The Aims of Scientology: Part 2

Reference: The Aims of Scientology: Part 1

As promulgated by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard in 1969:

                                                         TARGETS

     The vital targets on which we must invest most of our time are:

     T1.  Depopularizing the enemy to a point of total obliteration. 

     T2.  Taking over the control or allegiance of the heads or  proprietors of all news media.

     T3.  Taking over the control or allegiance of key political figures.

     T4.  Taking over the control or allegiance of those who monitor international finance and shifting them to a less precarious finance standard…

–          L. Ron Hubbard HCO POLICY LETTER OF 16 FEBRUARY 1969  TARGETS DEFENSE

For Full Policy click hereTargets Defense

271 responses to “The Aims of Scientology: Part 2

  1. This is why Germany considers the Church of Scientology a threat to democracy and freedom in their country.

    Germans have a lot of experience with totalitarian groups, and they can recognize one when they see one.

    Thanks for posting this, Marty.

    Alanzo

  2. Hubbard is starting from the point that he is absolutely right, and whoever opposes his goals is absolutely wrong.

    Well, this violates the premise that absolutes are unobtainable. Hubbard’s ideas seem to be more like FIXED IDEAS.

  3. And there are still those who feel that it’s all miscavige and how he is “leading” —

    Anyway — I’m have a full set of early pre-GAT I LRH books which I will happily ship to anyone in the US — you pay media mail shipping. email me windhorsegallery AT mac DOT com

  4. In retrospect, Targets Defense policy, from L. Ron Hubbard, seems way too big and wrong of a response. The most observant writers and journalists have noticed Scientology is still operating this overly defensive Cold War mentality.

    Hubbard’s earlier strategy in the face of attacks was to come up with new Scientology services and get everyone busy doing the new services.

    Targets Defense policy and other general Guardian’s Office era policy from Hubbard I don’t recall any of it being based on his wholetrack (past lives) for principles and details. But rather he’s borrowing Cold War era “tech” which seems really bad advice, if you ask me. (Not that I’m a wholetrack believer anymore, I’m not, but the war like Guardian’s “Responsibilities of Leaders” and Private Eye and lawyer reliance policy era stuff is just irreligious period)..

    Thanks for noticing this policy is still being full time implemented at present in official Scientology.

    It could all cease being used, but that would take someone at the top of official Scientology to stop using it.

    While I’m an atheist, I do notice that the freezone, Independent Scientologists and Ron’s Org Scientologists seem to get along just fine without using Targets Defense (or extremist disconnection)! The freezone Scientology’s years of experience prove Targets Defense ought to be retired by official Scientology policy for sure! The freezone has done a lot of piloting of milder more decent more religious like behavior.

  5. Mark P (Grasshopper)

    Marty – you are doing the same thing, if you read the PL and rationale in context. You are being attacked by the church, and you attack back using the media, this blog, public officials. Ron was aiming deeper, is all, and he went too far. But it’s the same tactic. Nothing wrong with it if done legally.

    • martyrathbun09

      Your A=A misevaluation is astonishing.

      • Grasshopper (Mark P)

        Come on. Did you actually read the policy? The policy itself is not the problem. The problem with the church is they started doing and continue to do illegal and unethical things to “protect” itself. Had they just followed this policy and left it at that, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

        • martyrathbun09

          Yes, and apparently you have not read much of what I have chronicled along this evolution. Long since I eschewed that approach and made it very clear why. I could win that game in a heartbeat if I chose to. But, the end result would have been that I would have more or less resembled that which I conquered. Just as the author of the policy at issue here did. And on varying levels of harmonics, most Scientologists (corporate and independent) do.

        • Marty is revealing criminal activity for the purpose of staving off the destruction of families, the attack of critics and probably a strong desire to make things right.

          His goal has nothing to do with this Ron writting. Marty’s wants to be left in peace not world domination.

        • Mark P, you state; “The policy itself is not the problem. The problem with the church is they started doing and continue to do illegal and unethical things to “protect” itself. Had they just followed this policy and left it at that, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.”
          I don’t agree. The Policy is the problem, and is the catalyst for all the programs and actions which followed. The idea or policy engenders acts. the Nazi policy of anti-Semitism was the problem, and resulted in the subsequent acts of aggression and euthanasia (to protect itself-the Aryan race). Policies lead to actions, and ones with repeated mention of “take overs” are meant to be interpreted and put into effect aggressively.

      • Didn’t think for one moment that you had the ‘confront to confront’ my replies Rathbun. Just wanted to see how much of ‘being exposed’ you could really take. You are closer to zero than one on that subject. You are the destructive one regarding the keeping of the standard tech. You’re on a role of self pity for personal gain only – while you lead your cattle blindly along. Who’s worse David or Mark? You are doing nothing to honor the tech and only because of your hidden un-exposed overts. Make known what YOU did and you will feel better. Get them acknowledged and you won’t look so solid or angry. You will lighten up and probably even smile a bit. Help another and you can be helped. This is all I am saying. Don’t be a destroyer of something that you benefited from. You come across as a brute. And I know you can be ruthless Rathbun. If you had nothing to be so concerned about you would have let the followers get a different glimpse of you from the other side – but instead, as you do and once again, you decided on another path. To the degree that you carry along those undisclosed overts (against those who you harmed) you will continue to motivate in life. Clean them up and you will address your quest very differently but more importantly feel better. When you do so you may even thank me. I’m giving you some data here. No one else has to date. A guy campaigning as you are should not be addressing it with such revenge. Who are you really out to get? This can be answered and diminished if you follow the above. Now do everyone justice Marty and post this so that the followers can be a part of the above also. Is this not what the site is about?

        Guy Vogel

        • martyrathbun09

          One last rant posted to allow the readership to identify a Scientology troll.

        • True believers are certainly at their best when they text or talk.

          One doesn’t have to have a dialog to get one’s point across to persuade effectively.

          Just let them talk. The distortion of truth, clarity and common sense is accomplished by simply letting them talk.

          No disagreement or dialog needed. Just get some popcorn and sit back.

          It is sad really.

    • Let me see — is this the same Grasshopper who wrote back in 2013 concerning Marty’s book Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior (which pulled no punches regarding Hubbard and Miscavige)

      Grasshopper:
      “I just finished your latest book. Masterpiece. Incredible food for thought, and absolutely a must- read for anyone who is it was immersed in Scientology. Thanks. I will write more later, but I had to say that it is awesome. Thanks for writing it.”

      Amazing change of heart/mind …

      • Grasshopper (Mark P)

        No change of heart. Really not. I just don’t agree that this policy is wrong. And I’m illustrating that it’s not wrong by pointing out that this policy is being used against the church by those that have issues with it. I find it ironic.

    • It is false and misleading to name whistle blowers as “attackers”
      Bollocks ! (as they say in Great Britain)
      Whistleblowers reveal actual deeds, actual extant polices, actual criminality and actual time track.
      Revelations of truth are not attacks. Revelations illustrate what is being covered up.
      It is an OSA spin to call whistle blowers “attackers” while they themselves ATTACK with malicious falsehoods and some data from confessional folders carefully designed to push buttons.

      • Grasshopper (Mark P)

        Karen, this particular policy does not advocate the actions the church has taken against you or Marty or anyone else. This policy is a red herring in the sense that if your purpose is to show Ron’s advocacy of dirty tricks and a scorched-earth tactics, then you (or Marty, in this case) have chosen wrong.
        And, yes, whistleblowing of course is an attack. Nothing wrong with that.
        You and Marty are both advocating attacks for a “good cause”. Don’t deny it because that’s what you are doing. This policy advocates the same damn thing. So if you want to find some sort or moral superiority here, you need to find a real smoking gun.
        As it turns out you guys have plenty of examples of scorched earth tactics. This policy isn’t one.

        • martyrathbun09

          I am not part of any group. When you speak of ‘you guys’ you are speaking misinformed delusion. I am not, and have not been, advocating ‘attacks’. I have been for some time, and continue to, advocating the graduation from Scientology.

          • Marty: “I have been for some time, and continue to, advocating the graduation from Scientology.”

            Graduate: “to advance to a new level of skill, achievement, or activity”

            Great purpose! Couldn’t be better.

            • christianscientology

              Hi Marildi
              I don’t believe it is possible to “graduate from Scientology” there is nowhere else to go. Most Scientologists are OF Scientology. The only way out of Scientology is into the THETA UNIVERSE, then one is no longer OF Scientology but can be IN Scientology. Then you can HAVE IT or NOT HAVE IT at will.

              Love
              Pip

          • Grasshopper (Mark P)

            Marty. You and your wife are involved, quite rightly so, in a legal action against the church. You are not defending yourselves. You are attacking. I support you both in this and I hope you win. Rather than sit around, you took action.
            My issue is that this particular post seems to try to link the church’s policies and activities of 1968 with what the regime has been doing over the last several years. This can only be true if the policy is misunderstood.
            I do not consider that the author had anything other than beneficial intent. The policy itself spells that out. However it is incredibly easy for people with evil intent to apply the policy in the wrong direction. But the policy didn’t advocate evil intent, or illegal actions, which is why I’m writing this.

            • martyrathbun09

              You are wrong as to my wife’s suit, its nature and purpose. Scientology Inc. apparently sees it your way and consequently is spending many millions of dollars on T1-T3 in the San Antonio/Austin corridor.

              • Right on Marty! Because I understand Monique’s lawsuit completely as do about 45,000 other people in the world. She is correct to speak up about the issues that she did and the Church of Scientology is going to need some pretty written fact based information if they want people to believe them. Perhaps a testimony from David Miscavige might help?🙂 Oh I forgot, he can’t go to a deposition like that, he’s busy plotting out the next course of action against “The Texas Couple”. Like my good friend Tory Christman would say “Hey DM. Pull your head out of your ass. You just might learn something!” Because she is a real lady.🙂

              • Marty – I wish you and Mosey well.

            • Grasshopper,
              In the interest of clarifying your comments, can you please give an example of a non-attack? I see Mosey’s suit as an attempt to hold someone (or something) accountable for it’s illegal acts (harassment), you view her suit as an “attack”. If defending yourself is an attack, the what qualifies as a non-attack? Sorry, I could not even think of another word to use. I don’t mean “cause of action” which is legalese for a leg to stand on when you sue someone.

              I think I know where you are coming from in your argument, but I disagree with your sentiments. LRH walked a thin line between what is and is not legal.

              • Def. #3 from Miriam-Webster: “: to begin to work on or deal with (something, such as a problem) in a determined and eager way”. That’s pretty much how I understood it, and how I think Grasshopper means it.

                On another note, the frequent battle-cry of “Illegal!” tends to back me off. Back in the 1960s and 1970s it was “illegal” to refuse to be drafted into the US Army to be sent to Vietnam to kill and be killed. In fact it was a felony offense punishable by 2 years in Federal prison. Illegal. I’m proud I refused to be drafted then and would refuse again. There are many situations in which civil disobedience is “illegal”. Snow White was “illegal”, but was it wrong? Was it not an attempt to rectify injustice?
                Just askin’…..

                • That would be def #3 of “attack”, from the dictionary.

                  • Valkov,

                    I think you are confusing the terms “illegal” with “immoral”. Your draft refusal actions may have been illegal, but to you they were what was morally correct and you stood by your morals.

                    Snow White was neither legal nor moral. LRH, increasing in paranoia, convinced you and many others that Snow White was moral.

                    What the Co$ is doing to Monique Rathbun is neither legal nor moral IMO.

                    • No, I actually distinguish between illegal, immoral, and unethical. What I have in mind are those posters on various blogs who play up LRH’s “illegal” actions. Snow White is an example. It is described on Wikipedia as “a major criminal conspiracy”. I thought and still think it was pretty cool. Snow White and Operation Freakout are often presented in the same sentence by those whose goals include discrediting LRH and Scientology. There is nothing similar at all about the two operations. Freakout was an atrocity intended to harm a person; Snow White was an attempt to discover the contents of government files on LRH and Scientology, on the suspicion that they contained false information. This was a government that lacked all transparency and insisted it had the right to withhold all information from the public. In principle it was no different to knowing that for some reason you couldn’t get credit to save your life, but having no access to your credit report by any means except doing some kind of espionage. And without the information in your credit report, of course you have no means of correcting any false information in it.

                      Tell me, what do you think of Snowden or Assange? Are they criminals? Certainly there are plenty of people who agree what they have done is illegal.
                      But is it wrong? Depends on your viewpoint, doesn’t it?

                      So no, I am anything but confused on these matters.

                      What confuses me is how many posters on these blogs wear blinders and don’t think things through. That’s why I seldom post any more.

                • Valkov wrote:

                  On another note, the frequent battle-cry of “Illegal!” tends to back me off. Back in the 1960s and 1970s it was “illegal” to refuse to be drafted into the US Army to be sent to Vietnam to kill and be killed. In fact it was a felony offense punishable by 2 years in Federal prison. Illegal. I’m proud I refused to be drafted then and would refuse again.

                  I’m proud of you, too. It was wrong for us to invade that country and kill all those people. What you did took a lot of courage, and a lot of integrity.

                  Well done.

                  There are many situations in which civil disobedience is “illegal”. Snow White was “illegal”, but was it wrong?

                  Yes.

                  Alanzo

                  • Al, see my post just above yours. I saw nothing wrong with infiltrating opaque government agencies that refused all transparency and provided no opportunity to correct false information in their files. Preemptively I will say Yes, there was quite likely also true information in those files. That is beside the point, which is th elack of transparency. What do you think of Snowden and Assange? Are they heroes or villainous criminals? After all, what they have done is considered “illegal” by the powers that be. So I guess if Snow White was wrong, their “leaks” are wrong too?

                    • Chee Chalker

                      Comparing LRH to Snowden or Assange is laughable. Snow White was based only upon LRH’s paranoia. There is nothing more upsetting to a sociopath than being ignored. LRH was not high on any government entity’s radar, except maybe the IRS. LRH was viewed as what he was, a cult leader. If you really think high level government officials were thing of ways to destroy LRH because he was any kind of threat (legitimate or otherwise) there is nothing I can say to convince you otherwise.

                      Snow White was not moral (as one may argue in Assange’s case) because LRH’s intent was not to just discover what was being said about him and correct false information. LRH wanted to replace bad information (ie the truth) with false information. Much like Scientology itself. There is nothing there to prove it works and it cannot deliver what it promises.

                    • Chee, thanks but no thanks. I reject your basic premises so there is nothing for us to talk about. I did not say LRH was exactly comparable to Snowden etc however I do see him as a whistleblower.

                      I don’t accept your pseudopsychiatric speculations, either, although you have every right to fantasize in that way all you wish and that’s OK with me. It takes all kinds. But your post reminds me of that psychiatrist a few decades back who published a “psychiatric study of Jesus” (not to compare LRH and Jesus, as I suspect you will accuse me of doing, since you apparently didn’t get the sense of my original post, I doubt you will get the sense of this one either….). But no – I am comparing you to that psychiatrist, as one psychiatric fantasist to another. What he published could hardly be called “scholarship”.

                      Primarily, my point is unless you were there, which I doubt, it’s all speculation on your part. But as I ‘ve already said, that’s your right, just don’t delude yourself that what you wrote is “fact”.

                    • You are comparing Apples and Dung Beetle Balls, Valkov.

                      Snowden did what he did totally for the public good..

                      Scientology’s infiltration of government offices was totally self serving.

                      Alanzo

                • Valkov – that is correct.

                  The difference between the church now and the church then was intent. Ron made mistakes, and the church made mistakes. In the event Snow White was wrong, but the reasons behind it were, in my opinion, laudable. But, Snow White and the abuse of Paulette Cooper and the covert actions taken against the mayor in Clearwater in the ’70s were mistakes that should not have been made. They were wrong morally. And they made us vulnerable and put us at risk.

                  I am coming from the position that Ron was sincere in his development and his work behind Scientology. And that his intent and the intent of people practicing Scientology was to help people. I will also go as far as they did help people. In 1969, there were active attempts to outright ban Scientology – and some were successful. The government raided Scientology in DC only a few years earlier where they confiscated books and meters. Ron was wrong about who was behind all this, but the issues were real.

                  And I was a Scientologist back in those days – and so were my parents. What were we doing? We were on course, learning the TRs, getting some grades auditing, learning to audit others, and having a great time, and gaining significant insights. We were not being fleeced for money, and there was no IAS. And this is what people were trying to ban? Why?

                  If you were doing good and doing well, and someone was actively trying to shut you down, what would you do?

                  Let’s be more specific. I start a group in my town here, and do all the legal things to get it going – get a lease, get a tax ID, whatever, and then start advertising and getting people in the door, and we do TRs, and we co-audit.

                  Let’s say that someone starts calling the town council and says that I am a cult. That the actions I am doing is brain washing. That it is ungodly. That it corrupts our youth. Etc. Remember, all I am doing is running a group that has co-audits and TRs.

                  The people in my group are having fun. They are doing well. They certainly are not doing badly. Why would anyone oppose this?

                  So, I work with the person or people who are doing all this. I invite them in, show them around. I like my town, and want to help people. The people are unmoved. I am still a cult in their eyes, and they are still trying to shut me down. Why? Who knows. In reality, I believe people who would oppose this are fearful. They are fearful their sons or daughters will abandon the opposer’s beliefs. What I am doing – getting people into session and doing TRs – is perceived as against their worldview.

                  So, I defend myself against efforts to shut me down, and against people defaming me as a “cult.”

                  Let’s step back for a moment. The folks who are against my little group – if this really happened in my town – would probably back off once I get with them and invite them in if needed. I mean, why not?

