Home

no affinity

By Lana M.

Ever listened to a model LRH session?

He is so relaxed, so at ease.

And so different from the robotic auditors that are turned out by the “C of S” is their “Golden Age”.

In recent times we have been un-training’ a veteran Scientologist who had earlier been mis-coached (thanks to GAT)  into unnatural TRs, which then impacted on his ability to get reads on his meter drills, and resulted in him never completing the SOLO Course.

He had all manner of systems and methods worked out to “audit” someone, that had nothing to do with just being there, comfortably, and listening to the PC.

He was focused on the communication, but lacking the affinity.

In recent weeks he was given Qual help to sort out his TRs (thank you Jim Logan) and resolve each of the additives and confusions that he had accumulated. The result is he is now moving through his Meter Drills, he has natural and ARCful TRs, and he is getting reads.  His confidence in using a meter has increased 100-fold and soon he will be onto his OT Levels.

The robotic and un-ARCful TRs that are coached into student auditors in the C of S, go back to 1995. At that time, the Golden Age of Tech was implemented, and both the PRO TRs Course and the PRO Metering Courses required an RTC Representative pass to complete the course.

The RTC Representatives were (and still are) following an issue written and implemented by David Miscavige in 1994, called The RTC Code of Conduct. This issue states, in part, that RTC executives and staff must have an ‘almost cold’ attitude with all those they deal with, outside of RTC.

Having worked in RTC for 6 years, and having to follow that RTC Code of Conduct (somewhat unsuccessfully, I might add), I saw this ‘almost cold’ attitude adopted by anyone and everyone who wanted to emulate RTC executives and staff.  All RTC investigations, interviews and sessions had this air about them, and soon this same attitude was evident across the base.  For me, a person who has always carried a large smile and enjoyed sharing affinity with others, it was an oppressive scene where a  display of affinity or love for another person, was deemed to be out-ethics and contra-survival.

That I tried to follow this RTC ED makes no sense. Don’t ask me how to explain why I did it, or my views on why others continue to do the same all the way up to present time.  It makes no sense — but it is something I personal saw and experienced on all flows for many years at the Int base, and it has now permeated all the way down to individual org auditors and even parishioner auditor trainees.

Here, today, in the field, I cannot stress enough the importance of natural TRs, with affinity, reality, communication and understanding.

They underpin auditing results.

They are a key aspect of Scientology that makes the tech work.

Let’s apply KSW 1 to this point of TRs and communication, and make sure that PCs and pre-OTs are able to be fully in session by having an auditor with natural and easy TRs. We have the LRH model sessions as the ideal scene to go by.

“USE OF THE ARC TRIANGLE

“Even below an understanding of the communication formula comes an understanding of the ARC triangle. Now we are getting more basic.

“This turned up as a very interesting technical factor in reviewing countless TR video tapes this past year. It was actually a very interesting technical bug. I studied and studied these flunked video TR sessions to find the common denominator of all of them, and I finally nailed it. What I found was that they were specializing in “C,” communication, on the ARC triangle. They were specializing in “C” but what was out was their “A” (affinity) and “R” (reality) and their “C” was being pegged—it would go up just so far—because they weren’t anywhere up the line on their “A” and “ R. “

“As a result they couldn’t understand anything the other guy was saying. Most of the flubs were on this basis. They didn’t have any pc there, they weren’t listening to what the pc said, the ARC was out the bottom.

“The person gets stuck without full use of the ARC triangle. You can raise the communication level but then you have to raise the reality and then you have to raise the affinity and then you get some understanding. Only then can you continue to improve each point of the triangle.

“On most of those videos they were stuck with the communication being raised just a bit, and that was that, because they weren’t raising the affinity and reality levels along with it. So they did not advance or improve.

“A handling is to make sure the student gets a very sound understanding of the ARC triangle and its use before he tackles the TRs.

“This can be accomplished by having him represent it in clay, using the chapters on ARC in Fundamentals of Thought and Problems of Work and Chapter VII of Dianetics 55!.

“When he knows how A and R and C interrelate and how they’re used to bring about Understanding, he’s then prepared to really grasp the communication formula. And when he has a good familiarity with the communication formula he can drill the TRs and polish up his own communication cycle and improve with comparative ease.”  LRH HCOB 24 Dec 1979 TRs Basics Resurrected.

375 thoughts on “TRs minus Affinity

  1. Great article, Lana. When I did my VIII internship at AOLA, we had to continually lilsten to LRH model session tapes and drill “natural TRs”, TRs as LRH showed they should be done, not as him, but as oneself, naturally, and with interest. Best thing ever done to perfect my auditing. And I had done the TRs course twice plus all auditor courses from Level 0 through VIII and TRs done on each course and internship. “Fish and Fumble” was an instrumental demo tape used in Qual. And when one understands how ARC and TRs go together, well, the world is one’s oyster as the sayiing goes.

    • Chris,
      I came across a few tapes from the later ACCs done in 58, 59 where the “background music” to those LRH Model Auditing tapes is covered.

      Two of them are: Auditor Interest, 8 Aug 58 in the 20th American ACC and The Establishment of R, 28 Jan 59, in the 21st American ACC.

      There are more descriptions by LRH of TRs and the actual use of them in sessions in this time period, following the development of TRs 0-4, 6-9, but the above two for example, gave me the most reality on those Model Auditing tapes.

      Also, just after the Jan 59 tape, LRH introduced “muzzled” auditing. The issue in the Acad Levels, the Styles of Auditing, 6 Nov 64 HCOB is a summary of the line of materials developed from these taped lectures of the late 50s.

      There are plenty of comments and descriptions by Ron in these ACCs on the use of ARC, the communication skills of the TRs and a real comm cycle with the preclear interested in his own case and willing to freely talk to the auditor – and the admonitions against any sort of “marionette” type of thing.

      ARC, lacking Reality as in a robotic type of thing whether it’s machine like or super sweet or anything other than an actual, real communication, is not what auditing is about.

      I think that if LRH were to do a video of his TRs for some of the Sups under DM’s tutelage today, he’d likely be flunked as he fell outside of Dave’s idea of what is what.

          • Robin,
            There’s another lecture I just went through on my chrono study, on the London HPA course tapes, from April 59, the first one is called Beingness and Communication. He swung back around on TRs in 79, and that Auditor Beingness issue was written. This lecture from 59 is straight on that same line.

            Marvellous material, and the real KRC for this incredible person – the Auditor.

            • Jim,

              You’ll find Ron swinging back on his research line for instance if you study the HCOBs and listen to the lectures on Ser Facs on the BC you’ll see why he came up with R3SCA and then the processes R2-10/12 are the forerunners to Xdn,and FPRD etc.

              Just as he says in C/S Series 2.

        • Chris,
          That’s really good to hear, that tape being used 🙂

          For me all the Model Tapes just went “click” when I went through the these ACCs and in particular that Auditor Interest lecture.

          Good stuff!

  2. Thank-you, very much, Lana for the fantastic article with the exact correct LRH reference on it. You hit on a very large button for me on this. As a pre-GAT Class IV auditor, imagine how I felt, proud of myself for completing the CL IV internship and awarded my Gold Seal as a Cl IV when someone showed up in the Qual space and told me that I was not allowed to audit anyone until I completed the “New Golden Age of Tech” , “Upgrades or updates” or some such idiocy! Talk about invalidation! Man, “Start over from Student Hat onwards was all I had to do to regain the privilege of applying LRH standard tech and wear my auditor hat. It keyed in some evil purp as I think I wanted to kill someone. If only I had known the right target was Charlatan of the Board, I might have gone to visit him in person to practice my hand to hand combat training. Little did I know that the idiot was enthusiastically applying this “almost cold” approach by physically accosting Int Execs then shipping them down to the hole for life, as he did my good friend, Heber.

    Sorry for the on going itsa there. I’ll put a lid on it till CB or Ingrid takes me in. I could really use a 53 on this. Maybe RV or Jim?

    Anyway, thanks again for the correct indication. I feel better already. LFBD, VGI’s.

    Joe

    • Hey Joe,
      Thanks for your comment and you should be very proud of achieving your Gold Seal as a Class IV auditor! With the implementation of GAT (both 1 and 2) the order was that no one could audit until they have done their new training on the GAT materials — which is, per the LRH references on auditors, tantamount to cancellation of all auditor certificates (only done with an SP declare). In essence, COB declared all auditors with both GAT 1 and GAT 2, and then demanded that all retrain from the bottom up. If that aint invalidation, then I don’t know what is.
      A C/S 53 does wonders to handle BPC — but another very effective way to handle is TAKE A PC IN SESSION. You are qualified, trained and effective! Take charge and enjoy applying the tech to another. 🙂

      • Joe,

        Who gives a flying f-k what Dave says. Just do what Ron says:

        EXECUTIVE DIRECTIVE FROM L. RON HUBBARD

        LRH ED 431NT 29 November 1969

        ORG SERVICES

        Your attention is called to HCO PL 23 Nov 69 Amended which UPGRADES AND EXPANDS ORG COURSES AND SERVICES.
        SHs should at once resume their Dr. Courses.

        Field Auditors should be informed

        YOU CAN AUDIT ANY PROCESS FOR WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN CERTIFIED.

        That means ever certified.

        The point of Standard Tech and Standard Dianetics is so our orgs can guarantee their services. Thus WE in the orgs are sure of results.

        Look over this PL carefully and increase or restore your service.

        L Ron Hubbard

        LR

        • Excellent ref and point made Robin. Auditors have the ability to actually, effectively help their fellows. That is the whole game and it IS policy, as you’ve covered here with this reference, that Dianetic and Scientology auditors have the right guaranteed by LRH to help.

          Can’t be taken away. Not ever. By no one.

          • P.S. and as it is obvious by the policy, Scientology is yours to use and apply. The Axioms on which the entire Technology is based are our agreed upon postulates and considerations. If anybody owns these, it is us. We own the solution, it is OUR Scientology.

      • That’s an excellent point Lana. Retreads should be used in lieu of “redo’s” – at least per the guy who founded Scientology.

        ML Tom

      • Lana:

        Your comment about SP Declares and canceled certs highlights why ethics (justice) must be carefully administered. It takes a lot of work to attain certification to audit, and is not something undertaken lightly by a person. It is also a treasured skill. To casually take away someone’s right to audit by declaring them is, thus, a suppressive act in itself.

        Group justice must take into account the overall contribution, both in quality and quantity of a person as well as the act or acts they are considered guilty of. According to LRH, only 2-1/2 percent of the population is actually SP. As Man is basically good, it should be considered self-evident that he can walk back his occasional bad acts and redeem himself, without resorting to full on declares, unless he proves conclusively that his is part of the 2-1/2 percent.

        I say this so that when the time comes for us to again exercise group justice, we don’t fall into the same trap the Church did, decades ago. Too many good lives and bright futures were wasted because of hard and harsh justice, even before DM.

        Paul

        • Personally I think we should do what Ron says in the above RED and get auditors back in the chair and auditing again.

          And use one of the best weapons against the suppression of the Church and that is to “flourish and prosper”.

          As Ron says:

          YOU CAN AUDIT ANY PROCESS FOR WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN CERTIFIED.

          That means ever certified.

          There are probably hundreds if not thousands of auditors out there who are no longer connected to the Church. Who packed it in because of the invalidation and suppression directed against by the Church and terminals like Chaz Kember with the Orwellian Title of Auditor Activation Chief who’s directive to cease auditing unless they did the Golden Age of Tech probably deactivated more auditors than was ever “activated”.

          I know I wrote an Orders Query on it and being shown the RTC Field Auditor agreement.

          So what.

          That is *not policy*.

          The above *is* policy.

          In my opinion it is time we applied Scientology ourselves and stop following illegal and destructive orders. No matter who issued them.

          Orders are *not* senior to policy.

    • “I had to do to regain the privilege of applying LRH standard tech and wear my auditor hat. It keyed in some evil purp as I think I wanted to kill someone”. Hey Joe, in my book thats not an evil purp, thats the correct tone level for the situation.

      Great article Lana. I missed a lot of the gat stuff as I virtually just left in 95 coming back 2011, to have the privilege to experience Flags rampant out tech first hand.

      To me, if Scientology is not resulting in an individuals dynamics, improving, then its not Rons tech, simple as that.

      • 4a – Hey Joe, in my book thats not an evil purp, thats the correct tone level for the situation.

        Thank-you, 4a. With these acks, I’m getting more and more in the mood to DO something about it, like “flourish and prosper”.

        Joe

  3. Hey, Lana, (Super-thetan)

    I’m amazed at how right you are. Can I take this as my “Qual OK to audit” from the top jockey herself or should I see Jim or CB?

    Thanks, Lana.

    Joe

  4. Well I guess I was lucky to be kicked out years ago. I have relied on the public to tell me if my TRs are any good. It seems to me that if you want to handle people the first step is to establish ARC and in the practical world of real life, if I want to handle people I use ARC. Isn’t affinity a measure of how much life there is in a being? I assume cold Trs would be at death. Not a great tone to handle anything.
    to me that is what Keeping Scientology Working is all about. Using the materials to change conditions for the better. Towards the overall goal.
    You cannot handle an isness by force. but ARC works beautflly.
    DM is so far off the mark.

  5. The order for me to re-do Pro-TRs (GAT) was a big tipping point for me. I took it immediately as an invalidation and knew that I would never comply with the order.

    Interesting about the “almost cold” TRs. I’d observed its use but thought it was just an OOV thing. Its origins predate the 1994 mandate however; my earliest notice of it was with the International Finance Police that arrived in PAC ca.1993 for the purpose of giving everyone (EVERYONE!) a big withhold of nothing. Nobody expected The Spanish Inquisition: http://youtu.be/Tym0MObFpTI

    • PZ:

      The Finance Police predate even 1994. I remember a friend whose 2D was running a business in LA back in the mid-80s (before LRH moved on). He mentioned to me that something called the Finance Police was making the rounds to ensure that Scn businesses and their owners were paying money to the Church, one way or another. The more you made, the more you had to pay. We agreed this was someone’s demented wet dream, and had nothing to do with LRH.

      Paul

      • Yeah I remember the Finance Gestapo well and their Himmler like leader Wendell Reynolds. Seeing his photo next to his bio was who he reminded me of. Anyway according to Mike he doesn’t like anything like Heinrich Himmler so maybe I was thinking of someone else like Reinhard Heydrich 😉

        Anyways I was beginning to wonder about new Management’s style when they created such a post as “Financial Dictator”.

        Probably the only reason I’d hung around was because at least they weren’t messing with the Tech. At least back then.

        The justification was (I mean let’s call a spade a spade and an overt and overt) from Fred Harris or maybe someone else who I knew up lines is they had to replace the AG Finance Network after Herbie screwed the pooch according to the Policy Financial Irregs.

        Anyway even though intuitively it didn’t seem right at the time I sorta bought into it. Not entirely. Mind you. Like the justifications behind the Golden Age of Tech. I remained skeptical and became more skeptical as time went on.

        There was something wrong with the whole plan though I couldn’t put my finger on it at the time. Since there was so much confusion blowing off from the GO’s debacle at the time that it was hard to grasp onto any stable datum.

        Eventually though I had one of those slow simmering cognitions. You know the kind that some PC’s have sometimes have sometime after session but this one took years. After studying the scene from a more objective point of view.

        I realized that the whole scene at the time was just ripe for arbitraries of various kinds like replacing the AG Finance Network with something far worse.

        So Herbie committed some Financial Irregs. So he wrote a few arbitrary GO Dirs like the one on the Building Fund account that neither me or the AG I was word clearing could figure out.

        So what!

        The AG Finance Network worked just fine until Herbie started playing fast and loose with Finance Policy. Same with the GO until they came up with the not so “bright idea” to steal the files.

        In fact the Ol’man gives them nothing but praise in RJ 28.

        What happened was a certain terminals went criminal and other terminals tried to cover up their criminality.

        For instance do you abolish the Tech Division because it was taken over by several criminals and SPs (which was basically what happened at SH in the mid ’60’s according to the policy Tech Recovery) or do you handle the crims and SPs involved and replace the Tech Personell responsible ?(which is exactly what Ron did according to the policy)

        The fact is what has happened is that the new management who took over have been writing this script that has nothing to do with actual policy or tech for years and the play is finally ending and the curtain is slowly dropping while the fat lady is finally singing.

        • Funny how soon as the 3D Engram discussion board got put on hiatus (’cause it got derailed so badly), it all comes back over here! Makes it hard to read MS2 blogs.

          I think these blogs can be utilized quite effectively to strip false data on Tech issues and supply correct data (as Jim and Lana do in their tech articles), IF we can limit or stop altogether the diatribes on the CoS history. There is a lot of potential, but it can’t be hijacked and devolve again and again into just a rant forum. That needs to be taken into session.

          • Chris,
            The discussion and commentary here all falls within the purview of MS2’s guidelines, to the best of my observation anyway.

            Even your opinion on what the blog should be, falls within.

            We are fortunate here in that we have some very well-versed Scientologists contributing all sorts of ideas and viewpoints.

            It is inevitable that thetans without banks will have different responses. As well, a healthy ability to be fluid on the Tone Scale and toss back and forth some spicey particles, makes for a more enjoyable experience, n’est pas?

          • Oh please Chris,

            No one here is trying “hijack” this board. Some us here are expressing our opinion. I suggest you apply the Code of Scientologist and the Creed of the Church. Instead of forwarding some Conspiracy Theory that some of us are “hijacking” this board.

            As far as I have seen none of our comments or “rant”(s) as you call them violate any of the rules of this blog.

            I have a suggestion. If you don’t like something those of us who are allegedly “hijacking” this board are saying then I suggest you move onto another comment.

            Also False Data Stripping is done according to the HCOB on it not by reading some discussions on a blog.

                • LOL. Sorry for the comm lag, had to go for dinner with wife and kids.

                  Well, if you didn’t go misduplicating me, Robin, you woouldn’t get your head stuck up yer arse so often (I’m laffing, so don’t get yer knickers twisted – hey, isn’t that an LA heavy metal band?). I never said we should do FDSing here, so that’s the misduplication; I said MS2 blogs can strip off the false data someone might have on tech and that correct refs could be supplied in their stead.

                  As far as moving onto other threads, as we’re to demonstrate to Miss Lana and Master Jim we have understood the use of TRs in communication (lol), perhaps you can not go from TRs to DM to Wendell to Finance Police to SMERSH quite so often on these threads? I think then we could both prosper. 🙂

                  • That’s Twisted Sister but Knicker Twister sounds like a good name for just another band from LA 😉

                    Yeah we could stick to TRs instead of freewheeling the track but where’s the fun in that?

                    🙂

                    Reminds me of the lecture the Emeter and ARCXs where I think the Ol’man only mentioned either of them once and then took us on a tour through history.

                    One of my most fave lectures BTW. Sorta like Comm Cycle in Auditing which you’d think was about said subject but diverged into Marcabian culture. Another fave of mine but anyway….er….where was I…

                    Oh yeah.

                    We can stick to the topic if ya want but I personally find that kinda boring. I mean if ya want to learn how to do TRs read the above HCOB cited do the clays Ron recommends to do then read TRs Remodernized and do ’em until ya got ’em down.

                    I think the problem with the Church these days is they make look so complicated. I mean at least 20 packs of so called “Standard” Tech Drills on how one is supposed to fly ruds!

                    Give me a frickin’ break!

                    You fly ruds per the HCOBs Flying Ruds and Ruds Defs and Patter and if you can’t get the rud or ruds to fly per C/S Series 1 you do a GF or find someone to do one if you can’t.

                    Easy peasy!

                    The only problem I find with discussing tech is that it can lead to Verbal Tech.

                    Whereas talking about Smersh or Wendell or Miscavige (though he is my least fave subject and I’d rather talk about the other STDs instead) there isn’t really a chance of that occurring. Unless you give any of the above as somebody else’s item and try to indicate anyone of them as “the SP” then you’d probably end up with the fun and frolic Ron discusses in C/S Series 78.

                    If ya know what I mean?

                    So yes I believe we should have the correct refs etc. and it’s a good idea to post these per the policy on Franchise Promotion Musts and to discuss ’em like it says to do in there as long as we don’t digress into verbal tech and allow the occasional flights of fancy by some of us conspiracy buffs.

                    I’d just like to say that the above is my opinion and that anyone reading this should read the refs I’ve cited.

                    LR

                    • RV: I mean at least 20 packs of so called “Standard” Tech Drills on how one is supposed to fly ruds!

                      I just got a hold of those GAT I things recently (they got leaked not too long ago) … unbelieavable how they bloat piecemealed it together. Every little tiny action then arbitrarily broken down into sub-actions for drilling which you are then expected to remember. The impression I got from looking them over the other day is by the time you actually get into the chair to audit the PC … the importance has been shifted … auditor thinks he’s now some sort of precision engineer pulling off this gig called “A session”. It’s a thing he does following a routine, and as long as he can perform all actions he learned perfectly and something goofs up, well … he’s done it perfectly, therefore it must be the PCs fault. They shifted the importance of auditing.

                    • “he’s done it perfectly, therefore it must be the PCs fault. They shifted the importance of auditing.”

                      Exactly.

                      One of my biggest objections about these so called drills. That and the fact that many of them violate the Comm Cycle in Auditing.

                    • Exactly FM and they had a drill on chasing down a dirty needle and practically doing a 20 button prep check in order to get a rud to fly???

                      Also if you’re getting a DN on a rud then it’s not necessarily a withhold but could be and likely is *out TRs*. Just like it says in the HCOB on Dirty Needles.

                      As far as I’m concerned these drills totally violate point 4 of KSW.

          • Most certainly there is a liability connected with delving into the history of Scientology, as one can witness with just about every blog out there having gone to the dogs. It can be a fine line. I would guess as long as the Mods keep a tight leash to ensure it doesn’t degenerate into endless natterfests making sure posts are constructive in nature, it should be OK for the most part. Technical discussions and wins from the tech I generally find higher toned whereas the CO$ retros are often somewhat charged and negative. Some histories, esp. the ones Bernie Wimbush has posted, are very fascinating to me as they often fill in some blanks to the trails up the bridge. I personally find RVs post quite interesting and informative, and as long the majority of discussion posts don’t lean to heavily into the past, I’m good on it.

            But I prefer tech posts, some very nice heads-up posts from Jim Logan, interesting retros from RV, your keen insight on technical matters in respect to auditing and variety of viewpoints on matters by other posters.

            The wins from the tech of course top all else.

            • FM,

              I think the only liability you are going to run into regarding a History of Scn is assigning wrong cause to what happened to the Church. This instead of blowing BPC churns up more.

              Another thing is that many when they discuss the past don’t look at it objectively and add their own HE&R and “shame, blame and regret” particularly *blame*.

              Regarding wrong cause. Just the other day I was going over that booklet Church Management use to hand out on Command Channels which by the way promoted a top down management structure that totally ignores what is called “Horizontal Fast flow” which kinda explains how the Organization became a virtual dictatorship.

              I mean you look at the so called “Command Structure” and from my point of view there was definitely more chiefs than indians but anyway.

