Home

wolf

By Lana M

An OSA email was sent around to a bunch of email addresses in recent days, working to discredit someone in the field.  We have all seen these emails at various points – I certainly have.

A person who received the anonymous email, read it and then sent it on to his friends with a warning that he thought I was the person that was sending these emails around and that I am “playing both sides”.  His proof that I must be the author of the anonymous email was that it was sent from a hushmail account, and I too have a hushmail account (albeit a different one).   He warned his friends not to trust me.  He also made the point that “all her activity seems to be to break up the independent field by “bad mouthing” people.”

As I have a personal policy not to mud sling, and I do not engage on natter blogs or chats, I thought it was an interesting accusation.  Who am I bad-mouthing?

Admittedly there have been two posts I have authored, of almost 500 articles on MS2, that may have caused some trouble. One of them was a post that was published for less than 4 hours and was then taken down, which asked a field auditor to return money that had been taken from a preclear with promises of service that were not then delivered. There was a public outcry from several persons that I should never have posted the article, named the person or gotten involved – but I felt ethically obliged to, and so did. I don’t know that it resolved anything and suspect that the money has still not been returned many months later.

The other was an article I wrote about two out-ethics individuals who had caused some trouble here on the home-front. I did not name them in the article, which unfortunately seems to have missed withholds from a whole gamut of people who all assumed I must be referring to them (when I was not).  It was a mistake to post that article as I continue to hear rumours of people who are now steering clear of me because they assumed I was talking about them. It is a reflection on a) the ethics level of the field and b) the lack of clean up and “clean hands”, and c) the way the larger group in the field responds to a (very light) ethics gradient. It was a mistake to post the article and I won’t be doing it again, as it seemed to make a vast number of people uncomfortable, which was never the intention.

So per the rumours, I am not to be trusted, I am breaking up the independent field, and  the most popular rumour is that I am OSA run or controlled.  This last one has been circulated steadily now for several years, probably based on the fact that in late 2010 I had RTC visit my home for 3 nights in a row and I cooperated to get a justice action done to look into past injustices. When Milestone Two was launched it was this rumour that was used to cause a number of people to jump ship.

The fact that I am not standing on one side of the fence and pitching rocks at the people on the other side of the fence, is enough proof for people who do engage in this type of activity, to think I must have another agenda.

Possibly the reality break that occurs is that there are a vast number of people in the field who have left the Church of Scientology (either publicly, or very quietly) and they have unresolved upsets, out-tech or confusions which they have not sorted out. They had a postulate relating to Scientology, to their spiritual freedom and to the group, and they abandoned that postulate and moved onto something else. But without cleaning up and resolving that first postulate, they find themselves unable to really move on – still hung up on or with the subject, finding fault with it and with others involved in it.

I don’t engage in critical natter about the C of S as I consider that they are well intentioned people, doing the best they can with what they know and believe. They are not bad people. There are a handful of SPs that create problems within the C of S (just as there are outside of the C of S), but Sea Org members, staff members and parishioners are just trying to do their best.  There are many good people I have worked with, both within and outside the Church perimeter. I won’t throw stones at former staff or at those still on staff. I see no point in it.

I  believe that people in the field who have moved away from the C of S are good people. Many of them have failed purposes or thwarted goals, and they throw in the towel and discredit their past gains and successes using or applying Scientology. If there was an LRH Chaplain program operating that traveled around the globe, providing free sessions and clean ups, then these people would be able to end cycle and move on – but such a program does not currently run and instead they try to find relief by venting to others, which does not help or alleviate the bypassed charge.

I have many times provided a free ARCX service to people who just want to handle the BPC.  It is a no-strings-attached offer, and I try to provide them some relief so they can get on with their life.

There is possibly another reason why I am not trusted by some, and that is that I don’t believe there actually is an “Independent Scientology” field.   In my experience many of those who call themselves “Independent Scientologists” are not training or auditing, but spending a lot of time flinging mud around at the C of S and others, with little to no plans to actually do The Bridge. Either that or they have decided that Ron had it wrong, missed something, didn’t complete his research or had a screw-loose, and if they do any Scientology they practice bits and pieces mixed in with things of their own (or others) manufacture, often in a hodge podge mess that results in disaster for their preclears. So this “Independent Scientology”  field is independent of LRH and The Bridge, which means it aint Scientology. We should rename is just the “Abandoned Scientology” field and they can wander off and do what ever they wish.