                  But what if they didn’t? What if, no matter what I did, this group wanted me out of town? What should I do? Remember, I am doing nothing illegal, I am coercing no one. I am helping people. And getting attacked. What do I do?

                  • Get your TRs in, increase ARC for the naysayers, go out and help the community. Not by prodding or stroking people. Or flogging them a book filled with bogus medical claims. Just real, effective, old-fashioned, out-exchange help! Feed the hungry. Run a soup kitchen. A shelter for the homeless or abused. A children’s centre. Support for the disabled. Put smiles on people’s faces. Love in spite of all! And do it because you can and want to not out of thirst for “good PR”.

                    It’s not rocket science. That this advice is nowhere to be found in Hubbard’s writings is possibly why you are stumped for ideas.

                    • Only place I saw were two places, the “Coffee Shop Auditing” binder that came out, one of three binders, one event, one year.

                      And the Scientology Volunteer Ministers programs, over the years, smatterings of what they contained, might have been the closest to help the public outright.

                    • Of course I could ignore them. It’s a strategy, alright. Turn the other cheek. I remember Jesus advising that, and, yes, that is good advice.

                      You could ignore me too. Why are you even answering me? Why aren’t you feeding the poor and doing something useful instead of sparring with me here? Why isn’t Marty and Mosey just ignoring the invasions of their privacy? It is rude to sue. Rather, Marty and Mosey should just toughen up and do the right thing and ignore what the church is doing, knowing they will get their chits in with the Lord. Hey man, good advice.

                    • mwesten: WOW! I have not heard such expressed words – be it here or elsewhere for a long…. time. This is actually what a part (a part) of Scientology should be defined as. It just does not exist. And due to its absence perhaps this alone plays a role why Scientology has a difficult time with itself. It does seem to be a never ending battle does it not? The Action of these words is the missing, essential ingredient that one seldom hears about in Scientology. And most Scientologist will never get it. Nice to hear such an ‘offering’ without the thinking of or feeling that the ‘other’ will go criminal on you because of some difference in the mechanics of ‘out exchange.’ What Hogwash! What harm could there possibly be in doing for another – in need? Why does every Scientologist (who I have been in contact with) see the act of giving (with helping another) as a stigma? I have heard such crap as: “well they pulled in their situation (let’s say one is homeless) and you will be making them (the DB) right for it if you acknowledge in any way.” Can you imagine? Others have said: “they are responsible for their condition.” And still others: “their postulate stuck.” This maybe (I said maybe) true but does it mean that if you help a person of need that they are going to be out exchange with you? Will this then also mean that they have gone (or can go) criminal on you? What nonsense! How is this any different than giving a donation to one’s favorite cause? Will they go criminal on you too. What Bull Shit! I have to concede. This part of Scientology really sucks! And those who follow it are troubled and I have met my share – and recently so. Most Scientologist (who I have come to meet) wonder why they have such stuck flows in life – but mostly with their finances. Others are baffled why I am doing well – okay financially speaking. I am a Scientologist. I try to apply the tech. However have you ever noticed that most are very desperate, poor and empty headed (even in the freezone) when it comes to their finances? They have no concept of money. They are stuck. They have nothing! Hey maybe they can learn something from this and open up their flows. Note: this will first require (for most) an O/W ethics action. I myself have always believed (and I freely give) that if you give good things will be returned – without even looking for them. Good job mwesten.

                    • Guy
                      Very good post. I have always understood, with no specific tech, that paying forward was a viable part of exchange. Expectations of someone paying forward after you help them ruins the help. Like retaining ownership of a toy after giving it to a child. Just help, knowing that many that you help will go on to help others, or at the least, harm others less than they would have otherwise.

                      This just seemed a natural part of exchange to me. At a factory I worked at, people often needed a dollar to buy a soda when they had no change on them. They would usually pay you back. I always told people to give it to someone else who needed a drink in the future. I spread this idea and it became popular and ‘the norm of the area’. I smiled.

                      At the highest level, exchange, along with other ‘laws’ such as karma, energy flows, mass etc. are non existent. But as long as we live and operate in this realm, they do apply and need to be understood. Once these activities are fully understood, and our considerations on them are fully viewed, they become a choice, not a ‘law’.

                      Makes life very simple and enjoyable. Have fun.
                      Mark

                    • A=A=A. The efforts you describe against your co-audit group are not the same as the efforts of the Co$ to silence Marty or indeed the efforts of government agencies to bust a man guilty of making bogus medical claims, practicing medicine without licence, inurement, money laundering and tax evasion.

                  • LRH wanted to help people? You mean by throwing old ladies off a ship into the water and by locking children in a ship’s bilge? (or whatever bottom of a ship is called). Both of those recollections were from Hana E. and both occurred during LRH’s “helpful” days of the 1960s.

              • What I mean is taking the offensive instead of the defensive. I mean attack as in chess, not attack as in shooting missiles into enemy bulwarks. If you retreat to a position so as to be left alone, and the person bothering you does not leave you alone but gets in your face, invades your privacy and generally does not go away, if you take the offensive against this person you are attacking. Now, attack as it turns out is a charged word – so forget attack. You are striking back. You are defending yourself by proactive action. You are suing them. You are doing God’s work by exposing the bastards for what they are. I guess that is better to say than “attack.”

            • The policy is littered with absolutes and suppressive generalities, all wrapped up in one giant games condition.

              He doesn’t say who is attacking him/Co$ or the exact nature of these attacks, only that they are attacks.

              He equates people behind attacks on him/Co$ as enemies.

              He calls for the total obliteration of his enemies.

              He calls for the destruction of the mental health sector (psychiatry and psychology!)

              He says that “heads of news media” (and “bankers”) are “directors of psychiatric front groups”. Who exactly? Where’s the evidence? Is it safe to assume then that some of these “attacks” were simply critical news articles?

              Society is a let-down and Scientologists are on their own. In other words, it’s us vs. them. Oh and don’t forget that Scientology is man’s only hope so the whole world is fucked if this policy is not applied.

              I don’t doubt Hubbard’s intentions any more than I do Hitler’s. What’s more interesting to me is his language, and how a policy loaded with generalities and thought-stoppers can have such a destructive effect on those not yet equipped to see them.

              • mwesten: “Who exactly? Where’s the evidence? Is it safe to assume then that some of these ‘attacks’ were simply critical news articles?”

                There is apparently a LOT of evidence in the form of public records that indicate government and private agencies conspired together for years to destroy LRH and Scientology.

                • “apparently”

                  • Too bad they didn’t succeed in destroying LRH/Scientology. IMHO that would have been the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics.

                • Can you show just a little of this evidence?

                  So we can examine it and decide for ourselves?

                  Or is it our place not to question?

                  Alanzo

                • Sadly, I think this “everyone is out to get me” thought process on the part of LRH was simply his paranoia and his narcissism. I don’t think, in the middle of the Cold War, many people in government were concerned with a blowhard with an undistinguished military service record and an even less impressive work history. All this “us vs. them” serves only to bind the group together even tighter against the “enemy”.
                  I’ll give LRH credit though…….making his followers suspicious of the very group (psychiatry) that would help expose Scientology for what it was, was a crafty move.

                • Letting go, Alanzo and Chee Chalker,

                  “Apparently,” none of you has read *Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior.*

                  • marildi, that is a weak feint. I read all three of Marty’s books and was disappointed to learn that the third contained allegations of attacks but no specifics. As the Anons are fond of saying, DOX, please?
                    Where did you hear there was “apparently a LOT of evidence”?

                    • LG, don’t you remember where Marty wrote about what he had discovered after going through many, many documents of government and private agencies when he was on the Special Project to get an All Clear? Here are some excerpts from the book:

                      ————————-
                      “For the next 20 years [i.e. since 1950, when *Dianetics: the Modern Science of Health*, was published], the AMA’s then-mighty Department of Investigation would take clandestine action against Hubbard and his organizations. Two successive heads of investigation for the AMA, Oliver Field (1950s) and Thomas Spinelli (1960s and 1970s) would work hand-in-glove with several governmental agencies to infiltrate Hubbard’s lectures and organizations.
                      […]

                      “…Hubbard had hit so close to the quick with his disclosures of what Dianetics and Scientology processes had uncovered about the dirty work of the CIA and the very best psychiatrists [my note: see *Science of Survival*, where LRH wrote about finding many pc’s who had been given pain-drug-hypnosis] , it is a wonder he was not physically assassinated.

                      “Perhaps because of his high profile, and the growing ranks of dedicated religionists surrounding him, the APA, AMA, CIA, FBI and FDA and friendly media alliances would have to settle for old-fashioned (albeit of unprecedented intensity) character assassination. The documents demonstrated that the ranks of the massive government and private agencies arrayed against Hubbard and Scientology were swelled by other military and intelligence groups also involved in mind control experiments, including Naval Intelligence, Air Force Intelligence and Army Intelligence.

                      “The truth of Hubbard’s 1951 pronouncements about our government’s dirty activities would not be corroborated publicly until the mid to late seventies, with the advent of the Freedom of Information Act and the U.S. Congress Church Committee Hearings into unlawful CIA domestic intelligence operations. That Ron was twenty years ahead of his time in recognizing what the CIA and psychiatrists were up to was acknowledged by author Walter Bowart in one of the first popular exposures of that activity, *Operation Mind Control* (Dell, 1978). By then, Hubbard had been so discredited by establishment campaigns, and his church subjected to such intense fire for scandals of its [establishment’s] own manufacture, that nary a person would listen to the longer history, the bigger picture.
                      […]

                      “Now Hubbard’s writings took on a markedly different tone than most of what he had written before. Rather than speak of turning the other cheek and dealing with establishment attacks with a healthy insouciance, Hubbard prepared the GO to do what the enemy was doing, but to do it better.”
                      ————————-

                      It is the dilemma of that “markedly different tone” which is what the debate is about now.

                    • Marildi, Letting Go
                      My father was a cataloger for the Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal. He became a Dianetic auditor in 1969 and did quite a bit of auditing. He audited 2 co-workers that knew that they knew each other but couldn’t remember how. It turned out they had both been subjected to PDH at the Air Force base in Maryland.

                      That is pretty specific, first hand (I met them both) information.

                      The instant Ron published that Dianetics handles these engrams easily, genuine attacks began. Ron’s policies to handle these attacks may have sewn the seeds of destruction that later, disturbed individuals latched on to, but hindsight is 20/20.

                      What would you or I or anyone do when being shit talked by several large and powerful organizations around the world. It’s a wonder he could do the valuable work that he did after that. He made errors, but still retains my admiration. Even in his mistakes, I and many others have learned what not to do.

                      I was reading the Management Series( ’74’), and most of the work is brilliant and sensible. If people could look without fixed opinions, they could see what is wrong and what is right with it. If you pay attention to poeple’s actions around you, every day, the rightnesses and the errors become clear. It’s not that hard, just look.
                      Mark

                    • Great comment, Mark. Further corroboration of what LRH was up against.

                    • marildi, DOX. Documents. You’re just relaying what Marty said, who likewise did not provide documents (in the book) to back up those statements re the APA and co.

                      Your second point about Hubbard being ahead of his time does not constitute evidence that the people exposed were working against him.
                      Nor, might I add, does it necessarily comprise the whole reason for “attacks”.

                      Do you feel you are the only person here who truly understands LRH?

                    • LG, here’s an excerpt that clarifies whose documents Marty had reviewed and was basing his statements on:

                      “The documents told an incredible saga. And the story was told in the words of those conducting the crusade against Hubbard, not by Hubbard himself, nor by the church. Within weeks of the May 9 1950 publication of Dianetics: the Modern Science of Mental Health, vested pharmaceutical and medical interests declared war on L. Ron Hubbard. On June 1, 1950 the editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association (AMA)., one Austin Smith, shot missives to doctors and medical societies across America, asking for authoritative statements condemning Hubbard and his work. There was no indication Smith had done the slightest study of Dianetics himself before judging it, beyond noting the book’s general contention that mental therapy did not need to be brutal, nor did it need to be expensive.”

                    • marildi,

                      Your final quote from Martys’s 3rd book, to me, is where LRH went overboard.

                      You quoted Marty’s 3rd book saying:

                      “… Hubbard prepared the GO to do what the enemy was doing, but to do it better.”

                      When I did my doubt formula steps, in my mind, over and over, over the years, one thing I’ve noticed of the best priests is their greater ability to forgive.

                      Very missing in LRH’s standpoint was more the Martin Luther King role model behavior, if one is being more like a religion man world problem solver of humanity’s problems.

                      But instead said put all this GO tactics borrowed from the “best” of enemies’ tactics, and do those dirty irreligious tactics better, is just wrong.

                      That behavior making it policy to act better than the enemy, the whole Responsibility of Leaders, get Manuela devotees acting dirty like the other dirty players attacking one, is Cold War stuff, it’s saver rattling, and covert and overt intel and attacking.

                      The greatest religious role models haven’t acted that way, and it was overall a major disappointment with Scientology altogether for me, and I’m not even religious, but that Scientology had a GO and now an OSA shackled to the Cold War spy versus spy gamesmanship against enemies (enemies very easily and most often who are not enemies which causes even more blowback).

                      The GO and OSA are built on irreligious strategy, and doesn’t help LRH’s image at all, it’s instead just added to LRH’s poor public image, and he just never saw this. LRH never said, this GO crap was a big mistake, hey everybody, the GO writings are all blanket cancelled!

                    • Chuck, I understand what you are saying. But assuming there really was a conspiracy of powerful factions that were determined to destroy LRH and Scientology, what should LRH have done? Do you think a Martin Luther King Jr approach would have worked (not a rhetorical question)? This is putting aside for the moment later decisions LRH made.

                    • marildi,

                      Just going to the extent of exposing the truth about the sources, as was done in history.

                      The dirty tactics of the FBI and US Justice Dept and those abusing and using these dirty tactics were themselves the target, when they were exposed.

                      Look at Hoover’s reputation today, when his excesses were exposed.

                      NO need to engage in massive work like the GO people and Mary Sue and Jane Kember et al, were promted to act and zealously carried out their abuses for which they rightly did time.

                      Better to act morally, take the lies, expose the lies, and find allies in the media.

                      But Scientology’s problems for which Scientology is validly criticized have NOT been dealt with like other groups deal with their valid faults.

                      Scientology has a whole other layer of territory to it, that needs discussion, debate, and let’s see the proof of the results.

                      The rules to implement Scientology include a whole field of unconfronted problems that get swept away and from the Scientology (LRH) side the criticism is unfounded and ignorance. When in fact that additional criticism is something Scientology and LRH just never felt the need to face the statistics of other people validly finding fault with the points they find fault with.

                      But the fight and lump all critics zealously and fanatically into enemies, and then have sets of procedures and penalties and rules for dealing with the enemies, is dogmatic.

                      It’s simply NOT facing one’s (Scientology’s) own practice and rules faults.

                      And one has to admit some faults, and act more like a religion, not like a Cold War country.

                      Scientology says many things that a whole lot of people have NOT found to be true. Rather than continue to blare one’s belief as fact, and then label all who disagree as enemies and have a load of defensive and counter attack rules, one ought to confront the criticism, like the rest of the world more sanely does! And discuss the details, go into the nooks and crannies of the criticism, and face all the points.

                      And then stop claiming things that are factually NOT true.

                      Change.

                      Change one’s own behavior in light of what evidence proves one’s beliefs NOT as gloriously wonderful as one’s told it must be, in the Scientology writings of LRH.

                      And also, just work to expose the wrongs in the FBI and other supposedly powerful groups attacking one.

                      Scientology wasn’t merely attacked for the reasons LRH said.

                      LRH did simple not confront and debate and change in light of the criticism of even the one book, by Dr. Winter, in my opinion.

                      The long list of valid criticism that LRH didn’t face is all through the critical books written about him and Scientology over the years.

                      Countering the supposedly powerful interest groups, should have been done and should be done when necessary.

                      I don’t even think that the freezone, Ron’s Org or Indie Scientologists get any criticism from society that amounts to much. I don’t know their history of being attacked by the powerful intesests these last 30 years now, do you? I’d be open to look at how they deal with that criticism, but the fact that I haven’t noticed and heard of their troubles with powerful authorities might be my ignorance, but I think they simply aren’t getting much heat from vested interests.

                      How LRH acted in the past, I think he should have just still NOT made the Sea Org (I agree with the older timers who thought that) and I don’t think he should have done a whole lot of the dodging and lack of facing up to the attacks against him.

                      Had he let things be a lot looser, less “organized” and let people just do his practices freely like the freezone does today, and there wouldn’t have been this whole making his own movement such an easy to find target, even though he said going Fabian with the Sea Org was his method.

                      I think he should have been more an author and let people develop their groups and centers themselves and not demanded a slice of their profits like he did.

                      I think he should have let field auditors fumble and interact themselves. That is one of Dr. Winter’s valid complaints.

                      This whole era of refined tech that today’s Indie’s who were well trained in recent years up through the 1980s at least, which they benefited by their being the organized Class 8 course etc, I mean LRH could have done all that lecturing and if people wished to stick with his “standard” procedures fine, but the penalties and rules and sub organizations he formed to go after the squirrels, is simply wrong and shows greed and narrow minded ness on his part. (I am not fond today at all of such writings as Keeping Scientology Working for many reasons but particularly him saying he was above all other Scientologists who ever had tech ideas to improve what LRH had discovered, I mean Alan Walter and others have said that many many tech points were there ideas, for instance the LIC list, and LRH accepted and then expanded that concept to other repair lists for instance.)

                      Too much to discuss in a blog, but you sort of get my answer.

                      LRH by making GO policy so fundamental, and himself not telling people in the early 1980s to cancel the GO and all his orders over the years to them entirely, opened the door to that policy being reused as OSA’s today.

