posting your general conclusions is not really helpful to me, because it doesn’t really “inform” me of anything but your general conclusion. if you could inform me of specific examples, of flaws in the red-on-white, that would be helpful! 🙂

            • OK. Off my top of my head, here are a few: In his early 1990s article on Clear, David Mayo wrote that it was “PR and marketing considerations that led Hubbard to decide that certain people were Clear at a certain point.”

              During Scientology’s period of greatest expansion, from the late 1960s and well into the 1970s, the top of the Grade Chart was an OT 8 that promised “Total Freedom, Total Power, ability to be at cause, knowing and at will, over life, form, matter, energy, space, and time, subjective and *objective*.” Turns out that that level never existed, even though it was sold to people, and excited many people into spending their savings on Scientology, or joining the Sea Org, and, in general, handing over their minds to Scientology’s “mental healing” and “training” procedures. And why not? At the end would be “Total Freedom and Total Power,” right?

              How about Hubbard’s wacky “LSD, Years after they come off of,” written around March 1977?

              Hubbard’s “red on white” places a strong emphasis on “overts and withholds.” Both former Senior C/S International, David Mayo, and former ED International (which turned out to be a sham position used to protect Hubbard, although Franks didn’t know it at the time, but that’s another story) have told of how this was used – deliberately – by Hubbard as a control mechanism.

              “Auditing” that introverts a person so as to find what is WRONG with the person (especially things the person didn’t know were wrong until he was TOLD) weakens the persons critical faculties. More covert control occurring as “tech.”

              How about the Introspection RD?

              The tech used on The RPF? And it *is* “tech” also.

              And OT 2 and OT 3. Talk about hypnotic evaluation! Jeez!

              And that’s just a beginning.

              • OK understood these are “off the top of your head”. I’ll pass on commenting on anything about the upper, “pre-OT” levels since I haven’t done them. Have you?

                I will comment on this: “How about Hubbard’s wacky “LSD, Years after they come off of,” written around March 1977?”

                I took quite a few LSD trips around the late 1960s. And I knew quite a few others who had also done so. When I read “Years after”, it “indicated” hugely to me, and to a couple of other people I knew at the time. I thought “Wow, this is really describing some of the aftereffects I can see and feel in myself, from taking LSD all those years ago! I want to do this Purif program.” I did do the program as soon as the mission was able to C/S it, and it was just as advertised. I still recall the particular day in the sauna when the LSD residues were tapped and flushed out by my body. I can still recall other days when I identified som e of the other toxic residues that were flushed out.

                And I know a couple of other “trippers” who had an experience similar to mine.

                So to me that particular issue does not seem “wacky” at all, but right on target. To me it is “been there, done that”.

                Makes me wonder, did you take much LSD? How long ago, and how to you perceive yourself “before and after”? And do you perceive any long-term effects from it, that you didn’t or don’t like? I certainly did, and I know a few others of my generation to whom that issue sounded right on.

              • OT levels? Did I do? Yes.

                LSD? Did I do? Yes.

                Hubbard on those who’ve taken LSD:

                “Apparently they have become a sort of vegetable or a zombie to a greater or lesser degree…. The way LSD got popular was because of Henry Luce, the head of Time magazine, who publicized it and glorified it from mid-1950 on. He and his wife were under psychiatric care and were on LSD. Nearly as I can trace it, it was a Nazi intelligence drug developed in Switzerland…”

                Since you didn’t mention them, I take it that you agree with the other examples I cited.

                Anyway, this thread has now run its course – stale topic.

                Good chatting with you.

                • Well, as I said, I did not mention some of them because I have no experience with them, not having done even the lower the Bridge. I did do LSD and I did do the Purif so I feel qualified to comment on at least my experience with that. Not mentioning the others most emphatically does NOT mean I agree with any of your statements about them. As I said, I commented on what I have experience with. If I don’t comment it means “I don’t know about it one way or the other”. I do know that some of the “data” LRH gives on his write up of the OTIII incident does not compute, in terms of geological findings. Yet I also know that some people got a lot of benefit from running that level. To me that raises more questions about what was LRH looking at when he inspected that incident? It does not prove anything one way or the other because there are “contrary data” on both sides of the controversy. So my conclusion is, we do not have all the data.

                  • The promise of OT 3 was that one would “have no more BTs,” and that, with no more “BTs,” one would simply need to do drills to attain full OT.

                    Then, eleven years later, came NOTs that made the same promise.

                    I’m sorry but there are no “full OTs” in sight, but there are some glass Humpty Dumptys.

                    Be glad you never became one.

                    • It works the same way with science – research uncovers new data. From what I read, if I remember right LRH found out in research after OT III that there were BT’s who were unconscious and difficult for the pc to spot. That’s flimsy data but I’m just saying it might not be fair to fault him on this point.

                    • Also I read somewhere that after the development of NOTs, LRH was thinking about testing whether or not OTIII was really necessary, and he wanted it piloted because he was thinking it might not actually be necessary for progress to a higher state. I think he was not really done researching a “Bridge” and his life was cut short. If he had lived longer under better circumstances, the upper end of “the Bridge” might look different today, than what we have. And work better, too.

                    • For eleven years Scientologists who did OT 3 were certain they “had no more BTs.” When, in 1978, Hubbard TOLD them they had more BTs – presto! – they had more, lots more.

                      That’s not science, that’s mind-control, suggestion, and hypnosis.

                      People subjected themselves to such control because of the promise of “full OT.”

                      What they got were some nebulous “wins.” Some got insanity and illness.

                      Bad trade off.

                    • Oh, I’m definitely glad I never became one of those. But on the grade chart I knew, the EP of OTIII was “Freedom from overwhelm”. I think there was a positive “ability gained” also but I don’t recall it. The only worthwhile question to my mind is, did does OTIII deliver “freedom from overwhelm”?
                      And how consistently does iit do so?

                      There are plenty of people, like Geir Isene, who have done th elevel and don’t think much of it, and do not believe in the existence of BT, or th ewhole OTIII story line, but yet say the level was beneficial in some way. So clearly it does something for quite a few people if not for everyone, and produces some positive change for some people who do not even believe the story line about BTs at all. it apparently does address some kind of ‘charge’ for many people, that they feel better of for having discharged. If the story line is false, then to me the question becomes, what is actually happening there?

                    • The idea to do a pilot (test), to see if OT 3 was necessary, was originated by David Mayo around 1978 and was shot down by Hubbard. A year before that, Hubbard had written ‘Revolt in the the Stars’, which – similar to the 1968 “R6 bank” image book covers – was supposed to ever so slightly “key in” the public so they’d respond to the (supposed to be hypnotic) Sea Org symbol, and rush into Scientology orgs seeking to do their “Bridge.” ‘Revolt’ is about “Incident 2” and “Xenu,” although it doesn’t touch on the detailed content of the – supposed – implant of that “incident.”

                      In 1980, Hubbard authored the theory part of the *original* New OT 8. (No longer included in the materials by the CofS.) It announced that this was the *3rd* Wall of Fire.” The 1st Wall of fire being OT 3, the 2nd being NOTs.

                      In 1978, if Hubbard had wanted to remove OT 3, he could have done so. He would also have had to removed content from the Class 8 course, and also withdrawn RJ 67, and also modify some of the NOTs materials which referred to OT 3. Also, the rationale for the Sea Org (being the “Loyal Officers” who “came back”) would have been gone.

                      No such changes occurred, but Hubbard was still running Scientology in 1978.

                      Additionally, around 1980 or 1981, Hubbard C/Sed Annie Broeker on OT 3.

                      Indications are that what “research” Hubbard did in the late 1970s led him to more implants, not less.

                      Even Pain and Sex, according to Hubbard (1982), were the result of implants. And don’t forget OT 2, which is implants aplenty.

                      IMO, much (not all) of the “upper Bridge” is a combination of Hubbard’s “case,” plus control-motivated mind games to which he subjected his followers.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Your first paragraph is not true. It is covered in What Is Wrong With Scientology? and other essays on this blog.

                    • As I said, I won’t comment on levels I haven’t done or materials I haven’t read. I assume you are taking the opportunity of my posts to present your opinions to some other audience. OK, no problem for me.

                      Perhaps you might post on Geir’s blog? He is quite open to any view, and doesn’t hesitate to respond with his own opinion. I do recall him saying that of the entire Bridge, one of his favorite levels was OTII. At the same time, he thinks OTIII is “fiction”. And I have never heard him post anything at all about “implants”. Since he did the entire Bridge, I’m sure he would be interested in your viewpoint on it.

                      isene.wordpress.com

                  • Marty, then we’ll have to agree to disagree about that first paragraph.

                    On the topic of ‘Revolt in the Stars’, what was it supposed to do? if not to become a blockbuster hit and lead to the expansion of Scientology?

                    How? Because, Hubbard believed, that the population of Earth were implanted with R6 and would respond, just as they were supposed to have responded to the 1968 “R6” imagery book covers and the Sea Org symbol.

                    What was Hubbard’s (later disowned by $cientology) 1980 OT 8? if not a continuation in the belief that it was even MORE implanters – this time existing outside the physical universe – who were causing his problems. Hubbard’s search for a “THEM” on which to pin his problems never stopped. Then, in 1982, came Pain and Sex HCOB, the implanters who invented pain and sex. If Hubbard had lived long enough we possibly would have had a Pain and Sex RD to free us from the Pain and Sex Implants.

                    There was something like that in the Heaven’s Gate cult, but it involved a surgical procedure, at least for the men. But that’s another subject!

                    • I guess I have one more comment, and it is about the “upper bridge” It seems that is where most of the controversy is centered. I practically never hear people complaining about the Grades or even about Clear. Not even about OTI or OTII. Almost all the brouhaha seems to be about OTIII and above. So evidently there is significant difference between the “lower bridge” and the “upper bridge”. Apparently the “quality control” on understanding, teaching and delivery of the lower bridge was “in” to an extent it was not, on the “upper ” levels.

                      So it seems to me that much of what I read neglects the lower bridge, negatively focuses on the upper bridge, and then kinda equates the upper bridge with Scientology, which is of course a skewed way of looking at it all. I guess the ‘upper bridge’ was not well understood or delivered, and resulted in a lot of disappointed people?

                    • Valkov,

                      On YouTube there’s a excerpt from a Class 8 lecture, by Hubbard, from 1968, where he explains the relationship of the Clearing Course implants, the OT implants, and the OT 3 implants.

                      The nature of auditing changes when one goes from the not confidential part of Scientology to the confidential part. Essentially, it goes from mainly “asking” to mainly “telling.”

                      Hubbard’s teachings and his various “techs” follow the same pattern. As one goes more deeply into it, the message changes.

                      Amongst other things, Hubbard the hypnotist becomes more and more blatant. At the same time, one, having been slowly conditioned, is more likely not to notice those changes, or see their contradiction to the initial public statement as to what Scientology and auditing were.

                      It’s a bait and switch.

                      As for “Clear,” for starters, suggest you read David Mayo article on (Dianetic) Clear, which can be easily found on the net.

                    • Well I just wrote a lengthy comment in response, but accidentally erased it. Now I have other things to do, so I may try to recreate the jist of it later this weekend. It won’t be easy! It was quite a dissertation.

                      I have been having that problem with my new netbook, activating things accidentally on it. It is small, and I am clumsy. Oh, well. It is a bummer!

                    • Typo correction: That’s Clearing Course implants, *OT 2* implants, and OT 3 implants.

  6. “If possible, of course, ruin him utterly.”

    Ron needed to be word cleared and crammed on the Golden Rule.

    • Whoops!

      I forgot that he’s also required (in his next lifetime/reincarnation) to do the ‘golden rule’ in a granite-based clay demo on all four flows on all eight dynamics…………

      We’ll re-evaluate if he doesn’t have an acceptable cognition.

    • Ron put alot of great worthwhile stuff in his spiritual tech. But in areas of policy, he really put in some hum-dingers of pure evil. One could even go so far as to say “stupid evil.”

      This policy that Marty cites is one. “Never fear to hurt another in a just cause” is another. There are not the only ones.

      • I wouldn’t say it was “pure evil,” at least not when the issue quoted was written. The following is the text that comes immediately before the quote in the blog post:

        “IN ALL SUCH CASES OF ARREST FOR THE PRACTICE OF SCIENTOLOGY, THE HASI WILL SEND A REPRESENTATIVE AT ONCE, BUT DO NOT WAIT FOR HIS ARRIVAL TO PLACE THIS SUIT. THE SUIT MUST ALREADY HAVE BEEN FILED WHEN THE HASI ATTORNEY ARRIVES.

        “In other words, do not at any moment leave this act unpunished, for if you do you are harming all other Scientologists in the area. When you are attacked it is your responsibility then to secure from further attack not only yourself but all those who work with you. Cause blue flame to dance on the courthouse roof until everybody has apologized profusely for having dared to become so adventurous as to arrest a Scientologist who, as a minister of the church, was going about his regular duties. As far as the advices of attorneys go that you should not sue, that you should not attack, be aware of the fact that I myself in Wichita, Kansas, had the rather interesting experience of discovering that my attorney, employed by me and paid by me, had been for some three months in the employ of the people who were attacking me, and that this attorney had collected some insignificant sum of money after I hired him, by going over to the enemy and acting upon their advices. This actually occurred, so beware of attorneys who tell you not to sue. And I call to your attention the situation of any besieged fortress. If that fortress does not make sallies, does not send forth patrols to attack and harass, and does not utilize itself to make the besieging of it a highly dangerous occupation, that fortress may, and most often does, fall.”

        (Ability [1955, ca. mid-March] “THE SCIENTOLOGIST, A Manual on the Dissemination of Material,” page 157 of old Tech Vol II)

        • We will have to “agree to disagree” on that point. I stand by the “evil” descriptor. By Ron’s own “infinity valued logic” such policies are pretty far over in the “non-survival” and thus evil range. I am looking at the results of such policies. Yes, under unreasonable and existential threat, one attacks and counter-attacks.