              One looks at the VFP for say OSA which is basically to gain acceptance for Scientology.

              BTW the GO’s old purpose as stated in Policy was to promote the *indispensability* of Scn. The Ol’man if you read the PL Quality Counts didn’t give a damn about whether Scn was accepted as he says by a “bunch of Wogs”.

              So as one can see by various efforts to be “mainstream” and “accepted” (which is probably a big button behind this whole “Ideal Org” program. So the public can point to these so called “Cathedrals” and say something like “see, see, we’re just like any other Church” etc. ad nauseam) has basically ripped the Organization apart and distracted it from actually servicing the public it has.

              Anyway that is my opinion but this one change in the purpose of OSA has caused a lot of trouble by directing the public and staff toward a slavering urge to gain acceptance which is totally off purpose.

              • Re: “… assigning wrong cause to what happened to the Church. This instead of blowing BPC churns up more.”

                I agree. It would be useful, however, to catalog all the tech, admin and ethics arbitraries that’s been introduced. Anyone know if such a list is already being compiled?

                • Hi Pazooter,

                  I’ve been working on a list myself and it’s turning into something like one of those Goals Lists they used to write back in the day of SOP Goals 😉

                  But I’ll give you some of the high points I’ve found:

                  First the abolishment of the GO was one major factor. Since this office served a purpose as covered in HCOPL 1 March 1966:

                  TO HELP LRH ENFORCE AND ISSUE POLICY, TO SAFEGUARD SCIENTOLOGY ORGS, SCIENTOLOGISTS AND SCIENTOLOGY AND TO ENGAGE IN LONG TERM PROMOTION.

                  True the GO diverted from this purpose but that was no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water.

                  Then they eliminated the Office of Controller whose job was according to policy of January 29 1969:

                  The duties of the post consist of coordination of all Scientology orgs and activities.

                  Of which I always thought that Mary Sue did an excellent job of until she got pulled into the whole GO 1361 debacle.

                  Better than what is going on now which looks more like fixation than actual coordination.

                  Then there is the elimination of WW which controlled none SO Orgs and acted as a buffer against the Sea Org which as we can see became totally corrupt.

                  The GO and Controllers office acted as a check against the Sea Org “moving in” like they did with the Franchise Network and protected them in practice.

                  To be honest they benignly neglected the Franchise or Mission Network and pretty much allowed them to do what thou wilst as long as they got their Franchise Fees which seemed to work better than placing them under the thumb of SMI which has basically destroyed the whole Network.

                  SoCo’s handling of NN, CCHR, Criminon was definitely more competent than ABLE’s current handling of those same organizations which used to have a good rep at one time and now are flapping in the wind.

                  I mean as far as I’m concerned CCHR is a joke. In fact they’re so fanatical about eliminating Psychiatry that most of their original allies like the Anti-Psychiatry movement started by Dr. Szasz have totally abandoned them.

                  NN’s so called Drug (mis)education program which BTW is supported by the DEA has pretty much been dropped from school curriculums and their NNs are being sued because of their blatant out tech.

                  As far as I’m concerned they’re as bad as Charter and National Medical Enterprises and other Health Insurance rip-off artists.

                  Like I said Pazooter that is the start of a rather long list.

                  There are other things like how the hell did CMO gain as much power as it did?

                  From what I understand a Commodore’s Messenger was basically a page who worked for Ron at one time running his personal messages to staff and running back their responses. Yet they seemed to have superseded the original Commodore Staff Aides and managed to run rough shod over WDC like a bunch of spoiled little brats. Yet no one spanked them and threw them in their room for some “downtime”.

                  Things like that that I’m working on figuring out.

  6. Good spotting, Lana! I remember with fondness Red Van Dyke. I think he was RTC Rep at ASHO in the mid-80s. Very high ARC. I hate to even imagine him going “almost cold”, and I sincerely hope he never did. Great article. I’ll bring it into my courseroom to read to my students!

    • Hi Dave,

      Red was Snr C/S ASHO Day during the later 80s and into the 90s when I was doing my NED, FPRD and VI course internships (under Harold Lieberz as intern supe). I also did my Class V, VI and FPRD C/S Internships under him and James Marchand. He was a fabulous terminal. He later became KOT Int, although he blew from that post, was recovered, and then blew again. Too much out-tech going on at that time for him, I believe. Red was instrumental in my being a cracker-jack auditor and top-notch C/S. I’ll never forget him.

      Glad to hear Observation Academy is doing well. 🙂

      • Chris, it’s good to know that Red Red broke free of the RTC. But this also raises a huge question (in my thought, at least), WHERE IS HE NOW? He was on Toronto staff in the 70’s and came from an outer district of Toronto that I can’t recall at the moment. Point being here is that Red was a very caring and on-source guy. Has he really been so silent since leaving the SO?

        • One night, ages ago, Red, myself and probably my oldest friend in this life George Matz, imbibed a quart of Tequila at a party. We took turns swigging this stuff in a little kitchen in the apartment where the party was held.

          Now being all three of us, staff members at the time, we’d not drink all that much, so this Tequilla sure took to all of us. I ended up talking to an apple, George found himself in some sort of ranting escapade in the lobby of one of the larger downtown Toronto hotels, and Red relayed the next day he ended up at home, not having the vaguest clue how he got there.

          I’m quite sure Red is a practicing Scientologist, still, as I and my ol’ buddy George. Even though we all find ourselves in the scene that DM and his ilk have provided for randomity.

    • Hey Dave,

      My Shiroka!

      How ya doin’ man?

      Hear you got that ol’ warhorse Dougie Davidson workin’ for ya all up there.

      I remember when we used to joke that when Doug did his OTs there’d be a planetary shift.

      Anyway I think it was on or around the time we had the big Northridge Quake down here that Dougie was on OT III 😉

      Or at least that’s what Annette toll me 🙂

      BTW say hi to Nora for me big guy and the rest of the gang.

      LR

  7. I had the pleasure of doing the Pro TRs course with Clay Table Processing – the exact handling for this situation. It blew my mind and it was so easy to actually do the TRs afterward. The processing is SO easy to do as well. I recommend it.

  8. Ron really wanted pc’s betterment and he gave us incredible tools for that. DM and his cohorts aren’t interested in ARC or PCs getting better. Only he could come up with gang bang sec checks!! He wants intimidated pcs.

    • Now, now Ingrid let’s give credit where credit’s due.

      Actually it wasn’t Dave who came up with Gang Bang sec checks but Wendell Reynolds former Financial Dictator and head of the Finance Police.

      • The “gang” is just the expression of the suppressive use of generality. Overwhelm with “everybody”.

        Has zero to do with what a real use of this incredible tech is intended to achieve.

        There’s a lecture from April 59, in the London HPA tapes, (released as the Skills of a Theta Being series it appears), entitled The Overt-Motivator Sequence that is probably the clearest statement I’ve run across on this whole phenomena, and its use to unburden a being, free them from not-ising and the manifestations of the Axioms on the “lie” and from there enable a thetan to get to the truth of life and as-is the Bank.

        What a difference an intention makes in how Scientology Tech is used. And the gains that can be made.

        • Jim,

          Yeah that whole thing was about as suppressive as it gets.

          I had to personally sort out cases who had experienced it first hand. I think the recent release of the Senate’s Investigation on torture or “enhanced interrogation” comes close.

          Debatable if being stuck in a room with a bunch of screaming SO execs compares to water boarding but I’d say it comes close.

          Experienced a milder version of it myself when some exec didn’t like the fact that I wrote a KR on him.

          Aside from all the HE&R connected to this action which isn’t really a “sec check” but merely accusing someone of having overts is that it is a gross case of *Illegal Auditing* or more accurately reverse “auditing” and the actual intention is to cave someone in and in the case of the Mission Holders so that they could extort money out of them.

          My 2 bits.

      • I beg to differ, DM was using it during the infamous mission holders conference raid by CMOI in November 1982. I seen it with my own eyes. In fact her had Mithoff doing it! Wendell had not yet invented the Int Finance Police. That was in mid-1983.

        • Tom,

          I see that you ain’t too proud to beg but the fact is that the International Finance Police was established after Herbie Parkhouse was removed from the post of AGF WW in late 81 early 82 and that if you look over the dramatis personæ involved in the infamous Mission Holders’ Conference you will find Wendell Reynolds introduced International Finance Dictator:

          http://www.xenu.net/archive/audit/missions.html

          So no it was not Mithoff but Reynolds who pretty much kicked off what were called “Gang Bang Sec Checks” as part of their so called “audits” (for which they charged the Mission Holders a staggering 5gs a day to perform) of Mission or Franchise Holders.

          BTW the way “sec check” is a misnomer since what Reynolds and his team of Finance Police did was put the person on the meter and accuse them of financial overts and of withholding money from Management.

          The practice stirred up so much BPC in the field that it was eventually stopped and the Financial Dictatorship was abolished around late ’83 early ’84 and the name was changed to International Finance Director.

          BTW I remember when the SOED was issued which was way before ’83 and being totally outraged by having some kind “Finance Dictator” being placed in charge of finances.

          • I’d just like to add that it was not a “sec check” in the sense of the word which we all know means security check but was using the trappings of Scientology in order to extort money.

            Such as in this case they used an E-meter instead of a gun.

            That said. This so called system was not invented by Reynolds or Miscavige since there was already a similar system in play before this known as tag team regging. Where regs would gang up on a prospect.

            A “system” still used by the IAS and other money grubbers.

            What it is is just a total perversion of the laws of auditing.

  9. A most excellent article, Lana. 🙂

    I’ve had the good fortune never having been personally audited by any cold chrome steelbots. Seems things had changed after I left.

    • FM

      That level of “TRs” is what we used to attribute to newbies who hadn’t quite grasped the concept of communication and knew absolutely nothing about the ARC triangle.

      Like…like ….ummmm…you know who. Who’d probably never done a TRs course in his life and probably couldn’t pass a TR video if his life depended on it.

      • Considering they’ve been using non-SCN actors in their TRs films, who probably know how to act but not how to be there, should I be surprised?

        • Good point FM.

          In response not really.

          Personally I loved the original Tech Films and got a lot out of them.

          The new ones that I was forced to watch as part of the “Golden Age of Tech” suck big time.

          Don’t know what the Phase II ones are like but I can’t imagine they got any better.

          • Interesting. Good to hear your take on them in terms of a highly-trained technical terminal, since you have comparative knowledge on it.

            I only saw the original LRH TR films, the latter was just news to me through various grapevines after I finally came to play with the big boys and girls in Indieland. Was an awesome Pro TRs course with CTP back in ’93 running on a decent ’91 checksheet too. (Unfortunately we don’t have that particular one out here.)

            • Fortunately they still had the Original Pro TRs film but the others….

              Well I used to love the original auditors code where the C/S calmly leans back after his folder page tells him that this is a “different case” lights a cigarette and says “there are no different cases my dear.” compared to the later one with the stodgy C/S who sounds like he has a bad case of hemorrhoids and *needs* a cigarette when reciting the same line.

              Then there’s the false TA film where the new Bill Keen looks like some drugstore cowboy and just doesn’t have the charisma of the earlier Bill Keen. I voted that one as one those tech films most likely to put you to sleep.

              Like the Golden Age of Tech while attempting to improve on the original all they did was f_k it up.

              • I consider replacing LRH Tech films a tech degrade. Does Dan Koon running away really justify tossing the originals and replacing with them other ones not approved by LRH? This is no different than chucking valid HCOBs and reissuing them in the form of an altered makeover never based on LRH instructions.

                It’s a suppressive act to deliberately withhold actual LRH materials.

                • FM,

                  It’s their PR area that is totally out of control. First it started with the lectures by “editing” out or redacting anything that was considered politically incorrect then they edited out any mention of past “SP”s like NIBs and Reg and anyone else who ended up with golden rod then started air brushing out Ron’s cigarettes and his ashtrays and removed them from his office even though there was no revision in the LC’s Checklist for his office etc.

                  On and on and on like a bunch of lil’ Winston Smiths in 1984 dumping anything and everything down some Memory Hole in an effort to make Scientology “acceptable” and “mainstream” which seems to have had a reverse effect that none there seems to have noticed being cut off from the fruits of observation and all that.

                  So now they are making “Tech” Films with non Scientologists probably cause they’re afraid that they’ll blow from all the off policy, out tech and injustice.

                  Kinda sad but that’s the way it is now.

                  • Case in point was an LRH lecture where he found himself up in the Van Allen belt, so the CO$ pulled it telling Ted Koppel it’s no longer part of current Scientology to appease extant scientific data. With the more recent discoveries, are they going to reissue it?

                    Same when LRH stated he nearly got run over by a train on Venus. No one is going to disagree there are no trains on Venus, but the lecture still nicely correlates and furnishes insight what goes with the case as LRH was about to unravel the implant data on the CC and OT II among other findings. To me, the lecture was a perfect delineation on the power of the case over one’s perceptions.

                    • FM,

                      Actually as I remember it Miscavige saying that there was no such lecture and denied that Ron ever gave it.

                      What I found so shocking was that someone who was supposedly the head of RTC was either so ignorant of the tech itself or had such a lack of understanding of PR that he would lie openly on national TV.

                      Especially since “Between Life Implants” was one of the more popular lectures among BC students and any reporter would be able to verify that he lied by cracking open a set of Tech Vols and find the lecture listed there.

                      Regarding Venus. There has been more than a dozen probes sent there but we still haven’t gotten any accurate detailed images of what is actually on the surface.

                      http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/targetFamily/Venus

                      As for the Van Allen Belt. I never heard anything in that lecture that contradicts any current Scientific data about it and from my understanding of the phenomenon Ron’s description seemed quite accurate and seems to align with NASA’s research of the region:

                      http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/rbsp/main/

                      Personally I think that there has been a coordinated effort by certain factions in the Government for reasons of “National Security” to invalidate the state of OT at least publicly and that the Church currently is playing along in this game.

                      It is my opinion that the success of the Remote Viewing Project scared the bejesus out of them and now there is an ongoing effort to put the Genie back in the bootle.

                      But that is my opinion and I can’t prove it. Though what I can pretty much prove is that the Church has now veered away from those abilities covered in the earlier lectures on the State of OT.

                      For instance the original OT IV if run correctly will produce a Thetan Exterior, V and VI give the thetan familiarity with operating outside of the body. Yet these levels are no longer part of the Bridge.

                      Why is that?

                      There is no HCOB or Policy that canceled those levels yet they are no longer considered part of Church doctrine.

                      Omitted levels is a definite out point. One big enough to drive not just a Sherman Tank but a few very large semis through.

  10. Great handling, Lana! Thank you for communicating this very important truth.
    Reading this reminded me of an experience I once had on course years ago. I was doing meter drills on the NED course and for “some reason” could not get reads. ….a little background: at the time I was having a rough time in my personal life and had a lot going on. Well, I had a wonderful auditor-trained course supervisor who came over to observe my flailing efforts and said, “I see the problem. You’re too low toned.” My first reaction was something on the order of, “Hey, you can’t say that! That’s invalidation!” But before the words could pass my lips he whipped out a bulletin on the Mood Drills and told my twin and I to get started doing mood drills from -40 to +40. It took a couple of days. My tone level (affinity level) came way up. After finishing we went back to EM Drill 19 and, lo and behold, with no further drilling I was getting huge reads on the prepared lists. Magic! Or maybe the meter really does read on ARC. : -)
    Also, by some strange coincidence, the difficulties which I had been having in life vanished naturally, like mist rising from a lake in the morning light.

    Miscavige really tries to give his disease to everyone, doesn’t he?
    Thanks for pointing out LRH’s remedy! So simple. The sure cure for Miscavigitis.

  11. A prominent blogger in our Field apparently has an “introduction” he wrote to give “context” to TRs when he’s instructing people on the subject. It draws from Oriental philosophy and quantum physics. When he wrote about this, I knew he was well and truly part of the “Dark Side”.

    In 1976, I did the HAS course, which had ample and complete materials from LRH writings explaining anything you’d care to know to orient you with regard to the TRs. When I was done, there was no question about what TRs did, why you drilled them, and how they fit into life and auditing. You might not be an “expert” on TRs when you finished the course, but you certainly knew and could demonstrate them, and why. And this course was designed for people right off the street, of which I was one.

    Oriental philosophy and quantum physics and TRs. Seriously? LOL.

    Paul

      • RV:

        If you consider combining it with psychology “moving beyond”, then sure. Also this particular person now spells Scientology with a lower case “s”. I think he also has about 4 “himself help” books out now.

        Paul

        • I love those guys who “move beyond”, I sure wish one of them could explain to me where they move to! And if they have moved there, why are they still here. Its enough to send a guy spinny:)

        • Yes I see what definition of “moving beyond” you’re using there Scat 😉

          Who knows maybe at some point he may find “closure” as well 😉

          Yeah I’ve read some of his “help himself” books on Amazon. I imagine they are quite lucrative. Funny how he bitches and moans about the HCOPL HCO It’s First Substance and Duty actually being enforced in his case.

          Paulette Cooper in drag 🙂

          • Just to add not that I support anything “Op Freak Out” or anything like that. But M should know that the Church tends to respond reactively these days as covered in Ron’s Essay on Authoritarianism.

            For along time I thought they were going after him because he was simply auditing in the field or a least that was the impression I got and then I realized that Trey pretty much audits unmolested.

            Aside from the fact that Mhas self published several books on the subject I definite no no per the policies on copyrights and such in Vol 1 is the fact that not only does M knows where the bodies are buried but he buried many of them himself.

            Also he has a problem with applying the HCOPL PTS Type A Handling the section about not creating antagonism.

            That said and more on topic I’m sure M has a problem with TRs (though this is my opinion) since he was to a large degree one of the key enforcers of the Golden Age of Tech as IG RTC.

            • *** Video removed by moderators. MS2 is not here to ridicule or pick fights with others, whether they are Scientologists or not (any more). Let’s keep the conversation above 2.0 please.

              • Hey FM,

                Maybe Marty should start a franchise of some kind regarding his philosophical rambling like KFC but instead of “finger lickin’ good”.

                Well I’m sure ya got the concept 😉

                The sad irony is that Marty as IG RTC was probably on the Pro TRs and Metering final pass which took forever.

                Now it all becomes clear why.

                Sheeesh.

                • Funny yet sad in a way to see Marty’s TRs so badly out. Hopefully at some point he’ll get his false data stripped and his mis-us on the subject cleared.

                  As Ron says in the RED by the same name The World Begins with TR 0 and ain’t that the truth.

                  I had this cognition sometime back that aside from obvious SPs and possible dark conspiracies is the fact that many of those in the Church these days suffer from out TRs. Particularly TR 0.

                  Back in the old days some SP would walk down North Berendo now LRH way and carry some placard telling us we were a cult and we were a bunch of whack jobs and students and PCs would just go about there business being there and going to course and auditing or whatever.

                  Nowadays PAC Security comes around and tells everybody to go away and hide somewhere.

                  A definite lack of confront.

                  I remember back in the old days if the AG PR of our Org had someone like Anonymous perched on her front door she probably would have invited them in for coffee and cake and asked them what their upset was.

                  In other words would have *confronted* them and maybe handled their upset.

                  Again nowadays you see youtube videos of these protestors surrounding the Org and the staff and public cowering inside.

                  Either that or they send some psycho nut case out there to antagonize them.

                  Where does it say in any of the TRs that you antagonize the person you are supposed to be confronting?

                  Pathetic.

                  So much for “confronting and shattering” suppression.

                  • Well said. If one wanted to sabotage all the works of Scientology, TR’s would be a great target. And turning confront into confrontation a perfect place to begin. Intention is cause.

                    • Exactly Pazooter.

                      You’re right on the money there.

                      Confrontation instead of confront I think became the style of “management” at a certain point and then infected auditor training sort of like a virus.

                      Especially when sec checking came back in in the early ’80’s. Along with squirrel actions like SRAs.

                      Even back in the mid 70’s I remember Bill Foster the ED of the Toronto Org bellowing like some wounded water buffalo at his execs.

                      The fact that his office within hearing distance of the Academy didn’t seem to phase him.

                      I also remember the HCO Sec Blair Sisson always going off on his Comm Off Kalco like that Marine Corp Sargent in Full Metal Jacket. Total inval and eval.

                      True occasionally one has to go into anger to impinge at times but these guys seemed stuck in that tone level.

                      They definitely had “anger issues” 😉

                      A lot of people go poor Bill Franks etc. but from I understand he was the worst of the worst.

                      The word was that when he and his Storm Troopers from CMOI hit GOWW they kicked in the doors and caused as much mayhem and destruction as they could. Much like the FBI before them.

                      Talk about “anger management” 😉

                      I think with such stellar examples many SO went into the “winning valance”.

                      Anyway I remember when I was non-SO at ASHO then later at AO a lot of public and many SO members I think preferred to be audited by us because we didn’t seem to have that accusative confrontational style that a lot of SO auditors had developed which I think had less to do with their training and more to do with the environment they were in.

                      As far as intentionally sabotaging TRs. I think you may be on to something here Pazooter as many of the so called GAT drills blatantly violate the auditing comm cycle.

                      I remember reading over one drill where the auditor asks for an ARCX or something and the PC says “no” so the drill instructs the auditor to quote TR4 unquote the question.

                      Why would you “TR4” a question that the PC has already answered?

                      That isn’t one isolated incident. There are many such flaws in those drills that totally violate the comm cycle and the HCOB on Arbitraries. I listed all these errors and practically got writer’s cramp doing it. Yet nothing was done because those drills are practically sacred.

                      Anyone who thinks that those drills will somehow make a “perfect auditor” has their cranium firmly implanted in their rectum as far as I’m concerned.

                      On the off chance that the TRs are drilled correctly. Any good work the TRs supervisors have done is pretty much undone when their students do those drills IMHO.

                    • And before that Emile Gilbert has his own style of crudeness. Sorry to hear that about Blair. He wasn’t always like that. And Kaoko (spelling?) was a sweetheart. Arbitraries worked into the Admin TR’s maybe?

                    • RV: There are many such flaws in those drills that totally violate the comm cycle and the HCOB on Arbitraries. I listed all these errors and practically got writer’s cramp doing it.

                      Very interesting post. Thank you. 🙂

                    • RV: Yes when Emile became CO Can me and a guy named Don Johnson used to call him the “Fat Frog”. Never to his face. Mind you

                      Somewhat nerdy-looking thin guy with glasses and a panache for dark humour?

                    • Robin,
                      I knew and worked daily with Bill Foster and Blair Sisson. Bill was part of the Command Team that came from Flag in the early 70s, following the FEBC. He had that characteristic “fire breathing”, that unfortunately became the Stat Push, no question, In fact, on his arrival in Toronto on Garrison Mission, he took me as a wet-behind-the-ears Supervisor, and called me on the carpet for what seemed like a timeless period, he having been personally briefed by LRH on how to get a Course Room rolling.

                      Well, I took that dressing down, and turned it around and handled my 8 or so semi-conscious students, with Bill’s intention through me, and my own added and within a month or two we had more than 250 active students on course, winning and getting trained and going in session. It was a fantastic scene.