                      I haven’t studied, but I’d love to see the whole unedited day sequence of LRH’s writings and lectures on the transition and collapse of the GO.

                      The GO and all it’s policy needed to be thrown out, and I don’t LRH is the type of person at that time, to see this, so it wasn’t all thrown out. LRH still had never faced all the valid criticism, which to him, there was no valid criticism of anything he’s left the movement with. That’s the biggest problem. The only way around that, is like the Indie and freezone and Ron’s Org do, which is simply NOT do the GO stuff.

                      And that is my answer, LRH should have done like the Indie and freezone and Ron’s Org are doing today! Skip all that stuff, even then, when he was being attacked! Hoover’s reputation of abuse came out of its own!

                    • Chuck, I am glad you post here; your wealth of detailed knowledge of the inner administrative materias of the “church” is your unique contribution. Although you claim to be an “atheist”, what I read in your post here, is that your are none-the-less an idealist. You outline a “high road” you say LRH and Scientology SHOULD have taken. Although it sounds good, to me it rings false and I would like to outline why. Ideal “coulda/woulda/shoulda” solutions arrived at with the aid of those huge rear-view mirrors are likely to have been unattainable in the moment. What the ROs and Freezone are doing NOW might have been completely inapplicable in the 1950s/1960s or even 1970s and 1980s. LRH and Scientologists were walking in a different river then, if you get the allusion.

                      My other point is that idealism can be used to make wrong, to diminish the person or object the idealism is applied towards; thus LRH et al can be found wanting in many ways when judged in the light of those “coulda/woulda/shouldas”.

                      This is especially true when one ignores the actual scenes back then, in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s. I am old enough to recall much of what was going on, and I think you are too. Did you have your eyes open to the things that were happening, nationally and internationally? Do you recall who/what he power centers were, back then? And how we were being governed? Do you recall Eisenhower’s warnings about the “military/industrial” complexes?

                      I’s not that the “high road” you outlined was necessarily unworkable for LRH to choose.

                      My question is, do you apply your idealistic standards of behavior to the other side, as well?

                      Should J. Edgar and the FBI have looked at the criticisms pointed their way, and admitted their faults and mistakes and reformed themselves? Should the American Medical Association have looked at themselves and admitted to and dropped their “anti-competititve practices”? Which they were found guilty of in Federal Court, but not until the 1990s.

                      My point is, if you are going to judge LRH and Scientology by those high standards, should you not also judge the “opposition” by those same standards of conduct? Especially as they had virtually all the power, the G-men with guns, the psychiatrists with virtually unlimited powers of commitment of any individual to locked psychiatric institutions, agencies like the FDA to raid and break down doors and confiscate whatever they liked, basically all the power in the world to apply against LRH’s attempt to disseminate and establish the practice of Dianetics and Scientology tech in society?

                      NO, the world the ROs and Freezoners are operating in today bears little resemblance to the landscape back then.

                      It is a difficult topic to really delve or dive into in this blog venue, but how else can we discuss it accurately?

                    • Chuck, thanks for the great reply. Valkov just articulated many of the things I was considering also (thanks, Val!). One thing he wrote that I am still not convinced of, however, was this: “It’s not that the ‘high road’ you outlined was necessarily unworkable for LRH to choose.”

                      For starters, I’ll say again that I am still not sure which of the many “excesses” (using your word) were actually LRH’s and not that of others, since after a certain point in time Miscavige was the one who controlled the comm lines to and from LRH. In the earlier decades, however, and more to the point of my question to you, the impression I have gotten is that the situation for LRH and Scientology was a lot like having one’s country invaded by an enemy who fully intended to wipe it out. And just like a country in such a situation, what else could LRH have done but to fight back with both force and intelligent “war tactics”?

                      You brought up many good points which I would agree with, but specifically what in the 1967 PL that was quoted in the blog post conflicts with any of those points? Here is more of the context of the PL, where LRH elaborates on the targets he had listed out, including specifying who exactly the enemy were:

                      “The names and connections, at this time, of the bitterly opposing enemy are:
                      “1. Psychiatry and psychology (not medicine).
                      “2. The heads of news media who are also directors of psychiatric front groups.
                      “3. A few key political figures in the fields of “mental health” and education.
                      “4. A decline of monetary stability caused by the current planning of bankers who are also directors of psychiatric front organizations would make us unable to function.
                      “5. The cold war is being fought on home ground and has an apparent target of degrading western society to a point where we are finding it difficult to operate; a degraded society can be swallowed up easily by an enemy.
                      “6. The public is somewhat sympathetic already but in a democracy trials are by public opinion. To win all the way, the bulk of public opinion must be at the level of love us … hate the enemy.
                      “7. Many groups exist with similar aims. They need organizing and uniting.
                      […]

                      “We do not have a Utopian dream or a planned society. We are trying to survive. Our theory is that if individuals become more honest and less harassed they will be capable of building a better society.

                      “The fact is we would have gone along happily minding our own business. But these fantastic and continuing attacks have pushed us more and more into developing a technology and direction of defense.
                      […]
                      “If we unite all groups into an interplay and use all forces extant and channel them we have a very big chance of winning.

                      “Therefore from an appreciation of all data to hand and experience it seems that T1 to T7 is beneficial. Things that don’t are a relative waste of time.

                      “If we, doing our jobs, doing no wrong, breaking no laws, are having trouble operating, what about the rest of the West? We’re not the only ones in hot water. In fact we are probably in far better shape than many, many other groups and for sure in better shape than other individuals.

                      “So we can and must take the lead.

                      “And we ourselves must develop many leaders.

                      “We may as well start now and push all we are doing in defensive actions into T1 to T7.”

                    • Marildi wrote:

                      But assuming there really was a conspiracy of powerful factions that were determined to destroy LRH and Scientology, what should LRH have done?

                      Well this is the lynchpin, isn’t it?

                      If there was a conspiracy of powerful factions, then LRH was justified in making Scientology into a full-blown totalitarian cult, using all the mind control, intelligence tactics, socially coercive and abusive brainwashing techniques that he could find on Scientologists and the enemies he told them they had.

                      But if you just look at the FDA raids, you will see that LRH WAS claiming medical cures with Scientology. He WAS selling Scientology to people claiming that they could be cured of everything from arthritis to leukemia using Dianetics and Scientology auditing.

                      It is the FDA’s job to stop people from making these kinds of claims. But LRH was notorious for this, and incorrigible.

                      Thus the raids.

                      LRH then told Scientologists that “the government was out to get them because they were so effective” and drove that little tricycle all the way to the bank.

                      When you step back and look at it, there is no justification for creating a totalitarian brainwashing cult, Marildi and selling it to people as a religion.

                      Alanzo

                    • Show me THE PROOF there was no “conspiracy” (although I would call it a “collusion” between agencies having different functions, the “lynchpin” being “at whose direction?”). Where’s you PROOF?

                    • I did show you the PROOF that one “attack” by the government was not a collusion, or a conspracy: the FDA investigates and regulates fraudulent medical claims. LRH was making fraudulent medical claims.

                      That is proof that there was no conspiracy to take out Scientology because it is so effective at clearing people, or making OTs – as LRH manipulated Scientologists to believe.

                      And LOOK! It’s STILL WORKING.!

                      Alanzo

                    • So you are claiming that the attainment of Clear And OT equates to medical treatment? That is a conflation that is just plain silly. Dianetics claimed only to “eradicate” PSYCHOSOMATIC maladies. Do you have any proof that it does not do so?

                    • Re-read Dianetics. There are STILL claims of cures for arthritis and even leukemia in that book. Remember the engrammic phrase “it turns my blood to water?”

                      There were many more flyers and ads that LRH placed to sell auditing on the basis of quack cures which were brought up as part of the trial.

                      Haven’t you actually looked into this vast conspiracy which is what your whole justification for LRH’s abusive tech and policies rests upon?

                      Of course not. That would be too dangerous to your worldview.

                      Right?

                      Alanzo

                    • That, Al, proves only that the FDA or someone else who then instructed the FDA to take action, saw “medical claims” being made by LRH or others involved.

                      It proves absolutely nothing about anything else; there may well have been a dozen “conspiracies” at work at the same time. Someone instigated the FDA action; do you know who it was? I doubt it. In any case there is no logic in your supposed “logic”, and certainly no proof of anything except what the facts show. Go to your nearest college and take a course in logic, dude!

                    • I can’t help but notice that there have been no facts presented which support that vast conspiracy that you cling to for justification of LRH creating a brutal brainwashing cult.

                      None at all.

                      And yet it’s the vast conspiracy which is the basis of your whole justification for LRH doing this to Scientologists and others who he deemed his enemies.

                      Remember Valkov, lack of evidence for something is not evidence for something.

                      I showed a government agency acting along their stated purpose lines. And this is when LRH’s spin became “They are attacking us because they don’t want Man to go FREE!” And even you have now admitted that there are no Clears or OTs.

                      You have not showed the government, or anyone else operating in a conspiracy against Scientology in any way.

                      Alanzo

                    • marildi, that’s just hearsay. Marty may have seen those documents, but – were they original letters? Can we see them now? I don’t know, have you ever been involved in any legal investigation whatsoever? If so, you’ll know that internal documents are inspected where possible. I’d like to see the actual documents, not mentions thereof, no matter how credible. You, quite obviously, do not have them.

                    • Letting go, those documents were copies of the originals, which GO members had made during their break-ins. And my understanding is that at least some of them are available to the public per the FOIA

                    • to marlidi and Valkov,

                      Wow, we are getting too deep, and I now would need to respond way more carefully, too much mental effort to go over every point you make.

                      You both ought write some books or essays, maybe even submit essays to Marty or Mike, as guest essays once in a while.

                      Anyways, I retreat and cannot mentally go to more depth on your answers, it’s too much I have to get some rest today.

                      Marty’s thread on the docs from the GO mentality and LRH writings today still being policy that OSA is doing, is relevant.

                      It’s a point we all agree should cease, especially to implement this GO stuff on ex members anymore.

                      I retreat from further debate though, on should LRH have just not taken this whole GO era step.

                      My only other point, is in this current age, it would be impossible to destroy LRH’s writings, except the private writings which Miscavige, like Marty on another post long ago mentioned, Miscavige could destroy the private writings that only he and Starkey and few others have even seen.

                      Like the ASI traffic, when I was the Computer guy at ASI for a tiny few years, 1992-1995, Miscavige and Starkey both, on separate occasions, had me several times take some items OFF of the ASI computers. I presume all hard copies that ASI possessed disappeared from ASI at that those moments those were ordered off the ASI computers.

                      But the legacy of LRH’s tech is out in the world, on the internet, there’s no way to destroy those LRH writings and lectures at this point.

                      So, all that could be destroyed on the people and groups that organize to do the legacy of LRH’s tech on each other!

                      When LRH decided to go GO on the world, he could have instead just spread the tech way wide and get it published all over so no matter if the organizations and he was jailed, the tech was OUT, and people like they did in those two states in Australia when Scientology was banned in Australia, that’s a case in point that proves despite “losing” to the governement and having Scientology banned and all books burned and confiscated etc, that people still hid the tech and the meters and carried on.

                    • Chuck, I have said the same thing to Valkov more than once, that he could write a book. I’m really not in the same bracket as Val, since he has a lot more knowledge about many subjects in addition to Scientology. And you yourself seem to have a lot of knowledge of Scientology and its history, better than mine – so maybe you should write a book too.🙂

                      Thanks very much for expressing your viewpoints in this and other comments, which I found helpful!

                    • So you are claiming that the attainment of Clear And OT equates to medical treatment? That is a conflation that is just plain silly. Dianetics claimed only to “eradicate” PSYCHOSOMATIC maladies. Do you have any proof that it does not do so?

                      The burden of proof lies with the person asserting a claim. Shifting the burden to those critical of the claim is fallacious, and is not a valid form of reasoning. Just sayin’.

                      Hubbard claimed a whole host of conditions were “psychosomatic” including the common cold, arthritis, myopia, asthma and even “heart illness”. He stated that his claims were “scientific facts, supported wholly and completely by laboratory evidence.” No examples of any tests or trials were included, nor have they surfaced since.

                      In DIanetics Today, he claims that a broken limb will heal (by X-ray evidence) in 2 weeks rather than 6.

                      In History of Man, he claims that cancer can been cured by auditing out conception and mitosis.

                      In All About Radiation, he claims that a combination of certain vitamins can protect people from radiation and cure “incipient cancer”.

                      Buy the time NOTS was released, Hubbard claimed he had discovered “the full steps and sequences for handling a physical condition.” (NOTS Series 34)

                      And people wonder why the APA, AMA and FDA went after him!

              • Well said mwestern.

              • Right on! Anyone this is afraid to see the flaws in LRH’s works are afraid to live life!🙂

              • Are you seriously bringing Hitler into this?

          • Marty, you are such a brave a soul. I can’t stand it if someone said something like that to me!🙂 Like “me , all us, us guys, we, them that are” I am glad you are on the “people’s side!”🙂 Or should I say for the greatest good.🙂 LRH did clearly have some issues trusting people.

          • christianscientology

            What no third dynamic Marty!

        • “And, yes, whistle blowing of course is an attack.”

          I have no idea how you formed this as a truth in your mind. Before you continue to publish other ideas and assert wrong items and wrong indications on people, you take a minute to clarify this.

          A whistle blower (whistle-blower or whistle blower) is a person who exposes misconduct, alleged dishonest or illegal activity occurring in an organization. The alleged misconduct may be classified in many ways; for example, a violation of a law, rule, regulation and/or a direct threat to public interest, such as fraud, health and safety violations, and corruption.

          By your standards, anyone who has ever written a K.R. has attacked another person. Huh? Anyone who dials 911 to report a crime in progress is attacking someone? Really?

          The Continental Congress enacted the first whistle blower protection law in the United States on July 30, 1778 by a unanimous vote. Not because they want to make it safe for people to attack others.

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

          • Criminals regard whistle blowing as an attack.

            Mafia calls people who turn state evidence and come clean “rats”.

            The Church really has the same mentality.

            • I am surprised the whistle blower protection act has not been bought up in some court cases. People are protected by law for whistle blowing. The Church has no right to attack people for whistle blowing and in fact, it is illegal.

              No one should be punished for doing the right thing, especially those with the courage and integrity to blow the whistle on corporate fraud or other illegal activities. Congress has enacted several laws that provide whistle blowers with both protection from retaliation and monetary rewards.

              Have you uncovered illegal activity that you wish to report?
              Has the Church retaliated against you because you reported wrongdoing or fraud?

              Do you need to protect your career because you reported your Church’s illegal or unethical conduct?

              Are your reputation and financial stability on the line because you did the right thing and spoke out?

              There are whistle blow attorneys who specialize in setting these matters straight.

              The most recent contract enforced on all staff is one requiring them to forfeit their right to free speech or to whistle blow!

              Whistle blower law means that an employer cannot retaliate by taking “adverse action” against workers, such as:

              Firing or laying off
              Blacklisting
              Demoting
              Denying overtime or promotion
              Disciplining
              Denial of benefits
              Failure to hire or rehire
              Intimidation
              Making threats
              Reassignment affecting prospects for promotion
              Reducing pay or hours

              Nevertheless I can assure you, anyone on staff that refused to sign away their constitutional rights to whistle blow was:

              Fired
              Expelled
              Blacklisted
              Demoted
              Denying promotion
              Disciplined
              Denied benefits
              Intimidated and
              threatened
              And cut off from every resource.

              That the Church is now enforcing it’s members or staff to sign contracts not to ever whistle blow is a flagrant abuse of power. And violates several laws. Violates a persons constitutional rights, civil rights and human rights.

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

              • Pulling their Overts and making them known broadly. Oracle, you are providing a very valuable service. This hat may have been thrust upon you and a few others, but you are able and needed. It would be a tragedy if you took this hat off. I will wear this hat as well at every opportunity.
                Mark

          • Yes, they are attacking wrong-doing in their organization or some external organization. It is a proactive action to get rid of something bad. Dialing 911 to report the crime is attacking the crime – but attack is obviously a badly chosen word. What I mean is taking action to correct some evil.

            • Well thank you. Correction is in qual and is all about fixing things. That is very creative and positive, There is a fine line between fixing and attacking. I have called 911 without any attention for attack. Only to help fix something.

              When I was 14 I went up from the East Villiage to Times Square with some girl I hardly knew because she wanted to buy some heroin. I had a feeling I was being used in some way I had yet to understand. I knew she was going there to buy drugs but I had no idea how I fit into that. We got to Times Square and went into a bar called the Blarney Stone Bar. It was an Irish Pub and Diner. I just followed her in to the bathroom. We opened the bathroom door and there was a very thin girl sitting on the toilet unconcious but still alive with a needle hanging out of her arm and a lot of snot stuck between her nose and her mouth. I stood trying to access the situation.

              The girl with me, just picked up her purse and began to rifle though it for cash.

              Wow that kind of forced me into the theater on some moral ground. I challenged her about this choice.

              “What the fuck are you doing?”

              She said, “Oh well, she is dying, she will not need the money.” So flippantly. Insufficiently

              I ran out of the bathroom and up to the bartender. I knew he was a responsible member of society because he was wearing a uniform that was immaculate. He was so much older I assumed he was so much wiser. And he was responsible for the environment.

              I told him a young girl was dying in the bathroom and he needed to call 911. He assured me he was right on it.

              I distanced myself from all of it and went out the front door. I waited there against the wall waiting for the police and ambulance. Except, a lot of time went by and nobody came. Maybe 20 minutes. I went back in the bar and up to the bartender and reminded him of the situation. In the kindest and most concerned voice he assured me he had contacted the police and they were on their way.