          But when such a “policy” is extended to ANY perceived “enemy” and then you define “enemy” so broadly that even a still faithful yet disgruntled (justifiably) member of your “church” can be defined of such and then “fair-gamed” then in my book, this is pure evil. This has resulted in a movement that can never grow to any great extent. Not in the modern era.

          The Muslims were able to do it as they came about in a barbaric era where might made right. But its no longer chic to cut off the heads of non-believers and apostates, not even figuratively. And certainly not “fair-gaming” and “disconnection.”

          Based upon real world results, quoting the full policy or “putting it in conetext” doesnt change the policy’s inherent evil nature.

          • I don’t disagree with you on what the policy was eventually extended to mean. I was just pointing out that originally ATTACK simply meant to sue if ARRESTED FOR PRACTICING SCIENTOLOGY. In other words, the original meaning and purpose of the policy wasn’t “pure evil.”

            • And what about “ruin him utterly”? I’m having trouble going as far as you’d like readers to go.

              • Letting go, below is the part of the quote with the immediate context for “ruin him utterly”. What I get by “ruin him utterly” is that it is in connection with the person’s “professional decease,” which is in the sentence just prior. And if you read more of the issue you get an idea of which professions he’s talking about and what he meant by “well knowing that he is not authorized.” My understanding is that LRH was talking about those who themselves were deliberately attempting to ruin Scientologists. I would agree that it was a mistake to have stated it so strongly, in any case, but my point has been that the quote should at least be put in context so as to get a sense of where LRH was coming from.

                “The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly.”

                • These arguments qualify you for the OSA legal department.

                  • With all due respect, Marty, I see that an Ad Hom reply.

                    I was just reading Claire’s comment and what she says is basically how I feel too:

                    “LRH was under pretty continuous attack for 36 years. At a certain period, he even had to take up residence on a boat to escape. All that would do something to you. I used to wonder why some of the PLs he wrote seemed to have been written by someone in a continuous rage. If a pc arrived in that shape, I would run the ruds immediately. I am not making excuses, but think that perhaps we should have some compassion. Despite that, he turned out an amazing body of work.”

                    • martyrathbun09

                      If you felt that way, you’d have said something along that line instead of painstakingly defending sociopathic policies that are being used to attempt to ruin lives as we speak.

                    • I’m not defending sociopathic policies. Here’s one of my comments on this blog thread:

                      “And in case you had any doubt about it, I certainly agree with you about the church and Ron himself not practicing Scientology, specifically the ethics tech.”

                    • martyrathbun09

                      You win.

                    • Marty: As we are beginning to realize, every HCOB, PL, parable, hymn, paragraph and even sentence, must be fully examined for it’s truth, from all sources of wisdom. Even disconnection is the right thing to do at times. (Don’t talk to your nattery cousin for a couple of weeks while doing NED.) Cutting off all comm. between your loving parents and their grandchildren, not so wise.
                      Seems like a lot of trouble? Hell, I’ve got nothing better to do. I mean, really, I don’t see anything that is better to do. And I’ve got lots of time ahead of me. And you and a few others are doing a lot of the work for me. Piece ‘a’ cake from here on out. The biggest problem I see right now is the attraction this couch has for my backside. Well, time to get up. Talk to ya later. Lots to do.
                      Thanks, Mark

                    • Marildi” Important post. Kudos

                    • Thanks, Mark. I try.😉

                    • While many say that the way to deal with manipulation is thinking, I the crazy guy say that thinking can get one entangled in the first place. I don’t believe that people that get manipulated, don’t think. I have seen and I have done it myself to make the arbitrary seem reasonable, the harmful seem benefitial etc –with thinking. I think that’s close to what was called ‘reasonableness’ in Dianetics.

                      Anyway, since I do believe that the purpose of processing was good, and that it’s not something you come across every day (a method to as-is), I don’t believe that the guy who created all that intended to harm people. Maybe he would harm a stubborn enemy. But the kind of reasoning that people are low-lives and need SCN to get straightened out and that justifies a wide variety of overts we commit against them (something I have been told by some people), sounds like way too SP to me, and I don’t believe that if LRH was such a person, he could come up with processing in the first place.

                      For the moment, I’m somewhat neutral with regards to PLs mostly because I don’t have any thorough knowledge. I do think that fighting takes a low level of responsibility. You need to assume you’re not cause over the situation to a degree, before you engage in fighting, and there are no exceptions, no matter how bad the bad guy is. And I also think that domination is even worse than fighting. But why would a person who intended to dominate others write about domination, define it, criticise people who dominate and attempt to have people as-is it in processing? Was he stupid to think that people would become aware of domination and people who dominate and not become aware of him if he dominated? I think he wasn’t that stupid. Actually, I think he was clever.

                    • Thanks, Spyros. I come from pretty much the same viewpoint as you.

                    • WHY COULDN”T HE FUCKING PAY HIS TAXES, HE WAS FUCKING RICH WHILE HIS SLAVES WERE POOR AS HELL.

                • He is talking about shutting down people delivering scientology outside of his/Co$ control. It’s really very simple. Those auditors “not authorised” by the Co$ are to be harassed by bringing lawsuits against them – so they stop delivering – with the added purpose of discouraging others from auditing independently.

                  Ruining them utterly is a huge leap beyond “professional decease”. He wanted his competitors destroyed.

                  • Mwesten, thanks for you interest. I didn’t get that it was an issue of delivering Scientology outside of LRH’s control. I believe he was referring to certified auditors in the field who were misapplying tech. Mind you, I’m not at all condoning such extreme measures as LRH’s words would indicate, but here is what follows directly after the quote about “professional decease”:

                    “A D.Scn. has the power to revoke a certificate below the level of D.Scn. but not a D.Scn. However, he can even recommend to the CECS of the HASI that D.Scns. be revoked, and so any sincere Scientologist is capable of policing Scientology.This is again all in the interest of keeping the public with a good opinion of Scientology, since bad group processing and bad auditing are worse than bad publicity and are the worst thing that can happen to the general public to general public communication line.

                    “The best thing that can happen to it is good auditing, good public presentation,
                    and a sincere approach on the subject of Scientology itself. Remember, we are
                    interested in ALL treatment being beneficial, whether it is Scientology or not. For bad treatment in any line lowers the public opinion of all treatment.”

                    • Oh for crying out loud. In the text just prior he is talking about auditors delivering without authority. He mentions copyrights. He says to “make it interesting” for unauthorised groups (such as “Precept Processing”). It follows as clear as night follows day that such people are to be sued, harassed and, if possible, ruined utterly.

                    • Yes, LRH was also talking about auditors delivering without authority. But because I happen to think his overall, primary intention was to help, in this Ability article (Dissemination Manual) I can see the basic intention to be what he stated in the last paragraph I quoted – an interest in “ALL treatment being beneficial.”

                      LRH stated elsewhere (but I can’t remember the reference) that there is even a technical point involved as regards “unauthorized groups.” It’s the principle that someone operating on an overt (i.e. “knowing that he is not authorized”) can’t duplicate – and thus wouldn’t be able to duplicate the tech. Not that this applies in any way to current Independent auditors, who are operating on the fact that the CoS itself is out-tech, not to mention out-ethics.

                      LRH’s strategy may actually have saved Scientology from complete destruction during the years he himself operated on that ruthless policy, and I still feel that this was his basic intention – to save Scientology. But at the same time, he made it vulnerable to being destroyed, as with DM. Just the fact this article was not an HCO PL and would not therefore be “senior policy” by any means, would have made it easy for someone one with benevolent intentions, unlike DM, to have simply followed the applicable and sane PL’s.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      Saved it from what? Do think that strategy may have been a factor in Scientology’s destruction?

                    • Saved it from the AMA and APA and the various government agencies, all working together to try to put it out of existence, and who might have succeeded otherwise. And yes, I do think it was a factor in its destruction, which is what I meant when I said that strategy made it vulnerable to being destroyed.

              • Letting go: Sorry to be so graphic, but does ‘ruin them utterly’ apply justifiably if the individual, say, raped your daughter? What if they stole sugar from the cafeteria? There is a line below which it is not true and above which it is. Act wisely but be willing to follow any action when needed. Been in any wars lately? I have. Willingness and responsibility. A good pair.
                The ability to recognize truth and untruth in everything we come across, in PT, without prejudice is one of the END PRODUCTS of enlightenment.
                Mark

        • Context makes all the difference, doesn’t it? 🙂

      • “Stupid evil” — what a pithy and brilliant turn of phrase. It captures so much of what we’re seeing these days. Well played, Moonshot.

      • I don’t think Ron was stupid by any means. This was well thought through. IMO making it a choice of intelligence for self acquisition of power, fame and money.
        This motive does not at the same time discount real gains made through Scientology by way of Self effort.

  7. Attack rather than defend, is not a bad policy, when you have the moral high ground. If you don’t have the moral high ground, an attack highlights the fact that you don’t have the moral high ground and that “weapons of mass distraction” are being employed. I don’t think Judge Waldrip is easily distracted. Time will tell. I cannot fathom how there could be any justification for their 199 day siege – and surveillance (which has nothing to do with free speech ) into your home through the kitchen window. Prying and spying are not expressions of freedom of speech.

    • Theo sismanides

      The moral high ground. You are right Wendy. When you have the moral high ground. Mosey does have it in this case. And she could have much more if Marty would keep the line and support the Indepedence (the “i” miniscule) of Scientology.

      • By doing what? Delivering scientology independently of any organised group? By promoting the free discussion of scientology and other spiritual subjects? By create-creating a forum where you and I are free to learn from eachother, to share wisdom, to think and grow as truly independent beings?

        Oh wait…

        • mwestern, Scientology runs on the third dynamic. Marty did do and does do a lot of good on this. Due to his high position in the church and his abilities he was in a position to draw a lot of attention from Scientologists who started declaring their Independence on this very blog.

          Auditing was occurring outside the church well before Marty was out. It was not Marty who did that only. Marty just made it to have a tremendous PR together with Mike Rinder and others who held high positions.

          The blog was Marty’s creation and we were all happy to see each morning a new declaration of Independence.

          And now this lawsuit. That’s courageous, too. But it is my opinion that Marty could have organised the Indies much better. He didn’t want to do that. Unfortunately fighting just by yourself against the monster is not always easy.

          We are in a position now where the church admits harassment by the Squirrel Busters and this is unbelievable. Maybe this is a matter for a lawyer specialised in the constitution. We all have a saying in this.

          I quit law long ago and joined the Sea Org and I think I did good as I see the “justice” system is full of little technicalities and gross outpoints.

          If the Indies were united things would be different. That’s all I am saying.

          • Relying on Marty to “organise” people does not sound very “independent” to me. You also assume that indies want to be organised. I bloody don’t.

            Survey people. Find out what people actually think or want. If that’s a group then go create one. Stop nattering about what people aren’t supposedly doing and go and actually do something productive. Stop dissing someone for following his own path and start creating your own. Peace.

          • Theo, there used to be another poster on this blog who frequently attacked Marty for not being a leader and not organizing the Indies. Marty has said again and again that he, and all of us, are on our own paths. And, he DOES NOT WANT TO BE A LEADER. How much more explicit can he make this for you?

            Start your own group, organize it and lead it. There may be many who want to follow you. Personally, I’ve had enough of organized groups, having been a staff member for 15 years. There seem to be many like me, but perhaps you’ll find others more in your camp.

    • All oppresors and suppresors in the world have the moral high ground, from their point of view. They all know that people don’t deserve to be treated well. And no wars have ever been incited nor fought by people who didn’t have the moral high ground, from their point of view. And even in the case of a person who tries to undermine everyone, he knows that he should better do it. He is right, of course, for himself. It’s just that maybe another doesn’t think so.

  8. In a 1952 lecture LRH described the trick of putting a person in confusion and then giving them the data you want them to accept as new stable data. I think the Church is using this strategy in court. Moving to dismiss Mosie’s suit under SLAPP is so absurd it will make the judge’s head spin, and then they will drop the other shoe, which will be what they are really trying to accomplish.

  9. “When we need somebody haunted we investigate…When we investigate we do so noisily always.”

    – L. Ron Hubbard, MANUAL OF JUSTICE, 1959

    “People attack Scientology, I never forget it, always even the score. People attack auditors, or staff, or organisations, or me. I never forget until the slate is clear.”

    – L. Ron Hubbard, MANUAL OF JUSTICE, 1959

    “So we listen. We add up associations of people with people. When a push against Scientology starts somewhere, we go over the people involved and weed them out. Push vanishes.”

    – L. Ron Hubbard, MANUAL OF JUSTICE, 1959

  10. I hope the Ray Jeffry team plays fire with fire. You have our prayers for a slam of your own Marty.

    The combined thoughts of thousands support you all Marty, Mike, Mosey.

    This movie is in the chase scene. The good guys are having an epic battle with evil.

    The world knows who you are, and knows now what you are doing Dave. Your greatest enemy is the internet because the internet is open free knowledge. No matter the out come of any of your cowardly legal smoke screens, your legacy is dog meat because of your taste for cruelty.

    How Dave are you dealing with the constant barrage of legal chipping away at the ramparts of your make believe ecclesiastical title?

    In your quite moments Dave, when you are alone, with no sycophants to cower or beat, with no grandiose and opulant crutch to support you – your fears must get the better of you.

    And do you know why your fears get the better of you? Because your fears are really your knowing. Your fears are your knowing that the jig is up.

    You may be resurrecting in your mind memories of past legal victories and falsely assuming thereby that things will not change because of your supperior personhood and super OT powers, but as there are no absolutes in MEST, there are no absolutes in legal outcomes.

    Your attention Dave is being hijacked by all of this. You can’t get it out of your mind because you have thousands and thousands of people all over the world hoping the end of this story.

    Thousands and thousands praying, postulating, hoping, thinking that the crimes against families, children etc stops. And how does that stiop?

    By justice arriving at your doorstep. With all the force and success of truth.

    • One more thing Dave:

      Where are your celebrities? Where is Tom, Chick, Kirstey and the rest?

      Why are they not standing up for you and having a media blitz to defend you from evil apostates?

