Steve "Thoughtful" Hall ferrets out DM's spy network

Steve Hall (center) and real friends

Steve Hall has apparently really got DM’s goat. The latter has targeted the creator of Scientology-cult.com with repeated infiltration efforts. He has three missionaires who used to be RTC (until DM dismantled the place in late 04) working frenetically to flip “friends” of Steve presumably to build a “dead agent” pack on him.  The irony is precious. All three missionaires doing DM’s bidding were historically disaffected as all hell with DM through the eighties, nineties and at least to mid 2000’s (Marion Pouw, Mike Sutter and Hansuili Stahli).  They were also notably incapable of duplicating and applying fundamental Scientology. Now, to compound the comedy, all the marks they have been flown around the world to handle were  severely disaffected with Scientology (yes, the subject – not the management or DM) when they approached me shortly after I put my webpage up several months ago. Since they seemed to have no use for the subject we fell out of comm. So, DM has only successfully brought back on board people who have no use for Scientology. A coincidence? I think not.

All of DM’s spy v spy  nonsense is all about cutting communication, simple and plain. Let’s take a look at what LRH has to say on the subject of those devoted to cutting communication:

“Why should it punish any variety or state of communication? Because communication is the only way out. To continue an entrapment it is necessary, then, to punish communication or some phase of it — to enforce or inhibit communication. In order to continue a barrier, to continue a trap in existence, you would have to debar communication. So therefore, a universe which operates all too often as a trap resolves  — an escapement from that universe occurs — when communication is expertly and knowingly handled. And when it is not well handled, it’s punished. Now, therefore we get a fixation in this universe.

“Now thereness is simply a part of communication. It is the creation of a station or a terminal from which one communicates. And that is thereness. So thereness and communicatingness are punishable things by those who desire to entrap. And they are good things to those who have some tolerance for and some desire for freedom.

“So we get the make and break of personality, of beings above and below a theoretical line. And above this line a person would find nothing terribly wrong with thereness and he would certainly find nothing wrong with communicating or being communicated to. And above this line he can survive as himself in full knowingness. And below this line we would have an obsession to punish or a feeling that there should be punishment for thereness and communication.”

Thank you Steve for continuing to be there and and for continuing to effectively communicate.

Advertisements

65 responses to “Steve "Thoughtful" Hall ferrets out DM's spy network

  1. You have my undying admiration, Steve.

  2. Pingback: Tweets that mention Steve “Thoughtful” Hall ferrets out DM’s spy network « Moving On Up a Little Higher -- Topsy.com

  3. Hi Marty,

    About Mike Sutter. His name comes up often when talking about the SO.

    Wasn’t he your junior for a long time?

    What kind of person is he? What post is he holding now?

    You said he was disaffected with DM? In what way?

  4. Steve, you are a rampart; a strong-hold. Thank you for your work.
    Weeks ago I had asked how low would DM go. He has just taken another major step down.

  5. Marion Pouw, Mike Sutter and Hansuili Stahli.

    These names seemed familiar to me and then I realized that they were all Ex-GO or more specifically GAS (Guardian Assisting Scientologists). The covert ops and dirty tricks side of the GO and that their “disaffection” towards Miscavige was because he shut the Guardian’s Office down or so it seemed.

    As you know in the world of espionage things are not always what they seem and as you know he hired back many of the same GO members back, even those he accused of being plants, such as the notorious Jane Kember and others who operated through David Morse and Assoc. which is where I believe I heard their names mentioned.

    Not to go into too much detail here, you might be interested in a book I’ve just been reading for the second time called ‘Prelude to Terror’ by Joseph Trento about how CIA set up an “off the books” private intelligence agency which later became involved in “The October Surprise” and later “Iran-Contra” which may have some interesting parallels to what is currently occurring:

    http://books.google.com/books?id=-WkQRkEItS0C&dq=Prelude+to+Terror&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=7R4GS8nsKI7ssQObgY3BCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=&f=false

  6. Um… just to clarify. There are three sea org members flying around meeting up with ex’s in the hope of getting “dirt” on Steve Hall? And those that have coughed up have no interest in Scientology?

