Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology From: pilot@hiddenplace.com (The Pilot) Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 11 - OCT 1997 PILOT POSTS TO ARS Date: 10 Oct 1997 14:00:11 POST11.txt SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 11 - OCT 1997 PILOT POSTS TO ARS Note that I am now numbering these archive posts as I issue them. The original set had 9 and the one last month brought the total to 10. This set of posts is large (because I posted my research notes to ACT and answered some very long posts from Russia) so I spread it across 3 archive files, numbers 11 to 13, to keep the file sizes down. ========================================== Contents: Subj : Super Scio - SCN PULLS IN ATTACKS (Attn Cornelius) Subj : Super Scio - Dianetic Sessions (Attn Pope Charles) Subj : Super Scio - About Excalibur Subj : Super Scio - The RPF Subj : Super Scio - About Lonesome Squirrel Subj : Super Scio - About Forrie Ackerman Subj : Super Scio - Freezone Sea Org (attn Theta B) Subj : Super Scio Humor - Keeping Electricity Working Subj : Super Scio - Answering Homer About Mayo Subj : Super Scio - Attn Stephan Blandow about R245 and Reform Subj : Super Scio - Christianity (attn Michael, Joe, Neal, Keith) Subj : Super Scio - Discussion with Koos Subj : Super Scio - About Jewish Scientologists Subj : Super Scio - LRH SciFi (Review for St. Andreux) Subj : Super Scio - About THE TRUTH as Posted Subj : Super Scio Humor - About Sex and Uniforms Subj : Super Scio - Scientology Weddings ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - SCN PULLS IN ATTACKS (Attn Cornelius) SCIENTOLOGY PULLS IN ATTACKS (ANSWERING CORNELIUS) On 31 Aug 97, krasel@wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de (Cornelius Krasel) posted on subject "Does Scn pull it in?" > As far as I understand Scientology, there is a doctrine that, when > something bad happens to you, it is at least partially your fault: > you are "pulling it in". > > Is it possible to interpret this doctrine as follows? "Scientology > currently is pulling in the reaction of European governments as a > response to former overts committed in the organization." > > --Cornelius. > > -- > /* Cornelius Krasel, U Wuerzburg, Dept. of Pharmacology, Versbacher Str. 9 */ > /* D-97078 Wuerzburg, Germany email: phak004@rzbox.uni-wuerzburg.de SP3 */ > /* "Science is the game we play with God to find out what His rules are." */ Absolutely. The idea is obvious enough to most Scientologists that they think of it occasionally, not just on the subject of the European attacks but on the subject of all attacks in general. The question gets asked often enough by the members that registrars and Sea Org executives are afraid of it because they are practicing double-think (as in Orwell's 1984) to avoid confronting this issue. There are two ways that they use to push members off of this train of thought. The first is to scream loudly about the evil suppressives. In other words, to try and get off the hot seat by shifting the questioner's attention onto the "bad guys". They carefully ignore the fact that there is an obscure HCOB which says that you can't go PTS to an SP unless you have first comitted overts against them. In other words, even according to the tech, the over/withhold/pulling-it-in mechanism is senior to the fact of suppression and PTSness. (PTS = potential trouble source, somebody who is suffering from the influences of a suppressive person). The second is to say that the "overt" which caused them to pull in these attacks was something like "failing to get the stats up". This is obviously stupid. There is no cause and effect relationship. But they say it anyway because it will sometimes trick the questioner into feeling guilty for not paying enough money to the org or not doing enough courses and sometimes they can even make a sale by jumping on this one hard with enough fake certainty that this is the real reason for the attacks. This is definitely a button to push on hard. "What did you do to pull in these attacks?". Best, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - Dianetic Sessions (Attn Pope Charles) DIANETIC SESSIONS (ANSWERING POPE CHARLES) On 20 Sept 97, wbarwell@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (William Barwell) wrote on subject "Stupid Questions about Auditing": > "The patient sits in a comfortable chair, with arms, or lies on a couch in > a quiet room where perceptic distractions are minimal. The auditor tells > him to look at the ceiling. The auditor says: "when I count from one to > seven your eyes will close." > The auditor then counts from one to seven and keeps counting quietly and > pleasntly until the patient closes his eyes, A tremble of the lashes will > be noticed in optimal reverie." > > > Dianetics Page 249 1992 edition. > > Is this how a Scientology auditing session Begins? Or is this > confined to Dianetics auditing? > If Scientology auditing is different, what is the exact procedure? > > Is the "look at the ceiling" still used? > > Pope Charles > SubGenius Pope Of Houston > Slack! This has been obsolete since the early 1950s. There is a beginner's Dianetic book co-audit which is based on the Dianetics book. I'm uncertain exactly how much of it is actually done according to the original book and how much is modernized with more modern procedures (all techniques in DMSMH are obsolete by modern standards, the book is only read on professional courses for the underlying theory). The exact degree to which they use it in its original form may also have varried over the years. So you might or might not find things like the above used in this beginners course, but definitely nowhere else. Professional Dianetic sessions (Standard Dianetics (HSDC) in the 1970s and New Era Dianetics (NED) subsequently) use the exact same session procedure as Scientology sessions. The CofS currently only uses NED in professional (paid for) auditing. Note that Scientology auditor training to class 4 is currently a pre-requisite to training on NED because modern Scientology metering techniques etc. are needed to run NED. The standard session procedure is known as "model session". It evolved during the 1960s with various changes and pretty much standardized in the Standard Tech era. The setup is the one commonly depicted in the various magazines with the PC sitting in an ordinary chair (often a cheep folding one) holding the cans and the meter hidden from his view behind a meter shield so that only the auditor can see it. One goes through a bit of preliminaries such as asking if the room is alright to audit in and checking if the PC has had enough sleep etc. One says "Start of Session" (or "This is the Session" in the old days) and then one checks the "rudiments". The rudiments are a set of questions about things that could distract one to the point where it would be difficult to start a new process on the person. These are things like upsets (officially called ARC Breaks - breaks in affinity, reality, or communication), present time problems, and missed withholds (withholding an overt act and having it "missed" by somebody nearly finding out about it). When these things are out of the way, then a process can be run. It might be Dianetics or a Scientology process. The basic Dianetic process was R3R developed in 1963 (Routine 3 R, which means that it was originally a level 3 process (old system of levels, not the current grade chart) and happened to get assigned letter R in the lineup at that time). It has gone through variations since then (R3RA in standard dianetics, R3RN in NED, etc.). In its simplest form (NED is a bit more complex), you might ask the PC to "locate an incident that could have caused a pain in the head" and then run him through it by asking for its date and duration, telling him to move to the begining of the incident, having him close his eyes, and asking him "what do you see?". Then you tell him to move through the