During his class VIII lectures, Ron repeatedly pointed out how it can come to squirreling. I’m quoting Ron:
On an examination I just gave you haven’t yet got the exact mechanism of how an individual squirrels, and you better damn well get it. The individual has been audited non standardly, therefore he appears to be a strange beast on whom non standard tech doesn’t work. A person whose supposed to knowhow to audit has audited the person on standard tech and now the person has not resolved. So it’s a wide open invitation to invent a technique. Invent something. Invent something strange. This individual is very peculiar indeed. He doesn’t respond along this line. Now, what I am trying to teach you is, is that only happens where, that standard tech has been followed is a false report. It hasn’t been followed.
… It’s the false report. “Oh, yes we ran a valence shifter, and we did this and we did that, and we did everything.” … Anybody told me anything like that the look of contempt they would get would be quite withering. There might even be a beam go with it. I would look through the auditing report and look over the PC and I would find out the case had been audited over ARC breaks.
… That thing you’ve got to learn, because it is your only shield against the invitation to invent something new and strange. You understand? Well alright, will you get that down, because that’s a very important point. That is how squirreling occurs. The case now is a strange case. Well the only thing that is wrong with him is that standard tech has not been done, while somebody thinks it has. So you have got to find out what standard tech hasn’t been done and get it done, and he ceases to be a strange case. Right now. You follow? All right. [LRH during the 10th class VIII lecture from October 3, 1983 ASSISTS]
Now, the data about the wrong report inviting to squirrel tech can be used “white” and also “black”. Ron recommends the “white” version: how to avoid squirreling. But one can also use it “black” to precisely establish squirrel tech and make it acceptable. And exactly that was done.
After the takeover team had legally acquired the Scientology Church in 19771)See the 1st entry here: http://english.freiescientologen.de/archiv/timetrack/1977s.shtml , the first thing to do was to twist the bridge in such a way that no one could go Clear and OT anymore. The project seemed almost non-executable. How should you change all the tech in Ron’s absence so drastically that none of the technologically-experiencedScientologists cried out?
Well, by simply using the above-mentioned quote “black”:
It starts with a wrong report that leads to “standard tech not working”. But which single report could have such an impact on all auditors that they would accept the change of the above bridge by a different person than Ron. That’s a bit much!
The only wrong report that could make such a thing possible was: Ron was seriously ill, has had a stroke because he audited as an OT on Dianetics. This wrong report was turned in by David Mayo2)What most people don’t know is that Mayo belongs to the founders of RTC, the takeover team: In the available RTC’s certificate of incorporation it says: http://english.freiescientologen.de/archiv/timetrack/1982s.shtml#687 „RTC is formed by Terri Gamboa, David Mayo, Norman Starkey, Phoebe Maurer, Lyman Spurlock, Julia Watson, and David Miscavige.” – Only from Mayo’s pretentious self portrayal do we “know” that Hubbard made him successor after a “long and detailed letter” from April 1982. Mayo did not show this letter to anyone. (“If it isn’t written, it’s not true” LRH). Hubbard is supposed to have said, according to Mayo, that he was preparing for his death and Mayo was responsible for the Scientology Tech until Hubbard’s next incarnation. Thus, Mayo later justified himself as the new source with the right to revise LRH, which he had extensively practiced since 1978 already. At the same time, Mayo claims that Ron said the Tech was incomplete. Ron, however, assured us in the 70s that the Tech had been transferred to us functionally and in full., class XII auditor and Snr C/S of Flag, the highest org. Mayo claimed to have been called to the seriously ill3)Except for Mayo’s doubtful reports (e.g. in “An Open Letter to All Scientologists From David Mayo“) we have no reliable data that would confirm Ron became ill in 1978 or later. Not even his wife or children had had access to him. He had been completely sealed off from the outside world by the new authorities and it is unclear when he really died. CST/RTC needed this “hidden Ron” to establish themselves as the “owners of the hidden data line”, as a new issue line for tech and policy. Thus, they had 14 years (since Ron’s disappearance in 1972 until his supposed death in 1986) to change the tech and bridge unnoticeably and “with Ron’s consent.” Ron in 1978 and to have created NOTs as a remedy for his illness “with Ron together”.
Ron had foreseen this development when he wrote this in 1969:
Dianetics can be made to fail by alteration of its materials from its precise workable application.
It is basically so simple it is hard to conceive that this could happen.
But it has happened several times and was a contributing cause to its lack of use in several areas for some years.
There are various ways to make Dianetics difficult. Most of these come under three headings:
1. False information as to how it doesn’t work by some vested interest acting as a third party (see HCO B 26 Dec 68 on 3rd Party Law).