      Why was Tom booed at Dodger Stadium?

      Your celebrity toys are not standing up for you because they are professional actors and artists that know beyond a shadow of a doubt that your PR is radio active. No one is standing up for you because they are protecting their careers first.

      And Tom Cruise getting booed! Man, that can’t be good. They did not boo him because of his latest movie. They are booing him because of you. Because of Scientology. That one fact in itself spells doom for you and good news for any future pain you will cause families and loved ones.

      It is done. The rest is just the details of the downfall. Time…… The clock is ticking. And the audience is craving for the final act.

    • “Your attention Dave is being hijacked by all of this.”

      That is so true. And I suspect it’s one of the main reasons Dave has disappeared from public view, why events aren’t happening, why an eerie atmosphere of suspension, paranoia and doubt has settled like fog over Clearwater.

      Another main reason, lest we forget, is that Dave has zero competent allies — apart from expensive lawyers and PIs — to help him through this, to handle day-to-day operations, while he lurches like a drunken sailor-boy from one crisis to the next.

      Here finally is the payback for driving away gifted and dedicated executives like Marty, Marc, Mike plus so many others, and insanely throwing the surviving executive strata into the Hole. Now the hour has come when he needs to field an effective team … and the bench is empty. He really DOES have to do everything himself. And (as any reader of this blog could have told him, including the OSAbots reading now) he just hasn’t got the chops for it.

  11. I’m getting the ends justify the means and don’t do what I do do as I say. How can one lose? Keep reading Scientology ethics since yours just don’t do. Oh and keep scientology working while your at it. That’s why my viewpoint is a bit further back so as my focus seems clear. ARC Bill Dupree

  12. I find the date very interesting. What he said AND WHEN HE SAID IT.

    • Totally agreee on that one. So much for the “good old days”. I’ll go with what my grandma used to say – “The ‘good old days’ is bullshit.”

  13. One has to wonder whether Daniel Montalvo was a plant.

  14. Thanks.

    I needed this data at this precise point in time.
    With seven law suits on my plate.

    :)))

    Dio

  15. one of those who see

    Re the Church’s latest on Tony’s blog: It’s fascinating, isn’t it. Thousands of Scientologists all over the world know that David Miscavige runs Scientology. They practically bow down to him. But, they are prevented from seeing any of this on the internet because it’s entheta. The rest of us who know that David runs everything are bitter defrocked apostates so we can’t be trusted. LOL – The Church at work. I like that the truth is coming out to some degree in their admissions. Though they are throwing CSI under the bus to protect Miscavige. They are trying to make this about Marty, but the lawsuit is from Mosey.
    Re: this post. I think LRH was trying to protect Scientology at all costs. But, the cost ended up to be Scientology. This is where more Eastern Philosophy was needed. Truth should have been the goal and as – isness. That is a very high plane of existence to be on and in my knowingness, I think it is attainable. LRH just didn’t attain it and since I’m not yet there myself, I’m not going to blame him. But, want to be clear, I see no blame in Marty’s post, just a statement of truth for us to see.

    • If corporate Scientology had primarily concerned itself with helping others, with serving its members, with helping them build thriving families, then nothing could have assailed it as generation upon generations of Scientologists lived wonderful and productive lives.

      By running a greedy and self-serving “can’t have” on the majority of people who have actually ever reached for Scientology, by pricing it into the stratosphere and often not delivering even when paid for, by suppressing the importance of the second dynamic and the care and nurturing of spouses and children, by encouraging its flock into penury, by spending more money and human resources on attorneys and vicious and petty surveillance operations than on acts of public good—Scientology has doomed itself to the likely fate of being a curious but ultimately unimportant footnote in the religious history of humankind, and deservedly so.

  16. Small, recurring donation made. Enough is enough
    Love to U2
    Olivier

    Old pirates yes they rob I
    Sold I to the merchant ships
    Minutes after they took I from the
    Bottomless pit
    But my hand was made strong
    By the hand of the almighty.
    We forward in this generation
    Triumphantly
    Won’t you help to sing
    These songs of freedom
    Cause all I ever have, redemption songs,
    Redemption songs

    Emancipate your selves from mental slavery
    None but yourselves can free our minds
    Have no fear for atomic energy
    Cause none a them can stop the time.
    Bob Marley Redemption Song

  17. Hi Marty.

    To me, the most basic, devastating and most difficult to confront upset that Ron Hubbard and the Scientology he created produced, was that he never achieved “soulhood” or had as goal that his members achieve it.

    He did not and could not operate from the viewpoint of a soul. From the kindness and compassion and understanding and wisdom that nourishing and following one’s heart, one’s spiritual impulses brings.

    He nourished the demands of the ego by yielding to its impulses which weakened him and produced the inability to make happen all that he wanted/needed to achieve. Thus he and his Scientology are being a lie and a failure in the eyes of most who were a part of it.

    There are tons of examples of this you are bringing out and your growing consciousness and imparting of what it is to genuinely operate as a spirit is wonderful to witness.

    The ego can only live in the physical and walk the physical. Seeking harmony and pursuing the elevating of any situation so there is a much less physical distancing barriers and a higher love level is never envisioned and cannot be achieved.

    There are so many examples of this and you are bringing them out one by one.

    I will just add one to it which, I don’t believe, has not been examined: His greatest good to the greatest number of dynamics.

    Dynamics one thru 6 exist only in the physical universe. To make them as equally as important to the 7th is a horrendous, to me, manipulation which is completely ego produced and meant to control and shut off the soulness, the guidance of the heart.

    The decisions one makes should be guided by what will benefit souls in the long run. What will provide, all souls involved, with greater strength and freedom to make happen what each wants, with greater connectivity to the beautifulness and kindness each soul is endowed with, and with a greater degree of harmony with oneself and with all souls.

    Jefferson Hawkins, stated it quite well in his recent interview with Tony Ortega: “The normal dictionary definition of “ethics” is “moral principles that govern a person’s or group’s behavior.” It’s our “moral compass,” if you will. It’s that inner voice that tells us if something is right or wrong. In Introduction to Scientology Ethics, Hubbard’s goal is to replace a person’s normal sense of ethics with his own Scientology system, his “technology of ethics.”.

    Regards,
    Luis

  18. Isn’t it time for Ray Jaffry to checkmate this case and walk away with all the winnings with a summary judgement based on the admissions of the laughable Anti-SLAPP?

  19. Davey is scared and his back is to the wall. He is making mistakes which will come return to haunt him, as they should.
    I am amused by his (as a cult our right to hate must be protected) stand. I think what we are seeing is Miscavige being given enough rope, well you know;)
    Monique and Marty you have truth on your side and so many of us wishing you well.

  20. The aim of this anti-SLAPP is to keep David Miscavige out of court. It will result in the anti-SLAPP being determined by whether the suit against CSI is valid. If it is then David Miscavige of RTC doesn’t need to respond because CSI will, after appeals no doubt, capitulate and that will be that.

  21. Wow! Your reference really explains to me the state of mind of these radical scientologists and how they are able to justify their actions or overts. They are actually being faithfully religious by obeying their religious tenets when they set out to destroy you or other perceived enemies of the Church by whichever dirty means or tricks possible. It’s written by LRH himself!!! In another words, they are excising their First Amendment when they are trying to utterly destroy you! This is quite astonishing!! I just read Tony Ortega’s blog posted today which illustrates this mentality perfectly! The Church now openly admits they have been stalking Marty and its enemies by PI’s over the years because they are following their religiously tenets! It is perfectly righteous and justified to destroy the enemies of their religion! After all we are just worthless inferior wogs or dogs that can be discarded like trash. I see an eerie similarity between this concept and the viewpoint of the Islamic radicals. This is “Scientology Jihad” in the making!!!! Scientology Jihad is coming!!! I predict that when DM is finally cornered with nowhere to turn, he will order his minions to launch the Scientology Jihad as a way to exit this sector of universe with a BANG! It will make Jim Jones and Jonestown look like a kindergarten play!

  22. Bingo. Now try to justify that datum against the beingness of an auditor, the principle of affinity, reality and communication, the goal of understanding, the application of pan-determinism, the subject of personal integrity, or any other fundamental philosophic ideal of Scientology. It can’t be done, because this incorrectly-included fixed idea from LRH doesn’t align with the purpose of help, philosophy, wisdom, religion, love, respect or anything good. It is one of the key held-down sevens within the mechanics of Scientology philosophy that always calculates the final result will be wrong. It is a “fatal flaw” that sounds workable, but has in fact doomed the organization to failure. Because anyone practicing it is perceived as irrational, dangerous and incompatible with the mission of a safe, sane environment. The policy of refusing to listen and the insistence on attack! comes from the playbook of psychopathy and so it could never be a workable part of a philosophy of wisdom or spiritual betterment. Scientologists who are dismayed by the perception of LRH has a fraud need look no further than the LRH datum that Marty is pointing to. Sure there are sociopaths, but the “world” itself was never out to destroy or crush Scientology. They grow alarmed by the trademark of psychosis which LRH himself injected into the “Church” and so take action to safeguard themselves and others from harm.

    Can you imagine this datum in use by auditors and C/Ses? Oh yeah, it already is inside the Church.

  23. Though Hubbard’s tactics may seem unpalatable, they are and were effective. He probably got them from “The Art of War, by Sun Tzu. The things Hubbard has said about always attacking a weak point and various other strategies are also suggested by Sun Tzu. Where Hubbard says to never defend, but always attack is suggested by Sun Tzu, but in different words. Sun Tzu says to never fight where your enemy wants you to fight, but appear where unexpected and to always attack one of his weak points – hence you never defend against an attacker. A weak point is a point that is undefended, per Sun Tzu. I don’t support Hubbard, but he knew how to win. He took all of our money and time and laughed all the way back to hell. Ha ha ha.

  24. The Golden Age of Lawyers

  25. Is it true the green and red vols have been pulled out of the courserooms? Wouldn’t want students coming across the above tidbits of tech. Just sayin’…

  26. Through the years on this blog and simply in conversation with other former Scientologists I’ve always tried to walk the middle road.

    Ever mindful of my own personal gains as well as my losses while a member, I always tried to remind myself and others of the positives.

    I never went to the other side — wondering IF or WHEN or WHY LRH is characterized by some as evil.

    THIS policy — has me now saying … yup …

    This is someone who is evil.

    When evil is defined as a wish for others to be “destroyed utterly.”

    Makes my heart lurch I have to say.

    Am proud of myself that I left. Am proud that I wasn’t so horribly ruined as others have been.

    Am extraordinarily proud of those who were involved at a high level who were able to extricate themselves from this cult. Wrenching free of the devil is no small feat!!

    Christine

    • Wow Christine, just wow. Coming from you means something to me.

    • WH:
      “THIS policy — has me now saying … yup …

      This is someone who is evil.”

      Would that be:
      – totally evil?
      – evil in virtually all aspects?
      – middling evil
      – evil in a few aspects?

      Just about everyone has a bit of evil that surfaces under the right condition. Not to apologize too much for LRH’s demonstrated evil impulses, I will acknowledge that he had well documented areas of aberration that he kept in place.

      I really wish he wouldn’t have done that (kept those particular evil impulses) but my wish and your labeling of the man as evil are equally useless to any resolution we seek.

      I haven’t yet lost sight of the contributions to the understanding of the nature of man that he did provide.

      • Wow. The best I could come up with on my comment was to give the context of the quote in the blog post. But it was to express exactly what you did. Thank you.

      • 2ndxmr: Thank you for your thoughts — my purpose in commenting wasn’t to get agreement or disagreement but simply to voice my own current state of mind.

        I’m finding that group certainty and solidarity often has become — FOR ME — a substitute for any real journey of my own.

        I’m throwing nothing away (as everything in my life has merit in my journey) neither am I in agreement with even 50% of any one tradition including buddhism.

        That said — I believe that once a tradition tips over to the “more harm, than good” … it’s a tradition, at this point in its evolution, that should be discarded whole cloth.

        BECAUSE — not everyone is able to decide what to keep and what to discard instead will keep what the majority find good — EVEN IF (as we are seeing INSIDE scientology today) is terribly harmful.

        Christine

  27. Marty, or someone, please advise me if I just missed it, and if so when/where. This is driving me crazy. I want to know how DM & Co. can keep getting away with calling us squirrels, dissenters, etc., as his justifying doing whatever the hell he wants to the people who decided he could go take a flying leap, He, himself, squirreled the hell out of and altered the works of Hubbard which affected every single person that walked thru the doors of an org, as “we” all know. He has been operating a fraudulent organization after stealing the “name” of Founder and Religion, by violating the very policies that specifically prohibited such a thing from happening. He should be on Trial!

    Regardless, what I want is Help in saving my last shred of sanity over this subject of COS/Scientology/Miscaviage/Hubbard, please. I have not found one time or place when anyone brought this up in Court, but I haven’t followed everything either.

    Now that the Anti-Slapp has been introduced, wouldn’t this be a great time to interject the Truth of what DM himself did to the COS? I seriously think it’s past due to see this character hit the dirt, take a blow, get convicted of everything he’s guilty of, etc. Karma time means giving something Good back to all those People who were attacked and brought to suicide, bad health, death thru the suppression of it all, the milkng of millions of dollars for IAS and SuperPower and whatever other ideas were up the ass of DM at any given time when he “wanted” something, and on and on the list of his crimes go.

    Help me, if you can by letting me know if his fraud has ever been brought up in court and/or his squirreling. And isn’t THIS the Exact Right Time to do so, in Monique’s case? Thanks 🙂

  28. How timely! I was just looking for this exact quote in relation to the cult’s misuse of personal information here in the UK – thanks!

  29. I am moved when people have the courage to speak up about horrors done to them. Not onley in the Church of Scientology case.

    And I don’t want to hear that “Being a Victim ” Crap on it

    open your eyes

    http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?33224-Child-abuse-in-the-Sea-Org&p=863506&viewfull=1#post863506

    “I was one of those 11 year old children locked up in the chain locker, and sexually abused at aged 14. In answer to where my parents were… my father wasn’t on the scene, but my mother was left in the UK whilst I was sent to the ship. When Ivis Bolger and Monica Quirino found out about my being abused, it was me who sent for a sec. check and not the person who raped me! Beggars belief, and I thank God every day that I am not involved, and that my children never have been and never will be !