              I went back outside an waited maybe another 30 minutes. Nothing. On some level I could feel the girl in the bathroom dying.

              I went back in and confronted the bartender a little more aggressively.

              He leaned over the bar, informed me that I was a little bitch, and that he did not want a junkie in the bathroom to fuck up his lunch hour.

              As soon as I heard it, I got it. I turned around and ran out turned left and ran and ran until I found a police officer.Five minutes later the place was full of cops and medics and they had that young girl on the floor of the floor of the restaurant alive at first and then dead. I mean, she died right there in front of all of us.

              I looked over at the bartender and he was just drying wine classes with a bar towel like this had nothing to do with him.

              That was my big whistle blow. I tried to save someones life. I wasn’t attacking anyone.

              I think this may be why I was not affected by uniforms after that.

              Maybe why I saw right through them.

              I don’t know how many decades you spent on the front lines to push Scientology forward. In all reality I doubt any of us more than Marty.

              This man is not attacking. This is not an easy thing he has chosen to fix. There are a lot of needy people and he has only tried to push them up .

              There is a wide difference between help and attack.

            • One of the first things a person finds out about in the Church is HOW TO WHISTLE BLOW! (Knowledge Reports)

              And if you don’t WHISTLE BLOW loud and clear you too are considered an enemy.

              They would not have the vast ethics libraries they now now covet without WHISTLE BLOWERS!

              The funny thing, Sea Org Members are scared to death of ghosts. Ghosts that could be lurking within their fellow staff. The things they can’t see. They have built walls and tunnels to travel in to block their view further. Because of the ghosts that might be on the roads.

              This is how someone who has worked with them for the decades can be thrown under the bus to applause. The ghost finally emerged. They nod at this SP that has just appeared before them, this person ghost who was lurking there all the time and they, yes, they always had a sneaking suspicion.

              How else can you understand this type of behavior unless you realize these people are afraid of ghosts? And possible suppression from ghosts?

              When they look at one another it is with high suspicion, they don’t just take what is in front of them and leave it at that. It is also all the invisibles that could some day emerge from the head. All of the evil ones that must be festering down there and barely suppressed.

              Whistle blowers in the group can give light to some of the ghosts traveling through the halls of the Organizations.

              They are just scared to death of ghosts.

              • Fear of ghosts is a profitable business. People creeped out by ghosts are quick to spend to protect themselves from possible ghostly influences.

                Ghosts from the past plague our present. Ghosts are not supposed to be allowed, there are no rooms for them, seats for them, plates for them, they do not spend, eat, sleep or present themselves as any value in this economy.

                If you speak to one you are considered high insanity. If you perceive one you can be influenced by one and that would be an invisible group member others could not control. They are viewed across the board as pesky evil critters. The most oppressed species among us. No wonder they get pissed off from time to time. They are consistently qualified as total unwelcome liabilities in the Church.

                The entire crux of the matter is to distance yourself from ghosts. OIf you mention you might know one or more that is actually helpful you are routed to redo purif.

                The anti’s are scared of them too to the point they promote all Scientologists are loony as hell to even think with them. Total not is there.

                Both ends of the fanatical swing are a fear of ghosts.

                • I guess the reason I have had a different experience with Scientology, (And yes, there are people out here that think we were all supposed to have the same experience. And if you didn’t have theirs there is something wrong with YOU. You either no case gain if you don’t have the same wins or brainwashed if you do have wins. This is a very limited view.) is that I never expected anything out of it for today, for this life, for my career, for my bank account etc etc. I just didn’t count on it meaning anything in the now.

                  I was always good in the now with the way things were. It was an investment I made into my future. A future life, a future self, a time in the future when I find myself only as ghost. Me as a future ghost. Will I have survival skills as a ghost? Because, I want to survive as a ghost. One day I will be one, and so will everyone else. I have some interest because people seem to lose so much in between lives. I wanted to understand that. Not today or the government or enemies or buildings or stats or mental health. It is a matter of understanding the unknown. It is very easy to understand what we can see and now today. But today is over pretty fast. Tomorrow is a guaranteed event. You may not have anyone to hold your hand or lead the way. I think. most likely not.

                  When I hit that moment, next time, I want to be comfortable with it. I want to be cool with it.

                  Someone started a saying recently , “Do something today, a future you will thank you for”. I always had that idea since I can remember.

                  It was never just about this year. For many people, Scientology is not even about any NOW right It is about their past.

                  I have always known there will come a time when I can not put “the past” behind me. It will travel with me someplace else. What I know, who I have been, and how I have treated others. The choices I have made. Exploring Scientology has been a conscious choice but my involvement in it was never about today only or this life only.

                  Because at the rise of every dawn, I will go through a cycle where by the end of the day, I have created something that will become “The Past”. My past. And that knowledge will certainly form my “future”.

                  The fear of ghosts is basically a fear of a condition and experience we all face.

                  My interest in Scientology has only been with regards to that condition and experience. I will arrive in it. So will everyone else. The truth is, many of us will know more about this experience then. There will be nobody to report back to or to write a success story for.

                  I prefer not to enter that situation with only “faith”. And I have not been afraid of ghosts, ever. Why people fear something they have been is very curious to me. I feel my time spent understanding myself and others, and exploring the supernatural and making that part of a “now” I should think with, is sane. It’s called future planning.

                  What happened yesterday is over. Therefore, yesterday really is not a problem. Except if one is stuck in it! How people fixate in it as an investment I find strange. The focus should be up ahead because that is something real that is coming. That’s where the action is.

                  People that git fucked up or tripped up or set up for losses in this life, did so because they in some way they were not prepared. And a lot of them are doing the same thing all over again. They are not working for a future, they are still not able to move beyond what happened yesterday.

                  This is really, getting lost in time. Over and over and over again.

                  If you got no benefit from the Scientology at all, and nobody who worked in the Sea Org or an Org or Mission or as a field auditor, had any value for you, why are you wasting more of your time? Invest in something else.
                  Whatever will contribute to a better tomorrow for you.

                  If you find ghosts abhorant or silly, or scary, or imaginary, that is only how you will feel repelled by yourself should you ever find you are in the position of being one.

                  • What if every farmer that dropped a seed in the Earth threw a temper tantrum the next day when he did not see a bean stalk?

                    People go around and invalidate their choices and experiences and hopes because of very minor set backs and because they place time limits on their returns.

                    The truth is, a lot of us are not going to understand the pay off in this particular game or our investments in it until much farther up the line.

                    Needing to KNOW EVERYTHING right NOW, it a must have can’t have people run on themselves.

                    You only have to know enough to get through tomorrow all right. To get those that need depend and trust you, through tomorrow all right.

                    With this Scientology business, you have to NOT KNOW right now. You will find out when you are a ghost. That is when you are going to know. And not before.

                    None of us know a fucking thing about it today. It is a future understanding that is only a possibility.

                    • I really don’t see why some people are so upset that they invested in something so far away from them to enjoy they have no reality on it. So they discount their investment.

                      Let me say this, if you are not willing to invest in your own future, why should you be upset if others did not? They only went into agreement with you.

                    • So, David Miscavige does not take Scientolgy as a love thing. Does this really have anything to do with me and you?

                  • When I think of the real differences between me and others, in disagreements about this Scientology business, I mean, there are so many people out there making me wrong for exploring Scientology. Making me wrong for being curious. Making me wrong for having rights. Making me wrong for having an awareness of eternity. And my place in it.

                    The only difference between us, is that I plan for things and they do not.

                    If it isn’t a fucking salt shaker on the table in front of them right now, it does not matter. And in this way they say they will not matter some day.

                    I just think I matter and will always matter. I just think they matter and will always matter. They think all that matters is what they can see right now. The future is not a matter and they will not matter in it.

                    And that is the only point on which we disagree. That does not make anyone of us really bad.

                    • It just means I love so I need that tomorrow as an investment. It brings me hope. I own that all right.

                    • In all of the abuse I have taken for exploring Scientology and being in it, defending others that do the same, not one person has been CURIOUS enough about me to ask me why.

                      Because I do not want to lose people that I love.

                      That makes me ignorant, brainwashed, stupid and crazy with magical thinking in their eyes.

                      No. It is none of that. What it is, is that I care.

                      I just do not agree that I should be discounted for this. Or made to be crazy or evil or fragile.

                      If others do not care so much about love, that is their prerogative. But humanity was here long before Scientology. Where is the mercy, where is the love?

                    • christianscientology

                      I am with you all the way Oracle

                    • Maybe I could blow off all the plants with some sexual song that would discount all of their reason for inserting themselves. The very scary and forbidden concept of pleasure. God forbid that. Marty’s blog just got Xrated.

                    • Hey you know what this brings to mind? The purpose of sex is pro create. David made kids illegal in the Sea Org. Tearing out the purpose for pro create. That only leaves me with one question. Why did David have a wife all of those years? It was not to have kids. Did he have some selfish reasons? Did he hoard that womb for over two decades making sure he did not have to compete with an infant? It would seem he has issues with infants. He did outlaw them. Infants were a threat to this man on some level. He invested heavily in killing them by the van load. Not for nothing but the man saw infants as op terms. You gotta wonder why he has issues with you?

                    • David, you are a known baby killer. You made babies illegal in your time. So many women suffered. You fight the oppressed in court with out apology. This is not about Scientology. It is about your murdering tenancies upon people that have no voice. You have blood on your hands. People can smell it and you can’t kill them off fast enough. But your pool of victims is so god damned small. That you looked the other way while women sacrificed their children to work for you.How fucking narcissistic and self important can you go? “Serving me is more important than serving your child.” You like, pushed and squeezed your way in front of infants. What else can I say?

                    • christianscientology

                      “Never regret yesterday, life is in you today and you make your own tomorrows” – L Ron Hubbard

              • A common means of totalitarian control. Pit one citizen against another, breed distrust. Whistleblowers are necessary in a large organization, but to make everyone a snitch every day is quickly destructive.

                I have always been appreciative when someone assisted me in finding my outpoints, but I am one of the few. This does not work on a broad scale. Normally in a well run organization, people handle small outpoints privately between each other. Most people know this instinctively and it works well most of the time. This breeds trust and camaraderie among group members. Only gross and repeated outnesses are handled through ‘channels’.
                Mark

        • Mark ~~
          I am really disappointed in your logic.
          Who said the policy above advocated actions done on Marty and myself?
          What are you talking about and dubbing in?
          *You* are adding in added inapplicable data.
          Find a smoking gun? Whistleblowing is an attack ?
          Boy oh Boy, I am not even sure if your account hasn’t been taken over
          by someone else……

          • Well, I am about as popular as a turd in a punchbowl today.

            Let me just say this. 1969 was 45 years ago. It was clearly misapplied. This policy, despite T1, did not actually condone things like Snow White and the actions against Paulette Cooper, and all the other insanities that came later. It clearly stated that Scientology did not break laws and shouldn’t.

            OSA reissued it in ’87. By that time, the policy was undoable, since the church had dirty hands.

            Whistleblowing is an attack on people who do wrong. Or, if attack is too string a word, whistleblowing is a proactive action to do God’s work and root out corruption, criminality, fraud, and evil in your own or some other organization. That’s what I mean by that.

        • Grasshopper, I think you mean to say that Marty and others are “attacking” as per the first definition of “attack” below – and that this is the type of attack LRH had in mind in the above HCOPL, when read in full context and not being literal-minded about it. Whereas, the CoS is attacking as per the second definition:

          : to criticize (someone or something) in a very harsh and severe way

          : to act violently against (someone or something) : to try to hurt, injure, or destroy (something or someone)

          http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/attack

          • Marildi
            Your documentation of widespread government attacks against LRH is a reference to one letter written in 1950? (letter from Dr. Smith to other doctors). Have you read a copy of this letter? LRH (or someone in the Co$) forged a bunch of wartime records (I will try to find that reference, I think I read it in Going Clear….fact checkers from a newspaper or some sort of publisher went to pull military records in St. Louis. They were able to determine LRH’s was fake (Tommy Davis said they had been “sheep dipped”). How do you know “Dr. Smith’s” letter was not fake also.

            • No, not just that one letter. Please see my other posts above.

              As regards LRH’s wartime records, have a look at Margaret Lake’s (who sometimes posts here) thoroughly documented research on the subject, linked below. At the end of her paper, she sums it up as follows:
              ———————————–
              CONCLUSIONS

              Hubbard’s Navy service record (as today supplied by the National Personnel Records Center [NPRC] of the the National Archives) is demonstrably incomplete, and in certain cases also provides false and inaccurate information with regard to Hubbard’s actual activities during World War II. This is especially true for the South Pacific period, during which he was a Naval intelligence officer and also attached to the US Army. In all likelihood, most of these incomplete and inaccurate records are due to administrative oversight and error. There may have also been intelligence-related activites which affected certain documents. And some records may have been lost in the 1973 NPRC fire of Army personnel records.

              If one relies solely on Hubbard’s service record from the NPRC to understand Hubbard’s military career in the Navy (as most earlier Hubbard researchers and biographers appear to have done), one will be left with an inaccurate and incomplete picture of Hubbard’s World War II years. One must look into the military, travel and other records of the National Archives (as well as other reliable sources) in order to get a more complete and accurate picture of Hubbard’s Navy service. This is especially true as it pertains to accurately answering the questions surrounding the South Pacific period, i.e. the truth behind whether Hubbard was flown home in the Spring of 1942, whether he was injured, and whether he saw combat.

              When more extensive research was conducted into these areas, it was found that Hubbard was in fact flown home from the South Pacific (as he had claimed), did in fact sustain injuries while in the South Pacific (including being “blinded” by something which physically damaged his eyes), and was sent into an area where he may have seen combat. The injuries, combined with a later duodenal ulcer, left Hubbard in a debilitated condition after the war. As a result, the Veteran’s Administration considered him 40% disabled, after World War II, after conducting physical exams and tests.

              http://scientologymyths.com/hubbardww2.htm
              ————————————

              • Marildi

                I read your other posts. There is not one shred of proof in any of them.
                I have also seen Margaret’s conclusions before, all of which have been debunked. I will have to get back to you with some links that show Margaret is delusional. Have you read Going Clear? LRH was not injured in WW II as he claimed. He was also not a blood brother to Indians or anything else he claimed. His own son Nibs stated that 95% of what LRH claimed about his (LRH’s) accomplishments were NOT TRUE. Have you ever read what Gerry Armstrong had written about LRH’s claims? Part of me just wants to give up this debate with you because it is so sad. But I also believe you must be open to some logic because you are on this blog, so there is hope!

                • Chee Chalker: “I read your other posts. There is not one shred of proof in any of them.”

                  Since you won’t accept what a reliable source who was there says he saw with his own eyes, I guess you will need to do a Freedom of Information request and look for yourself. I’ve read that there are extensive FBI records through the 50’s and 60’s, for example, which are relevant and which can be viewed by the public.

                  You also wrote: “I have also seen Margaret’s conclusions before, all of which have been debunked.”

                  That’s pure assertion. Your Dox?

                  • Maridli,

                    Read Going Clear, specifically the section regarding LRH’s military service. You can also review the extensive Index, where all the assertions in the book are documented.

                    • Chee Chalker, Margaret’s paper was written AFTER Wright’s book – so how could HE be debunking what she wrote about the assertions in his book which were inaccurate and incomplete? Below is an example from her paper (complete with footnotes for her references), first quoting Wright:

                      “Wright: ‘The document provided by the Church of Scientology says that Hubbard received a ‘Purple Heart (palm)’, which would indicate that he was wounded in action on two separate occasions while in the Navy. The document in the National Archives lists only four service medals (not including a Purple Heart) and Hubbard’s military records do not mention any battle wounds. Moreover, if someone was wounded in action more than once, the Navy recognized subsequent wounds with gold and silver stars, not a palm, according to archivists and to John E. Bircher, the spokesman for the Military Order of the Purple Heart.’

                      “Hubbard’s records also don’t make mention of where Hubbard might have gotten the ‘Expert Rifle & Pistol’ award, yet the Navy version claims Hubbard received it.

                      “Further, there are several issues which Wright does not seem to be aware of with regard to the Purple Heart and Hubbard’s service:

                      — “During the early months of World War II, the Navy did not give out Purple Hearts at all, only the Army did.[191]
                      — “The Army DID use ‘leaf clusters’ (or perhaps ‘palm’ on some Separation documents) to indicate a second Purple Heart award.[192]
                      — “Hubbard was in fact formally attached to the US Army in Australia, during the first several weeks of his service in the South Pacific after Pearl Harbor (see ‘Combat’ section).
                      — “It turns out that the most likely period in which Hubbard would have seen action and was injured was during this period in Australia/South Pacific (see ‘Combat’ section).”
                      http://scientologymyths.com/hubbardww2.htm

      • The Church organized the I.R.S. whistle blowers. The Church has organized whistle blowers on psychiatry. The Church encourages whistle blowing when it suits their needs. Perhaps they use whist blowers for “attacks” and therefore when anyone whistle blows on them, they see it as an “attack”.

        The Church will get VERY VERY noisy with it’s whistle blowing campaigns.

        What others do is unforgivable. What the Church does to others is insignificant.

        1. Everything bad that happened to the whistle blower was (a) ridiculous, (b) unimportant, (c) deserved.

        2. Everything the whistle blower and others do to the Church is (a) very important, (b) very bad, (c) irremediable.

        3. Those things which the whistle blower / former staff member did for the Church over decades of hard labor were (a) without real value, (b) were actually just “suppressive” acts.

        The Church has morphed into an aberrative personality.