There are a number of groups and auditors and individuals who ARE working hard to just do Scientology in the field, per the book, using the resources, training and capacity that they have.  Some do an incredible job of it and others do the best they can.  These people I support wholeheartedly and bend over backwards to assist or help.  I am one of these people and I have received help from many people with more technical training and experience than myself, and I thank them for this.

So, back to the subject of this article — trust.

I don’t really care if people “trust” me or not.

I don’t have delusions of grandeur or a desire to take over the world. Sorry to disappoint some (LOL).

I don’t have a campaign to “save” all the non-believers, or to undermine those who have decided to leave Scientology altogether.

I also have no plans to overthrow the Church, to bring about its down-fall, or even to cause trouble for them.

If you don’t trust me — that is OK. It really is no skin off my nose. I have opened my doors to close on 100 people over the last several years, helped many, written/moderated 462 articles on a blog that has had over 10,000 comments with more than 300,000 visits. I have been open and honest in my articles, sharing my journey, my lows and my highs. I do my best for each person that comes to my door or emails me for help  — and my help is honest and genuine. There are many who can confirm this.

I do not need or desire approval from others. I do what I feel is right based on the philosophical beliefs of Scientology.

I trust L.Ron Hubbard, as each piece of tech that I study, drill and apply, works and improves life.  I know that no matter what occurs in the Church or in the field, the tech will continue to work each time it is correctly applied, and that nothing can shake the certainly of a person who has experienced those gains.

I have that certainty, and that is plenty enough for me.

62 thoughts on “Don’t trust her

  1. Hi Lana,

    I have no idea what all these whisperings and emails are all about.
    However, I was surprised when you said:

    “…..There is possibly another reason why I am not trusted by some, and that is that I don’t believe there actually is an “Independent Scientology” field…..”

    To my understanding people in the “Independent Scientology” field are, by definition, Scientologists who are practicing Scientology (The Tech) outside of the control and direction of the organization known as the Church of Scientology. And it also seems to me that this is what you are doing when people come to your door for help, is it not?
    (and I am glad that you continue to do so.)
    I am a Scientologist, however I often find it wise to emphasize that I am an independent Scientologist and not connected to the COS. This is because the COS has been giving SUBJECT of Scientology a bad name for about 25 years and the public tends to have what the COS is doing confused with actual Scientology. Additionally, DM and some of his cohorts have brazenly altered LRH’s Tech over the years, a fact which they themselves have document very clearly in writing. I think that it is wise to indicate that one is not connected with those practices to people right off the bat so that they can differentiate.

    But I do agree with you that most Scientologists still in the COS are good people and that most seek to do good things with the Tech they have as best they can despite the suppression that they are connected to.
    ~Karl

    • Thanks Karl,
      It is the term that I don’t agree with, as though it started off as “Independent” from the Church of Scientology, for many it progressed to “Independent” from LRH. I think the term is an arbitrary. A Scientologist is a Scientologist. A Scientologist trains, audits, applies LRH tech in their lives – in whatever capacity they can, with the resources they have. They are good people. They don’t need the term “Independent” to differentiate themselves, as they are known by their actions and by their products.
      It is very simple in my eyes – though many will not agree.

          • I should add the WHY.

            Back in 1996, Scientologists were either in the church or they were associated with the Freezone (whether they liked it or not). The Freezone had a reputation back then for disparaging LRH and revising the tech. I suppose the church has the same reputation today.

            Without wanting to play the old game (GPM) of church versus Freezone, I chose to call myself an “Independent Scientologist.” It meant I was still with LRH and the tech — but outside of and unaffiliated with the church.

        • It was certainly a term that was promoted by Steve heavily. It was actually used as a term going back as far as 1981 and 1982, but was really adopted in the last 5 years.

