Subject: SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 68 - NOV 99 PILOT POSTS TO ARS/ACT
Date: 11 Nov 1999 04:00:16
From: pilot@scientology.at (The Pilot)
Newsgroups: alt.clearing.technology

POST68.txt

SUPER SCIO ARCHIVE 68 - NOV 99 PILOT POSTS TO ARS/ACT

Nov 11, 1999

The first few posts, down to the Humor post, went to both
ARS and ACT, the remainder were posted to ACT only.

Best,

The Pilot (aka Ken Ogger)

==========================================

Contents:

 subj : Super Scio - POINTS OF INTEREST FROM THE DM DEPO
 subj : Super Scio - Russian Teaching Ban Stupidity
 subj : Super Scio - Old And New Names For Tape Sets
 subj : Super Scio HUMOR - The Breast Implants
 subj : Super Scio - To Jiriki3 On Reposting
 subj : Super Scio - Continuing the Reform Discussion With Homer
 subj : Super Scio - Lamont Johnson
 subj : Super Scio - To Dimitry On The Russian Page
 subj : Super Scio Tech - A Note On Levels Course Packs
 subj : Super Scio Tech - To Oleg On OT Levels
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering ThomLove on Platens etc.
 subj : Super Scio Tech - Discussion with Croseus on Advanced Topics
 subj : Super Scio Tech - EARLY TRACK
 subj : Super Scio Tech - RESEARCH NOTES

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - POINTS OF INTEREST FROM THE DM DEPO

POINTS OF INTEREST FROM THE DM DEPO

On 6 Oct 99, martinh@islandnet.com (Martin Hunt) posted
an improved version of the DM Depo previously posted by
Bob Minton <bob@minton.org>.  The subject header was
"Miscavige Declaration of Sept. 24, 1999---Fixed www.xenu.net"

They have my thanks for putting this important document
on the net.

> I, DAVID MISCAVIGE, declare and say:

Note that the document itself seems to have been filed with
the court by David Miscaviage a few days previously and is
quite interesting reading.  It is a few thousand lines long
so I am not going to quote most of it.

>  2. I am, and since 1987 have been, the Chairman of the Board
> of Directors of Religious Technology Center ("RTC")

Many orthodox members don't even know this, so I'm including
it here as a remainder.

In a practical sense, DM is the current operating head of CofS.
He has the power to launch RTC missions against any org,
Sea Org unit, or even a mission (what used to be called
franchises) or field auditor, with the power to cancel
certificates or pull the organization's right to deliver
the tech or declare people squirrels and so forth.

Since the tech is seen as all important by the membership,
the power to deny the tech to anyone involved has tremendous
impact.  This is the equivallent of being damned with no
hope of salvation.

This is enough clout to allow him to boss anybody in the CofS
around, and the rumors are that he uses it to the hilt.

Whether or not he is a puppet controlled by hidden masters
remains to be seen.  Since CST has the power to pull the
copyrights from RTC, it is possible that they are controlling
him.  On the other hand, he might have the CST board under
his thumb.

Note that as far as power over other Scientologists is
concerned, it all comes down to the copyrights and control
of the tech.  If the copyrights were to come into the
public domain, the hidden influences and overt lines of
control would lose their sting.

>   8. As Chairman of RTC, I am not the "successor" to L. Ron
> Hubbard.

Damn right.

> 12. I have been a member of the Scientology religion since
> 1971. In 1976, at the age of 16, I joined the Sea Organization
> ("Sea Org").

Just to remind folks how young this guy was when he made
his bid for power.  Note that he had control by age 22
(1982) and possibly earlier even though he did not step out
and become visible as head of RTC until after LRH died.  A
regular child prodigy.  Unfortunately, the wunderkind's talent
seems to have been Machievellian rather than Artistic or Scientific.

> 26. The declarants in this case are part of a very small number
> of individuals who attempted to take advantage of the religion at
> times in its history when it was in upheaval. First, in the early
> 1980's when the Founder of the religion had gone into seclusion,
> staff of the autonomous, and now disbanded Guardian's Office
> ("GO"), discredited Scientology's reputation internationally.
> When some of their acts became public, attorneys and litigants
> hoped to capitalize on the fallout and launched a wave of civil
> suits. Second, in the mid-1980's, after the Founder had
> passed away, there was an effort to alter the Scripture of the
> religion. It was in this context that the actions of Vicki Aznaran,
> Jesse Prince, Gerald Armstrong and Stacy Young were played out.
> Now, funded by Wollersheim, they seek their retribution. Why they
> have chosen to lie, and why they focus their lies on me personally,
> begins with the dismantling of the GO.

He kept Prince, Aznaran, and Young around long after the GO was
dismantled (or better stated as long after the GO was reoganized
into OSA.)  They certainly don't seek retribution for the
disbanding of the GO because he gave them power AFTER that.

> By the time I was 13, I was a highly trained auditor. By the
> age of 15, I was Clear.

There is another deposition where he says that he is a class 2
auditor (knows how to pull withholds and sec check).  I suppose
that is all the training he is interested in.

> In the beginning of 1980, Mr. Hubbard went into self-imposed
> seclusion to continue his Scientology researches, free from
> the distraction of day-to-day affairs.

Miscaviage at 20, hatching his plot to gain control.

> The GO was, in fact, answerable to no one except those in
> the GO, and Mrs. Hubbard held the highest position in the GO.

The GO was indeed a bad screw up and I do not want to defend
their actions.

And yet I would not paint Mary Sue as a black villian.

DM, on the other hand, clearly delights in using her as a
scapegoat.

> There were also examples in which GO
> staff had used unscrupulous means to deal with people they
> perceived as enemies of the religion - means that were completely
> against Scientology tenets and policy, not to mention the law.

Oh yes, I quite agree.  Dead agenting and so forth are quite
contrary to the Scientology basics of the 1950s.

But if DM really thought this, he would not be perpetuating
the same tactics through OSA.  And I think that the Cipriano
case is an apt illustration that OSA is still engaged in these
kinds of vile activities.

This statement by DM can only be deemed the greatest hipocracy.

This is the priest screaming against fornication while screwing
all the young girls in the choir.

His only real objection would seem to be that the GO was
not working for him and therefore was dangerous to his bid
for power.  It had to be replaced by an identical organization
(OSA) which would be under DM's thumb.

> 46. Following the disbanding of the GO, Bill Franks, a senior
> church official at the time, aligned himself with these few corrupt
> Mission Holders. In December of 1981, what began as a conference
> conducted by Mr. Franks to address expansion plans for the religion
> turned into a "mutiny" by these Mission Holders, ...

There are some good writups of Frank's attempt at reform and
cleanup and the subsequent destruction of the mission network
by DM at his infamous Mission Holder's conference.

> 53. As already described, Mr. Hubbard was in seclusion,
> researching and writing, and did not hear about the fate of
> the GO until months later.

So the bastards didn't even tell him that Mary Sue was in jail.

If they (DM, Broker, etc.) didn't tell Ron something as significant
as this, then they didn't tell him anything except what served
their own purposes.

Talk about cut comm lines.

> 76. The resultant attempts to harass me in litigation extended to
> not just creating false allegations, but false documents as well.
> In 1984, a former church staff member then employed by one of those
> splinter groups, created a document entitled SMASH SQUIRRELS PJT.
> This forged document, allegedly written by me, ...

If Davey is such a great friend to Squirrels, why hasn't he
published a "be nice to squirrels" SPD?

I don't know if the document is real or forged, but the actions
taken to smash "squirrel groups" in the 1980s are legendary.
They used to BRAG about these things at Flag events.

> 97. I had served as one of the Trustees of RTC, since its
> inception. My only duties as Trustee were to appoint or remove
> directors. We held no other corporate power. In all that time we
> had removed only two directors because of personal problems they
> needed to tend to, as opposed to any corporate malfeasance. Since
> that time, RTC directors had served continuously. Two of the board
> members were Vicki Aznaran and Jesse Prince.
>
> 98. Their duties, of course, were to see to the purity of the
> religion. Yet in the winter of 1986, a situation regarding an
> individual working with Aznaran and Prince to alter Scripture came
> to my attention because that person was an employee of the Estate,
> and was helping care for the ranch property in Creston, California
> where Mr. Hubbard lived until his death.

I assume that he is talking about Pat Broker here.  I wonder
why he is afraid to mention the guy's name.

> ... I soon learned this individual
> was pretending to have "special data" concerning Scientology and
> had begun a project to change the "Scientology Grade Chart." This
> chart lists the various steps of ascent to total spiritual freedom,
> with the exact steps of religious training and auditing to achieve
> these higher levels of awareness. [See What Is Scientology?, Ch. 6
> p. 179, Ex. J.] This chart is central to the practice of the
> religion. As such, it is sacrosanct. Moreover, I also discovered
> this individual had plans to direct RTC and other churches.