    What’s really going on here? Coincidence or not I doubt their doing it because they love DM. Either they are being bribed or threatened. In both cases I feel sorry for them.

  7. So, Steeno, my Moari, Fijian friend, heed these words of LRH and note well how sad you felt when you consider disconnection as a choice. No need to mire down in the entrapment of cutting communication when you could flourish in the freedom of communication. Our thereness does make a difference.

  8. Well done Steve!! My biography book is about to be completed, the english version of it, I will need some help to get it well used to spread the truth. Do you have any advice?

  9. Steve is a very inteligent dude.

    He ws able to handle that and he´s going to handle everything that comes up in the future.

    Carry on Steve. Each attack is an opportunity to grow even more.

    Roberto Sánchez Núñez

  10. Second what winsmexico said regarding “an opportunity to grow even more”.

    We could all take many pages from The Long Walk to Freedom by Nelson Mandela. Within the pages of this simply magnificent autobiography we can learn the true meaning of forgiveness WITH continued effort to shine the light on abuse. As well as confession attendant to ones own past.

    The inspiration that is Mandala is how he emerged from prison never seeking revenge, instead seeking a means of truth and reconciliation and true justice.

    Marty and his band of merry men and women appear to me to be a wonderful example of core scientology in action.

    WH

    • Thanks WH. Another interesting example is Viktor E. Fankl who wrote “Man’s Search for Meaning” in 1946 after surviving 4 Nazi death camps. Fantastic book. A classic. I look forward to reading Nelson Mandela.

  11. I had a realization about this very thing the other day. During the “growth” period of Orgs in the 70’s and early 80’s, there were really only 2 courses in Division 6 that were pushed heavily – The Comm Course and the HQS Course.
    The Comm Course at that time was an introduction to the Communication Formula, in full, with drills associated with each part of it.
    (The Communications Formula being a bedrock foundation of the philosophy of Scientology, as well as a core key discipline in it’s application.)
    Being There Comfortably, and perceiving was the first gradient.

    Compare that to what happened in the late 80’s, with the introduction of the “Success Through Communications Course”. No longer was a fundamental of the Scientology Philosophy being taught, but you had such drills as “No Answer”, and “Diverting a Conversation”!

    Is it any wonder the “Church” has wound up in the position it is in? I was told this was an “LRH piloted and approved” course. It may be an “LRH” ™ approved course, implying that it is part of the Religion of Scientology that is Based on the Works of L. Ron Hubbard, but it is way off base as far as being “basic” Scientology, in my humble opinion.

    This is part of what we face. The Religious Philosophy of which LRH was the Source, and “the Religion of Scientology, based on the works of L. Ron Hubbard.” I know what works for me.

    Thank you all for being there and communicating.

    • Tom, I concur. A huge turning point – and quite frankly major why.

    • I agree. This is a major why. Where I was on staff in the late 70s, the line up was:

      1. Intro lecture on ARC, communication and what auditing was.
      2. Comm Course (original TRs 0-4) with the book Evolution of a Science.
      3. Free intro auditing session with rudiments and abbreviated CS-1
      4. Basic Study manual (optional)
      5. Life Repair on wants handled basis (optional)
      6. HQS course, original with objectives and Self-Analysis full co-audit.

      After that the focus was on getting trained and co-auditing Dianetics. (HSDC)

      This line-up was completely destroyed, and with it a working introduction to the subject.

      • Maria,

        I did my first courses in 1976 and the wins were absolutely fantastic. Life got steadily better for the next twenty years.

        I can remember when Scientology was actually fun and have created a website that celebrates those wonderful times. http://tinyurl.com/yddtj8p

      • martyrathbun09

        Old Auditor, wonderful. I am putting a link to you on my home page.

      • Another key thing where I first did Scn was that there were always auditors around and they talked to everyone, and made sure that new people felt welcome and validated. They were so COOL. You always felt good after you had talked to one of them. Of course, they really knew how to use two way communication to assist someone who was having a hard time. They also often came in at the end of course time and gave little short talks that we all looked forward to. We admired them. We wanted to be auditors too.

