The Aims of Scientology: Part 4

references:

Aims of Scientology: Part One

Aims of Scientology: Part Two

Aims of Scientology: Part Three

How to obtain ‘humanitarian control’ by L. Ron Hubbard:

“All of a sudden somebody is jumping all over us in “Wango-bingo” and all itwould take would be a quiet phone call. That’s one way to keep order. That is an intelligence method of handling things. It’s not blackmail, because blackmail is demanding money and that has nothing to do with it. “You jump on us, you’re dead” — that type of material.

It follows this way: We start to expand an area and we instantly and immediately want protective information in that area. We may be able to coordinate who causes the unrest of the world against the channels that they would have in that area. And that tells us the most favorable protective information.

That is the formula. And the more we study the general scene, the more we can coordinate, how do these birds do it? And then we will find what lines they use and get protective information on the lines they use.

So, Mr. Big decides to knock us flat in Bongville. All of a sudden it cools by the simple reason that we already know that the head of the public health service at Bongville has three wives. What you normally do is leak it to him. Somebody goes out and has dinner with his daughter as a perfect stranger and says “You know, I would be awfully careful of jumping on those Scientologists in Bongville if I were you. You know somebody ought to tell your Daddy that there’s some wild rumor—of course, we don’t know what the truth of it is—that actually you have three mothers. And they know that over there.”

Our general world study tells us what we look into to find protective information.

If we keep this up it will eventually lead us straight to the top which will give us humanitarian control.

     Information is the keynote.”

(emphasis added)

– L. Ron Hubbard 1 July 1968, Information and Control

Full Scientology Office of Special Affairs Issue, Information and Control

394 responses to “The Aims of Scientology: Part 4

  1. Irreligious environmental control. Very important series showing today’s official Scientology’s behavior is governed by Hubbard’s policy.

    What a waste of time and unfortunate path to put staff (OSA staff and the RTC staff who oversee OSA) onto.

    Imagine if OSA’s recruiters were straightforward with OSA recruits? An OSA recruitment poster would read: Join OSA! We protect Scientology and ensure Scientology’s expansion by digging up the dirt on enemies, and threaten to expose their dirty laundry to keep them from criticizing and jeopardizing Scientology’s expansion!

    Intel tech and exposure threat tech works!

    Join the winning team that is ensuring Scientology’s inevitable expansion! We’re the cutting edge role models of the most successful and expanding new religion in earth’s history!

    • Don’t twist it, Chuck. It wasn’t an offensive campaign – it was defensive. Makes a big difference. And whether it was a needed or wise defense is a separate question.

      • You’re correct, Marildi. This was defensive in nature. I don’t really think ultimately the primary issue is whether it was needed or even wise in a sense. What it certainly appears to ME to be is an EXTREMELY low toned activity in any case. What are you doing to YOUR religion and group by putting it in the business of finding out sexual secrets or other crimes about potential enemies to use as extortion of one sort or another? What do you do to your OWN culture and what do you promote (as a method of religious defense) to the greater culture outside of your group?

        Yes, I can UNDERSTAND why LRH felt he should do this for the survival of his group. But what he didn’t appear to do (effectively in any case) is to weigh the plusses and minuses – to really look at if the downsides of such activities would eventually outweigh the upsides.

        Because you see …. EVEN WHEN THIS “WORKS” ….. it seeps into YOUR OWN GROUP and becomes acceptable methods that YOUR OWN GROUP uses within the group itself as a way of handling EACH OTHER. This is how “good groups” become corrupted and this is bad, very bad ….. especially for a group that asserts it is a religious philosophy dedicated to raising emotional tone and spiritual awareness among people.

        • Joe, as an immigrant to the USA, “the land of he free and the home of the brave”, these are the kind of questions I have asked myself for many years as I have discovered the truths underlying various realities. What has the country been doing to itself operating agencies like the CIA assassinating people in other countries, plotting to overturn governments, running programs like MKULTRA using its own citizens as guinea pigs, etc etc. Evidently that “freedom” comes at a high price and with a dwindling spiral.

          • Ron fought with shadows. And his noisy war against them finally came to fruition by authoritative organizations becoming aware of false healing claims.

            Thus true believers had an external enemy as defined by Ron. Ron’s destructive tendencies, his violence against critics, would become a religious duty for true believers , a jihad against a peceived evil, spawned within the mind of a creative genius.

            In 1950-51 Barbara Kaye was Ron’s PR secretary and girl friend. She lived with Ron and talks about his feeling followed all the time by hitmen.

            To read the entire interview:

            http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/miller/interviews/barbkaye.htm

            “At all times he thought the American Psychological Association and the AMA and CIA had hit men after him… he thought everyone was after him. This was long before the IRS was after him. No one was after him at that time, but he certainly had delusions.”

            “The affair began when he took me home from the office one night and kissed me goodnight in the car. That’s how it all started. Took me some time to realise he was disturbed. He was highly paranoid and would be rushing along the street with me and I would say, “Why are you walking so fast?” He’d look over his shoulder and say, “Don’t you know what it’s like to be a target?”

            At all times he thought the American Psychological Association and the AMA and CIA had hit men after him… he thought everyone was after him. This was long before the IRS was after him. No one was after him at that time, but he certainly had delusions.”

            • And…………

              If in fact there was/is a cabal against Scientology and Hubbard……….

              Where are they today??????????

              Why haven’t the evil cabal gotten in touch with disaffected members to finally put a stake in the heart of “man’s only hope”?

              Every true believer is convinced that Ron had the CIA, FBI AMA etc after him.

              The friggn IRS caved to Scientology. How in God’s name can you think that the “evil government” was after him when they could not even crush Scientology with non tax exemption status???????

              WHERE IS THE EVIL CABAL NOW????

              There is none, there was none. It was simply a fight against a man who made false healing claims. Just like a fraud diet pill.

              So, the evil cabal just all up and decided to not be an evil cabal anymore?

              All the SPs got together in their SP offices and decided not to be SPs anymore?

              If I was an evil cabal, and I saw Scientology faultering, I would contact the Freezone, Independents, Marty, Mike, Tony etc and lend a hand to kill the beast.

              Where is the huge world wide coordinated effort to crush Scientology?

              It cannot be found and it is not actively involved in this final act of Scientology credibility because THEY DO NOT EXIST!!

              They only dectructive force destroying Scientology is Scientology itself and it’s brainwashed deluded cult army of true believers.

              We are reasonable people for crying out loud. Where is that cabal????

              It can’t be found because it existed right square in the middle of the Old Man’s cabesa

      • Marildi wrote:

        Don’t twist it, Chuck. It wasn’t an offensive campaign – it was defensive. Makes a big difference. And whether it was a needed or wise defense is a separate question.

        Marildi – You are a study for everyone to see.

        The way you can twist the context of something into some new compartment in order to NOT LOOK AT IT is simply amazing.

        Justify, justify, justify.

        Here’s a question for YOU: Is this how YOU personally operate, or how you would operate? If you had a rival or an opponent in some area of your life, how would YOU handle it?

        Not you as a Scientologist, but you, Marilldi. Would YOU find the dirt on their “sexual crimes” and then threaten their daughter with it?

        If so, I can completely understand why you are justifying for Hubbard here again.

        If not, then how can you justify this? Is it because it aligns with the ideals of the basic Scientology that you were recruited with?

        No.

        Can you justify it because it is effective?

        No.

        Can you justify it because it makes you feel good as a human being to operate this way?

        How? On what basis do you justify this?

        Alanzo

        • I wouldn’t justify , defend or attack it. The main reason being that I have had the pleasure of knowing people in the Sea Org who had all the information David Miscavige was privy to, and they were not using any of it to harm attack or suppress others.

          Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.

          Plato

          • And good people can rise above bad laws. There are states right here in the U.S. that had laws about which race you could marry. Plenty of people relocated and moved on.

        • Al, it is also how the country you live in operates. What do you think about that?

          • I think it is an attempt by you to look away from what is being exposed here about Scientology and L Ron Hubbard.

            I think it is a way that you use to justify, and to look away from what is being said about Scientology and L Ron Hubbard.

            And, I think when you see this kind of flat out factual -can-not-be-denied documentation like this, you say to yourself “But the United States runs like this, too!!”

            And in that way, you look away from Scientology and from L Ron Hubbard and use it as a way to not have to confront what is being said about Scientology and L Ron Hubbard.

            Would you like me to put it another way?

            I can, you know.

            In fact, I can repeat it more than you can look away from Scientology and L Ron Hubbard.

            Alanzo

            • Delicious! Love it! A trolling non-answer that in the same breath evaluates and invalidates me, a person he has never met. This might be one of the best examples of one part of the “Alanzo Doctrine”: “When pressed to give an answer, attack and introvert with a blanket eval and a blanket C/S.”

              How like a Miscavologist. Or did you learn that earlier, in Scientology?

              Either way, I guess you learned your lessons well, back when you worked with OSA. Or was it still the GO, then?

              I guess they are right, it can take ages to get the Scientology out of your head, once you let it in…..

      • Critical counter response is in the viewer’s eye.

        I as a viewer think critical response from Scientology, against their enemies is offensive, causatively offensive.

        It’s a matter of viewpoint.

        Only since the Cold War people call it “defensive” does not mean it is defensive.

        A counter response that is invalidative, is also viewable as invalidative and thus attack in non physical form.

        You only “win” in your mind with dogmatic unflexible definitions that you then service fac style enforce and tell others they misunderstand what you are doing!

        That doesn’t win, to those that see a counter critical response as offensive.

        One could agree with the criticism aimed at one.

        One could just change the subject to how one plans to reform.

        One could respond all sorts of other ways than criticize or spread new info derogatory and aimed to switch the subject onto the person(s) who originally attacked one.

        Defensive in your meaning isn’t what I would call it.

        I’d called it counter critical response aimed at the person who first did something one took as critical of oneself.

        Hubbard liked to package what Scientology does, what the GO did, and what OSA does, which Marty’s showing the Hubbard backbone policy for, in the accepted “defensive” response.

        That distinction isn’t laid out.

        LRH could have said, TR 2, appropriate response (by the highest tone persons) meaning tolerance, forgiveness, admission of Scientology’s faults for which it is being “attacked” or criticized.

        There are a boatload of reasons Scientology is “attacked”, it’s Hubbard policy responses, as laid out in today’s OSA Network Orders (LRH’s old Guardian’s Office era policy) is validly criticised.

        Scientology’s response ought to be, “We are putting all of of Office of Special Affairs church policy on hold, until we review and most likely cancel our use of it!”

        Not, for OSA to defensively counter attack the opinion leader critics, as business as usual, which is their “defensive” response.

        • martyrathbun09

          +1

        • Thank you Chuck!
          I think I get it now, perfectly, the entire series Marty has been posted…

          Paulette Cooper: an example of a very gross blood stained reality directly under LRH at that time.

          On the other hand, I still agree with most of LRH and understand Hubbards motive and intentions. Had there been a rappid exspantion and actual Ideal Scene achieved, as postulated. The World today might have been quite different.
          The real WHY Scientology derailed so badly isn’t clear to me exactly, and I hope to god for those answers.

          • That rationale is precisely the same as exercised by the majority of Scientologists who were unfazed by the news that David Miscavige runs prison camps where torture is routinely practiced at Scientology’s international headquarters.

            • Wow, I have never heard of anybody who was unfazed by that news.

            • If you mean by “majority of scientologists” those still in the church, I doubt the news has reached them.

              There is an amazing disconnect among them from unpleasant reality.

              It might be more believable to them if you said Obama eats babies for breakfast, even though a high percentage of remaining church scientologists have kids, brothers/sisters or neices/nephews in the sea org who have probably been RPF’d.

              They live in a different reality than you and I. Though as the inhabitants of that reality leave, it will become unsustainable.

              I think miscavaiges departure will burst the bubble. But what will be left will be a mess, people traumatically stripped of their reality.

              They deserve it though. Right?

              • martyrathbun09

                Actually, you and I live in separate, different realities. If you read my books you’d understand that I meant what I wrote. As I have been saying for five years, Miscavige is going nowhere. And there will be no single event that strips people en masse of their realities in the traumatic fashion you have mocked up.

                • So many times I have the “hope” that miscavige will fold … and I’ve been disappointed because if he folds I’ve felt that the end of scientology as we know it will fold.

                  But — more and more I’ve been disabused of this and agree — no single event will strip people EN MASSE … just like there never was a “one-shot clear” or instant enlightenment.

                  Life is way more complicated and yet way simpler than we were led to buy into in scientology

              • People still in have heard of the abuse at Int inflicted by DM. I recently brought it up with someone still in and he/she said
                “Oh that old story?” They believe those stories were “made up by SPs”
                They believe the stories of abuse are just a coordinated attack on scientology by bitter defrocked apostates.
                The people still in don’t want to know the truth.

            • And I have made it my business to expose over and over again the Human Rights violations, the atrocities and torture playing out at Scientology headquarters which is the home of the *Taj Mahal* palace David Miscavige lives in.
              I am eternally grateful to Marty and Mike Rinder for help and guidance when I needed it most.

            • You don’t seem like your old self, Marty. What’s going on?? I mean, seriously.
              Anyways, thanks for the ack, I guess.

              • Antoine — which old self? The old self that was going to college? The old self that was inspector general? The old self that left and was reported dead? The old self that started this blog? The old self that was attacked by KSW Indies? The old self that was writing his first book? The old self that brought home his new born son?

                None of us are ever their old self unless they are locked up in concrete mind set … and the only ones who wonder about our old selves are others … the hardest thing is to work at change and OTHERS keep you firmly fixed in THEIR idea of you …

                Seriously Antoine – you don’t seem like your old self either … oh wait … I don’t know who your new self. I mean Antoine – that could be anyone, even an Antoinette

              • Perhaps he’s had to shape shift a little to keep up with all of the back stabbing, inval, eval, wrong items, wrong indications, treason, slander, sabotage, injustice, perjury, deception, false reports, stalkers, ingrates, critics, plants, media attacks, hate web sites, police coming to arrest him based on false reports of stalkers, private investigators, pilferers, pillagers, Scientologists, Anti Scientologists, sociopaths, religious fanatics, domestic terrorists, sadists, witch hunters, reporters, unscrupulous journalists who ridicule his efforts to communicate and educate, evaluators, thought police, pirates, con men, crybabies, bawl babies, frienemys, and hyper active chatters that make his blog look like it’s been hit with graffiti (me).

                Perhaps not.

                Nevertheless, he is holding up better than Miscavige. David is surrounded by servants and slaves that are obedient to his every whim and only permitted “Yes Sir” replies. Never to mention a foible or an outpoint or some disenchantment. And he can’t even schedule an event these days with out wobbling all over the place.

              • Antoine, I read and reread Marty’s reply to you – at first it sounds like an inval but it’s not; he’s saying that it IS going to be traumatic when they leave en masse.

        • Chuck, thank you for not making it a personal attack (which would have been hypocritical) and just sticking to the topic itself.

          You wrote: “LRH could have said, TR 2, appropriate response (by the highest tone persons) meaning tolerance, forgiveness, admission of Scientology’s faults for which it is being ‘attacked’ or criticized.”

          I have no disagreement whatsoever about that approach as a large, general rule, but you are talking about a very different scene than what LRH considered it to be at the time of the briefing that was quoted in the blog post. As I said in the last exchange, I get that LRH truly considered (and may well have been correct) that Scientology was forced into a kind of war in which it had to fight back in order to survive at all. That is to say, in the context of the time of this briefing he was not talking about the kinds of criticisms you are referring to. He was talking about actual attempts, in his view, to shut Scientology down for no other reason than that it was exposing and jeopardizing the status quo of that particular time in history.

          Here is some additional context of the briefing, which indicates LRH was talking about the bigger picture as he saw it:

          “You can study this political scene and see which way it moves and gradually get some coordinated factor. There may be only one single body on this planet which is disturbing it. There may be not more than a few guys bringing about the totality of its unrest and economic duress.

          “…We try to isolate who is creating the unrest and giving the orders.”

          • Hi Marildi,

            I don’t agree that LRH was at risk, or his subject. I think he was over worried, over reacted and the GO era resulted.

            Even if he was jailed, or “destroyed” somehow, that wouldn’t have destroyed Scientology, even if LRH and Scientology International was bankrupted!

            His writings were spread all over, all through his whole career, almost up to the minute available to those that paid for the latest issues to be sent them.

            The books were always in print, all available in almost any country of the world.

            He even said in Study Tape 9, that the tech was out, even back in 1961 when he lectured that tape. He said if nothing else came out, that what he’d put out that far would have long range impact.

            He 1965 onwards switched into worry mode, dire worry mode, out of proportion to reality.

            Even if true, and let’s say the cabal of evil string puller powerhouses at the top somehow caused LRH to get jailed and the churches bankrupted and orgs closed! The tech was out! People would continue doing it whether LRH was in jail and there was no org to go to, and if they lived in a country that Scientology was banned, they could go to the US and do it there, since it would not and will not be banned here, America is bend over backwards religious tolerant, it’s in the Constitution.

            America’s religious tolerance is just too great to ever BAN Hubbard’s books.

            So I don’t buy a cabal of international bankers could destroy Scientology in the US, so I thought even Ron’s Journal 67 briefing on the baddies running the world, that this was not really even a threat to Scientology, really!

            • Hi Chuck,

              Thanks for this. You present your argument very well, and in a respectful way which makes it not difficult to “have.” (You must be auditor trained.🙂 ) The point about LRH having been misguided in his assessment of the situation was one I did see as possible and said as much. But as for his solution, you’ve made a good case for the idea that it was unnecessary since most likely Scientology would not have been wiped out. And now that you mention it, I remember that Study Tape – where LRH said that long after this planet becomes “a billiard ball,” Scientology would still be rattling around (or words pretty close to that). Yeah, that was a good one.🙂

              Okay, so assuming that LRH “lost the plot” and was misguided in his evaluation and the handling, do we at this point need to continue to dwell on all his mistakes and personal flaws – on top of what has already been done in that regard, which is substantial! Or can we move on to focusing more on the beneficial contributions he made, and hopefully even making improvements? I’m not talking about lessening the efforts of those who mean to shine the light on Miscavige and the CoS so as to bring an end to all the harm being done by them. But I don’t understand the attempts to keep hammering in the notion that what they are doing is based on LRH – when in fact policy as a whole has been grossly misinterpreted and altered. Debbie Cook’s email of a while back, for instance, listed out quite a few references being violated

              • p.s. Here’s the Study Tape quote. It’s even better than I remembered:

                “And you can’t let go of something like this in a society or a world of this type or size without having repercussions that don’t just go up a century. They’ll be still racketing up the line until this planet is a billiard ball.” (“Training: Duplication” 24 Jan 62)

              • Agreed, it’s been my bend over backwards view to hope this reform might someday, and I ended up thinking in human history it simple is inevitable, it’s human, for reform of ANY person’s excessive out of step ideas to be retired eventually, including the current whole OSA tech and OSA bureaucracy that reaches into the orgs with their DSAs (Department of Special Affairs local people who are in the OSA network).

                Thanks for the 1962 Study Tape 9 quote. I think, when I was a course sup, not only did students raise their hands in need of help, I really appreciate it when students raised their hands to share the most interesting nuggests of LRH’s comments and ideas that stunned them, in line with the LRH claim that his training held “case gain” all it’s own.

                This particular comment, if one is a believer in future lives, and other similar comments from LRH should be thought about, for sure, they are important and put everything into perspective, if one believes in the extensive number of future lives ahead, although I don’t believe that.

                I did appreciate the thoughts! And for me, it leveled out, and made unnecessary what are most of the obnoxious admin setups and blowback causing safety tactics of the movement all from LRH.

                Best to be a field auditor and field group setup, and stop paying into the OSA protected admin system, at this point in history, were a person a Scientologist.

                Another test of the unnecessariness of the OSA sub unit, is that Ron’s Org does not attract Scientology’s antics, not like Mayo’s AAC group attracted.

                Out of neglect, out of lack of personnel, out of willful decision to stop the GO era stuff of attacking (or “defending” against” that is a semantic debate and off to the side of what even LRH said about the success of his getting Scientology out to the world) and going opinion leader critics should all end, the sooner the better for a new news story about official Scientology’s actually cleaning itself up!

                • I meant to say: “..going after opinion leaders should all end….” because the point I take from Marty’s series on OSA policy, is to show the LRH refs that make this still a problem for ex members and for Scientology itself.

                  It’s a whole part of the LRH corpus that needs retirement, and all I’d argue is do the tech, train on the tech, do what is normally legal of a religion.

                  Lawyers for Scientology all wrapped up in battling for Scientology’s legal rights to do the OSA (GO era) LRH writings, is a Scientologist debatable issue.

                  Not just because LRH said so, but Scientologists who do the tech, have a big right to take part in the debate, and anyone with interest has a right to help that debate to get the OSA stuff gone out of Scientology. (I hate to see Scientologists’ money even further wasted paying OSA hired lawyers defending OSA’s ways because LRH said OSA’s ways are Scientology’s ways!!!!)

                  Scientologists ought to stick to the stuff that Indie Scientologists and Ron’s Org stick to. Stop throwing money at these lawyers protecting obnoxious OSA tactics!

                  • Chuck, thanks for the additional comments. I agree that “defending against” vs. attacking is more semantics than anything. However, I still say that “OSA’s ways” have gone far beyond what LRH indicated in any GO/OSA documents I’ve seen. What I get from them is that they are in reference to corrupt (at least per LRH’s perceptions) establishment efforts to squash Scientology – and not advising immoral and criminal harassment of individuals who simply have their grievances. So the question to you is, do you have reason to think that LRH had anything directly to do with that type of thing? I’ll limit the question to before the 80’s, since after that time DM controlled the information LRH received and what he supposedly ordered or condoned.

                    • Yes, I think he was getting daily briefings on the threats to Paulette Cooper’s life, for instance.

                      I believe he ordered, it’s frankly in Responsibilities of Leaders, saying Manuela should have hired a person to intentionally duel and shoot Bolivars antagonist that “ruined” Bolivar’s career when Bolivar couldn’t see it.

                      LRH gloated and laughed when one of the messenger’s dad was pushing the pea around and bloodying his nose, and LRH watched, and some several other Apollo staff watched this elder man push the pea around with his nose, on the Apollo deck.

                      LRH showed very bad behavior (throttling and loud shouting and screaming) against Mike Douglas, and LRH acked like a beserk upset child kicking and screaming and trying to punch at Otto Roos..

                      I read his 1982 comment against mild mannered John Aczel, where LRH said, I paraphrase: “….and if you see WDC SMI, spit on him for me…” something when I read it, I didn’t have the back story that LRH really meant it. But ask Denise Brennan, because at that time LRH’s wrath was literally executed, starting that spitting kick around that time.

                      Marty talks of Russell Miller’s book, and too bad in my opinion, more of LRH’s instances of petty violence and irrational statements and particularly LRH’s throttling, LRH’s laughing at the messenger father pushing the pea and bloodying that man’s nose from splinters on the deck, and I wish Otto Roos gets interviewed, and there are more, Hana Eltringham Whitfields’s stories I take as real about LRH’s excessive cruelty with the kids in the chain locker.