As far as Scientology tech is concerned, the idea of improving
the grade chart has great technical merit but would indeed be
heresy to a standard tech adherent.

I've been saying for years that the grade chart should be
extended to handle other areas such as protest and invalidation
as full grades of release.  And also that the lower grades
should be run again as upper OT levels.  These are obvious
concepts rather than off the wall ideas.  There is tons of
material from the 1950s that could be resurrected into the
modern grade chart and one of Ron's later remarks is that the
"grades harmonic onto the OT levels."

It would not surprise me at all if Ron had said to do things like
this.  If he was doing any research at all in the the early 80s
when he was off the lines, I would think that it would have
these kind of things in it.

The grade chart stems from 1965 and was basically "quickie" in
those days.  The idea was just to get the rudimentss to stay in
so that the person could run R6.  A vastly broadened version
would be very in keeping with the later philosophy of expanded
grades (1970).


> 99. This, of course, was entirely contrary to the authority
> vested in RTC. Alteration of Scripture is what RTC is charged with
> preventing. Yet Aznaran and .Prince were not only abrogating those
> responsibilities, but assisting in this severe violation.
> ...
>
> 102. The manner in which this person attempted to gain a position
> of "Source" was by claiming to know things Mr. Hubbard wished to be
> done, that Mr. Hubbard had never articulated or written down.
> ...

When Ron died, it was stated at events that Pat Broker had
Ron's research notes from later years.

As DM is careful to point out, Broker was not a tech person.
Even Jessie Prince is only a lower level auditor (as is Miscaviage)
and has not studied a great deal of tech.

None of the persons involved would have the sense to talk about
improving the grade chart and as DM points out, all would
consider it heresy unless it actually had been stated by LRH.

My assumption at this point is that Broker really did have
notes from LRH about various things to do with the tech.  I
would expect that there would at least be a small notebook or
two, perhaps consisting of brief observations and suggestions
in the manner of the Research Notes bulletin that came out
briefly in 1969 when triple grades were released.


> 103. Following this, I was later to discover the individual who
> wanted to control the religion arranged a surreptitious meeting
> with Vicki Aznaran to plot how he could covertly direct affairs of
> various churches, write new Scripture, copyright it in his name,
> and altogether avoid corporate lines of authority within the
> ecclesiastical hierarchy. ... I
> later found out that Aznaran and this individual had again met
> surreptitiously and they decided they would go forward with their
> plan. They even went so far as discussing how they could copyright
> religious writings into this individual's name and thus provide him
> with income.
> ...
>
> 105. I ultimately was to discover the individual attempting to
> set himself up as the new "source" had even initiated plans to give
> lectures, to be recorded and made part of Scientology Scripture,
> as well as filmed lectures to modify church orthodoxy. To a
> Scientologist, this is utter heresy as only L. Ron Hubbard's own
> words as he wrote or said them can ever be the Scripture of the
> religion. This was also the very threat to the religion Mr. Hubbard
> had predicted when formulating his estate planning - the religion
> losing its purity through subversion and alteration of the
> teachings of the Founder. RTC was essential to Mr. Hubbard's plans
> to prevent this from occurring, yet one of its Directors (Aznaran)
> was actively participating in this violation, while another
> (Prince) was condoning it.
>
> 106. Because these violations were of such a serious nature, I
> and other RTC Trustees had no choice but to take action and remove
> Vicki Aznaran and Jesse Prince from their corporate positions.

Let us read between the lines and deduce the real story.

First we have DM and Pat Broker working together to isolate Ron
and take control of the subject.

Broker is closer to Ron and collects his research notes.

DM is further from Ron, busy establishing his power in ASI etc.

Ron dies and the two have a falling out.

Broker tries to leverage his possession of the research notes
into a controlling position where he would have the authority
of source.  Two of the RTC board members side with him.

DM however has much more power in CofS and controlls a majority
of the RTC board.

CST probably doesn't give a damn either way and lets the
thieves fight it out between themselves.

When the dust clears, DM has control, Broker is in hiding, and
Ron's last notes are nowhere to be seen.

Broker's hands aren't clean either, so he stays in hiding.
Perhaps he hopes to leverage those notes into some real money
somehow.  Maybe he periodically offers to sell them to DM
for fifty million bucks or something and DM is waiting for
the price to come down.

It's like reading about the Medici and the Borgia's in the
good old days.

Did DM star rate Machiavelli's "The Prince" and do it in clay?

> 109. The prominence I have in the religion today comes from the
> actions I have undertaken since becoming Chairman of the Board of
> RTC. ...
> By way of example, through my duties in RTC, Scientologists the
> world over have been provided Mr. Hubbard's teachings in their
> purest form, including a project that removed all alterations to
> those teachings, even down to small typographical errors; ...

The extensive editing of clearsound lectures shows this
to be yet another hypocritical claim.

Missing tapes were restored to the BC by Ron's direct order
in the 70s.  The tech volumes were ordered to be redone at that
time as well to get the missing "confidential" materials back
into them (R3M stuff, etc.).  The org dragged its heels for
decades and has only complied slowly.  My assumption is that
there are people inside Gold and Bridge who have fought
tooth and nail for decades to get the materials out to the
public and that high level managers such as DM have stalled
the process as much as they could.

> 113. But Prince's allegations are contradictory on their own. He
> claims to have been second in command of all Scientology based on
> being second in command in RTC.

Here I have to agree with DM.  Prince is not one of the big
names, just one of DM's cronies who was kicked once too often
and has turned on his tormentor.  But that does not invalidate
the data that Prince has provided.

If DM is the reincarnation of Machievelli, perhaps it amused
him to have a prince as a lap dog.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - Russian Teaching Ban Stupidity

RUSSIAN TEACHING BAN STUPIDITY

On 7 Oct 99, referen@bway.net posted on subject
"CoS in Russia"

> RUSSIA: Russia Scientologists face Moscow teaching ban.
>  By Michael Steen
>
>  10/07/1999
>  Reuters English News Service
>  (C) Reuters Limited 1999.
>
>  MOSCOW, Oct 7 (Reuters) - A Russian branch of the U.S.-based Church
> of Scientology is threatened with closure after a court found  it
> guilty of teaching without a licence, a judge said on Thursday.

Oh now this is pure stupidity.

When you use an idiotic reason just to make trouble, you
only end up encouraging fanaticism.

This is like the FDA raid where they siezed e-meters as if
they were some kind of illegal drug.  Maybe they thought
that the pc's were getting too many dirty needles (an in joke).

Before any critics start carping at my objections to this,
let me point out that I do not complain when valid wrongnesses
are attacked.

But things like this just give DM and his cronies ammunition
to incite the membership.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - Old And New Names For Tape Sets

OLD AND NEW NAMES FOR TAPE SETS

Just to help folks translate between the old and the new
names for the lecture sets.

Note that many of the old lecture series have not yet been
done by clearsound and therefore aren't listed here.
See the Master Tape List that I posted (available at fza.org)
for a complete list.

Also note that FZBA has also posted other tape lectures which
are not in these sets.

The clearsound titles and tape counts are from the 1999 Books,
Lectures, and Materials Cataloge that came out recently.  In
one case (the 1st Melborne ACC), the count stated in the cataloge
is lower than the actual number of cassettes in the clearsound set.

LIST OF CLEARSOUND CASSETTE SETS AS OF OCTOBER 99

   * = has been posted by fzba

[in date order]

Special Course in Human Evaluation = HEV, 1951, 9 tapes

* Dawn of Immortality = HCL lectures (most but not all), 1952, 24 tapes.

* Time Track of Theta = HofM from HCL, 1952, 4 tapes

* Route to Infinity = Tech 80 lectures, 1952, 7 tapes.

Perception of Truth = Logic & Axiom lectures, 1952, 4 tapes.

* Secrets of the Mest Universe = Nov Lectures, 1952, 6 tapes.

* Philadelphia Doctorate Course = same (PDC) of 1952, including the
PDC Supp lectures of 1953, 76 tapes. [PDC supp not yet posted]

====== above are all included in the new R&D volumes =====

Admiration & the Renaissance of Beingness = Spring lectures, 1952,
18 tapes.  (the first few are at the tail end of new R&D vol 15).

* Ext & the Phenomena of Space = 1st ACC, 1953, 84 tapes

Rehabilitation of the Human Spirit = 2nd ACC, 1953, 67 tapes

* Universes and the War between Theta & Mest = 5th ACC, 1954, 38 tapes

Phoenix Lectures (no transcripts - corresponds to the book,
25 tapes, 1954, mostly from the 7th ACC - see master list).

Creation of Human Ability lectures = 8th ACC, 1954, 38 cassettes

* Solution to Entrappment = 9th ACC, 1954, 35 tapes.

Communication Freedom & Ability = Unification Congress, 1954, 16 tapes.

Anatomy of the Spirit of Man Congress = same (ASMC), 1955, 15 tapes.

* Conquest of Chaos = Academy Lecture Series (ALS), 1955, 6 tapes.