    —–

    Let’s see where this thread goes…”

    • Source: HCOPL 1 September 1965, “Ethics Protection”:

      “In short a staff member can get away with murder so long as his statistic is up and can’t sneeze without a chop if it’s down. … When people do start reporting a staff member with a high statistic, what you investigate is the person who turned in the report.”

  30. I hear so much about Tony Ortega and his battle against scn.

    He said he was never a scngist.

    I wonder why he is interested in scn?

    How can he know what scn is about without being it it?

    Directly or indirectly….

    Can someone please explain?

    Dio

    • Can a physician who has never had cancer be interested in finding a cure and ending the suffering of others? I’m not sure what Tony’s intentions were when he started out and I won’t elevate him to sainthood, but he has worked his butt off to learn about scn and its organizations, its policies and most important, its people. As a third party with no vested interest in retaining any of scn or its practices, he is a valuable resource of information for me.

    • It’s about having compassion for your fellow man. Some people just don’t have it in them to sit quietly while great injustice and abuse is perpetrated.

    • It just occurred to me, that my inquiry on Tony Ortega might be taken out of context, that is that I am against his efforts.

      Therefore I want to clarify.

      I am not against him at all. I support him fully. I also think he is an amazing writer. I find his writing quite easy to read. I only wish I could write anywhere near as well. More power to him.

      I am just curious as to who he is and why he devotes so much time and effort into following and writing against the C0$?

      And how can he afford to do so?

      Plus my questions in my first post.

      (Time lapse)

      Well, it also occurred to me, to see what I could find on line about who Tony was and I found out who he is, I still do not know why he writes against the CO$ and how can he afford to do so?

      Dio

      • Sometimes a person get’s gripped by a subject, he chooses his Game if you will

        • Cat Daddy,

          Thank you for your reply.

          I get the idea that he just got the “bug” and and it became an obsession and decided it is his mission.

          More power to him.
          The more enemies the cos has the better.
          Get them from the front and back and sides and top and bottom.

          Dio

      • Dios if you looked on line how can you still not know “why.” He is a journalist. This is an important story and not just for scientologists. It isn’t just in the Church of Scientology that people are conned, swindled, bullied and abused particularly by sociopathic personalities hiding behind a corporate veil. There are many garden paths leading the starry eyed to emptiness, ruin, and loss. Ex Scientologists are not the only ones who grieve for time mis spent, lost or wasted or were capable of giving up everything for the sake of a cause and who chose to live on nothing in order to make that happen.

        You are of course free to wonder about anything and everything inside your own mind (I hope this is true for you) but, to ask in a public forum about someone ‘s personal finances, someone who is not demonstrating any unusual wealth or poverty, only draws attention to you. Why are you wondering about this?

        I remember that integration has been a stated objective here. Perhaps it is only meant to be about knowledge and tec. What about people?

      • Dio, your questions are fair and completely appropriate. It shouldn’t be too hard to learn about Tony’s career with a bit of googling. He’s a fairly public figure as the former editor of Village Voice, and most of his nearly two decades of reporting on Scientology were done there. I believe he supports himself today mostly through donations to his blog, plus occasional freelance writing for other publications.

        The Village Voice connection is telling, though. Though it’s fallen on hard times lately, for a few decades it was a cultural lodestone in New York. I was picked it up whenever I was in or near the city. The Voice (“Village” refers to Greenwich Village, once the center of alternative and bohemian culture) covered news, art, music, and other goings-on around town. They specialized in stories just below the surface of mainstream awareness. As an example, I remember their reporting on Mob involvement in Atlantic City when gambling was legalized there in the late 70s.

        Smart, brave, funny, irreverent, and totally plugged-in to the New York scene — I think you can detect most of those qualities in Ortega’s reporting today, only with a dedicated focus on the corporate COS. As to how he developed this fascination, I can’t remember all the details, but it began with something that happened in the 90s (pre-Lisa M, I’m pretty sure), and I guess it ballooned from there. Part of the attraction — and again, typical of the Voice in general — was that it was a big story yet maybe a little too bizarre or confusing for the mainstream press to take much interest in. It was a story Ortega could “own” along with just a few other reporters like the two blokes in Tampa. From a professional standpoint you could say he’s done quite well with this unique franchise.

        I don’t think there’s anything darker or more mysterious than that.

    • I can attest to that the subject of Scientology may have a certain appeal to outsiders, even if they never intend to get any Scientology training. What really got me personally interested were the horrible stories I’ve heard breakaways tell. And how people could be manipulated into enduring these abuses they have experienced.
      Plus, when I saw the videos of the people of the LMT protesting in front of the Fort Harrison hotel, and how Scientologists, grown people that could be my parents, would go batshit crazy I really wanted to see this for myself. This whole subject has so much depth it can really enthrall you. I guess this is what happened to Tony🙂

  31. positive postulates still going strong in your favor .
    I wish I could do more to help.

  32. Yes that is the way L Ron Hubbard sees the world. Sick. He needs a good Life Coach.

  33. PS: That is the very reason why I put all my Green Volumes in the dumpster, along with the ethics book, and all the basic books and lectures and all the other meaningless no-better-than-the Nazis junk I had accumulated over 20 years of attempted brainwashing of me. The whole lot is a crock. A twisted, sick version of what life is really all about. Leave it all behind and live a real life with beautiful free people. I highly recommend it. :-))

    • someone JUST back from Flag leaked ~~
      There are no OEC and no Tech Vols in the courseroom anymore-all the materials to be studied are in the coursepacks. In many cases,just excerpts from whole texts are studied.

      So I went to the Bridge Publication site this evening and the Red volumes and Green volumes are gone ! I finally found one image of the Red volumes but the link “to buy “is dead.
      http://www.bridgepub.com/
      Happy to be wrong if I am, please post link.
      There is something I cannot quite put my finger on behind this, something does not add up…

      • Karen: Red and green vols. being withheld from students and public. This is important. I will inquire with Nashville and Atl. Perhaps they are being re-written…..again. Several of us need to look into this.
        Mark

      • Might have to do with the Carcia case and what the judge asked of Scientology.

        “Next in the Garcia Fraud Lawsuit: Scientology Is Asked to Explain Its Arbitration System”

        http://tonyortega.org/2013/10/20/next-in-the-garcia-fraud-lawsuit-scientology-is-asked-to-explain-its-arbitration-system/#more-11109

        Would that help as even a bunch of Anons poses the Red and Green volumes in bookform these days.

      • A proposed explanation: Perhaps this is all part of Mi$cavige’s long range plan to gradiently destroy the Tech and supplant LRH as the source of the Tech with himself as the “Ecclesiastic Leader”.
        With GAT, he positioned his GAT issues to be “equal to” TECH issues.
        With GAT II, is it possible that his next gradient is to completely supplant LRH issues with GAT issues except for a few excerpts which he has cherry-picked for his own purposes?
        Would he dare to be so blatant? If he is doing this, I think that people are going be rebelling in LARGE numbers.

        • t has already been happening. I recently read a report that The red and white and green and white volume sets are no longer available for sale through the CoS. New course packs in fact have excerpts from technical issues but the complete issues themselves are not available anymore.

          Looks like DM is turning Scientology into something like EST by cherry-picking LRH materials.

  34. No wonder he had so many enemies.

  35. Seems like the entire slapp ruse is a red herring designed to derail the simple fact that david miscavige, osa, leblow and several scientologists illegally harassed, intimidated and mentally tortured an innocent lady in order to make her husband’s life a living hell.

    I read over some of the rules and regs for slapp lawsuits in Texas. misavige’s lawyer must himself be a sociopath or he had to have been totally embarassed presenting that irrelevant, ridiculous motion.

    “The DEFENSE of anything is UNTENABLE. The only way to defend anything is to ATTACK, and if you ever forget that then you will lose every battle you are ever engaged in, whether it is in terms of personal conversation, public debate, or a court of law. NEVER BE INTERESTED IN CHARGES. DO, yourself much MORE CHARGING and you will WIN. And the public, seeing that you won, will then have a communication line to the effect that Scientologists WIN.”

    Judging by the cheers for Leah and the Boos for Tom, I would say that the “public” are well aware of the crimes of the miscavige and his so-called church and are also aware of the new fact that miscavige and the church are LOSING.

    This over-the-top need to be right, and to WIN at all costs is clearly laid out in Martha Stout’s book, The Sociopath Next Door.

    I really admire Mrs. Rathbun and Mr. Jeffrey for taking this on.

  36. Hi Marty,

    I’m sending my best wishes to you and your remarkable wife and hope that you both know that she has a significant number of supporters here in the U.S. and throughout the world; a great number having never had any personal affiliation with Scientology, but who are impressed by Monique’s bravery, honesty, and intelligence and want her to be awarded this injunction and to be free from the harassment from the Church of Scientology and its leader, David Miscavige.

    We are getting the word out to the general public about this case and I have noticed that the C o S sock puppets don’t respond to me when I bring attention to the point that Monique just wants the harassment to stop and if they would like someone to harass them, or someone they care about, in the same way.

    I have had the C o S cause my comments to be removed from my Disqus account and from the ABC comment boards, despite the fact that my posts haven’t violated any of Disqus’s standards and I only bring up facts which are already in the public domain. I have not had comments removed from any other site; only ABC.

    There are also fewer socks showing up on the comment boards. Many delete their comments completely soon after they have responded to others.

    One significant factor that I think is on the mind of the enraged David Miscavige is the fact that so many of those whom he sees as his biggest enemies are actually working as allies in exposing his and the C o S’s many faults, crimes and abuses. He would like nothing better than to have hatred and arguing going on to divide camps, however he won’t have the satisfaction of getting his wish, and this is driving him even further into crazy town (he’s already the eccsleaziastical leader there, of course).

    Wishing you peace and much happiness!

  37. There are possible only a few times in Scientology’s legal strategies history where Scientology was fighting the moral good fight.

    This quoted passage of Scientology scriptures could only be tempered with a very few of Hubbard’s other more moral theory.

    The Way to Happiness, alone, I think is about the only moral high ground writing that tops all his combative irreligious immoral stuff.

    I see no good way out for official Scientology.

    So much of what Hubbard wrote should just be discarded.

    Back in the 1980s, during all the “hot” legal cases, that caused that massive man-up of OSA in the 1980s, it appalled me. I felt we should just accept the big losses, lose to the IRS, lose religious status, lose all the buildings, just lose!

    And if the tech survived, as the freezone and independents have shown it will, out in the unofficial FIeld Auditor and Field Group field out there which have always been out there all through Scientology history, that’s the only long term sensible way forward.

    In fact, the “Why TRs” film, showing a young Scientology TRs course being run by a young man on a distant planet, from that young man’s memory, to me, is about the only sensible long term realistic view Hubbard wrote about the future.

    In 1983 I read some of Hubbard’s desperate despatch comments where he was fearful of “losing it all.”

    Hubbard was back and forth, worrying in extreme on the one hand, then writing things like the “Why TRs” script on the other hand, or writing The Way to Happiness.

    It’s difficult to take it all seriously, and a huge challenge.

    The freezone and independent Scientologists have the easiest road.

    ————————–

    Marty a couple years ago you said if Hubbard really were around to pick up today’s pieces that he’d NOT likely even keep plugging to keep this whole big “show” going like it’s currently going. You thought he’d likely let his behemoth crash. A sane Hubbard would do that, no doubt. I just wonder if all of LRH’s other ambitious ideas about what it takes to make a strong juggernaut movement would have allowed him to let it all really crash.

    Your chapter 24 of your 3rd book, I urge all people to read that chapter!

    I wish even more that more of LRH’s final year’s of thoughts could be detailed.

    Hope Monique wins!

    Thanks again for going public all these years Marty!

  38. LRH seems in this seems like an angry Greek god, vindictive, spiteful and out to crush all opposition. Yea, perhaps he was the devil himself, clothed in aluring charm, selling freedom and infinite absolutes? What did he gain, eventually? A few souls to buy his freedom? Must be getting more difficult.

    Today’s report on Tony’s blog brought home to me the reality, as far as I can grasp it from the distance. We live in luxury, and Marty has afforded us and continues to afford us the luxury to come here and chat, as if there weren’t the holy inquisition knocking at the door. As if Monique had never been put through all this. But she has, and has been robbed of her peace, something most of us probably take for granted.

    I agree with Li Po. Enough is enough. This case is brought by Mosey. She deserves what so many of us take for granted. A life free to live as we please, and preferably free from fanatics.

  39. Pretty sick stuff.

    That policy is really getting Scientology nowhere except ridiculed in the public eye. I also do see some people apparently fearful of the cult, but that doesn’t mean they like it.

    I wish and hope and pray that Mosey takes that scummy organization to the cleaners.

  40. This is necessary posting and thanx. For anyone with CO$ knowledge, this is method of operation 101! Back in the 80’s this war strategy would be, and was, devastating. But today, in the information-internet age, this tired old Bullshit is totally transparent to all parties concerned. DM cannot dominate this front today as his mentor did in yesteryear!

  41. Madora Pennington

    The Old Man did not stand tall, but went on the run and hid, and took his wrath from his public humiliations out on the SO. That quote means: BE THE BIGGEST BULLY AND EVERYONE WILL BE AWED AND WANT TO BE LIKE YOU

    This is the thinking of an abusive-type person.

    The Westboro Baptist Cult Hate Group ACTUALLY UNDERSTANDS the 1st Amendment. They hold their revolting pickets in compliance with laws, and they have won at the Supreme Court level. They don’t take away others’ right to the 1st Amendment. They don’t violate others’ freedoms. They are open about what they do, who they are and their message. They let cameras in to interview their leader. Think about that, TeamScientology – you look like a bunch of irrational idiots next to the WBC.