        We also had a lot of FUN – little parties, poetry nights, music, art, it was great. People would just drop by because it was “home.”

    • “Based on the works” has become more and more foreign and far afield from LRH.

      Initially “based on the works” had some validity. For example, because so few people could deliver excellent introductory lectures the hope was OP Z … which never launched. Oh … bits did launch but the intention never made it.

      LRH gave CS 6 (Diana) the option of creating this feeder line OUTSIDE the orgs as separate units OR within the orgs.

      BUT — it was doomed from the get go — why? Because you can create a policy (or set of canned lectures) and if it replaces a THETAN — then you have something worse than nothing.

      You have – Policy where a thetan should be.

      And sadly — after the late 70’s and early 80’s those of us who were thetans (OK we’re all thetans but you get my drift) — were replaced by policies and those policies kept getting further and further and further from LRH.

      The old timers must be flabbergasted at what scientology has become …

      WH

    • Maria, that 70s line up was creating glowing wins. It was real Scientology.

      Wow. Huge difference between “LRH” ™ and LRH.

      Thank you each one who has helped . Marty, thank you. Wow… the impostor SCN Corporation is running a massive a must- have/can’t have of abused, hijacked life technology. That is no small thing.

      • That line up certainly did and with the addition of the HAS Co-audit and the Essentials of Dianetics course we were making auditors!

        The STCC wasn’t all that bad and it was a nice course for people too timid to do TRs. Nice gradient and all that.

        I think what started the dwindling spiral was when someone at AVC decided to alter the original HQS checksheet by eliminating all those nasty offensive policies like KSW, Tech Degrades and Safeguarding Tech then they dropped the objectives off the course finally eventually destroying the course entirely by making it just another BOTW Squirrel “Life Improvement Course”.

        They also sabotaged the line up further by eliminating the HAS Comm Course and Co-Audit and only offered the STCC which meant the public ended up doing nothing but “patty cake” TRs.

        At that point we stopped making auditors and ended up with the self absorbed new age types and lunatics who only wanted auditing.

        Not that it would have mattered because Miscavige and his cronies wiped out the whole Franchise network and pretty much eliminated Div 6s under the guise of “expanding” them.

    • Tom, The STCC drills were written by LRH. I was there in RTRC the morning his typed sheets with xxxx outs and all arrived. I was sent off with another RTRC Compiler to do them. I thought they were pretty cool, actually. Their stated purpose was to be able to use communication for business and social purposes. At the time LRH was working out Div 6 Routes into orgs and he realized that the Hard TRs Course and HQS as being delivered in Div 6s were costing orgs and missions a lot to deliver, plus there were a lot of blows.
      Comparing only the old Hard TRs Course to the STCC, you’ve got a good point, but you need to look at the broader scene he was trying to handle.
      That said, I agree that there’s little to compare to sitting there as a brand new student and suddenly looking down on your body. That certainly makes an impression.

      • Exactly Joe!

        I was posted in Div VI at the time the STCC came out and read the mults and refs regarding it.

        As I wrote it was nice gradient for public who were gun shy of a “rough, tough, hard” TRs course, but at the time as far as I remember it never replaced the HAS Comm Course or HQS which both had “TRs Modernized”.

        That came later when some idiot tried to wipe out TRs in general about the time I had transfered to Qual and had to help my friend in HCO put out the fire in the Telex room when the Ol’man sent us “TRs Basics Resurrected.” and the Mult to put TRs back in!

        Seems he wasn’t too happy with the training candidates we’d sent for Super Power and you know Ron picky, picky 🙂

      • Joe,
        LRH would evaluate all the amazing wins being described here with the HQS as it was and the Comm Course intro. It’s apparent that while there may have been lots of guys that couldn’t make that gradient, the ones that did are Scientologists. You know he’d look at this and re-think the line-up.

        This needs that LRH touch of ‘hey, this WORKED’ .