Games and the Spirit of Play = Games Congress, 1956, 13 tapes.

Power of Simplicity = 15th ACC, 1956, 26 tapes.

How to present Scientology to the world = Org Series (OS), 1956, 18 tapes

Anatomy of Cause = 16th ACC, 1957, 29 tapes.

Radiation & Your Surival = part of LCNRH, no transcipts, 10 tapes.

* Freedom Congress = same (FC), 1957, 16 tapes.

Illusion or Truth = 18th ACC, 1957, 22 tapes

* Ability Congress = same, 1957, 9 tapes.

Restoration of Knowing Cause: Clear to OT = 19th ACC, 40 tapes

* Clearing Congress = same, 1958, 6 videos without transcripts

First Postulate = 20th ACC, 1958, 35 tapes.

Origin of Abberation = LCC, 1958, 6 tapes.

Skills of a Theta Being = SHPA 1959, 26 tapes

Cause & Sphere's of Influence = 1950 Success Congr. 1959, 6 tapes

Principles of Creation = Melborne Congr, 1959, 6 tapes

Responsibility & the state of OT = 1 MACC, 1959,
(26 tapes per promo, but 32 tapes in actual fact).

State of Man congress = same (SMC), 1960, 9 tapes

Anatomy of the Human Mind Congress = same (AHMC), 1960, 5 tapes

Expansion of Havingness = Clean Hands Congress, 1962, 9 tapes

St. Hill Special Briefing Course - 437 tapes, 1960s (a few
omitted for confidentiality, but 160 of them that used to be
considered confidential are included) (see master list)

[Note that the PDC supplements have not yet appeared on
the net.  Note that only the first half of the 1st ACC has
appear so far.  Note that many BC tapes have been posted
but not the entire BC.  Also, many other tapes, not available
on clearsound, have appeared on the net.]

Not covered here are the many miscellaneous collections such as
the Money tapes or the 2D lectures which are not from one specific
lecture series.

===============

Hope this helps,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio HUMOR - The Breast Implants

HUMOR: THE BREAST IMPLANTS

On 21 Oct 99, tilman@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman Hausherr) posted
on topic "Between Breast Implants"

> Could any funny people here make up a "Between Breast Implants"
> lecture?

Great inspiration.  Thank you Tilman.

========= THE OT ( OPERATING TITS ) LEVELS ===========

Once a person has gone clear, they are now ready to do
the OT or Operating Tits levels.

The preliminary step consists of Sex Checking until flat.

------

Operating Tits I:

a) Go to a crowded place.
b) Touch and Let go of tits until something happens

-------

Operating Tits II:

Run the breast implant platen as follows:

Those who are being breasts  <---- Those who are unbeing breasts

Breastishness  <--- Unbreastishness

Breastivity    <--- Those who desire to seek breasts

Breastabimini  <--- Nix Breastishness

Breastishnessishless  <--- The breast as an RI (Reliable Item)

-------

Operating Tits III

The head of Max Factor (76 beauty parlors around larger cities)
(very Italian Opera) solved overTitillation by mass implanting.
He caused people to be brought to Titgeeack (Paris) and put
topless gowns in the principle fashion shows.  Everyone's
bras were then packaged in boxes and sent to Hawaii (Pacific)
or Las Palmas (Atlantic).  His name was Xenude.  He used
prostitutes.

One can freewheel through the Big Tits (BTs) and die unless
it is approached as precisely outlined.  The freewheel lasts
too long, causes too many orgasms, denies sleep etc. and one
dies.

One's body is a mass of individual Big Tits stuck to oneself
or to the body.  One has to clean them off.  It is a long
job.  They respond like any preclear.

The Big Tits believed they were one.  They are actually two.
This is the primary error.

Good luck.

---------

Operating Tits IV

Mockup heat in tits until the nipples pop up.

--------

Operating Tits V

Find places where tits would be safe.

--------

Operating Tits VI

Find places where tits are not.

--------

Operating Tits VII

Also called Nipples for Operating Tits or NOTS for short.

Locate tits and ask them "who are you" until you get blown.

===================

Humorously,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - To Jiriki3 On Reposting

TO JIRIKI3 ON REPOSTING

On 2 Oct 99, jiriki3@my-deja.com posted on topic
"Pilot -- your posts"

> Pilot Ken-san. :)
>
> I see you just posted recently and hope you don't mind me re-posting to
> alt.self-reliance so I can reply to some out of a.c.t.
>
> Appreciative,
> Gassho,
> Bryan :)))))

Feel free to repost anything I post to ACT anywhere on the
net.  I'm writing these things for the sake of others and
it encourages me to hear that they are considered valuable
enought to copy around.

Note that I can't read AS-R (unless Homer decides to add
it to his list of free newsgroups at lightlink).

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - Continuing the Reform Discussion With Homer

CONTINUING THE REFORM DISCUSSION WITH HOMER

On 1 Oct 99, Homer Wilson Smith <homer@lightlink.com> responded
to my earlier dialog on "Super Scio - To Christine on Reform"

> >Xine said:
> >>  Despite all his contributions, I believe Pilot
> >> will destroy the Free Zone eventually -- he will be sold the reform
> >> movement and he'll lead the true believers and reformers to theirs deaths,
> >>like the Pied Piper leadings the rats to the ocean.
>
> This is not immediately obvious to me.  Pilot is smart enough to
> know an SP when he sees one, and stupid enough to dream he can audit
> it!  :)

Yup.  You've got me pegged.

> That's cool, no?
>
> I don't see any inherent danger in *TRYING*.

Exactly, and the attempt deserves to be made.

>  He could win.

Right again.  But don't bet any money on it, the chance is slim.

Constantinople should have won.  The gates were opened by the
traitor during the last attack of the last day when the besigers
were ready to give up and go home after one last try.


> >Sorry Pilot,the chances of reform are nil,not because of RTC but because of
> >the ordinary membership.
>
> Correct.  The Church is geared up to attract people who don't
> want to think for themselves, who don't want to know that all is not
> yet known, who don't want to believe that they might have to do some
> work to make the rest known etc.  The Church is for people who want it
> all spoon fed to them and never have to lift a mental finger
> themselves to discover anything new because it is already done for
> them.

The chances are certainly not nil.  There are still good people
in there.


> If you audit them, and they become more able, they will uniformly
> use those abilities to harm and destroy anyone who tries to help
> themselves, or find a new route.

If you sec check them endlessly and they become meaner, they will
work harder at trying to harm and destroy.

However good processing that really makes somebody more able
oftens mellows them out at the same time.

The evangalistic squirrel haters were rarely in good case shape.
And of course I'm talking about real case state here rather than
what silly certificate they had managed to collect.

The occasional staff member who is in good shape and does know
the tech often covertly derails efforts to attack and preaches
ARC instead of KSW.  I always did when I was on staff or actively
on lines.  So did a lot of the others who were trained and in
good shape.  But we were never in the majority.

People behave better when they don't have bypassed charge lighting
a fire under their ass.

If the tech had really worked well enough to truely handle
everyone's case, the org would have fixed itself and become
a good neighbor.

But how many Sea Org members ever got their cases handled.


> >They're the ones opposing reform on this issue.
> >Now,I think most Churchies would like relaxed ethics,cheaper prices and an
> >end to all the constant sec-checks but they AIN'T gonna stomach a tech
> >reform,no way.
>
> They will stomach a tech reform in the same sense as the other
> reforms, but they won't stomach a major tech paradigm change from
> revealed word of God, to *ON GOING* scientific research.

You generalize, which is a mistake here.

Some will and some wouldn't.

Currently, the active crowd are the ones in closest agreement
with the current party line and the inactive crowd are the ones
who aren't.

In the late 60s to early 70s, the party line was continually changing,
going to the extremes of get the evil SPs in 69 to massive reform
and we made big mistakes and stop using ethics etc. in 70.

And those two are just the most extreme example.  Really there
was a different paradigm in each year from 66 to 72.

And reform was a winner hands down over witch hunting SPs.

But of course some people would make themselves scarce and others
would get active in response to each paradigm shift.  So the
people who were hanging around a lot would generally match
whatever the current party line was.

Right now the place is a ghost town in comparison with the late 70s.
That tells me that the current paradigm does not line up with
the bulk of the public.


> >Tech reform would probably destroy the Cof$ faster than anything else I can
> >think of so it might be best to just forget the idea and leave Cof$ to do
> >what they do best.....making future Freezoners.
>
> That can't go on forever, something has to change.

Definitely.

The human condition is that when something has to change it
usually changes for the worst.

But there are wonderfull exceptions like the American Revolution.

One of the factors which gave us a good revolution instead of a
downscale one was the great inspirational writings which set
higher ideals.

Obviously, I'm hoping to swing this one around so that when CofS
snaps it will move in a positive direction instead of turning into
something worse.