    I had a good laugh at TeamScientology’s attempt to divide the Rathbun marriage. Prevent Marty from advising on his wife’s lawsuit? Give me a break!

    This twisted thinking that marriage has no value is built into the Scientologist mindset. LRH abandoned all three of his wives. As I’ve become a more and more vocal critic of Scientology, a number of Scientologists have reported me to my husband without addressing my behavior with me, and/or shunned us both, for things I said and I did. What do they want him to do? Smack me around until I give up my free will and became a submissive wife? (i thanked him for not doing that.)

    Friends can disagree. Cult members shun.

    Rock on Ray-J and Mosey!

  42. Cat Daddy, Thank you for that clip. Nicely said, Professor Dawkins.

  43. From a never-in from yon o’er Tony O’s Bunker:

    First, Marty and Mosey, rock on. My heart goes out to you for all you have undergone and all you have yet to suffer in this ugly legal battle. Remember that you are in the right. What you are so courageously doing now will not only help you and others who’ve been harmed by Fair Game, it will help others who may be faced with this kind of harassment in the future, and others who don’t even have anything to do with Scientology (once these precedents are enshrined into Texas law, it’ll be a darker day for all makes and models of bullies out there.) So hang in and know how many of us have your backs. I think of Thomas Jefferson’s remark about slavery (after the Framers made the terrible compromise that imbedded slavery into the Constitution): “I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.”

    If I were COB, I’d be trembling right now. Because personally, I do believe God is just. Sadly, humankind isn’t always.

    Second, as a never-in, I would never presume to come to your turf and criticize your belief system. Whatever I may think of it personally, I greatly respect others beliefs as I would hope they would respect mine. As long as nobody gets hurt. Beliefs are called beliefs for a reason – they involve our inborn spirituality and how we choose to manifest it. They are faith, not facts. The only facts in question here are pretty evident – LRH embedded the seeds of this terrible policy into your religion. DM has policy letters he can look up that will allow him justify to himself – and to those poor sods who do his bidding – that destroying your lives is for the greater good. And good for the planet. There is something deeply wrong with that. I think it is incredible that so many of you have broken the chains and are finding ways to adapt what you found useful in Scientology to a new life of free thinking and free living. I hope you will all keep pushing the envelopes of this frontier, even though it involves the difficult task of tearing down some of the rotten pillars to be found in your religion’s very foundations.

    All this takes courage as well. I see a lot of courage on this blog and it is inspiring.

    Finally, my spouse “MrPI”, who doesn’t follow the Fall of the House of COB closely at all, was pretty damn outraged at CO$ courtroom antics today. He made the ironic but not entirely illogical suggestion that the Rathbuns formally announce your new micro-splinter sect of Indie Scientology. This ‘religious sect’ has two inviolable, “ecclesiastical” rules and rituals that are the very basis of the faith:
    1) Extreme and total privacy at all times, for both the “clergy” and their visiting “congregation,” and friends and family of same.
    2) A total ban on all photography or videotaping of said clergy and their congregation, friends and family by those outside the faith. You know, like the Native Americans – it steals your soul, and all that.
    Without these two sacred tenants, you are not able to practice your religion. Which is in violation of the 1st amendment.
    So that means CO$ has continually and repeatedly infringed on your first amendment rights.
    What are they, religious bigots?
    Anyway, sending prayers from my own personal and totally unprovable belief system…please know in your darkest moments that you are never alone in this fight. Like I said, it goes beyond your personal issue, or even the issue of Indie Scientologists. This is as important a human rights issue as it gets.
    Namaste.

    • +1
      Wonderful post.

      • Thank you. PoisonIvyherself, who I know from the many comments on the Tony O blog just reaffirmed my belief in mankind. +100000 and Ditto.
        Thank you Marty and Mosey too. Today’s blog and commenters have risen to a higher level indeed and I appreciate you all for the cogs I have had just in reading today. I have greater hope for us all.

  44. The filing of this motion is surprising at all to me. The criminal mind (Miscavige) accuses others of crimes that he himself is guilty of. I hope the judge can see through this sort of chicanery. It is a typical RCS trick – try to play the victim and use “religious freedom” as a pretext for commiting criminal acts.

    • When I was a little boy in the cadet org, we were all called to the rarely used study room to hear a story. It was called “Cry Wolf”. For many years afterward, I tried to fathom why we had been told this story.

      Now I know.

  45. The anti- SLAPP motion is s stunning and risky strategy. And the Church’s admissions are a confession of wrongdoing. What on earth are the Church’s attorneys thinking? That although slander and libel are not free speech, intimidation somehow is?

    • I think they know that the case against them is strong. They have behaved very badly and put themselves in an untenable position. Having only lemons, they are trying to make lemonade. Admit the lot of it, since it can be proven easily on tape and with witnesses, and try to justify it. Its a weak hand, but the only one they had. I see 8 figures and a permanent restraining order at the end, whether its dragged out to the churches PR detriment, or settled sooner. A court ruling would be best as it will hopefully set a precedent to keep the church from hurting others.

  46. I take this literal now: I have a personal conversation with my wife about who is doing the dish wash tonight. So, I do not say, „I did it yesterday“ (defense position) but say something like „you brat have to learn to clean, last time you did it I had to redo it… (attack). Does this make sense? At least I started a fight. And I lose in the end.

  47. This is individualism where winning of self matters the most. Everybody else can go to hell. This was Hubbard. This is Scientology.

    Unfortunately, this is also today’s America.

    • A bit of a generality about America Vinair. Just sayin’

      • Of course, not all of America is like that, but don’t forget that Scientology is an American religion. It is a symptom of where America is headed.

        We I am doing something about it. See
        http://vinaire.me/2013/10/19/project-recover-america/

        • And America is where Burning Man, Rock and Roll, VHS, people free to practice religion. Generalizing a whole nation is as one way is……………. (Place your own word)

          • I am simply pointing out the major factor. Scientology concerns every person on this blog. I am taking a peek at what lies behind it culturally.

            .

            • What lies it culturally is the desire for spiritual enlightenment: simple

              People want to know about causes and effects of life.

              That is a wonderful trait.

              God, in whatever degree, is still alive in America!

              • Do you think that money can be made by making people believe in a personal God?

                Wait till you see a Church that makes people believe that they are God.

                There is no such thing as a personal God. God is an abstract reality.

                • Life is always dual. The great masters I have studied say itvis both personal and impersonal.

                  An illustration that made it clear to me:

                  That power, which has the capacity to create persons, certainly is not devoid of that capacity Itself

                  That is why there is Bhakti Yoga and Jnana Yoga.

                  Yoga, being a truly open source system, has roads for all the various mental tendencies of human beings. Someone with a more heart based tendency naturally gravitates to the personal: the path of love.

                  One who is intellectual by nature gravitates towards knowledge and wisdom.

                  But the liberated sages I have studies say Wisdom and Love are in essence the same when that ultimate state is attained.

                  These two natures one personal and the other impersonal are one and the same.

                  • And God is only abstract when it is orphaned as an unknown because of unfamiliarity with it as experiencial. It is only an abstract because it is only an idea in the mind. And ideas of things are not the reality of things.

                    Speculation is not direct experience.

                    • God is.

                      There was a fish that discounted the reality of water. It’s ubiquitousness obviscates it’s obviousness. But to know this to be true requires dedication to the inner spiritual adventure.

                      Staying in the infinite attraction of the intellect won’t do.

                      It is a grand and monumental task to transform the human into the divine. Book learning and knowledge is only the begining. The very source of reality itself has to dissolve into the vast spheres of consciousness. Where all questions find their answers through the intuitive powers of the soul.

                      It is there that the reality God is perceived. Not believed in: perceived

                  • The Buddha view of existence, and the Dharma view of existence, are apparently contradictory. That’s why one needs to follow the Middle Path.

                    • Buddha preached Dharma. Dharma just means duty, aligning with truth, cosmic law.
                      Do you mean the Sanatan Dharma?

                    • Brian, my background is Far Eastern. Here are the quotes I’m referencing:

                      “The Chinese master Wu-men said “To have a Buddha view and a Dharma view is to be enclosed by two iron mountains.”

                      Robert Aitken comments, “The Buddha view is that all is empty. The Dharma view is that all is karma. One is the First Principle, the other is the Second Principle. You are caught in principles. What is the way out? The eucalyptus trees stand motionless in the night air. Only a faraway rooster can be heard.”

                      So, do you take the Buddha view or the Dharma view, in your thinking?
                      Which ever one you choose, it will be only the sound of one hand clapping.”

                      The Gotama buddha himself is quoted as having made similar statements, on the order of “Buddhas have led countless beings to Nirvana. Yet no being has ever been led to Nirvana.” (paraphrased)

                      The point is, in LRH terms, it’s about “statics and kinetics”. Karma is about kinetics, mechanics, the phenomenal world, samsara or maya, which are “empty of own-being”. Dharma is about karma, which literally means “action”.

                      Hope that helps make clear my frame of reference? It basically says “words tend to get in the way,” That’s why he points at the moon or whatever.

                      That said, your posts lately have been clear and pure as the mountain air. In describing them to a Scientologist, I would call them “theta”.

                    • Thanks Valkov. That is certainly a way to see it.

                    • In case I did not make clear how I understood Wu-men, he said that to hold a Buddha view AND a Dharma view is to be enclosed by 2 iron mountains.

                      In other words, if you hold those 2 views, you are dichotomizing existence.

                    • Or in balance🙂

          • It is the runaway individualism in America, which is taken to an extreme in Scientology. Scientology is a symptom of a cultural malaise.

            • I see your point there

              • On the other hand Vinair, I have listened to many a wise man from the east. In person and in books. Many of them from Alan Watts, Vivekananda, Swami Satchidananda, Yogananda and many more, have stated that America is a place where the future spirituality of thebplanet is being birthed.

                That is because it has broken from thousand year old locked step traditions of older countries. And America has always had an undercurrent of a spiritula search. The constitution protects it.

                We in America are the spiritual petri dish. An experimentation in human potential. Ron was just a link in the chain.

                The churches of europe are empty.

                The search for transcendence is alive and well.

                The universality of eastern thought(India) and the rugged individualism of America with it’s mastery over matter through science is a perfect balance of what the future world looks like.

                India/America: one mastering the art of spiritual transcendence and one mastering the external sciences.

                Things are as they should be.

  48. From one of the hymns at Church this morning – spoke to me anyway:

    God of the poor

    Friend of the weak

    Give us compassion we pray

    Melt our cold hearts

    Let tears fall like rain

    Come, change our love

    From a spark to a flame

    (Beauty for Brokenness by Graham Kendrick)

  49. What a ridiculous lawsuit. It’s like killing both your parents and then asking the judge to take into account you’re an orphan.

  50. This really is a sort of last ditch attempt to tie litigation up by the COS. It is also a really stupid move in many regards, primarily that this case is getting longer legs and is becoming such a huger matter across media. The interesting aspect to this is that the legal teams from COS are building this, not the other way around. They are fueling this with their 16 or so attorneys, and their volumes of rebuttal. So much overkill and no one bothers to note how those actions just fuel the case and get attention from the media, who will simply treat this like David vs. Goliath. There is so little positive to be gained from this for them, actually, I have a hard time seeing anything worthwhile to be gained from this for them. The smart thing would have been to settle this quietly, particularly from an Art of War perspective.

    No, this is really indicative of a lack of introspection and consequence, which seems to sum up my view of the organization in the last several years.

    On the positive of those of us who experienced the insanity on the inside, these results have been sweet comeuppance. There was so little justice available to us on the inside because the requirement that any justice would have to be tempered with the current “expansion strategy” many, myself included, were simply tossed aside and not given our fair shot. Instant “ethics” protection for those who have donated “significant amounts” while those who actually did were ignored and left to figure things out for themselves. In retrospect, a good thing as it offered opportunity to reevaluate the party lines and the truth. Those in the COS really are willfully “sheeple” (as eloquently coined by Rinder).

    I have to say the implosion really has arrived, and there is no turning it around. With each and every dollar spent on following the above policy, the COS does nothing but dead agent themselves.

  51. BULLA AD EXTIRPANDA
    Holy Vatican City
    PAPAL BULL OF AD 15 MAY 1252R

    Remimeo

    CANCELLATION OF AUTO-DE-FE

    The practice of ordering APOSTATE and HERETICS to Public Penance will cease. AUTO-DE-FE of APOSTATES and HERETICS may not appear on any Holy Inquisition Tribunal Orders. It causes bad public relations.

    This Papal Bull does not cancel any Papal Bull on the treatment or handling of an APOSTATE or HERETIC.

    POPE Innocent IV

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-da-fe

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_extirpanda

  52. If I went to some of the super-cool SCNists I’ve met, and told them something like ‘mmm I think that talking about her O/Ws in the kitchen isn’t that good”, or “…is not LRH” I would get a response like “well, at least I do something about saving the planet!” and “you dont mind your own business because you have O/Ws” or something. Mind you, I’m only talking about the super-cool people that are above others, are wise, and dont take back chatting….because they’re too cool.

    Now, I don’t think LRH ever told them to talk about people’s confidential O/W writte-ups in the kitchen room. But I have read by LRH that low toned people immitate the behaviour of high toned people –and when he wrote that he was reffering to people in SCN orgs.

    If I was actually honest and didnt harm etc and I got a troll who said that im bad and this and that, I would consider too that the guy might be boiling in his own O/Ws. But you see the same does not apply when you try to ‘correct’ a person that actually commits the O/Ws.

    I’m not profficient with HCOPLs but I’m saying this because I think that when LRH said to be harsh towards attackers, he didn’t mean people that pointed out you do something wrong to correct you, or for some other greatest good. I think he meant the trolls who troll you because they’re being trolls, and their job is to troll others. Also, I think when LRH was writting that stuff back then those orgs weren’t the same as now. So the stuff that applied back then don’t apply anymore. Also I remember reading in an HCOPL by LRH that the police should only be used in extreme occassions when there is no other option –that one should avoid using the police. I don’t think that’s what the COS applies either. The COS exhausts it’s civilised options with it’s authoritarian attitude anyway. They (the cool guys) are not there to chat with. They’re there to command overtly or covertly and shut disagreements up.

