Current Bridge and Available Materials?

[guanoloco]

i don't think you can assume that mentally troubled people would be that consistent (the woman who claims to be Marty's real wife is an outlier).

and now we have reports c. 1980 of the same sort thing -- paranoid imaginings of people coming in during his sleep and doing things to try to harm him in some way. except there was no purpose to it then, it was just delusional symptoms of a 'mental case'.



they smelled wrong? he had a thing about being hypersensitive to smells -- things like (supposed) laundry residue that no one else could smell, and required a bizarre number of extra rinsings -- right?



it might not have occurred to you guys, but there are times when your feet can swell a bit. i experience it including after long airline flights when i've kicked my shoes off like to sleep, and an old man like him with health problems certainly could have had some issue that caused it. but what sort of person jumps to the paranoid accusation that it was something devious done to them?

He and Mary Sue did the exact same ploy using the IRS to get his enemies.

This one blew up in their face.

The FBI letters are malicious intent. Cowboy's story is merely pathetic. Also, this paranoia didn't go away or stop. It worsened.

 

[I M Dex]

This was bugging me, so I looked up Cowboy's original post about it on ESMB 1. He mentions the smaller shoe (doesn't specify 1/2 a size), nothing about replacing everything with an exact duplicate.

View attachment 20986

https://forum.exscn.net/threads/trepidatious.27909/post-707214

Bear in mind, just 'cause you're paranoid, that doesn't mean they aren't out to get you

 

[marra]

All this talk about Clear has triggered a long-lost memory which I think may be of interest to someone so I'll relate it here.

Just before I joined Sunderland Org in the UK they sent two guys to AOSH UK to train as auditors and they expected them to audit each other to Clear during their training. When they came back after a few years they were the only trained auditors in the org and possibly the only Clears also, so they were considered to be very special.

Not long after they returned I became a public scientologist and I trained at Sunderland to be a Class 5 auditor and Case Supervisor. By this time, one of these guys was the OES and the other was the HES. Anyone who knows about the structure of a scientology org will know that this means between the two of them they were in charge of almost all areas of the org.

Years later I was tasked by the ED to do a FES (Folder Error Summary) of all the OES's pc folders. This meant retrieving them from AOSH UK and then going through every single auditing session in every folder to look for errors.

What I found was both amusing and shocking.

A typical exchange from a session with the, now OES, as a pc and the, now HES, as auditor:

Auditor: "We are now going to run (specific process)"

PC: "Oh, I don't think we need to do that. I'm fine on that subject".

Auditor: "Okay, we'll go on to the next one"

This kind of thing was happening throughout his auditing and when I concluded the FES I stated: "This pc has had no auditing".

It was also obvious from the exchanges between them that they had both had sexual relations with the same woman at the org and this was the cause of some embarrassment between them which caused them both to steer away from that subject in session. In scientology this is known as "mutual out ruds".

I have no idea how they completed their training and even attested to Clear but they both did.

 

[Reyne Mayer]

Auditor: "We are now going to run (specific process)"

PC: "Oh, I don't think we need to do that. I'm fine on that subject".

doesn't that actually get away from the classic problem of the auditor ending up evaluating for the PC (in violation of their code), and running them on one-size-fits-all processes -- even though it may take it too far?

p.s. i'm really curious, when you were at Sunderland how big was the org -- like how many active public and staff?

 

[onceuponatime]

This only just occurred to me now, but can you imagine how incensed Hubbard must have been about all the lost revenue with almost everybody bypassing spending 10's of thousand$ on NED auditing? He must have been beside himself with rage. I do recall David Mayo, as Senior C/S Int, going out on mission to orgs to give a talk on how the bulk of these "natural clear" attests were false, and everybody will need to do NED. I remember well how stressed, even hostile he was at my org, at least in my presence. I merely took a look at him and he stared daggers at me. Pissed me off, and later on I found a way to disrespect him to his face. Of course, much later I came to appreciate the impossible situation he was in.

I'm not sure he'd be upset about lost revenue, I think the upper level stuff was more lucrative, he got a bigger piece of the pie. If a PC is doing lower level actions at an org or mission how much would end up in his pocket? I think for OT levels it was a much straighter line right to his bank account.

 

[I M Dex]

I'm not sure he'd be upset about lost revenue, I think the upper level stuff was more lucrative, he got a bigger piece of the pie. If a PC is doing lower level actions at an org or mission how much would end up in his pocket? I think for OT levels it was a much straighter line right to his bank account.

Think about how outraged he got about the missions making money that didn't go to him, he had the mission network raped, pillaged and destroyed.