                      Blair and Kauko Kaarianen had one of the best relationships there could be. I know, as I lived and worked with both of them.

                      I recall one time Kauko was on reception as the Dir Comm and we had a particularly busy night in the Avenue Road Org. The phone was ringing, bodies coming in and out of the entrance in a continuous stream, letters out by staff churning and all as random as could be. Kauko was a bit stressed. So Blair as his senior came up to help him get on top of it and get him to complete cycles to get some order in and sort it out. He asked Kauko “what is man’s deadliest desease?”

                      A comm lag ensued as Kauko thought it over and finally, with his Finnish accent and his wonderful expression he said ” multiple sclerosis?” at which both gales of laughter ensued. It blew the whole thing and another night of production occurred.

                      Nah, Blair Sisson was one of the good guys at Toronto, and worked his butt off, and took care of his people.

                      Now, how the heck did I miss you back in the day in Toronto Org? What were you doing there?

                    • I remember Kauko – he married my ex-wife! And when I was down there doing the DPF one time, I’d see him and her together, key in, go write up some O/Ws, key out, do some MEST work (20/10 theory), see Kauko and Linda together again, key back in, go write some more O/Ws, key out, etc. etc. Helluva time, but an amazing result at the end of it.

                      Kauko was a great guy, though. Hope he’s doing well.

                    • I have no idea how I missed YOU there, Jim. But thank you for this scenario. Yes, Blair was one of the good guys, as was Susan. And Kauko was a total delight. I’d finished my 2½ year contract at Toronto (HGC Auditor last year there) in the Fall of 1973 and went on to be Tech, and later ED of the Winnipeg org under Fred Harris. So many good Өn’s that time, that place. I think Sara Cohen (Qual) may have mentioned you in a letter to me after I left.

                    • P.S. As a note, the gag in the question from Blair to Kauko is of course the HCOB, Man’s Deadliest Disease, in the Q&A series.

                    • Jim,

                      I guess you’re impression of Blair was different than mine due to your personal experience.

                      Me, I was standing in reception and there was Blair reaming Kalco out about something. So that was my first impression which I admit might have been the wrong one.

                      Same with Bill Foster. Maybe if he had of moved his office out of hearing distance of the Academy I might have had a better opinion of him.

                      Bill Franks well I knew several people who worked with him that he was Mr Intimidation incarnate. Maybe not as bad as Rocky Stump who used to carry a loaded 45 from what I’ve heard.

                      BTW yes Don was a somewhat nerdy guy who wore glasses and liked to imitate Clint Eastwood in Dirty Harry especially the line about the 44 Magnum which I’ll put here as long as MaBu doesn’t object to our crude American form of entertainment 😉

                    • So, Robin, you were in the Academy in Toronto when Bill Foster was the CO? Ron Turnbull, Real Laplaine and I were in the Academy supervising.

                      If you were there then, were you in the Courseroom? If you could here Bill from the Acad, then I was in the Acad, and apparently so were you, so that is interesting.

                      Tell me about your time in the Acad in Toronto when Bill Foster was there.

                    • Ah, Ron Turnbull – there’s a name from the past.

                      Speaking of names, what about Graham van Zant and George Baillie and Andy Hoare and Martin (somebody) and there were a couple others my brother used to hang with back then that hung together some. And do you recall a Frank Davis, Jim?

                    • Pazooter, I got there in early 75 so you’d left by then. I knew Fred Harris. (I was born in Winnipeg too!)

                    • “(I was born in Winnipeg too!)”

                      Well, now THAT explains it! You’re suffering from brain freeze! lol

                    • Chris,
                      Yep, I know all those fellas, we spent time together on staff and even hung out on the weekend occassionally. I got some stories that we’ll jab about when you come out to Nova Scotia.

                      The only one that I don’t recall clearly is Frank Davis.

                    • Frank said he was there until about ’73 (maybe it was ’72). He then went to SH to do his SHSBC. He’s now a Class VIII operating out of the mid-west in the USA. Might have left before you got there.

                    • Frank was there when I transferred out of TOR in October ’73. He was there briefly in and out in ’71. This from my conversations with Frank.

                    • “So, Robin, you were in the Academy in Toronto when Bill Foster was the CO? Ron Turnbull, Real Laplaine and I were in the Academy supervising.
                      If you were there then, were you in the Courseroom? If you could here Bill from the Acad, then I was in the Acad, and apparently so were you, so that is interesting.
                      Tell me about your time in the Acad in Toronto when Bill Foster was there.”

                      Jim we’re getting so many comments here that it’s hard to find the reply button on some I’ve threads. So I put this reply under pazooter.

                      Hope you get this.

                      Anyway I was there doing the Hubbard Practicing Dianeticist Course. You know the one were some chuckle headed knuckle head at AVC put EM 25 on the check sheet (Ya know the ones that made hardened meter vets threaten to defenestrate themselves by the nearest window open or not) Anyway I think it was with your help and my twins patience that I actually got through EM 25 in one day (well actually it was one day and one very long night) so if I didn’t thank you then I’m thanking you now big guy.

                  • Chris,
                    The only reason I went to Winnipeg is I’d already settled on who I wanted to be Mom for that life, earlier. She was from Montana, but ended up with a Nova Scotian husband. So, off I went to find her and there she was in Winnipeg. It was August.

                    Now, years later, moving back to T.O. from Oakland, California, I came into Winnipeg driving my U-Haul, again, in August. This time it was below freezing, and chilled to the bone. Dang!!

                    Nothing like the cold Arctic air coming down, clean, clear and as cold as could be.

                    I only lived there a couple of years, then it was down East – where the warming Gulf Stream eases the freeze. My body thawed 🙂

              • Considering he recently stated ‘Indie SCN’ is a failed experiment, I thought I would point out the actual source of failure. 🙂

                • I agree FM. As far as I’m concerned the “Indie” movement causes all the trouble they complain of by thumbing their noses at the Church with these silly “Doubt Formulas” where they declare their “independence” and such.

                  Personally I felt that doing this sort of thing was violating the policy PTS A Handling by creating antagonism and First Policy as well.

                  I tried pointing this out on Marty’s blog but was accused of being chicken.

                  Then I objected to their idiotic “solution” of petitioning the Obama Administration to have the (in)Justice Department and their F_king Bunch of Idiots AKA FBI to “investigate” the Church (as if we didn’t have enough Government interference interfering in our First Amendment rights) which I think was one of the things that got me 86ed.

                  I remember when the Obama administration put their petition in some circular file which I expected they would. One probably because of Waco they wisely wanted to stay clear of any Religious dispute and two because many of the names on the list were anonymous handles (as if the Government is going to take a petition seriously that isn’t signed with a John Henry of some kind) and Marty threatened to abandon working for the Obama campaign. As if Obama needed him to get re-elected.

                  But it shows what an overinflated opinion Marty has of himself. As if he is a king maker of some kind and that the 2012 election would be swayed by the whack jobs who comment on his site.

                  ‘Nuff said 😉

                  • RV: Personally I felt that doing this sort of thing was violating the policy PTS A Handling by creating antagonism and First Policy as well.

                    I tried pointing this out on Marty’s blog but was accused of being chicken.

                    I pointed out something similar, in that if you’re gonna rattle the CO$ cage, don’t come back and complain they’ve kicked your a$$. He knew what he was in for to begin with. You see his posters expressing accolades sympathy and tears for all the bad things the CO$ has done to him, but then he actively pulled it in. If he were still on board with LRH, I would certainly support him, but denigrating the subject as he has been doing, it would be merely just pocorn hour to me now if they were to do a cornfield “Nicky Santoro” number on him. Every bit the SP DM is.

                    • Exactly FM,

                      Used to see the same phenomenon on ESMB. Someone would natter and whine about how badly they were done by the Church then motivate for pages of text while everyone on the board held hands and sang Kumbaya but as soon as anyone said anything good about the subject they’d be all over them like a pack of piranha.

                      Same phenomenon on ARS which is why I skipped over to belief net for a while. Then when it was getting kinda slow someone suggested I should join the Ex Scientologist Message Board.

                      First I said nah ’cause I don’t consider myself an “Ex Scientologist”.

                      Anyway short story long. The guy said neither was he and at least check it out. So I did. Some good intel but mostly hand wringing, gnashing of teeth and crying in their beer.

                      Just what you’d expect from low responsibility cases. Worse though was that Emma was allowing the anti cult crowd who had never been Scientologists like Zingh and others who in one would could be described as nothing but “carping critics” to put it mildly or just down right SPs.

                      Those who enjoyed bashing Ron and the subject. You know the usual nut cases who hang out Tony Ortega’s blog and are stupid enough to think that Russell Miller is actually a biographer when in fact he’s just a low life hit man who uses a Word Processor instead of a rifle.

                      Anyway. Since we’re on the subject of M&M. As you remember their blogs were a relatively safe space at one time like the SA blog was once. Where one could discuss the merits of the subject without being called out by the internet peanut gallery. Until it was infiltrated by the anti-Scientology Nazis who felt their sacred right to Freedom of Speech was infringed upon which is typical of the criminal mind.

                      As I remember like here the rule *was* you could post on the on SA blog as long as you didn’t attack Ron or the Subject. Yet no one their seems to have told these carping critics and their big potty mouths somewhere else if they were gonna dis Ron or the subject. Yet the brain trust over there just smiled benignly like those guys Ron talks about in the policy on KRs and believe it or not in many cases defended them.

                      To sum it up. I don’t know if M&M are suppressive. But I do know like their erstwhile ally they’ve committed a whole pascal of Suppressive Acts.

                    • Just to add:

                      “now if they were to do a cornfield “Nicky Santoro” number on him.”

                      Pretty funny when ya think of it. But then what would OSA do if they whacked Marty 😉

                      “Every bit the SP DM is.”

                      Yeah they remind me of two recently divorced Exs who are both in the same tone level 🙂

                    • Chris: Just what you’d expect from low responsibility cases. Worse though was that Emma was allowing the anti cult crowd who had never been Scientologists like Zingh and others who in one would could be described as nothing but “carping critics” to put it mildly or just down right SPs.

                      All just useless nonsensical natter now … they’re also on their way petering out as most of them are no longer interested in CO$ matters.

                      Chris: Anyway. Since we’re on the subject of M&M. As you remember their blogs were a relatively safe space at one time like the SA blog was once.

                      I think alot of these guys in the white lights have become closet antis … gradually becoming more overt about though.

                      Chris: As I remember like here the rule *was* you could post on the on SA blog as long as you didn’t attack Ron or the Subject.

                      Not scoring any points or credibility with CO$ Scientologists esp. so in giving free reign to avowed squirrels. On this front DM has won.

                      Initially a lot of people came out when M first started up his blog and was fully on board with LRH, but that fizzled out when he “turned Injun”, bridges burned. Looks like he’s just running after CO$ money now, something I suspected he was after in the first place continually pushing their buttons and baiting them every step of the way.

                    • FM,

                      Actually what you attributed to Chris was actually me.

                      Personally I don’t think Miscavige or OSA for that matter has the power to cause the indies to self destruct. I think they are quite capable of doing it themselves.

                      There’s a term used by law enforcement and criminals alike called “suicide by cop” and these so called “indies” should know that publicly disavowing the Organization is just like pointing a gun at a cop and say go fer it dude!

                      Mise well take a gun and blow their own brains out but they’d rather the Church take care of that minor detail.

                      Take Trey. Even though they screwed him over and gave him what he called his “burn notice” you didn’t find him doing some silly “Doubt Formula” (which I think is silly because how can you be in doubt to an organization that is operating in Treason per the Policy called Promotional Actions of an Org but anyway…) he just went ahead and audited basically doing what he’d been doing before he was given his “burn notice”.

                    • RV: Take Trey. Even though they screwed him over and gave him what he called his “burn notice” … he just went ahead and audited basically doing what he’d been doing before he was given his “burn notice”.

                      … and he took dozens of CO$ PCs with him. Severe self-inflicted CO$ damage.

                      Sorry, forgot to edit my HTML blockquote.

                    • FM re Trey,

                      “and he took dozens of CO$ PCs with him. Severe self-inflicted CO$ damage.”

                      Yeah I’d say that was another foot bullet of magnitude but it’s the incompetence that I’ve come to expect from in this case IHELP(ourselves) 🙂

                      Actually Trey is auditing more hours these day than he was under IHELP’s suppr….supervision 😉

                      Who knows maybe Trey should send ’em an Xmas card thanking them 🙂

                    • FM: Trey never “took CoS pcs” with him; he continued auditing his own pcs. He has long had a field practice. And there is definitely more to the story. But there was no self-inflicted damage.

                    • Chris,

                      Actually FM is correct to the extent that the Church considered his PCs their PCs.

                      As far as self inflicted damage. Actually the blow back was quite immense since Trey was considered such a stable terminal by the Field.

                      Sure if you assume that IHELP’s intention was to ARCx and muddy the field then there was no “self inflicted damage” and they did achieve their overall objective of “no auditing” in the Church of Scientology’s area of control.

                    • Already got it, Robin. Late on the chain, but that happens I’ve found when one replies via email notification (I do as well). Re Trey, I was a terminal for him when it all happened and afterwards so understand the fallout. It was just a mis-dupe on my part to FM’s posting. Merry Xmas you American Canuck. 🙂

                    • I will. I think I’m auditing them tonight (shhhhh….they’re having “marital difficulties”). lol

                    • Chris: But there was no self-inflicted damage.

                      CO$ self-inflicted damage, meaning the CO$ lost members when Trey got declared. Most certainly his PCs were also connected to the CO$ in some way or form, be it via events, routing for OT levels, etc. Many were also previous CO$ drop-offs who then contacted Trey later for services who hadn’t done their upper levels.

                    • “Ah”, said I. I says I see now, I says. My bad for mis-duplicating. Yes, CoS foot bullet by shooting one of their best field auditors, long-time winner of field auditor of the year award. If you ever have a chance to talk with Trey, ask him how it went down. Quite the interesting story.

    • I remember that intro well.I think most public would rather get a root canal than have to study that before they get to do TRs-It was so complex and significant. It was hilarious as to how seriously this “prominent” blogger took himself.( and still does)

      • Yeah and like I wrote earlier. This guy was charged with passing metering. He should have been charged alright! But anyway I’m sure Marty will get around to promoting Subub or starting his own cult….

        Never mind that’s already been accomplished.

        Marty as far as I’m concerned ranks up there with Jack Horner, Paul Twitchell, the de Grimstons, Mayo and Cap’n Bill and others of that ilk.

        All the above who’ve claimed that they’ve moved beyond Scientology.

        I see the other blogs run by Marty and others like him and I thank my lucky stars that we have something like MS2. I mean we don’t always agree on the fine points but a least I believe we are real Scientologists.

      • FM:

        I must’ve stopped reading his stuff before he got to that. He banned me from commenting at one point (truth hurts, you know). By the time he offloaded his “the Church lies” and “look what they’re doing now” content on a different blogger, he’d already gone too far for me. Fortunately the “with-LRH” crowd finally gained a significant voice at about the same time in MS2.

        FM

          • RV:

            Alas, I guess we’ll have to share the award. Tell you what– you take it on weeks that start with an odd date and I’ll take it on weeks that start with even dates. 😉

            Paul

              • RV:

                Actually, I just realized why there are people who still follow Marty. There’s no way more than a tenth of the people who follow him could actually understand what he’s talking about. But you get the distinct impression that they’re all sitting around, thinking, “Oh my, he *sounds* so smart, he must know what he’s talking about.” If they approached Scientology with that kind of slack attitude, then they couldn’t have any certainty that it works. Thus, with “weak certainty that the Tech works”, they would easily follow someone like Marty. Makes perfect sense. KSW strikes again.

                Paul

        • Paul: He banned me from commenting at one point (truth hurts, you know).

          Was barely 6 months ago. Should be no problem to find that thread since his site has been next to dead. But the debate was taken up on FB and other mediums. He negated that the bank reads on the meter and proposed some other bogus source research such as a pre-apprehension mechanism to explain why he himself can’t make a meter read. Real nutty stuff.

          I never got banned, but then didn’t read/post there anymore after he laced into KSW, although some of my posts magically disappeared sometime later. I saw that coming years earlier.

          Yes, MS2 is the top dog blog in line with LRH. APIS FB is OK too, but has little traffic. Very despairing posting alongside those who have no other agenda other than to either squirrel or invalidate the tech.

          • FM:

            I was mildly interested in APIS at one point, until I read in their bylaws that the guy who started it was “ED for life” or somesuch. I didn’t know this guy from Adam, and had no guarantee that he was really “with-LRH” and would remain that way. So I passed.

            Paul

            • Paul,

              Just so you know, Michael Moore (founder of APIS) is totally “with LRH”, always has been, always will be. He’s a stand-up guy and was here long before a lot of others, putting sanity and standard Scientology back into the hell that was/is the Free Zone.

              • CB:

                Yeah, it was just the “ED for life” thing that put me off. From revisiting their website, it appears that you are the COO, and most everything else is HFA. Good on ya. Interestingly, one of the members appears to be Karen de la C. I don’t know what kind of tech she delivers, but she is definitely a Marty-ite, last I checked.

                In any case, it appears that the purposes of APIS and MS2 are very similar and both are based in Oz. So the question becomes, why do we have *two* organizations like this, when it appears one would do as well? No attempt here to be antagonistic or a smart-ass. Serious question.

                Paul

                • Hi SJ,

                  Karen is definitely true blue LRH. In my experience uses nothing but 100% standard tech. The license plate on one of her cars reads “I (heart symbol) LRH”. Although she exposes the evil activities of the COS on her UTube channel, she has never said one negative word against LRH or the subject that I have ever heard. That is not who she is.
                  She does extend her personal friendship to Marty because Marty was one of the few at the int base who befriended her when she was enduring unspeakable suppression at the hands of DM. She is a loyal friend and does not forget acts of kindness or expressions of goodness.
                  One of my favorite LRH Policies from 13 Sept 1978 says:

                  “There is so much good in the worst of us,
                  And so much bad in the best of us,
                  That it ill behooves any of us
                  To speak about the rest of us.” -LRH

                  As Lana points out in this wonderful testimonial, real Scientology is the remedy for Miscavology and/or any other destructive alterations or mis-applications of the tech.

                  • Briliant, Espiritu. KRC. KRC. Boots of responsibi-
                    lity. Right? Isn’t Karen a CLXII auditor/CS? One
                    of the few on the planet personally trained by
                    LRH himself! Yes. I know your answer already.
                    OK. Get with RV, get in comm with Karen and let’s
                    have Karen take Marty and Mike in for their “Clean
                    Hands Makes for Happy Living” handling ASAP.
                    Let’s get those guys in before they do themselves
                    in completely. Can you think of a better “blow to
                    the enemies of the group”?

                    • Joe,

                      Actually talked to Karen at a Graduation over at Helen Chen’s Academy for a very long time and I think it was maybe me who convinced her to get back in the chair.

                      She’s very cool and very pro Ron.

                      Sometimes she says things I don’t agree with but that’s the “liability” of freedom of speech.

                      You’ve also got to understand that she is very heartbroken over the death of her son. Who was real nice kid and feels the Church is to blame for his death.

                      Yeah so she hangs out with Marty and posts on Steve’s blog. So what?

                      As far as I’m concerned she can associate with whoever she wants. Remember that Ron canceled that policy on disconnection way back in ’68.

                      Sure I have my own personal issues with Marty and Mike but I think Karen is a fine lady and I would never say anything against her.

                      LR

                    • Actually, one should do their own research on these guys (Karen, Marty, Mike) as Karen often did not distinguish between “Scientology” and the “Church of Scientology” (even her blog is “Surviving Scientology”, not, “Surviving the Church of Scientology”). Not to mention throwing LRH under the bus in the mix. And continued support for Marty’s view on standard tech (“there is none”) and his anti-Scientology stance begets a deeper look. LRH didn’t say one had to disconnect, no, but he did say if one continued to associate with an SP, then that made one PTS. And please don’t think this is anything more than my opinion on this, much as Robin or anyone else has an opinion. However, one should look for themselves to divine the truth. Which is what we’re doing here.

                    • I agree with Chris on “look”. I’m not advocating alloying one’s affinities. I do advocate application of Scientology and that includes obnosis.

                      I also agree on the Old Poem, “there’s so much good in the worst of us, so much bad in the best of us, it ill behoves any of us to talk about the rest of us”.

                      A healthy dose of KRC and all sorts of insights into behavior are possible.

                    • Well Chris and Jim.

                      I haven’t really bothered to review her youtube site. So I guess I’m lacking that data.

                      From my own personal communication with her she was very pro the tech and Ron. Of course this was a couple of years ago so things may have changed.

                      Also the reason she may equate the subject with the organization if she does as you say probably has more to do with BPC as covered in the HCOB The Cause of ARCxs than some suppressive urge of some kind.

                      Also it is also covered in the policy on Quality of Service.

                      Like I said Karen says things that I don’t totally agree with. Like for instance I think what she says about the GO and “Operation Snow White” is totally incorrect but like I said she is entitled to her opinion.

                      Personally I think that the problem if there is a problem is with Marty who has set himself up as an OL and to some people tends to be charismatic as I said to some people. Like Miscavige is to others and Hitler was ….

                      I mean I could go on how people fall under the spell of others who don’t have the best of intentions. I mean history is littered with such false prophets and Marty happens to be one of them.

                      Though I’m sure once Karen gets her BPC handled and sees who Marty really is that she’ll be fine.

                      Which is why my opinion about her hasn’t changed and that Old Poem should apply to all of us as well as the people still in the Church.

                      In fact I’ve ceased calling them Koolaid Drinkers, Churchies or Culties or any other derogatory term. The way I see it. They are Scientologists who have been led astray. Some realize this but others haven’t.

                      Personally I think we should be inclusionary instead of being exclusively exclusionary which I think is the main failing of those who call themselves the “Independent Field”.

                      I suggest reading the policy on Group Sanity on what Ron has to say about this point.

                      Anyway that’s my 2 bits on all this and despite what you both say I still consider Karen an ally, comrade and a friend.

                    • Well, Robin,

                      Firstly, it isn’t just her YouTube site, but getting ALL the data is part of any due diligence. Secondly, no one mentioned anything about there being suppressive tendencies; just LRH tech on it. Thirdly, it could also be out-list or any number of reasons, couldn’t it? We’re not trying to C/S it here, just stating facts. Fourthly, no one advised you or anyone to alloy your affinities – that would violate the Code of Honor. In fact, one should also keep their own counsel on many subjects. Lastly, recognize this is just a perspective, and much like you have your opinion on her, or Mike and Marty, others have their opinion. It’s similar to the differing views you and Jim have on Blair – they’re almost opposite, but both just opinions. In tech there are no opinions; in everything else there are, and opinions are subject to Axiom 31. Very simple, really. 🙂

                    • This is very true Chris. Opinion does enter into a lot. As far as I can see we are involved in a war which is what Ron said would happen when the Organization violated the PL on LRH Relationship to Orgs in Vol 7.