        LRH gives an answer in PAB 13 ON HUMAN BEHAVIOR, written in 1953.
        It is a briefing to auditors on the importance of knowing the most aberrated and most aberrative types of personality.
        In this PAB, LRH says:

        What we will call the aberrative personality does the following things:

        1. Everything bad that happened to the preclear was (a) ridiculous, (b) unimportant, (c) deserved.

        2. Everything the preclear and others did to the aberrative person was (a) very important, (b) very bad, (c) irremediable.

        3. Those things which the preclear could do (a) were without real value, (b) were done better by the aberrative personality or by others.

      • The KEY WORD in Karen’s post is “ACTUAL.”

    • Mark P: Hubbard’s policy “Targets Defense” is yet more evidence of the fascism, paranoia, and self-serving institutional lies and deception doctrinally embedded in the Church of Scientology.

      Hubbard says “We are being attacked.”

      But what Hubbard never says is this: “We have critics and we should look at what they are saying. Is our PR bad because we are destroying families by Disconnection? Is our PR bad because we practice Fair Game? Do we have bad PR because we are financially ruining many of our own members? Does the public look at us like a sociopath criminal group due to Snow White and the arrests, convictions, and imprisonment of eleven top GO people including my own wife?”

      Hubbard ignores the substance of why the Church was being exposed in the media, sweeps it all under the rug, and then assets that the Church is the most ethical group on the planet.

      The Church of Scientology is completing self-serving. It is not trying to help or even trying to survive.

      Read Hubbard’s polices and you can clearly see that the Church is a master race group (homo novis) whose aim is nothing less than world domination.

      Scientology hates democracy, wants to take over governments, the economy, education, mental health, and everything else.

      “Targets Defense” is totalitarian in nature and has nothing to do with spiritual enlightenment.

      • J.Swift
        There are genuine criticisms and outnesses to be pointed out in Scn. tech and policy. The previous comment shows a superficial understanding of the matters at hand, and the lack of detail and fixed opinions can mask the actual outpoints that need to be addressed.

        Unfortunately, Mr. Hubbard did sow the seeds for destructive actions in some of his writings, but he was on solid ground most of the time. There is a lot more ground than there are seeds in the field.

        You can do better, we need all the help we can get.
        ARCL, Mark

        • MarkNR, yours is not even a good inval. In fact, it reeks of your own cognitive dissonance. Don’t splatter your denial on me. If you think you can save a sinking ship then please keep bailing. I am not stopping you.

          I understand only too well. The details are enormous and well-documented in court cases, online, and by dozens of former executives and hundreds of former members. If you care to read dozens of books, thousands of pages of court transcripts, and interview dozens of people as I have done it is all there. All of the details and eyewitness accounts are there if you actually want to examine the existing scene.

          Anyway, you need to bail faster because the ship is now bow down in the water and stern up in the air. Good luck.

          • J.Swift
            I get your opinion, but cannot join it. Einstein cheated on his wife, married his cousin and sowed the seed of the atom bomb which was used to kill thousands, but I will continue to use GPS, DVDs, and modern medical devices.

            If you had noticed my comments in the past, you would better understand my work.

            Thank you for your communication, I value it all. (Not sarcasm) I ask not for your agreement, only your effort, which we all have in abundance.
            Mark

    • Fascinating Mark P (Grasshopper)! I’m not sure how you got to that conclusion.

      There is a huge difference between (a) using communications media to tell the truth (Marty) and share information, and (b) not only using the media to tell lies (Church of Scientology, a gazillion examples) — but then also to have a _policy_ aiming to “[take] over the control or allegiance of the heads or proprietors of all news media” (the Church again).

      With all due respect, Grasshopper …

      • Yes, there are some differences. At a high level though, if you are backed into a corner by an unrelenting person or group, the answer is to be proactive and spread the truth about those that are opposed to you, work with others to gain allies, do what can be done legally, and continue to do the right thing and do good work. This is really what Ron is advocating in the PL and it is basically the story of what Marty has been doing since the “Squirrel Busters” camped outside his door three years ago.

        The church itself has abandoned this particular policy years ago. It is no longer (paraphrased) “Sincere, effective and committing no crimes.” It has no allegiance of any news media and less and less public officials, It is not (T5) generally revitalizing the societies in which they are operating, it is not (T6) winning overwhelming public support, and it is not (T7) using similar groups as allies (unless the NOI is a similar group, which, I guess, is true, but not what Ron meant).

        From the PL:

        “Our only justification for doing these things is that Scientology is the only game where everyone wins.”

        Sadly – very sadly – that is demonstrably no longer true.

        • You seem to be entrenched in us vs them. Do you believe LRH had no responsibility in the attacks on Scientology? That he lived a blameless life and people just started attacking Scientology because it was successful? Not because of inurement?

        • Interesting views. Following your reasoning, if I understand it correctly:
          1. Marty (and most of the bloggers here) and Church of Scientology are of comparable magnitude? (unrelenting persons or groups?) Hardly so. CofS has a billion dollars or more at its disposal, and Marty does not. CofS owns whole printing presses. Marty does not. CofS has no compunction about lying to protect the church or COB. Marty has committed to the truism that if you tell the truth, it becomes part of your past; if you continue to lie, as the church does, it become part of your future. (I am going by what I know of Marty via this blog over a period of many months of reading and reflection.)

          2. “… this is really what Ron is advocating …” Flunk. Verbal tech.

          3. What is your evidence that the church has abandoned this policy? Even where the church has claimed to abandon self-destructive policies, it has not. It claimed “fair game” was rescinded (it was not; only using the term in an ethics order was forbidden). It claimed (via Tommy Davis and others on national TV in various countries) that there was no such thing as disconnection; false per many scores of victims of the policy. So even if you can find written documentation that this policy was abandoned, the church has a record of continuing “abandoned” practices in the background. People would be rightly skeptical.

          4. Here’s how I see it. COB and CofS have overts against Marty. Those overts have made them critical of Marty (and others). Their missed withholds cause them to become ever more nattery, putting up maligning websites and spewing bad press. Where they can squiggle the facts in their brains, they perceive Marty and others to be harming them; they then use that as a motivator to commit additional overts. Those overts include lies on legal documents, false statements, libel, slander, lies about truth (the “exact time, place, form, and event”) of activities conducted by COB and the church, reporting of false statistics, concealing and denying Marty’s role and status in the church, harassing and stalking his wife, and so on.

          The Squirrel Busters themselves, one of the most ludicrous sights to ever hit the Internet, doing as much or more harm to the church’s credibility than Marty, were themselves a sick Greek chorus of natterers criticizing Marty and justifying their actions by using Marty’s works as a motivator. By opposing freedom of association of Marty and his connections, by opposing Marty’s freedom of religious practice outside the church, by opposing Marty’s free speech, they placed _themselves_, not Marty, squarely in the spotlight of violating the U.S. Constitution.

          So in a way, I agree with some of the solution. COB and CofS might actually benefit from having their withholds pulled and writing up their overts, and putting themselves in an ethics condition from which they might strive to strike a blow at anything that goes against our American rights, guaranteed in the Constitution and Amendments, of freedom of religion, freedom of association, freedom of speech — and freedom various other violations the CofS now perpetrates on a regular basis and has for some time.

          • Re 1. Doesn’t matter. I am talking tactics. Big or small, if someone is going after you – say a biker gang or some corrupt organization – this is not an unreasonable tactic if efforts to talk it out have come to naught.

            Re 2. Funny. But read the policy.

            Re 3. I already stated the evidence. They are demonstrable not following the targets. They may be pushing T1 to the max, but they are failing on the others. Ergo, they abandoned the policy, and by doing so lost any moral superiority they had. In 1969, there was no Snow White or Paulette Cooper.

            Re 4. Agreed.

            • Grasshopper – you bring up a very interesting scenario in the situation you presented of having a group, etc etc etc and then being attacked ……… what do you do?

              I don’t know that there is an absolute answer for all circumstances, but there are certainly datums in Buddhism, Christianity and SCIENTOLOGY that very strongly suggest (or even “order” as Jesus did) that the WRONG thing to do is to assume the posture as the “counter – enemy” and engage in the usual enemy game that is so much the life story of planet Earth. LRH wrote many, many words in the 50s and in lectures as well about ridges in the mind and what happens when you meet energy with energy.

              But …. he just couldn’t help himself I guess. One very possible handling (and I would suggest that in the long run it is actually more workable) is to out create the attacks with MORE affinity, reality and communication all the way around. in your scenario for example, one could have the people who have been audited write up their cogs and wins and these could be passed out day after day on the street. the attackers could even be invited to lunch over and over again talk. There are many ways one can come up with to counter attacks without playing the “enemy game.”

              And, let me pre-empt anyone replying with “so, would you make nice with Hitler and Stalin?” No, (I love the Hitler examples, like there’s no in between gradient between him and Mr. Rogers)

              • Good comment. Good roads, good weather, and good works. I agree. If the group or person just won’t quit and plays dirty pool, despite taking the high road, I see no reason not to point that out.

                I mean – Isn’t that what exes and indies and anon is doing with David Miscavige and the church? That would be my point.

              • christianscientology

                Loved what you had to say Joe. “Love your enemies do good to those that persecute you” that was Jesus’ answer. It is difficult for your enemy to take a swipe at you while you are hugging him!

    • Grasshopper: I have been wanting to say this for a while now. I will keep it plain and simple. No one else has said a word to date. I am somewhat surprised why not. What you (and everyone else who is following here) are missing is that Marty Rathbun has Overts on the church – and many of them. His overts were missed and so he blew. That’s it. And now he is gravely motivating. Is this not the tech? I have LRH lectures from 1956 that talk about this very same thing. He is not a hero by any means. He is anti betterment. He mixes practices. He ridicules LRH. Go back and read some of his comments over the last couple of years. He has denounced the workable tech of LRH many times over in his writings. Just read between the lines and you will see and find the real intention of this guy. He is simply leading everyone along for a long ride (seeking as much support as possible nowadays) – and now a current law-suit. He is desperate. Is his nattering not stemming from mis-withholds? Is this not what we have learned? Has something been missed? With all that he is coming across with, why is anyone not saying to this guy: hey Marty do you have similar overts of you own? Is this not what we were asked along the way? I too am out of the C of S. However I can honestly say that I am sick of this guy. Reading most of what he has to say can make anyone roller coaster. He is so PTS that he is like the real SP from my point of view. He’ll come out with eight derogatory comments about LRH and the works of Scientology. His sly, devious comments can put any reader (who is using LRH tech) into a spin. He hides it very well. As you may see he will then give a positive note or two about LRH – just to lead those along, that is if you haven’t crashed already. Then again, another 1.1 comment on the works of LRH. Be your own adviser. Make your own decisions – LRH. Better to be your own navigator then to have someone like Marty Rathbun lead you and others on a path that may take you off life’s target.
      Let’s try to help this guy. Let’s get him on an ethics program. Let’s have him write up his overts (Time, Place, Form, and Event). This cleans one up quite well. I’ve done it. It’s refreshing. In short, mankind is basically good. We still have to move forward and somehow help our fellow man. Maybe Marty Rathbun can still be helped.

      Guy Vogel

      • OH. Good. Grief.

        Guy responded to my earlier comment about having a full set of EARLY PRE GAT I books that I was willing to ship to anyone in the US if the person paid shipping.

        We had a few emails back and forth. Establishing that I am no longer a scientologist and he is. Then he wanted to know what GAT was. I said I was amazed he had not heard of it but it was “golden age of tech”

        To which he responded that he didn’t WANT the FREE books I was willing to pack up and ship him because he ONLY wanted STANDARD TECH pre 1978 books.

        On my original comment I clearly said they were PRE GAT — therefore “standard” LRH books.

        Duplication isn’t a strong point amongst fundamentalists.

        I appreciate Guy Vogel tremendously because it reminds me why I never ever ever want to be around those who continue to use STANDARD TECH in, out or in between.

        IF someone wants to incorporate a piece of LRH philosophy (most of which he lifted from others) — knock yourself out.

        BUT WHOLE CLOTH fundamentalism — oh goodness.

        Buddhism — well before LRH (and NO!!! LRH was not Buddha) – spoke of “reaping what you sow” (oh wait – that’s in the Bible too) (and LRH was NOT Jesus nor God) …

        Oh hell — I give up.

        Marty is more patient than I

        Wildhorse — (opps that is what Guy typed in an email to me, instead of WINDhorse)

        I kinda like it — Wildhorse — nice ring to it

        • YOU get over here to the US of A and take on the boots in the sky and lead the way. Fix the whole fucking mess and lead the people forward into a better day. When can we pick you up from the airport and drop you off at the Int base to take over and save the day? Huh? You are not available?

      • Guy Vogel said:

        “Let’s try to help this guy. Let’s get him on an ethics program. Let’s have him write up his overts (Time, Place, Form, and Event). This cleans one up quite well. I’ve done it. It’s refreshing. In short, mankind is basically good. We still have to move forward and somehow help our fellow man.”

        Yes, by all means, do let Hubbard lead us by our noses to planetary war and whatever else he might decide for us children.

        I would said you are brain washed, but that would be an understatement. You have no brain left to clean up, you are just all blank slate, regurgitating Hubbard’s platitudes.

        You have bypassed so many schizoid, underhanded, megalomaniac pronouncements from Source that you really don’t know what’s up or what’s down anymore.

        Warning to you: lifelong study of Scientology produces a kind of delusional or schizophrenic state of mind.

        Please note that for every statement that Hubbard makes, there is an equally and opposing counterstatement hidden somewhere inside his gigantic No Hidden Data Line.

        Except of course when he deemed it confidential, need to know basis, Secret and OSA Secret, in which case it is NOT hidden, because frankly, you don’t need to know. And thank you for your cooperation.

      • Scientologists have these insidious little thought machines used to compute with.

        Ron actually implanted these thought vias, mind filters with study tech and your granting him an undeserved status of wiseman.

        So you guys are thinking with overt motivator sequence and various other well demoed and well educated “absolute” information.

        The concept that you have overts because you are critical is part of the brainwashing.

        It is the logic of a Scientologist the twisted logic of Ron’s that is being demonstrted here.

        Scientology is a dangerous, twisted education that misdefines people, life and circumstances.

        This thread is a fabulous demonstration. The more true believers speak and write, the more I am convinced of my assertions.

        It can take 12 years to deprogram oneself from seeing life through Hubbards “human eval and tech”

        So many layers of lies and inaccurate information regarding human behavior.

      • Guy, you are stuck in group think. The “matrix” has you, essentially.

        Hmm. The only reason people blow is overts? Or M/Us? Do you not see the control mechanism there, so plainly before you?

        By your reasoning, any German, soldier or civilian, who did not go along with Hitler in WW II must have had overts against Naziism or Hitler. Why else would anyone leave?

        Please. Think about that. When a _system_ is running off the rails, people have to be able to communicate about what has gone wrong.

        Otherwise, even in the best of systems — which Scientology is not — you have things happen like the NASA engineer saying to delay the launch due to a temperature problem with the O-rings, him being ignored, and then watch in horror as the Challenger blew up.

        Even a science-engineering based organization like NASA can screw up like that. How much more so can a group like Scientology screw up when all critical thought is stopped, “Source” can never be wrong despite ample evidence that he was often wrong or dishonest, where faith in the “tech” trumps reason and investigation, and where the _only_ greatest good is KSW, and the only thing you can say about a sincere critic is “What are your crimes!”

        Though you would not be able to realize it, you apparently have “overts” against reason, sanity, critical thinking, honesty and truth above all, science, full disclosure, non-criminal behavior, freedom, etc., because you are supporting an organization that has come to oppose those things. Please note that I am saying an _organization_, not Scientologists in general.

        By your reasoning, you are nattering about Marty. Therefore you must have an overt and a missed withhold against him. Right? So get out your solo cans and fly your ruds on him. Then you should feel great. Why? Because the “tech” works 100% of the time when applied standardly.

        Wake up.

      • The tech is the tech, and we are at the same time both at the cause and at the effect of it. We cause harm, we withhold, the withhold gets restimed; that all occurs automatically and there is nothing we can do about it, it happens, period. And, we are ‘compelled’ to complain and natter for the exact same reasons the tech says we do. However, this is where we do have some cause; we do not need to respond that way, we can recognize what is happening and truncate the sequence.

        Yes, Marty has O/Ws, of great significance, as he has so often alluded to in various interviews and elsewhere, and no doubt the above sequence automatically kicks in on him as it does everyone else, and no doubt there was some harping and criticism as a direct result. If he is able to get his O/Ws off, TPFE, in a session or write up, that would help clear things for him, as the tech explains.

        All that being said, just because someone has the O/Ws, the misses and so forth, it doesn’t necessarily follow that ALL the resultant criticism and fault finding is due to the misses. If that was the case, then no one could ever be a whistle blower with integrity, could they?

        I guess what I am saying is that, yes, the scenario you described for sure took place, but regardless, once your eyes are opened, the need to speak out isn’t due to your O/Ws, but to your newly resurrected integrity. Clearly there is a significant difference.

        It is obvious that Marty is swinging away from total reliance on LRH and the tech LRH created to bring him, Marty, to a more comfortable state as a Being. This is something we will all have to do at some point, including yourself.

        The only way you can determine if ‘criticism’ is dictated by ones o/w or ones integrity, is to know the motivation behind the words or the acts.

        My own personal view of the posts on this blog by Marty is that Marty recognizes the values of the tech given to us by LRH, and having woken up, is also able to see what to toss away. The tech is very helpful, to say the least that can be said about it, and the admin can be used in a very hurtful manner, which is the least that can be said about that.

        I think Mary is sincere, although don’t agree with all his views, but I enjoy reading his views and the responses to them, being lead to review my own considerations and experiences is a very healthy exercise.