                      Yes, I finally accepted LRH could and was cruel and ruthless and on some of the most faithful people who ever came along to help his movement out!

                    • Chuck, I liked that you wrote “I think” with regard to LRH getting briefings about threats to Paulette Cooper’s life. I’ve read accounts that he knew what was going on and others say he didn’t. That seems to be the situation in general too, as regards whether he did or didn’t know about the extreme GO harassment of anyone critical.

                      As for the harsh/cruel treatment of staff, I would say there is far too much smoke not to be any fire, or a lot of it. What has puzzled me is how LRH could have come up with so many profound truths and then turn around and violate them without knowing he would be doing himself in. Phil Spickler’s answer is that LRH changed drastically in 1958 when he felt betrayed by Nibs. Otto Roos wrote that LRH had a horrendous amount of out-tech on his case as a result of all the research he did in the 50’s and 60’s without getting in session to clean up all the out-lists, etc. In *Memoirs*, Marty wrote about Alan Walter’s viewpoint of what happened to LRH that caused the big shift in personality. Here’s an excerpt from the book:

                      “In the early 1960s, the FDA sent an agent to Hubbard’s home at St Hill Manor near East Grinstead, Sussex, England, posing as a reporter for one of America’s then-leading magazines, the Saturday Evening Post. The reporter spent days at St. Hill as Hubbard’s guest. The reporter gained Ron’s trust by swearing he would clear up some of the more outlandish accusations the mainstream media had used to sully his reputation over more than a decade. Documents taken from Food and Drug Administration (FDA) files by the GO included daily cables from this reporter/agent, reporting Hubbard’s every move and utterance to the FDA. To add insult to injury, the reporter wrote a damning indictment of Hubbard, which was published in the Post [Saturday Evening Post]. According to a once-prominent Scientology promoter, Alan Walters, who was studying under Hubbard in England at the time, Hubbard’s disposition notably – and permanently – changed for the worse after this betrayal.”

                      Btw, it’s been a while since I read the Otto Roos Story/Debrief, but I remember there were some interesting stories about what Otto himself witnessed with regard to OT feats that were occurring during some of the OT research. You might find it interesting. Here’s one link for it: http://www.clearing.org/cgi/archive.cgi?/homer/roos.memo

                      Thanks for the comm. And I’ll say again that maybe you should write a book, or even put some sort of write-up on the Internet. Based on many of your comments, I get the idea that you have a lot of first-hand data that could be contributed to the annals of Scientology history.🙂

                    • Sometimes the understanding of a person is not from a theraputic standpoint. Not seeing them through being victimized by wrong or no auditing.

                      Sometimes the understanding of a person comes from knowing their value system.

                      Value systems, morals, integrity etc are consciously ideals that a person governs their life by.

                      So a person who had honesty as a value would not lie.

                      A person who had kindness to others as a value would not ask old men to push peanuts around on a splintery deck while he laughed, all the while that guys daughters are watching and crying.

                      A person who had valuing children would not put them in a dark dangerous prison.

                      A person who valued the family would not have as a product of the 2d:

                      1) One son suicide
                      2) one son disses dad to the press (Nibs)
                      3) 2 X-wives in terror of Ron
                      4) betrayal of Mary Sue

                      It was not Ron’s case that led him astray. It was the value system that he himself ascribed to that governed his action.

                      He was a lier, bigamist, child abuser, vulgar, violent, criminal.

                      His value system was greed and power.

                      You grant him far more benevolence than he had Mirildi.

                      Ron’s dispicable legacy was self made. Created by a value system of immorality.

                      As he said, “we are not moralists”

                      Boy howdy, you can take that one to the bank.

                      Just look at the depravity.

                      DM is following LRH’s policies of hate and destruction to the tea.

                      Ron is most assuredly “Source”

      • Marildi.. yes that is defensive and low tone, and that tone can get any lower.
        A man who believes in use of treachery will not stop using the same means on the members of his group if he needs to in order to FORECE his will to have his way.

      • I agree with you Marildi. If LRH was just a puppet Scientology wouldn’t continue… we owe it to the man who kept it going against all odds. That was a man of purpose indeed. All the rest is just just short sighted especially by those who have benefited all those years from it. Sorry that’s my take on it.

      • Marildi…. I just had a thought.. [rare thing🙂 ] wondering why those who new all about what has been posted why those people were willing to fallow and enforce such PL’s? Why they have stayed in the cofs.? Why have they accepted and put up with the conditions? Why complaining and blaming only now?

        • E, the vast majority of us were blinded by the slow but sure alteration of the original principles, but eventually came to see things in a truer light. The debate that continues is on what LRH actually meant by certain things he wrote and whether or not it was correctly interpreted by others, and whether knowingly misinterpreted or not.

          • My dear…. what he really meant only he knew, the rest which others come up with is simply assumptions BUT THE TRUTH WILL BE ESTABLISHED which ”assumption” will collect the most agreements. But that still wont be the original since only he had that and that have vanished with him…hehehe he might cough it up in his new life under different name.

            • “BUT THE TRUTH WILL BE ESTABLISHED – which ‘assumption’ will collect the most agreements.”

              Yes, that’s the trouble.

              • Marildi… scientology is dead but not buried… as I told you some years back, the most important part, which works is in safe hands…that will never die, never vanish.

                • Elizabeth, you were right about that, and I see it better now. You’ll see the comment I just posted in reply to Chuck, who is basically in agreement with what you say here – and were already saying years ago. A big acknowledgement to you!🙂

          • No one will ever know the truth.

            • I like Marty’s idea of applying the data series. It’s amazing that no one yet has done so against the whole timeline. and found the outpoints such as dropped time, altered importance, wrong source, omitted data, etc. etc. One thing that would be especially relevant would be to determine to what degree Miscavige altered the comm to and from LRH, since he was the sole person in charge of those lines, per my understanding – and what year that began in relation to all the wrongnesses that occurred after that point, which I believe was sometime in the early 80’s.

              • M…… to find out what works that is the easiest, but getting the agreement on that one … now that will not happen. What works is so very easy to segregate from the garbage…. do birds fly? when one is asked a question the answer is usually there. Ok a bit more.. but my dear all those well trained auditors and C/S’s are available who has used the TECH before the 80’s..they are the ones who should be doing the sorting.

        • Answer: It’s a very long runway to get to the OT goodies at the end! It’s so long of a runway, and if one is not getting the goodies along the way, but sees others’ wins advertising the goodies, one keeps going,

          Hope of OT abilities, was my reason.

          I was already as a young person sold to devote my life like a monk (or like a nun does) to a religious/mystical cause that worked towards real OT abilities.

          That OT carrot is the answer why I would have stayed in the Sea Org and taken years and likely NOT have reached OT 8 in my Sea Org staff lifetime even.

          I at least was helping others attain the real OT 8 abilities, which when I was a member thought were as real OT stuff.

          You put up with the system, I was a long time admin nerd, first I was Admin/OEC/FEBC Course Sup at Flag for 4 or so years, then on the routing forms project where I read most of what LRH wrote admin wise all his life, then I was in INCOMM (computer branch and had access to all the SIR libraries and read a lot more of his private stuff), and then the ASI computer guy, where I proofread all his admin writings to ASI that hadn’t been already vetted by Miscavige and Starkey.

          All that reading, all seemed consistent with LRH’s bigger policies like Business of Orgs, and the Legacy of the Tech and Clear to Eternity Ron’s Journals, and with LRH ED 339R Int statement about bringing the whole universe back to Native State someday (if one is trained and really cleared up almost ALL of the definitions in the Tech and Admin Dictionaries, which I did as course sup for myself and when helping Flag outer org trainees); all that reading all seemed consistent to me.

          Not being an outside person, but a college dropout and never had a real job other than entry level job before, I had no world experience other than I liked reading the NY Times and NY Review of Books level of world understanding.

          I took LRH’s word that higher spiritual states and out of the body was real, and that Scientology’s (Hubbard’s) methodical and decades researched and shuffled around Bridge to Total Freedom was the best way to get to OT, as LRH finally laid out.

          I witnessed the 1975-1976 era of exemplary Class 12 auditors at the then FSO at Clearwater, just off the ship, almost to a man and woman they were LRH C/Sed and best auditors still today in my mind (I’ve heard of better before and after, and auditing to me is a lot to do with the auditor’s character as a person, their knowledge or regular life, that’s more my view today of auditors).

          I saw Flag management from late 1975 onwards, until 2003 when I quit the Sea Org. First wife was CS-3, she was promoted from the Flag FBO post to CS-3, she later worked under Mariette Lindstein when Mariette was CO Flag Command Bu at the HGB, and my 1st wife also did a stint as GI EI. I always was grading everyone by their sticking to LRH policy, which I had accumulated a very detailed knowledge of.

          But in all this playing along in the course sup, my research and writing project for the routing forms, in INCOMM just knowing what the stuff that is on the INCOMM computers really means, it all goes back to the tech from LRH that when delivered supposedly delivers the OT abilities.

          So, for me, what kept me was that others, at least, since I as a Sea Org member after decades was myself not, were at least getting the OT abilities.

          Like definitions 1 and 3 in the Tech Dictionary, of Operating Thetan.

          The big omission if one is a Scientologist, is one is not given the theory of OT 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 today, and of the other confidential processes.

          And then this all is simplified and made layman understandable.

          There is a huge amount not properly summarized into even the Wikipedia articles about Scientology.

          Agreed that the more outrageous aspects of LRH’s writings get focused on, at this time, since those have for the most part been unpublicly seen before, and are thus new news at this time.

          In 30 years, the summary view of Scientology will be changed as the details get all sifted through, and a different summary of it all becomes common knowledge.

          Big future threads about Scientology, one is future lives, is that real or not, it’s not real to me, and I don’t see Scientology or any other earth practice winning that argument, and that future lives will always be as it is, something that is NOT taught as it being reality in any western country’s school system!

          OT abilities are not taught as being real in western country’s school systems.

          To me, these are the real backbone reasons I thought Scientology might be supportable. As a religion, Scientology has the right to believe this and do what they do tech wise to make themselves believe they are achieving this, that is something that religions are allowed.

          back to this thread, though, and why OSA does what it does, and why lawyers are defending OSA’s ways since LRH wrote OSA’s ways, and thus their case is somewhat the point that OSA’s ways are part of the Scientology’s religion’s ways, I guess my only point on this thread is that other Scientologists, the Indie and Ron’s Org Scientologists, operate and are valid Scientologists, and these Indie and Ron’s Org Scientologists do NOT feel the need to do, and they as Scientologists are very much allowed to debate against using, the OSA ways (even though the OSA ways were LRH’s ways)!

          LRH’s ways of old can be discarded! OSA tech is not the same as the auditing and training tech that Indie and freezone and Ron’s Org Scientologists center on.

          • Chuck.. Thank you for your post, sharing you experiences-your life with me.. While you walked your designated path of learning-experiencing I walked mine.
            Got in 73 and by 76 Fall I have attained full OT 7 than NOTs on Flag and I left in 82.
            But in 76 after the attainment of OT7 I started –or continued with solo sessions. You see, I believed that was more to the bridge than what I have experienced so far, I believed all that it existed and I wanted it.
            I can say since than I have solo audited daily-all this year’s: First of course the human side, the human realities, agreements=games were confronted than when the attention was no longer introverted on self-me- the ‘I’ the universal experiences were confronted..
            The self-created Path: ones very own universe is the most incredible creation, nothing more than dreams, wonder, great adventures and of course when confronted one do understand why the construction of this universe exist.. What has held it in place so long, what is the true power [ which has nothing to do with the human beliefs] and one finally become aware of ones role in this universe and of course one realises what intangible Infinite is and how the Infinite become tangled in mass-MEST and come to believe in BEINGNESS-segregation one-ness and self..
            While I was on my adventure.. I realised my dreams they have become my new reality.. LRH was not wrong, only have not fully grasped the meaning of those words he had plaster on the board: what OT abilities were.. Without him having those experiences those were just empty words.
            It is up to each person to find those experiences than it will be reality.
            PS; if LRH would have experienced the reality what is Infinite.. the rest would never have happened.. what is now.

          • Chuck: ”” It’s a very long runway to get to the OT goodies at the end! It’s so long of a runway, “”
            The problem people have is not having reality what OT abilities are.. some thinks; walking through walls, levitation, conjuring BMW. etc…etc..are those abilities… that is human reality which is a narrow band of collected agreements. theta abilities can hardly be explained because cant find the concepts.
            About walking through walls, of course one can.. but that do not happens the same way as a human believes is done. Levitation is the same way. please Chuck and keep it in mind , when one clears away all the misconceptions, erases the barriers the counter intentions which when in place will not allow the person experience any other realities one becomes aware of abilities which one uses daily, and these experiences are OT abilities.. Those abilities which one has created his own universe had not changed but the beliefs have, and the denial that one cant is a powerful ability in it self.

      • Google Barbara Kay. Then inject her experience into the mix. “Barbara Kay interview” is what should be googled.

        There is more to this story than “Ron the victim.”

      • It’s all offensive. Time to open your eyes.

      • Chuck’s twisting it? I don’t think so. By your reasoning, any number of heinous, overt acts could be justified as defensive.

        So let’s think of what Ron said: Never defend; always attack. (Hubbard’s “manual of justice.”)

        Hubbard clearly did not advise defensive actions. His aims were offensive. Take down the enemy first. Utterly destroy people. Chuck is right on.

    • Exactly, Chuck. It seems clear that Hubbard felt the best defense was a good offense. Coupled with Hubbard’s paranoid tendencies and his history of trouble caused by ripping people off, this means that from the very beginning, too much time and energy was wasted on “defense” — i.e. collecting dirt on anyone in a given area that might eventually be able to lob criticism at Ron. This was not a campaign, this was (and is) a philosophical orientation that Ron insisted that his followers embrace and enact on his behalf. Ron’s own words make it clear he considered this a good pre-emptive strategy, to be enacted before any trouble arises, so that when it does, he’s pre-loaded with ammunition against the people who inevitably caught on to his game anywhere he went. IMO, this is the policy of a con-artist who has gathered many useful tools to protect his con, and wants those tools to go out and collect dirt to obscure the truth.

      “Join the Sea Org, and be a tool!”

      No, an honest recruiting slogan wouldn’t work at all.

      • There’s no reason to collect dirt on people unless you’re up to dirty business yourself. In everyday life people just don’t do that.

        • Except governments do.

          • I believe that LRH said something like “what you fight and lose against, you assume the valence of”. But you’re talking about the Co$ assuming the valence of a government as if it weren’t a negative outcome.

            • I am not here to present my own value judgements, but to still more closely determine and understand WHAT happened. “Negative outcome” is a relative term which depends on viewpoint. It may be the mechanics are in accordance with that quote from LRH. Or he may have planned it to all go more-or-less the way it has gone, is my opinion. Or both.

            • And LRH did intend for “scientologists” to govern. Any organization has the elements of a “government”, including Intelligence functions, defense against external and internal threats etc. Its in the nature of existence that they do, in order to promote and facilitate their own survival.

      • Yes agreed, good example, the dictum “the best defense is a good offense” which is how I see it. This kind of life experience to even have remembered LRH’s counter attack as defensive tactic, to remember or relate it to “the best defense is a good offense” is the kind of life experience thought I hadn’t remembered when I first encountered LRH’s wording.

        The OSA recruitment mag I saw said something about ensuring Scientology’s inevitable continued success, and overall to marildi’s point in her favor, the impression is OSA is overall “defensive.” That OSA will be sititing back and somehow judiciously waiting to put to use all their intel gathered that is detrimental to the livelihood of the critic/enemy only putting pressure on the critics and enemies to the degree they criticize or attack Scientology,and obviously from the intel gathering and PI gathering ‘business” which LRH saw as proper domain for his founded Scientology religion! The arguments about incorrectly doing the counter tactics aside, the whole GO/OSA impetus is wrong, no matter how one defines it as judiciously defensive or abusively implemented on non real enemies. Skip all of it, I would argue, of course.

        A church with the intel/PI gathering bureau, that fundamentally seemed unreligious to me, and one of the downsides to being a Scientologist, one of LRH’s bigger mistakes one in official Scientology has to put up with, because I thought at least we were making real OTs. I accepted GO/OSA since I knew so many of their members, my 2nd wife was Invest Files In Charge and my 2nd wedding was attended by mostly OSA staffers, who in general I liked as above average smart Sea Org members. Many I’d know for years prior to their being recruited into OSA.

        I assumed that longer range, GO/OSA would be not engaging in counterattacking as Scientology became accepted in the decades ahead, is how I thought about OSA. I’d seen most of their being recruited, during the wave in the early to mid 1980s, and I pressumed they’d filter back to other parts of Scientology’s Sea Org, or to RTC like many did in the mid to later part of 1980s, or they’d filter to the RPF and then to tech jobs, as many good tech people find their feet and purpose as tech people sometimes on the RPF. So many old patterns ebbing and flowing in the middle ranks of the Sea Org took place, and still take place, as people shift all over the Sea Org orgs and org boards.

        Amids all the personnel movement over the years, what one was “qualled” for, where Sea Org members are all graded and rated based on what orgs they have the “clearances” for, that is a whole interesting pecking order vital aspect to one’s Sea Org member life. Clearances decided where HCO personnel people who did the CSWs to transfer you around to this or that place, your clearances majorly decided where they wanted to use you as a “coin” for their personnel purposes and within your personal post desire inclinations which mostly were secondary!

        I always would think of the bigger reasons of why Scientology as a spiritual therapy/exorcism practice might not ever win public support, Despite all the admin details and all the bureaucratic units that LRH wrote into the whole system.

        You as a Sea Org member wonder privately that if despite OSA’s doing it’s GO era stuff and the same org board layout as the old GO, were they really making Scientology’s expansion inevitable?

        The tech and delivery of results producing OTs is Scientology at its core for me, what makes or breaks Scientology, not even OSA’s ways!

        The best Scientology pilot group seems to be the freezone.

        It’s not for lack of an OSA that the freezone carries on!

        One other counterargument against the freezone, is LRH’s policy statements that groups, organized groups survive longer.

        That the intense structure of all the Sea Org echelons and networks (LRH Comm, Snr HCO, Snr Qual, Flag Rep, Int/Flag Finance Network, PR Network, OSA Network, CMO, RTC) all cross policing what they police and enforce of LRH’s sub compartmented policies and directives, I mean it’s a big massive admin structure, mostly undermanned and at most times in the past it cross ordered itself becoming a top down mess.

        So Ron’s Org, Indie field auditors, simpler Scientology groups, seems a welcome relief from the Management Series guided networks!

        We’ll see, and the Ron’s Org getting a building and continuing on at present seem to me in a way the cutting edge of Scientology, doing less of Hubbard’s controversial stuff, and just having a building as a central delivery center for EU, is what it is, and something to watch.

        Official Scientology has its Bridge to Total Freedom routes at the bottom of the Bridge, all routing people onto LRH’s Bridge. The route out of Scientology goes sometimes to the freezone.

        That is what also I thought it sometimes meant on this blog, where official Scientologists coming here for the first time who hadn’t heard of the whole freezone Scientology world, that these new ex official Scientologists would become aware of the freezone Scientology options and its whole history.

    • Re “We protect Scientology and ensure Scientology’s expansion by digging up the dirt on enemies …”

      Not just digging it up, but manufacturing the dirt out of whole cloth in a number of cases (Cooper, Cazares, Rathbun, Rinder, Young, and on through a long list of lesser known persons).

      How can a lie factory present itself as the road to total freedom?

  2. Oh, just another one that wants to rule the world and own it.
    I would say, I sell Germany for one Euro. Good deal.
    I forgot to mention that now he has to pay all the debts we have and fulfil our obligations.
    Sorry! Next time read the small print before signing the contract.

  3. This PL actually SOUNDS sensible on the surface. Start a new enterprise (Mission) in a new area, learn the environment. Keep everything running smooth, right?

    But to gather dirt on your possible future enemies EVERYWHERE YOU GO. Sure, this PL was nicely and intelligently written, but it indicates he was either attacked at EVERY TURN, or BELIEVED he was attacked at every turn.

    Those who viciously attacked Dia. and Scn. in the early days were mostly real SPs who felt threatened, but to attack every criticism and every individual who questioned him, that ain’t right. Some criticism came from family members who saw their loved ones go through a rough time when a read was missed or a process was overrun etc. etc. You’re not an SP for loving and caring about your child/family member/friend.

    It is well documented that LRH and Scn were attacked by some unsavory people for nefarious reasons, but to make this standard operating procedure everywhere, in a policy letter no less, goes against the basic purpose and whole philosophy of Scn on so many levels.

    Ron said approx. “only the tigers survive and even they have a tough time.” Well, tigers live a solitary life and have no friends.
    Mark

    • Sorry, this was a confidential briefing, not a policy letter. My bad.
      Mark

    • Those who viciously attacked Dia. and Scn. in the early days were mostly real SPs who felt threatened,

      Who exactly? Did you know them? How do you know they are “SPs”? Did you measure their behaviour against Hub’s social and antisocial criteria? How did they “attack”? What did they do exactly?

      It is well documented that LRH and Scn were attacked by some unsavory people for nefarious reasons

      Sigh. Docs or stfu.

      • Evidence of early attacks have been on this site and all over the internet. Did you miss that I was pointing out the wrongness of this briefing?

        • Forgive me, I’ve seen numerous claims but no evidence. Do you have a link?

          • There re plenty of docs of all kinds, but it is you who has to connect the dots yourself. No-one is going to do it for you. And even is some tried to, there is an excellent chance you still wouldn’t see it, if you think you already know.

          • MWESTEN:
            Sorry to say that I cannot do that right now. I fully understand that you deserve better from me. I have been reading reports from hundreds of people about the crimes committed BY Scn. individuals (incl. LRH) and crimes ON Scn. (incl. Ron). Many on this and other sites recently. A few could be anecdotal or hearsay, but the quantity and personal verification by such numbers is impossible to ignore.

            Right now, I’m just not going to spend 8-10 or 20 hours pecking on this keyboard, cutting and pasting to compile hundreds of statements or reports that have already been seen by most of us.

            You can call me names and I will have no argument.

            You have seen as many reports on both sides as I have.

            I have a packaging system to assemble and program, with about 350 lines of logic, and I will be doing tornado cleanup volunteer work as the spring progresses through the Southeast US. I also have my personal work to do, unencumbered.

            Sorry to fail you.
            Oh by the way, Erzsebet pointed out that I should be more careful in throwing the ‘SP’ term around. I have written about this extensively on this and other sites, and failed to follow my own advice. My apologies.
            Mark

    • “This PL actually SOUNDS sensible on the surface” No, it doesn’t Mark. It doesn’t sound sensible at all. Not for one moment of reading this text did I think “yes, makes sense”.

      “Sure, this PL was nicely and intelligently written”. Mein Kampf was nicely and intelligently written.

      “It follows this way: We start to expand an area and we instantly and immediately want protective information in that area.”

      I’m sorry Mark, there are only two ways in which this briefing could make any kind of sense:-

      1. The organisation promoting this approach is a criminal one.
      2. The reader desperately wants to justify the mind which conceived it.

      If you had been told David Miscavige had written this briefing, you would demand his immediate arrest and imprisonment.