                      The fact that they have to faithfully institute his estate planning under Trust B also has a lot to do with it as well.

                      From what I understand CST was supposed to act as a check against RTC. Yet by legal legerdemain it was turned basically into a paper tiger.

                      An additional check was HCO which no longer is interested in its First Substance and Duty and would rather just go along to get along with whoever seems to be in charge and would rather not wear there hat as far as holding the form of the Org.

                      Note also that prior to the late ’80’s that what was originally called LRH Tech Compilations became RTRC adding “research” which basically gave them a license to squirrel the tech which they immediately did after the effective name change with the introduction of the so called “Life Improvement Courses” and various derivative works allegedly “Based on the Works of L Ron Hubbard” that violated the following policy:

                      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE 37 Fitzroy Street, London W. I
                      HCO POLICY LETTER OF 21 JUNE 1959 BPI
                      SIGNATURES ON BULLETINS, POLICY LTRS AND SEC EDs
                      Only when I have personally written a bulletin, a policy letter or a SEC ED should it be signed “L. Ron
                      Hubbard” or “L. Ron Hubbard, Executive Director”.
                      When I have knowledge of or have okayed a bulletin, policy letter or SEC ED but have not actually written it, it should be signed “Jane Doe (the name of the actual writer) for L. Ron Hubbard” or “Jane Doe, for L. Ron Hubbard, Executive Director”.
                      When I have not seen or okayed a policy letter or a bulletin or a SEC ED but it is published by the authority of a held post such as HCO See, it should be signed “Jane Doe (actual name of person issuing) HCO See (or other title)”.
                      The field or public must not be led to believe that I have written or issued things I have not. Further, other people have authority, too.
                      L. RON HUBBARD

                      Then of course there was the “abolishment” of the Guardian and Controller in violation of the policy Seniority of Orders. In fact there are many who were or are currently involved in “management” who think that “orders” are senior to “policy” which is a completely altered importance and violates the admin scale.

                      There are probably other things like Third Parties involved in creating or at least intensifying the conflict as covered in the HCOB The Third Party Law.

                      Then there are those wonderful patrons. Many who were probably the target of Con-Evil Eval done by the Ol’man which created WISE that was supposed to keep external influences external but failed probably due to the IAS which currently welds so much power because it is practically the Church’s sole source of income currently.

                      In fact you’ll find that most of the support for this “Ideal Org” program coming from these elitist patrons who want Scientology to be accepted by their elitist friends which just happens to align with OSA’s objective of making Scientology “acceptable” and “mainstream”.

                      Anyway this is the battlefield. As far as two opposing forces we have those or us I believe who want the Orgs to deliver Standard Tech and apply policy and those who SPECTRE like seek to use the organization to achieve world domination of some kind either overtly or covertly.

                      Right now the scene is complicated. Not only by SPs and PTSes involved (as Ron says in the RED What Went Wrong if you don’t run the Problems to EP you get the same proportion as you would outside Scientology and if you look at the current state of the world outside Scientology it ain’t nothing to write home about) a certain number of DBs who out number Big Beings about 15 to 1 according to the PL Alter-is and Degraded Beings.

                      In short it is an area of confusion. How people handle confusions according to the tech which is covered in the HCOB Problems Intensive is take a stable datum or as is covered in the HCOB R3SC by Itsa and other references on Ser facs a Safe Solution of some kind.

                      In Karen’s case and others who have joined the Cult of Marty or Mike they view them as a stable datum or a safe solution.

                      As you know these stable datums or safe solutions like Miscavige organizationally for instance replace the ability to observe.

                      Anyway that’s the way I see it and the above is only my opinion based on my own observation of the scene.

                    • Robin,
                      As I stated, alloying affinities is not my aim.

                      I also stated, it ill behoves me to engage in certain things. So, I pretty much don’t.

                      On the other hand, I can obnose areas, and with an eye to seeing what is, which eye has sharpened considerably with more KRC and exercise of the simplicity of just looking without vias or interpostions of inapplicables that color the view.

                      The hour lost on natter, the slow down because of some petty ARCX, well, I prefer to salvage those and apply my efforts and attention to something I consider a more worthwhile and productive venture toward optimum results across the greater number of Dynamics.

                    • RV: From my own personal communication with her she was very pro the tech and Ron. Of course this was a couple of years ago so things may have changed.

                      Personally I find it hard to consolidate supporting those who actively bash and deride the tech while supposedly being solidly on board with LRH. Doesn’t add up for me, some sort of in-between-lives area, probably enroute out. I’ve noticed those who associate with those hostile to SCN Tech follow on the heels of M. for supposed decompression (PTSness ???) and then finally out. But then folks who’ve been hit like some of these guys have been can be expected to blow a fuse or two, some SO ordeals seemingly having taken them to the edge. But then some, like M. … in my book … was an SP all along.

                    • Well Jimbo I totally agree with you on that point.

                      There has been a lot of time spent nattering about the scene and speculation of its possible cause or causes by all of us.

                      Though it seems that Mike and Marty have established some kind of franchise and in Marty’s case a lucrative industry regarding it by hawking his books.

                      Disaster capitalism at its best 🙂

                      You and me and I’m sure everyone here on the other hand would rather understand the scene instead of exploit it and in the meantime apply Standard Tech and policy where it can be applied which is unfortunately difficult since due to circumstances we have no Organization structure or frame work to apply it in with out going into direct conflict with that Government Approved and Tax Exempt abomination calling itself the “Church of Scientology”.

                      I think Ron says somewhere something about Danger Conditions and Seniors being forced to wear the hat of the Junior which in this case in my opinion is the Church of Scientology since the organization only reason for existence is to service the public thus like any Corporation whether business, government or in this case religious and therefore it is not management who is senior or RTC or CST but us. You and me and everyone else here.

                      This is covered in the article Essay on Management and the way I see it management has become that “spoke in the wheel” Ron talks about.

                      Anyway that is my own viewpoint on the scene and it may not be correct but it works for me 🙂

                  • “Personally I find it hard to consolidate supporting those who actively bash and deride the tech while supposedly being solidly on board with LRH. Doesn’t add up for me, some sort of in-between-lives area, probably enroute out. I’ve noticed those who associate with those hostile to SCN Tech follow on the heels of M. for supposed decompression (PTSness ???) and then finally out. But then folks who’ve been hit like some of these guys have been can be expected to blow a fuse or two, some SO ordeals seemingly having taken them to the edge. But then some, like M. … in my book … was an SP all along.”

                    Well Marty, like Miscavige and others we can only judge by their actions and also by their inaction AKA overts of omission.

                    For instance Marty and Mike the evidence is in Black and White that they as others like Warren McShame for example supported the little tyrant who had wrought so much damage to the Management Structure of the Organization and were part of the Criminal Conspiracy that seized control of the Church.

                    I mean I don’t care what anyone says Miscavige could not have done it alone and despite any dispute about who helped from the outside. The fact is that they assisted him from the inside and even covered up his and their own crimes and high crimes.

                    If RICO was applied as it was in the case of the GO and the Controllers Office than Marty and Mike would be indicted coconspirators. Too bad that justice is never fully applied in the “wog world” as they’d all doing time Leavenworth or some other fine Federal Facility.

                    As far as I’m concerned neither Marty or Mike have atoned for their various sins or made up for the damage they have caused. In fact they revel in it by being given the false status of “whistle blowers”.

                    But this is just my own humble opinion FM.

                    • Goo points, Robin. Like Ron says in HCOB 28 May 1960:

                      “By their actions you shall know them, whether bad or good, whether on another side or ours.

                      And what in their actions gives us the keenest insight? Their ability to help.

                      Some think that help cannot be done. Shun them. Some think that help is always an effort to betray. Process them for here you have the criminals of Earth.

                      Some people cannot help. They can only injure and destroy. And if in the name of help they only injure and destroy then know them carefully for they are criminals.

                      What is a criminal? One who thinks help cannot be on any dynamic or uses help “

                    • Exactly Chris,

                      That would be the most appropriate HCOB to apply.

                      Some people claim that Marty and Mike helped them to see the corruption and such of the Organization (sorta like some kind of seeing eye dog) but the fact is that if one studied the related Policies and HCOBs themselves like the one above among others they would have come to this conclusion on their own. If they had actually looked for themselves.

                      So as far as I’m concerned it is simply a case assigning false or incorrect cause and I don’t see any of the people saved by Marty or Mike’s allegedly keen insight becoming more on source and moving on to gentle cause over the situation but in fact quite the opposite.

                      Sorta like the drug pusher or the drug pushing Psychiatrists who “help” one escape reality for a short time.

                    • Well, I DID figure it out, actually. As Cram Off CCI I was pounded on HARD because my refusal to accept tech and admin arbitraries. I could recognize them easily enough, but was powerless, even as a Qual terminal, to do anything about them. I left in a spin. So yeah, I found many of the bizarre incidents that occurred at Int as related by Marty and Mike VERY stabilizing for me, as it confirmed that it was not just me being contrary. And yeah, this is a very short version of my story.

                      Mind you, I also very early on also saw Marty’s true color as a distractor to LRH (Ha! I was totally trashed on his blog!), and have not bothered to visit his blog for a long time. But the Int incidents, related there; WOW! They were an eye opener for me for confirming the larger picture of what was going on at CCI at the time.

                    • Pazooter,

                      No doubt about it. That confirmation of what you know is a good thing.

                      I’d already had my confirmation that something was very wrong when I was ordered to RB and the Truth RD for daring to write reports on the various off policy and out tech actions I was observing.

                      In fact the so called “Black PR Lines” that they used in my “Roll Back” Session were taken from reports that I had written.

                      The funny thing was when they rolled me back it turned out my source of my “Black PR” or “Disaffection” was in policies and HCOBs written by Ron 😉

                      Seems the irony escaped them so they shunted me on to the TRD. I’ll forgo the description but when it was over they wanted me to do what I called the “groveling step” which I refused to do and demanded a Comm Eve instead which was such a joke it ended up being cancelled.

                      But that didn’t stop them from tossing me back and forth between Qual and Ethics like some ping pong ball.

                      In the end I think it was some RTC Rep who told me that I was right about the Golden Age of Tech and that it was off policy and out tech but that they had spent so much time and money promoting it that they had no intention of canceling it.

                      So it basically came down to it was either RTC’s way or the highway.

                      At least she was being honest 😉

                      So I choose the highway. Nothing really happened to me. I didn’t lose or gain any status. Management had always considered me a disaffected trouble maker who always questioned every move they made. So I think they were just happy to get rid of me 🙂

                      Regarding Marty. I used to comment on his blog as RJ and was kind of fun in the beginning and he’d kept it a rather safe place to start with and then it started to degenerate after he began sucking up to Tony Ortega and other heavy weights in the Anti-Cult Cult.

                      Anyway I think we parted company when he suggested that any mention of a possible conspiracy involved with the destruction of the Church was actually an OSA op of some kind.

                      An assertion that was so ludicrous that it was breath taking. Anyway I told him where he could stick his own conspiracy theory and next thing you know my comments were no longer being posted.

                      So I figured I’d been ’86ed.

                      In this case instead of RTC’s way it was Marty’s way or the highway.

                      Same handling pretty much.

                      The kind of handling you’d expect from some individual or group who was operating by Service Facsimile. Instead of observation.

                      Regarding many of the Int Incidents he’d been promoting on his blog. Many of them had already been leaked to ARS.

                      So in reality as far as I’m concerned Marty came late to the party. Fact is much of the intel in Tobin’s TRD series had already been revealed earlier. I expected Marty to add something new but all he did was give his own Nuremberg Defense. You know that he did what he did because he was following orders.

                      I guess I should have spotted his own lack of responsibility on the scene but I had my own issues back then. Fortunately I got some good auditing by Trey and I don’t see things quite as I did back then and was able to see Marty for what he really was.

                      That said as I wrote earlier I’m glad that your experience with Marty helped. It’s just that for me it was a zero sum gain.

                      Fun in the beginning but oppressive near the end. Sort of like my experience with the Church.

                      Funny someone told me that Mary Sue had come up with the following quip:

                      “If it’s not fun then it’s not Scientology.”

                      Never been able to find that datum in an HCOB or Policy letter but it certainly works for me 🙂

                      Whether it’s the Church or Marty’s blog. Neither of them were any fun any more. That’s something I can say with total certainty.

                    • Yep, I took from Marty’s info what was valuable to me (in aligning my available data). Mostly, his experiences minus his self-importance, which was, egotistically speaking, huge.

                    • Ain’t that the truth 🙂

                      The danger with Marty and also Mike is that because they know some things some people figure they know everything.

                      In other words they wrap ideas and concept in the mantle of false authority. Another thing is that much of what they say is hearsay which can neither be denied or confirmed yet is stated as an indisputable “fact”.

                      Not because there is any actual evidence but because they say that’s the way it is.

                      Personally I don’t like any datum that I can not test for myself by my own actual observation.

                    • “… because they know some things some people figure they know everything.” ~ yes!

                      I first started paying attention to Marty’s blog because some of the experiences he wrote about were consistent with my own observations and suspicions about what was happening elsewhere in the church. I also quickly realized that just because someone has been declared an SP, does not necessarily mean that they’re not an SP. 🙂

                    • “I also quickly realized that just because someone has been declared an SP, does not necessarily mean that they’re not an SP. :-)”

                      Yeah they do occasionally get it right 🙂

                      Something you’d expect from their shot gun or hell fire drone approach 🙂

                    • pazooter: I also quickly realized that just because someone has been declared an SP, does not necessarily mean that they’re not an SP.

                      Unfortunately most issued SP goldenrods do not provide sufficient information that makes the declare self-evident. Listing a number of policy infractions and violations does not detail specifics exactly what the offender had done, and I was often left wondering. Further, based on my experience, most declares may have been appropriate to remove a person from staff, but certainly not enough to disconnect and break a personal friendship. Just because someone blew the SO and didn’t return is no reasonable cause for me to disconnect, it’s an issue between the individual and the church.

                      And then of course others who should have been booted out the day through the front door were left to wreak havoc for decades. I think M & M were at least in part products of their environment. I remember when I joined high-school gangs and we did terrible things I would never have considered doing on my own, and when I looked back on that, I’m very sorry for some of the suppressive sh*t I pulled. One major SP was running this out-of-valence gig.

                      But when M. starts knocking the tech, the very thing that provides spiritual freedom, then that itself tells me all I need to know. Same with all the others that run along the same trail he’s on.

                    • FM,

                      Your question re what should be in an EO is answered in the following PL:

                      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
                      When writing an Ethics Order, don’t ARC Break its readers by leaving out the data.
                      Don’t create a mystery. Example of Wrong phrasing: “Woody McPheeters is declared a Suppressive Person. He stopped a student from coming on course.” That leaves out all the data. Leaves questions – Where did it happen? Is it in our area? What did he do? Who did he do it to? What’s the evidence? Correct Example: “WOODY McPHEETERS in Baltimore, U.S.A. is declared a Suppressive Person. On (date) he discouraged Fred Fairchild from taking the Saint Hill Course by writing to him lies about the course, well known by said McPheeters to be false statements. Evidence: Letter from McPheeters dated — to — now available in Ethics Files. Charge: Suppression of a Scientologist and barring his way to Release and Clear. Findings by former evidence of course record and this: Suppressive Person. All Certs etc.”
                      Don’t be unspecific or you leave people in a huge mystery.
                      Ethics Orders are supposed to run group engrams out, not in!
                      Always put in what you know, nothing you don’t know, and only what you have evidence or witnesses for. Ethics Orders are issued on real data, not opinion.
                      WHAT THEY DID
                      Don’t issue orders saying “made derogatory statements about Ron,” or “suppressed Scientology.” Obviously that’s quite impossible as a charge.
                      I . No statement could possibly injure Ron. It’s quite impossible to “spoil Ron’s reputation” or “upset Ron” by some suppressive utterance. Ethics weren’t made to defend Ron. Statements “about Ron” are just indications of suppression. This is never used in an Ethics Order. Just omit statements or charges about Ron.
                      2. Suppressives can only restim people’s banks. They have no power at all. To infer one could do much to Scientology is silly.
                      All such charges are based on a Suppressive’s actions against other persons and Scientologists or groups. These can be restimulated and can be made to wobble about. Some man forbidding his wife auditing is pronounced Suppressive “for forbidding his wife auditing on date – by –.”
                      PTS
                      The Potential Trouble Source is also named as to why and with what Suppressive Person he or she is connected.
                      Often no Ethics Order is issued on a PTS. They disconnect at once when the Suppressive is named. THE RIGHT SUPPRESSIVE
                      Always find the right Suppressive or all the Suppressives in examining and declaring a PTS.
                      If you name the wrong one or err in that it’s a group not a person the PTS won’t disconnect.
                      If you name the real person or group the PTS gets a meter blow down, sighs with relief and disconnects. 413
                      Suppressive Persons or groups deal in such generalities, the PTS is often quite blind to the real one. Be very careful here. It’s the only way to goof handling a PTS.
                      LABELLING
                      Never be afraid to issue orders that label somebody an SP if you have the real evidence.
                      If you label them you get them back in some day. If you don’t label them, they are far more likely to vanish forever.
                      Labelling them is a kind action.
                      If you are frightened of civil suits because of an Ethics Order, just remember to issue them only when you have the evidence.
                      I .
                      2.
                      CIVIL ACTIONS
                      Ethics can handle any Civil Action amongst Scientologists.
                      Two data are the Biggest Senior data in Law:
                      IF YOU DON’T PROVIDE FAST, CHEAP JUSTICE, PEOPLE WILL TAKE IT INTO THEIR OWN HANDS AND WRECK ONE ANOTHER;
                      LAWS CAN ONLY BE ENFORCED, IF THEY SPRING FROM THE CUSTOMS AND HABITS OF A PEOPLE. Good Scientologists swarm in under Ethics. Bad ones howl. The good ones comprise 80%. The bad ones comprise
                      20%. The majority rules. We have Ethics.
                      Civil Actions are what the group demands. By Civil is meant disputes-marriages, separations, settlements, child care, money owed, that sort of thing.
                      We must handle these. Fairly. It’s done by an Ethics Order Convening an Ethics Hearing naming the parties and purpose. It summons them to a person appointed to Hear it, a time and a place. The hearer decides what’s to be done between or amongst them.
                      But this firm policy exists:
                      NO CIVIL MATTER IN AN ETHICS HEARING MAY BE DECIDED BY RECOURSE TO TECHNOLOGY.
                      There is no “get processed” finding in a Civil Ethics Hearing. Or an “until processed.” The decision is made there and then on its own merits and no dependency on tech.
                      All Civil matters in writing an Ethics Order are headed CIVIL HEARING.
                      This removes the idea the disputants are in trouble with Ethics. They aren’t. They’re in trouble with each other. Say so. And what kind of trouble and how much and who is suing who.
                      Write a nice informative Ethics Order. Don’t leave anyone in mystery. Mysteries cause trouble and the purpose of Ethics is PEACE IN WHICH WE CAN GET IN TECHNOLOGY.
                      L. RON HUBBARD
                      LRH:mh.cden Copyright c 1965 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

                      FM,

                      Personally I don’t see it as Miscavige somehow Svengalied Marty or Mike for that matter into committing Suppressive Acts. To me that is just total irresponsibility .

                      They could have applied the HCOPLs Orders, Query of, Orders, Illegal and Cross, Staff Member Reports particularly the section on Job Endangerment Chits.

                      BTW we’re not talking about being a gang or mafia member where certain rules of conduct apply. We are talking about former Scn Execs who either committed or were accessories to suppressive acts.

                    • RV: As far as I’m concerned neither Marty or Mike have atoned for their various sins or made up for the damage they have caused.

                      What do you feel they ought to do? What LRH should have been applied?

                    • FM,

                      Well to begin with they could start by ceasing to commit suppressive acts like their flirtations with the media, being informants for the FBI and calling in the (in) Justice Department to handle what is basically a *Religious* dispute.

                      I think what was called the “Reformation” should serve as an example of what happens when Governments interfere in Religious disputes.

                      Also Marty and Mike should actually take responsibility for their own actions and the part they played in the destruction of the Church instead blaming it all on Dave and giving him more power than he deserves.

                      Funny the more they op term him it seems the more they become like him in many ways. Or at least the way they depict him as being i.e. the synthetic valence Ron discusses in HCOBs like How a Suppressive Becomes one and those regarding “Detested Valences” in the R2 10/12 materials.

                      Another thing that is somewhat ironic is Marty’s Blog has become one of those “hate sites” he used to rail against in the beginning.

                      Mike on the other hand isn’t so bad though he calls his his site “Something Can Be Done About It” and basically does nothing but carping criticism of the Church which in many ways is counterproductive since all they do is perpetually circle the wagons.

                    • RV: Your question re what should be in an EO is answered in the following PL:

                      HCOPL 2 Jun 65 I WRITING OF AN ETHICS ORDER … I don’t think I’ve seen this one before. Thanks for posting.

                      RV: Personally I don’t see it as Miscavige somehow Svengalied Marty or Mike for that matter into committing Suppressive Acts. To me that is just total irresponsibility.

                      Not suggesting they were not responsible, anymore than I wasn’t responsible for crap I pulled. But realistically, without getting thrown out the front door, what could they have done, since DM holds all the controls, even beating up on Rinder regularly times for just looking the wrong way? I’d say leave, and that’s what he did. Not sure what else he could have done effectively. Writing reports on DM? Based on the stories about the hole, even Debbie Cook mentioning the Int Management structure having been unmocked and no one there to look after any reports. Debbie did not end up in the hole either because reports were written on her, DM’s henchment arbitrarily dragged her off. And I agree, just because they may not have had any choice but to walk out the front door, doesn’t alleviate any of them of any suppressive acts.

                      It’s one thing to see it from a viewpoint of standard LRH policies which ought to be applied, another when the top down command structure is King John based.

                      RV: Well to begin with they could start by ceasing to commit suppressive acts like their flirtations with the media, being informants for the FBI and calling in the (in) Justice Department to handle what is basically a *Religious* dispute.

                      Are you sure it’s an internal dispute? Based on the lockdowns reported (Larry Wollerscheim case another example), it sure seems criminal activities were at work. I might be mistaken. People having been physically beaten up for years with the situation only getting worse? People detained, even chased down and brought back. What I see here is that Scientology has ceased to function as LRH had intended, and it’s become a survivor’s game.

                      I fully agree dragging SCN through the media mud is not the way to handle it, most certainly driven by personal agendas.

                      RV: Also Marty and Mike should actually take responsibility for their own actions and the part they played in the destruction of the Church instead blaming it all on Dave and giving him more power than he deserves.

                      I agree. What they are currently doing is worse than just not taking responsibility.

                      RV: Funny the more they op term him it seems the more they become like him in many ways. Or at least the way they depict him as being i.e. the synthetic valence Ron discusses in HCOBs like How a Suppressive Becomes one and those regarding “Detested Valences” in the R2 10/12 materials.

