In Italy: today begins a new project: “Project Scientology 72.” 

This article was first published by David Effe in Italian on his blog progetto-scientology-72/
Of course I like this and so you find here the translation into English:

Your comments are welcome! Andreas Gross

scn-72-logo1Hello readers,
today begins a new project with this article.

The name of the project is: “Project Scientology 72.”

The previous “Project Ron’s Org Italy” for the moment remains pending, since this new project is located at an even more fundamental level, and therefore it has precedence.
Recently I was involved in the study, translation and review of the Dianetics Course’s Checksheet, based on data supplied to us by CBR regarding LRH’s disappearance at the end of 1980.
I was so committed eliminating any revision or new issue dated after 1980.
Unfortunately I continued to run into problems and lack of logic in an attempt to apply that data, which prompted me to investigate and try to understand more and more, to the point where it has become quite clear that the tech alterations (and even also policy and ethics) started well before 1981.
The first clue I had precisely by the illogicality of the NED Checksheet, the HCOPL of 6 July 1978. Well, this Checksheet, while still being the first step of training and auditing (the inversion between Dianetics and Scientology has in fact taken place in late 1981), the author “forgot”, somewhat inexplicably, to teach the indispensable foundations for a new auditor as the Model Session, the Rudiments, the Havingness (especially useful in Dianetics, but this is subject for another article that I have not managed to write …), and even how to write the Worksheets! (and everything about the folder admin). Also completely is missing a clarification, what should been done with the predecessor Hubbard Standard Dianetics Course. Moreover, it fails to explain what are we supposed to do about its predecessor Hubbard Standard Dianetics Course. And that was such an outpoint, far more huge than the previous one. In a nutshell this “new course” of Dianetics does not take the slightest trouble to explain why the HSDC, which until then had been THE standard for almost 10 years (since 1969), had been removed and replaced by this new course of NED, or, alternatively, to indicate whether the previous HSDC was or was not a pre-requisite for this new course.
But neither of those logical and due explanations were made. The HSDC was never deleted (although containing a substantial amount of “erased” bulletins from the new publications of the 1978 NED).  It has not even been specified whether this HSDC, as it contained everything that the NED course had “forgotten” to include, was or was not the legitimate prerequisite.
(to learn more, read the article  Project RO Italy part 2 )
The second big clue I found in the 1978-revision of HCOB June 25, 1970 II, “Glossary of Terms of the C / S” (see my article  The “Alternative Route” for more information).
In this HCOB LRH states that a Dianetics Clear, if he reached this state in his Dianetics auditing, had to continue on the subsequent Scientology grades 0-VII to become a Scientology Clear (ie a TRUE Clear).
And this remained unchanged until 1978, when the review of that HCOB stated that a Dianetics Clear continued on the Scientology Grades 0-IV, but no longer on the Grades V, VA, VI, and VII.
And I guarantee that if you knew you what is done on these grades, and the amount of work required to complete them, there would no longer be ANY doubt, as I sure have not too: it is absolutely impossible to become Clear based alone on Dianetics.
To solve this mystery of the abolition of the Grades V-VII for a Dianetics Clear in 1978, I began to rummage a bit in the materials of these degrees, and while trying to not read the confidential parts, it was inevitable to avoid some reading, and I’ve been really upset for several days, believe it or not. I also prepared a draft of an article where, without of course mentioning confidential data, trying to give a fair and due evaluation on this to all Scientologists.
Legitimate confidentiality was decided by LRH to prevent confidential data falling into the hands of the enemy, because the enemy would use the platens to repeat the implant on us (which in fact already had happened. I will tell about this in one of my next articles …). But the downside was that confidentiality was used by RTC to keep us ignorant on the actual power of these Grades, the effective amount and risk of the work necessary to truly become Clear, and therefore how actually higher is that state compared to what we had previously thought!
Moreover, to further demonstrate that the confidentiality has been used, with evil intentions, to keep us in ignorance in order to be able to further deceive us, there’s the fact that in such confidential volume (vol . XIII, Power up to Clearing Course) are including a large amount of publications not confidential, that LRH never intended as such, and that if they had been rather free and not secret, would have given us a lot more reality about the true state of Clear, and it would have been much more difficult to deceive us.
You will get all the necessary information on the article I will publish about it.
… (snipped a part which I will publish in a separate article)
The third clue was about the event for the presentation of NED and NOTs held at Flag towards the end of 1978, LRH was not present, and the ceremony was held by David Mayo, and this is a matter of record. But how is it possible that LRH was not present, and not presented in person such an important event?
So then the statement “LRH disappeared at the end of 1980” has not proven to work, since we have evidence that alterations have started at least in 1978.
Hence the hypothesis “LRH disappeared for 10 months after 1972” Oldman had tried in every way to tell us. And he was right.
I told him that I had already read this story, narrative, theory, or in any way you want to call it, and that it had seemed too plausible.
But at the time there was no evidence of that.
There was not any facts to support this thesis.
Only stories and testimonies.
And a seeker of truth can not possibly be based on the concept of “credibility” in pursuing his goal. “Credible” and “True” have not in fact no relationship between them. One thing can be entirely “credible” may be in fact completely false. While something quite “unbelievable”, can also be completely true (I’m quoting Corrado Malanga here). I do not want to. I’m not and I will never be in favor of “other practices.” But when someone says something correct one must acknowledge it). In Scientology, we have many examples of this. Just take a clue from the entire track, or even by the recent (and still ongoing, do not forget it!) implants in “the between life area”.
So I had to scrap this possibility, pending further developments. And you can find at least a dozen occasions I’ve said that “we must never discard any hypothesis, not even the most incredible ones”.
So here we are.
Oldman was right (see  Ron and 1972  for more info). And as soon as I came to these conclusions, I did not fail to write him and give him due recognition.
So here is where the name “Scientology 72” comes from: It comes from the fact that the development of the Scientology material is completed in December 1972, when LRH, who at the time was in retreat in Morocco, was sought by Interpol, so he flew to the United States (on the December 4, 1972) and he was arrested in New York, and since then was never heard from again. He was probably brought into one of the many secret prisons, which are now known.
After 10 months what returned was an impostor, a doppelganger, a lookalike. That was not perfectly identical to the true LRH, because he was careful in the following years to be seen as little as possible in public, until he was done away at the end of 1980.
We have to believe everything because this is a believable story?
Absolutely not.
I have not believed that.
The evidence emerged from the study of tech.
And in subsequent publications in this series, we will make it increasingly clear and obvious.
So this explains the “Project 72 Scientology.”
Its purpose is to fully restore the tech as it was until the end of 1972.
The real Tech, Policy and Ethics original LRH.
For example, did you know that there is NO mention in the Red volumes about the “tech” of the Overt Withhold Writeups? Anything. Zero. Nor in any book of Ethics (Introduction to Scientology Ethics) until 1978 (!!). This “tech” must have been invented and implemented in subsequent reprints of this book.
You know also how many revisions or cancellations of LRH bulletins made ​​until 1972?
Less than 10. And you know instead how many were made ​​from 1973 onwards? 200.
In future publications will follow complete lists of such deterioration, thanks to Andreas Gross author of the Scientology-1972 website ( HERE), and also to Michel Snoeck, author of the site “Wise Old Goat” ( HERE ).
Funny fact that Andreas and I have chosen the same name (actually very similar but not identical). But he for a website, I, however, for a project. Although I don’t exclude the possibility that it may develop into something in the future.
It is also very interesting that we both came to the same conclusions, NOT based on “hearsay” testimonies and stories, but based on the tech study, in particular the Red volumes.
In my first email that I sent him, wrote him a list of changes, contradictions and illogicality that I myself had discovered or noticed all by myself, and only through the study.
This list matched perfectly with what he himself had done, and that you can find on his website (in English though, but I will shortly begin translating the highlights of his work). Only he made ​​a much longer work, complete and thorough (he’s been working on that some longer than me… but anyway, he definitely preceded me! 🙂 ).
And this is a job that anyone of us could do, and would reach to the same our identical conclusions.
But for now I think it is enough data.
I know, these are not good news.
Or maybe yes.
This is certainly not pleasant.
Certainly a removal of a lot of stable data, and that can be very confusing.
I too had 4 horrible days about all this story.
But then I had to admit the evidence.
Above all the evidence of the fact that the stable data given by CBR “1980” is NOT correct.
And it took the some guts to admit it.
It cost me a lot.
But that data is not correct.
This does not invalidate also automatically everything else.
The vast majority of the data proved correct (UFOs, aliens, history of the Illuminati secret societies, conspiracies for a One World Order, European Union, etc …).
BUT a little alarm bell rang, at least.
But that is exactly what our job consist of.
Confront ANY thing, and especially to admit it, although it may not be pleasant.
As for you, you have every right to feel confused, doubtful, and wanting to take some time to think about it and digest it, or maybe not.
Of this I am sorry.
But though I can also show you THE POSITIVE SIDE of the thing.
Actually there are SEVERAL!
The first is that until 1972, Scientology is VERY EASY and simple to understand. NO contradictions. No confusions. Simple. Linear!
The second is that there is A LOT less stuff to be studied! From 1973 onwards it has been added a significant amount of GARBAGE. New courses, new “tech” new “bulletins, new rules, and so on.
The third  and most important, is that LRH HAS COMPLETED ITS WORK! Clear and OT are COMPLETELY TO BE OBTAINED. Do not believe us? Then I have to explain the real reason why the government decided to go the hard way and abduct LRH …
It all started when Ingo Swann, one OT Scientologist, began to collaborate with the CIA to “prove that Scientology works” …
He was then employed in the project “Remote Viewing”, I.e. the exterior viewpoint, in which, to be exteriorized, proved so concluding that these phenomena are possible, reporting the exact things that were happening on the other side of the planet. And that was in June 1972. The evidence convinced the US government to act as soon as possible, and to take possession of Scientology.
But for now that’s enough.
The rest in the next several articles.
See you soon!
David Effe

Posted in Blog and tagged , , , .

One Comment

Leave a Reply

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