How Scientology works: Re-stating the obvious

The other day, Mike Rinder posted an entry on Marty’s blog that gives a great illustration of the Scientology mind-set.

Mike posted a passage from LRH called “Invalidation.” In it, Hubbard basically says that people with dominating personalities either demand that others do what they say as a condition of a continued relationship, or belittle others in order to increase their perceived importance.

Except, in typical Hubbard fashion, what I’ve explained in one sentence, he stretches to well over five hundred words. And Scientologists confuse this verbosity for intelligence.

The concept Hubbard presents is not earth-shattering. It’s the basis of abusive relationships. (In fact, it’s the basis of Hubbard’s relationship with his Scientology followers – that man is weighed down, and that without Hubbard’s help, they can’t get out of the morass.) I’m sure that most of you, like me, have understood the basic concept since they were in their teens or twenties.

But Scientologists take this restatement of common sense as proof of Hubbard’s brilliance.

How does this happen? I have a theory, and it stems from the fact that the most ardent Scientologists are those that are born into the religion or are attracted to it in their teens or twenties – the time of life when we really start to figure life out. While us wogs are out experiencing life and learning these lessons first-hand, Scientologists are encouraged to turn inwards, reading LRH’s writings, listening to LRH’s lectures, and surrounding themselves with people who feel the same way.

We’ve all had “a-hah!” moments when we figure things out – when we suddenly realize, for example, that our dominating parent or partner was belittling us to make themselves seem more important, because in fact they have low self-images and feel that any importance they have must be manufactured. Maybe we figured it out on our own or maybe it was pointed out to us. It’s called an epiphany; Scientologists call it a “cog” or “cognition.” On the outside, we generally credit these epiphanies to our own understanding. Scientologists credit their “cogs” to the “technology” of LRH.

No wonder Scientologists think LRH is brilliant – and no wonder it’s so easy for the rest of us to see that he was a man of average intelligence at best.

Remember, Scientology preys on those who are looking for answers. Scientology’s streetside Personality Tests and slick TV ads are meant to ensnare those who are seeking out truths. Ever notice how few people become Scientologists in their 40s or 50s, and how those who dabble in it tend to drift away? That’s no coincidence. Scientology is designed to latch on to the needy. Inside LRH’s “Admin Tech” you’ll find LRH’s simple marketing philosophy: Do market research to find out what people want and then write ads promising them the answers.

Do you see the sense of what I’m saying? Of course you do, and there’s a reason for that: Most of you are either not Scientologists, or ex-Scios who have figured out how the scam works. It’s an easy leap for us, but nearly impossible to fathom for those who are still “in” – and by “in” I don’t mean “in the Church of Scientology,” but rather “in the Scientology mind-set.” People like Mike Rinder and Marty Rathbun actually do read essays like “Invalidation” and believe that Hubbard has some unusual insight into life. And when there’s a coincidence – like Hubbard’s first question dealing with height – they say things like Mike did: “Oh, how prescient LRH is.” (Note the use of present tense.) They really do believe this.

How do you explain this to a Scientologist? I’ve tried, pointing out to Scientology friends that much of LRH’s tech is just common sense and life experience. Their answer? “Yes, but nobody ever dived into it to the depth that LRH did.” In other words, no one else could be bothered to stretch one sentence into five hundred words. It’s enough to make you bang your head against the wall. If anyone has had any success explaining this to Scientologists, or if you’re an ex who cares to share how you figured it out, by all means, comment away.

The sad part is that Hubbard treats his followers just as he says in this essay: He explains everything and invalidates their ability to discover these things on our own. So sad, because figuring out life is half the fun of living, don’t you think?

ML,
Caliwog

Advertisements

63 responses to “How Scientology works: Re-stating the obvious

  1. I think there’s another key factor in the way Scientology works – “Stating the Opposite”.

    When I say “opposite” I mean Hubbard writes the opposite of how he or the Church really behaves.

    Yes, some would call this lying, and it is, but I’ve also noticed how diametrically opposite his teachings are to his own behavior, and that of the Church.

    These therefore aren’t small lies, white lies, they are complete and utter 100% contradictions.

    What’s interesting to me is that this is counter-intuitive. You would have thought that you could get away with white-lies much better than great big whoppers. But that’s not the case with Scientology. It seems the more outrageous the statement or claim, the further you are taking someone from reality, from the place where they could look objectively and say “hang on that can’t be right”.

    I think this has to be a major reason why Scientologists take something like ten years to sort themselves out even after they leave. It’s like they’ve been living 180 degrees to reality.

    For example, Hubbard said Scientologists had to think for themselves – now that’s an absolute whopper of a lie, and is 100% opposite to the reality of Scientology. But somehow it’s so perfectly opposite to the truth that it becomes true in the mind of the Scientologist.

    I think this is fundamental to the effectiveness of Scientology indoctrination once you’re in. Hubbard either states the obvious or states the complete opposite. Once you believe he is infallible it becomes impossible to spot the difference.

    It must be like walking through a hall of mirrors for a Scientologist trying to find their way out. Are they looking at a reflection or are they looking at reality? The reflections are 180 degrees to reality so they look kind of real.

    In a real hall of mirrors, the trick is to close your eyes since that particular sense has become unreliable and confusing, but there is no such trick for the Scientologist. It seems to be a case of getting out and letting time heal the mind.

    • Yep, this is something I noticed almost immediately when I started looking at LRH’s teachings vs. actions. I am still amazed at the fact that Hubbub was able to blatantly announce some of.his more abusive methods of control, even go into HOW he was doing it, and yet people revered him so much and found him to be “such a great guy” that they never noticed this fact. Part of me thinks it may have even started out as a game or a joke on his part, a challenge to see how much he could get away with despite laying it all out in front of them. I also kind of boiled down his technique to something akin to the “opposite” thing mentioned; whenever he wanted to get away with something, especially if it was directed toward his followers and would cause Scn to crumble if it was ever discovered (meaning it was done in secret), he would lecture on it and associate it with the opposite of Scn or himself. Since his followeds “knew” LRH to be so kind and stuff, “he would never act like THEY would!” End result is LRH’s behaviour can never be recognized as being the same as an SP’s, or psychiatrists’, etc. It’s not even that brilliant, it’s just amazing that so many people permitted this trick to work at all.

    • Helmuth, speaking for Boskone

      My favorite reflective lie is that auditing is absolutely nothing like hypnotism even though, book one Dianetic auditing at least, clearly uses all the classic elements of inducing a trace state, eye-movement during trance, and even post-hypnotic suggestions.