    • Tom, you bring up an interesting subject about the Comm. Course as compared to the STCC…

      The Comm. Course wasn’t around in the late 80’s when I came on board but I did do the STCC as part of my OEC/FEBC line-up in the early 90’s. At the time I remember thinking it was a pretty weak course but then I figured perhaps it was simply too low of a gradient for me…funny how it did not occur to me that perhaps I thought it was weak because of it being a watered down version of the original, and that actually the drills were only “based on the works of…” not “written by…”. Big difference, actually!

      A bit off-topic here, but in my mind the best ‘recent’ dissemination effort was the Dianetics campaign of the mid-eighties. It’s how I got involved, in fact; first as a bookbuyer, then a PC, then an auditor, and then a staff member. All in a matter of a few weeks. I think there are many with a similar story.

      Later as an Executive, I could never understand why such a successful campaign wasn’t taken up again. I also think the Dianetic Seminar and HDA are lousy substitutes for the EOD checksheets.

      • You’re missing something here: the STCC drills were written by LRH himself. Typed on his own typewriter. He wrote them. He developed them. He also wrote TRs Remodernized. LRH wrote all the TRs. The drills in TRs Remodernized are for training auditors. The STCC drills are for people newly investigating Scientology to help them out in their social and business lives. The blow outs that people had in Div 6 doing “Hard TRs” are really more suited to using TRs as a therapy, which LRH ALSO developed.

        Likewise, the HDS and HDA were Div 6 introductions to Book One.

        Get the difference between a Div 6 course and a Div 4 Academy course.

        Jeff Hawkins’ DMSMH campaign was for certain the best book campaign ever. Others dropped the ball of working out how to get those people into a Div 6 for a service. DM than cancelled the campaign because it was “costing too much for no result.” Two or three years later the Int stats started to tip over and slid down for the next 10 years straight. Who knows if they’ve ever come back up. But there’s your Why and your Who.

      • martyrathbun09

        Joe. Maybe so. But I agree with Jim that the old man would look for what works. I believe ultimately he would have burned STCC. I have no use for it – I put people directly on the TRs. Someone filled him full of “TRs are out gradient”. I consider that as false a report as can be. When I got HARD TRs in a div six course room there were dozens of people getting it, graduating and going right onto auditor training. Many that I met there over a 3 month period went on to positions through out the SO and were leading field Scientologists for decades.

      • Marty, I’m in no way disagreeing with you, Jim or anybody banging the drum for the old TRs. In fact, when we put out the initial version of STCC we also still had another TRs course that had TRs 0-4 on it! Everyone was confused about it. Someone commenting said that the STCC drills were not LRH and I am correcting that. They absolutely were LRH’s creation.

        I know how many people got on board for life from doing the TRs and the old HQS Course in Div 6. But it took MONTHS to do both. At $35 for TRs and $75 for HQS, the org or mission went broke. What was never evaluated that I know of was whether or not the income generated from these two loss leaders was ever recouped by Div 4 starts, which would have made them viable. The whole Div 6 thing has never been really sorted out and that can be laid at Diana’s doorstep. The whole Op Z thing, Richard and Ramina Nunnelee’s Book One seminars, the Life Improvement Courses–there’s been a ton of work done on introductory routes but nothing has really been sorted out. Now all you’ve got is fancy videos hitting you in the face in Div 6, not a live being anywhere in sight, oh, and Larry Anderson telling you that it’s okay to go blow your brains out. Add to that all the horrible PR being generated and Jesus H. Christ, after we win the current game of Get Shorty, there are going to be a lot of other games to be played and won.

      • martyrathbun09

        Joe, I am with you. My wife just came up with a beautiful analogy. LRH was perfect – just as LRH said the analytical mind is perfect. And what does LRH say about what the perfect computing machine will produce when being given false information? I think Jim summed it up wonderfully on what made LRH’s perfect computing machine head and shoulder’s above all others – he always worked it toward what works. And if that meant jettisoning previous solutions found to be unworkable, so be it. I think perhaps DM’s greatest and one of his most basic Suppressive Acts was to get LRH to comment in a despatch that it is an “enemy line” to say that Ron can be lied to. And he did so, guess how?, by false reporting to LRH. That was game, set, and match for DM. Any challenge to DM’s suppressive acts from that point forward became an automatic death sentence. Hence, the Dark Ages. The Phoenix, though, is surely rising from the ashes.

      • Concerned Citizen

        I do agree with your wife. I also get the point and I agree that the old comm. course should be restored to div 6 and that it made all the difference in terms of raw dissemination. I however feel there is a place for STCC and I have personally gotten great wins from it. I have also helped people, in many situations, with just that course- I mean, I repaired marriages, helped failed sales men etc. It is Business TRs if you will, the lowest gradient, and some people do get life changing wins with these drills. I don’t see it doing what the old comm course did, I think it was a colossal mistake to replace it with STCC, but I do see it doing what LRH said it would do. It does have a use and workability.

      • martyrathbun09

        Ok thanks for that viewpoint.

      • Joe,
        We’ve had quite a few decades now to assess what was successful and what was so-so and what laid eggs. I remember the ‘loss-leader’ aspect of these beefy Comm Course and HQS Course. Those that made it through include for example, me, and I only got the auditing requirements done on me. From there, I joined staff and within weeks did TRs to major wins, and within a year I joined the SO, did Hard TRs, to major stable wins and a full, perfect two hour confront.

        Doing my ‘bill’ calculation to get through A-E, I added up my contributions and converted them to monetary value using Production and One’s Standard of Living and I had, for the time at Int only, between 5-7 million dollars of work I did. That was a conservative estimate. That was compared to a $350,000 ‘freeloader debt’.

        I think the ‘loss leader’ of that $75 HQS student paid off. I’m by far not the only one.

        This is a valid string to pull and you know as well as I do, LRH would do just that and he’d say something like ‘Well, what do you know, we WERE making Scientologists with this stuff’ and he’s get it back in, NOW. He’d also evaluate the whole thing and include the STCC stuff and how that has been doing.

        I’m excited as hell about the major wins and stability that these courses, the old HQS and Comm Course have actually produced.

      • Joe,
        I’d also include in that eval, all this pandering to the acceptance level of this society. This is SCIENTOLOGY, not some watered down something or other. It’s a fact, it goes in the teeth of a lot of aberration and that jarring of the case of an individual or the culture is, well, part of the impact of Scientology on the world around us.

        This isn’t meant to set aside the intent of the STCC materials, but more to comment on all this ‘apologizing’ for Scn being SCN. Sort of like DM dismissing LRH on the Nightline interview in 92. That always stuck in my craw. YES, there are such things as past lives, exteriorization, ‘whole track’, engrams, implants, space opera, Statics, Kinetics, and the whole nine yards.

        Now that it’s ‘out’ it’s bound to create a stir, and I’ve considered lately, that’s exactly what needs to be done.

        It’s a fact, looking at all these blogs, message boards, gossip columns, newspapers and the internet, LOTS of beings have their attention utterly wrapped up in Scientology. I figure that’s only going to abate when they eventually RUN IT OUT WITH SCIENTOLOGY!!!!!!!

        Could it be, this is just running the Tone Arm action INTO the process? Methinks.

      • I’m with you on this one Joe.

        As far as I’m concerned I thought the STCC was a great course for some people who would have found TRs completely out gradient.

        Jim and Marty I also understand your point of view the TRs Course made auditors, but we are talkin’ Div VI here which is basically an Intro to Scn and as far as I’m concerned STCC was a great Intro Course.

        Personally I thought the Ol’man was a genius in devising a set of drills to undercut TRs.

        To me its very similar to the technique of undercutting objectives.

        Joe correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t Ron order some of those who were on the TR pilot to do these drills when they weren’t making it on Hard TRs?

      • RJ, I don’t recall specifically that LRH ever sent people to do STCC TRs if they weren’t making it on auditor Hard TRs. The STCC drills didn’t exist until March 1980 and LRH’s work on Auditor TRs was in late ’78 to late ’79. He tried all kinds of things and the breakthroughs and advances were many: KTL, FDSing, TRs Clay Table Processing, Crashing MU Finding come to mind right off the bat.

