Home

couple-fighting

by Milestone Two crew

We have had a number of articles regarding ethics in the last week, and here is an additional observation that our readers may enjoy.

It is puzzling to some of us how a handful of individuals in the field spend their days fault finding with Scientology – seemingly fixated on trying to prove to all others that they have a reason to be motivating and be a victim of the system or technology or Founder or something.

What is clear is the intention to destroy – but understanding the illogic of the situation is not always as clear. OK, there is the venting of BPC – an ongoing effort to get as-isness by communicating about problems as they see them — but we are not talking about the venting of upset. We are talking about several individual, ongoing campaigns to smear, confuse or destroy the Founder, the Tech or Scientology itself.

Below are some great excerpts from an LRH lecture that we wanted to share. As always, LRH’s words speak for themselves.

“The basis of destruction is Alter-isness. And when somebody would like to destroy you, but can’t, all he can do is alter-is you. Got the idea?”

“Destruction as we know it, in war or in anything else, is simply Alter-isness of the creation. It is not the cessation of creation-it is the Alter-isness of the existing creation.

“That’s why I’ve been talking to you about busted pagodas, you know; and broken ashtrays and all that sort of thing, you see. Actually, the ashtray is still being created, because its fragments are still there. But somebody has alter-ised the creation, you see. And they call that destruction. And when done very, very, very spectacularly, they call it war.

“But Alter-isness, Alter-isness is the keynote of all destruction.

“And any person who has a great many overts against another person starts trying
 to alter-is. Get the idea? He starts to alter-is the other person. He alter-ises anything
 the other person is doing. You see? He alter-ises anything the other person thinks. He alter-ises any other thing the other person has as a reputation and so on. And it adds 
up to basically what looks like destruction. And this basically is caused or can be caused
 by no more than an overt.

“In other words, you get this silly situation where one overt breeds another overt, which breeds another overt, which breeds another overt, which brings about a bad opinion.” …

And further on and example is provided:

…“A husband and a wife. Wife one day is walking down the street and, her husband 
is a blond, she’s always been attracted by brunets, you know. Married this guy, loved him dearly, everything is going along all right and she sees this brunet guy, see. She says, “Whew; boy! Tsk! Oh, wow!” You know. And then she says, “Oh-oh! I’m a married woman. Yep. Well [sigh], it would have been nice.”
That night she’s sitting there, you know; and the husband hadn’t been feeling very friendly these days he’s worried about business or something of the sort, you know-and he’s sitting there, reading a magazine or something, muttering to himself about somebody he’s committed overts against, you know: [laughter] And the wife is sitting there and she suddenly remembers this guy with the black hair, you know: And she says, “Oh, wow; you know; that-that-that … [gasp!] What am I doing? He’s a good husband. He’s faithful. He’s loyal. He’s decent. He’s everything. And what am I doing something like this to him? You know? Well, I’ll straighten out. I’ll toe the chalk mark.” All her own volition, you see. Noble.

“Couple of weeks go by and she sees one of these physical culture magazines you see. It’s sitting on the stands, you know: And there’s somebody with tremendous biceps, you know; curling up, the neck muscles all taut, you know: And she says, “Woooowwww” you know. “That’s pretty good, you know. Wait a minute! What the hell is the matter with my husband?”

“Now, she gets this all explained, just because her husband doesn’t look like that and therefore so on and so on. And she’s got it all explained and that’s why she’s annoyed with her husband. That night she’s serving up the roast beef and the mashed potatoes and something like that and he notices they’re slightly underdone, because she has been a little bit abstracted while getting dinner, you know. And he says, “Dear, I wish you’d do the roast beef a little bit more next time.”


“(She) “Crab! Crab! Crab! You’re always chopping at me!” [laughter] Here it goes.


“He goes around and he says, “I can-what have I done?” See? “What have I done?” He can’t think of anything he’s done so he skips it. “Well, she’s just a little bit out of sorts, you know.”

“Well, because she barked at him and jarred at him and was upset about him, now she can be more upset about him. You get the idea?

“Now, this has a rather unexpected twist here. Eventually, if you caught her in a moment and you said; “What color eyes does your husband have?” She wouldn’t be able to answer the question. Got that? She’s flashed back and flashed back and flashed back, you see, and 
piled up overt after overt until she’s alter-ised, not only the circumstances and condition of the thing, she’s actually alter-ising his appearance.”

“Now, that’s basically because she understands very clearly that he thinks that her thoughts would be an overt against him. Just untangle that one. Got that?

“It begins because she thinks, you see, that her thoughts would be considered by him to be an overt act against him.” …

The denouement:

…“So, people’s ideas of what an overt act is shift all over the place. See, they shift all over the place. They could be some of the most remarkable things you ever heard of.

“But we all seem to have — per school training and religious training and other things — we’ve all been given to believe that the other fellow has a standard pattern of what are overts.

“In other words, there’s overt one, two, three, four, five, six, seven and eight, you see. And if you do these things, then he will consider them overts. You got the idea? And then he will start to alter-is you because he’s now got a motivator.

“This is (quote) “human conduct” (unquote) as understood by-oh, I don’t know, psychology, Freud, Thomas Aquinas, Saint Paul-lots of guys. See this? They got it all figured out.

“So part of your education is what the other fellow will consider an overt.”

(Excerpts from LRH lecture, ALTER-ISNESS – KEYNOTE OF ALL DESTRUCTION, 18 Nov 1959, 1st Melbourne ACC.)

172 thoughts on “Human conduct

  1. “It is puzzling to some of us how a handful of individuals in the field spend their days fault finding with Scientology”

    Yes it is puzzling, but what a rat trap for those in it!

    I sometimes read Tony Ortegas site, Im not a fan,but it sometimes has interesting stats about the current church in it. For instance the financials recently posted for the UK and Australia tell in the Churches own hand, the failure of daves church.

    There is a series of interviews of people who knew Ron, the questions are mainly asked in such a way as to denigrate him and the Tech but there is one interview of his literary agent Forrest Ackerman in which the agent, being around in the early 50s, tells of using Dianetics, his wife using it, A E van Vogt using it, and his wife and the success these people had with it.

    What struck me was the lack of attention given to this piece of information. Here were people, in one case, one having seen a psychologist for many years, handling their individual phobias. Amazing wins!! You could see Forrest was still struck by the workability of this Technology.

    Why these people concentrate on perceived personality flaws, when these sorts of gains are available, is truly, logically, staggering to me.

    This article goes along way toward explaining this for me, thanks!

    • 4a,

      No surprise here.

      What they are using is an old hoary Black Propaganda Technique called Character Assassination. They figure if they can figuratively kill the messenger that they can kill the message. Only those who have an inability to differentiate accompanied by a low IQ buy into it.

      The same kind who read all the lies on the internet and use only the internet as their only source of reference about Scientology think they actually know something about it.

      Like the HCOB on False Data Stripping about using other sources like The Proper Behavior of Sheep written by A. Wolf.

      Also another datum from the materials on the False Data and Loss RD which is now part of Super Power and that is that some kind of loss preceded the persons acceptance of False Data.

      In this case it was probably some personal loss in auditing of some kind. Possibly some unreal expectation AKA as a Hidden Standard that wasn’t achieved like being able to levitate or something.

      So they go on the internet to find out why they didn’t make their unreal “gains” and voila.

      Same boat as those who commit continuous overts and are somewhat suppressive who don’t make any gains with any other process other than Power or those who are PTS and who lose their gains who are on the same leaky life raft as those who miss apply the tech and don’t get a result or some adverse result.

      The latter is a standing order that says something to the affect that every time you turn out an incompetent auditor you make enemies for Scientology and which seems to be the only thing that the current Church is competent at doing these days with their one size fits all concept of delivery.

      See HCOPL Quality of Service.

      The fact is that many people have approached the subject of Scientology and achieved whatever goal they had or handled a ruin of some kind like Seinfeld who still raves about his gains or Hal Puthoff and the late Ingo Swann who caused a paradigm shift in the concept of “psychic phenomenon” that even though became involved in other things have nary a bad word to say about Scientology.

      Yet despite this there are a few squeaky wheels that the press who the most part currently work for suppressive vested interests seem to glom onto. That and the fact that they create *controversy* every time they open their yaps and demand the Injustice Department “investigate” Scientology.

      And so it goes.

      • Hey RV,
        I think you’ll like Merrell Vannier’s book, Arrows in the Dark. He’s just published it.

        arrowsinthedark.com

        Scroll down to the bottom and enter Preview as the username and finddonalverzo as the password.