    • Mark.. if I were you I would not throw around the word ”suppressive”, there are no suppressive people only suppressive acts. And those acts are when the persons confront is low, that person will do anything to supress the incoming stuff because cant handle it. But this person has power and will use to silence that incoming crap once and for all: USING ALL THE MEANS AVAILABLE AND THAT COULD INCLUSE BLACK MAIL…..showing anger.. take away something valuable, disowning you, cut communication.. physically over power the source, rub you off the face of the Earth.. those are acts because cant handle any other way.

      • Erzsebet
        My severest apologies to you and all. Throwing ‘SP’ around willy nilly is something more attributed to DM. I have written all of you on the difference in SP and ‘acting in a suppressive manner’. I then failed my own advice. My forgiveness is requested but not demanded.

        I continue to learn.

        Thank you, Erzsebet, for your assistance.
        Mark

        • Mark my dear. there is nothing to forgive…and if you felt guilty or bad, than hop into session and confront those useless sensations-believes and agreements you have on the matter.🙂 good night to you!

    • Re “Those who viciously attacked Dia. and Scn. in the early days were mostly real SPs who felt threatened ….”

      I sure don’t agree with that and I believe the overwhelming evidence is to the contrary.

      Take one simple example: the FDA. They had every duty, for the good of all, to stop Scientology from making wild and unsubstantiated claims about auditing curing all ailments, about Dianazene being effective with no proof, and so on.

      Or take Paulette Cooper who saw through the mask of Scientology and described what she saw. This was for the public welfare and she was right to call Scientology out on its abuses even back then.

      Or take early Dianetics enthusiasts who lost their commitment when Hubbard would not allow actual scientific research, and then watched in dismay as he hid behind the label of religion.

      These were hardly SPs. They were people looking out, logically, and dutifully, for someone proclaiming miraculous results with no documented evidence. They were doing their ethical duty.

      As I and others have said many times, if Scientology would show just one clear or OT as originally defined by Hubbard, the world would change for Scientology overnight. Or if one OT recalled just one piece of actual, usable technology from the whole track, Scientology’s fortunes would change instantly. Or just one PC cured of cancer. Or _anything_ beyond self-reported anecdotal “it works” prompted by peer pressure resting on intense group indoctrination.

      I am compassionate for the fact that it takes people time to shed the blinders and look at the evidence of things. It took me a long time. And am still working on parts of it.

      • Not everyone who disagrees with you is BLIND. Just because people are seeing something different than you does not mean they are BLIND. Just because someone is not interested in the things you are does not make them HANDICAPPED. I see this as narcissistic myself.

        • No one said anyone who disagrees is blind. But open your ears. Multiple sources recognizes it takes years, even decades to decompress from Scientology.

      • Are you speaking of the same FDA that has repeatedly been shown to have been compromised by the Pharmaceutical and food manufacturing companies, over the past few decades? Try Google sometime, you will avoid many footbullets in your posts.

        • Not to mention the Medical “electroshock” lobby.

        • Hmm. Accused of foot bullets from the sharpshooter?

          No one is saying the FDA has not done questionable or flat out wrong things.

          So let me ask you to focus on one simple aspect of the question: was the FDA, as a federal agency with assigned tasks, wrong or right to challenge Hubbard’s claims that his product, Dianazene, proofs the user against radiation poisoning? There never was and still is not scientific evidence for such a claim.

          So, sharpshooter iamvalkov, what say you? Was the FDA wrong to challenge Hubbard’s claims for Dianazene?

          • OK, link me to some studies of Dianazene by objective researchers. And who brought the complaint against LRH’s claims for it? And if they were after Dianazine, why were they confiscating E-meters and books and written materials? And breaking down doors?

          • Perhaps “no one said it”, but it was implied in your post that the FDA were wearing the “white hats” in that scenario. You like to point out that if LRH was shown to have lied even once, he may have lied many more times.
            I simply pointed out that if the FDA has been shown to have been compromised (more than once), it may have been compromised in that case, too.

            You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Unless you are involved in using a double standard.

            I find these kind of discussions rather a waste of time, because they are largely based on “maybes”, and there is no absolute proof either way. There is evidence, but the best anyone can do on what is available is to create inferences about the events.

            • Clearly you are into black and white thinking. The world is in shades of gray. The fact that institutions like the FDA serve to provide some public good does not imply the conclusion you reached — that they therefore are taken to be “white hat” and totally good.

              I find your concerns illogical and inaccurate. No one (well, at least not me) is suggesting the extreme conclusions of binary thinking that you suggest.

              It is not that I “like” to point out that Hubbard lied. It is that I like to point out the _truth_ about a cult (and its founder) that has ruined many lives and keeps people imprisoned.

              And yes (with face palm) of course an institution that has lied then becomes suspect regarding its further institutions. True of the FDA and especially true of Hubbard and Scientology. With the FDA, there is at least some public oversight and hope of straightening things out. Scientology has none.

              You may be aware of many of Hubbard’s lies. But others who are here exploring Scientology may not be. Therefore I will continue to post items that express my own truth and observations to hopefully be of benefit to others.

  4. humanitarian: concerned with or seeking to promote human welfare.

    control: power or authority to guide or manage

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

    • Marildi, look around at what the “humanitarian” “Control” has wrought. Thousands of men and women being emotionally, mentally and spiritually executed in various ways over the years and in present time. You want to own it, defend it, water it down or dress it up, that’s on you. You bought into it as we all did. You just don’t want to pay the price of having been wrong. So as this “Humanitarian control” you defend continues to hurt people, you can share in that responsibility. This isn’t a word game. You want to be a wordsmith, then go on jeopardy. Please stop being an apologist as real people are being hurt, many who post here. If the church had any sort of positive record of actually managing human welfare, especially in terms of its scale and wealth, you could possibly make a case. It does not. Chuck Beatty did not twist anything in the opening comment. I hope you willing to at least look at the possibility that you may need to raise your confront and take some responsibility for the dark underbelly of the subject.

      • Sebastian, LRH wouldn’t declare people who abided by Standard Tech. Only Miscavige does. In that light, please differentiate between Scientology as a philosophy and the organisation or the so called church. It looks like the boundaries between those two completely different things are being confused on this blog for a year now.

        • Theo, its carrot and stick. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Differentiate all you want. There is nothing new in the philosophy of scientology. Why should this blog make an effort to differentiate such things when the church treats them all as one package in order to lure people in. Is it an exercise in making oneself feel less duped? Marildi spends her days doing that. Sure LRH and DM are not identical. So what. They both used and abused people. Sure LRH said Love is the greatest secret in the universe. So what. What does that justify. Thousands of men and women have said the same thing in many ways long before him. If you like the way LRH codified some self-help practices and can use them, great. But it doesn’t justify anything and no one is required to keep some line from being blurred. If you think you owe it to LRH, that’s fine. But don’t expect everyone to share your enthusiasm or feel the need.

          • Thank you. After the…. “Sure LRH and DM are not identical. So what. They both used and abused people”… I don’t have to read more… LRH is NOT around. All those great lessons that were given to people are for nothing. Well… it’s not my opinion. I am not going to give any advice to anybody. Do as you please. I do too.

        • Baloney! Hubbard ripped anyone out of his cult who did not toe the line with him. Crap, he even wiped out his own son, pulling all his certs, and probably pushing Quentin toward suicide — if he was not actually murdered.

          The problem did not start with Miscavige. Far from it.

            • Your posts sound to me like the character in this video. Hysterical with condemnation. Most of us are aware of Hubbard’s crimes and guilt. If we choose to measure that against other values we have, and not not become hysterical with blame, that is a person’s prerogative. It does not make people here guilty of anything except doing their own math. That is not something I want you to do for me. You don’t live my life, I don’t work for you, and you don’t pay my bills. I have done you no dis service and I am responsible for your dis content. I do not owe you any apology or explanations for who I am or how I think. You will not make me feel less love for myself, or feel bad about myself, by slandering Hubbard. I am not Hubbard. I feel no need to defend or attack Hubbard.

              • And if I see Miscavige as a source, that is my prerogative. I don’t have to explain it to you. Nobody is on trial here. You are solid in a purpose to prosecute and I am not a criminal on trial.

              • You are way off base in your assumptions about my intent.

              • Dear Oracle: How do you know that “most of us are aware of Hubbard’s crimes and guilt”? Do you know everyone on this blog? Are you speaking for some subgroup that runs this blog? Do you know everyone who may be seeking information about Scientology?

                Your “hysterical” with this or that logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks do not serve the advancement of free speech. Your reaction is way to Scientology-ish for my taste.

                No one is trying to do anything for you or to make you think anything you do not want. It does seem to me that you want others (me?) to be quiet, or at least less vocal, about Hubbard’s and Scientology’s flaws. No can do.

                Frankly, your post is so off track from anything I thought, suggested, or implied that I’m not even sure you were addressing your response to me.

                Best wishes to you.

      • Well said, Sebastian.

      • Sebastian, I was not apologizing for the kinds of things that have occurred “over the years.” I was simply looking at what was occurring in the context of over 4 decades ago, which is what LRH was writing about at the time of this briefing. There have been and are still MANY gross wrongnesses committed by the church.

        • Marildi, the briefing was in 1968. LRH lived for almost another 20 years. I don’t see much point at always looking at things “in context” if that commentary only shields, lessens, apologizes for or does not contribute to the eradication of the abuses. Defining words to infer good intentions when history has proved otherwise is counter-productive to stopping abuses. At best your demonstrating some misplaced loyalty in my opinion. You appear to have a disconnect going on when it comes to abuses and spotting source.

          • Sebastian: “I don’t see much point at always looking at things ‘in context’ if that commentary only shields, lessens, apologizes for or does not contribute to the eradication of the abuses.”

            I would say that NOT looking at things it in context and seeing the full truth of a situation, both the good and the bad, can in fact contribute to further abuses. Because when critics refuse to see the whole picture, and even misrepresent it to greater or lesser degrees, they lose credibility and defeat their own purposes with respect to anyone who isn’t just jumping on the band wagon of anything negative.

            • And I should add that the way it seems to me is that seeing LRH only in the worst light leads in the direction of discounting the positive contributions he made.

            • Your right about a loss of credibility. I can see there is little or no point in continuing this.

            • Marildi –

              Marty posted a briefing that was written by LRH in 1968.

              LRH died in 1986 and never rescinded or corrected this briefing.

              LRH also lied about being blinded and crippled in combat in WWII, and printed and reprinted those lies in the “About the Author” sections of every Scientology book from 1950 until he died in 1986.

              He never rescinded or corrected those lies.

              If you want the proper context, you have to not just look at what he said in 1950, or in 1968, you have to include that he kept saying it over and over until the day he died.

              He had the chance to stop saying these lies and distributing these abusive and illegal policies to his staff EVERY DAY until the day he died.

              Each day, he did it again, and again.

              THAT is the proper context to understand L Ron Hubbard and the situations he faced, and how he handled them with Scientology.

              Alanzo

              • Al, Margaret has published material relating to the injury claims, some of which was quoted in just the past few days. that indicate the claims are true, and that folks who state otherwise are, by this point, are willfully lying or at best are remaining willfully ignorant.

                • Well, it’s clear that Margaret has no axe to grind for LRH.

                  Link?

                  • No need to go after Margaret for her views, who she is, or how she chooses to live and what she decides to write about. She has rights too.

                    • If Margaret wants to argue that L Ron Hubbard was in battle in world war two, and was blinded and crippled by shrapnel during battle, and that he cured himself in Oak Knoll Naval Hospital using Dianetics – as he claimed all throughout his life – then this needs to be inspected.

                      There is a high probability that she is just continuing LRH’s lies.

                      So let’s see it.

                      Where’s the link?

                      Or do you think her statements should go unchallenged and that there is no value in scrutiny of these claims?

                      Do you believe that people should be lied to, and that they should accept those lies, and endanger their careers, and their families, and their own sanity based on them?

                      I don’t.

                      There is nothing wrong, and everything right, with challenging these lies that LRH told to people. If those challenges can’t prove the lies as lies, then people have the truth, and not lies to be fooled by.

                      Right?

                      The only reason L Ron Hubbard was able to harm as many people as he did was because his lies and his manipulative and damaging practices could not be challenged.

                      Those days are over – for good.

                      If you don’t want your beliefs and your reasoning challenged, maybe you should not be on fora where those beliefs and that reasoning is subject to being challenged.

                      Alanzo

                    • If you don’t believe “people should be lied to”, you are placing a strict standard of conduct on yourself, and I feel you need to be very, very sure that in your own statements, you do not even inadvertently lie to anyone. Do you think you fact-check your own posts that carefully?

                    • You can’t inadvertently lie, Valkov.

                      Look up the definition of “lie” and report back to me after you’ve cleared the word to full conceptual understanding.

                      I’ll starrate you on it and send you back to study.

                      You can write up a success story after we’re done.

                      Alanzo

                    • One can make a statement that turns out be false or misleading, believing it to be true when it is not. I’m sure you knew that’s what I meant, but perhaps I gave you too much credit.

                      This literalist nit-picking and talk of word-clearing is childish and on a par with what the CoS does – thought-stopping by obfuscation of meaning and by literal definition. See how much of a Scientologist you still are? But don’t worry, you may get over it in time. Or when you pass on, perhaps then you will be cleansed of it.

                    • Valkov wrote:

                      One can make a statement that turns out be false or misleading, believing it to be true when it is not. I’m sure you knew that’s what I meant, but perhaps I gave you too much credit.

                      You were using the world “lie” to state that I knew the truth, but was intentionally deceiving people.

                      That is what a lie is, and that is why you used that word in relation to what I post. You continue, desperately, trying to make me into a liar whenever I show evidence that L Ron Hubbard lied to Scientologists.

                      I know your schtick, Valkov. We’ve been working this act for years, and there is not a trick of yours with which I am not familiar

                      By the way, the trained seal wants his beach ball, his sailor’s hat, and his earrings back.

                      Alanzo

                    • Ok Al. Your comment indicates you reject my explanation of what I meant by my post. Here is definition #3 found online: 3. “an inaccurate or false statement; a falsehood.”

                      It says nothing about intent. But since you want to play it that way, OK, I am likely to get mean about it, since you have just essentially publicly called me out as deliberately lying about what I meant.

                    • Right. He asks for a link to the document I mentioned because he has not read it, but then goes ahead with the operation of pre-emptively “dead agenting” her. How like a modern-day “Scientologist”.

                  • It’s not so clear that you have NO axe to grind against LRH….. Link? You come here and post “authoritatitvely” on the subject, yet it’s obvious you haven’t consistently been reading this blog. The links and posts are here, and as I posted to one of the guys above, I am not y’all’s Reference Librarian. I have a life beyond these quibbles.

                • Link please to show a credible verification of Hubbard’s military injury claims of being blind, crippled, etc.

                  • Below is my post from a couple of threads back:

                    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
                    ————————————

                    • Thanks for the link, Marildi.

                      Alanzo

                    • Sigh. Those claims that support Hubbard’s falsehoods have been deeply investigated and found to be lacking.

                      We have Hubbard — and any number of Scientologist representatives — on tape and video lying about any number of things. We have overwhelming documentation that he made up stuff.

                      Why is it so hard to accept that he was not honest in much of what he said?

                    • FOTF2012: “Hubbard’s falsehoods have been deeply investigated and found to be lacking.”

                      Wow, that’s quite the generality being thrown out. With no links or anything – from the guy who keeps demanding links.

                      And you obviously still haven’t read the article, which was fully documented and included photocopy evidence on many points. I’m surprised at you FOTF2012, since you consider yourself logical and push “scientific proof.”

                    • Marildi, it seems you really, really want to believe in Hubbard, and hold onto purported research that would vindicate Hubbard from his lies and embellishments about his military career.

                      I can understand and as a matter of faith, if that is your belief, you are welcome to it.

                  • That’s a twisted, “trick” request, because you can easily dismiss anything I post as not being “credible” (to you). Don’t you get yet, that subjectivity is always involved on all sides, and you are the one who has to “connect the dots” based on whatever “evidence” you come across? And the way others connect the dots is not necessarily the same way you end up connecting the dots of evidence?

                    There is no point to posting links for folks who believe they already know the truth. Search Marty’s blog for Margaret’s posts on the subject, and you will either find credible evidence or you won’t. Frankly it’s not my job to be everyone’s Reference Librarian. I have life, too.

                    • Dear non-reference librarian iamvalkov: I have no idea what you are talking about or even whom you are talking to. The things you are stating rather pedantically are things that people already know.

                      I stand by my assertion that Margaret’s posts on the subject of Hubbard’s military story credibility have been superseded or countered by other research. I likewise do not wish to become a reference librarian, so I would just encourage people to do their homework.

                      Truth is not a matter of everyone can connect the dots how they want — unless you are a pure constructivist who does not hold that there is any objective reality.

                      People can believe what they want, but that does not make it truth, and it does not stop others from speaking their views.

                      Didn’t those of us who were “in” learn that efforts to stifle free and open discourse, stymie critical thinking, and attack people who speak up is _not_ the road to anywhere? Especially not freedom.

      • It’s always the confront of the person who disagrees with you, that is lacking, eh? Some would call that ad hom.

        • “Its always…”. Really. You don’t know me. But you would like to make me the issue. Just another attempt to evade, water down issues and distract. I have seen a few here who are real good at it. As if your under some obligation to shield each other.

          • YOU made my “confront” or lack of it the issue in your post, to which I replied. So that doesn’t fly.

            • iamvalkov, the only comment I made which contains a reference to the matter of raising confront was contained in remards I made to marildi . I did notice that you appear in places where the response should be from her. Not sure what to make of that. But I was not speaking with or to you that I was aware of. You can check the record. If you feel the need to come to her defense, well, that could be considered noble under other circumstances.

    • It’s kind of a mute point anyway.

      David had Scientology officially converted into a Bonafide religion with Church status. Keeping financials private was clearly HIS top priority.

      At which point he agreed to separate Church from State and therefore surrender any interests or rights to marry Scientology with any management or governing body. He surrendered Scientology’s interests in any community control with that.

      • And that is exactly how U.S. Gov offloaded Scientology as a concern.

        Then David wriggled his way back into being a NEW problem for US Gov as a domestic terrorist. The man is clearly addicted to chaos.

        • It seems if he isn’t fighting a member of US Gov, he does not know what else to do with himself.

        • _Miscavige_ created a problem as a domestic terrorist? No. It was under Hubbard and operation Snow White that Scientology launched the biggest infiltration of the US government in history. _Hubbard_, not Miscavige.

          (Oh, but I forgot. Hubbard-supporters will claim that Snow White was just a defensive action.)

          • No? No? Miscavige has a restraining order on him Texas for domestic terrorism. Please do not bag “Hubbard- supporters” into one bag and explain what the bag will think. That is bigotry. No body here has been asked to apologize for their views. Nobody here has to apologize to you for who they are, how they think, or the life they live. There is a wide difference between disagreement and bullying. Nobody here you owes you agreement or apology for what they think or who they are.

            • My comment was about David Miscavige. I did not mention Hubbard. Must you respond to everything as a means to attack a dead man that is not here to speak for himself.? Must every thread be about Hubbard? I have no interest in dead people. I am not talking about HUBBARD! YOU are fixated on Hubbard. NOT ME. I have no desire to hate or blame someone who isn’t even here! As far as I am concerned, people take their sins to the grave with them. That’s the way I roll. It doesn’t even have anything to do with Scientology! It’s part of humanity. A LOT of people feel that way.

              There are people who share back and forth ideas here with the purpose of seeking companionship, and figuring things out. Not for prosecution.

            • Quit trying to make others the issue, Oracle.

              I’d like to see a link to a restraining order for domestic terrorism on Miscavige. Link, please.

              When you post things that imply that _Miscavige_ is the problem and Hubbard was _not_, be prepared for push back. Because that is a false position.

              • I never said Hubbard was not. You are adding to my thoughts and expanding on them. Adding words I never said, thoughts I never had! Why don’t you just continue the conversation between us with yourself?

      • Speaking of David’s private financials, donations from “members” have paid millions upon millions of dollars for his fuck buddies and playmates.

        He hired Shelly Miscavige as one of the highest paid executive in the Church for over 20 years. As soon as he didn’t care to fuck anymore he threw her off the property.

        That implies her position and all of the money spent on her and paid to her was in HIS financial and personal pleasure interest, NOT the groups.

        Dollars and staff spent on Tom Cruise and his other playmates? Parties on a cruise ship over a quarter of a million dollars.

        Let’s take the Scientology out of the picture because that is the umberella he hides under to commit corporate crimes.

        Just view him as an executive of a corporation , whic in fact, that is really all he is, and look at his ethics there. How has he handled his fiduciary trusts? Would anyone outside of the Church hire him? A non Scientology. Based on an talent, to chair a board? Uh………

        • What executive utilized their staff by stuffing them in tailors in the desert?

          The real estate investments he has made are atrocious. He has turned the Int Base into an elephant just as a property manager! Who could they possibly sell that to? For what function? He has invested millions into making a real estate parcel that is only worth the land it sits on.

          Empty buildings rotting across the globe.

          An honest briefing from the IAS beggar would go something like this:

          Thank you John Doe for taking the time to hear my briefing. You may not know, but Commander Miscavige is VERY high maintenance for the Church. We need millions of dollars every month to keep him in pleasure and out of jail.

          • And how does he secure his position as a corporate officer? He forced his employees to sign contracts swearing never to say anything negative about him. So he can never be rated as an employee!

            I mean, all of this is HIGHLY illegal. Criminal.

            • I personally do not view David Miscavige as a Scientologist. I do not think he can think with any of it.

              I see him as a corporate criminal, from tax evasion (he has not paid millions in gift tax or even filed gift reports in his personal file) he appoints people based on undated resignation letters, he is criminal across the boards. He USES Scientology and Scientologists for personal consumption. He has done nothing but created problems for the Church and it’s staff and members. His brutal mismanagement is masked by donations. When he attacks the Indie movement overtly and covertly it is all about the MONEY.

              OSA sent someone to interrogate me and it was all about the MONEY and CUSTOMERS and BUSINESS plans of Marty! It was all about MONEY and BUSINESS.

              David is just a another corporate criminal.

              • Everything David has or is, is because he identifies himself as a Scientologist.

                It does not take a rocket scientist to see that he is not and this is complete fraud also.

                This is the big WHY/LIE on the lines. And why he has made it illegal for any one around him to notice or communicate an outpoint. It is the only way he can continue the fraud.

                • Why do you think he stirs up all of this conflict? It secures his job as COB RTC and makes the staff thinks he is working / earning his perks.

                  They don’t even know he is the one creating it.

                  I do have to give him credit for being crafty. The U.S. gov actually could hire a man like that and put him to good use. He could take down a company church or country methodically.

                  He’s the one that deserves the Oscar.

                  I got you Dave.🙂

                  • People, if you have any doubts just ask yourself this.

                    What Scientologist would torture a class Xll auditor trained by Hubbard and have her running around a pole in the desert?

                    • What Scientologist, given 20 million dollars and an organization to expand, would spend it on a private office for them self?

                      Given billions would build underground vaults to bury the information, instead of establishing missions on the streets to keep the knowledge in circulation?