                      Same happened to me when I joined up with that high-school gang. That unintentionally assumed bad-guy valence reinforced by anti-social acts I pulled did not get handled until I comp’s the LX RD. The solution to me lies in getting these guys cleaned up, auditing sessions, some ethics, and assisting us putting auditing and training on the map out here.

                      RV: Another thing that is somewhat ironic is Marty’s Blog has become one of those “hate sites” he used to rail against in the beginning.

                      Virtually all other sites out there have also become that. Too bad.

                      RV: Mike on the other hand isn’t so bad though he calls his his site “Something Can Be Done About It” and basically does nothing but carping criticism of the Church which in many ways is counterproductive since all they do is perpetually circle the wagons.

                      Yeah, it’s pretty much a J & D blog now.

                    • “Not suggesting they were not responsible, anymore than I wasn’t responsible for crap I pulled. But realistically, without getting thrown out the front door, what could they have done, since DM holds all the controls, even beating up on Rinder regularly times for just looking the wrong way?”

                      Not entirely true. In fact Marty admits using Mike as a Pinyata himself.

                      Also I don’t believe that Miscavige held “all the controls”.

                      Anyone at Int at any time could’ve of taken out that lil’ twerp and the only reason they didn’t is covered in the HCOPL Ethics, The Design of.

                      Regarding Debbie. She was just as bad as all the rest of them. Many of the actions she’d taken at Flag were in a word Off-policy which is probably why she was promoted to Int.

                      All kindsa people are fawning over what a brave deed she done with that New Years message of her’s like she was frickin’ Joan of Arc or something. Yet when push came to shove she took the money and ran.

                      Personally I wasn’t impressed.

                      “It’s one thing to see it from a viewpoint of standard LRH policies which ought to be applied, another when the top down command structure is King John based.”

                      Why should it be viewed any other way? If an organization claims that it is Scientology Management then it follow policy and the form of the Org.

                      Not some Mexican Army’s Org Board with some Generalissimo on top giving all the orders and call it “Scientology Management”.

                      To me it’s like an auditor going into session and giving the PC “dream therapy” and say that he was “auditing” him.

                      There is Squirrel Policy as well.

                      “Are you sure it’s an internal dispute? Based on the lockdowns reported (Larry Wollerscheim case another example), it sure seems criminal activities were at work. I might be mistaken. People having been physically beaten up for years with the situation only getting worse?”

                      Sure there are other factors covered in various GO Dirs, the PLs on Infiltration and Counter-Espionage but aside from all these influences is the number 1 factor that Policy was not applied.

                      Nor was the Tech either. Since most of the cases at Int were never handled properly with Standard Tech.

                      You can’t blame Miscavige for that since it was Mithoff’s job as the Senior C/S to see that Staff cases were handled.

                      ” People detained, even chased down and brought back. What I see here is that Scientology has ceased to function as LRH had intended, and it’s become a survivor’s game.”

                      That is *not* true. It is just being made to seem that way. Thanks to people like Marty and Mike who continually go over the salacious details of what happened to them at Int.

                      BTW Int is *not* Scientology. In fact if Int fell into a crater and headed to hell. Scientology in general would be better off.

                    • Interesting (to me, anyway) personal experience on, “Anyone at Int at any time could’ve of taken out that lil’ twerp and the only reason they didn’t is….”

                      Once Dave Petit (CO-CCI) called me into his office about a KR I’d dared to write and proceeded to physically attack me for it. I not only defended myself, I attacked back. Amazingly, he backed off. It was like he suddenly realized what he was doing and came back into valence.

                      One of the security guards had been standing right there watching the whole thing and afterwards approached Dave and told him how he had seen me come into the office and start attacking him. Again, Dave surprised me and told the guard to disregard the whole incident. I never got in trouble, never heard about any of it again.

                    • Amazing what happens when you stand your ground or hold your location is space Pazooter.

                      I had a similar incidents myself.

                      No violence involved but a lot of intimidation. One incident where Ivan the CO AOLA had his Communicator come down and give me “advice” on how I should “audit” a case.

                      “I said thanks but no thanks.”

                      Then she said “But that’s what Ivan wants!”

                      I said “I don’t give a f_k what Ivan wants.”

                      Anyway she went away in a huff and nothing happened.

                      All bluster.

                      Same with a bunch of Execs who wanted me to admit to me “Black PRing Management” because I had written a bunch of reports on them.

                      I told ’em they had to prove that with a Comm Ev.

                      Sure I ended up being Comm Eved but they were never able to find me guilty of the charge so they canceled it.

                      Then they was the time I refused to audit ruds the way they say to do them in the GAT drills and they couldn’t do anything about it because I continued to audit them according to the HCOBs.

                      But it got to the point that I was the only one fighting some lonely battle.

                    • What you said, “only one fighting some lonely battle.” And wow! pour on the significance of what you said there. One’s life in a suppressive world nearly always comes to that moment. You think you are alone (and visibly are) but that instant moment, a time crunch in Dianetic parlance, you are pushed into an instant Doubt (or possibly Liability) Formula. Much to cogitate on here.

                    • RV, It is very easy to be critical of people at Int when you were not there. There is a lack of reality here and I personally find it offensive that you can be so opinionated about people at that location, and their actions or lack of them, when you were not there. I have said it before and will say it again. I am not interested in a continued debate about the past and who is right and who is wrong.

                      It comes down to who is applying Scn now.

                      Who is getting standard tech applied?

                      Who is moving the the Bridge?

                      DM is an SP. No question. There are others too but he sits at the top of the heap. I am not granting him power by saying that. It just is the truth of it. And if you ain’t been at Int and experienced the scene there, then frankly your view and opinions about those of us who were, are offensive.

                      Moderators take note please.

                      I agree that the whole place was off-policy, but that certainly was not for a lack of trying to get policy applied. And I agree that if the Int base fell off the planet, Scientology would be a better place — IF DM was also there at the time and fell off with it. If he was at Flag or the Freewinds, then no, Scn would continue its downward spiral.

                      Let’s talk about getting ARC applied in TRs. THAT is what this article was about.

                      Anyone tried working on that point recently?

                      PS. And if you aint careful RV, there will be no ice-cream for a full month 🙂

                    • I sent Paul some references last night or today on TRs and gave further data on auditor beingness. Seems he had it mostly worked out already, but always good to have more correct data on TRs. 🙂

                    • Hey but FM started it!!!

                      I meant that Miscavige himself would be riding shot gun with Warren McShane driving that Int Base bucket to hell.

                      I agree. There has been too much dwelling in the past.

                      BTW I never said that Miscavige wasn’t an SP but that I don’t believe he was the only one and that were other factors that involved in the destruction of Scn.

                      That said I agree that it more important what we do now then what we’ve all done in the past.

                    • Lana. I agree with all you said in the mainstay. No one should ever distract from the future you are pointing to. But please keep in mind that there are those out there who are still feeling relief (case gain) from running out group engrams. We may not always get it right, but every bit of cognition that releases us from the past is a gain.

                    • Bruce, exact time, place, form and event blows charge. Yeh, you may feel a bit better by getting some dribbles of charge, but you’re going to stir up much more than you get off, I can assure you. And it WILL persist. In fact, this general charge has persisted on the net for a couple decades now. It’s not blowing stuff off. Debbie Cook’s letter did because she pointed out exact violations of tech and policy and the references that were violated. Generalities won’t do and do not resolve anything.

                    • Chris, you are assuming WAY too much here. Group engram runing (in short, blowing off the arbitraries) is VERY LRH and effective. I frankly do not know where you are coming from here.

                    • Bruce, did you read the 3D Engram blog MS2 ran and then put on hold and Lana’s comments why? They might give you an indication of where I am coming from. That and all my comments on the subject here and the LRH references I posted on exactly how to do it. As to how charge blows, what I said is accurate per the tech on blowing BPC.

                    • Hi Bruce,

                      Here is what he MS2 crew posted on the website:

                      “** COMMENTS ON THIS POSTING HAVE BEEN PAUSED AND ARE NOT BEING PUT THROUGH. The aim was to destimulate, key out and resolve issues for people, but instead this thread has gone off the rails in many directions and has acted as an invitation for people to post false information that makes the water even muddier. So we are reviewing how to better achieve the outcome we are after, and after Christmas you will hear more on this. Signed – MS2 crew ”

                      So, all I was saying was, time after time after blog after blog after forum after forum, that’s all these things end up doing, just muddying up the waters and adding charge to the case/issue. To fully blow it would require exact time, place, form and event, not generalities or false information. Yes, it blows some charge, but it also lays in further charge by bypassing the CORRECT whys. As to running out a group engram, there is specific procedure on how that is done, and that’s what I mentioned as well. So this is from a technical standpoint, I admit, but it’s applicable in life.

                      ARC,
                      Chris

                    • I would love to read what Ron would have to say about a blog for its present public. Until then, I’ll go with the folks I see embracing and advancing the most theta.

                    • Hey Robin,

                      Lot of data here, but I was wondering if you could do me a favour: being an auditor, you know that generalities ARCX. Now, a lot of the time you’re giving specific incidents, but also a lot of the time it’s a generality, like:

                      “Anyone at Int at any time could’ve of taken out that lil’ twerp and the only reason they didn’t is covered in the HCOPL Ethics, The Design of.”

                      How? What action? When?

                      “Regarding Debbie. She was just as bad as all the rest of them. Many of the actions she’d taken at Flag were in a word Off-policy which is probably why she was promoted to Int.”

                      What off-policy? What actions?

                      “Nor was the Tech either. Since most of the cases at Int were never handled properly with Standard Tech.”

                      What cases? What out-tech?

                      Etc. HCOPL “Generalities Won’t Do” applies.

                      Thanks.

                      On another note, unless you had a personal comm line with Debbie Cook and were on the lines when the CoS was beating her up in that court case, I don’t think you have any right to say what you did because I have at least a dozen personal friends on top of a number of pcs/pre-OTs who are now out and doing better and moving up the Bridge BECAUSE of her email. And on top of that, I hear it continually how it helped people leave. So you’re off-base there, m’boy.

                      Cheers

                    • To answer your question Chris:

                      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
                      HCO POLICY LETTER OF 7 DECEMBER 1969
                      ETHICS, THE DESIGN OF

                      Remimeo
                      All Exec Hats HCO Area Hat I & R Hat

                      It is very easy for a staff member and even an Ethics Officer to completely misunderstand Ethics and its functions. In a society run by SPs and controlled by incompetent police the citizen almost engramically identifies any justice action or symbol with oppression.
                      Yet in the absence of true Ethics no one can live with others and stats go down inevitably. So a justice function must exist to protect producers and decent people.
                      To give you an example, when a little boy this life, the neighborhood a block around and the road from home to school were unusable. A bully about five years older than I named Leon Brown exerted a very bad influence over other children. With extortion by violence and blackmail and with corruption he made the area very dangerous. The road to school was blocked by the 5 O’Connell kids, ranging from 7 to 15 who stopped and beat up any smaller child. One couldn’t go to school safely and was hounded by the truant officer, a hulking brute complete with star, if one didn’t go to school.
                      When I was about six I got very tired of a bloody nose and spankings because my clothes were torn and avidly learned “lumberjack fighting” a crude form of judo from my grandfather.
                      With this “superior tech” under my belt I searched out and found alone the youngest O’Connell kid, a year older than I, and pulverized him. Then I found alone and took on the next in size and pulverized him. After that the O’Connell kids, all 5, fled each time I showed up and the road to school was open and I convoyed other little kids so it was safe.
                      Then one day I got up on a 9 foot high board fence and waited until the 12 year old bully passed by and leaped off on him boots and all and after the dust settled that neighborhood was safe for every kid in it.
                      So I learned about justice. Kids would come from blocks away to get help in their neighborhood. Finally for a mile around it was a safe environment for kids.
                      From this I learned two lessons:
                      1. Strength is nothing without skill and tech and reversely, without skill and tech the strength of brutes is a matter of contempt.
                      2. Strength has two sides, one for good and one for evil. It is the intention that makes the difference.
                      ————————
                      On further living I found that only those who sought only peace were ever butchered. The thousands of years of Jewish passivity earned them nothing but slaughter.
                      So things do not run right because one is holy or good. Things run right because one makes them run right.
                      Justice is a necessary action to any successful society. Without it the brute attacks the weak, the decent and the productive.
                      There are people who suppress. They are few. They often rise up to being in charge and then all things decay. They are essentially psychopathic personalities. Such want position in order to kill. Such as Ghenghiz Khan, Hitler, psychiatrists, psychopathic criminals, want power only to destroy. Covertly or overtly they pay only with death. They arrived where they arrived, in charge of things, because nobody when they were on their way up said “No”. They are monuments to the cowards, the reasonable people who didn’t put period to them while they were still only small bullies and still vulnerable.
                      Ethics has to get there before tech can occur. So when it doesn’t exist or goes out then tech doesn’t occur and suppression sets in and death follows.
                      187
                      So if someone doesn’t hold the line, all become victims of oppression.
                      TWO SECTIONS
                      The Ethics Section is in Department 3. This department is called Inspection and Reports.
                      In small orgs there is only one person in that department.
                      Primarily his duties consist of Inspecting and Reporting to his divisional head and the Executive Council.
                      That is the first section’s function.
                      WHEN inspection reveals outness and reports (such as graphs or direct info to the EC) do not result in correction THEN it is a matter for the second section.
                      The second section of Department 3 is Ethics.
                      Now it is an Ethics matter. If correctly reported outnesses that threaten the org are NOT corrected then one assumes that suppression exists.
                      Because he has files of damage reports and chits and because he can see and investigate, the Ethics Officer locates WHO is causing outnesses and suppressing the org. By condition assignments, publication and Comm Evs he gets in Ethics.
                      It occasionally happens that it is someone high up in the org. It sometimes happens his seniors or the EC scold him for daring to report on things or to them. Then he knows the suppression is high up and he is delinquent in duty if he does not report it to the next highest org and if no action there right on up to the Sea Org. Anyone removing him for daring to report the factual results of his inspections can be severely handled by upper organizations. The Ethics Officer can only be in trouble if he fails to do his job and keep in Ethics.
                      Hitting people with conditions is such a small part of Ethics that it is almost an abandonment of post. Letting people be hit with wrong conditions is a Comm Ev offense.
                      Letting an SP collapse stats or an org is a shooting offense.
                      An Ethics Officer uses Ethics to protect Ethics upstats and keep the stats up and to smoke out crimes that push people and stats down. It is a simple function.
                      The basic duties of Dept 3 are what it says. Inspection and Reports. These alone usually work. When they don’t and stats fall or people fall off the org board, one goes into Ethics actions.
                      You don’t let incompetent and suppressive people on staff in the first place and you crowd Ethics in on them if they’re found to be there.
                      You DON’T confuse an executive’s effort to get the stats up with suppression.
                      The E/0 is making the environment safe so that production can occur and service can be given. He is making it unsafe for those who by neglect or continual errors or suppression push stats down and get good staff members to leave.
                      If none of this is well understood and yet someone is making it impossible to work, find a 9 foot high board fence……
                      The E/0 must know his Ethics policy. He must understand why he is there. And the rest of the people in the org should understand it too.
                      L. RON HUBBARD Founder
                      LRH:rs.ldm.rd
                      Copyright® 1969
                      by L. Ron Hubbard
                      ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

                      Which is the policy I cited earlier.

                      Now regarding what I said about Mithoff.

                      Well be in my next comment.

                    • No Robin, You’re not getting it. I wasn’t asking for that PL to be re-posted. Please re-read my comment and then look at these references:

                      (From HCOB 29 March 1965, ARC Breaks):

                      “AN ARC BREAK OCCURS ON A GENERALITY OR A NOT THERE.

                      The Generality

                      Example of a Generality

                      “They say you are cold-hearted.” “Everybody thinks you are too young.” “The People Versus Sam Jones.” “The will of the masses.”” LRH

                      Aso, HCOPL 29 February 1972 Issue I, Exec Series 10, Correct Comm:

                      “9. One demands specific names and instances, not generalities. (Nonsuppressive comm)

                      10. One demands full particulars, not half-reports or vague generalities. (Nonsuppressive comm)” LRH

                    • HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex HCO POLICY LETTER OF 20 JULY 1970
                      Remimeo (TECHNICAL) All Tech Hats
                      C/0’s Hat
                      Exec Dir Hat
                      Chaplain’s Hat Qual Sec Hat Dept 13 Hat C/S Hats
                      C/S Checksheets HCO Area Sec Hat E/0 Hat
                      CASES AND MORALE OF STAFF
                      Two recent circumstances have called to attention urgently a relationship of the VIABILITY (survival value) of an org and STAFF CASES.
                      X Org was failing. It was causing trouble on world publication lines. An independent survey on cases found 47 percent of the cases on that staff were failed cases, mainly because of lack of auditing. The 4th Mate Athena began a single handed project to straighten up these cases and get them functioning. Because of this (and other admin actions) the org began to function, outstanding actions were done and the org became solvent where it had previously not even been paying its staff. It is now fulfilling its obligations over the world.
                      Y major Org was found to be down morale, non-functional and dwindling. A survey showed 57 percent failed cases with 87% mentioning no wins. It was not paying its staff and was being bolstered by the SO. The early action is to handle staff cases. The SO has the situation well in hand. But it shows graphically what staff case neglect will do to an org.
                      Many earlier cases are on record. Varying degrees of poor tech, altered tech and almost total loss of tech have illustrated gruesomely that INATTENTION TO STAFF CASES CAN ALL BUT DESTROY AN ORG OR ACTIVITY.
                      The reason why squirrel groups fail in the first year or two is the alter-is and abandonment of actual tech plus guilt. Here the cases, if handled at all, get butchered.
                      The factor therefore is a very important one. The policy therefore is:
                      THE CASES OF STAFF MEMBERS REQUIRE ATTENTION AND CASE GAIN.
                      There are multitudes of reasons why this “can’t happen”. “No auditors”, “have to handle the public”, “GI would crash if any people were off post being audited”, “can’t afford extra auditors”, and thousands more can be offerred in excuse for not auditing staff. Financial reasons are so unreal as to be treasonable. As when cases aren’t handled the GI crashes. It’s all rather like “if we put any fuel in the car we won’t have any money to make the trip”.
                      It is not generally recognized that when lower grades and full tech slipped out, ethics came crashing in. It was just the time when quickie auditing began to be done that ethics in orgs became a problem. The HCO org board slipped from Dept 1 (Routing and Recruitment functions) to Dept 3 (Ethics functions) because Div IV (the Tech Division) ceased to handle staff cases as well as public. Div V (Correction) neglected to notice
                      and tech slid into it. Div 2 (Dissemination) slid into the Public Divisions because new public had to be gotten—there “wasn’t enough to audit” to use Central Files pcs.
                      In short, when tech lost full use and was not used and used well on staff cases even the org board scrambled.
                      All this when analyzed and found is of course being put right. But from this we learn
                      1. SHORT CUTTING TECH DELIVERY IS FATAL.
                      2. LOSS OF AND FAILURE TO USE VALID DIANETICS AND SCIENTOLOGY TECH FOR WHATEVER REASON IS FATAL TO AN ORG’S SURVIVAL.
                      3. FAILURE TO HANDLE STAFF CASES WITH FULL TECH AND GOOD AUDITING CRASHES AN ORG.
                      Quite obviously then the intent of any of these counter intentions is treasonable. For it results in a crashed org.
                      Thus resistance to full tech delivery, dropping tech off checksheets and not auditing staff cases to good wins are charges of the most serious nature and should result in immediate dismissal of the instigator when proven beyond reasonable doubt in a properly instituted Comm Ev.
                      SYSTEMS To get over this hump of staff cases where it backlogs there are several solutions.
                      A. The staff staff auditor was an essential post in the 1950s and was very successful. It was never authorized to be abolished. There should be two staff staff auditors for every fifty staff members, doing each other’s C/Sing or C/Sed on usual lines. For 75 staff there should be two staff staff auditors and a C/S.
                      B. A staff lacking auditors can train part time and co-audit. The co-audit would be by groups of comparable levels of training. This is a more expensive (in terms of org time and GI) arrangement. It should be in progress anyway as far as part time training goes. It can be combined with A in which the staff trains but does not rely on co-auditing for case progress.
                      AUDITING PRIORITIES
                      Staff staff auditors should do their own scheduling or with cooperation from tech services exactly on this pattern and no other:
                      The folders of the staff are arranged in four files under these categories.
                      Staff Case Category 1: to Case Gain.
                      Staff Case Category 2:
                      Staff Case Category 3: Attention.
                      Staff Case Category 4: history.
                      Those who have had VGIs F/Ns at Examiner and OK as
                      Those who haven’t had VGI F/Ns at Exam recently. Medically ill in need of thorough Assists and Medical
                      Consistent no change, no case gain in their auditing
                      Obviously to pick up staff morale and general effectiveness SO THAT MORE ATTENTION CAN BE AFFORDED it is of great interest that the cases are scheduled only in this fashion.
                      Staff Case Category 3 (Medically 111) gets priority and full auditing to put them into Category No. 1. Staff Case Category No. 2 (no recent VGIs F/Ns) are audited to get them into Category No. 1.
                      Staff Case Category No. 4 (Consistent no case gain) is routed to Ethics lines for Sec Checks, production examination, etc and if status unrelieved and unproductive, off staff lines into a pc category.
                      Staff Case Category No. 1 is programmed to bring them on up their grades (or Progress and Advance to get them back to their last grade) in an orderly fashion apportioning the auditing fairly.
                      If this scheduling is followed and continues to be followed and if the C/Sing and
                      Auditing are normal in quality, then the majority of staff will at all times be in good case condition. If other scheduling of staff is followed, then the cases and the org will suffer.
                      STATISTIC
                      The Staff Case Supervisor statistic is percentage of staff who are in good case gain condition measured by the last Examiner reports and cancelled by any adverse Exam report. The stat is simple to calculate. It is simply the number of folders in Staff Case Category No. 1 divided by the number on staff. If 39 staff cases were doing well out of 52 on staff, it would be about 75.1%.
                      The C/S would also have number of staff case folders C/Sed.
                      The staff staff auditors would have number of hours of well done auditing sessions. If no C/S they would share the percentile stat.
                      STAFF AUDITING SECTION
                      This unit belongs in the new Department 13—Dept of Personnel Enhancement as the Staff Auditing Section.
                      Any purely auditing goofs in the last session can be repaired by Dept 15 Case Review and returned to the Staff Auditing Section. Or if there is any danger of wait, repaired by the staff staff auditor (since any wait in repairing an auditing goof occasionally winds up in a Medical Category).
                      LACK OF SECTION
                      Lack of this section or a condition of no auditing on staff is an Ethics Charge that can result in removal. Its presence as a section and the state of staff cases should be the point of first importance to any investigatory body or SO Mission to that org.
                      It should be realized that an unflat or undone Grade I (Problems) when not fully handled causes no case gain and the suppressive tendencies of the society to move right on into the org.
                      Above and beyond any efficiency factor, staffs work hard ordinarily and it is very unjust to deny them by any excuse or mechanism the technology which they handle.
                      Any and all trouble occurring in orgs during a long period of heavy enemy attack on them was traced not to the enemy BUT TO LOSS OF TECH MATERIALS, REDUCTION OF THE USE OF TECH (as in quickie grades) AND IGNORING STAFF CASES.
                      Thus these points are spotted as the points most likely present when an org is failing or failing to take and hold its area.
                      Follow it, get it in!
                      THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS POLICY LETTER CANNOT BE OVERSTATED.