 

[Reyne Mayer]

I think the upper level stuff was more lucrative, he got a bigger piece of the pie. If a PC is doing lower level actions at an org or mission how much would end up in his pocket?

i think it likely that as the fading of the counterculture and youth movement trigged situations of financial 'emergency' in the '70s, where he wasn't even rationally looking at the real causes to begin with, someone with a history of delusional belief in persecution and resulting scapegoating, did paranoid and greedy things that may not have entirely made sense.

also, i figure the point was to end up driving more people more quickly into his orgs for the expensive stuff that he took the full cut of.

 

[marra]

doesn't that actually get away from the classic problem of the auditor ending up evaluating for the PC (in violation of their code), and running them on one-size-fits-all processes -- even though it may take it too far?

p.s. i'm really curious, when you were at Sunderland how big was the org -- like how many active public and staff?

Doing what the pc suggests is called Q&A in scientology and it is an auditing High Crime.

As a public, my only knowledge of staff and public numbers is based on how many people I saw when I was in the org so it isn't scientific. Also, I don't want to specify the time period because it will help to identify the people in my story, which I don't want to do because that information is taken from pc folders and is therefore confidential. My best guess is about 6 full-time and 6 part-time staff and maybe 30/40 public, most of whom rarely did any services.

 

[pineapple]

doesn't that actually get away from the classic problem of the auditor ending up evaluating for the PC (in violation of their code), and running them on one-size-fits-all processes -- even though it may take it too far?

Doing what the pc suggests is called Q&A in scientology and it is an auditing High Crime.

Well, there's also "I promise to audit the pc in front of me and not to audit some imagined case," from some older version of the Auditor's Code.

And LRH, shockingly, said as late as 1968 that, "some people could start at Grade IV and do just fine." (!)

I once, during Life Repair, told my auditor I didn't think we needed to run something 'cause I didn't have much charge on it, and we ended up not doing it. (I probably F/N'ed when I said it.)

Unfortunately, scn increasingly tended to force people to run things they weren't interested in, sometimes for hundreds of hours. The most outstanding example is the interminable drug RD's commonly done in the 70's.

I can dig that you can't let the pc opt out of everything, though ...

ETA: Changed "1967" to "1968" in 2nd para. It's HCOB 2 Nov 1968R, "Case Supervisor Class VIII The Basic Processes" where he makes the remark.

 

[Hatshepsut]

Unfortunately, scn increasingly tended to force people to run things they weren't interested in, sometimes for hundreds of hours. The most outstanding example is the interminable drug RD's commonly done in the 70's.

I can dig that you can't let the pc opt out of everything, though ...

ETA: Changed "1967" to "1968" in 2nd para. It's HCOB 2 Nov 1968R, "Case Supervisor Class VIII The Basic Processes" where he makes the remark.

In 1989, the date when Greg Wilhere gave his talk on the L's, a LOT of folks had the feeling of long Bridges without interest. The DRD was the most dragged out, I agree.

What ever happened to the numbers of players 'winning' at the subject of theta clearing.? The early to mid 80s seemed to have plenty. Was an invisible glass ceiling forming for pieces and broken pieces?. To me, it almost seems a similar thing is happening across society and politics with our caste of makers of games getting worried.

Good video about the downward spiral. I had forgotten how much you have to dig to reach that authentic spirit inside us which has submerged beneath the lies and agreements. You have to really zero in on him, buried in the blended nuances. Are there any still looking for such a being in today's world of identity politics, where our pieces are shoved around the board unawares of the end game.

 

[marra]

Well, there's also "I promise to audit the pc in front of me and not to audit some imagined case," from some older version of the Auditor's Code.

And LRH, shockingly, said as late as 1968 that, "some people could start at Grade IV and do just fine." (!)

I once, during Life Repair, told my auditor I didn't think we needed to run something 'cause I didn't have much charge on it, and we ended up not doing it. (I probably F/N'ed when I said it.)

Unfortunately, scn increasingly tended to force people to run things they weren't interested in, sometimes for hundreds of hours. The most outstanding example is the interminable drug RD's commonly done in the 70's.

I can dig that you can't let the pc opt out of everything, though ...

ETA: Changed "1967" to "1968" in 2nd para. It's HCOB 2 Nov 1968R, "Case Supervisor Class VIII The Basic Processes" where he makes the remark.

Yes, you "audit the pc in front of you and not some imagined case" but you are confusing the issue here. The c/s gets information about the pc from actions such as having him/her audited on a Green Form or suchlike (it's been over 20 years since I last thought about this stuff). The c/s then decides what the auditing actions are going to be and the auditor follows the c/s instructions. The auditor does not follow the pc's instructions. Auditors spend many hours in training how to deal with distractions in a session such as the pc saying what they think they should be audited on. At that stage in the proceedings it doesn't matter what the pc thinks. Decisions have already been made.