                      I could go on and on.

                      The wrong item on this 3D list, is that David Miscavige is a Scientologist.

                    • Oracle wrote:

                      What Scientologist, given 20 million dollars and an organization to expand, would spend it on a private office for them self?

                      Given billions would build underground vaults to bury the information, instead of establishing missions on the streets to keep the knowledge in circulation?

                      Oh! Oh!!

                      I have an answer!!

                      Because he is a money-grubbing Scientologist, taught from the age of 6 that the GI stat is the most important stat in all of Scientology.

                      And because the “knowledge” has proven to be a legal liability, that gets bigger and bigger the more people you sell it to. People go insane and die and commit suicide on you. They murder people on you. And if they survive this “knowledge”, they turn around and sue you once they come to their senses and realize that they have been conned.

                      DM has learned that the fewer people who are charged up the wazoo for this “knowledge”, and the fewer people who are delivered this “knowledge”, the lower the legal liability to himself.

                      He can still get the GI stat up without incurring all that legal liability.

                      It is actually a long term strategy that is totally legal within the protections of the 1st amendment in the United States. And he is playing it for all it is worth – just as he was taught to do ever since he was a little boy.

                      Do I get a little smiley face?

                      Come on, Oracle. Give me a little smiley face.

                      Alanzo

                    • 🙂 Alanzo, I have a feeling if David ever goes on trial for any wrong doing, his defense will be a simple, “I was only following orders”. ” Even though I was the Commanding Officer, the “Religious Leader” , and everything under my command was my responsibility, I was at total effect of memos”.

                      And his attorney can pay you to be there and verify his testimony.

                    • I’d love to be there!

                      And thanks for the smiley face.

                      Alanzo (:>

      • Huh? It was under Hubbard that the religion angle was launched. What Miscavige did was get IRS tax exemption for it.

        • I never said Hubbard didn’t launch the religion angle, I did not defend Hubbard about it, I wasn’t talking about Hubbard at all . I am not responsible for your A=A. Nothing I said was untrue yet you ATTACK.

      • I think you mean moot, not mute. But in a way, mute makes more sense, as it would refer to some aspect of being silent or unable to speak.

  5. Chuck Beatty
    What about: We protect ourselves and ensure Scientology´s demise by digging up the dirt on Miscavige and his cohorts, and threaten to expose their dirty laundry to keep them from criticizing and jeopardizing the apostates´ expansion?

    Intel tech and exposure threat works!

    Join the winning team that is ensuring our inevitable expansion! We´re the cutting edge role models of the most successful and expanding new “Freedom from Cults” movement in earth´s history!

  6. Marildi, it’s easy to recognize a scientologist because they are quick to justify and defend the indefensible if it came from Hubbard. So often Hubbard reads like a wanna-be Gestapo head, yet his fans mindless claim it was all for his end goal of TOTAL FREEDOM. It’s so 1984 its scary.

    • Sunny, it’s just as easy to identify a critic by what they omit.

      This non-discussion is just like those Facebook jibes the Democrats publish against the Republicans and vice versa. All on the level of “You! “NO, you!”

  7. The Church of Scientology AKA “The House of Cards”

    LRH AKA Francis Underwood

    Mary Sue AKA Claire Underwood

    I’ll leave the rest of the casting to those fans of the show AND former scientologists

    CAVEAT: (I am only on season 2 episode 18 – which I’ve been watching marathon due to the incessant snow — have no idea how things are going to go except to know that it’s ONLY going to get darker and more evil — I have to speed forward on certain scenes)

    • in the very last episode of house of cards….. just kidding, lol.

      it seems to me PR control in an area should have been obvious and simple. go out, apply the tech, let the public see the vast improvements. most of your enemies would shrug their shoulders and say, guess i was wrong about those scientologists.

      i don’t think hubbard believed his own tech worked, this led him to revert to old tactics he picked up out of some army war manual.

      and yes, it was a shame when the US changed the name “department of war” to department of defense. war is peace. ect

      • Victoria, I heartily recommend this book which details how the American Medical Association for decades lobbied for and PRed for the suppression and eradication of the Chiropractic profession. The AMA was finally convicted in Federal Court but not until the 1990s when Chiropractic was able to bring suit and win against them.

        It is a good case study of how the “real world” works, written by 2 respected Chicago journalists. It doesn’t matter what “works” or what doesn’t, it is what the various parties to these struggles believe, and how they act on their beliefs.
        http://www.amazon.com/The-Serpent-Staff-Unhealthy-Association/dp/087477800X

        • Is it really a thing to be proud of that alternative medicine, possibly including chiropractic methods, is promoted without solid scientific validation?

          Is it not possible that the horrible AMA was insisting that recognition not be granted without scientific validation?

          • Sorry, I do not see it that way. However, you should read the book and judge for yourself. Call me a cynic, but I fail to see the “pure altruism” of established, organized medicine. For all the good they may do, their hands are no cleaner overall than those of organized, established, “scientology inc”.

            Research it for yourself, then believe whatever you want to believe, it’s no skin off my nose. Perhaps you need to believe in heroes and righteous medical men exposing all those scammy “alternative therapies”.

            The AMA was convicted in Federal Court of long-standing “anticompetitive practices”. It was well documented. But don’t read the book if you are fond of and need your stable datum of the AMA’s nobility.

            By the way, the AMA spent decades and many PR dollars to create that idea of themselves as the “noble defenders of the public health” in the minds of the government and the public. The AMA is also largely responsible for having torpedoed any attempts at healthcare reform in the USA, going back to the times of President Eisenhower, who wanted better health coverage for Americans.

            Google is your friend.

            Google is your friend.

            • No one is saying that those organizations are perfect or even good. Duplicate. Duplicate.

              • You are implying you think I am failing to duplicate something. Of course you have no way of knowing what I do or do not duplicate, so I might consider that a a demeaning slur, an ad hom and an invalidative evaluation of me. But go for it if that’s what amuses you. It does not really reflect on me.

    • You hit the nail right on the head.

  8. Funny that one of the first big lies that critics use to dead-agent Ron is that he did have three wives but lied about that fact. “See, he’s entirely untrustworthy.”

    What I’ve found over the long run is that if you’re very honest about what you can or can’t do and you just go about helping people the best you can and endeavor to improve your ability to help, no one tries to stop you. The exception would be a real sociopath who hates real help. Interesting that the only attack we’ve had on us in seven years is from david miscavige.

    Were the booming missions of the seventies covertly attacked by local or state “enemies” who had escaped detection? Or were they put out of business by David Miscavige on the orders of L Ron Hubbard?

    All of the evidence I’ve seen points to the latter.

    • No, critics usually point to lies by LRH that started way before his bigamy problems. The complete fabrication of his war record/ injuries coupled with the gross misrepresentations about his education credentials and experience are usually the major, and most relevant, that critics point too. Those lies, and his business dealings in the 1940s & 1950s, are far more relevant and important than his womanizing.

      I find it revealing that pointing to any lies or abhorrent behavior by LRH is immediately labeled as “dead agenting.” it’s yet another example of CoS “thought stopping” techniques which prevent scientologists from engaging in critical thinking or believing anything negative about Hubbard – just like labeling anyone that isn’t a super fan of Ron singing his praises is an SP, merchant of chaos, critic or DB.

      • I see many of the posters on this thread as working very hard to “dead agent” each other. Some do it more or less intelligently. I see “dead agenting” as being practiced commonly in life by various “agents” – politicians, salesmen, jealous girls against their perceived rivals etc etc.

        “Dead agenting” as I see it, is a “thought-stopper” only to those who are credulous enough to be unable to think with it.

    • LDW: “Were the booming missions of the seventies covertly attacked by local or state “enemies” who had escaped detection? Or were they put out of business by David Miscavige on the orders of L Ron Hubbard? All of the evidence I’ve seen points to the latter.”

      On the website scientology-cult.com, there is an article by “Gang of Five” titled Secret History of David Miscavige, which is based on first-hand witnessing of events. Here are some excerpts:

      “In early 1977, Dave was sent ‘over the rainbow’ to work with LRH in La Quinta, California…During this period, Dave lived in the CMO men’s dorm with Pat Broeker, where they became very good friends…

      [In 1981] “…DM started reporting directly to LRH through Pat and his traffic was no longer being seen by anyone else. This was the start of the destruction of the Mission Network and LRH getting reports through Pat from DM about the missions being external influences in the orgs…

      “The Mission Network was crashed stemming from DM doing Mission Holder Conferences, gang sec checking the Mission Holders and forming up the Finance Police who went out and destroyed this feeder line to orgs. It was totally contrary to all LRH policy and how LRH dealt with Mission Holders in the past. However, these orders which destroyed the Mission Network did come from LRH BASED OFF FALSE REPORTS THAT WERE SENT UP BY DM [my caps].” – See more at: http://www.scientology-cult.com/secret-history-of-david-miscavige.html#sthash.N5XOuegQ.dpuf

      • One of the oldest missions on the planet is the Peoria, IL mission, run since 1954 by George Seidler. I worked there as Course Sup and ED (sometimes both at the same time) for 5 years from 1985-1990.

        George’s daughter, Melanie Seidler Murray, worked directly with Ron during the late 1970’s and early 80’s. Through many stories I heard from both Melanie and George, Ron was in frequent contact with what was going on in missions – at LEAST through this communication line with these two people and many more.

        The idea that Ron would shrink all his comm lines down to a 20 year old punk named David Miscavige and believe everything he told him, when he personally knew many of the mission holders for decades who ran missions at that time, is just a little out-pointy, don’t you think?

        It at least violates all his policy on management.

        Right?

        And it denies all LRH’s comm lines and the relationships he built as Founder of Scientology since the earliest days of Dianetics.

        It appears to be a way of blaming everything on David Miscavige, who was a 20 year old punk at the time, and denying all Ron’s responsibility for what happened to his own Scientology mission network – which Ron greatly benefitted from as the receiver of all that money he stole from them.

        Nope. Sorry. I don’t buy it.

        Alanzo

  9. Scientologists: defending the indefensible since 1954.

    When does a person stop being a Scientoliogist?

    When they realize that the indefensible can not be defended any more.

    Alanzo

    • Nobody has to defend anybody as the basis of figuring out who THEY are.

      You have a severe code of ethics of your own for condemning and labeling people. Just because I do not condemn Hubbard does not invalidate me or my experiences.

      You seem to think there are people here that are obligated to take this abuse.

      I am not sorry about who I am and you will not drag me to that place. That’s unhealthy in arena. Check yourself out man.

      • I invite your challenges to me.

        I respect and welcome them.

        Here you are saying that I am condemning and labeling people. You are saying that I am abusing people.

        You are saying that I am trying to drag you into a place of being sorry about who you are, and that this is something I am doing to you that is unhealthy.

        And finally, you are saying that I need to check myself out.

        With this post, aren’t you committing the same crimes on me that you say I am committing on you?

        Why, when you do it, is it just and good, and when I do it (if I do it in the way you are doing it to me now) it is a crime?

        Really, Oracle.

        Isn’t what’s happening here that you are becoming uncomfortable with the holes you are perceiving in your own reasoning, and instead of looking at those holes for yourself, you are targeting me as your tormentor?

        Why is what you are doing to me any different than what you are accusing me of?

        Alanzo

        • I am not uncomfortable with myself and that is not something you can sell me on.

          My tormentor? I have never lodged or published any such complaint, not my item and I am not the author of that.

          Targeting you? You post, I assume looking for feedback?

          I did something “to you” by giving you feedback?

          We are not the same at all. What I am doing is very different than you. I am here because I love, and you here because you hate.

          I do mean NOT to suggest and do not imply that your affliction is worse than mine. Loving people can make you just as foolish as hating them.

          It is just that loving people kind of validates them. It is a gratitude.

          And hating people kind of discounts their right for having a life. You imply the world would have been better had they not lived. Not sure I can pass that kind of judgement on anyone.

          Did Hubbard make his mother happy? Others happy? They think so. Who am I to convince them they have made a grave mistake about their own happiness? What could possibly give me that right?

          I do not feel I have a license to judge, I am so guilty myself of so many things. It would not be appropriate for me to take on the hat of the prosecutor.

          I can not judge Hubbard. But I feel I have the right to not let someone walk all over me at the same time. I can draw the line there.

      • Another ad hominem logical fallacy, Oracle.

        • From “Open your ears” on down, you have charged me with being deaf. blind, perhaps dumb, and now illogical. Perhaps hallucinatory.

          I suspect your problems began with humanity, and that is why you got involved with Scientology in the first place.

  10. INFORMATION AND CONTROL

    (Excerpted from a briefing given on 1 July 1968.)

    “They tried to knock out the FBI about a year ago. Hoover was under fire, even Johnson was going to remove him. They tried to pull the rug right from underneath the FBI, get Hoover dismissed and the whole unit smashed. It was done via the White House and State Department—heavy brass. Mr. Hoover, being an old intelligence man from a way back, had the name, rank and serial number of every one of their crimes.

    I imagine he made a couple of quiet phone calls and said, “Well, Lyndon, life is interesting because if anything happens to the FBI or I am removed from the FBI, ‘You’re…waff-waff, waffle-waffle, waffle-waffle’ will be my first public statement.” Because the heat came off in a matter of an hour.
    We can take a clue from that. If we don’t have prosecution-type data we are not safe. ”

    Well, that makes sense Ron, why don’t we just take a clue from the STASI, the KGB, CIA? Yeah, Yeah, now I understand, I’m not confused anymore.

    To deliver a Self-help therapy what we really need is the Old Man from The Mountain and his cult of Assassins. Great. Why didn’t I think of that?

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

  11. Marty, I know this has been and continues to be run on (former) Scientologists to keep them in line. Are there examples broadly available where it has been used against non-Scientologist officials to the intended effect (without repercussions)?

      • Thanks, Conan. I wasn’t aware that the Snow White program involved the acquisition of sensitive or delicate information.

    • Police raided orgs in Europe and came away with blackmail material on judges, reporters, and other “opinion leaders.

      http://www.lermanet.com/scientologynews/belgium/belgiumsraids.htm

      There are more articles like this. Do a google search and you will find them.

      This is totally 100% standard L Ron Hubbard Scientology.

      Alanzo

      • Thanks, Alanzo. The documents mentioned in the article sound like ethics and PC files. I’m interested in whether data was collected on non-Scientologist officials. Your Turin article seems to discuss PC folders as well.

        • Sorry, I did see the part about “investigators are said to have found”. I wouldn’t be surprised, but was curious about specifics.

    • And another raid in Turin, Italy in May of 2010:

      Raid at the Scientology Headquarters in Turin: Secret Archives with Information on Sex, Health, and Politics Found

      May 20, 2010

      Scientology is under investigation by the Turin prosecutor’s office. Equipped with a magistrate’s warrant, a mobile squad raided the religious organization’s headquarters in Turin. According to a report by La Stampa, investigators were looking for the personal files dedicated to members as well as to enemies of Scientology.

      For nine hours, police rummaged through the offices located on Via Bersezio. In the basement, hidden behind a locked door, investigators are said to have found secret archives with files on magistrates, policemen, journalists, and relatives of former followers.

      Their content is now being examined by the judiciary, however the Turin daily newspaper reports that the files are crammed with sensitive information about sex, health and politics. A4 sheets full of strange acronyms and intelligible only to the cult’s ministers, who record on these pages the results of e-meter sessions, a special examination which supposedly enables Scientology to understand the spiritual state of patients.

      The suspected offense is related to the violation of the standards for the handling of sensitive data.

      http://www.gazzettadiparma.it/news/italia-mondo/35486/Perquisita-la-sede-di-Scientology-a.html

      Again – not David Miscavige – L Ron Hubbard.

      Alanzo

      • Thanks Alonzo
        PC and ethics folders AND RELATED RECORDS should NEVER be left unsecured. ESPECIALLY ON PURPOSE. NEVER EVER EVER.

        C/Ss and auditors and ethics officers are acting as priests and must be held to those standards.

        I may not be the brightest monkey on this site, but I’m 57 and I knew this when I was 12. We all know this. How could hundreds, if not thousands of staffers having auditor training and admin training not know this. They were either criminal or totally cowed. Both are unacceptable in the original philosophy of Scn. and practically every other religion.

        I am not without sin, but,,,,,,,,DAMN.

        On the other hand, Ron also sewed the seeds of common sense that should prevent crimes of this nature. Find out who is ACTUALLY acting in a suppressive manner and handle them. Stay honest and clean and be competent. Play above board and maintain good relations with the environment.

        If Ron had resolved actual GPMs and not dropped it in favor of implant GPMs, things may have been different. Don’t ignore a R/S and don’t leave it simply ‘released’.
        Mark

        • Did you read the part about blackmail records of area judges and reporters that the police found at the Turin, Italy Org?

          Those records were collected as part of standard LRH Scientology that Marty has posted.

          There is a whole other covert Scientology that Ron created underneath the Scientology that professed the values that you are saying that you have known since you were 12.

          So how do you know that the real Scientology is supposed to keep PC folders locked up and confidential? Maybe you have just been PRed to believe that by Ron in the overt part of Scientology, while the covert Scn that Ron set up has no such rules or values at all.

          When the actual, covert Scientology appears, Scientologists always blame the covert Scientology on “squirreling” by individual Scientologists.

          But Marty is showing that it is not squirreling at all.

          It is standard LRH scientology to do these things, and those Scientologists who were collecting blackmail on area judges and reporters were applying standard Scientology from L Ron Hubbard.

          And you can bet that EVERY OTHER ORG ON THE PLANET IS DOING THE SAME THING.

          You are coming along, Mark. Keep thinking with the data that Marty is posting, and assimilating it with your own experiences and what you have seen of Scientology throughout your career.

          It will all start to make sense.

          Alanzo

          • Alanzo
            Thanks for the data and acknowledgement. I have been recognizing outpoints for about 30 years now. Much of the info on this site verifies what I suspected or had a feeling about.

            But I learned a few years ago that I must handle it this way for now:

            I see an act of stupidity, error or harm by Ron or someone or some people in the Church. I look straight at it, learn and evaluate all the facts that are available and say “Damn, thats f^^^ed up”. I disseminate info if needed, and then I turn around and continue my investigation and examination of my past existence.

            I cannot afford the luxury of getting dug in or interiorized to the situation. The work I have been doing which is derived from Scn., eastern wisdom, and other sources is the greatest thing I have ever done. There may be a time soon that I stop and say “It’s time to use my newly recovered abilities and clarity”. That time will become apparent to me and you will know it also.

            We don’t always agree, but has been said for many years, “I will fight for your right to say it”. Much of the info you have brought to this site has been useful.

            Right now I have some exploring to do. We’ll talk again.
            Whatever you do, DO IT. DON’T JUST THINK ABOUT IT.
            Mark

      • Terril, wow. That is the above strategy at work. Thankfully, I’m shocked. I must be getting better. I asked my question initially because I had no real idea how to start a search for such data, and also because I believe how the orders played out in real life (and continue to do so) matters most of all.

  12. Note to the Ron’s Adoring Fans Club:

    Assumed “Similarities” Are NOT Similar or Same Class of Things.

  13. “Terl grated his fangs. Leverage, leverage, all was leverage…”

    Battlefield Earth.

    Seems to me like Ron knew how low-toned this was. Terl is the bad guy, not the good guy. Also seems to me that David Miscavige took Terl as his model.

    You know, this also looks like a great example of Ron riffing on something off-the-cuff, and literal-minded SO members taking it as gospel. How many times has that happened? How many times in lectures has Ron said “joke” at the end of one of his riffs because of some of his literal-minded followers taking it seriously? How many people still think R2-45 was anything other than a joke?

    The fault lies on both sides: Ron for being dramatic and irresponsibly riffing on this in the first place, and his unthinking and in some cases evil-minded followers who would choose this “policy” to follow instead of the primary policies of Scientology, such as:

    “We always deliver what we promise.”

    “HELP PEOPLE!”
    “ANSWER PEOPLE’S QUESTIONS EXACTLY!”

    (Caps and exclamations in the original)

    And, from “The Reason for Orgs”:

    “The only reason orgs exist is TO SELL AND DELIVER MATERIALS AND SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC AND GET IN PUBLIC TO SELL AND DELIVER TO. THE OBJECT IS TOTALLY FREED CUSTOMERS!”

    (Again, italics, caps and exclamations in the original).

    We can argue all day about whether Scientology is capable of freeing people – that’s not the point. The point is that Ron is pretty clear that that is the whole purpose. It is all over policy – I could give a hundred examples if I wanted to. And, here, instead, the SO and OSA decides that these off-the-cuff remarks are to be followed by the letter, all the time IGNORING the policies that Ron set down on paper, in green on white, publicly available, and emphasized with capital letters and exclamation points.

    So, you can say that the aims of “Scientology” are what OSA says they are.

    • martyrathbun09

      Thanks. These ‘off the cuff remarks’ were explicit directions to the Controller and her staff on how to deal with those who oppose or criticize Scientology.

      • Or anyone you think might ever oppose or criticize scientology. Or any judge or lawyer or prosecutor who might have some inkling of the crimes committed by LRH, DM or other scientologists and might someday take them to task for their crimes.

      • Understood. He said it as instructions.

        But it is still interesting that these directions are followed with such zeal and gusto while the far more compassionate and positive policies are ignored. For example, in Green on White in the PR series “Opinion Leaders”:

        “… how about the violent opposition? How about that fellow?

        Well, he’s a problem. But is is an opinion leader.

        The decision here stems from
        (a) Is he talking about actual abuses? or
        (b) Is he just lying?

        in either case one has certain courses of action. If the abuses are actual, work to remedy them. If he is just lying, lay out the truth. If he really isn’t an opinion leader ignore him.”
        [Emphasis added]

        and

        “Usually anti-opinion leaders are made by neglect.

        This is from 1971, PR Series 6. Written in Green on White years after the verbal order above was uttered. The church is a textbook case now on how NOT to do PR. It’s ridiculous.

        And there are more and more and more examples, in Green on White. Why is it that David Miscavige, OSA, the SO, and certain ex-SO members chose to enforce and forward destructive policies? Policies that had been superseded? Policies that even if still in place, were countered by positive policies that would be A. more effective, and more importantly, B. ethical? Why?

        Ok, so yes, David Miscavige and the church has been doing this for 45 years. These people selectively chose to go on the low road and ignore the positive. It seems like if there was ever a choice, DM and his lackeys CHOSE the wrong. Actively chose it. And then made it look like it was what LRH wanted. Ron has been dead for 28 years, but I can be pretty certain that what we are looking at now in Scientology is not what he wanted. Hell, what he saw in 1985 was not what he wanted, according to Sarge.

        Ron should not have made these policies, and he should not have continued the SO, and when he dismantled the GO, it should have remained dismantled. I get that. He left in place a legacy that can be used by malicious people to destroy – and they do use it, obviously. But, again, the very same legacy that can be used to destroy has a counter-legacy, in publicly available policies, that can be applied to good. There are far more examples of good policy than malicious policy.

        The church today is:

        1. Applying the destructive policies (cancelled or extant) to absurd lengths,

        2. Misapplying the questionable policies like “Dead Agent” by lying (ignoring the senior policy “never use lies in PR”)

        3. Ignoring all positive policies and creating crazy policies like the IAS, the “Propaganda by Redefinition of Words” (PR series 12)-named “Ideal Org Program”, and ignoring all data on cert cancellations and tech degrades with GATs I and II.