                      L. RON HUBBARD Founder
                      LRH:sb.rd Copyright ©1970 by L. Ron Hubbard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

                      As Ron says:

                      THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS POLICY LETTER CANNOT BE OVERSTATED.

                    • Now regarding what out tech.

                      This is covered in the following HCOB:

                      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
                      HCO BULLETIN OF 28 AUGUST 1968
                      OUT TECH

                      Remimeo Class VIII All Orgs
                      After Standard Tech is out for just so long in an org, Scientology ceases to have any meaning.
                      Squirrel processes and repairs wind the staff up in a ball, enturbulate the field and cause a general lethargy and trouble.
                      Ethics then goes in hard or it all goes up in smoke.
                      There is only one Standard Tech! It contains only a few dozen processes and actions. It was not complete before 1966. Students study mainly the Research Line. Standard Tech consists of the exact grade processes and Case Repair.
                      Some still look for magic buttons that resolve a case all at once. Some can’t duplicate what they read and hear.
                      They need the broad body of knowledge.
                      BUT the actual application of Dian & Scn today contains only a few dozen STANDARD INVARIABLE SIMPLE actions and processes.
                      When these are not used, when opinion enters, it’s all gone.
                      STANDARD TECH ALONE RESOLVES ALL CASES.
                      No matter how bright, the other processes and new inventions of someone else (a) work only on a few and (b) are efforts to solve one’s own case by auditing others.
                      To let Standard Tech go out is an act of Treason as Scientology then loses all meaning in an org.
                      This is why I am teaching a Class VIII Course.
                      LRH-jp.ei.bh
                      Copyright © 1968
                      by L. Ron Hubbard
                      ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
                      L. RON HUBBARD Founder

                      No generality there.

                    • Robin, this is going nowhere as you’re either not duplicating or seeing my point or you’re just not-ising it or side-stepping the question. I will TR3 it again:

                      I’m not asking for a specific reference, I’m asking you to clarify your statements you made and which I highlighted as to off-policy actions Debbie Cook did and out-tech cases at Int. I don’t need names in order to protect confidentiality, but you can surely list a few exact cases and the exact out-tech found on the case. Danke.

                    • Not true. As you so aptly pointed out to Formost, the issue on how to write up and ethics order applies here, as well as Exec Series 10. I’m asking you for exact instances, not the references. However, since you seem unwilling to answer…..

                    • You know I can’t answer that question specifically since I wasn’t there. However I was able to observe the immediate result of those policies being violated.

                      Ask any staff member who has since left the base what their case and training level is?

                    • RV: “Anyone at Int at any time could’ve of taken out that lil’ twerp and the only reason they didn’t is covered in the HCOPL Ethics, The Design of.”

                      Not trying to pile on anything here, Robin, but that’s not what I’ve ascertained by talking to a great number of ex-Int staff and ex-SO, some long time, some very great people as well. Each person, as you should know, being an auditor, will have their own “why” or reason, not to mention the historical culture and evolution of the SO and Int and the takeover, etc. all contribute to a scene. here’s also data on PTSness and OWs and etc., etc. So that comment just ends up being a blanket generality that doesn’t really explain nor blow the charge on the area.

                      Just my view on it from my own observations and comm with many people as well as a tech perspective.

                    • Well this covered in the following policy:

                      HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex
                      HCO POLICY LETTER OF 3 MAY 1972R REVISED 18 DECEMBER 1977
                      IMPORT ANT Executive Series 12 ETHICS AND EXECUTIVES
                      Any person holding an executive post (head of department or above) is deemed an EXECUTIVE.
                      Evaluation has revealed that the breakdown in many orgs is a failure on the part of executives to wear their ethics and justice hats.
                      It has been found that below administrative Whys there is usually an ethics situation as well, which, unhandled, causes the administrative Why not to func- tion or raise stats.
                      In an area which is downstat, it is the duty of an executive to investigate and find any out-ethics situation and get it corrected.
                      Ethics is a personal thing in relation to a group. Unethical people are those who do not have ethics in on themselves personally.
                      It is the responsibility of the executive to see to it that persons under his control and in his area get their personal ethics in and keep them in.
                      Dishonesty, false reports, an out-ethics personal life, should be looked for and, by persuasion, should be corrected.
                      When an executive sees such things, he or she must do all he can to get the person to get his own ethics in.
                      When an area is downstat, the executive must at once suspect an out-ethics scene with one or more of the personnel and must investigate and persuade the person to be more honest and ethical and correct the out-ethics condition found.
                      If this does not correct and if the person or area remains downstat, the ex- ecutive must declare the person or area in Danger and apply HCO PL 9 Apr. 72, CORRECT DANGER CONDITION HANDLING.
                      The situation, if it does not correct, thereafter becomes a matter of full group justice with courts and Comm Evs. Persons whose ethics have remained out must be replaced.
                      The seniors of an executive are bound to enforce this policy and to use it on

                      Any executives whose personal ethics are out and who fail to apply it. It will be found that those who do not apply this policy letter have themselves certain dis- honesties or out-ethics situations.
                      IT IS VITAL TO ANY ORGANIZATION, TO BE STRONG AND EFFEC- TIVE, TO BE ETHICAL.
                      THE MOST IMPORTANT ZONE OF ETHICAL CONDUCT IN AN OR- GANIZATION IS AT OR NEAR THE TOP.
                      Ethical failure, at the top or just below it, can destroy an organization and make it downstat.
                      Historical examples are many.
                      THEREFORE, IT IS POLICY THAT AN EXECUTIVE MUST KEEP ETHICS IN ON HIMSELF AND THOSE BELOW HIM OR BE DISCIPLINED OR COMM EVED AND REMOVED FROM ANY POST OF AUTHORITY AND SOMEONE FOUND WHO IS HIMSELF ETHICAL AND CAN KEEP ETHICS IN ON THOSE UNDER HIS AUTHORITY.
                      The charge in any such case for a staff member or executive is FAILURE TO UPHOLD OR SET AN EXAMPLE OF HIGH ETHICAL STANDARDS.
                      Such offenses are composed of:
                      1. DISHONESTY.
                      2. Use of false statements to cover up a situation.
                      3. Representing a scene to be different than it actually is to cover up crimes and escape discipline.
                      4. Irregular 2D connections and practices.
                      5. Drug or alcoholic addiction.
                      6. Encouraging out-ethics.
                      7. Condoning or failing to effectively handle an out-ethics situation in self or others as an in-charge, officer or executive.
                      TECHNICAL
                      People with out-ethics withholds cannot see. This is proven by the brilliant return of perception of the environment in people audited effectively and at length on such processes.
                      Such people also seek to place a false environment there and actually see a false environment.
                      People whose ethics are low will enturbulate and upset a group as they are seeking to justify their harmful acts against the group. And this leads to more harmful acts.
                      Out-ethics people go rapidly into Treason against the group.

                      A person whose ethics have been out over a long period goes “out of va- lence.” They are “not themselves.”
                      Happiness is only attained by those who are HONEST with themselves and others.
                      A group prospers only when each member in it has his own personal ethics in.
                      Even in a PTS (potential trouble source) person there must have been out- ethics conduct toward the suppressive personality he or she is connected with for the person to have become PTS in the first place.
                      People who are physically ill are PTS and are out-ethics toward the person or thing they are PTS to!
                      Thus a group to be happy and well, and for the group to prosper and endure, its individual members must have their own ethics in.
                      It is up to the executive or officer to see that this is the case and to DO the actions necessary to make it come about and the group an ethical group.
                      EXEC OR OFFICER’S STEPS FOR GETTING IN ETHICS ON A STAFF MEMBER
                      STEP 1
                      Inform the person personally he is in Danger condition by reason of acts or omissions, down stats, false reports or absence or 2D or whatever the circum- stances are.
                      He is in fact IN Danger because somebody is going to act sooner or later to hit him.
                      He may be involved already in some other assignment of condition.
                      But this is between you and him.
                      HE IS IN DANGER BECAUSE YOU ARE HAVING TO BYPASS HIM TO GET HIS ETHICS IN, A THING HE SHOULD DO HIMSELF.
                      If he cooperates and completes this rundown and it comes out all right, you will help him.
                      If he doesn’t cooperate, you will have to use group justice procedures.
                      This is his chance to get ethics in on himself with your help before he really crashes.
                      When he accepts this fact, Step 1 is done. Go to Step 2.

                      Step 2

                      Ethics is gotten in by definition on the person.
                      GET THE DEFINITIONS FULLY UNDERSTOOD.
                      The following words must be Method 4 word cleared on all the words and the words in their definitions on the person being handled.
                      “ETHICS: the study of the general nature of morals (morals [plural] [noun]: The principles of right and wrong conduct) and of the specific moral choices to be made by the individual in his relationship with others.”
                      “The rules or standards governing the conduct of the members of a profes- sion. ”
                      “JUSTICE: (1) moral rightness; equity. (2) honor, fairness. (3) good reason. (4) fair handling: due reward or treatment. (5) the administration and procedure ofthe law.”
                      “FALSE: contrary to fact or truth; without grounds; incorrect. Without meaning or sincerity; deceiving. Not keeping faith; treacherous. Resembling and being identified as a similar or related entity.”
                      “DISHONEST: disposed to lie, cheat, defraud or deceive.” “PRETENSE: a false reason or excuse. A mere show without reality.” “BETRAY: to be disloyal or faithless to.”
                      “OUT-ETHICS: an action or situation in which an individual is involved contrary to the ideals and best interests of his group. An act or situation or rela- tionship contrary to the ethics standards, codes or ideals of the group or other members of the group. An act of omission or commission by an individual that could or has reduced the general effectiveness of a group or its other members. An individual act of omission or commission which impedes the general well-being of a group or impedes it in achieving its goals.”
                      Do not go to Step 3 of this until all the above words are cleared by Method 4 Word Clearing.
                      STEP 3
                      Ask the person what out-ethics situation he or she is involved in.
                      It may take the person some time to think of it or he may suppress it and be afraid to say it for fear of consequences. Reassure him that you are only trying to help him.
                      He may have brought it up in a session but did not apply it as out-ethics. Coax him through this.
                      If his conduct and actions are poor or downstat, he for sure will be able to come up with an out-ethics personal scene.
                      Sometimes the person is secretly PTS and is connected to a suppressive or antagonistic person or group or thing. In such an instance he will roller-coaster as a case or on post or have accidents or be ill frequently. (See PTS tech for material on this and for future handling. Checksheet BPL 31 May 1971RG IV, PTS AND SP DETECTION, ROUTING AND HANDLING CHECKSHEET, but go on handling with these steps.)
                      Sometimes the person just uses PR (brags it up and won’t come clean). In this case, an auditing session is required.
                      If the person gets involved in self-listing, get him audited on HCOB 20 Apr. 72, CIS Series 78 II, PRODUCT PURPOSE AND WHY AND WC ERROR CORRECTION, which gives the auditing session procedure. A person can be- come very upset over a wrong item. It is easily repaired, but it must be repaired if this happens.
                      By your own 2WC or whatever means or repair get this Step 3 to a clear-cut out-ethics situation, clearly stated. Do not forget to go on with this eventually if there is a delay in completing it. GIs will be in if correct.
                      STEP 4
                      Have the person work out how the out-ethics situation in which he or she is involved would be a betrayal of the group or make them false to the group or its ideals.
                      Do not make the person guilty. Just get them to see it themselves.
                      When they have seen this clearly and have cognited on it completely, go to next step.
                      STEP 5
                      The person is now ready to apply the FIRST DYNAMIC DANGER FOR- MULA to himself.
                      Give him this formula and explain it to him.
                      FIRST DYNAMIC FORMULA The formula is converted for the first dynamic to:
                      1st 1: 1st 2: 1st 3: 1st 4:
                      Bypass habits or normal routines.
                      Handle the situation and any danger in it. Assign self a Danger condition.
                      Get in your own personal ethics by finding what you are doing that is out-ethics and use self-discipline to correct it and get honest and straight.
                      1st 5: Reorganize your life so that the dangerous situation is not continually happening to you.
                      1st 6: Formulate and adopt firm policy that will hereafter detect and prevent the same situation from continuing to occur.
                      Now the person is already involved in another group situation of down stats or overt products or bad appearance or low conditions, courts, Comm Evs, for something.
                      It does not matter what other condition he was in. From you he is in Danger.
                      So 1st 1 and 1st 2 above apply to the group situation he finds himself in.
                      He has to assign himself a Danger condition as he recognizes now he has been in danger from himself.
                      1st 4 has been begun by this rundown.
                      It is up to him or her to finish off 1st 4 by applying the material in Steps 2 and 3. He or she has to use self-discipline to correct his own out-ethics scene and get it honest and straight, with himself and the group.
                      1st 5 is obvious. If he doesn’t, he will just crash again.
                      1st 6, in formulating and adopting firm policy, he must be sure it aligns with the group endeavor.
                      When he has worked all this out AND DEMONSTRATED IT IN LIFE, he has completed the personal Danger Rundown.
                      He can then assign himself Emergency and follow the Emergency Formula (HCO PL 23 Sept. 67, Vol 0 OEC, EMERGENCY).
                      STEP 6
                      Review the person and his stats and appearance and personal life.
                      Satisfy yourself that the steps above and the out-ethics found were all of it. That no wrong item has been found. That the person is not PTS.
                      Handle what you find. But if you find that the person did not improve and gave it all a brushoff, you must now take the group’s point of view and admin- ister group justice.
                      Your protection of the person is at end because he had his chance and is apparently one of those people who depend on others to keep his ethics in for him and can’t keep them in himself. So use group justice procedures thereafter.
                      If the person made it and didn’t fall on his head and is moving on up now AS SHOWN BY HONEST STATS AND CONDITION OF HIS POST, you have had a nice win and things will go much, much better.
                      And that’s a win for everybody.
                      L. RON HUBBARD Founder

                    • RV: Not some Mexican Army’s Org Board with some Generalissimo on top giving all the orders and call it “Scientology Management”.

                      And that’s the million dollar question. Is there anyone who could possibly have unseated DM considering he’s the boy the IRS has extended their tax status too. Who has that power? Debbie Cook mentioned DM threw all the Senior Execs into long ethics programs, so who can challenge?

                      I could find no fault with her New Years write-up, I agree on every single point, which may be another topic altogether.

                      LRH held all the power, and seems DM does too. Mind you, these are just my opinions, and if we don’t take Rinder’s story, then we are left with speculations, and we’ll never know.

                    • Ron didn’t hold all the power. After he left resigned from the post of LRH ED he became a consultant to the organization.

                      You’ll find this data in the policy Founder.

                      Don’t make me post it.

                      Also in any version of RJ 28.

                      Not to mention the fact that practically every Policy Letter or RED issued from that point had to approved by Board of Directors CSC or CSI.

                      This myth that Ron ran a virtual dictatorship is a myth perpetrated by a bunch of DaveBots, OSA and of course M&M to give Miscavige’s Dictatorship some kind of false legitimacy.

                      And yes making Miscavige COB CTCC on a lifetime appointment was somewhat problematic but that’s what his “friends” in the IRS wanted.

                    • RV: Ron didn’t hold all the power.

                      When LRH orders DM sec checked, a Mission holder’s Conference held or Mayo declared, it gets done regardless what RJ28 says.

                      No such thing as Board of Directors CSC or CSI not approving anything LRH writes, it a legal front only.

                      That wasn’t my point.

                      Way too much data, testimony and evidence exists that DM does in fact hold ultimate power. It’s not just one datum, it’s hundreds if not thousands. It may well be his power is propped up by Celebs and other background players which I suspect. But that’s not my point either. He does with the CST Board and the WDC as he likes, they are his pawns. No IAS, iDeal Orgs, GAT exist without his approval. No one can say “NO” to him. That’s what I mean, seems nobody can unseat him … that was my entire point. How can anyone put a stop to his squirrely offline activities when as soon as he snaps his fingers you are in the RPF or offloaded? In view of this I question to what extent M & M can be held liable. Not buying into this they could have applied this and that LRH reference to affect a remedy, but then we’ve all … all of us … at one time or another been guilty of not applying LRH. I’m very hesitant to lay blame at feet than what may actually be due. I most certainly question it too, esp. in view of the fact they’ve pretty much “turned Injun” at this point … not any sign of clean hands, in fact downright suppressive supporting small-fry media circus clowns such as Ortega in denigrating the tech.

                    • “When LRH orders DM sec checked, a Mission holder’s Conference held or Mayo declared, it gets done regardless what RJ28 says.”

                      FM,

                      Yeah that’s the problem with history being rewritten by guys like Marty and Mike. The fact is that the CSC Board of Directors existed. Board minutes do exist and as I wrote all LRHEDs HCOPLs etc were approved and accepted by them.

                      Aside from the line that states precisely “accepted by the Board of Directors of the Church of California of California” is the Church of Scientology of California Corporate Stamp.

                      What to think those are. Decorations or boiler plant?

                      Are you saying Ron is a liar when he says he resigned management position within the Organization and assumed the the post of Founder?

                      And why would he form a entity known as “Scientology Consultants”?

                      Much of what is written on the internet makes it seem that he was in total control yet if this were true and he was watching the lines like a hawk as they assert did it take two years to correct Quickie Grades?

                      The line that got direct results and immediate action was the SO #1 line which is covered under Standing Order #1.

                      Regarding Micavige why wouldn’t Ron directly order him to sec checks? The fact is that he was working directly for Ron as the President of ASI.

                      Mayo was declared by a com ev that was Chaired by Ray Mithoff and ordered by the International Ethics Officer.

                      One that was recommended by Ron on the evidence that was available in PC and Pre OT folders that Ron personally reviewed. Whoever says Ron personally declared Mayo is lying.

                      This fiction that Ron was running the show single handedly bypassing the Board of Directors, the Controllers Office, Ad Councils, Exec Councils, FP Committees, Staff Meetings etc is just fiction.

                      The only time an Org ended up with a Mission was when its stats were down or it didn’t report per the Multiple System.

                      Ron was mainly running the Flag Ship Apollo and advising his Commodores Staff Aides which include Mary Sue who was his C/S G on what actions to take internationally, consulting as a C/S and researching the upper levels of OT and occasionally being pulled in through SO #1 plus running the Media Org and Rehearsing the Apollo Stars.

                      When do you think he had time to personally run Scientology’s administrative lines?

                      Regarding Miscavige he filed the vacuum that was created by removing the Controllers Office and eventually took control by using a power push back up by a conspiracy of like minded individuals like for example Marty and Mike.

                    • Chris accused me of “side stepping” this issue. So I decided to come back and address it.

                      BTW the policies and HCOBs that I have posted should be read because they not only apply to Int but to any Org.

                      My personal experience with Int is limited but I did work of the Exec Series 40 project. This was getting prospective Int Base Staff members qualled in trained at ITO before firing them to the Int Base.

                      Well to make a short story long. Most of the “qualled” staff we sent up were a bunch of kids who had absolutely no life experience or had worked in an Org and their only Qual was that they hadn’t taken LSD.

                      Not I could justify this by saying “well that’s what they wanted” or “we were told that they’d take care of the rest of their quals.” etc, etc, justifier, justifier, etc. but the fact is we basically didn’t wear our hat and the Int Base was inundated with a bunch of raw recruits that knew nothing about anything especially policy and tech who’s mind could easily be molded and manipulated by someone like Miscavige.

                      Thought you’d like to know that some of on the outside played a small part in making the Int Base the hell it became.

                    • RV: “Thought you’d like to know that some of on the outside played a small part in making the Int Base the hell it became.”

                      Thank you. By the power invested in me, you are forgiven. 😀

                    • Seems one of my comments vanished into cyberspace yet again.

                      My fault for getting too personal here. But it sorta exemplifies the fact that to a greater or lesser degree we are all responsible in some way for the way things have gone and not just Miscavige.

                      As far as I’ve concerned M&M have mined that vein continually and endlessly and look where they are today.

                • The simple answer Paul is that the APIS was set up many years ago with a constitution that has Michael with sole responsibility and control as President, and with a constitution that is heavily weighted to no one usurping that control. This was done, at the time, for a reason – but with the scene in the C of S and DMs reign and control, many are uncomfortable about actively being part of an organisation that has the potential to do the same (not that I think that would occur).

                  We felt we needed a not for profit charitable company, established with a board of OTs with the express purpose of getting Scn applied – and with a mandate and mission to get delivery occurring and hold the torch for LRH on standard delivery. It is important that no one person has ultimate control or responsibility — and that it is a group of trained OTs with the same purpose to see LRH tech available for generations to come.

                  APIS has a good purpose, but is unfortunately, to a degree, starting long ago, associated with the Freezone (the APIS website domain is IntFreezone) and that group is a melting pot that includes some heavy duty squirrels and nut jobs. APIS has held the torch for standard tech, and that is commendable. Michael has been a steady and stable person promoting standard tech for more than a decade.

                  So we formed a new company (Milestone Two Ltd) and Michael was invited to be part of it, but he declined due to existing commitments.

                  We support APIS and do not a slag them. They have a good purpose and are good people.

                  • LM:

                    Okay, thanks for the clarification. As usual, I’m late to the party, and as usual, I tend to ask hard questions.

                    I think Chris’s position as COO of APIS probably says a lot about APIS. I can’t say as I blame Michael much for the shape of their constitution. I set up the History Project’s bylaws in a similarly rigorous way, and for similar reasons, though I did not declare any post there “for life”.

                    But I see the wisdom of MS2’s organization. I believe that this grouping of trained of OTs as the organizational core is something that was missing in all of the Church. Those of us not as trained or processed can help at lower levels, but I feel more comfortable knowing that trained OTs are at the helm. I believe that, had the upper echelons of Scientology been run by such people in the first place, we might have avoided what’s happened to the Church.

                    Paul

                    • Roy Selby was at the helm of APIS as well, Paul, and Roy was one of those rare birds that are OT and work in action as well as being 100% LRH. And there were one or two others. But Roy and Michael were the big beings there.

                    • CB:

                      “Was”, “were”? You realize their org board lists you as COO and almost everything in Divs 1-7 HFA? Roy’s not on the org board by that name, at least. I got a kick out of one of the senior positions in Dept 21 being held by “Hari Seldon” (an obvious pseudonym). You should get them to update the org board if things have changed.

                      Paul

                  • Yes. I still get Micheal’s monthly LRH quotes
                    and production reports. Quite theta. Nothing
                    wrong with that. Re; Karen – I think we have
                    mostly all taken our blows from DM but none
                    quite match the level of damage incurred Karen
                    and her family. I’d love to help her too.

                    • I do agree – what Karen went through was horrific and no one should have to go through that, especially the whole scene with Alexander. Many SO members went through their specific hells and it’s a sad commentary that they got so beat up. But I’m glad to see some of them still continuing with their original purpose.