      Pointing this out frequently provokes a strong emotional reaction that “Auditing isn’t hypnosis, because in auditing you aren’t asleep!”, showing that they have deeply accepted Hubbard’s false definition of hypnosis/trance without questioning it.

  2. Jonathon Barbera

    Scientology is based on L. Ron Hubbard’s observations of life, the mind and the spirit. The most important of these observations are those found to be based on truth.

    What is obvious to you will not always be obvious to the next guy.

    And L. Ron Hubbard was not infallible. Just this morning I was reading a HCOB where he cancelled two other references and admits his error regarding the technology. There have been many lectures and references with similar statements by LRH.

    L. Ron Hubbard is right when his observations coincide with the truth about life. Unlike old-fashioned religions that were fixed into place upon their founding, Scientology evolved for over thirty years with many revisions and changes occurring. As a result, Scientology contains more accurate and applicable observations per square inch than the average religious or philosophy text.

    Finally, it must be stated that the earlier Scientologists were always encouraged to look for themselves and observe life directly without using LRH as a via. There are references where LRH welcomes the doubt of the student with the insistence of trying it out for oneself instead of merely relying on LRH’s word as gospel truth.

    • You really think that other religions were fixed in place at their founding? Are you honestly trying to tell me that Christian practice has been unchanged for two thousand years? Judaism and Hinduism are even older and while the underlying scripture hasn’t changed in a while — though the scriptures themselves evolved over a lot longer than thirty years –interpretation and practice certainly has.

      And do you know what? They are still changing.

      As I understand it, Scientologists are not allowed to interpret Scientology scripture nor change any practices.

      Within that framework, any ability to disagree with Hubbard is limited. You can choose not to follow a step but you can’t do something else in its place. Likewise, not doing a required step presumably limits your ability to progress. What happens then?

    • >Finally, it must be stated that the earlier Scientologists were always encouraged to look for themselves and observe life directly without using LRH as a via.

      But they were also told that if it didn’t work as LRH stated, they should re-study because they had an MU.

      Hubbard *says* Scientologists should think for themselves, but he also instructed them very carefully to reject beliefs that were counter to Scientology. I think Sid has a point, Jonathan. LRH was saying one thing, but directing his followers to do another.

      And regarding the truth – Hubbard gave his followers a get-out-of-jail-free card. “What’s true for you is true.”

      ML, CW

      • Jonathon Barbera

        I think the difference of opinion here has to do with what Scientology appears to be and what it really is.

        You could listen to every lecture and read every book and reference while only understanding a small part of what Scientology is. Scientology is really the result of processing. A person is transformed by Scientology — they don’t merely read about it.

        Imagine a guy who gets involved with Scientology because he wants to do more in life. Even without auditing, he will be coerced to contribute more time, money and effort to the church. You see? Even before he studies or receives auditing, he is already changing as a person to meet the demands of the organization.

        Scientology is not a passive subject. Studying it from an ivory tower is useless. Scientology must be applied before one sees results.

        For Scientology to be applied correctly, the various points of Keeping Scientology Working are kept in. I never interpreted KSW as covering everything LRH ever said or wrote. KSW, for me, is about the correct study and application of the tech as found in the HCOBs.

        When studying the tech, MUs are found and cleared. LRH didn’t care if you “believed” in the process you were going to run. It only mattered to him if the process was being run correctly as per the instructions.

        An atheist with no interest in Scientology would benefit from processing all the same. His needle on the meter will rise and fall like a Scientologist’s needle. As long as he was willing to answer the questions or follow the auditing commands, the session would work.

        That’s how I boil down all of Scientology and find it easy to dismiss the complaints from non-Scientologists. Scientology is about what processes will or won’t bite, how to get the TA into a good range, how to clean a needle, how to F/N a process, etc. Whereas all of the commentary about politics or psychs are merely a footnote to the tech.

        The meter is an objective tool found in our consensual objective reality. One could argue against every statement made by LRH with its subjective significance, but the meter proves out the research when the tech is applied per the instructions.

      • @Jonathon: I’d be interested to hear your reaction to these two articles on the e-meter from the “ask the scientologist” blog.

        http://askthescientologist.blogspot.com/2010/06/scientology-e-meter.html
        http://askthescientologist.blogspot.com/2010/06/more-on-scientology-e-meter.html

        The e-meter appears to demonstrate that what you are thinking can have a detectable affect on the body but any of its capabilities beyond that are far from proven.

        Likewise, the notion that, “As long as [someone] was willing to answer the questions or follow the auditing commands, the session would work” needs some clarification.

        Clearly some people have found things not to “work”. As I understand it, the claim is that this is _always_ due to misunderstoods, misapplication, etc. This puts it outside the realm of science with disprovable assertions and into the realm of belief.

        This is fine, but the notion that the tech always works is an article of faith rather than an empirical fact.

        Additionally, while you don’t consider policy to be part of the tech, what about ethics?

    • Well of course he’s “right” when his observations coincide. If someone takes an obvious (and some things ARE just obvious) statement and bundles it up in sci-fi/new age terminology and stretches it out, all theu have done is take a lot of time to repeat something much shorter. Yes, there is room for some aesthetics, but overall, LRH was just verbose in order to be verbose. Much of what many Scns consider to be “observations” by LRH are actually EXPLANATIONS, and oftentimes they don’t coincide with “the truth of life,” or there is simply no way to know if it did. Observation is not explanation.

      Last couple of things:
      1) Your comment is a self-referential closed loop, since “truth” is what you have observed…so obviously someone will “be right” when their observation coincides with “truth, or rather, their observation coincides with their observation.
      2) “The truth of life” means what?
      3) Most religions aren’t unchanged at their founding. And you’re incorrect to say Scn evolved over 30 years, since it is apparently STILL evolving today, 59 years later.
      4) “Per square inch” of what? That doesn’t mean anything. “Accurate and applicable observations” are nice, but most people prefer having applicable solutions or methods of dealing with things, as are found by many in most other religious texts.
      And lastly, yes, LRH did say “try it out yourself!” Even if we assume it would be unlikely for any religion to have followers who didn’t find truth in the teachings (otherwise, why be there?) this “see if it is true” attitude may feel safe to those newly in, but for those who believe their spiritual lives depend on being a member in Scn, when faced with either eternal damnation or simply playing along and saying they believe something is true (when they really don’t), it can be pretty easy to choose the latter.

      Brain misfiring now, too much illogic at once.

  3. Jonathon Barbera

    Moses didn’t declare ten commandments and then come back a few years later and announce new research that revised the original reference. Other authors came after Moses and added new information — but they didn’t attempt to revise the Torah. Some could say Jesus was attempting to reform Judaism as it was practiced in his life-time, but today we recognize Jesus’ religion as different than Judaism and not a revision of it. (It would be different if Jesus had been the reincarnation of Moses!)