When I eventually blew from the org, the final straw was a situation just like this. I was a volunteer auditor, auditing a paying member of public and, as a qualified c/s myself, I disagreed with what the auditing action was. I followed standard tech and reported my thoughts to the c/s at the end of each session. His response was to give me a cramming order at the end of each session. These orders, along with the auditing actions I was being forced to do, were, in my opinion, out-tech and were simply punishing the auditor, which is a c/s high crime.

There is an HCOB called Auditor's Rights which says that if an auditor feels he cannot help the pc by continuing with the current auditing action, the auditor is within his/her rights to notify the c/s that they refuse to continue with this auditing. However, they must make it clear to the c/s that they are willing to audit someone else instead.

I did this exactly per the HCOB and the c/s went nuts and gave me a 3-page cram. I told him to fuck off and I left the org with him chasing after me. I was a highly trained auditor and c/s and was almost single-handedly keeping the org going by volunteering as an auditor and c/s. Their response was to treat me like shit.

Not long after, the c/s became overwhelmed by the pressure of trying to keep his stats up and he became seriously ill and died. I would have preferred it if he had just left like I did.

 

[Enthetan]

Think about how outraged he got about the missions making money that didn't go to him, he had the mission network raped, pillaged and destroyed.

Don't forget field auditors, whom he also hated.

Missions and field auditors were only (only) assessed 10% of gross. Orgs sent up more, and S.O. service orgs sent up most.

 

[onceuponatime]

Yes, you "audit the pc in front of you and not some imagined case" but you are confusing the issue here. The c/s gets information about the pc from actions such as having him/her audited on a Green Form or suchlike (it's been over 20 years since I last thought about this stuff). The c/s then decides what the auditing actions are going to be and the auditor follows the c/s instructions. The auditor does not follow the pc's instructions. Auditors spend many hours in training how to deal with distractions in a session such as the pc saying what they think they should be audited on. At that stage in the proceedings it doesn't matter what the pc thinks. Decisions have already been made.

When I eventually blew from the org, the final straw was a situation just like this. I was a volunteer auditor, auditing a paying member of public and, as a qualified c/s myself, I disagreed with what the auditing action was. I followed standard tech and reported my thoughts to the c/s at the end of each session. His response was to give me a cramming order at the end of each session. These orders, along with the auditing actions I was being forced to do, were, in my opinion, out-tech and were simply punishing the auditor, which is a c/s high crime.

There is an HCOB called Auditor's Rights which says that if an auditor feels he cannot help the pc by continuing with the current auditing action, the auditor is within his/her rights to notify the c/s that they refuse to continue with this auditing. However, they must make it clear to the c/s that they are willing to audit someone else instead.

I did this exactly per the HCOB and the c/s went nuts and gave me a 3-page cram. I told him to fuck off and I left the org with him chasing after me. I was a highly trained auditor and c/s and was almost single-handedly keeping the org going by volunteering as an auditor and c/s. Their response was to treat me like shit.

Not long after, the c/s became overwhelmed by the pressure of trying to keep his stats up and he became seriously ill and died. I would have preferred it if he had just left like I did.

They "solved" the Auditors Rights with Auditors Rights Modified. Imagine auditors having rights, what a crazy concept. Next thing you know staff and SO members will start thinking they have rights.

Your story is all too typical of how Scientology shoots itself in the foot. They have people willing to help them and work for no pay, and then Scientology treats them like assholes. Little tip Scientology, if someone is working for you for free don't be a jerk about it. Just say thank you and let them contribute.

 

[I M Dex]

"Audit the pc in front of you and not some imagined case" is one of many examples of Hubbard conning everyone by giving lip service to a principle while doing the opposite. Hubbard's "bridge" is a set generic pro-forma sequence of unvariable "levels" dictated by a one-size-fits-all grade chart" that only superficially allows for addressing the individual as an individual. To actually, meaningfully take up what is truly relevant for the individual would involve actually listening to them and processing accordingly with what they voice. This is specifically and emphatically blasted in Scientology training as "the disease of Q&A", thus ensuring that trained auditors and case supervisors will see this common sense approach as "idiotic" and "ruinous". This is why I've had such a multitude of clients come to me seeking what they hoped and expected to accomplish through "auditing" and never did, after having done all or most of Scientology's "bridge", through their "OT levels". Scientology is all about "auditing" Hubbard's projection of a "standard case", which is as imaginary as it gets, and not you.

 

[Reyne Mayer]

Scientology is all about "auditing" Hubbard's projection of a "standard case", which is as imaginary as it gets, and not you.

and has has been said by many over time, isn't that basically LRH's own case?

that would of course have him falling into the same trap as those he liked to criticize and put down -- or even hate -- like Freud, who assumed that his somewhat confused and twisted upper class Viennese upbringing, particularly regarding sexuality in the Victorian era, should be the 'standard'....