incident, and so forth. There is nothing particularly hypnotic in the current procedure and there is no attempt to try and introduce Dianetic reverie as it was known in 1950. The standard dianetic version is covered in detail in the book "Dianetics Today" (out of print and hard to find) which basically is a complete standard dianetics course pack compiled into book form. For the latest NED version, you would need a NED course pack or a set of the new tech volumes (the old tech volumes are from 1975 and have the older standard dianetics version only). But the main differences in NED are simply an improvement in how to identify the item to be run and asking the PC (when the incident has errased) for the postulate that he made at the time of the incident. I suppose that this is really more than you really wanted to know. Bless me father for I have engrams, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - About Excalibur ABOUT EXCALIBUR There has been some talk about Ron's Excalibur book. I am really hoping that somebody posts it because I would very much enjoy reading it. The rumor that I heard about it was from a Flag Class 8 back in the 1970s. She said that the class 8s at Flag were passing around a xerox of it and that she had read it. She said that it was considered to be confidential and so she could not talk about what was in it with one exception. The exception was one section of the book which Ron had read to the Philadelphi Doctorate Course students. It was the segment about the players of the game etc. This is at the end of PDC lecture 39 of 12 Dec 52 titled "Games Processing". He tells the students that he is going to read them something but he doesn't say where it is from. My impression when I first heard the tape (before I was told that it was an excerpt from Excalibur) was that he had dug out some old research notes that he had written about the subject of games. Here is a bit of it (consider this to be a book review, certainly a fair use quote). "Now the cast system of games consists of this - The Maker of Games - He has no rules, he runs by no rules. The Players of the Game - Rules know but he obeys them. The Assistant Players - Mearly obey the players The Pieces - Obey rules as dictated by players, but they don't know the rules (and then what do you know?). And then there's Broken Pieces - They aren't even in the game but they're still in the game (and they are in a terrible maybe, am I in a game or am I not in a game). Now, how to make a piece (this is how to make a piece) - 1. Deny that there is a game 2. Hide the rules from them 3. Give them all the penalties and no wins 4. Remove all goals (ALL Goals) Enforce them thier playing. Inhibit their enjoying. Make them look like but forbid their being like players (look like god but you can't be god). To make a piece continue to be a piece, permit it to associate only with pieces and deny the existence of players (never let the PCs find out that there are players). Now out of this you're going to get a game". --- Note that in "making a piece", he is talking about how to reduce a thetan down to the status of only being a piece in a game rather than a player. Earlier in the lecture he was talking about games processing and how to get somebody back up to being a player. In other words, this was not a formula for processing but the exact opposite, a description of what had been done to people that needed to be reversed by means of games processing. ----- Now it might be that somebody is reading this who has been made into a piece. This could be true on either side of the conflict. So let us try the following checklist. Suspect that you are a piece (a pawn in somebody else's game) if: a) Have you been made to look like either an OT or an expert authority when you do not actually have the abilities? b) Have the real rules of the game been hidden from you? c) Do you just get penalties and no wins? d) Have your own goals been lost somewhere along the line? e) Are you being forced to play (by your own side)? f) Are you being kept (by your own side) from having fun? g) Are you unaware that there are many real players on ARS? h) Are you unaware that a game is going on? Note that I tried to make this test very fair, especially as to the first question which is written in a manner that could be answered by somebody on either side of the conflict. Now if you have suddenly discovered that you are mearly a pawn in a game, please wake up and smell the coffee. Have a look around on ARS and on the net. Find out what is really going on. Begin to make up your own mind instead of thinking what you are supposed to. Gather up all the data that you can and start making your own decisions. Begin to play for real. Good Luck, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - About Lonesome Squirrel THE LONESOME SQUIRREL On 4 Sep 97, news@petermc.demon.co.uk (Peter McDermott) wrote on subject "Lonesome Squirrel" > I'm reading Fishman's 'Lonesome Squirrel' at the moment, and > I have to say that on the basis of the first five chapters, > this is definitely my favourite of all the nut-cult memoirs. > > The guy is a complete laff-riot. The Al Bundy of $cientology. > Does he ever think about *anything* other than his dick? I'm > starting to understand some of the cults DA posts here about > his dating teenage girls/prostitutes now, but it's gotta be > hard to DA somebody *that* upfront about their sex-life. > > I seem to recall some posts suggesting that not all of the > stuff in the book is true. Out of curiosity, can anyone tell > me which bits am I supposed to look out for and why? I agree, its funny as all hell, and the title is quite catchy. I found it a fun read, but I do consider it a work of fiction. There is obvious insider information. He either had excellent sources or he was deeply involved in the subject, either in the CofS or in a freezone group. But there is a lot that doesn't jive. A lot of it is incorrect for the time period presented, in other words it might have been correct auditing procedure ten years earlier or still be being done that way at a splinter group but would have gotten his auditors retrained in the time period in question. Also, some of it is incorrect for a PC but would be appropriate for somebody training as an auditor. Let's take the clay tits story which people were having fun with on ARS last year. He "bullbaits" the girl running a grade zero process on him, bothering her about her breasts, and she ends up ordering him to make tits in clay. This is totally unheard of in auditing a PC. But this kind of thing is common among professional auditors when they drill each other on how to run processes. One of them will play "PC" and harrass and bullbait the other one so that they will never be thrown off base by having a PC act like this. And in that case, an auditor who was too fixated on breasts might well be ordered to make tits in clay until they got over it. These drilling sessions on processes with a pretend PC bullbaiting the auditor were really in vogue around 1973-4 while flag was still at sea (before Clearwater) and faded out later. A lot of his stuff sounds like 1960s or early 70s and some of it even sounds like 1950s or splinter group ideas. I've heard bad things about the GO, but his tales are more extreme that anything I've heard even from disaffected ex-GO members. They just don't ring true, but again there may be half truths present. If somebody kept running back to their old psychiatrist like he describes, they would have been out the door and barred from any staff position. They could petition to do services, and if they had bucks in their hand the petition would be probably be granted, but if they did it again that would pretty much be the end of their involvement with the CofS. I think that he should become a professional fiction writer. He is good at it (really). There are nowhere near enough funny books. I could imagine a really neat sci-fi comedy about