    The original basic teachings of the Buddha have never changed. The various branches of Hinduism may or may not have been revised, each according to its own traditions.

    But the main point here is about the founder of the religion revising or even cancelling parts of the subject during his life-time. Most religions have been revised by later scholars with new interpretations.

    Scientologists aren’t suppose to interpret the subject for others. This is called verbal tech. It results in, for example, one Scientologist emphasizing how tough people should be and how “at cause” it is to suppress others. Within the context of this interpretation, the tech delivered is directed at changing the person into some pre-conceived ideal Scientologist instead of making the person more himself/herself.

    Why would a Scientologist want to skip steps? I’m reminded of the current practice of quickie grades. L. Ron Hubbard wrote the Keeping Scientology Working reference with special emphasis on quickie grades. Each of the expanded grades begins with the instruction to run all reading processes. Yet even today people are ending off a grade on the first win instead of running all of the processes for that grade. They either think they will get “better” auditing on the upper levels (because it is more expensive) or they cannot confront the processes on the grades.

    • There is no possible way that Moses actually wrote any of the Torah in its current form so the idea that it appeared in one go and was never revised is untrue.

      Additionally, later authors have not attempted to revise the Torah, huge chunks of it — including basically the entirety of Numbers — haven’t been part of Jewish practice for two-thousand years. Likewise, the books that follow the Torah radically reshape the overall world-view portrayed in the Torah.

      And while commentaries can offer insight on the interpretation of scripture, individuals are responsible for understanding it themselves. One is free to disagree.

      Additionally, Mohammed clearly did revise the Qur’an during his lifetime and even cancelled some of it.

      Anyway, it’s a mistake to think that scripture is religion. It’s only one piece of the fabric.

      As to why one would want to skip steps, it was in reference to this notion that Scientologists are encouraged to try things for themselves to see if they are “true”. Presumably this means that if they do so and don’t think something is the right action they are free not to do it or to do something else.

      If not, what is the point of this freedom?

    • “L. Ron Hubbard is right when his observations coincide with the truth about life.”

      So am I and everyone else; when our observations “coincide” with the truth about life.

      “Unlike old-fashioned religions that were fixed into place upon their founding, Scientology evolved for over thirty years with many revisions and changes occurring.”

      This is untrue and a logical fallacy. First of all, one could say all forms of belief are forever changing but “old fashioned religions,” whatever that means, were NOT fixed into place upon their founding. In the case of Moses, it’s been said that he was given, not ten, but hundreds of commandments and ONLY TEN made it into the Bible. So the others were deleted or revised later. As for Jesus, there seems to be not one but many. There’s the Essene Jesus, Paul’s Jesus, the rebel shaman Jesus who used cannabis and psychedelics, etc.

      By the way, the so called “Holy Annointing oil” (Hebrew: shemen haMishchah שמן המשחה) spoken of in the bible, formed an integral part of the ordination of the priesthood and the High Priest as well as in the consecration of the articles of the tabernacle (Exodus 30:26) and subsequent temples in Jerusalem. The primary purpose of anointing with the holy anointing oil was to cause the anointed persons or objects to become qodesh – most holy (Exodus 30:29).

      Originally the oil was used exclusively for the priests and the Tabernacle articles but was later extended to include prophets and kings. It was forbidden to be used on an outsider (Exodus 30:33) or to be used on the body of any common persons (Ex. 30:32a) and the Israelites were forbidden to duplicate any like it for themselves (Ex.30:32b)

      The Greek title “Christ,” in Hebrew “Messiah,” means “the anointed one.”

      And this is where Christ broke with tradition by using and giving it freely to everyone who needed it. Here’s the recipe: The “holy anointing oil” described in Exodus 30:22-25 was created from:
      1) Pure Myrrh (מר דרור mar deror) 500 shekels (about 6 kg)
      2) Sweet Cinnamon (קינמון בשם kinnemon besem) 250 shekels (about 3 kg)
      3) *Sweet Calamus (קנה בשם keneh bosm) 250 shekels (about 3 kg)
      4) Cassia (קדה kiddah) 500 shekels (about 6 kg)
      5) Olive oil (שמן זית shemen sayith) one hin (about 5 quarts according to
      Adam Clarke; about 4 liters according to Shiurei Torah, 7 liters according to the Chazon Ish)

      *Sweet calamus was the KJV incorrect trranslation of the Hebrew “keneh bosm” -which sounds a lot like “canna-bis” (2 reeds or 2 sexes) The “m” in bosm is used to form the plural in keneh bosm or aromatic cane, yes, marihuana.

      * From the time of Moses until that of the later prophet Samuel, the holy anointing oil was used by the shamanic Levite priesthood to receive the “revelations of the Lord”. At the dawn of the age of Kings, Samuel extended the use of the anointing oil to the Hebraic monarchs by anointing Saul (and later David) as “Messiah-king”. These kings lead their people with the benefit of insights achieved through using the holy anointing oil to become “possessed with the spirit of the Lord.”

      “Anointing was common among kings of Israel. It was the sign and symbol of royalty. The word ‘Messiah’ signifies the ‘Anointed One’, and none of the kings of Israel were styled the Messiah unless anointed.”1 The title was clearly only given to those “having the crown of God’s unction upon them” (Leviticus 21:12).

      [ Jesus came from Nazareth Galilee and was baptised by John in the Jordan. As Jesus was coming up out of the water, {he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending upon him like a dove. And a voice came from heaven} “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.” At once the Spirit sent him out into the desert, and he was in the desert for forty days, being tempted by Satan. He was with wild animals, and angels attended him. (Mark 1: 9-13)

      It should be noted that the vision and words described were seen and heard only by Jesus, as it specifically states that “he saw”. ]

      What we perceive as being “high” or “stoned” the ancients called “possessed by the Spirit of the Lord.” But I digress. 🙂

      “As a result, Scientology contains more accurate and applicable observations per square inch than the average religious or philosophy text.”

      Name several of these “accurate and applicable observations” [that have been proven without a doubt to be scientifically true and accurate observations]

      You claim Scientology has more knowledge per square inch but as I understand it, Scientology was different in that it contained a technology which when applied would raise one to higher levels of awareness called The Bridge ™ which had two major goals on its processing side: Clear and OT. Well, neither of these two states of awareness have been achieved 60 yrs later according to LRH’s own definitions for them. So, none of the “observations” or conclusions, etc., regarding these so called states were, as you say, “accurate.”