          • I agree. Steve started the “Indie 500” list and he promoted various “Indie Events”, started an “Indie Classified” list etc but as you say the term goes back to the early 80’s when the Church began to splinter.

            My whole problem with the so called “Indie Movement” was the demand by many of its members in some cases coercing others to declare their “independence” by basically disavowing the Church of Scientology which could be considered a “suppressive act” and give OSA an opportunity to paint a target on their back.

            Just because fair game has been canceled doesn’t mean it isn’t still practiced by some of the more fanatical members of the Organization many of who just happen to be in OSA.

            Of course the mainstream media makes it seem that declaring someone an “apostate” and thus “fair game” is only something the Church of Scientology does. It is a common practice of pretty much all religions and even political movements only varying by degree.

            In fact I’m sure if anyone went to a rally of Democrats and said they supported the 2nd Amendment that they’d be considered like a skunk at a picnic 🙂

      • Just to clarify: As far as the term “Independent Scientologist” goes, which I do apply to myself, perhaps an even more descriptive word will be found someday that precludes any misunderstanding of its use.
        My view is that if something is referred to as “Scientology” it must, by definition have originated from LRH.
        The only exceptions are BPLs and BTBs (reference HCOPL 24 Sept 1970 RA, revised 3 July 1977) which are valid references. However, no one may be comm eved or disciplined for not following them. (HCOPL 13 Jan 1979, Orders, Illegal, and Cross)
        In effect, they are only advices.
        Ron is the source of anything which should properly be called Scientology.

        • Actually the definition of a Scientologist is as follows:

          SCIENTOLOGIST, 1. one who betters the conditions of himself and the conditions of others by using Scn technology. (Awl 73 UK) 2. one who controls persons, environments and situations. A Scientoldgistoperates within the boundaries of the Auditor’s Code and the Code of a Scientologist. (PAB 137) 3. one who understands life. His technical skill is devoted to the resolution of the problems of life. (COHA, p. 12) 4. a specialist in spiritual and human affairs. (AbilMa 1)

          Nowhere in the above definitions that one has to be a member of the Church.

          As far as I’m concerned Scientologist and Independent Scientologist is just a false dialectic.

          • Hi RV,
            I agree with Ron’s definition of a Scientologist. The word “independent” as in “independent Scientologist” is merely an adjective. It is used in order to indicate a difference between the use of the word “Scientology” by the current COS and what is meant by people who audit and train outside of the COS. As I mentioned, perhaps a better word could be found. Perhaps “standard” or “traditional”, or something. In any event, I think that it is important to make some indication that much of what is delivered as “Scientology” in the COS is not Scientology.

            “Intelligence” is “the ability to recognize differences, similarities, and identities” (HCOPL 26 Apr 70R) With all of the negative stuff in the media about the practices of the COS I think that it is useful to indicate the difference between “that” and Standard Tech. Otherwise, many people might assume that we are practicing “that”.
            A “dialectic” is “a technique of exposing false beliefs and exposing truth” in Socratic logic (Websters).
            So, in my view applying the adjective “independent” to differentiate between church Scientologists and those who practice Scientology outside of the COS is a valid dialectic.
            As I have said, a better adjective would be helpful, especially since some who apply the term to themselves can be just as squirrelly as the COS can be at times. Any ideas?

            • My view its that its just going into Q&A with the IRS and InterPol’s altered definition of “Scientologist” as a member of a Church of Scientology.

              Also the technique used in a dialectic are two opposing views or premises. Basically a GPM like Dialectic Materialism which is Marxist concept of two opposing forces e.g. Capitalism vs Communism.

              Besides there are still many in the Church despite all the hoops created by so called “management” who still *are* Scientologists by Ron’s definition and I think it ill behooves us to create an “us vs them” when eventually what we’d like is to get them on *our* side.

            • This subject of appellation has been discussed many, many times on other forums throughout the years, Espiritu. Nothing ever came of it other than some thought a distinct dissociation from the CoS such as “independent” was warranted, while others thought that just the word “Scientologist” was all that was needed, and if one was talking to a non-Scientologist, explaining that one practiced the philosophy outside the walls of the CoS. And why. But if there is another descriptive (“standard”, “orthodox”, “fundamentalist”, etc.), it certainly would be interesting to see them.