        The church is CHOOSING to follow malicious policy – policy that we KNOW is destructive. They are NOT following it because it is LRH, because there are extant LRH policies that cover the same areas that are positive. In addition, the church has a right NOT to follow bad policy and create new policies (or emphasize other LRH policies that are better). But it doesn’t. David Miscavige doesn’t. So all of this sits with the current SO and OSA hierarchy, led by Captain Miscavige. He himself is the man who hand-picks which policies or advices or off-hand bathroom utterances or scribbles on used napkins should be followed, or not.

        Why would he choose the wrong ones?

        • martyrathbun09

          Might have had something to do with his training.

          • You literally made me laugh out loud! Very, very good. The same training that made it okay to strike his PC when he was a kid.

            • Yes, some droll humor from Marty. However your counter may be countered by this: hitting the pc may not have been taught by LRH, but may have identified Miscavige as material LRH could use for his larger plan, which I suggested in a recent post. Miscavige may well be carrying out what he sees as LRH’s wishes and purposes as taught to him by LRH, while at the same time Bill Robertson was sent off by LRH to do the same, ie following LRH’s wishes and purposes that Robertson establish the original Free Zone, a la Asimov’s novels “Foundation and Empire”.

              I wouldn’t put it past LRH to think like that, given what he seemed to know about how life and existence dichotomizes out. He would try to use those dichotomizing tendencies in the service of himself and scientology. He would try to ride the 2-headed dragon.

              • Val, I love your ability to think out-of-the-box – and the courage to speak out!

              • Why did he assign R2-45 to be used on 12 Scientologists who were “dichotomizing” in the service of “himself and scientology” then?

                Do you think Ron was just kidding when he outlawed Scn squirreling and squirrel groups? Do you think he really saw Scn squirrels as a way to make Scientology, as a whole, survive – whether he got paid for it or not?

                I don’t. I think Ron was deadly serious about getting his cut of any money that changed hands for any Scn or Dn that was ever delivered by any one on the planet.

                Deadly serious.

                By the way, I respect your ability to think outside of the box, and your courage, to speak out, too, Valkov.

                We just disagree a lot.

                Like A LOT.

                Alanzo

                • I see – they these 12… they were murdered, then?

                  THINK! Ron ordered the murders of these people, so you say. They did not get murdered, did they? And yet you take this shit seriously?

                  Come on! Scientologists are supposed to be mindless cult members, blindly following every command Ron utters. Ron COMMANDS them in this ethics order to perform R2-45 on them. And yet, miraculously, they did not die! How can that be? Did they miss? Did the guns misfire? Of course not. They didn’t do it! The ignored the order! It is treason to ignore a direct command from the commodore – and yet, these 13 people still walked the earth. WTF!

                  In the same EO, he ORDERS qual to deliver reverse processes. So which is it? Murder? Or reverse processes?

                  When these mindless, unthinking Scientologists got this EO, do you think they actually took it literally? WE KNOW FOR A FACT THEY DID NOT. Unlike the blind-with-rage-at-the-scam-artist-L-Ron-Hubbard haters on the internet, they know LRH and know the real point he was getting across. We KNOW they did not take it literally, or seriously, because THEY DID NOT KILL THEM.

                  FFIO, man. R2-45 is a joke. This EO was also a joke – with a bitter point, but certainly a joke.

                  Prove me wrong, show me the death certs.

    • Grasshopper, excellent comment.
      Sometimes we pay attention to the rotten tree and forget about the beauty of the entire forest.
      Mark

    • Oh, Grasshopper. There have reportedly been planned, attempted, and actual murders. It seems R2-45 was not entirely a joke.

      How could it be for a group in it to win or die in the attempt? For a group that would rather see you dead than unable?

      • Grasshopper (Mark P)

        Dox or stfu. Surely you can show me the myriad dead bodies that Hubbard-drunk culties have stacked up over the years. For all of hubbard’s talk of “pink legs” and “you jump on us, you’re dead” and all the rest, you’d they’d have a stack a mile high. Remarkably, Scientology is remarkably short of murdered people given how they are commanded by Hubbard to administer R2-45.

        • Take iamvalkov’s advice. Google it. There are ex-Guardian Office members and maybe OSA who say that was the case. But in case you missed it, look at one of the more famous cases: http://www.paulettecooper.com/scandal1.htm.

          • Paulette Cooper is still very much alive. Abused? Yes. Killed? No.

            Regarding R2-45 specifically, I did Google it. The only thing I see is the link to Ron’s EO. No links at all to the death certificates of the 12. There ARE no death certificates of the 12, because they were not killed. Certainly, certainly if there were actual documented cases of people actually being murdered by Scientologists using R2-45 or other means, someone out there would have posted it. And I don’t mean crap like “I was told to kill so-and-so”. That does not fly with me. If this is a real cult, the orders would have been executed had they really been issued. Anybody can say anything, and I know people have lied about the church, because I have been there. Show me where they actually were carried through. You can’t, because it never happened. You can’t even prove the orders, except for this one ludicrous example of a (rather bad) joke on Ron’s part that he issued to make a point.

            There is enough tragedy in the church without making crap up. Relax a bit and focus on the real.

            • Marildi, it seems you really, really want to believe in Hubbard, and hold onto purported research that would vindicate Hubbard from his lies and embellishments about his military career.

              I can understand and as a matter of faith, if that is your belief, you are welcome to it.

        • No “Grasshopper/ Mark P” — No one here has to do “dox or stfu.” That’s about as juvenile and adolescent a “directive” as I’ve read in a long time. When someone writes “stfu” what I read is that the person has nothing intelligent to contribute.

          For bodies, just because Paulette Cooper is still alive does not prove the Church did not make plans to have her terminated. There are credible accounts that they did.

          There is further evidence in “Time Magazine” (May 6, 1991, page 50 — Scientology: The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power). The gist of some of what was discussed was, as cited in other sources referring to the Time article: “In Scientology, “EOC” — “End Of Cycle” — is church jargon for suicide. Scientologists have actually been sent out as assassins, with orders to kill critics of Scientology and then EOC after the target was terminated.”

          So there’s some “dox” for you (take them or leave them, but I will not ever, and will never ask anyone else to “stfu.” Rude and juvenile. Scientology did plenty to make people “stfu” — being free of that in my life has been liberating.

          There is no reason for any of us here to regress to Scientology tactics for “handling” (meaning shutting off and shutting up) discussion and a free exchange of ideas.

  14. Whatever happened to the admonition in the face of SPs to just flourish and prosper? Seems to me LRH adopted the SP valence and thus infected the entire organization. Once you’ve taken that viewpoint against perceived enemies on the outside there’s not much preventing you from using the same methodology against perceived enemies within. Which brings us to present time…

  15. Wow, 45 years ago and how did that work out for you and scientology religion? Hummm maybe you should have called these issues ‘Pilots’ to be review and eliminated when not needed. I mean with all the OTs being made it should have been assumed an issue such as this would not be needed forever. I can certainly see why I never got promoted to OSA and when the PCO from INT came with the approval to go be the INT FBO I declined opting to keep my family together. A few things that were right🙂

  16. Thanks for this series. It makes it very easy to see who’s pretending to be “out” but really playing for Team OSA.

  17. Many commenters here and beneficiaries to a certain degree of Scientology, I suppose, for at least some time, does not include in this equation what Hubbard protected or tried to protect. What was his end goal. That’s interesting because that briefing is taken out of context and separate from the philosophical background of Scientology which we all know and understand, not all to the same extent unfortunately.

    When the saying “the end justifies the means” comes to mean what Miscavige and others did and keep doing to loyal Scientologists then we can all decry that saying and agree that the end does NOT justify the means. As we live in a world that’s mostly a bad example of application of that saying in the above way, people tend to overlook that one can use “bad” means to defend a just end. Using “bad” means to defend a just purpose, for a lot of people who find their buttons pushed in a clever way, is as bad as using bad means to defend a unjust purpose. “Bad” means is bad means no matter what the end is. No matter what is at stake. If we forget that big picture we cannot really understand what is really at stake. And that does not mean that there is no limit to the means one can use for a just cause. The science of law has dealt with such matters extensively.

    Example: Miscavige used harsh LRH policies to persecute loyal Scientologists and throw them off Scientology. Was that justified or warrantied by Standard Policy? No. We have numerous occasions and testimonies on that. We can’t be more reasonable on that but call it Suppression. And on this we all agree. Using the “end” in a twisted way he applied bad means indeed. But those actions by Miscavige have been known to be flagrant violations of the rights of Scientologists or a human being and flagrant violations of Standard Tech and everybody can see it. Some years ago though it was not like this.

    And for some time now Marty has taken a new slant on Scientology and LRH. Picking up such “examples” wants to demonstrate that LRH was a suppressive himself, all he cared about was to rule the world and that he was a dangerous man indeed.

    So, some here believe that those harsh LRH policies if used against organisations who are provenly suppressive of Mankind (FBI, CIA, KGB or so many others who I can’t name as the list would never be completed) are still considered “bad”.

    Why is it like that? Homo Sapiens cannot confront Force.

    And here is now the opposite example of the wrong interpretation of the saying which in essence says “the end can NEVER justify the means”. I remember that story from LRH on a ship which was going straight to the rocks and the captain was yelling. And the christian priest, all he observed and had to say, after the ship and the crew was rescued, was that the captain yelled at the crew.

    So, the question is where do you draw the line? When does the end justify the means and when doesn’t it? Obviously there are several legal principles and principles that have been developed in the philosophy of law which deal with such matters. Even in self protection depending to the seriousness of the attack a person can use a variety of means culminating in even killing the attacker.

    That’s not considered to be a crime. Why? Because that’s sensible (under the circumstances) defence. When one goes to battle and has no intelligence he can be just killed just because there was no intelligence actions taken there. So, one does not go to a battle much less a war without informing his troops about intelligence. LRH was no simple man. He had to accomplish a gargantuan task which he did.

    So coming now out on the Internet and picking up excerpts from briefings and out of context is surely aimed at something else. It’s just for consumption by a puzzled audience.

    If one cannot confront Force one cannot go OT really. The Free Being is the reference. Those who just natter against LRH being a blackmailer or using techniques used by the FBI and such organisations in order to protect Scientology just can’t see the purpose behind all that, anymore. I am sorry they lost all their wins. But it looks like for them to be lost they must have been of no much significance. And that’s the important point here. How come a being involved in Scientology for so long falls back to a previous or even worse state and lose his wins and purpose?

    As I said, maybe there were no significant wins or purpose in the first place. Or if there were that being has committed so many overts against Scientology and Scientologists (and thus humanity) that they can’t be helped anymore unless an ethics handling occurs.

    Staying on purpose with Scientology is not some magic trick. It takes courage and love for your fellow man. And constant creation. I do talk to every person I know about it. And try to help them. Every day. That helped me keep my purpose. Scientology IS a tool. It’s not just to be used on the Internet for consumption and one’s own ends.

    • martyrathbun09

      I haven’t editorialized in this series. Your evaluation of my intentions, as per usual, is inaccurate.

      • “The Aims of Scientology” as a title does give a certain editorial impression, though.

        • martyrathbun09

          I’m sorry. What did you take this to mean?: “If we keep this up it will eventually lead us straight to the top which will give us humanitarian control.”

          • No. Anyone who has read even a small portion your blog would know you didn’t mean that, except maybe sarcastically – and rightfully so since stretching those actions beyond what is clear from the briefing, and out of their place and time lead to many extreme outnesses.

            I meant that the impression the title gives is that these are THE aims of Scientology, the basic aims, which they are not.

            • martyrathbun09

              Please answer my question.

              • I thought the question was did I take the title to mean what you wrote in quotes:

                “If we keep this up it will eventually lead us straight to the top which will give us humanitarian control.”

                But if you are asking if I think the above statement is valid, the answer is no. It MAY have saved Scientology from being wiped out at that particular period of time if there really was a war against Scientology going on (and I’m not convinced there wasn’t) – in the same way that winning certain wars in history has been the lesser of the evils.

                • martyrathbun09

                  I didn’t ask that either. I’ll try it one more time by repeating: What did you take this to mean?: “If we keep this up it will eventually lead us straight to the top which will give us humanitarian control.”

                  • Sorry, I missed that you were just quoting LRH’s statement and asking me what I thought he meant.

                    What I think is that at the time he wrote it, LRH had a particular worldview in which he considered it necessary to defend against those he concluded were out to destroy him and Scientology. And if this defense were successful, Scientology would be free to attain its true humanitarian aims, simply as a result of its tech being applied. It would have the needed control, i.e. “power or authority to guide or manage”, as opposed to being dis-empowered, to accomplish its aims.

                    • martyrathbun09

                      It is astounding how much staunch Scientologists wildly mock it up in defense of the religion that guarantees to produce the ability to stop mocking up. There is a situation observed that could lead to a wild and woolly data series data trail and why.

              • Marty — I had a bit of trouble with the last two lines on this article — because the end quotes are at “and they know that over there”

                Then the follow 2 sentences with the one “if we keep this up …” are not in quotes …

                So until I read it again and saw the end of the PL with LRH ending — it was confusing.

                Perhaps marildi thinks YOU said … “if we keep this up” I did at first blush and figured you were being sarcastic.

                Makes a huge difference if YOU said it sarcastically or if LRH said in aiming for that as a goal

        • Marty wrote to Marildi –

          I’m sorry. What did you take this to mean?: “If we keep this up it will eventually lead us straight to the top which will give us humanitarian control.”

          Uhh, Marildi. Marty is a guy who knows what he is talking about when it comes to these policies. He knows their proper context, their intent, and the consequences of applying them for decades.

          He’s not an untrained critic who natters on endlessly about things he does not understand about Scientology.

          You really should listen to him.

          Alanzo

          • You mean I should make Marty my guru and accept his points of view as my own?

            You’re contradicting yourself again.

            • No. You have consistently shot down the eye-witness testimony of every highly trained auditor who ended up a critic of Scientology by saying that they really weren’t that highly trained, or they did not have the experience and they would not know, etc etc etc.

              And here is a case of someone – Marty Rathbun – who probably has more experience with these policies and seeing their results than anyone in Scientology history.

              And yet you still find a way to look away from factual information that is being presented to you.

              Here is yet another opportunity for you to stop doing that.

              That’s what I mean.

              Alanzo

              • Your first paragraph is a complete Straw Man Fallacy. And otherwise, you didn’t at all address the point I made. Either you’re too obtuse to get it or you deliberately evaded it. This is why I don’t waste much time trying to discuss things with you, Al.

                I do like your humor sometimes, though.😛

              • Nobody is looking away or being blind just because they are not using information as you have chosen to use it. This idea that people are not confronting when they do not think like you is a wrong indication. You are highly evaluative and downright punitive to anyone who chooses to do the math on information and does not come up with the same total. In fact your message to anyone that does not see things like you do is they are BLIND and Handicapped. You invite them constantly to self inspect for handicaps and faults because your view is the only right view. You work to make people like themselves less, and it recoils on you like injustice and they end up liking you less. Nobody here is attacking YOU for your views. You are the on locked in attacks. You can not really create friendships and allegiances based on mutual hate and enemies. A lot of people do not care to blame or hate. Many people just are not angry. We have heard the charges over and over and over and over. We know the crimes. We know the mistakes. We KNOW. Just because we have other math to tally it with does not mean we are not doing the math right.
                You are unjustly accusing people of being blind and stupid or brainwashed. We have all had different experiences, goals and values. Each person has a right to do their own math. It does not mean they are handicapped if they are not behind you on your math.

                • Well Oracle –

                  For those who continue to follow LRH down his garden path to destruction, I intentionally engage them and have them display their thinking for everyone to see. It’s good to get that kind of thinking out onto a computer screen where everyone can inspect it.

                  Challenging people, and their “math”, is the best way we have to ensure that math is correct.

                  Alanzo

            • LOL — what a straw man argument. The question is not about making Marty or anyone a guru. It’s about recognizing first hand experience and observation to be valid data.

              I’d hazard a guess that most of the folks who post here have had enough of supposed gurus for one lifetime.

            • Marty forwards valuable information. He does NOT dictate to others how they should read it, respond to it, or how to think with it. Those are personal choices and personal rights. It is not Marty that is getting punitive with people about the way they do the math on the information.

              • This metaphor of “math” that you have come up with for the reasoning a person uses is an interesting one, Oracle.

                With Math, there is only one correct answer, though. And so in that way, your metaphor is not apt for what is being displayed here by the commenters on Marty’s blog.

                Reasoning is what is happening here, and what is being displayed: what assumptions and premises a person is using, what evidence they have to support those premises and assumptions, and how the connections are made between these to come to the conclusions they’ve made.

                Sound reasoning can have many different conclusions. There is not one correct answer with reasoning.

                But there is sound and unsound reasoning.

                Socrates taught that inspecting one’s own reasoning was a very valuable exercise. It led to an examined life, the only one worth living, he said.

                Man, being basically social, requires the assistance of others to present, and to test reasoning. Often others, with their different experiences and assumptions and learning, can spot things in one’s own reasoning that were hidden to them. Sometimes they are not willing to see thes things, too.

                Testing each other’s reasoning, and seeing all the different ways that reasoning can produce different solutions, and learning why those different solutions are valid for different individuals, can be a fantastic fireworks display of beauty and fellowship.

                But unsound reasoning produces wrong conclusions. And wrong conclusions can ruin lives.

                L Ron Hubbard displayed a LOT of unsound reasoning, and he passed that unsound reasoning onto Scientologists. Actually, in many different ways, he FORCED that unsound reasoning onto them so they they would have wrong conclusions about themselves that he could then exploit.

                That’s why it’s important to inspect and clean up your reasoning after you have been through something like Scientology. It is a very valuable exercise.

                It’s like going through a car wash.

                Alanzo

                • Al, it is your assumption that LRH “displayed a lot of unsound reasoning”. Have you considered the possibility that he in large measure acted to achieve his purposes? As in “smash my name into history”? You and many other critics take a narrow view, often “scientology inc”-centric, meaning the official established orgs. To see a bigger picture, we need to look at the overall status of “scientology” throughout the world. The ROs and the Freezone are “scientology”, too, as Chuck has been trying to point out in some recent posts.

                • Alanzo: “With Math, there is only one correct answer, though.”

                  Oracle: Is that a fact? Was Einstein’s equation E=mc² correct? No, it is not. We now know matter and energy are not one. That atoms have similarities but no two atoms are exactly the same. However, is was workable enough for numerous technological advances. Answers change all the time Alanzo.

                  The idea that there is only one correct answer with people’s conclusions is exactly what you seem to impress on people though. With your reasoning, the “answer” should all be laid out on this planet so people no longer need to make choices or decisions for themselves. The one with the ” only one correct answer” should think for them. What will the restaurants do without menu options?

                  • Alanzo: “L Ron Hubbard displayed a LOT of unsound reasoning, and he passed that unsound reasoning onto Scientologists. Actually, in many different ways, he FORCED that unsound reasoning onto them so they they would have wrong conclusions about themselves that he could then exploit.”

                    If this disturbs you, who would you do the same thing?

                  • Oracle –

                    My point was that sound reasoning can produce many different conclusions for the different individuals who use sound reasoning.

                    Math is not like that. It does have correct answers vs incorrect answers.

                    I do like how you used the word “math” though, as a metaphor, for reasoning.

                    However, we are using reasoning here on Marty’s blog.

                    Not math.

                    Alanzo

                    • Yeah Al, some of us are at least trying to use reasoning here on this blog.

                    • Alanzo: I do like how you used the word “math” though, as a metaphor, for reasoning.

                      However, we are using reasoning here on Marty’s blog.

                      Oracle: I will not conform to these policies you are issuing. ACOB March 13, 2014 Has just been cancelled.

                    • Cancel an ACOB?

                      You don’t have the fucking rank to cancel an ACOB.

                      Plus, it’s squirrel and I’m telling.

                      Alanzo

                    • Also Oracle –

                      I hardly need to remind you that the Critics of Alanzo ACOB clearly states that anyone who criticizes Alanzo has actual, real crimes in their past which can be used to shut them up (parking fines, speeding tickets, illegal transportation of alcohol), and all you need to do is act confidently that they exist, because they do, brother, they do.

                      And DON’T make me get all KAW on your ass!

                      Because I will.

                      Alanzo

                    • I can make Wally Cox look like a piker.

                      Alanzo

                  • Oracle: Is that a fact? Was Einstein’s equation E=mc² correct? No, it is not.

                    Wrong. This paradigm still stands today.

                    We now know matter and energy are not one. That atoms have similarities but no two atoms are exactly the same.

                    Oh dear. No. I’m not sure what you are trying to say here but it is indicative of a lack of basic scientific understanding, much like Hubbard’s nonsense.

            • “You mean I should make Marty my guru and accept his points of view as my own”?

              Marty did not state his point of view on these policies. So I don’t know how anybody could take them as their own. Stay alert and keep it real.

              • TO, my comment was in reply to what Alanzo advised:

                “Marty is a guy who knows what he is talking about when it comes to these policies. He knows their proper, their intent, and the consequences of applying them for decades.He’s not an untrained critic who natters on endlessly about things he does not understand about Scientology. You really should listen to him.”

                In other words, it was Alanzo who was implying that Marty had stated his point of view on these policies and that I should “listen to him.” I was basically objecting to the recommendation that I accept the opinions and conclusions drawn (as opposed to authoritative data) by ANY authority, not just Marty – something Alanzo has continually campaigned against doing when it comes to LRH. Not to mention that Marty himself has no interest in anyone making him their guru – which would be in complete contrast to what he is trying to do

                • Typo: I accidentally omitted a word on the quote of Al. Should read: “He knows their proper CONTEXT…”

                  • Typo: I accidentally omitted a word on the quote of Al. Should read: “He knows their proper CONTEXT…”

                    Another thing I love about you, Marilidi: your intellectual honesty.

                    Alanzo

                • Right, sorry, my comment to you was meant for Alanzo also. The comment from him implies Marty put forth his own thoughts about the issue when he only laid it out for people to look at. He never implied what people should think about it. So for Alanzo to be saying that YOU should digest it the same way Marty did, was an outpoint to begin with.

                • I love it when two women I both admire natter energetically about me.

                  It’s the indifference that I can’t stand.

                  Please never stop nattering about me.

                  Alanzo

                  • “Natter energetically”? We haven’t even warmed up.😀

                    Btw, Al, did you know that one definition of invalidation is this:

                    “basically, non-attention.”

                    Just thought you might appreciate that pearl of wisdom from LRH.😉

          • Alanzo, Marty is not the guy who knows obviously those policies, same as DM, as both of them did KILL people who just applied policy. And that was for many years. Marty just didn’t take more and went out. DM still does. And Marty is trying to find his balance outside the perimeter of Standard Tech. I have been declared for protecting HCOBs when Marty was in chasing up Tom Cruise. Give us a break with “Marty knows”, he doesn’t.

    • Theo, Not sure who is using Scientology here for anything. This is a writer’s group actually. We are all just writers writing. Exchanging views, writing the future and writing the past.

