David Mayo is the prime suspect of having been the instrument to sabotage LRH-tech.

Caspar de Rijk, Class IX

made an eval on the tech alter is and came to the conclusion, that also since 1975 the tech of LRH was alter-ised to an unworkable state. When he wrote this, Caspar was the founder of the RONS Org Netherland.

1. NOTS is based on a lie, the lie being that it is NED or at least a form of Dianetics for OTs. Truth is that NOTs has nothing to do with Dianetics but served to knock out Dianetics from use by Scientologists. It was a covert attempt to undermine the world and effectiveness of Scientology.

2. People who keyed out on Dianetics and grades were told they were now Clear and that it would be very very very dangerous and destructive to their cases if they would ever be run on Dianetics. So on the lower bridge Dianetics was knocked out of usage as well.

3. Mayo blames LRH for confusing the definitions of Clear. Mayo leaves Scientology (currently).

4. They changed the definition of reactive mind in the tech dictionary even already in 1975 conveniently leaving out GPMs. This shows the whole sabotage of the subject was a planned operation. They left out GPMs and that is what Dianetic Clears, Releases and anybody should run on the Clearing Course in order to go Clear. Just compare to the Scientology Abridged dictionary def of Reactive Mind.

The confidential NOTs materials give the first data on Dianetic Clear and are the justification for it. The reason they give has to do with OT III material and is confidential but is contrary to earlier LRH HCOBs. The fact that Mayo wrote these issues makes him the prime suspect of having been the instrument to sabotage the tech.

Mayo wrote the NOTs stuff, this is the stuff where the whole idea of Dianetic Clear comes from or integrates with. So it is most likely Mayo who invented the new definition for Dianetic Clear as well as the NOTs stuff. There is also an obvious time coincidence factor.

Here are Caspar’s detailed evaluations:

Posted in Blog and tagged , , , , , , , , , , .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *