Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology From: pilot@hiddenplace.com (The Pilot) Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 32 - JUNE 98 PILOT POSTS TO ARS/ACT Date: 12 Jun 1998 14:00:27 POST32.txt SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 32 - JUNE 98 PILOT POSTS TO ARS/ACT ========================================== Contents: subj: Super Scio - MASTER LIST OF LRH TAPES 0/3 subj: Super Scio - LRH EXPLAINS WHY OSA IS SO MEAN subj: Super Scio Humor - Code Of A Fanatic subj: Super Scio - To Deana Holmes subj: Super Scio - Answering Hilary's Questions To The Freezone subj: Super Scio - Ralph's New Scientology Helpline subj: Super Scio - To LittleLRH subj: Super Scio - To Wolf On Meters Etc. subj: Super Scio - ANOTHER MESSAGE TO ROD FLETCHER subj: Super Scio - Delaware Street Invalidates LRH subj: Super Scio - Publishing Plans (attn Ivy, Fza, etc.) subj: Super Scio - Remembering Raymond Kemp subj: Super Scio - The 5th Invader (attn Paul & D) subj: Super Scio - The Show Me Process (attn Sarah) subj: Super Scio Tech - Self Clearing Ch 3 Improvement subj: Super Scio - Dichotomies And Reality Generators ========================================== subj: Super Scio - MASTER LIST OF LRH TAPES 0/3 MASTER LIST OF LRH TAPES 0/3 The freezone could use its own super duper list of LRH Tape lectures with all the data on it instead of the shallow materials list that is at the org's website. Especially with tape transcripts begining to show up on the internet. Some of the critics might like a copy too, especially as it names confidential lectures. It is around 220K in size so I'm posting it to ARS/ACT in three parts. I'm hopeing that fza.org might combine them together and make it available as a file for downloading. I'm not including it in the archive post because it is too big. For people who only get clear-l and avoid newgroups, note that you can set your newsreader to only pull the headers so that you can select messages for downloading instead of pulling the entire feed. It took a hell of a lot of work and it might have some flaws. As a side effect, I ended up listening to dozens of tapes in the last few weeks, digging out old reels I hadn't heard in decades and so forth. Here is the introductory section. ---- MASTER LIST OF LRH TAPED LECTURES: A thorough study of LRH materials is an important aspect of the Scientology religion for many of those who practice it. Although the orthodox CofS provides a list of LRH materials by year at their website, the list is incomplete because it omits materials that they consider confidential or otherwise wish to hide, and it also is missing data. It does not include the lecture series designations and tape numberings that are needed to tie old and new tape sets together nor does it show various renamings and repackagings. As such, it is inadequate for use in researching or cataloging old tapes or indexing a tape collection. Also, anyone who does have an extensive tape collection needs a simple text file which they can download to their own computer and annotate as desired. I have been handwriting annotations on the old flag master list (source #1 below) for many years in this manner and I needed to do this computerized version for my own use and wished to make it available to others so that they could benifit from my work instead of having to repete it. So here it is, the most complete list of LRH tapes that exists outside of Gold's hidden archives. I'm sure that they could do better than I have, but of course modern policy is to inhibit communications so we end up with duplicate work. ---- Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - LRH EXPLAINS WHY OSA IS SO MEAN LRH EXPLAINS WHY OSA IS SO MEAN LRH SAYS THAT IF YOU SEC CHECK PEOPLE TOO MUCH WITHOUT RUNNING OUT ANY MOTIVATORS, THEY WILL GET MEANER AND MEANER. This is from an LRH tape lecture of 24 July 1952, titled "E-meter behavior versus flow lines and patterns". This is one of the tech 88 supplementary lectures and the transcript can be found in new R&D volume 11. This specific quote is on page 129. ---- Begin LRH quote. "You can run overt act, overt act, overt act ... Oh he just gets meaner and meaner and meaner and meaner!" "You keep running these overt acts out and you're leaving unexplained motivators there. I mean, he's got motivators he's never used. You're giving him this tremendous supply of motivators. And, "Look at all these things that happened to me. I can do anything I want to anybody". And he goes out and he bawls out his boss and he bawls out this guy and that guy and then he sees people come into the parking intersection, he's liable to bump their bumpers and so forth. And he's talking around mean, ornery, he gets sarcastic". "Boy, you're wondering, "Is this what it's like bringing somebody up the Tone Scale?" No, No, that's what it's like by taking out all the overt acts a fellow has done and leave the motivators in place: he just gets meaner and meaner." "If you take the motivators out he gets more and more pathetic, more and more pathetic, you see? He's got to have more and more motivators. And when you take the overt acts out, he gets meaner and meaner, and meaner and meaner. He gets ornerier. He becomes capable of more overt acts." "So you've got to have a balance there". End of LRH quote ------ Anyone whose familiar with auditing the grades knows that we balance the two sides in processing. You run things that you've done and things that were done to you, back and forth. Even grade 2 which is aimed at overts switches off between the two sides. The only exception is those damn sec checks. And that is mostly done to staff, and it is especially done to Sea Org and OSA. It makes them mean and nasty. This really explains a lot. Thank you Ron. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio Humor - Code Of A Fanatic HUMOR - CODE OF A FANATIC This just in from the Loyal Officers hiding in the 4th dimension. They were telepathically trying to pick up the recent internet posting of old tech volume 6 which contains HCOPL OF 14 OCTOBER 1968R REVISED 1 JANUARY 1976 titled "The Auditor's Code" but instead they got this! HCOPL OF 14 OCT 1968R REVISED 1 JAN 1990 THE CODE OF A FANATIC 1. As a fanatic, I promise never to invalidate anything that my leaders tell me to believe. 2. As a fanatic, I promise never to evaluate anything for myself but only to believe what I am told. 3. As a fanatic, I promise to administer only standard footbullets to myself in the standard way. 4. As a fanatic, I promise to spend all my time at the org and never ever go bowling. 5. As a fanatic, I promise to work night and day even if I am tired and hungry. 6. As a fanatic, I promise to enjoy eating rice and beans no matter how overrun I get on them. 7. As a fanatic, I promise not to permit anybody to get audited unless they pay huge bucks to the org, and to ensure that they then only get sec checking and not real auditing. 8. As a fanatic, I promise never to sympathize with anybody who has been hurt or mistreated or taken advantage of, especially if this was done by the org. 9. As a fanatic, I promise to never let anybody act on thier own determinism but to insist that they only follow command intention and the orders of international management. 10. As a fanatic, I promise never to try and leave the org or do anything to change or improve my life. 11. As a fanatic, I promise never to get angry with top management but to swallow anything they feel like dishing out to me. 12. As a fanatic, I promise never to use any process I might accidentally read in the LRH materials because most of them are old and we don't do that anymore and the few that are still in use must be paid for with big bucks. 13. As a fanatic, I promise never to stop doing anything that my seniors have ordered no matter how stupid it seems or how many times it has failed. 14. As a fanatic, I promise never to grant beingness because beings are individuals and do not make good robots. 15. As a fanatic, I promise never to acknowledge that anything ever came into Scientology from any other practice or was discovered by anybody other than Ron. 16. As a fanatic, I promise to suppress all free and open communication on the subject and insist that communication can only take place after properly aquiring issue authority. 17. As a fanatic, I promise never to let anybody make any meaningful comments about Scientology but only to permit entheta communications such as dead agenting critics. 18. As a fanatic, I promise to continue attacking critics as needed until there is nobody left on earth who is capable of thinking a free thought. 19. As a fanatic, I promise never to actually study or listen to LRH materials because I might get misunderstoods but only to do what Int Management says is LRH tech. 20. As a fanatic, I promise to insist that all the mistakes made by the org are imaginary. 21. As a fanatic, I promise to insist that standard tech is absolutely right and never to look at the preclear or what is happening to him. 22. As a fanatic, I promise to gather secrets from my preclear and report them to ethics and be helpful to OSA when they need to cull pc folders for dirt. 23. As a fanatic, I promise to keep anybody from ever getting any refunds because they are responsible for the condition they are in and it doesn't matter what we did, they deserved it anyway. 24. As a fanatic, I promise to help sue anybody who posts Nots 34 or any other confidential materials to the internet and never to let anybody know what the tech is. 25. As a fanatic, I promise to stamp out all practice of Scientology or auditing and attack anyone who posts tech to the net. 26. As a fanatic, I promise to refuse to permit any being to be physically injured, violently damaged, operated on or killed in the name of "mental treatment" unless that treatment is being done on the Introspection Rundown at Flag. 27. As a fanatic, I promise not to permit sexual liberties or violation of David Miscaviage, especially by Grady Ward or Garry Scarf. 28. As a fanatic, I promise to refuse to admit to the ranks of practitioners any being who is capable of thinking for themselves. 29. As a fanatic, I promise to disconnect from anybody that the org doesn't like even if they are friends, family, or people who have saved my life. 30. As a fanatic, I promise to make all my fellow staff members into fanatics too and suppress any attempt at free thoughts that they might have. 31. As a fanatic, I promise to give all my money to the org and to get everybody else's money and give that to the org too. 32. As a fanatic, I promise to stamp out free speach on the internet because people will say bad things and therefore must never be allowed to communicate. 33. As a fanatic, I promise to stamp out religious freedom because nobody must believe anything except what Int Management tells them. .. The list goes on and on. Fantics need many more instructions than thinking beings. At the end is the final promise: 666. As a fanatic, I promise to thank Ron for anything good that happens to me because all good really stems from Ron. Thank You Ron. ------ Those wraskally loyalist officers have yet again tricked me into joking and degrading. Shamfull Sakriledge. I'd better start Reforming. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - To Deana Holmes TO DEANA HOLMES On 11 Jun 98, mirele@newsguy.com (Deana Holmes) posted on subject "Going on a long vacation or leaving permanently...who knows?" > Frankly, I am very annoyed and for the first time in three-plus years > of activity on a.r.s I am taking a vacation. I might also be leaving > permanently. There's a number of reasons for this: > > I don't appreciate being called a cunt by Martin Hunt. > > I don't appreciate being second-guessed by Tilman Hausherr. > > I don't appreciate being called weak (on IRC) by Grady Ward. > > (As for gunbunny's remarks about medication, that is *quite* true. > But gunbunny doesn't count because he's shilling for Scientology.) > > It's as if what I do doesn't matter anymore. What matters is being > sued, apparently. > > It's as if discretion (at the very least) is not the better part of > valour. > > Well, you all can just bite and devour each other; I can see that I'm > not welcome here or on IRC. > > I'll decide later whether or not I'm going to take down my web page. > > Deana Well done and helpful things are often avidly read and appreciated but are not really acknowledged adequately. So let me say thank you. And I really hope that you leave the website up and come back soon. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - Answering Hilary's Questions To The Freezone ANSWERING HILARY'S QUESTIONS TO THE FREEZONE In mid May, Hilary B Osborne posted some questions for her religion class. Unfortunately, she didn't know that most of the apparent dialogue on ACT is actually the feed from Clear-L, and few people noticed her post. And those that did reacted with worry instead of taking an opportunity to engage in some pleasant communication. Since the questions seem harmless, I would think that people could just answer them without worrying about whether or not this was for real or some kind of troll. One could always skip a question that seemed dangerous. In general its good to tell one's stories and get things onto the net. And its silly to live in fear. One can be carefull and take sensible precautions (if one needs to) without having to be paranoid about everything. I'm sorry that I didn't catch this one earlier, but I've been quite busy. Its probably too late for Hilary's purposes, but I thought I would answer anyway, both because they seemed like good questions and to serve as a reference for future researchers. > [posted to ars and (I hope) act. My server doesn't get act, so > please reply by email and/or in ars. I will read act when I get a > chance to use dejanews.] If needed, you can pick up ACT from newsact.lightlink.com. One of Homer's excellent freebies for the freezone. > As part of a religion class, I am writing a paper on the Freezone. > The best way to get accurate information is to ask those involved. > > FYI, I am not now nor have ever been a Scientologist, nor even > interested in getting involved with Scientology. I have no > religious background. I try to remain objective when studying > religions and philosophies. I believe that as long as no one > is harmed, people can believe/do whatever they want. An admirable attitude. > The following is a list of questions that I would like answered. > > Additional information would also be welcome. > -- > -Were you ever a member of the Church of Scientology? Yes. > If yes: > -How long were you a Church member? Officially I still am. Its about 33 years now. > -When did you leave (around the time of significant events?)? I haven't actually left. But there is a point where I became unrestrained and that was when Ron died back in the mid eighties. Up until then I always had the hope that he would take action and straighten things out. Its not that I felt that he was perfect or that all the wrongs were due to his subordinates. Many of the mistakes were his. But I felt that this was due to his having taken on a nearly impossible task. So there was always the hope that he would fix things. Once he was gone, there was nobody left at the top that I trusted and it seemed like the org would just continue to sink. For me there was no choice left but to take personal responsibility and not depend on anybody else to handle the situation. With hindsight I would say that I should have made that decision much earlier. > -Why did you leave--what was the final straw? Besides the above, there was the endless overrun that Flag was pushing on OT 7 (solo nots). From what I could see, there was a terrible lack of understanding of the tech on the part of the highest case supervisors at Flag. > --- > -Are you a member of any organized Freezone group, such as the FZA? No. But of course fza.org is being a wonderful host and really spreading my writings around. > -What of Hubbard's do you accept and which do you reject? > Specifically: Dianetics? OT levels (which ones?)? Specific books/ > policy letters? I am learly of all policy letters. The org works in such a backwards manner that the policies they operate on must be flawed. So on these I expect each one individually to prove its worth rather than assuming that they are all correct. I like some and discard others. Basically I have no trust in this area. For tech on the other hand, my assumption is that Ron is generally correct and I trust Ron's judgement in this area. So I only discard a technical point if there is significant evidence to the contrary. My main differences with the org are in areas where Ron said something one way in the early days and then said something else later. The org always takes the later statement as correct and I often think that he was right the first time. So when there is a conflict, such as the different definitions of clear that were used over the years, I examine each in the light of real results rather than assuming that the later one is correct. On that basis, I think that his 1958 definition of clear was correct and the mid sixties definition is some kind of sales PR that has never held up in practice. > -Is there a point on the bridge at which you stop, or do you use > material from different parts? I'll use anything that works. I have a preferance for the materials of 1952 to 1954, but the modern stuff has its points too. > -Do you use a "grade" system, wherein certain steps must be taken in > order, or is it more freeform? Definitely freeform. That is the 1950s approach. Anything goes. The only limitation is what the person can do, not what certificate they hold. > -If you perform auditing sevices, how much do you charge, relative > to the amount the Church charges? (Same amount? Half? None?) I don't charge. I put my materials out for free, although I do expect that someday I'll collect normal book royalties. Right now I only audit to help friends, and I don't charge for that. If I was auditing professionally, I would charge less than the org, they are way out of line. > -- > -What was you religious background, if any? Lutheran in theory. But my family was heavily into metaphysics. Things like Science of Mind, Rosicrucian drills, etc. > -If you were religious, do you still hold those beliefs? Thanks to the mixture of Lutheranism and metaphysics, I basically grew up with a very Gnostic Christian exposure and I pretty much retain that. I think of Christ as a great teacher and seeker after truth who found kinship with the Universal Mind (to put this in pre-Scientology terms). > -Do you consider Scientology, as you practice it, to be a religion? Definitely. > -- > -Have you noticed a significant demographic difference between the CoS > and the Freezone? (I.e., are Freezoners generally older/younger?) My guess would be that Freezoners are older. At least any who were in CofS are obviously older when they leave it than when they joined. > -If you are anonymous on the net, what is the reason? First, I don't trust OSA to leave me alone if my identity were exposed. I think that unobtrusive freezoners would not have to worry, but I say a lot and that makes me an important target. Second, I want the CofS to reform and I have more leverage if I remain a member. If they find out who I am they would toss me out immediately. Third, there are all the people who would be asked to disconnect from me. Some are themselves reformers and would not want to be put on the spot. Others are people whom I would feel bad about loosing. And of course there is the practical factor that being mysterious does help me get attention and spread the word. I think that it is shamefull to block the tech with the foolish confidentiality just to generate an attractive mystery. But a harmless mystery like "who am I" is lots of fun. And it is very annoying to OSA, which is also a plus. > -Were you ever or are you afraid of Fair Game or other harrassment by > the CoS or others? Certainly. > -- > I am most interested in doctrinal and practice differences between > Freezone and Church. Importance of wordclearing, adherence to policy, > hierarchy, etc.. There is no single Freezone standard. Acceptance of varying technologies is probably the basic difference. Personally, I don't care for many of the policies, and I put far less importance on wordclearing. > I know the Freezone is at most loosely organized, and that you can > speak only for yourself or a small group. > > If you know of anyone else I should contact, please let me know. > Feel free to forward this to other Freezoners. > > I also appreciate additional thoughts and comments. My questions > are by no means complete. > > Thank you. > > -HiLary Osborne I see Scientology as a Gnostic religion where one is expected to seek truth rather than obey authorities. Ron was very anti-authoritarian in the old days and I think that he was right. Many of his early rants against authority can be applied squarely against the modern CofS. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - Ralph's New Scientology Helpline RALPH'S NEW SCIENTOLOGY HELPLINE Ralph Hilton posted: > Tell the staff that you care enough to give them a home while > they find a new job. Tell them that you will help them do their > OT levels and auditing if that is what they want. Tell them that > the OT levels are free on the net. Or if they want to leave scn > altogether then you'll help them with that. > > Tell them that the OT levels are on the net and they have a > place to stay for a month or 2 while they get a job and sort > themselves out. > > The key thing for many staff is that they have no friends if > they leave. That is how they are controlled. To which inducto@aol.com (Inducto) replied : I think Ralph has really hit the nail on the head here. The one : thing that would probably shake the CoS most -- and the critics : who like to just attack and criticize should listen to this if : they are really committed to doing what is going to be effective : in causing reforms and throwing out the current abusive CoS : regime - is to have some real options that staff and members can : see that they can go to if they leave CoS. This is why the CoS : aparatchiks will never mention reform, the freezone (it's always : "squirrels"), and especially not alt.clearing.technology. : : This should be posted as a new subject, and I hope that Pilot will : add his comments. : : I. And another post from Ralph on this - Ralph Hilton wrote: > > 2 things are needed - > > 1. People willing to help those leaving staff in Scientology. > > 2. Those willing to courier the message to staffs. > > When you are next picketting it would be good to be able to say - > yes - there are several people willing to help accomodate > Scientologists who wish to leave - here are their numbers. > > Perhaps Roland would do a flyer if we can get a few people willing to put > themselves on the line. To which Roland replied # Yes. I'll do it. We will need a flyer for each country or part # of the US. That being the case then that leaves plenty of room # for Success Stories of people who have left and joined the # freezone as well perhaps. Having said that I would not carry # anything that puts people into the hands of another cult, such # as Christianity. It would be a case of "out of the frying pan, # into the fire". I think when people get out they don't want to # be put under any pressure (they certainly wouldn't like my ECT # therapy I have designed). I imagine they might even do silly # little things like word-clearing and such like until they can # find their feet again and start thinking for themselves. So it # would be best (in my opinion) to allow them a half-way stage. # # Roland Let me add my support and say that Ralph has come up with an excellent idea and has already begun to implement it with a helpline section at his website. I might suggest that he have an option for anonymous volenteers who would be known to him as co-ordinator but who would not identify themselves publicly to avoid CofS harassment. One of the important ethical agreements would be that the excaping staff member would not be pressured as to what he decides or pushed into getting involved in a specific freezone group or practice. I do think that these people should be given access to the internet and allowed to read pro, anti, freezone, and whatever else and come to their own decisions. One might even have volenteers who are specifically in a fence sitting postion themselves but are willing to help so that someone who is very leary of "squirrels" could ask for such as situation. Some would otherwise be afraid of having to make an irrevokable decision. I know some who are soured on the organization but not officially out. Staying with such a person would not automatically put the staff member in the postion of being connected to a "suppressive person" and yet such people would not be inclined to push the ex-staffmember back in. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - To LittleLRH TO LittleLRH On 6 Jun 98, "an auditor" posted on subject "LRH AND MP3s" > ok guys here is what i have got : exteriorization and the space phenomena > series, secrets of the mest universe series, the FPRD lectures, state of man > congress series, ability congress tapes series, Games and the power to play > series, and the human evaluation lectures. > > Now these is the special offer: i am not selling them but just giving it > away in mp3, the only problem is : i need a tutorial to teach me how to put > a tape inti mp3 format and then how to post it to alt.binaries.scientology. > > As a true believer of the free tech i am willing to post them and hope > others will follow so that we can all share the same free tech. > > much love, > littleLRH Exteriorization and the Phenomena of Space is the 1st American ACC (see the tape master list I put out). It is a huge set comparable in size to the Philadelphia Doctorate course. The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd ACCs are the basic theory underlying the self clearing book. Basically I took the modern discoveries on grades and so forth and retrofit them into the early ACC style and combined them with the OT drilling to make something that a beginner could do solo. I would really like it if people had access to these lectures. It's a huge amount of material. Probably 4 MB of text for the 1st ACC transcripts. I don't know much about MPeg3. It would be good if somebody could post some helpful information. If you post binaries, be sure to cross post to alt.binaries.slack like zenon did on his second try. I couldn't find all of the tech volumes on ABS because there are too few open servers that carry it and it doesn't propogate well by itself. The cross post lets it propogate and there are open NNTP servers that carry slack (which don't carry abs) that made all the tech volumes available to those who looked hard. I would suggest first scanning in the transcripts and posting them to ARS and ACT as text since the zenon books and the FZ bible posts really made it around while the tech volumes on abs were rare and obscure. I think that ARS would be happy to see these transcripts. It would be 84 posts (1 per tape) of about 50 K each. But please cover your ass and do this anonymously. And put religious freedom disclamers at the begining like FZ Bible does. Affinity, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - To Wolf On Meters Etc. TO WOLF ON METERS ETC. On 2 Jun 98, mikedwolf@rpf.org (Mike de Wolf) asked on subject "TO THE PILOT" > Hello Pilot! > > I've been reading quite a bit from your archives recently, and I find > your posting quite fascinating. Unfortunately, it seems somewhat > insulting to say that for a Scientologist, you are quite a > freethinker! Yes, it has all gone backwards. The CofS changed from a freethinking anti-authoritarian group into an unthinking group that worships Ron as the ultimate authority. I guess I was just backwards and refused to change direction with the rest of the herd. A slogan like "Think for Yourself" would really have been true in the old days. > Here a few questions on issues that I have not seen addressed in your > posts: > > First, what is your theory on how the E-Meter works? Scientology > critics have said that it is merely hand hand perspiration or subtle > changes in the PC's grasp that causes the needle to move. Absolutely not. That one is easy to see if you do some e-meter drills and play around with it a bit. But doing them in a loose and experimental manner is much better than the way they teach them on CofS courses these days. You should try experiments and play around. You can see the effects of sweat. It reduces the resistance and therefore drives the TA (Tone Arm) lower. But as the hands sweat, you get a slow shift that is too gradual to see as a needle reaction. Going from dry to wet hands (clutching the cans and working in a hot courseroom encourages sweat) over a period of, let's say, 15 minutes, will gradually shift the TA from (for example) 2.2 to 1.9, and then you take a towel and wipe your hands and the TA is back at 2.2. One friend alternately wet and dried his hands (using water, not as conductive as sweat - salt water would have been better) picking up the cans each time to observe the effect (a slight change in TA position up and down). Experimenting like this used to be encouraged and now is forbidden. As to grasping the cans, body reactions look different than mental reactions. One of the meter drills was to work extensively with body reactions until you could tell the difference. Good students, looking at the meter as they coach somebody, work extensively with trying to affect the meter both physically and mentally. Usually the coach is holding the cans and trying to produce reactions for the student who is operating the meter. There are all sorts of effects and some of them are very distinctly mental while others are physical. If you are doing this yourself, solo, there is obviously nobody else there doing any kind of chicanery and you know if you're holding the cans steady or relaxing your grip or whatever. On rare occasions I have gotten spectacularaly large reads on myself that would shift the TA position (more than one dial wide on the needle even at the lowest sensativity). Shifting between 4.0 and 2.0 for example, implies an immediate resistance change from 25,000 to 5,000 ohms. Specifically, this kind of thing happened a few times on implant platens and in that case the item would continue to react by thinking the same thought so that you could see the reaction over and over again until it stopped reacting (usually 3 repeats). So for example, I would think the item (maybe something out of clearing course or OT 2 or my own platens) and the needle would take off like a rocket and you would have to swing the TA down fast to catch it at the bottom, less than a second for the whole reaction. One would see the characteristic curl of a rocket read at the bottom. Then it would drift up (not spectacularly fast, but moving steadily so that you would be waiting for it to stabilize) and over the course of about 7 or 8 seconds would eventually get back up to 4.0 and come to rest. You pause for a moment, assure yourself that nothing further is going on and that the needle is just sitting there (moving around a little) at 4.0 (about 25,000 ohms) and then you would look at the platen and think the exact same thought (the item) again, and bang, the needle would dive and so forth exactly as before. These kind of reactions were extremely rare (usually you just get small falls) but it happened often enough that I might get one like this every few hours of auditing. Of course eventually the platen flattens and just FNs (floating needle) thereafter. Another interesting point is that on oppose type platens that have the items in pairs, the second item in the pair will react exactly the same way as the first one in almost all cases. Ron says this and I have found it to be true in practice. If (fake example) "to create cats" reacts with a 2 division wide rocket read and the reaction repeats exactly 3 times before it FNs, then "to destory cats" reacts exactly the same way with the same number of repeats before it FNs with only a slight variation in TA position which might be due to shifting can grip or sweat. An ordinary multi-meter does not provide the ability to focus in on a tiny window in the range to see what would be minisule reactions. But there is a phenomena called a floating TA which is a floating needle that is so wide that you have to shift the tone arm around to keep it on the dial. In other words, it might be floating between 5,000 and 12,000 ohms rather than the usual case where the float might only be between (guessing) 6,000 and 6,200 ohms. That reaction is large enough to see on an ordinary multimeter. I tried that, grabing the probes at a time when I did have a floating TA on the meter and you really can see it as a tiny FN on an ordinary multimeter dial. > Since you believe that needle movements are valid measurements, how do > you think restimulation alters the electrical conductivity of the > human body so that the meter can detect it? That is a damn good question. In the early tapes of 1953 and 54, there are mistakes and discoveries. The meters turn out to be reacting a bit differently than the therories that they were built on. For example, the tone arm was supposed to measure the person's tone and they were trying to make it go up to 4.0. There are lectures where Ron is doing experiments (demonstration sessions) and saying hey, this is working backwards or Volney (Matheson) doesn't know what he just built. So the thing got pounded around on a practical basis rather than being clearly understood from the begining. It makes a lousy lie detector. But it seems good for finding areas where there is some mental charge that can be handled. If the current were just physically flowing through the mass of the body as if the flesh were a huge resistor I don't think it could react this way. So the effects must be more subtile and field dependent. You can affect TV reception not just by touching the antenna but also by moving your hand around the antenna without contact, therefore there is a field effect present. My guess would be that the field is responsive to (or generated by?) thought. I'm inclined to think of theta and energy fields used by it to control the body. But it is also concievable to have such a thing based on the electrical (?) nature of the nervous system. Of course I'm just speculating here. There are observed phenomena which are useful and there is, as always, an inadequate amount of scientific work in the area. > Also, since solo auditing is done with two cans separated by an > insulator held in one hand, I would expect electricity to follow the > shortest path, namely through the hand. In that case, how does > restimulation of a body thetan located in the right knee affect the > conductivity of the left hand? Another good question. Obviously the body thetan can't. It's the person himself who is reading on the meter. If someone writes a date on a piece of paper and somebody else finds the date by meter dating (yes I've done this successfully many times, you zero in on the date by meter reads), it is not the piece of paper which is reacting but the person's thoughts about the date. It has to be the same for BTs. They don't read, you read when you think of the location that they are in. A different question that I have about solo cans is about the small shift in TA postion (about half a division) when there is a major difference in the physical mass in the circuit. In the two can situation you have an entire body in the way and with solo cans you have an average of an inch or so of skin surface. The TA difference is almost a constant (at least for the same person). If my TA is down around 2.0 on 2 cans it will be about 2.5 solo and if it is up at 5.0 on 2 cans it will be about 5.5 solo. So the two track very closely and vary much less than mental changes due to a few minutes overrun of a process. Again I can only conclude that there is some kind of field effect rather than a measure of the resistance of flesh. > Next, when I was closer to Scientology (during the crazed late > 70s/early 80s) I was told that rather than nattering, all one had to > do was write up any outnesses one saw, send it uplines, and they would > be handled. Have you attempted to do this over the years, and what > were the results? Its about like talking to the wall. You can flatten it as a process but the wall doesn't answer back. The original Class 8s show up and begin spouting verbal tech, so I telexed International Ethics like it says in policy. Dead Silence. A couple of highly trained people on staff percieved a major outpoint (old emeter drill 3, now obsolete due to the old mechanical TA counters being eliminated). So they write up a proposed bulletin giving a drill that works instead of the flawed original one. Repetedly sent up lines. Dead Silence. Some Class 8s I knew had some real problems/questions and would write queries up for technical advice. Not quite dead silence. The reply was "what does your materials state". There are exceptions, but usually nobody will do anything but quote policy so the only things that can get corrected are policy violations rather than flaws in policy. You can get things corrected if you know the exact policy violation. But its hopeless if its in policy but wrong or stupid. > Lastly, (since this is election time in California) during that same > same period, I was connected to a number of Scientologists who were > active in the Libertarians. This struct me a peculiar, since > Libertarian politics stresses maximum persoanl freedom and minimal > goverment power over individuals, while Scientology (at least the > organization) sought substantial control over various parts of > individuals lives. > > Can you comment on the Scientology/Libertarian link? Is there still a > Libertarian presence in Scientology, or did they all leave either by > SP declares (such as Bruce Bishop) or be alienation? I don't know of any Libertarian link except that it is very attractive to people who believe in freedom. Here we have the conflict between what most Scientologists feel vs how the organization acts. The organization dramatizes control while giving lipservice to freedom whereas most individual Scientologists actually do believe in personal freedom. That is why 9 out of 10 are not active and sit on the fence. They wouldn't tolerate the heavy control (or the many other outpoints) but they are sold enough on the goals and purposes that they restrain themselves and keep their mouths shut rather than hurt the organization. They think that things should be better in the org, but the standard party line is that in that case they should get on staff intead of criticising from the sidelines. They think of that and shudder in horror so they agree to shut up. They end up stalemated, unable to move in either direction. > Mike de Wolf > > "A science which depends on Authority alone is a breath in > the wind of truth and is therefore no science at all." > > - L. Ron Hubbard One of the nice LRH quotes. I wish the org would apply these things instead of the messed up policies. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - ANOTHER MESSAGE TO ROD FLETCHER ANOTHER MESSAGE TO ROD FLETCHER On 19 May 98, rod_fletcher@hotmail.com responded to my earlier message on sbject "Re Super Scio - TO ROD FLETCHER" >In article , > pilot@hiddenplace.com wrote: >> >> >> TO ROD FLETCHER >> >> On 27 Apr 98, rod_fletcher@hotmail.com posted in response >> to my earlier post on subject "Super Scio - MAY 9 EVENT INFO" >> >> >In article #1/1, >> > pilot@hiddenplace.com wrote: >> > > >> > > MAY 9 EVENT INFO >> > > >> > > The latest promo says "Come to the Dianetics Anniversary >> > > Event. See a new feature-length Scientology film". >> > > >> > > May 9, 1998 at the Shrine Auditorium, 655 W. Jefferson Blvd, >> > > Los Angeles. >> > > >> > > Doors open at 6:30 PM and the event starts at 7:30 PM. >> > > >> > >> > You know Pilot it's nice of you to be a reformer behind the scene. >> > Never heard of a reformer being a coward behind the scene. I >> > wonder where you got those stolen materials. Rod. >> >> Boy, yet another Black Scientology attempt to blow me off by >> missing withholds that aren't there to be missed. > >SORRY PILOT BUT I DON'T BUY IT. THERE IS NOT BLACK SCN ATTEMPT AND >THE WITHHOLD THEORY YOU ARE THROWING AT ME IS YOUR ATTEMPT TO DENIGRATE >SCIENTOLOGY. IF YOU DON'T HAVE THEM FINE, IF YOU DO IS UP TO YOU TO >GET IT SORTED OUT. I do not Denigrate Scientology. I am a firm supporter of the tech and the religion. Much more so than people who throw 90 percent of Ron's work out of the window and attack anyone who trys to think for themselves. I do, however, make less of the CofS and especially of OSA because their current behavior is so bad. I will stop that when they get their ethics in. I am assuming that the caps are an indication of bypassed charge because I have missed a withhold on you. I know that you went through a whole song and dance about being a newbie and not knowing any better than to use caps, but I notice that your previous post is in lower case and all your other messages on the net were in lower case. Perhaps a different thetan has taken over your body? Or did OSA implant you and make you forget? Or are you just trying to weasel your way out of the situation? >> Do you actually know any real tech that can be used to >> help people? Or do you only know reverse processes? > >YES, AND MORE THAN YOU CAN THINK OF. AS MATTER OF FACT I DON'T >KNOW WHAT REVERSE PROCESSES ARE. YOU ARE PROBABLY THE EXPERT ON >THIS SINCE YOU BROUGHT UP THIS SUBJECT. Ron talks about that occasionally. Obviously you are untrained and don't know the tech. >> The real tech does exist. It's in the books and tech volumes. >> In fact a lot of it just got posted to the internet by some >> people who really are spreading LRH tech around the planet. > >YES, YOU ARE RIGHT THERE IS A LOT OF TECH SPREAD ON THE PLANET. >SEE http://www.scientology.org FOR MORE SPECIFCS. There is very little real tech there. It is mostly just PR. The graphics are nicely done (my compliments to Michael etc.) but that doesn't make up for a shallow content. About the only real meat is the "Story of Dianetics and Scientology" lecture, which is a nice one. But again, it is not really a lecture that teaches anything about the tech. >IF YOU ARE REFERRING TO ZENON PANOUSSIS SPREADING THE TECH, THEN WE >ARE IN A COMPLETE DIFFERENT FIELD. HE IS A COPYRIGHT CRIMINAL WHO >PROBABLY DOES NOT EVEN DARE TO SHOW UP AT HIS UPCOMING TRIAL. HE >CHALLENGED THE CHURCH TO RAID HIM, BUT OF COURSE HE CAREFULLY >DESTROYED ALL THE INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE AND THEN TELLS THE CHURCH >TO RAID HIM. I'LL BE SURPRISED IF HE HAS THE GUTS TO SHOW UP AT THE >TRIAL TO FACE THE CONSEQUENCES OF HIS CIMES. I AGREE WITH YOU THAT >THE TECH IS BEING "SPREAD" WITH ONE MODIFICATION THAT IT IS BEING >DONE BY PANOUSSIS AND OTHERS IN A VERY ILLEGAL FASHION. So what. Ron would want it done. Only suppressives would try to stop it. They are doing your job for you, and all you do is carp and natter and shoot at them. >> You might think of them as evil critics and squirrels, but >> they are doing more than you are to get the tech out there. > >THIS IS YOUR OPINION AND I LEAVE IT AT THAT. YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW >ME HOW CAN YOU EVEN SAY THAT. DON'T RIDICULE YORUSELF NOW. Perhaps I have misjudged you. Maybe you are Freezone Bible and are only putting up a false show for your OSA seniors. A sort of scarlet pimpernel. If that is the case, then I sincerely appologize. >> When have you actually helped somebody? > >EVERYDAY FOR WELL OVER 20 YEARS. OK. How have you helped? >> Do you really think that your current low toned behavior >> is doing anybody any good? > >YOUR ARE THE ONE WHO IS HIDING, WHICH IS CERTAINLY NOT HIGH ON >THE TONE SCALE. Ron calls it fabian and he encourages it. Listen to the "Welcome to the Sea Org" tapes. >> The tech is for setting people free, not for making slaves. > >I DON'T SEE THE CHAINS ON MY ANKLES, NOR ON ANY OF MY FAMILY MEMBERS >AND MANY OTHER FRIENDS WHO HAVE BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH. THE CHURCH FOR >MANY YEARS. THE CHURCH IS OPEN EVERYDAY AND IS PRESENT IN JUST ABOUT >EVERY COUNTRY OF THE WORLD. WHO IS GOING TO BUY THE "SLAVE" LINE? >COME UP WITH SOME MORE CREATIVE IDEAS I.E. TELL THE TRUTH. Ask the RPFers. Ask all the old tech terminals who have been stopped, driven out, or otherwise unmocked. >I INVITE YOU TO VISIT http://on-line.scientology.org AND SEE FOR YOURSELF >IF THOSE PEOPLE ARE SLAVES. THERE ARE MANY MORE TO COME. I KNOW THAT DEANA >HOLMES AND ASSOCIATES CAN'T STAND THE IDEA OF SCIENTOLOGISTS BEING ON THE >INTERNET. READ THOSE STORIES FOR YORUSELF. THEY ARE COMING DIRECTLY FROM >THE APPLICATION OF SCIENTOLOGY. YOU CAN'T CONTROL THAT MANY PEOPLE, YOU >CAN'T ENSLAVE THAT MANY PEOPLE AND THAT'S WHY YOUR ALLEGATIONS ARE BOGUS. You can put massive stops on their lines and fill them with false data and cut their comm lines. I know some of the people who have Scientologist online websites. I have even been asked to put one up. But the issue authority business is one of the stupidist mistakes the org has made. These people could be having lots of fun and communicating very freely and makeing a good impression on the net with very personalized websites. Some of the critics might not like that but they would at least respect it. Instead the entire program makes Scientology into a laughing stock. A similar debacal is the Old Timer's Network's website, which would have been really something, but they COULDN'T GET ISSUE AUTHORITY. They tried for a YEAR. For that year they had a pretty but contentless page with a picture of stars from the Hubbel telescope. Last I heard, the whole project was in the trashcan and even the old site was inaccessible the last time I looked. >> I guess that is just too hard for you to have. > >NO, IN ACTUAL FACT I ENJOY HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU GUYS. AS A >MATTER OF FACT I DO RESPECT YOU FOR YOUR ARTISTIC VALUES AND HOW YOU >PLAY THAT INSTRUMENT. SOME OLD TIMERS IN LONDON AND AT ST. HILL STILL >REMEMBER YOU. THAT'S WHY I LEAVE IT AT THAT. Playing process of elimination? I think I'll skip this one and leave you in a Q & A. >> The Pilot > >http://www.scientology.org >http://on-line.scientology.org > >-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- >http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading How about studying some tech? There is a nice lecture in the 1st Melborne ACC called "Responsibility for Zones of Creation". 1MACC-21 of 23 Nov 59. The entire ACC has been re-released as the "Responsibility and the State of OT" cassettes. Here is a nice LRH quote from it to wet your appitite. "And the further a person falls away from responsibility for destruction, the more good they pride themselves in and the more destructive they are." Please go ahead and check out the quote. I guarantee you that its a valid one. But you should hear it in context. It might really do you some good. The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - Delaware Street Invalidates LRH DELAWARE STREET INVALIDATES LRH On 22 May 98, nobody@nowhere.com (DelawareStreet) posted in reply to my previous post on "Super Scio - Quote About Clear (To Rognnet)" > On: 19 May 1998 14:00:13 > Message-ID: > Super Scio - Quote About Clear (To Rognnet) > > The Pilot wrote: > > >QUOTE ABOUT CLEAR (TO RGONNET) > > >On 6 May 98, rgonnet posted > >on subject "Fatman said CLEARING IS NOTHING! True!" > > snip . . > > >I would say that the 1965 definition (and the corresponding > >DMSMH definition of 1950) is sales hype, and I think that > >the 1958 definition is the honest one (I've talked about > >this elsewhere, see the Scientology Reformer's Homepage). > > The "How to get squirrel data" homepage you mean. The Scientology Reformer's Homepage does not contain tech data. I know that you might think that tech which I write might be squirrel (even though it isn't), but the Reformer's page is not a tech writing. So its not squirrel even by your own organization's standards. It is a heartfelt story of an ex-staff member. THE ONLY TECH ON THE REFORMER'S PAGE CONSISTS OF LRH QUOTES. Lots of LRH Quotes. Accurate Ones. Check them out. I dare you to. > >But a literal minded fanatic > > might wake up if they get > >hit with all of Ron's varying definitions and statements > >about Clear. > > Well, is it good to wake them up? > > > On that basis, this is a good quote to > > pass around. > > Or round file. ROUND FILE? REALLY? ROUND FILE AN LRH QUOTE? Have you lost it completely? Do you realize that the org could declare you an SP for that one statement alone. It is a high crime. Please star rate HCOPL "Tech Degrades" immediately. I'm allowed to say things like that if I feel like it because I can have my own opinion and occasionally I disagree with Ron (not usually, but sometimes). But you are not allowed to or else you get in trouble. Since you trashed the quote itself, I'll repeat it here. It really is a true LRH quote. In fact I was correcting the slight alter-is that was introduced by rgonnet's having translated it back from the French translation. # From Tape SHSBC-322 renumbered 353 # # 6311C07 (standard tape IDs are the 2 digit year followed # by the 2 digit month followed by a "C" and then the two # digit day). # # Title "Relationship of Training To OT". # # From near the end of the tape. # # "Our interest in the state of Clear is so microscopic # as to be a yawn, see; it's of no importance at all. # The state makes somebody more comfortable - so what? # You can make a sick man more comfortable by putting a # pillow under his head, see?" I like LRH quotes and want to seem them accurately presented. Why don't you post some too? > Because it comes from you and the "freezone." > Group with ideas like it is okay to do what ever you want with > Scientology, regardless and no matter, which has brought widespread > misuse and misapplication. "Any auditing is better than no auditing" - L. Ron Hubbard > Justified here by the anti-Scientologist's > you wish to assist. Just to get a chance to take a jab at the > legitimate organization from which you apparently were once a part. Still am a part actually. And I have lots of friends. Try looking over your shoulder sometime. > >Best, > > >The Pilot > > Delaware Street Maybe I was a little too rough in the above. I just finished answering that idiot rod_fletcher and it put me in a bad mood. You do talk a bit more sensibly than some of the other OSA handlers. Try listening to some of the old LRH tapes. Read Dianetics 55, especially the parts about secrecy and so forth. We only have this one tiny moment in eturnity (LRH again). Don't waste it on a GPM flip flop from freedom into slavery. ARC, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - Publishing Plans (attn Ivy, Fza, etc.) PUBLISHING PLANS (attn Ivy, Fza, etc.) I'm very glad for all the help. By all means distribute things and improve things and spread copies around. And I'm really enjoying things like the feed coming in from selfclearing-l and the self clearing diaries up at fza.org and all sorts of good stuff like that. I think that I should let you know my own plans so that you know what to expect. ---- I consider that Super Scio is really a record of research, so I don't plan to do a major revision. I doubt that it will ever be mass marketed because of its length and specialized public. I hope that the book will continue to be around through all your good efforts. In the long run this book will be superseeded, but even then I hope it stays around, just like we keep the original DMSMH around despite having R3R. What I expect is that individual chapters will form the core of future books. The Cosmic History, for example, is certainly a starting point for a sequal to Ron's History of Man. But I'm still far from knowing enough to do this one justice. One day I'd like to take the first chapter (What Is / What Isn't true), add in the things on the reformers page, add a lot more of personal experience, and put together a real book about being in Scientology in the old days. My tentative working title is "The Horror And The Glory". But I think that ones a long way off too. Of course platens will get added to and corrected and the chapter on OT processes should grow extensively. But again, these deserve to be individual books, and I am imagining that there will be huge amounts of material in these areas. If somebody wants to do some editorial cleanup, they are welcome to do so. I ran it through a spell checker and went over it endlessly before I released it on the net, but errors still crept in. Eventually I will need to combine the various tech postings in the archives into a Super Scio sequal. But right now it doesn't feel like the right moment for me to back up and regroup and organize. And the "political" sceen is still current enough that most of the old ARS posts are still applicable. ---- Self Clearing on the other hand is a working edition of what is meant to be a very practical book. I really want it to evolve into an optimum form for helping people. So you can expect a significantly improved second version. There has been a good bit of feedback on the early sections of the book and that helps me to anticipate questions and problems. Unfortunately, nobody seems to have made it into the later chapters yet and I would really like to get some feedback on those too. Also I'm only about halfway through myself on a deep second run of the processes, and as you know, I do keep spotting ways of making the processes easier and more effective as I do that. So it will be awhile yet before the second version gets done. And I'm distracted by needing to write a co-processing book. Making that safe, simple, and easy requires such a depth of understanding that I'm doing a review of professional auditing first. Right now I'm putting together a hybrid level zero course checksheet which will be a composite of various orthodox checksheets used in different years. I'll probably post that next month. People who are distributing copies of the self clearing book should know my long range plans so that they don't get caught with a warehouse full of xeroxes. I do plan to find an American mass market publisher eventually. I need one that is big so that they will shrug off any CofS harrassement suits, and I want one that will put the book into the chain bookstores. At the same time, I will not condone a publisher trying to shut down the existing free distribution channels. A high quality inexpensive professional edition has nothing to fear from xeroxes and its cheeper than do it yourself laser printing, so there is no reason for a publisher to object. But I don't think that many publishers will understand this yet. I expect them to learn eventually, but probably not in this century. The internet is still too new. So I need one who is not only big but also open to new ideas and aware of the net. A hard combination. And let's add in an agent and a publisher who will front for me and guard my identity. Unless of course the CofS finds out who I am. In that case all bets are off and I'll go into a mad frenzy to find a publisher immediately. What I expect is that I'll start looking around carefully in a few months. If I get lucky I might have one this fall. All this internet exposure might make it possible to sell a publisher on the book despite all the difficult requirements above. If that does happen, I would expect a one year comm lag, so that a mass market edition might hit near the end of 1999. Books do not get printed fast and there is no way that a mass market publisher would get one out this year even if I signed a contract today. I would very much like to see it printed before the year 2000 business gets everything all snarled up. So that is my target. Find a publisher in the fall and hit mass market in fall of 99. That might be wishfull thinking. In this case I am being optimistic and making a strong postulate rather than operating from any reliable data or knowingness. It is what I feel needs to happen rather than what I know will happen. In the meantime there is a huge gap to fill and I think that Anthony is doing a great service in making copies of the book available. As to translations, I think it would be much longer before an American publisher (if I ever get one) would move into foriegn markets and I would expect them to negotiate for an existing good quality translation rather than doing a new one if one already exists. In practice, I don't think that the work can be translated by anyone who is not themselves an expert in the tech. I greatly appreciate all the help I'm getting. I love to see people using this suff, spreading it around, and working with any and all tech. My strongest goal is for us to find our way out of the trap. I had a vision once while listening to some shallow PR at a flag event. They were talking about some low level idea of OT and I was thinking what I really would expect. I imagined super beings, conciously godlike and immortal exchanging an infinite variety of creations for each other's amusement. Real co-existance of static. The net when its at its best gives you a hint of this because its hard to hit each other and easy to present a mockup. There is Sarah joking and Homer poking and an interesting flux between beings. I for one wouldn't trade that dream to sail around on a yacht and have worshippers shouting hip hip horray at some bronze bust of my current body. So if the book ever does become a best seller in humanoid terms, you can expect that I'll be indulging in tech research and running around encouraging people rather than trying to control or suppress the subject and setting up some gestapo like organization. Affinity, The Pilot PS. I'll try to take a look at Cosmosofy and answer Kurt about it next month. If you haven't gussed yet, I've been very busy, both with the tech and with my job in computers. ========================================== subj: Super Scio - Remembering Raymond Kemp RMEMBERING RAYMOND KEMP On 4 Jun 98, Ivy relayed a message ACT on subject "IVy: URGENT NEWS!!! Death....." >I am not sure who I am writing to but I know you all knew my >granddad......Raymond Kemp. > Raymond Kemp died on June 1st 1998 from a massive heart attack. He >went down sunday night and then it took 40 mins to brig him back. He was >taken to Inland Valley Regional Medical Center in Wildomar Ca. There he was >placed on life support for 9-12 Hours...but the damage had been done. He >had no brain activity and this caused the doctor to advise us to remove the >Life Support because my granddad would become a vegtable.......we removed >it and he finally passed on at 3:36 p.m June 1st. > You can contact us at this address and we will keep you all >informed. The Memorial Date is Friday, June 12th, 1998. Not sure of place >or time...that is planning out today. > >Thank-you, >Pamela Kemp, Chandra Leighton & Family Ray was an old timer when I first came into Scientology. I did not know him closely, but I remember his lectures with fondness. We exchanged correspondence briefly in ACT last year and I'm glad that I had at least a brief opportunity to communicate with him in these later days. I remember once when he flew into town and the org rented a hall for him to speak in. He gave a talk which showed a profound insight into ARC Breaks which went beyond anything I've seen written in the tech. He began by talking about the opera "Carmen". Carmen is a rambuncious and sexually liberal cigarette girl who gets arrested for slashing another girl in a knife fight. She promises a soldier known as Don Jose a good time if he sets her free. She delivers on the promise and starts hanging out with Don Jose thereafter. But she also starts making it with a bullfighter and Jose gets upset and stabs her. Near the end Don Jose whines about how Carmen changed on him. But Ray pointed out that she had never changed, she was the same from the start to the end, sleeping with anyone who struck her fancy. She even has her big song at the begining about love being like a little bird that flutters from tree to tree. Then Ray made his fantastic point, which was that Don Jose did not ARC break with Carmen but with a picture or valence that he mocked up as Carmen. The actual girl didn't change, but she acted differently than the valence was supposed to act in Don Jose's mind. You mock up that with which you are ARC Breaking. Its not just that you mock up ARC breaks in the sense of letting yourself get upset. You also mock up the thing that you are ARC breaking with. Very profound. He will be missed. ARC, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - The 5th Invader (attn Paul & D) THE 5TH INVADER (ATTN PAUL & D) On 24 May 98, fza@fza.org (FreeZone America) asked on subject "FZA [Fwd] ATTN PILOT - a message from D" > In R&D 10 (I think) Ron mentions if we come across anyone from the 5th > invaders 3rd batallion, to contact him.ÿ I saw mention of contacting > him in 2 locations over this.ÿ Do you know why? What should one do if > he or she knew someone from the 3rd battalion? > > D See the Role of Earth tape (a transcript was posted recently by FZ Bible and it is now up at the Scientology Library site that has the PDC transcripts). Ron describes a 5th invader batallion landing in Tibet and getting wiped out and ending up in the reincarnation sequence here on Earth. I think that there is another place where he says that he was the commander of that batallion, but maybe I'm misremembering, its been a long time and there are lots of tapes. As to what to do, I think that at that time he was simply hoping to audit such people through the incident and see if the data matched up. In present time, I would suggest simply running the self clearing book. Also, since there was a recent thread asking for information on invader forces, I will mention that I did a summary on these things and listed the various tape references in a post called "The Cosmology of Scientology" which can be found in post03 in the archives for 1997. Affinity, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - The Show Me Process (attn Sarah) THE SHOW ME PROCESS (ATTN SARAH) On 11 Jun 98, "Steve n' Sarah" posted on topic "LRH comments on the recent "flame war" " > I remember,the other day I was looking for something in the Tech Vols > and came across a process 'Show me your (body part)'. > Ron added a note to the effect that the Auditor should not ask for > body parts that might embarrass the PC. > I haven't figured out yet if this was meant as a joke or if he seriously > thought auditors would attempt to get their PC's to strip off. > > Sarah (laughing) I think he was quite serious. This is from HCOB "INTERIM PROCESS" of 20 May 57 which is in old tech volume 3. I wasn't in Washington in 1957, but I know people who were. Doing TRs in the nude was not uncommon. It was not done in the academy but it was often tried by staff and students after hours. The time period was one of extreme sexual looseness in the orgs. I think it is specifically an injunction against what the pc would consider embarassing rather than any particular body part. That is whatever it is for the person in question. I remember giving a touch assist for period cramps to another staff member (late 1960s) who happened to be a pretty girl. We were friends but were not having a 2D (and I am male). She asked me because she knew I gave good assists and she trusted me not to have any considerations. The assist worked too. The pcs considerations are whatever they are, not what we might assume them to be. Part of the auditor's job is to not have any considerations while he is auditing the pc nor to have any considerations after the fact about whatever came up in session. Even in the late 60s, most staff and students (but not raw public) were flat enough on body parts that you probably would include genitles in the process and get a grin out of the pc. PS. I didn't know the reference so I simply did a grep (a unix command that has been ported to PCDos and OS/2) on "show me your" in the directory where I stored the 20 Megabytes of tech volumes that were posted recently. About 30 seconds later it came back and I knew to bring tech vol 3 up in brief (an editor) and search the text, which took about 3 seconds to reach the phrase. In the old days it would have taken fifteen minutes to half an hour of bouncing through indexes and tech vols to find it (if I could find it at all). It's great to get out of the stone age. Affinity, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio Tech - Self Clearing Ch 3 Improvement SELF CLEARING CHAPTER 3 IMPROVEMENT I hid on a better variation for 3.3 Emotions while doing some other research (described in another post). The process given is workable but it is easier and faster if you alternate positive and negative emotions. Pick objects and alternately put sadness and happyness into them. The alternately put fear and courage into objects. Then alternate hate and love. And boredom alternated with great interest (or excitement). Usually it seems best to do two alternations with the same object before moving on to another one. I slightly prefer starting with the lower emotion and ending with the higher one, but the other way around also works as long as you don't leave the negative emotions behind in the objects. A rapid pace, moving quickly from object to object, is generally best. You can also have yourself feel these alternately, but it is easier if you run these on objects first. An advanced step, for later in the book or for a second pass (unless you are already an advanced student), is to alternately mockup a big sphere of hatred and then love for the entire environment (or the whole world) until something dissolves. You kind of push these spheres out and layer them over everything as you are doing this. The same goes for the other pairs above, but hatred and fear probably are the most significant on this variation. On these two I found old walls of blackness that I had layered over everything that were forming a sort of shell around me. Doing it consciously regained control over the old mockups and dissolved them with a gain in perception and good feeling. They were remnants of bad times in the distant past. Best, The Pilot ========================================== subj: Super Scio - Dichotomies And Reality Generators DICHOTOMIES AND REALITY GENERATORS I was trying to think up a good assist to help somebody improve their confront of pain. Putting the pain in the walls is good, but it is sometimes hard to run. A friend who I had previously discussed the reality generators with suggested that alternately putting pleasure and pain into objects would mimic the generator's operation. This works like dynamite compared to just putting the pain in the walls. It makes it into an easy process. You might, for example, give the wall your headach and then give the wall a sexual orgasm alternately. That made me think of doing it with other things. In the 3rd ACC, Ron considers that putting emotions into walls and objects is one of the most important OT drills in existance and that you should run lots of it. He also talks about dichotomies (used in certainty processing, etc.), but he doesn't hit upon combining the two. There is a bit of putting emotions in objects in the self clearing book, but I didn't empasize it because it is not easy to drill this one very deep. So I've been hoping to find a way to make it run better and this is it. I tried alternately putting fear and courage into walls and objects and again it was fast and easy and powerful, leading to a big gain very quickly. I'm posting that separately as a self clearing improvement. So I bounced this off of another friend and he mentioned having had an LSD trip back in the sixties where he was seeing the concepts of "up" and "down" in objects and the concepts began unravelling and then everything seemed to be coming apart and he got scared (and swore off the drug). He hypothesised that these dichotomies were all present in objects from the reality generators and that one could then spot them and gain control over reality. In his bad drug experience he was at effect and therefore was loosing havingness against his will, but in a conscious drill his thought was that one should be able to hold or undo these things in a willful manner. This reminded me of power process 5, "what is / what isn't". The LRH theory was to use this to take off not-isness, but it has the wild variable of sometimes makeing a "theta clear" or keyed out OT as it did in my case. My latest theory on this is that many people run it by spotting things which are and different things which are not and that if they run it that way it blows some not-isness and therefore is a nice process. But some people run it by spotting that the same thing both is there and isn't there concurrently (as I did) and that's what brings about the OT keyout. Oleg also recently posted an experience from an LSD trip that he tied into these reality generators. It gives me the feeling that the drug does begin to expose the underlying structure but that since one is at effect one must back off. If you unravel everything causatively, then you can put it back at will and so it is an ability used at one's whim, but if you successfully unraveled it at effect, then you would just be without a universe, so you stop yourself. Not having done LSD myself, I'm just speculating here. After this, I talked to the first friend again and he had been spotting mountains alternately as solidities and as waveforms based on the quantum mechanics particle/wave dichotomy. He was getting great cogs and gains on this. Then I began pushing all sorts of dichotomies alternately into objects; Motion/no-motion, importance/insignificance, intelligence/stupidity, and so forth. After a few of these I began to see the entire formation of GPMs as locks on a static set of reality generators. You set the generators running. Then you get into the time stream. Then you dramatize them, banging between opposing sides sequentially in a time stream. That makes GPMs. The really interesting thing is that these processes of putting (or spotting) alternating dichotomies into objects are damn easy to run and flatten fast with big cognitions. Probably the next gradient is to spot these things running down through time or whatever, but I'm now inclinded to weaken the entire structure with a fast run on just alternating the dichotomies in objects first. Have Fun, The Pilot ========================================== This set of posts was all posted with the following trailer. ------------------ The free Self Clearing Book, The Super Scio book, and the "SCIENTOLOGY REFORMER'S HOME PAGE" are all over the net. See The Self Clearing Homepage for URLs to these sites http://fza.org/pilot/selfclr.htm or http://www.proweb.co.uk/~tech/clear.htm Or see The Pilots Home Page at http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm Some translations are available, see In German - http://www.cso.net/mt/pilot.htm In Russian - http://www.user.cityline.ru/~cisergem/ and www.aha.ru/~espinol and http://www.tagil.ru/~sk/pilot/pilot.html. All of this week's posts will be collected in Super Scio Archives #32 and posted to ACT. See the Pilot Archives at FZA.ORG. Note that some of my posts only go to ACT. I cannot be reached by email. I watch ARS and ACT for messages with Pilot in the subject line. ------------------