        • Thanx Jim,

          1984 just informed me about the book so I’m pretty hepped on checking it out.

          Seems he was involved in the same type of “fun and games” that my better half was involved in 😉

          Thanks again for the heads up.

          LR

            • Pretty good from what I’ve read so far though he should correct the following paragraphs in the Intro:

              In 1954, a religious organization was established in Washington, D. C. and named the Founding Church of Scientology. Other churches followed. The Church of Scientology of California was later formed in Los Angeles and designated “The Mother Church,” from which all other churches are governed. Missions were created as privately owned and operated centers that provided introductory services and encouraged graduates of those services to seek higher level services from churches.

              And;

              In 1966 in response to increasing legal and public relations issues, Hubbard formed the Guardian’s Office (the G.O.) as an autonomous network to handle external matters. Jane Kember was appointed Guardian for her lifetime. Worldwide headquarters of the G.O. were established in East Grinstead, England, near London. Continental Offices were created in the United Kingdom, United States, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and Africa. The continental offices were further subdivided into local Guardian’s offices in every church of Scientology.

              Actually in the first case it was the other way around the Church of Scientology of California was founded in ’54 followed by the Founding Church DC in ’55.

              For some reason FCDC couldn’t gain 501ciii status so CSC became the mother church when it was granted tax exempt status in ’57.

              Second one is that Mary Sue was appointed the first Guardian in March 66 followed by Jane Kember when Mary Sue was appointed as Controller in ’69.

              Like I said minor errors.

              Never got to the point where Merrel discusses COINTELPRO yet but I am in total agreement with his thoughts on disconnection.

              BTW disconnection was never applied to family members or even close associates when the HCOB was first released.

              At least not during the time I was auditing in the ’80’s. Back then it was an option like if the person had a suppressive land lord or boss or something like that they could disconnect from instead of try to “handle”.

              Fact is we’d been doing that for years but never had anything in writing that said it was OK till then.

              It’s only recently that they’ve gone into total overdrive on it.

              Personally I think it has more to do with the re-revision of the PL on Suppressive Acts where anyone who remained connected to an “SP” could be declared one as well.

              That and the fact that the SPRD has been pretty much defenestrated. Along with real PTS Type A handlings.

              Anyway I remember Merrel and I getting into debates over the one man rule thing. Giving the impression that Ron was some kind of benevolent monarch or dictator when in fact he wasn’t.

              Not that he wasn’t benevolent 😉

              It’s just that Ron didn’t jump down the lines unless someone really screwed up like in the case of Quickie Grades or the alterations he had to handle with Tech Correction Roundup.

              Otherwise he pretty much let the Orgs do what thou wilt. Unless they flapped and it took more than Mary Sue’s Heavy Hussar handling to bring the scene around.

              At least that’s the way I remember it before the coup and their zest to micromanage everything.

              Anyway I’ll read the book and let ya know what I think.

              LR

      • “something to the affect that every time you turn out an incompetent auditor you make enemies for Scientology”

        Man, isnt that the truth, not only are the pcs not getting the gains, bypassing charge etc etc, and how many of them will slip through, but the auditor, in the end gives up as the “tech doesnt work” and goes off and becomes a guru or critic or something!

        To me this is what KSW was/is all about, not the jack booting, ethics toting maniac some think of it as being, its just making sure that pcs dynamics are becoming more and more unblocked so he can live a better life!

        • Exactly 4a. I think a lot of people have that “jack booting, ethics toting maniac” concept of ethics thanx to a few SPs who end up in HCO and go into full fascist mode.

    • You are welcome 🙂

      For me, it was shifting my view to the other person’s reality on what THEY think is an overt, which is then withheld and then missed – then comes this impulse to destroy, which is after all is said and done nothing more than an alter-isness. They are restrained from outright destruction so they natter.

      It’s not my concept of what’s an overt – it’s the person’s and then it is all set in train. They figure you have the same idea of overt, so it’s withheld and on it goes.

      What sort of overts does someone nattering consider they have done to be in such a state of alter-isness?

      This is really such a simple and effective insight into human reaction.

      • Actually, that impulse to destroy is what could have prompted the overt in the first place as per the Prior Confusion materials, FPRD et al.

        Natter is just alter-isness which is “destroy” on the Cycle of Action. Bloody simple and unlocks all kinda things.

      • BC tape “Moral Codes, What Is A Withhold” is a good reference to add to this, as are the definitions of withhold, missed withhold and overt. Lots of clarification of this mechanism coming up in 1962, as well, Jim. 🙂

        • Followed by Ron’s discovery of the actual mechanism behind overt motivator sequence which if I remember correctly was to prevent things from being attacked.

          Ya know one of those highly “workable” mechanisms that was developed back on the whole track like say the R6 Bank.

        • Chirs,

          Moral Codes: What is a Withhold I have studied and used but for me the underlying Axiom, the mechanism of alter-isness, the “natter” as a substitute – that was the “oh THAT’S what that is!!” sort of cog was what I got out of the Melbourne ACC tape quoted here. This tape rounded out the KRC I got from the BC tape. It’s a much more fundamental understanding for me.

          I’ve done a lot of auditing since I studied the Moral Codes material, given and received. Reality has increased in proportion to charge as-ised on all Dynamics. Plus I’m now auditing Solo NOTs and find my ability to assume viewpoints has added to my grasp of life in all sorts of marvellous ways.

          This Mel ACC tape is the background music to the Moral Codes tape and the “ah HAH” moment of understanding the other person took a huge leap upward.

          It’s that study manifestation of data shifting, re-aligning on a simplicity and new values arising.

          • Hey Jim,

            Yup, I do agree. I made reference to that tape (Moral Codes, etc.) basically as a commentary on the article in regards to being able to see what an overt was for the other person, not necessarily what one would consider an overt themselves.

            However, Ron does say this as well (from the definition of a withhold):

            “a withhold is what the pc is withholding and it does not have to
            include what the pc considers is a withhold. (SH Spec 98, 6201C10)”

            Anyway, I remember when I was on the SHSBC and auditing on Solo NOTs and I realized that Ron had the whole Bridge laid out with Book 1 (Dianetics) and Book 2 (SOS). It’s ALL there. Pretty well everything else was “dumbing it down” for us “humans”. lol

            • Roger that Chris,

              That was sorta the impression I got when I reread DMSMH on the SHSBC. Ron pretty much had it taped back in 1950 and was just waiting for us to catch up to him 😉

            • My study of the books and tapes in sequence has me arriving at a different conclusion; he had certain assumption points that he used to further study. Some of them held up, some went to the wastebasket. Many, many things appeared as the research continued and were a result of that research which continued all the way up the line. These weren’t apparent early on, in any meaningful way, but developed.

              In retrospect, with the knowledge gleaned later, DMSMH is prescient in all sorts of ways, and basic in many others. But, he didn’t have it all taped in 1950, that much is clear and he certainly says so throughout the recorded lectures of the full research line.

              • Hey Jim,

                Sorry, I should have been more clear in what I was trying to say. I wasn’t trying to imply that LRH had it all taped out; as you mention, he explored and developed much from that basis. But in those two books (complemented by his lectures of the time and some articles) he pretty well had the framework of the case, just not how to get there. Even NOTs is well explained in SOS. Anyway, from all my study, it makes sense to me. Cheers. 🙂

                • Chris,
                  I”ve found the beginnings and development of all sorts of things in my sequential study. I’ve found the initial looks at the Qs, where he defines that term as “questionable points” as he has put them there as an assumption to evaluate data.

                  “And we run into our Q in the whole problem. And it ís very interesting to know the Q in a problem that is, the questionable point. Where do we take off in this theory? Theta-MEST is not the takeoff point now; the takeoff point is self-determinism.”

                  BASICS OF SCIENTOLOGY AND DIANETICS, PART II
                  A lecture given on 21 September 1952.

                  I’ve found the basics of the OT Levels, including NOTs. All the material on Clear that came out in 78-79, even what he meant by “natural Clear”.

                  This research line, the developments of any part of the auditing, all the techniques, every Grade, is ALL there. Of course, you have to study it and duplicate it and understand it.