his adventures in the space org. Maybe something like "Barbarella" done with horny Marcabian ladies and a super Fishman who can make any girl yearn for him with his OT powers. In contrast, Bob Kaufman's insider story is accurate as to the tech used at the time he was involved. It would be totally incorrect and obviously false if it was even two years earlier or later than the date stated. The tech used to change very fast while Ron was still alive. Best, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - The RPF THE RPF The Rehabilitation Project Force, or RPF is the Sea Org's way of "rehabilitating" errant sea org members so that they can become good boys and girls again. I have not been in the RPF myself, but there are endless rumors about the abusive conditions in the RPF. I've heard stories around the org and seen the way RPFers behave, so I'm inclined to believe most of the tales I have seen on the internet because they do fit the evidence. In other words, although the internet tales could be made up or exaggerated, all indications are that that these are at least mostly true. On story I heard back in the 1970s from a current sea org member at that time was as follows: Somebody (I don't remember the name) was in the RPF at Flag (or on the Flagship? - its been a long time since I heard the story) and Ron came through on an inspection. He sarcastically asked "Well, ...(name), how do you like the RPF". The guy replied that he did like it because he was finally able to get audited (the one supposed benifit was the readit-drillit-doit coaudit that the RPFers engaged in). Supposedly, Ron created the RPFer's RPF on the spot and tossed this guy into it. My own experiences were only with lower ethics conditions and outer org staff. The worst that ever happened to me was being handcuffed to a pipe for an hour. Not even uncomfortable actually, but very very bad for one's mental state. Between the overboarding (cold showers), liability formulas (sleepless all night ammends projects), various other stuff like being told I was being declared (didn't happen) or the handcuffing (part of a doubt condition - the one where I cognited that tech was good but policy was suppressive and only wrote up the first half to get out of the handcuffs), and what with the execs yelling and screaming, and watching all the abuses being done to others (one guy was made to stand in a dark closet and people would periodically pull the door open and throw a bucket of dirty water on him), I sometimes went into a complete daze, caught between my high goals to clear the planet and the horror that was being practiced. I remember that once I wandered the streets for an entire day unable to clear my thinking and confront what was going on. All indications are that the lot of the Sea Org members and especially those in the RPF was ten times worse than what I experienced. Now my question is, how could somebody praise this kind of shit saying that it is good for one or could rehabilitate anybody? Note that I'm talking here about the RPF, lower condition penalties, and abuses of any kind, I'm not talking about the tech which I do think can help people. I can see three possibilities: 1) The guy just doesn't know. He has never been in the SO and he is believing "shore stories" and justifications. 2) The guy is an OSA stooge who is lying in his teeth. 3) The guy has actually been through the RPF and has had his mind adjusted to the point where he loves his masters, 1984 style. According to Ron, a being who is overwhelmed enough begins to like it. In the early tech, this was seen as one of the sources of masochism and the method by which somebody comes under the domination of an SP. In the early days this was seen as something to be auditied out rather than something to be used to control people. But the RPF is an example of how to apply this tech in a reverse or evil manner ("Black Scientology") so as to add to a person's abberations instead of freeing him. The RPF is most certainly one of the things that has to go if the CofS is to exist in the 21st century. Regretfully, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - About Forrie Ackerman ABOUT FORRIE ACKERMAN On 2 Sep 97, inducto@aol.com (Inducto) posted on subject "Did Hubbard have ANY friends?" > Chris Owen wrote: >> Forrie Ackerman, the sci-fi freak and Hubbard's agent, definitely >> considered himself Hubbard's friend (and seemingly his friendship >> was reciprocated). > > You must be referring to Forrest Ackerman, who was interviewed for Bare > Faced Messiah and referred to as Hubbard's "former" literary agent. (isn't > Author Services the corporation Hubbard formed so he wouldn't have to pay > outside agents?) > > From the tone of Ackerman's interview, it seems like he ranks with > Heinlein and Ellison as colleagues from Hubbard's sci-fi writer days who > sporadically kept in touch with Hubbard but were cynical about Dianetics > and Scientology, not major additions to the (still empty) category of "friends". > > If you have another source where he says friendlier things about Hubbard, > please quote and cite it. > > Inquiringly, > > I. Forrest Ackerman was the main speaker at a "Ron" event in the 1980s. He had a large display of Pulp magazines with Ron's stories in them set up on tables around the walls. He was totally non-Scientology, it just had nothing to do with him and he wasn't saying anything about it. He talked extensively about his early experiences with Ron and he sounded quite friendly, but of course there was no substance nor was there anything interesting enough to have stuck in my mind. But it was quite interesting to see him because he is almost legendary in the Sci-Fi field. He appears as a character in a number of other writer's stories, such as Farmer's pornographic "Image of the Beast" series. In Niven and Pornelle's "Inferno", they have him in hell because he let his magazine collection suffer from water damage. Best, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - Freezone Sea Org (attn Theta B) THE FREEZONE SEA ORG On 27 Sep 1997, thetafl@aol.com (ThetaFL) wrote > FREEZONE SEA ORG > > Yes folks, we are forming the Sea Org in the Freezone. A reformed Sea > Org in the Freezone where a difference in the sanity of the planet can > REALLY be made. > No human rights violations (no RPF), no dismal working conditions or > crummy food. No more sleeping like pigs in a sty or sardines in a can. Work > at your own pace and get more done than those mindless fanatics at flag. > We care a lot more about the quality of the work than chasing stats > down the street. > Except for the 22 member Bridge Team everyone else will work at home or > their office. Yes, we will someday have real Orgs but not the slave labor > camps that the present illegal and bogus leaders of Scientology provide. > The way that the present Orgs are run the planet will never be cleared. > Humanity needs the tech in an accessible way that is in harmony with all > the dynamics, this means no more rip offs! > We, the founders of the new and reformed Sea Org will deliver a > manifesto within the next few months detailing our plan to put Scientology > back on the bridge and the current crop of DBs running it out on the > streets where they belong. > > Theta B., Provisional Captain of the Reformed Sea Org > > When we are strong enough all names will be revealed. To get on our > mailing list just send me an e-mail. Good for you! The name Freezone Sea Org is a nice attention getter for promoting the effort, but you really should have an official name that is slightly different. How about The Un-Sea-Org. Are you planning on standard or an enhanced standard tech or some other flavor or a pick and choose smorgasboard like Valerie Stansfield was doing at her freezone center? Are you planning on other reforms? I've been promoting a whole list of things to fix. The most extensive version is in the final section (number 32 of 32) of the Super