    • Generaly, I think all those HCOPLs don’t have any actual application in the Church today, the way it acts. Take for example that HCOPL that says that whoever quits staff after staff status 1 get’s a treason condition. Horsesh*t! How can I be at treason towards a traitor? That’s quite tricky and mindboggling. Also, take all refferences to Squirrels and throw them out of the window, as the most popular squirrel of all is the Church itself. WTF is ‘Standard Tech’ anyway? Where did you get it from, the arch-squirrels?

      I know I’m bad for invalidating all those people and their tech, but I think it’s better than to tell them that it’s OK and leave them to rot along with others.

  53. I think we all know that the current regime takes such negative “tech” completely out of context and runs with it. You are quoting a bit out of context – but this is okay because the church is applying it out of context.

    This was from an article written in 1955 about a completely different situation, and reads very differently in context. The article is pages long.

    Directly after the “ruin him utterly” ‘graph, Ron writes:

    “A D.Scn. has the power to revoke a certificate below the level of D.Scn. but not a D.Scn. However, he can even recommend to the CECS of the HASI that D.Scns. be revoked, and so any sincere Scientologist is capable of policing Scientology. This is again all in the interest of keeping the public with a good opinion of Scientology, since bad group processing and bad auditing are worse than bad publicity and are the worse thing that can happen to the general public [and] to the general public communication line.

    “The best thing that can happen to it is good auditing, good public representation, and a sincere approach on the subject of Scientology itself. Remember, we are interesting in ALL treatment being beneficial, whether it is Scientology or not. For bad treatment on any line lowers the public opinion of all treatment.”

    This is what Ron wrote. There is no way to twist this into funding clowns wearing “Squirrel Buster” T-Shirts and video cams on their heads. In fact, if the church actually practiced “good auditing, good public representation, a a sincere approach to the subject of Scientology itself” we would not be here, and this blog would be unnecessary, and Mosey would not be being harassed in Texas.

    • Thanks for posting this.

    • Grasshopper, I fully agree that the context is significant. In my post above, I quoted the text immediately before the blog post quote – which indicates clearly that LRH’s statement was specifically in the context of Scientologists being persecuted merely for practicing Scientology. And history has shown that there definitely was a strong campaign going on to stop Scientology. Here’s the link if anybody wants to see the text that precedes the quote:

      https://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2013/10/19/scientology-standard-operating-procedure/#comment-280713

      • Thanks, M. Actually, it was your comment that spurred this. I think it is very clear that Ron was very spiteful about people and institutions who were targeting himself and Scientology, leading up to various GO campaigns of the ’60s and ’70s, so even though the context of this particular article does not literally meant to ruin a person in a scorched-Earth, take no prisoners, sort of way, it is is clear that later, Ron and the church went down that path with people like Paulette Cooper and the US Government. These actions were vengeful and stupid, and, of course, illegal and wrong. By Ron’s own definition of “ethics” these actions were and are “out-ethics.” And it bit the church in the ass, and they were learning the lesson, except that the SO and DM had to take over. Had Mary Sue been taken back on board, we would be looking at a very different Scientology right now.

        The actions the church is taking now against Marty, Mosey, Mike, Karen, etc., are crazy. They are wrong whether they are “legal” or not, and stupid, and, again, by Ron’s own definition of ethics, are incredibly out-ethics. There is no way that having cackling morons with video hats camped out at Marty’s place in Texas is “pro-survival” on any dynamic. There is no way that obsessive PI monitoring is “pro-survival.”

        So here we have the church – and Ron himself, actually – not practicing its own religion, not doing the right thing.

        I have been re-reading the Ethics book – on the section “Ethics, Justice, and the Dynamics. Other than Ron’s over-the-top commentary, there is little wrong with it. There is nothing in it that says that the Sea Org is senior to all your other dynamics. He is right that if you do things like cheat on your spouse and steal from work that life will get much harder. He does NOT go far enough to flesh out the more nuanced questions of ethics. For example, if you quit your job for a better job with more pay, is that “out ethics?” Some rote people will try to say that you are betraying your current company by quitting. I know personally some “Scientologists” who would consider someone leaving for a better job a personal and organizational betrayal. Especially if they own the company, and they are paying you chump-change. This is the problem with Ron’s not really fleshing out the ethics stuff, and also with people not really thinking with what was written. Of course, if you find a better job with better pay it is the right thing to do to take the job – even though it “hurts” the original company. You are not leaving because of “overts” (another datum that has been very, very over-played).

        Ron did lock discussions about this down (verbal tech, and all that). I understand the reasoning behind that, but it killed Scientology and is bad policy. Enforcing a ban on discussion enforces a rote interpretation of the tech, which I know Ron abhorred, but which was inevitable.

        By the way, this same article did talk about how it was okay for trained Scientologists to discuss tech with each other. Another thing the church abandoned.

        • Grasshopper, very well said. And in case you had any doubt about it, I certainly agree with you about the church and Ron himself not practicing Scientology, specifically the ethics tech.

          As for what you say about Ron not going “far enough to flesh out the more nuanced questions of ethics,” I see it a little differently. You may be right that he could have said more, but I feel the tools are there and aren’t really that difficult to understand and use.

          With the example you gave about quitting a job, it could be that doing so would put that particular 3rd dynamic, the guy’s company, in such a bad state that the total good gained by all the other dynamics involved wouldn’t be as great as the harm caused to his company – in which case quitting wouldn’t be the greatest good for the greatest number of his dynamics. But in another situation, the greatest good might very well be to change jobs, even though someone else considers it betrayal. It’s the guy’s dynamics and his responsibility to determine the greatest good for them.

          Obviously, figuring out the greatest good can be tough but that’s where the tool of the Doubt formula comes in – look at the stats, activities, intentions, etc. of both “groups.” And, yes, there are times when someone is going to get hurt no matter what you do. But, contrary to what some posters have expressed, I would say that the principle of “Never fear to hurt another in a just cause” is sometimes valid, if the just cause is actually a matter of the greatest good. And these dilemmas exist for anybody, not just Scientologists. Oh, btw, I’ve held the post of MAA,😉

          • p.s. Forgot to say – like you, I think the verbal tech policy was a mistake. I’ve commented on that a few times myself.

          • Take a look at the oxymorons you are resorting to in order to justify Scientology’s sixty year history of using big dollars to ruin people utterly: ‘I would say that the principle of “Never fear to hurt another in a just cause” is sometimes valid,…’ Note: ‘never’ and ‘sometimes’ don’t agree.

            • No, the “never” is qualified by “in a just cause.” I even tried to clarify what I meant by saying there are times when no matter what you do someone is going to get hurt.

              • I give up.

                • Aw, come on Marty. All I’m saying is that there are instances where one dynamic is going to be hurt even though it’s the best choice one has. Even in the example given, where the company may suffer badly if the guy decides it is the greatest good for his first and second dynamics for him to quit. Or vice verse, he and his family would be hurt, financially and/or otherwise, but he feels that quitting the job (at least right away) would put the company in a very bad position.

                  • And who decided what was a just cause ? In this case “Just Cause” is the toughstopper and the desired behavior: “Hurt someone” and “Never” is the deal closer or hard sell.

                    Paulette Cooper

                  • Miraldi, I respect your experience for perceiving a benevolent Scientology and finding benevolent motives to Ron’s motives. You, being a decent person sees decency in your perceptions. You would make a good friend.

                    But I also see, or interpret, from your writings that you default to seeing decency in Ron’s motives when decency is not there.

                    It is laudable to see the good in things. But it is wishful thinking to not see the bad. You don’t need to protect Ron from the obvious choices he consciously made that has resulted in inhumanity.

                    To justify, by rationalizing and jumping through hoops of plausible but fallacious argumentation, you do yourself a disservice.

                    Right now, at this moment, Marty and Mosey are under assault by a doctrine meant to destroy people. A doctrine that cannot be watered down by inaccurate wishing thinking.

                    “destroy utterly” needs no theoretical clarification from you when real human beings are being harmed to disprove your attempt to explain the doctrine as benign

                    Lives were harmed when Ron was live, personally orchestrated by him. And lives are still being harmed. From the mind of one man.

                    Your continued need to justify these motives speaks to your decency and, at present, inability to perceive the indecent.

                    • “Your continued need to justify these motives speaks to your decency and, at present, inability to perceive the indecent.

                      Not quite Brian. Marildi very much perceived the indecent — and pointed it out. Suggest you re-read her actual article and not just your wished-for version of it.

                      To Cat Daddy’s question: “And who decided what was a just cause?”

                      It seems Ron, or someone high up on the food chain did, CD. And they f**ked up royally.

                      So what’s your point? That we should all now abandon deciding what are just causes, because others screwed up in the past in doing so?

                      Ethical governments, groups and individuals decide to “hurt another in a just cause” on a daily basis. It’s called the justice system.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      The operative implant command is the word ‘never.’

                    • “The operative implant command is the word ‘never.'”

                      Do you consider that LRH intended to install an implant when he wrote “Never fear to hurt another in a just cause”?

                    • martyrathbun09

                      I didn’t even consider that in stating the fact. What is your response/reaction/view to/about the fact stated?

                    • I commented earlier on my view of the use of the word “never” where I wrote that it is qualified in that statement by “in a just cause,” and added that there are times when no matter what you do someone is going to get hurt.

                    • My point is the hoops some jump through to justify some of Ron’s writings. That has been my experience reading some statements.

                      Trying to superimpose benevolence over malevolence: “destroy utterly” being speculated as only causing “professional decease” is wishful thinking taking into account the blantant evidence to contrary. Pre DM and the present.
                      That is my only reason for my post. It is important, in my view, to not sugar coat the real potentential of inhumanity, that comes through these written instructions.
                      Sorry, “destroy utterly” is flat out evil. No sugar please.

                    • Sorry, “ruin utterly” for those who need who would see my mispeak instead of the real meaning.

            • I think the devil is in the details. Who defines what is a “just cause”? It is very subjective, and almost certain to be biased in practice, because of the nature of existence. How many people do you know who can be objective enough to decide for real what is a “just cause”?

              LRH’s rants always need to be evaluated by reason, not blindly followed, and his materials always need to be “evaluated for importance”, just as he claimed he evaluated existing knowledge for importance and seniority of data, in the development of Scientology. Statements like “Always ruin him utterly” are obviously insane, below 2.0 by his own definitions! Even reports from the early days on the Apollo are that people working directly with LRH would withhold from implementing or passing on his more obviously destructive “orders” until he had had a day or 2 to settle down. Some of his closest associates functioned 3 feet behind LRH’s head as his consciences and his reasoning faculty at times. Folks, read the “Apollo” thread on ESMB.

              • LRH’s rants always need to be evaluated by reason, not blindly followed,

                YES

                And now justify his acts against adults and children on the ship

                • Why try to justify those kind of things? Let us make an analogy. Different states over her have various degrees of “criminal sexual conduct”. Some states have 4. some have 5 degrees. Here is an example:

                  Minnesota Criminal Sexual Conduct Charges

                  Minnesota places criminal sexual conduct charges into five categories. These categories are first through fifth degree charges, with first degree charges being the most severe. Minnesota criminal sexual conduct and rape statutes contain five categories of criminal sexual offenses. The following outlines the difference between the varying degrees of criminal sexual conduct crimes:

                  1st Degree – This is considered the most severe charge of criminal sexual conduct in Minnesota. Described as sexual penetration as well as certain sexual contact with a victim under 13 years old. This degree will likely include use of force, violence, a dangerous weapon, and other injuries caused to the victim.

                  2nd Degree – This is sexual contact without penetration. It is considered very sever because of the violence potential, typically brought against a person if violence, force, a weapon, or threat of violence was used at the time of the act. These charges may also be brought against the accused when the victim was extremely young, did not consent, or was unable to consent.

                  3rd Degree – This involves sexual penetration again like 1st degree. Age may play a role here as well, for example if the victim was young, unable to consent, or unwilling to consent. 3rd degree criminal sexual conduct charges are considered not as severe as 1st or 2nd degree charges and are described as aggravated contact rather than assault resulting in injuries.

                  4th Degree – 4th degree criminal sexual conduct charges are typically finvolve a young victim who was vulnerable, unable to consent to sexual conduct, or did not consent to the sexual contact. 4th degree criminal sexual conduct charges involve aggravated contact; however, the victim is not typically severely harmed. Statutory rape charges will often fall into this category.

                  5th Degree – Sexual contact as well as lewd actions. 5th degree criminal sexual conduct is considered the least severe of criminal sexual conduct charges. 5th degree criminal sexual contact involves sexual contact in which neither penetration nor severe injury occurred. ”

                  So, if one really wanted to “justify” the worst of LRH’s overt acts against people on the ship, one could use a scheme of “Degrees of Bullbaiting”. Or “degress of criminal bullbaiting”, as it is arguable whether any of these were willing participants.

                  Those acts which involved potential death or physical injury of the bullbaitee would of course be “1st degree”, etc.

                  How would all this be justified from the other side? Well obviously, by the view that a thetan cannot be killed or injured, right? So no-one is actually being harmed.

                  This is in fact pretty much the justification used by some folks even today. There are arguments against this view, of course, in LRH’s own materials. But as other shave pointed out, his materials can be cherry-picked to justify any side of any controversy. So why bother? Choose whatever pieces of LRH you like, and have those for dinner! Or use for fertilizer, or whatever.:-)

                  • I am not accusing him of that all, just not caring and neglect, even reckless endangerement and stuffing all that displeased him in a chain locker or overboarding.

                    L

                    • CD, I didn’t think you were accusing him of anything. It was a loose analogy I made. “Reckless endangerment” sounds accurate. Traditionally, the Captain of a ship had power of life and death over all aboard. LRH acted that out.