                    • Joe,

                      I agree Michael’s monthly News Letter is very theta and I enjoy getting it.

                      Chris,

                      I agree Karen’s been through a lot. I think the death of Alexander was a major secondary and probably impinged quite a lot.

                      From what I understand Quentin’s death greatly affected Mary Sue as I’m sure it affected Ron.

                      Also while we’re on the subject of secondaries I think Ron’s death affected us all greatly to a greater or lesser degree. I’m sure there are many Scientologists out there who are still stuck in that secondary.

                      Despite being told by Stormy Normy to suck it up and move on.

                    • I agree Chris. We still got some serious auditing to do. All us auditors.

                      Well at least we don’t have to be serious about it 😉

                      As Ron says in PDC 21 get that remedy out there and being applied or something to that affect.

          • Yes well I think Lana deserves a lot of credit for keeping this bog *sane*. It sure is a refreshing change from other soi-disant “Scientology” blogs. Many of them as far as I’m concerned are nothing but false flag ops and should be handed their burn notice.

            Also Jim deserves a special round of applause for posting some of the technical data he’s been coming across in his studies. I did the BC many years ago including what we called the “wall of tapes” but Jim manages to across many references that I’d never seen.

            Thanks again Jimbo.

            Also I’d like to thank everyone commenting on this board for being there. It’s great to be around a bunch of people who are with the subject and really with Ron.

            Gives me hope.

            LR

  12. I’ve been sitting here thinking back on my time on the HAS course. It occurred to me that I may have absorbed some false data while on that course, and perhaps someone more educated than me could help with that.

    As part of bullbait and TR1, we were required to deliver the auditing question with complete lack of expression. No twitching, no moving our hands, no raising eyebrows, etc. Similarly, we were required to ack the PC (TR2) without expression as well. If the PC laughed, cried, picked their nose or whatever, we were required to simply ack without expression if they answered the question.

    Obviously, this precludes “natural” TRs. So the question is: was I instructed improperly, or were the drills actually supposed to be done that way? Second question, if I was instructed improperly, then how does one coach “natural TRs”? That is, if a TRs session should look more like a natural conversation, how do you, as a coach, distinguish between a via and a genuinely natural reaction? “Vias” were a BIG deal on that course.

    Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask these questions.

    Paul

    • Paul, I’m out right now but will get you some references when I get home but yeh, you were instructed improperly. And to coach, one uses the TRs HCOB and Coaching HCOB and plain obnosis.

      Get back with you soon.

      • I don’t mean to harp on about Karen, Chris but I think the lesson to learn here is that DM has no use for auditors trained by LRH and with Karens elevated status, he decided to make an example of her.
        Am I bitter or just pissed off with my own familial distasters courtesy of you know who? The man is death on families.

        • Joe: “I don’t mean to harp on about Karen, Chris but I think the lesson to learn here is that DM has no use for auditors trained by LRH and with Karens elevated status, he decided to make an example of her.”

          Totally agree with you, Joe. I saw that long ago when he began getting rid of certain Class XIIs and all the pre-GAT Class VIIIs. And yeh, there are definitely some strings to pull on his 2D! Also, I’m sorry to hear about your run-ins with the out-tech and off-policy surrounding the 2D area. I hope it gets resolved for you.

    • Paul,
      I recommend you study two tapes from the BC, the first is from 16 Jan 63, TV Demo, TRO Demonstration, and the next, on the same day is the tape TRO Lecture.

      These two lectures (one is a demo of coaching TRO and handling various attitudes including a “professional attitude”) go over what you are asking about, i.e., some sort of additive attitude, mannerism, unnatural/out R type of thing.

      I have copies of them for you if you need them.

      Also, there is an issue from 1980, that summarizes all of the LRH critiques of TRs videos that were submitted during the clean up of these stiff, unnatural TRs that resulted from not knowing what the TRs were all about. The introduction of Dianetics 55! to TRs study occurred while I was a Sup on the Flag Hard TRs course in 79, as well as what would become Clay Table Processing on the TRs course.

      In a nutshell, from what you describe, I’d say, yep, you were mis-coached into some sort of “system” of “TRs”.

      Make no mistake, TRs 0-IV, are a precisely disciplined technology of exact application of the principles of communication that make auditing to results possible. The ease and naturallness that is attained by somebody who has their TRs “in”, is an effortless competence that is a key part of the skill of an auditor.

      Listen to LRH Model Auditing tapes, and see for yourself the natural, disciplined, effortlessness of real TRs.

      Get a hold of me, and we can sort out any question on this, no worries, mate.

      • JL:

        You’ll have to forgive me. My twisted sense of humor kicked in. You mentioned tapes demonstrating TR-0, and I just thought of “listening” (or reading a transcript) to a tape of a TR-0 demo, and thinking that there couldn’t be anything in the MEST universe closer to paint drying than that. 😉

        I just read through the only one of the above references I have– a transcript of a lecture simply called “TR 0” on that date. Makes the point that what appear to be outnesses in later TRs are often or usually traceable back to weak TR-0, and illustrates some of the ways that TR-0 can be weak or go wrong. From the transcript, I can imagine it would be hard to coach TRs to an expert level without also having excellent TR-0 oneself.

        Paul
        Email: admin AT scnhistory DOT org

      • Paul,

        This is from TRs Remodernized; in it Ron clearly says how it’s to be done, and quite succinctly:

        “TRAINING STRESS: The command goes from the book to the student and, as his own, to the coach. It must not go from book to coach. It must sound natural not artificial. Diction and elocution have no part in it. Loudness may have.

        This drill is passed only when the student can put across a command naturally, without strain or artificiality or elocutionary bobs and gestures, and when the student can do it easily and relaxedly.”

        The various tapes that have been mentioned are also quite valid, but for the sake of coaching, the above HCOB s quite clear.

        ARC,
        Chris

      • I remember that 1980 bulletin, Jim. As I remember, it clarifies, restates, and nails down a lot of basics about TRs.
        Another thing that I have always done when starting someone on TRs or trouble shooting is to clear each key word in the TRs bulletins thoroughly before beginning (including using them in sentences and clearing the derivations). Words like “Be”, “There”, “Comfortably”, “Communicate”, “Understanding”, etc.
        LRH wrote the instruction manual. All one has to do is to duplicate what it says and apply it. I have never seen doing that fail to result in big wins.

  13. A few years ago someone I know gave me a hint where he was, somewhere out in Alberta. Don’t know if still current but haven’t heard anything since he blew the last time, some time back.

  14. Hey guys,

    Just a note on obnosis.
    I just noticed that our comments on this blog don’t come out in time sequence. Are they running on Alphabetical order mixed in with something else? Would it make it easier to pick up where we leave off if they were strictly time stamp order or is that difficult to set up?

    Just curious.

    Joe

    • BTW Joe I think this is the way WP is set up. You click on reply and it ends up in the sequence of the commenters though sometimes the threads get so long that the reply button vanishes into some black hole.

      In this case just find the first commenter on the thread and use that reply button and it should work.

  15. “Well Chris and Jim.
    I haven’t really bothered to review her you tube site. So I guess I’m lacking that data.
    From my own personal communication with her she was very pro the tech and Ron. Of course this was a couple of years ago so things may have changed.
    Also the reason she may equate the subject with the organization if she does as you say probably has more to do with BPC as covered in the HCOB The Cause of ARCxs than some suppressive urge of some kind.
    Also it is also covered in the policy on Quality of Service.
    Like I said Karen says things that I don’t totally agree with. Like for instance I think what she says about the GO and “Operation Snow White” is totally incorrect but like I said she is entitled to her opinion.
    Personally I think that the problem if there is a problem is with Marty who has set himself up as an OL and to some people tends to be charismatic as I said to some people. Like Miscavige is to others and Hitler was ….
    I mean I could go on how people fall under the spell of others who don’t have the best of intentions. I mean history is littered with such false prophets and Marty happens to be one of them.
    Though I’m sure once Karen gets her BPC handled and sees who Marty really is that she’ll be fine.
    Which is why my opinion about her hasn’t changed and that Old Poem should apply to all of us as well as the people still in the Church.
    In fact I’ve ceased calling them Koolaid Drinkers, Churchies or Culties or any other derogatory term. The way I see it. They are Scientologists who have been led astray. Some realize this but others haven’t.
    Personally I think we should be inclusionary instead of being exclusively exclusionary which I think is the main failing of those who call themselves the “Independent Field”.
    I suggest reading the policy on Group Sanity on what Ron has to say about this point.
    Anyway that’s my 2 bits on all this and despite what you both say I still consider Karen an ally, comrade and a friend.”

    That makes two of us, RV.

    Another reference, “What is Greatness”. Then ask yourself the question, “What would LRH do?” Do we need to take another step higher up the scale of OT, of KRC? If we can’t handle what has happened to our group, then what do we do if we find ourselves with a problem that we can’t seem to overcome? How about, find two or three bigger problems and handle them all? I have some dandies in mind and still want to regain control of our church with all those good people being lead down a dark road to oblivion.

    Are you in for the final assault on insanity or will you become a cinder, alone in the sky?

    Joe

    • What is Greatness IS being applied, Joe. However, Ron didn’t say one should not-is what is going on, either, just that one should love despite reasons not to. Perhaps this can also apply to Marty and Mike and DM? Just a thought.

      • I get ya Chris.

        I mean what’s there not to love about the Terrible Trio?

        😉

        Personally I think Karen is just lacking purpose in her life. For a while she was running some kind of Scientology Dating operation then she was or still is hawking Kincaid prints.

        Just the kinda things you’d expect a highly trained Class XII who was personally trained by the Ol’man to do.

        (It’s hard to convey sarcasm in print so I’m putting it here.)

        Anyway the fact is she is auditing again. So that is a plus point.

        True you could apply What is Greatness but you can also apply what Ron says about auditors as well in Open Channel.

        And also that Old Poem that was issued as an HCOB and as Policy.

  16. Chris Black says:
    “What is Greatness IS being applied, Joe. However, Ron didn’t say one should not-is what is going on, either, just that one should love despite reasons not to. Perhaps this can also apply to Marty and Mike and DM? Just a thought.”

    And, it’s a good thought, Chris. Now think in futures, think big and tell me what you envision as an ideal scene for our third and fourth dynamics. Do your own eval taking a good, hard, honest look at the existing scene then write a program designed to improve conditions across all dynamics.

    Why are we here in comm on this fantastic, very theta web site run by the very biggest thetans? From your comments on MS2 I see that you are a man of vision, very unique in that you never really succumbed to the best laid plans of mice and men like DM. You never stopped auditing regardless of the noise and distractions. For this, my admiration for you is boundless. I see that you create your 2D, your family and your personal conduct as a being at cause (OT) is already miles above the rest. Hence I see no need to include your first nor your second in an eval.
    However, we have a problem with our third and fourth dynamics. Push has indeed come to shove. Be patient with our good friends here. RV too is very OT and pushing in the right direction toward resolution of these final barriers to freedom, good will to men and peace on Earth.

    Merry Christmas, Chris.

    I love you too.

    Joe

    • LOL, Joe. Thank you, and I love you, too!

      Here are some nice quotes for you for Christmas:

      “If we are doctors (by which might be meant ‘repairers’), then we are doctors on the third and fourth dynamics, the dynamics of groups and mankind as a whole, and we handle the first (self) and the second (sex and family) only to achieve better function on the third and fourth.” LRH (SCIENTOLOGY 0-8)

      “We’ve been told how bad it is over there for seventy-six trillion years. It’s about time somebody said how good it can be somewhere. And that’s what we are doing.” – LRH (PAB 53, 27 May 1955, “Ownership”)

      “What is the essential difference between what I’m doing in Scientology and other people? Is it because I’m brighter? No. Is it because I know more? No. There’s really only one thing: I recognize that it’s my job. I also recognize anybody has this job.

      There was this great big pair of boots and they were sitting right in the middle of this universe. They were awfully big boots. You could get down amongst them with telescopes. You could look the length and breadth of them and find absolutely nothing inhabiting them.

      In these boots, it just simply said, “These are the boots which go down a road which leads out of this joint.

      Prime Cause has nothing which could enslave it, except itself. Just like there’s really nobody ever going to really pick up this preclear and carry him out this universe. Nobody’s ever going to do that. He can have his boots put on but he’ll still have that last mile to walk himself.

      That means that he’ll have to take responsibility for what he does and his force; not only for that but for everything that goes on around him

      We find out that there is a bigness which has to grow in the person. And if you don’t see that bigness growing, he’s not on his way out.

      The difference between the preclear that has to be chained down to have the boots put on him and me is, I never wanted to be a slave and I never had to be. That’s all. I never agreed.” L. RON HUBBARD

    • Thanx Joe,

      And a very Merry Xmas to you and you’re Family.

      I’ve also posted the Merry Xmas wishes I received from Ron and Mary Sue sometime back and I’m sharing them with all of you.

      Personally I don’t know what Ron would say about the current scene except what he says in the Essay on Management when I wrote him about my trepidations about the current Management.

      But I do know from what he says in the PAB Open Channel that he’d be be proud of you.

      So Merry Xmas again Joe and everyone here.

      • Wow, RV. It’s a good thing I got a full box of kleenex nearby. I miss Ron too. The last few days on this blog has been, for me at least,
        the best third and fourth dynamic session I have ever had and
        thanks largely to you, my friend. Merry Xmas to you and yours too. And that goes to all you great people here.

  17. Chris Black;
    Ah, Ron Turnbull – there’s a name from the past.
    Speaking of names, what about Graham van Zant and George Baillie and Andy Hoare and Martin (somebody) and there were a couple others my brother used to hang with back then that hung together some. And do you recall a Frank Davis, Jim?

    Last time I saw Ron Turnbull was, I think mid 90’s in TO. Graham Van Zant in late 90’s was spending every second month on Freewinds hob knob-bing with Captain Napier and Nick Frazer (Freewinds staff). I last saw George Baillie in SO auditing as CL IX at FSO in 2004. Andy Hoare was the first OT VIII to return to Toronto, not sure of the year. Martin Jones is now promoting his business on Linked-In. I don’t think I know Frank Davis.
    BTW, is your brother’s name, Tom?

    Joe

    • Hey Joe, thanks for the updates on all these guys. George is in the SO? Wow! And auditing NOTs. I remember when I bought a few of the old green books from Andy Hoare after I was declared, but bought of eBay and Andy sold them to me, no problem. He audited me back in 1980 for a couple of intensives. I was still a mite green! lol. Martin Jones – my brother and he lived together I think with Graham for a bit off of Davenport, along the tracks, when the org was on Avenue Road. My brother’s name was James Black. He was the top DMSMH bookseller on the planet. Diana H. wrote up a Div 6 program based on his successful actions (although I think they left out how Jim would stick his foot in the door like any good vacuum or encyclopedia salesman! lol). I’ll have to look up Martin on Linked-In. And re Graham, yeh, he fits the bill doing that hob-nobbing. He was just “that type of being”.

      Again, thanks!

    • Joe,

      I remember most of the names there. RT was the Lead Course Supe when I went to Toronto to do the HPDC (Hubbard Practicing Dianeticist Course which was later canceled) and George was the KOT at the time (always nice to meet the guy who was responsible for the HCOB Dianetic Commands Have Background Data or what we used to call the “Bailey Bulletin” 😉 ).

      Andy took me in for a C/S 53 when I bogged inexplicably (at the time) on my Dianetic co-audit while on the HPDC.

      (Before going on. The Org on Avenue RD in Toronto was a very spooky place having been a mortuary prior to the Church buying it. Full of old ghosts and weird paranormal phenomenon. Such as strange pictures of incidents and such which I found fun to run but very hard to flatten 😉 )

      Graham van Zant was the Qual Sec when I was posted to TTC Can in the early ’80’s. The guy always reminded me of Burl Ives for some reason 🙂

        • I remember Otto. He’s the guy who regged us to drive almost 3000 mile east to do courses that we could have done at our local Org.

          Back then we were young and foolish and I guess the fact that Otto could sell ice-cream to Eskimos didn’t hurt.

          Janet was in B1 Investigations when I met her. She was either married to or shacked up with the AGI Mike Crellin.

          Ernie I didn’t get to know until I came back to Toronto in the early ’90’s to finalize my Green Card application.

          I got along well with Ernie and Janet though I’d always found Otto rather intimidating for some reason. Even though he was a good reg. We just never hit it off on a personal level.

          Maybe it had something to do with the fact that he left me stranded in Hamilton Ontario when I was passing out promo for his Chimney cleaning company.

      • Robin,
        Well, this is interesting, in’it. You were in T.O. when I was in T.O.

        My impression from what little P.T. data I have, is that most of the old guys we’re mentioning on the blog are still about – somehow or other “on lines” or in some way still connected to the scene in Toronto, or L.A. or wherever.

        My gut tells me we’re on different sides of the same side of this artificial fence. In other words, I’m predicting those thetans are in this for the long haul and sooner or later we’ll meet again, carrying forward on the long game.

        • True you just can’t keep a good thetan down. I think we can look at this point in Scientology’s history as a glitch. Eventually we’ll get it sorted out. I mean whoever’s stopping us can’t last forever while we can 😉

          • One of the ideas I’m practicing is not feeding life to any entheta. This is the whole First and Second Postulate thing, where for example and ARCX has ARC as a First Postulate. The ARCX gets its fuel from the prior ARC sort of thing.

            Spotting and as-ising the First Postulate, the Second has nothing to it. Then with the power of choice on that little two-terminal affair restored, why you can postulate ARC or not. But the charge is gone as the two-terminals are gone, voila.

            The Axioms are the agreed upon considerations – the ongoing postulates that are the basics of the scene, the universe we are all playing along in, here. Someday, maybe, those that appear to be tangled up in unwanted conditions, may come up to realization of their own partticipation in whatever tangles they’re in and use Scientology to handle Scientology, even.

            Meanwhile I see no sense in feeding the lie.

            • I agree Jimbo,

              It may take longer for some than for others but eventually they will get there.

              Like some of these PCs who try all these other practices and/or revert to drugs and/or alcohol and then come to realization that it is Scientology handle the condition and not staring at their and/or smoking dope.

              I mean you can run from the truth but you can not hide forever from it 😉

            • Jim, I’m going to post a couple references on granting life to entheta or death as it’s not a widely known and understood concept. I’ve posted this on other forums/blogs, but thanks for bringing it up here.

              “NOW, THE FUNNY PART OF IT IS THAT EVERY TIME YOU CLOSE TERMINALS WITH A PSYCHOSOMATIC ILL AND YOU SAY, “I AM NOW GOING TO DEVOTE MY TIME TO THE TREATMENT OF THIS PSYCHOSOMATIC ILLNESS,” YOU HAVE DEVOTED YOUR TIME TO THE TREATMENT OF IT, ALL RIGHT. AND AS TIME GOES ON, YOU WILL DISCOVER FOR YOURSELF – UNDOUBTEDLY YOU WILL MAKE THIS ERROR, I AM SURE, BECAUSE NEARLY EVERY AUDITOR DOES. HE GET SO DESPERATE ABOUT THIS POOR PERSON WHO HAS LUMBOSIS OR SOMETHING OF THE SORT THAT HE HAS TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS LUMBOSIS, SPECIFICALLY AT THIS LUMBOSIS, AND HE WILL DISCOVER THE ODD THING:

              THAT ILLNESS, AND INABILITY AND DEATH ARE SYNONYMS.
              IT IS A GRADIENT SCALE OF DEATH: ILLNESS, INABILITY, STUPIDITY, IGNORANCE, CRUELTY, GREED, VORACITY.

              THESE THINGS ARE ALL RIGHT IN THE BRACKET WITH DEATH. THEY HAVE NO LIFE, THEY CAN GENERATE NO LIFE, AND SOMEBODY HAS TO COME ALONG WHO HAS LIFE TO GIVE THOSE THINGS ANY REAL EXISTENCE OR CONTINUANCE.

              THE ONLY THING THAT WILL FLOW, THE ONLY THING THAT WILL COMMUNICATE, THE ONLY THING THAT WILL ESTABLISH AN AGREEMENT AND A REALITY IS THE ARC TRIANGLE: UNDERSTANDING, AFFINITY, REALITY, COMMUNICATION. ARC, LIFE, THE ABILITY TO LIVE, THE ABILITY TO BE. THAT IS THE ONLY THING WHICH LIVES IS LIFE.

              NOW THAT SOUNDS LIKE AN AWFULLY FLAT SORT OF A STATEMENT THAT IS AWFULLY, AWFULLY TRUE.

              YOU HAVE A HIGH LEVEL OF ARC. YOU ARE ALIVE, YOU WANTED TO DO SOMETHING FOR SOMEBODY. VERY OFTEN SOMEBODY IS GOING TO COME ALONG TO YOU AND SAY, “YOU WERE A FOOL, AND THERE IS SOMETHING DOWNGRADED AND SOMETHING BAD ABOUT WANTING TO HELP YOUR FELLOW MAN.” YEAH, THERE MUST BE SOMETHING BAD AROUND THERE, BUT IT IS NOT YOU. IT IS THE PERSON WHO IS TELLING YOU SUCH A THING.”

              (EDITED BY STAFF FROM UNTITLED TAPE NO. 5412C04 HCAP-12 LAST LECTURE 1954)

            • And:

              “THIS IS A PRINCIPLE ON A SOCIAL DYNAMIC, A VERY INTERESTING PRINCIPLE:

              EVERY TIME YOU CLOSE TERMINALS WITH ENTHETA, YOU ARE BEING ASKED TO DUPLICATE – WHAT?- ENTHETA.

              WHAT DO YOU DO WITH AN ENTHETA LINE? IGNORE IT. DON’T EVEN BOTHER TO CUT.”

              (EDITED BY STAFF FROM UNTITLED TAPE NO. 5412C04 HCAP-12 LAST LECTURE 1954)

            • And finally:

              “AND ANY TIME WE SAY, ‘WELL, WE WILL PROCESS THIS PERSON’S BROKEN LEG,’ WE DIDN’T MAKE IT MORE ABLE.
              WE TOOK THE PAIN OUT OF THE BROKEN LEG, BUT IT IS A VERY WEIRD THING.

              YOU WOULD GET EVERYTHING CONCENTRATED ON THE BROKEN LEG, AND THE BROKEN LEG WILL COME TO LIFE.
              YOU WILL HAVE SOME LOVELY SOMATICS, AND IF YOU ARE CONCENTRATING ON THE BREAK, IT WON’T GET WELL, IT WILL JUST CONFIRM. WHY?

              YOU ARE PULLING THE LIFE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OUT INTO THAT BROKEN LEG, AND THAT IS WHAT’S HAPPENING.

              PROCESS TO INCREASE ABILITY AND YOU WIN. PROCESS TOWARD DEATH, OR TO ERADICATE DEATH, OR TO ERADICATE CRIME, AND YOU WILL LOSE.

              DO YOU FOLLOW ME?