Scio post. I find it unbelievable that some idiot actually responded by singing the virtues of the notorious RPF. I'll post some more about that separately. Best Wishes, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio Humor - Keeping Electricity Working HUMOR - KEEPING ELECTRICITY WORKING The loyalist officers in 4th dimensional hiding captured the following post from the alt.religion.electricity newsgroup in an alternate universe. Any resemblance to Earth people living or dead is purely accidental and is due to God playing dice with the various universes. - The Pilot ==================== KEEPING ELECTRICITY WORKING - A 21st Century Retrospective By David MissCambridge, Keeper of the Current Issue authority granted by the first Church of Edison As KofC of the CofE, it is with humble pride and pleasure that I announce the upcoming hundreth anniversary of one of our most basic policies, Keeping Electricity Working, issued by our glorious founder on Jan 17, 1898. It is this policy above all others which has preserved the technology of electricity for us and future generations. It was here that TOM first identified the evil world conspiracy of financiers, plagarists, and space aliens that was attempting to pervert his discoveries and deny electricity to mankind. Consider, for example, the evil Tesla who proposed that the divine current should ALTERNATE! A stupid and ridiculous idea. How would it achive any useful work if the current simply zig zagged back and forth in the wires? He would have undermined the entire struture of DIRECT CURRENT which moves DIRECTLY to its target and achieves LIGHNING FAST 100 PERCENT STANDARD RESULTS. But TAE, by virtue of his superior genius, saw that it wasn't just the yappings of Tesla and Westinghouse, for the same attacks and unworkable ideas were showing up all over the world. Of course we know that the characteristics of a suppressive person would be to deny the truth of the CofE and seek to deny it financing by undercutting its prices. But it was only TAE himself who could spot the true source of all these SPs, the true suppressive influence behind them. We now know that it was the Venusians, led by their evil telepathic ruler, XeMoonie, who inspired these diabolical attacks. But by means of our tin foil protective hats and an enlightened leagal system, we have driven his influences off of Earth and will keep mankind free of his dreadful doings. Now remember the key points, 1. stamp out any experimentation or variation of our workable tech. 2. Buy a fresh foil hat from your local CofE every year 3. Report any squirrel wire twisters to the police immediately. Remember that only certified CofE graduates may work on anything connected with electricity. We know that the courses are expensive, but the results are proven. For Electricity is dangerous and anyone who applys sqirrel practicies to twist wires on their own could be electrocuted or have their house burned down. Your entire neighborhood is at risk if you ignore them. Keeping our homes safe is everybody's job. And we have a wonderful new TECH BREAKTHROUGH to announce. By careful study of TAE's research notes, we have discovered that the size of the wire might be increased to carry more current. Our new double sized copper conductors will be available next year at only $100 dollars a yard. Not only will this bring about obvious savings, but it will allow the average apartment house to support more lighting fixtures. With this breakthrough, we think that it will even be possible to place lights in stairwells. Just imagine it, your iceman will no longer have to stumble around in the dark with a heavy and potentially dangerous cube of ice for your icebox. We are working now on a project to carve TAE's writtings onto iron plates and burry these in secret vaults all over the world. This will ensure that future civilizations will benifit from his wisdom and knowlege. Send your contributions in now. Building a better future, Davy (end of interdimensionally captured transmission) ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - Answering Homer About Mayo ANSWERING HOMER ABOUT MAYO On 9 Sept 97, "Homer W. Smith" responded on subject "Super Scio - On Confusing Pilots and Mayonaise" > The Pilot (pilot@hiddenplace.com) wrote: > >> philosophies. Even outside orthodox Scientology, David is >> basically a standard tech adherent. > > Not. > >> So don't confuse pilots and mayonaise. The one comes packaged in >> a jar, standard and certified, a predictable product. > > Present time Mayo bears no resemblance to anything standard, and > certified that comes in a jar. > > Have you talked to him recently? > > Homer Nope. I have no idea of what he is up to except that there is a cute picture of him at the beach available on the net. In the old days he was Mr Standard Tech. When he launched the AAC it was still pretty much a standard operation. I'm only familiar with his version of the Nots levels and they seemed pretty similar to the org's. In other words, he seemed like freezone "standard tech" (in contrast to Alan for example). If he has advanced to discovering new theories and techniques, then I'm very glad to hear it. He does have tremendous experience with the subject and one really would expect him to make new breakthroughs. My post was mainly meant to point out the stupidity of thinking that I'm David Mayo. If we were the same it would make it too easy for the org to play dead agenting games and it reduces the number of opponents. So I trashed the idea as hard as I could. If I offended David, my appologies. Best, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - Attn Stephan Blandow about R245 and Reform ANSWERING STEPHAN - About R245 and Reform On Sat, 06 Sep 1997, Stefan Blandow Stefan Blandow > The Pilot wrote: > > > > MORE ON R2-45 AND JOKING > > > > Have the wrong newser > > > > It used to be that you could sit around in the course room > > laughing at the tapes and joking with the other students. > > We used to say "if it isn't fun, it isn't Scientology". > > The truest thing there is, gosh and golly, and big eyes, all the time. > > Again, > What newsreader can you recommend, Pilot, The > > > Sorry if I've gotten carried away here, > > May your wings take you far away and carry back, I was behind you > > steff Sounds like you're an old timer. Please post some stories. I'm especially interested in what was happening at the top while I was off in the boonies. Or stories of how things were before I got involved. I wonder sometimes how much of the sane, smart, and pleasant organization that I joined was really a product of the people who had been in since the 1950s and were trying to make the dream real. The results were always sporatic. There was a lot of individual effort to smooth over the rough spots. The long term solution was seen as more research. We didn't have all the answers. We didn't even have expanded grades but we did have the occasional keyed out OT, just enough wild and sporatic phenomena to let us know that we were hot on the trail of something. But clear and the early OT levels were coming out even as I was getting involved and joining staff and training as an auditor. There was a lot of wishful thinking about the confidential levels that were coming out. Even the top class 7 auditors hadn't done these things. So everybody was still coping and making do. There was no idea of being standard or having all the answers. But there was the heavy PR coming down from on high which said that Ron finally had found all the answers and that these OT levels were it. In retrospect, knowing now what was on those levels, it was a gross betrayal. Not because the data was wrong, but because it was shallow and motivatorish and was not of comparable magnitude to things that had been found earlier. That stuff could have been put out as another little piece in the puzzel. The solo audit techniques could have been released as the solution to getting enough auditing cheeply (the PC audits himself). We could have embarked upon digging out the thousands of earlier processes, dusting them off, and filling out the lineup. The research could have continued. Instead Ron had to take to sea and pour money down the funnel of a floating albaross and crush all the voices of dissent. As each new tidal wave swept the beach, we thought that it was the last. We blamed the insanities on the fact that the operation was new and the sea org staff was green. We expected that Ron would train them up and that they would get through the new and wonderful OT levels and be freed of the abberations that caused them to wreak havoc on the landscape. But instead, the tidal waves grew higher, and after FEBC training, the dramatizations were worse instead of better. And the clearing course and OT levels were shown to be failures as to solving abberation. People did make gains while running them but they were far from being the ultimate and final solution that they were promoted as. The only thing that prevented a total collapse was the introduction of expanded grades, and Ron didn't even bother to put those together himself, he just deligated it to others to dig out some of the old processes which had worked well in earlier days. But force and exploitation and money making continued to be the order of the day. Which is why I am pushing so hard for reform. Once upon a time there was a group that I could be proud of and which I could in good conscience introduce my friends to. I want very much to make the dream real and achieve those early goals. It does seem like the only way is to fly far and circle back, spiraling ever higher. Enough for now. As to your question about newsreaders, If you are running under windows I would suggest that you get a copy of Free Agent which is shareware that is easily downloadable. Even if you are making due with the newsreader capability of Netscape (download the latest release), you can write your posts with an ordinary text editor and then pickup the file from the newsreader. Personally, I write everything with a text editor and jam it into the newsfeed with homebrew code, so I don't use any commercial software to post. I do it this way because I wish to remain anonymous. That way I can ensure that everything in the message header (even the date time stamps and posting host) is bogus. You don't need to go to such extremes. Best, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - Christianity (attn Michael, Joe, Neal, Keith) RESPONDING ABOUT SCIENTOLOGY AND CHRISTIANITY The discussion began with a post of Keith's. Michael Voytinsky responded with a list of various points criticizing Scientology. And I decided to put in my own two cents worth, reinforcing some points and suggesting that others should be discarded or revised because they were too weak or questionable. One of the points I felt was weak was the anti-christian thing and both Neal Hamel and Joe Harrington took exception to that. Here is the start of my 5 Sept post to set the context - the subject line was "Super Scio - Answering Michael Voytinsky" # ANSWERING MICHAEL VOYTINSKY # # On 25 Aug 97, "Michael Voytinsky" # posted the following: # # # > Keith wrote in article # > <5trn6h$lcu$1@nadine.teleport.com>... # > # > > The one thing I know is that the picture of Scientology as a whole # > > is nothing like it is portrayed here on ARS. # > # > Please enlighten us about what Scientology is really like. # # I thought that I might butt in here, not meaning to get in to a fight # over these things but simply to let you know what is obvious even # to a Scientologist verses what seems to be questionable ground. # I do want the Scientologists to wake up and if there are weak spots # in a list like this, they use them to wiggle out from under instead # of facing the unpleasant truths. # # > Are any of the following false: #> 4) Scientology's claim that it is compatible with other religions is a lie. # # Again shakey. I would say that it is half compatible, requiring # significant adjustments of faith as one advances. The heavy # anti-Christ comment on the Class VIII tape is not only confidential # but is also restricted to Class VIII auditors only, so that even an # OT 8 is unaware of it. People who do OT 3 are not told that business # about Christianity being an R6 dramatization and are not forced # to abandon Christian ideas. I never saw it until I read it on # the internet, and I still discount it as one of Ron's mistakes. # # The most that you could say would be that the inner circle of # Scientology management is hostile towards Christianity. You can't # really say it of the membership even at the upper levels. # # But one is expected to come to an acceptance of past lives. That, # however, is true of all of the Christian metaphysical practices # in the US, so its not that big a jump. I was raised a token # Lutheran with heavy metaphysical trimmings (Edgar Casey, Cosmic # Conciousness, etc.) so I found 100 percent compatibility between # the Christianity I was raised in and Scientology and I still # consider myself a Christian although many Christians would think # of me as some strange sort of heritic. To this Neal Hamel responded: > Once again, not shakey. Here is a quote from the publically available > PAB 31 written in the 50's: > > "Religion does much to keep the assumption in restimulation, > being basically a control mechanism used by those who have > sent the preclear into a body. You will find the cross as a > symbol all over the universe, and the Christ legend as > implant in preclears a million years ago." > > > and this from the same PAB: > > "A few operating thetans -scarcity- could lead to trouble. > Witness the chaos resulting from the activities and other > determinism technology of one operating thetan, 2,000 years ago. > It is despicable and utterly beneath contempt to tell a man he > must repent, that he is evil. Those who talk most about peace on > earth and good-will among men themselves carry forward the seas > of unrest, war and chaos." > > In other words, Hubbard is saying that Christ's message is despicable. > Compatible? Most emphatically not! > > -Neal H. On Sept 6, Joe Harrington picked up Neal's post and carried it further, providing one of his own earlier essays in which he also quoted PAB 31 and a lot of other material (Helatrobus Heaven implant references etc.). Since this has been posted before, and since the original materials are available at the clambake website, I wouldn't repeate the entire thing here. The only incorrect reference that he quotes is the bogus OT 8 of 1980 (probably part of Capt Bill's Galatic Patrol stuff - see Bill's website and compare the style) and omitting it doesn't invalidate the rest of Joe's paper. As to PAB 31, all that I can say is that I've been shot in the ass. The damn tech volumes (old or new version) do not include this one (they skip from PAB 28 to PAB 32). So now I'm hunting for one of the old books of collected PABs, I think that I have one burried in a box somewhere. But I think that my earlier argument still holds true. In the 1950s, Ron was generally careful to label his own anti-Christian sentiments as a personal matter and divorce them from the tenents of Scientology. He even starts out the same way with his anti-Psych rantings, telling people that they don't have to agree with it or accept it as part of the subject of Scientology. But his postion on psychs deteriorates rapidly and eventually he has them labled as the enemy and the orgs primed for active attack against them. As to Christianity, he remains fairly mellow until the black days when he founded the Sea Org and even then his rantings in this regard are kept confidential. And, thank goodness, he never primes the organization to get into a fight with Christianity as they do with the psychs and "squirrels". And so you will not find overt behavior. The only solid ground is as follows: a) Hubbard