      OT VIIIs still wear glasses and Hubbard made the observation that Christ and Buddha were mere releases (not even Clears).

      Anyway, that’s my two cents worth. I realize people -like yourself- will continue to “apply Scientology” and even call it a religion but the goal of full OT will never be achieved by Scientology for, 1st of all, Hubbard did NOT leave a route all mapped out as he claimed; so someone other than LRH will have to come up with AND SELL others the rest of the bridge.

      In the final analysis, no matter how complex the labyrinth, it is all a ponzi scheme, bait and switch scam in my humble [but well informed] opinion.
      Good luck to you in ALL you do.
      Ex$cnAnon
      27 yr ex-member (July 1978 – Jan. 2005)

  4. Perhaps it’s my browser, but the link to the entry being discussed links to THIS post instead. Anyone care to post the relevant post/comment made by Finder which is being discussed? Thanks!

  5. tnx Caliwog.
    always enjoying your posts,and always is just as I think….
    This is exactly why I look on $cios,like they are 3 year old kids. Kids you maybe CAN impress with those few hundred words,but when you are 13,14 that start to become ,if nothing else, boring… But ,for me,it is with all of LRHs lectures,books,etc. Just so silly. It is something we all know-but some people love when one show them “with finger”……so funny…
    What a big reality-comedy show,first time World Wide. I will miss it ,when this all finish-soon.
    Big hello from LRHs Bulgravia.

  6. Jonathon Barbera

    SpecialFrog, I read those two E-Meter articles. I don’t entirely disagree with the author of those articles — but I do think he (and others) are trying to over-complicate a simple observation.

    Does the needle read because the PC “believes” it will? Well, what if it did? That would still indicate something could be improved. If the PC believes it, then it is true for him, right? If the processing is effective, the PC will change what he or she “believes” about a subject.

    Let’s use an example of young man who is normally self-confident and ambitious in life but who turns into a babbling idiot when trying to talk to a pretty girl. Why does he react that way? Maybe deep down he “believes” he doesn’t deserve to have a girlfriend. If he is asked the right processing questions, he will eventually cognite on his situation and realize for himself why he is sabotaging his efforts with women.

    The meter itself does nothing, but the auditor uses the meter to locate the charged areas (through assessments and listing lists). It is also used to indicate when the charge is released and the PC is in a good condition for ending the process or session.

    People mock up their own conditions or problems. All auditing can do is help them to realize how and why they are doing it. If they do not “repent,” then ethics becomes part of the tech. When someone says it doesn’t work, there is something wrong. Misapplication does exist, but there are numerous repair actions available to address and correct it when it does occur. I suspect the current church has lost many parishioners by sending them to ethics when they should have been sent to review for repair actions.

  7. This guy Jonathon-he is really trying to explain like it actually works….
    and it looks like he really believe it… he is saying like that is just like cell phone-dial numbers,press green and you get call….this is so funny…..
    again LRHs Tech – WE are wrong,cause we know it is NOT working!!!-we sure did something wrong with it,cause it always works! When its not working-it is your own mistake-go on and do step one again,again,again,again….and later one realise that it is “better” if it works…..ksw….

    Big hello from LRHs Bulgravia.

    • koki, Scientology does work. How could it not work if it based on what the individual “believes” about himself or herself? The E-Meter isn’t a magic device at all. It’s an ordinary galvanometer.

      Scientology is based on the simplest simplicity there is: subjective reality is mocked up by the individual himself or herself.

      You can insist Scientology won’t work for you. If that’s what you “believe” about the subject, then that is what is true for you. Your subjective reality is exactly that.

      Other people use Scientology to change their own subjective realities. Claiming otherwise is silly because of the very nature of subjective reality.

      • The claim that “subjective reality is mocked up by the individual” is essentially religious dogma. This doesn’t make it wrong but it means that any argument based on it is inherently unpersuasive to anyone who doesn’t believe it.

        It is an assertion that certainly has not been proven in any way and seems to be incompatible with scientific thinking in general.

        Additionally, while I agree that if I don’t believe Scientology will work for me it probably won’t, it still doesn’t logically follow that it will work if I do believe.

        Nothing pejorative is intended by the term “dogma”, by the way. The issue with Scientology religious dogma is that many Scientologists seem inclined to pretend that it is not religious dogma but scientific fact.

  8. Maybe Scientology is good for people who don’t have much common sense, or a problem in learning certain things from experience.

    Instead, they have to arrive at the common sense things through the convoluted writings and procedures of a psychopathic blowhard like Hubbard. It makes it “true” for them. Hubbard was such as asshole and couldn’t apply most of what he taught in his own life, except for selling it. They like that Hubbard was a lying fool and a chain smoker, because it makes them feel good about lying, being a fool and chain smoking too.

    • Astrid, if your personal reality has no room in it for Scientology, then what does it contain? Do you “believe” in anything at all or is life just counting down the biological minutes until extinction?

      • I can’t speak for Astrid but yes, if you come right down to it life is simply counting down the minutes until extinction. I have never had any difficulty with the concept that this is the one and only life we have (and are incredibly lucky to have) and that it is an all too brief flowering between nothingness.

        Why is there a need to believe in anything else? What is wrong with your ‘reality’ that you need to fill it with such blatant fictions just to give yourself the illusion that there is something more, that you are something more. Make the most of what you have and live every day to the fullest because, for sure, this is it. There is nothing more.

      • ….and finally we get to the heart of it. People just can’t handle the reality of the physical universe. Much better to believe we’ve “mocked it up”. Much better to believe we’re immortal thetans.

        The funny thing about “religions” is that they all have come up with a theory to explain how we come to be here, and what to expect after we die. This then governs what we should believe and how we should behave while we’re here.

        It really does make me want to shake people.

        THIS is the life you’ve got!
        THIS is the time you have!
        THIS is the amazingly beautiful planet on which we live!
        THESE are the only family you will ever have!
        THESE are the only friends you will ever have!

        Make the most of it! Enjoy it! Explore! Savour it!

        DEAL WITH IT!

        Any other theory about your immortality is just that, a theory. A faith. You are taking a gamble by living your one precious life on some unproven speculation. Although I do concede that if you do need one of these mental crutches to get you through life, then maybe it’s simply how you cope.

      • for Astrid -I dont know….but I don’t have to “believe in anything”,I am happy in real life! happy with my wife,with kids,with hours that I spend with them….talks ,laughs,hugs,kisses and even tears and anger….that is life my brotha…..
        about $cio-it is left,then it is right…it is “religion”,then it is “scientificly proven”-and ,in fact,it is stupid LRHs pyramid…..
        use that internet….find people who were in it for 30,40 years and look what they tell you about it…and all say the same-DON’T WORK!
        and about what u want to believe-it is totally up to u! I don’t care what you believe,I just know $cio-don’t work!
        Big hello from LRHs Bulgravia.