  2. Possibly slightly off-topic, but I feel the following comment is important enough to be said.
    Concerning the CofS, as well as a number of former members or some other persons connected with the subject Scientology I would summarize the state of affaires amounts to a “no product situation”.
    Therefore HCOB 26 March 79RB, Misunderstood Words and Cycles of Action, seems to apply.
    This embraced not only the person who “organizes” his Bridge or donations by making money (without ever really progressing), but also those who fail to deliver. Overworking books and materials the 16th time is “organize” instead of production.
    “When you see an area that is organizing only, you know that area is loaded with misunderstoods.
    When people have incomplete cycles due to Mis-Us, they get bogged down into organization.
    You can tell when people have Mis-Us-they are totally involved in organize, organize, organize. They don’t know what they are doing.
    There is a level below this. They have overts and withholds which prevent even organizing.
    Below that level people are PTS.
    Lacking a sense of organization actually lies below this. It is below the level of Mis-Us, overts and withholds and PTSness – and you’d have to go north through PTSness and overts and withholds to even get to the Mis-Us.”

  3. Practically everything that is being found fault with the CofS could be classified as “suppression”. Altering the Tech, destroying the Tech of LRH, changing materials, enforced donatingness ( 🙂 ), misapplications of ethics, no delivery, etc. etc.
    It is nothing but run of the mill suppression. On many blogs you find solid agreement on that. However, the other side of that is almost a taboo: the person that goes PTS. I cannot remember one single comment saying “I am PTS and wonder what to do now. Can someone help me out with a handling, please?”
    Earlier mis-handlings may play a role, here. But what I want to say that is a considerable number of persons in a state to potentially make trouble. They may seem to be out for destruction, however may feel that they themselves defend against or attack a suppression. People may even get stuck in doing such.
    Of course there are overts and misunderstood words, however the entrance point will be in many cases a PTS-handling. Showing them that they can do something, that there is a bridge, running out the bypassed charge of prior mishandlings, demonstrating that there can be service or progress, etc.(If one can do something about it it is less suppressive.)
    Overts (possibly Why-finding) would fit in then.
    But I feel for many of them PTS-handling is the entrance. After having identified the correct item and when overts have been confronted and charge is off of the alledged overts they have not done, there is so much PTSness gone.
    (As an aside, a person or group that becomes to similar looking to a felt source of suppression – for instance by raising membership fees – may be misidentified with the suppressor and receive an undue lack of popularity. I’d view such as an indicator for unhandled charge from the PTS area.)
    (By PTS-handling I mean a handling that matches the case-level of the person, not a rote “treatment” that restimulates additional charge.)

    • Very true Worsel.

      There are lot of them who are PTS but others who are Pretended PTS, False PTS etc.

      Some who can be handled by referral to the Book of Case Remedies or a C/S 53 assessed and indicated.

      A real mix.

  4. I just wanted to note something that I came upon recently in a C/S instruct during my Solo II. It’s from Release Goofs, HCOB 2 Aug 65. Release Goof number 7 reads: “Pc’s Own Purposes. The leader in making a high state of being collapse (given an R6 bank) is the pc’s own purposes. A person shot up scale can postulate. Postulating going down scale or an attack on something can collapse a state of release. Protest, wanting to get even, revenge are some things that a pc postulated that made him go back in the bank. It’s a goof for a pc to postulate himself down scale or to postulate himself right by showing another he is wrong…” I feel like for many it is a huge release to realize the true state of the corporate Church and to get out. I certainly felt ‘released’. Most people want to expand on that release and move on up the Bridge outside the Church while some ‘postulate going down scale or an attack on something’ and collapse their state of release. I think this factors into the natter for some people.

    • One other relevant or complementary piece of tech (IMO):

      “Engrams, secondaries, locks all add up to mental masses, forces, energies, time, which express themselves in countless different ways such as pain, misemotion, feelings, old perceptions and a billion billion thought combinations buried in the masses as significances.

      A thetan can postulate or say or reason anything. Thus there is an infinity of significances.

      A thetan is natively capable of logical thought. This becomes muddied by outpoints held in by mental forces such as pictures of heavy experiences.

      As the masses and forces accumulated and copied from living build up, the logic potential becomes reduced and illogical results occur.” LRH (C/S Series 6, What The C/S Is Doing, section “Mental Masses”)

  5. This is interesting Nora and Worsel, it seems we can all come up with different views as to why a person acts in a destructive way, and all valid.
    I think Chris Black has the right idea, in that for any one person its only when they get into session and find the exact BPC that asisness can occur!

    • I share this view. If an action brings about an as-is-ness, it was the correct one. If it doesn’t as-is, not even on a gradient, then there is something wrong with it. This datum has helped me each time when I used it.

    • Thanks, 4a. Here’s some LRH on that (from C/S Series 7, C/S Q&A):

      “This doesn’t mean the pc is always wrong. He is generally right when he says he’s overwhelmed or upset. He’s almost always wrong when he says what overwhelmed him or what BPC was out WHEN SIMPLY SAYING IT DOES NOT CORRECT THE CASE OR PRODUCE F/N VGIs.”

      SOOOOO, IF someone actually DID find the CORRECT charge, they’d cease nattering or moaning and complaining. That they don’t indicates they haven’t as-ised their BPC, i.e., they have NOT spotted correct source nor correct time, place, form, event.

      • Good reference Chris,

        ‘Splains why the internet is a lousy place to attempt to handle one’s BPC on the subject. Probably right up there with Coffee shop “2WCs” and Cocktail Party “why finding” in total effectiveness 😉

        Like any other squirrel process like say Skype “Auditing” one gets the occasional “win” (usually a restim of some manic) to seem to warrant such action.

        Probably the amount of actual BPC actually handled could fit into a thimble while the amount of charge stirred up would likely fit in several Olympic Sized swimming pools.

  6. BTW Jim I never had a chance to comment on your post which I thought was spot on.

    For instance Ron says:

    “Destruction as we know it, in war or in anything else, is simply Alter-isness of the creation. It is not the cessation of creation-it is the Alter-isness of the existing creation.”

    So true. You look at the Third Reich for example and World War II.

    Did we really defeat fascism?

    Not really. In many ways it went into a stealth mode of some kind.

    The Cold War.

    Is Communism dead?

    Really?

    Then why do we still have the Internal Revenue Code?

    A graduated tax or to each according to their need and from each according to their ability to pay was proposed by Karl Marx as part of the Communist Manifesto.

    And various laws on the books or currently being written that subjugate the rights of the individual for the good of the state.

    Of course they don’t call it communism or fascism which are both forms of socialism but something like the social compact or something else.

    But a rose is but a rose….

    More germane various efforts in the past to destroy the Church have resulted in nothing but a complete alter-is of the organization to the point that the Church of Scientology is nothing but a facade.

    A tax exempt and Government approved facade but a facade non the less.

  7. From the tape “The Free Being”:

    “The composition of what is an overt act contains omission seldom looked at, it’s omission…..not to do things for the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics.

    That becomes an overt act; and one cannot maintain his freedom in the face of an overt act of that magnitude.

    A guy will only go as ot as he is responsible and can accept the definition of an overt.

    There is no other barrier to OT.” LRH

  8. Here’s another quote that I think also helps explain some of this phenomenon, especially when non-Scientologists are involved, such as Tony Ortega or non-Scientologist commentators on various blogs.

    “WHOLE GROUPS OF PEOPLE SUDDENLY BECOME CONVINCED THAT A CENTRAL ORG OR SCIENTOLOGISTS ARE UP TO SOME EVIL. THEY HAVE CONFUSED A SCIENTOLOGIST WHO IS UNDOING AN IMPLANT WITH THE CREWS WHO IMPLANTED. A=A=A.

    THIS PARANOID REACTION TO SCIENTOLOGY STEMS FROM THIS ONE MECHANISM, THE IMPLANTED CHARACTER OF PEOPLE.

    ONE’S FIRST REACTION TO THIS NEWS MAY BE ONE OF HEARTBREAK, FEELING BETRAYED, ETC. I FELT THE SAME WAY WHEN I FOUND OUT. THEN I REALIZED THE EMOTION CAME OUT OF THE IMPLANTS THEMSELVES.

    ONE IS SUPPOSED TO FEEL DISHEARTENED AND BETRAYED WHEN HE OR SHE REALIZES IT.

    THAT KEEPS IT FROM BEING UNDONE AND LEAVES THE BEING TRAPPED. THE REACTION IS JUST PART OF THE TRAP.