himself did not like Christianity. b) Scientologists must adjust any other religious beliefs that they hold so as to allow for the existance of past lives. c) Currently the inner circle of Scientology management does hold anti-Christian sentiments because of various confidential rantings. My own personal agenda for reforming Scientology requires that point c) above must change. This is one of the many things that went bad as Scientology entered its psychotic phase in the late 1960s. It shifted from a base of ARC (affinity, reality, and communciation) and responsibility to a base of hatred and blame everything on the bad guys. The anti-Christian sentiments are the least of it and are not encouraged among the membership. The anti-sex sentiments are stronger (they now qualify for Orwell's "Junior Anti-Sex League" as described in 1984) and are pushed at the membership. The anti-homosexual ones are even stronger and bar one from upper levels. And all of these pale against the real hatred of SPs, Psychs, and "Squirrels" where the org attacks actively. All this hatred has to go. None of it was present in the gentle organization that I originally gave my alliegance to. What I remember is John Mac (the first clear) giving nice lectures reconciling his own Christian and Scientology beliefs, and he didn't even bother to reconcile his homosexuality with Scientology because it wasn't even an issue in those days. Of course he is long since declared suppressive as was any voice of reason during the Sea Org madness. My real point is that the anti-Christian arguments are weak and do not ring true with the membership. They come across as false accusations even when they are not, and there are so many contrary examples such as myself who do reconcile Scientology with Christianity that you will end up with pissing contests instead of delivering a good solid blow that might wake somebody up. So why throw marshmellows when you've got real rocks in the arsenel? Again confessing to my own personal agenda here, I encourage valid attacks (please, no violence) because Scientology management must be made to change. Reforming Scientology at this time requires pressure both from without and from within. But please keep it on solid ground. Haggling and name calling and saying what a shit Hubbard was or things to that effect just encourages the "us versus them" attitude that I want to eliminate. Best, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - Discussion with Koos KOOS DISCUSSION For once Koos has said a couple of correct things mixed into his usual rantings. Therefore I will treat this message with respect and try to answer it in a sensible and reasonable manner rather than making fun. On 6 Sep 97, Koos Nolst Trenite wrote in response to my previous post "Super Scio - Adventures in Koosland" > Interesting how "Mr. Anonymous and Hidden The Pilot" uses all the > SAME kinds of terms and same attempts to make nothing of Koos, to > make Koos "not exist", as the other well-known psychos do. > > This really tells all about Mr. Anonymous Hidden "The Pilot". > > "The Pilot" would make a good OSA-frontman (per the excellent and > correct definition provided recently to us by Robert Vaughn Young). If I were an OSA front man, would I be complaining about the evils of the RPF, the wrongness of attacking the freezone, or putting up webpages like "The Orgs Grades are Out"? > Scientologists (L. Ron Hubbard, Richard Reiss, "The Pilot") try to > enforce the idea that the only future lies in Scientology. Don't confuse apples and oranges. I think that the future lies in understanding and deveoping the capabilities of the mind and spirit. I might sometimes loosely call this Scientology, but I don't mean the CofS. I mean anything which works in this direction, which would even include you if you ever achive real wisdom. > That idea happens to be very false. > > The truth is that the communication techniques of Scientology, > called Auditing, will be taken over by other disciplines of > science and therapy; and those people will create the future, > and not Scientologists. This is fine by me. Whoever can use it should use it. If it is true, then it is science and natural law which cannot be copyrighted or owned by any singular individual or group. > I'm very sorry to tell this to Scientologists and to their OSA-guys, > but that is how it will be: > > The future lies in life, and in people who USE discoveries, and not > with those of Scientology Organizations, who prevent people from > using new discoveries, or who use discoveries only to dominate > people. This statement is the reason I am treating your post with respect. Because this is correct. The CofS will only have a place in the future if they reform completely and become helpers instead of dominators. > Thus there will be no "Super Scio" or Scientology in charge of life, > but there will be LIFE, and people will use whatever discoveries > there are, for LIFE, and not for a fascistic idea. Here you are totally off base. Where have I ever said that Super Scio will be in charge of life? Neither super scio nor scientology as a technical subject could ever be in charge of life, because they are tools and studies. You are confusing these things with the official "Church of Scientology" (the CofS) which is an organization that is trying to run peoples lives and is doing a very bad job of it. If you want to call the CofS fascistic, I can see your point. But that is not me and it is not the tech. Please get the difference instead of generalizing. > There are many discoveries that have been made, already in the last > two centuries, which will affect spiritual and social life of the > future and will mould it Agreed. Again you are correct. > - the idea that you would be all set if > you only study Scientology, or only "Super Scio", is entirely false, > but such a false idea is necessary to create and maintain a mafia > and a monopoly. Yet again you confuse me with the CofS. Have I ever said that I had all the answers? I have done the exact opposite. I bend over backwards to encourage freezone research and other seekers of truth. It is only the CofS which is currently claiming to have all the answers and trying to maintain a monopoly. This is simply an organization which is behaving very badly, acting like the mafia and attacking any attempts to further research the subject. It is not even the Scientology tech which does this, but simply the existing organization. > The hidden motive for such false ideas, is - AS ALWAYS - the refusal > to face suppression from one or more individuals. > (see the 'Understanding Suppression Series' > http://Art-Org.com/ri-bulletins/usp.htm) You have too many things confused together here. The hidden motive for acting like the mafia and dominating others is very simply a desire to dominate and control and enslave others. It is the pawns who have been dominated and are being controlled who are suffering for "their refusal to face suppression from one or more individuals". In other words, you have confused the masters and their slaves. > This is why "The Pilot" is locked up, by himself, in his Ivory Tower: > To not have to face the force of evil, and > to feel free to smash the force of good (of Koos). I am neither by myself nor am I locked up in an Ivory Tower. You make the mistake of confusing my personal life with my pretended identity on the internet. As far as not facing evil, I think that I am working very hard to take something that is acting evil (the current CofS) and change it back into a force for good in the world (the original goals and ideals that I believed in when I joined). As to smashing Koos, if you post things that I feel to be goodness, as you did this time, then I will not smash them. When you make unfounded accusations and foolish rantings, you encourage others to smash you. When you spot truth accurately, you will get encouragement except for those who have vested interests. My