      • Thanks Joe 🙂

        I thought the STCC came out about the same time as Op “Z” and the Essentials of Dianetics Course which was when I was posted in Div VI circa late 77 – mid 78 then had transfered to Tech then Qual when the Mults hit the fan regarding the pilot.

        Lucky me 🙂

        At least that point in my career I remember with distinct clarity.

        Anyway despite the time track over loop it might have been when Mayo took over that I saw a critique sending someone to do STCC.

        Then again it could have been a hallucination, since it was before I did the purif 🙂

        Anyway, I do remember the course itself which I did think at the time was a nice easy gradient to TRs .

      • You’re right. So screw the other side –maybe STCC has no worthwhile purpose in any universe! It sure didn’t seem like real Scn to me. 🙂

      • Joe,
        I can’t say for anyone else but I got the point LRH wrote the drills for STCC. My comment is that the wins and certainty of the old HQS and Comm Course have held up. That is a pluspoint and in the future these pluspoints need to be evaluated and in this case, somehow re-instated.

        I did the ‘HQS’ as part of the A-E courses assigned me and it was too light. No bite. On the other hand, within the first week of getting into Scn in 75, I got CCHs done on me by a guy on that HQS and I went exterior afterwards with complete and full perception. That particular occurrence and my certainty on that result held me through the difficult days I went through.

        Whether it’s Div 4 or 6, those courses really, really did something. RESULTS.

  12. I just saw this quote on another site and wanted to post it:

    “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”
    Thomas Jefferson

  13. Hello,
    That’s for Hansuelhi and Mike. H, I recall better days back at Int with you and I just before VA, Spike and Jessie went down. I also recall that night you approved my and my twin’s RPF CSW.

    Dave was the ‘new boss’ then.

    To see you now at this low is disappointing. I sincerely hope it comes to an end quickly as you realize how much you’ve compromised. We’ll see.

    Mike S, I’m back to battery. My father told me years ago when you thought you’d finished me off, ‘there’s nothing more dangerous than a wounded tiger’.

    I’m that tiger, wounds healed. There’s more than one too this time too. I’ve got friends, Steve is one of them.

    • My biggest fear was losing scientology — my next biggest fear was becoming impoverished again as I had been in the SO.

      Both came to pass.

      And when I recovered, I realized that there is nothing more dangerous than someone with nothing to lose.

      My next step in healing took years. I moved beyond dangerous and aggressive. Now I’m working on the middle way. Equanimity.

      We are lucky here on this board. It is here where genuine friends meet. And lurkers/OSA/etc can start to wonder … hell … maybe they are right?

      This board isn’t filled with divisive comments and yelling. Lurkers must start to wonder … maybe being kind isn’t being weak.

      Someday I’ll tell my story. It’s been quite the ride and frankly wouldn’t trade a bit of it. It’s what makes me, me. (something apparently Aaron Sexton et al haven’t figured out yet)

      WH

      • martyrathbun09

        WH – can’t wait to hear your story.

      • WH,

        You have already piqued my interest with your reference to “OP Z”, which I have never heard of. So I will patiently wait to hear the rest of your story as well. We all have our own road to walk. An old Lakota proverb says “Knowledge is rooted in all things–the world is a library.”
        There will be richness in the book you share.
        Looking forward to it.

      • ” It’s what makes me, me. (something apparently Aaron Sexton et al haven’t figured out yet)

        WH
        Could you please amplify on “Aaron Sexton et al” ? I am a complete outsider that just finds this whole thing captivating. I have seen his vids and thought he was an actor at first (this may be due to the fact that he mentioned Marty, Mike and others negatively), but he gave such detail and I can’t discount his words without more info. This is not to say that you were discounting either.

        I wish all of you peace and Happy Thanksgiving!

        Mike

      • martyrathbun09

        Mike B, I had the same impression. What is there to respond to – after three segments he had condemned the entire subject and LRH without having witnessed to any single specific act. Xenophobe is in a heap of trouble.

      • Do you KNOW that he never witnessed anything? Can you confirm that he is or is not who he says he is (as far as CoS posts, etc.)?