      • The Universe is wondrous. To think we are floating on this blue marble among trillions of suns. EVERYTHING, plants, animals, genetics, other biological processes, music, holds a fascination and is worthy of contemplation and study.

        I understand that people are afraid of the unknown, death, not knowing why we are here, but to cling to a “batteries-not-included” hard sales con-job like Dianetics and Scientology?

        When I hear Hubbard “lecture” it grates on my nerves, the man is so full of it, and all over the place.

        The mediocrity of the minds of people like Rathbun and many of the other followers, who consider themselves to be superior beings, leaders to spread this convoluted, manipulative garbage, “to save the planet” is appalling.

        For followers, there are a few honest ones, like Claire (Fuzzy), who likes some things about it, but doesn’t think it is the only way to save the planet. They are about the only ones I can stomach.

        The worst thing is the fascist tones of it, which are heavy. I don’t like the lack of respect Scientology engenders for one’s own body and health, the sleep deprivation in the Sea Org, the smoking.

        If Hubbard political gained power, I believe he would have moved in the direction of exterminating his opposition, disposing of people quietly and without sorrow.

        As far as my personal philosophy goes, I don’t know. I think everyone is connected to everything in a sense, but Hubbard’s explanations are just rude, to most other conceptions of spirituality.

        I don’t know where we go, if anywhere, after we die, but of all possibilities, I’m sure it isn’t to an implant station on Mars.

  9. soteku, koki, Sid and Astrid:

    Thank you to all of you for your responses. You will be surprised to discover I do not disagree with your objective stance on reality.

    For some ten years I was an atheistic materialist whose only “god” was objective reality. Now I tell people: “If God Is The Imagination Then We Can Imagine Anything!”

    What changed in me? Objective reality is still our common reality. But when I looked at seemingly rational, objectively-minded and scientific people, I discovered something interesting. They weren’t necessarily happy no matter how “objective” they were.

    Happiness is limited by subjective reality. Hence, no matter how imaginary subjective reality is, it can still impinge on the individual’s thinking and behavior. According to LRH’s carefully worded definition of a static, a thetan doesn’t exist within objective reality at all.

    But imaginary or not, the thetan continues to create effects within objective reality.

    If a person were wholly objective in his or her thinking and yet still unable to get anywhere with personal goals or interpersonal relationships, for example, I would suspect the subjective reality of the individual of interfering with the thinking and behavior.

    Scientology processing works because the subjective reality of the individual is imaginary or mocked up. We can change our own imaginary thoughts, right? Well, then Scientology always works as long as it is correctly applied and any indicated repairs and so forth are included.

    The simplest simplicity of Scientology is that it is based on the child’s game of make-believe. I’ve often compared the Sea Org (and the whole church) to a Live Action Role-Playing Game.

    If you understand the difference between subjective and objective realities, then Scientology becomes quite obvious and workable.

    • I agree that your mental state has a big influence on your physical state as well as how you interact with the world around you but it does not follow that what you are really doing is manipulating some subjective reality as opposed to just operating in objective reality. Again, you are attempting to use dogma as the basis for a rational argument.

      And even if I accept the general premise of subjective realities I remain far from convinced that L. Ron Hubbard had any clue how to help anyone improve their own.

      If you picked five thousand people at random from the world population I am willing to bet they would be on average a lot happier than the LARPers in the Sea Org and likely happier than the same size sample of public Scientologists.

      The trail of damaged people in Scientology’s wake does not make the statement that “Scientology always works as long as it is correctly applied” far from a given.

  10. Thank you for your reply Jonathon and whether you realise it or not I think you have just provided the perfect example of exactly the phenomenon that Caliwog was describing in this post.

    First, however, can I address your observation that ‘seemingly rational, objective-minded’ individuals weren’t necessarily happy. Why on earth would you assume they would be? Why should an ‘atheistic materialist’ be happy just because of his rational beliefs? My assumption is that you consider atheism or rationalism to be a belief system which should result in a positive ‘feel good’ response from the individual when nothing could be further from the truth. It isn’t a replacement for religion, there is nothing in the place of a ‘god’ but simply an acknowledgement that there is no place (or need) in the universe for any invented theories to explain why we are here or what happens to us after we die. There is no emotional response and to suggest that there should be is akin to expecting the Theory of Evolution to make you angry or the Theory Gravity to make you melancholy.

    I do though completely agree with you that the way we think (our subjective reality if you like) directly impacts on our behaviour and mood and I would venture to suggest that the vast majority of laymen you choose to ask would agree that this is a self evident fact and nothing more than common sense.

    Instead you have, if I have understood correctly (and even for someone who considers himself reasonably literate and intelligent scientology is almost impossible to follow coherently) described the self same fact in unnecessarily verbose, complicated and confusing terms. This is exactly the behaviour that Caliwog quite correctly calls scientology and Hubbard out on in the post above. You are describing something that most ‘wogs’ simply consider common sense.

    What still amazes me is that anyone can take the ramblings of an average 1950’s pulp science fiction writer seriously. Surely that single quote about ‘the best of way of making money is by starting a religion’ would disqualify every single other thing he wrote from any form of serious consideration.

    • soteku, you complain because it isn’t simple enough while others complain just as often that LRH’s explanations are too simple.

      I used to be like you and found some of his works seemingly “incomprehensible.” Since 2006, I’ve listened to over a thousand lectures by L. Ron Hubbard. After becoming accustomed to his older style of slang, you realize he is trying to talk as plainly as possible. What helped me was to listen to the lectures in their chronological order (an idea I began before the church announced their own study). By following the chronological research of the subject, each new development fits into place. When I first tried to study the subject in the early 1990’s, all of the references and lectures were studied out of order. It was a chaos of sometimes conflicting ideas when I was in the church. I’ve learned much more about the subject studying it on my own.

      • No Jonathon, what I am complaining about (drawing attention to is a rather more accurate description) is exactly the phenomenon that Caliwog outlined … the tendency of Hubbard and scientologists to explain the most simple of concepts using the most verbose and complicated explanations when, in actual fact, all they are talking about is common sense and life experience to the rest of us.

        I’m glad you have found some benefit from scientology and the fact you are out of the church is great. However life is much too short for me to waste any time on the inane ramblings of Hubbard let alone listen to more than a thousand lectures! You must have the patience of a saint.