>
> Homer

Affinity,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - Lamont Johnson

LAMONT JOHNSON

On 24 Oct 99, ladyv <ladyv@dynamism.org> posted on
topic "LaMont Johnson"

> Hello everyone,
>
> It is with regret that I must inform you of the sudden
> death of a clearing great; LaMont Johnson. He was also well
> known to us all for his wonderful music. His beloved wife,
> Jayne was with him.
>
> I believe it was heart failure. A bright and powerful spirit,
> I will certainly miss him.
>
> Love,
> Enid

I only knew him back in New York in the 1966-69 timeframe.  He
would pass through occasionally spreading joy and good cheer.
The org would get the poor old upright piano in the academy
tuned and he would give a concert Saturday or Sunday night
after course.  I doubt that he would remember me from that
time, I was just one of the many admiring staff and students.

He positively glowed with engergy, not just while he was
performing but in ordinary conversation as well.

I'm sorry that I didn't get to talk more with him on the
net or see him in person in modern times.

When I heard the news, I wondered where he was now and I got
this image of a giant figure, a thousand feet high, standing
over LA and looking down with a gentle smile on his face.

I also wondered how many of us could have it if he came back,
mocking up a body out of thin air, and gave a few lectures
about what he'd run into in the between lives area.

Certainly a big being.

He will be missed.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio - To Dimitry On The Russian Page

TO DIMITRY ON THE RUSSIAN PAGE

On 5 Oct 99, "Dmitriy N. Ukhanov" <dongos@aaanet.ru>
posted on topic "To Pilot and others"

> Hi all !
>
> i and my friend wants to
> create Russian web page about Scientology
> and alternative tech.

Good idea.

> we are want to store LRH materials here,
> Pilot's books, Trom, Filbert's materials and other.
>
> first question to PILOT:
> can we store your materilas on our page?
> Super Scio and Self Clearing and other in russian ?

Of course.  I have said many times that everyone can do
this as they desire.

> second question:
> what about confed materials like OT levels?
> we want to store it there.

Fine by me but probably not fine according to CofS and Helen
Korbin.  You can expect trouble, but maybe you can succeed
because your are under different laws (which I am not familiar
with).

I would suggest that you keep this at a separate website so
that the other site is not lost if this one gets in trouble.


> third question:
> we think about name of our page.
> i'll glad to see your variants of our page's name.

Unfortunately I don't read Russian.  Also, you didn't include
the URL.

> ARC, Dmitriy

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - A Note On Levels Course Packs

A NOTE ON LEVELS COURSE PACKS

A modern level 0 pack was posted recently by Freezone Bible
(Tech Lion).  And a level 0 pack from the 70s was posted
earlier this year (or maybe it was late last year).

It's really great to see these on the net.  But I did want
to point out something which some people might not be aware
of.

If you study the modern level 0 pack, you also need to
study the final section of the old pack which gives all
the HCOBs for the expanded level 0 processes.

This is because at some time in the 1980s, the CofS removed
the full expanded processes from the academy levels and moved
them to the internship.

In the old days there was a rule that all the material was
studied on the course and no new material was added for the
internship.  I think that it was the right way to go and
the later arrangement is a mistake.

I don't know what they've done with these in the new Golden
versions, whether they restored them to the academy or
left them on the internship.

But if you study the course in the field, let me suggest
that you add the processing section.

Note that I put together an all time composite class 0
checksheet which has been up at fza.org for quite some
time now.  The last few sections (20 onward) list the
various HCOBs needed in the processing section and explain
the differences between the two checksheets in that area.

Also note that the older pack has the process drills BTBs,
which was to be used for advise only and not considered to
have the force of an HCOB.  This later disappeared and left
the students without adequate drilling on the processes.
In the new Golden Age, they have supposedly created HCOBs
which drill the students, but if they are treating these
as HCOBs instead of as suggestions, it is a mistake because
they are too evaluative.  Using them as absolutes leads
to auditing an imaginary standard case instead of the pc
in front of you.

In summary, the level 0 students stopped learning how to
run the expanded version of grade zero and that was left
for the internship.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - To Oleg On OT Levels

TO OLEG ON OT LEVELS

On 23 Oct 99, "Oleg V. Matveyev" <espinol@aha.ru> posted on
topic "TO PILOT: New and old OTs"

> Dear Ken,
>
> Can I ask you a question?
>
> On CofS chart, there are old and "new" OT Levels. I have read in your life
> description that you did both. Can you explain how they correlate to each
> other, what are their logic and sequence, and when and how they appeared?

The old OT levels came out during the second half of the 1960s.
I did them in the late 70s just before they were replaced with
the new OT levels.

There were a number of different early OT Is, but the version I
did was the one with a series of "objective" type solo OT drills
done outside.  This was the one in use throughout the 1970s and
into the early 80s.  It was really a high powered variation of
the basic spotting techniques (see self clearing chapter 1) as
applied to bodies.  I have not seen anything explaining the theory
behind it (if there is such a writeup, it is confidential) but
it seems obvious that one is basically spotting bodies until one
exteriorizes.  It was replaced at some time in the 80s and I
don't know what the new version is, but I assume that it is some
short light action meant to give the person confidence and get
him exterior before tackling more difficult levels.

OT 2 has remained fairly constant.  It is a huge collection of
implant platens to be flattened.  These mostly appear to have
been researched in 1966, sometimes using earlier material found
in the 1964 era.

Of course you know of OT 3 and I have talked about it at length.
The idea was to blow off the entities.  Originally it was aimed
at handling incident 2, that being seen as the primary source,
but gradually it shifted over to cumulative cluster handling,
which considers that incident 2 is simply an example of a cluster
forming incident.

Since this did not seem to handle all of a person's remaining
case after clear, an assumption (which I believe to be incorrect)
was made that more handling of entities was needed and eventually
OT 3X was introduced to do more running of OT 3 after beefing
up the pc's intention with OT 7.  Since that didn't do the trick
either, NOTS was eventually developed to address this area yet
again, but I'm getting ahead of the story.

The assumption seems to be that one handles entites and then
one's case is gone and one can go on to do OT drills.  Completion
of entity handling was OT 3 on the early bridge, OT 3X on the
bridge of the 1970s, and NOTS OT 7 on the modern bridge.  But
of course they continue to ignore the person's own case and so
now they are busy rerunning all the OT 7 completions on the
Golden Age Nots retread.

Old OT 4 as done in the 70s was a sort of clearing course
retread, with emphasis on mocking up items etc. so that one
could not be implanted again.

Old OT 5 and 6 were a collection of real OT drills, basically
an improved modernized version of CofHA Route 1 type stuff.

Old OT 7 was basically a souped up version of TR 8 to drill
intention.

Old OT 4 to 7 were great levels producing lots of TA action
(at least for me) and big gains in proportion to the very
sort amount of time needed to do them.  The real outpoint
was that these were "quickie" levels in the sense that there
are hundreds more processes like these in the 50s materials
and this kind of stuff can be run for thousands of hours
instead of a dozen hours.  And of course the OTs case remained
unhandled.

So they put those aside and made a new OT 4 through 7 which
is basically a replacement for OT 3X.  The new idea was that
it was drug case which was keeping people from handling
entities well, so OT 4 is the OT drug rundown, and then they
did audited NOTS as OT 5 on the assumption that people were
not soloing well enough to do a proper job.  Then OT 6 is
training on Solo Nots and OT 7 is running Solo Nots.

The Nots tech is actually a better approach to entity handling
than OT 3, but they still do OT 3 first even though it is
the more difficult method.

As I have said many times, entites are not the basic why on
one's case, but Ron is right in that they do hold one back
and the level is worth doing.  But all they do is amplify
your own abberations, they are not source.  So you still need
to get your case handled once they are out of the way.
You can run the grades really deep after OT 7 with fantastic
gains.

The biggest mistake was to assume that going clear undercut
the grades, and it does not.  The clear state drains the
force from the bank, but it does not handle the abberated
postulates that the person made in the area of the grades
which caused him to form a bank in the first place.

So there has been this chronic difficulty with people who
were clear or OT 7 still having PTPs, Overts, and ARC Breaks,
and the big mistake is to keep chasing after entities as
the reason.


> I'll be immensely grateful for your answer.
>
> ARC
>     Oleg

===========

I also wanted to ask you about the following which was
posted by "Dmitriy N. Ukhanov" <dongos@aaanet.ru> on
topic "QUESTION TO ALL !  attn. PILOT !"

> today i has read a letter from Oleg Matveyev in russian
> newsgroup called fido7.su.scientologie.
>
> this letter about Pilot and Super Scio.
> in this letter Oleg has spews lot of crap about this book
> and about the Pilot.
>
> Oleg has said that he was first russian who
> was been personally communicated
> with Pilot and drawn a conclusion that Pilot is
> bad specialist and Super Scio is the book
> about Pilot's screwed case.

Is this a misunderstanding?

What's up?

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Answering ThomLove on Platens etc.

ANSWERING THOMLOVE ON PLATENS ETC.

On 2 Oct 99, thomlove <thomlovenetmail@netscape.com> asked
on topic "Pilot and others, I have a question."

> Hello All;
>
> I'm wondering, if a pc/preOT/OT were to have to run something that was
> not yet real to them, such as a platen for a GPM or something, would
> they have to be able to contact the actual item they experienced to
> benefit from the procedure, or could they 'imagine' that they are
> contacting the actual item and still get the desired result?

One can get at least a partial result.

See the LCC tape transcripts ("Origin of Abberation" cassettes)
posted recently by FZBA.  LRH says that errasure is a myth.  It
is really a gradient scale of ability to confront and ability
to mock up.


>  I know you can run imaginary incidents and eventually get down into the
> real ones, but does that work here as well?

Yes.

> The reason I ask, is that if someone were to attempt the Pilots Penalty
> Universe tech, or any of the other similar techs, where platens are laid
> out, it may not be real to that individual that they can contact their
> own actual experience. So would erasing occur even if the actual
> experience itself was not spotted?

As mentioned above, it is a gradient.

I have heard privately of the penalty universe "keyout rundown",
where one just gets the idea of pushing another into "to create
is native state" etc. producing huge gains without any great deal
of perception or reality on the incident itself.

Also note that OT 2 is often run with little reality or perception.

If you mockup items and feel charge releasing or simply feel
good while you're doing it, then it is fine.

Or you can call platen items off on an e-meter and see them read
and flatten (hopefully to an FN) and make gains.

But you should not sit there calling platen items on a meter
and have neither reads nor FNs or, unmetered, simply feel
heavy or disturbed while spotting items.  That is just
restimulating things without discharging them.

The actual monitoring factor is whether or not charge is
coming off.

Charge coming off is good.

No charge present and simply having fun mocking up is also good.

Charge being stirred up but not discharging is bad.  Avoid
this because it reduces the band of accessibility and slows
down progress.

It would be best if people stayed away from platens until
they had done enough processing to tell the difference between
getting overrestimulated and having things running out.
It doesn't take a lot of processing to get that much judgement,
you just need a few good actions where you pushed through
something heavy to a big win and a few reverse examples
where you overran and began grinding without benifit.

Item platens are dicy because they can restimulate without
adequate charge coming off.

On the other hand, the events leading up to an implant, or
the top entry point to a penalty universe, or your own
old intentions to implant somebody else discharge much more
easily and don't tend to restimulate without at least some
discharge taking place.  That is because they are at the
beginning whereas detail items are in the middle of the
incident.

> I'd like to know...
>
> ThomLove

Hope this helps,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - Discussion with Croseus on Advanced Topics

DISCUSSION WITH CROSEUS ON ADVANCED TOPICS

On 2 Oct 99, croesus123@aol.com (Croesus123) posted on
topic "To the PILOT"

> Here are a number of questions
>
> Question 1
>
> In 1967 I went exterior. Then the auditor told me to look at my body (he did
> the no-no) and I had a sudden surge toward the body and slight lessening of
> tone. I still stayed slightly exterior but completely went in over the next
> three days.

See self clearing chapter 11.  If you do enough drilling on going
in and out of mountains etc., you can get to the point where you
don't have that pull towards the body when you look at it.

This is separate from what you describe next.

> For the next three months I would have a very unusual occurrence. During
> periods when I was falling asleep, I would suddenly awake with a very real
> electrical shock going through my head. It wasn't a seizure (I don't think) but
> a sudden electrical surge that jolted me awake. When I awoke I wasn't groggy or
> confused. But it was so powerful and overwhelming I thought that there is no
> way I'm going to touch that. After a few months it never happened again.
>
> I don't believe it was an incident but some type of electrical field that got
> unsettled during my experience. It seemed real and in present time. Ron talks
> about beams and electrical flows that pin a thetan to a body in the PDC tapes.
> If so are there any drills or procedures to address these things. Any thoughts?

I've had this happen, and I've seen somebody else posting about this
kind of thing too, so it is not rare nor is it delusion.  In fact,
this one needs to be investigated and figured out.

I had this happening on rare occasions (but quite spectacular when it
did occur) for many years.  The shocks were strong enough that I was
afraid that it might bring on a heart attack or a stroke.  Note that
the shocks would be repetative, perhaps a half dozen or so one after
the other.

The first time was in the early 70s, many years after my early ext
experiences and OT keyout.  So obviously it did not turn on due
to those things.

I had the impression of a beam coming down from space on which
the shocks were flowing.

It was quite scary until one night I managed somehow or other to
shift the beam (or perhaps my energy fields or something) to a point
a few feet away from the body, and the shock would come down and hit
that place instead.

After that it became extremely rare, but would happen maybe once
every six months or so.  But it was not particularly bothersome
because I could shift the target off of the body and was not
worried about getting hurt.  One night the shocks were so bright
that they lit up the darkened room clearly.

Another thing I noticed was that if I had been shocked awake,
I could start another wave of shocks by grabbing back onto the
mass of the dream that I'd been having.

Whatever it was blew at some point while I was writing the
self clearing book and trying the processes in it.  I can only
guess (because it hasn't happened since), but I suspect that it
was the final process (chapter 48) where one mocks up a scene
and steps in and out of it, but it might also have been some
of the drills on energy beams in the chapter on energy, especially
the one of making copies of beams.

If it occurs again, try shifting the beam off to the side of the
body.


> Question 2
>
> Do you still use a meter in auditing?

Rarely.

It is good for checking implant items and it is good for case
repair if you get all tangled up.

But I prefer to run off the meter nowardays and build up knowingness.

However, at the time I was writing Super Scio, I was still running
everything in formal solo sessions on the meter, being very careful
with admin and meter phenomena etc.

It was only in the last few months, just before posting the book,
that I was doing a lot in informal sessions, unmetered.  It was
partially that I was doing so much writing for the book that I
didn't feel like writing a ton of session admin at the same time
and it was partially that I wanted to see how safe it was just
to try things casually.  If that hadn't worked, I might not have
posted the book for fear of spinning people in.

The self clearing book, on the other hand, was done exclusively
off of the meter.  I needed to know for sure that it was possible
to do it that way.

Since then I've only picked up the cans to check implant items,
and I'm even getting sloppy about that because a platen just
tends to FN if I get it right and I prefer to fool around with
approximations of the items and getting Itsa until it does
fall in place and start FNing rather than using formal listing
procedures.  But I would NOT recommend that to anybody else.
I researched out tons of items in a formal manner before my
Itsa line came up to the point where I can muck around and
work in towards an item without the surrounding charge taking
my head off.

> If so do you still go to the EP of
> cognition, FN and release or erasure on a process?

Yes for charged processes (I can pretty much tell when I'm FNing).

For drills, I generally just go to a win.

> I ask these because my
> understanding is that, from novice to OT 7, the meter is primarily
> reading the electrical effects on the body of BTs which are
> restimulated or induced to react to questions or life.

I have not seen any LRH reference which says this.

> Once they are gone the only reading items would seem to be
> mental mass created by either the PC or the genetic entity or other
> body entities that might monitor and direct the body itself.

With or without BTs, the the thetan is the primary reading
entity.

Running solo Nots, there generally were small reads on BTs and
large reads on my own charge.  Since the level encourages you
to look for BT charge and doesn't tend to restimulate one's
own charge very much, you don't bump into much that is your
own charge except for an occasional out rudiment.  But if I
had a real ARC break, it would give a big read and significant
TA action running it whereas handling BTs who might come up
on an ARCX rudiment gives small reads and little TA action.

The main thing is that you are not looking for your own case.
If you start running it again, for example by doing more
grade processes, the TA action increases significantly.

The body is primarily at the effect of the thetan himself.
The meter is reading on the body, but it is the thetan who
is impinging on the body that causes the largest effects.


> We must remember that Ron researched the meter primarily in the
> sixties and seventies when he was dealing with the material of
> the non-interference zone.

Completely wrong.

The modern meter was developed by Don Breeding at Ron's request
in the late 1950s.  It is still basically the same circuit
although it has been refined.  And of course the earlier Scientology
work was done by Matheson in the early 50s and he started from
earlier meters which go all the way back to work by Jung etc.
in the first half of this century.

The meter was always aimed at the thetan, not entities or
even the GE.  They will read too, but they are the lesser
effect.

The Mark IV meter design was aimed at listing for GPM items
on the pc, not entities.  The Mark V just had some improvements
in sensitivity.

The Mark VI tried to make the same read a little bit larger
and had a lighter action.  You can see the same read on a
Mark V by doubling the sensitivity, but it becomes hard
to keep the needle on the dial.  The real problem being
solved was that a solo can gives a smaller read for the
same amount of charge because of less surface area.

But the Mark VI was a really cheap flakey construction
despite the pretty case, so they did the Mark VII.