    AN IMPLANT IS MEANT TO BE TRICKY AND CONFUSING.” LRH (HCOB 8 MAY 1963, THE NATURE OF FORMATION OF THE GPM)

    • Good ref Chris,

      Pretty much explains why there are those out there who believe Scientology is brain washing, hypnotism, mind control etc.

      Then there are those criminal minds that Ron talks about the HCOB by the same title who were involved in such operations like the late and unlamented Jolly West and Marg Singer.

      No wonder the GO went PTS. Other then possible infiltration and such they had to deal with such miscreants on a daily basis.

      Suppressive with a capital “S” for sure.

      • Robin,
        I heard a sort of new wrinkle on the ref Chris posted, recently. It goes something like “Scientology: a prison of workability”. Or, from one pundit, “It works. That’s the trap”.

        Well if that isn’t testament to the fact these things dramatized are meant to be tricky and confusing, I’m sure I would have a hard time finding something more to the point.

        • Jim,

          That’s why when I so called pundit or talking head I think of that ol’ Frankie Sinatra (the other guy they called the “Chairman of the Board” and was pretty chummy with the Mafia BTW) hit Send in the Clowns.

          Man they do get tangled up in their own efforts at “irony” 😉

          Reminds me of the PDC lecture. I think it’s Scientology Defined where Ron says something like just say “Scientology Doesn’t Work” and see what happens.

          Man even our staunchest enemies can’t say that because they know it does and that’s a problem. The real problem for them.

          So they come up with such idiotic statements. It’s like saying if your car or some other product is reliable then you are somehow being “trapped” by it.

          Sheeeesh

          As Ron says in the HCOB on the Continuous Overts case. Even in that clinker they call a soul they know it works and they can’t withhold themselves from saying it which happens their greatest fear.

  9. Interesting reference Chris, thanks! It explains quite a lot, of course the church, now unfortunately, has become the implant, so the reaction to the Tech/LRH, even MS2, is muddied in with that as well! What a mess!

    “ONE’S FIRST REACTION TO THIS NEWS MAY BE ONE OF HEARTBREAK, FEELING BETRAYED, ETC. I FELT THE SAME WAY WHEN I FOUND OUT. THEN I REALIZED THE EMOTION CAME OUT OF THE IMPLANTS THEMSELVES.”

    Wow, I had to re-read this to get it, really interesting!

  10. I recommend going to Merril’s blog “SaveScientology” for a great new article explaining attacks on us by LRH. Here is one quote ” We can cause stats at will. External actions don’t affect them” I have a thriving field practice and it is all because I am causing it-I know the tech works, so it is easy to cause my stats!!
    We have an HBO show coming out that is designed to destroy Scientology. it won’t affect my stats. people want WINS!!!

    • HCO POLICY LETTER OF 13 JANUARY 1983

      THE BUSINESS OF ORGS

      Orgs are in the very new, for this universe, business of setting people free.

      SPs will find all manner of reasons not to, for this is what they, with their own crimes, fear.

      Thus it follows that they cut dissem lines, corrupt tech, suppress and confuse orgs, persuade people to be inactive and resort to other shifts, all quite “reasonable” and “logical” as to why this must be the way it is; so be alert to this and go ahead and set people free.

      It’s done with org services well delivered, on-policy, with standard tech.

      So just do it, man, do it!

      L. RON HUBBARD
      Founder

    • Merrell is definitely doing something about the scene. Unlike that other blog which deceptively goes by the name “Something Can Be Done About It” and does nothing but natter.

      He pretty much outlines the most effective pathway I’ve seen so far for taking back control of the Church.

  11. It appears to me that those who attack the SUBJECT of Scientology (as opposed to the organization) do not really understand the subject and the real intention behind its development and probably have not received much or any benefit from it.
    And some of those who do this may even be currently incapable of understanding that anyone (who is not a well-recognized historical figure) could really have such an intention to help his fellow human beings lead better lives and then succeed in doing so.

    • “It appears to me that those who attack the SUBJECT of Scientology (as opposed to the organization) do not really understand the subject and the real intention behind its development and probably have not received much or any benefit from it.”

      That and unknown crimes as covered in the HCOB Critics of Scientology or the RED Project Squirrel.

    • Espiritu:

      “If a person is very, very mean to you, the chances are they don’t know you. That’s the best chance in the world that they don’t know you. They’re very mean to you. How could you guarantee they don’t know you? Well, that’s very, very obvious, for the excellent reason that A-R-C added up together comprise knowingness.

      And this is understanding which expands and expands and expands and becomes more knowing and more knowing and more knowing. You can be further and further from things and know what they’re all about, in other words.

      Don’t worry about people who are mean to you or who get mad at you. There’s no reason to worry about them at all. They’re not even getting mad at you. They don’t know where you are, who you are, or anything else. That is people going around trying to be understood. Why try to be understood? Why not try to fix up people so they can understand.

      That’s why Man can be basically good and be considered to be the foulest beast on the face of the Earth. Simply, as his affinities go down, his communication and agreements go to pieces too.”

      LRH – From a Lecture given on the 28th of July, 1954, Entitled: ARC-As Isness

    • Or:

      “Now, when you have to explain all of your motives to somebody, you realize that you really shouldn’t bother. Because if your motives are not visible to them when you don’t intend to hide your motives, then an explanation of your motives are not very likely to do very much to them, because their level of awareness of you already doesn’t exist. Do you see?

      It almost comes down to it that he – a thetan could make a hard and fast rule, only he never should make hard and fast rules – but it’s a good one to observe, is never explain. Be as obvious as you please and be as plain as you please and as straightforward as you can be. And if the ordinary evidences which lie around then don’t justify your actions and so forth, there’s no sense in explaining it to the person who is challenging them, for the good reason that he wouldn’t be able to understand them anyway.”

      L Ron Hubbard From: Scientology Definitions II – 6 December, 1966

  12. This new film coming out, Going Clear, is supposed to be the final, destructive blow to the subject of Scientology. M&M both have their shoulders behind this and are helping to deliver what they think is the final curtain for Scientology so that they feel better about their crimes while in the Church. For the producers of Going Clear it is a gamble on making piles of money by “exposing” the “truth” of a controversial subject to millions of people on cable TV. For Ortega it is a good opportunity to advance his career, for he knows this is one of the greatest stories of all time and he has hitched himself onto the shooting star of all stories..
    However, this show and its attack are just going to backfire on all of them because they are completely in the dark as to what Scientology actually is. The very subject of Scientology in itself is all about truth and survival. By it’s very nature, it will not only survive but it will get stronger from these attacks. It will not get stronger in the Church but it will get stronger out here in the field, because those dedicated Scientologists still in the Church and the ones under the radar and especially those of us who are dedicated and out here in the field aren’t going to stand for this anymore. They all know, all to well, behind all attacks on Scientology is out tech. The bigger the attack, the larger the out tech. Deep down inside, all Scientologists (real ones) know this datum to be true and they will break free of the suppression of Davey and his gang of thugs to seek real Scientology. Belonging to the Church is now going out of fashion, but not Scientology itself. Too many people recognize truth..
    So gear up and get ready for increased delivery. We’re going to be busy.
    ML Tom

    • Tom

      An applicable quote expanded to include the internet and the fawning corporate media complex in general:

      “I don’t care what the newspapers say about me as long as they spell my name right.”

      “Big Tim” Sullivan

      Maybe they don’t know anything about the actual subject but at least they spelled the name right 😉

      If the three stooges (that’s Marty, Mike and Tony) think that this so called “documentary” is really going to bring down the Church then they are more deluded then the “bubble dwellers” they say exist within it.

      Funny thing from what I understand even though the “doc” got a standing ovation (mainly from the security hired to protect them from evil OSA and the usual suspects in the anti-Scientology movement.) it didn’t receive any awards at Sundance nor even an honorable mention at the Academy.

      Poor Gibney and Wright instead of hitching their careers on a shooting star. It’s turned into a lead weight which will probably drag their careers to the bottom of a very muddy pond reserved for bottom dwellers like Paulette Cooper and the late and unlamented Russell Miller who’s only venue will be the fanatical anti-cult circuit.

      It’s already falling like a shot duck on the movie meter over at IMDB which is bad news for HBO.

      Don’t worry about its high rating which is probably being padded in the same phony manner they accuse the Church of doing.

      Ain’t it funny how criminal minds works?

      It will probably end up in the pantheon of anti-Scientology hit pieces that have come and gone. Like the Incredible Shrinking World of L Ron Hubbard that was filmed and presented just before the biggest expansion of Scientology ever in history or the LA Times “expose'” followed by DMSMH becoming a best seller again and hitting the top ten of the NYT Best Sellers list again.