  11. soteku tnx…. and Jonathon-when your child smile at you,and when it look at you with those lovely eyes,and when one realise that not god,not tethan,not whatever made this child but you and your wife,and she lays next to you each night,spoon position,and tell you-I love you both so much…. then you will find what happiness is….I just hope you find it soon enough….
    “god” is in you-do not give that privilege to anyone or anything else….
    wish you happy life.

    • koki, you are exactly right!

      But some people need help discovering these things…

      • Jonathon-thank you….this is why I left $cio only after a year,and this is why NO $CIO can not discuss with me…..Only thing I have (my brain left me long time ago…) is simple questions,which they couldn’t answer for me,and only life provide me that answers……
        Try sometimes ask those kind of questions and you will see that you are always brought back to LRH….and we all know that he WAS making mistake ,a lot!!!!!! He did not know anything about wife cook you a dinner,love your kids,be with them for 10,15,20 years,trying to resolve a problem if it happens……He only knew how to find new wife,see kids only few time a year,and make his all life a one big lie!!!!when his son did suicide,LRH was angry on him-cause he fucked LRHs life-instead be sorry for loosing son…..
        and now you are telling us that we are making mistake,and that $cio is beat way…..and then you tell me that I am right..!?!
        Jonathon,I wish you-that you stop for 2,3 days and think about what people tell you here….It is impossible that all of us wish you bad….and I am sure we all wish you best life. It is enough just when you start to have doubts…….It is OK to have doubts!
        Big hello from LRHs Bulgravia.

  12. SpecialFrog, I do not know what happened to the Sea Org.

    When I was last in the Sea Org in 1993, I experienced and witnessed no abuses as described by the ex-INT crew. If the current management has made Sea Org life that much worse, then it should definitely be reformed.

    As far as improving one’s subjective reality, it is an obvious undertaking and is proven out by the PC’s own cognitions and wins as well as meter phenomena such as floating needles and TA movement. Scientology is really set up so it can’t fail. Anyone who has experienced loses with the tech is probably in need of some simple repair actions. (Jason Beghe’s experiences are an example of this.)

    • It’s more than just the ex-INT crew who have described abuses but goes as far back as chain lockers and overboarding on the ships with Hubbard. I’m glad you did not experience such but it’s a mistake to assume your experience is everyone’s.

      Additionally, even without the overt abuses, Sea Org work schedules and limited time to spend with families (if allowed at all) seem unlikely to lead to happiness. From the recruitment posters it is sold as a necessary sacrifice in order to save the planet.

      As to your final point, I would argue that it would be more accurate to say that Scientology is really set up so that it can’t be blamed for failure. Any positive results are proof that Scientology works, even if they don’t exactly fit the “final product” of the process. Any negative results are proof that the process was done incorrectly because Scientology works.

      • Jonathon Barbera

        SpecialFrog, I can only speak for my own experiences in the Sea Org.

        Being in the Sea Org was actually a very good experience. Yes, the hours were long and the work demanding at times, but it is through these challenges people improve themselves.

        When another crew member corrected me for an outness, it was to improve me and not merely to squash me down. When I interacted with upper management crew, they didn’t abuse their power over me even when it would have been easy to do so.

        I didn’t join the SO for money or free training. I genuinely wanted to contribute to the dissemination of Scientology. The problem as it has been described by the ex-INT crew, however, is the church is going in a different direction today.

        In the Sea Org, the seniormost Intention is Command Intention. When I was in the Sea Org, I viewed Command Intention as being from L. Ron Hubbard first and then “upper management” second. I didn’t know back then that Command Intention had been re-defined as solely David Miscavige’s Intention. (I might have remained in the Sea Org if I had understood why I was there!)

      • Once again, the stories of problems in the Sea Org are far from limited to ex Int Base people (Nancy Many, Hana Whitfield, etc), but I’m glad you had a good experience there.

        Any response to the final part of my comment?

  13. SpecialFrog’s final comment: “As to your final point, I would argue that it would be more accurate to say that Scientology is really set up so that it can’t be blamed for failure. Any positive results are proof that Scientology works, even if they don’t exactly fit the “final product” of the process. Any negative results are proof that the process was done incorrectly because Scientology works.”

    I wouldn’t go so far as to accept “any positive results” in place of the intended result. This is what has led into quickie grades and people attesting to Clear when they aren’t.

    If people no longer feel free to “tell all” in a session or are unwilling to be honest when they go to the Examiner after session, then they are in a brainwashing cult. Instead of getting the intended wins, they glibly attest just to claim some empty status or avoid condemnation from their peers.

    The church blames PCs for not winning and the PCs blame the church for not winning. Maybe they should move beyond the blame level and just apply the tech.

    • I’ll try one more time.

      The assertion is that the tech always works if properly applied.

      Any cases where the tech appears to work are taken as evidence of this.

      Any cases where the tech does not appear to work are also taken as evidence of this because the only possible explanation entertained by Scientology is that this is because of a misapplication, MU, etc.

      The proof that the tech always works is that the tech always works.

      It is as much a religious belief as it is to believe that applying the sacrament of confession will absolve you of your sins and allow entry to Heaven.

      Anyway, I’ll leave you with this post from Jeff Hawkins’ blog:

      http://leavingscientology.wordpress.com/2010/11/05/think-for-yourself/

      • Jonathon Barbera

        SpecialFrog, I’ll try one more time! 🙂

        1. Subjective reality is composed of imaginary components.
        2. Scientology always works when applied correctly because it is easy to manipulate imaginary components.
        3. Scientology only fails when imaginary components are not addressed correctly or completely.
        4. The E-Meter does nothing more than react to what a person “believes” about subjective reality and its imaginary components.

        The reactive mind to be erased by Dianetics and Scientology could be called the subjective mind. A real “Clear” would be someone who is in Present Time and within objective reality and not stuck in the past or imaginary mental arrangements.

  14. Jonathon

    Firstly I commend you for coming here and engaging in this kind of discussion – there are so few Scientologists who are willing to do so.

    There were lots of points you have made which I would like to respond to, but I think others have done an excellent job anyway.

    We can argue on and on about whether Scientology works, we can debate about objective and subjective reality, about axioms and tenets, but there is a simple answer staring at us right in the face.

    If Scientology works then why is the CofS in such a horrible mess? Why are so many Scientologists so easily controlled and manipulated? How is it possible that a widely acknowledged sociopath continues after more than two decades to dominate the CofS with impunity? Why do freezoners and independents squabble so? Where are the Scientology thought leaders? Where are the Scientology books published outside of the CofS?

    Scientology is dying because of the disinfecting sunlight cast upon it by the Internet, which has caused the world to decide to put ethics in on the church once and for all.