        Anyway, I understand all that you said, and the sequences you laid out are undoubtedly true to an extent -we have no choice over that- but what you may want to consider is what does one do when one’s eyes have been opened, even if you were the biggest, most destructive asshole of them all, remain silent?

      • Guy Vogel wrote:

        He’ll come out with eight derogatory comments about LRH and the works of Scientology. His sly, devious comments can put any reader (who is using LRH tech) into a spin.

        If a comment from someone can put a Scientologist into a spin, then Scientology must make people pretty weak mentally, don’t you think?

        If a Scientologist goes into a spin because of some comment, then this is actually evidence that there is something wrong with Scientology.

        Let’s try to help this guy. Let’s get him on an ethics program. Let’s have him write up his overts (Time, Place, Form, and Event). This cleans one up quite well. I’ve done it. It’s refreshing. In short, mankind is basically good. We still have to move forward and somehow help our fellow man. Maybe Marty Rathbun can still be helped.

        Did you know that the tech of OW write ups came from Mao, and were first used on the inhabitants of his reconditioning camps in China?

        The use of confession to break down people, to introvert them, and to try to destroy them mentally has been used by every totalitarian organization in the world.

        OW tech might bring about some relief every once in a while. But that has to do with the very human emotions of guilt and shame which every human has, and which LRH exploited on Scientologists to keep them under his control.

        There is nothing spiritual about LRH’s use of confession on people, nor Miscavige’s.

        Per your own logic, you are nattering about Marty. Per your own tech, that means that you have OWs on Marty. Per your own argument, you should not be listened to, but only made to write up your overts.

        See how circular your logic is? See how, when you use it, you actually discredit your own points?

        I don’t think that your opinion comes from your overts. I think that your opinion is filled with logical problems that you are not skilled enough to see because Scientology does not teach the skills necessary to see them. Once you do become skilled enough to see the logical problems, and you dump trying to think with Scientology, then your opinions change for the better.

        Good luck.

        Alanzo

        • Alanzo nails it as to the source of confessionals to control people.

          The Church of Scientology, functioning as a neo-Fascist regime, uses confessionals pretty much the same way as did Mao — and as North Korea still does. Other regimes have done the same.

          Here is a relevant blurb from the infamous Pol Pot regime:
          “Throughout December 1978, Mike Deeds and Chris Delance were tortured and forced to write their confessions. Of limited historical worth, the Americans’ confessions are more a testament to man’s remarkable creativity under extreme duress. Both men wove facts from life with fiction to tell a more convincing story.” (http://www.newsweek.com/inside-pol-pots-school-torture-225986)

          Does that not sound just a little too chillingly like The Hole?

          Catholicism seems to have a rather benign confessional nowadays, but not always. Aside from forced confessions in the Inquisition, picture life in a small village where the priest knew everyone’s misdeeds. Liberating, or a recipe for extortion? Now picture that priest requiring that the penitent write down everything in his or her own hand, to be kept forever by the church, and used against you should you try to leave. Liberating?

          And please don’t say that you love writing up your O/Ws because you feel so good afterwards. Like a bad post on Facebook when you were too naive to know better, your words may haunt you. And remember it was not _you_ who woke up one day thinking, “Hey, I think I’ll write up a record of everything that I think I ever did wrong in my whole life, and give it that record to an organization that is fairly controversial and is getting mixed reviews on if and how it protects confidentiality!”

          No. You did not wake up thinking that. You advocate for writing up O/Ws because it has been engrained into you to do it. You have no better basis to require this of someone than Mao, Kim, Pol Pot, Vietnamese communists, Jim Jones, or any other self-imagined demigod had.

          You are in fact, advocating a sort of rape of the soul and personal boundaries implemented under false pretenses, often by people way to young to have life experience or common sense to fully grasp what they are demanding of others.

          • FOTF
            Confessing, or rather confronting and resolving one’s overts and withholds, as has been demonstrated in hundreds of thousands of cases, can be very beneficial, when done wisely and honestly, for the benefit of the person doing the confronting. As with flow 2 in session, self to others, it resolves errors in the past which are hanging up in the present.

            Even a delicious healthy avocado is dangerous if you eat 20 a day, or if it is injected into a vein or shoved up your butt.

            Every bit of truth throughout history has been used to harmful ends at one time or another. If 20 wise, honest, and skillful individuals audited confessionals on 500 people, compared notes, recognized outpoints, developed corrected methods and monitored the individuals for 10 years for long term benefits/harm, would you then wish to examine it honestly.

            My personal observations have been positive, but then I have never undergone forced Sec Checking, but then, Sec Checking is just that, SECURITY CHECKING, not confessionals. Perhaps it should be done away with, but that is a different story.
            Mark

            • The objection is not against auditing.

              It is against how the _organization_ — the so-called “church” — misuses, fails to protect, and abuses confessional material.

              All effective psychotherapy relies on people telling the truth to a trusted counselor. And that truth will natural include the disclosure of past and present actions that are troubling.

              Most individual auditors are great, caring people. But within the church, they have the liability of working for a seemingly corrupt organization that has not earned trust in the handling of confidential materials.

              • FOTF
                “Most individual auditors are great, caring people. But within the church, they have the liability of working for a seemingly corrupt organization that has not earned trust in the handling of confidential materials.”
                Mark
                Wise one you are, young Jedi. I have met countless staff members in outer Orgs who are conscientious and able, yet PTS at a distance to upper management. The auditors and C/Ss I have worked with would never dream of betraying their PCs. But get to the upper Org, with eligibility checks and such, and everything changes. Money and leverage become the rule. And then that money gets used for purposes such as,,,, well,,,, you know the rest.
                Mark
                PS;The persons doing Flag tours that I have had dealings with were consistently harsh, uncaring and bully types, looking for leverage and accusative…..Sad.

        • Alanzo and FOTF2012, your ignorance of confessional tech is showing. Otherwise you wouldn’t be doing an A=A with other “confessionals.”

          • Marildi –

            I think your ignorance of totalitarian mind control tactics is showing.

            Or else you would not be compartmentalizing LRH’s tech of confessionals away from them.

            Alanzo

            • I know enough to know that the results are very different. And I’m not talking about DM’s sec checks, which is not confessional tech.

          • A non-sequitur, ad hominem attack does not advance your claims, Marildi.

            The argument being advanced was that confessionals have been used for thought control and to induce obedience of followers has been used in both political and religious settings.

            Therefore, the Scientology misuse of confessionals (lack of confidential storage, staff right up to COB reading and joking about confessional information, and the use or threat of use of confessional material to control dissidents) is not new in human history.

            And in fact, LRH may have picked some of the techniques straight out of Maoism, Stalinisms, or other totalitarian schools of thought.

            If you understand what A=A=A means, then you can see that an analysis of differences, similarities, and longitudinal historical context of cults and “true belief” systems in general can and do shed light on the evolution and practice of Scientology.

            • FOTF2012: “And in fact, LRH may have picked some of the techniques straight out of Maoism, Stalinisms, or other totalitarian schools of thought.”

              Have you studied or experienced confessional tech? If so, you should be able to differentiate between it and its eventual misuse by the CoS, and between it and its use by totalitarian schools of thought.

              • I have and I can. Not sure of your point.

                The point of the discussion is that confessionals have been part and parcel of many totalitarian systems.

                As far as the power of the Scientology organization over the individual is achieved via confessionals, Wakefield has a decent discussion at http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/wakefield/us-14.html.

                Is it not odd that LRH, so all-knowing, had so much to say about so many things but missed the dynamics of cult control?

                • FOTF2012: “The point of the discussion is that confessionals have been part and parcel of many totalitarian systems.”

                  Again, WHICH “confessionals”? The CoS version?

                  I read what Wakefield wrote in the link you provided, and if you think that is “a decent discussion” on the subject of Scientology confessionals, then you are badly misinformed. What she writes here is way off the mark:

                  “…First, through the practice of auditing, also called the ‘confessional,’ in which the Scientologist over a period of time divulges all the secrets of his entire lifetime. And second, through the ‘ethics’ process of writing up one’s ‘O/Ws’ (overts and withholds), in which the person records every wrong deed, real or imagined, committed in this and in previous lifetimes. The Scientologist must produce these O/Ws until the Ethics Officer is satisfied that he is reduced to an acceptable level of contrition and humiliation.”

                  I’ll say again what I wrote before, that I am not talking about the CoS version – which is not confessional tech but a corruption of it. Which version did you “study” and receive?

                • What in the world makes you think “LRH missed the dynamics of cult control”?

        • Al, Al, Al, AAAALLLLL!

          “Did you know that the tech of OW write ups came from Mao, and were first used on the inhabitants of his reconditioning camps in China?”

          Uhhhh, I don’t think so. Weren’t “confessionals” institutionalized by the early Christian churches?

          I think you’re out on a limb there, ‘Zo-bro.

        • Alonzo ….. Alonzo ….. it really DOES matter what the intention of the confessional procedure is. My last comm cycle with Lundeen of ASHO was when he called me many years ago to tell me that my cycle was now “handled.” All I had to do was buy two intensives of sec checking (which I knew by the way would be the start of 20 or 30 intensives, until the CoS had sucked every cent out of me). I politely declined his offer. I though maybe I should have told him that I wouldn’t come in for the sec checks if he paid ME the money (well … ok…. I would have done that, ha ha).

          But in early 1973, when confessionals started “coming back” into use as “Integrity Processing”, even though I was a Fdn staff member, I also joined DAY staff as a staff staff auditor and joined the “integrity processing team” because I was a green Cl IV (had done a Dianetic Internship) and wanted to really improve as an auditor and knew this would put me through my paces. It did and I did indeed improve by leaps and bounds as an auditor. AND DONE WITH THE INTENTION TO HELP FOLKS AND TO GET THEM CASE GAIN, this auditing worked extremely well to big time VGIs on all my pcs. No KRs, no make wrongs, no being done as punishment or as enforcement to do anything …… everyone got the basic list. Heck, a few years later as a CS, I even wrote my own custom made list on baseball to deliver to a major league ball player from our local team who was in the HGC. He laughed at many of the questions (they indicated to him!) and had a good time too on the list.

          ALL DEPENDS on the intention one has in the doing – just like priests in confession. My intention was ALWAYS to see my pc’s blown out and extremely happy. Of course now it’s mostly done as a money maker and as way to control parishioners’ thoughts and behavior. BUT IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE.

          • Correct. It doesn’t have to be.

            But in a top-down authoritarian cult environment like Scientology, it is a tool that was used all along to suppress dissidence and get the dirt on someone, and their associations, in order to purge and discredit, and to break people.

            Just as anything else in Scientology it is the exploitation of a followers vulnerabilities for your own gain. LRH proved himself not responsible enough with this power. Security Checking was developed for Scientology in South Africa, and that is exactly what it was for SECURITY CHECKING and INTERROGATIONS.

            LRH turned it into a spiritual service and told everyone who much BENEFIT they would get out of it.

            Do you know that the primary job of any interrogator is to show the person he is interrogating that there will be a benefit to him for giving up information that he has nothing to gain by giving up, and everything to lose?

            When it was first re-introduced into Scientology in the late 1950’s and early 60’s by LRH (after early Dianeticists completely rejected it) he said that sec checking was an “OT Process”, THE route to OT.

            LRH’s followers were much more open hearted and well meaning than LRH himself was. He used their open-heartedness throughout his career as Founder.

            It does all depend on the intention of the sec checker. I have had some of the biggest wins I ever had in auditing from sec checking. And I have suffered some of the most long term damage from the brainwashing I had as a staff member from it too.

            LRH said that man can not be trusted with justice. That is false. But Scientologists, and their authoritarian organization, can not be trusted with sec checking, that is for sure.

            Alanzo

          • Joe P.
            My experience as well. Excellent post.
            Mark

      • Well, Guy, first – it’s complicated. But I certainly do not agree with your assessment of Marty here.

        A couple of points. You say “His sly, devious comments can put any reader (who is using LRH tech) into a spin.” Um, if someone actually knew and could apply and uses LRH tech, then the comments from anyone about anything would not put them “into a spin.” Jesus – ever hear of TR-0 bull bait? Grade 0?

        Second – well, here you are reading this blog and contributing to it. The church these days considers this a suppressive act. So, you too are in the ranks of SPs.

        I view Scientology from a slightly different lens than Marty does. But that’s okay. I support what he is doing. Scientology can only survive if it’s in the sunlight, and more importantly, people are only as free as they can think freely and read and do what they want to.

      • Sha Nay Nay calmed down. Laughter! Thank you!

      • We know what Marty’s overts are. Helping Slappy McTinyfists set up this empire of mind-control in the first place. And his amends project is helping to take it down.

        • I do not believe it forwards a healthy purpose at all to declare or announce what we consider other people’s overts to be. As much as Marty has been judged and criticized, I have never heard one of the stone throwers admit, the only reason Marty was there do the work was because they chose not to.

          I didn’t take on the hat of running Scientology because I didn’t want it. I have only myself to hold accountable if I chose to let someone else run the show.

          I do not blame anyone for my losses, my losses are for the others crying of their wounds. I personally have not suffered any loss to mention.

          I think that is easy for mostly everyone to say. It is easy to lay on the couch while someone else cooks the pasta, and then bitch because it wasn’t cooked el dante.

          But what that does is discourage people from doing the cooking when they see the penalties involved. And then then lay on the couch and become the effect of the cook.

          I do like to watch the current events unfold and pull the strings. It is a game.

          But we were all in this love together. And we have made of it what it have.

          I have no interest in the witch hunts and public sacrifices and sadism and degradation that transpires through these channels. That has nothing to do with Scientology and everything with a person’s ability with humanity.

          I have no idea who in this entire theater has the right to demand Marty owes them amends. But I assume it was someone who preferred to sit on the couch.

          • A bit of truth.
            Of all the abilities I have encountered in those I have crossed paths with on this rock, the one I most admire and respect is the ability to put out honest effort, the willingness to do their due diligence. I put it ahead of agreeing with my opinions. Those who are unwilling to do the work are destined to fail, no matter what path they are on. Any successes are temporary and unappreciated. These persons are easy to recognize. But even those can be kick started, no matter what path they choose.

            I have had success so far in my path. I wish all the best in your’s, just go ahead and walk it. Being a spectator gets awfully old awfully quick.

            Audit, meditate, study physics, learn psychology, pray. But do it with honest vigor, paying attention to what you see and make your own decisions. This is the path of all paths.
            ARCL, Mark

          • christianscientology

            Well said Oracle

      • christianscientology

        Hi Guy
        Whether Marty has overts, and/or missed withholds is not for me to say. It certainly comes across to me that he has ARC breaks, both with the Church, LRH, the Tech and particularly COB.

        As I understand the tech if you have a disagreement you basically have only two choices, either to “handle it or disconnect”. I would believe that Marty and his wife are perfectly within their rights to seek legal redress if they feel that they have been subject to illegal actions, but I would see that as entirely separate to any personal misgivings towards the Church of Scientology and its officers.

        Regards
        Pip

  6. Chuck: “It could all cease being used, but that would take someone at the top of official Scientology to stop using it.”

    Yes, and they could cease using it based on fundamental LRH policy:

    “It takes many things to ensure expansion. Thus when you are interpreting policy it should be interpreted only against EXPANSION as the single factor governing it.” (HCOPL 4 Dec 66, “Expansion, Theory of Policy”)

    • “It takes many things to ensure expansion. Thus when you are interpreting policy it should be interpreted only against EXPANSION as the single factor governing it.” (HCOPL 4 Dec 66, “Expansion, Theory of Policy”)

      single factor governing it.

      You do see that he wrote that, right?

      What if it is unethical? or if it harms a lot of people? Or if it’s a lie? Or if it is illegal? Or if it causes more harm than good?

      None of those are factors which should govern the policy. EXPANSION is the single factor which should govern it, per L Ron Hubbard.

      See Marildi, from some other writer you could see this is AT LEAST a poorly thought out statement. But L Ron Hubbard made so many of these types of statements that it is clear he did think it out. And he did really mean it.

      To L Ron Hubbard, the single factor which should govern policy is whether it causes expansion.

      Don’t justify, just look.

      Don’t say “YEAH BUT!!!”

      Just look.

      Alanzo

      • Right, Alanzo. In the Ron-iverse guhLAXee there is only one greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics: Scientology.

        Therefore expansion of that greatest good can never be less than the greatest good, period.

        How right can you be? Immortal. Ron died. How wrong an you be? Dead. Ron died.

        ‘Nuff said?

      • Al, my viewpoint on that is if it is illegal, unethical, harms a lot of people etc, it will not result in expansion but in contraction. That is in fact what has been happening. Therefore policies have been misinterpreted and misapplied. Whether by Hubbard and /or by others is moot.

        • Lenin and Stalin expanded the Soviet Union.

          So the single governing factor of their policies was being met, per LRH.

          And yet the Soviet Union no longer exists.

          So there must be something wrong with the single governing factor of policy which LRH operated on, and which he taught Scientologists.

          Right?

          Alanzo

          • Al, I don’t agree. That’s way too simplistic for real life. Something led to the expansion, and something led to the collapse(contraction). They were not necessarily the same policies, factors, or actions that led to those things. But if it makes you feel more comfortable thinking you have “an answer”, even though that answer is just a bit of bias confirmation, carry on. I don’t seem to have your need to, your feeling of, “must have an answer”. I don’t need to know what the true causes were. Although in the cases of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, it is plausible to me they collapsed because overall their actions benefited fewer people, not to mention fewer dynamics (as in environmental destruction), than they harmed.

            • Thier actions were without humanity, and evil. This is what thinking with an ideology does, whether Naziism, Communism or Scientology. Even thinking with Christianity and Islam can do this, as is seen throughout history and even into the present.

              That’s the point, Valkov. L Ron Hubbard’s single governing factor for policy was EXPANSION. That simplistic, money-grubbing thinking – instilled in all his followers – eliminated humanity in their thoughts and actions and brought about evil.

              Why? Because they lost themselves into their ideologies. Their impulse to be human was snuffed out.

              This point about thinking with an ideology, and what it does to a person. Have you ever thought about this?

              Alanzo

              • Yes, expansion based on a PRODUCT. A beneficial product, not a harmful one. Whether you delivered such a product in your years as a Scientologist is ultimately between you and your Conscience. Or perhaps it is easier to just shunt all the responsibility over to that omnipotent “master brainwasher” LRH, leaving yourself clean and pure and innocent as the driven snow…..

                The endless “he said, she said” on these blogs is boring and unproductive, from where I sit.

              • It’s funny how difficult it is to see one’s self as others might see one. For example, it is quite obvious to me that you are thinking with an ideology.

          • A historical pedant notes: the USSR (i.e. federating Soviet Russia with the other Soviet Republics) wasn’t set up until after Lenin’s death.

          • Alanzo,
            You are a wise guy, and can think well. But imho your solid agendas or fixed ideas blind at times your own judgment and logical capacity, without you being aware of it. We are all like this at times, that’s why we are doing mental/spiritual work on ourselves, so forgive the personal remark. But please read carefully Valkov’s replies to you. He has his agendas too, all-right, but he makes always extra efforts to set them aside, and see things freshly and from other view points too, and that is really high and unique.
            I would elaborate more on the points in question, but I am busy before catcing a plane…read Val, he has some rare pearls, if one cares to notice.
            All the best,
            Hemi

            • Valkov has certainly improved over the years, I’ll give you that. He and I have had a Vaudeville act that we have been schlepping from blog to blog for about 5 years now.

              When we first hit the road together, I had to carry him for every line. The trained seal was funnier and more responsive than he was.

              But as time went on, and he kept up his tap dancing lessons, he has gotten better.

              It’s still the “Alanzo & Valkov Show”. And NOT the “Valkov & Alanzo Show”, though.

              Never forget that.

              Alanzo

      • Alanzo: “What if it is unethical? or if it harms a lot of people? Or if it’s a lie? Or if it is illegal? Or if it causes more harm than good? None of those are factors which should govern the policy.”

        You’re being too literal, Al. The following is on the same page as what I had quoted:

        “All our policy then is built on EXPANSION…

        “It is calculated to ensure a continued and widening demand by ensuring that product remains good and beneficial.”

        • Good and beneficial in terms of EXPANSION?

          Good and beneficial in terms of people shuddered into silence who know too much and are likely to speak to the other paying customers?

          Good and beneficial how?

          Again, Marildi, it is vague and foggy and undefined.

          It’s at LEAST bad writing with contradictions and foggy sub-points.

          But one thing is defined, and that is the single governing factor of all policy – EXPANSION.

          Not compassion. Not love. Not helping someone. Not feeding the poor because they are downstat.

          Sorry Marildi, you’re still justifying for Ronny. Even after all the damage you have seen his policies do. You still justify for him – even though it is policy and not tech, as you were using last week to justify.

          Can you see your justifications dart back and forth like mercury?

          Alanzo

          • The years when Scientology was expanding were when the product was as LRH described, “good and beneficial.”

            • Do you have a direct line?

            • Since there are no Clears, as described by LRH, nor any OTs, as described by LRH, then how could the product be good and beneficial?

              Sorry Marildi. There is just no there there. There are so many false assumptions going on here. I just can’t play fairy tale make-believe long enough even to acknowledge your clarification of this policy.

              But okay. Thank you for your clarification. I do see the point you are making, even though the shifting sand and rickety foundation continues to collapse around it.

              Once again you have proven yourself to be a stalwart and exacting librarian for the world of Scientology.

              Now you’d better get yourself out of there before it all falls in your head!

              Alanzo

              • “Since there are no Clears, as described by LRH, nor any OTs, as described by LRH, then how could the product be good and beneficial?”

                Whether there are or aren’t any Clears or OTs “as described by LRH.” does not equal nothing good or beneficial. Your logic speaks for itself.

                • What is that something that was good and beneficial?

                  Have you ever actually defined it?

                  If it wasn’t the product that LRH was selling, what product was it that was good and beneficial?

                  I think defining exactly what that was will be a very productive exercise. Because then Scientology can finally be evaluated for its real products, instead of its fake ones.

                  Alanzo

                  • Al, why don’t you start by reading all the testimonies by posters – even on these recent threads alone.

                    • Chee Chalker

                      Marildi,

                      I’ve read a lot of these “testimonials” and I have yet to read one that a) pointed to anything concrete or b) even made sense. Curing a goldfish of red bumps is as believable as reducing crime in Columbia, both of which have been attributed to LRH tech. I think what we would all like to hear is one concrete situation, occurrence, etc that you can directly contribute to the use of the tech. Please, no gobblygook about “blowing charge” or going exterior. If you can’t prove it, it is simply a matter of faith. One person is going to have to do a parlor trick

                    • Chee Chalker, I’ll give you a couple of simple examples that are fairly clear-cut.

                      A friend of my kids, who was about twelve at the time, had a big problem with sweating profusely (and it was a real source of embarrassment for him). I sat him down at the kitchen table one day and ran some Dianetics on him. He was leaning over the table and as he recalled incidents in his past, the sweat started dripping off his forehead so much that it made a little pool on the table. But by the time we finished with the process he had stopped sweating and never had the problem again in the years since.

                      I also audited one of my sons who had a fear of heights which was giving him a problem when he was bicycling in the hilly area around our house. So I audited him on it, and he recalled a time when he was a very young child and was crossing over a Bridge and got very scared. Once he had remembered that, the fear of heights was handled and that was the end of it.

                    • Hi Marildi.
                      In addition.
                      My former wife, shortly after becoming pregnant, began getting morning sickness. It got worse and could hardly hold any food down. Went to the doctor, he couldn’t help. It got worse and she lost weight, an unsafe amount of weight for our child. She was hospitalized and fed through an IV. A few days later she went to the Church in Atlanta for a Pregnancy Assist, (audited). She was sick when she went in. 3-4 hours later she came out not sick. She was never sick again.

                      Now, my 2 grandchildren are 2nd generation barley babies. Very healthy, very smart. very happy.

                      I personally have not raised the dead but I have healed the sick. In fact, it’s really not that hard. I’ve lost track of how many burned fingers, aching knees and backs, and stomach pains I’ve helped to relieve. If someone doesn’t see it, they just aren’t looking and have their own agenda.

                      Audit with actual love and the technique isn’t so important. Jesus of Nazareth audited with love alone and look at his results. This is not a derogatory statement, but a very high compliment.
                      Mark

                    • Great examples, Mark. You’re right – “it’s really not that hard.” And there are SO many examples. Those who don’t see that either never had much experience with the uncorrupted version of the tech – or, as you say – they have their own agenda. It’s no more complicated than that with regard to the tech itself (as opposed to the management). And I would agree that auditing with love – or we might even say, with the right intention – is by far the senior factor.

                    • Hollo there Marildi.
                      One problem I had with auditor training was the complexity with trying to do what I was told as opposed to doing what I knew. Trying to juggle meter reactions, body indicators, what step of the routine we are on, etc, all while having a real conversation with the PC and really understanding what he is saying and what is going on with him. All with the fear that if I miss one tick or fleeting 2 swing F/N, I could cost him hours of expensive auditing time.

                      Then it hit me, or rather it released from me. ONLY DO WHAT YOU KNOW. As you learn more and see it in session you will know more, but don’t worry about what you have been told or read. Once you see something that you read about play out in session, THEN you will recognize it and thereafter know it.

                      Sure, at the very beginning you follow a routine to get your feet wet, but that gives you the opportunity to KNOW a few things as you see them. Thereafter, keep your eyes open for things you don’t yet know, but ACT on what you know.

                      Simplistic example:
                      A guy can’t find an E/S and is grinding. Ask him something that YOU are unclear about, that YOU are curious about. Not sure about who all was in the room at the time? Ask him who all was in the room. Don’t know who did what? Ask him who did what. Your own curiosity is one of the best indicators of what to do.

                      Do what you KNOW. The rest will come as you see and know more.
                      Mark

                    • christianscientology

                      Beautiful Mark. A quote from Mary Baker Eddy – “DIVINE LOVE ALWAYS HAS AND ALWAYS WILL SUPPLY EVERY HUMAN NEED”

                    • Joe Pendleton

                      Marildi – the two successes you noted are GREAT examples of the actual workability of auditing. All it takes is an auditor who understands what he or she is doing along with the intention of helping another person. The tons and tons of “man decades” (not “man HOURS”) that the CoS has wasted on other (and usually destructive) activities has primarily been the source of its decline. All of the positive aspects of Scientology can still be used as one wishes (and we who have left the CoS are under no obligation whatsoever to use any of its negative aspects).

                    • Thanks, Joe. You are spot on. I’ve appreciated your other posts too.

                  • Alonzo – just to START:

                    1- The ARC Triangle is an almost magical formula if one uses it with the intention of increasing one corner so as to increase the other two (and does it with knowledge of one’s current context and does it with judgment). I live in another culture in Asia and travel widely, including as an American to some Muslim countries. This never fails me. It is priceless to have this knowledge to use.

                    2 – I could say the whole comm cycle, but here I’ll just say “acknowledgement.” Just today, I delivered an ack to someone, who EXPECTED an addition to the ack and was ready to counter it …. when I just stopped after the high affinity ack ….. the other person seemed almost stunned in happiness and thanked me.

                    Just two. I could come up with 20, 30, many more. Life changing ideas and abilities that can make one happier and make this a better world. And I say the above ALSO feeling that LRH got loonier as time went on, dramatizing his own insanities to the detriment of others. Ultimately, I had a very bad ending to my Scientology experience, and lost friends and loved ones and my job when I “became an SP.” But …… do I regret my 35 years working in Scientology? I certainly do not, it was a ride baby, it was a ride.

              • Literal Clears and OTs are irrelevant. Scientology is all about gradient improvements that are perceived by the person himself as existing. That “product” was frequently there in the 1960s and 1970s, I saw it and heard of it myself, from many people.

          • Al, doesn’t it seem obvious that he meant “good and beneficial” to the consumers of “the product”? He specifically refers to a product. And he did provide for “money back” in cases of dissatisfaction.

        • You guys are granting Ron far to much sanity than he had. It is, on one level, sad to hear folks try to implant benevolence into warlike policies.

          Ron couldn’t have been this nuts, says the apologists.

          Reminds me of when Clinton said,” it depends on what you think the definition of “is” is”

          The facade of Ron’s benevolent messiah brainwashing is crumbling.

          Humpty Dumpty is of the wall folks.

          And all the kings horses and all of Ron’s words can’t create a diamond when it’s really a turd.

          • What really got me seeing how crazy and sad an apologist can be is when you guys were actually arguing if Ron as really meaning blackmail or extortion in past threads.

            Holy shit……. Did he mean extortion or blackmail!!!!!!!!

            The agrument became about semantics, not the idea that a “messiah” would even be talking like this.

            Fundamentalist thinking is so rife with false assumptions.

          • And you, Brian, are granting LRH less sanity than he had. Try the “middle way”. Likki is elsewhere and doing fine now. Besides, did LRH ever audit her himself? I doubt it. If there was harm, it was likely done by others.

      • Ask yourself Alanzo – has forced abortions, lying to governments, committing crimes, establishing “the hole”, led to expansion? Uh, no. That’s the point. Doing stupid things shrinks orgs. We see evidence of that all around.

        • Not to mention embarking on an overall program of “criminal exchange”. In other words, taking money and giving nothing in return. Where’s the LRH policy on that?

          Brian? Perhaps you could document for us how MIscavige learned that from LRH?

      • Alonzo – that line you quote is probably my favorite line in all of LRH policy. I’ve often thought that it one was allowed in the CoS to actually DO that with some judgment, there would never have been the problems there was. Though I doubt that LRH would have actually allowed his juniors to apply that if they didn’t agree all the time with HIM.

        Honestly, it never even occurred to me that this line would justify unethical or illegal behavior (just smart and logical behavior) but you make a pretty good point there. This is a trap LRH fell into ALL THE TIME. He was somewhat obsessed with “the SINGLE source of all aberration”, “the ONLY reason a student gives up a study”, books are “THE” reason for expansion, yadda yadda, yadda – you know what I’m talking about. I could come up with many more. Of course, then Ron would in fact come up with OTHER factors that contradicted his SINGLE factor being the ONLY cause of something. Unfortunately this tendency of his would get seized on by the TRULY “not quite bright” who would invalidate everything else while dramatizing their destructive pursuit of any particular hobby horse at any particular time, ignoring all their other materials. And LRH himself is largely responsible for that because of he way he himself communicated.

        • Thanks, Joe. I have read a lot of your posts over the years and I have much respect for you.

          It’s not only the “not quite bright” who would become Scientology thinking machines instead of human beings. It’s anyone who adopted the ideology to do their thinking for them.

          It is not just Scientology. It is communism, fascism, etc. Ideologies turn us into thinking machines for the ideology and divorce us from ourselves.

          That’s the basic human mistake we all made.

          Alanzo

          • True, Alonzo. I would add to your list, fundamentalist religious teachings. I attended a pentacostal Christian church for a couple of years quite recently and I can tell you that when people enter into and agree to that kind of universe, they ALSO agree that there is NO OTHER WAY of thinking and that anything they are presented in the religion MUST BE TRUE. LRH’s slow but sure decision that Scientology become a fundamentalist religion that cannot be questioned in any of its ideas can be seen in the evolution of Scientology materials, from his original lectures on education (where one must be able to discard ideas one does not agree with and where it is a VIRTUE to question authority in any area) to the eventual point where ANY disagreement with “source” must must MUST be due to one’s own misunderstood word, previous false data, suppression, etc (that one could really never have one’s OWN truth if it differed at all from LRH’s). This is one of the eventual outcomes of fundamentalist religion which Scientology fell into when Ron decided that all his opinions and pronouncements on any and all subjects were unquestioned truths.

          • christianscientology

            Sound! Alanzo

  7. How nuts!

  8. Gerry Armstrong must be at least be smiling right now.

    • Video of Gerry Armstrong signing non disclosure and settling with the C of S.

      • Video of Gerry speaking of his time as an intelligence officer for the G.O.

      • Amazing is it not? The church gives him money they expect him without his knowledge yet to know that he will later spend to defend himself from them. Why isn’t this church just able to mind their own business in life instead of offering people ZERO worth paying for this way and all the other time they have failed? The truth I guess is a only learned by a small handful it would seem.🙂

  9. This is enlightening and disheartening. I always felt that raising individual IQ so that one could make up one’s own mind about anything, was a far more tenable and worthwhile goal.

  10.   “If we, doing our jobs, doing no wrong, breaking no laws, are having trouble operating, what about the rest of the West? We’re not the only ones in hot water. In fact we are probably in far better shape than many, many other groups and for sure in better shape than other individuals.
         So we can and must take the lead.”

    Doing no wrong?
    Breaking no laws?
    This is doing our jobs per many statements etc.
    This is bollocks.

  11. From the same PL:
    “A. Our best defense is that we are sincere, that we are effective and
    that we commit no crimes.
    B. Our next best defense line was being sure the public knew we were a
    Church.
    C. Our next best was being quick and able and using very fast comm lines.
    We must not repeat the errors of 1 to 9.
    And we must reinforce A, B and C.”
    And:
    “We do not have a utopian dream or a planned society. We are trying to survive. Our theory is that if individuals become more honest and less harassed they will be capable of building a better society.
    The fact is we would have gone along happily minding our own business. But these fantastic and continuing attacks have pushed us more and more into developing a technology and direction of defense.
    We now have a lot of experience. We have been hurt, we have been held back. It has cost us millions. Normal channels of the society have let us down. Therefore we are on our own.”

    A measure of balanbe, and seeing the big picture. Never hurts. Looking at certain parts of a donkey, or better yet, a camel, might mislead as to its identity or function… How about the middle path? The golden one.
    We all (or most) left the Curch and its doctrines, arbitraries and chains, chains, and more chains. We are free. We can take from Ron and his tech whatever (each finds) is good, beneficial, enlightening, and throw the rest away. I get the feeling many still fight past ghosts and implanted ideas. Who says we need to adopt everything written by Ron? Or even everything written in a bulletin? The CoS does!!! But we are out of there, and we know better, and we re-learned to observe before accepting – so, what’s the problem?
    I am an Indie right now and using the tech, doing NOTS. Absolutely fantastic. Done for me, and me alone. The moment I will feel it is no good, I will go home and do something else. It is that simple, and it leads to happiness and freedom. And bunch other things too! Almost 2 years of Indie services, we don’t read this kind of bulletins…what for? We are not attacked, only loved, and after sessions whole day I go speak and hug my psycotherapists frieds, who keep asking: what the …. are you doing there looking so good?
    Knowledge CAN be used and applied to great benefit. But with fads or arbitraries of any kind, it is not knowledge any more and does not work.
    Spoke my mind, and heart. Does that make sense to anyone? I hope it does.
    With love and care,
    Hemi

    • martyrathbun09

      …”so, what’s the problem?” When those you are affiliated with become somewhat effective, they will know. And they will wonder what hit them so hard and so fast out of the blue, notwithstanding my continuing attempts at educating the oblivious.