              Personally, I just use “Scientologist” and deal with any MUs after. 🙂

              • I agree Chris.

                Any antagonism toward Scientology can be effectively handled by the appropriate step in the Dissem Drill.

                As I wrote earlier this change one’s name or some adjective of some kind is just a Q&A and not really required if one can do the above Dissem Drill.

                For instance the CST’s Articles and By Laws are easily accessible on the Internet and right there it says the Church of Scientology and the Religion of Scientology are not necessarily “co-terminal”.

                Besides calling it “Independent Scientology” could give someone that there is some other tech.

  2. Well said Espiritu. Who gives a damn about what some rare, very rare person or SP who spread on the net about you dear Lana. You are a good person, you help, you are a Scientologist, a real one. You and your friends built a group which keeps alive the flame of freedom. Because of people like you, the Bridge is available for those who want. In France, we are a little group of independent scientologists and we keep the Bridge open to the top for those who wants. Thanks to you and my friends french indies, I am back in the chair auditing the CCRD preps on my wife. And myself I finally attested Clear with the certainty that I am; and soon the next steps. So to hell with the entheta. It is just crap, it is nothing, it is just bullshit. Who wants to play with bullshit. It just stinks.
    All my love to all those who keep fighting. And for those who ran into a bog of mud with the GAT, just find someone who can debug you even by mail and get back in the chair. Auditing and getting audited is the best gift you can give yourself. To hell with the “perfection”. To hell with your mistakes. Get debugged and in the chair winning and your pcs winning. It is much easier that one thinks.
    Joseph

    • You make me smile Joseph. You embody all that is great in Scientology. You have passion, you have integrity, strength and a great love in your heart. Bless you and all those you in France. I am so proud to have you as friends.
      Our love to all those in Paris who have been enduring significant attacks and violence over the last weekend. Stay safe.

      • In Paris there is a slogan that is spreading around after these attacks: ‘Not afraid, even not afraid. Même pas peur.’ Thanks for thinking of us.

        Lana, don’t get too cautious because of supposed this and thats and things that people don’t like you did or said, their critics and opinions. You can’t do it right for everybody and you shouldn’t try. Getting too cautious is getting less oneself.

        I love your articles. You are a real poet, a great writer. An artist !

      • Thanks Lana. I have a large smile on my face. Even if you don’t see me commenting a lot, I am still there with you fighting for freedom and love. Keep going all of you spreading theta. We’ll make it.

    • Thank you, Joseph. You GREATLY over-estimate my personal contributions, but thank you.

      As for you, wow! I love your attitude and high level of confront, not to mention PRODUCTION. Wow! France is going strong.

  3. Lana, I have seen you GROW, from strength to strength, in your spiritual journey, from first encountering your postings, on MOUALH, then onto Steve Hall’s blogs. ALL (your writings) were put forth with dedicated commitment, and conviction. You not only weathered the very WORST personal attack I have yet seen, orchestrated by the former IG of CO$, but have continued to stand and grow tallER, in spite of that vengeful display, the essence of which made me leave that individual’s blog sometime earlier.

    Whichever view currently prevailing in those who have left the CO$, I nevertheless feel emancipated enough, to make my own decisions, regarding the future, and equally free to use the toolbox of gifts bequeathed by the Ol’ man and grant beingness to others, without trying to prescribe how they are to use them.

    “Judge people by what they think of “help.” The good can help. The bad, “help”, only to destroy.” LRH- Ability Magazine.

    • Hi RIB,

      Nice to see ya drop by every once in a while.

      I actually was 86ed from the “former IG’s” blog which I still consider a badge of honor 😉

      My observation was and still is that Marty started out with the best of intentions but ended up being subverted by Tony Ortega among others.

      I mean there was a reason why Ron listed reporters as one of the Potential Trouble Sources.