    If Scientology worked, the leader of its church would be a fine, upstanding, compassionate individual. If Scientology worked, Scientologists would not have been fooled for one second and the reign of Miscavige would have ended as soon as it began. If Scientology worked it would be a hugely respected religion. If Scientology worked then these and other Internet forums would be deluged by people wanting to share the good news, or at least be willing to engage us in debate.

    Scientology cannot continue to blame everyone else for its horrible reputation.

    If Scientology worked we would not be in this situation, having this conversation right now.

  15. Jonathon,
    Could you please explain to me YOUR understanding of LRH’s OTIII material.
    Also, could you please tell us if you “believe” in LRH’s OTIII material ?

    Thanks, and I look forward to your reply.

  16. Scientolgoy does not prey on those looking for answers. Scientology is a religion devoid of the ability to act – it is not a person. PEOPLE prey on those looking for answers would be more accurate – except of course this is not the case.

    Many of us that were involved in Scientology reached out to people because we thought in all honesty, we could help them. In fact, you will find that the case with every ex I have ever met bar none – including Marty himself.

    All religions are delusions and most members within them act and reach out because they are thinking they are really helping people.

    Until you understand this fact Caliwog, you are going to keep missing the boat on what is means to have been in the Sea Org or have had been a senior scientologist.

    To you, it seems a game run be henchmen, but when you are in there, it is much more serious then that and no one makes it more serious then the individual himself. It is not run by henchmen, it is run and works through the actions of deluded people acting in good faith.

    I have enjoyed reading many of your entries, but it seems that you do not really get what is going through Marty’s or Mike’s head.

    All humans, bar none are programmable. If it were not for language, this would not be possible. At some point for the intelligent ones, they come to a small realization that there is a bit of a joke going on, a bit of a realization that it is not real and most of us left because we were at that fork in the road.

    Those that remain in after that are hard to reach – and for the better part they are happier not to ever be reached, and will die with their beliefs. Thos that remain and allow the doubts to disappear into the past and to be forgotten have truly allowed themselves to become part of a reality shared by only a small group and to that group they will remain – even if the church declares them, they will seek out those people for comfort.

    We all have a right to be comfortable and not be attacked for it – we seem to draw the line when others are getting duped and we therefore believe we have the right to interfere and prevent others from falling into the trap of the Scientology religion. Unfortunately for Scientologists, they beleive they have an inalienable right to force people into Scientology for their own good – and that they are doomed without it. Scientology actively punishes those that do not attempt to draw family and friends into Scientology.

    It is for that reason we are against it.

    I will never be against a person believing whatever they decide to until it interferes with others lives.

    Understand this, and the fact that Marty and Mike think this way and you will begin to understand that all the facts you present will never change this for some – ever.

    As populations become more dumb, less educated (as is happening int he USA) and more robotic because of the T.V. they think is real, the more recruits Scientology gets.

    At some point there will be a division between those that are deluded and the athiests who are just plain smarter and in them rests the future. When that division comes the nut jobs will out-number the ones at the top and that will be a battle worth fighting for.

    For now, realize that Marty and his clan represent the past in humanity and not it’s future. They will die off, one way or an other – and you are helping in a small way to achieve this. If it wasn’t Scientology, it would be some other church or cult for these people – remember they NEED the delusion and will seek it out to whoever is offering it.

  17. Jonathon is one of those deluded people who should not be allowed to have any say or input as to the future of a species – even that of a dog’s.

    Farty people who do not know the definition of reality as he/she/whatever it is thinks comprises reality need a brain operation.

    You notice he had time to listen to thousands of LRH books and yet failed to read a single one written by a nobel prize winner or someone with an actual education?

    He is one of those types finding facts to suit his reality rather than the other way around.

    We call these people “lost” and it is best to forget about them.

    Don’t argue with idiots too much – you may catch their disease.

    As stated before we will only see Scientologists or people like Jonothan become famous in areas where idiots can make it – like the entertainment industry – when it comes to brain cells being required, you will never find his kind in N.A.S.A. or any of the fields of science or their branches.

    Jonothan is a lost cause because he does not understand why his reality can be different from others or why he has the reality he even has right now.

    Just ask Jonothan to explain how humans are the way they are now physically, mentally and every other way and you will hear pure rubbish.

    He is sort of the like the Michelle Bauchman’s of the world – living in their own world insisting it is great – when really everyone else is laughing at him.

    Tell me jonothan, if you seem soooooooo knowledgeable about people, mind etc. could you explain (without googling the answer) why you can not – and no Scientologist can remember everythingt hat has ever happened to them in their entire life? But about 13 people in the world can – why can they, and the other 7 Billion can not?

    Just curious…hit me back, you stupid dipshit. 🙂

  18. Aaron, I welcome everyone to recognize religions and gods as imaginary. Come out from the shadows of superstition and delusion. Enter the light of sanity!

    Look around the room. What do you see? Objective reality. I am already there.

    There isn’t one Scientologist in the world who counts me as a fellow Scientologist. I am not on ~their~ Bridge.

    Yes, I’ve listened to a thousand lectures by L. Ron Hubbard, but I’ve read books by other authors as well. I was recently reading Game Theory: A Nontechnical Introduction by Morton D. Davis. I’ve also been reading some C++ books to improve my programming skills. Anyhow, none of that is important.

    I will repeat my primary statement to you and hope you will now understand it: “If God Is The Imagination Then We Can Imagine Anything!”

  19. Jonathon-is there some books you don’t want to read,or maybe it is “recommended” not to?
    did you read some books on $cien but that are telling truth,not that promo lie shit?
    Aaron explain you completely.
    There is NO different “bridge”…. it is same shit-different package!
    by the way-I am sorry for your empty life…..
    Big hello from LRHs Bulgravia.

  20. koki, I’m not a member of the Church of Scientology. I was declared in 1994.

    I am free to read any books and do so regularly. I recently read Janet Reitman’s Inside Scientology.

    koki, you are projecting “your empty life” onto my full and happy life. Maybe you are the one who is need of something more? I could recommend many non-Scientology books to you…

  21. If God Is The Imagination Then We Can Imagine Anything!”

    WELL DONE.

    So you basically are stating that it is OK to imagine any reality? That is not particularly helpful when you actually have to deal with reality.

  22. Aaron, no, that is not what I stated.

    Objective reality is reality. Insane people confuse their own subjective realities with actual reality and this is called delusion.

    On the other side of the extreme, people who embrace nothing but objective reality continue to wonder why they are unhappy or unfulfilled in life. They have neglected their own subjective reality.

    It’s vital for people to be able and willing to LOOK at objective reality as it is and understand it without subjective bias or superstitious belief. Science won’t work otherwise. But, at the same time, people can’t abandon their ability to imagine other possibilities or else there will be no more innovation. Many technologies people enjoy today were inspired by older science fiction authors.

  23. Objective Reality is not reality, Jonothan. That is scientific fact.

    When I see a blue wall, it is only because my brain is wired to inform me that when the wavelengths of light between says 315nm and 385 nm hit my eyes, that my brain in turn converts that into the color blue.

    Another animal may see it as orange, red or another color you can not imagine.

    When I hear a sound in nature, I hear it between a certain bandwidth, but in almost all cases, the sound produced is actually in a band that extends above and beyond my hearing capability. Thus, my brain tells me what to make of that sound.

    When I say a cat is cute to it’s face, it will not hear the words as you have said them, but totally different.

    Thus, your objective reality is not real at all except to yourself.

    This is where you have a confusion about reality, my lad.

    Your perceptions are not there to tell you what is real or not real – they are only there to give you information that results in actions that will assist your survival as an organism – thus subjective.

    Subjective and Obective reality are both non-contenders for reality.

    Next thing you will tell me is that the TV is a constant stream of informaiton when in reality is in a series of pictures at about 1 every .025 seconds that appears to be a constant stream – you would not even know a TV did this to you unless someone informed you.

    A lot of things you have said and have come up with Jonothan are clearly proof that you are easily duped. This is primarily because you actually do not understand what is real and what is not.

    Objective Reality is only a reality you see – however fortunately thanks to measures, we can identify when you are being duped – and to know what is real and what is not real – it is not as easy as analizing what you see and hear – that is the great flaw of every ivory tower philospher or cult leader – or mindless blogger like yourself.

    You should learn some of those measures, it will assist you to stop making an ass of yourself. And that observation is not my objective reality – it is based on Scientific measures – you dumb ass.

    You do not know what is real. I fear if I tell you what is real it may send your brain into despair because you seem like the type who can not withstand their reality being shattered.

    But, hey, if you are happy then you are happy – no need to be a party pooper and spoil your fun. This is the trouble with religious, spiritual and cult types – they hate being woken up after they have been woken up because we have shattered their delusions.

    And delusions, Jonothan, is what your actual reality is.

    You are d-e-l-u-d-e-d and have no business trying to explain to anyone what reality is.

    • Aaron, You have hit the nail SQUARELY on the head Bravo!! Bravo indeed !!
      But me thinks Jonothan will not grasp your finely worded statement, truly a sad chap. My opinion of course.

    • Aaron, when you are in a court of law, the judge will ask you for the objective facts as you witnessed them. She isn’t interested in your subjective opinions or feelings about the case. If you were to tell her that isn’t how “reality” works, then you will be the one labeled as “deluded” and unreliable as a witness.

      objective: of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind

      subjective: relating to or being experience or knowledge as conditioned by personal mental characteristics or states

  24. Sheesh you guys! Here is a basic workable yardstick: “Who would you like to invite to a dinner party?”
    Jonathan: Yes, definitely
    Aaron: No
    Special Frog: Yes
    Sid: Yes
    Johnney D: No
    Koki: Yes

  25. You gotta love Martys stupid post on Biggi Reichert.

    All sounds soooooo sinister.

    Note “sleeping pills were determined not to cause death…” Duh, I guess that was what the car exhaust was for you idiot, Marty.

    My father did the same thing, take pills, fall asleep, pipe from exhaust causes death.

    I guess she was depressed…

    As for the marks on the head, Marty – she is a woman, I note with curly hair, perhaps they are curling iron burns – don;t tell me your black woman wife has never burned her scalp with crack cream or tried to straighten it out with an iron or crack cream (that burns the scalp).

    And as for the US government being bought off by DM…gimme a break you moron – like you would know if the Us government is helping them or not.

  26. BTW, Aaron it’s “creamy crack” that black women put on their hair to straighten it – because once you start using it you can’t stop. And yes creamy crack and other strong straighteners can easily cause burns on the scalp, as can curling irons and other implements we torture on our curly or kinky hair with.

    But good spot, that being the reason for the burns on her scalp is much more explicable than some Running Man-esque evil Dr. Operating a sadistic scalp burning torture lab at Flag for OTs in debt.

  27. Marty’s latest is a real dooozy!! Marty making deals with the FBI and Justice Department……..oh please… give me a break !!!

    http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/petition-the-president-of-the-united-states/#comment-150386

  28. Oh my God, Marty is a fruit loop.

    Like that crazy girl who petitioned Obama’s wife.

    I’m Suuuuuuure Marty will get justice….
    Perhaps he will use his OT powers to get them re-open the investigation – oh wait, that didn’t work, did it?

    What a dork…

  29. MARTYS BLOG – SCOT CAMPBELL

    I found his story interesting – typically, high tech cases of staff going nuts were sent to CMO CW under the care of them – as they had the Class IX’s and above.

    Low tech cases were indeed sent to PAC and there were a coupe of lock ups there.

    It is plausible what he is saying as I too was drugged at the completion of my FSSO mission in 1995 – although I have never talked about it due to the reason why I was drugged and what they hoped would happen was pretty sad – on their part.

    However, in March 1995 dozens were locked up at PAC base form INCOMM and still to this day, law enforcement will not even look at it.

    How much fun it would be for someone to have in their possession all the staff lists of the SO in the USA – and to see how many people simply can not be found anywhere at all.

    There were Declares and Blow Ethics Orders done for people to cover events that did not factually happen, I often wonder now if those people are in ditches somewhere.

    You would honestly be surprised how easy it is for someone to arrive form abroad to CMO IXU, go to Int, and from there, disappear entirely.

    If family don’t know where they are, and at Int they are told they have been sent to a lower level org (when they have not), then years go by…

    I too had people guarding me inside and outside my room and there was minor duress on occasion – but the graphic detail of Scotts story does come across as being unlikely.

    Having said that, many things I was saying on the Internet in 2001-2003 were thought to be perposterous until proven others wise, years later.

    Rather than going to law enforcement, I think Scott needs therapy first because I doubt his memory is accurate.

  30. It appears Marty is now attempting to compare himself to the great labor activist Joe Hill !!!
    geez, the balls on this guy!!

  31. Father,Son, and Holy Thetan = Marty Rathbun……

    scuse’me i just threw-up a little in my mouth…

  32. aaron ,will you be so kind and contact me on stakoko@gmail.com,
    PLEASE……
    lots of love from Croatia.

Leave a Reply

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