      • martyrathbun09

        Mike B,
        I’ll tell you how in the know he is – I never heard the name till this kangaroo court went in the news.

      • WH,
        THE most ‘dangerous’ I can think of is an OT, not swamped by Epurps, pan-determined as he chooses, and flooding free theta. That is a ‘tiger’.

        Hey, have you seen a tiger? C’mon, that’s art.

      • Mary McConnell

        Tom, In the late 70’s the Church announced a new L. Ron Hubbard based planetary dissemination program called Operation Z or ” OP Z” as it came to be known. With this program ‘we were supposed to get the planet Clear in 5 years, meaning by 1983.’ I was involved with this in the early 80’s, working on Div 6 social coordination & spec ops pgms in Los Angeles, programs that were set up and managed by Diana Hubbard and Laurel Sullivan before the program got squashed by DM.

  14. Thought provoking

    Thank you Steve and Marty for being there and communicating. You are being heard and the interchange is in itself very rewarding and therapeutic.

    Great article, Old Auditor! I agree on your point of getting the staff repaired. What a great goal to strive for…a rekindling of theta. The universe is already smiling brighter at the thought.

  15. This video is an eerie parallel of how the real Scientology has been hijacked and is being abused.

    Thanks for pulling back the curtain on DM and the ™ watered down substitute.

  16. A comment about communication courses and what they have to do with Scn: I think the Success Through Communication Course is fine as a strictly introductory route, a gradient into Scn. But if it replaces the Comm Course as it was delivered in the 70’s, then a big part of Scn and its potential is lost.

    My husband and I both had some of our respective biggest wins on OT TRO. I had the most complete ext experience ever, not in session, but on that drill. So did he. Man, if you really understand and do what that drill says, you find out what a static is. You get the mass on 8-8OO8.

    So STCC is fine as a route in, but certainly not as a substitute for real TRs. Real TR’s can give you the cognition that “makes you” a thetan, and that’s what Scn is about. 🙂

    • Tone 41, re TRs, Amen.

      • That’s one more cool thing about your blog — some old wins get rehabbed as people connect up. I had forgotten how fundamentally TR’s (particularly OTTRO and TRO) speak to a thetan, as a thetan.

    • tone41…
      Point is though, it’s the big blow-out win that gets a person sold on the subject, so in actually, STCC is not really that good of a route-in.

      Blow-out wins from Book One and the Comm Course I know have gotten a lot of people in but actually I don’t recall many people coming in from the STCC…it’s that major stable win that is a vital element.

      • Ceestr8 . . .

        Yes, I agree! I did STCC after doing a lot of real TR’s, and I found it utterly rinky-dink. Blow-out wins, real thetan-makers, is definitely where it’s at. And I’ll tell you, it was darned nice rehabbing that particular blow-out win from many years ago! I was just trying to see the other side of it, and allow that STCC could have some worthwhile purpose in some universe. 🙂

  17. Concerned Citizen

    Dearest Thoughtful,

    In an HCOPL LRH mentions Ethics Presence asserts the truth of Un-kill-ability. Man you’ve got ethics presence. It takes being right you know? And you are. Keep it up my friend, you have many many friends.

  18. Concerned Citizen

    I also just want to add to the above, that STCC can be quickied and has been much too often, and sometimes that too colors it’s efficacy. But if you do the drills, really do them to EP, it can and does get great results. (Not the Comm course results, but great ones nonetheless)

  19. Just to get this thread back to the original subject of the post, i.e., off of Div TR courses and back to the RTC latest project to contact and “recover” ex-Int base staff, the people that Marion, Hansueli and Mike are contacting are people who actually never really worked with DM. They are contacting and “handling” ex-staff who only were around DM and saw him at meetings or briefing but who never sat with him in his office or who he ever consulted with. In other words, they are going after people who would never have had occasion to witness DM’s darker side. Therefore, they could say they never witnessed the abuses that many others who did work DM closely say they witnessed.