      Following the media’s attacks on Scientology is a study in reversal of fortune.

      No press or media attack has ever been successful. The only thing that has been successful in destroying the Church is its current Management’s out-tech and off-policy. Allowing SPs, CIs and Agent Provocateurs to infiltrate and disrupt the organization and as is currently occurring seize control which all leads back to off-policy and out-tech.

      For instance someone like Miscavige would have never gotten as far as he’s gotten if the policy Ethics the Design of was applied fully.

      Nor would have anyone like Marty or Mike be able to air out the Church’s dirty laundry if the policy on Counter-Espionage been applied. A job that was transferred from the GO to RTC.

      Of course since self examination doesn’t seem to one of Miscavige’s or his inner circles biggest traits ( see policy on the Anti-Social Personalities) at some point we’re going to have to straighten out this mess but in the mean time I see some heavy traffic coming our way as you were saying Tom 🙂

      • Robin,
        I haven’t seen Gibney’s film but for a few snips. Apparently he tried to animate the OT III materials. I thought that is an interesting turn of events, considering the Revolt in the Stars idea.

        It’s like Tom M points out – even though these fellas are bent on destroying Scientology, they actually disseminate it. “It works. That’s the trap” as one pundit put it.

        • P.S. the IMDb rating system doesn’t allow for “padding” according to its description. The “down 242” is legit.

            • As I was ‘splaining to Jim, Lucy er…I mean Chris. Is that any moron can rate a movie in the Data Base even if they haven’t seen it.

              Just like any organ donor can rate a product or book on Amazon. com unseen and untried.

              What’s telling is as I stated earlier is that the Doc’s ranking is dropping like some politician’s pants in a whore house.

              Shows that interest in the big show is falling off even before the main event on HBO.

              People have heard how badly it sucks and like the folks over at Sundance are running in the other direction.

              In other words the execs over at HBO have purchased a big fat white elephant that is now shitting on their carpet.

              Serves ’em right.

              They should have stuck to ground breaking programs like Californication or Board Walk Empire or …..

              I know what I’m gonna be doing that night.

              Watching reruns of Burn Notice 😉

              • Yes, but what what I’ve usually seen on IMDB is that they don’t allow it to be rated before it’s release…at least that’s what I’ve seen on other movies’ pages. I do understand about how the ratings could be falsely upped or downed; I was talking about it wasn’t yet released. That’s all.

                • Chris,

                  It was actually released at the Sundance.

                  So they’ve made it available to be rated.

                  I see they’re doing it with other movies that have had a limited run or pre-released to Art venues like ARClight etc.

                • “‘Rank’ is dropping off; ‘Rating’ is abnormally high”

                  That’s basically what I was saying. Also as I was saying the Doc is currently in limited release.

                  BTW a lot of the Docs that hit Showtime or HBO or whatever have had a run in small Art theaters in New York and/or LA where the tragically hip go so they have something to talk about at their Cocktail Parties and/or do the Film Festival circuit.

                  They do these limited releases hoping that some premium channel or studio exec sees it and decides to distribute it which costs big bucks in many cases more than the movie or doc cost to make.

          • Jim,

            I was referring to the rank not the rating.

            Actually the rating suffers from the same flaws as the Amazon ratings do.

            All they have to do is call in the anti- Scientology hive to swarm the ratings section whilst the ranking is based on hits in relation to other movies on their website.

            Different animal entirely.

            It’s ranking as opposed to rating means that although it’s highly rated by these morons. Nobody else is really interested.

            They’d rather check out what the IMDB has to say about say Plan B from Outer Space er sum thin’ like maybe Water World.

            Regarding the animated version of III. They ran an animated version on Ted Koppel’s Nightline when he introduced Slappy the Squirrel as the “leader” of Scientology back in the early ’90’s. Same thing on South Park.

            Remember what Ron says about the incredulity of the materials in Scientology Review?

            Anyway like you wrote Ron planned to introduce the world to Incident II in Revolt in the Stars.

            Funny wasn’t lil’ Dave workin’ at Over the Rainbow at that time?

            Anyway the project never got off the ground because of the flap with the GO and other excrement hitting the fan at the time. Also I think Ron placed a higher priority on getting the Tech Films made so got shelved.

            Actually I don’t think it would have been a bad idea. It would have done an end run on those idiots who think they are shocking anyone but themselves.

            Reminds me of the story of some SP getting a hold of Confed. Materials in the HCOPL Security of Data and started reciting it to his wife.

            Ron says she recovered but he never did.

          • Mike occasionally has an ability to state the obvious.

            Personally I rank Dave’s conversance with the subject right up there with his “friends” in InterPol and the IRS.

            That “why” he gave from that abomination he called an “eval” of the “blind leading the blind” was probably his own personal why as the so called “leader” of the Church.

          • According to TO:
            “Yesterday Mike Rinder and your proprietor were being interviewed about Alex Gibney’s film Going Clear for a well known national news organization when the interviewer asked, what is David Miscavige’s biggest skeleton in his closet? […] That he’s not a Scientologist, Rinder answered.”

            • Think I don’t understand is why Tony being so evasive by saying “a well known national news organization” which could mean any News Service from the NYT to the National Enquirer which is where both of ’em belong right next to the story ’bout the two headed baby.

              If it wasn’t for Tony’s fanatical following of anti-Scientology nut balls he’d probably doing human interest stories for the weekly Snow Flake Tribune or the Hoboken Penny Saver.

              Mike on the other hand looks more like a deer caught in the headlights then some guy in the spot light.

              Maybe that statement indicates that his overts are catching up with him. Maybe not.

            • David Miscavige’s biggest skeleton in his closet? […] That he’s not a Scientologist, Rinder answered.”

              Hey, neither are Rinder or Rathbun.

              Who do you think has been running our church all along?

          • I noticed that and appreciated that Mike said it!
            It is a truth that needs to be disseminated far and wide to the planet at this time.
            It may not be “the real why” for the collapse of the COS (unless someone has a way to actually reach DM, and make him into an actual Scientologist who could see the error of his ways), but it IS a truth that definitely needs to be told and broadcast from the roof-tops. DM is NOT a Scientologist. I thought that was the perfect answer to the interviewer’s question.

    • “In the scale of Awareness Levels, it is Awareness that determines the Level, not conduct. Conduct is dramatization and above the awareness of the person.”
      (HCO PL 16 August 65, Auditing Restrictions.)
      A person is overwhelmed by the Level he/she dramatizes. That’s what we are dealing with.

    • I doubt there’ll be much in the way of any changes such as implementing the Check and Balances LRH called for, the restoration of altered tech, ceasing the insane offbeat fundraising, etc. The church as the result of these media onslaughts will continue to be hampered, will continue to lose membership. It’s not going anywhere.

      This documentary is just another pale shot from the media, no different than the BBC documentaries, the Debbie Cook New Year letter and court testimonies, etc. Yes, it’s going to hurt them somewhat, but it’s far from the end of the world, no more than the same-old same-old we’ve seen out here over the last 6+ years. Every time some big CO$ entheta thing comes out, the anti and ex crowd goes briefly into enthusiasm before the flames peter out again. DM won’t be taken down (doubtful), he’ll just gradually fade himself out into the background removing himself as a target.

      Let’s just suppose paradise came along, DM was removed and some standard tech folks inside put everything right. The existing antis and ex attacker which likely comprise the majority out here (the support they have is nothing short of phenomenal) won’t go away until they’ve either turned the church either completely squirrel or have it sued and shut down altogether.

      As much as I despise all the fundraising, the fact that DM managed to get tax status and accumulation of billions in funds and assets is probably why the church is still in existence. I think it was Mat Pesch who was ex-FLAG FBO, recently stated the church had been losing money long before DM took over. I don’t think it’ll make much of a difference at this point who takes over the church or what they do. I’m happy we have pockets of standard tech out here, and hopefully that’ll carry us through for some time, as I feel that will be the future if there is any.

      • I disagree with your assessment FM.

        The only thing that will save the Church is if it reverts to the Standard Structure as outlined in the OEC Volumes, applies Standard Tech as given in the Tech Volumes,reinstitute the Reform Code and conforms to Ron’s estate planning as given in Trust B.

        These antis and exes do not have any “phenomenal” support of any kind except among themselves.

        All they do is natter. Nothing but bombast. Nothing more.

        • My point is whatever “only point” that would save the church simply ain’t going to happen.

          The support I’m talking about manifests itself in all the entheta about SCN in the media, groups such as Anonymous protests, lawsuits, etc.

          What’s occurred over the last 6 years will continue into the future, as will the decline of the church.

          • FM,

            Sorry I don’t see any “phenomenal” support there.

            Anonymous is just a bunch of hackers with too much time on their hands who are easily manipulated by the CIA to do their bidding.

            Case in point the whole Iran effort.

            All they’ve managed to do is cause so called management to circle the wagons and give them an outside enemy to “fight” while they twist and pervert the tech beyond all recognition.

            The fawning corporate media and their idea of “infotainment” is a laugh. Either that or constantly beating the war drums urging us into another strategic disaster like Iraq. Their credibility these days with the average public on a scale of 1-10 is probably -5.

            Most people these days. If they even bother with the news amongst all the paine en circuses or corn and games get it from alternative news sources.

            This is why you see someone like Ortega doing nothing but constantly preaching to the choir.

            • Unless by “most people” you are talking about a select group of Scientologists or perhaps the odd academic or “researcher”, most lay people DO read tabloid and mainstream print media and watch mainstream news on the telly. That’s why Fox, ABC, CBS, CNN, NatEnq, etc, etc, have such a following. Whether or not they have any influence or impact on Scientology is another thing.

              Of course, maybe I’m just being manipulated by the CIA to say that.

              • Could be.

                I thought I saw a 201 for you last time I was at Langley code name BG/Canuck 😉

                Sure the tabs have a following especially up there in Canada and other Commonwealth countries.

                Me the only section I thought was good in your Toronto Sun up there was the Sunshine Girl. The rest was bird cage lining or fish wrapper as far as I’m concerned.

                BTW Fox or more accurately Faux News is losing ground down here. From what I’ve heard they had to shut their office in NY.

                Same with the ‘Nets like the big 3 ABC, NBC NKA MSNBC and CBS. The only people who watch ’em are old fogies looking for a cheap walker.

                Hardly any watches CNN anymore down here unless you’re stuck in the airport lounge area waiting for a flight. Used to be big back in ’90’s.

                We’ve got so many options down here like Roku, Apple TV and Chromecast. So who needs cable or for that matter Direct TV?

                National Enquirer is a joke. I don’t know anyone who buys that. Maybe a few who occasionally read it when they are waiting at the Supermarket check out.

                Like the rest of the News Papers and Mags down here they make most of their revenue from ads.

                Totally a different view down here from what it is up there.

                I was really surprised when my brother in law and his wife came down here from the Great White North and took what Greta was saying on Faux News seriously.

                Seems you really got a button on the fact that Capitalism’s Invisible Army controls the News which is pretty much accepted down here:

                http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php

                But what do ya expect from a bunch of backwards Canucks who live in Igloos, shuffle around in Snow Shoes, go ice fishing and think that Hockey is a sport 🙂

                • “But what do ya expect from a bunch of backwards Canucks who live in Igloos, shuffle around in Snow Shoes, go ice fishing and think that Hockey is a sport :)”

                  Or guys that have been holed up too long in their apartments in of all gawdforsakin’ places – LA – working on conspiracy books. LOL

                  • You must be writing about someone else because 1) I’ve never written a conspiracy book 2) I don’t live in LA though you did get the part about living in an apartment right 😉

                    Not exactly holed up in it BTW.

                    I mean I spent the last week in Orlando Florida while you probably snow shoveling your way to your car 🙂

                    • Book, schmook – I didn’t want to give it away. Ok, a screenplay, if I remember rightly. And Glendale, not LA, although like Vancouver, Richmond – a separate city like Glendale – is considered part of “Greater Vancouver” So, “Greater LA”. No, you don’t always hole up, but ya gotta admit, that room of yours is usually pretty dark with a lone light bulb burning. You’d be smoking in there too if you could. A regular Philip Marlowe! LOL

                    • Actually it’s a spy novel and yes I am also working on a screen play based on it.

                      But it is not a “conspiracy book”. In fact you won’t find mention of the Illuminati in it.

                      Actually we are part of LA County so yeah very little distinction there to outsiders we’re just one big sprawling city of about 150 communities looking for a center 🙂

                      Technically though the City of LA stops at Atwater Village and NoHo to the North and Huntington Beach to the south and never wonders into Beverly Hills to the west or Pasadena to the East.

                      You mean Raymond Chandler the creator of the Philip Marlowe detective novels right?

                      I actually lived about a half a block from one of his old apartments when I really lived in LA. Actually the Los Felix section just north of the Org.

                    • “I actually lived about a half a block from one of his old apartments when I really lived in LA. Actually the Los Felix section just north of the Org.”

                      Go figure….lol.

                    • Meant to say Los Feliz but that spell checker seems to have a mind of it’s own 🙂

                      BTW Chandler’s one of my faves. Read practically every thing he wrote.

                      Like Ron he started out with the Pulps.

                • RV: But what do ya expect from a bunch of backwards Canucks who live in Igloos, shuffle around in Snow Shoes, go ice fishing and think that Hockey is a sport

                  That’s Americans for you.

                  At least ya got the igloo part right. A hearty morning starts out tenderly being woken up by the loving licks and rubs of polar bears all too exited to roll in the snow with us out in the sun. After a heaping serving of Maple Syrup over Canadian Bacon to get the day going, we race the cuddly white teddys in our snowshoes to the artic shelf for a refreshing dip in the polar waters. In the winter time Flipper is in the tropics, so we frolic with the Greywhale pups and sea lions among the ice floes. At noon, when the sun is about to set, the penguins eagerly watch us play a game of hockey before we retire with a whale blubber snack.

                    • In a survey done in the L.A. area a couple of decades back, they asked respondents how many days would it take to drive through Mexico to get to Canada. Better than 80% gave a numerical answer. I bet you the story above could be successfully pawned off with replies such as “WOW!! I didn’t know that!” on a good percentage of the people.

                    • Yeah well most Canadians think all us Americans are packing heat and are prepared to shot first and ask questions later.

                      BTW did you know that the third largest Canadian city is….. drum roll….

                      Los Angeles.

                      There are more Canadians in this town then there is in Vancouver.

                      🙂

                    • City Core, Yes, Greater Vancouver, Nope. In fact there are more Canadians in the LA area than in the city cores of either Toronto or Montreal.

                      Most certainly true I stay out of areas in the US that wouldn’t worry me in Canada. Mind you Toronto also has some nasty strips to stay clear of, and from what I have heard, no shortage of guns either. Worst that can happen to you in Vancouver is getting robbed, but even that is not so common. At night here, cops everywhere, mostly harassing druggies, pimps and whores — all good.

                    • I read it way back when the LA Weekly was still worth reading and Michael Ventura was churning out Letters at 2 AM.

                      They didn’t distinguish city core from the metro area.

                      Anyway. I’m not a big fan of Police harassment. As long as the druggies are minding their own business and the pimps and whores are making transactions between consenting adults I couldn’t care less.

                      Personally I’d rather have less cops and more liberty which is one of the reasons I moved to the US.

                      Been all over LA, even the parts like South Central and was never mugged once.

                      Used to walk from the Complex to the Manor because I’d always miss the last shuttle since I worked in the FES unit at night. Never had a problem.

                      The only time I was ever mugged or someone ever robbed me was in Vancouver.

                      Not afraid of guns because I learned how to handle one.

                      Personally I think one of the main causes of gun violence are trigger happy cops.

                      And a lot of gun deaths are caused by accident because the person doesn’t know how to handle the weapon and leaves a round in the chamber and the safety off when stowing it.

                    • RV: Anyway. I’m not a big fan of Police harassment. As long as the druggies are minding their own business and the pimps and whores are making transactions between consenting adults I couldn’t care less.

                      Big outcry over the last decade crack heads invading several neighbourhoods bringing B & Es, vandalism and assault into residential areas. One family member had 10 grand in tools stolen by them. I got broken into a few times too. They made beggars asking for money at intersections illegal too. I used to file police reports as well when these were wandering the alleyways at night obviously scoping for goods to pay for their habits. And of course Prostitutes for running to drug dealers on street corners after a trick. Gas Station and 7-11 robberies are unheard of nowadays. The cops here are good, streets clean again, people happy with them, super-fast emergency response too.

                      Been here for almost 32 years, never been robber or assaulted.