                      That’s why I compared it to “bullbaiting”, as in when doing the TRs. G.I. Gurdjieff, a “guru” who predated LRH by a few decades, taught that people could not personally advance(evolve), unless they were continuously aware of their own mortality, that in the natural course of things people were “asleep” and thus not aware in that way. Perhaps this is something LRH picked up from his acquaintance with Eastern ideas. There are Buddhist processes that involve imagining the death of yourself and others. Nothing like the threat of death to make one feel very much alive!

                      But all that aside, he got away with it because he was at sea, on a ship of which he was the Captain. I’m glad I wasn’t there! Unfortunately, the SEa Org then set up a “Land Base” and has continued to mimic the worst of LRH’s actions. Really, it is not justifible. THat is why I made up the mock scale of “Criminal Bullbaiting Conduct”, even though it was actually in accord with earlier sea-going traditions for a Captain to punish people at whim, if it came to that. Yes, it was sea-going tradition even for the Dutch! 🙂

            • Marty. He said “Never FEAR to hurt another…” not ‘never fail to hurt another…..Operating from a Condition of Fear or Hesitation or lower will always bring wrong decisions or actions. Wise actions can only be undertaken from a position of complete willingness and responsibility. He did not always follow his own advice, but there is wisdom there to be seen. When ‘cherry picking’ is needed, we trust your hands more than most.
              Thanks: Mark

              • Never fearing to hurt another is a sociopathic characteristic.

                • I find this discussion fascinating because it points up how differently 2 or more people can evaluate the same datum. It kinda goes along with my theory that in some sense, a person takes away from scientology what he brought to it in the first place.

                  In this case, when I first read the Code of Honor, this particular part of it brought to me a great relief, because with a somewhat Buddhist background, I was programmed to think that I should ‘never’ hurt any living thing. For example, the Dalai Lama does not squash a mosquito which lands on him to feed, but tries to flick it away without killing it.

                  Personally, I think this is a bit crazy, as mosquitos frequently carry disease and I don’t want them in my space or the spaces of my wife, children, friends and associates. I think it is OK to kill mosquitos.

                  What about killing another human? I think it can be justified, as for example in the case of a criminal home invasion, or one of those random mass shooters at a school. I think most people would find it difficult to shoot and kill another human being, as we “instinctively” feel it ought not be done. Thus it is necessary to apply reason. The difficulty is in those situations where hesitation can cost more lives, more mayhem. Sometimes one does not have time to “think it through”. Perhaps a solution is fast-acting tranquilizer guns. Many police are moving, have moved, towards electric stun guns. Of course these can still cause death, but they usually leave the person stunned, alive. But they have limitations of range.

                  These are major ethical questions. Ethical philosophers have been delving into them for as long as there have been philosophers. One contemporary philosopher is Jacob Needleman, who has written many books related to the subject of “conscience”. One is titled “Why Can’t We Be Good?”. It is worth a read, it tackles these kind of issues.

                  My own feeling is that as a knee-jerk policy, this kind of attitude is sociopathic. Cherry-picking the one precept and using it to justify harmful actions the way Scientology has been doing, already makes any person doing so, suspect, because s/he is applying it as a generality, without thinking anything through.

                  As always, I believe people read into situations what they will, rather idiosyncratically, and interpret things the way it suits them. and not necessarily in rational, “good”, ways

                  i think it is usually the interpretations, out of context, that result in sociopathic practices. In the case of Scientology, there is plenty of context to guide sane use of the Code of Honor, but these contexts are often not applied or are overtly misapplied. But it is not too surprising, because not that many people study Ethical Philosophy. It is not a standard part of the curriculums in high schools, for example. Even Civics has mostly been dropped from public schools. That’s our US culture.

                  • Also, it is qualified by “in a just cause”. What is a “just cause” can of course be a thorny question, all the more reason this kind of precept cannot be applied in a knee-jerk, unqualified way. It is also qualified by preceding statements such as “Ethics IS Reason….etc”, and also statements that it can be applied by an individual “providing he sees eye to eye with it.”

                    Scientology obviously went down a long slippery slope to get to where it got to, with that “unshakable policy” which includes “ruining a person utterly if possible.” That flies in the face of LRH’s other utterances, such as about the rarity of an actual SP.

                    Looking over all this, it really seems like LRH developed some bi-polar traits which were never handled. Of course “bi-polar” is the new label for what used to be called “manic-depressive”, which in turn looks a lot like what we used to call and perhaps still do, “rollercoaster”.

                    That in LRH’s case this condition may have been precipitated and made worse by the stresses of outside suppression simply makes me feel sorry for him.

                    This is not to excuse any bad action on his part, but since I worked in psych hospitals for many years as one of many people who genuinely wanted to help people in psychic distress, I try to understand others to the best of my ability. Having worked in psychiatry in the 1960s and 1970s, I can tell you there was a lot of harm to patients that was essentially covered up and never really made the news. Mostly from use of relatively untried pharmaceuticals that caused very serious and irreversible physical nervous system damage when used long-term.

                    There are “unmotivated” overt acts, but sometimes a person gets hit “out of the blue” for no apparent reason and hits back. As in many sports, it’s the one who hits back that gets the penalty called on him. But LRH had a reason to speak up about what he had seen, but he may not have anticipated how hard “they” would hit back.

                    I personally believe LRH was attacked by some kind of “vested interests” having to do with with the “military/industrial complex” President Eisehower referred to; it was perhaps not clearly stated at the time, that ” organized Medicine” was actually part of this complex. Of course the ‘vested interests’ felt he had hit them first, by observing and then exposing some of their unsavory practices.

                    Here are some good quotes of Eisenhower:
                    http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/d/dwight_d_eisenhower.html

                    Reading these, you might think he was a Democrat, but he was actually a Republican. How times have changed.

                    Eisenhower, like Presidents before him, actually worked for a better, more universal healthcare system in the USA; the American Medical Association spent about 4.5 million dollars in the 1950s, to defeat the passing of his initiatives in that direction. But back then, some medical Doctors also accepted money to openly endorse various brands of cigarets.

                    • I have no doubt that there were in fact efforts to “ruin” LRH “utterly”. How many of us could stand up to that? Most of us have long since learned to toe the line and keep our mouths shut about some things; I, for example, did not go to the news media about any of the things I learned working at the hospital. And possibly, it being a “company town” in which the “company” was a large University and the Hospital being that University’s hospital associated with their Medical School, the local newspaper would not have published my story anyway. But in fact, I didn’t try to get it published. I did make some efforts to get the story out and create an effect in other ways. But that’s another story.

                    • Valkov, excellent summary! I have come to a similar set of conclusions myself, especially the military/industrial complex and the roller-coaster phenomena becoming such an extreme and nearly obsessive focal point for LRH. Looking back over my own responses in life, when I am “IN” a particular state, I don’t necessarily see that state as being a source of skewed perception and response – if I lack any humility or cognizance of my own frailty in that respect, then I base all kinds of actions and reactions on it, producing a self-fulfilling path that may or may not be the “greatest good,” all the while thinking that I am in fact working towards the “greatest good.” To my mind this is the advantage of open discussion based learning and society – the feedback loop is far more nuanced and inclusive of diversity that may appear to be divisive, but is really what is productive of progress and innovation.

                      I’m enjoying your posts a lot these days Valkov, I love how you have synthesized the hours and hours of reading I know you have done on the various blogs on the subject of Scientology. Great insights.

                    • A big Thanks! Maria for your ack! It makes me feel less like an old fossil when I talk about the 1950s and 1960s, and most readers have no clue what I am referencing because they are younger and did not witness any of it!

                      This has led me to think about TIME in a couple of different ways. One, is that every generation sees and experiences a different world form the generation before. And 10 years can make all the difference. I was born in 1945 and I have seen and experienced a world that even those born in 1955 have not seen – much less those born in 1965 or more recently. We speak of Time as flowing or passing, and that may be true, but it is just as true that the World flows and passes. The world itself is in flux, is a flux, and Heisenburg’s principle adds the element of observer action and co-creation of the world. Maybe more about that, later.

                      But in terms of my post and your comment about the world of the 1950s, I had a new, for me, thought.

                      It has become almost a convention or a tradition to compare Scientology and the CoS with Fascist regimes past and present – North Korea, Hitler’s Gemany, the Soviet Union, etc, and their most infamous leaders. But the truth may be a lot closer to home. The origins of the Scientology culture may be a lot closer to home.

                      As I thought about the 1950s, I realized that the USA was at that time living under a reign of terror of its own. Just think, the House Unamerican Activities Committee. Senator Joe McCarthy’s “witch hunting for Communists, communist sympathizers, and even people who knew people who had a possible communist as a friend. People were being blacklisted. People were losing their jobs as their employers “disconnected” from them. People who could not get a job because they were being shunned for possible communist associations.

                      And J. Edgar Hoover was also right in the middle of all this, running the Federal domestic spying agency, the FBI.

                      Everyone in the country was being indirectly or very directly in Senate hearings, “sec checked”. And although “Communist spies and infiltrators” were the nominal target, McCarty’s witchhunt was actually much broader and was targeting homosexuals and probably damaged more people.

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy

                      The whole ball of wax, the sec checking, the paranoia, the “Knowledge Reports”, the disconnecting and subsequent shunning, the existence of domestic “internal” and “external” “Intelligence agencies like the GO and now OSA, are really no more than reflections of AMERICA ITSELF, as it was in the 1940s and especially 1950s, the Korean War era, the Cold War, and the fear of Communism as a threat to the existence of this country.

                      I have thought before that LRH’s known preoccupation, in the 1950s, with “Communists”, did not seem unusual for that era. It was essential back then, to be against Communism as a matter of principle. His references to being approached by Communist agents, or people he thought might be Communist agents, could be true. He may have been so approached. But it is equally or more than equally likely he was approached by our own “agents” (J. Edgar Hoover’s folks) attempting to entrap and thus discredit
                      him.

                      Folks reading this, if you think “It can’t happen here”, well, it DID happen here. Read your histories of those times.

                      It was actually still going on in the 1960s. The Vietnam war, the Cuban missile crisis, the assassination of JFK and later Robert Kennedy….. all were in the 1960s.

                      Younger people who did not actually witness these eras of American history may not understand how I can view “Snow White” as a possibly laudable operation, as much as I think of “Freakout” as an atrocity.

                      The lives of these younger readers and posters were never on the line, they have never known anything but a volunteer Army, they were not subjected to the involuntary Draft for Vietnam, they were not faced with jail time for their activism, their protests of the war, or their refusal to be
                      drafted to go kill and be killed.

                      so now I see the CoS as being little more than a reflection of American society as it existed then

                      For those of you who believe ‘we come back’, consider this:
                      The witchhunter Senator Joe McCarthy died in 1957, likely of alcoholism. David Miscavige was born in 1960. He reportedly loves his Scotch, and is a demonstrated witchhunter, using all the same tactics used by McCarty, J. Edgar Hoover et al.

                      This is a flight of fancy on my part, but the rest is fact, as stated, about those historical eras and their relevance to LRH, DM, and the origins of CoS aggressively paranoid behavior.

                • There are a lo “nevers” in the Code of Honor, including:

                  “Never withdraw allegiance once granted.” Used a lot to prevent people from leaving staff or Scientologist-owned companies. It is an invitation to slavery. When you grant allegiance to anyone or any group, you have given up your freedom to that degree. This clause is counter to the “Be true to your own goals” and the “self determinism” clauses.

                  “Never desert a group to which you owe your support.” Close to the above. Again, manipulative types say “you OWE me! You are deserting!” when you leave a sweat-shop job where every single item in the labor code is violated.

                  You can’t follow the Code of Honor rotely, because if you do, you will be tied into a knot. Therefore, either chuck it, or apply it rationally.

                  • I’ve always loved the Code of Honor. To me, it’s very uplifting and empowering. But if I had to pick two clauses as the ones I didn’t always see fully eye-to-eye with, they would be the “Never withdraw allegiance..” and “Never desert a group…” clauses. And I had trouble with them for the exact reason that Marty mentions above: the use of the word “Never”.

                    I actually think sticking by ones allegiances, ones group and ones friends is important. But always? No matter what?!

                    That was a bit too absolutist for me. People and groups change. And when they do, one needs to be willing to re-evaluate where one stands. Should it be done sparingly? Definitely. But never? No way.

                • Never fearing to hurt another is a sociopathic characteristic.

                  I always saw that precept as saying: have courage, even when the worst might happen. I didn’t read it as: be compassionless.

                  • Marty: “Never fear to hurt another is a sociopathic characteristic ” is a COMMON PHENOMENON, NOT A PRINCIPAL. You and I both know that some of the most numerous, crippling, and repeated implants in history were intended to make the populace more docile, controllable, LESS DANGEROUS. Don’t harm the implanters.
                    Was this statement used by the evil for evil purposes, of course. But any obsession, compulsion, or REPRESSION is harmful. One must be able to act when action is called for. The wisdom of each particular action is a whole nother matter.
                    “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” T. Roosevelt.
                    Ron did not add enough disclaimers and explanations to suit some, but the basic statement is valid. Many sociopaths have chosen to have harmful, rather than fearful purposes, but that does not make their fears pro survival. There are endless factors which can complicate this area, but this part is basic.
                    Thanks MARGARETfor your wisdom.
                    MARTY, I respect your advices and consider you almost perfect..
                    MarkNR

                • Exactly……. if a person fears hurting another, that would mean they are in touch with the pain they would feel. And being aware of and feeling for other’s pain is sympathy.

                  And sympathy, per standard word cleared clay demoed tech is downtoned.
                  Below hate on the tone scale.

                  • Brian: Wrong direction of thought. But then, I automatically include compassion and empathy in my direction of thought. When I say “One must be capable of action when called for”, I include good sense and sympathy (not in the tone scale sense). You are right to infer that it may be missing in some.
                    Mark

        • If I may add my opinion? I think part of the problem with what you just suggested is answered in your own writing. Judgment. Ethics, apparently, is a personal matter, yet you write ‘I know personally some “Scientologists” who would consider someone leaving for a better job a personal and organizational betrayal.’ This indicates that Ethics have become a code by which to govern (and police) others, not necessarily oneself.

          I would rather live my life in the relative freedom of the law, which at least largely does not seek to govern or judge who I work for or associate with.