2. Failure to provide or get studied the actual data and HCOBs.
3. Mis-instructing which enters an instructor’s or examiner’s opinion4)Nowadays, this wrong data is not left with individual examiners or supervisors anymore, instead, the RTRC – “Ron’s” Technical Research & Compilation Unit under the RTC was established. or invalidation or alteration of the actual technology. [HCOB APRIL 27, 1969 II Dianetic Failures]
Dianetics was indeed used successfully with Clears and OTs for ten years (from 1969 to 1978). Strictly talking, Ron was the one who had brought Dianetics even back to life in the first place in 1968, after its long sleep5)LRH wrote about this: “I found that Dianetics had been forgotten for a dozen years and was being given a light brush-off as a course and that auditors and pcs were trying to use Scientology grades to handle body ills such as headaches, chronic somatics and so on. Man’s usual PTP is his body. So if one gave him gold ornaments he’d try to use them to cure his aches and pains. Thus Dianetics was forgotten and unused and Scientology was being made to attempt cures. Thus they were, both subjects, busily being made to fail to some degree. [HCOB 22 April 1969 Dianetics versus Scientology] – NOTs was developed this way in order to fail.. In my opinion this was not only to handle the body troubles of PCs on the lower levels because, at the time, they were being handled more or less successfully with Scientology PTS applications. Instead, Dianetics had to be rehabilitated by Ron in 1968 in order to successfully push pre-OTs through OT III (delivered since 1968). For the Milazzo (one of the major methods on OT III), Dianetics R3R was used6)See LRHs Handwriting 15 February 1968 Additional Tech Data for how the Milazzo is audited with R3R. in 1968. The Class VIII Course (Sep/Oct 1968) is a pleading of how indispensable Dianetics is to successfully get pre OTs through OT III. So the application of Dianetics by Clears and OTs is not just an insignificant triviality that you can miss out on due to “risks and side effects” but a key tech to successfully master this level.
It would have been noticed earlier within these 10 years if Dianetics had made the pre OTs and Clears sick. And surely Ron would have looked for a remedy and found one and informed us about it.
Instead, David Mayo (off-source) shows up, claims that Ron is seriously ill, says he was Ron’s personal auditor and that, therefore, a massive change of the bridge is required. Following this, Dianetics R3R became NED R3RA in 1978 (for the worse as I will show in a different FSB), there were claims that you could become Clear without the Clearing Course (which stands against everything Ron ever declared, which I also explain in a different FSB) and Clears and OTs are not allowed to use Dianetics. Rather, a lot of neutered rundowns are presented (Scientology Drug RD, End-of-Endless Int RD and NOTs) that are supposed to bring the same EP even without Dianetics. Lots of correction lists have been revised to get Dianetics remedies out of use. Of course they don’t work at all because only Dianetics can delete, Scientology can only key out. These neutered rundowns lead to “managed” conditions returning over and over: the PCs go back to drinking alcohol, repeatedly have Out-Int and won’t get through the OT-III-case (today‘s NOTs-case).
So the EPs of these rundowns are redefined in such a way that they correspond to the inability of these eunuchs:
In 1978, the intended EP of the Dianetics Drug RD was still written in the Bridge of the book “What is Scientology”: “Freedom from harmful effects of drugs, medicine and alcohol and free from need to take them.“
Since then, the PCs have only been receiving the following EP on their certificates with the Scientology drug RD: “Freedom of the damaging consequences of drugs, medicine or alcohol.” – Of course, Scientology key-out processes cannot cause an erasure, only through Dianetics auditing you can become ” free from need to take drugs, medicines and alcohol.“
And this is precisely the case with the Int-RD where PCs have been continuously complaining about Out-Int since the pure Scientology version. A 1.1er called this rundown this: “End-of-Endless Int RD”, the take over team finds this extremely funny.
And what about OT III and NOTs7)NOTS was also sold in a similar way: With “We want to end off “endless OT IIIs” [Mayo, David: HCOB 17 Sep 1978 NOTS-Series No. 7 VALENCES] an endless handling of the OT III case was actually introduced, which previously was possible to finish within a few hundred hours.? I don’t want to go into too much detail here since this FSB is not meant to disclose any confidential data so anyone can read it. But I am not saying too much when I say that sometimes Dianetics is necessary for a successful Milazzo in order to get the person through OT III successfully.