                    • Down here we’ve never had that problem because a lot of the flotsam and jetsam is pretty much aware of the possibility that some of these home owners may be armed Smith and Wesson or a Rutger or maybe even a Desert Eagle 😉

                      So they mostly hang out and conduct their in public areas where they know they are save from some armed citizen putting a bead on them while they are crawling through a second story window.

                      Actually the best sales force in personal protection is the antigun lobby who keeps threatening gun control causing a rush to buy guns and ammo before they manage to get ’em outlawed or something.

                      A lot of people think our president is behind this push but I doubt it because 1) he’s a Constitutional Scholar and knows the 2nd isn’t going anywhere anytime soon and 2) because many people of color are the one’s who own the most guns per capita because they live in the most “high risk” neighborhoods.

                      You find that those who support gun control here are those whinny wimpy limousine liberals who live in guarded and gated communities surrounded by rent-a-cops.

            • I feel all this is a very complicated and involved kettle of fish esp. along legal lines.

              And should the good guys ever take over the church, will they ack all of DM crimes and accept liability subjecting themselves to claims and lawsuits which could bankrupt the CO$? Will you ack that GAT was all a squirrely fraud and return the all the money, the money for IAS donations still in accounts, unused services which are said to be in the hundreds of millions?

              Or are you going to cover it all up like DM has keeping all the money people were defrauded out of and continue to fight claimants in court? And I think this best answers what will take place at the CO$ in the future — DM will just be faded out and into the background where he, possibly along with others, esp. celebs will continue to run the show.

              I don’t think DMs messes can be “properly” cleaned up to everyone’s satisfaction without bankrupting the place. They are probably stuck with the cards they have, and in a position, all thing considered, forced to play the hand they have.

              • FM,

                Actually anyone who gave money to the IAS signed off on a form that said it was a non-refundable donation for which they received a tax deduction for thus any request for a refund would be considered income by the IRS and would complicate their tax filling.

                A double edged sword.

                A law suit. Well good luck. Anyone who donates to an 501Ciii organization is not supposed to expect a tangible benefit of any kind. So what would the claim be?

                Fraud?

                Hard to prove which is probably why no charitable organization has never been sued down here.

                Those suing the organization have a greater burden of proof than the organization does in proving that the money wasn’t spent properly.

                I’d say anyone who wanted to sue the IAS would be tilting at wind mills.

                Besides the entity known as the IAS would probably be phased out if the Org decided to get on policy. Because it violates the datum on Vital Data on Promotion about subsidizing an activity.

                BTW one of the key reasons that Miscavige is where he is is because the IRS appointed him as the Chairman of the Church Tax Compliance Committee which is a lifetime appointment according to the Secret Closing Agreement.

                So those guys over at Sc-IRS-ology were partially right about the IRS controlling Church to an extent but they had the wrong target because it wasn’t through Meade Emory and the CST.

                Regarding Golden Age of Tech and all of that. Those who did those actions still received what they paid for so any request for refund on those services would probably handled according to the policies on refunds and Suppressive Acts.

                If I was running the Church. I’d probably handle it the same way Ron handled those who did Mayo’s squirrelly version of the HRD and is covered in the HCOB on Verbal Tech using lots of False Data stripping especially on the subject of F/Ns and Overruns.

                You can make it a big problem if you wish but I don’t see it as such.

                  • I don’t think so really.

                    As far as I know they are still delivering GAT and calling it Scientology. None of the false orders, directives, related to have been canceled.

                    They are delivering “Super Power” and the Running Program directly to the public without having the Staff do it first which was the sequence recommended by Ron.

                    Note Super Power in quotes because I have no idea what they are doing that they are calling the Perceptic Rundown.

                    As I’m pretty sure the original RD didn’t require special chairs developed by NASA’s LSD or moving television screens or any of the other high tech electronic devices that they are promoting in their promo.

                    Also they continue to arbitrarily cancel certs even of those who did the first iteration of the Golden Age of Tech. Not only that but they are having Pre OTs redo their Purif and Objectives en mass.

                    In other words the leopard hasn’t really changed its spot. In fact the out-tech and policy situation over there is worse then it was before the Golden Age of Tech phase II.

                    It’s just that they’ve gotten better at PRing the public about it.

      • FM,
        Well, actually, if the basic action of TR4 were honestly done, all sorts of stuff would go poof.

        In other words, as it covers on the savescientology.com site, honest internally conducted if possible, or externally initiated as applicable, review and reforms (just like LRH did in 68) that address the issues, then announce the resolutions broadly, would in fact understand and then fully acknowledge the majority of the problems now causiing BPC.

        It’s nothing more than a broad scale PAB 151, conducted with the PR Series, and actual honest handlings of legitimate Protest PR stuff being aired today…

        The cause point of the overts can take responsibility for those overts, come clean, handle the consequences of the acts, and create a better future. The naysayers can nay all they want about Scientology. They will. But an honestly reformed CofS…well, you know what happens in a session when the pc is fulminating and BPCed to the point of blowing up and you find and indicate the exact right BPC, don’t you?

        It goes “poof”.

        • I’m not in any way suggesting the tech to handle doesn’t exist. I don’t think there’ll ever be an opening to make that and other applicable tech happen to set the Church of Scientology straight. I wished that wasn’t true, but I’m also not one to harbour what I feel are unrealistic hopes when all indicators point the other way. Our commline and influence to the church is pretty limited to these blogs, and maybe, just maybe someone takes note and does something about it. It’s finger-crossing all the way. From the perspective of your average parishioner, the thought of a previously gone/declared Scientologist having swum among the sewers of the Rath & Rinderpool handling the management of the church is unthinkable. And even those guys in their ways are making waves drawing attention to the outpoints but unfortunately they knock the tech too.

          Personally I feel the greatest good we can do out here is what we can actually effect right now and tomorrow … audit and train in our homes/centers … or theirs.

          • FM,
            I truly understand, mate. I do.

            There’s all sorts of future. We make it. Lots of things can be accomplished, no matter the odds. That’s the game of Scientology in the first place, here, on this li’l blue planet – against all odds.

          • “Personally I feel the greatest good we can do out here is what we can actually effect right now and tomorrow … audit and train in our homes/centers … or theirs.”

            Or start a new church, done as LRH intended. Once we can wrest our rights free to do so, the CoS plays it both ways – a religion, and a corporate business with trademarks and such. It’s either a religion – in which case there’s nothing that bars beginning “The New (or Reformed) Church of Scientology” – or it’s a business, in which case it’s taxable, etc. I just can’t see how they can TM a church! Oh, wait, it’s in the USA! Of course! DUH! :-p

            • Yeah, folks lamenting and waiting for some miracle through the clouds to get the CO$ back on track … nah, not gonna happen. Youtube and whatever else on the net much of which is factually undeniable will remain near-permanent shackles. And will taint us too to some degree. But one on one FSMing for us out here cannot be undermined by much of anything. What’s her Class VIII Pam Kemp built up a full auditing practice in the 80s entirely from talking to non-Scientologists and was so busy at times she had to schedule them off. Its all doable.

          • Somewhere Ron says that the Orgs must survive for the good this planet. So at some point CST eventually will be forced take them out of the hostile hands they are currently in.

            It’s not going to happen over night but it will eventually have to happen.

            There is no way anyone is going to Clear the planet by holding courses in their living room.

            Nor is the field going to be able all by itself to hold the line on Standard Tech.

            These are basically stop gap actions.

            Those people who hang out at Rinder’s and Rathbun’s blogs are really either Squirrels, SPs, or Dilettantes. I wouldn’t waste my time worrying about them.

            Ron could’ve written Dianetics and gone off to write Screen Plays for Hollywood or back to writing fiction but instead he established an a network of organizations.

            He wasn’t doing this for his personal entertainment.

            • Robin,

              I disagree re CST – that’s a lost and hopeless cause. And while I tend to agree with you re holding courses in living rooms won’t clear the planet, it can clear an area. That’s how Book 1 began its magnificent boom. But then again, not everyone is going to make it, although we may have to come back for them some day. In the meanwhile, they can do whatever they please and follow whatever their hearts tell them, so long as they don’t bar the route out for others.

              I do think, though, that we need a central org to hold the standards for Scientology and the field. I agree with LRH on this and see this is exactly what has occurred.

              “When you want results you had better use standard techniques and procedures. Most clearing “failures” are caused by use of non-standard techniques and procedures. Also, such failures can be caused by ignorance. An auditor thinks he is using standard material. He isn’t sufficiently trained to know.