      Anyway I have been approached by various “journalists” but when they find out that I won’t be a party to any effort to malign the subject or its founder they move on to a softer target 😉

      Actually Marty in the beginning made it clear that his intention was not to attack the subject or its founder but eventually compromised his integrity and the Code of Honor in general like Mike has to much the same degree.

      Personally I don’t consider either of them suppressive but are to a large degree PTS and they will continue to be PTS until they either handle or disconnect which it seems they are both unwilling to do.

      Fact is that it’s easy to go PTS if one doesn’t keep one’s Code of Honor in. I mean look at the Church.

      I think Jim made a very good point that Marty, Mike and Miscavige were dramatizing a GPM. One starts at the beginning of a GPM opposing whatever goal that they feel is opposed to theirs or whomever they conceive is an opposition terminal and eventually become it.

      • Hi RV 🙂 Yep, much of what you say is spot on. The nastiness, and hostility emanating from this pair, ultimately caused me to walk outta those “once proud supporters of standard LRH tech delivery”.

        That’s history now. The “cases” still not handled though.

        How could they be? If one effectively abandons the trusting pc / trusted auditor covenant?

        Methinks there’s a sh– load of undisclosed “contra-survival” stuff buried there, which explains the responses we have just touched on here.

        Oh well, “life” doles out its own lessons in these matters, hey?

        –racing. 🙂

        • True Dat RIB,

          Good lecture I listened to way back when I did the FPRD Course was on Individuation which could be applied to Marty, Mike and Dave.

          As far as I know nobody can get anywhere near these guys with an e-meter.

          I mean sure there are all kinds of people in the field who can’t get auditing just because they are not geographically situated near any auditors.

          But these guys won’t get auditing.

      • “Suppressive groups are defined as those which seek to destroy Scientology or which specialize in injuring or killing persons or damaging their cases or which advocate suppression of mankind.

        It does not matter whether the person so connected disconnects or handles, or whether the connection has been previously severed. …

        If a person was a member and left, IT STILL REMAINS SUCH A PERSON MUST HAVE HAD SOME BASIC AGREEMENT WITH THE MOTIVES OF THE SUPPRESSIVE GROUP.” (HCO PL 29 June 68, Enrollment in Suppressive Groups) (Emphasis added)

  4. “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.” LRH

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

  5. I had a email come in regarding a Class 12, I assume that is the one you are referring to.

    About two years ago I got a very similar one about Trey Lotz. I believe both of these disinformation campaigns from the church in their on going scorched earth policy on anyone who has escaped the confines of their control.

    Just the other day I think the real fellow who got this going about you Lana showed up at Mike Rinders and took a shot at me for being,”…from MS2″. Actually I am from Montana as far as I am concerned.

    Anyway,” being from MS2″ got me this,” Don’t waste your breath with Kfrancis , dear Espiando ; she is from MS2 , and that says it all.”

    It’s kinda sad because 1st I am not a woman ( Ha…!) and more importantly this sort of thing just divides folks into separate camps that are different enough that communication with that other camp ” over there “is just a waist of breath”.

    Love what you do Lana, you’re not the problem, you are trying to do something about it for real.

    • Ah KFrancis — yes, I saw that comment and got a chuckle from it. Deary me… some of these complainers really just need to find that first postulate and as-is it, so they can move on.

      Trying to paint MS2 and anyone who comments or follows or contributes as a cultist, non-thinking sheeple is getting a little old at this point. These same people are intolerant of anything other than their own reality, which is very limited. In a world with so many cultures, belief systems and faiths, it is not a great position to assume.

    • KF,

      I’m very familiar with this exercise. It used to happen a lot on ARS. The assertion was that if one wasn’t critical of the Tech and Ron then one must be an OSA plant.

      All it is really is another form of ad hominem. Instead of discussing any valid points the commenter brings up they accuse them of being part of some kind of “conspiracy”.

      The fact is that OSA exploits this paranoia to sow discord in the field. In fact its the same “tech” the NSA and other alphabet soup agencies use against any group they consider a “threat”.

      In other words it isn’t Scientology.