      I know some people writing here have imagined themselves in an Org through writing. That became clear when a few of them started wearing justice hats to start up witch hunts instead of writing. And it turns out, those people were sharing on the blog for economic reasons / consumption. But even then, they were not using Scientology for consumption, they were using Marty.

      The only Scientology being used here is the comm cycle. But that was actually something being used before Scientology was coined as a word.

      • Not to suggest you are not an intelligent, passionate, loyal thinking man. With unique perceptions. I think you are and it is always a pleasure to read your posts. XXOO

        • For the “others” who may get this strange feeling they are in an Org somewhere, when they are reading or writing on this blog. And feel they are on post in an Org. I suggest the following remedy repeatable:

          A. Recall a time you were in an Org.

          B. Where are you now?

          A. Recall a time you were in an Org.

          B. Where are you now?

          To E.P.

          • Good one!🙂 very good..love it🙂 do you know that the theta do not move only changes viewpoints? by considering: I am here in my living room arguing with my cat… oh she arguing, or I am in the garden admire the glorious colors of the crocuses. ?

            • I don’t know how a thetan could change his view without moving. Something. But I am still learning. I will think about this as a possibility before me to understand better. Thanks.

              • Oracle.. matter moves shifts, collides and continually reshape itself. Theta is intangible.. has no mass therefore don’t have location. But can be aware or not. Or assume identity when the theta assumes identity : I am..me..self” when assume that viewpoint the theta segregates self and say I am this or that. Example I am a human being. And in that moment goes into agreement with all the considerations-laws agreement with the human group;female or male body, have limitation how and what the body can do, must eat, sleep, only can ‘’see’’ with the eyes, believes that was conceived ..born..lives… and dies: after the body ‘s death it is no more.
                Also believes that what is outside those agreement what is IS a human the rest is NOT NORMAL, Strange unusual. Etc,,etc,,
                Human looks with the eyes and believes what is seen is real, and never believes that what the ‘’eyes see’’is a illusion.. do not exist.. Also believes when the body is inside the box=house and since that is a constructed item and has inside and outside.. . so the eyes can perceive the inside and the outside of the box.. but those are in existence because the theta considers it is there, simply put it there for the fun. The Theta perceive when not using the eyes 360 degree and perceive holographic image of the item
                When one eliminates all the human consideration, no longer goes by them, Than the theta no longer play the game ‘’’I am human” than is free to view different realities. But not until than. Those who has ‘’visions, see different outside of the normal don’t have those agreements .

        • Τhank you very much. I just have this weird notion that Scientology meant Standard Tech.

      • I actually use parts of Scientology on a regular basis.

        • Sometimes it is not easy to grant distance. But it is there and there will always be distances between you and others. It is called giving people space. One part of Scientology you may want to use is the notion of distances. In your efforts to get everyone to view as you do, you are asking them to be in the same space. Ain’t nobody going to want to share the same space with you when they are getting bashed already for being in a different space. So you lock yourself into a GPM there. It get’s lonely. The need for company only gets worse. You can not force your ideas anger or unhappiness on other people thinking this is going to bring you any comfort. People who are happy in unhappiness together, are only in ARC with out OUT OF ARC goals. Suggesting that there is something wrong with people who do not see as you and think as you because they choose to be in ARC with IN ARC things, is asking people to like themselves less so you can like yourself more. Most people really are not willing to make these kinds of sacrifices. Because there is a lack of fairness in such appeals.

    • Thank goodness for the internet. And you know what, the internet was born on March 12, 1993 (the day before L. Ron Hubbard’s birthday)…..I think there is something supernatural and mystical going on with that coincidence don’t you?🙂

  18. Well, I thought of Ghandi and Mandela. They had a set goal, a big one and through compassion, kindness but, above all, through loyalty to what they really believed in, got them to accomplish what they envisioned.

    I don’t doubt the first attacks on Scn were heavy and that they caused overwhelm, stress and whatever else but, departing from the original purpose was the demise and a fall onto the means used by other criminals (Hoover, etc). No need to use their means when you have in your hands a technology that can make individuals more aware of truthful conditions, thus more sane.

    The stop became generalized and that was a turning point in sanity.

    • Silvia, this is the best post on the thread. Rather than go to extremes, like LRH himself did, and as his critics often do, you’ve looked at the whole picture with equanimity and given true-life examples that are compelling.

        • How kind of you.

          • Look, the way I see it, Marty forwards valuable information. Some people are going to swing to the left with it and some people are going to swing to the right with it and some people are going to integrate it into com parables to do some math with it, and some people are going to judge Marty to be a certain somebody because he forwarded it and label him something good or bad depending on their needs.

            Marty does not dictate to people where their mind should go these things.

            Other people do rise up and work dictate your mind should go with it. However you took it, fine. However everybody else took it, fine. It has actually been a long time since there has been any real conflict going on here or people getting bashed for how they see things.

            I see things very simple. People have two choices. They can live to win, or live to loose.

            People that live to win are generally helping others to win also.

            People that live to loose are generally insisting everyone else is loosing too.

            Marty has a long history of winning and helping others to win also. He does not forward valuable information to set people up for losses. He forwards valuable information for the purpose of helping others win. To know.

            Do not feel obligated to have a loss. You do not owe that to anybody. Do not apologize for not having a loss. People that demand that I have a loss are just another form of tax collector. “Mock up some misery to pay your due.”

            It is O.K. to take the motion that comes in and use it to win. But this does bypass charge on people sometimes.

            Nobody here needs to attack anyone or defend anyone because of valuable information shared by Marty.

            I read it. I was not here when it was written and I am not aware of what problem was addressed. I don’t even care. But I have never agreed to inherit Hubbard’s enemies. He created them, not me. It frankly has little to do with me. I don’t even have to understand it.

            Anyone who wants to discredit him, I am am not and have not stood in their way. It is good to know what he wrote because I am curious. I am not MAD, I am CURIOUS. That does mean I am handicapped.

            Humanity before Scientology is my motto.

            If we had the humanity right nobody could have peddled Scientology. Nobody would want or need it.

            People will use information about Scientology to become abusive. That is not on me either.

            Only man can hurt man. Nobody is going to fix anything through social abuse. Nobody DESERVES social abuse. It is a WRONG INDICATION.

            • I think it’s part of a process. I still find myself “sitting in judgement”, and I don’t like myself then.

            • Marvin Gaye’s father was a serial abuser. He beat his children through out their lives and pimped his wife. He shot his own son. Marvin grew up in a life that was so far beyond the suffering experienced in the Sea Org or grown adults volunteering for abuse in Scientology. I can’t tell you. He released this song in a time of total social chaos and should have been awarded a Noble Peace prize for it. He never had the idea once that his life was ruined. Never.

              I know there are plenty of people that came into Scientology and were asked, “Who / What is ruining your life”?

              After you sign on with them, you are told it is only YOU that is ruining your life.

              I skipped over that part somehow and only learned about it when I was volunteering at a mission.

              You are recruited in, using blame and sympathy. Blame your daddy and we will sympathize.

              I saw loads of people decide who / what is ruining their life. And sign on.

              Once you are in, it is taboo to point the finger unless you are the M.A.A..

              They THEY decide who / what is ruining your life.

              If your life is ruined it is because you consider it so. But that is NOT the origination of the prospect, it is a question demanding an item on a list from a div 6 reg.

              And people do offer up an item, frequently. “My Daddy” “My Mommy” “The married man I have been sleeping with” .. whatever.

              They are encouraged to decide that another human being has the power to ruin their life. Effect. Then they are promised that Scientology will put them back at cause.

              That can be true or not deciding on whether the other person decides it is true. Just like they made a decision that someone else is ruining their life.

              But once you flip into the Scientology all you hear about is how YOU are ruining your own life and nobody else is. And that is how you are put back at cause. Ta Da! How easy was that.

              By being told or led to cognition, you have been giving yourself a wrong item on a list. It is YOU, YOU that are ruining your own life. But they asked YOU for an item at the reg desk! A wrong item yes?

              They do not say, “Do you realize you are ruining your life”? I mean, other therapies have surpassed this already. The slowest drug rehabs are doing intervention to tell people how they are not only fucking up THEIR life, but others too!

              It is only the sympathetic reg in Scientology that asks you to name who your victimize r is before signing up for course.

              Until the newly created benefactors show up and try to convince you, it is the SCIENTOLOGY that is ruining your life.

              Personally, I have never surrendered total control of my life to put someone else with the power of destroying it. I have always retained at least 51%. If other surrender more and take a gamble, they have to live with the loss.

              Frankly, I think there are a lot of people complaining about let downs in Scientology that have no idea what it is like to fight for your life, to be abused within an inch of life and death, to fight to stay alive, and survive gun shot, knife wounds, wars, soldiering, ghetto, starvation, and a host of other challenges not for the faint hear-ted.

              It’s all relative. If Kate Middleton went into the Sea Org tommorrow, I am sure it would be a big scandal. You take someone that crossed the river to get into the U.S. and he has been picking at farms for 20 years to pay for the comm course, he will have a different response.

              I do not have any interest in inheriting Hubbard’s enemies or friends.

              I do not want to be recruited into these circles. A lot of people have no idea what it means to suffer and overcome.

              They only know what it is like to have their life “ruined”. by someone bigger or more powerful with more control over their life than they do. And I believe it. It’s just not ME or MY life.

              But I was not there for the same time as others more devoted and I did not carry the same burdens. I did not care like they did so I was not effected like they were. I did not invest as they did. I simply did not love as they did. I was just curious.

              My life was not ruined before during or after Scientology. I am not on the same page with others.

              There is nothing I could have experienced in the Church that was bigger than what I had to live through before I arrived there.

              I hate to break the news but Scientology is a very lofty choice for the curious and explorers that have the time to explore the supernatural.

              The rest do not have this luxury of exploration and complaining they have ruined lives. The are too busy surviving.

              Most people who explore Scientology have never had to make a critical choice, Even when they join the Sea Org, the critical choices are made by others. They have never been put in the position of kill or be killed, eat or starve, beg or walk, save yourself or someone else, take the bullet or let someone else, live or die by your next words or decision.

              This obviously does not apply to Marty. He has been put in the position of live or die by your next decision. He chose to live. That’s the way he rolls.

              If others had ever put up against the wall like that they would know, they decide whether they live or die, survive or not, and nobody can ruin your life but you.

              In South Central L.A. Narconon was known as “The white boy’s program”.

              Because their mommy or daddy could spend 25 grand to get them clean.

              Scientology is not and has never been a live or die situation. For those of you that are taking it that way, I can only assume your problems have been very limited.

              Marty’s problems are real. Being stalked by religious fanatics and extremists is no minor matter. Taking on the Power Brokers is no easy feat. And that is exactly what he was doing for the Church.

              Don’t think you know me or him just because we all explored Scientology.

              You want to be mad? Be my guest. Maybe it takes a whole lot more for me to be mad because I have other reasons to be glad you could not possibly know about.

              I am tired of the wrong indications that I am blind and brainwashed because I am grateful for what I have learned and know. People that do this think they know me and they do not, they are hallucinating. They do not know me. For them to explain me is like attempted rape.

              This also is not some kind of abuse I can not roll with.

            • Firstly — thank you for the reminder about Marvin Gaye — ONE OF MY ABSOLUTE favorites.

              But mostly thank you for this incredible comment. It is TO ME such truth.

              Reminds me of what one of my favorite buddhist Tibetan teachers has talked about “Bourgeois Suffering” —buddhist talk about suffering as a human condition and that there is a path OUT of the suffering.

              BUT BUT most Western buddhist hasn’t a CLUE about suffering. THEY suffer from a bourgeois point of view … Starbucks closed early, their cell phone is lost — you get the idea.

              Anyway — thank you Oracle.

              Marty is TO BE the real deal … navigating through life and offering what he has learned to whomever cares to listen … and profoundly devoted to his wife and son —

              • Damn — typo —

                Marty is TO ME (not to be – he IS already🙂

                Christine

              • Excellent exchange! It’s been a while since I was active here – miss you guys!

                A couple of points:

                Oracle made the comment: “Humanity before Scientology is my motto.” Excellent. This is true of any religion or science or belief. I ran across a little book written in 1862 called “Lessons in Life” by a man named J. G. Holland. In it there is a chapter called “Men of One Idea.” It is brilliant. For example:

                “Man cannot live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God, whether spoken through nature or revelation. There is no one idea in all God’s universe so great and so nutritious that it can furnish food for an immortal soul. Variety of nutriment is absolutely essential, even to physical health. … The sailor, kept too long upon his hard biscuit and salt junk, degenerates into scurvy… It is precisely thus with a man who occupies and feeds his mind with a single idea. He grow mean and small and diseased with the diet. The soul bears relation to such a wealth of truth, such a multitude of interests cluster about it, it has such a variety of elements — as illustrated by its illimitable range of action and passion — it touches and receives impressions from all other souls at such an infinity of points, that it is simply absurd to suppose that one idea can feed it, even for a day.

                “A mind that surrenders itself to a single idea becomes essentially insane.”

                And he goes on to illustrate examples, such as the devotee of the “all vegetable diet” and even devotees of abolition (remember, this was 1862).

                What is Scientology but a single idea, in this sense? To some people, it is THE solution, THE truth, supplanting ALL OTHER TRUTHS. But no idea is bigger than we are. The human soul, the essential “us”, is bigger than ANY one idea.

                If someone “graduates” Scientology, I think this is what they realize. Not that Scientology is all bunk – because it’s not – but that there is SO MUCH TO KNOW, and so many great things out there. Marty has been kind enough to share his journey with us, as have others. We all go through this journey.

                And the second point: Suffering. We feel tragedy when it touches our lives directly. Yet, real human suffering – heart-wrenching and soul-wrenching pain – happens every day, every hour. People tend to jump on cruelty-prevention or disease-prevention bandwagons only after they have been touched personally by cruelty or disease. And yet the cruelty and disease have always been there. We certainly cannot take on the entire universe of suffering that is happening right now, this minute, to people all over the globe – but we can certainly expand ourselves to recognize it, and to acknowledge it, and in the end be empathetic to humankind – and to be grateful for what we have. For in the end, there is not only limitless suffering, there is also limitless joy.

              • +1

                TO, you made some excellent points. And many other great comments on your various posts today. You often make me sigh with relief.🙂

              • Sisters and brothers, amen and thank you for being here and being who you are. Let’s pass the bottle around! Laughter! Reading these memos by Hubbard, I had the thought that it was the rum talking. Laughter!

                I’m sure plenty of men have had the thought of totally obliterating their enemy. Because I watch the Investigation Discovery channel while I’m folding laundry.

                https://www.youtube.com/user/DiscoveryID

    • The first “attacks” on Scientology were inevitable because of Hubbard’s unfounded, unresearched, unscientific, and unverified claims. Hubbard’s approach triggered the criticism.

      Ghandi and Mandela were true leaders and heroes. You mention their compassion — a trait lacking in Hubbard. The lack of compassion may indeed be what led Hubbard to react — to attack, not defend — at lower emotional levels.

  19. Sylvia:
    I was just thinking the same thing! I’ve been in deep meditation starting a couple months ago regarding what’s going on with the new world order taking over. Having another 1776 war like we did to become free doesn’t seem the answer in today’s sophisticated electronics weaponry world. Also, the new world order relishes in chaos as a further reasoning to clamp down on us with the police state they are creating.

    I find it quite odd that I am on the 9th ACC and LRH explains how communication dissolves any mass or any difficulty between people and is the solution to entrapment. Both a besieging force and a besieged fortress breaks down in morale on both sides, because there is no communication. LRH says that if you could thoroughly communicate with any thing you could resolve (or dissolve) any difficulty. The weird compartamentation you see in a stroke with both sides of the body divided against each other as an example of this. It can also happen from top to bottom, or back to front, etc. Any communist country breaks down with corruption because of this lack of communication, after about 75 years.

    Listening to this ACC made me wonder why LRH would then choose to “go to war” in this fashion. I believe he was the greatest humanitarian ever to walk the face of this earth or this universe, for that matter AS FAR AS HIS AUDITING TECHNOLOGY GOES. Yeah, I second you as well as far as the church must have fallen on some real hard times. Perhaps it was the correct solution to an act of war-like strategy that he did against the government at that time. Although history will continue to repeat itself, the environment in which it does will always be different. LRH should have looked ahead and realized that one day these policies he wrote would get leaked out. But he lacked that foresight and the church of today continues to lack it as well, compounding the felony. What’s worse is that they continue to ignore the allegations with anger when confronted by reporters, which looks highly suspicious and continues to foster hatred from the general public.

    In contrast, Frontline recently aired a fabulous episode regarding sexual scandal and much other jaw-dropping horrific corruption in the catholic church for the past 8-9 years. It culminated in an interview with the pope who responded by saying that he thought that the new world order shouldn’t be so much about government but about dissolving the barriers that bind us, to make us more spiritual, and about transparency. If only the CO$ had this wisdom. And they also seem to continually ignore the fact that Ron told us he did not come to us as a god, but a man, and “don’t believe this because I’m telling you, but try it out and see if it’s true for you.”

    Markee Marqui

  20. “Lead us straight to the top which will eventually give us humanitarian control”

    LRH spoke often that the TOP political system was a benevolent monarchy.

    LRH of course painted himself out to BE that benevolent monarch. He would say sometimes people needed a rest and therefore he would send them to the RPF — a favorite story of Dave Foster

    OR — how he always left the door slightly cracked open for someone to repent, make restitution and come back

    IN TO THE FOLD

    A benevolent monarch is the FINAL WORD. The RULER.

    It’s always irritated me when there are hierarchies …

    LRH created one of the most elitist hierarchical societies on earth — and sadly even when you leave it — your mind is still, FOR YEARS, cemented into part of the hierarchy depending on where you were when you left and why.

    It’s not easy being human. But we also have great potential to include and evolve.

    It’s a question of being willing to look differently …

    • Well said Windhorse

    • BTW Wind Horse, do you meditate a practice from a particular lineage?

      • For years I practiced Shambhala Buddhism — with Chogyam Trungpa as the lineage holder (he held both Kagyu and Nyingma lineages) – I left about 2 years ago. Then I started studying with the grandson of one of my absolute favorite lamas — Tulku Urgyen (died before I got involved with buddhism in 1996).

        Kyabgon Phakchok Rinpoche — he’s a young lama (not a monk — wife and 2 kids) — has a practice center in NY, travels the world teaching and lives in Nepal — and a Facebook page. (it’s worth liking that page for his insights)

        He is like his grandfather — RiMe (which is a combination of the 4 lineages of Tibet — not a mush but an acceptance of each other) .. but primarily Nyingma/Dzogchen

        And from here — I’ve shifted into an exploration of Christianity/Catholicism — fascinating that similarities in ritual and ultimately in belief.

        Although FEW buddhist would see the parallels EXCEPT Tulku Urgyen who pointed out the Dhamakaya, Sambhogakaya and Nirmanakaya is not UNLIKE the father, holy ghost and son.

        Probably way more information than you wanted/needed to know.

        Currently I’m reading Thomas Merton (Trappist Catholic monk) and his 7 journals — he was close to Zen Master Suzuki Roshi. Merton died in 1968.

        He was a leader in interfaith dialogue. His death in Thailand, during an interfaith conference remains the subject of speculation.

        ——————–

        So my personal journey towards my true self continues, as I work to discard my false self (ego)

        BTW — there are a vast number of Catholic mystics — St. Theresa of Avila being one of them who speak of numerous levels of prayer — about the middle level is the simple practice of samatha

        (ALL unknown words can be googled with an easy explanation)

        BTW — the last time I posted something fairly in depth about buddhism — I was attacked quite vociferously by several KSW indies about the sanctity of this blog. I’m going to be interested in seeing who flames me🙂

        Christine

        • You’ll get no attack from me. When I was a young boy from Long Island I hitch hiked to Tail of the Tiger in Vermont. Chogyam was popular in the 60s for obvious reasons.
          My friend shot, directed and narrated “Crazy Wisdom”. She was close to him. As close as anyone could get I guess.

          I studied with Swami Satchidananda in New York for a while. He was a disciple of the great Swami Sivananda.
          I owe Satchidananda much in my early boyhood development. At this one event Swamiji got eleven other spiritual leaders from all sorts of perspectives to be on the same stage.

          Sitting on 12 chairs were:
          Pir Inyat Khan (head of the Sufi order)
          A Trappist monk (forgot his name)
          A Zen priest
          A women Protestant minister
          A Rabbi

          And many more. One would stand up and walk to the podium. Then they would sing a hymn or chant from there tradition and then give a sermon. It was then and there, as a boy of 17, that I saw the unity in all true paths.

          I am proud to say that I would be given condescending attitudes towards my desire to find God through Scientology. I was audited for implants when I would talk about God Realization.

          After I left Scientology in 82, I got back on the yogic path and have been a student of Yogananda and that lineage ever since.
          In our tradition we honor the saints and sages of all religions. St Theresa is one of them.

          Being on this site has helped me to revisit certain psychological imprints from my experiences in Scientology. Things not useful that were in the background of my cognitive process.

          I am also a willing piñata for those who need one on this blog.

          Ron did one thing that is good. He brought together a generation of truth seekers. For good or bad, he stoked the fires of liberation for the Star Trek generation.

          This diaspora of Scientology is spreading soul seeds everywhere, with the unfinished business of liberation.

          And so…………….. onwards we go; Moving up a little higher.

          Namaste Christine

          Brian

  21. Jean-François Genest

    Humanitarian control W•A•S the aim.
    Homo Novis controlling humans, life forms, MEST, spirits, infinity ∞
    The true aim had to be watered down (and disguised) to be acceptable at the common human denominator, otherwise it would be total rejection. Thus the publication of “The aims of Scientology by L. Ron Hubbard” as a smooth way to ease into the mainstream. Every one on The Bridge & everyone on the Organizing Board, self-determined to be controlled. Except, several were ALREADY self-determined so the plan backfired.

    Would each human on Earth, from the Arctic to South America, Asia, Africa, etc. decide on their own determinism: “Hey! I want to go Clear and OT! Sign me up!” ? Therefore, some persuasion was needed.

    Drink Coca-Cola! Pick me up and smoke me sometime!
    Buy this book NOW! Buy your intensive NOW! Obey!
    Control, control, control

  22. Hi Marty,
    As I suspect you may already know, Tony’s blog today is an interview with Russell Miller. Have you ever read Bare Faced Messiah? If you have read it, would you care to share your opinions on the book?

    Cheers!
    Chee

  23. For Alanzo, and anyone else disappointed and dismayed by Hubbard’s games.

    I was raised by men and I learned at an early age, they can be unpredictable, dominating, sneaky, greedy, controlling, concerned with thier status and P.R., and all that brings them to their knees in the line of duty.

    Most men do carry a lot of duty. I think I know men better than men know men. My buttons do not get pushed by them often. They are the product of women. And it is a damned fine product when all is said and done. I could count the men I have met and did not like, on one hand. They were simply the men that fucked with my sons. Directly or indirectly.

    I did read one policy letter by Hubbard that made me think less of him as a man. It was the policy letter about workers. I think it was called, “Worker mentality” , but I am not sure of this now.