              You see, there is a thing called Scientology. It has axioms. It has principles. It has the goal of empowering a thetan to overcome his own problems. This standard Scientology we don’t change every day. The uninformed, not knowing that a standard exists see in each new release a new subject. So they say, “Why don’t I experiment on my pcs?” And they experiment with the standard background, not with a further reach of old, tried, principles.

              Without a guiding central organization Scientology would fall into an anarchy of opinions in a week for there are too many who can go through the motions of auditing who do not know their basics. They think a new thing, Scientology, is an experimental thing. It is not. The basics are inflexible and have been for years.

              We know now just exactly what clears people. And we know exactly what a clear is. And we know exactly how to train and process. These are hard won riches. Don’t waste them and your time, too.

              This is the way out! Are some people so fond of the trap they avoid the flaming beacons which show the entrance? Or are they afraid to set Man free?

              L. RON HUBBARD” Ability 76, ca. early June, 1958 – “Offbeat” Processing

              P.S. M&M’s blogs aren’t the only ones around. Just saying too much attention on M&M it seems.

              • ” M&M’s blogs aren’t the only ones around. Just saying too much attention on M&M it seems.”

                I totally agree Chris.

                The only reason that these blogs became popular was because they allowed Scientologists who still considered themselves Scientologists to vent about the mess current management was creating.

                Then as you know. It became a “natter fest” which was eventually infiltrated and taken over by hostile forces who were totally antipathetic toward the subject.

                Same play as what happened to Homer’s ARS.

                Personally I began to suspect that something was “rotten in the state of Denmark” when I found out that Mark Bunker was involved with his blog.

                Basically the same play with Mike’s blog who’s idea about doing something about it is becoming a snitch for the FBI and demand a full investigation by the (in)Justice Department.

                In other words siding with the COINTELPRO action that wrecked the Church in first place.

                Mike’s idea is that we need more FBI involvement to fuck up the scene even further.

                Thanks but no thanks.

                Anyway I’ve since concluded that anyone still hanging on to M&M’s every word and action such as their involvement in “Going Clear” is either completely PTS, a total squirrel, being Suppressively “reasonable”, or just plain Suppressive.

                One good thing though is that at least they have been quarantined.

                🙂

                As far as CST. I believe that Merrell is right and it is the most effective legal angle to pursue. I doubt with the current Government backing that the Church has that any counter organization would be effective.

                On the latter. I can see why the FBI is so benign about investigating the Church of Scientology. They’ve managed by their infiltration and by the elimination of the GO to get the Church in the position that they want it and that is being totally and completely ineffective. The last thing they’d want to do is tip over that apple cart which is why Mike’s offer to become a rat is falling on deaf ears and if he’s really serious about it is pissing in the wind.

            • I’m not suggesting we are going to clear the planet without a proper organization, but to get and keep the show going based on what we can do here and now is a positive step in that direction.

              • I agree. I mean we should keep doing what we are doing while this Org scene is getting sorted out. I’ve personally never said otherwise.

                However I personally again think that we should support efforts like Merrell’s in getting the scene sorted out and not get defeatist because of a bunch of “nattering nabobs of negativity” 🙂

                (Probably the only thing that ol’ Spiro said that made any sense before he was busted for tax evasion.)

                You get an org that applies Standard Tech and Policy and is actually doing what its supposed to be doing which is turning out auditors who can audit and give wins the PC wins. It doesn’t matter what the naysayers say or how much the subject was previously maligned.

                Case in point and I’m sure Chris is familiar with this fact. Back in the ’70’s Harley Davison was taken over by AMF and after that Harley’s became unreliable and leaked like sieve.

                Several family members got together and purchased the ol’ HD trademark back and started making rugged reliable motorcycles again just like their forefathers did and now Harley Davidson is the most sought after brand on the Motorcycle market and despite the whining and moaning of the rice rocket riders they sell out and not only that but they have people on waiting lists to get the latest model.

                So if Harley can do it so can we.

  13. “Anything for which the individual feels any misemotion – antagonism, anger, fear, grief, apathy – is something for which he has not accepted responsibility; and there is misemotion only when an individual refuses to accept responsibility in that sphere of action. He can control anything for which he has accepted the full responsibility. He is unable to control that for which he has not accepted responsibility.” LRH (Dianetic Auditor’s Bulletin, Cause and Effect)

  14. During an interview with the producers of “Going Clear” Rinder said that the fact that auditing works is what makes Scientology a “trap”.
    He’s a real whore that one.

    • That is so very insidious and quite deceitful. That quote I posted about confusing Scientologists (Rinder isn’t one either) with the implanters really fits here.

      • Maybe so but it’s also sweetly ironic. Here’s Mike saying that his key objection to Scientology is that it works meaning it gets results. I mean if it was something totally ineffective like say Subub or SRF or EST NKA Landmark or a Course in Miracles etc. he probably wouldn’t have a problem with it.

        Interesting I’m reading Merrell’s book and the chapters on the Anti Religious Movement and their efforts to make “cults” and religious movements in general seem dangerous instead of the Intelligence Agencies who infiltrate and manipulate them into becoming “Terrorist” organizations.

        As far as I’m concerned Mike and his buddy Marty have become total “wogs”. Worse actually like you say Tom. Media whores.

        • One of his recent posts a few days ago he states that MS2 doesnt really allow any other views which you might find more to your liking yet he’s blocked plenty of pro-Scientology posts … or perhaps posts he didn’t like.

          The hypocrisy is touching … lol.

          • FM,

            You can probably apply the HCOB Other Peoples Withholds to pretty much anything Mike complains about.

            One thing’s for sure he’s become adept at cutting theta comm lines these days. Pretty much anything he allows is pretty much entheta.

              • It’s been pretty obvious that Marty and Mike have gone to the dark side for quite some time now.

                Marty was the first one to go down that long dark tunnel and it seems Mike is determined to follow down that same tunnel where the only light will be that proverbial on coming train.

                I know I push other people’s buttons about using psycho babble but Mike to me seems to be dramatizing the battered wife syndrome.

                From what I understand back at the Int Base Marty used to pound the living shit outa Mike because he was ordered to by Miscavige which is soooooo damned Nuremberg.

                • “I know I push other people’s buttons about using psycho babble but Mike to me seems to be dramatizing the battered wife syndrome.”

                  LRH explains it much better.

                  • True I’m sure he does.

                    Actually the section on the “winning valence” in BK I pretty much covers it.

                    But I was just having a lil fun at Marty and Mike’s expense.

                • RV: Marty was the first one to go down that long dark tunnel and it seems Mike is determined to follow down that same tunnel where the only light will be that proverbial on coming train.

                  These guys are just so full of it.

                  First they came out complaining about ‘everything’ DM, proposed Scientology services among the Indies, pointed out the alterations of the tech … and then cutting down KSW and LRH policies, fabricating attributes about it such as fundamentalism & stop-stopping … and finally … SCN: a failed experiment … and now … “Scn? There is something to it” … lol

                  Seriously confused puppies.

                  • Totally agree with ya FM.

                    That whole “thought stopping” BS phrase was actually developed by some acolyte Margaret Singer.

                    I mean if aren’t totally confused or suffer from total mental anarchy or compete reasonableness or are so open minded your brains are about ready to fall out of your head and have an actual stable datum or rely on stable data of some kind like say Marty and Mike are on the lunatic fringe then you are being “thought stopped” in someway.

                    Whatever.

                • What I noticed in the last video link above with the Gibney & Wright clan is the solid victim valence he’s convinced himself into. (Maybe part of the Docu marketing persona required for what the church has labeled a “Whinefest”) Haggis bouncing to and fro between 0.8 and 1.1. (Lots and lots of alter-is) The 2 pundits seem to be the highest-toned ones in possession of what seems to be a fairly highly amount of embellished and twisted data.

                • Or the Weak Valence. It’s more victimish. You get waaaaaay more inflow with that one. stuck inflow eventually. No outflow. Maybe a dribble.

    • Merrell,
      That’s Robin Adair, signing off one of his posts with LR, Love Robin. Unless it was one of his aka’s, like Leaping Roger or Longranging Raphael or Lately Rhonda or…

  15. “Well what was going on is I’d had a few beers, the Beer Goggles were on, and heck, she looked OK the night before ”

    LOL bin there and done that! But no, thats not the kind of story I was talkin about!

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