      Also it is very evident that anything being discussed has stepped on a few toes (which are rather tender these days from all those foot bullets 🙂 ) over there when one gets one of these poison pen emails from an “anonymous” source.

      What it does is divert the group from discussing things that might be producing Tone Arm Action into attacking each other to rout out the suspected spies and traitors.

      Works wonderfully. In fact KGB used this technique to shut down the Soviet desk. Their campaign was so effective that CIA had no idea that the USSR was on the verge of collapse and found out about it through CNN like everybody else.

      So much for “America’s Premier Intelligence Agency” 🙂

    • KF,
      The dramo of all of this is getting clearer and clearer to me as I study the GPM and how a postulate for a game devolves into a mish-mash of valences agin each other with a flip from one side to the other, back and forth until the whole thing runs out and sits as “blob”. Then the next one begins with a postulate of game.

      The one you refer to is this sort of devolved thing where it’s hard to tell who is being what in the flip flop as that particular character goes from one to the other in a dizzying speed of valance shifting.

      In the game you have on the one hand, “OSA” is the baddie valence and must be opposed for the good of all that is good. From the “OSA” side, they ARE the good guys and the “miscreants”, the ones who are “anti” or identified by “OSA” as such, have to be taken out.

      All of this turmoil is apparently over “Scientology”. Only thing is, it isn’t Scientology it’s about. Each side has an A=A and have mistaken Scientology for some other earlier something in their Bank.

      DM’s Church of Scientology Vs M&M and the “anti-Scientology” camp is a game over something that isn’t Scientology. Neither side has understood the subject they are fighting about.

  6. Lana:

    You go girl.

    The being who is ready will walk off this planet this lifetime minus case + abilities, the one who is not ready will walk as they are, as they will.

    Everything going on, all we see in Corporate Scientology and in the field are the sideshows at the carnival called Earth.

    The truth is the truth is the truth, for each being. No amount of money, barking, grandstanding, wishing or denying can/will ever make a frog a Prince, or a Princess less than who and what she really is.

    Existence on Earth and beyond has a WARNING LABEL: You win, you loose or you draw. Nobody in the game is exempt, all penalties apply, all rewards are irrevocable.

    The oddity one finds written into the essence of The Tech, standardly delivered and received is this:

    There is one more level in the game, never quite imagined before now. It is that there are those beings who will not walk off the planet at all, they will soar and continue to rise ever greater heights.

    Now as opinions go, I’d say your wings look very nicely feathered and fluffed to me, Lana.

    You go girl!

    • Your comment reminded me of a great article from Mark Shreffler a couple of years ago, which talks about the reactive mind and how THAT is the actual enemy and correct target.

      Maybe a reader can help me relocate it (almost 500 articles now, and some tend to get buried and hard to find).

      You are right about the carnival called Earth — and if we can remain focused on tackling the Reactive Mind as the enemy that causes continual strife, violence, insanity and criminality, then we will start to make headway. 🙂

      Thanks for being here Ren. Love your comments and views.

  7. Good for you Lana, especially for your wise, balanced view of the CofS and for not seeking “trust”. (What kind of person needs desperately to be trusted? A con-man, of course.)

    A bit surprised that OSA can still send poison-pen emails, I thought they were getting down below the 1.1 band these days.

    I don’t usually comment here because I might get into arguments with some of your regulars. If you want to classify me with the “Abandoned Scientology” field, that’s okay. But I still think that anyone who wants to learn about the mind and spirit needs to read LRH, just as a student of physics cannot ignore Newton or a student of maths cannot ignore Pythagoras. Once a truth has been stated it’s there for all time, whatever other truths may later be found.

      • That’s right Lana.

        We dust it up, duke it out and even get into a full blown Donnybrook quite often sometimes.

        Especially on some of the most arcane points anyone could possibly imagine.

        But hey.

        I think Ron said something about Thetans being a disagreeable bunch unless one puts something there they can agree on like…..

        hmmmmm.

