I Can Dream, Can't I?

Veda

Well-known member
Something tells me you're being sarcastic, but in case you're not - thank you. These are made for my friends who actually do think they're funny, but I thought this was worthy of sharing.
I wasn't being sarcastic.

You have a good sense of humor.

The graphic reminded me of my own thoughts, while a new Scientologist, long ago.

A friend of mine, who would later join the Guardians Office (now renamed OSA) very much disliked people labelled as "squirrels." At the time, premier amongst the "squirrels," was a fellow named Horner whose "squirrel" group was named "Eductivism."

Somehow, my friend had placed himself on the Eductivism mailing list, and when he'd receive the monthly Eductivism newsletter, after contemptuously looking it over, he'd give it to me, and I'd, contemptuously, look it over, and then throw it away.

I can recall having a a vivid fantasy of Horner driving his car off a steep cliff, which I regarded with great pleasure and satisfaction.

At the time the message coming from the mysterious Flagship, cruising somewhere in the vicinity of the Mediterranean, and reflected in the occasional, lucky, staff members who had been sent for training at the Flagship, was the attitude expressed in the 1965 Keeping Scientology Working, and in other Hubbard writings, which emphasized unreasonableness and ruthlessness on behalf of Mankind's only hope: Standard - On Source - Scientology.

I had read both the 1951 book Science of Survival - which advocated isolation, and even extermination, for the "low toned" (interchangeable with uncooperative with Scientology) - and also the Manual on Dissemination of Material, of March 1955. (It didn't mention "squirrels" or "squirrelling" in the Science of Survival, but they were obviously included amongst the "low toned.")

Quoting from the 1955 Manual on Dissemination:

...Always attack... if you discover that some group calling itself 'precept processing' has set up and established a series of meetings in your area, you should do all you can to make things interesting for them... The least that could be done in such as area is the placement of a suit against them... The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than to win.

The law can be used very easily to harass... If possible, of course, ruin him utterly...

Ten years later, in an Executive Letter of 27 September of 1965, there were more instructions for Scientologists on how to deal with those who defiantly did unauthorized auditing:

Treatment - They are each Fair Game, can be sued or harassed.

Any meeting held by them should be torn up. The names of persons attending should be collected and they should be labelled SP...

Harass these people in any possible way...


Tear up any meetings and get the names of those attending and issue SP orders on them...


First published in 1968, the book Scientology Ethics featured long lists of Crimes and High Crimes:


"Suppressive acts include public disavowal of Scientology... public statements against Scientology... continued membership in a divergent group; continued adherence to a Suppressive Person or group..."


Below is also from1968, as published in the Auditor newspaper:


And this is a photo and caption from the Auditor newspaper of 1968:


And another photo and caption, from 1968, of a Class VIII student being thrown over the side of the ship into the sewage-laden dock water:




From Flag Order 909 of 1968:

The purpose of Ethics is:

TO REMOVE COUNTER-INTENTIONS FROM THE ENVIRONMENT.


And having accomplished that the purpose becomes

TO REMOVE OTHER-INTENTIONEDNESS FROM THE ENVIRONMENT...

This set the mood for the period, and it was accepted enthusiastically, and justified, as Scientologists knew they were just one step away from the top of (the then) Grade Chart.

Includes definition of Operating Thetan from L. Ron Hubbard

During the period of Scientology's greatest expansion, the top of "Bridge" Grade Chart was the ability to be TOTALLY FREE AND AT TOTAL CAUSE.

TOTAL POWER.

This, combined with the idea that each Scientologist is an Infinite Mind, was a tremendous ego rush for Scientologists.

1970 Grade Chart

To paraphrase Hubbard from the OEC volumes: "We can demand total discipline because we can deliver total freedom."

Every level of this Grade Chart was sold by registrars. People were recruited into Scientology, and the Sea Org, and some even sent their children to be servants for L. Ron Hubbard, because they believed what this Grade Chart, and what Hubbard over many years, told them.

The top level was OT 8.

Under ability gained, was: "Ability to be at cause knowingly and at will over thought, life, form, matter, energy, space, and time, subjective and objective."

Under ability lost was: "Freedom from inability to be totally free and at total cause as a being."

This was not presented as a hypothetical. It was sold as fact. This was when Scientology established itself.

Orgs were crowded.

Scientology Academies were overflowing.

And, amongst all this excitement, and expectation, was Horner and his Eductivism center, "squirreling," and jeopardize the juggernaut of Scientology.

Intolerable!


Postscript:


About Jack Horner: http://www.scientolipedia.org/info/Jack_Horner

Horner broke with Hubbard in the 1960s. He disagreed with the idea of Hubbard as the single "Source."

For his disobedience he was spied upon, hounded, and assaulted, and Fair Gamed in other ways.

Oddly enough, I had opportunity to speak with Horner on two occasions, once in 1983 and once in 1985.

Almost every notable person, who had been involved with Scientology, had been Declared Suppressive by that time, and he wasn't regarded as that strange anymore.

He turned out not be suppressive at all, and a pretty nice guy; and (circa 1970) OT 8 - which justified his having been Fair Gamed, and even exterminated - turned out not to have existed.





























 
1649985897991.png

1) That is an ABSOLUTE UNIT of an Ethics Officer.

1649985983522.png

2) Are people STILL seriously talking about getting thrown overboard? I don't care what anyone says - there is nothing about that that does not look fun. I wouldn't mind if it happened to me, BUT - Disqualified.

You folks who got to join the Sea Org, or even luckier, were born into Scientology took so much you had for granted. Maybe that contract meant nothing to you - but it would have meant the world to me to be able to sign that contract.
 

Tanchi

Well-known member
View attachment 17843

1) That is an ABSOLUTE UNIT of an Ethics Officer.

View attachment 17844

2) Are people STILL seriously talking about getting thrown overboard? I don't care what anyone says - there is nothing about that that does not look fun. I wouldn't mind if it happened to me, BUT - Disqualified.

You folks who got to join the Sea Org, or even luckier, were born into Scientology took so much you had for granted. Maybe that contract meant nothing to you - but it would have meant the world to me to be able to sign that contract.
Maybe Stephen Brackett thought it might be fun? Self overboarded himself?
 

Veda

Well-known member
View attachment 17843

1) That is an ABSOLUTE UNIT of an Ethics Officer.

View attachment 17844

2) Are people STILL seriously talking about getting thrown overboard? I don't care what anyone says - there is nothing about that that does not look fun.
It was a long drop into raw sewage. Not all the people, many of them older people, knew how to swim. Some were terrified. (All the while, Hubbard was filming it from the upper deck.)

Those from the 1950s, still believed Hubbard's written rejections - in the Axioms and elsewhere - of FORCE and PUNISHMENT, as old harmful practices. They did not expect crude and sadistic punishment at the "safest and sanest space on Earth."

Nor did the children - as young as four - expect extreme punishment such as the dangerous chain locker punishment.

I wouldn't mind if it happened to me,
I think you would have.

BUT - Disqualified.
You were lucky to have escaped it..

You folks who got to join the Sea Org, or even luckier, were born into Scientology took so much you had for granted. Maybe that contract meant nothing to you - but it would have meant the world to me to be able to sign that contract.
In the prior post, I was illustrating the atmosphere - milieu - that encouraged the mindset that condoned the killing of SPs and squirrels.
 

Veda

Well-known member
From another thread:

"...I am progressing in making my penance for that article... I am atoning for it."
How are you atoning ? Are you on a formal program? Do you have an "Ethics" condition?

Do you have an "Ethics" Officer?

Or "Case Officer" who oversees operatives?

A response would help clarify matters.
 
Top