The purpose of RTCs PRO-TRs Course is to get rid of the TRs on the long run

David wrote a nice article about Pizzagate, the pederasty scandal of Hitlory Clinton and her friends in Washington DC.

Pizzagate is a “nice subject” which has to be confronted. The cannibalism, satanism and child abuses of the ruling class and their officers. You need your TR0 welldone to be able to confront this. Otherwise people can “read and hear” about all these crimes and think: “Oh, they are just playing”. – As you move forward on the Bridge – right and left side – you will realize more and more of such things and you will need more TR-training on each new level. This was the original setup by LRH: TRs the hard way on every new class (auditors as well as admin courses). – This was replaced by RTCs “Pro TRs Course”, where you – still at the start of the bridge – “get in your TRs till full EP”. “Once and for all”. So if you finally achieved the “EP of the TRs”, you are not likely willing to do the TRs again “the hard way”. So THAT is why we end up with so many Scientologists, who are not willing or able to confront too much any more. Otherwise RTC would have had a hard time to cheat Scientologists and lead them into a squirrel sect.

After every big case change, one should do the TRs again – especially TR0 and TR0BB – this is a training – not much unlike the training of a bodybuilder – which has to be done your whole life. An athlete would find the idea of a physical “training to EP” a stupid idea. The same with the TRs: there is no EP as the TRs are no process. They are a training and you will achieve always a new level of confront and ability. So also the “EP of the Pro TRs course” is total bullshit: “…being who can handle anyone with communication alone and whose communication can stand up faultlessly to any session or social situation no matter how rough.” fake-HCOB 24 DECEMBER 1979 TRs BASICS RESURRECTED. There is no such EP. To claim this, gives the students only one certainty: That he did not achieve this EP as there might be people and social situations, which he – after the Pro TRs – can not handle with communication alone. – You have to improve your TRs permanently and never stop improving them.

Davids article gives us a nice opportunity for a test of our Trs. 🙂

Here is his article about Pizzagate.

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , .


  1. “…being who can handle anyone with communication alone and whose communication can stand up faultlessly to any session or social situation no matter how rough.”

    Not to mention it would make the Grade 0 level redundant and unnecessary, and nobody would have withholds thus Grade 2 would also be redundant and unnecessary. Definitely squirrel/fake.

  2. Greetings from beautiful rural Uraquay? Having fun here CSing and training others. Large get to gether!
    Andreas you are very correct in this writeup on the watering down of TRs. I loved doing Hard TRs and 2 hour on the meter FNING on OT TR0, TR9 and TR0 Bullbaiting. And not just once from 1970 into 1973…and then they pattycaked the TRs. As you go up the Bridge you have changes in reality and ability. So keep your TRs tuned up and go for higher gradients as you become more yourself.
    The RTC cult had a plan. And this may be a part of why so many who left the church felt they get little or only temporary gains. That and weak grades, no Power etc.
    Back home to USA in a bit over a month , maybe 2.
    Frank Davis

  3. One thing that is extremely confusing to me as I look at material from the 1990s are the dates of publication.

    For example, in the EST repair rundown auditor training manual, I see that there are policies dated in 1989 that are supposedly by LRH which refer to the earlier ones and compiled by the RTC.

    One could make the argument that even though Hubbard supposedly died in 1986, these materials were released posthumously, and that 1989 dates refer to the official COS publication dates. This is a possibility I am seeing from that view and what the Church has promoted.

    But if that is the case, then why would the supposedly posthumous HCOBs reference dates after his death as well?

    Either one must argue that he either (1) requested these be published on that later date or (2) that the RTC adapted the dates to that of publication.

    But if they were meant to be published later, then why wait 3 years after death, and withhold material while he was alive supposedly writing music and fiction?

    If the RTC did adapt his work, then why not simply credit the RTC and/or the people vs saying LRH did so? The only things that keep these in place are references to earlier works.

    No sense no matter how I look at it, it makes zero sense. One can only rule that these post 1986 documents are 100% fraudulent.

    What I also don’t understand is how nobody else sees any of these items from after 1986 nor questions them. Worse, why do some try to push the 1991 date as a cutoff point? Based on what criteria exactly?!

    Can anyone help me understand this logic? To me it seems like it is sheer insanity.

  4. Hi Ian,
    you are very right: “One can only rule that these post 1986 documents are 100% fraudulent.”
    It is even worse:
    also the earlier issues since 1973 are fraudulent as I showed in several article on this site. It only became obviously with the HCOBs and HCOPLs since LRHs alledged death (which was also fraudulent, not his body). But the never issues as you pointed out show the impudence, with which RTC is publishing in LRHs name.
    They are changing the subject “Scientology the science of Certainty” (as LRH wrote & published in June 1953. This book was later combined with the Scientology: Auditor’s Handbook and other material to make the book The Creation of Human Ability. Its text is contained in the Technical Bulletins volumes, as Journal of Scientology Issue 16-G) to a new designed “Scientology Religion”, which is no thread to the US-deep state who took over Scientology since 1972.

  5. Thanks Andreas for answering.
    Yes the deep state goes very far. I’m probably being monitored as I read and write this.

    That said, my question is really how nobody seems to notice this. 1972-1986 dates of death disputes aside, the above points are self-contradicting and nonsensical. I’m just surprised that nobody notices this even when you show it to their face. At least people who argue 1986 cutoff have some sort of rationality, but 1991+ ?? On what logic or data is that based? Oh, “I know someone who was there and he is reliable” or “I saw it for myself” – great, so now we take arguments from authority and testimonials as fact, despite the fact that the writings themselves are self-contradicting and contradict pre-1986 material?

    Makes you wonder if there really are people in the field trying to subvert it intentionally, or if they are just incredibly stupid and useful idiots?

  6. Hi Ian
    yes, they monitor us: so what? This can not kill us. Only a lack of integrity would kill us.

    What is personal integrity… L. Ron Hubbard Quote:
    “What is personal integrity? Personal integrity is knowing what you know. What you know is what you know and to have the courage to know and say what you have observed. And that is integrity and there is no other integrity.”

    With your recent article on this blog “Unclear on Co-Auditing Method One Word Clearing” you have earned your integrity. Welcome on board!

    The most difficult to confront is evil. And even more confront it needs to recognize evil in your own group.
    One could say you need to be OT prior to start on your Bridge 😉

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.