only vested interest in all this is to have the satisfaction of seeing the CofS actually become the good and helpful organization that they falsely promised to be. I and others worked very hard for them for many years out of an incorrect belief that we were working to set mankind free instead of dominating and controlling it. I want them to make good on their promise. Let them become in truth what they pretended to be. > Koos Nolst Trenite - Ambassador for Mankind The Pilot - Ambassador for Freedom ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - About Jewish Scientologists ABOUT JEWISH SCIENTOLOGISTS There has been some discussion on the subject of Is "marcabs" Hubbard's code word for "jews"? (sorry I can't find the original post). This is barking up the wrong tree and just asking to put your foot in it. There is a huge percentage of Jews in American Scientology. Definitely greater than the national average. The reason is New York which has a large liberal reformed Jewish population who are not particularly religious but who are educated middle class with enough money to pay for courses etc. Jerry Sienfield and Woody Allen present the typical image. I've heard it said that there are more Jews in New York than any other city in the world including Tel Aviv. New York is probably the number three center for Scientology in America and might even be the number two recruitment center because Clearwater is not a top area for getting in new people. A large percentage of high ranking American Scientologists are non-practicing Jews. If you start claiming that Scientology is anti-Jewish, they might give you enough rope to hang yourself and then trot out a literal army of Jewish Scientologists. As far as black people go, I've never seen any racial prejudice in Scientology (but maybe you should ask a black Scientologist). The percentage is disproportionately low, but I think that is because ghetto dwellers don't have the money and people who have gotten out of the ghetto are learly of being expolited. That only leaves well educated middle class black people as potential customers and some of them do not like American Scientology's total refusal to even recognize that races exist. In other words, American Scientologists are generally against anything like welfare, affirmative action, quotas, or any concessions to race. On the other hand, they are truly an equal opportunity employer because they manage exclusively by statistics and do not look at the color of a person's skin before throwing them into the RPF. I can't say how it is in South Africa, some of them might have some stupid idea about thetans who get born in black vs white bodies, but that idea absolutely does not exist in America. I'm not even sure that you'll find it in South Africa. I remember that John MacMasters (1st clear) who was from South Africa was very proud of having been adopted by one of the native tribes there (this is when he was still in good standing in Scientology). The really sad thing is that many OTs who are black (Amanda Ambrose, the jazz singer, for example) have wanted very much to see Scientology brought into the ghettos but have been blocked by policy from doing anything effective. I don't mean that a ghetto mission is against policy. In fact there is a policy which encourages starting them. But the practicalities of the matter are that such a mission cannot be set up in a viable manner. The missions are forbidden to undercut the standard prices. There is no workable way to finance it (it costs a fortune to start a mission these days). There is no flexibility in policy or standard tech for putting together the kind of self help group that would work well for poor people (of any color). And lack of money is seen as down-stat and "you are responsible for the condition you're in". My data may be stale on this. I'm talking from a 1980s timeframe here. But if the organization had any real ARC for people, it would rethink tech and policy to find a way to get real self help missions into the poorer areas. That they wouldn't do that shows where their intentions really lie. The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - LRH SciFi (Review for St. Andreux) RON'S SCI-FI (REVIEW FOR ST. ANDREUX) On 6 Oct 97, saint andreux posted the following on subject "Mission Earth" > Okay, I'm bored with reading all my Phillip K. Dick books > over and over again. I'm considering popping down to the > local library and picking up the Mission Earth series. > > Question, is fighting my way through the first one even > worth the time and effort? And, if so, will I want to > make my way through all 10? > > I like Frank Herbert, I like PKD, and I like Tolkien, Burroughs, > etc., so epic or book series don't bother me, but was LRH > about as good at writing sci-fi as he was writing philosophy? > > -- > saint andreux --><-- O G Y R N E T W O R K www.prairienet.org/~saint > SacraMenstrual Church of the SubGenius Local 451 Outreach Ministry > LOGIC OF SLACK : PURE HATRED IS THE PUREST FORM OF LOVE > "His name was Xenu. He used renegades." - LRH from OT3. The Tech Is > Bunk. It's about time somebody posted a review without any vested interest either in making Ron out to be all glorious or totally incompetant. Since I enjoy Sci-Fi, I'll do it. Of course if you don't like Sci-Fi, you wouldn't like Ron's either. For a baseline, my favorite Sci-Fi author is Robert Heinlein and I would recommend his "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" and "Stranger in a Strange Land" as among the best ever written (better than any of Ron's fiction). The following is, of course, just my opinion. Battlefield Earth is his best and deserves to be called a classic. Final Blackout is his number two book and might even be called a classic as well. Highly recommended. The rest of the novels are not great works, but will pass the time well enough. Fear deserves special mention because of the impact at the end. Many of the others, like Death's Deputy or Kingslayer, have an interesting twist or gimmick, so they might be worth reading although they suffer a bit from pulp era deficiencies. His poorest writing is the Mission Earth series. I do not recommend it and if I were the org I would be embarrassed to have it on the shelves. It reads like an unpolished first draft, and that is probably what it is. Heinlein suffered from a similar bad period when he was very ill and his wife Virginia sent out some unpolish material ("I will fear no evil") and the fans were very unhappy. I suspect that this is the case with Mission Earth. A hastily jotted down rambling that goes on and on. Don't count on it getting better in volume 2, it doesn't really improve until about volume 8 or 9 (and it is possible that somebody else finished it, immitating the poor style but doing slightly better). It should have been worked over and tightened up. Cut down to about a third of the size (there are nowhere near enough interesting ideas to carry that much wordage). The one interesting point for Scientologists is that the alien's agent on Earth is Rockecenter, a poorly disguised parody of Rockafeller. He is identified as knowingly working for the space aliens. Another interesting point is that the series is written from the viewpoint of one of the lesser villians, who is constantly being bested by the hero. That kind of gimmick is not suited to a work of this length, because there is no comfortable way of settling down and identifying with someone. One almost wonders if he was writing from the villians viewpoint as a sort of purgative. So there you have it - Battlefield Earth good, Mission Earth bad. It seems like he showed great promise but flubbed it in the end. Time to Beam Up, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - About THE TRUTH as Posted ABOUT "THE TRUTH" AS POSTED On 7 Oct 97, elrond@cgo.wave.ca (Gregg Hagglund) put out a wonderful response to a bitter post by hoss@stopaf.com entitled "The Truth". Gregg's