Really the whole lineup is simply trying to make the reads
a little bit bigger for the same sensitivity.  You could
get the same effect with a mark IV if you could make the
dial a foot wide so that you didn't have to be constantly
moving the TA to keep the needle on the dial.

> But once this is gone should we expect the same meter phenomena?

Yup.

But you tend to run at lower sensitivities and the reads (on
your own case) get huge and often you have to be able to
read through an FN.

Also sometimes you spot things that don't react until you
bring them closer or something like that.  You do begin
to go beyond where the meter is reading.  Ron mentions something
like that on one of the tapes around late 63 early 64 too.
In that case I think that you're still getting reads in
your own energy fields, but if you have them moved far away
from the body, it might not show on the cans.

> I would expect that the remaining case after OT 7 might
> react a little differently. But maybe not. Maybe a floating
> TA is still the major correct end point for very advanced
> materials. But obviously if one has a floating TA and one
> doesn't feel as large as a planet space-wise, there is still
> have other stuff in the way.

I expect that it is like it is with FNs.  If the TA was floating
three divisions wide and then suddenly narrowed to two divisions,
that would be a significant read.

But note that it is not a steady increase.  You still move case
in and out depending on what is in restimulation etc.

The first time I was so blown away that I had to run at sensitivity
one (by can squeeze), it was just before the big EP on solo
Nots (the real EP, which actually happened quite early on
the level).

After years of overrun and crapped up reviews at Flag, I
was back up around sensitivity 8.

When I hit the huge EP on handling the penalty universes
(see Super Scio), I was again down at Sen 1 and the TA flying
all over the place.

When I was digging into actual GPMs, I was back to running
at around sen 5 and gradually it came back down towards 1
as I neared the end of the line plot.

But eventually, I got into endless difficulties trying to
handle fragmentation (see super scio chapter 6).  I had a
really bad year where everything seemed to be grinding to
a hault.  Eventually I was running up at sensitivity 32
and the TA was often heading up to 5 or even 6, just awful.
And then I finally stumbled onto the "point to the being
you divided from" command and the whole area came apart.
If I hadn't found that, I think I wouldn't have dared to
write Super Scio either.

After writing (and trying out) the self clearing book, I
was again down at sen 1 with the TA floating all over
the place, really free of charge.  But of course I started
digging a little further and came up with tons more case.

So at this stage, I'm seeing that even the sensitivity
follows a progression of running high and then lower and
lower as a really major case factor comes apart.


> So what is one releasing from or erasing after OT 7? One's own mass?

Damn right!

I would say at this point that nobody touches more than one
percent of the case available on the grades when one does them
at lower levels.  We are counting on keyout effects to give
the guy some space and some cogs.

> But suppose one is running beams like in L12 (I believe that's
> the right L #). Should or does this also react like mental mass
> would and show up as such on the meter?

I haven't used any of the L's procedures.  I think that they
are overly forced.

Using simple beam handling drills from the 50s material,
you come up a nice gradient with, I think, much more perception.
And they do seem to read on the meter.


> And what have you noticed meter wise when running the 1952-55
> processes after completing OT7? Any differences. Or when you
> encounter the early incidents you mention (such as the basic
> overt idea that you mentioned in your last postings)
> do you get the same meter reads and run these things to the same
> old EP?

Well, as I said, I don't tend to use the meter much these days.

When I was (Super Scio stuff), these things would read like
always, except that these things that I tend to refer to as
big or basic or whatever generally would have spectacular
reads.

I've seen the meter go around through 7.

I've seen a 3 division wide super theta bop that had dial wide
theta bops at each end and where you could see tiny theta bops
at each end of the dial wide swing, the whole thing being
in patterns of 3s (three back and forth on each bop within
a bop - the read took about a minute to repeat, and repeated
precisely even as to exact TA positions etc.).

I've seen 2 and 3 division long rocket reads.

I even saw an RS once between 1.5 and 6.5 on the dial.  That
was on the tail end of the previous actual GPM.  There is a
brief period of acting really suppressive during the final
stages of an actual GPM just before you abandon the whole
thing and start a new one.

But don't let me give you the wrong idea.  It is mostly just
like before and the spectacular stuff is rare.


> It seems that we are limited by many things besides mental mass.
> The very structure of the games we're involved in seem to be a
> limitation. For example, how can many thetans rise in power and
> then influence and act over the same dynamics with each exercising
> their full power? They either have to agree completely about the
> course of the dynamics or fight for control of who is
> going to run the group and who is going to take the orders.

I've been looking at that kind of thing a lot.  This is one of
the basic sore spots.

What I find on early track is reality faning out whenever two
beings choose to postulate contrary to each other.  That leads
to having lots of alternatives and you go through an area
continually shifting back and forth between different mockups.

Imagine a shopping mall with a hundred stores etc.  A thousand
people are walking around in it.  Mostly they just want to
look and play with what is there, but occasionally they force
something to bend to their will.  So you walk along and every
store has at least ten alternate versions as you walk in the
door and you shift over to the one you like best at any given
moment, except that sometimes you shift to a less favorable
one because a friend has chosen to be in that one instead of
the one you would prefer.

The keynote is that there is no single agreed upon reality.
Instead there are many half agreed realities and you shift
around.

When that disappears and all is forced into line, then we
are all trapped and begin continually fighting with each other.


> Lets me explain. Lets say we have a hundred people working at
> an org. Through auditing each goes exterior, increases their
> spatial considerations and beingness and become very powerful.
> At this higher state each starts noticing that they have been
> limiting themselves by running just one body and being one
> identity. They now realize they are powerful enough to run a
> number of bodies and can assume numerous identities no longer
> thinking they are just a body and single identity.
>
> Each starts assuming control of the whole group, this being the
> natural result of the expansion. Unless they are in complete
> agreement on the direction and action of each body and the whole
> group itself there would be chaos. It would seem that somewhere
> along the line one thetan would have to have more power than the
> others for the sake of organization. This would be true all the way
> down. In other words only one thetan could exercise his full
> ability and the others would have to cut down their power
> accordingly to have a hierarchical organization.

This is why having a one and only org is guaranteed to be a
trap.

In actual fact, even with everyone at maximum horsepower you
would not find that everybody felt like leading all the time.
They would only feel like it occasionally.

For a big being, wanting to lead is either a momentary thing
so that they can try a particular game or mockup, or else it
is a solution to being led badly by someone who is making a
mess of things.

So of the hundred, perhaps only a half dozen feel like leading
this week.

A high toned group would fragment slightly, but only slightly.

You might end up with half a dozen groups.  Anyone who wants
to lead just announces that he is forming another group.
Any time a leader is bad, the members just drift over to one
of the other groups which is being run better instead of
having to put on a leader's hat themselves.

This does not work right here on Earth because the "group"
itself owns a pile of MEST.  But if the beings were powerful
enough to wish things in and out of existance, that would
not be a factor.

So on the early track, it does work, at least until the beings
decay to the point where they want to force others to obey
them instead of attracting a bunch of followers by providing
interesting mockups etc.


> In fact implanting has been the accepted solution to this
> problem. It is a much "easier" solution than trying to organize
> a bunch of powerful free beings into a hierarchical organization.
> To organize a bunch of free beings they have to voluntarily limit
> their space and scope and freely agree to it all. If this doesn't
> work it then takes implanting to get the required reduction. But
> this forces the issue and never addresses why the beings couldn't
> do it voluntarily.

Basically you cannot hold a group of free beings in a fixed
hierarchy for long.

A group of free beings would be in a continual flux, otherwise
they would not be free.

Interestingly enough, when I was happiest on staff was during
the musical chairs days.

If you make it easy for people to shift around, while at the
same time continually keeping them aware of the responsibilities
of keeping everything working right, the organization might
appear unstable to an outsider but actually be quite high
toned and productive.  It was like that at New York when it
was booming.


> So where are we going with all this auditing? It is wonderful
> to put out the idea of OT and rekindle everyone hopes and dreams
> again. But where are we going?

I've written about that occasionally.

Multiple realities.  Things being wished into and out of existance.
Extremely high randomity.  Tremendous asthetics.

Right now it is like living with one and only one TV channel
with no choice of program.  The target is to have hundreds of
channels and give everybody a channel swicher.  That is total
freedom.

Since this is not possible as long as we are locked into a
single fixed reality, we might say that reality as we currently
know it IS the basic abberation.

> If hundreds of thousand of thetans really reached the high states
> of real OT we would have chaos.

Yup.  Chaos is at the TOP of the scale as well as the bottom.
I wrote about that in Super Scio.  Maximum order is at the
mid point, the equivalent of 0.0 (death) on an expanded tone
scale.

Only a thetan who was sort of dead as a being would want
a perfectly ordered unchangeable single reality.  He wants
that because he can no longer create and therefore the
existing creations must persist eternally.  Unfortunately
we dropped below that point with the fall of home universe.

> Everyone wants to be free but then they find that they still
> have to turn around and operate in this society through these
> bodies etc. But then they have to impose the old restrictions
> of acting through one identity etc.