        Scientology 🙂

  8. Thank you Lana.
    Very well written. That’s the kind of stirring the pot the Email was intended to handle.
    I can tell you that at least 15 people wrote to Hushmail naming the “Church” of Scientology International (OSA) as the perpetrator of using their platform (Hushmail) to send out Hate mail.
    It is actually against Hushmail policy and rules to allow members to have an account to target someone.
    The account was quickly closed. No data as to whether Hushmail shut down the account or whether the OSA operative did his dirty work and then shut it down.
    Hushmail has previously had numerous complaints on Scientology In and is on to this.
    But hilarious that an anonymous person would write a hate email and vanish (account closed) within hours and not assume that recipients would not know it was OSA. classvaud@hushmail.com Bogus OSA operative account gone and vanished.
    It backfired, have Independent Scientologists who read the OSA hate mail bonded and tightened their line with me even further. Oh well.
    I am sorry a troublemaker fell for it and involved you.
    Bright Blessings and all good wishes to you.
    Karen

    • Great to see you posting here, Karen!
      I agree. Furthermore, I believe that OSA has been third partying Scientologists who practice Scientology outside of the church and find value in the teachings of LRH for years. Their strategy seems to be “divide and conquer”. I also think that, unfortunately, they have had a few successes at this endeavor amidst their numerous “food bullets”.
      We must remain vigilant and spot these activities as Lana has done, because we actually need every one of us to keep Scientology (the subject) alive and being applied.
      ~Karl

      • Personally I think OSA’s or more accurately those who have infiltrated and seized control of the Organization per the policy on Infiltration is their fear that the field may cohere into a viable reform movement of some kind.

        So they are using the old “tech” of divide and conquer or Balkanization or disruption which has very limited workability i.e. it seems to work just like any other squirrel “technology”.

        Another aspect we should look at is not just their efforts to label other Scientologists as “apostates” but also attempts to “snitch jacket” Scientologists by making it appear that they are OSA operatives.

        Much of this “tech” being used of more accurately abused is covered in the PR Series, Sun Tzu’s Art of War , James McCargar’s A Short Course on the Secret War and various GO Directives many that have since been labeled OSA Network Orders which are hard to obtain but still a few can be found here:

        http://www.freezone.de/english/timetrack/data/policies/index.htm

        Like that old saying goes “knowledge is power”

    • Karen,
      Let’s not mince words, you are actively involved in stirring the pot at least as much as OSA is doing it.

      Sitting at some sort of faux “pan-determinism” position in this GPM dramo of DM’s Church of Scientology Vs M&M et al, is disingenuous on your part. You have skin in this game and perpetuate it as much if not more than many.

      You regularly contribute to the fray. Playing both sides in an aberrated game that has zip, zero, nada to do with actual Scientology.

      Take this comment as a motivator if you will. It would be better to cease the PT continuation of this destructive games condition and take some real responsibility for the current situation. Especially for you, as someone who has studied GPMs and should know better by now.

      • Come on, Jim. You sound like a crotchety old grouch!
        And I realize that you might even proudly admit to that. 🙂

        But Jim, Karen is really a very nice person.
        She sent a theta message validating Lana with added detailed information about hushmail’s policies.

        Is it not better to accept olive branches and compliments offered graciously?

        As Hulk Hogan would say, “…anything less would be uncivilized.”

        ~Karl

      • Hey Jim. Karen stands tall. Just like Lana. Both have the courage of their convictions. Both are fighting the “good fight”. You have come a long way, in your own increased viewpoint capacity. So what about putting yourself in Karen’s shoes? Then take another look at what you have written to her.. IMHO, that was totally uncalled for. Please show some respect for this amazing being, will you, Sir?

        — racing.

        • Something to keep in mind (and this is not directed at Jim):

          “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)

          • A great reminder there, Chris. Not the easiest thing to do, though easily said. These silly fire-fights that rage on and on within blogs at large. They would run-out of steam pretty sharply, were one to just simply ‘get’ the simplicity of the factors you’ve just stated.
            As is (ness) pulls the release-cord on any ‘resistance’ right? 😀

            • Very true, Calvin. Just imagine if this was applied on a global scale to groups, such as ISIL and France or Syria, Russia and the US. Ron once wrote that a possible solution was to have the capital of each opponent in the opposite country. He also said (additionally to the data Jim’s posted on GPMs recently) that fights and such occur when one cannot BE the other person/group.

              Scientology, applied, truly could change the world. But the “pc” would have to be willing to go into session. 😉

        • Calvin,
          Chris’s observation is more to the point I’m making. Responsibility is a quite something and lack of it sits at the core of disability.

          We’ve all experienced plenty of motivators. Scientology is a new thing in that rather than dwell on the horrible things done to us, the real answer lies just ahead of that – what have we done that we have withheld and in so doing lessened our capacity for doing anything.

          The blogs you refer to have devolved to “motivator mania”. Both sides of this aberrated game. Some of these ‘orrible things are factual, while the majority are overblown or indeed complete fictions.

          They have nothing to do with Scientology. In Scientology it’s a return to cause over the Dynamics and that surely isn’t attained by dwelling on being effect. Is it?

          Look at it from the perspective of the short quote Chris gave. Any trouble, and hardship, any tragic and terrible thing experienced by any being who is in this universe – you, me, Karen among us all – has a key lying there that opens the door to freedom from any adverse effect.

          Motivators persist as they lock up against overts and in that balance you have a timeless thing that floats along, sucking up the life forces and making for hell on earth. Compassion for another’s suffering would be better served by returning them to cause over that suffering.

          It’s time to get up and over this tired old game. Don’t you think?

          • Much so, Jim. Though, try telling any of this to a guy / gal with a belt laden with explosives threatening to detonate right in front of you.

            That’s when the Ol’ man’s words would suddenly hit you in a rush”
            — ” Your only crime is being there! ” 😀

  9. By the way probably the best policy is to be like Fox Mulder and trust no 1.

    Just kidding 🙂

    But really how can anyone trust an email sent from an anonymous source that’s nothing but natter.

    I mean you guys at OSA should really do a retread. Probably a retrain wouldn’t hurt.

    Here’s a bright idea!

    Try applying policy.

  10. LM:

    I’ve tracked you since the beginning of MS2. If someone tried to convince me you were some OSA operative or otherwise some sort of 1.1 crumb, I’d have to laugh.

    When MS2 first started, there were people (starting with Marty) who bad mouthed the effort. I had read through the founding documents, and I could find nothing to complain about. Most particularly, the purpose of the activity was a worthwhile one. Even if you weren’t inclined to join the effort (back then there was a membership fee), the idea that one would object to the existence of the group seemed ludicrous to me. But it did act as a handy test for the people in the Field. If you objected to the mere effort, you were someone of questionable value in my opinion. If not an outright enemy of LRH and/or Standard Tech.

    One thing to consider– it may be that you (Lana) have a certain ethics presence that follows you around. I apparently have this problem as well. It’s a mystery to me where people get this idea about me, since I’m pretty much a big goof (well, really more like a surfer dude, even though I’ve never surfed and I have no hair). But I have had quite a few people take an instant dislike to me over the years as a result of this. Apparently I miss withholds just by showing up somehow. Anyway, only you can judge whether such a thing applies to you. But if it does, it might help explain some undeserved attacks.

    Anyway, if you ever need a character witness, I’m there.

    Paul

      • LM:

        Well, it’s really more of a spiritual than a physical image. I’ve looked at myself (personality wise) from the viewpoint of people in my environment most of my life, and the “surfer dude” thing seems to be what I think most people see. And I really do have a thing for colorful Hawaiian shirts. That’d be my uniform if I had one.

        Of course, can you just image this fat bald drill sergeant type going down the beach yelling at the surfers to line up their boards properly? That would be something. 😉

        Paul

    • Jonathon,
      Good point. This is part of my earlier article on GPMs and “the collection of valences known as the Goals Problem Mass.”*

      There are valences out of GPMs dramatized by beings playing this game. Sooner, or perhaps way later for some, with good auditing and training and working their way up and outta this stuff they’ll see this.

      If Scientology is applied and carried through then all those valences go and in this game, everybody wins.

      *HCOB 17 Jan 62, Iss II, Responsibility Again.

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