answer was so good that I just have to quote it and then offer up some commentary of my own, especially addressed to those who are still in the CofS. > In article <3439B479.42EB@stopaf.com>, hoss@stopaf.com wrote: > > > The Truth: > > My, my, aren't we dictatorial! > These may be your truths and those of others and > if you are comfortable with this that is fine with me, > but your title should have been 'My Truths', IMHO. > > > #1. There is no god > . > Then be alone. > > > #2. There is no afterlife. > > Then have no comfort. > > > #3. Morality exists only to the extent that human beings perceive it. > > Yes, one is most definitely responsible for oneself: God does *not* > intervene. > > > #4. Jesus Christ died, and was buried. End of story. > > End of the mortal story. You won't know the immortal one > until you are mortally done. > > > #5. There is no such thing as karma. > > Some recognise moral debts as karma, some think Karma > is fate, but many believe *nothing* is written. > > > #6. There is no such thing as a "soul". > > Don't worry about it, it comes free, even if you don't > care about it. > > > #7. The meaning of life is whatever you want it to be. > > As long as you try to live in harmony then you won't > go wrong. God doesn't require recognition. > > > Any questions? > > Yes, why did you feel compelled to impose your 'Truths' > on some Usenet Groups which would find it inherently offensive? > Are you as arrogant as some of those whom say that the > only path to immortality is theirs and no other? > Why throw an insult at the Christians by denouncing Jesus > or irritating the Pagans by touting your ill feelings of the > 'other side'? Do you expect either to try to convert you? > That is foolish, as it doesn't matter whether you believe or not > in the immortal side. > > Live in harmony now and when you come to dine at God's > table, you may look a little sheepish the first time, but you will > be welcomed by Her all the same! > > Now, please remember for future reference that ARS is > discussing Scientology: its crimes and criminality. > Here Co$ beliefs are relatively unimportant, ( Co$ teaches > there is no God or Christ, but that is a secret so *don't* > tell anyone ok?) their anti-social activities *are*. > So please narrow your newsgroups, thanks. > > Best, > > Gregg SP4 > http://www.cgocable.net/~elrond Now to all you good Scientologists, First, skip the one paragraph about Co$ so that you can view the above without prejudice. Read it again (without the offending paragraph). Does this look like the writing of an evil suppressive person? Does this sound like it was bad intentioned? Does this sound like it was meant to enslave people and convince them that they are mud, or does it sound like the work of somebody who has a bit of spiritual awareness. Is the above theta or entheta? Forget the party line, what do you really think? Then please tell me why the author is carrying the designation of SP4 and displaying it proudly? Why is he in a viscious battle with the CofS? Do you think that this might, just might, mean that there could be something, some little something, wrong with the CofS? This has nothing to do with whether or not the tech works (I think it works, but that's beside the point). It has to do with organizational behavior and operating policies. Of course I wouldn't dream of evaluating for you. After all, if its true for you .... But maybe just this once, you could be three feet back of the organization, three feet back of the supposed battles for freedom, and take an objective look at what's really going on. After all, the freedom of all mankind is at stake here. You really owe it to yourself and the world to take a clear look for once. Yours in Freedom, The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio Humor - About Sex and Uniforms On 30 Sep 97, lsaderrick@aol.com (LsaDerrick) wrote on subject "Why is sex suppressive in the Sea Org" > I was told by someone (not on ars) that in Sea Org, the color of uniform > (white or blue) designates whether or not the person wearing it is allowed > to marry, reproduce, etc. And if so is it blue=breeder, white = > non-breeder; or the other way around. > > Is this a myth? If so PLEASE explain the blue vs white colors of uniform. > > Thanks > . The ones who wear white are virgins. They have a special course for those SO members who are about to be married to hat them on how to have sex. They must begin by looking at Ron's picture and saying "Thank you Ron for the pleasure I am about to recieve". The actual screwing must be in accordance with the auditor's code, with no invalidation, evaluation, and continuing the processes repetitatively without variation until the EP (end phenomena) is reached. After consummation, they must get a solo Nots completion to examine their genitiles and blow off any of Xemu's little helpers that may have rubbed off. Married couples must do a routing form and apply for ethics clearance each time they have sex. Although the sex is free, the before and after consultations are charged for at high rates. ---- Sorry, just another joker's and degrader's fit. None of the above is true. The Pilot ========================================== Subj : Super Scio - Scientology Weddings SCIENTOLOGY WEDDINGS On 11 Sep 97, scott@webcorp.com posted on subject "Re- Rape in the Sea Org" > In article <3415E417.2577C8E7@innernet.net>, > Joe Cisar wrote: > > > But then they weren't really married, either, since it > > was only a scientology wedding. > > This raises some interesting questions. What is the ritual form of the > $ci wedding service? Are people married in a $ci service "really" > married? Is a $ci wedding more "real" than a Moonie wedding? > > Scott B. > > "goin' to the Sea Org, and we're goin' to get married..." Scientology weddings are supposed to be true legal weddings under dire threat of ethics action. The ceremonies book has 4 different wedding ceremonies written by Ron. A single ring and a double ring ceremony in Scientology speak and another of each in non-Scientology speak. The Scientology ones have things like postulating ARC and the non-Scientology ones have phrases like a wife should be able to have a cat if she wants one and the husband should provide it. The usual drill is that anyone who is a Scientology minister by virtue of doing the minister's course may perform the ceremony but they do it as a designated stand-in for the official chaplin of a Scientology organization who is legally ordained and registered and is responsible for counter signing and regestering the marriage certficate. This may vary in different countries. The reason for the heavy ethics is that in the old days this was abused. Scientologists did used to get remarried unofficially while waiting for their divorce papers to come through on their previous marriage. The business about no sex outside of marriage made this a desirable action for Sea Org members. This was seen as very bad PR and possibly dangerous leagally and therefore the practice was crushed very quickly. I believe that now they even have minimum times that you have to remain married before divorcing and to wait after divorcing before you can remarry (I think six months or a year each). And its all got to be ultra leagal or else people will end up in the RPF. Best, The Pilot ========================================== See the "SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" by the Pilot at http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/pilot.html or http://www.igs.net/~michaelv/scnreform.htm or The Pilots Home Page at http://super.zippo.com/~freezone/pilot/index.htm Get the Pilot materials (the 32 part SUPER SCIO book) at: ftp://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/pub/ss/index.html or pick up the ss## files from Homer's archive at lightlink.com. All of this weeks posts will be collected in Super Scio Archive #11, 12, and 13 and posted to ACT. ------------------