              ENTHETA FLOWS TO THE DEGREE OF ARC INVESTED IN IT:

              ARC FLOWS AND COMMUNICATES.

              ENTHETA FLOWS AND COMMUNICATES JUST TO THE DEGREE
              THAT ARC IS INVESTED IN IT.”

              AND WHEN YOU REMEMBER THIS AND KNOW THIS WELL AS AN AUDITOR, WHEN YOU HAVE SEEN THIS WORK OUT AS AN AUDITOR, BOY, WILL YOU BE AN AUDITOR.

              THANK YOU.”

              (EDITED BY STAFF FROM UNTITLED TAPE NO. 5412C04 HCAP-12 LAST LECTURE 1954)

                • You’re welcome, Joe. And like LRH has said (forgive me harping on this point, but it’s a key datum):

                  “If we are doctors (by which might be meant ‘repairers’), then we are doctors on the third and fourth dynamics, the dynamics of groups and mankind as a whole, and we handle the first (self) and the second (sex and family) only to achieve better function on the third and fourth.” LRH (Scientology 0-8)

      • LOL. And we have Robin to thank for the upstat! Or should we thank Marty and Mike, without whom this would not have been possible. LOL

        • I had no intention to subvert the topic of this thread, but then one thing led to another. There’s a stark difference in the nature and direction discussing these matters among subscribing Scientologists than in bitter natter house anti-blogs … which sometimes shine clear lights into this tunnel.

          • Yeah I understand FM.

            M&M are such easy targets sometimes. I guess we were having too much fun at their expense 🙂

            All I can say. It’s better than taking these guys seriously like OSA seems to be doing and limping away with a foot full of bullets in the process.

            OSA’s a good target too. I used to call them GO Lite you know because the same vindictiveness yet with only half the intellect 🙂

            • Yeah, the church is really fueling their platform for media attention. Without the internet both of them would probably have remained under the radar since the CO$’ psych-ops would never have come to the attention of the public. The light has been turned on the church they can never turn off again.

              Some folks said that LRH never conceived of the internet. Well, he was still alive when computer networks were already in existence, and Gov’ts had sent digital transmissions across the country long before that. So why would LRH announce future communications technologies when those concepts had already been in the scope of design since the 60s? So Berners-Lee came up with something practical along that line around the late 80s. Where do some people think LRH came up with the term “Terminal” from? Does he need to get more specific? … lol.

              • Yeah I know FM,

                Fact is the Ol’man was years ahead of his time. His mock up for Central Information Retrieval was pretty far advanced with a key word search engine and network access to every HCOB, PL, RED and any lecture he’d ever given.

                Probably he was so hot on getting transcripts of all his lectures done through the Tapes to Books project which in my opinion went beyond the Discovery Series.

                Also we pretty much had e-mail access with any Org in the Pac area to Int and even Creston with Merc.

                In fact that’s how the Ol’man ran the pilots he ran like the CCRD pilot I was on plus others like FPRD and the Running Program.

                I mean we’d screw up and we didn’t have to wait a day for Ron to give us the 411 and send us to cramming 😉

                Then there was InCom which kept track of all the stats and Streamlines that when it was used properly tracked a student’s progress on course and would send an alert if they were past due.

                Then of course there were the computerized Time Machine Orders and the OCA that could be graded in just a few seconds.

                I mean all this stuff existed back in the ’80’s before the great leap backwards that occurred sometime in the ’90’s.

                Anyway I agree Ron was a total visionary back then. I mean he wrote Targets and Computers back in ’69 and he also anticipated that the internet would be inundated with false data and such and listed contributing to it as a crime in the Computer Series.

                I remember reading the interview Ron did with Rocky Mountain News and him talking about digital books back then.

                Sad that the Organization never carried his vision forward.

                Reading M&M. As far as I’m concerned they are Scientology malware in persona 😉

                • Thanks for all the infos.

                  Werner Von Braun, after his Apollo junkets had come to an end, had already proposed a satelite-based education system schools would be able to connect to from computers, and he knew exactly how to do it. But they weren’t interested, nor Congress in his proposal for a manned flight to Mars.

                  • Yeah good ol’ Werner was a visionary for sure.

                    They (him and NASA) were able to put a man a moon before the end of the decade just like the late JFK planned with Werner’s Saturn V rocket.

                    I actually thought we were moving in the same direction when we put our first black man in the White House but Obama sorta turned into Bush Lite.

                    At least he doesn’t have a neanderthal like “vice”really surrogate president Chenny .

                    I mean whenever I saw Bush giving a speech I always noticed that Chenny’s lips were moving 😉

                    Moving on.

                    Yeah there are a lot of good people out there and even not so good that are pretty farsighted. If it wasn’t for Hitlers obsession with Vengeance Weapons like the V2 Rocket we would have never gotten Armstrong and Aldren on the moon.

                    Then again we wouldn’t of had to worry about ICBMs pointed at our major cities.

                    I guess there’s a trade off.

                    Actually the internet was conceived back in the 60’s by ARPA forerunner to DARPA who wanted a redundant computer network that would with stand a nuclear attack.

                    One of the nodes went to a place called the Stanford Research Institute which happened to be the place where Remote Viewing started and according to legend Class VI Full OT VII Ingo Swann aka the father of Remote Viewing got the idea for using Coordinates from noted UFOlogist Jacque Vallee who was working on the ARPAnet there from the idea of “mailing addresses” which was the number assigned to the physical location of a file back then.

                    Well now it’s time to get on the little train at Disneyland and sing it’s a Small World After All 🙂

                    • RV: If it wasn’t for Hitlers obsession with Vengeance Weapons like the V2 Rocket we would have never gotten Armstrong and Aldren on the moon.

                      So they say, and I believe that to be true.

                      Werner was not only a top Scientist, but top-notch organizer and his PR skills getting funding from Himmler and then Hitler were second to none. H & H didn’t become very interested until he sent the first rocket into outer space, then got serious financing for the development for precision navigational technology to fire them off to London. Braun never cared for war, he was a Space-travel fanatic. Even JFK held him in the highest regard and became not only a good friend but also his most trusted advisor on space and moon missions.

                      RV: Then again we wouldn’t of had to worry about ICBMs pointed at our major cities.

                      I just read up on the latest cutting-edge toys Russia developed … nasty stuff.

                      Enjoy Disneyland. 🙂

                    • My only complaint is that America had rocket scientists too Goddard and Parsons who invented JTO (Jet Take Off) for their air transports yet they went with a bunch of “former” Nazis.

                      Sneaking them into the country under “Paperclip” and the project with the Orwellian name of “National Interest” and such.

                      True Werner was a genius but he built Mittelwerk over the dead bodies of a lot of slave laborers.

                      The HCOB Captive Brains comes to mind whenever I think of Von Braun and his team of Nazi scientists.

                      And the Soviets where no better. Using their own Nazi scientists after the “Great Patriotic War” to be the first ones into space with Sputnik.

                      True like Oppenheimer, Von Braun was not a war fanatic but they both contributed to painfully exterminating thousand of innocent civilians.

                      About Disneyland. It’s a Small World After All seems apt that the currents created by Oppenheimer and Von Braun was one of the reasons that Ron felt compelled to develop workable mental technology.

                      That and the “non lethal” techniques both the US and the Soviets were devising to “win hearts and minds”.

                      Talk about “nasty stuff”. We’ve just gotten a mere glimpse into that world with the release of the “Torture Papers”.

                    • RV: True Werner was a genius but he built Mittelwerk over the dead bodies of a lot of slave laborers.

                      British bombing caused the Baltic Sea facility to be moved into the Harz mountains, and was taken over under orders from Berlin who procured the workers. He may have called the development shots, but had no control over the labour workforce. The whole operation had been seized which started out as a purely technological research project 10 years earlier. All grants Werner ever requested were submitted to the Department of Science/Technology, not the military.

                      RV: True like Oppenheimer, Von Braun was not a war fanatic but they both contributed to painfully exterminating thousand of innocent civilians.

                      Yes, very true. Oppenheimer, like many of the top Scientists of the time was also schooled in Germany in theoretical physics under Max Born.

                      RV: It’s a Small World After All seems apt that the currents created by Oppenheimer and Von Braun was one of the reasons that Ron felt compelled to develop workable mental technology.

                      Planck, Einstein, Born, Heisenberg, et al sure laid out a lot of groundwork for LRH for sure. Two of my favourite quotes by Max Planck:

                      “All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.” ― Max Planck

                      “Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.” ― Max Planck

                  • The way it was ‘splained to me by some geek working on it was that it was called *Central* information retrieval. Either way it still comes out SIR with the “s” sound on the “C”.

                    Really an icky picky point as far as I’m concerned like tomato or tom-mat-toe.

                    • Probably ‘splained wrong, then, Lucy. In operation at Flag – when I was using it – it was definitely named “Source Information Retrieval”, or SIR.

                    • Source central whatever it was supposed to be called according to the following excerpt:

                      “FUTURE

                      Real computers will be applied to Scientology management. They are being programmed based on OEC* policy and HCOBs and will have something to operate on which is very sane, logical and prosurvival. The potentials of the whole track computer will be harnessed to the tremendously powerful administrative policy of Scientology to help get that policy IN and increase production.” LRH
                      (from HCO PL 23 Nov 85 “INCOMM”)

                      My description of it was not too far off according to one of the geeks who worked on the project over at InCom (and was which was a sore point for me making more money than I was as a Tech Trained terminal over at ASHO) and as Shakespeare says: “A rose by any other name…”.

                      The relevant point here was that InCom was diverted from creating a centralized data base of source material and was eventually used to scan and store secret dossiers on Scientologists. Like some kind of Orwellian nightmare.

                      Our dispute over what it was called to me is like pointing out such “outpoints” as the Flag being upside down flag on the Soviet Pleasure Cruiser.

                      As I said he (it was either Dan Kingsbury or it might have been someone else) called it such because it was supposed to be a Centralized Data Base.

                      Doesn’t matter because like many other truly bright ideas the Ol’man had like for instance *policy* and *tech* it was never fully utilized or ended up being perverted into something else.

                      Like scanning in secret reports on the activities of Scientologists that seemed “suspicious”.

                    • RV,
                      This data on INCOMM is not accurate. I work on those lines closely for several years and they were not collecting secret dossiers on people. Instead they were collecting mountains of information on orgs and having great trouble presenting, categorizing and filing the information so it was retrievable and useful to management. RTC files included reports written on and by people, for the purpose of finding infiltration, subversion and corruption. The only organization that keeps dossiers on people is OSA, and that is on those they perceive or decide are enemies.

                      Let’s work to keep the generalities out on this subject please. You are painting a picture of the Sea Org that is not accurate or factual.

                    • This was my understanding as well, Lana, and it was verified by a briefing and tour of the facilities before I fired home when I was down doing some OEC training in 1988.

                    • Lana,

                      I don’t see why you feel you need to defend the Sea Org against poor lil’ ol’ me. I mean much the intel that was used to track down all us “disaffected” field auditors for that “Special Project” (which included RB and TRD) ordered by RTC’s IG office run by Lisa Hamilton as Mission i/c was taken from InCom computers.

                      I saw the files.

                      Also what you say about RTC isn’t entirely true. If you read the latest version of the PL Counterespionage :

                      HCO POLICY LETTER OF 1 SEPTEMBER 1969R REVISED 24 SEPTEMBER 1983

                      It says:

                      As industrial espionage is an ordinary occurrence in most compa- nies, the staff is requested to be alert for:
                      1. Any theft of documents or materials.
                      2. Orders or directions which will result destructively.
                      3. Any disturbance of files, bills or addresses.
                      4. False reports or advices to staff or customers or preached defeatism.
                      5. Willful corruption of tech.
                      Anyone detecting any of the above should report the matter at once to the Reports Officer, Religious Technology Center, with names and full particulars.
                      Should further investigation result in the disclosure and apprehension or arrest of persons attempting willful harm to this organization.

                      which as you can see assigns the hat that was once held by the GO to RTC.

                      So why wouldn’t RTC assume other hats that were once held by the GO?

                      For instance I know that RTC not OSA kept tabs on Mary Sue, Arthur ,Suzette and other what were considered High Profile Scientologists and their friends and associates.

                      Operations they probably considered too delicate for OSA.

                      From what I’m reading here. You are giving me the text book version of what RTC was supposed to be doing as opposed to what it actually was doing at times which to me is like reading the National Security Act of 1947 and thinking that CIA operates within the letter of that law when in fact as Senator Church would say had become a “rogue elephant”.

                      So what I am writing here is based on my own personal experience and data I’ve collected since then and may not conform with your idea of the Sea Org.

                      From my point of view the Sea Org became a “rogue elephant”. To me this is obvious from all the damage they are causing to the Scientology network. In my opinion we probably been better off if we had kept the Controller’s Network intact instead of illegally “abolishing” it and allowing someone like Miscavige (and whoever is behind him) to replace it.

                    • Real computers will be applied to Scientology management. They are being programmed based on OEC* policy and HCOBs and will have something to operate on which is very sane, logical and prosurvival. The potentials of the whole track computer will be harnessed to the tremendously powerful administrative policy of Scientology to help get that policy IN and increase production.” LRH
                      (from HCO PL 23 Nov 85 “INCOMM”)

                      My description of it was not too far off according to one of the geeks who worked on the project over at InCom (and was which was a sore point for me making more money than I was as a Tech Trained terminal over at ASHO) and as Shakespeare says: « A rose by any other name… ».

                      Hi Robin,

                      Well, “SIR” and what you are talking about above and what you referenced are, to my understanding, two separate things. SIR was a system to aid in cramming and in Qual and was “supposed to” at one time be exported to Quals around the planet. It is “SOURCE” Information Retrieval, not Central, because it was to be all LRH transcripts, LRH EDs, PLs, HCOBs, BFOs, etc., that could be searched for key words. It was not “Central” as in central files, or central intelligence, or central data repository. So there is a difference and when you’re throwing data out here, it’s best to be as accurate as possible. When it’s not, it won’t as-is, and that’s the bottom line if one is trying to blow group engrams. Otherwise it’s just a coffee or barber shop with a bunch of old coots grumping away.

                      Merry Christmas, you old coot. 😉

                    • Same to you. I was almost tempted to get on my walker and hit ya with my cane.

                      Yeah true sometimes we comment like a buncha grumpy ol’men. Always whining about the good ol’ days.

                      Also true that these geeks get carried away and get confused in terms. I mean I did a short gig as a programmer and I should know better than anyone else that half the time they don’t know what they’re are talking about and the other half of the time they’re making shit up so sound somewhat competent when some initiated asked them WTF? when the system crashes.

                      Though I did learn two mantras if things went wrong:

                      Reboot and back up 🙂

                      Or is that the other way around….hmmmm….

                      Anyways Chris you have a Merry Xmas too. 🙂

                    • I figured. But I was thinking the same about you, only using a baseball bat to knock some sense into ya. Just be watchful of your “facts” as coming from the OL you are, they might be misconstrued as Gospel. LOL

  18. Success Story 18 Dec., 2014

    Why Milestone Two?

    Due to circumstances brought about by failures in current management of my church, I have for several years now, been forced to live the life of a semi-recluse living alone and unable to openly voice objections or to make recommendations toward resolving the concatenation of crises which have made life a living hell for myself as well as, I am sure, a myriad of the very best people I have ever had the privilege of rubbing elbows with and knowing.

    Thanks to the magnanimous, Lana, her friends and the Milestone Two website, this week my life has finally taken a dramatic turn for the better. For the last four days my outflow and comm level have increased at least ten fold. Things have already begun to resolve and again I have begun to walk freely in the sun without the shadows that had so darkened my days.

    Thanks to Lana and MS2, this week I have made so many good friends that I feel like a new man, outgoing and extroverted. Thank-you, Lana.
    I hope you will forgive me for publicly revealing your secret weapon for success, Lana. I think you are simply using standard LRH tech and policy.

    By doing so, you have made all this possible and I am sure I speak for all of us in saying; You are OT and your kindness and friendship will forever be, so precious.

    Please continue to flourish and prosper.

    Merry Xmas to you and your family, my dear Lana and may life never be the same again for any of us.

    Joe

  19. Jim Logan says:
    That’s nice to hear, Joe. Glad you’ve got some coal on the purpose agin’ 🙂
    Reply

    Yes. For sure and thank-you very much, Jim. You too are very, very much a part of the wins on this blog and a stable terminal for Lana and all on board. I’ve been following this blog since it’s inception and in fact had read articles on Lana and yourself before MS 2. I’ve got to say that I have never met anyone with your genius and level of duplication and admiration for LRH tech anywhere or anytime in my 40 or so years of study of Scientology and I owe my wins to you too. I remember seeing you as long ago as about, 1975 at the org on Avenue Road. How different things were then!

    I gather that you are in Nova Scotia and although I was in New Brunswick with the Canadian infantry in 1964-65 for about one year and visited Halifax, I regret not having visited more of your beautiful province. Perhaps someday.

    My guess is that if you & I ever sat down to chat, we could come up with a list of names that would number in the hundreds, perhaps thousands. BTW, I wasn’t quite sure whether or not to extend that list when I was prompted to on the blog above as I am not familiar with the rules or policy in regards to the PR of doing that. I thought better of throwing caution to the wind. Would you enlighten me on that, Jim?

    I am delighted and deeply honored to participate and contribute anywhere and in any way I can to this OT group.

    With ARC and KRC,

    Joe

    • Dear Joe,
      I am really happy to hear of your wins, and that life is on an upswing again. Just fantastic.
      And thank you for the compliments and best wishes for Christmas and the New Year. I too wish you the best.
      You asked where Jim is located, and you will not find him in Nova Scotia, as I have greedily grabbed him a few years ago, and he is here in Australia with me — but we will both be in Canada next year for some time in the summer, to fish and enjoy the highlands of Cape Breton (where our cabin is getting finishing touches).
      Have a love Christmas, and may you have plenty of egg nog! 🙂

    • Joe,

      While you were the Infantry up there. Did you ever run into a guy by the name of Dobie Dobrastanski (Spelling?)?

      Said he did a gig around that time with the Canadian Army.

      Another one I’ll take a stab in the dark on is Rita Hays (married name. Married some guy named Bob Hays actually a Texan who was up there for a while) who was in the Forming Org Supervisors started by Fred Harris. Another one you might know.

      Anyway let me know if you know these characters. All them were good friends of mine and I haven’t seen any of them for years.

      • Dobie was in Edmonton during the time I was there, 77 – 84. Don’ know what became of him. Is this “Bob Hays” actually “Bob Hay”, brother of Doug Hay who live in Vancouver?

        • Chris,

          From what I remember Rita’s last name was Hays or maybe Hays with an “S” because we used to joke that maybe her name should be Haze because she’d “kiss the sky” as the old Hendrix tune goes quite often 😉

          Anyway we didn’t meet her until she came to LA and Her, Dobie and my wife pulled a gig doing the mural in LA Renaissance for CIPIRO in the early ’90’s.

          Dobie I heard moved back to Vancouver Island or there abouts sometime in the mid 90’s.

          Rita moved to the desert somewhere near Palm Springs last time I heard.

  20. Sorry RV. Only one I recall is Fred Harris whom I met in that building across the street from the org on Avenue Road in 74 or 75. Saw him once again in early, mid-80’s when he returned to T.O. to do an event where he sold me and others at the event a copy of Battlefield Earth shortly after it’s release.

    Joe

  21. Hi Bruce. Pleased to meet you. I’m Joe. Somewhere burried deep in the recess of old memories, I know there is more data on Fred but that data eludes me right now. As soon as my foggy old brain comes back to life, I’ll be happy to share. Meantime, what about Paul and Phil Anderson?

  22. Chris Black says:
    December 22, 2014 at 3:07 pm

    I know of him, maybe met him once or thrice, but that’s about it.

    Gary Critchley?

    Donno if you were asking me, Chris but, no I don’t recognize Gary Critchley’s name.

    • I think I was asking you, Joe. I get lost in these threads sometimes. lol. Gary was on staff in Toronto before moving to Edmonton and the Edmonton org. Just a name. I wasn’t involved with the Toronto Org at all, but my brother was and through him I met Martin Jones (was a good friend, lost touch) and a couple of others. I remember eating at a restaurant (Greek?) across the street from the Avenue Road org; it was down some steps to the lower level. That was back in ’74 or ’75. That’s about it.

      • Across the street was Plato’s restaurant, proprietor’s name was Johnny. All Greek. But the go-down-the-steps place was on the same side of Avenue Rd. as the orgs. In fact it was to the side and under 113. I forgot the actual name of the place but everyone knew it as “Hushies,” the guy who owned and ran it. Had great knishes. Had mafia types use to hang there, drove around town in some grand old Jaguar. Jack Manning would know more about them.

        • Thanks, Bruce. It was Plato’s I remember going to a couple of times with my brother and his org buddies, although I think we also went to that one down the steps. Jim lived for a bit on Davenport in ’75 I think it was, so the org was just around the corner. Earlier, he had lived on Dupont with Martin and either Graham or I think another Scnst they used to hang with.

          • That seems to fit my recalls. Tho I seem to remember when they lived on Davenport and that would have been earlier than ’75. Maybe I’m thinking of others who lived there.

            • No, you’re probably right, Bruce. I was still in my drug-addled days back then when I used to visit James. I can’t remember which location with which time. Maybe I should do the new GAT II Objectives lineup? LOL

  23. remoteviewed says:
    “Julian Hay?”
    Name’s not familiar to me Joe. Was he related to Bob Hay?
    Reply

    No. I don’t think Julian was related to Bob. Julian came in on lines at Tor F in early 80’s and later married Kitty Kerr, a long time Scientologist and practicing medical doctor in Toronto who got a lot of her patients from Toronto public and staff. Kitty is David Kerr’s sister. Julian is a business man who moved up to OT pretty fast as a public Scientologist.

    Joe

    • LOL. Must be an alternate universe in Vancouver, a “Bizarro” world, because there are not only the Hays out there, but John Bell, Doug and Susan Kerr (Susan was/is DSA W/Can) and I think a couple of other “doppelgangers” in name only. lol

  24. pazooter says:
    Don’t recall a Phil Anderson. Paul was an exec at FCB for many years. May still be there for all I know.
    Reply

    Phil is Paul’s younger brother who was on staff at Tor F, joined the SO and ended up at Int with his wife Diane. He was WDC Pubs last time I saw him when he “asked” me to drive him across the boarder to Buffalo so he could get back on post in LA. After telling the customs agent at the boarder that we were both Canadian citizens going to the Hubbard Dianetics Foundation in Buffalo, we were allowed through and drove straight to the airport in Buffalo where Phil got a flight to LA. Before getting out of my car at the airport, Phil said; “I like the way you called that old, black dude (customs officer), “Sir” because it’s a good thing you got me through safely, otherwise you would have been in really deep shit.”

    Joe

    • Joe: “Before getting out of my car at the airport, Phil said; “I like the way you called that old, black dude (customs officer), “Sir” because it’s a good thing you got me through safely, otherwise you would have been in really deep shit.” ”

      Nothing like taking responsibility, eh? Sheesh!

What is your view?

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