    You see what this sets up? The classic “he said, she said” diversionary tactic. If it’s all just hearsay then what is the Scientology public at large to believe? “Oh,” they can be told, “it’s just A’s word against B’s. Therefore, no one can say for sure what is true. Everyone can go back to sleep now.”

    But Scientologists are not that stupid (excepting, of course, those the project are turning). Marion, Hansueli and Mike Sutter are not contacting anyone who DID work closely with DM because those people DO have factual data about the physical, emotional, financial and other abuses.

    Now, whereas the Marion & Co. project are contacting ex-staff who for the most part worked on non-executive posts, they are staying far, far away from other staff who held some of the highest or most important posts in Scientology, including: original LRH Messengers, top ASI execs, CMO execs, key marketing people, tech people, RTC execs and, of course, the top execs on OSA, PR and legal lines.

    Why? Because all these people have extensive personal knowledge of the long litany of abuses. There’s no way these people can be “turned.”
    They saw what they saw and no amount of Black PR sec checking is going to change that.

    The only ones the project can hope to handle are those who never had extensive personal dealings with DM and who therefore never saw what the others saw.

    There’s a concept in LRH management tech called the Multiple Viewpoint System. It’s a way to verify the validity of data. Well, when you have people from all over the org board and from different decades saying, “X, Y and Z abuses happened. I saw them with my own eyes,” it is more than likely that those abuses DID happen. In fact, it’s a dead certainty.

    Against these voluminous accounts, some OSA doctored affidavits won’t hold much water with any thinking reader. (One of those persons who has been strong armed by Tommy Davis & Co to write an affidavit told me personally that the affidavit she wrote saying she had never personally seen DM physically abuse anyone [which is true in her case] was later changed– without her knowledge or consent–to state that she never saw DM either physically abuse OR even get mad at anyone, something she knew was false as hell.)

    There’s a battle raging for the hearts and minds of the vast majority of Scientologists who find themselves being pulled in different directions. The above might help clarify just one of the tactics being employed to get the toothpaste back into the tube. From here it looks lame as hell.

  20. The first Comm Course I did lacked OT-TRO. I cycled through TRs many times over several years, but never got what I feel was the full EP.

    Eventually I did the Therapeutic TRs course with OT-TRO, but still no. Eventaully I did the STCC and got my major stable win on OT-TRO, which is what I needed all along.

    I think the STCC is a great course, as “social communication” is a very important basic for many people.

    I think the key is to get the OT-TRO done to a major stable win, and that is a necessity for any TR course. There should not be an “easy way” on that point.

  21. Branwell Brontë

    Marty,

    Curious as to your thoughts or views on the sale of Times Publishing’s DC magazine, ‘Governming to eRepublic, which is owned/run by two v prominent church ohtee public.

    Times Publishing is the owner of the Saint Petersburg Times.

    Sale was announced Friday — that no-traction news day anybody wanting to make a press release and have it die that night — but has made it to the ken of the New York Times, today.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/business/media/23govern.html

    Is it possible that this deal carries with it the whiff of anything other than a legit ‘arms-length transaction’ but one brokered by cofs?

    Lord knows, the St. Pete Times, as is the case with so many print news outlets, is hurtin’ for the revenue.

  22. Marty I have a late comment, sorry, I can’t keep up, there is so much to read here.

    You said above:

    “So, DM has only successfully brought back on board people who have no use for Scientology. A coincidence? I think not.”

    I’m not a Scientologist, but I “know my policy” and DM has gotten into the “only one” condition, he’s fully dramatizing the 1959 “Individuation” tape, he’s incapable of being influenced by anyone.

    And to your observation above, I believe he’s “snapped terminals” with the people you noted above who are the antithesis of the “good Scientologist”, the “enemy” valance.

    I think it’s conceivable that LRH, himself, his own case neglected, I think Otto Roos might agree, even LRH fell prey to the “Individuation” 1959 pitfall, of not being sufficiently audited properly.

    I have my thoughts even on top of all this, which I’ll not say here.

    But, I think DM’s gone the route of the “Individuation” tape past the point of no return, and he’s snapped terminals with the SP valances in the world he’s imagined are out to get him.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s