The fact that this isn’t achieved anymore today shows that the EP has been radically redefined by OT III. LRH defined his EP in his Handwriting on 20 April 1968 and in the HCOB 20 Oct. 1970 EPs (OTs, please look it up). This clearly defined EP had been reached after only a few hundred hours on OT III in the 70s, as oldtimers (i.a. a class VIII: “In 1971, I needed a good 170 hours on OT III”) have reported.
After the Dianetics ban had been in use for several years for OTs, this clear EP stayed absent on OT III, it had become unreachable. So David Mayo simply wrote an HCOB 10 Nov 1981 OT III and OT III Certificate, in which he just dropped the EP. It was simply abolished. You now can attest OT III even and especially if someone has failed on OT III!
Can it be expected any differently? Of course the NOTs tech that is offered as a replacement for the Dianetics doesn’t work either. Here, the fraud also starts simply with the name choice: NOTs is the abbreviation for “NED for OTs”. But that is exactly what it’s not: The main point of “NOTs” is the removal of Dianetics from the repertoire of the pre OTs.
Actually, since there has been NOTs, there have been exactly those problems which NOTs are apparently supposed to handle: Blows, severe illnesses, psychotic attacks, death and suicides. You don’t even have to take the extensive lists of critics off the Internet as proof: I personally know more such cases from friends on the pre OT levels III to VII as to easily deny this statement of facts. Other Scientologists most likely feel similar.
On 11 June 1997, Flag Registrar Allan Juvonen gave a briefing for Clears and OTs in the ballroom of the Hamburg Org (Church of Scientology) that my wife and I attended. His topic was GAT (Golden Age of Tech) regarding NOTs.
Obviously, the church wasn’t able anymore to cover up the destructive consequences by NOTs and had to face the worsening criticism. Instead of finally admitting to the failure of NOTs and to come back to the working Tech from the 70s, Flag only made insignificant concessions: So far, OTs on solo NOTs would only use 5 to 10 auditing tools. This was now improved with GAT for OTs. The use of 79 tools on New OT VII was right in order to reach the full EP on New OT VII. The pre OTs would now all be called in so that they – of course at their own substantial costs – could be retrained so that they get their case under control with all tools.
By the negligence and non-use of about 70 tools, more and more cycles had been opened and left unfinished during the solo auditing on OT VII and increasingly more by-passed-charges had accumulated with the OT VIIs.
Allan did an impressive show and demonstration on that to supply us all with mass: With arms stretched high he showed us how an OT VII, who had only wrongly audited with these few tools, needed to keep away this by-passed-charge with a lot of physical effort. He clung to a pillar for more strength to look for support and to avoid collapsing.
This briefing and demonstration by Allan indicated to the present pre OTs so much that the audience was yelling and applauding and not even wanting to calm down.
From this official briefing on the part of a Flag representative and the enthusiastic reaction by the audience, we can only assume that no one had successfully gone through the pre OT levels III to VII in the Church at that point of time.
But there aren’t 79 different techniques for the pre OT but at least 80: Dianetics with R3R remains left out of the Church. And it is not just one of 80 but one of the most important of all 80.
There are no reports from the 1970s about failing the pre OT levels. Back then, people worked according to LRH. And as he says in KSW 1 very fittingly:
We have some time since passed the point of achieving uniformly workable technology.
The only thing now is getting the technology applied.
If you can’t get the technology applied then you can’t deliver what’s promised. It’s as simple as that. If you can get the technology applied, you can deliver what’s promised.
The only thing you can be upbraided for by students or pcs; is “no resulte’. Trouble spots occur only where there are “no results”. Attacks from governments or monopolies occur only where there are “no results” or “bad results”.
Therefore the road before Scientology is clear and its ultimate success is assured if the technology is applied. [HCO PL Feb 7, 1965 No 1 Of The Series: Keeping Scientology Working]
Instead of going back to the source – to the LRH source – many lose themselves more and more in new squirrel versions. Instead of remembering that the pre OTs between 1968 and 1978 got through the pre OT levels successfully and quickly, without illnesses, psycho drama and death, and then advanced to the real OT levels IV, V, VI and VII (which today are “replaced” by NOTS, so basically abolished), Capt. Bill kept working on and “develops” the unsuccessful squirrel versions from NOTs by David Mayo. Others feel called upon to “continue to improve” Capt. Bill’s bridge.
I, however, recommend going back to the original technical standpoint before 1972 – before the takeover of the Church and, therefore, the technical publishing line – to the original LRH tech because “If you can get the technology applied, you can deliver what’s promised.” [KSW 1]
Enjoy the correct Bridge!
Copyright © 2005, 2015 by Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Gross, All Rights reserved