Or perhaps just make the pretense of doing that to keep from
upsetting people.

> After you've been around awhile you realize this. The early
> novice dreams that freedom is flying around with no involvement
> and no responsibility.

Yes.  Real freedom is flying around with maximum involvement
and maximum responsibility.  But it does include the flying
around part.

> It isn't that. We still have to turn around and act over the
> dynamics right now.

Hopefully the humanoid dynamics get errased eventually.  I do
not see them early on the track.  I do see self and others.
I see co-creation and co-existance of static.  And I see what
I call the upper dynamics - asthetics and logic and games and
so forth.  But I do not see the fixed humanoid societies and
frozen patterns of relationships.

> David Miscaviage has more control and is at greater cause over
> the church than you or I, maybe not because he is more causative
> but because of his accepted position.

Sort of true, and yet I would say, and I think that Ron has
said (of this kind of position) that he is really at great
effect and trapped rather than truely able to exercise his
own will.

> In other words his cause level is brought about to a very great
> degree by his position, not necessarily by his case level. Or
> maybe his cause level is very high individually and he fully
> deserves his position. I don't know. I don't know Mr. Miscaviage
> and I don't know if he is doing a poor job or not. I've heard all
> the stories on the outside, primarilly from people who have
> an axe to grind yet this same approach of tearing the person down
> was done to Hubbard. From a certain point of view the degree of
> carping by true SPs about Miscaviage it is favorable indiactor.

I think that the good guys in power get carped at and the bad
guys in power get carped at and so it is not an indicator either
way.

A better indicator would be to observe what effects are actually
created.  And in truth, his main product seems to have been to
create a solidity rather than a true horror.  I think it was
worse in the orgs in 1969, and so there is room to run the orgs
worse than he is doing.  But the place is slowly sinking into
the mud.  You can't keep a group alive without continually
injecting new life and ideas.  You see companies like that
sometimes, overly conservative and gradually sinking. If it
was an auto manufactuer, I'd just ignore it.


> I think David is in a very difficult position and he is handling
> it better than I could.

Not only do I think that I could do better, I think that I've
known quite a few managers in the orgs that could do better as
well.  It is beside the point that the majority of people would
do worse.  You don't make somebody a major general because he is
better than most of the privates, you make him a major general
because he is better than the other generals.

And I do not consider myself a great manager.  It is not my
primary line of interest.  In the computer field I do best in
a staff position making the technical decisions while somebody
else runs the people and makes the project happen.

> I personally think Miscaviage is executing his job exactly as
> Hubbard wanted him to and as required by the identity he has
> assumed. Remeber he will not have to answer to you or I but to
> Hubbard. I personally think that, off to the side, Hubbard is
> somewhat approving of what he has done. But that is my opinion
> and probably not shared.

This kind of thing could be debated endlessly back and forth.

And in the old days, Ron himself did not remain constant in
areas like this.  What he might have wanted in the late 70s
might be different from what he would want now.

If he came through the between lives area in good shape, I
would actually suspect that, having dropped the old games and
worries, he would be much happier with the freezone than with
the CofS.

He had an old story which is on a tape (I think in the 9th ACC)
about being a race car driver in Marcab and in later incarnations
he would fight against the legends made by his earlier lifetimes
until one day he realized that he'd been the earlier guy too.

There is a distinct possiblity that in another decade we will
see him as a new young freezone leader who rants worse against
Hubbard than Phil Scott does.  Then one day, as he is picking
his teeth with Miscaviage's bones after crushing the CofS,
he'll say "hey, wait a second, I WAS Hubbard!"  And then he'll
have a good laugh and say, "Who cares, it was a great fight!"


> There are a lot of questions here. Hopefully it holds together
> as really a few general questions that you can understand after
> reading it. It's a little disjointed to me. I'd appreciate a reply

It was a good set of questions, you really got me rambling.

> Also, thanks for being there. It is really important that you
> continue what you are doing. I am terribly disappointed in people
> like David Mayo and other former Scientologist, and I use the
> term weakly, who disappeared when things got tough and in effect
> denied everything they supposedly were. They weren't entitled
> to the altitude we gave them. They were fakes. To put it bluntly
> they didn't love their fellow man enough to really stay the course.

I suspect that they just got burnt out.  Ron had a fantastic
energy level.  And he seemed to run down eventually too.

Frankly, I'm going to run out of steam sooner or later myself.

The real obligation is to make more researchers.  I expect to
have successors.  I've never believed that I could solve it
all alone.

I see Ron's attempt to become the one and only source as his
fatal flaw.  Everything else we could work around, and certainly
we can forgive some outpoints considering the great plus points.
But that one bars the research line.


> I expected them to continue on much like you did. But they didn't.
> But that separates the wheat from the chaff. You are a real
> Scientologist in the truest sense of the word, a true seeker of
> the truth with the courage and determination to continue at all
> costs.

Yes, but that only holds true as long as I continue moving
forward.

I keep expecting to grind to a screeching hault.  It's happened
to me before.  The most recent example is that year I mentioned
when I was trying to solve fragmentation and just missing it
again and again and getting more and more charged up and finally
just dropped everything for awhile until I unenturbulated.

And the longest was in the early 70s when I was in shell shock
for about 3 years after I finally gave up and got off staff.
I never really let go of the tech or the goals, but the mass
of confusion and charge needed time to settle out and be
Itsa'ed.

I am determined to continue on at all costs, but sometimes
that means crawling off into a cave for awhile and healing.

Ron probably should have taken a year off and gone on vacation
to Tahiti or something after bashing his head into OT 3.
Then maybe we would have gotten expanded grades instead of
quickie tech when he taught the original Class 8 course.

And that brings us back to that shifting flux of high toned
super able beings.  Then one doesn't have to carry the
entire effort forward by oneself, and yet we all see to it
that there is continual forward progress.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - EARLY TRACK

EARLY TRACK

As I've mentioned before, early track, prior to home universe,
is extremely hard to figure out because it is quite outside of
the human context.

I ran an early track overt while getting sec checked about
two decades ago.  A tremendous amount of charge came off and
yet the contxt was so alien that I had not a clue as to what
it really meant.

Well I finally figured it out and remembered a bit more of
the surrounding events and it would seem like a good idea
to pass on the info since it is nothing I would consider
very hard to confront nowardays.

The original session was simply a sec check in the middle of
Nots.  And some vague question had gotten me bothered about
what horrible thing had I done which had gotten me into
the trap of the Mest universe in the first place.  That wasn't
really what was being asked for, it was just one of these
fishing expedition type questions like "is there some reason
you don't deserve auditing" and this idea had popped into
my mind.

And once I had my teeth into that idea, I wasn't going to
let it go, and I had a good auditor who was going to push
for whatever it was and help steer me with meter reads (and
be very encouraging and in ARC - not a gestapo style sec
check) and we just sat there for what seemed like about an
hour fishing for this damn thing.

And the upshot of it was that I had changed something to
the wrong color or something like that, and I had a vision
of seeing flows of colors and changing something that I
shouldn't have and perhaps lying about the color as well.
And there were no bodies in this thing or sceenery to
speak of.  Just bodiless beings and color flows and I
did something wrong.

And it could have been the wildest dub-in, but the amount
of charge that seemed to fly off and the absolutely incredible
feeling of relief made me feel that this was something
major that had released.

But as to what it meant, I didn't have a clue, and I've
puzzeled at it occasionally wondering what the hell it
really was.

And recently I realized that it was the same as changing
the colors of a mockup or picture to get control of it,
except that it was not my mockup but a reality that I was
fighting for control of.

In other words, there was an energy flow being created
by somebody else.  I wanted to take over their creation
and make it my own.  I'm not talking about copying it
and making my own copy (which would have been the proper
behavior in the context of the incident), but about
taking over the actual creation of the other guy so that
I could redirect it and use the flow for my own purposes.

So I reached out mentally and began changing the flow's
color to bring it under my control (before shifting its
end points).  To fool the person who was creating the
flow, I started feeding him a mocked up picture of the
flow in its original color to hide what I was doing from
him.

So it really was an incident of stealing another's
creation.  For me, the specific incident was a first time
of doing such a thing although I doubt that I was the
very first to try it.  But perhaps I coined a particularly
good and subtile trick for fooling the other guy while
doing it.

A bit later down the track it seems like we were all doing
this sort of thing to each other continually.  And eventually
we drop down to home universe (the kids sent to thier room
so they will stop screwing up each other's stuff) and
keep on sinking until we land here.

In some strange way, it feels like this particular overt
was my early contribution to our downward spiral.

Looking back from here, its almost laughable.  But it
is like a four year old stealing his first penny.  The
guilt and remorse on it at the time was extreme.

And it seems to me that later I went along with a lot of
stuff that I should have objected to because I felt that
I should sink downwards for having through up such a
nasty trick.