      • Marty,
        I think I understand what you mean. I never take your words lightly. They helped so much in so many occasions. both me and those I am affiliated with. And as to being hit hard and fast, I stated before and repeat now, those hit, and those in line to be hit, and additionally all those who are good, positive, truth seeking and aware beings, should help each other, especially in facing evil, destrutive, hard and fast hitting people and organizations. I do believe this is important. and I am ready to walk the walk on this! And IMHO, a strong part of the hard and fast hit, is deliberetely separating, 3rd partying and causing upsets between many of us FREE, positive beings. I wish and hope for a change on this, and more cooperation and mutual help.
        Hemi

      • Possibly LRH wondered, initially, “what (and who) hit him so fast and so hard out of the blue”?

        • I don’t think LRH had a clue that the enemy after him was his paranoid tendencies.
          Paranoid people assign the cause of their paranoia to external props, people, organizations etc.

          The genius of Ron is that he sold to Scientologists that Ron’s nemisis was: Xenu, AMA, CIA, Nibbs, Sarah, Mayo, IRS, Marcabs, Catholics, FDA, Psyches etc.

          He sold you on the externalized definition of his internal mental problems.

          Google Barbara Kay, Ron’s PR secretary and one time main squeeze.

          She slept with the man and dated him. What you know of him is through words on paper and a well oiled PR machine.

          • Brian, my comment was to Marty, but perhaps addressed to all readers, so OK: And what you know of LRH is through….. how and who and what? I simply do not feel the huge “rush to judgement some other commenters here seem to feel. That is not really a good or sufficient reason to ad hom me as a “true believer” just because I notice other or additional aspects of LRH and Scientology. There are more than 2 types of people. You do your own cause a disservice by trying to paint everything in black and white.

    • Love and care back to you and I am happy for your good news.

      It is a good scene in the Indie Movement.

      You said,

      “we don’t read this kind of bulletins…what for? We are not attacked, only loved”

      Because Marty Mike and Karen and some others have been taking all of the heat.

      When I started in the Freezone / Indie movement (2002) we were hiding in private apartments (which still got infiltrated with OSA spies and conflict makers) and motels to do our auditing and training. Seriously. I watched the staff knock on peoples doors looking for their original LRH books they had PURCHASED and demanding they surrender them book burnings. Seriously.

      You are not attacked and only loved came from a lot of sacrifice, blood sweat and tears my friend.

      • Oracle,
        I meant not attacked by the public, people in general or other groups. Because we respect all those and treat them as equals – at least. We are attacked by the CoS, however, in various forms.
        Still you are absolutely right, of course. These guys did lie on the fence so we and others can cross safely to freedom. Never forgotten!
        All I humbly ask of them is two-fold:
        1. to realize that their sacrifice made a big difference, in saving souls,
        which can now continue to save themselves and others far into future.
        And that the changes they fought for can and are working miracles.
        2. Allow also a change of flow: from helping, sacrificing, giving, to being
        helped, being given back, in whatever way they need and wish. By me,
        you, us.They deserve no less!

    • Re the following quote reposted below from Ron, are people aware of how chillingly like Jim Jones Hubbard sounds? — I’m referring to Jones’ recorded speeches right before the murder/suicide/Kool-Aid.

      “We do not have a utopian dream or a planned society. We are trying to survive. Our theory is that if individuals become more honest and less harassed they will be capable of building a better society.

      “The fact is we would have gone along happily minding our own business. But these fantastic and continuing attacks have pushed us more and more into developing a technology and direction of defense.

      “We now have a lot of experience. We have been hurt, we have been held back. It has cost us millions. Normal channels of the society have let us down. Therefore we are on our own.”

    • “Does that make sense to anyone?”

      It makes sense to me, Hemi. First I’ll say that Marty’s continuing efforts at educating others about the CoS have not gone in vain, and many of us have come to understand much better just how reprehensible the actions of the church can be.

      But I also understand the point you are making about this PL, supported by the context you quoted at the beginning of your post – the point being, that this PL is not actually a reference for the actions the CoS engages in unless it is grossly misinterpreted. For one basic thing, the people they attack as the so-called “enemy” are not those LRH listed in the PL – let alone the fact that times have changed a lot in the several decades since. There is even policy that would indicate the above HCO PL should probably be deleted as no longer the situation:

      “GOOD POLICY BASED ON ACTUAL SITUATIONS EXPERIENCED, FOLLOWED WELL, MAKES AN EXPANDING DEPARTMENT, ORG OR CIVILIZATION…

      “The wisdom of the policy and whether or not it was a successful solution to some actually possible confusion or crisis determines whether or not it should be added or deleted.” HCOPL 13 Mar 65 “The Structure of Organization, What is Policy”:

  12. Actions follow ideas. Philosophy comes from ideas. Ideas are written down in words.
    Words are read, demoed and demonstrated with action.

    Action is the only proof of comprehended ideas.

    David Miscavige is a student of L Ron Hubbard: his philosophy and his geo political strategies.

    L Ron Hubbard communicated the ideas that David Miscavige is following.

    L Ron Hubbard is the only cause, the only source to Scientology’s depravity.

    Scientology, GO/OSA became the institutionalization of L Ron Hubbard’s paranoia, meglomania and narcissism.

    David Miscavige is a fitting legacy. A perfect example of how study tech can create and support a sociopath when the information studied and demoed is the sort that Marty has here presented.

    Something tells me there is a hell of a lot more coming down the pike.

    Dave must be freaking.

    ” help me I’m melting, oh what a world, what a cruel cruel world”

    Ding dong the……………..

    • So is it your thesis that Miscavige thoroughly comprehended and has been following the entirety of LRH’s ideas? Some argue that is the case, others argue it is not the case. So what?

      • True believers love to equate Ron’s written words and proceedures with their great wins in life.

        But somehow go into denial with the wacko cult writtings and evil done.

        • So, Brian, according to you, there are “true believers” and…… what? Are you suggesting there are just 2 kinds of people? Smacks of some of LRH’s thinking……

          • How do you define a true believer Valkov?

            • Do you always answer a question with a question? I define that as evasion.

              • I was really trying to get your definition so I could start on my unenviable task of trying to answer your “only two people in the universe” question.

                What the hell Valkov. I see you on the next round.

            • OK, I’m back from my appointments. I do not define “true believer”, it is not a term I use in my thinking. I basically see it as a “label”, similar to “wog”, “retard”, and other pejoratives.

              That said, I would define it for myself as having to do with a person who has a fixed idea or ideas on some subject, inspite of contrary data.

  13. Gerhard Waterkamp

    The HCOPL is delusional at so many levels and in so many areas, one has to wonder about the mind who composed it.

  14. These 4 points were unwisely written, but the entire PL is a different story.
    Evaluating each sentence and even each phrase for its relative importance (judgement), then the PL as a whole is necessary and not that difficult. A feat that upper management has proven unable to do. They took these 4 points as the whole message and were blind to the rest, just as explained in Dianetics. Interesting.
    Mark

  15. HCOPL 11May71 Black PR

    .”……..When you gather information by intelligence procedures and at once employ it for PR, the result is likely to be poor.
    It is not that it isn’t done. It is that it isn’t very effective. Also it is an act of desperation.
    ……….”
    This is an important PL in that it stresses the necessity of being factual and honest in all PR and even propaganda, and that protest PR is only employed after one has failed, where ….”neglect has already occurred on the issues”, and also the necessity of choosing your enemies wisely.

    “Actually, you don’t choose your enemies, but you darn well better keep up with who has chosen you as an enemy.” MNR

    One can take partial sentences and phrases from this PL and turn them around for harm, but the principles and data are sound and sensible, and need to be known. Evil is not ‘everywhere you look’ but it is common enough that if you are not knowledgeable in it’s handling, you will become the bad effect.
    Mark

  16. singanddanceall

    TARGETS

    The vital targets on which we must invest most of our time are:

    T1. Depopularizing the enemy to a point of total obliteration.

    T2. Taking over the control or allegiance of the heads or proprietors of all news media.

    T3. Taking over the control or allegiance of key political figures.

    T4. Taking over the control or allegiance of those who monitor international finance and shifting them to a less precarious finance standard…

    LOL

    good luck with that.

    Not possible with the internet, and blogs, and sites that allow freedom to communicate.

    LRH never thought with the internet where speed of particle flow was fast,

    as opposed to books and letters out and magazine’s out where speed of particle flow was slow back b/4 the net. LOL

    If word of mouth is the best form of advertising, which the internet is,

    the COS is a big flunk. LOL

    I mean it can’t stand on it’s own two feet after 60 plus years now, without resorting to covert, dirty, blackmail operations.

    Give me a break. LOL

  17. As promulgated by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard in 1969:

    TARGETS

    The vital targets on which we must invest most of our time are:

    T1. Depopularizing the enemy to a point of total obliteration.

    T2. Taking over the control or allegiance of the heads or proprietors of all news media.

    T3. Taking over the control or allegiance of key political figures.

    T4. Taking over the control or allegiance of those who monitor international finance and shifting them to a less precarious finance standard…

    There must be something wrong with me. I mean, of course these are unattainable goals. Taking over control of international finance? Heads of all media? Key political figures like who, the president?

    Hubbard and the CMO were going to do this? Who? David?

    I mean, I think this is hysterically funny. Doesn’t anyone else think this is funny?

    David Miscavige has a restraining order on him Texas and he thinks he might take over the government and the federal reserve?

    This is the first time I have ever seen this but I thought it was one of the funniest things I had ever read. Who is going with David and the C.M.O. to take control of these things? Jenny Linson, Charmain and Lori Webster?

    Does anyone in CMO even have a high school diploma?

    I can’t get worked up about it because it is just so fabled it’s hysterical.

    Even if David did believe it possible, isn’t he quite bogged on target 1?

    I laughed til my ribs hurt!

  18. Here’s why I no longer follow LRH —-

    He promised to relieve us from our HUMAN suffering. Who wouldn’t want that?

    He promised that we would gain certainty. Who wouldn’t want that in this human world of confusions and uncertainty.

    Well — guess what. I NOW no longer reject suffering as it’s HUMAN and I am human — not a god, not homo novis (a totally invented concept that demeans those who are HUMAN — only the entire population of earth — except for the handful of deluded humans AKA as scientologists)

    ——————

    “To avoid the legitimate suffering of being human we inflict UNTOLD suffering on others.” C.J. Jung (emphasis mine)

    Windhorse or more recently called

    Wildhorse🙂

    • I’m beginning to enjoy the idea of being comfortable with uncertainty. Wildly more interesting and real🙂

  19. It is like Pinky and the Brain one is a genius, the other is insane:

  20. Natural Philosopher

    Seems to me like some policy that Vladimir Putin is engaging in right now! The trouble with having such rigid policies is that they don’t flow with the times. As pointed out above, even though the internet exists the organization and staff of Scientology are forbidden from using it and so cannot partake in it, experience it or make use of its vastly increased speed of communication. DM is happy to leave them updating CF’s and churning out snail mail in volume while the rest of the world passes their Cold War mentality by. By failing to see that policy changes are necessary and lacking any management to review these policies the organization is stuck in past.

  21. I normally recommend the Data Series and the 1950’s research lectures for Scientologists to be able to evaluate Hubbard and his Church, so they can plainly see for themselves that they are incompatible, as Hubbard’s research lectures do not support his organized Scientology, including a lot of his technical claims.

    It worked for me, but I understand so many people feel betrayed and confused by all the doublespeak, that obviously other people’s inputs are needed.

    Gabor Mate, M.D. “When the Body Says NO” is a wonderful book for integrating consciousness, healing and regaining one’s integrity. On Chapter 19: The Seven A’s of Healing:

    2. Awareness

    All those seeking to heal-or to remain healthy-need to reclaim the lost capacity for emotional truth-recognition.

    Animal and young humans are highly competent at picking up on real emotional cues. If we lose that capacity as we acquire language, it is only because we receive confusing messages from our immediate world.

    The words we hear tell us one thing, the emotional data say something different. If the two are in conflict, one will be repressed. In the same way, when a child eyes, diverge, the brain will suppress images from one eye in order to avoid double vision. The suppressed eye, unless corrected, will become blind.

    We repress our emotional intelligence in order to avoid an ongoing war with the crucial people in our lives, a war we cannot possibly win. And so we lose our emotional competence even as we gain verbal intelligence.

    Full awareness would mean that we would regain our lost capacity to perceive emotional reality and that we are ready to let go of the paralyzing belief that we are not strong enough to face the truth about our lives.

    Clearly, we do not need to lose language skills in order to relearn emotional perception. To develop awareness, though, we do have to practice, pay constant attention to our internal states and learn to trust these internal perceptions more than what words-our own or anyone else’s-convey.

  22. Marty Rathbun
    I applaud and admire your decision to publish the scathing comment by ‘Guy’. I do not agree with his evaluation of the scene, but to make progress toward and graduate from the messes extant, we must examine and confront every viewpoint. To view all without so called filters.

    To recognize and confess your overts publicly, to then assist others with similar overts, to assist those who were harmed by those actions, and to even work to prevent others from going down the same road, all while being hammered at every turn by some truly evil individuals.

    You are a man I would like to have behind me in a dark alley, and this road we’re on has some pretty dark alleyways.
    ARCL, Mark

  23. Tom Gallagher

    Thanks Marty for another epiphanic delve into the mind of the self-described ‘god-like’, infallible founder.

    Hubbard was, without a doubt, delusional and a megalomaniac.

    He and his replacement both remind me of another similar historical figure. Caligula……….

  24. It seems to me the majority of the comments on this post so far are knee-jerk reactions, in some cases possibly posting what the commenter thinks “Marty wants to hear”, which seems to be “See how crazy/venal/evil(fill in the blank) LRH really was! Marty’s post proves it! Hallelujah hallelujah!”

    It’s a weird mix of projection and identification.

    • Yay! Valkov is back!🙂

    • I am speaking of my own personal experience. Maybe it fits to others a bit.
      Look, I have been in Scientology for years. Starting in 1976. I knew that there is a Guardians Office. But the office had been behind a closed door and that’s all the information I had.
      Then I made progress. Not by counting the completions but real progress. Then I survived the 82 to 85 time and later I quit because Scientology did change. I did not think a lot about Scientology the next years. Then as the internet started I had a look on Scientology again. Freezone and stuff like that. And finally on the modern blogs like this one.
      If I would have had no wins then I could at one agree to LRH being evil. The problem that I have is, that I have seen and experienced things (if I mention those on a blog I am usually not treated very nice on those blogs) that do not fit into Scientology being bad. So I am trying to find out how to make it fit one way or the other. On the bottom of all this is a confusion. Behind, or earlier on this track, is the time I had been inside and the wins, losses and experiences I had. (including the experiences with secret service agencies)
      So, basically I am in confusion about the subject Scientology and LRH.
      Good enough as a comment?

      • I really do appreciate it Schorsch. What alarms me is always those folks who are so sure they absolutely KNOW the “truth” about LRH and Scientology, just as some Nazis “knew” the “truth” about Jews…..

        My heritage is Russian, but I cannot fail to see that many Russians are among the most ethnically chauvinistic people; anti-semitic, homophobic, religiously intolerant etc. Yet they themselves only see their own better qualities, their kindness, open-heartedness, loyalty, etc. In fac they are simply human. And so was LRH and Scientologists.

  25. Robert Almblad

    Well this has been a lively post with equally lively comments…

    I am so grateful to be invited into Marty’s internet living room along with such great guest commentors that are so articulate and thoughtful. (Maybe it’s more like, the Good, the Bad and the Ugly? Ha.. but I think Marty’s monitoring of comments always keeps the blog very attractive and informative.)

    Thanks so much Marty for posting and to all of you regulars for commenting. The peanut gallery is reading and learning.

  26. If non-dualist spirituality is correct, that all is one and all is God and whatever is not God is illusion, then he who tries to harm will find that harm coming back on him, sooner or later, in one form of another.

    So tell me, who would agree that the Co$ is currently reaping the fruits of its campaign to “Depopularize the enemy to a point of total obliteration”?🙂

  27. What is truly obnoxious is that while one department of the Church was running on the targets laid out in Marty’s post, the rest of the public had been given this policy issue:

    “Politics, Freedom from” HCO Policy Letter of 14 June 1965, reissued 10 Jan 1968).

    “I hereby declare Scientology to be nonpolitical and nonideological

    All statements attacking any political entity or ideology are hereby withdrawn and cancelled in any lectures or literature …

    Scientology is for a free people and is on this date declared free of any political connection or allegiance of any kind whatsoever.”

    The left hand is hidden from the right hand. Stunning hypocrisy and subterfuge.

  28. Internal audit

    Internal auditing is an independent, objective assurance and consulting activity designed to add value and improve an organization’s operations. It helps an organization accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, control, and governance processes.[1] Internal auditing is a catalyst for improving an organization’s governance, risk management and management controls by providing insight and recommendations based on analyses and assessments of data and business processes. With commitment to integrity and accountability, internal auditing provides value to governing bodies and senior management as an objective source of independent advice.

    Professionals called internal auditors are employed by organizations to perform the internal auditing activity.

    The scope of internal auditing within an organization is broad and may involve topics such as an organization’s governance, risk management and management controls over: efficiency/effectiveness of operations (including safeguarding of assets), the reliability of financial and management reporting, and compliance with laws and regulations.

    Internal auditing may also involve conducting proactive fraud audits to identify potentially fraudulent acts; participating in fraud investigations under the direction of fraud investigation professionals, and conducting post investigation fraud audits to identify control breakdowns and establish financial loss.

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

  29. Pingback: The Aims of Scientology: Part 3 | Moving On Up a Little Higher

  30. Pingback: The Aims of Scientology: Part 4 | Moving On Up a Little Higher

  31. Pingback: Scientology’s Code of Honor | Moving On Up a Little Higher

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s