    Hubbard’s accomplishments were only made by possible by the people that worked to help him make his dreams come true. And I have found most of those people to be very generous in their support to Hubbard. It may happen some day, things can be sorted out. Things can be made better.
    We can recreate some promise and hope from all of this. If that is ever the case, we need to change the idea of workers in the Church as people who owe. All of labor is a labor of love. That is never owed. Unless there is slavery.

    All around the planet people in the Church prepare to celebrate Hubbard’s birthday over two decades after he checked out. While the staff that made it all possible, most of them, lay by the road as road kill or worse. There is a fundamental injustice in this, I do not think I need to explain. If we ever do improve upon this adventure, let’s change that. As a top priority. It is all of us that have made it what it is and what it is not. We need to take the blame also but do not, because we were never permitted to share in the hard earned glory.

    Hubbard got all the glory and he set it up that way. The result is that he had to inherit all of the blame. When you share the wealth, which comes in many forms and can only be viewed by a person’s wants and needs, you share the responsibility. When you hoard it all, you have to own it all. There is a price to pay for taking all of the glory in any game. The truth is you can not succeed in any adventure without a lot of support from others. it is a CO CREATE axiom.

    I am sorry for those that hoped Hubbard was a holy man not capable of sin or error. I know from my own experience, great men have great flaws. A holy man that has never sinned wouldn’t know enough to rise above current conditions. Holy men that never sin are far too mediocre. And the “holier than thou” flow is a covert lording over of people.

    I am glad that Hubbard was more overt. I am not at a loss because he was a man with great flaws. Because he was greedy or arrogant or used people. He is the one that paid the price.

    He lost everyone and everything he loved, hid in a motor home. He lost his right to open his front door and have people ring it. He lost his family, a son. He lost friends he could trust. He surrendered power after he abused it. He had to live with the agony of his choice at using his wife as a shield and sacrifice. No man can stand proud after that. He could not even face her after that.Or the Scientologists. He had losses too. Does anyone ever think of that but me?

    He knew pain. He denied himself pleasure and made sacrifices also.. He was unique. He invited us on adventures we could not have otherwise had. He gave people pleasure and he gave people pain. He gave people hope and promise, reason and purpose. Burdens too heavy to bear and secrets to carry into the long dark nights.

    I am still grateful for all of the auditing I have had. But I do not owe.Not to the Church, not to the disgruntled. Do not look for apologies or suggest I owe you one because I am what I am and I think what I think. I have no debts. I don’t even have a Freeloader debt. I paid for it all. I did not consider ever that I was paying Hubbard. It was always the people in front of me that were actually helping me.

    The fact that staff are handed free loader debts and labeled “freeloaders” when, because of them a Church exists at all, is a terrible injustice. It is a lie and false report. It is not possible to Freeload as a staff member.

    A disgrace. Even when you do the math, it is so out exchange.This will not survive in today’s world and will become the straw that breaks the camel’s back. Flagrant injustice.

    I am so happy to have known the people that walked this way. We too, are all unique and not mediocre. I don’t care if we are extra ordinary or sub ordinary, really. What else would the lot of us had become or done? And for some reason I just can not explain right now because it is only a feeling, But I know we will all cross paths again. Hope again. Live again. Dream again. Gamble again. Dance again. Laugh again. Win again.

    It was time well spent for me. The only loss I will have, is when I miss your company.

    • It is good to be compassionate to the ignorant. It is not good to be ignorant to their deeds.

      Love encompasses all. But love is not permissive or justifies acts of greed.

      Understanding the nature of someone, as they are, is wisdom.

      Denial of that nature or whitewashing that nature is not.

      I was also raised by a man. But I never learned the lessons you did my dear Oracle. My father taught me loyalty and integrity: by his example only

    • The Oracle wrote: “Hubbard’s accomplishments were only made by possible by the people that worked to help him make his dreams come true. And I have found most of those people to be very generous in their support to Hubbard.”

      You, dear Oracle, are very generous of spirit.

      And wise:

      “I am sorry for those that hoped Hubbard was a holy man not capable of sin or error. I know from my own experience, great men have great flaws. A holy man that has never sinned wouldn’t know enough to rise above current conditions. Holy men that never sin are far too mediocre. And the ‘holier than thou’ flow is a covert lording over of people.

      “I am glad that Hubbard was more overt. I am not at a loss because he was a man with great flaws. Because he was greedy or arrogant or used people. He is the one that paid the price.”

      And compassionate:

      “He knew pain. He denied himself pleasure and made sacrifices also.. He was unique. He invited us on adventures we could not have otherwise had. He gave people pleasure and he gave people pain. He gave people hope and promise, reason and purpose. Burdens too heavy to bear and secrets to carry into the long dark nights.”

      A dreamer in the highest sense:

      “It may happen some day, things can be sorted out. Things can be made better. We can recreate some promise and hope from all of this.”

      You love:

      “And for some reason I just can not explain right now because it is only a feeling, But I know we will all cross paths again. Hope again. Live again. Dream again. Gamble again. Dance again. Laugh again. Win again.”

      Your whole post is quotable! Thank you, Oracle, for sharing your very big heart and your company.🙂

      • Oracle, I honor your truth. I honor your loyalty. In my path, the development of loyalty is essential to liberation.

        Loyalty is divine. It is an eternal promise souls make to each other. That they will always be friends no matter what. That they will help them move on up a little higher: together

        Ron is not done. He has unfinished biz here. Beyond a doubt, this man will be back.

        In my tradition, the student and teacher keep connected. One day Ron will get it right. Just like the rest of us.

        No doubt he was special. No doubt he inspired dreams of knowledge and freedom. He stoked those fires: on purpose.

        I think he loved that he was helping people. How could he have not?

        But when the moral rudder has no captain, the ship hits rocky shoals.

        Great men fall with a thud!

        We’ve probably all been there lol. On some level, cause: here we are😉

        • But love for him and knowledge of him is essential to experience clarity.

          It is good for people to rant about Ron. He deserves it lol!

          People need maybe to go through anger. He wasn’t straight with us. He lied to us. And that should not be whitewashed. He wasn’t just a friend lying. He was a self proclaimed Buddha who said he would take us to Total Exterior with full perceptions, Total Freedom.

          That broken trust has a bit more karmic heft to it.

          People need to heal. He is the ideological cause for black op thug training and attack. Maybe Ron was really a red neck from Montana lol.

          In the other world he must be getting an ear full.

          Sending him love.

    • Oracle –

      You and I see Scientology and L Ron Hubbard very differently.

      I see Scientology as a public health or public safety issue.

      Let’s say there is a guy who is driving a truck around your neighborhood selling bottled water. He’s going door to door selling this water, and claiming all kinds of health benefits for it. And it is pretty expensive, too.

      He sells a few bottles and the people who drink it seem fine. In fact they seem very happy with it. Some LOVE it and swear by this bottled water.

      But then it turns out that the more you drink it, the sicker you get. Some people become addicted to the water and go bankrupt paying for it. Other peoples’ families are destroyed from the effects of the water.

      And then you find out that all the guy’s claims for where the water came from were all lies. And then you find out there is a slow acting poison in the water he is selling and you find out that HE PUTS THE POISON IN THERE HIMSELF.

      I feel that it is very irresponsible to go around plugging the benefits of this guy’s bottled water, especially when you know the people it has sickened and enslaved, destroyed and even killed.

      I don’t see it as keeping a hold of my own wins. My own wins, and the good feelings that I got from the water are the very least important items on the scale of issues connected with this guy and his bottled water. The most important issues are the health of other people, and making sure they do not get sick from this guy’s bottled water.

      I see it as a public safety issue which requires warning the public about this guy’s toxic bottled water deception so that no one else can be harmed.

      So yeah, you and I see it differently.

      Alanzo

      • Al and Brian, is it possible that you two are making the same mistake Ron made? Pushing back against what you don’t like? And thinking you have very good reason for doing so, as perhaps Ron thought he did?

        If you think about it, it’s the use of force – whether on the physical or non-physical plane. And since you are both Buddhists, I’m curious what The Buddha would say is “Right” in this situation. What would he have advised to do about Ron at this point?
        \
        This is absolutely no put down to The Buddha or Buddhism, which I have great respect for, even based on the little I know. But I’m curious, which Buddhist principle would apply?

        • Wow, I just found these quotes in Wikipedia:

          “He abused me, he struck me, he overcame me, he robbed me’ — in those who harbor such thoughts hatred will never cease.”

          “He abused me, he struck me, he overcame me, he robbed me’ — in those who do not harbor such thoughts hatred will cease.”

          (Dhammapada 1.3-4; trans. Radhakrishnan – see article)[37]

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forgiveness#Buddhism

        • We can love and forgive and still be aware of the danger of dangerous literature and there authors.

          Putting the spot light on Ron’s darkness is healing for people climbing out out of the regimented membership and mindset that Ron created as teacher.

          People need to be warned about Ron also Mirildi.

          • Warning is one thing. Repeating the same negative things over and over to the same people doesn’t quite compute.

            • I can see why you say that, Marildi.

              But in order to expose the thinking which enslaves a person into Scientology, and the lies and the false data they are imprisoned by, it requires someone like you, or like Valkov, or like many others who I have engaged with on the Internet in the past – and who all eventually freed themselves – to display the Scientology Mindset out in the open so that it can be exposed to others.

              For every Scientologist willing to engage me, dozens more are watching.

              The longer you engage me, the more other people see, and the more the enslavement and the imprisoned thinking from Scientology can be exposed.

              You will eventually make it out. I’ve seen you make huge progress. But lots of others have been exposed to your Scientology Mindset in the meantime, and seen it outside their own minds and out onto their computer screens, and gotten their own thinking going again in the process.

              It’s a public health issue. The more the enslaving disease of the Scientology Mindset is exposed to sunlight, the more it can be disinfected, and the more people are freed from it.

              Alanzo

              • AND during this process of engagement, the good parts of Scientology can be exposed and separated out from the diseased parts.

                Then the good parts of Scientology and be re-evaluated and restored to their proper context, no longer distorted and encysted by the Scientology Mindset.

                Alanzo

                • You’ve come a long way, Al. There was a time when you saw NO good parts of Scientology. I guess my efforts have paid off.🙂

                  • Yes they have.

                    Your efforts and those of others who engage with me.

                    I have always known that there was good in Scientology, but the people who engage with me continue to remind me of it. And, like you do very frequently, they remind me of things that I have forgotten and where my interpretation might be off.

                    It is a dialogue, with the end goal of getting closer and closer to the truth for everyone.

                    Socrates would be proud of us.

                    Alanzo

                • Yes, Al, you have always posted “for the lurkers”. And obviously so does Brian. And I imagine there are readers with whom your posts resonate.
                  For the record, I am not one of those. But I have gotten somewhat used to being a foil for people like you and Brian. As long as I get to post my 2 cents worth also.

                  And I am not convinced that your one-sided stridency is as effective as a more middle-of -the road approach might be.

                  The evils of “Scientology Inc” are obvious and speak for themselves. I personally prefer clear statements of facts and then being allowed to make my own evaluations and decisions.
                  Frankly your moralizing judgements, and Brian’s, tend to turn me off, and I wonder if others do not also respond that way. You both seem all too eager to do the thinking for others, just as the CoS does. I see you involved in “information control” to an unhealthy extent, which of course means you are presenting more than the truth – you are pushing your own opinions and judgements more than you are simply presenting the truth.

                  I don’t come to this blog to “debate”, I come here for information to expand my own understanding of WHAT HAPPENED, not to imbibe your evaluations and judgements as my own. I’m for a “multiple viewpoint system” that communicates facts above all. What you or Brian find morally wrong, or your speculations about the motives of the various actors in the unfolding history of Scientology are pretty irrelevant to me. Sometimes I agree with you, sometimes I don’t, so “carry on”, I guess. Since that’s what you do in most of your posts, if you get my meaning.
                  That said, I suppose y’all have your reasons for “carrying on” about it. Myself mostly having “never been in” in the sense you were, my focus has always been LRH’s ideas, and that remains my focus.

                  • Val wrote:

                    Myself mostly having “never been in” in the sense you were, my focus has always been LRH’s ideas, and that remains my focus.

                    Mine too.

                    I love your showers of abusive and distracting Scn ad-hom, your broad generalities about me and the specific things I write, and your desperate, unceasing need to DA me into an idiot. It’s been a long time since you have flat-out called me an idiot, and I miss it.

                    In my 14 years on the Internet exposing the Scientology mindset, you have been one of my best foils ever, in an old crusty underpants kind of way.

                    Alanzo

            • I repeat Mirildi not for you. There are other’s just reading this blog for the first time that need to know the truth. It is not about you.

              Your emotional, judgemental and reactive response to me is evidence of your own mindset.

              Something not quite resolved in your world. Something still unsettled.

              There are more people reading this blog than you Mirildi. Your uncomfortable and snarky reactions to me belong to you alone.

              My continued posts are for those who would benefit.

              My persistence, in retrospect, from blogging here for two years, has in my view reaped benefits.

              I have been thanked as well as cursed. It’s all good.

              • Brian: “There are other’s just reading this blog for the first time that need to know the truth. Your emotional, judgmental and reactive response to me is evidence of your own mindset.”

                Actually, you show that it’s not just “the truth” you’re interested in when you repeat what has been pointed out to you as false – giving you the actual reference. It seems you just can’t give up the sensationalism of certain assertions you love to make – and won’t let any actual truth get in the way. Talk about mindset!

                At least I make an attempt to have an honest discussion. And some of those “reading this blog” will understand my eventual frustrated response at times to your sanctimonious diatribes.

                They’ll also see how you then repeatedly throw up such responses in my face – many times more often than they actually occurred – while at the same time, your own “emotional, judgmental and reactive” and “snarky reactions” are thinly veiled by your condescending “understanding.”

                • Brian: “There are other’s just reading this blog for the first time that need to know the truth. Your emotional, judgmental and reactive response to me is evidence of your own mindset.”

                  This seems like an example of what we used to call “Pot/Kettle”.

                  • LOL – I almost wrote that too.

                    And there are many other times that the very things being criticized about “Scientologists” are demonstrated right in the same post as the criticism!

  24. I agree Alanzo. People need to be warned. It is not a like Ron, hate Ron issue.

    It is a public hazard at this point. Destructive to families and communities.

    • It’s an issue of exposing the Church’s present-time evils and warning people in big letters to be very, very careful around, and preferably, stay away from the Church. The Church needs to be exposed for what it is and what it does to people.

      That is not what you guys are doing, with your diatribes against Ron.

      • They’re trying to ruin him utterly.😀

        • I didn’t think of that, but I believe you’re right. It is the “scientology mindset” at work. If pressed, they would probably justify it by saying “He pulled it in!”

          I suppose they are just providing the motivators LRH needs, eh? On the other hand, perhaps they have “succumbed to the invitation to hate”?

          • “…perhaps they have ‘succumbed to the invitation to hate’?”

            Yes, perhaps. One thing that seems clear is that they don’t see they are contributing to the existence of hate in the world.

            With all your study, you are the knowledgeable one, Val – isn’t there some Buddhist precept, or one from another discipline, that would apply?

            • I mean other than Scientology – which I’m pretty sure would be rejected out of hand.

              • M…. people love to ”hate”, that sensation is easily available and long lasting, hate is bigger heavier energy flow and because so easily available on different-lower level reality people stay stuck to those ideas, of course ”hate” those concepts also act as anchor.
                People need the daily helping of stimulation to make them feel alive, active… hehehe. love is not as easy to have for those on the lower level but ”hate”’ well there is nothing but that sensation where they are… and they dramatize that easier; with words
                Love.. that energy flow is much lighter as a matter therefore it vanishes easily.. and how one can dramatize real love?

                • “People need the daily helping of stimulation to make them feel alive, active…”

                  Wow, insightful! The rest of your post too. Thanks, Elizabeth!

              • marildi, I really don’t. There are many that might apply. How about, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink”?

                Words are like Rorschach blots. Some people read into words their own evaluations and conclusions. It’s a waste of time to put up words in the hope of enlightening another who thinks he already knows and understands. His own agenda will be all he sees, while his sight and understanding slide over anything that does not agree with his carefully selected “facts”. There’s the “true believer”, the one whose need for certainty is so great he will look for and join many “causes”, contradictory ones, ones in which he reverses himself but basically remains the same tool he always was.

                Now there’s a Rorschach blot for you! 🙂

                • Val, you answered it to a tee in your eloquent post below about “passion.” Once, again you put into words what I could only bet a “sense” of.

                  I like your ending line too: “Now there’s a Rorschach blot for you!”

                  Funny! Nevertheless, IMHO that is the correct blot. LOL

      • Why not warn them of the entire history of evil, including Ron’s?

  25. Episode 5 of Internet Wild Kingdom with Marlin Perkins.

    Keeping low to the ground, staying downwind, and scurrying on our hands and knees, we’ve come upon a small group of Scientologists at the wild fringes of the Internet.

    Peeking over an anthill, we can see that hey have gathered together next to a babbling brook, to talk about other individuals who dare to publicly criticize the writings and lectures of L Ron Hubbard.

    Jim is using an Internet-based message blog to record and inspect what these Scientologists are saying about them.

    Shhh! Let’s get closer….

    It appears they believe that these critics of Ron are “lower-level” people who are motivated by, and filled with, hate.

    Shazay-am. Have we discovered some new strain of Scientologist? Or is this the typical and natural behavior of the Scientologist pretty much wherever they’re found?

    Yes.

    I think it is.

    (Music swells) Well that’s the end of our episode!

    Thanks for tuning in to “Internet Wild Kingdon” with Marlin Perkins as we continue our search for a Scientologist who doesn’t dramatize Scientology all the fucking time.

    Alanzo

    • LOL😀

      Okay, Al, with you it might be a matter of needing a creative outlet.

      Could be worse.😉

    • Please do your next segment on those Critics who once were Scientologists themselves, but are still dramatizing Scientology most of the time, in the way they interact with those who don’t entirely agree with them. “Dramatizing” – isn’t that a bit of Hubbardiana?

      • I second the motion.for the next segment.

      • Valkov wrote –

        “Dramatizing” – isn’t that a bit of Hubbardiana?

        I think it’s quite Scientucky of you to accuse critics of being like Scientologists. Aren’t you taking the thing that was supposed to make you Homo Novis and admitting that it is something extremely undesirable in this way?

        It’s also not very uptone, creative, or artistic, like all that Scientology was supposed to make you into.

        Don’t be sittin there, whittlin on your front porch, natterin at critics for how badly your life turned out, Scientucky!

        Alanzo

        • Scientucky. That is friggin hilarious. LINE CHARGE.

          I lived in the hills of E. Kentucky for 10 years. The only place I’ve seen where a trailer house could be placed just down the street from a guy who turned down 600 million for his business. The contrast is striking.
          As I watched the greatest guitarist I have ever seen, the guy sitting next to me was cutting the top out of a soda can to use as a tobacco spit cup.
          Mark

        • It’s good that you can joke about it. I have been reflecting on myself, you Brian et al, and the dynamics of our interactions on these blogs. That has been good. Of course my conclusions have probably been different from wht you might hope for. Here’s one: I mistrust you and Brian because of a mistrust I have for people of “passion”. Just as you mistrust people of “ideology”. Ideologies in fact destroyed and ruined the lives of my entire family, who were “stateless White Russians” living in China and Korea after fleeing Russia as a result of the civil war in Russia and the triumph of Communism there. I grew up knowing all about the evils of certain kinds of ideologically driven actions by supposedly good people. I rejected ideology when I was quite young, still a kid.

          However, it is “passion” that makes ideology dangerous. You and Brian both operate from your “emotional centers”, which is what I mistrust about you both. You indulge in rhetoric, and try to sway people by your passionate rhetoric. I am practically hard-wired to resist this kind of approach. The result I strive to operate through my “intellectual center”, cautioning myself to step back and try to perceive and analyze things by collecting facts. I don’t like to jump to conclusions. I reflexively consider passion driven communications to be “demagoguery”. For example, Hitler was a “passionate” speaker who manipulated people through his speeches, in turn stirring up their passions, which led to evil consequences. This happened in Russia too, leading to the revolution and civil war, the GULAGs, the “cold war” etc etc. To eventually discover that the leaders of both sides were cynically using “ideology” to manipulate the populations of their countries, when the actual issues were all about cornering natural resources, territories, and wealth for the select few, was depressing to say the

          I have learned that not all passion-driven viewpoints are “demagogic”, but the caution remains.

          If you are interested in where I am in fact coming from, rather than your own self-involved fantasies about my “mindset”, try reading this book. One of the chapters includes part of my family’s story:
          http://www.amazon.com/Mole-Hunt-Search-Phantom-Traitor-Shattered/dp/0380721279

          • Valkov: “I reflexively consider passion driven communications to be ‘demagoguery.'”

            My feeling has been the same. In fact, the word “rabble-rouser” came to mind, but I figured if I used it the only reaction would be to discredit it because LRH used it. But I see it’s in the definition of demagogue from Wikipedia:

            “A demagogue or rabble-rouser is a political leader in a democracy who appeals to the emotions, fears, prejudices, and ignorance of the lower classes in order to gain power and promote political motives. Demagogues usually oppose deliberation…they accuse moderate and thoughtful opponents of weakness. Demagogues have appeared in democracies since ancient Athens. They exploit a fundamental weakness in democracy: because ultimate power is held by the people, nothing stops the people from giving that power to someone who appeals to the lowest common denominator of a large segment of the population.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogue

            • p.s. Great post, Val. Very thoughtful.

            • Thanks marildi. To me it seems that when he wanted to be, LRH could be a master demagogue himself. He at times displayed great powers of persuasion.

              Some critics likewise, apparently have adopted him as their model of how to pursue their agendas. It turns me off, but perhaps it works for them to some extent, in accomplishing their ends, whatever those may be.

              Some claim it is to “warn the public” or to further awaken those still in, the “lurkers” reading this blog or other. But in fact I find there are others doing far more effective jobs in those directions, and yet these supposed guardians of the public welfare never actually post links to the most effective and up-to-date materials available online, like Mike Rinder’s blog, or Tony Ortega’s blog, or the newer South African blog. So I question whether what they state as their agenda, is honestly that? I think in some cases they are simply seeking attention and status.

          • Valkov –

            I don’t know anyone who displays more passion towards me personally than you do. Not one person ever on the Internet – but you.

            You are number 1 in personal passion towards Alanzo.

            So let’s try this. Next time I write a statement on the Internet that you find stupid, copy it with your cursor and then paste it at the top of your post.

            Then, underneath that, write why you think the specific statement I wrote was stupid, and show the reasoning and the evidence you use to support your point.

            Otherwise, these adhom-based, generality-strewn lectures of yours about me personally are just not worth responding to.

            I hope you understand.

            Alanzo

            • Also, Valkov –

              Thanks for the book recommendation and the story about your family, which I always suspected might be there, but never knew.