          If you know of a Scientology organisation where you can exist without someone using Ethics to control you, let me know. I won’t join, but I would be interested to hear about it.

          • You are right. Ron defines ethics as a personal matter, and yet people are judging each other and pointing fingers all over the place.

            What is the “greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics” is different, by definition, for everyone. And it is different depending on circumstance. In the rote world of the RCS, the “3rd” dynamic is always the church (or a Scientologist-owned company), and when someone calls you “out ethics” it is usually because you are doing something that he thinks is not the greatest “good” for HIS dynamics.

            This is an example of theory vs. practice. In theory, the tech of ethics is great. In practice, it is a nightmare.

            • Grasshopper: Exactly. Everyone knows but seem to forget. It’s YOUR dynamics. YOUR family, YOUR groups, YOUR mankind, etc.etc.. Obvious but often overlooked. No one can tell you what YOUR dynamics are. At the top, you will find that the dynamics are an invented consideration, but one that must be mastered to get to the top, as is with all the ‘rules’ about the way things work.
              Mark

              • Yes, indeed, it is one’s own dynamics. Evaluations from others on what one should be doing on one’s dynamics are rarely helpful. One has to figure it out oneself. I always thought that was the great liberation of Scn ethics, to be freed from the dictates of others in that regard.

                • Claire:

                  Quoting you: One has to figure it out oneself.

                  Me: While what you say is “true”. It is a partial truth. Usually it is best to get as much other viewpoints form other competent people or sources ( good role models) on a given subject, then evaluate them and use that as data to figure out even better solutions.

                  And as it has been said, you learn all you can from all those who came before you and then stand on their shoulders to see even farther.

                  Dio

        • Grasshopper: You are a stable datum in sea of data. I first read Ron on my own, without coercion or correction and never got the idea that I should do any of the crap that is going on now in upper and sometimes middle management. I got the idea if someone was telling lies about you, caused you to lose your job and lose your kids, then expose them fully and destroy them utterly. Made sense. Anything sensible can be corrupted by evil individuals, just look at practically all religious writings for the last 3000 yrs.
          Ron audited people who had been through PDH at an Air Force base in Maryland, then had the balls to write about it. Then he said, with Dianetics, it is handled easily. That was bold. The attacks came immediately afterwards, both overt and covert from seemingly everywhere. Did Ron get pissed off, he sure did. Did it affect him thereafter, sure. Did he make errors, of course. Did DM use that covertly to gain control, sure nuff.
          But I, and some others, can read 100 HCOBs and PLs and pick out 4 or 5 or maybe 10 sentences or paragraphs that are wrong or need to be fully explained in context. Lets do that, apologize for not doing it sooner, and get the show on the road.
          Again, my favorite def. of ‘Intelligence’ is “The ability to assign relative importances”. Look at the whole body of work and it’s potential, especially with what has been learned over the last 20, 30 yrs, and with the addition of valuable info from other religions, sciences.
          I saw a principal, just this weekend, from examining my own early existence about primary and secondary considerations. It resolves a big chunk of confusions. I disseminate my discoveries to all who wish to know. The work must go on.
          SORRY if I have been insulting to those who have been horribly, even engramically, treated by individuals in the name of the church. It was often your recognition of wrongness that brought cross hairs to bear down on you. Then you finally had the balls or guts to get out. For that, you all have my respect.
          Thanks for giving me the space to rant again
          Mark

    • Grasshopper: Thanks, the sanity shines through if we bother to look.

    • Can you explain why you think it was written out of context? Hubbard was writing about how to deal with two types of situations in that section of text – how to deal with someone who brings a lawsuit against a Scientologist, and how to deal with someone offering services outside of Scientology. These two situations are exactly why the CofS is going after Marty so heavily now.

      • The second sentence does not immediately follow the first in context. That said, in case number 1, this was specifically about someone or some agency jailing you for doing Scientology, not suing you. In the second case, yes, it was about people doing something and calling it Scientology. CADA owned the rights to “Science of Survival” and was claiming ownership of “Dianetics” so back in the 1955 this was a real issue.

      • The Free zone was formally launched around 1982, and people have been offering services outside the church for much longer than that. LRH talked tough about early defectors, but “fair game” was carried out against them in the way it has been carried out more recently, with the growth of the GO and now OSA.

        I don’t believe Marty is being singled out because he is “offering services outside the church”. Hundreds, maybe thousands of people have done that over the decades.

        I belive he is being hounded because DM feels Mary is the biggest threat to him personally because they were best buddies for 25 – 30 years working together at the top of Management, and therefore Marty knows a lot of inside stuff DM doesn’t want exposed, about himself and the Church. It is Marty’s razor-sharp and knowledgeable public criticism of the Church that he is being attacked for, not for offering auditing/training.

  54. Oh! Oh!!

    I have a question!

    Could someone tell me why the Church of Scientology is referred to by some on this blog as “RCS”?

    What does that stand for?

    And why not just call it “The Church of Scientology” or “CofS” for short?

    Thanks,

    Alanzo

  55. Have been thinking about the “Attack” PL quoted by Marty above all day. LRH was under pretty continuous attack for 36 years. At a certain period, he even had to take up residence on a boat to escape. All that would do something to you. I used to wonder why some of the PLs he wrote seemed to have been written by someone in a continuous rage. If a pc arrived in that shape, I would run the ruds immediately. I am not making excuses, but think that perhaps we should have some compassion. Despite that, he turned out an amazing body of work.

  56. You cannot have *religious* exemption and be doing criminal acts.
    Criminal entities do not (normally) get Religious Status and get away with no taxes.
    Yet we see an endless crime wave….
    When the actions admitted to are deemed criminal and malicious, I am told by some very bright Legal minds
    that it opens the door for IRS reversal of the 501C3 and RICO LAW SUITS.
    For YEARS the “church” has gotten away with kidnapping, holding people against will, sending posses acting as Federal Marshall to pursue a fleeing Sea Org member and bring him back, beatings, punchings, body slammings, assault and battery played out daily at INT base. None of this reported to Law Enforcement, all covered up.
    Ecclesiastical !

  57. I read in detail the Anti-Slapp Motions.
    The fixation on Marty is boarderline hysteria.
    It is more that Miscavige meltdown.
    It is fear the corporate veil will be pierced and all the sham and pretense
    of Miscavige being an “ecclesiastical” leader only will be blown out of the water,
    Everyone and his DOG in Scientology Inc knows that Miscavige micro manages *every square inch* (inside joke) of all of Scientology.

    • Karen#1: A. Hitler showed genius and insanity, and his actions became more insane and self destructive as time passed and the threats were near. DM is following the same predictable path. To bad he takes so many others………. He will predictably lash out in more unpredictable ways. Look for him to become more bold and stupid.
      Mark

  58. RCS stands for “Radical Church of Scientology”. It is a term that is used by some people to distinguish between what they see as the church built by L Ron Hubbard (CofS), and the church currently run by David Miscavige (RCS).

    However, as the OP shows, Marty has been harassed and attacked by this “unalterable, senior policy of Scientology” which “has been in continuous effect since March 1955 to the present”.

  59. Point well taken Alanzo.

  60. Being a leader VERSUS mending “manufactured sheep” — (a comment from Marty to Emilie responding to Theo – Oct 21 8:24 AM)

    WOW — now this should clue those who insist 1) Marty MUST take over the indy movement or (funnier) 2) Marty et al have ALWAYS intended to take over and run Institutional Scientology

    VERSUS — Marty’s own stated purpose which has been pretty damn obvious since the beginning of his blog …

    He wants to help others become UNFIXED from their suffering, whether it came from scientology auditing/scientology policies that destroyed their family/ scientology misapplication or just the human condition of suffering etc etc etc

    In other words — MARTY WANTS TO HELP HIS FELLOW MAN …

    Why is this so incredibly hard to understand?

    Hmmmm — because IF one choses to remain INSIDE A BOX of beliefs (whether that box is the existing church or a self-imposed box outside of the COS that adheres to CERTAIN beliefs) …

    ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO HEAR HIM.

    Boxes like coffins are not good conductors of sound/sight/smell etc

    Christine

  61. I have always ask how can you think that someone who wrote that sort of thing can be called source?… it baffles me how after more than 50 years people dont realize this guy was a con man:
    check this one up:
    “And the public, seeing that you won, will then have a communication line to the effect that Scientologists WIN.”
    im from buenos aires, argentina… and that is really similar to what the defacto goverment in the 70s where trying to pull out when we where at war for the falklands…. we are winning we are winning they said… terrible stuff to write in a religious context… faith puts yourself in a very very vulnerable position, nevertheless i still think that all religions through a “cult fase” at the beginning and it depends on the flexibility of the doctrine if they can keep it up or no…

  62. Marty,

    Suggestion:

    Start up a blog under the following terms and conditions and purpose:

    Here is the situation or and scenario:

    You did the scn bridge in the cos or the fz..

    You were a successful and competent scientologist while there.

    Due to corruption you decide to leave and do your own thing

    But the cos and the word scn has become so corrupt and repulsive and disreputable that any reference to or hint of scn will receive the worst kind of rejection and condemnation possible.

    But you really know in your heart and mind that the main idea, the main goal behind Dianetics and scn was one of the best things or likely the best thing to ever befall earth.

    In principle it was the true savior of mankind, at least on earth.

    There is nothing that really comes close to doing what good auditing or clearing and bridge work can do for a person.

    ( An aside: I personally know that from experience. Prior to scn, I have tried many, many different ways. I have personally tried something from most other “paths” or “ways” of self help and self improvement and clearing and mind improvement on earth.

    That is everything I could find in my searching for answers.

    I became an expert on what does not work. I have even tried some other ways, after my scn sojourn (experience) too. And am always keeping my eyes open for another or better way.

    My case is extreme physical abuse and mind control. I was beat up to a zombie state. 30 yrs of such abuse. Auditing was the only thing that was able to effectively erase the effects of those experiences, at least enough so I can have some control over my life, now. )

    Now back to my suggestion and the scenario:

    Scenario:
    You really know the objective of the bridge.

    You know from experience that it saved your life like nothing else ever really could. And you have tried other ways too. You are not necessarily a “one trick pony”. Or the one who has only read one “book”.

    (As in “beware of him who has only read one book.” )

    You are a true truth scientist.

    (As in: The holy man says the holy is truth, and the truth scientist says the truth is holy.)

    And you want to continue with the basic idea and goal and really want to help others too.

    Your only alternative:
    You need to build a new and hopefully or ideally better bridge to help others.

    And you cannot use any scn data. It is as off limits and as strictly prohibited as possible.

    At best you can only use the spirit (the idea) of the tech, but not the letter of the tech.

    You want to and have to build your own bridge now.

    Your new bridge must as remotely as possible bear no resemblance or connection to, to the scn bridge.

    But the goal is, at the least the same quality or preferably and ideally better.

    You mainly have the bible to work with.

    One reason is that is it is the most politically correct religion, and self help book, self improvement book, at least in the English speaking world.

    And it has the most workable and soundest body of ethics in the world.

    But take into consideration that it is also not perfect. It has errors. It was transcripted, recorded and written by imperfect men, with good intentions. It has been copied by hand and translated many times. Who know exactly what has got lost in the process?

    The goal now is to develop and build a system of clearing (a tech) and a bridge, primarily based on what is available in the bible, and the spirit of the bible, the intention of the bible.

    So the purpose of my suggested blog is for all qualified members of this blog, who are well versed in the bible to primarily (but not necessarily exclusively) to use the bible as explained, to build a new and even better bridge.

    You know the idea, spirit and principles of the scn bridge well, but cannot use it by the letter only in principle and spirit.

    At best uou have to take what you know in principle from what you learned in scn and now use it to glean and extract ideas, data, and principles from the bible to make this new and hopefully better bridge. A primarily Christian bridge, if you will.

    The idea and goal is to first find data in the bible of comparable magnitude to that in scn that is key to the goals of the bridge.

    Find data in the bible that means the same thing, or is similar to, or complementary to key scn bridge data.

    (An aside: This idea is really the real underlying message in LRH’s article: How to study a science, (or scientology). It is what he really meant. It was the “keys on the wall” to the way out of the trap of scn.)

    Then build a new and hopefully better bridge (actually a better bridge if all possible) based on that data.

    Find and glean any data, or principles from the bible that will help “clear” a person, and reach a stable state of enlightenment.

    Example:

    scn: “as ising”.

    Bible: let your yea be yea and your nay be nay.

    If you are true to yourself, you will not need to worry about not being true to any man.

    Do not bear false witness. (Which I interpret as: do not see falsely (witness falsely). See what you look at honestly and tell the truth, in your retelling if and when necessary. Do not see things that are not there.

    I used to have a lot more, but they escape my memory now.

    And that is not the best example either. The real good ones I used to have, escape me now.

    But in any event, I hope I have made myself sufficiently clear and I will leave the finding of other such data up to qualified and competent members of this blog.

    It would be best to reread the bible now, and see it and interpret it now, through your scn eyes, with the intention of accomplishing the above.

    That is, read the bible now, with the intention and goal of identifying and gleaning or extracting, key data to build this bridge.

    You can even extrapolate from bible data, too.

    Read the bible as times as necessary to get as much understanding as possible.

    If anyone has any questions or even better suggestions, please post.

    Dio

  63. Food for thought for today and tomorrow:

    From word of the day from Merriam Webster:

    eristic

    DEFINITION
    adjective
    characterized by disputatious and often subtle and specious reasoning

    EXAMPLES

    “Dialectical argument is a cooperative, two-sided truth-seeking art that requires a constructive and balanced attitude, whereas eristic dialogue is one-sided, quarrelsome, and antagonistic.” — From Douglas Walton’s 1999 book One-Sided Arguments

    “Does free speech tend to move toward the truth or away from it? When does it evolve into a better collective understanding? When does it collapse into … the pointless and eristic game of talking the other guy into crying ‘uncle’?” — From an article by Mattathias Schwartz in the New York Times Magazine, August 3, 2008

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