Looking at this a bit more right now, it seems to me
that other people were doing this by distracting the
guy whose creation they were stealing, and I thought
up the trick of feeding him a false picture so he
wouldn't notice what was going on.

Of course stuff like this can't even start until there
is some kind of idea of ownership and games conditions,
so this is not all the way back.  It would seem around
the era of what I call the Agreements universe, since
things would have to be forced into alignment before
anyone would care about a particular instance of a
creation.  Earlier on the track, you would just spin
off copies sideways and ignore what the owner was
doing with the original.

I don't know if this will make any sense to anybody
else, but I thought I should get it written down incase
anyone starts tangling with stuff like this.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

 subj : Super Scio Tech - RESEARCH NOTES

RESEARCH NOTES

1. TRICKS WITH ANCHOR POINTS AND INCIDENTS

Inspired by the recent Fzba posting, I was looking over
the 1st ACC again.

Ron talks quite a bit about anchor points and making space,
and especially getting the space back into old incidents
to discharge them.  And he emphasises having the pc mock up
something which is real to the pc and having the pc put
mockups of it in the 8 corners of the room.

I came up with some interesting variations.

Pick an earlier lifetime that you already have some recall
of (or at least some vague idea about).  Then think of what
nice massive object might have been good havingness for
you in that lifetime.

Mockup 8 copies of the object in the corners of the room
(making a cube around you).  Mock them up and unmock them
alternately.  You'll find it easier to spot the lifetime
being considered and might spot an incident.

Note that you could also throw the mockups away or even push
them into the body as is done in some of the other 1950s
drills, but at this point mockup / unmock seems to work
better for me.

A nice variation is also to mockup the 8 objects around
somebody else and to mockup somebody else mocking up the 8
objects around you, the intention being to give somebody
else space and havingness.

Anyway, I tried this with mocking up railroad cars (which
I like).  Two lifetimes ago I was a design engineer doing
work for the railways in North Carolina and Virginia, and
the trains were nice havingness.

Note that you pick something you like, not something that
is undesirable.  The idea is to get back some of the lost
havingness of the earlier lifetime and get some space
mocked up as well.

After mocking up and unmocking these a few times (this was
very fast), I suddenly spotted the death of that lifetime
(which I had not previously had a clue about).

It then occured to me that one could get time back into
an incident by spotting time points just like one might
spot anchor points.  Of course we do this already by
getting the duration of an incident, and various drills
like those used in Trom's timebreaking etc. also have
a bit of this.

But I decided to try this in its purest form, which was
simply to alternately spot the beginning and end of the
incident.  I didn't even bother trying to get the duration,
but just spotted the two points in time alternately just
as if I was spotting two points in the room or in the
body in a locational process.

After a few alternations of this, a full recall of the
entire incident fell into my lap.  In other words, I
didn't even run it or scan through or anything, I just
remembered the whole damn thing all at once.

I'd been getting older and had just started wearing glasses.
This was 1893.  As an engineer, I'd sometimes inspect a
bridge by simply swinging myself underneath it to see
if the wood was rotting.  This was something I never
would have imagined, a careless action of grabbing a
truss rod and flipping head first over the side to look
underneath.

So there I was on a hundred and twenty foot long wood
span over a creak and I flip over and the damn glasses,
which I wasn't used to and had forgotten I was wearing,
fell off, and I grabbed at them instead of holding on
properly and broke my neck on the rocks twenty feet below.

The really funny thing is that in this lifetime I'd
always get nervous walking over big bridges and I would
have this continual irrational feeling that my glasses
were going to hop off and fly over the side of the bridge.
I've been known to actually hold them on my face with my
hand while crossing a bridge.

An interesting point is that I never spotted the incident
until I tried these anchor point drills.

==========

2. DECAYED SERVICE FACSIMILES

The original concept of a "service facsimile" was of
an incident (a picture or facsimile) which was kept in
restimulation by the pc himself because it was of service
to him (aided his survival - like getting sick to stay
out of school).

The later 1963 concept was that it was really a computation
which the person used to make himself right (in other words
aiding his survival).

Orthodox grade 4 only does the shallowest handling of
the Service Facsimile.  They are really just trying to
get their hands on the current Serv Fac that the guy is
using in this lifetime.

And of course the one that the guy is using right now
is quite important.  But obviously if he is using one
now, he has used others before and the time track is long,
so he has gone through lots of these.

When this was researched in 1963, they were only interested
in getting the current Serv Fac out of the road so that
they could get on with running out GPMs.

Now this is all well and good, but it is like putting in
a rudiment (get something current out of the way), rather
than doing a full grade handling.  In other words, it
is like handling the current big ARC Break rather than
running a full Grade 3.

Some freezoners have talked about running out lots of
Serv Facs rather than just going for the big one in this
lifetime.

I went a bit further as well in Self Clearing chapter 25
(which is where this is covered), but I didn't go nearly
far enough.

There is lots more that can be done here and I've hardly
scratch the surface.  Here I'm just going to get down
some important notes so that they don't get forgotten.

After you have used a service fac for too long and have
accumulated too many overts with it, it tends to decay
and invert.

Consider somebody who is limping.  Maybe he is limping
to make others wrong.  You can check and see if the
question "how would limping make others wrong" will
turn on a torrent of Itsa.  If it does NOT, then it
might be the decayed inversion of a service fac where
he made others wrong by walking fast or something like
that.  This would be hard to try and find on somebody
else, but if you are soloing and up to fooling around
without too much case keying in, then you can feel
around for the right way to phrase it.

If you've got one that's inverted, it is sometimes
easier to run it as "how did that make others wrong"
rather than "how would it make others wrong" because
it is so long gone and the accumulation of overts is
so heavy.

Another interesting point is that you can also find
this breed of animal on the buttons of controlling
others or making others listen to you and so forth
in addition to making others wrong.  Apparantly there
is a broader class of things that one uses.

One of the mistakes was to think that these things
stemmed from GPMs.  At basic it is the other way
around.  If you get early enough on the track, it
is a simple effort to make others wrong or control
them or whatever.  It probably led to the mocking up
of GPMs in the first place.  Later on the track, it
gets wrapped up into the GPM RIs because it is how
you handle things that are going badly, so of course
you do it when you are facing opterms or whatever.

To try and get under all this, I came up with the
following process: a) Mockup a way to make youself
right, b) Mockup a way to make yourself wrong.
This is a very dicy process because the second command
is very out ARC and might spin somebody if it were
run by itself.  But we can get away with a reverse
side if we alternate the two.  However, this is a
high gradient process and not for beginners.

When I tried it, I felt a great deal of mass moving
around and then it seemed like a great solidity
let go, and then I had the realization that there
is nothing, no matter how right it usually is, which
will always work to make yourself right.  In other
words, any answer to question a) can also be given
as an answer to question b).  And vise versa.

3. THE CDEI IMPLANT

CDEI style reliable items were showing up sometimes
in the GPM research of 1963-4.  Things like "those
who demand to eat apples" and so forth.  Also things
like "too much eating of apples."

It occured to me that we handle CDEI in a sloppy
way that works on an ARC break assessment because
we don't worry about which way the flow is going.
But if it were an actual set of items, it would
be a bit more specific.

So I came up with the following:

Being curious about eating apples
Desiring to eat apples
Demanding to eat apples (enforce)
Too much eating of apples (flow being enforced on you)
Trying to stop eating apples (inhibit)
Can't get away from eating apples
Making nothing of eating apples (no apples - not-isness)
Can't stop mocking up apples that have to be eaten

Notice that this scale decays down to compulsive create.

I haven't quite figured this one out properly yet.
The items might be slightly different and there might
be a few more.

There might or might not be opterms.  It is possible
that it is a simple decay scale rather than a two poled
pattern.

This is very early, almost as early as the penalty
universes.

We turn off ARC breaks by simply spotting the item on
the scale.  Usually we don't really run out the upset
like an engram, we just indicate the item in the vaguest
sloppiest sort of way and the bypassed charge turns off.

If you think about that for a moment, it is incredible.

The implications are that all ARC breaks are locks on
this damn thing.

It is possible that LRH clipped the edge of this during
the GPM research in 1964 and bounced.

I wanted to get this one written down just in case I
bounce off of it too.

==================

As always, I poke around and try to push various areas
a bit further but mostly I'm using supposedly light
processes on heavy areas trying to raise confront and
get more Itsa.  I do think that the biggest mistake
in the BC research was to continually chase after magic
buttons such as GPM items without following them up
with basic processes in the areas uncovered.  Doing
that leaves you with too much charge and too little
Itsa.

When you string a rope across a chasm, you follow it
with a bridge rather than continuing to cross hand
over hand.  If you don't, eventually the rope frays
and breaks on you.

Best,

The Pilot

==========================================

All of these were 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 see The Pilots Home Page at http://fza.org/pilot/index.htm

Some translations are available, see links at fza.org

Also see the new www.fzint.org website.

All of the current posts will be collected in Super Scio Archive
#68 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.

------------------