              Alanzo

            • It’s good that you can joke about these things, even if it involves making fun of and demeaning me. Or “scientologists” in general. or some “scientology mindset” you think exists across the board. Enjoy what you can; pardon me if I am sometimes unable to join you. You have much more experience actually “in” scientology as it took shape in the USA. I have no axe to grind in that regard. As for my comments and responses to your posts, going back to your “I’m on a mission from God” days a few years ago, I responded
              to your posts in the spirit in which you seemed to intend them. If you want to make posts I would respect, talk about your own experiences in Scientology as you have on your blog, which has some good writing on it, like your OSA stories. Talk about what you experienced, not about some pseudo-scientific psychoanalysis of others whose views and experiences might differ or not entirely agree with yours. Each individual person is unique; although we have some commonalities by virtue of being human in the first place, any particular person cannot be fully described by focusing on or trying to reduce him/her to those commonalities.

              • Ad-hom based lecture about me personally received, dad.

                Once again.

                You would do better with me if you were able to actually take a specific thing I wrote and show me how it is wrong, and why.

                Otherwise, I’m going to take the keys to the car and go out with my friends and do whatever I like and not come back until late.

                Alanzo

                • Hey Al, as a critic, you do have some flaws – but no one is as funny!

                  Honestly, I think you missed your calling. But if you must be a critic, stick to humor mode.🙂

                • “Otherwise, I’m going to take the keys to the car and go out with my friends and do whatever I like and not come back until late.”

                  That will provide me with a great opportunity to call the Police and report the car as stole, so go for it!

                  Ad hominem, from Wikipedia: “An ad hominem (Latin for “to the man” or “to the person”[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.[2] Fallacious Ad hominem reasoning is normally categorized as an informal fallacy,[3][4][5] more precisely as a genetic fallacy,[6] a subcategory of fallacies of irrelevance.[7] Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of facts.”

                  Point being, an “address to the person” creates a logical fallacy only when the address to the person is irrelevant to the discussion or debate. In fact, you use it all the time by your references to “scientologists” and their supposed “mindset” and all that. That’s why I feel perfectly fine about addressing your “person” in relation to your arguments. You attempt to discredit the arguments of others by labeling them as “scientologists” imp[lying that automatically makes them defective.

                  You are a convicted Scientologist (or do I mean “convinced” Scientologist of many years); presumably your thinking and behavior were infected and warped by the implantation of scientological thinking and behavior towards others, and the justifications thereof. You decry the practice of “dead agenting”, but you incessantly try to dead agent LRH even almost 30 years after he died, and justify it as “public health warnings”.

                  So as far as I’m concerned, you are still a Scientologist at heart until proven otherwise, because you still invalidate others the same way you did when you were actually “in”. You’ve “changed sides” but your behavior hasn’t changed that much. I will say it has changed some, and definitely for the better in many instances.

                  I’m gonna check to see if the car is gone. I have the Police Department on speed dial…… 🙂

                  • Val, putting it in my own words, the critics who refuse to look at Scientology objectively and “unemotionally,” i.e. without their egos, will take as long to be free on the subject – or free from it – as any other true believers.

                    And good point about Ad Hom – I’ve seen that and tried to find a quote on it not long ago and wasn’t able to.

                    “I have the Police Department on speed dial…” LOL😀

                  • Valkov wrote:

                    So as far as I’m concerned, you are still a Scientologist at heart until proven otherwise, because you still invalidate others the same way you did when you were actually “in”. You’ve “changed sides” but your behavior hasn’t changed that much. I will say it has changed some, and definitely for the better in many instances.

                    Can you see that your concluding paragraph contradicts itself?

                    Keep going, Valkov.

                    You will make it, all the way.

                    Alanzo

                    • Here’s something else for you, Val My Pal.

                      Much of Plato’s “The Republic” is taken up with the argument of reason vs. emotion. Or reason vs. passion. One conclusion by one of the speakers at one point was that “reason contributes to virtue” while “emotion contributes to vice”.

                      Socrates is quoted there as defining “passion” as “that which makes reason passive”.

                      Some in the dialogue concluded that reason was always senior to passion. Socrates seemed to be one of them.

                      But this is still quite debatable. And it was not settled conclusively in The Republic. The debate continued, and the above reasoning is only one set of reasonings in The Republic about reason vs passion.

                      Then Aristotle, Plato’s student, continued this debate in his “Ethics” book, and it forms the basis of his “Golden Mean” tool for moral decision making – which beats the shit out of Hubbard’s “Greatest Good for the Greatest Number of Dynamics” any day.

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicomachean_Ethics#Book_II:_That_virtues_of_character_can_be_described_as_means

                      This is why your concluding paragraph to me is self contradictory, and why your ad hom attacks consistently lead you to fallacious reasoning: No person is any one thing. Ever.

                      And I know – that’s what you continually say to me about L Ron Hubbard.

                      This is also why you never understood my use of “Scientologist” as a target for debate: No person is or ever was a “Scientologist”. “Scientologist” is a synthetic valence which Hubbard intentionally created for his followers to adopt (created while running the BC) that replaced a recruit’s personal goals with organizational ones, their personal problems with Scientology’s problems, and their personal morals with Scientology’s morals.

                      It was his real life application of “GPM” technology. “Scientologist” is a false GPM identity that he created for Scientologists to adopt. It’s like a dirty blanket that Hubbard got you to wear, so that when you wore it you would forget yourself and why you got into Scientology in the first place, and which gave him a way to grab on to you and to control you for his own bidding. He then created the Sea Org on ships, isolated from civilization, which was his floating brainwashing laboratory filled with lab rats.

                      This is the real story of Scientology which you have never gotten and have always resisted, and which provided the energy for our play.

                      I have always known that You, Valkov, were never a “Scientologist”. You are YOU, and you always have been. But you identified so strongly with this dirty blanket Hubbard gave you, that you never got the point. When I would wail at the “Scientologist” identity, which is all throughout Hubbard’s writings, you would feel personally insulted.

                      And still to this day you do.

                      You are not a Scientologist, Valkov. But you never got the cognition. So to speed things up, I’m feeding it to you now.

                      You and I often argue the same exact points but from different angles.

                      Oh well. As a kind of Greek theater, it has had its purpose.

                      Ever since you had me read “Beyond Belief” by Elaine Pagels I have had immense respect for you, Valkov. And known that you were way beyond Scientology. But you got so passionate about my posts that you could not even see that.

                      So here’s a treat for you, my friend, which I know you will enjoy, and which is somewhat on the topic of our discussion here – you crusty old fucking coot.

                      Alanzo

                    • You’re obviously making progress. What you seem to miscontrue is that I was never involved in any of those activities. I never did any of the SHSBC. I didn’t even do the Academy Levels. I suspect you have no clue as to where I’m coming from, what my interest in “Scientology” is all about.

                      Talk about “contradictions”! I have never identified as a “Scientologist” except perhaps in the very earliest sense, as a person seeking to know, or seeking “how to know”. Somehow in this you see some all-embracing “synthetic valence LRH created” as applying to me. Sounds like a fixed idea to me.

                    • Valkov –

                      Unless you were a 1950’s Dianeticist, before orgs, before the Bridge, and before HCOPLs and the Emeter, and have never applied ethics tech, then it does apply to you.

                      I understand that there are panty-waist dilettante Scientologists who only dabble here and there, but I have to tell you Valkov, you have NEVER acted like one of those.

                      Your constant and continual opposition to any criticism of L Ron Hubbard says frickking RTC/OSA all the way.

                      I’m not saying that you were. I am saying that you have those characteristics. Most people could not care less what I write about L Ron Hubbard.

                      But you?

                      It’s like I’m mixing pork with cheese and feeding it to my family as a Hassidim, or praising Obamacare down at the VFW a block away from me.

                      I write about the very real socially coercive cult mind control techniques that L Ron Hubbard put into Scientology and it drives you WILD!

                      Why?

                      Why can’t you simply read something like that and go “Hmmm. Interesting. Might be true, might not be” ?

                      Almost everyone on the planet who knows about Scientology knows that it is a cult. Why, when someone details exactly how it is a cult, do you explode?

                      Alanzo

                    • Valkov dear did you explode as alanzo said? ? not good…. not good at all…that can be pretty massy especially on the unmentionable!🙂

                      PS Alanzo I am reading the same stuff from you for 3 years.. it seems time, the forward movement which usually propels thing forward for every person don’t exist in your life.

                      I am of course not waiting for your reply since to you I am less than a gnat on the bottom of the elephant.. I like that… I really do.. it would worry me if you would ack my existence than I would be in deeeeep s.

                    • This statement of yours speaks for itself, and proves my point as far as I’m concerned:
                      “Your constant and continual opposition to any criticism of L Ron Hubbard says frickking RTC/OSA all the way.”

                    • “I write about the very real socially coercive cult mind control techniques that L Ron Hubbard put into Scientology and it drives you WILD!”

                      Is that ALL you think LRH put into “Scientology” whatever you think THAT term comprises? Or did he also put other elements into Scientology?

                      “WILD”? lol

                    • If a guy poisons clean clear water and then offers it to you as something healthy, does it really matter that the water was clean and clear?

                      Why concentrate on the clean, clear water and ignore the poison if it harms some people to drink it??

                      Alanzo

                    • To paraphrase the Gotama guy, or maybe it’s the Gyatso guy(the current DL), the water remains the water. The impurities are the impurities. The pure water is still there. The impurities can be removed to reveal the presence of pure water.

                      I have no problem with the people who are working to spot and remove the impurities. To the extent your efforts go to achieving this end, it’s all good.

                      However, often you come across as saying it’s all impurities, that there is no clear pure water there. I see this as a counterproductive error.

                      For a concrete example, I see the CoS as an impurity staining the pure water of basic “scientology” truths.
                      It’s a matter of considerations and mechanics. The CoS is just one set of mechanics that has evolved in association with the subject, one expression, one concretization, in the same as English, Russian, Japanese, Chinese, Hindi, Ojibwe, Navaho, etc etc are each one a specific evolution of the basic concept of “language”. Each one is a specific set of mechanics developed around the basic concept of language.

                      There are other forms of mechanics that have already evolved based on and floating in the original “pure” stream or pool of “scientology”. There are the Ron’s Orgs, the various and manifold Freezone and Independent practitioners, there are the private individuals that have integrated some basic idea into their lives, etc etc.

                      Just as there are a myriad sets of mechanics based on the substrates of Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, etc etc.

                      Because at bottom, there are as many “scientologies” or “christianities” or “buddhisms” as there are individuals. It is a great paradox, that the application of a “standard tech” will apparently produce a different, unique, and individual result on each person to whom it is applied. Apparently.

                    • Why Valkov, why, why do you explode?
                      Well Alonzo, I’ll tell you why.

                      Most everything you have said over the last few months is true. Most of the concepts about brainwashing and cult-like behavoir of Mgmt. and staff and public blindly following along are correct. You have seen many crazy and harmful and evil things and have seen many reports about many other awful things that have gone on and are going on in the CoS. You have even put separate details together and figured out additional harmful acts that have gone on. These things have had a bad effect.

                      FOR SOME. AGAIN…….FOR SOME.

                      Valkov and I, on the other hand, continually stress the precision and workability and brilliance of auditing procedure. Especially when, even in it’s immensity, it is considered a start, a beginning, just enough to get us going toward a better existence.

                      Take Method One. Many thousands of confusions have been resolved by it’s procedures. Many thousands. And then the M1 correction list. Brilliant. Many more thousands of hangups and confusions have been cleared up with that, done skillfully. No matter whether it was developed by LRH or some of his minions.

                      From LRH’s writings, it is obvious that he had an enormous love and forgiveness for his fellow man. From some of his writings and actions, and verified reports from others and the latent effects of some of his policies, he could be downright mean. shortsighted and paranoid. Some say it was because of early attacks on him and his work, then later, being fed a lot of bulls##t, from his ‘loyal’ assistants. This is a valid point of debate.

                      I and many thousands of others have had their lives greatly enriched and improved by the subject, especially when enhanced by some of the eastern philosophies. Some have been harmed greatly.

                      He may have written a thousand, or ten thousand, or perhaps a hundred thousand words that didn’t work out, or were downright evil. He wrote millions of words which were obviously very constructive and correct.
                      Some people, while being led on a path, will BECOME LED, LOSING THEIR OWN DIRECTION. Some others WILL TAKE OFF AND FLY, REGAINING THEIR LONG LOST WILL. Some who lead will become saintly guides, using their love to add strength to those they assist. Some will become oppressive tyrants, enslaving those they lead.

                      This is simply a technical problem which needs to be resolved. Some who dig as deeply into the psyche as Scn. procedures are capable of doing, will go friggin nuts before they gain the strength and serenity to get through it. Another serious technical problem.

                      Let’s use Alonzo and Brian and others to dig the infections out of the wound and expose the tumors. Let’s use Marildi, Oracle, Karen and others to straighten out the ‘Tech” and help people on a large scale. I don’t mind being ‘used’ to follow my own purposes, but I am the master of my own actions.

                      We all have a Godly purpose to fulfill. Find it. Follow it wisely, keeping an eye on the big picture. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water, even if the water has a couple of spiders in it.
                      Mark

                    • Excellent post, Mark!!

                      Very well thought out with excellent points all through. And your example of Method 1 word clearing was very well chosen.

                      Thank you!

                      Alanzo

                    • christianscientology

                      Nice post Mark!
                      There are so many posts coming through on Marty’s blog, I have asked my wife to go through them and highlight those she thinks I may be interested in answering and your’s got starred.

                      I am currently reading a book by Tim Freke “The Mystery Experience” and he points out that life has two strands to it – The Mystery and The Story. Each person has their own story and what can so easily happen is the story occludes the mystery. L.R.H. was a master “story teller” so much so that “the story” became more important than the mystery.

                      Love will always be the Mystery and Understanding, the story. When we put love first then every persons’ understanding (viewpoint) falls into its proper place.

                      Thanks again for the “theta comm” it’s much appreciated.

                      Love and ARC
                      Pip

                    • Thank you, Pip.
                      Your comment clarifies and broadens my understanding of this phenomenon beyond just ‘book lernin’. It resolved something for me today!

                      Catch my post on “Flows” I believe it is worthy, although abbreviated.

                      Many of my discoveries have been inspired or triggered by my friends on this site. Will take a few years to write up in detail.
                      Mark

                    • christianscientology

                      Hi Mark

                      Thank you for your reply. Yes “book learnin” is always the story. In Zen there is the saying “the finger pointing at the moon” the finger has its function but it is the moon that lies beyond.

                      I just happened to read a verse from the Bible around the time I received your post. It is from Hebrews Chapter 4 verse 12. I have been aware for a long time that SOUL and SPIRIT are not the same thing and had thought this verse made that clear however I happened to read another translation of the Word and it said that there is a place where SOUL and SPIRIT meet.

                      “God’s word is living and active. It is sharper than any two-edged sword and cuts as deep as the place where soul and spirit meet, the place where joints and marrow meet. God’s word judges a person’s thoughts and intentions.”

                      Compare Hebrews 4:12 in other versions with the God’s Word translation above.
                      http://biblehub.com/hebrews/4-12.htm

                      This resolves a fundamental problem in Scientology. Most Scientologists I know maintain that THEY ARE A SOUL and as such do not differentiate between SOUL and SPIRIT.

                      The SOUL is your story, the SPIRIT is THE MYSTERY. THETA is to A THETAN as SPIRIT is to A SOUL. Your true identity is THETA expressing as A THETAN. To operate as A THETAN (a Soul) is to express the story and to ignore THE MYSTERY.

                      I would appreciate your comments on what I have written here either personally at pip_threlfall@yahoo.co.uk or through Marty’s blog.

                      Love and ARC
                      Pip

                    • It appears to be a different wording of the difference in Theta and Thetan. Life and Life Unit. The particular words used in the translations have such broad and varied meanings and usages, that it leaves so much to interpretation.

                      It is my viewpoint that there is no solid dividing line between life and individual. As one grows, he expands farther and further into life as a whole, while maintaining his ability to be an individual.

                      In the verse you quoted, I would equate spirit with God and soul with individual. Perhaps I am being too simplistic. The terms ‘story’ and ‘mystery’ leaves me wanting to understand. Also, I have not seen God as a single judgmental individual. I am my harshest and quickest judge and jury and jailer.

                    • christianscientology

                      Hi Mark

                      There is a fundamental difference between THETA and a THETAN. Theta has no mass, whereas a Thetan has mass. A Thetan is located in space and time, to say they are not is to NOTIS the fact. If a Thetan is not “postulating and perceiving” it isn’t a Thetan, it is Theta.

                      The words INDIVIDUAL and INDIVISIBLE have the same root. In the same way Theta is indivisible and a Thetan is individual. The Bible says man was created SPIRIT and became a LIVING SOUL that seems quite straight forward to me.

                      I agree there is no solid dividing line between life and individual in the sense that life is indivisible and living is individual. Living (individual) is what life (indivisible) does.

                      I also agree that as one grows, he expands farther and further into life as a whole while maintaining his ability to be an individual but that is as far as it goes. The final step is to willingly surrender our individuality to indivisibility where SOUL surrenders to SPIRIT, where a Thetan surrenders to Theta. We see this in the account of Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane when he says “if it is possible for this cup to pass from me, but nevertheless NOT MY WILL BUT THY WILL BE DONE”. That which we give up willingly we are free to take up again; hence WILLING EFFECT IS TOTAL CAUSE. The one thing that stands between us and ETERNAL LIFE is death. Being willing to die would bring about eternal life, or put another way to be willing not to be a Thetan would bring about Theta.

                      I once asked a Buddhist what was the bottom line about being a Buddhist, he replied “we are learning to die”, and to do that involves overcoming desire, until one finally overcomes the desire to overcome desire.

                      It might be said that to become fully OT it would only be necessary to overcome the desire to be fully OT. We all have individuality running on an “automaticity”. There used to be a popular song with the line “lay down your arms and surrender to mine” Anne Shelton – 1956. Here in the U.K. it was banned in case it undermined the “morale” of the armed forces. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FM_ClZnBz4U

                      Regards
                      Pip

                    • Sorry, Pip, that I haven’t addressed this post proper. I am still studying the concepts.
                      Mark

                    • christianscientology

                      Hi Mark

                      It’s me again.

                      I have been looking again at what you wrote particularly this sentence “As one grows, he expands farther and further into life as a whole, while maintaining his ability to be an individual.

                      I would like to quote what Osho says:-

                      The Individual Is Indivisible

                      What is the totality of myself? Why do I go on avoiding it?

                      “The totality of yourself has nothing to do with you. It is not your totality or my totality; totality is one – in which we all disappear. That is the fear. You can remain only if you are partial, if you are only a part. The moment you want to be the total, you will have to commit a kind of suicide, a spiritual suicide. You will have to disappear.

                      “If the dewdrop wants to be the ocean, the only possible way is to disappear into the ocean, to die as a dewdrop. The moment a dewdrop dies as a dewdrop, it becomes the ocean. That creates fear.

                      “People talk about God, but nobody wants to lose himself.”
                      “Hence the talk of God remains impotent, meaningless. People worship God but they keep a distance. They go to the temples, but they never really go – because they go on clinging to their idea of themselves.

                      “There are two ways to be. One is as an ego: separate from the total, which is illusory because there is no way to be really separate. You can only believe that you are separate; deep down you remain one with the whole. Hence all that you create around the idea of the ego remains illusory. In the East we call it maya. Maya means a world of futile dreams.

                      “The other way to be is not to be separate: losing one’s definition, losing all demarcations, distinctions. Then you enter into the world of the real, the world of brahma. Then you transcend dreams. And the basic, fundamental dream is the dream of the ego, the dream that I am. You are not; I am not, only existence is.

                      “But that is a great risk. Disappearing into the vastness of existence frightens, scares. You feel so cozy in your small world of dreams; surrounded by your own dreams it is so warm, you are so sheltered, secure.

                      “That’s why people go on clinging even to miseries because those miseries are part, an essential part of the dream world you live in. Your happiness, your unhappiness are two aspects of your dreams. The real knows no happiness, no unhappiness; the real is beyond all duality. There is utter bliss. But remember, bliss is not happiness; you will not find any happiness in bliss, you will not find any unhappiness either.

                      “It is a totally different world of which you cannot have any notion unless you have tasted of it. Bliss can have no meaning for you. Bliss is meaningful only to buddhas, to those who have known. But to know, you have to fulfill a basic requirement: you have to disappear. It is a very paradoxical requirement – to be, you have not to be.

                      “You ask, ‘What is the totality of myself?’

                      “When the totality is, no self is left – neither mine nor thine. And when the self is there, there is no totality.”
                      You can find this at http://www.osho.com/shop/in/audio-books/individual-osho-talks/philosophia-perennis-v1-bliss-past-lohia.html

                      Love and ARC
                      Pip

                    • Pip
                      In my work, I have not found that as I expand into Theta, I lose myself. In fact, my individuality becomes more clear. The two are not incompatible. I can look at a chair, or I can look at the whole room. The clearer things become, the more I am able to look at both at the same time.
                      Mark

                    • christianscientology

                      Hi Mark

                      You don’t “expand into Theta” you ARE theta expressing as A THETAN. It’s interesting that you say “my individuality becomes more clear”. The individuality is the ego so what you are saying is my ego is becoming more clear.

                      This is where LRH made his big mistake, you will notice in his early works he would acknowledge the great thinkers of the past that he was indebted to but as time went on and he got loads of adoration he made the fatal mistake of disconnecting. The formula for power being DON’T DISCONNECT, he came to believe that Scientology was THE ONLY WAY. In the original interview on “An Introduction to Scientology” when he is asked by the interviewer “why Scientology” he replies “because it works”.

                      Once it becomes the only way it stops working. I have just watched the film “An Introduction to Scientology” (that takes me back a bit, I used to be in charge of showing it back in 1968) and where he says “IT WORKS”, is at 51.33 minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXbPuJO5F-U

                      Love
                      Pip

                    • It doesn’t contradict itself at all, except in your mind. I qualify an earlier absolute statement by saying you have changed to some extent. That’s life.
                      You have changed, haven’t you? The “scientology mindset” doesn’t have quite the same grip on you, does it? But it still has something of a grip, doesn’t it? Personally if I were you, I be filled with hate for some aspects of the “Scientology experience” as I(you) knew it. I’d be really pissed at what turned out to be a betrayal.

                      However the bottom line here is you react to me like a scientology reacts to an “enemy” – you try to DA, invalidate, demean, me. Who started it? Who cares who started it. Anytime you want to stop interacting on this level, I think it’s possible to rise above it, don’t you?

                    • And another:

                      Alanzo

                    • Valkov writes:

                      However the bottom line here is you react to me like a scientology reacts to an “enemy” – you try to DA, invalidate, demean, me.

                      Your tears are real crocodile tears, I can tell.

                      I’m hurtin’ for ya, Scientucky!

                      What can I do for you to make you feel better?

                      Alanzo

                    • Demonstrate you can be even more insincere. That would amuse me.

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

  27. CHRISTIANSCIENTOLOGIST
    “You don’t “expand into Theta” you ARE theta expressing as A THETAN. It’s interesting that you say “my individuality becomes more clear”. The individuality is the ego so what you are saying is my ego is becoming more clear.”
    Mark
    Several excellent and insightful points.
    I agree with you on many things, but you often say them in a better or more precise way.
    Mark
    PS: This thread got so long that the replies got cut off.

  28. christianscientology

    Thanks for the validation, Mark

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