 

[guanoloco]

Doing what the pc suggests is called Q&A in scientology and it is an auditing High Crime.

As a public, my only knowledge of staff and public numbers is based on how many people I saw when I was in the org so it isn't scientific. Also, I don't want to specify the time period because it will help to identify the people in my story, which I don't want to do because that information is taken from pc folders and is therefore confidential. My best guess is about 6 full-time and 6 part-time staff and maybe 30/40 public, most of whom rarely did any services.

...we mustn't rabbit...

 

[Type4_PTS]

They "solved" the Auditors Rights with Auditors Rights Modified. Imagine auditors having rights, what a crazy concept. Next thing you know staff and SO members will start thinking they have rights.

Your story is all too typical of how Scientology shoots itself in the foot. They have people willing to help them and work for no pay, and then Scientology treats them like assholes. Little tip Scientology, if someone is working for you for free don't be a jerk about it. Just say thank you and let them contribute.

This brings back a memory of my final days of good standing as a Scientologist. I was on the RPF and after doing some conditions I decided that I was going to leave the Sea Org. I still was a true believer at that point and had a very strong intention to work as an FSM, not just for the Class V or Advanced Orgs, but also for all the other orgs including Social Coordination International and the SMI Expansion Office which both were involved in expanding Scientology into other countries. And I clearly expressed this sincere desire when doing the condition formulas.

Apparently, though I committed a High Crime of deciding to leave the Sea Org and a few short weeks thereafter was routed to HCO Security who handed me an SP Declare.

I am truly grateful now that they did that as it put me on a real path to total freedom. I also think it's hilarious that they would declare someone who was at the time truly intent on working to expand Scientology.

 

[Enthetan]

Apparently, though I committed a High Crime of deciding to leave the Sea Org and a few short weeks thereafter was routed to HCO Security who handed me an SP Declare.

I am truly grateful now that they did that as it put me on a real path to total freedom. I also think it's hilarious that they would declare someone who was at the time truly intent on working to expand Scientology.

Per HCO PL "Sea Org Resignation", anyone resigning from the SO is an out-ethics degraded being.

To allow a resigned SO member to show that policy as visibly bullshit, could not be tolerated.

 

[guanoloco]

This brings back a memory of my final days of good standing as a Scientologist. I was on the RPF and after doing some conditions I decided that I was going to leave the Sea Org. I still was a true believer at that point and had a very strong intention to work as an FSM, not just for the Class V or Advanced Orgs, but also for all the other orgs including Social Coordination International and the SMI Expansion Office which both were involved in expanding Scientology into other countries. And I clearly expressed this sincere desire when doing the condition formulas.

Apparently, though I committed a High Crime of deciding to leave the Sea Org and a few short weeks thereafter was routed to HCO Security who handed me an SP Declare.

I am truly grateful now that they did that as it put me on a real path to total freedom. I also think it's hilarious that they would declare someone who was at the time truly intent on working to expand Scientology.

Here's what they did for you:

Immunity, Pathology, and Cure - Ideological Possession

Fast cures tend to be triggered by a catastrophic failure of one or more of the above benefits to the afflicted individual. This may occur when, despite the highly motivated perception and reasoning of the possessed individual, she experiences an unexpected, painful, and shocking outcome of an ideologically motivated action. The painful shock activates the Love of Truth long enough to locate the cause of the pain, forcing the afflicted to admit the symptoms, and therefore identify the disease for what it is, effecting the rapid cure.​

​

​

Slow cures tend to involve a rising awareness by one afflicted individual of the same disease in friends or others with whom she identifies. This can be induced when the individual sees inconsistencies in those others’ words and actions that cause direct harm to others and to the stated goals of the possessing ideology. (In theory, this slow cure could be induced by observations of one’s own actions under ideological possession, but this is prevented by the self-righteousness that is felt when one acts in the grip of the disease.)​

​

The Diagnosis and Treatment of Ideological Possession

With apologies to Dr. Peterson, and an open invitation to him to amend and augment the following (he is the clinician, after all), here, for diagnostic purposes, is a list of symptoms of ideological possession—that most fatal of epistemic diseases.

fee.org

It's the same story for all of us in one shape or another.

A sure sign of a cult is the existence of apostates and victims.

Scientology has both...Islam has both and the Queer Woke Cult has both. The apostates have to hide and protect themselves from further abuse and victimization.

 

[Type4_PTS]

Per HCO PL "Sea Org Resignation", anyone resigning from the SO is an out-ethics degraded being.

To allow a resigned SO member to show that policy as visibly bullshit, could not be tolerated.

If I had the ability at the time to make a large donation then maybe would have tolerated it.